Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.2 Att 6 Exh A with attch "A"-Mit Neg Dec CITY OF DUBLIN MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Title: Jordan Ranch/Subarea 3/Wallis Ranch General Plan Amendment & Specific Plan Amendment Description of Project: Consideration of a General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, Planned Development rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for portions of Jordan Ranch (re-designating an existing Community Park site to a joint School/Park site and changing an existing Mixed Use land use to Medium Density Residential); Subarea 3 (re-designating 10.75 acres from Rural Residential/Agricultural to Parks/Public Recreation); and Wallis Ranch (re-designating a 1.9 acre site in the south portion of the property from Semi-Public to Parks/Public Recreation). Project Locations: Jordan Ranch: East of Fallon Road, north and south of Central Parkway. -- --- - -- --- Subarea 3:Bounded by-0ublin Blvd�,-Lockhar# Street, Central-Parkway and- - --- Fallon Road. Wallis Ranch: West of Tassajara Road, south of the City limit line and east of Camp Parks RFTA. Project Applicants: City of Dublin, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA 94568 Lennar Homes, 6111 Bollinger Canyon, #550, San Ramon, CA 94583 BJP ROF Jordan Ranch LLC, c/o Mission Valley Properties, 5000 Hopyard Road, Ste. 170, Pleasanton, CA 94588 Trumark Homes, 4185 Blackhawk Circle Road, Danville, CA 94506 Proposed Finding: The attached initial study identifies potentially significant supplemental effects, but: a) revisions in the project made by or agreed to by the applicant before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study was released for public review would avoid or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant supplemental effects would occur; and b) there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the City, that the project as revised may have a significant supplemental effect on the environme t. Mitigation measures have been included in the project to avoid potentially significant upplemen fects. _ og Oy ?�lS Luke Sims, AICP Date Community Development Director Copies of the Initial Study documenting the reasons to support the above finding are available at the City of Dublin, Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568, or by calling (925) 833- 6610. Attachments—Initial Study Date Published: �-7"�5 Date Posted: 8��1^15 Date Notice Mailed: S"1� 15 Considered by: On: N.O.D. filed: Council Resolution No. Exhibit A City of Dublin Appendix to Mitigated Negative Declaration for Jordan Ranc��/Wallis Ranch/Dublin Ranch Subarea 3 Proj ect CEQA Analysis of Jordan Ranch Subsequent Land Use Applications Introduction The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration analyzed the impacts of a General Plan Amendment (GPA), an Amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (SPA), a Planned Development rezoning with a Stage 1 Development Plan (PD rezoning) and potential changes to an existing Development Agreement for the three Subareas identified in the Initial Study; one of the Subareas is the Jordan Ranch. Following the circulation of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND, or MND) in early August 2015, the applicant for the Jordan Ranch, Mission Valley Properties, filed a number of subsequent land use applications with the City to allow future development on Parcel H and Neighborhood 7 of the Jordan Ranch. The applications for Parcel H are consistent with the proposed General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and PD rezoning amendments addressed in the MND. The applications for Neighborhood 7 are consistent with existing Medium Density Residential land use designations and PD zoning for the site. The subsequent applications include: • A Planned Development Rezoning with a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for all three portions of the Jordan Ranch subarea, as identified in the MND. A Planned Development Rezoning with a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan have also been requested for the Subarea 3 and Wallis Ranch Subareas; • A Site Development Review (SDR) application and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for Parcel H and Neighborhood 7; • On Parcel H (located on the northeast corner of Fallon Road and Central Parkway), the GPA/SPA and PD rezoning would remove the potential for development of up to 115 dwellings and up to 5,000 square feet of non- residential use and replace this with up to 45 Medium Density Residential dwellings as shown on the related PD rezoning Stage 1 Development Plan site plan. The subsequent applications for Parcel H would do the same, and provide design details of the proposed dwellings and landscaping, as well as development standards generally consistent with other existing and approved medium density residential development in Jordan Ranch. The site plan is the same as the site plan for the PD rezoning Stage 1 Development Plan (Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8267) and • On Neighborhood 7 (located on the eastern side of the Jordan Ranch property), previously approved for 100 Medium Density dwellings is now proposed to accommodate up to 105 detached three-story townhouse dwellings (Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8269). PD zoning and a related Stage 1 Development Plan was adopted in 2012 along with the Medium Density Residential land use designations. This potential development was reviewed in a 2012 CEQA addendum to the prior EIRs that included Jordan Ranch (Resolution 91-12). The 5 additional units proposed in the subsequent applications are also residential and generally within the same development area as the 2012 project. As further discussed below, the increase from 100 units to 105 units on the Neighborhood 7 site is not considered a substantial expansion or increase in the use. Similar to Parcel H, the subsequent applications for Neighborhood 7 provide design details of the proposed dwellings and landscaping, as well as development standards generally consistent with other existing and approved medium density residential development in Jordan Ranch. The purpose of this Appendix is to document that these subsequent applications for Parcel H propose development of the same use, density, development area and location as proposed in the GPA/SPA and Planned Development Stage 1 Development Plan addressed in the MND, and the subsequent applications for Neighborhood 7 propose development substantially the same as analyzed in the 2012 addendum. The discussions below review each of the MND resource topics and conclude that the subsequent applications for Parcel H and Neighborhood 7 would not result in any new or more severe significant environmental impacts than identified in the August 2015 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or the 2012 Addendum. As such, the subsequent applications do not constitute substantial revisions to the MND and do not require recirculation of the MND under standards set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15073.5 . CEQA Analysis of Subsequent Land Use Applications Following is a summary of any new or more severe significant that could occur with the approval of the subsequent land use applications identified above. 2 Aesthetics: The type, location and amount of development proposed in the subsequent land use applications (45 dwellings on Parcel H and 105 dwellings in Neighborhood 7) is consistent with the maximum number of dwellings shown in the Project Description on Page 8 of the Initial Study. The type, location and density of development would be the same between that described in the MND for Parcel H and the 2012 Addendum for Neighborhood 7 and the subsequent applications for those sites. The appearance of proposed dwelling units in terms of design and architecture, use of materials, exterior colors, landscape design, fences and any signs as reviewed through Site Development Review ensure that the appearance are generally consistent with existing development on the Jordan Ranch and other nearby neighborhoods. The design details of the proposed dwellings would not result in any physical aesthetic impacts beyond the discussion in the IS/MND for Parcel H or the 2012 Addendum for Neighborhood 7. No significant impacts to aesthetic topics were found in the 2015 IS/MND document with respect to the approval of the GPA/SPA and PD rezoning or in the 2012 Addendum. There would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to aesthetics than was analyzed in the 2015 IS/MND or 2012 Addendum; the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. Mitigation measures relating to aesthetics set forth in previous Eastern Dublin CEQA documents will continue to apply to projects included in the Subsequent applications. Agriculture & Forestry Resources: The same area of land on the Jordan Ranch would be disturbed under the proposed subsequent land use applications as described and analyzed in the 2015 IS/MND and the 2012 Addendum No new impacts to this topic was identified in the Initial Study. There would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to agriculture and forestry resources than analyzed in the 2015 IS/MND for Parcel H or in the 2012 Addendum for Neighborhood 7. Thus, the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND . Agricultural impact mitigation measures contained in previous Eastern Dublin CEQA documents will apply to the projects covered in the subsequent applications. Air QualitX: The subsequent land use applications contain the same number of dwellings and type of development as was analyzed in the 2015 IS/MND for Parcel H. No new air quality impacts were identified in the 2015 Initial Study with respect to the GPA and SPA and PD rezoning. The 105 townhome units is 3 not a substantial change from the 100 units assumed in the 2012 Addendum as they would not substantially increase trip generation. Therefore, no new or more severe significant impacts would result from the approval of the subsequent land use applications; the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. Mitigation measures pertaining to air quality contained in previous CEQA documents will apply to the subsequent land use applications Biological Resources: No significant impacts were identified in the 2015 IS/MND or 2012 Addendum with respect to biological resources. The subsequent land use applications include the same location and residential type of uses, and would disturb approximately the same amount of ground surface as was analyzed in the IS/MND and 2012 Addendum. Therefore, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to biological resources than was analyzed in the 2015 IS/MND and 2012 Addendum. As such, the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. Biological resource mitigation measures contained in previous Eastern Dublin CEQA documents continue to apply to those projects included in the subsequent land use applications. Cultural Resources: The same amount of ground disturbance would occur under the subsequent land use applications as was analyzed in the 2015 IS/MND and 2012 Addendum. No significant cultural resource impacts were identified in the either document. Therefore, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to cultural resources than was addressed in the 2015 IS/MND and 2012 Addendum. As such, the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND . Geology & Soils: No significant geology or soils impacts were identified in the IS/MND with respect to the requested GPA and SPA and PD rezoning, or in the 2012 Addendum . The requested subsequent land use applications would include the same location, amount and type of development included in the GPA/SPA and PD rezoning for Parcel H and in the 2012 project on the Neighborhood 7 site. Therefore, no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to geology and soils would occur with the subsequent land use applicants than was analyzed in the IS/MND and the 2012 Addendum. As such, the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. Mitigation measures contained in previous Eastern Dublin CEQA documents will apply to subsequent land use applications. Greenhouse Gas Emission: No additional analysis of greenhouse gas emissions was required for the 2015 IS/MND or the 2012 Addendum. For the reasons set 4 forth in the IS/MND, no additional GHG analysis of the subsequent applications is required and the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. Hazards and Hazardous Materials: No impacts to hazards or hazardous materials were identified in the 2015 IS/MND that analyzed the impacts of approving the requested GPA/SPA and PD rezoning for Parcel H or in the 2012 Addendum for the Neighborhood 7 site. The proposed subsequent land use approvals would include the same land use type and density as was studied in the MND and 2012 Addendum. Therefore, there would be no new or more severe significant impact with respect to hazards and hazardous materials than was analyzed in the MND and 2012 Addendum. As such, the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. Hydrology & Water QualitX: Hydrology and water quality issues were analyzed n the 2015 IS/MND that examined impacts related to the approval of the requested GPA/SPA and PD rezoning on Parcel H and in the 2012 Addendum for the Neighborhood 7 site . No impacts were identified in either document. Hydrology and water quality impacts associated with the subsequent land use applications would be the same as determined for the GPA/SPA and PD rezoning actions on Parcel H and in the 2012 Addendum for Neighborhood 7 since the same density, residential land uses, and area of disturbance are proposed in the subsequent applications. Therefore no new or more severe significant hydrology and water quality impacts would occur than were previously addressed in the 2015 IS/MND and 2012 Addendum, and the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. Hydrology and water quality mitigation measures contained in previous Eastern Dublin CEQA documents will continue to apply to subsequent land use applications. Land Use & Planning: The subsequent land use applications contain the same type, location and density of land uses as included in the GPA/SPA and PD rezoning that was analyzed in the 2015 IS/MND for Parcel H and as included in the 2012 Addendum for Neighborhood 7. Based on the same land uses, there would be no new or more severe significant land use and planning impacts than analyzed in the 2015 IS/MND and 2012 Addendum, and the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. Mitigation measures pertaining to land use and planning contained in previous Eastern Dublin CEQA documents will apply to subsequent land use applications. 5 Mineral Resources: No impacts to mineral resources were identified in the 2015 IS/MND or the 2012 Addendum and none are anticipated with respect to the subsequent land use applications. Noise: No significant noise impacts were identified in the 2015 IS/MND that studied the proposed GPA/SPA and PD rezoning on Parcel H, or in the 2012 Addendum for the Neighborhood 7 site. Since the subsequent land use applications would be located in the same location as assumed in the MND and 2012 Addendum and would have substantially the same density, no new or more severe significant noise impacts are expected than studied in the 2015 IS/MND and 2012 Addendum. The increase of 51ots on Neighborhood 7 would not substantially increase potential traffic noise or potential construction noise. As such, the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. All previous noise mitigation measures contained in previous Eastern Dublin CEQA documents would apply to the subsequent applications. Population and Housing: There would be no new or more severe significant impacts related to population and housing since the GPA/SPA and PD rezoning in the MND for Parcel H and in the 2012 Addendum for the Neighborhood 7 site include the same location, type of land use and density as the subsequent land use applications. Public Services: No significant public service impacts were identified in the 2015 IS/MND that analyzed a GPA/SPA and PD rezoning for Parcel H or in the 2012 Addendum for the Neighborhood 7 site. Land uses would be substantially the same in terms of type, amount and location of development area, and density in the subsequent land use applications as are included in the MND for the GPA/SPA and PD rezoning for Parcel H and in the 2012 Addendum for the Neighborhood 7 site. No new or more severe significant impacts would therefore occur in terms of public services with the subsequent applications, and the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. Mitigation measures contained in previous Eastern Dublin CEQA documents relating to public services continue to apply to subsequent land use applications. Recreation: Since land use types and densities in the subsequent applications are substantially the same for the GPA/SPA and PD rezoning project studied in the 2015 IS/MND and in the 2012 Addendum for the Neighborhood 7 site, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with the approval and construction of land uses included in the subsequent applications. The increase of 5 units in Neighborhood 7 is not a substantial increase; also, the developer 6 would be required to pay Public Facilities Impact fees for parks based on the increased number of units. For the above reasons, the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. All Eastern Dublin mitigation measures contained in previous Eastern Dublin CEQA documents relating to recreation continue to apply to the subsequent applications. Trans�ortation & Circulation: Potentially significant impacts to this topic were identified in the 2015 IS/MND. However, the IS/MND only found potentially significant impacts with respect to traffic safety with the construction of the proposed Elementary and Middle Schools. No significant impacts were found with respect to the proposed park or residential development portions of the project. The number, location and type of residences proposed in the subsequent land use applications are substantially the same as analyzed in the 2015 IS/MND and 2012 Addendum. Therefore, no new or more severe significant impacts are anticipated beyond those analyzed in the 2015 IS/MND and 2012 Addendum. As such, the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. All previous Eastern Dublin traffic and transportation mitigation measures continue to apply to residential development included in the subsequent applications. Utilities & Service S�stems: The number, type, location of residences included in the subsequent land use applications are substantially the same as analyzed in the 2015 IS/MND for the GPA/SPA and PD rezoning on Parcel H and in the 2012 Addendum for the Neighborhood 7 site. Therefore no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to utilities or services systems are anticipated beyond that previously analyzed in the 2015 IS/MND and 2012 Addendum, and the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND. Eastern Dublin utility and service system mitigation measures contained in previous CEQA documents continue to apply to dwellings proposed as part of the subsequent land use applications. Summary Based on the above analysis, approval of the subsequent applications for development of residences on Parcel H and in Neighborhood 7 would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts than were studied in the 2015 MND and 2012 Addendum. This because the MND analyzed a GPA/SPA and PD rezoning for Parcel H that assumed the same 45 medium density attached and detached units as proposed in the subsequent applications. Similarly, the 2012 Addendum for the Neighborhood 7 site assumed substantially the same residential development as in the subsequent applications. The increase from 7 100 to 105 units is not a substantial increase with respect to the resource topics. Therefore, the subsequent applications are not a substantial revision that would require recirculation of the MND under the standards of CEQA Guidelines section 15073.5. 2524932.1 8