Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.3 Attch 4 Exh A-1: Initial Study/Addendum Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment(2014) Addendum and Initial Study , t y rs i"S^ta e'�s $ e r . �i ", steiiF N! 3' x,. a' iG ,` u. nH,„ Amp i i� P ;fir"�`�"'s� � :� a' ��� t�. ���a44, a � �'�'`.�' �'r'`� �'�t"•"4'p,Vi�ff MEµry�Pp(k�' { , i �N Ik�.�.t I i r Prepared for: City of Dublin Prepared by: to. a. !— A z.- Company February 24, 2014 w E EXHIBIT A-1 TO ATTACHMENT 4 i Addendum and Initial Study Table of Contents Addendum 5 Initial Study » Attachments Attachment A: Source List I Attachment B: Traffic Generation & Distribution List of Figures Figure 1: Project Location f Figure 2: Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Districts List of Tables Table 1: DDSP Amended Net New Development I ICommunity Development Department 3 I i 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment 4 1 City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study Addendum i Community Development Department 15 i E 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment CEQA Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan (certified February 1, 2011, City Council Resolution o8-11) February 24, 2014 PROJECT-DESCRIPTION AND PRIOR_CEQA ANALYSIS: On February 1, 2011, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution 09-11, adopting the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan (DDSP). At the same time, the City Council adopted Resolution o8-11 certifying a Program Environmental Impact Report for the DDSP, hereinafter referred to as the DDSP EIR (SCH 20100022005). This Environmental Impact Report evaluated the potential impacts associated with intensifying development in the 284 acre Downtown Dublin area to accommodate additional residential and non-residential uses. The DDSP EIR identified the environmental impacts of implementing the DDSP and concluded that even with feasible mitigation measures, impacts to transportation and circulation were significant and unavoidable and could not be lessened to a level of less than significant. On February 1, 2011, the Dublin City Council certified the DDSP EIR via Resolution o8-11. Certification of the DDSP EIR included the adoption of mitigation findings, findings regarding alternatives, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was also approved. In 2013, the City initiated an amendment to the DDSP to increase the number of residential units permitted in Downtown by 1,2oo and decrease the amount of commercial square footage permitted by 773,000 square feet, to create minimum density thresholds for the Transit-Oriented and Retails Districts, to restrict residential development west of San Ramon Road in the Retail District, and including other minor amendments, hereafter referred to as the "2014 DDSP Amendment" or"the Project". The Prior Approvals (including the approved DDSP and the certified DDSP EIR) noted above are incorporated herein by reference and available for public review at Dublin City Hall during normal business hours. CURRENT CEQA_ANALYSIS_AND DETERMINATION THAT AN ADDENDUM I_S_APP_ROPRIAT_E FOR THIS PROJECT: In order to determine if there were any significant environmental impacts that were present with the Project that were not already addressed (and mitigated if necessary) in the DDSP EIR, an Initial Study was completed. The Initial Study, dated February 24, 2014 and incorporated herein by reference, determined that the potentially significant effects of the Project were adequately addressed in the DDSP EIR, and that no substantial changes have been proposed with the Project or the conditions under which the Project will be 6 1 City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study undertaken which require revisions of the previous EIR. This Addendum to the DDSP EIR has been prepared, which notes the difference in the 2014 DDSP Amendment and previously analyzed DDSP and their relation to the certified DDSP EIR. The 2014 DDSP Amendment varies from the original DDSP as follows: �j Proposed 2014 DDSP Difference Amendment • Residential Residential mom Residential 737,100 100 543,850 400 093,250) 300 2,202,710 1,1o0 1,622,96o 1,900 (579,750) 800 20,730 100 20,730 200 - 100 3,035,540 1,300 2,187,540 21500 (773,000) i;2oon The Initial Study determined that an additional examination of potential impacts to the traffic and circulation section of the SEIR should be completed to ensure that with the additional residential units (and corresponding decrease in commercial square footage), increasing the minimum development density in the Retail and Transit-Oriented Districts, and restricting residential development west of San Ramon Road in the Retail District, no new significant environmental impacts could be identified and no increase in the severity of the previously-identified impacts would be discovered. SUPPLEMENTARY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS: RBF Consulting completed a supplementary traffic analysis to analyze how the traffic impacts of the 2014 DDSP Amendment (with the additional residential units but a lesser amount of non-residential square footage) compared to the development potential of the original DDSP. The analysis concluded that the traffic impacts would not be substantially different. The traffic analysis is attached to this Addendum and Initial Study as Attachment B, and incorporated herein by reference. The highlights of the traffic analysis are included in the sections below. In assessing whether the 2014 DDSP Amendment creates significant impacts that were not present or that were substantially more severe than the original DDSP, the traffic analysis examined three main measurements: i Community Development Department ( 7 E F i 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment 1. Overall trip generation rates of the 2014 DDSP Amendment; 2. Revised trip assignments to the roadway network; and 3. A traffic queuing analysis for critical movements at the intersections of Amador Plaza Road / Dublin Boulevard and Village Parkway / Dublin Boulevard , both of which were operating at Level of Service E. A new trip generation analysis was conducted to compare trip generation estimates for the 2014 DDSP Amendment to estimates for the original DDSP. As shown in Attachment B: Traffic Generation & Distribution, the proposed project would result in an overall decrease in project trips at buildout as compared to the existing DDSP. This analysis indicates that: • The proposed project is projected to result in a net decrease of 5,005 daily trips and 1,232 PM peak hour trips. Compared to the DDSP, the proposed project would generate six percent fewer daily trips, and 17 percent fewer PM peak hour trips. The reason for this reduction is that commercial development generates a greater number of trips than residential development when compared on a similar square footage basis. • The 2014 DDSP Amendment would generate a zero net increase in AM peak hour trips at buildout as compared to the existing DDSP. Based on the project trip distribution prepared for the DDSP EIR, the proposed project trips were assigned to the roadway network and compared to the DDSP. The change in trip assignment between the DDSP and the proposed project during the AM and PM peak hours are illustrated in Attachment B: Traffic Generation & Distribution. No significant increases resulted, and in many cases, the peak hour trips decreased. Traffic queues were also analyzed under proposed project conditions for critical movements at the intersections of Amador Plaza Road / Dublin Boulevard and Village Parkway / Dublin Boulevard. These two intersections were analyzed because the City's threshold of significance is greater than 50 trips if the intersection is already operating at LOS E or lower, which applied only to these two intersections. The maximum left-turn queues for the southbound and westbound approaches would remain unchanged with the proposed project during the AM and PM peak hours. The results are shown in Attachment B: Traffic Generation & Distribution. Forecast AM and PM peak hour trip generation of the proposed project would be equal to or less than the trip generation forecast for the DDSP and no additional traffic impacts were identified. Therefore, the traffic analysis concludes that no new or substantially more severe significant impacts will result from the 2014 DDSP Amendment, and no additional mitigation measures are required. 8 1 City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study NO SUBSEQUENT REVIEW IS REQUIRED PER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15162_ Pursuant to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for the 2014 DDSP Amendment, as no substantial changes have been proposed with the Project or the conditions under which the Project will be undertaken which require revisions of the DDSP EIR. No new significant environmental impacts have been identified and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts has been discovered. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, with minor technical amendments and clarifications as outlined in this Addendum, the DDSP EIR will continue to adequately address the significant environmental impacts of the 2014 DDSP Amendment. CONCLUSION: The City prepared an Initial Study in connection with the determination to adopt an Addendum. As provided in Section 15164, the Addendum need not be circulated for public review, but shall be considered with the DDSP EIR before making a decision on the proposed project. The Initial Study (with the traffic analysis) is included below and the DDSP EIR is available for review in the Community Development Department at the City of Dublin, loo Civic Plaza, Dublin, California. Community Development Department 19 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment io ( City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study INITIAL STUDY Community Development Department I ii i pP i 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment 12 I City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study City of Dublin Initial Study/ Environmental Checklist Background & Project Description Project Title Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment(2014) Lead Agency Name and Address City of Dublin loo Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Contact Person and Phone Number Kristi Bascom Principal Planner (925) 833-6610 Project Location The City of Dublin is located in the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 27 miles east of the City of San Francisco; approximately 26 miles north of the City of San Jose; and approximately 15 miles south of the City of Walnut Creek. The Downtown Dublin Specific Plan (DDSP) project area is located in the southwestern portion of the City and is approximately 284 acres in size. The project area is generally bound by Village Parkway to the east, Interstate 58o to the south, San Ramon Road to the west, and Amador Valley Boulevard to the north. There are some partial boundary limits that extend beyond those roadways, most notably for a portion of San Ramon Road, a portion of Amador Valley Boulevard, and all of the Village Parkway within the Specific Plan area. See Figure 1: Project Location. i Community Development Department 113 4 fpP f[ 4 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Figure is Project Location a x . LEGEND n r v E V� �„ �..,+�,5�.rk�, � 'gyp .t'• '"e �, .' ', � ` s s � t - € 4 Aft zo �*' .♦ �y. M, pill �1 Project Applicant's/Sponsor's Name and Address City of Dublin loo Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 General Plan Designations Downtown Dublin -Village Parkway District Downtown Dublin -Transit-Oriented District Downtown Dublin - Retail District Zoning DDZD - Downtown Dublin Zoning District 14 1 City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study Project Description Background and Intent The Downtown Dublin Specific Plan (DDSP) was adopted by the Dublin City Council in February of 2011 with the intent of encouraging development within the Downtown area that would be more conducive to a more walkable, mixed development, and vibrant community. The DDSP includes three distinct districts (Retail, Transit Oriented, and Village Parkway Districts), with separate development standards for each. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the DDSP in September 2010 to analyze environmental impacts of potential development associated with the DDSP in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Subsequent to the adoption of the DDSP and certification of the DDSP EIR in February 2011, the City decided to increase the total allowable net new residential dwelling units in the DDSP area. To accommodate these units without causing any new significant impacts, particularly as it relates to traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and noise, the total allowable net new non-residential development potential was proposed to be reduced commensurately. Proposed Project As shown in Figure z: Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Districts, the DDSP is divided into three districts: Retail, Transit Oriented, and Village Parkway. Table 3-4: Net New Development of the DDSP defines specific land use development limits for each of these districts for both residential and non-residential development. The proposed project includes shifting some of the allowable development in each district from non-residential to residential uses. For residential development, the total allowable development in all three districts would increase from 1,30o dwelling units to 2,5oo dwelling units; a net increase of 1,200 units. Conversely, total non-residential development (retail, office, services, etc.) would decrease from 3,035,540 square feet (SF) to 2,262,540 SF, for a net decrease of 773,000 SF. Amended development limits for each district is shown in Table 1: DDSP Amended Net New Development. Community Development Department 115 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Figure 2: Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Districts I------- A LEGEND �I I I ;txdYc Plun Boundmr � } �ih GmB Line Specific Plan Districts R tail _ r '* k t I Y) r` i� I - I i r S - k s Al ,a r =ry c;f i Plewanton L Table 1: DDSP Amended Net New Development P �� €- r T € � EJC •TSi�g ll�$l� Difference - `- WT`u°, to � • AN- Residential �„Fetail 737,100 100 543,850 400 (193,250) 300 2 202 710 1,622,960 Transit- �� , , Oriented. (+1–motel 1,100 (±150-hotel 1,900 (579,750) 800 rooms) rooms) „Village Parkway 20,730 100 20,730 200 -- 100 3,035,540 2,262,540 Total" incL 1 o hotel 1,300 (Incl. hotel 2 500 (773 000) 1 200 (— 5- , , , ro ms room-5 16 City of Dublin C Addendum and Initial Study The proposed net increase in residential DUs and decrease in non-residential development is proposed to further enhance the City's on-going effort(and recent success) of encouraging more transit-oriented residential development in the vicinity of the West Dublin-Pleasanton BART station and to further incentivize a more vibrant and active downtown. Apart from this change in allowable development limits, three other minor amendments are proposed to the DDSP: allowing Live/Work units in the core of the Retail District(they are currently only allowed in the Transit-Oriented District), restricting the development of residential uses in the Retail District to the core area east of San Ramon Road, and establishing minimum residential density requirements in the Retail and Transit-Oriented Districts (none currently exist). All other existing development standards that regulate building height, setback standards,floor area ratio, parking, etc. would remain unchanged. Similarly, all design guidelines that regulate the urban design and preferred aesthetic character would remain the same, as would mobility and infrastructure plans and administration and implementation requirements. The DDSP Environmental Impact Report(EIR) (SCH #2010022005)was certified by the Dublin City Council concurrent with approval of the DDSP in 2011. This modification of the DDSP would require a General Plan and Specific Plan Amendment, both of which would have to be reviewed and recommended by the Planning Commission and approved by the Dublin City Council. Proposed General Plan Amendment: The proposed text amendments to the General Plan consists of edits to Table 2-1 (Land Use Development Potential: Primary Planning Area)with deletions shown in °+..�;t and additions shown as underline. Only the section of the table related to the DDSP area is shown here: Table 2-1 Land Use Development Potential: Primary Planning Area Downtown Dwelling, , � Dubin Speclflc Acres Dwelling Ur�t F# t Units/acre Ulf. Plan ATea is Mediurn Hig-h-, OF High De" 230.2 6.1-25.1+ 1,3ae 22500 2.7 3-,5}�6.750 Downtown Dublin Downtown Maximum Maximum Potent uarre Dublin Specific Acres Floor Area 30 f Square Plan Area Ratio(Gross) Feet Feetiemployee Wins) Village Parkway 32.9 35 5 0-1 � 200-450 X11-�� .15 District ?.508 Community Development Department 117 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Retail District 113.1 .60 2,9&2,762,7324 200-450 6'579ee 6,139-13,814 Transit- Oriented 84.2 1.2 4-.4-e 3,821,5524 200-450 9,779 22,eeo District 8'492-19'1°8 Total: 230.2 X86 7,085,87 17P467 39000 1_%746%15A3_0 4 Maximum Development Potential in the Retail and Trans it-Oriented Districts were modified by the 2014 Downtown_Dublin Specific Plan Amendment(City Council Resolution xx-xx) Proposed DDSP Amendments: The proposed text amendments to the DDSP include the following proposed modifications (with deletions shown in S+r�>keoui and additions shown as underline): Table 3-1: Land Uses I III BUILDING USES' L DISTRICT ORIENTED DISTRICT DISTRICT • Allowed Prohibited z Prohibited • Allowed Allowed Allowed ••; Allowed 3 Allowed 3 Allowed 3 e • • y Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed *•• I I Prohibited Allowed Prohibited • ' RF^" Allowed' Allowed CUP/PC4 •° Allowed 6 Allowed Allowed • ® +° Allowed Allowed Allowed • ®~ Allowed 6 Allowed Allowed ••• - • ZC or MUP/ZA ZC or MUP/ZA ZC or MUP/ZA ` • - III I CUP/ZA CUP/PC CUP/ZA CUP/PC CUP/PC CUP/PC CUP/PC CUP/PC CUP/PC ►• TUP TUP TUP 18 ( City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study Notes 1 Additional and similar uses may be permitted by the Community Development Director. z Prohibited unless adjacent to Dublin Boulevard. 3 Assuming accessibility(ADA)standards can be met. 4 May be permitted with a CUP/PC in a mixed-use development. 5 Subject to additional development standards if located within 1,000 feet of I-58o or I-680. 6 Allowed as paFt of a mixed use deyelopFnent.—ARQwedibrQughQutAhe Retail District except on those properties_west of San Ramon Road. CUP—Conditional Use Permit PC—Planning Commission TUP—Temporary Use Permit ZA—Zoning Administrator ZC—Zoning Clearance MUP—Minor Use Permit Table 3-4: Net New Development MINIMUM NON-RESIDENTIAL H (S F) RESIDENTIAL (DU) RESIDENTIAL 1, 737,199-543,850 +e0-400 22 unitsinet acre Transit- ' 8 iTaoo 30 units/net acres Oriented (±15o hotel rooms) Parkway Village 20,730 aee-= No minimum du o hl ote ) �9- � Notes Includes projects that have been approved,but not yet constructed Table 6-1: Development Pool NON-RESIDENTIAL SQUARE RESIDENTIAL • • DWELLINGS �iiri ■ 34 -175,170 100 4QQ Transit- 1',' 24;8@@ 1,145,050 1,10 -1• Oriented (±s,5o hotel rooms) 0 400-M Page 44, Section 3.4.8 Multi-Family Residential,shall be amended to read as follows: 3.4.8 Multi-Family Residential Medium to high deRSity Fesiden Multi-Family Residential development is generally in the form of stacked flats(apartments or condominiums)and attached townhouses. Minimum residential density is 22 units per net acre.in the Retail District and 30 units per net acre in the Community Development Department 119 I 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Transit-Oriented District. The Village Parkway_District has no minimum density requirement. Residential densities in the General Plan are 6.i to 14.9 units per a e for Medium Density Residential, 14.1 to 25.0 units per i%re for Medium High Density Residential, and 25.0 1 for High density DesidentW Residential uses above 25 „nits/-, rn Higher_density_residential_uses are appropriate and strongly encouraged in the aewnt^,^en area, especially in the Transit-Oriented District near the BART station. Page 47, second and third paragraphs after Table 3-3: Base and Maximum FAR Per District: This Specific Plan allows for a future construction of approximately 32.2 million square feet of non-residential development and 1,3ee 2,5oo residential dwelling units. Assuming an average of 1,200 square feet per residential unit (and an average of 500 square feet per hotel room), this represents 4­59 5.26 million square feet under this Specific Plan. Page 57, Building Design Table (Retail District): Section 2, "Residential Uses" shall be amended to add the following language: ImNot ermitted west of San Ramon Road. Allowed at a minimum_density_Of22_u_nit"er_net acre Permitted within a residential development or mixed-use development if designed based on the following standards: Page 66, Building Design Table (Transit-Oriented District): Section 2, "Residential Uses" shall be amended to add the following language (Underlined text is new): Permitted within a residential development or a mixed-use development if - - designed based on the following standards: The maximurn residential density shall be a minimum of 3o-units per net acre and shall-not exceed a density e#85 units per acre. The remaining language in the DDSP would remain unchanged. Other public agencies whose approval is required None. 20 1 City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study Ill. Environmental Checklist Environmental Factors Potentially Affected by the Project The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agricultural Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Hazards&Hazardous Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Materials Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance Instructions 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question (see Attachment A: Source List). A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g.,the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on 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 any 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 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. 5. Earlier Analysis maybe used where, pursuant to the tiering, Program EIR, or other Community Development Department 121 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15o63(c)(3)(D). In this case, the checklist entry will be "No New Impact" and a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a. Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses 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. 22 ( City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant /No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): t. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic X vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees,rock X outcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its X surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,which would adversely affect day or X nighttime views in the area? Discussion (a) As described in the DDSP EIR,there are no designated scenic vistas in the vicinity of the project area, and therefore there would continue to be no impact. (b) The project area is fully developed and there are no natural or built features that are considered scenic resources. Portions of the project area are visible from Interstate-68o(an officially designated State Scenic Highway and a locally designated scenic route), Interstate-580(a highway eligible for designation as a State Scenic Highway and locally designated scenic route),and San Ramon Road(a locally designated scenic route). As described in the DDSP EIR,all proposed projects visible from Interstate-68o and Interstate-580 would be subject to design review per polices of the General Plan. Furthermore,specific projects would be required to comply with the development standards and be consistent with the design guidelines as identified in the DDSP,which remain substantively unchanged. Therefore,no new impacts have been identified. (c) The project area is located in an urban built-out area and is adjacent to two major interstate freeways. The DDSP EIR concluded that impacts to the existing visual character would be less than significant. The proposed project would not change the allowable building heights and all new development projects would be requirement to comply with the existing development standards and be consistent with the design guidelines as identified in the DDSP. Therefore,the proposed revisions would cause no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to the existing visual character beyond those Community Development Department 1 23 k f 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant (No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): identified in the DDSP EIR. (d) The project area is located within an urban area that produces considerable light and glare. Newly proposed development projects would be required to comply with the DDSP which includes a number of specific design guidelines that address light and glare. The DDSP EIR concluded that impacts from light and glare would be less than significant. The proposed project would continue to require that all new projects comply with the design guidelines regarding light and glare and therefore the proposed revisions would cause no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to light and glare and no additional review is required beyond the DDSP EIR. z. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects,lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model(1997)prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources,including timberland,are significant environmental effects,lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land,including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project;and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),as shown on the maps prepared X pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural X use,or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forest land(as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)),timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section X 4526)or timberland zoned Timberland Production(as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in loss of forest land or conversion of X forest land to non-forest uses? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment,which due to their location or X nature, could result in conversion of Farmland 24 City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Discussion (a-e) The project area is located in an urbanized setting where there are no agricultural or forestry resources,and therefore there would be no new impact. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available,the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of X the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality X violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality X standard(including releasing emissions,which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial X pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? Discussion (a-c) As described in the DDSP EIR, short-term air quality impacts associated with construction would be anticipated with future development projects; however, all development within the project area would be required to comply with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) control measures identified in the DDSP EIR. Additionally,the El R concluded that the DDSP is consistent with population growth assumptions in the BAAQMD Clean Air Plan and it anticipated to reduce vehicle miles traveled due to the DDSP guiding principles to create a walkable,transit-oriented,and mixed-use community. As all future development projects under the proposed amendments would be required to comply with the design standards in the DDSP and the mitigations identified in the DDSP EIR,the project would not conflict with or obstruct the air quality plan,violate air quality standards,nor result in cumulatively considerable net increase in any criteria pollutant. The proposed amendments were designed to ensure that vehicle trips,and related emissions,would not exceed trips/emissions from Community Development Department 1 25 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant /No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): the existing allowed land uses. As discussed in the transportation section, both total trips and peak hour trips are considerably less under the proposed land uses than the existing allowed land uses. Similarly,related emissions will be reduced compared to the project analyzed in the DDSP EIR. As such,the proposed amendments will not cause any new or more severe significant air quality impacts than identified in the DDSP EIR and no additional review is required. (d) As described in the DDSP EIR,future development project which generate toxic air contaminants (TACs)are required to comply with BAAQMD rules, regulations and permitting requirements. All projects are also required to comply with the California Air Resources Board(CARB)and implement any applicable toxics control measures(ATCMs). As such,there is no new impact identified with respect to exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. No additional review is required beyond the DDSP EIR (e) As described in the DDSP EIR,odors to be expected within the project area include construction and operational(e.g.odors from restaurants or waste receptacles). Construction odors would be temporary and are not generally considered offensive. Future uses would be required to comply with City regulations in the Municipal Code(Chapter 8.24: Commercial Zoning Districts,Chapter 8.64: Home Occupations Regulations,and Chapter 8.2o: Residential Zoning Districts)which minimize operational odors. Therefore,there is no new odor impact from the proposed amendments. No additional review is required beyond the DDSP EIR. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect,either directly or through habitat modifications,on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive,or special-status species in local or X regional plans, policies,or regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional X plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act(including, but not X limited to,marsh,vernal pool,coastal,etc.) through direct removal,filling,hydrological interruption,or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of X 26 ( City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,such as a tree X preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan,or other X approved local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan? Discussion (a-f) The project area is located in an urbanized setting and is fully built out. As described in the DDSP EIR, biological resources were not analyzed as they were determined to be an"effect found not to be significant." Therefore,there would continue to be no impact on biological resources. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined X in CEQA Guidelines section 15o64.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource X pursuant to section 15o64.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique X geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains,including those X interred outside of formal cemeteries? Discussion (a-d) As described in the DDSP EIR,the project area is located in an urban setting and has been disturbed through prior development. There are no identified historic resources within the project area and therefore there would continue to be no impact. While the likelihood of finding archaeological resources is extremely low,measures identified within the DDSP EIR with respect to the discovery of potential cultural resources during construction would continue to apply,and therefore no new impacts have been identified. No additional review is Community Development Department 1 27 I I I 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Significant Mitigation Significant No New Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): required beyond the DDSP EIR. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,including the risk of loss,injury,or death involving: a) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other X substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42? b) Strong seismic ground shaking? X c) Seismic-related ground failure, including X liquefaction? d) Landslides? X e) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of X topsoil. f) 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 X on-or off-site landslide,lateral spreading, subsidence,liquefaction or collapse? g) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code X (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? h) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers X are not available for the disposal of wastewater. Discussion (a-c) As described in the DDSP EIR,there are three faults within six miles of the project area and future development projects may be subject to liquefaction. Mitigation measures identified in the DDSP EIR with respect to ground shaking and liquefaction would continue to apply,reducing these impacts to less than significant levels. There are no new impacts identified. (d) As described in the DDSP EIR,the project area is relatively flat,lacks steep slopes,and is not within a seismic hazard zone where landslides may occur during a strong earthquake,and therefore there 28 1 City of Dublin k Addendum and Initial Study Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): would continue to be no impact. (e) As described in the DDSP EIR,future development could result in soil erosion or loss of top soil during construction. Mitigation measures identified within the DDSP EIR with respect to soil loss and erosion during construction would continue to mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels and no new impacts have been identified beyond those in the DDSP EIR. (f) As described in the DDSP EIR,soils within the project area do not exhibit characteristics of expansive soils;however site-specific soil evaluations and adherence to City and State building codes would be required as part of any proposed development. Thus,there are no new impacts identified. (g-h) As described in the DDSP EIR,soils within the project area do not exhibit characteristics of expansive soils and wastewater sewers would be available to the entire project area,and therefore there would be no impact. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,either directly or indirectly,that may have a X significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan,policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of X reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Discussion (a-b) As described in the DDSP EIR,California is a substantial contributor of global greenhouse gases, emitting over 400 million tons of CO,a year and that it is not anticipated that any single development project would have a substantial effect on global climate change. Greenhouse gas emissions from the proposed project would include emissions from area sources and mobile sources associated with new projects. With the proposed increase in net new residential development and the decrease in non-residential development,the projected daily traffic volumes were analyzed and projected to decrease from volumes projected for DDSP buildout as analyzed in the DDSP EIR. 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, X use,or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable Community Development Department 29 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, X substances, or waste within X mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section X 65962.5 and, as a result,would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?(V.13) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport X or public use airport,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the project result in a safety X hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency X response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent X to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Discussion (a-b) As described in the DDSP EIR, new projects could involve the transport, use,disposal, and release of hazardous materials during construction and may result in the demolition and removal of structures which may contain asbestos and/or lead based paints. Mitigation measures within the DDSP EIR would continue to apply, requiring compliance with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and preparation of a stormwater pollution prevention plan(SWPPP). Additionally, prior to demolition of structures constructed prior to 1980(when asbestos and lead based paints were commonly used), a qualified environmental specialist shall inspect the buildings to determine presence of asbestos and/or lead based paints. If found to be present,subsequent permits and approvals would be required along with the appropriate disposal of the contaminated materials. With implementation of the mitigation 30 1 City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant /No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): measures in the DDSP EIR,there will be no new impact. (c) As described in the DDSP EIR, Nielsen Elementary School(75oo Amarillo Drive, Dublin)is located within a quarter mile of the project area and new businesses that locate near residential areas or schools may expose these sensitive uses to greater risk of exposure to hazardous materials,wastes,or emissions. However,as further described in the EIR,all new projects would be required to comply with regulations established by federal,state and local regulatory agencies,and therefore there will no new impacts to sensitive uses. (d) As described in the DDSP EIR,the project area is not located on a hazardous material site pursuant Government Code Section 65962.5;however,there are seven sites within the project area that are currently being monitored by the Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB). Mitigation measures described in the DDSP El R would continue to apply to new projects and would require the preparation of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and subsequent testing. There will be no new impact. (e-f) As described in the DDSP EIR,the project area is not located within an airport land use plan or within the vicinity of a private airstrip,and therefore there would be no new impact. (g) As described in the DDSP EIR,the proposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan,and therefore there would be no new impact. (h) As described in the DDSP EIR,the project area is located in an urbanized area and would not be subject to potential wildfire hazards,and therefore there would be no new impact. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste X discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local ground water table level(for example, X the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage X pattern of the site or area,including through I Community Development Department 31 s i 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Significant Mitigation Significant /No New Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner,which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site. d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,including through the alteration of the course of a stream or X river,or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner,which would result in flooding on-or off-site. e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or X provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water X quality? g) Place housing within a loo-year flood-hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard X Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a loo-yearflood-hazard area structures,which would impede or redirect X flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, X including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? X Discussion (a) As described in the DDSP EIR, new project construction could violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. However, mitigation measures described in the DDSP El R would continue to require compliance with the RWQCB and preparation of a SWPPP,and no new impacts would result. (b-f) As described in the DDSP EIR,the project area is largely developed and served by existing stormwater facilities. Per RWQCB requirements,new projects would include design features to increase percolation(thereby decreasing stormwater flows,impact to drainage systems,and groundwater degradation),and no new impacts would result. (g-h) As described in the DDSP EIR,several properties within the project area are within the Federal 32 I City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): Emergency Management Agency(FEMA)1 oo-year floodplain;however,new projects would be required to comply with FEMA floodplain regulations,and no new impacts would result. (i-j) As described in the DDSP EIR,the project area is located well inland from the San Francisco Bay or other major bodies of water to be impacted by a tsunami or seiche and is not within a designated dam failure inundation area,and therefore there would be no impact. to. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy,or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project(including,but not limited to the general plan,specific plan,local X coastal program,or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community X Conservation Plan? Discussion (a) As described in the DDSP EIR,the DDSP would help ensure greater land use compatibility and would not physically divide a community,and therefore there would be no new impact. (b) The proposed project is a change in the allocation of residential and non-residential uses within the DDSP planning area and other minor modifications to focus development in key areas at minimum densities. For residential development,the total allowable development in all three districts would increase from 1,3oo dwelling units(DUs)to 2,5oo DUs,for a net increase of 1,2oo DUs. Consistency of the DDSP with applicable General Plan policies was analyzed in the DDSP EIR. The proposed amendments are likewise consistent with policy direction to intensify the downtown,increase residential opportunities close to the BART station,and increase opportunities for alternative transportation modes near existing transit corridors and facilities. No new impacts would therefore result. (c) The project area is not within a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan,and therefore there would be no new impact. 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known X mineral resource that would be of value to the Community Development Department 133 P 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site X delineated on a local general plan,specific plan,or other land use plan? Discussion (a-b) As described in the DDSP EIR,there are no known mineral resources within the City of Dublin or designated in the General Plan or other land use plan,and therefore there would be no new impact. tz. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the X X local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground X X borne noise levels? C) Substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels X X existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity X X above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport X or public use airport,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to X excessive noise levels? Discussion (a-d) As described in the DDSP EIR,compliance with DDSP design guidelines and development standards would ensure that new projects do not exceed long-tern stationary noise thresholds. However,new projects could result in short-term construction-related noise and vibrations that exceed noise 34 1 City of Dublin k Addendum and Initial Study Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant I No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): standards for nearby sensitive uses and increased long-term mobile noise sources(vehicular traffic), Mitigation measures described in the DDSP El R would continue to apply to new projects including the preparation of construction noise management plans(when applicable)and noise from transporting construction materials. Additionally,new projects located adjacent to heavily traveled roadways would be required to prepare acoustical analyses and incorporate site-specific mitigations. Based on these requirements,impacts would remain less than significant and no new impacts would result. (e-f) The project area is not located within an airport land use plan or within the vicinity of a private airstrip, and therefore there would be no new impact. 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,either directly(for example,by proposing new homes and businesses)or X indirectly(for example,through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? P b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,necessitating the construction of X replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement X housing elsewhere? Discussion (a-c) The DDSP EIR determined that the existing land use designations would not induce substantial growth. It also determined there was no potential for significant effect on population and housing. Assuming an average of 2.7 persons per household(Dublin General Plan,2013),the additional 1,200 dwelling units would increase the City's population by 3,240 persons. This population increase is relatively minor and is consistent with the DDSP policies to encourage residential development in the downtown. Additionally,the proposed project would not displace existing housing nor require the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. As such,there would be no new impact on population and housing. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or need for new or physical altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times,or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? X b) Police protection? X c) Schools? X Community Development Department 135 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): d) Parks? X e) Other public facilities? X Discussion (a-b) As stated in the DDSP EIR,new projects would be required to comply with applicable building,safety, and fire codes,fund on-and off-site improvements,and contribute to the City's public facilities fees, and therefore there would be no new impact. (c-e) The proposed project would increase the demand for schools, parks,libraries and other public facilities by increasing the allowable net new residential units(and therefore population). However,the incremental increase in population of 3,27-640 persons is consideYed ^^! ,�n consistent with the DDSP's policies to encourage residential development in the downtown. Dublin Unified School District fees,City public facilities fees,and the DDSP provision for community benefits-ke ,g-at4e4Rg-spac_es-) would continue to apply for new projects,and therefore impacts would remain less than significant. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities X such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational X facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Discussion (a-b) The DDSP EIR reviewed the impacts on recreational facilities of the project,which were found to be less than significant. The proposed project would increase the demand for parks by increasing the allowable net new residential units,and therefore population. However,the incremental increase in population is consistent with DDSP's policies to encourage residential development in the Downtown. Each new development project would pay public facilities impact fees that will fund the acquisition of parkland and the development of future park facilities. Impacts to recreational facilities would remain less than significant. 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan,ordinance,or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, X taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non- motorized travel and relevant components of 36 1 City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant /No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): the circulation system,including but not limited to intersections,streets,highways and freeways,pedestrian and bicycle paths,and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program,including,but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures,or other standards X established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or X a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature(for example,sharp curves or X dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses (for example,farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X f) Conflict with adopted policies,plans,or programs supporting regarding public transit, bicycle,or pedestrian facilities,or otherwise X decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Discussion (a-b) The DDSP EIR identified the project's effects due to transportation and circulation as significant and unavoidable impacts that could not be lessened to a level of less than significant. Therefore,approval of the Project included a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Additionally,as part of the DDSP approval in 2011,the City amended the General Plan related to acceptable Levels of Service(LOS) standards within the City to require a LOS of D or better for all intersections except for intersections within the DDSP area. The objective of this action is to ensure a balance between vehicular and non- vehicular circulation and create a more pedestrian-friendly downtown. For the 2014 DDSP Amendment,a new trip generation analysis was conducted to compare trip generation estimates for the proposed project to estimates for the DDSP. As shown in Attachment B: Traffic Generation&Distribution,the proposed project would result in an overall decrease in project trips at buildout as compared to the existing DDSP. This analysis indicates that: • The proposed project is projected to result in a net decrease of 5,005 daily trips and 1,232 PM peak hour trips. Compared to the DDSP,the proposed project would generate six percent Community Development Department 137 R 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant /No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): fewer daily,and 17 percent fewer PM peak hour trips. The reason for this reduction is due to fact that commercial development generates a greater number of trips than residential development when compared on a similar square footage basis. • The 2014 DDSP Amendment would generate a zero net increase in AM peak hour trips at buildout as compared to the existing DDSP. Based on the project trip distribution prepared for the DDSP El R,the proposed project trips were assigned to the roadway network and compared to the DDSP. The change in trip assignment between the DDSP and the proposed project during the AM and PM peak hours are illustrated in Attachment B: Traffic Generation&Distribution. Traffic queues were also analyzed under proposed project conditions for critical movements at the intersections of Amador Plaza Road/Dublin Boulevard and Village Parkway/Dublin Boulevard. These two intersections were analyzed because the City's threshold of significance is greater than 5o trips if the intersection is already operating at LOS E or lower,which applied only to these two intersections. The maximum left-turn queues for the southbound and westbound approaches would remain unchanged with the proposed project during the AM and PM peak hours. The results are shown in Attachment B: Traffic Generation&Distribution. The DDSP EIR identified significant and unavoidable traffic impacts on three MTS roadway segments. Forecast AM and PM peak hour trip generation of the proposed project would be equal to or less than the trip generation forecast for the DDSP. Therefore,the proposed project will not cause new or more severe impacts than were identified in the prior EIR and no new traffic impacts result. (c) The project area is not located within an airport land use plan or within the vicinity of a private airstrip, and therefore there would be no new impact. (d) Similar to the level of detail contained in the existing DDSP,the proposed project does not include specific development plans which would substantially increase hazards nor does it alter roadway design such that implementation of the proposed project would create sharp curves or dangerous intersections. This analysis is done at the site specific level and the DDSP El R contained mitigation measures requiring that these issues be examined at that time. This condition,and therefore there would be no new impact. (e) As described in the DDSP EIR,new projects would be required to comply with applicable building, safety,and fire codes to ensure proper design and each future development project would fund on- and off-site improvements and contribute to the City's public facilities fees to minimize impacts to fire and police services. In addition,the projected daily traffic volumes would decrease with the proposed project,and therefore there would be no new impact. (f) As described in the DDSP EIR,the DDSP includes several policies and design guidelines to support alternative transportation and to create a mixed-use community that encourages use of alternative 38 1 City of Dublin Addendum and Initial Study Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): transportation,including walking,bicycling,bus transit,and the nearby West Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. The project further enhances these objectives by increasing residential development opportunities near the BART station. Therefore,there would be no new impact. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality X Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the X construction or which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of X existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements X and resources,or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider,which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity X to serve the project projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the X project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal,state,and local statutes X and regulations related to solid waste? Discussion (a-e) As described in the DDSP EIR,no new or expanded water or wastewater treatment facilities would be required and there would be adequate capacity with existing infrastructure. Additionally,new projects would be required to pay impact fees to fund stormwater infrastructure. Because the proposed project would offset an increase in allowable net new residential development by decreasing the allowable net new non-residential development,there would be no appreciable difference in water and wastewater servers,and therefore no new impact would result. f-g) I Community Development Department 139 2014 Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Significant Mitigation Significant No New Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): As described in the DDSP EIR,the project area is served by the Altamont Landfill,which has a total estimated permitted capacity of 62,000,000 cubic yards and a remaining estimated capacity of 45,720,000 cubic yards(74 percent capacity). Future development would occur over an extended period of time and the Altamont Landfill would see an incremental increase in additional solid waste until ultimate buildout of the project area. The proposed project would increase the projected total solid waste generation by 6.37 tons/day(or 2,325 tons per year)which represented approximately o.o6 percent of the permitted maximum disposal rate of 11,500 tons per day. This is not a significant increase and no new or more severe significant impact would result. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Does the project: a) 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 X or animal community,reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Have impacts that are individually limited,but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when X viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects,the effects of other current projects,and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Have environmental effects,which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, X either directly or indirectly? Discussion (a) The project area is located in an existing urban area. The project area contains buildings,parking lots, and streets and as such,there is no natural habitat for fish or wildlife species. Because the site is already developed,there would be no new impacts to sensitive plant and animal species,riparian habitat,and federally protected wetlands,and/or archaeological resources. The City would conduct site specific review of any individual future development projects to ensure that there would be no impact to biological and/or historic resources. Implementation of this review process would ensure that future development within the project area do not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,substantially reduce habitat or eliminate habitat for fish and wildlife species below 40 1 City of Dublin *,BRFryA - IMrt __ Addendum and Initial Study Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Impact Significant Mitigation Significant No New ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Incorpor. Impact Impacts Issues(and Supporting Information Sources): self-sustaining levels,and/or eliminate important examples of California history or pre-history. (b) The project area is largely built-out. Any additional development in the project area will primarily be infill development that will occur incrementally over time. The City of Dublin General Plan,as well as the DDSP,provide a framework for orderly future development consistent with goals and policies as approved by the City Council. The proposed project is to amend the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan to change the allowable net new development for residential and non-residential uses. No specific development project is proposed. The additional potential residential development within the project area would not be considered cumulatively considerable given the reductions in non-residential development and overall development potential within the City. No new or more severe significant impact will result. (c) As described throughout this environmental checklist,the proposed project would not result in substantial environmental effects on human beings either directly or indirectly and therefore there would be no new impacts. Community Development Department 141 Addendum and Initial Study Attachment A: Source List City of Dublin, Downtown Dublin Specific Plan (2010) City of Dublin, Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report(2010) City of Dublin, Dublin General Plan (1984, as amended). Community Development Department I A-1 i r I I C Addendum and Initial Study Attachment B: Traffic Generation & Distribution Community Development Department ( B-1 � [ / & / b -4 5 5 5� . / / \ /� \ 1 \ / /�\ ■ E � o \ \ % D m » w� a � o ? c 2 $ / / y. m % % 0 M . M ■ k 0 5- § 2 ® \ C a y / / \ /. { � E \ I \ /� 2 � � . 7 4-0 \ 0 < � c \ C ) « � ■ } \ rn co \ § / \ f ) / C 'k / & k \ / E 75 / o \ 2U / \ L \ U \ c E \ 0 4 3 IV 0 § U — 2 k # \ } \ ~ N e m & In 00 a n tt n cu LA W 1 'a nr5 T. 1• �, Pd _ - tti9 6 `� a�1 as�e° a a C4 ro � � rn � s d ' w 'a eat —+ cn t.o y . 1T1 . TT r cr ,� pH 1,lia48noq � Z N ,k nBP�exdoH s z ' ro ua�,onsn� �z a y — C W "<