HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso 14-03 Subare 3 Rec CC Adopt CEQA RESOLUTION NO. 14-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A CEQA
ADDENDUM FOR THE DUBLIN RANCH SUBAREA 3 PROJECT
PLPA 2013-00033
WHEREAS, the Applicant, Kevin Fryer, has submitted a Planning Application for
residential development on Dublin Ranch Subarea 3 (Subarea 3) which would result in future
development of up to 437 single family residences on an approximately 64 acre site. The
project proposes General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments to reallocate
existing High Density Residential and Medium Density Residential land uses, to reduce and
change Open Space land uses to Rural Residential/Agriculture and to increase the Stream
Corridor designation. The application also proposes a Planned Development rezoning with
related Stage 1 Development Plan. The applications are collectively referred to herein as the
"Project"; and
WHEREAS, the Project is in the General Plan Eastern Extended Planning Area and the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, for which the City Council certified a Program Environmental
Impact Report by Resolution 51-93 ("Eastern Dublin EIR" or "EDEIR", SCH 91103064) on May
10, 1993 (resolution incorporated herein by reference). The Eastern Dublin EIR identified
significant impacts from development of the Eastern Dublin area, some of which could not be
mitigated to less than significant. Upon approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan
Amendment and Specific Plan, the City Council adopted mitigations, a mitigation monitoring
program and a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution 53-93, incorporated herein
by reference); and
WHEREAS, the Project is located in Dublin Ranch Area B. On November 18, 1997, the
City Council adopted a Negative Declaration (ND) for the Area B-E project (Resolution 140-97,
incorporated herein by reference). The ND concluded that the potentially significant impacts of
developing Areas B-E had been adequately described and analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR
and that no new or more severe significant impacts would result from future development in
Areas B-E; and
WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified significant unavoidable impacts from
development of the Eastern Dublin area, some of which would apply to the Project; therefore,
approval of the Project must be supported by a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
WHEREAS, for the Subarea 3 Project, the City prepared an Initial Study to determine if
additional review of the proposed Project was required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section
15162. Based on the Initial Study, the City prepared an Addendum dated January 2014
describing the Subarea 3 Project and finding that the impacts of the proposed Project were
adequately addressed in the prior EIR and ND; and
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2014, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed
public hearing on the Subarea 3 project, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity
to be heard; and
Page 1 of 3
WHEREAS, a staff report dated January 28, 2014 and incorporated herein by reference
described and analyzed the Subarea 3 project, including the related Addendum, for the
Planning Commission and recommended adoption of the CEQA Addendum and approval of the
Project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the CEQA Addendum as well as the
prior CEQA documents, and all above-referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony
before making any recommendation on the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission makes the following
findings to support the determination that no further environmental review is required under
CEQA for the proposed Project. These findings are based on information contained in the
CEQA Addendum, prior CEQA documents, the Planning Commission staff report, and all other
information contained in the record before the Planning Commission. These findings constitute
a summary of the information contained in the entire record. The detailed facts to support the
findings are set forth in the CEQA Addendum and related Initial Study, the prior CEQA
documents, and elsewhere in the record. Other facts and information in the record that support
each finding that are not included below are incorporated herein by reference:
1. The proposed Project does not constitute substantial changes to the previous projects
affecting the Project site, as addressed in the prior CEQA documents, that will require major
revisions to prior documents due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in severity of previously identified significant effects. Based on the Initial Study, all
potentially significant effects of the proposed Project are the same or less than the impacts for
the Eastern Dublin and Areas B-E projects which were previously addressed. The proposed
Project will not result in substantially more severe significant impacts than those identified in the
prior CEQA documents. All previously adopted mitigation measures continue to apply to the
proposed Project and project site as applicable.
2. The Initial Study and Addendum did not identify any new significant impacts of the
proposed Project that were not analyzed in prior CEQA documents.
3. The City is not aware of any new information of substantial importance or substantial
changes in circumstances that would result in new or substantially more severe impacts or meet
any other standards in CEQA Section 21166 and related CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162/3.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends the following
to the City Council:
1. No further environmental review under CEQA is required for the proposed Project
because there is no substantial evidence in the record as a whole that any of the standards
under Sections 21166 or 15162/3 are met.
2. The City has properly prepared a CEQA Addendum and related Initial Study under
CEQA Guidelines section 15164 to explain its decision not to prepare a subsequent or
supplemental EIR or conduct further environmental review for the proposed Project.
2 of 3
3. The City Council adopt the resolution attached as Exhibit A (incorporated herein by
reference) adopting the CEQA Addendum and related Initial Study (Attachment 1 to Exhibit A)
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 for the Project and make any further
required CEQA findings.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of January 2014 by the following vote:
AYES: Bhuthimethee, Do, O'Keefe, Kohli
NOES: Goel
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Get
PI nning Commission hair
ATT T:.
Assist nt Ct Y Development Director
G:IPA#120131PLPA-2013-00033 DUBLIN RANCH Subarea 31PC Mtg 01.28.141pc reso recom_addendum.doc
3 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. XX - 14
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
ADOPTING A CEQA ADDENDUM FOR THE DUBLIN RANCH SUBAREA 3 PROJECT AND
ADOPTING A RELATED STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
PLPA 2013-00033
WHEREAS, the Applicant, Kevin Fryer, has submitted a Planning Application for
residential development on Dublin Ranch Subarea 3 (Subarea 3) which would result in future
development of up to 437 single family residences on an approximately 64 acre site. The
project proposes General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments to reallocate
existing Medium High Density Residential and Medium Density Residential land uses, to reduce
and change Open Space land uses to Rural Residential/Agriculture and to increase the Stream
Corridor designation. The application also proposes a Planned Development rezoning with
related Stage 1 Development Plan. The applications are collectively referred to herein as the
"Project"; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan amendment for Subarea 3 would change the land use
designations as follows: reduce Medium-High Density Residential from 8.6 acres 7.5 acres and
move this use from the northeast area of the site to the western area of the site along Lockhart
Street; increase Medium Density Residential from 27.2 acres to 38 acres along either side of an
open space corridor; designate 14.5 acres of existing Open Space as Rural
Residential/Agriculture (as a partial replacement for 24.9 acres of existing Open Space land use
designation proposed for residential and rural residential/agriculture use); and increase the
existing designated Stream Corridor from 1.3 acres to 2 acres. No changes are proposed for
the existing 2-acre Neighborhood Park designation; and
WHEREAS, the project would also rezone Subarea 3 to the Planned Development
zoning district and would approve a related Stage 1 Development Plan for future development
of up to 437 dwelling units along either side of a stream corridor and open space area; and
WHEREAS, the Project site is vacant and undeveloped, with two small hills in the
northeast corner of the site. A vegetated stream corridor flows from the northwest corner for
approximately 1,000 feet and is collected into a storm drain pipe in the middle of the site. The
site is bounded by Central Parkway to the north, Dublin Boulevard to the south, Fallon Road to
the east, and Lockhart Street to the west.
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State
guidelines and City environmental regulations, require that certain projects be reviewed for
environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the Project is in the General Plan Eastern Extended Planning Area and the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, for which the City Council certified a Program Environmental
Impact Report by Resolution 51-93 ("Eastern Dublin EIR" or "EDEIR", SCH 91103064) on May
10, 1993 (resolution incorporated herein by reference). The Eastern Dublin EIR identified
significant impacts from development of the Eastern Dublin area, some of which could not be
mitigated to less than significant. Upon approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan
Page I of 4 EXHIBIT A TO
ATTACHMENT 6
Amendment and Specific Plan, the City Council adopted mitigations, a mitigation monitoring
program and a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution 53-93, incorporated herein
by reference); and
WHEREAS, Dublin Ranch Subarea 3 is in Dublin Ranch Area B in the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan area. On October 10, 1994, the City Council adopted Ordinance 4-94 prezoning
the 1,538 acre Dublin Ranch to PD-Planned Development in accordance with the 1993 Eastern
Dublin General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Following annexation of
Dublin Ranch, the City Council adopted Ordinance 24-97 on December 2, 1997 rezoning Dublin
Ranch Areas B-E to PD-Planned Development and adopting the then-required Land Use and
Development Plan (LUDP) by Resolution 141-97. The LUDP established permitted uses,
development standards and other regulations for future development of Areas B-E. Subarea 3
was anticipated for up to 485 units on approximately 64 acres of Medium High Density
Residential and Medium Density Residential uses on either side of an open space corridor; and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 1997, the City Council adopted a Negative Declaration
(ND) for the Area B-E project (Resolution 140-97, incorporated herein by reference). The ND
concluded that the potentially significant impacts of developing Areas B-E had been adequately
described and analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and that no new or more severe significant
impacts would result from future development in Areas B-E; and
WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified significant unavoidable impacts from
development of the Eastern Dublin area, some of which would apply to the Project; therefore,
approval of the Project must be supported by a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
WHEREAS, for the Subarea 3 Project, the City prepared an Initial Study to determine if
additional review of the proposed Project was required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section
15162. Based on the Initial Study, the City prepared an Addendum dated January 2014
describing the Subarea 3 Project and finding that the impacts of the proposed Project have
been adequately addressed in the prior EIR and ND. The Addendum and its supporting Initial
Study is attached as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2014, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed
public hearing on the Subarea 3 project, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity
to be heard; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated January 28, 2014 and incorporated herein by reference
described and analyzed the Subarea 3 project and related Addendum for the Planning
Commission and recommended adoption of the CEQA Addendum and approval of the Project;
and
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 14-XX
recommending that the City Council adopt the CEQA Addendum for the Subarea 3 project,
which resolution is incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during
normal business hours; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated 2014 and incorporated herein by reference
described and analyzed the Subarea 3 project and related Addendum for the City Council and
recommended adoption of the CEQA Addendum and approval of the Project; and
2of4
WHEREAS, on , 2014 the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing
on the Project at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Addendum, as well as the prior EIR and ND
and all above-referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony before taking any action on
the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council makes the following findings to
support the determination that no further environmental review is required under CEQA for the
proposed Subarea 3 Project. These findings are based on information contained in the CEQA
Addendum, the prior CEQA documents, the City Council Staff Report, and all other information
contained in the record before the City Council. These findings constitute a summary of the
information contained in the entire record. The detailed facts to support the findings are set
forth in the CEQA Addendum and related Initial Study, the prior CEQA documents, and
elsewhere in the record. Other facts and information in the record that support each finding that
are not included below are incorporated herein by reference:
1. The proposed Project does not constitute substantial changes to the previous projects
affecting the Project site as addressed in the prior CEQA documents, that will require major
revisions to the prior documents due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in severity of previously identified significant effects. Based on the Initial Study, all
potentially significant effects of the proposed Project are the same or less than the impacts for
project which were previously addressed. The proposed Project will not result in substantially
more severe significant impacts than those identified in the prior CEQA documents. All
previously adopted mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR continue to apply to the
proposed Project and project site as applicable.
2. The Initial Study and Addendum did not identify any new significant impacts of the
proposed Project that were not analyzed in the prior CEQA documents.
3. The City is not aware of any new information of substantial importance or substantial
changes in circumstances that would result in new or substantially more severe impacts or meet
any other standards in CEQA Section 21166 and related CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162/3.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin finds the
following:
1. No further environmental review under CEQA is required for the proposed Project
because there is no substantial evidence in the record as a whole that any of the standards
under Sections 21166 or 15162/3 are met.
2. The City has properly prepared an Addendum and related Initial Study under
CEQA Guidelines section 15164 to explain its decision not to prepare a subsequent or
Supplemental EIR or conduct further environmental review for the proposed Project.
3. The City Council considered the information in the Addendum and prior CEQA
documents before approving the land use applications for the proposed Project.
3 of 4
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin adopts the
CEQA Addendum and related Initial Study, attached as Exhibit A (and incorporated herein by
reference), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 for the Dublin Ranch
Subarea 3 project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin adopts the
Statement of Overriding Considerations attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by
reference
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 2014 by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
G:IPA#120131PLPA-2013-00033 DUBLIN RANCH Subarea 31PC Mtg 01.28.141cc reso_adopting addendum_and soc_Qan_2014).doc
4 of 4
Dublin ]ranch Sub Area 3
GPA & SPA
PLPA-2013-00033
INITIAL STUDYI
CEQA ADDENDUM
Lead Agency:
City of Dublin
Prepared By:
Jerry Haag, Urban Planner
IE
JAN 2 , 2114 January 28,2014
DLISLIt4 pI_ANNING
EXHIBIT A
Table of Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................2
Applicant........................................................................................................................3
Project Location and Context ......................................................................................3
Prior Environmental Review Documents..................................................................3
ProjectDescription........................................................................................................4
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected.............................................................15
Determination................................................................................................................15
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .......................................................................17
Attachmentto Initial Study .........................................................................................30
1. Aesthetics ...............................................................................................30
2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources .................................................33
3. Air Quality .............................................................................................34
4. Biological Resources .............................................................................36
5. Cultural Resources................................................................................43
6. Geology and Soils .................................................................................45
7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions..................................................................48
8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................48
9. Hydrology and Water Quality............................................................51
10. Land Use and Planning........................................................................53
11. Mineral Resources.................................................................................54
12. Noise .......................................................................................................55
13. Population and Housing......................................................................57
14. Public Services.......................................................................................58
15. Recreation...............................................................................................60
16. Transportation/Traffic.........................................................................61
17. Utilities and Service Systems...............................................................64
18. Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................................................67
InitialStudy Preparers .................................................................................................68
Agencies and Organizations Consulted ....................................................................68
References ......................................................................................................................68
City of Dublin
Environmental Checklist/
Initial Study
Introduction
This Initial Study has been prepared in accord with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and assesses the potential environmental impacts
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. Because the
proposed project is generally based on the land use designations, circulation patterns
etc. assigned to the project by the City of Dublin General Plan, the Initial Study relies on
a Program EIR certified by the City in 1993 for the Eastern Dublin General Plan
Amendment and Specific Plan (the "Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 91103064). That
EIR, also known in this Initial Study as the "Eastern Dublin EIR," evaluated the
following impacts: Land Use, Population, Employment and Housing, Traffic and
Circulation, Community Services and Facilities, Sewer, Water and Storm Drainage,
Soils, Geology and Seismicity, Biological Resources, Visual Resources, Cultural
Resources, Noise, Air Quality and Fiscal Considerations.
In 1997, a Negative Declaration was prepared for multiple properties in the Eastern
Dublin area, including Planning Area A (approximately 363 acres of land) and Areas B-
E (approximately 468.5 acres of land), all located north of the I-580 Freeway, east of
Tassajara Road and west of Fallon Road. This will be referred to as the "1997 ND,"
approved by the City Council on June 17, 1997, by City Council Resolution No. 140-97.
This CEQA document analyzed amendments to the Dublin General Plan and Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan, proposed Planned Development rezoning to ensure consistency
between City zoning an the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
The 1997 ND included the approximately 64 acres of land in Sub Area 3 of Planning
Area B, which is the subject of this analysis.
The subject of this Initial Study is a proposed General Plan and Specific Plan
Amendment and a Planned Development (PD) rezoning with related Stage 1
Development Plan applications to develop portions of the 64-acre site located in the
Eastern Dublin portion of the City of Dublin. The Development Plan includes
construction of up to 437 dwellings at various densities and product types, internal
roadways, open spaces and other related improvements.
City of Dublin Page 2
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Applicant:
Integral Communities
500 La Gonda Way, Suite 102
Danville CA 94526
Attn: Kevin Fryer
(925) 899-5065
Project Location and Context
The project is located in the southeastern portion of the Eastern Extended Planning area
of the City of Dublin as identified in the Dublin General Plan. More specifically, the
project site is located south of Central Parkway, west of Fallon Road and north of
Dublin Boulevard. Lockhart Street forms the western boundary of the site. The
Alameda County Assessor's Parcel Number for the site is 985-0027-12.
Exhibit 1 depicts the regional setting of Dublin and Exhibit 2 shows the location of
Subarea 3 in context with nearby features, including nearby roadways and adjacent
creeks.
The site is currently vacant and is characterized by relatively flat areas on the west side
of the site with two small hills in the northeast corner rising to a height of 470 above sea
level. The site generally slopes from northeast corner down to the southwest corner of
the site. Slopes range from 5 to 50%. Two small "outparcels" are located in the southeast
area of the site as identified on Exhibit 2. These parcels are not part of the application.
In addition to the two small hills on the site. a vegetated stream corridor exists on the
northwest portion of the property. The corridor extends for a length of approximately
1000 feet in a northwest-southeast direction.
Land to the west of the site, west of Lockhart Street, has been developed for attached
dwelling units or is vacant. Land north of the site is currently vacant and is planned for
a future expansion of Fallon Sports Park. Property east of the site is vacant. Land use
south of the project site includes a combination of commercial uses (Fallon Gateway
Center) and vacant land.
Prior Environmental Review Documents
The project has been included in two previous CEQA documents, as noted below:
Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (State
Clearinghouse #91103064). A Program Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern
Dublin General Plan Amendment (Eastern Extended Planning Area) and the Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) was certified by the City Council in 1993 by Resolution
No. 51-93. This document and its related Addenda collectively are referred to as the
"Eastern Dublin EIR" or "EDEIR." It evaluated the following impacts:
City of Dublin Page 3
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Land Use; Population, Employment and Housing; Traffic and Circulation;
Community Services and Facilities; Sewer, Water and Storm Drainage; Soils,
Geology and Seismicity; Biological Resources; Visual Resources; Cultural
Resources; Noise; Air Quality; and Fiscal Considerations.
The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution No. 53-93)
for the following impacts:
Cumulative loss of agriculture and open space land, cumulative traffic,
extension of certain community facilities (natural gas, electric and telephone
service), consumption of non-renewable natural resources, increases in energy
uses through increased water treatment and disposal and through operation
of the water distribution system, inducement of substantial growth and
concentration of population, earthquake ground shaking, loss or degradation
of botanically sensitive habitat, regional air quality,noise and alteration of
visual character.
The Eastern Dublin EIR was challenged in court and was found to be legally
adequate. In 1994, the 1,538 acre Dublin Ranch portion of Eastern Dublin was
prezoned to the Planned Development zoning district (Ordinance 4-94) and
subsequently annexed to the City.
1997 Negative Declaration
In 1997, a Negative Declaration was prepared for a General Plan Amendment,
Specific Plan Amendment and Planned Development rezoning for approximately
453 acres of land, identified as Dublin Ranch Areas B-E and including Subarea 3 of
Area B. The ND was approved by the City Council on November 18, 1997 by
Resolution No. 140-97. The 1997 General Plan and Specific Plan amendments did
not affect Subarea 3; the PD rezoning supplemented the prior prezoning and
adopted a District Planned Development Plan and Land Use and Development Plan,
in accordance with then-existing PD requirements (Resolution 141-97). The PD
rezoning also included permitted uses, development standards and design
guidelines applicable to Areas B-E, including Subarea 3. The related Negative
Declaration and addressed all topics included in the standard CEQA checklist,
updating them from the prior EDEIR analysis. .
Project Description
Overview. The proposed project includes construction of up to 437 attached and
detached dwellings on the site, grading of the site, extension of utilities and related
improvements.
The applicant has requested approvals of the following in order to implement the
project: amendments to the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and a
PD rezoning with related Stage 1 Development Plan. Other City approvals, including
but not limited to a Stage 2 Development Plan, a Site Development Review (SDR)
permit and a Vesting Tentative Tract Map would be required to implement the
proposed project.
City of Dublin Page 4
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Existing Land Use Approval. The City of Dublin has approved a development plan for
the site that would allow construction of up to 485 dwellings on the site (City Council
Resolution 141-97, November 18, 1997) generally in the northeast and west/southwest
portions of the site, on either side of the stream corridor and designated open space.
Development Plan. The proposed Stage 1 Planned Development Plan is shown on
Exhibit 3. As shown, residential development would generally occur in the western and
north eastern portions of the site. A stream corridor located in a general northwest-
south-east direction would fulfill environmental requirements for approved
development projects elsewhere in Eastern Dublin. The southwest portion of the site
would be reserved for Rural Residential/Agriculture uses, primarily open space.
The City of Dublin, through the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, has
previously approved a range of land uses on this site, consisting of a mix of Medium
Density Residential, Medium High Density Residential, Stream Corridor, Open Space
and Park. Existing land use designations would allow a range of 287 to 596 dwellings
on the site as well as 24.9 acres of Open Space, a 2.0-acre Stream Corridor and a 2.0-acre
Neighborhood Park.
Proposed uses that would be allowed under the amended General Plan and Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan and the Planned Development rezoning process would include 437
total dwellings units as shown on Table 1.
Table 1. Proposed Development Summary-Subarea 3
Land Use Type Acres Max. Dwellings Density (du/ac.)
Med. Density
Residential 38.0 330 8.6
Medium High Density
Residential 7.5 107 14.2
Rural
Residential/Agriculture 14.5 -- --
Stream Corridor 2.0 -- --
Neighborhood Park 2.0 -- --
Total 64.0 437 --
Source: Project Applicant 2013
The proposed amendment would allow slightly fewer dwellings on the site than
previously approved (485 approved v. 437 proposed) and would replace much of the
current Open Space designated portion of the site with a Rural Residential/Agriculture
(RR/A) land use designation.
City of Dublin Page 5
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
The applicant is proposing up to 107 multi-family dwellings in a row-condominium
design. The proposal also includes up to 330 single-family homes. Proposed project
design is described below.
Circulation and access. Vehicular entry to the site would be provided for the southern
portion of the site at the existing intersection of Finnian Way and Lockhart Street.
A second access would be provided on the northern frontage along Central Parkway
that would also provide access to Fallon Sports Park north of the project site. A traffic
control device, either a stop sign or a traffic signal, would be installed at this
intersection as determined by the Dublin Public Works Department.
The internal circulation system is proposed to include a mix of local public residential
streets and private alleys. Local residential streets would have a width of 36 feet, curb to
curb, and a 5-foot wide sidewalk.
A 10-foot wide paved meandering trail and access path is proposed along the stream
corridor. The trail would be a continuation of an existing multi-use trail that starts in the
north-central portion of the Dublin Ranch development. The trail would provide a
pedestrian and bike connection between the north and south portions of the site.
Building architecture and design. Sub Area 3 is proposed as a mix of residential
densities and product types. The project would have the higher density townhome
product along Lockhart Street to blend with the projects to the west of the project. As
the project moves east the product would become less dense single-family homes. The
northeastern corner of the project would accommodate single-family homes that would
take advantage of the proximity of the project to the Fallon Community Sports Park to
the north.
The proposed architectural design for all products is a contemporary craftsman with a
blend of materials including stucco, siding, brick veneer, concrete tile and standing
seam metal roofs with decorative elements including balconies, and similar features.
The residential townhomes are designed as a "6-pack " building cluster with six
dwellings with front doors facing onto landscaped common paseos (open space areas).
Garages of these units would be accessed from common alleys. The floor plans of these
units are proposed to range in size from 1,902 s.f. to 2,170 s.f. Each of the units would
have a private deck for outdoor use.
The second housing type proposed in Sub Area 3 is a 3-story single family home to be
located on a 30-ft. x 50-ft. lot. The front doors of this product would face either on a
public street or on a common landscaped paseo. Garages would be accessed from
private drive aisles. The floor plans include 3 and 4 bedrooms and range in size from
1,975 s.f. to 2,291 s.f. Each of the homes would have a private side yard for outdoor use.
The third housing type proposed in Sub Area 3 is designed to be a single-family
dwelling located on either a 38-ft. x 48-ft. lot or a 48-ft. x 48-ft. lot. This two and three
story product would include 3-4 bedrooms with some plans offering optional 5t'
City of Dublin Page 6
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
bedrooms and range in size from 1,729 s.f. to 2,917 s.f. The front doors would front on a
public street or on a common landscaped paseo, while the garages would be accessed
from private drive aisles. Each home would have either a side or backyard for private
outdoor use.
The last housing type proposed for Sub Area 3 is a 6-unit cluster that would be located
on 42, 45, and 54-foot wide and 48.5-foot deep lots. This product is designed to be more
"traditionally oriented" with front doors off of the public street or adjacent to the
garage on a private alley. The garages would be accessed from the public street or the
private alley. This product ranges in size from 1,859 s.f. to 2,258 s.f. The majority of this
product would be arranged into 6-unit clusters.
Open Space. The existing stream corridor on the site would remain where it is currently
located. A portion of the site (approx. 14.5 acres) is proposed to be redesignated from
Open Space to Rural Residential/Agriculture which would allow for the flexibility of
the site uses including allowing for viticulture. This would ensure that this portion of
the site would remain undeveloped.
Visually Sensitive Ridgelands. Two hills designated as "Visually Sensitive Ridgelands-
Restricted Development" are located on the project site. The Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan states that these hillsides are to remain to provide a distinctive visual feature as
well as providing a screen for development. The Specific Plan allows for development
on the north side of these hills as long as they follow the policies in the Specific Plan.
The proposed development would shift one of the existing hills from its present
location to the south to allow for less dense development on the north side of the hill.
The hill would be re-graded to appear as a natural hillside and sensitive engineering
design and gradual transitions are being proposed as well as revegetation to minimize
visual impacts. For the majority of the northern portion of the site, the recreated hill
would rise above the proposed development and block views of it. A small mound
would be built on southeastern side of the development envelope and this area planted
to screen any potential views to the proposed homes. As proposed, the relocation of the
hill would comply with the intent of the Specific Plan to provide a distinctive visual
feature and screening for development.
The neighborhood behind the hillside has been designed to fit with the natural contours
and the building pads would step down gradually to match the existing topography of
the back side of the hill. Where feasible the graded slopes are 3:1 or less. The cut and
graded slopes would be re-vegetated with native vegetation or vineyards.
The second existing hill would be removed and graded to accommodate proposed
development.
Utility services. Domestic water, recycled and sewer service would be provided by
Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD). The project developer would be required
to install mainline extension of sewer along the frontage, to the entrance of the project
as well as the in-tract water and sewer lines and laterals.
City of Dublin Page 7
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Preliminary storm drainage plans include collecting storm water runoff into a series of
underground storm drain lines and transporting storm water flows in a southwest
direction into a subregional stormwater detention and bio-filtration pond located
immediately north of the I-580 freeway west of the site that has been sized to
accommodate runoff from development of the site.
Grading. The applicant proposes to grade the site to allow construction of the
residential areas, roadways and related improvements. One existing hill on the site is
proposed to be graded to accommodate proposed development with the other hill
relocated to the south that would allow a portion of the development while screening
the view of development from motorists along I-580. Grading is proposed to balance on
the site. Retaining walls would be constructed on several of the proposed lots as well as
in portions of open space areas.
Erosion controls would be implemented during grading activities pursuant to City and
Regional Water Quality Board requirements, as enforced by the City of Dublin, to
protect surface water quality.
Inclusionary housing. The project's inclusionary housing requirement has been
satisfied with the construction of The Groves residential project just west of the project
site.
Requested land use approvals. A number of land use approvals are required from the
City of Dublin to construct the project as proposed. These are described in more detail
below.
General Plan Amendment. The City of Dublin General Plan designates the Subarea 3
site as a mix of Medium High Density Residential, Medium Density Residential,
Stream Corridor, Open Space and Neighborhood Park. The proposed General Plan
land use designations would be generally consistent with current land use
designations, but with a greater amount of Medium Density Residential and Open
Space Uses and a smaller amount of Medium-High Density Residential. A portion of
the current Open Space land use designation would be replaced with Medium
Density Residential; most would be replaced with Rural Residential/Agriculture.
Neighborhood Park and Stream Corridor uses would remain. Exhibit 3 shows
existing and proposed General Plan land use designations.
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment. Similar to the requested General Plan
Amendment, land use designations on the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land Use
Maps would be changed to be consistent with the amended General Plan.
PD Rezoning with related Stage I Development Plan . Previously approved land
uses on the site would be replaced by a new Stage I Development Plan to reflect the
proposed project, as shown on Exhibit 3.
In addition, the following City approvals are required in order to construct the
proposed project.
City of Dublin Page 8
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Stye 2 Development Plan, The Stage 2 approval would establish final land uses,
land use intensity and development regulations for the project.
Site Development Review (SDR). An SDR Permit is required to approve the exterior
designs of structures, landscaping, project fencing, lighting and similar project
details.
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map(s). Tentative and Final subdivision maps are
required to create individual buildings lots, roads, easements and similar elements.
City of Dublin Page 9
January 2014
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project
80
5
Antioc
San 24
Francisco - oaklan
t Project Site
Dublin
San so Tracy
Francisco
Pacific Ocean Bay S4 Livermore 80
8
Li
101
2377J'
8
0 " 10 Miles San Jose
85
9J 101
f Detail 17
Santa
Cruz 52
�LCalifornia 52
EXHIBIT 1
REGIONAL
LOCATION
SUB AREA 3
1-06-2014 16:0:27 Ivilhauer P: 19]28 PLN CEOA Exhi—Re,,n,IL...G d.
QTY
Cps P 0 TY
co Cpl
AL
A
�OgptO�
s
A � �
4
E
�� DUBLIN ,RANCH �<'
DUBLIN RANCH DRIVE 1 °� MASTB CANNED
a
DUBLIN �a
: A
-- CENTRAL_
PARKWAY ,fir
3 SUBAREA 3
— —
PROJECT AREA
_—_-DUBLIN
BOULE ARVAR D Z
I-580
I-580
PLEASANTON W a
EXHIBIT 2
SITE CONTEXT
SUB AREA 3
I-08-2014 16:4}:}5 Wha— P:19728 PLN CEOA Exh2-Vc6nil uo.Gw
1
►
► I
\ --------
M
SC
RR/A
NP III
7 NOTAPART
��- M H I
►w II
LL'
NOT APART /
� II
, h
M / II
• a
10 ���
i \% I I I
► � I II
EXHIBIT 3
STAG E I P D
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SUB AREA 3
1. Project description: Development of the site with up to 437 dwellings at
various densities and product types, a park, open
spaces and roads. The project includes, re-grading of
the site, installation of retaining walls and related
improvements. Requested land use entitlements
include amendments to the Dublin General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, a PD rezoning with
related Stage 1 Development Plan. Future land use
approvals are anticipated to include a Site
Development Review (SDR) permit and a Vesting
Tentative Subdivision Map(s).
2. Lead agency: City of Dublin
Community Development Department
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin CA 94568
3. Contact persons: Michael A Porto
Consulting Planner
(925) 833 6610
4. Project location: Generally located between Central Parkway and
Dublin Boulevard west of Fallon Road and east of
Lockhart Street. Assessor's Parcel Number 985-0027-
12
5. Project sponsor: Kevin Fryer of Integral Communities
6. General Plan designation: Existing:
Medium Density Residential
Medium/High Density Residential
Park
Stream Corridor
Open Space
Proposed:
Medium Density Residential
Medium/High Density Residential
Park
Stream Corridor
Rural residential/Agriculture
7. Zoning: PD-Planned Development
City of Dublin Page 13
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
S. Other public agency required or potential approvals:
• PD (Planned Development) rezoning with Stage 2 rezoning and
Development Plan (City of Dublin)
• Site Development Review (SDR) Permit (City of Dublin)
• Vesting Tentative and Final Subdivision Maps (City of Dublin)
• 1602/3 Streambed Alteration Permit (California Department of Fish
and Game, possible);
• State Incidental Take Permit (California Department of Fish and
Game, possible);
• Section 404 Permit including a Section 7 consultation (under the
Endangered Species Act) from the United States Department of Fish
and Wildlife (United States Army Corps of Engineers, possible);
• Section 401 Clean Water Certification (San Francisco Bay Regional
Water Quality Control Board, possible);
• Notice of Intent (San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control
Board);
• Issuance of encroachment permits (City of Dublin)
• Issuance of building and grading permits (City of Dublin); and
• Approval of water and sewer connections (DSRSD)
City of Dublin Page 14
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
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 - Air Quality
Resources
Biological _ Cultural Resources - Geology/Soils
Resources
Hazards and - Hydrology/Water _ Land Use/
Hazardous Quality Planning
Materials
Mineral Resources -- Noise -- Population/
Housing
-- Public Services _ Recreation - Transportation/
Circulation
-- Utilities/Service - Mandatory
Systems Findings of
Significance
Determination (to be completed by Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the
environment and the previous Negative Declaration certified for this project by the
City of Dublin adequately addresses potential impacts.
_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 the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Negative
Declaration will be prepared.
__I find that although the proposed project may have a significant effect 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 earlier analysis as described on the attached sheets, if the
effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." A
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report is required, but must only analyze the
effects that remain to be addressed.
X I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be any new or substantially more severe significant effect in
this case because all potentially significant effects: a) have been analyzed adequately in
an earlier EIR and ND pursuant to applicable standards; and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR and ND, including revisions or mitigation
City of Dublin Page 15
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
measures that are imposed on the proposed Project, except for those impacts which
were identified as significant and unavoidable and for which a Statement of Overriding
Considerations was previously adopted by the City. An Addendum to the Eastern
Dublin Environmental Impact Report and the Dublin Ranch Planning Areas B-E
Negative Declaration will be prepared.
Signature: Date: t/111 It q Printed Name: �_ For: l
City of Dublin Page 16
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "no impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the
parenthesis following each question. A "no impact" answer is adequately
supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does
not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault
rupture zone). A "no impact" answer should be explained where it is based on
project-specific factors as well as general factors (e.g. the project will not expose
sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as
well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and
construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a 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.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less-than-Significant With Mitigation Incorporated"
applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from
"Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less-than-Significant Impact." The lead
agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce
the effect to a less-than-significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17,
"Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other
CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or
negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). The checklist will include a response
"no new impact" in these circumstances. In this case, 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 were "Less-Than-Significant with
Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures
which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
City of Dublin Page 17
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
6) Lead Agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to
information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances,
etc.). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where
appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is
substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached and other
sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is a suggested form and lead agencies are free to use different formats;
however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist
that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each agency should identify the significance criteria or
threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question and the mitigation measures
identified, if any, to reduce the impact to a less than significant level.
City of Dublin Page 18
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Environmental Impacts (Note: Source of determination listed in parenthesis. See listing of
sources used to determine each potential impact at the end of the checklist)
Note: A full discussion of each item is found Potentially Less Than Less than No New
following the checklist. Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
1. Aesthetics. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic X
vista? (Source: 1,3,4)
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,including X
but not limited to trees,rock outcroppings,and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
(Source: 1,3,4)
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character X
or quality of the site and its surroundings?
(Source: 6)
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare X
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area? (Source: 1,4)
2. Agricultural Resources
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland or
Farmland of Statewide Importance,as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland X
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency,to a non-
agricultural use? (Source: 1,2,3)
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture use, X
or a Williamson Act contract? (Source: 1,2,3)
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which,due to their location or nature,could
result in conversion of farmland to a non- X
agricultural use? (Source: 1,2,3)
3.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:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the X
applicable air quality plan? (Source: 1,4)
b)Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air X
quality violation? (Source: 2,3)
City of Dublin Page 19
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Potentially Less Than Less than No New
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase X
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors?
(2,3.5)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X
concentrations? (Source: 2,3,4)
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial X
number of people? (Source: 5)
4.Biological Resources. Would the project
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,either directly
through habitat modifications,on any species X
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?(Source: 2,3,4)
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian X
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? (Source: 2,3,4)
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally X
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?
(Source: Source: 2,3,4)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any X
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? (Source: 2,3,4)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances X
protecting biological resources,such as tree
protection ordinances? (Source: 2,3,4)
City of Dublin Page 20
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Potentially Less Than Less than No New
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
f) Conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan,Natural Community
Conservation Plan or other approved local, X
regional or state habitat conservation plan?
(Source: 1,3,4)
5.Cultural Resources. Would the project
a) Cause a substantial adverse impact in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in X
Sec. 15064.5? (Source: 2,3,5)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archeological resource X
pursuant to Sec. 15064.5 (Source: 2,3,5)
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X
paleontological resource, site or unique geologic
feature? (Source: 2,3,5)
d) Disturb any human remains,including those X
interred outside of a formal cemetery? (3)
6.Geology and Soils. Would the project
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 Earthquake Fault Zoning Map X
issued by the State Geologist or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault(Source: 2,
3)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking (2,6) X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,including X
liquefaction? (2,3)
iv) Landslides? (2, 3) X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of X
topsoil? (Source: 2,3)
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- X
or off-site landslide,lateral spreading,
subsidence,liquefaction or similar hazards
(Source: 2,3)
d) Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property? X
(Source: 2,3)
City of Dublin Page 21
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Potentially Less Than Less than No New
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available X
for the disposal of wastewater? (Source: 1,2)
7.Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the
project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport,use or
disposal of hazardous materials X
(Source: 2,3,5)
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the X
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment? (Source: 2,3,5)
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
materials or acutely hazardous materials, X
substances,or waste within one-quarter mile of
an existing or proposed school? (Source: 2,3,4)
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Sec. 65962.5 and,as a result, X
would it create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment? (Source: 5)
e) For a project located within an airport land use X
plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted
within two miles of a public airport of public use
airport,would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? (Source: 2, 3)
f) For a project within the vicinity of private airstrip, X
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
(Source: 2,4)
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with the adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan? X
(Source: 2,3)
City of Dublin Page 22
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Potentially Less Than Less than No New
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss,injury or death involving wildland fires, X
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands? (Source: 1,2,5)
8.Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the project:
a)Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements? (Source: 2,3 ) X
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer X
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? (2,3)
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of X
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? (Source: 2,3)
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of X
the site or areas,including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or river,or
substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site? (Source: 4,5)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would X
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
(Source: 5)
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X
(Source: 3,5)
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary
or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood X
delineation map? (Source: 5)
City of Dublin Page 23
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Potentially Less Than Less than No New
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect flood X
flows? (Source: 3,5)
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss,injury,and death involving flooding, X
including flooding as a result of the failure of a
levee or dam? (3)
j) Inundation by seiche,tsunami or mudflow? (5) X
9.Land Use and Planning. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? X
(Source: 1,2,3.4)
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 X
general plan,specific plan, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect? (Source: 1,
2,3,4)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan? X
(1,2,3,4)
10.Mineral Resources. Would the project
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? (Source: 1,
2)
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general Plan,specific plan X
or other land use plan? (Source:1,2)
11.Noise. Would the proposal result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise X
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance,or
applicable standards of other agencies? (2,3)
b) Exposure of persons or to generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise X
levels? (Source:2, 3)
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise X
levels in the project vicinity above existing
levels without the project? (2,3)
City of Dublin Page 24
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Potentially Less Than Less than No New
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
d)A substantial temporary or periodic increase in X
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project? (2,3)
e) For a project located within an airport land use X
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? (2, 3)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private X
airstrip,would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels? (Source: 2,4)
12.Population and Housing. Would the project
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, X
either directly or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)? (Source: 2,4)
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement X
housing elsewhere? (4)
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement of X
housing elsewhere? (Source: 4)
13.Public Services. Would the proposal:
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
government facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service rations,
response times or other performance objectives
for any of the public services? (Sources: 2,5)
Fire protection X
Police protection X
Schools X
Parks X
Other public facilities X
Solid Waste X
City of Dublin Page 25
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Potentially Less Than Less than No New
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
14.Recreation:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing X
neighborhood and regional parks or recreational
facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated (Source: 2,5)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or X
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
(Source: 2,5)
15.Transportation and Traffic. Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in X
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)? (3,5)
b) Exceed,either individually or cumulatively,a X
level of service standard established by the
County Congestion Management Agency for
designated roads or highways? (3,5)
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in X
location that results in substantial safety risks?
(3,5)
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature(e.g. sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses,such as farm X
equipment? (5)
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (5) X
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (5) X
g) Conflict with adopted policies,plans or programs X
supporting alternative transportation (such as bits
turnouts and bicycle facilities)
(1,2)
City of Dublin Page 26
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Potentially Less Than Less than No New
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
16.Utilities and Service Systems. Would the project
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X
applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board? (2,3)
b) Require or result in the construction of new water X
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion
of existing facilities,the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
(2,3)
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm X
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities,the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects? (4,3)
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve X
the project from existing water entitlements and
resources,or are new or expanded entitlements
needed? (3)
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater X
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
providers existing commitments? (5)
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted X
capacity to accommodate the project's solid
waste disposal needs? (5)
g) Comply with federal,state and local statutes and X
regulations related to solid waste? (5)
17.Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade X
the quality of the environment,substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, substantially reduce
the number 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?
City of Dublin Page 27
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Potentially Less Than Less than No New
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
b) Does the project have impacts that are X
individually limited,but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects,the effects of
other current projects and the effects of probable
future projects).
c) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human X
beings,either directly or indirectly?
Sources used to determine potential environmental impacts
1. Eastern General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan
2. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan EIR
3 1997 Area B-E Negative Declaration
4. Discussion with City staff or service provider
5. Site Visit
6. Other Source
XVII. Earlier Analyses
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for
review.
Portions of the environmental setting, project impacts and mitigation measures for this
Initial Study refer to environmental information contained in the 1993 Eastern Dublin
General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (State
Clearinghouse No. 91103064), hereinafter referred to as the Eastern Dublin EIR. The
Eastern Dublin EIR is a Program EIR which was prepared for the Eastern Dublin
General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan of which this Project is a part. It was
certified by the Dublin City Council on May 10, 1993. Following certification of the EIR,
the Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for impacts including
but not limited to: cumulative traffic, extension of certain community facilities (natural
gas, electric and telephone service), regional air quality, noise and visual. The Eastern
Dublin EIR reviewed transition of then vacant lands to urban uses over an
approximately 20-30 year time frame. For Subarea 3, the EIR assumed land uses and
patterns similar to those shown on the current General Plan and EDSP maps, with the
stream corridor and open space through the middle of the site and residential to the
northeast (MHDR) and west/southwest (MDR).
City of Dublin Page 28
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a large number of mitigation measures which apply to
this Project and which would be applied to any development within the Project area.
Specific mitigation measures identified in the certified Eastern Dublin EIR for potential
impacts are referenced in the text of this Initial Study.
This Initial Study also relies on the Negative Declaration for Dublin Ranch Areas B-E,
adopted by the Dublin City Council on November 18, 1997 through Resolution 140-97.
The ND assumed a mix of residential and open space uses consistent with the existing
General Plan and EDSP designations.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and 15163, this Initial Study is intended to
identify the potential for any new or substantially increased significant impacts on or of
the project which were not evaluated in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the 1997 ND and
which would require additional environmental review.
City of Dublin Page 29
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Attachment to Initial Study
Discussion of Checklist
1. Aesthetics
Environmental Setting
The project is set in an a portion of Eastern Dublin that is transitioning to urban uses
under the auspices of the City of Dublin General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin
EIR, adopted in 1993.
The project site is characterized by two small but distinct hills in the northern and
central portions of the site that slope to the south and west. The hills are identified as
"Visually Sensitive Hillsides-Restricted Development" in the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan (see EDSP Figure 6.3). A small watercourse exists in the northwest corner of the
site. No dwellings exist on the site.
No public parks, scenic vistas or scenic overlooks are located on the site.
As a largely rural area, minimal light sources exist on the project site. Major light
sources adjacent to the site include lights from Fallon Sports Park to the north, lights
from the Groves residential complex to the west and lights from the commercial center
to the south.
Regulatory framework
Dublin General Plan.-The project area is included in the Eastern Dublin Extended
Planning Area. Implementing Policy C.2 of the General Plan states that "proposed site
grading and means of access will not disfigure ridgelands." Further, Implementing
Policy C. 5 requires development projects to be consistent with all applicable General
Plan and Specific Plan policies."
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The City of Dublin adopted the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
(EDSP) in 1993 to guide the future development of approximately 3,300 acres of land in
the eastern Dublin area. The Specific Plan includes a number of policies and programs
dealing with visual resources, including but not limited to protection of ridgelines and
ridgelands, scenic corridors, and hillside development. As noted above, the two hills are
classed as "Visually Sensitive Ridgelands-Restricted Development"
Previous CEQA documents
Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures
to reduce anticipated visual resource impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project.
These include:
• Mitigation Measure 3.8/1.0 reduced project impacts related to standardized tract
development (IM 3.8/B) to a less-than-significant level. This mitigation requires
City of Dublin Page 30
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
future developers to establish visually distinct communities which preserves the
character of the natural landscape by protecting key visual elements and
maintaining views from major travel corridors.
• Mitigation Measure 3.8/2.0 reduced the impact of converting the rural and open
space character of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan area (IM
3.8/B) but not to a less-than-significant level. The mitigation measure requires
implementation of the land use plan that emphasizes retention of predominant
natural features. Even with adherence to this measure, IM 3.8/B would remain
significant and unavoidable on both a project and cumulative level.
• Mitigation Measure 3.8/3.0 would reduce the impact of obscuring distinctive
natural features of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan area (IM
3.8/C) but not to a less-than-significant level. The mitigation measure requires
implementation of the land use plan that emphasizes retention of predominant
natural features.
• Mitigation Measures 3.8/4.0-4.5 reduced the impact of altering the visual quality
of hillsides (IM 3.8/D) to a less-than-significant level. These mitigation measures
require implemtation of appropriate Eastern Dublin Specific Plan policies
including but not limited to use of sensitive grading design to minimize grading,
use of existing topographic features, limiting use of flat pads for construction,
using building designs that conform to natural land forms, recontouring hillside
to resemble existing topography and minimizing the height of cut and fill slopes.
• Mitigation Measures 3.8/5.0-5.2 reduced the impact of altering the visual quality
of ridges (IM 3.8/E) to a less-than-significant level. These mitigation measures
limit development on main ridges that border the Specific Plan area to the north
and east but are allowed on foreground hills, and would limit development in
locations where scenic views would be obscured or would extend above a
ridgetop.
• IM 3.8/F analyzed alteration of the visual character of the Eastern Dublin
flatlands. No mitigation measures were identified and the impact was identified
as significant and unavoidable.
• Mitigation Measure 3.8/6.0 reduced the impact of altering the visual quality of
watercourses (IM 3.8/G) to a less-than-significant level. This mitigation measure
protects Tassajara Creek and other stream courses from unnecessary alteration or
disturbance, and adjoining development should be sited to maintain visual
access to stream corridors.
• Mitigation Measures 3.8/7.0 and 7/1 reduced impacts on scenic vistas (IM 3.8/I)
to a less-than-significant level. These mitigation measures require protection of
designated open space areas and directs the City to conduct a visual survey of
the EDSP area to identify and map viewsheds.
City of Dublin Page 31
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
1997 ND. The 1997 ND updated the prior EDEIR analysis on aesthetics and visual
resources and referenced a visual study prepared for the Area B-E project that identified
refinements in project design to help address visual impacts. No additional potentially
significant aesthetic impacts or mitigation measures were identified in the 1997 ND.
The proposed project will be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures
related to aesthetics set forth in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
Project Impacts
a,b) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista or substantially damage scenic
resources, including adjacent to a state scenic highway? No New Impact. The Eastern
Dublin EIR identifies that implementation of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
would result in a potentially significant impact (Impact 3.8/I), development on
the project area [i.e. the Eastern Dublin planning area] will alter the character of
existing scenic vistas and may obscure important sightlines). Adherence to
Mitigation Measure 3.8/7.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR reduced this
impact to a less-than-significant impact. This measure requires the City to
complete a visual assessment and guidelines for the Eastern Dublin area.
The proposed project would include removing one hill area and relocating the
southwestern hill to the south. The southwest facing slope of the retained hill
would be planted with native grasses and vegetation to retain an open space
appearance. This would screen proposed residential development on the north
side of the hill from passersby on the I-580 corridor.
The existing stream corridor on the western portion of the site would remain and
be preserved as part of the proposed development.
All of the mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the
visual policies contained in the EDSP will apply to this project. No new or more
severe impacts with respect to scenic vistas or scenic resources adjacent to a state
scenic highway would occur than previously analyzed. No further analysis is
required.
C) Substantially degrade existing visual character or the quality of the site? No New
Impact. The proposed project includes the consideration of a development plan
on Subarea 3 of the Dublin Ranch. Aesthetic impacts would include disturbance
of existing vegetation, grading of building pads and roads and construction of a
mix of housing units where none now exist. The Eastern Dublin EIR addressed
the following potential impacts related to visual and aesthetics impacts of
adopting the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan:
Impact 3.8/13: Urban development of the project site will substantially alter
the existing rural and open space qualities that characterize Eastern Dublin
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified one measure to mitigate this impact
(Mitigation Measure 3.8/2.0, "Implement the land use plan for the project site
which emphasizes retention of predominant natural features..."). Both the
approved and current development plans on the project site would adhere to
City of Dublin Page 32
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
this mitigation measure by preserving on-site natural features (stream corridor
and relocated hill). However the Eastern Dublin EIR concluded that even with
adherence to this mitigation, alteration of rural and open space on the project
site would remain a potentially significant impact.
The proposed project would include grading and recontouring of a portion of the
site, including one of the visually sensitive hillside areas to facilitate
development on the project site. The proposed development plan would retain
the south facing slope of the hillside as natural open space as required by the
Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR addresses the impact of visual
change in the character or quality of portions of Eastern Dublin and included
mitigation measures that reduced this impact to a less-than-significant level. No
new or more severe impacts have been identified in this Initial Study with
respect to this topic and no further analysis is required.
d) Create light or glare? No New Impact. The 1997 ND identified this impact as less
than significant. The project site contains minimal light sources and construction
of the proposed project would add additional light sources in the form of
streetlights along exterior and interior roadways as well as building and security
lighting. The project area is in the process of transitioning to urban development.
City of Dublin development requirements will be imposed as part of the normal
and customary standard conditions to restrict spillover of unwanted light off of
the project site once SDR and tentative map development applications are
submitted. No new or more significant impacts would result with respect to light
and glare than has been previously analyzed in previous EIR and ND and no
additional analysis is required.
2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Environmental Setting
The Eastern Dublin EIR identifies the project site as a combination of "locally important
farmland" and "other lands," (see EDSP Figure 3.1-13). Although it is likely that the site
was historically used for grazing or other agricultural operations no agricultural
operations have been observed on the project site during the preparation of this Initial
Study.
Figure 3.1-C contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR notes that a Williamson Act contract
was previously in force on the site, but was non-renewed as of 1993 and has since
expired. No other Williamson Act contracted properties exist on the site.
No forests or major stands of trees exist on the site.
Previous CEQA documents
Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified several potential impacts related
to agricultural resources. Impact IM 3.1/C stated that discontinuation of agricultural
uses would be an insignificant impact due to on-going urbanization trends in Dublin
City of Dublin Page 33
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
and the Tri-Valley area. Impact 3.1/D identified a loss of lands of Farmlands of Local
Importance with approval and implementation of the General Plan and Specific Plan.
This was also noted as an insignificant impact. Impact 3.1/F stated that buildout of
Specific Plan land uses would have a significant and unavoidable impact on cumulative
loss of agricultural and open space lands. Finally, Impact IM 3.1/E noted indirect
impacts related to non-renewal of Williamson Act contracts. This impact was also
identified as an insignificant impact.
1997 ND. No additional impacts to agricultural resources were identified in this
document.
Pro-ect Impacts
a,c) Convert prime farmland to a non-agricultural use or involve other changes which could
result in conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use? No New Impact. No
significant impacts were identified with respect to agricultural resources in
previous CEQA documents listed above other than the cumulative loss of
agricultural and open space lands. The EDEIR assumed the project site would be
urbanized. No new conditions have been identified in this Initial Study with
respect to conversion of prime farmland to a non-agricultural use and no new or
more severe impacts would result than were analyzed in previous EIR and ND
and no additional analysis is required.
The proposed project would continue to contribute to cumulative loss of
agricultural land and open space, which was identified as a significant and
unavoidable impact in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Impact 3.1/F).
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No
New Impact. The City of Dublin has zoned the project site for a mix of residential
uses, open spaces and a stream corridor. No Williamson Act contracts presently
exist on the site nor are any agricultural operations on-going. No new or more
severe impacts would result than have been previously analyzed in previous EIR
and ND and no additional analysis is required.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to a non forest use? No
Impact. No forest land exists on the project site and no impact would result with
respect to this topic.
e) Involve other changes which, due to their location or nature, could result of forest land to
a non forest use? No Impact. See item "d," above.
3. Air Quality
Environmental Setting
The project is within the Amador Valley, a part of the Livermore sub-regional air basin
distinct from the larger San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. The Livermore sub-air basin
is surrounded on all sides by high hills or mountains. Significant breaks in the hills
City of Dublin Page 34
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
surrounding the air basin are Niles Canyon and the San Ramon Valley, which extends
northward into Contra Costa County.
Previous EIRs
Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures
to reduce anticipated air quality impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. These
include:
• Mitigation Measures 3.11/1.0 reduced construction dust deposition impacts but
not to a level of less than significant. MM 3.11/1.0 requires development
projects to implement dust control measures. Even with these measures, the
impact would remain significant and unavoidable
• Mitigation Measures 3.11/2.0-4.0 reduced project and cumulative impacts related
to vehicle emission from construction equipment (IM 3.11/B) but not to a less-
than-significant level. These mitigations require emission control from on-site
equipment, completion of a construction impact reduction plan and others. Even
with adherence to these mitigations, this impact would remain significant and
unavoidable.
• Mitigation Measures 3.11/5.0-11.0 reduced mobile source emission from ROG
and NOx (IM 3.11/C) but not to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation measures
require coordination of growth with transportation plans and other measures,
many of which are at a policy (not a project) level. Even with adherence to
adopted mitigations, IM 3.11/C would remain significant and unavoidable.
• Mitigation Measures 3.11/12.0-13.0 reduced project and cumulative impacts
related to stationary source emissions (IM 3.11/E) but not to a less-than-
significant level. The two adopted mitigations require reduction of stationary
source emissions to the extent feasible by use of energy conservation techniques
and recycling of solid waste material. Even with adherence to the two measures,
stationary source emissions would remain significant and unavoidable.
1997 ND. No additional air quality impacts or mitigation measures were included in the
1997 ND.
The proposed project will be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures
related to air quality.
Protect Impacts
a) Would the project conflict or obstruct implementation of an air quality plan? No New
Impact. The amount of development proposed on the site would be less than
previously considered and approved by the City of Dublin. Approved uses on the
project site includes up to 485 dwellings with a mix of attached and detached
dwellings which has been incorporated into the Regional Clean Air Plan. If
approved, the proposed project would allow development of up to 437 dwellings
with approximately the same mix of attached and detached dwellings and would
City of Dublin Page 35
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
represent a decrease of 47 dwellings. Therefore, approval and implementation of
the proposed project would represent a substantial dwelling unit decrease on the
site and would not conflict with or obstruct the regional Clean Air Plan. No new or
more significant impacts would result than was previously analyzed in prior
CEQA documents. No further analysis is required.
b,c) Would the project violate any air quality standards or result in cumulatively considerable
air pollutants? No New Impact. Air quality impacts of development of the Eastern
Dublin Planning area were analyzed in the 1993 Eastern Dublin EIR. The EIR
found that future development of the Eastern Dublin area, including the proposed
project, would contribute to the cumulative impacts related to dust deposition,
construction equipment emissions, mobile source emissions and stationary source
emissions and would exceed air quality standards. These impact (Impacts
(IM/3.11/A, B, C and E) were was found to be significant and unavoidable when
the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan was approved. Since the proposed project is
consistent with or lower than the number of dwellings anticipated in the Eastern
Dublin EIR there would be no new or more severe impact with respect to violation
of air quality standards than has been previously analyzed in the Eastern Dublin
EIR and 1997 ND, and no additional analysis is required.
d,e) Expose sensitive receptors to significant pollutant concentrations or create objectionable
odors? No New Impact. No New Impact. No schools exist or are planned within or
adjacent to the project area, so no impacts would result. Similarly, the site is not
located adjacent to any freeways that would release significant air emissions, and
in any case, the number of dwelling would decrease from the past approval. Since
the proposed project does not include manufacturing or similar uses, no
objectionable odors would be created.
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified mobile source and stationary source emissions
as potentially significant cumulative impacts which could not be mitigated to
achieve the necessary reduction in source emissions needed to meet the
insignificant threshold and, pursuant to CEQA, the City of Dublin adopted a
Statement of Overriding Consideration for these impacts. Reducing the number of
dwellings from the previous approval means fewer people will be exposed to
pollutant emissions, but the impacts would still be significant. No new or more
severe impacts are identified in this Initial Study beyond those identified in the
Eastern Dublin EIR and 1997 ND.
4. Biological Resources
Environmental Setting
The following analysis is based on a Biological Resources Assessment prepared for the
site by the firm of WRA Environmental Consultants dated November 20, 2013. This
report is hereby incorporated by reference into this Initial Study and is available for
review at the Dublin Community Development Department during normal business
hours.
City of Dublin Page 36
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
The project site is an undeveloped area located in an urbanizing portion of the Eastern
Dublin. The site contains the following biological communities as identified in the WRA
report:
• Non-native annual grasslands
• Disturbed and developed
• Mixed riparian forest
• Cattail marsh
• Seasonal wetlands
• Freshwater marsh
The seasonal wetland, marsh and mixed riparian portions of the site are located in the
approximate center of the site. This area also includes re-vegetated habitat that
represents mitigation for loss of sensitive habitat elsewhere within the Dublin Ranch
area elsewhere in Eastern Dublin.
Special-status (protected) plant species identified on the site include areas containing
Congdon's tarplant and San Joaquin spearscale.
A number of special-status wildlife species were observed on the Subarea 3 site,
including northern harrier and white-tailed kite. Although not observed on the project
in the recent biological assessment, a number of special-status wildlife species have the
potential to occur on the site, including American badger, burrowing owl and
loggerhead shrike.
A number of trees are found on the site within the mixed riparian forest habitat area.
Tree species include valley oak, box elder and willows.
Regulatory framework
California Fish and Wildlife Code Section 1600. Streams, lakes, and riparian vegetation as
habitat for fish and other wildlife species, are subject to jurisdiction by CDFW under
Sections 1600-1616 of the California Fish and Game Code. Any activity that will do one
or more of the following: 1) substantially obstruct or divert the natural flow of a river,
stream, or lake; 2) substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or
bank of a river, stream, or lake; or 3) deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other
material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it can pass into a
river, stream, or lake; generally require a Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration
Agreement. The term "stream," which includes creeks and rivers, is defined in the
California Code of Regulations (CCR) as follows: "a body of water that flows at least
periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish
or other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow
that supports or has supported riparian vegetation. In addition, the term stream can
include ephemeral streams, dry washes, watercourses with subsurface flows, canals,
aqueducts, irrigation ditches, and other means of water conveyance if they support
aquatic life, riparian vegetation, or stream-dependent terrestrial wildlife.
Riparian is defined as, "on, or pertaining to, the banks of a stream;" therefore, riparian
City of Dublin Page 37
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
vegetation is defined as, "vegetation, which occurs in and/or adjacent to a stream and is
dependent on, and occurs because of, the stream itself." Removal of riparian vegetation
also requires a Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act gives the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Corps regulatory and permitting
authority regarding discharge of dredged or fill material into "navigable waters of the
United States." Section 502(7) of the Clean Water Act defines navigable waters as
"waters of the United States, including territorial seas." Section 328 of Chapter 33 in the
Code of Federal Regulations defines the term "waters of the United States" as it applies
to the jurisdictional limits of the authority of the Corps under the Clean Water Act. A
summary of this definition of "waters of the U.S." in 33 CFR 328.3 includes (1) waters
used for commerce; (2) interstate waters and wetlands; (3) "other waters" such as
intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands; (4) impoundments of waters; (5)
tributaries to the above waters; (6) territorial seas; and (7) wetlands adjacent to waters.
Therefore, for purposes of determining Corps jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act,
"navigable waters" as defined in the Clean Water Act are the same as "waters of the
U.S." defined in the Code of Federal Regulations above.
The limits of Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 as given in 33 CFR Section 328.4 are
as follows: (a) Territorial seas: three nautical miles in a seaward direction from the
baseline; (b) Tidal waters of the U.S.: high tide line or to the limit of adjacent non-tidal
waters; (c) Non-tidal waters of the U.S.: ordinary high water mark or to the limit of
adjacent wetlands; (d) Wetlands: to the limit of the wetland.
Some areas that meet the technical criteria for wetlands or waters may not be
jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act. Included in this category are some man-
induced wetlands, which are areas that have developed at least some characteristics of
naturally occurring wetlands due to either intentional or incidental human activities.
Examples of man-induced wetlands may include, but are not limited to, irrigated
wetlands, impoundments, or drainage ditches excavated in uplands, dredged material
disposal areas, and depressions within construction areas.
In addition, some isolated wetlands and waters may also be considered outside of
Corps jurisdiction as a result of the Supreme Court's decision in Solid Waste Agency of
Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (531 U.S. 159
(2001)). Isolated wetlands and waters are those areas that do not have a surface or
groundwater connection to, and are not adjacent to a "navigable waters of the U.S.",
and do not otherwise exhibit an interstate commerce connection.
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1341)
requires any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity that may
result in a discharge of a pollutant into waters of the United States to obtain a
certification from the state in which the discharge originates or would originate, or, if
appropriate, from the interstate water pollution control agency having jurisdiction over
the affected waters at the point where the discharge originates or would originate, that
the discharge will comply with the applicable effluent limitations and water quality
standards. A certification obtained for the construction of any facility must also pertain
City of Dublin Page 38
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
to the subsequent operation of the facility. The responsibility for the protection of water
quality in California rests with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and
its nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs).
Federal and California Endangered Species Acts. The Federal Endangered Species Act
(FESA) of 1973 prohibits federal agencies from authorizing, permitting, or funding any
action that would jeopardize the continued existence of a plant or animal species listed
or a candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the ESA. If a federal
agency is involved with a proposed action or project that may adversely affect a listed
plant or animal, that agency must enter into consultation with the USFWS under
Section 7 (a) (2) of the FESA. Individuals, corporations, and state or local agencies with
proposed actions or projects that do not require authorizing, permitting, or funding
from a federal agency but that may result in the "take" of listed species or candidate
species are required to apply to the USFWS for a Section 10(a) incidental take permit.
The State of California enacted similar laws to the FESA, the California Native Plant
Protection Act (NPPA) in 1977 and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) in
1984. The CESA expanded upon the original NPPA and enhanced legal protection for
plants, but the NPPA remains part of the California Fish and Game Code. To align with
the FESA, CESA created the categories of "threatened" and "endangered" species. The
State converted all animal species listed as "rare" under the FESA into the CESA as
threatened species, but did not do so for rare plants. Thus, these laws provide the legal
framework for protection of California-listed rare, threatened, and endangered plant
and animal species. CDFW implements NPPA and CESA, and its Wildlife and Habitat
Data Analysis Branch maintain the CNDDB, a computerized inventory of information
on the general location and status of California's rarest plants, animals, and natural
communities. During the CEQA review process, CDFW is given the opportunity to
comment on the potential of the proposed project to affect listed plants and animals.
East Alameda County Conservation Strategy. The project site is located in the East
Alameda County Conservation Strategy ("Conservation Strategy") Study Area. The
Conservation Strategy is intended to provide an effective framework to protect,
enhance, and restore natural resources in eastern Alameda County, while improving
and streamlining the environmental permitting process for impacts resulting from
infrastructure and development projects. The City of Dublin is a partner in the
Conservation Strategy and uses the document to provide a baseline inventory of
biological resources and conservation priorities during project-level planning and
environmental permitting.
Previous CEQA documents
Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures
to reduce anticipated impacts to biological resources from the General Plan and EDSP
project. These include:
• Mitigation Measures 3.7/1.0-4.0 reduced impacts related to direct habitat loss
(IM 3.7/A) to a less-than-significant level. These mitigations require
minimization of direct habitat loss due to development, preparation of
City of Dublin Page 39
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
vegetation management and enhancement plans and development of a grazing
management plan by the City of Dublin.
• Mitigation Measure 3.7/5.0 reduced impacts related to indirect loss of vegetation
removal (IM 3.7/B) to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure 3.7/5.0
requires revegetation of graded or disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
• Mitigation Measures 3.7/6.0-17.0 reduced impacts related to loss or degradation
of botanically sensitive habitats (IM 3.7/C) but not to a less-than-significant level.
These measures require a wide range of steps to be taken by future developers to
minimize impacts to sensitive habitat areas, including preserving natural stream
corridors, incorporating natural greenbelts and open space into development
projects, preparation of individual wetland delineations, preparation of
individual erosion and sedimentation plans and similar actions.
• Mitigation Measures 3.7/18.0-19.0 reduced impacts related to the San Joaquin kit
fox (IM 3.7/D) to a less-than-significant level. These measures require
consultation with appropriate regulatory agencies regarding the possibility of kit
fox on project sites and restrictions on use of pesticides and herbicides.
• Mitigation Measures 3.7/20.0-22.0 reduced impacts related to the red-legged
frog, California tiger salamander, western pond turtle and tri-colored blackbird
(IM 3.7/F-I) to a less-than-significant level. These measures require
preconstruction surveys for the species and protection of impacted habitat areas.
• Mitigation Measures 3.7/23.0-24.0 reduced impacts related to destruction of
Golden Eagle nesting sites (IM 3.7/J) to a less-than-significant level. These
measures require preconstruction surveys for this species and protection of
impacted habitat areas.
• Mitigation Measure 3.7/25.0 reduced impacts related to loss of Golden Eagle
foraging habitat (IM 3.7/K) to a less-than-significant level. This measure requires
the identification of a Golden Eagle protection zone within the Eastern Dublin
planning area.
• Mitigation Measure 3.7/26.0 reduced impacts related to Golden Eagle and other
raptor electrocution (IM 3.7/L) to a less-than-significant level. This measure
requires undergrounding of electrical transmission facilities.
• Mitigation Measures 3.7/20.0 to 27.0 reduced impacts related to burrowing owl
and American badger (IM 3.7/M, N) to a less-than-significant level. This
measure mandates preconstruction surveys and a minimum buffer of 300 feet
around burrowing owl nesting sites and American badger breeding sites during
the breeding season.
• Mitigation Measure 3.7/28.0 reduced impacts related to special status
invertebrates (IM 3.7/S) to a less-than-significant level. This measure requires
follow-on special surveys for these species during appropriate times of the year.
City of Dublin Page 40
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
The Eastern Dublin EIR also addresses potential impacts and mitigation measures
regarding bald eagle, peregrine falcons, red-legged frog, California tiger salamander,
western pond turtle the prairie falcon, northern harrier, black-shouldered kite, sharp-
shinned hawk, Cooper's hawk, short-eared owl and California horned lizard.
1997 ND. The 1997 ND updated species surveys since the EDEIR but did not identify
any additional potentially significant impacts or mitigation measures related to
biological resources.
The proposed project will be required to adhere to applicable biological resource
mitigation measures adopted through the Eastern Dublin approvals, as applicable to
the site.
Project Impacts
a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species? No
New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR documents the presence of special-status
plant and wildlife species within the general project area. Numerous mitigation
measures are included in the Eastern Dublin EIR to reduce impacts to candidate,
sensitive and special-status species to a less-than significant level. These are
listed above and continue to apply to the proposed project, as applicable.
Therefore, no new or more severe impacts with respect to candidate, sensitive or
special-status species would occur than have been analyzed in the two previous
CEQA documents and no additional analysis is required.
The proposed project would continue to contribute to cumulative loss or
degradation of botanically sensitive habitat, which was identified as a significant
and unavoidable impact (IM 3.7/C) in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
b, c) Have a substantial adverse impact on riparian habitat or federally protected wetlands?
No New Impact. Wetlands and waters of the United States have been identified
on the project site. Mitigation measures have been included in the Eastern Dublin
EIR to reduce such impacts to a less-than-significant level. The proposed
development plan (see Exhibit 3) shows that the existing wetlands, marsh areas
and other biologically sensitive areas within that have been incorporated into a
stream corridor areas that is protected and preserved. The Comprehensive
Biological Management Plan shall also address impacts and updates to previous
mitigation measures to ensure long-term protection of riparian habitat, wetlands
and other waters. No new or more severe impacts would occur than have been
previously analyzed with respect to this topic. No additional analysis is required.
d) Interfere with movement of native fish or wildlife species? No New Impact. As
assumed in the EDEIR and the 1997 ND, the project continues to provide open
space area along and past a designated stream corridor. This ensures that there
continues to be an opportunity for wildlife and fish species movement within the
Eastern Dublin context of gradual urbanization over time. Mitigation measures
contained in the EDEIR address protections for wildlife and fish species in areas
not anticipated for future development. The project would be required to
City of Dublin Page 41
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
implement these adopted mitigations, as applicable. No new or more severe
impacts would occur than have been previously analyzed with respect to
potential interference with fish or wildlife movement and no additional analysis
is required.
e, f) Conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources or any adopted
Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans? No New
Impact. Approval and construction of the proposed project could affect native
oak trees and other trees species on the site. The City of Dublin affords Heritage
Tree status to any oak, bay, cypress, maple, redwood, buckeye, or sycamore tree
with a main trunk of at least twenty-four inches in diameter when measured at
fifty-two inches above the natural grade; trees required for preservation under an
approved development plan, zoning permit, use permit, site development
review, or subdivision map; and trees planted as replacements for unlawfully
removed trees. Permits are required for the removal of any Heritage Tree. Any
Heritage Trees that are proposed for removal must be identified in future Stage 2
Development Plans, Site Development Review and Subdivision applications.
Conditions regarding replacement of trees will be considered at that time.
Approval of a development plan, zoning permit, site development review, or
subdivision map that specifies tree removal will meet the requirements for
Heritage Tree removal permitting. Additionally, a Heritage Tree Protection Plan
may be required prior to issuance of permits for grading, or building unless a
certified arborist has confirmed that the activities would be outside of the ground
area of the drip-line of the trees and the area immediately surrounding the drip-
line.
The project site lies within the Eastern Alameda County Conservation Strategy
(EACCS) planning area. The City of Dublin utilizes the Conservation Strategy as
guidance for environmental permitting for public projects, and private
development projects are encouraged to use the EACCS as a resource as well.
The Conservation Strategy embodies a regional approach to permitting and
mitigation for wildlife habitat impacts associated with land development,
infrastructure, and other activities. The Conservation Strategy is neither a
Habitat Conservation Plan nor a Natural Community Conservation Plan, but is a
document intended to provide guidance during the project planning and
permitting process to ensure that impacts are offset in a biologically effective
manner. In any case, the project remains subject to all adopted biological
resource mitigations, as applicable. As there is no previous or existing habitat
conservation plan for the site, there would therefore be no new or significantly
more severe impacts with respect to this topic than previously analyzed in the
Eastern Dublin EIR and no additional analysis is required.
City of Dublin Page 42
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
5. Cultural Resources
Environmental Setting
Potentially historic structures. The site is vacant and contains no structures. The Eastern
Dublin EIR did not identify any significant historic structures on the project site.
Underground cultural resources. The Eastern Dublin EIR did not identify the presence of
archeological or paleontological cultural resources on the project site.
Previous CEQA documents
Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures
to reduce anticipated impacts to cultural resources from the General Plan and EDSP
project. These include:
• Mitigation Measures 3.9/1.0-4.0 reduced impacts related to disruption or
destruction of identified prehistoric resources (IM 3.9/A) to a less-than-
significant level. These mitigations mandate a program of mechanical and/or
hand subsurface testing for the presence or absence of midden deposits,
recordation of identified midden sites, collection and/or testing of resources and
development of a site-specific protection program for prehistoric sites.
• Mitigation Measures 3.9/5.0-6.0 reduced impacts related to the disruption or
destruction of unrecorded prehistoric resources (IM 3.9B) to a less-than-
significant level.
• Mitigation Measures 3.9/7.0-12.0 reduced impacts related to disruption or
destruction of identified historic resources to a less-than-significant level (Impact
3.9/Q. These measures would include preparing site-specific archival research
for individual resources, encourage adaptive reuse of historic resources,
recordation of historic sites on local state and federal registers, as appropriate
and development of preservation programs for significant resources.
The adopted EDEIR measures largely implemented then-Appendix K of the CEQA
Guidelines. Appendix K has since been replaced by CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5,
which addresses historic and archeological resources, including human remains;
similarly, EDEIR references to Appendix K have been replaced with section 15064.5 in
the discussions below.
1997 ND. The 1997 ND did not identify any additional potentially significant impacts or
mitigation measures with respect to cultural resources.
The proposed project will be required to comply with the applicable EDSP EIR cultural
resource mitigation measures.
City of Dublin Page 43
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Project Impacts
a) Cause substantial adverse change to significant historic resources? No New Impact. No
historic resources have been identified in the project area in the Eastern Dublin
EIR. No residences or other structures exist on the site so no historic structures
are present. No new or more severe supplemental impacts have therefore been
identified for the proposed project than were disclosed in previous CEQA
documents and no additional review is required.
b, c) Cause a substantial adverse impact or destruction to archeological or paleontological
resources? No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR identifies a remote but
potentially significant possibility that construction activities, including site
grading, trenching and excavation, may uncover significant archeological and/or
paleontological resources on development sites. The Eastern Dublin EIR
categorized these resources as pre-historic cultural resources. None of these pre-
historic sites were identified by the EIR within near the project site. The Eastern
Dublin EIR assumed that all pre-historic sites would be disturbed or altered in
some manner. This potential impact was identified and addressed in the Eastern
Dublin EIR (Impact 3.9/A) and mitigation measures 3.9/1.0 through 3.9/4.0
(page 3.9-6 — 3.9-7) that require subsurface testing for archeological resources;
recordation and mapping of such resources; and development of a protection
program for resources which qualify as "significant" under Section 15064.5 of the
CEQA Guidelines. Mitigation Measures 3.9/5.0 and 3.9/6.0, described above,
also were adopted to address the potential disruption of any previously
unidentified pre-historic resources and would apply to the project as may be
appropriate.
The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan also contains policies (Policies 6-24 and 6-25)
requiring research of archaeological resources prior to construction and
determination of the significance and extent of any resources uncovered during
grading and construction.
Therefore, no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to cultural
resources have been identified that have been previously analyzed in the EDEIR
and 1997 ND and no additional analysis is required.
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of a forfnal cemetery? No
New Impact. Existing cultural resource mitigation measures contained in the
Eastern Dublin EIR through Appendix K/section 15064.5 reduced impacts to
human remains to a less-than-significant level. No new or more severe
significant impacts with respect to human remains are anticipated beyond those
previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required.
City of Dublin Page 44
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
6. Geology and Soils
Environmental Setting
Geology and soils. The Eastern Dublin EIR notes that site soils are largely composed of
undifferentiated alluvial deposits (EDSP Exhibit 3.6-C). The EDSP further notes that
alluvium soils are characterized by crudely stratified Quaternary stream deposits of
sand, silt and clay.
Landslide potential. Portions of the site have moderate to steep slopes. Although some of
the hillsides would be re-graded to allow for development, there is a potential for
landslide on the site.
Seismic hazard. The project area does not lie within an Earthquake Fault Zone (formerly
Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone) (see Exhibit 3.6-B contained in the EDSP EIR).
Major active faults in the region that influence earthquake susceptibility include the San
Andreas, Hayward, Calaveras, and Greenville Faults. The site is subject to strong
ground shaking in the event of seismic activity, consistent with all of the Bay area.
Tsunami and seiche hazards. The risk of damage to future improvements on the site from
a tsunami or seiche is low due to the inland location of the site.
Previous CEQA documents
Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures
to reduce anticipated impacts related to Soils, Geology and Seismicity from the General
Plan and EDSP project. These include:
• Mitigation Measure 3.6/1.0 reduced impacts related to primary effects of
earthquake ground shaking (IM 3.6/B) but not to a less-than-significant level.
This mitigation measure requires that future structure and infrastructure
facilities be designed to applicable local and state building codes.
• Mitigation Measures 3.9/2.0-7.0 reduced impacts related to the secondary effects
of earthquake ground shaking (IM 3.9/C) to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation measures mandate building setbacks from landslides, stabilization of
unstable land forms, removal and reconstruction of unstable soils, use of
engineered retaining structures, use of appropriately designed and engineered
fill, and design of structures to account of potential soil failure.
• Mitigation Measures 3.6/9.0-10.0 reduced impacts related to substantial
alteration to landforms to a less-than significant level (IM 3.6/D). Mitigations
require grading plans with minimal cuts and fills and careful siting of homes and
improvements to avoid excessive grading.
• Mitigation Measures 3.6/14.0-16.0 reduced impacts related to expansive soils (IM
3.6/H) to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation measures require formulation
City of Dublin Page 45
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
of site-specific designs to overcome expansive soils, reducing the amount of
moisture in the soil and by appropriate foundation and pavement design.
• Mitigation Measures 3.6/17.0-19.0 reduced impacts related to natural slope
stability (IM 3.6/I) to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation measures mandate
formulation of use of site-specific designs based on follow-on geotechnical
reviews of individual developments, limiting the location of improvements on
downslopes of unstable soils, removal/reconstruction of potentially unstable
slope areas and installation of surface and subsurface slope drainage
improvements.
• Mitigation Measures 3.6/20.0-26.0 reduced impacts related to cut and fill slope
stability (IM 3.6/J) to a less-than-significant level. These measures include
developing grading plans for hillside areas that minimize grading and associate
cuts and fills, ensuring that grading plans comply with appropriate building
codes, utilizing keys and benches as part of grading to ensure slope stability and
minimizing use of unreinforced fill slopes, appropriate compaction of fill areas
and on-going maintenance of slope drainage areas.
• Mitigation Measure 3.6/27.0 reduced the impact related to short-term
construction-related erosion and sedimentation (IM 3.6/K) to a less-than-
significant level. This measure includes limiting timing of construction to avoid
the rainy season and implementing a number of other specific erosion control
measures.
• Mitigation Measure 3.6/28.0 reduced the impact related to long-term erosion and
sedimentation (IM 3.6/L) to a less-than-significant level. This measure includes
installation of erosion control facilities into individual development projects,
including sediment catch basins, creek bank stabilization, revegetation of graded
areas and similar measures.
1997 ND. The 1997 ND updated geotechnical investigations for Dublin Ranch since the
EDEIR. No supplemental impacts or mitigation measures were identified in this ND.
The proposed project will be required to comply with applicable EDSP EIR soil,
geologic and seismic mitigation measures.
Pro-ject Impacts
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse impacts, including loss,
injury or death related to ground rupture, seismic ground shaking, ground failure, or
landslides? No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified that the primary
and secondary effects of ground-shaking (Impacts 3.6/B and 3.6/Q could be
potentially significant impacts. With implementation of Mitigation Measure
3.6/1.0 the primary effects of ground-shaking are reduced but not to a less-than-
significant level by using modern seismic design for resistance to lateral forces in
construction, which would reduce the potential for structure failure, major
structural damage and loss of life. A site-specific geotechnical report will be
prepared by the applicant as part of future development applications, consistent
City of Dublin Page 46
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
with the EDEIR mitigations and as required by the City of Dublin for all
residential development projects. The site-specific report will identify
construction techniques, such as special footings and use of appropriate building
materials, to ensure that project improvements are consistent with City and State
building code requirements related to ground shaking, landslides, ground failure
and other geologic hazards.
No new or more severe significant impacts with respect to ground rupture,
seismic ground shaking, ground failure or landslides are anticipated than have
been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required.
b) Is the site subject to substantial erosion and/or the loss of topsoil? No New Impact.
Construction of the proposed project improvements on the site would modify the
existing ground surface and alter patterns of surface runoff and infiltration and
could result in a short-term increase in erosion and sedimentation caused by
grading activities (Impact 3.6/K). Long-term impacts could result from
modification of the ground-surface and removal of existing vegetation (Eastern
Dublin EIR Impact 3.6/Q. The project is required to implement grading and
erosion controls through Mitigation Measures 3.6/27.0 and 28.0 contained in the
Eastern Dublin EIR.
The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan also contains a policy (Policy 6-43), which
requires that new development be designed to provide effective control of soil
erosion as a result of construction activities. This policy will be applied to the
proposed project.
With adherence to previous mitigation measures, there would be no new or more
severe significant impacts than have been previously analyzed in the EDEIR and
1997 ND and no additional analysis is required.
c,d) Is the site located on soil that is unstable or expansive or result in potential lateral
spreading, liquefaction, landslide or collapse? No New Impact. Consistent with
Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure 3.6/7.0 and standard City development
conditions, the project developer will be will be required to retain a licensed
geologist or equivalent to prepare a site-specific soils and geotechnical report for
future Stage 2 Development Plan, SDR and tentative map applications. The
report will be required to contain detailed methods to minimize impacts from
shrink-swell and/or lateral spreading potential for future site improvements
should these conditions be found on the site. EDEIR Mitigation Measures
3.6/9.0-10.0 will also be implemented to prepare detailed development plans
with consideration of hillside conditions so as to avoid landslide potential. With
adherence to the Eastern Dublin EIR mitigation measures and Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan policies , no new or more severe impacts have been identified
related to lateral spreading, liquefaction and other soil hazards than have been
analyzed in previous CEQA documents; no additional analysis is required.
e) Have soils incapable of supporting on-site septic tanks if sewers are not available? No
New Impact. Proposed residences on the site would be connected to sanitary
City of Dublin Page 47
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
sewers provided by DSRSD, so there would be no new or more severe impacts
with regard to septic systems.
7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Environmental Setting
Since certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR in 1993 and follow-on CEQA documents, the issue
of contribution of greenhouse gasses to climate change has become a more prominent issue of
concern as evidenced by passage of AB 32 in 2006. On March 18, 2010, amendments to the
State CEQA Guidelines took effect which set forth requirements for the analysis of greenhouse
gasses. The topic of the project's contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change
was not analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR or the 1997 ND. Since the Eastern Dublin EIR and
ND have been certified, the determination of whether greenhouse gasses and climate change
needs to be analyzed for this proposed project is governed by the law on supplemental or
subsequent EIRs (Public Resources Code section 21166 and Guidelines, Sections 15162 and
15163). Greenhouse gas and climate change is not required to be analyzed under those
standards unless it constitutes "new information of substantial importance, which was not
known and could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified as
complete" (CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15162 (a) (3).) Greenhouse gas and climate change impacts is
not new information that was not known or could not have been known at the time the
Eastern Dublin EIR was certified and the 1997 ND approved. The issue of climate change and
greenhouse gasses was widely known prior to these actions. The United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change was established in 1992. The regulation of greenhouse gas
emissions to reduce climate change impacts was extensively debated and analyzed throughout
the early 1990s. The studies and analyses of this issue resulted in the adoption of the Kyoto
Protocol in 1997. In the early and mid 2000s, GHGs and climate change were extensively
discussed and analyzed in California. In 2000, SB 1771 established the California Climate
Action Registry for the recordation of greenhouse gas emissions to provide information about
potential environmental impacts. In 2005, the Governor issued Executive Order # S-03-05
establishing greenhouse gas emission reduction targets in California. AB 32 was adopted in
2006. Therefore, the impact of greenhouse gases on climate change was known at the time of
the certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR in May 1993 and the approval of the ND in 1997.
Under CEQA standards, it is not new information that requires analysis in a supplemental EIR
or negative declaration. No supplemental environmental analysis of the project's impacts on
this issue is required under CEQA.
Project Impacts
a,b Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment or conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? As discussed above, no additional
environmental analysis is required under CEQA Section 21166.
8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
(This section of the Initial Study is based on a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
prepared by Haley & Aldrich, Inc. in April 2012 ("Report on ASTM Phase I
City of Dublin Page 48
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Environmental Site Assessment, Dublin Ranch Property, Subarea 3, Dublin California.")
This document is incorporated into this Initial Study by reference and is available for
review at the Dublin Community Development Department during normal business
hours.
Environmental Setting
The Phase I analysis prepared by Haley & Aldrich did not identify any recognized
environmental conditions on the project site. No recommendations were made in the
Phase I report that would result in any remediation on the site.
Previous CEQA documents
Eastern Dublin EIR. This topic was not directly analyzed in the EIR; however, hazards
impacts were identified in Chapter 3.4 (fire and police emergency response, wildfire
hazards).
1997 ND. The ND discussed a Phase I site assessment of Areas B-E prepared since the
EDEIR. No problem sites were identified and no significant impacts were expected
from use of small quantities of paints, pesticides, and other similar substances typical of
urban non-industrial uses. The ND also stated there was no significant risk of explosion
or accidental hazardous substance release. No additional significant impacts or
mitigation measures dealing with hazards or hazardous materials were included in this
document.
Project Impacts
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,
use or disposal of hazardous materials? No New Impact. There would be no impact
with regard to transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials, since the
proposed project involves construction of a residential development on the site.
There would be no use, storage or transport of significant quantities of hazardous
materials associated with the proposed development. No new or more severe
impacts would therefore occur on the site than have been previously analyzed and
no additional analysis is required.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment? No New Impact. Based on the discussion in subsection "a," above, no
new or more severe impacts are anticipated with respect to the release of
hazardous materials than were analyzed in the 1997 ND and no additional analysis
is required.
c) Ernit hazardous materials or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No
Impact. Approval and implementation of the proposed project would have no
impact with regard to this topic, since no schools exist or are planned near the
project area. No new or more severe impact would occur with respect to emission
or handling of hazardous materials within one-quarter of an existing or planned
school and no additional analysis is required.
City of Dublin Page 49
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
d) Is the site listed as a hazardous materials site? No New Impact. The 1997 ND reported
that none of Areas B-E were included on a list of hazardous waste and substance
sites. No properties comprising the project area are listed on the State of California
Department of Toxic Substances Control as an identified hazardous site as of
November 14, 2013. There is therefore no new or more severe impacts impact with
respect to this topic than have been previously analyzed and no additional
analysis is required.
e,f) Is the site located within an airport land use plan of a public airport or private airstrip? No
New Impact. The project site lies within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) of the
Livermore Municipal Airport and would therefore requires review by the
Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). A portion of the existing
Open Space land use designation lies within the Airport Protection Area and
would be redesignated as Rural Residential/Agricultural (RRA) however no
residential uses would be permitted consistent with the development limitations
for the APA. All other permitted and conditional uses within the proposed RRA
land use designation have been reviewed for consistency with the current Airport
Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). The EDEIR discussed the potential for
land use incompatibilities with respect to the airport, but identified the impact as
less than significant based on the land uses being consistent with the requirements
and policies of the designated areas (Impact 3.1/H). The project proposes the same
type and general location of residential and open space uses but continues to limit
development in the APA area. Therefore, there would not be a new or more severe
impact since ALUC review for development projects was included in the Eastern
Dublin EIR and this project has been reviewed by the ALUC and found to be
consistent with the current ALUCP; no additional analysis is required.
g) Interference with an emergency evacuation plan? No New Impact. The proposed
project would include the construction of a residential project on private land. No
emergency evacuation plan would be affected since no roadways would be
blocked. No new or more severe impacts would result than have been previously
analyzed.
h) Expose people and structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No New Impact. The
project site is located in a partially developed area with residential development
existing to the west (The Groves). A City park has been partially constructed to the
north (Fallon Sports Park) and a commercial development to the south. Property to
the east, on the east side of Fallon Road, is vacant. The project proposes a similar
type and scale of development as assumed in the EDEIR and 1997 ND, and is
subject to mitigation measures for Impact 3.4/E contained in Eastern Dublin EIR
and to the City's Wildfire Management Plan (updated in 2002). No new or more
severe significant impacts related to wildland fire hazards are anticipated beyond
those in the prior EIR and ND and no additional analysis is required.
City of Dublin Page 50
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
9. Hydrology and Water Quality
Environmental Setting
Local surface water. The project site is located within the Alameda Creek watershed
which drains to the San Francisco Bay via the Arroyo Del Valle and Arroyo de la
Laguna. A small stream flows in a northwest-southeast direction through the project
area.
The project area is located within the jurisdiction of Zone 7 of the Alameda County
Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 7). Zone 7 provides maintenance
of regional drainage facilities within this portion of Alameda County.
Surface water quality. Water quality in California is regulated by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), which
controls the discharge of pollutants to water bodies from point and non-point sources.
In the San Francisco Bay area, this program is administered by the San Francisco Bay
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Federal regulations issued in
November 1990 expanded the authority of the RWQCB to include permitting of
stormwater discharges from municipal storm sewer systems, industrial processes, and
construction sites that disturb areas larger than one acre of land area. The City of Dublin
is a co-permittee of the Alameda County Clean Water Program, which is a coordinated
effort by local governments in Alameda County to improve water quality in San
Francisco Bay.
Flooding. The project site lies outside of a 100-year flood hazard area (Flood Insurance
Rate Map, Community Panel No. 06001C0328G).
Previous CEQA documents
Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures
to reduce anticipated impacts related to hydrology and storm drainage from the
General Plan and EDSP project. These include:
• Mitigation Measures 3.5/44.0-48 reduced impacts related potential flooding (IM
3.5/Y) to a less-than-significant level. These mitigation measures require new
storm drainage facilities as part of new development, requires developers to
prepare storm drain plans for individual development projects and requires new
flood control facilities to alleviate downstream flooding potential.
• Mitigation Measures 3.5/51.0 and 52.0 reduced impacts related to non-point
source pollution (IM 3.5/AA) to a less-than-significant level. These mitigation
measures mandate that specific water quality investigations be submitted as part
of development projects and that the City should develop community-based
programs to educate residents and businesses to reduce non-point source
pollution.
City of Dublin Page 51
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
1997 ND. No potentially significant impacts or mitigation measures were included in
this document.
The proposed project shall adhere to all of the applicable above previous mitigation
measures.
Project Impacts
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? No New Impact.
Approval and construction of the proposed development project would add
impervious surfaces to the undeveloped site that would increase the amount of
stormwater runoff and potentially degrade water quality. Mitigation Measure
3.5/51.0 contained in the EDSP EIR requires each project developer to prepare and
submit a water quality investigation. The City of Dublin also requires new
development proposals to adhere to the most recent surface water quality
standards adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Typical methods
of adherence include routing runoff water though vegetated swales or mechanical
water cleaning devices, sweeping of parking lots, covering of trash dumpsters and
similar actions. The required water quality investigation will be submitted and
reviewed as part of the Stage 2 Development Plan and related SDR and tentative
map submittals showing detailed project design. Adherence to the existing
mitigation measures will ensure that no new or more significant impacts with
respect to water quality violations or wastewater discharges would result than
have been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required.
b) Substantially deplete groundwater recharge areas or lowering of water table? No New
Impact. No new or more significant impacts are anticipated with regard to
depletion of groundwater resources than have been analyzed in previous CEQA
documents. Much of the site would remain as rural residential/agriculture that
would allow recharge of the underground aquifer. Also, stormwater runoff from
the site would be directed to an existing off-site stormwater basin located west of
the site that would allow recharge into the underground aquifer.
Also, the proposed water source for this project would rely on surface water
supplies from DSRSD and not local groundwater supplies. The project site is not
identified as a groundwater recharge area in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
Therefore, no new or more severe impacts would occur with respect to this topic
than has been previously analyzed in earlier CEQA documents and no additional
analysis is required.
c) Substantially alter drainage patterns, including streambed courses such that substantial
siltation or erosion would occur? No New Impact. No grading is proposed along the
streambed. New impervious surfaces would be added to the project site to
accommodate new dwellings, roadways, driveways and similar surfaces. Existing
drainage patterns may be slightly modified based on proposed development,
similar to the existing approved Development Plan. However, project stormwater
runoff would flow into existing underground lines previously installed in
surrounding streets designed to accept these increased flows (Jim Templeton,
project engineer, 1/15/4). Moreover, adherence to Mitigation Measure 3.5/44.0
City of Dublin Page 52
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR reduced impacts related to changed drainage
patterns and erosion to a less-than-significant level. No new or more severe
impacts would result with respect to changed drainage patterns than have been
previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required.
d) Substantially alter drainage patterns or result in flooding, either on or off the project site?
No New Impact. No impacts or significant changes to drainage patterns are
anticipated as part of the project. The proposed development area lies outside of a
FEMA 100-year flood hazard area. Proposed drainage patterns would generally
follow current patterns (Jim Templeton, project engineer, 1/15/14). No new or
more significant impacts are anticipated than have been previously analyzed and
no additional analysis is required.
e) Create stormwater runoff that would exceed the capacity of drainage systems or add
substantial amounts of polluted runoff? No New Impact. Adherence to Eastern Dublin
EIR Mitigation Measures 3.5/44.0-48.0 will reduce drainage and pollution impacts
to a less-than-significant level. These mitigation measures require new storm
drainage facilities as part of new development and requires developers to prepare
storm drain plans for individual development projects such as the proposed
project. These plans must also address the potential for increased water quality
impacts. For the proposed Subarea 3 development, sub-regional drainage
improvements to serve this project have already been installed (source:Jim
Templeton, project engineer, 1/8/14). No new or more significant impacts have
been identified in this Initial Study regarding increases in stormwater runoff than
have been previously analyzed; no additional analysis is required.
f) Substantially degrade water duality? Please see items "a" and "e."
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped by a Flood Insurance Rate
Map? No New Impact. As noted in the Environmental Setting section, above, the
site lies outside of a 100-year flood hazard zone. No new or more significant
impacts are anticipated than have been previously analyzed.
h, i) Place within a 100-year flood hazard boundary structures that impeded or redirect flood
flow, including darn failures? No New Impact. Refer to item "g," above.
j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflows? No New Impact. The project site
is located well inland from San Francisco Bay or other major bodies of water to be
impacted by a tsunami or seiche. No impacts would therefore result.
10. Land Use and Planning
Environmental Setting
The project site is vacant and contains no dwellings or other structures.
City of Dublin Page 53
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Surrounding uses include a combination of developed and undeveloped properties
within the Eastern Dublin Planning area. The Groves attached residential project has
been constructed to the west. Fallon Sports Park exists north of the site, which is
currently proposed for expansion. The Fallon gateway commercial project and
undeveloped land exists south of the site. The property east of the site is undeveloped
and is vacant.
Project Impacts
a) Physically divide an established community? No New Impact. The project site is
located within a distinct area, between Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway
west of Fallon Road. The site would either be developed for urban uses or be
reserved for agricultural and open space uses. Two small outparcels on the
periphery of the Subarea 3 site are not included in this development proposal.
Therefore, no existing, established community would be physically divided. No
new or more significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study than
have been previously analyzed in prior CEQA documents.
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation? No New Impact.
Although amendments have been requested to the General Plan and Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan to change development areas on the site, the number of
dwellings would be somewhat less with the proposed project than has been
previously approved (485 previously approved v. 437 proposed). No changes are
proposed to any regulation regulating environmental protection. No new or more
significant impacts are anticipated with regard to land use regulations than have
been previously analyzed in other applicable CEQA documents.
c) Conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No
New Impact. The project site lies within the Eastern Alameda County
Conservation Strategy (EACCS) planning area. The City of Dublin utilizes the
Conservation Strategy as guidance for environmental permitting for public
projects, and private development projects are encouraged to use the EACCS as a
resource as well. The Conservation Strategy embodies a regional approach to
permitting and mitigation for wildlife habitat impacts associated with land
development, infrastructure, and other activities. The Conservation Strategy is
neither a Habitat Conservation Plan nor a Natural Community Conservation Plan,
but is a document intended to provide guidance during the project planning and
permitting process to ensure that impacts are offset in a biologically effective
manner. There is no existing habitat conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan for the site. There would therefore be no new or significantly
more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and 1997
ND and no additional analysis is required
11. Mineral Resources
Environmental Setting
The project site contains no known mineral resources. This is based on the Eastern
Dublin EIR.
City of Dublin Page 54
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Project Impacts
a, b) Result in the loss of availability of regionally or locally significant mineral resources? No
New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR does not indicate that significant deposits of
minerals exist in the project area, so no new or more severe impacts would occur
than have been previously analyzed.
12. Noise
Environmental Setting
The City defines "noise" as a sound or series of sounds that are intrusive, irritating,
objectionable and/or disruptive to daily life. Noise is primarily a concern with regard to
noise sensitive land uses such as residences, schools, churches and hospitals. Although
noise is controlled around commercial, industrial and recreation uses, community noise
levels rarely exceed maximum recommended levels for these uses.
Regulatory Setting
The Noise Element of the General Plan identifies the following primary sources of noise
in Dublin: traffic noise from freeways and major roadways within the community and
noise generated by the BART line adjacent to the I-580 freeway.
The Noise Element identifies the following maximum noise exposure levels by land use
type.
Table 2. City of Dublin Land Use/Noise Compatibility Standards (decibels)
Land Use Normally Conditionally Normally Clearly
Acceptable Acceptable Unacceptable Unacceptable
Residential 60 or less 60-70 70-75 75+
Lodging Facilities 60 or less 61-80 71-80 Over 80
Schools, churches, 60 or less 61-70 71-80 Over 80
nursing homes
Neighborhood 60 or less 61-65 66-70 Over 70
arks
Office/Retail 70 or less 71-75 76-80 Over 80
Industrial 70 or less 71-75 Over 75 --
Source: Dublin General Plan Noise Element, Table 9-1, 2012
The City of Dublin also enforces an interior noise standard of 45 decibels for residential
dwellings.
Previous CEQA documents
Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR notes that major noise sources within
Eastern Dublin include traffic noise from arterial roadways, helicopter overflights from
` Camp Parks RFTA, west of Tassajara Road, noise generated by development of land
uses under the Specific Plan and General Plan and construction noise. No specific
significant future noise sources are identified on the project site.
City of Dublin Page 55
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated
noise impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include:
• Mitigation Measures 3.10/1.0 reduced impacts related to exposure of proposed
housing to future roadway noise (IM 3.10/A) to a less-than-significant level.
This mitigation measure require that all future development projects within a
future CNEL 60 noise contour have an acoustic analysis prepared to ensure that
future dwelling units meet City noise exposure levels.
• Mitigation Measures 3.10/4.0 and 5.0 reduced impacts related to construction
noise (IM 10/E) to a less-than-significant level. These mitigation measures
require developers to submit construction noise management plans and to limit
hours of construction operations.
1997 ND. No new or more severe significant noise impacts were identified in this
document.
The proposed project will be required to comply with applicable noise mitigation
measures identified above.
Protect Impacts
a) Would the project expose persons or generation of noise levels in excess of standards
established by the General Plan or other applicable standard? No New Impact.
Development of proposed residential land uses on the project site would increase
noise on the project site and future residences would be subject to traffic noise
from vehicles using Fallon Road, Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway. A
recommended condition of SDR and subdivision map approval would require an
acoustic specialist to ensure that project features to reduce interior and exterior
noise levels on the project site will conform with City noise standards. With
adherence to Eastern Dublin EIR noise mitigation measures and noise standards in
the General Plan, no new or more significant noise impacts have been identified
than previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required.
The project would contribute to cumulative noise conditions identified as Impact
3.10/B in the Eastern Dublin EIR, which is exposure of existing residences to
future roadway noise. This impact was found to be significant and unavoidable in
the Eastern Dublin EIR. Also, EDSP EIR Impact 3.10/D, exposure of proposed
residential development to noise from future military training activities at Parks
RFTA, was found to be significant and unavoidable. The project site is not located
near Parks RFTA.
b) Exposure of people to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? No
New Impact. The proposed project would not include construction or operational
elements that would result in significant groundborne vibration levels to nearby
residents (source: Kevin Fryer, applicant representative, 11/18/13). No new
impacts would result with respect to vibration or groundborne vibration than was
analyzed in previous CEQA documents on the project site.
City of Dublin Page 56
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
c) Substantial increases in permanent in ambient noise levels? No New Impact. Increased
levels of permanent noise on the project site that would occur based on project
development would be reduced to a less-than significant level through adherence
to applicable mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR . No new or
more significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study than have been
previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required.
d) Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels without the project? No New Impact. Increased levels of short-term
construction noise generated on the project site would be reduced to a less-than-
significant level through adherence to applicable mitigation measures contained in
the Eastern Dublin EIR and the Dublin Noise Ordinance. These measures require
project developers to limit hours of construction activity and to prepare
construction noise management plans. No new or more significant impacts have
been identified in this Initial Study than have been previously analyzed and no
additional analysis is required.
e, f) For a project located within an airport land use plan, would the project expose people to
excessive noise levels? No New Impact. Impact 3.10/C in the EDEIR identified
potential noise impacts from the airport as less than significant. Based on Exhibit
3-2 contained in the Livermore Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
(2012), the Subarea 3 sits lies north of the noise compatibility zone for this airport.
The project site would therefore not be subjected to substantial aircraft noise from
this airport. No new or more significant impacts are therefore anticipated in terms
of this topic than was previously analyzed in previous CEQA documents and no
additional analysis is required.
13. Population and Housing
Environmental Setting
The project is currently vacant and contains no dwellings or other structures.
Project Impacts
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly? No New
Impact. Approval of the proposed project would not induce substantial additional
population growth in the Eastern Dublin area, since development on the affected
properties has been envisioned in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and Dublin
General Plan. Approval of the proposed project would result in fewer dwellings
being constructed than currently approved on the site (485 units currently
approved v. 437 proposed.) No new or more severe impacts would occur with
respect to this topic than were previously analyzed.
b,c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing units or people? No
New Impact. Since the site is currently vacant, no housing units or people would
be displaced should be project be approved and implemented. No new or more
City of Dublin Page 57
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
severe impacts than were previously analyzed are therefore anticipated with
respect housing displacement.
14. Public Services
Environmental Setting
The following provide essential services to the community:
• Fire Protection. Fire protection services are provided by the Alameda County
Fire Department. The Department provides fire suppression, emergency
medical response, fire prevention, education, building inspection services and
hazardous material control. The nearest station is Station 18 at 4800 Fallon
Road.
• Police Protection: Police and security protection is provided by the Alameda
County Sheriff under contact to the City of Dublin.
• Schools. The Dublin Unified School District provides K-12 educational
services for properties on the project site.
• Library Services: Alameda County Library service.
• Maintenance. Maintenance of streets, roads and other governmental facilities
are the responsibility of the City of Dublin.
Previous CEQA documents
Eastern Dublin EIR. Applicable mitigation measures contained in Eastern Dublin EIR
addressing fire and police protection include:
• Mitigation Measure 3.4/7.0: Establish appropriate funding mechanisms to cover up-
front costs of capital fire improvements.
• Mitigation Measure 3.4/9.0: Incorporate Fire Department recommendations on
project design relating to access, water pressure, fire safety and prevention into the
requirements of development approval.
• Mitigation Measure 3.4/10.0: Ensure, as a requirement of project approval, that an
assessment district, homeowners association or other mechanism is in place that will
provide regular long-term maintenance of the urban/open space interface.
• Mitigation Measure 3.4/12.0: The City shall work with the Fire Department and
qualified biologists to prepare a wildfire management plan for the project area.
City of Dublin Page 58
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
• Mitigation Measure 3.4/1.0: Provide additional personnel and facilities and revise
beats as necessary in order to establish and maintain City standards for police
protection service in Eastern Dublin.
• Mitigation Measure 3.4/3.0-5.0: Incorporate into the requirements of project
approval Police Department recommendations on project design that affect traffic
safety and crime prevention.
1997 ND. No additional public service impacts or mitigation measures were identified
in this document.
The project will be required to comply with the above mitigation measures.
Project Impacts
a) Fire protection? No New Impact. Approval and implementation of the proposed
project would increase the number of fire and emergency medical calls for service
that would need to be responded to by the Alameda County Fire Department, the
City of Dublin's contract fire department, as a result of residential development on
the project site. The proposed project is required to adhere to mitigation measures,
including payment of public facility impact fees to assist in funding new fire
stations (Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure 3.4/7.0) . Consistent with Eastern
Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure 3.4/9.0, proposed development on the project site
will be conditioned to meet Fire Department requirements including but not
limited to maintaining minimum water pressure and fire flow, providing adequate
site access, using fire retardant building materials and similar features. Proposed
development on the site will also be conditioned to be consistent with the City's
adopted Wildfire Management Plan (Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure
3.4/12.0).
Based on discussions with Alameda County Fire Department staff, there would be
no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to fire service
beyond that analyzed in previous CEQA documents (source: Bonnie Terra,
Alameda County Fire Department, 11/18/13) and no new or expanded fire
stations would be needed to provide fire and emergency service for the proposed
project. No additional analysis is required.
b) Police protection? No New Impact. Similar to fire protection, there would be no new
impact with regard to police protection, based on mitigation measures included in
the Eastern Dublin EIR. These Mitigation Measures include paying City of Dublin
public facility impact fees to assist in funding new police facilities (EDSP EIR
Mitigation Measure 3.4/1.0), incorporating Police Department safety and security
requirements into the proposed project, including but not limited to adequate
locking devices, security lighting and ensuring adequate surveillance for
structures and parking areas (EDSP EIR Mitigation Measures 3.4/3.0-5.0).
Based on discussions with Dublin Police Services Department staff, there would be
no new or substantially more severe impacts with respect to police service
City of Dublin Page 59
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
associated with the proposed project beyond that analyzed in previous CEQA
documents (source: Captain Tom McCarthy, Dublin Police Services, 11/20/13). No
additional analysis is required.
c) Schools? No New Impact. No new impacts to school service are anticipated should
the proposed project be approved since payment of mandated statutory impact
fees at the time of issuance of building permits will provide mitigation of
educational impacts of the proposed project pursuant to CEQA. There would be
no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact
than has been previously analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No additional
analysis is required.
d) Other governmental service, including maintenance of public facilities? No New Impact.
As assumed in the EDEIR, maintenance of public facilities would continue to be
provided by the City of Dublin with no new impacts in regard to this topic. New
public facilities will be required to be designed to meet City of Dublin standards.
There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts
with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in previous CEQA
documents; no additional analysis is required.
15. Recreation
Environmental Setting
No neighborhood or community parks and/or recreation services or facilities exist on
the project site. However, the City of Dublin maintains a wide range of park facilities
throughout the community, including the Fallon Sports Park, located just north of the
project site.
Regional park facilities are provided by the East Bay Regional Park District, which
maintains a large number of regional parks, trails and similar recreation facilities in
Alameda and Contra Costa County.
Previous CEQA documents
Eastern Dublin EIR. Applicable mitigation measures contained in Eastern Dublin EIR
addressing recreation include:
• Mitigation Measure 3.4/29.0: Ensure, as a part of the approval process, that each
new development provide its fair share of planned open space, parklands and trail
corridors.
• Mitigation Measure 3.4/31.0: Calculate and assess in-lieu park fees based on the
City's parkland dedication ordinance. Credit towards parkland dedication
requirements will only be given for level or gently sloping areas suitable for active
recreation use.
City of Dublin Page 60
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
• Mitigation Measure 3.4/36.0: Require developer to dedicate public access easements
along ridgetops and stream corridors to accommodate the development of trails and
staging areas.
1997 ND. No significant impacts related to recreation were identified in this document.
Protect Impacts
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks? No New
Impact. Approval and construction of the proposed project would increase the use
of nearby City or regional recreational facilities, since it would include increasing
the on-site permanent population on the site. A 2-acre neighborhood park is
proposed as part of the project (see Exhibit 3). The project will also pay public
facilities, which include a parks component. There would therefore be no new or
more severe impacts with respect to recreation than were previously analyzed and
no additional analysis is required.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of recreational
facilities? See item "a," above.
16. Transportation/Traffic
Environmental Setting
Roadways and freeways. The project area is served by arterials Fallon Road, Central
Parkway and Dublin Boulevard. Regional access is provided by I-580, south of the site.
Existing transit service. Transit service to the project site is provided by
the Livermore/Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA) which provides bus service
in Dublin and throughout the Tri-Valley. The Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART)
provides regional rapid transit service with the nearest station located at the Dublin
Transit Center, located on the south side of Dublin Boulevard just west of Arnold Road.
Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities. Bicycle lanes exist along Fallon Road, Dublin
Boulevard and Central Parkway.
Previous CEQA documents
Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures
to reduce anticipated traffic impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. These
measures generally include construction of new roadways, widening of existing
roadways and improvements to local freeway facilities to accommodate anticipated
increases in the number of vehicles associated with the build out of the Eastern Dublin
area.
With the exceptions noted below, the EIR found that all traffic and transportation
impacts could be reduced to less-than-significant levels with adherence to mitigation
measures identified in the EIR. A number of impacts could not be reduced to a level of
City of Dublin Page 61
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
insignificance even with mitigations. These include: impacts to the I-580 freeway
between I-680 and Hacienda Drive (IM 3.3/B), impacts to the I-580 Freeway between
Tassajara Road and Airway Boulevard (IM 3.3/C), cumulative freeway impacts (IM
3.3/E) impacts to Santa Rita Road and T-580 Eastbound ramps (IM 3.3/I), and
cumulative impacts to Tassajara Road (IM 3.3/N).
1997 ND. No additional potentially significant transportation impacts or mitigation
measures were included in this document.
The proposed project will be required to comply with all of the applicable mitigation
measures for transportation and circulation impacts, including payment of traffic
impact fees applicable to all new development in Eastern Dublin.
Project Impacts
a,b) Conflict with applicable plans related to the effectiveness of the circulation system,
including all modes of travel, including intersections, streets, highways and other
components or conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including
level of service standards, travel demand measures and other applicable standards? No
New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR considered the development of the project
site with residential land uses and adopted mitigation measures to address the
impacts of residential development throughout Eastern Dublin.
The City of Dublin has approved a previous development project on the site that
would have contained up to 485 dwellings. Table 3 compares estimated vehicle
trips from the proposed Subarea 3 project v. trips that would have been generated
from the previously approved development project.
Table 3. Comparative Trip Rates-Approved v. Proposed Development (AM, PM
& Daily Trips)
Dail Trip AMP ak Hour Tri Rate/Unit PM Peak Hour T Rate/Unit
Land Use Category Rate Total In o Out% Total In o Out%
MDR(Single-Family- 9.52 0.75 25 72 1.00 63 37
Detached)
MHDR(Apartment) 6.65 0.51 20 80 0.62 65 35
Size I Daily AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips
Approved Uses D.U. Trips I Total I In I Out Total I ' In I Out
MDR 313 2,980 235 59 178 313 1 197 1 115
MHDR 172 1,144 88 18 70 106 70 37
Existing Project Trips 4,124 323 77 1 248 1 1 267 1 152
Proposed Uses
MDR 330 3,142 248 62 179 330 208 122
MHDR 107 712 55 11 44 66 43 23
Proposed Project Trips 3,845 303 1 73 223 1 396 251 1 145
Net Change in Project Trips (279) 1 (19) 1 (4) (25) (24) 1 (16) (7)
Sources: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation, 9t Edition, Single-family detached
housing (#210) and Apartment(#220), 2012. Proposed project uses based on current plan submitted by
Mission Valley Homes, Mr. Kevin Fryer, Project applicant, September 2013.
City of Dublin Page 62
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Based on the above table, the proposed project would generate an estimated 279
fewer total daily trips, 19 fewer a.m. peak hour trips, and 24 fewer p.m. peak hour
trips than the current approved development.
However, if approved and constructed, the project would continue to contribute to
significant and unavoidable cumulative project impacts as part of the larger
Eastern Dublin project. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified such impacts on the
following roads and transportation facilities:
• I-580 freeway between I-680 and Hacienda Drive;
• The Santa Rita Road/I-580 eastbound ramps;
• The Dublin Boulevard/Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard/Tassajara
Road intersection
• Other impacts to Tassajara Road, as identified in the EIR.
As part of future development project applications, the project applicant will be
required to consult with the Dublin Public Works Department to identify the
appropriate traffic control device that would need to be installed at the proposed
project entrance along the north side of Central Parkway.
Overall, the proposed project would generate fewer daily trips, a.m. or p.m. trips
than the currently approved project and would not result in any new or more
severe impacts with respect to traffic loading on local or regional roads. MTS
routes or other routes of regional significance.
c) Change in air traffic patterns? No New Impact. The proposed project includes
residential uses and would have no impact on air traffic patterns. No new or more
severe impacts would result with respect to this topic than was previously
analyzed in other CEQA documents; no additional analysis is required.
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use? No New
Impact. Approval of the proposed project would add new driveways, sidewalks
and other vehicular and pedestrian travel ways where none currently exist. The
current development proposal will be required to comply with current City
engineering design standards and other safety standards to ensure that no safety
hazards would be created or exacerbated. No new or more severe impacts with
respect to design hazards would be created than previously analyzed; no
additional analysis is required.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? No New Impact. Multiple access roads would
be provided to serve the site and would provide adequate emergency access to
and from the site as required by the California Fire Code. No new or more severe
impacts would result with respect to this topic.
City of Dublin Page 63
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public transit, pedestrian
facilities or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? No New
Impact. No conflicts to plans, policies or programs that promote public transit,
pedestrian use or similar features were identified in previous CEQA reviews for
this project. The project developer would install sidewalks along all adjacent
streets to enhance pedestrian circulation as well as on local, in-tract local streets.
No new or more impacts have been identified in this Initial Study that has been
previously analyzed in other CEQA documents for the project site and no
additional analysis is required.
16. Utilities and Service Systems
Environmental Setting
The project area is served by the following service providers:
• Water supply and distribution: Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD).
• Sewage collection and treatment; recycled water: DSRSD.
• Storm drainage: City of Dublin and Zone 7.
• Solid waste service: Amador Valley Industries
• Electrical and natural gas power: Pacific Gas and Electric Co.
• Communications: AT &T
Previous CEQA documents
Eastern Dublin EIR. In terms of water resources, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified
overdraft of groundwater resources (Impact 3.5/P) as a potentially significant impact
Adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.5/24.0 and 25.0 would reduce this impact to a level
of insignificant. These measures require the City of Dublin to coordinate with DSRSD to
develop recycled water resources and otherwise carefully use water resources and that
all new development in the Eastern Dublin project area to connect to the DSRSD water
system. Impact 3.5/Q identified an increase in water demand as a potentially significant
impact, but this impact could be mitigated to an insignificant level based on
implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.5/26.0-31.0. These mitigation measures
require implementation of water conservation measures in individual development
projects and construction of new system-wide water improvements which are funded
by development impact fees. Another related impact identified in the Eastern Dublin
EIR is the need for additional water treatment plant capacity (Impact 3.5/R). This
impact was identified as being reduced to a level of insignificance through the
implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.5/32.0-31.0, which requires improvement to
the Zone 7 water system, to be funded by individual development impact fees.
City of Dublin Page 64
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Impact 3.5/S (lack of a water distribution system) was identified as a potentially
significant impact in the Eastern Dublin EIR, but this impact has been reduced to an
insignificant level through adherence to Mitigation Measures3.5/4.34.0-38.0. These
mitigations require upgrades to the project area water system and provision of a "will
serve" letter prior to issuance of a grading permit. Impact 3.5/T identified a potentially
significant impact related to inducement of substantial growth and concentration of
population in the project area. The Eastern Dublin found that this was a significant and
unavoidable impact.
Regarding sewer service, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified Impact 3.5/B (lack of a
wastewater collection system) as a potentially significant impact that could be mitigated
through adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.5/1.0-5.0. These measures require DSRSD
to prepare an area-wide wastewater collection system master plan, requires all new
development to be connected to DSRSD's public sewer system, discourages on-site
wastewater treatment, requires a "will-serve" letter from DSRSD and requires that all
sewer facilities be constructed to DSRSD engineering standards. Impact 3.5 noted an
impact with regard to extension of a sewer trunk line with capacity to serve new
development, but could be reduced to an insignificant level since the proposed Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan sewer system has been sized to accommodate increased sewer
demand from the proposed Specific Plan project. Impact 3.5/G found that lack of
wastewater disposal capacity as a significant impact. An upgraded wastewater disposal
facility has been completed by the Livermore Amador Valley Water Management
Agency and is currently operational. Impact 3.5/E identified lack of wastewater
treatment plant capacity as a potentially significant impact, which could be reduced to
an insignificant level through adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.5/8.0 and 9.0 that
require provision of adequate wastewater facilities through expansion of regional
wastewater collection, treatment and disposal systems.
No additional mitigation measures pertaining to utilities or service systems were
contained in the 1997 CEQA document.
Project Impacts
a)Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB? No New Impact. The
current project would contain the same type of development as analyzed in the
EDEIR and 1997 Negative Declaration and, based on recent discussions with
DSRSD staff (noted below) regarding this project, the proposed project would not
exceed wastewater requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB). No new or more significant impacts with respect to wastewater
treatment requirements have been identified in this Initial Study than have been
analyzed in previous CEQA documents; no additional analysis is required.
b) Require new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities?
No New Impact. Water, recycled water and wastewater extensions to existing
mains in adjacent roadways would need to be constructed to serve the amount of
development proposed in the Subarea 3 development application. According to a
representative of DSRSD, District water, wastewater collection, treatment and
disposal facilities from the construction of the proposed project would not result in
Page 65
City of Dublin January 2014
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project
a new or more significant impact than was analyzed in previous CEQA documents
(source: Stan Kolozdie, DSRSD, 11/19/13); no additional analysis is required.
The proposed project would also contribute to cumulative impacts related to
consumption of non-renewable natural resources (Impact 3.4/S, increase in energy
use though increased wastewater treatment and disposal and though the operation
of the water system (Impact 3.5/F, H, and U), and inducement of substantial
growth and concentration of population (Impact 3.5/T). All of these impacts were
identified as significant and unavoidable in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
c) Require new storm drainage facilities? No New Impact. The proposed project would
direct stormwater runoff to an existing subregional drainage basin located west of
the project site in Eastern Dublin area. This facility has been sized to accommodate
peak flows from anticipated development in Eastern Dublin, including the project
site so that no new and or upgraded drainage facilities are needed to support
proposed development (Jim Templeton, project engineer, 1/8/14). No new or
more significant impacts are anticipated with respect to storm drain facilities that
have been analyzed in previous CEQA documents; no additional analysis is
required.
d) Are sufficient water supplies available? No New Impact. The EDEIR planned for
residential uses on the site, with water service provided by DSRSD. Based on the
information provided by DSRSD staff, the District has planned for future urban
uses on this site and included such development in the District's Urban Water
Management Plan (source: Stan Kolozdie, DSRSD, 11/19/13). Therefore,
adequate water supplies are available to serve the project, as assumed in the
EDEIR. No new or more significant are anticipated with respect to water supplies
than have been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required.
e) Adequate wastewater capacity to serve the proposed project? See response to "a," above.
e, f) Solid waste disposal? No New Impact. The project site is within the franchise area of
Amador Valley Industries that provides residential and commercial solid waste
pick-up and recycling services. According to representatives of the company, no
solid waste service is currently provided to the area, since it is undeveloped. The
topic of solid waste disposal was not identified as a potentially significant impact
in previous CEQA documents and no new or more significant impacts have been
identified in this Initial Study than have been previously analyzed.
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No
New Impact. The existing service provider will ensure adherence to federal, state
and local solid waste regulations. No new or more severe impacts are anticipated
impacts than have been previously analyzed.
City of Dublin Page 66
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
17. 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
i.inportant examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No. Potential
impacts related to biological resources, including a reduction in habitat area of fish
or wildlife species, elimination of a plant or animal community, or elimination of
an important example of major periods of California history or prehistory was
analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The proposed project would represent less
development intensity than previously analyzed in earlier CEQA documents.
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.
Cumulative impacts of the proposed Sub Area 3 project have been fully analyzed
in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the 1997 ND.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly? No. No such impacts have been
discovered in the course of preparing this Initial Study.
Page 67
City of Dublin January 2014
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project
Initial Study Preparers
Jerry Haag, Urban Planner, project manager
Agencies and Organizations Consulted
The following agencies and organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial
Study:
City of Dublin
Luke Sims, AICP, Community Development Director
Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director
Michael Porto, Project Manager
Andy Russell PE, City Engineer
Obaid Khan, City Transportation Engineer
Bonnie Terra, Alameda County Fire Department
Darrell Jones, Alameda County Fire Department
Chief Tom McCarthy, Dublin Police Services
Kathleen Faubion, AICP, Assistant City Attorney
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
Website
DSRSD
Stan Kolozdie
Applicant Representatives
Kevin Fryer
References
Dublin General Plan, City of Dublin, Updated through 7/2/11
Eastern Dublin General Plan, Wallace Roberts & Todd, 1993
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report,
Wallace Roberts & Todd, 1994
Eastern Dublin Comprehensive Stream Restoration Program, Sycamore
Associates, 1996
Eastern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies and Standards, David Gates &
Associates, 1996
City of Dublin Page 68
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project January 2014
Livermore Municipal Airport Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan ESA
Associates, August 2012
Parks and Recreation Master Plan, City of Dublin, 2006 update
Page 69
City of Dublin January 2014
Initial Study/Sub Area 3 Project
EXHIBIT B
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1. General. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the City Council
of the City of Dublin adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for those
impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR as significant and unavoidable (Resolution
53-93, May 10, 1993). The City Council carefully considered each impact in its decision
to approve urbanization of Eastern Dublin through approval of the Eastern Dublin
General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan project. The City Council is currently
considering the Dublin Ranch Subarea 3 project, which would result in future
development of up to 437 single family residences on an approximately 64 acre site
(PLPA 2013-00033). The project proposes General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan amendments to reallocate existing High Density Residential and Medium Density
Residential land uses, to reduce and change Open Space land uses to Rural
Residential/Agriculture and to increase the site's Stream Corridor designation. The
application also proposes a Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1
Development Plan. The applications are collectively referred to herein as the "Project".
The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with the 1993 land
use approvals for urbanization of Eastern Dublin, including the Subarea 3 property.
Pursuant to a 2002 court decision, the City Council must adopt new overriding
considerations for the previously identified unavoidable impacts that apply to the current
Project.' The City Council believes that many of the unavoidable environmental effects
identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR will be substantially lessened by implementation of
previously adopted mitigation measures with future development of the Project. Even
with mitigation, the City Council recognizes that the implementation of the Project
carries with it unavoidable adverse environmental effects as identified in the Eastern
Dublin EIR. The City Council specifically finds that to the extent that the identified
adverse or potentially adverse impacts for the Project have not been mitigated to
acceptable levels, there are specific economic, social, environmental, land use, or other
considerations that support approval of the Project.
2. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts from the Eastern Dublin EIR. The
following unavoidable significant environmental impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin
EIR for future development of Eastern Dublin apply to the Project.
Land Use Impact 3.1F. Cumulative Loss of Agricultural and Open Space Lands;
Visual Impacts 3.8/13; and, Alteration of Rural/Open Space Character
Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.318, 3.31E. 1-580 Freeway, Cumulative Freeway
Impacts
1 "public officials must still go on the record and explain specifically why they are approving the later project
despite its significant unavoidable impacts." (emphasis original.) Communities for a Better Environment v.
California Resources Agency 103 Cal. App. 4 th 98. (2002)
2228163.1 Page 1 of
Exhibit B
Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.311, 3.31M. Santa Rita Road/1-580 Ramps, Cumulative
Dublin Boulevard Impacts.
Community Services and Facilities Impact 3.41S. Consumption of Non-Renewable
Natural Resources and Sewer Water and Storm Drainage Impact 3.5/F, H, U.
Increases in Energy Usage Through Increased Water Treatment, Disposal, and
Operation of Water Distribution System.
Soils, Geology, and Seismicity Impact 3.618. Earthquake Ground Shaking, Primary
Effects.
Air Quality Impacts 3.111A, B, C, and E. Future development of the Project will
contribute to cumulative dust deposition, construction equipment emissions, mobile and
stationary source emissions.
3. Overriding Considerations. The City Council previously balanced the benefits of
the Eastern Dublin project approvals against the significant and potentially significant
adverse impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The City Council now balances
those unavoidable impacts that apply to future development on the Project site against
its benefits, and hereby determines that such unavoidable impacts are outweighed by
the benefits of the Project as further set forth below. The City declares that each one of
the benefits included below, independent of any other benefits, would be sufficient to
justify approval of the Project and override the Project's significant and unavoidable
impacts. The substantial evidence demonstrating the benefits of the Project are found in
these findings, and in the documents found in the administrative record for the Project.
The Project will further the urbanization of Eastern Dublin as planned through the
comprehensive framework established in the original Eastern Dublin approvals. The
Project will create residential development that is compatible with the residential
development in the vicinity of the Project. The Project will help the City toward its
RHNA goal for new housing units and will help implement policies contained in the
Housing Element of the General Plan. The Project will provide a multi-use trail as well
as streetscape improvements such as curb, gutter, sidewalk, and landscaping that will
be an amenity to the larger community and provide safer pedestrian and bicycle access
between existing neighborhoods. The Project will create new revenue for the City,
County, and State through the transfer and reassessment of property due to the
improvement of the property and the corresponding increase in value. The Project will
contribute funds to construct schools, parks, and other community facilities that are a
benefit City-wide. Development of the project site will provide construction employment
opportunities for Dublin residents.
2228163.1 Page 2 of