Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.3 PA 84-009 Blancarte Rezoning �6 —act CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 23 , 1984 SUBJECT: PA 84-009 , Blancarte Rezoning, A Proposal to Rezone a Parcel located at 7900 Dublin Boulevard from a Highway Frontage District (H-1 ) to a Retail Business District (C-1) . EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1 ) Exhibit A: Resolution adopting a Negative Declaration. 2 ) Exhibit B: Resolution approving the rezoning . 3 ) Exhibit C : Ordinance Amending Zoning Ordinance. 4 ) Planning Commission Staff Report of April 2, 1984 , with background attachments . RECOMMENDATION: 1 . Hear Staff presentation. 2 . Open Public Hearing. 3 . Take testimony from applicant and public . 4 . Close Public Hearing. 5 . Adopt resolution regarding Negative Declaration. 6 . Adopt resolution regarding rezoning. 7 . Waive reading and introduce ordinance amending Zoning Ordinance . FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None . DESCRIPTION: I . BACKGROUND Mark Blancarte, representing Retail Property Development, is proposing to rezone an approximately 40 , 000 sq. ft . parcel located at the southwest corner of Dublin Boulevard and Regional Street from H-1 (Highway Frontage) to C-1 (Retail Business) . The purpose of the rezoning is to facilitate the development of a small retail building which is presently not permitted under the H-1 zoning classification . The general intent of the H-1 District is to provide areas limited to highway-oriented businesses . The C-1 District is intended to provide areas for comparison retail shopping and office uses . The surrounding uses are retail or office in nature and are zoned C-1 . The proposed General Plan designates the property for retail and office uses . The major issue associated with the rezoning request relates to the Dublin Boulevard Traffic Study, which calls for an additional 12 feet of street frontage for a right-turn lane . The applicant should be aware that the necessary dedication and improvements to this vehicular lane could become a condition of approval during the Site Development Review process . ------------------------------------------------------------------ ITEM NO. COPIES TO: Mark Blancarte II . RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council : 1 . Adopt the Negative Declaration 2 . Approve the rezoning 3 . Waive the reading and introduce the ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance . EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ----------------------------------------------------------------- ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION CONCERNING PA 84-009 BLANCARTE REZONING WHEREAS, Mark Blancarte submitted a planning application to rezone a parcel , located at 7900 Dublin Blvd, from H-1 (Highway Frontage) to C-1 (Retail Commercial) ; and, WHEREAS, The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , as amended together with the State ' s administrative guidelines for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and City environmental regulations, requires that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact, and that environmental documents be prepared; and, WHEREAS, public notice of the decision to prepare a Negative Declaration was given in all respects as required by law; and, WHEREAS, Staff has completed an Initial Study which indicated that the proposed rezoning would not have a significant effect on the environment; and, WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration has been prepared by the Dublin Planning Department; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review, and recommend that the Negative Declaration be adopted at a public hearing on April 2 , 1984 ; and, WHEREAS, the City Council did review the Negative Declaration and considered it at a public hearing on April 23 , 1984 . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby find that the Negative Declaration has been prepared and processed in accordance with State and local environmental law and guideline regulations, and that it is adequate and complete . Therefore, the City Council hereby adopts the Negative Declaration. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this th day of 1984 . AYES : NOES : ABSENT: Mayor. ATTEST: City Clerk DP 83-20 EXHIBIT B RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ----------------------------------------------------------------- APPROVING A REZONING CONCERNING PA 84-009 BLANCARTE REZONING WHEREAS, Mark Blancarte filed an application to rezone a parcel , located at 7900 Dublin Blvd. , from H-1 (Highway Frontage ) to C-1 (Retail Commercial ) ; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the City of Dublin is in the process of preparing and adopting a general plan, and that there is a reasonable probability that the proposed rezoning will be consistent with the future general plan; and, WHEREAS, there is little or no probability that the rezoning will be a detriment to, or interfere with the future general plan, should the new zoning ultimately be inconsistent with the future general plan; and, WHEREAS, the rezoning will not have a significant environmental impact; and, WHEREAS, the rezoning is appropriate for the subject properties , in terms of being compatible to existing and permitted land uses, transportation, and service facilities ; and, WHEREAS, the rezoning will not have substantial adverse effects on health or safety, or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare, or be injurious to property or public improvements ; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a public hearing on April 2 , 1984 , has recommended that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration for this rezoning and that the rezoning be approved; and, WHEREAS, the City Council did review and consider the staff report at a public hearing on April 23, 1984 ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby approve the rezoning request . PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this th day of 1984 . AYES : NOES : ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk DP 83-20 EXHIBIT C ORDINANCE NO_ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ----------------------------------------------------------------- AMENDING TIME ZONING ORDINANCE TO PERMIT THE REZONING OF REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF DUBLIN The City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows : Section 1 . Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Dublin Ordinance Code is hereby amended in the following manner : A parcel , located at 7900 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-1500-17-5 ) , is hereby rezoned from H-1 (Highwav Frontage ) to C-1 (Retail Commercial ) . The C-1 zoning regulations are hereby adopted as the regulations for the use, improvement and maintenance of the subject property . A map of the property is as follows : \O' J •\ N 1 � N , Section 2 . This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty ( 30 ) days from and after its passage . Before the expiration of fifteen ( 15) days after its passage, it shall be published once with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the same, in the Tri-Valley Herald, a newspaper published in Alameda County and available in the City of Dublin. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Dublin on this th day of 1984 , by the following votes : AYES : NOES : ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: Citv Clerk CITY OF DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT Meeting Date : April 2, 1984 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: PA 84-009 Blancarte Rezoning A proposal to rezone a parcel from a Highway Frontage (H-1 ) District to a Retail Business (C-1) District GENERAL INFORMATION PROJECT: . A proposal to rezone an approximately 40, 000 sq.ft. parcel , located at 7900 Dublin Blvd. , from H-1 to C-1 . APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE: Mark Blancarte Retail Property Development Co. 1 Harwick Walk Pleasant Hill CA 94523 PROPERTY OWNER: Atlantic Richfield Co. c/o 7900 Dublin Blvd. Dublin CA 94568 ' LOCATION: 7900 Dublin Blvd. ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: 941-1500-17-5 PARCEL SIZE : Approximately 40, 000 sq.ft. EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USE: H-1, Site contains an abandoned ARCO Gas Station SURROUNDING LAND USE AND .ZONING: North- Grand Auto - C-1 South - Offices - C-1 West —Cousin ' s Furniture Store - C-1 East - Levitz Furniture Store - C-1 — ZONING HISTORY: The records from Alameda County do not indicate when the site was originally zoned H-1. 'It is likely, however, that this zoning district was established in the 1950 ' s or 1960 ' s . The building permit for the ARCO Station was issued on 10/7/69 . APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Section 8-45 . 0 states, in part, that the intent of the H-1 District is to provide highway-oriented types of uses (gas stations, motels , restaurants, etc.. ) Section 8-48-0 states , in part, that the intent of the C-1 District" is to provide comparison shopping and office uses . Section 8-103 . 6 states, in part, that the Planning Commission shall make a recommmendation to the City .Council when a petition to reclassify property has been properly heard. ' I ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: A draft Negative Declaration has been prepared on the basis that the rezoning will not have a significant effect on the environment. --------------------"--------------------------------------------- ITEM NO. NOTIFICATION : Public Notice of the April 2 , 1984 , hearing was published in the Tri-Valley Herald, mailed to adjacent property owners, and posted in public buildings ANALYSIS : The applicant is requesting a rezoning for the purpose of developing a small retail building (the abandoned gas station would be demolished) . The existing zoning is oriented to highway uses such as restaurants , motels , taverns , and service stations and does not permit the full range of light retail uses . The surrounding uses are retail or office in nature, and are zoned C-1 . As noted above, the intent of the C-1 District is to provide for comparison shopping . The proposed General Plan designates the property for retail and office uses . it appears that the best use of the property would be for light commercial development . The only real issue associated with the rezoning request relates to the Dublin Blvd. traffic study, which calls for an additional 14 feet of street frontage for a right-turn- lane . The applicant should be aware that the necessary dedication and improvements to this vehicular lane will become a condition of approval during the Site Development Review process . RECOMMENDATION FORMAT: 1 ) Hear Staff presentation 2 ) Open public hearing 3 ) Hear applicant and public presentations 4 ) Close public hearing 5 ) Make a recommendation to the City Council on the Negative Declara�ion 6 ) Make a recommendation to the City Council on the rezoning request . ACTION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions : 1) Adopt Resolution (Exhibit A) recommending that a Negative Declaration be adopted. 2 ) Adopt Resolution (Exhibit B) recommending that the subject site be rezoned from H-1 to C-1 . ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A - Resolution recommending that the Negative Declaration be adopted Exhibit B - Resolution recommending that the site be rezoned to C-1 Background Attachments : 1 ) Location map 2 ) Statement from applicant 3 ) Negative Declaration 4 ) Draft Ordinance COPIES TO Applicant -2- NEIISEN v \ SCHOOL • 'w�ppR - C 01' \ / \ r z 9 r c 0 tic C , 0 ,11 pJ O S. M S a 1 � Z O ' v r = u pP• A �•n 4S�JN , *,Y J p. 9� Ct. t RCt`� OJ 6 l0 o 1 O O G A 111 t R _�-'--`f _\—/-------------------_---__—__---__—_---___-------_---- It------------------- n / L C, M a P '� y - OD f E3 10-h co-r-+Cl ReZOne� . N () ClDO DUh11 ,-j Blvd 0 zoo' 400' The intention of this application is to transform what currently is an abandoned service station along Dublin ' s main retail arterial , into a desirable shopping center complex. The develop- ment will consist of a single story building of approximately 12 ,000 sq . ft . , positioned near the rear property line facing Dublin Blvd. , with ample parking in front of the premises . Numberous promotional retailers noticeably absent from Dublin ' s centralized retail activity along Dublin Blvd . have expressed interest in this project . This applicant intends to redevelop the property from an obsolete zoning designation into a retail shopping environment that will benefit the city and its residents through additional sales tax revenues (projection : $30-35 ,000 per year) and increase the number of quality retailers in the city. ,J • � i CITY OF DUBLIN 11.0. 13ox 2340 Duhlin. CA 9468 (415) 829-4000 NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR: PA 84-009 Blancarte Rezone A Proposal to Rezone a Parcel from a Highway Frontage (H-1 ) District to a Retail Business (C-1) District (Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. ) LOCATION: 7900 Dublin Blvd. , southwest corner of Regional Street and Dublin Blvd. PROPONENT: Mark Blancarte 0WNER: Atlantic Richfield DESCRIPTION: A proposal to rezone an approximately 40, 000 sq. ft. parcel , from H-1 to C-1, for the purpose of developing a small retail building . ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: 941-1500-17-5 FINDINGS : The project will not have a significant effect on the environment . INITIAL STUDY: The Initial Study is attached with a brief discussion of the following environmental components : MITIGATION MEASURES : None required PREPARATION: This Negative Declaration was prepared by the City of Dublin Planning Staff, ( 415 ) 829-4916 . SIGNATURE : I/1� _ ( DATE:�'LSI { Lclurence L. Tong,__ Planning Director DP 83-11 CITY OF t?UaLli4 PA Na. y-GG iN'%/IR0r4 MF-A-J-r ,.I. ASS a-9 ilkF-ojr-,J 7 F0F;s-VI , (1�1:12tlM (Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000 et se—) Based on the project information submitted in Section 1 General Data, the Planning Staff will use Section 3, Initial Study, to determine whether a Negative Declaration or an Environmental Impact Report is required. SECTION 3. INITIAL STUDY - - to be completed by the PLANNING STAFF Name of Project or Applicant: At-Go -.s rezohe, 14 1 :h2 C-- 1 A... ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING - Descrip}ion of project site before the project, including information on: topography; soil stability; plants and animals; historical, cultural, and scenic aspects; existing structures; and use of structures �r QSAI 4 :2 rc a,., O o00 f r e- O .. ti c..r -e wov h2 l�000 , 14. Description of surrounding properties, including information an: plants and animals; historical, cultural, and scenic aspects; type and intensity of land use; and scale or development. 1 S ri1Dv., ' mar.'.-•� rC..► �:r B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - Factual explanations of all a:u-Ners except "no" are re- . quired on attached sheets. Cam,g -�'T FACTS SC= OF IMPACT to QomT- YES =Cwy 1`e F 10 1.0 WATER - 1.1 Hydrologic Balance Will construction of the project alter the hydro- logic bolonce? 1.2 Ground Water Will the project affect the quality or quantity of I ground water supplies? 1.3 Depth to Water Tablo Will the rate of water vr;thdro-al change the d..pth or gradient of tha venter table? 1.4 Drainoge and aonneI Form Will construction impedo the natural drainage pattern or cause alteration of stream channel form? 1 1.5 Sedimentation Will construction in on area result in major sediment I ' Influx into adjacent water bodies? t 1.6 Flnoding Will there be risk of loss of life or property due In rloa.fin 7 A-5 SCALE OF 7i TACT NO QUALIFIM YES NO E- 0 10 1?, 15 1.7 Water Qwlity Does drinking water supply foil to meet state oral I federal standards? Will sewage be inaje7•�otely cccommc?afed and ' treated? Will receiving voters foil to inert local, st•:'c and I I federal standards? Will ground water suffer contamination by s-:rFu:e I I seeps}t, intrusion of soil or polluted water from adjacent water bodies or from another r:nn!.ir.;anrcd o .rifer? ' I I I • 2.0 AIR 2,1 Air Pollution Will there be generation and dispersion of p-Mufonts I I by project related acti.itics or in pro :r.it r tr, t!:e I project whit%s•rill er^ecd s:a:c n:r:.::i-^o quality stocdards? 2.2 Wind Alteration Will structure and terrr]in'impede prc%-c:ilire wins I I flow causing channeling along certain orri:s's or V, I I obstruction of wind movements? . I I I 3.0 EARTH ( I 3.1 Slope Stability Are there potential dong-rs related to clape r.30.)res? Will there be risk to life or property of 3.2 Foundation Support excessive deformation of mc:eriols? I 3.3 Consolidation Will there be risk to life or property%ccow.t:of excessive consolidation or foundati•]r nntr•iois? 3.4 Subsidence Is there risk of major ground subsidi:n.:rs ns:-)ciated I I With the project? I 3.5 Seismic Activity Is there risk of damage or loss res ibiijo frrm earth- I . quo:cc activity? f t 3.6 Liquefaction Will the project taus^of Se r!>nos-i to Uqu-rcction I I of soils in slcpes cr under founcolirns? 3.7 Erodibility Will there be s•:bstantiol loss of so;!c!-:n!a cr.- 41-1 I I I I struction practices? I I 3.8 Permeability Will the permeability of soils ossociot'f!svi!%the I I project present oiverso conditionsrelot;ve IC dc- I ' velopment of wells? i 3.9 U%ique Feolures Will any unique geological features brs do mo�ed I I or destroyed by p:oject activities? 3.10 Mineral Resources Are there geologic deposits of potcntial r»-:ercinl I I „i value close to the project? 4.0 PLANTS AND ANIMALS 4.1 Plant and Animal Species Are there rare or endangered species present? Are there species pre=- t w%icis are p-3'tic'rlarly susceptiole to impact from human activity? Is there vegetation pros^nt. the!as;of s•:%i4. will deny food or hobitot to imparfonr wild:ife s?eci-s? Are there nuisance :necies or plant or n-iimz!s for whit%conditions will be improved by tl-e project? 4.2 Vegetative Community Types Are there any unusual populations of plants that may be of scientific intcre:t? I Are there veg_ra6ve comnunity tyres v,hich arc ( I portieularly su:eeptiblc to impact firm human cc:lvlty? Are th::c major trees or major vcgrtntioi that will ( I ho cj:•c:r.ly nf`rr.tc-I by th-rsroj^cl? _ O.rr, there v^ 7Ca:icn rnmmunity tyn r'^r^rr. dr. t,a I I I of which v:ill deny fra 1 or has ita'to i ^^'ar; s•:i',lli I I 3pe..eies, rr to o:U!];l.allot nvml] or r�'••• r'^`_'r•'•t7I• . 4,7 Diversity Is there subston:inl diversity in tit., n^t••-n: -•sr.:n-n:ly I I I as reflected in the ns.m%n•and tyrsr•,f i]l—t :r nr.i-r-1 I I I species p•esent or the thrcr.-dim,:nsinrr.l of plant species present? I I I • I I I • I I 1 I I I A-6 _ MTON err SOUS or DTACr No QC.MIFIED YES NO I I to of 101 5.0 FACILITIES AND SERVICES 5.1 Educational Facilities Will projected enrollments adversely affect the ex- I (sting w proposed facilities in terms of spacing for all activities, Including classrooms, recreational I I oreos, end staffing needs? Will the project impoct tha pvpiVteocher ratio so 1 1 as to impede the learning process? Is the school located such that it presents a hardship for o portion of the enrollment in terms of travel time, I I distance, or safety hazards? I I I • 5.2 Commercial Facilities Will there be on inadequate supply of and access to commercial facilities for the project? I 5.3 Liquid Waste Disposal Are provisions for sewage capacity inadequate for I ( 1 the needs of the project without exceeding quality I I standards? Will the project be exposed to nuisances and odors 1 associated with wastewater treatment plants? 5.4 Solid Waste Disposal Is there inadequate provision for disposal of solid I I 1 wastes generated by the project? 5.5 Water Supply Is there inodequnta quantity or quality of water I I I supply to meet the needs of thn•project? 5.6 Storm Water Drainage `Hill storm water drainage be inadequate to prevent I I I downstream flooding and to meet Federal State and I I local storsdords? 5.7 Police Will the project's additional population, facilities, 1 or other features generate an increase in police service 1 1 I or create a police hazard? I 5.8 Fire Will the project's additional populotion, facilities, 1 I I or other featvres generate on increase in fire services I I I or create a fire hazard? I 1 I 5.9 Recreation Will the project have inodegwte facilities to meet the recreational needs of the residents? I I I 5.10 Cultural Facilities Will cultural facilities be unavailable to the project I I I residents? 6.0 TRANSPORTATION I 1 I 6.1 Transportation Facilities Are the traffic demands on adjacent roads currently at or above capacity? If not, will the traffic gen- I 1 crated by the project cause the adjacent roods to I I I I t 1 reach or exceed capacity? Are the other transportation facilities which serve the project inadequate to accommodete the project's I I ( - travel demands? 6.2'Circulation Conflicts Will design of tha project or conditions in the surround- 1 1 ing or"increase accidents due to circulation conflicts 6.3 Road Safety and Design Will project residents and users be exposed to increased accident risks dun to roadway and street design or tack of traffic controls? I 1 7.0 HEALTH I I 1 7.1 Odors Will the project be exposed to or genorote any intense V111 I I 1 odors? 7.2 Crowding and Density Will the residents and users be exposed to crowding or 1 1 1 high density in their physical living environment? 7.3 Nuisances Will the project be exposed to or generate factors that 1 may be considered as nuisances? ( 1 I 7.4 Structural Sofery Will design and proposed construction techniques fail ' to meet state and loco[building codes? 1 1 8.0 NOISE I 1 1 I I I 8.1 Noise Levels Will the project be expos•sd to rr generate adverse noise levris? ( 1 I 8.2 lrbrotions Will the prnjact bo cxposerf to v hrotinns nnnoying to • humans? I 1 1 1 I 1 I CIF o�1 r IMPACTS .n t1IE OF L�1F'r�CT No CkMIFIED YES CtruQla ry NO 1P 1 10 1 1 IF 01 101 � I" 1 , I � 9.0 COMMUNITY CHARACTER I I 9.1 Community Organization Will the project disrupt an existing set of organizations or groups within fire community? 9.2 Homogeneity and Diversity Will the project change the character of the I { community in terms of distribution or concentration I I of income, ethnic, housing, or age group? 9.3 Community Stability and Will the project be exposed to or generate on I • Physical Conditions oreo of poor stability onJ physicol conditions? I I 10,0 VISUAL QUALITY 10.1 Views Will residents of the surrounding area be adversely affected by views of or from the project? I Will the project residents be adversely affected by I I views of a from the surrounding nrca? ' 10.2 Shodow Will the project be exposed to or generate excessive { I . sbodows? • I I I 11.0 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RE50UK Z5 I I I I I I - 11.1 Historic and Cultural Will ilso project involve the destruction or alter- I I Resources otion of a historic resource? Will the project result in isolation of a historic I { resource from its surrounding environment? Will the project introduce physical, visual, audible I { I or a!mo:pherie elements thnt are not in c!soractcr with I I o historic resource or ids setting? 11.2 Archoeo!ogicol Sites Will the project involve the destruction or alteration and Structures of on orchccolo:.)ical resource? Will the project result in 4-notion of co archaeological I I { • resource? Wili the project inlro•l,jcc physical, visual, audible I { { or atmospheric elements that are not in character with I I I an archoeological resource or its setting? I I I I 1 • I I I 12.0 ENERGY I 12.1 Energy Requirements Are there potential problems with the supply of energy required for tine project? Will the eaorgy requirements exceed the capacity I I I of toe scrvica utility company? Will there be a net increase in energy used for the I { project camp-3red to the no prof:=t alternative? 12.2 Conservation Measures Does the project planning onrf dtrsirn inii to include I ovai(zb!c energy con;crvotion mca:urn;? 15.0 LAND USE I { 13.1 Site Hazards Do conditions of the site, proposed site development, or svrrounding area create potentially hazardous situ- ' otions? --�.—� 17.2 Ph;sicol Threat. Viril! the project or the surrounding or create a feeling of insecurity and physical threat omnnj the residents oral uses? I I I 13.3 Sonitery Landfill Wil! !!sc project b-. !xpose-1 to strv!turn!damngc, I I { noise, air, or vuface nrd Ground water pollution I., I I I ar other nuixrncr.;ossocioteJ wits a sanitary landfill? 13.4 \r.aterwoys Wi:l Ota project affect on existing w_•tcr+ y throu3h I { I filling, dredging, druiniug, culy•:rting, v.�);tc dis- chargcs, loss of visual gvoliry or oth.-r land u:c I I practices? i I I I I I I A-8 — OLI TaNSNT SCALE. OF LNIPt1C r NO QUALIFIED YES UmllavNk . NO tit Io � IQ1� 1 ° 5 • Other En—,onmental Componentr. C. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE QL"1LIFIED NO NO YES UIQF4 CM, (�) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish cr wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important exa..-nples of the major periods or California history cr prehistory? (2) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (3) Does the project have impacts which are individually limited but cumulateively considercble? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect o` the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) (4) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial advers? effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? A-9 - r D. MITIGATION MEASURES - Discussion of the ways to mitiga`e tle significant effects identified, if any: tQ !ns ri; + f nc� 4a�l.� E. DETERMINATION - On the basis of this initial evaluation: The City of Vublih _ ;finds that there will not be any significant effect. The par- ticular characteristics of this project and the mitigation measures incorporated into the design of the project provid-; thn `actual basis for the finding. A NECATIVE DECLARATION IS QUIRED. 0 The City of Dublin ;finds that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment. AN ENVIRONtv1ENTAL IMPACT REPORT 1S REQUIRED** Signature and date: Name and title: PIChrft.� **NOT': Where a project is revised in resocnse to an Initial Study so !hay adverse effects are mitigated to a point where no significant environmental effects would occur, a revised Initial Study will be prepared and a Negative Declaration will be retjuired iis•ead of nn FIR