HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7.1 Adopt Western Dublin General Plan City of Dublin
Agenda Statement
City Council Meeting Date: June 8, 1992
SUBJECT: Resolution Adopting the Western Dublin General Plan
Amendment and Specific Plan (PA 88-144)
PREPARED BY: Brenda A. Gillarde, Project Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Adopting the Western Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Western Dublin Specific Plan; Making Findings Pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Adopting a
Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Western Dublin General
Plan Amendment and Specific Plan; and Adopting a Mitigation
Monitoring Program for the Western Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan.
Exhibit A of Draft Resolution: Findings and Statement of Overriding
Considerations
Exhibit B of Draft Resolution: Mitigation Monitoring Program
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Hear Staff presentation
2 Question Staff as necessary
Adopt Resolution Adopting the Western Dublin General Plan
Amendment and Western Dublin Specific Plan; Making Findings
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Western
Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan; and Adopting a
Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Western Dublin General Plan
Amendment and Specific Plan.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None
BACKGROUND
At the City Council meeting on May 28, 1992, several aspects of the Western
Dublin project were addressed. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the
project was reviewed for adequacy and was certified by the Council as complete
and adequate pursuant to CEQA guidelines. The Council then discussed the project,
which is the Draft General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan for Western Dublin.
The Council provided direction to staff, via "straw votes," on certain policies and
land use issues that relate to the Western Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan, for preparation of resolutions approving the General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan. In summary, the Council directed that:
the land use concept for the Milestone property should be revised to
reflect no more than a maximum of 74 units, no Brittany Drive
extension, one public access road via the Hansen Hills Ranch
subdivision, and the southerly alignment for the emergency vehicle
access route;
Page 1 of 4
ITEM NO. COPIES TO: Applicant/Owner
Senior Planner
Project Planner
Agenda File.
Application File
CITY CLERK
FILE o2 0 3
the land use concept for the Eden/Schaefer property should remain as
described in the Draft Specific Plan (December 1991) which would
allow no more than a maximum of 3,131 units, development in Upper
Elderberry and Wildflower canyons, an 18 hole championship golf
course and a pedestrian-oriented "village center";
the City's existing general plan policies should be amended regarding
30 percent slopes, oak and riparian woodland protection and others to
accommodate the development concepts described in the Western
Dublin Specific Plan, as revised by the Planning Commission and City
Council; and
other minor adjustments to the general plan amendment and specific
plan should be made as recommended by the Planning Commission,
Staff and the City Council.
The Council's direction regarding these issues is consistent with the Planning
Commission's recommendation. A resolutions has now been prepared for the
Council's consideration and adoption. This resolution incorporates the direction
provided to Staff by Council at the previous May 28, 1992 meeting. The content
of this resolution is explained more fully in the next section.
DISCUSSION/ACTION
The resolution for the Council's consideration addresses the necessary actions to
approve the Western Dublin project. The Council is requested to review the four
components of the resolution and then take the appropriate action, indicated in bold
typeface.
1. Adoption of the General Plan Amendment
This portion of the resolution will amend the City's current general plan. Text and
maps in the current plan will be modified as described in the Draft General Plan
Amendment for Western Dublin (dated December 1991), with revisions (dated
April 2, 1992) (refer to Attachment 2 of City Council May 12 agenda statement),
and as recommended by the Council at the May 28, 1992 meeting.
Briefly, the major changes would be to existing general plan policies relating to
development on slopes over 30 percent, oak woodland protection and riparian
woodland protection. In addition, the City general plan land use map would be
amended to reflect the land uses described in the Western Dublin Specific Plan, as
approved by the Council.
The Planning Commission recommendation to City Council is for adoption of the
general plan amendment as referenced in the City Council draft resolution.
2. Adoption of the Specific Plan
This portion of the resolution will make the Draft Western Dublin Specific Plan, as
revised, the guiding policy and land use document for western Dublin. Adoption of
the specific plan does not approve a particular development proposal but rather,
establishes the type, amount and location of development in western Dublin.
Page 2 of 4
Subsequent applications to develop in western Dublin will have to be submitted
consistent with the development concept described in the adopted specific plan.
The specific plan adopted by the resolution would be the document entitled Draft
Specific Plan for Western Dublin, dated December 1991, as revised by the Planning
Commission, dated April 2, 1992 and April 6, 1992 (refer to Attachment 3 of May
12 City Council agenda statement), and as recommended by the Council at the May
28, 1992 meeting.
Briefly the development concept would include no more than a maximum of 3,131
units on the Eden/Schaefer property with an 18 hole championship golf course,
custom lot homes and a pedestrian-oriented village center. The Milestone property
could have no more than a maximum of 74 units, semi-custom lots, with no
Brittany Drive extension, one public access through the Hansen Hills subdivision and
the southerly alignment for the emergency vehicle access route.
The Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council is for adoption of
the Specific Plan as referenced in the draft City Council resolution.
3. Adoption of Findings and a Statement of Overriding_Considerations
(Exhibit A of Draft Resolution)
In order to approve a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies
one or more significant environmental effects, the public agency must make written
findings for each significant effect, accompanied by a short explanation of the
rationale for each finding. The State CEQA Guidelines (section 15091) identify
three categories of findings: -
1. That changes or alterations have been included in the project which
avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect;
2. That such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of a public agency other than the City and such changes
have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted
by the other agency; and
3. That the mitigation measures and/or alternatives to the project are
not feasible due to specific economic, social or other considerations.
The findings for the western Dublin project are included as Exhibit A of the draft
resolution. For each significant impact identified in the EIR, the mitigation
measure is described and one of the three findings discussed- above is made. In
addition, alternatives to the project are identified and, with the exception of the
Cluster Development Alternative for the Milestone property, a finding is made that
the alternatives are infeasible for specific social, economic or other considerations.
The Cluster Development alternative for the Milestone property is the project
identified by the Council by its straw vote as the Council's choice for that
property.
In addition to making findings for each identified significant impact, a statement of
overriding considerations must be made if there are unavoidable adverse impacts.
As identified in the Final Western Dublin EIR (dated May 1992), there are six
unavoidable adverse impacts (EIR, pp. 16-1 to 16-4):
Page 3 of 4
1. Alteration of Eden Canyon for a main access road into the project;
2. Major landform alteration resulting from project grading;
3. Visual impacts on the existing Morris residence due to landform
alteration;
4. Loss of significant stands of coast live oak woodland, riparian
woodland and natural stream corridors;
5. Contribution to regional ozone emissions; and
6. Expansion of wastewater facilities.
In making a statement of overriding considerations, a decisionmaker must "...balance
the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable adverse environmental
risks." (CEQA Guidelines, section 15093.) If it is concluded that the benefits of
the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the unavoidable
adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable" and the project may
be approved.
The Council should review these findings and ask Staff for clarifications, if
necessary, or provide direction regarding revisions to the findings.
4. Adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring Program (Exhibit B of Draft
Resolution)
State law requires public agencies to adopt a mitigation monitoring program for
projects for which an EIR has been prepared and mitigation measures approved to
reduce identified environmental impacts. The mitigation monitoring program
requirement was established to ensure implementation of the mitigation measures
identified in an EIR. A mitigation monitoring program must identify the following:
Who is responsible for monitoring the mitigation;
What is the mitigation measure being monitored and how;
When should the mitigation be monitored and for how long;
Completion: When should the mitigation be completed and in place; and
Verification: What agency is required to ensure implementation of the
mitigation measure.
The mitigation monitoring program for western Dublin is contained in Exhibit B of
the draft resolution.
Staff recommends City Council adoption of the Resolution Adopting the Western
Dublin General Plan Amendment and Western Dublin Specific Plan; Making Findings
Pursuant to the-California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Adopting a
Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Western Dublin General Plan
Amendment and Specific Plan; and Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Program for
the Western Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
Council Action Required: Take action on the Resolution Adopting the Western
Dublin General Plan Amendment and Western Dublin Specific Plan; Making Findings
Pursuant to the-California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Adopting-a
Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Western- Dublin General Plan
Amendment and Specific Plan; and Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Program for
the Western Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
[s/wdjune8]
Page 4 of 4
RESOLUTION NO. - 92
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
ADOPTING THE WESTERN DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
AND WESTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN; MAKING FINDINGS
PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR THE WESTERN DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND
SPECIFIC PLAN; AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
FOR THE WESTERN DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN
Recitals
General
1. In response to residential development applications
from Eden Development Group and Schaefer Heights, Inc. , and
later, the Milestone Land Development Corporation, (the
"Applicants") the City of Dublin undertook the Western Dublin
Study to plan for the future development of the Western Dublin
Expanded Planning Area.
2 . The City Council and Planning Commission conducted
three joint public study sessions relating to planning issues in
western Dublin. The December 13 , 1989 study session identified
existing site conditions in the study area and described the
site' s development constraints and opportunities. The February
28 , 1991 study session considered different land use options for
the study area and chose the applicants' proposals as the
preferred alternative for further study. The November 11, 1991
study session addressed visual and parkland issues in the study
area.
3 . With the identification of a preferred alternative on
February 28, 1991, the City prepared a Draft General Plan
Amendment and Draft Specific Plan to plan for the future
development of a residential community of single-family and
multiple family residences with supporting community and
commercial facilities, together with an 18-hole championship golf
course and other park and open space facilities.
Draft General Plan Amendment
4 . The Draft General Plan Amendment, dated December 1991,
designates the proposed general distribution and general location
and extent of the uses of Western Dublin for residential,
commercial, industrial, public, open space and parks and
recreation, and other categories of public and private uses of
land.
1
Allow
5. The Draft General Plan Amendment includes a statement
of standards of population density and standards of building
intensity for Western Dublin.
6. Pursuant to the provisions of State Planning and Zoning
Law, it is the function and duty of the Planning Commission of
the City of Dublin to review and recommend action on proposed
amendments to the City' s General Plan.
7 . The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing on the Western Dublin Draft General Plan Amendment on
January 14 , 1992 which hearing was continued to March 16, 1992 .
8 . Based on comments received during the public hearings,
related text revisions, dated April 2 , 1992 , were made to the
Draft General Plan Amendment and were reviewed by the Planning
Commission at its meeting on April 6, 1992 .
9 . The Draft General Plan Amendment was reviewed by the
Planning Commission in accordance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) through the
preparation and review of an Environmental Impact Report. On
April 20, 1992 , by Resolution No. 92-023 , the Planning Commission
recommended certification of the Final Environmental Impact
Report.
10. On April 20, 1992, the Planning Commission, after
considering all written and oral testimony submitted at the
public hearing, adopted Resolution No. 92-24 , recommending City
Council adoption of the Draft General Plan Amendment, as revised
April 2 , 1992 .
Draft Specific Plan
11. The Draft Specific Plan, dated December, 1991,
implements the Western Dublin General Plan Amendment by providing
a detailed framework, including policies, standards and
implementation programs, for evaluation of development projects
proposed in western Dublin.
12 . Pursuant to State Law, the Western Dublin Draft
Specific Plan was prepared and reviewed in the same manner as a
general plan amendment.
13 . The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing on the Western Dublin Draft Specific Plan on December 16,
1991, which hearing was continued to January 6, 1992 , January 14,
1992 , and March 16, 1992 .
2
14 . Based on comments received during the public hearings,
related text revisions, dated April 2 , 1992, and April 6, 1992 ,
were made to the Draft Specific Plan and were reviewed by the
Planning Commission on April 6, 1992 .
15. The Draft Specific Plan was reviewed by the Planning
Commission in accordance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) through the preparation and
review of a Final Environmental Impact Report. On April 20,
1992 , by Res. No. 92-023 , the Planning Commission recommended
certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report.
16. On April 20, 1992 , the Planning Commission, after
considering all written and oral testimony submitted at the
public hearing, adopted Resolution No. 92-025, recommending City
Council adoption of the Draft Western Dublin Specific Plan dated
December 1991, as revised April 2 , 1992 , and April 6, 1992 .
Council Public Hearing
17 . The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on
the Western Dublin Draft General Plan Amendment and Draft
Specific Plan on May 12 , 1992 .
18 . On May 28, 1992 , at a public meeting, the City Council
reviewed the Western Dublin Draft General Plan Amendment and
Draft Specific Plan in accordance with the provisions of CEQA
through the preparation and review of an Environmental Impact
Report.
19 . A staff report dated May 28 , 1992 , was prepared for the
City Council ' s consideration of the Western Dublin Draft General
Plan Amendment and Draft Specific Plan, which report described
the amendment and Specific Plan and identified issues related to
the amendment and Specific Plan.
20. The City Council considered all written and oral
testimony submitted at the public hearing held on May 12 , 1992 ,
all written testimony submitted prior to the public hearing and
the recommendation of the Planning Commission.
21. On May 28 , 1992 , the City Council adopted Resolution
No. 59-92 , certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report
(Final EIR) as adequate and complete. The Final EIR identified
significant adverse environmental impacts which can be mitigated
to a level of insignificance through changes or alterations in
the project. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, findings adopting the
changes or alterations are required and are contained in this
resolution. Some of the significant impacts cannot be mitigated
to a level of insignificance and a statement of overriding
considerations is therefore required pursuant to CEQA and is also
contained in this resolution.
3
Findings/Overriding Considerations/
Mitigation Monitoring Program
22 . Public Resources Code section 21081 requires the City
to make certain findings if the City approves a project for which
an environmental impact report has been prepared that identifies
significant environmental effects.
23 . Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires
adoption by the City Council of a statement of overriding
considerations if the Council approves a project which will
result in unavoidable significant effects on the environment.
24 . Section 15092 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires the
City to make certain determinations if it approves a project
which reduces the number of housing units considered in the
environmental impact report.
25. The Final Environmental Impact Report ("Final EIR") for
the Western Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan
identifies certain significant adverse environmental effects.
26. Certain of the significant adverse environmental
effects can be reduced to a level of insignificance by changes or
alterations in the project.
27 . Certain of the significant adverse environmental
effects cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance.
28 . The Council has selected the Clustered Development
Alternative identified in the Final EIR for the Milestone
Development property, reducing the number of housing units for
such property from the project as reviewed by the Final EIR for
the Western Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
29. Public Resources Code section 21081. 6 requires the City
to adopt a reporting or monitoring program for changes in a
project or conditions imposed to mitigate or avoid significant
environmental effects in order to ensure compliance during
project implementation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT
A. The Dublin City Council approves the Western Dublin
General Plan Amendment dated December, 1991, with the Revisions
to Draft General Plan Amendment, dated April 2 , 1992, as
recommended by the Planning Commission.
B. The Dublin City Council finds the Western Dublin
Specific Plan consistent with the Dublin General Plan, as revised
by the Western Dublin General Plan Amendment.
4
C. The Dublin City Council does hereby approve the Western
Dublin Specific Plan dated December, 1991, with the Revisions to
Draft Specific Plan, dated April 2 , 1992 , and additional
revisions to Draft Specific Plan, dated April 6, 1992 , as
recommended by the Planning Commission.
D. The Dublin City Council does hereby direct the Staff to
edit, format, and print the up-to-date Dublin General Plan with
all City Council approved revisions and without any other
substantive changes.
E. The Dublin City Council does hereby direct the Staff to
edit, format, and print the Western Dublin Specific Plan with all
City Council approved revisions and without any other substantive
changes.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Dublin City Council does
hereby make the findings set forth in Sections 1, 2 , 3 , 4 and 5
of Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference, for the Western Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Dublin City Council does
hereby adopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth
in Section 6 of Exhibit A, attached hereto, which statement shall
be included in the record of the project approval.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Dublin City Council does
hereby adopt the "Mitigation Monitoring Program: Western Dublin
Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment" attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit B, as the reporting and monitoring
program required by Public Resources Code section 21081. 6 for the
Western Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Dublin City Council does
hereby direct that the Applicants shall pay all costs associated
with the implementation of the Mitigation Monitoring Program.
BE IF FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Dublin City Council does
hereby direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Determination
for the Western Dublin Specific Plan project with the Alameda
County Clerk and the State Office of Planning and Research.
5
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 8th day of June, 1992 , by
the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
114\Resol\28\consoH d.1
6
Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Environmental Impact Report for
Western Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment
prepared by WPM Planning Team,Inc.
for the City of Dublin
June 4, 1992
EXHIBIT Iq
Table of Contents
Section 1: Findings Concerning Significant Impacts
Section 2: Findings Concerning Alternatives
Section 3: Findings Concerning Growth-Inducing Impacts
Section 4: Findings Concerning Insignificant Impacts
Section 5: Miscellaneous Findings
Section 6: Statement of Overriding Considerations
2
Section 1: Findings Concerning Significant Impacts
AGRICULTURAL USE ON ADJOINING LAND
IMPACT: Agricultural use on adjoining lands could be adversely affected by proposed
development. Pets owned by project residents could harass or injure livestock. Residential use
close to the adjoining lands could result in livestock gates left open, or in damage to fences or to
other livestock control structures. Project residents,in turn, might be affected by flies and odors
normally attendant to grazing operations. FEIR pages 3-25 and 3-26.
Mitigation Measures: Provide project residents with disclosure statements addressing
protection measures for livestock, and also addressing the presence of agricultural
nuisances. Protect agricultural operations by enforcing leash ordinances and including dog
owner liability for livestock damage; provide fencing in grazing areas. FEIR page 3-27.
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT OF PROJECT OPEN SPACE
IMPACT: The project contains large amounts of open space, some private and some public, and
with several possible public or private owners or managers. In order for the benefits of the open
space to be realized, and to better address typical open space related issues, the ownership,
management and maintenance of the different kinds of open space must be coordinated
throughout the project. FEIR page 3-29.
Mitigation Measure: An open space management plan shall be prepared to identify the
entities who will own and manage the project's open space. Management and maintenance
responsibilities shall be specified and shall be specifically correlated with design-level
characteristics of the project. FEIR page 3-29,3-30.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
REGIONAL TRAIL CORRIDOR
IMPACT: A regional trail through and staging area on the site could result in conflicts with
adjacent land uses. FEIR pages 3-31, 3-32.
Mitigation Measures: Implement the provisions of the Specific Plan regarding the
regional trail including Specific Plan Action Program 7.7A requiring dedication of the
trail corridor and staging area and construction of related improvements according to
EBRPD standards. Prepare a design-level trail corridor plan as part of the Open Space
Management Plan and including provisions for the ownership, design, operation, and
management of the trail, staging area, other local trail access points, and provision for
connection to trails in the San Ramon Westside Area. FEIR page 3-32.
Findin : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
1X8914-EIR\891411 3
DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION
IMPACT: The extension of Dublin Boulevard will provide a link between western and central
Dublin, along the north side of I-580. Turn movements from this street to multiple driveways
serving proposed commercial uses could be a safety hazard. FEIR page 4-6.
Mitigation Measures: Control turn movements from Dublin Boulevard by limiting design
speeds, by spacing and limiting left turn opportunities, and by providing left turn lanes on
Hollis Canyon Boulevard. FEIR page 4-7.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
SCHAEFER RANCH ROAD INTERCHANGE
IMPACT: Full buildout of the project would result in congestion on area streets and intersections
if this interchange is not built. FEIR page 4-7.
Mitigation Measures: Construct the Schaefer Ranch Road interchange; or conduct
supplementary traffic studies at each 10% increment of project buildout, evaluating
project and area traffic effects,identifying a phased development limit for maximum
acceptable development without the interchange, and identifying project delay or revision
plans if the phased development limit is reached without completion of the interchange.
FEIR pages 4-8, 4-9.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
EDEN CANYON ROAD IN'T'ERCHANGE
IMPACT: Without improvements, offramps at the I-580 interchange would operate at an
unacceptable LOS F with buildout of Western Dublin. FEIR page 4-9.
Mitigation Measures: Provide improvements for the Eden Canyon Road interchange,
such as lane widening, offramp intersection signals, additional offramp lanes or restriping.
FOR pages 4-9, 4-10.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
BRITTANY DRIVE EXTENSION
IMPACT: Brittany Drive is proposed for extension to the Cronin project. With this extension,
traffic speeds on Brittany Drive are likely to increase. This could lead to conflicts between
speeding vehicles and pedestrians. FEIR page 4-10.
Mitigation Measure: The identified mitigation measure is not required because the City
adopted the Cluster Development Alternative for the Cronin property which reduces
development from 125 to 74 units, eliminates the Brittany Drive extension and provides
access through Hansen Hills. FEIR page 4-11.
1:\8914-EUN914.F1 4
Fes: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
SHELL RIDGE ROAD
IMPACT: Shell Ridge Road is proposed along steep terrain with sharp curves,presenting
potential safety hazards re: limited sight distance, straight alignment, and homes fronting on the
street. FEIR pages 4-11,4-12.
Mitigation Measure: No direct access shall be allowed to Shell Ridge Road.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS ROAD
IMPACT: An emergency vehicle access route to connect the western and eastern parts of the
Planning Area is needed to provide emergency vehicle access, emergency evacuation, a
maintenance road for proposed utility lines, and a pedestrian trail connection to the regional trail.
FEIR pages 4-12,4-13.
Mitigation Measure: Provide an emergency vehicle access route between the Eden
Canyon Country Club and Cronin Ranch, which route minimizes grading and visual
impact, and provides a trail connection to the regional trail. FEIR page 4-13.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
ROWELL RANCH RODEO PARK AREA
IMPACT: The current rural setting of the Rodeo Park and an existing house in Schaefer Basin
would be modified to a permanent, direct view of commercial and residential development and
graded slopes. FEIR pages 5-6, 5-7.
Mitigation Measures: Use berms, setbacks, and other design measures to conceal
structures from the Rodeo Park. Use design measures to avoid silhouetting structures on
the skyline. Detailed grading plans shall emphasize natural land contours, which provide
horizontal and vertical variation of slopes and a smooth transition to natural terrain. The
Master Landscape Plan shall emphasize planting along visible disturbed slopes and
ridgelines,planting to ease the transition between developed and open space areas, and to
soften the visual effect of structures and reduce glare impacts. FEIR pages 5-7, 5-8, 5-17,
5-18.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
INTERSTATE 580 - VIEW OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION
IMPACT: Construction of the Dublin Boulevard Extension involving tree removal and extensive
landform alteration would be highly visible from the I-580 freeway. FEIR pages 5-8, 5-9.
1 8914-EHM91411 5
Mitigation Measures: Align this street and plan grading to reduce grading and tree
removal. Include special attention to tree replacement for this area in the landscape-
revegetation plans. FEIR page 5-9.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
VIEW OF CRONIN RANCH FROM CENTRAL DUBLIN AND DUBLIN HILLS
IMPACT: Proposed development would be located on the upper slopes of Cronin Ridge, which
is visible from various parts of Dublin. FEIR pages 5-10, 5-11.
Mitigation Measures: The identified mitigation measures for development above 740 foot
elevation are not required because the City adopted the Clustered Development
Alternative for the Cronin Ranch which reduces the number of units and clusters them
below 740 foot elevation. Plan grading to minimize land disturbance and tree removal,
and replace removed trees, concentrating on placement to reduce visual impacts of new
development. FEIR pages 5-11, 5-12, 17-9, 17-10.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
VIEWS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FROM PALOMARES HILLS AND SUNNY
HEIGHTS
IMPACT: Development on Oak Ridge would be visible from portions of these two areas of
existing and ongoing development located just west of the Planning Area. FEIR page 5-12.
Mitigation Measures: Detailed grading plans shall emphasize natural land contours which
provide variation of slopes and a smooth transition between development and natural
terrain. The Master Landscape Plan shall emphasize planting along visible disturbed
slopes and ridgelands to ease the transition between developed and open space areas, and
to soften the visual effects of structures. Protect significant tree areas on the northwest
face of Oak Ridge by adjusting the Site Plan and Grading Plan to preserve these tree areas
in open space. FEIR pages 5-12, 5-13, 5-17, 5-18.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
VIEWS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FROM EDEN CANYON AREA
IMPACT: A number of rural residences are located in Eden Canyon. Proposed development
would be visible generally and on the skyline from these residences. FEIR page 5-13.
Mitigation Measures. Detailed grading plans shall emphasize natural land contours which
provide horizontal and vertical variation of slopes and a smooth transition to natural
terrain. The Master Landscape Plan shall emphasize planting along visible disturbed
slopes and ridgelands to ease the transition between developed and open space areas, and
to soften the visual effects of structures. Plan development on Oak Ridge and North
Ridge to minimize adverse visual effects. Include setbacks, berms,protection of trees, and
1:%8914-EHZ\S914.F1 6
additional plantings with special attention to avoiding silhouetting on the skyline. FEIR
pages 5-13, 5-14, 5-17, 5-18.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
EDEN CANYON ALTERATION
IMPACT: Eden Canyon presently has very high visual quality. The existing Eden Canyon Road
winds through a rural setting of dense woodland and widely-spaced homes. An access street,
proposed as an integral part of the project, would need to traverse a winding section of Eden
Canyon. Construction of this street would alter the visual character of the canyon. Eden Canyon
residents and visitors must pass through this section of the canyon to reach their homes. The
alteration of the canyon would be long-term in nature. The proposed four-lane road in the lower
canyon would have a fundamentally different visual quality that the existing road; a narrow,
winding country road would be replaced by an arterial drive. FEIR page 5-14.
Mitigation Measures: Detailed grading plans and the Master Landscape Plan shall
emphasize grading techniques and planting to ease transitions between developed and
open space areas. The site plan for Eden Canyon shall realign the roadway for minimum
canyon disturbance and shall provide large lot homesites to minimize grading and
vegetation removal along Eden Creek. Grading plans shall further consider ways to
reduce or avoid canyon fill, for example, by use of overflow channels and retaining walls.
The Master Landscape Plan shall further provide for dense replanting in disturbed canyon
areas. These mitigation measures would not reduce the impact to a level of insignificance.
The proposed street inherently requires major grading, and no other feasible route exists.
FEIR pages 5-15, 5-17, 5-18.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project.
However,even with these changes, the impact will not be reduced to a level of
insignificance. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted
upon approval of the project.
EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS ROUTE OVER RIDGELINE
IMPACT: Grading and paving of portions of an emergency vehicle access over Skyline Ridge
would be visible from Central Dublin. FEIR page 5-15.
Mitigation Measures. Detailed grading plans and the Master Landscape Plan shall
emphasize grading techniques and planting to follow natural contours and soften disturbed
slopes and ridgelines where visible from Central Dublin. Minimize impact with plan
alignment. Design and build the road to the minimum acceptable width with a surface
treatment which blends with the hillside setting. FEIR 5-16, 5-17, 5-18.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
1:8914-E1R\8914.F1 7
LANDFORM ALTERATION - EDEN CANYON COUNTRY CLUB AND CRONIN RANCH
IMPACT: Mass grading and extensive landform alteration are proposed. About 35 to 37 million
cubic yards of earth would be moved. The upper sections of several secondary ridges would be
removed, and ridgeline elevation would be lowered in some cases by 100 feet or more. Earth
removed from ridgelines would be placed in various canyons. Canyons would be filled to a depth
of 100 feet or more in some locations. Some smaller landforms would disappear entirely. FEIR
pages 5-17, 5-19.
Mitigation Measures: Provide a detailed grading plan and master landscape plan to
minimize visual impacts by emphasizing grading techniques to follow natural contours
where possible, by planting and grading to ease transitions between developed and open
space areas particularly along slopes and ridgelines. Strict"limits of grading" boundaries
shall be established for the project and specifically identified grading techniques and
treatments shall be included where necessary, for example, in the Schaefer Basin Area,
along the Dublin Boulevard extension, along Oak Ridge and North Ridge, throughout
Eden Canyon, and on the Cronin Ranch. (Note: The identified mitigation measures for
development above 740 foot elevation on the Cronin Ranch are not required because the
City adopted the Clustered Development Alternative for this area which reduces the
number of units, clusters them below 740 foot elevation and eliminates the Brittany Drive
extension, all of which also reduce the amount and intensity of grading for Cronin Ranch.)
These measures would reduce the severity of grading throughout the Planning Area, but
would not reduce this impact to an insignificant level. Mass grading is inherent in a
project of this size on a steeply-sloping site. FEIR pages 5-17 through 5-20.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project.
However, even with these changes, the impact will not be reduced to a level of
insignificance. Therefore a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon
approval of the project.
LANDMARKS
IMPACTS: Development could affect several natural features in the Planning Area with high
scenic value, including Blackbird Pond, Los Novios Rock Formation, the Marshall Cliffs, and
Donlan Point. FEIR page 5-20.
Mitigation Measures: Protect the visual qualities of these landmarks by preserving and
enhancing Blackbird Pond, by preserving Donlan Point and carefully planning its trail
viewpoint to minimize grading, and by minimizing grading in and around the Marshall
Cliffs and Los Novios Rock Formation. FEIR page 5-21.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
PROPOSED ELDERBERRY CANYON BRIDGE
IMPACT: With a possible height of 80 feet and a span of several hundred feet, the proposed
bridge over Elderberry Canyon could affect views for future residents of the Planning Area.
FEIR page 5-21.
1:\8914-E11U914.F1 8
Mitigation Measure: Provide additional design-level evaluation of the bridge focusing on
visual features as well as engineering. FEIR page 5-22.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
MORRIS RESIDENCE
IMPACT: The proposed project would require extensive grading near this residence. Proposed
fill banks would extend within about 200 feet of this existing residence. There would be a major
change in landscape character for the surrounding ranchland. FEIR page 5-22.
Mitigation Measures: Use detailed grading plans and the Master Landscape Plan to
emphasize grading which follows natural contours and planting which will ease the
transition between developed and open space areas near the Morris residence. Minimize
grading near the residence and provide fast growing trees for screening. FEIR page 5-22.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project.
However, even with these changes, the impact will not be reduced to a level of
insignificance. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon
approval of the project.
REGIONAL TRAIL- VISUAL CONCERNS
IMPACT: The proposed regional trail requires careful design and location planning to preserve
its visual value for trail users and area residents. FEIR page 5-23.
Mitigation Measures: Align the trail to minimize windy conditions and to provide a
minimum buffer between the trail and development. Trail alignment, street crossings and
connections near I-580 for direct and convenient location while avoiding urban
development wherever possible. FEIR page 5-23.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
WATER STORAGE TANKS AND PUMP STATIONS - VISUAL CONCERNS
IMPACT: Without careful siting and design treatment,proposed tanks and pump stations located
in the upper elevations of the project site, could have adverse visual effects both on-site and off-
site. FEIR pages 5-23, 5-24.
Mitigation Measures: Supplementary environmental review shall be required for design
level storage tank and pump station plans. Locate tanks below specified elevations. Use
burial, berrning landscaping and/or neutral paint color to conceal tanks. Locate and screen
pump stations to be unobtrusive. FEIR pages 5-24, 5-25.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
1 N$9WEIM914TI 9
LIGHT AND GLARE
IMPACT: City parks, a fire station, an elementary school, the golf course, the Village Center and
Neighborhood Center, and other public and private facilities could have night lighting which
would affect nearby residents. FEIR pages 5-25, 5-26.
Mitigation Measures: Design lighting to minimize impact on nearby residential areas. In
addition, a Lighting Plan shall be prepared for the Village Center pursuant to Specific Plan
Action Program 9AA to provide pedestrian scale fixtures, avoid harsh lighting colors, and
control lighting of signs. FEIR pages 5-25, 5-26.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
TRANSMISSION LINE CLEARANCE
IMPACT: Proposed fill in Wagon Wheel Canyon and near the golf course would decrease the
distance between existing transmission lines and proposed development increasing the safety
hazard of the lines. FEIR page 5-28.
Mitigation Measure: Verify that there is adequate clearance between the proposed project
and the transmission lines. Encourage additional clearance wherever possible and plan
tree placement near the lines to avoid violation of CPUC and PG&E clearance standards.
FEIR page 5-29.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
GRASSLAND
IMPACT: Approximately 842 acres of grassland would be converted to urban development and
would be permanently lost as a wildlife and habitat resource. Night lighting could reduce the
habitat value of remaining grasslands. FEIR page 6-6.
Mitigation Measures: The Environmental Management Plan required in Specific Plan
Action Program 8.3B shall include provisions to revegetate disturbed areas. It shall also
provide for grassland buffer next to preserved woodland, coastal scrub, and riparian
woodland with variable buffer widths as needed for specific habitat requirements. Control
night lighting in buffer areas, and control or discontinue grazing in the retained grasslands
to enhance productivity for wildlife. FEIR p. 6-6.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
NORTHERN COASTAL SCRUB
IMPACT: About two-fifths of all northern coastal scrub on the Cronin property would be
destroyed by proposed development. Night lighting could reduce the habitat value of remaining
northern coastal scrub. FEIR page 6-7.
1:\8914-EH;N914.FI 10
Mitigation Measures: The Environmental Management Plan required in Specific Plan
Action Program 8.3B shall include provisions to minimize removal of northern coastal
scrub, provide replacement of lost vegetation on a 3:1 basis, establish grassland borders to
protect the scrub resource and provide connecting wildlife corridors, and control night
lighting. FEIR page 6-7.
Findin : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
COAST LIVE OAK WOODLAND
IMPACT: Proposed development would destroy about 126 acres of oak woodland and its related
habitat value. Within these woodland stands are many large native trees. A number of specimens
are several hundred years of age. Many additional trees may also be killed due to soil compaction
and irrigation practices. Night lighting could reduce the habitat value of the remaining oak wood
land. FEIR pages 6-7, 6-7a.
Mitigation Measures: Complete a detailed tree survey and apply tree protection measures
for trees to remain pursuant to Specific Plan Action Program 8.3A. Based on the survey,
make adjustments to the development plan to protect additional trees, especially along
Phillips Ridge, Oak Ridge, Shell Ridge, and in Powerline Canyon. The Environmental
Management Plan required under Specific Plan Action Program 8.3B shall include
standards to protect retained woodland,replacement of removed trees at a 3:1 ratio and
shall minimize night lighting. FEIR pages 6-8 through 6-10.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project.
With respect to Cronin Ridge, the City adopted the Clustered Development Alternative
which reduces the number of units and clusters the location of the units at lower
elevations. Adoption of this alternative reduces the oak woodland impacts on Cronin
Ridge to a level of insignificance. With respect to the other oak woodland impact areas
identified in the FEIR, the changes or alterations required in or incorporated into the
project do not reduce the impacts to a level of insignificance. Therefore, a Statement of
Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon approval of the project. FEIR pages 6-
8, 17-9.
RIPARIAN WOODLAND/STREAM CORRIDORS
IMPACT: Major sections of riparian woodland and stream corridors would be destroyed on the
Eden and Cronin properties. Night lighting could reduce the habitat value of the remaining
riparian corridors and riparian woodland. FEIR page 6-10.
Mitigation Measures: The Environmental Management Plan required under Specific Plan
Action Program 8.3B shall include provisions to modify development plans to protect
riparian woodland, establish riparian buffer zones in consultation with the Army Corps
and Fish and Game, as applicable, and minimize night lighting. Plan development in
riparian woodland areas, especially in Upper Eden Canyon and Central Hollis Canyon to
reduce and minimize areas of alteration and related grading. Disturbed streams shall be
reconstructed according to the standards in the FEIR with reconstruction plans designed
by an interdisciplinary team of a biologist, engineer and landscape architect. FEIR pages
6-10a to 6-13.
1:\8914-ED;N91411 11
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project,
however, even with these changes, the impact will not be reduced to a level of
insignificance. A Statement of Overriding Considerations shall be adopted for this
impact.
AQUATIC BIOMES
IMPACT: Blackbird Pond, several stock ponds, and intermittent streams would be directly or
indirectly affected by proposed development through destruction of creek beds, canyon fill,
siltation, and possibly, more intense use by cattle. Night lighting could reduce the habitat value
of Blackbird Pond. FEIR page 6-13
Mitigation Measures: The Environmental Management Plan required in Specific Plan
Action Program 83B shall include an enhancement program for Blackbird Pond which
program emphasizes the riparian nature of this habitat resource, while minimizing safety
hazards to children and minimizing night lighting. The Environmental Management Plan
shall include relocation of stock ponds and other aquatic habitat in consultation with a
biologist and in accord with Army Corps and Fish and Game "no net loss" policies. The
Plan shall also include water supply and management provisions for new ponds as well as
five-year monitoring by a qualified biologist. FEIR pages 6-13, 6-13a, 6-14.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
WILDLIFE CORRIDORS
IMPACT: The development plan isolates several key wildlife habitats and provides no effective
access corridors between certain habitat areas. FEIR page 6-14.
Mitigation Measures: The Environmental Management Plan required under Specific Plan
Action Program 8.3B shall incorporate additional wildlife corridors into project plans and
shall provide planted, naturally landscaped wildlife passageways where roadways pass
through wildlife corridors.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
INTRODUCTION OF DOMESTIC AND EXOTIC PLANTS, ANIMALS AND HERBICIDES
IMPACT: Introduced plants could compete with native vegetation. Domestic animals could pose
problems for wildlife. Drifting herbicide sprays could affect native plants. FEIR page 6-15.
Mitigation Measures: Control use of new plants with an emphasis on native plants.
Enforce existing leash laws and establish stringent herbicide use rules,reporting
procedures and fines for observed violations. FEIR page 6-15.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
1:\8914-E1W914.FI 12
ENDANGERED THREATENED, AND LISTED SPECIES
IMPACT: Although an investigation has found that the Alameda whipsnake is not found on the
Eden Development Group property, there is a possibility that this threatened species could occur
on the Cronin property. FEIR page 6-16.
Mitigation Measure: Conduct a supplementary investigation of the Alameda whipsnake
on the Cronin property, subject to survey performance standards in the FEIR. If the
species is found, redesign the project per survey recommendations and submit the revised
project to the City for processing. FEIR pages 6-16, 6-17.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY
IMPACT: The water capacity of Zone 7 and DSRSD to serve the Planning Area as proposed is
adequate, given the current expansion programs nearing completion and the design features
contained within the proposed development by the applicant. However, development pressures
throughout the Zone 7 Service Area could inhibit ability to provide adequate long-term supplies.
Because several portions of the Planning Area proposed for development are located at higher
elevations, two additional pressure zones are needed. FEIR pages 7-2, 7-3.
Mitigation Measures: Design and construct all water system/facility improvements in
accordance with DSRSD's water management plans and design and construction
standards,including phasing and water conservation features. Pressure Zone 3 shall be
expanded and 2 additional pressure zones created for development above 740 foot
elevation. Availability of water service for development and fire protection, including
adequate reservation of adequate rights-of-way shall be verified. FEIR pages 7-3a, 7-4.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
WASTEWATER
IMPACT: Sanitary sewer service to the Planning Area is constrained by the lack of off-site
downstream wastewater collection facilities, the capacity at the existing treatment plant in
Pleasanton, and the capacity in the existing export pipeline. The Planning Area is not within the
DSRSD service area and would require annexation into the District. Improper design, sizing or
construction of the sewer lines or recycled water distribution could adversely affect area residents.
Also, several existing homes are not served by sewers and are not close to proposed sewer lines.
FEIR pages 7-6, 7-7.
Mitigation Measures: The City shall support current efforts to explore the feasibility of a
new wastewater export pipeline system and shall request DSRSD to update its collection
system Master Plan to reflect the Project approval. The project proponents shall prepare a
detailed wastewater capacity investigation reflecting development phased according to
sewer permit allocation. The proposed wastewater system, including the recycled water
system, shall meet all DSRSD standards, and develoment areas shall be annexed to
UV 914-EIR�8914YI 13
DSRSD. Applicable standards of other agencies, such as Alameda County and/or state
DOHS and RWQCB shall also be met.
All residential and non-residential uses, including existing homes on septic systems, shall
be connected to DSRSD's sewer system upon annexation to the District, unless DSRSD
exempts a particular home or amends its connection policy. Existing private wells shall
be abandoned except in circumstances specific in the FEIR. FEIR pages 7-7 to 7-8a.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
SOLID WASTE
IMPACT: Proposed development of the Western Dublin Planning Area will increase the amount
of solid waste generated including large amounts of organic waste, which will further reduce
available landfill capacity. FEIR page 7-10.
Mitigation Measures: The City shall require the preparation of a Solid Waste
Management Plan for Western Dublin with emphasis on composting and recycling, and
incorporating the objectives and goals of State mandated waste generation and diversion
plans. Require that construction and demolition debris be taken to qualified recycling
facilities. FEIR pages 7-10,7-10a.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
POLICE PROTECTION
IMPACT: Increased population due to development of the Planning Area will require an increase
in police personnel and possible reorganization of police operations. FEIR page 7-11.
Mitigation Measures: Expand police operations and systems to serve the Western Dublin
Planning Area. Incorporate Police Department recommendations regarding design and
circulation aspects of development. Take other necessary administrative and budget
actions to hire additional personnel and implement a "beat" system. FEIR pages 7-11, 7-
12.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
FIRE PROTECTION
IMPACT: Location of the Planning Area places it outside the 1.5 mile zone and 5 minute
response time for the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority (DRFA). This project would impact the
DRFA fire rating. Open space areas adjacent to the proposed houses would create an increasing
wildfire hazard over time if left untended. As human occupancy increases in the area, so would
the chances of fire as well as the number of people and amount of property value at risk. FEIR
page 7-13.
1:8914-EHN91411 14
Mitigation Measures: As required under Specific Plan Action Program 6.3A and 6.313,
construct new fire facilities to serve the Planning Area. Incorporate Fire Department
recommendations regarding design aspects that affect access, water pressure, fire safety
and prevention in the project. Prepare a wildfire management plan for the site to reduce
the risk of open land wildfires while protecting habitat and other open space values. The
plan shall specify ownership, maintenance, use, brush control and fire-resistant
landscaping measures, as well as periodic review of these measures, for project open
lands. FEIR pages 7-13 through 7-15.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
PARKS AND RECREATION
IMPACT: There are potential concerns regarding land and improvements for neighborhood
parks, the golf course,private recreation facilities,internal and perimeter open space, the Village
Center Plaza, the regional trail corridor, Hollis Canyon Linear Park, and natural open space areas.
At this early stage of planning, there are no detailed, design-level plans for ownership,
management and maintenance of the project's open spaces. FEIR pages 7-17 through 7-28.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures reflect Specific Plan Action Programs for open
space ownership and management generally, as well as for each type of the Planning
Area's park,recreation and open space lands, together with additional supporting
mitigations as follows:
1. General Open Space: Specific Plan Action Program (hereafter "AP") 7.1A
requires the Project Environmental Management Plan to include an open space
component with design level standards to ensure compatibility between project
land uses and park and recreation opportunities. FEIR page 7-17.
2. Neighborhood Parks: AP 7.2A and 7.213 and additional mitigations require
dedication of three neighborhood parks on land suitable for such use,calculation
of in-lieu park fees, and adoption of an open space ordinance or equivalent
provisions to restrict park uses. FEIR pages 7-18, 7-19.
3. Golf Course: AP 73A requires a golf course ownership and management
program which shall include public access to the golf course. Additional
mitigations require the golf course program be coordinated with solid waste
managment, wildfire management and environmental management plans. AP
7.313 requires the City to adopt a golf course ordinance outlining permitted and
conditional uses, structural setbacks and height limits. FEIR pages 7-19,7-20.
4. Other Private Recreation: AP 7AA requires private recreation facilities for
clusters of medium and medium-high density residential development together
with related improvement plans. An additional mitigation requires a developer
statement outlining the ongoing maintenance, health and safety concerns and
monitoring of such facilities. FEIR page 7-21.
1\8914-E1"914.F1 15
5. Internal and Perimeter Open Space: AP 7.5A requires provisions for ownership,
management and access for these areas to mitigate fire suppression, weed
abatement, trash, erosion, and slope instability impacts. FEIR page 7-21.
6. Village Center Plaza: AP 7.6A requires that a Village Center Plaza be provided.
AP 9.4A requires a conditional use permit to evaluate the site, landscape,design,
sign and lighting plans and related support plans,particularly for pedestrian
orientation. AP 9AB requires building design standards to reflect a pedestrian
orientation and mixed use compatibility through setbacks,building treatment and
parking standards. FEIR pages 7-23, 7-24.
7. Regional Trail Corridor: AP 7.7A requires dedication and construction of the
regional trail and the staging areas with related parking and turnaround area.
Additional mitigations require efforts to link the regional trail to the Rodeo Park
and require a staging area for the Martin Canyon Trail in Cronin Ranch. FEIR
page 7-25.
8. Hollis Canyon Linear Park: AP 7.8A requires dedication of land,preparation of
detailed park plans, construction of a bike path and trail,provision of a trail
crossing at Shell Ridge Road,and provisions to minimize park impacts on the
existing Morris residence. FEIR pages 7-26,7-27.
9. Resource Protection Area: APs 7.9A and 7.9B require permanent dedication of
these open space areas with arrangements for long-term maintenance,fire
protection access, and establishment of a zoning district to limit uses, lighting and
grading. FEIR pages 7-28, 7-29.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen each of the significant parks and recreation effects
identified in the Final EIR.
SCHOOL IMPACTS
IMPACT: The Planning Area is primarily within the Castro Valley Unified School District. The
eastern part of the Planning Area falls within the Dublin Unified School District. Neither school
district would be able to absorb the new students generated by development of the Western
Dublin Planning Area. Both school districts wish to serve the Planning Area. FEIR page 7-29.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Program 6.1A requires dedication of an
elementary school site located to maximize other community functions, and provision of
assistance to help resolve the issue of which school district will serve the Planning Area.
FOR page 7-30.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
ELECTRICITY, NATURAL GAS AND TELEPHONE SERVICE
IMPACT: Development of the Planning Area will increase the demand for electrical, natural gas
and telephone service. FEIR pages 7-30,7-31.
1\8914-EffN914.FI 16
Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall coordinate with the City and utility companies
in planning and scheduling future facilities and shall document that service is available to
new development. FEIR page 7-31.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
IMPACT: With project development,there may be inadequate provision for community
organizations, library services, and other municipal services. FEIR pages 7-32 through 7-34.
Mitigation Measures: Reserve land with suitable access for community organization
facilities. Analyze detailed effects on other municipal services to assure satisfactory
ongoing service. FEIR pages 7-33, 7-34.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
RUNOFF AND FLOODING
IMPACT: The quantity of runoff is increased by project plans to fill Elderberry and Hollis
Canyons and to alter drainage in other on-site canyons. This runoff may cause flooding if the
Powerline Canyon Reservoir and other drainage facilities on/off site are inadequate. Localized
flooding around the Morris residence has been reported apparently from blockage of the
Blackbird Pond overflow structure. FEIR pages 8-4, 8-4a, 8-5.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Programs 5.3A and 5.31) require a Master
Drainage Plan to further supplement FEIR information on runoff impacts, to provide
detailed drainage plans for project phases, to provide design features to minimize erosion,
and to coordinate modifications or enhancements to creeks or the abutting riparian area
with other agencies. Action Program 5.313 and additional mitigations require detailed
plans for retention and detention facilities and other measures to handle 100 year storm
events and ensure that project runoff not exceed existing levels. Follow procedures to
establish ownership and appropriate design capacity of the Powerline Canyon Reservoir,
and obtain permits from the RWQCB. Investigate flooding potential on the Morris
property. Design project drainage improvements to accommodate existing and future
flows. FEIR pages 8-5 through 8-7.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
SEDIMENTATION AND ASSOCIATED IMPACTS
IMPACT: The potential for surface erosion in Western Dublin will be increased during
construction operations as soil is exposed to rainfall and overland runoff. Erosion could lead to
additional transport and deposition of sediments within existing drainage ditches and pipes.
Sediments can also damage aquatic life and vegetation. Sediment particles carry natural organic
matter and nutrients. Particles washed from urban land surfaces also may contain traces of
toxicants. Livestock wastes could continue to affect runoff quality creating health risks for area
1:\8914-EIRN914.F1 17
residents. Sedimentation from project-related grading is a concern for existing and proposed
water features including the golf course related ponds and Powerline Canyon Reservoir. FEIR
pages 8-7, 8-8.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Program 5.3C requires the project
Environmental Management Plan to include a design-level water quality investigation.
Additional mitigations require a water quality report to examine water quality and runoff
issues at a design-level. The water quality report shall include a reservoir plan for
Powerline Canyon Reservoir. Discharge permits shall be obtained for the reservoir and
abandonment issues for existing wells and septic systems shall be resolved with DSRSD.
FEIR pages 8-9, 8-10.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
MASS GRADING
IMPACT: Mass grading has a significant impact due to landform alteration and to removal of
natural vegetative cover and wildlife habitat. The extent of grading also can increase the impacts
of erosion and changes in surface drainage and ground water conditions. Grading can cause
activation of existing landslides and cause new slope failures. Off-hauling of excess material can
create excessive truck traffic with associated dust problems,potential damage to existing streets
and traffic problems. FEIR page 9-9.
Mitigation Measures: A detailed grading plan shall be designed to minimize grading in
the Planning Area, to provide a smooth transition to natural terrain, to consider visual
concerns, to protect existing trees during grading, to encourage recycled water for dust
control, and to balance quantities of cut and fill on-site. Keep visual impacts and tree loss
to a minimum through special remedial grading approaches using reinforced earth or
retaining walls. FEIR pages 9-9, 9-10.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
SLOPE STABILITY
IMPACT: Numerous landslides are found throughout the Planning Area. Many show signs of
recent activity, and many are massive and/or deep-seated. In addition, debris flow areas and soil
creep on steep slopes occur in the Planning Area. Existing landslides, new landslides on unstable
slopes,debris flows and soil creep could damage structures or improvements if continued or new
movement would occur. FEIR pages 9-10, 9-11.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Program 8.2A requires a detailed geotechnical
investigation to provide supplementary identification and accurate mapping of all
landslides,debris flow areas, and soil creep areas. Specific recommendations to stabilize
landslides and unstable slopes shall be related to the proposed development. Design
grading so that slope stability is improved. Control water movement with ditches and
subdrainage. Identify and stabilize or avoid soil creep areas. Designate setback zones
where unstable features cannot by mitigated otherwise. Require the project detailed
grading plan to evaluate natural slopes, cut and fill areas and landslide areas and to
1\8914-E1R\8914.F1 18
enhance slope stability through the orientation and location of cuts and through fill design.
Establish a Geologic Hazard Abatement District to maintain and repair landslides and
other geologic hazards. FEIR pages 9-10 through 9-12.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
EROSION
IMPACT: Accelerated erosion could create unstable conditions, increase sediment in surface
runoff, and cause erosion gullies. FEIR pages 9-12, 9-12a.
Mitigation Measures. Specific Plan Action Program 8.2A requires an erosion control plan
as part of a detailed geotechnical investigation. The erosion control plan shall include
measures to prevent erosion of existing drainageways and measures for revegetation of
graded soil surfaces. Additional mitigations require erosion control before and during
grading to prevent erosion gullies and downcutting of streambeds. Temporary structures
shall provide erosion control during storm runoff and permanent measures shall provide
long-term erosion control. FEIR page 9-13.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
FILL SETTLEMENT
IMPACT: Proposed fills on the site are estimated to be up to 120 feet thick, which could result in
significant settlement. Differential settlement could occur, causing damage to building
foundations and utility conduits. FEIR pages 9-13, 9-14.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Program 8.2A requires that fill settlement be
evaluated as part of a detailed geotechnical investigation, with feasible measures identified
to minimize settlement risks for structures,roads and utilities. Include fill placement
procedures and standards in detailed grading plans for the project. Limit structures and
improvements in areas that have a potential for high differential settlement. Evaluate the
feasibility of removing compressible soils below fills, or design structures capable of
accommodating the predicted settlements. Monitor settlement of deep fills and postpone
placement of structures on the fill until most anticipated settlement has occurred. FEIR
pages 9-14, 9-15.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
EXPANSIVE SOIL
IMPACT: Changes in volume of expansive soils caused from changes in soil moisture content,
and the effects of corrosive soils can create ground movement that can damage structure
foundations and other improvements. FOR page 9-15.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Program 8.2A requires that expansive soils be
evaluated as part of a detailed geotechnical evaluation, with measures developed to reduce
1-\$914-EHN914.F1 19
the risk of damage to improvements from expansive soils. Evaluate expansion potential
and provide proper design of foundation and pavement sections. After grading, the
corrosivity of soils should be examined with the results used to design foundations and
other improvements. Recommendations for moisture control before, during and after
construction should focus on minimizing soil shrinking and swelling. FEIR pages 9-15, 9-
16.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
SEISMIC HAZARDS
IMPACT: The Planning Area is not within a currently designated State of California "Special
Studies Zone" for active faults. The nearest major active fault is the Calaveras Fault which is
located about 3,000 feet to the east. The Dublin Fault, which crosses the eastern portion of the
Planning Area may or may not be active. The Planning Area will likely experience moderately
strong to very strong ground motion during the life of the proposed development. Damage may
occur due to strong ground shaking during a major seismic event. FEIR page 9-16.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Program 8.2A requires that seismic hazards be
analyzed as part of a detailed geotechnical evaluation. Direct and indirect effects of
groundshaking, as well as liquifaction and lurching hazards shall be assessed. Design and
construct structures to maintain integrity during a major seismic event. Designate
appropriate building setback zones along the Dublin Fault on the Cronin property, and
design utilities crossing the fault with flexible connections to accommodate ground
displacement. Apply other mitigation measures if fault zones are exposed during grading.
Inactive faults in development areas shall be mapped and remedial measures prepared to
protect foundations,pavement and slope stability. FOR pages 9-16, 9-17.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
GROUND WATER
IMPACT: Shallow groundwater is present in the Planning Area. Severe damage can result if
groundwater is allowed to interfere with structures.With the addition of landscape irrigation
water introduced by development, shallow ground water conditions can become more prevalent.
Shallow ground water can increase slope instability. FEIR page 9-17.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Program 8.2A requires the project
' geotechnical investigation to identify all areas exhibiting shallow ground water conditions,
and to recommend mitigation for shallow groundwater effects. Groundwater information
shall be used to anticipate where groundwater will be encountered during excavation.
Subdrains shall be installed according to the standards in the FEIR and irrigation
guidelines shall be provided to project home- and property owners. FOR pages 9-17, 9-
18.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
1\5914-Er1;M914.F1 20
EXCAVATION FEASIBILITY
IMPACT: Some of the bedrock formations mapped on the site may contain units that are not
easily excavated with conventional earthmoving equipment. Methods such as blasting may be the
only alternative. Blasting can have disruptive noise and safety impacts on the environment.
FEIR page 9-18.
Mitigation Measure: Pursuant to Specific Plan Action Program 8.2C, blasting to facilitate
excavation is discouraged and should be performed only after other techniques have been
exhausted, and only then in accordance with an approved blasting plan to include noise
control and control of flying rock and detonation. FEIR page 9-18.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
FISCAL IMPACT
IMPACT: Mechanisms are needed to finance infrastructure and facilities for Western Dublin.
FEIR pages 10-3 to 10-5.
Mitigation Measures: The cost of providing needed capital facilities can be mitigated
through the adoption of a financing program consistent with the Specific Plan,including a
development agreement, area of benefit ordinance, analysis of financing techniques,
evaluation of bond pooling, and a citywide builder impact fee system.
Findin : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
CONSTRUCTION NOISE
IMPACT: The closest existing homes to the west of the Planning Area will experience
construction noise during grading of Oak Ridge and North Ridge. The Morris residence is
immediately adjacent to construction areas and will experience intense construction noise over a
prolonged period of time. FEIR pages 11-5, 11-6.
Mitigation Measures: Phase grading operations and use berms or natural barriers to limit
the duration of noise exposure for neighbors to the west. Noise effects on the Morris
residence can be mitigated in either of two ways,by using noise efficient equipment and
constructing temporary barriers or berms to shield the home from construction noise and
activity, or, by arranging for the residence to be unoccupied during construction. The
identified mitigation measures for construction of the Brittany Drive extension are not
required because the City adopted the Cluster Development Alternative for the Cronin
Ranch which eliminates the Brittany Drive extension. FEIR pages 11-11, 11-12.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
1 X8914-EHU914.0 21
TRANSMISSION LINE NOISE
IMPACT: The P.G.&E. transmission lines generate noise which could affect proposed homes
close to the right-of-way. FEIR page 11-6.
Mitigation Measures: Maintain specified minimum distances between the transmission
towers/transmission line right-of-way and residential development, or provide mechanical
ventilation systems so that residents can keep windows closed for noise control. FEIR
pages 11-11, 11-13.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
HIGHWAY AND STREET NOISE
IMPACT: As development proceeds in the region, increased traffic levels will lead to higher
highway noise levels. The Planning Area will be impacted by increased noise levels from I-580,
and by traffic on newly improved roadways within the project site. Traffic generated by
development in the Planning Area also will contribute to off-site noise impacts along nearby
roadways. Schaefer Basin is the only part of the Planning Area where proposed development
would be exposed to I-580 freeway noise in excess of 60 dB, Ldn. All of the major planned
roadways traversing the Planning Area will produce noise levels in excess of 60 dB, Ldn. These
streets include Hollis Canyon Bloulevard, Shell Ridge Road and North Ridge Drive. FEIR pages
11-6 to 11-10.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Program 8.5A requires site planning and
building design standards for noise mitigation in the Schaefer Basin Area. Additional
mitigations require noise attenuation plans for Schaefer Basin and the major Planning
Area roadways The noise plans shall use combinations of building pad height,berms,
setbacks, building orientation and mechanical ventilation systems to reduce noise impacts
by showing noise sensitive uses or moving them further away from roadway noise
sources. FEIR pages 11-11, 11-13 to 11-15.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
VILLAGE CENTER/NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER IMPACTS
IMPACT: The presence of different land use types within the same development creates the
possibility of noise impacts between adjoining uses,particularly when commercial and residential
land uses abut. FEIR page 11-10.
Mitigation Measure: Prepare and implement a noise management plan for the mixed use
area at an early stage of planning so that site planning can be used in addition to building
insulation to avoid noise conflicts. FEIR page 11-15.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
1\8914-EW914YI 22
PARTICULATES
IMPACT: Dust from construction activities would cause a temporary increase in particulate
matter near sites of proposed development including the Morris and Schaefer residences, and
possibly for some Dublin and San Ramon residents depending on prevailing winds. FEIR pages
12-8, 12-9.
Mitigation Measures. Specific Plan Action Program 83F requires strict dust control
measures for grading. Such measures can include watering exposed surfaces road
cleanup, covering haul trucks, avoiding unnecessary engine idling,reseeding completed
grading sites, and limiting vehicle speeds, and monitoring equipment for emission
standards compliance. Take special measures in the vicinity of existing residences
including onsite monitoring of dust levels,close supervision to ensure dust control
measures are followed and/or make arrangements for the residences to be unoccupied
during grading operations. FEIR pages 12-13 to 12-15.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENTJVEHICLE EMISSIONS
IMPACT: There may be localized violations of carbon monoxide (CO) standards due to
construction equipment operation. FEIR page 12-9.
Mitigation Measure: Monitor construction equipment to assure compliance with emission
standards. FEIR page 12-15.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
REGIONAL OZONE EMISSIONS
IMPACT: The project would contribute to emissions of ozone precursors. Although the increase
would be small,there are existing ozone problems in the area, and there is a regulatory
requirement to produce a reduction in air pollution. FEIR pages 12-9, 12-10.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Programs 83A and 8.7B require the City to
encourage land uses which reduce automobile traffic such as satellite work centers and
home occupations. Action Program 8.71) allows the use of golf carts on certain Planning
Area streets. Action Program 8.7F and additional mitigations require transportation
management planning including use of public transit, carpools,bicycles to reduce vehicle
trips and including a pamphlet for new residents to advise of vehicle trip reducing
alternatives.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project.
However, even with these changes, the impact will not be reduced to a level of
insignificance. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted
upon approval of the project.
1 X8914-EIIMMI4YI 23
WOOD STOVE AND FIREPLACE EMISSIONS
IMPACT: Inefficient wood stoves and fireplaces can add to carbon monoxide and particulate
concentrations. FEIR page 12-11.
Mitigation Measure: Require efficient EPA-approved wood stoves and fireplace units.
FEIR page 12-13.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
ENERGY USE FOR TRANSPORTATION
IMPACT: Proposed use of fuel for transportation via private vehicles could be inefficient. FEIR
page 13-2.
Mitigation Measure: Energy-conserving transportation actions are included in the
Specific Plan, including a pedestrian-oriented Village Center; a Neighborhood Center to
reduce the length of some shopping trips; a linear park connecting residences, schools,
parks and shopping; convenient services; provision for alternate modes of transportation;
and other measures to reduce the need for vehicular travel. FEIR pages 13-2, 13-3.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES
IMPACT: Without consideration of solar and other alternative energy technologies, there could
be unnecessary use of nonrenewable resources. FEIR pages 13-3, 13-4.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Program 8.8A requires developers to provide
demonstration projects and encourage energy conservation, solar, and other alternative
energy applications. CC &Rs for the project shall be sufficiently flexible to allow for
alternate energy use such as solar heating, thermal mass and clotheslines. FEIR pages 13-
4.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
SITE PLANNING FOR ENERGY CONSERVATION
IMPACT: Without careful attention to site planning, including building and window orientation
there could be inefficient and avoidable use of energy for space heating and cooling. FEIR pages
13-4, 13-5.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Programs 9.2B and 8.8B require most
residential lots and buildings to be oriented for energy conservation as much as possible,
especially in flatter areas. FEIR page 13-5.
1:\8914-EHN91411 24
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
ENERGY CONSERVATION IN BUILDING DESIGN
IMPACT: Failure to provide solar access for buildings could result in inefficient energy use.
FEIR page 13-5.
Mitigation Measure: Specific Plan Action Program 8.8C requires review and residential
building plans for energy conservation features.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
ENERGY-CONSERVING LANDSCAPE DESIGN
IMPACT: Improper use of landscaping and outdoor structures can result in inefficient use of
energy resources. FEIR page 13-6.
Mitigation Measure: Specific Plan Action Program requires the City to include review of
energy conservation features in landscape plans including considerations such as shading
effects of trees, and heat buildup of paving. FEIR page 13-6.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
PREHISTORIC RESOURCES
IMPACT: Although no significant archeological resources are known on-site, there is a potential
that future earthmoving activities could uncover archaeological materials. FEIR page 14-8.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Plan Action Program 8AA provides for monitoring by a
qualified archaeologist during grading. Follow stop-work and notification procedures
specified in the CEQA guidelines if cultural resources are found. FEIR page 14-8.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
ROCK WALLS
IMPACT: Portions of existing historic rock walls on Machado Ridge and Rock Ridge on the site
could be removed by proposed construction. FEIR page 14-9.
Mitigation Measures: Specific Action Program 8.4A requires the project Open Space
Management Plan to protect and avoid the rock walls to remain. Adjust limits of grading
on Rock Ridge to minimize damage to rock walls. FEIR pages 14-9, 14-10.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
1:\8914-EH;M914.R 25
HISTORIC SETTLEMENT AREAS
IMPACT: Several locations may contain buried or obscured materials from the time of early
settlers. Site alteration is proposed in these areas. FEIR page 14-10.
Mitigation Measure: Specific Plan Action Program 8.4A requires archival research on the
location and extent of original Planning Area settlements and preparation of a
supplementary design-level plan for any areas which might contain significant historic
information. The plan can include either construction monitoring or field investigation
prior to construction. FEIR pages 14-10, 14-11.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
IMPACT: An investigation has identified hazardous materials on the site generally related to
ranching and agricultural use and the presence of power poles with transformers. FEIR page 15-
1.
Mitigation Measures: Remove identified hazardous materials in the appropriate manner.
Close or evaluate existing wells and septic systems. Assess any other hazardous materials
encountered during grading. Make supplementary design-level hazardous waste.
assessments for the Morris and Cronin properties and if unanticipated hazardous materials
are encountered during grading.
Fes: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
TRANSMISSION LINE EFFECTS
IMPACT: The transmission lines could interfere with AM radio reception. FEIR page 15-4.
Mitigation Measures. The Specific Plan requires a disclosure statement for residents near
the transmission lines, noting that research is continuing on potential health effects of
transmission lines. Provide a disclosure statement about AM radio and television
interference for residents of homes sold along the transmission line right-of-way.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS: EDEN CANYON ROAD/I-580 INTERCHANGE
IMPACT: Without application of mitigation measures, traffic on interchange ramps would
operate at LOS F. EIR page 18-2a.
Mitigation Measure: Provide improvements to this interchange, including ramp restriping
and widening of Eden Canyon Road. FEIR page 18-3.
1.WWEEPN91411 26
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
SCHAEFER RANCH ROAD INTERCHANGE
IMPACT: A new freeway interchange at Schaefer Ranch Road would be needed before full
buildout of the project. Without this interchange, existing streets and roads would have additional
congestion. FEIR page 18-4.
Mitigation Measure: Construct the Schaefer Ranch Road interchange before buildout of
the Planning Area. FEIR page 18-5.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
EDEN CANYON ROAD/DUBLIN CANYON ROAD INTERSECTION
IMPACT: With the existing land configuration, this intersection would operate at LOS F under
cumulative traffic conditions. FEIR page 18-5.
Mitigation Measure: Provide improvements for this intersection. FEIR page 18-5.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
DUBLIN BOULEVARD AND SILVERGATE DRIVE/OTHER CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC
IMPACTS
IMPACTS: Traffic congestion could occur without adequate funding for improvements on these
streets. FEIR pages 18-5, 18-6.
Mitigation Measures. The project shall contribute its fair share to traffic improvements.
FEIR page 18-5.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
CUMULATIVE IMPACT: WATER SUPPLY
IMPACT: Ongoing urban development in the area is resulting in a cumulative increase in water
demand. FEIR pages 18-7, 18-8.
Mitigation measure: The City shall support and coordinate with areawide efforts to
address cumulative impacts on water supplies, including actions by the Alameda County
Flood Control and Water Conservation District/Zone 7, and the Dublin San Ramon
Services District. FEIR page 18-8.
Finding: Such actions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the City of Dublin. Such actions should be taken by such other agencies.
1:8914-EUN914YI 27
CUMULATIVE IMPACT: WASTEWATER
IMPACT: There is an increasing demand on area wastewater treatment facilities operated by the
Dublin San Ramon Services Agency and other agencies. FEIR page 18-8.
Mitigation Measures: The Western Dublin wastewater treatment and recycling facilities
are mitigations which have been incorporated in the Specific Plan. DSRSD is currently
expanding its program to meet service area needs. FEIR page 18-9.
Finding: Changes or alterations regarding wastewater treatment and recycling have been
required in, or incorporated into the project that avoid or substantially lessen the
significant effect identified in the Final EIR. DSRSD's expansion program is within
DSRSD's responsibility and jurisdiction. DSRSD can and should undertake the expansion
program.
CUMULATIVE IMPACT: SOLID WASTE
IMPACT: Ongoing urban development is creating pressure on remaining landfill capacity. FEIR
page 18-9.
Mitigation Measure: The City shall continue to comply with the requirements of the
California Integrated Waste Management Act. FEIR page 18-9.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
CUMULATIVE IMPACT: POLICE AND FIRE PROTECTION
IMPACT: Population increase will require additions to police and fire personnel and facilities.
FEIR page 18-9.
Mitigation Measure: The City shall continue to require improvements and to assess fees
for new development to cover the costs of additional police and fire protection. FEIR
page 18-10.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
CUMULATIVE IMPACT:PARKS AND RECREATION
IMPACT: Increased population results in cumulative demand for park and recreation facilities.
FEIR page 18-10.
Mitigation Measure: The City shall continue master planning efforts to assess recreation
needs and to plan for new facilities. FEIR page 18-10.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
1\8914-E0S914.F1 28
CUMULATIVE IMPACT: SCHOOLS
IMPACT: Increased population due to new development adds to the pressure on local school
districts. FEIR page 18-10.
Mitigation Measure: The City shall coordinate efforts with the Dublin Unified School
District to have ongoing procedures for requiring new development to pay its fair share of
local school improvement costs. FEIR page 18-10.
Finding: Such actions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the City of Dublin. Such actions should be taken by such other agencies.
CUMULATIVE IMPACT: OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
IMPACT: Increased population has a potential cumulative effect on other facilities and services.
FEIR page 18-10.
Mitigation Measure: The City shall continue efforts to monitor other cumulative impacts
on public facilities, and to require conditions of approval to resolve these issues. FEIR
page 18-11.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
CUMULATIVE LOSS OF OPEN SPACE
IMPACT: The project would contribute to the loss of open space in the area. FEIR page 18-11.
Mitigation Measure: The City shall support efforts of the East Bay Regional Park District
to acquire and secure permanent open space in the area, and/or the City shall establish a
fee for mitigation of open space loss.
Finding: Regional park planning actions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and not the City of Dublin. Such actions should be taken by such
other agencies.
CUMULATIVE VISUAL IMPACTS - LANDSCAPE ALTERATION
IMPACT: The project would be part of a process where existing rural landscapes in the area are
being replaced by urban development. FEIR pages 18-11, 18-12.
Mitigation Measure: Effective mitigation of regional landscape alteration would require
action at the state or regional level. FEIR page 18-12.
Finding: Such actions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public
agencies and not the City of Dublin. Such actions should be taken by such other agencies.
1:8914-EHZ1S914.F1 29
CUMULATIVE LIGHT AND GLARE IMPACTS
IMPACT: Proposed project lighting would contribute to cumulative nighttime light scatter. FEIR
page 18-12.
Mitigation Measure: Identify ways to reduce cumulative light and glare impacts. Effective
mitigation of regional light and glare impacts would require regulatory action at the local,
regional, and state level. The City shall review its existing sign ordinances to identify
ways to reduce cumulative light and glare impacts. FEIR page 18-12.
Fes: Regional light and glare regulatory actions are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of other public agencies and not the City of Dublin. Such actions should be
taken by such other agencies. Changes or alterations requiring City sign ordinance review
have been required that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the
Final EIR.
CUMULATIVE IMPACT: VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE
IMPACT: There is a continuing loss of existing vegetation and wildlife habitat to urban
development in the area. FEIR page 18-12.
Mitigation Measure: The City of Dublin shall adopt a heritage tree ordinance or shall take
equivalent measures to protect existing trees. FOR page 18-12.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required that avoid or substantially lessen the
significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
CUMULATIVE HYDROLOGY IMPACTS: STREAM CHANNELS
IMPACT: The project would contribute to the loss of stream channels in the area. FEIR page 18-
13.
Mitigation Measure: The State Department of Fish and Game, the Army Corps of
Engineers, and the City of Dublin require permits for stream course alteration. FEIR page
18-13.
Finding: Such actions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency as well as the City of Dublin. Such actions should be taken by such other agencies
and the City of Dublin.
CUMULATIVE IMPACT ON WATER QUALITY
IMPACT: The project would contribute to the conversion of existing vegetated surfaces to paved
areas used for vehicles and landscaping, leading to a potential cumulative effect on water
resources. FEIR page 18-13.
Mitigation Measure: The Regional Water Quality Control Board has detailed regulations
for protection of water quality. FEIR page 18-13.
1:\8914-E1RN8914.F1 30
Finding: Such actions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency. Such actions should be taken by such other agencies.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ON GEOLOGY AND SOILS
IMPACT: The project would contribute to the grading and paving of soil surfaces in the region.
FEIR page 18-13.
Mitigation Measure: Each city and county in the region has adopted ordinances to regulate
grading and geotechnical hazards. FEIR page 18-14.
Finding: Such actions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public
agencies as well as the City of Dublin. Such actions should be taken by such other
agencies and the City of Dublin.
CUMULATIVE NOISE IMPACTS
IMPACTS: The project would contribute to cumulative traffic-related noise impacts in the region.
FEIR page 18-14.
Mitigation Measures: The State of California has regulations and measures for excessive
sound levels along freeways. The City of Dublin evaluates new project under its Noise
Element. FEIR page 18-14.
Finding: Such actions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency as well as the City of Dublin. Such actions should be taken by such other agencies
and the City of Dublin.
CUMULATIVE AIR QUALITY IMPACTS
IMPACT: The project would contribute to cumulative emissions of ozone precursors,
exacerbating existing ozone problems in the area. FEIR page 18-14.
Mitigation Measures: The Bay Area Air Quality Management District has a primary
responsibility for taking action to protect air quality in the region. The District has
prepared a Clean Air Plan which includes measures to protect air quality. FEIR page 18-
14.
Finding: Such actions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the City of Dublin. Such actions should be taken by such other agencies.
CUMULATIVE ENERGY RESOURCE IMPACTS
IMPACT: The project would contribute to cumulative effects on nonrenewable energy resources.
FEIR page 18-15.
Mitigation Measures: Control of inefficient energy use is being addressed at the state and
federal level,through building design and other standards. FEIR page 18-15.
1 N8914-El"914YI 31
Findin : Such actions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public
agencies and not the City of Dublin. Such actions should be taken by such other agencies.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ON CULTURAL RESOURCES
IMPACT: The proposed project would add to the cumulative impacts on cultural resources
caused by large-scale development in the area and region. FEIR page 18-15.
Mitigation Measures: The City of Dublin has included cultural resource protection in its
planning efforts. FOR page 18-15.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project that
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Final EIR.
Section 2: Findings Concerning Alternatives
The City Council hereby finds that the five alternatives,identified and described in the Final EIR,
were considered and are found to be infeasible for the following specific economic, social, or
other considerations pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(c).
NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE. FEIR pages 17-2, 17-3.
Finding: infeasible. This option assumes that the project as proposed would not be built on
the site. The No Project Alternative is found to be infeasible, because the City's General
Plan has designated the Western Dublin area for planned development, subject to the
preparation of a Specific Plan. In addition, the No Project Alternative fails to provide
needed housing. The need for housing is documented in the Housing Element of the City's
General Plan, and in other plan documents of the City and other jurisdictions in the area.
RURAL RESIDENTIAL ALTERNATIVE (200 units). FEIR pages 17-3 through 17-6.
Finding: infeasible. This option assumes the development of rural homes or "ranchettes"
on large lots, served by septic tanks. The Rural Residential Alterative is found to be
infeasible for the following reasons: (1)Air quality and energy resources. As stated in the
Final EIR (page 17-6),rural residential development of this type would have higher per-
unit effects on air quality and energy resources. The dispersed development pattern would
result in a relatively high amount of private automobile use per household, with little
opportunity to use public transit. Chapter 16 of the Final EIR notes that ozone emissions
would be an unavoidable impact of this alternative. (2) Geologic hazards. The Final EIR
(page 17-6) also notes that in rural residential development, there can be an increased
geologic hazard due to uncoordinated grading on individual lots; such a development also
may be too small to support a viable geologic hazards abatement district. (3) Housing.
This alternative, with only one housing type represented in an area of 3,000 acres, would
not meet the City's General Plan Policy 2.1.1.A, "Encourage housing of varied types,
sizes, and prices to meet current and future needs of all Dublin residents."
1 X8914-EIRN8914.F1 32
REDUCED DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE (1300 units). FEIR pages 17-6 through 17-8.
Finding: infeasible. This option assumes development of 1300 homes and a small
commercial area. The Reduced Development Alternative is found to be infeasible for the
following reasons: (1) Economic viability. It is in the City's interest to have an
economically-viable development on the site, in order to provide sound and orderly
growth to accommodate the City's needs. In Western Dublin Report 2, an economic
analysis indicated that a project in Western Dublin with the mix of uses proposed in the
Specific Plan probably would not be economically viable if the project had less than 2800
units. The reasons cited in the analysis were the terrain, distance from existing utilities,
and required traffic improvements. (2) Fiscal impact. The Final EIR (page 17-8) notes that
this alternative could result in negative fiscal impacts on the City. (3)Unavoidable
impacts. Even with the reduced size of this project, unavoidable impacts on biological
resources,visual resources, and air quality would remain, as noted in Chapter 16 of the
Final EIR.
CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE (3260 units). FEIR pages 17-9 through 17-11.
Finding: infeasible as to the Eden/Schaefer Heights portion of the Planning Area: This
alternative would include the same number of units as the project,but these units would
be clustered at a higher density on 600 acres of the site,resulting in more intensive
development. The Cluster Development Alternative is found to be infeasible for the
following reasons: (1) Economic viability. The Final EIR (page 17-10) states that there are
serious questions of market feasibility and demand for this alternative. The increased
density of this alternative seriously compromises the marketability and demand for the
completed project as well as the financial viability of the project. (2) Unavoidable
impacts. The Final EIR (Chapter 16) notes that this alternative would still have
unavoidable impacts on air quality and on biological and visual resources. Note: The
City adopted the Cluster Development Alternative for the Cronin property.
OPTIONAL SITE ALTERNATIVE (3260 units). FEIR pages 17-11, 17-12.
Finding: infeasible. With this alternative, uses proposed for the project would be relocated
to another property in Eastern Dublin.The optional site alternative is found to be
infeasible for the following reasons: (1)No evidence of overall environmental benefit. The
Final EIR (pages 17-11 and 17-12) states that some impacts might increase for this
alterative, while other impacts would be reduced. The optional site alternative is not
identified in the Final EIR as an environmentally superior alternative. Thus, while certain
impacts might be reduced, there is no clearly-defined environmental benefit to be gained
by selecting this alternative. (2) Land ownership. This alternative would not meet the
applicants' objectives, since they do not control the land in question. (3)General Plan.
This site is not located in the Western Extended Planning Area, and thus would not meet
the City's stated General Plan objectives for development of Western Dublin.
Section 3: Growth-Inducing Impacts
The City Council finds that the Final EIR identifies growth-inducing impacts in keeping with
State requirements. The State CEQA Guidelines note that growth is not necessarily beneficial,
1\8914-EUM914.F1 33
detrimental, or of little significance to the environment. Environmental effects of growth are
addressed elsewhere in the Final EIR.
INDIRECT EFFECT ON POPULATION
IMPACTS: The project would foster economic and population growth in the surrounding area.
No project-related environmental impacts are directly associated with this growth-inducing
impact. Cumulative impacts associated with population growth are described in Chapter 18 of the
Final EIR. Findings related to cumulative impacts of population growth are discussed under the
findings for cumulative impacts. FEIR pages 16-6, 16-7.
EXPANSION OF WASTEWATER FACILITIES
IMPACT: The project will require extension of sewer lines and a wastewater lift station, which
could remove obstacles to growth on adjacent properties in Eden Canyon. FEIR page 16-7.
Miti gation Measure 16-1: Do not provide excess capacity in new sewer lines and lift
stations. FEIR page 16-7.
Finding: Based on the following information supplied by the Dublin San Ramon Services
District(DSRSD letter of March 2, 1992, as referenced in the Final EIR), and other
information in the record, this mitigation measure is found to be infeasible,for the
following reasons. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted
upon approval of the project.
a. Recent studies were prepared by the Tri-Valley Wastewater Agency in the Draft
Subsequent EIR for the Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan for the
Livermore-Amador Valley. These studies found that an infrastructure is not in
itself sufficient to induce economic growth. Other favorable economic factors
must be present and are generally more important. These studies further found that
limiting infrastructure to control growth could result in poor infrastructure
planning. DSRSD agrees with these conclusions.
b. The application of this mitigation measure could result in inefficient infrastructure
planning and resultant costs to the Dublin San Ramon Services District or to
others.
C. The section of Eden Canyon in question is not a part of the Planning Area, and
there are currently no development proposals for this area. However, the FEIR
(page 16-7) notes that there is potential for future development in Upper Eden
Canyon.
d. A final policy decision on land use in Eden Canyon should be made if and when a
specific development application is submitted to the City of Dublin or to other
jurisdictions.
f. Environmental review and clearance would be required for any potential
development in Eden Canyon, and specific environmental impacts could best be
addressed at that time.
1 N8914-E1RN8914.F1 34
g. A permanent decision to limit infrastructure capacity would be premature at this
time and could have negative economic consequences for DSRSD or other entities.
h. Actions to mitigate this potential growth-inducing impact are within the primary
responsibilities of agencies other than the City of Dublin.
IMPROVED EDEN CANYON ROADWAY ACCESS
IMPACTS: The project would include major improvements to about 1,000 feet of Eden Canyon
Road to provide improved access. Environmental impacts of this street improvement are
discussed in Chapters 4, 5, and 6 of the Final EIR. The improved driving conditions to be
provided by these roadway improvements could facilitate the development of properties in upper
Eden Canyon. However, these properties are under the jurisdiction of Alameda County, and
current County General Plan and zoning categories would not permit urban development. FEIR
page 16-7.
Mitigation Measures. None are identified in the Final EIR, since the growth-inducing
impact is hypothetical at this point, and the City of Dublin does not have land use
jurisdiction in the area potentially affected.
Finding. Actions to mitigate this potential growth-inducing impact are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of another agency. Land use decisions for upper Eden
Canyon are within the jurisdiction of Alameda County, and these potential land use
approvals by Alameda County would be the primary factor in inducing growth. Necessary
environmental review of any proposed projects in upper Eden Canyon would be
undertaken if and when development applications are submitted to Alameda County.
IMPROVED FREEWAY ACCESS
The project at full buildout would require a new interchange at Schaefer Ranch Road. This future
interchange would improve access to rural land on the south side of I-580. The City of Pleasanton
is proceeding with planning for possible expansion into this area. The West Pleasanton Sphere of
Influence Study provides information on land development potential and environmental
constraints in this area. FEIR page 16-8.
Mitigation Measures: None are identified in the Final EIR, since the growth-inducing
impact is hypothetical at this point,and the City of Dublin does not have jurisdiction in
the area potentially affected.
Finding: Actions to mitigate this potential growth-inducing impact are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of the City of Pleasanton. Any potential land use approvals
by the City of Pleasanton would be the primary factors in inducing growth in this area.
Section 4: Insignificant Impacts
The City Council finds that all other impacts of the proposed project are insignificant, as
documented in the FEIR and supported by evidence elsewhere in the record. No mitigation is
required for these insignificant impacts.
1\8914-EUM91411 35
Section 5: Miscellaneous Findings
With respect to the Cronin property, the City adopted the Cluster Development Alternative which
reduces the number of residences from 125 to 74, clusters the residences below 740 foot elevation
and eliminates the Brittany Drive extension. No other feasible mitigation measure or project
alternative would provide a comparable level of mitigation for the traffic safety,visual and
geology and soils impacts of the project as proposed.
Section 6: Statement of Overriding Considerations
Section 6.0 General
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council of the City of Dublin makes the
following Statement of Overriding Considerations.
The City Council has balanced the benefits of the Western Dublin project to the City of Dublin
against the adverse impacts identified in the EIR as significant and potentially significant which
have not been eliminated or mitigated to a level of insignificance.
The City Council, acting pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, hereby determines that the
benefits of the project outweighs the unmitigated adverse impacts and the project should be
approved.
The City Council has carefully considered each impact in reaching its decision to adopt the
project and to allow urbanization of the Western Dublin project area. Although the City Council
believes that many of the unavoidable and irreversible environmental effects identified in the EIR
will be substantially lessened by mitigation measures incorporated into the Specific Plan and final
development plans as well as future mitigation measures implemented with future approvals, it
recognizes that the implementation of the project carries with it irreversible environmental
effects.
The City Council specifically finds that to the extent that the identified adverse or potentially
adverse impacts have not been mitigated to acceptable levels, there are specific economic, social,
environmental,land use and other considerations which support approval of the project. The City
Council further finds that any one of the overriding considerations identified hereinafter in
Section 6.2 is sufficient basis to approve the project as mitigated.
Section 6.1: Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts
The following unavoidable significant environmental impacts are associated with the proposed
project as identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the project, which consists of
Volume I: Draft EIR with Revisions, dated May 1992; Volume 2: Appendices for Draft EIR with
revisions, dated May 1992; Volume 3: Response to Comments on the Draft EIR,May 1992. These
impacts cannot be fully mitigated by changes or alterations to the basic project.
Visual Quality Impact 5.317: Eden Canyon Alteration. An access street proposed as an integral
part of the project would need to traverse a winding section of Eden Canyon. Construction of this
1:\8914-EHN91411 36
street would alter the visual character of the canyon. No feasible mitigation measures are
available to reduce this impact to a level of insignificance, since this is the only available route for
the street. Alternatives to the project which could reduce this impact to a level of insignificance
are the No Project Alternative, the Optional Site Alternative, and the Rural Residential
Alternative. These alternatives have been found to be infeasible (see Section 2 hereinbefore).
Visual Quality Impact 5.4A: Landform Alteration-Eden Canyon Country Club. About 35 to 37
million cubic yards of grading are proposed for the project, with major landform alteration. No
feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce this impact to a level of insignificance. Much
of the terrain is hilly, and mass grading is required to construct a project of this scale in the
Western Dublin Planning Area. The No Project Alternative,the Optional Site Alternative, and the
Rural Residential Alternative could reduce this impact to an insignificant level,but these
alternatives have been found to be infeasible (see Section 2 hereinbefore).
Visual Quality Impact 5AB: Landform Alteration- Cronin Ranch. Mass grading is proposed for
the Cronin Ranch development. A section of Cronin Ridge would be lowered, and part of Martin
Canyon would be filled. Mitigation measures would not reduce this impact to a level of
insignificance without changing the basic project concept. The hilly terrain requires mass grading
to construct a project of this scale on the Cronin property. The No Project Alternative, the Rural
Residential Alternative, the Reduced Development Alternative, and the Optional Site Alternative
could reduce this impact to an insignificant level, but these alternatives have been found to be
infeasible (see Section 2 hereinbefore).
Visual Quality Impact 5AE: Morris Residence. The Morris property and residence is located
within the Planning Area. The proposed Eden Canyon Country Club development would involve
extensive grading and landform alteration of the area near the Morris property. Mitigation
measures would not reduce this visual impact to an insignificant level. The No Project
Alternative, the Rural Residential Alternative, and the Optional Site Alternative could reduce this
impact to an insignificant level, but these alternatives have been found to be infeasible (see
Section 2 hereinbefore).
Vegetation and Wildlife Impact 60 Coast Live Oak Woodland. Significant stands of oak
woodland would be destroyed due to construction of the golf course and residential areas of the
Eden Canyon Country Club project. These oak woodlands occur along incised canyons proposed
for filling, and there are no available mitigation measures which would protect these trees without
altering the basic nature of the project. The following areas would be affected:
• Upper Elderberry Canyon. About 3,600 lineal feet of this canyon would be filled for golf
course use, including large stands of oak woodland. The No Project Alternative, the Rural
Residential Alternative, the Reduced Development Alternative,the Cluster Development
Alternative, and the Optional Site Alternative would reduce this impact to an insignificant
level, but these alternatives have been found to be infeasible (see Section 2 hereinbefore).
• Upper Hollis Canes. About 4,800 lineal feet of this canyon would be filled for golf
course use, and large stands of oak woodland would be destroyed. The No Project, Rural
Residential, and Optional Site Alternatives would reduce this impact to an insignificant
level, but these alternatives have been found to be infeasible (see Section 2 hereinbefore).
• Wildflower Canyon. About 2,000 lineal feet of this canyon would be filled for residential
development and a school/park site. A large contiguous stand of coast live oak woodland
1:\8914-EIRO891411 37
would be removed. The No Project, Rural Residential, and Optional Site Alternatives
would reduce this impact to an insignificant level,but these alternatives have been found
to be infeasible (see Section 2 hereinbefore).
Vegetation and Wildlife Impact 6D: Riparian Woodland/Stream Corridors. Extensive areas of
riparian woodland and existing stream corridors would be destroyed due to the proposed project.
• Eden/Schaefer Properties. Riparian corridors in lower Hollis Canyon,Eden Canyon, and
Songbird Canyon would be removed. The Rural Residential No Project, and Optional Site
Alternative would reduce this impact to an insignificant level, but these alternatives have
been found to be infeasible (see Section 2 hereinbefore).
• Cronin Property. About 1500 lineal feet of Martin Creek and associated riparian
vegetation would be removed. The Rural Residential, Reduced Development, No Project,
and Off-Site Alternatives would reduce this impact to an insignificant level,but these
alternatives have been found to be infeasible (see Section 2 hereinbefore).
Air Quality Impact 12D: Regional Ozone Emissions. Vehicles associated with the project would
contribute to regional ozone emissions. Given the existing ozone problems in the area, and
regulatory requirements to reduce ozone emissions, this would be a significant unavoidable
adverse impact. Mitigation measures in the EIR would not reduce this impact to an insignificant
level. Only the No Project Alternative would be an assured way to avoid this impact, however this
alternative has been found to be infeasible (see Section 2 hereinbefore).
Expansion of Wastewater Facilities Impact 16.413: Excess Services/Capacity. Provision of sewer
capacity to undeveloped properties to the writ and northwest of the project site which is in excess
of sewer capacity needs projected for the development provided by the Alameda County General
Plan for these undeveloped properties is a potential growth-inducing impact. Mitigation Measure
16-1 on page 16-7 of the EIR would limit excess capacity to said area. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure 16-1 by the City is infeasible because the City does not have the legal
authority to control the amount of sewer capacity in the project's wastewater facilities which can
serve said undeveloped area. This authority rests with the Dublin San Ramon Services District.
Without implementation of Mitigation Measure 16-1, there may be a significant unavoidable
growth-inducement effect with the provision of excess sewer capacity in the project's wastewater
facilities.
Section 6.2: Overriding Considerations
The City Council has considered the public record of proceedings on the proposed project and
does determine that approval and implementation of the project would result in the following
substantial public benefits.
Economic Considerations. Substantial evidence is included in the record demonstrating the
economic benefits which the City would derive from implementation of the project. Specifically,
the project will result in:
a. The creation of about 200 new permanent jobs and a substantial number of construction
jobs.
1\8914-EI RFt�f8914.F1 38
b. Increases in sales tax revenues for the City.
C. Substantial increases in property tax revenues.
Social Considerations. Substantial evidence exists in the record demonstrating the social benefits
which the City would derive from the implementation of the project. Specifically, the project will
result in:
a. Increase in housing opportunities in the City and a region where housing is costly and in
short supply;
b. Increases in the amount of affordable housing in the community;
C. An arrangement for the City to contribute its fair share of regional housing opportunities.
Other Considerations. Substantial evidence exists in the record demonstrating other public
benefits which the City would derive from implementation of the project. They include:
a. Comprehensive planning incorporating innovative and extensive environmental
premitigation measures not usually found in projects of this type.
b. Dedication of approximately 2,000 acres or 69% of the 3,255 acre project site, for open
space. This includes parkland and a regional trail system link through the open space of
the project site. This open space will conserve the ecological values of the site and
surrounding areas and provide recreational and open space amenity opportunities for
residents of the project, the City, and the region.
C. Provision of a championship-level golf course will improve recreational opportunities in
the City, the region and will be a positive contribution to the City's image.
1 N8914-EIF�8914.F1 39
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
for
Western Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment
prepared by
WPM Planning Team, Inc.
June, 1992
EXHIBIT
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM:
WESTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN/GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
The State of California now requires public agencies to adopt a mitigation monitoring program
for changes to the project or conditions of approval which have been identified and adopted as
methods to reduce environmental impacts. The City of Dublin thus is required to establish a
mitigation monitoring program if the proposed mitigation measures in this EIR are accepted and
the proposed project is to be approved by the City.
This program identifies the following:
• Who is responsible for monitoring the mitigation?
What is the mitigation measure being monitored and how?
• When should mitigation monitoring be undertaken? What schedule is required?
• Completion: when should the mitigation measure be in place and monitoring be
completed?
• Verification: what agency is required to ensure that the mitigation measure was
implemented?
Permit Processing and Mitigation Monitoring
The mitigation monitoring program identifies the most appropriate and effective times to carry
out mitigation measures. Key steps in the processing of the Western Dublin project are identified
below, with notes about the relation of each step to mitigation measures.
Planned Development Prezoning and Annexation
Initial planned development prezoning is required at an early stage of the project review process.
In addition,more detailed planned development review will be required for individual
components of the project. The conceptual site plan,landscape plan, grading plan, and
architectural plans are required at this stage. Mitigation measures involving basic planning actions
would be required as conditions of approval for rezoning.
Tentative Map
At this stage, the applicant submits a subdivision map with street and lot layout. Typically, the
tentative map for a project is approved with a number of conditions,particularly those involving
1\8914-EIR\8914.MM l
technical matters such as street improvements. Mitigation measures involving significant site plan
revisions would need to be completed before approval of the tentative map stage.
Site Development Review
In Dublin, this is an important phase of project review,with intensive staff review of the
applicant's submittals. These typically include a site plan, landscape plan, grading plan, and
architectural plans. Many of the mitigation measures involving conceptual planning will need to
be completed by this point.
Grading Plans
At this stage, a detailed grading plan is submitted for approval. A number of mitigation measures
involving specialized grading,visual impact, and geotechnical issues will need to be resolved by
this time.
Improvement Plans
Traditionally, this refers to the detailed drawings for streets and utilities. Mitigation measures
involving these aspects of the project need to be completed before the improvement plans can be
approved.
For Western Dublin, this also is the stage where the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) is
required. The Environmental Management Plan will provide detailed standards for open space in
much the same way as engineering improvement plans direct development of the built
environment. Associated with the EMP are other related plans such as the Hollis Canyon Linear
Park plan.
Final Map
The final map is a legal document which records final lot and street location. This is the last stage
for most engineering-oriented mitigation measures to be completed.
Building Permits
Some mitigations are implemented when actual building construction begins and the site is
occupied. The final inspection for the building permit is the last step before occupancy of the site.
Ongoing Mitigation Measures
Certain mitigations will need to continue on an long-term basis, during operation of the project.
The Specific Plan and EIR provide for various ways to continue long-term environmental
1-\8914LEIRV914.MM 2
protection. For example, a Geologic Hazard Abatement District will provide for maintenance and
any necessary repair of landslides on the site.
Mitbmtion Monitoring for Specialized Project Components
Certain parts of the Western Dublin project have specialized mitigation measures, with
monitoring appropriate to these components. Examples include:
• Village Center. This mixed-use shopping area is not expected to be built until a later phase
of the project. Detailed standards for this area are best handled when a specific
development plan is submitted for a conditional use permit Plan review of the Village
Center would repeat some of the steps for the overall Western Dublin project, including
site development review permit, grading plan,improvement plans, and building plans.
• Neighborhood Center. Monitoring for this small commercial area would be similar to the
Village Center.
• Highway Commercial Area. The specific standards for this area would be applied at the
time a detailed conditional use permit application is submitted.
• Public Facilities. The school, fire station, and other public facilities have their own
specialized monitoring programs which take into account the appropriate agencies
involved.
1:\8914-EM\8914.MM 3
Chapter 2• Communitywide Socioeconomic Impacts
No mitigation monitoring required. Only planning recommendations, not environmental
mitigation measures are recommended in Chapter 2.
Chapter 3: Land Use and Planning
Measures 3-1 through 3-11 and 3-17 are planning recommendations which do not require
mitigation monitoring.
Mitigation Measure 3-12: Protection of Livestock
Who: Developers/Real Estate Agents/Homeowners Associations
What: Provide a sales disclosure statement regarding protection of livestock
When: Prior to sale of first lots by developers/at follow-on sales of homes
Completion: On-going implementation by Homeowners Associations
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 3-13: Enforce Leash Ordinance
Who: City of Dublin Animal Control
What: Strictly enforce City leash ordinance to protect wildlife
When: On-going
Completion: On-going
Who Verifies: City of Dublin Planning Department/Animal Control
Mitigation Measure 3-14• Establish Dog Owner Responsibility for Livestock Damage
Who: Dublin City Council
What: Amend leash ordinance
When: Prior to issuance of first residential occupancy permits
Completion: Prior to first residential occupancy
Who Verifies: City Attorney
Mitigation Measure 3-15: Minimize Potential Ag Conflicts
Who: Developers/Real Estate Agents/Homeowners Associations
What: Provide sales disclosure statement regarding ag conflicts
When: Prior to sale of first lots by developers
Completion: On-going implementation by Homeowners Associations
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 3-16: Provide Open Space Fencing
Who: Developers
What: Fence livestock grazing areas per Mitigation Measure 3-14
When: Require as condition of tentative map approvals
Completion: Prior to first building occupancy permit
Who Verifies: City Planning Department
I M914-E[R\8914AM 4
Mitigation Measure 3-18. Open Space Ownership/Management Plan
Who: Developers/City Planning Department
What: Prepare unified open space ownership and management plan document
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Prior to final map approval
Who Verifies: City Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 3-19: Provide Regional Trail Segment
Who: Developers/East Bay Regional Park District/City Planning Department
What: Implement provisions for a regional trail segment and staging unit
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Prior to final map approval
Who Verifies: City Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 3-20: Prepare Regional Trail Corridor Plan
Who: Developers/East Bay Regional Park District/City Planning Department
What: Prepare unified regional trail corridor plan
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Prior to final map approval
Who Verifies: City Planning Department
Chapter 4: Traffic and Circulation
Mitigation Measure 4-1: Dublin Boulevard Extension
Who: Developer, under direction of Public Works Director
What: Provide detailed improvement plans
When: Include as condition of tentative map approval
Completion: According to terms of Development Agreement with City/Final Map
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 4-2: Schaefer Ranch Road Interchange
Who: City of Dublin: City Council and Staff
What: Continue project development process for a new interchange
When: Ongoing
Completion: Completion of interchange
Who Verifies: Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 4-3: Schaefer Ranch Road Interchange
Who: Eden Canyon Country Club Proponents (traffic studies): City Council (selection of
options)
What: Prepare traffic studies; select option for mitigation if Schaefer Ranch Road interchange is
not constructed
When: Require as a condition of Eden Canyon Country Club planned development prezonmg
1\8914-E1R\8914.MM 5
Completion: When interchange is completed, or when City Council approves another option
Who Verifies: Public Works Director
Mitigation Measures 4-4 and 4-5: Eden Canyon Road Ramps/I-580 Interchange
Who: Developer, under direction of Caltrans and City
What: Provide deposit or meet other City requirements to help fund design and construction
When: Include as condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Construction required prior to development/occupancy of portion of project per
Development Agreement or other agreement
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 4-6: Brittany Drive Extension
Who: Developer, under direction of City
What: Redesign project or provide safety mitigations (may include deletion of extension)
When: Include as condition of tentative map approval for construction of Cronin Ranch project
Completion: Construction required prior to occupancy of Cronin Ranch project
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 4-7: Shell Ridge Road
Who: Developer/Consultants
What: Design Shell Ridge Road with safety features
When: Require as condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Verify that conditions have been satisfied on final map and improvement plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measures 4-8 and 4-9: Emergency Vehicle Access/Connection
Who: Developers of Eden Canyon Country Club and Cronin Ranch
What: Provide emergency vehicle access connection to Regional Trail
When: Require as condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Construction completed before occupancy of units, or as determined by DRFA
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Chapter 5• Visual Quality and Site Design
Mitigation Measure 5.3-1: Site Plan - Schaefer Basin Area
Who: Applicants
What: Provide allowance for berm treatment and setbacks
When: Include as condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Site Development Review permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
1:\8914-EIRR\S914.MM 6
Mitigation Measure 5.3-2: Grading Plan - Schaefer Basin Area
Who: Applicants
What: Provide berm treatment on grading plan in Schaefer Basin
When: Include as condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Site Development Review permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measures 5.3-3 and 5.3-4: Setback- Village Center(District A1) and District A2
Who: Applicants
What: Establish setback from berm
When: Condition of approval for conditional use permit for Districts Al and A2
Completion: Site Development Review permit for Village Center
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-5: Highway Commercial
Who: Applicant for specific project in highway commercial area
What: Demonstrate visual effects of development
When: Condition of approval for conditional use permit
Completion: Site Development Review permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-6: Street Alignment
Who: Applicants
What: Modify street alignment of Dublin Boulevard Extension
When: Condition of planned development prezoning approval
Completion: Verify on improvement plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-7: Grading Plan - Dublin Boulevard
Who: Applicants
What: Adjust grading plan to minimize tree loss and grading
When: Condition of planned development prezoning approval
Completion: Verify before approval of grading plan
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-8: Tree Replacement
Who: Applicants
What: Include tree replacement along Dublin Boulevard Extension in landscape plan
When: Condition of planned development prezoning approval
Completion: Site Development Review permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
1\8914-EIR\8914.MM 7
Mitigation Measure 5.3-9: Development Above 740 Foot Elevation
Who: Developer team for Cronin Ranch
What: Revise the Cronin Ranch development plan to eliminate lots above 740' elevation
When: Condition of planned development prezoning approval
Completion: Before approval of tentative map
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-10: Remedial Grading - Cronin Ranch
Who: Developer team for Cronin Ranch
What: Reduce tree removal on Cronin Ranch
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: Before approval of grading plan
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-11: Tree Replacement
Who: Developer team- Cronin Ranch
What: Replace trees to be removed
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR permit(designation on plans); completion of construction (installation of trees)
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-12: Site Plan - Oak Ridge
Who: Developer team- Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Include site planning measures to protect trees on Oak Ridge
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: Tentative map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-13: Grading Plan - Oak Ridge
Who: Developer team - Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Adjust grading plan to minimize remedial grading and tree loss
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-14: Revegetation - Oak Ridge
Who: Developer team - Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Include plantings along the northwest side of Oak Ridge in landscape plan
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
1\8914-EIR\8914.MM 8
Mitigation Measure 5.3-15 and 5.3-16: Oak Ridge and North Ridge Treatment
Who: Developer team- Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Include measures to reduce visual impact
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-17. Eden Canyon Site Plan
Who: Developer team- Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Include site planning measures to reduce visual impact in Eden Canyon
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-18: Eden Canyon Grading
Who: Developer team- Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Plan grading to minimize visual impact in Eden Canyon
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-19: Eden Canyon Revegetation
Who: Developer team- Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Plan for replanting in Eden Canyon
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 5.3-20: Emergency Vehicle Access
Refer to program for Mitigation Measures 4-8 and 4-9.
Mitigation Measure 5.3-21: Emergency Vehicle Access Standards
Who: Developer teams
What: Provide detailed standards
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: Approval of detailed improvement plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.4-1: Grading Plan
Who: Developer teams
What: Provide a detailed grading plan
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
1.\S914-EHN914.MM 9
Completion: Public Works approval of grading plan
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.4-2: Master Landscape Plan
Who: Developer teams
What: Provide a landscape plan
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR pen-nit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measures 5.4-3: Limit of Grading
Who: Developer teams
What: Minimize land alteration outside the limit of grading
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.4-4: Trails
Who: Developer teams
What: Planning to minimize visual impact in trail corridor
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measures 5.4-5 and 5.4-6: Blackbird Pond Enhancement/Local Landmarks
Who: Developer team- Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Provide detailed plans for Blackbird Pond/other local landmarks
When: Condition of planned development prezoning
Completion: Improvement plan and final map approval (plans); completion of construction
(improvements)
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.4-7. Hollis Canyon Bridge Evaluation
Who: Developer team- Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Prepare exhibits for evaluation of bridge
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Before improvement plan approval for Hollis Canyon Boulevard
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.4-8. Morris Residence
Who: Developer team- Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Plan grading and landscaping to minimize visual impact
When: Condition of approval of planned development prezoning
1\8914-EW914.MM 10
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.4-9 and 5.4-10. Regional Trail Corridor
Who: Developer team, in consultation with East Bay Regional Park District
What: Plan trail corridor for minimum visual impact
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/EBRPD
Mitigation Measure 5.5-1. Lighting for Neighborhood Parks
Who: Park lighting design consultant to City
What: Plan lighting for minimum visual impact
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Approval of park construction plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Recreation Department/Public Works Department/Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 5.5-2. Lighting for School and Fire Station
Who: Lighting design consultant to School and to Fire District
What: Plan lighting for minimum visual impact
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Approval of building plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department in consultation with appropriate agency
Mitigation Measure 5.5-3. Lighting for Private Recreation Facilities
Who: Lighting design consultant- Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Design lighting for minimum visual impact
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Approval of detailed improvement plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 5.5-4. Village Center Lighting Plan
Who: Lighting design consultant for Village Center applicant
What: Design lighting for minimum visual impact
When: Condition of conditional use permit for Village Center
Completion: Approval of detailed improvement plans for Village Center
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 5.5-5. Neighborhood Center Lighting Plan
Who: Lighting design consultant for Neighborhood Center applicant
What: Design lighting for minimum visual impact '
When: Condition of conditional use permit for Neighborhood Center
Completion: Approval of detailed improvement plans for Neighborhood Center
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
1:\8914-EIW914.MM 11
Planning Recommendation 5.6-1. Offsite Grading (optional monitoring)
Who: Developer team- Schaefer Heights
What: Arrange for offsite grading - Donlan Canyon property
When: Before submitting grading plan to City
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5.6-2. Transmission Line Clearance
Who: Developer team- Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Obtain PG&E approval of grading in vicinity of transmission lines.
When: Before submitting grading plan to City
Completion: Approval of grading plan
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 5.6-3. Landscape Plan -Transmission Line Area
Who: Developer team
What: Avoid use of trees which would conflict with transmission lines
When: Before submitting master landscape plan
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Chapter 6: Vegetation and Wildlife
Mitigation Measure 6-1: Grassland Revegetation
What: Reseed and manage areas of grassland
Who: Developer team (reseeding); Environmental Manager(management)
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Establishment of new vegetation; ongoing management
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 6-2: Buffer Zone
What: Designate buffer zones between all shrub/woodland area and new development
Who: Developer team
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 6-3: Grazing
What: Strictly control or discontinue grazing in remaining grassland community
Who: Developer teams
When: Include standards and restrictions in Environmental Management Plan (EMP)
Completion: Approval of EMP
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
1.\8914-EUN914.MM 12
Mitigation Measure 6-4: Northern Coastal Scrub Revegetation
What: Include standards for replacement of northern coastal scrub vegetation
Who: Cronin developer team
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: SDR approval (plan); approval of improvements (revegetation work)
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 6-5: Northern Coastal Scrub Borders
What: Redesign project to substantially preserve northern coastal scrub areas on the Cronin site
Who: Cronin developer team
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Tentative map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 6-6: Tree Survey and Protection Standards
What: Complete a tree survey and prepare protection standards for existing trees to remain
Who: Developer teams
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Before final map or grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 6-7: Coast Live Oak Woodland Revegetation
What: Include standards for revegetation of woodland
Who: Developer teams
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Final map or grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 6-8: Plan Adiustments to Protect Trees
What: Adjust site and grading plans to minimize tree removal/damage
Who: Developer teams
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Final map or grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 6-9: Riparian Woodland
What: Modify development plans to protect riparian woodland where possible
Who: Developer teams
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Final map or grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
1 N$914-EHU914.MM 13
Mitigation Measure 6-10: Riparian Buffer Zone
What: Designate buffer zones for riparian corridors
Who: Developer teams,under direction of City and other agencies with jurisdiction.
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Final map or grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 6-11: Reduction of Altered Area
Who: Developer teams
What: Revise development plans to minimize effect on riparian corridors
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Before tentative map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 6-12: Riparian Corridor Reconstruction - Eden Property
Who: Developer team- Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Provide plans for stream reconstruction and revegetation
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Before final map or grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 6-13: Riparian Corridor Reconstruction -Martin Canyon
Who: Developer teams
What: Provide plans for Martin Creek reconstruction
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Before final map or grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 6-14, 6-15, and 6-16: Pond Enhancement and Aquatic Habitat Replacement
Who: Developer teams
What: Provide detailed plans for pond improvement
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Final map or grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 6-17: Monitoring of Aquatic Habitat
Who: Biologist financed by developer fund
What: Monitor aquatic habitat and file annual report with City
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Five years after construction of new aquatic habitats
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
1\8914-E[R\8914.MM 14
Mitigation Measure 6-18 and 6-19: Wildlife Corridors
Who: Developer teams
What: Incorporate planning and design of wildlife corridors into project site plans
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Tentative map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 6-20: Introduction of Exotic Plants
Who: Developer teams
What: Restrict use of exotic plants
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Approval of master landscape plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 6-21: Control of Pets
Who: Homeowner associations
What: Restrict domestic pets
When: Beginning with project occupancy
Completion: Ongoing
Who Verifies: Dublin Animal Control/Homeowners Associations/Environmental Manager
Mitigation Measure 6-22: Herbicides
Who: Homeowner associations
What: Restrict use of herbicides
When: Beginning with project occupancy
Completion: Ongoing
Who Verifies: Homeowners Associations/Environmental Manager
Mitigation Measure 6-23: Supplementary Survey
Who: Biologist funded by Cronin applicants
What: Conduct supplementary whipsnake survey on Cronin property
When: Appropriate time of year before tentative map approval
Completion: Tentative map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department in consultation with California Fish and Game
Chapter 7: Public Facilities and Services
Mitigation Measures 7.1-1 through 7.1-8: Water Service
Who: Developer teams
What: Provide information to City and water agencies to assure adequate water service to area
When: Condition of approval for tentative map
Completion: Before recordation of final map
Who Verifies: City/DSRSD/other agencies as noted in Mitigation Measure
1:\9914-E1R,8914.MM 15
Mitigation Measures 7.2-1: Wastewater
Who: City of Dublin (Public Works Department)/DSRSD
What: Consult with the Tri-Valley Authority on export pipeline system
When: Prior to processing of tentative map
Completion: Approval of improvement plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 7.2-2: Update Master Plan for Wastewater Collection System
Who: City (Public Works Department)
What: Request that DSRSD update computer model
When: Before submittal of first detailed wastewater improvement plans in Western Dublin
Completion: Before approval of detailed wastewater improvement plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 7.2-3: Design-Level Wastewater Investigation
Who: Developer teams/DSRSD
What: Prepare a detailed wastewater capacity investigation
When: Condition of approval for tentative map
Completion: Final public improvement plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 7.2-4: Use of Recycled Water
Who: Eden Canyon Country Club design team/DSRSD
What: Provide recycled water system to golf course, etc.
When: Condition of approval for tentative map
Completion: Approval of detailed improvement plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 7.2-5: Annexation of Service Area
Who: Developer teams/DSRSD
What: Annexation of development to DSRSD service area
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Before approval of detailed improvement plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 7.2-6 and 7.2-7. Improvement Standards for Wastewater
Who: Developer teams/DSRSD
What: Design systems to comply with standards/furnish documentation that service can be
provided
When: Condition of approval for tentative map
Completion: Before approval of detailed development plans or final map
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
1\8914-ERN914.MM 16
Mitigation Measure 7.2-8: Verification of Sewer Capacity and Issuance of Sewer Permit
Who: Applicants
What: Sewer permit certificate and allocation
When: Condition of approval for tentative map
Completion: Issuance of final map
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 7.2-9: Treated Effluent Standards
Who: DSRSD
What: Treatment of wastewater to DOHS standards
When: Condition of approval for tentative map
Completion: Issuance of final map
Who Verifies: DSRSD/Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 7.2-10: Separation of Water Systems
Who: Applicants
What: Reclaimed water distribution system separation
When: Condition of approval for tentative map
Completion: Prior to Improvement Plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department/DSRSD
Mitigation Measure 7.2-11: Documents and Drawings
Who: Applicants/design team
What: Preparation of separate documents/drawings for the recycled water system
When: Condition of approval for tentative map
Completion: Approval of improvement plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department/DSRSD
Mitigation Measure 7.2-12 and 7.2-13: Wastewater Connections/Wells
Who: Existing property owners
What: Required water connections and well abandonment where feasible
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Per DSRSD and other agency requirements/prior to occupancy permits issued
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department/DSRSD/other applicable agencies
Mitigation Measure 7.2-14: Powerline Canyon Reservoir
Who: Eden Canyon Country Club design team/DSRSD
What: Include reservoir features to prevent eutrophic conditions
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Improvement plan approval
Who Verifies: City Public Works Department
1\8914-EOS914.MM 17
Mitigation Measure 7.2-15: Planning of Recycled Water System
Who: City and applicant/DSRSD
What: Coordinate planning of the recycled water system with DSRSD
When: During design stage of project
Completion: Approval of detailed improvement plans
Who Verifies: City Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 7.3-1 and 7.3-2: Solid Waste Management Plan
Who: Developer teams
What: Solid Waste Management Plan
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Final map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin City Manager's Office
Mitigation 7.3-3: Construction and Demolition Debris
Who: Construction contractors for applicant
What: Certify that debris were taken to a recycling facility
When: During construction phase of project
Completion: Upon completion of construction
Who Verifies: Dublin City Manager's Office
Mitigation Measure 7.4-1 and 7.4-2: Police Services
Who: City of Dublin Police Dept.
What: Planned expansion of police services
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Prior to project occupancy
Who Verifies: Chief of Police
Mitigation Measure 7.4-3: Police Review
Who: City of Dublin Police Dept.
What: Review of the planned uses for safety issues
When: During preparation of site development plan
Completion: Prior to site development plan approval
Who Verifies: Chief of Police or representative
Mitigation Measure 7.5-1: Fire Services
Who. Applicants, under direction of Dougherty Regional Fire Authority (DRFA)
What: Review of planned improvements and evaluation of expanded services
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Final map approval/final building permit approval
Who Verifies: Fire Chief(DRFA)
1\8914-EM\8914.MM 18
Mitigation Measure 7.5-2: Wildfire Management Plan
Who: Developer teams
What: Review of Wildfire Management Plan policies and guidelines
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Final map approval
Who Verifies: Fire Chief(DRFA) and the City Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 7.5-3: Fire Facilities
Who: Applicants
What: Design and construction of fire suppression facilities
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Prior to Improvement Plan approval
Who Verifies: DRFA/City Planning Department
Mitigation Measures 7.6-1 and 7.6-2: Environmental Management Plan
Who: Developer teams
What: Preparation of Environmental Management Plan, Open Space Component
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Final map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Recreation Director/Public Works Director/Planning Director
Mitigation Measure 7.6-3: Park Dedication and Improvements
Who: Developer teams
What: Park dedication and site requirements
When: Condition of approval for tentative map
Completion: Final map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Recreation Director/Public Works Director/Planning Director
Mitigation Measure 7.6-4 and 7.6-5: Park Siting and Zoning Issues
Who: City of Dublin/Applicants
What: Site evaluation and zoning provisions
When: During planned development prezoning
Completion: Prior to final map (assessment of park site) approval
Who Verifies: City-Planning Department/Recreation Department/City Attorney
Mitigation Measure 7.6-6 and 7.6-8: Golf Course Ownership and Management
Who: Developer and his consulting team
What: Prepare a golf course ownership and management plan
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Final map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Recreation Department/Public Works Department/Planning Department
1 X8914-0"914.MM 19
Mitigation Measure 7.6-7: Golf Course Zoning Provisions
Who: City of Dublin
What: Adoption of golf course related zoning provisions
When: During planned development prezoning
Completion: Prior to final map approval or as determined by City Attorney
Who Verifies: City Attorney/Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 7.6-9 and 7.6-10: Private Recreation Facilities
Who: Applicants
What: Provide information regarding private recreation facilities
When: Condition of planned development prezoning approval, for parcels designated for medium
density/medium high density use
Completion: Prior to SDR permit approval for medium density and medium high density project
components
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Recreation Department
Mitigation Measure 7.6-11: Internal/Perimeter Open Space-Ownership/Maintenance
Who: Applicants
What: Open space program for access, ownership, maintenance and management
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Final map approval
Who Verifies: City of Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 7.6-12,7.6-13, and 7.6-14: Village Center
Who: Applicant
What: Preparation of detailed plans for the Center
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Approval of Conditional Use Permit for the Center
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 7.6-15: Regional Trail Extensions
Who: Applicants
What: Provide a trail system and staging area
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: EBRPD/Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 7.6-16: Trail Linkage and Access
Who: Applicants/City of Dublin
What: Inter-district coordination of recreation facilities and trails; provide staging area
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
1\8914-EIW914.MM 20
Mitigation Measure 7.6-17: Linear Park Concept Plan/Ownership
Who: Applicant
What: Linear park concept plan to address: trails, ownership, funding, maintenance, etc.
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Final map approval (plans); completion of construction (improvements)
Who Verifies: Dublin Recreation Department/Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 7.6-18: Resource Protection Area
Who: Applicants
What: Resource Protection Area: dedication, access and maintenance requirements
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Final map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Recreation Department/Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 7.6-19: Resource Conservation Zoning Provisions
Who: City of Dublin
What: Establishment of open space zoning provisions
When: During plan preparation and review
Completion: Prior to final map approval, or as determined by City Attorney
Who Verifies: City of Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 7.7-1: School District Boundary
Who: City of Dublin/School District
What: Assist with resolution of District boundary dispute
When: During plan preparation
Completion: Prior to residential occupancy
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 7.7-2: School Site Dedication
Who: City of Dublin and School District
What: Conditions of approval for school site
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Final map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 7.8-1 and 7.8-2: Electricity, Natural Gas& Telephone
Who: Applicants
What: Documentation to provide services- submit service report
When: Before tentative map submittal
Completion: Final map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
1\S914-EIK\S914.MM 21
Mitigation Measure 7.10-1: Community Organization
Who: Applicants
What: Reservation of a suitable community facility site
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Prior to final map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 7.10-2: Municipal Services
Who: City of Dublin
What: Assess other municipal service needs
When: Before development agreement approval
Completion: Development agreement approval
Who Verifies: Dublin City Manager's Office
Mitigation Measure 7.10-3: Public Library Services
Who: City of Dublin
What: Coordination and support of the Alameda County Library System
When: Ongoing
Completion: Ongoing
Who Verifies: Dublin City Manager's Office
Chapter 8: Hydrology
Mitigation Measures 8.1-1 and 8.1-2: Master Drainage Plan/Flood Control
Who: Both applicants and their consultants
What: Eden Canyon Country Club and Cronin Ranch-Master Drainage Plan
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department and ACFCWCD
Mitigation Measure 8.1-3: Coordination with Other Agencies
Who: Applicant and City of Dublin
What: Inter-Agency coordination of permit processing
When: During tentative map preparation
Completion: Prior to Improvement Plan approval
Who Verifies: Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 8.1-4: Drainage Plan Submittal
Who: Applicants
What: Design details for retention/detention facilities
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department and ACFCWCD
1 N8914-EIRM914.MM 22
Mitigation Measure 8.1-5 and 8.1-6: Mitigation of Increased Runoff/Retention/Detention
Facilities
Who: Applicant's design teams
What: Design of appropriate drainage improvements
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: City of Dublin Public Works Department and ACFCWCD
Mitigation Measure 8.1-7: Design Standards
Who: Applicant's development teams
What: Design standards for on/off site improvements for a design-year storm event
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: City of Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 8.1-8: Golf Course and Open Space Corridors_
Who: Applicant for Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Golf course/open space drainage treatments
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: City of Dublin Public Works Department and Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 8.1-9: Morris Property
Who: Applicant for Eden Canyon Country Club
What: Preparation of design recommendation for Morris property
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: City of Dublin, Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measures 8.1-10 and 8.1-11: Erosion Improvements/Other Drainage Facilities
Who: Applicant's design team
What: Design and implementation standards for erosion mitigation
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: City of Dublin Public Works Department/Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 8.2-1: Water Quality Investigation
Who: Applicant's design team
What: Water quality investigation
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Improvement plan/grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
1:\8914-EIR\8914.MM 23
Mitigation Measure 8.2-2: Water Quality Report
Who: Applicant's design team
What: Prepare water quality report
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Improvement plan/grading plan approval
Who Verifies: City of Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 8.2-3: Treated Water Discharge (Irrigation)/Dam Safety
Who: Eden Canyon Country Club applicant
What: Obtain permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Bd./Div. of Dam Safety
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Improvement plan/grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department/DSRSD
Mitigation Measure 8.2-4: Wells and Septic Tanks (see also#7.2-12 and 7.2-13)
Who: Applicants
What: Address the issue of wells and septic tanks (abandonment and sealing)
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Per DSRSD and other agency requirements
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 8.2-5: Powerline Canyon Reservoir
Who: Eden Canyon Country Club applicant
What: Prepare a detailed reservoir plan as part of the Water Quality Report
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Improvement plan/grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department/DSRSD
Chapter 9: Geology, Soils, and Grading
Mitigation Measures 9-1 through 9-3: Minimizing and Balancing Grading
Who: Developers and their civil engineering consultants
What: Design development to minimize and balance grading
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Prior to issuance of grading permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department and Public Works Department
Mitigation Measures 9-4 through 9-10: Slope Stability
Who: Developers and their geotechnical engineering and civil engineering consultants
What: Identify unstable slope conditions and provide recommendations for stabilization; show
anticipated extent of remedial grading on tentative map
When: Prior to submittal of tentative map
Completion: Approval of tentative map
Who verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
1:\8914-EUM914.MM 24
Mitigation Measure 9-11: Geologic Hazard Abatement District(GRAD)
Who: Developers and their geotechnical engineering consultants
What: Establish district to repair and maintain slopes and geologic hazards
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: District established prior to Final Map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department/City Attorney
Mitigation Measure 9-12: Erosion Control Plan
Who: Developers and their civil and geotechnical engineering consultants
What: Design of erosion control measures
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Prior to issuance of grading permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measures 9-13 and 9-14: Erosion Control
Who: Developers' teams
What: Construction of temporary and permanent erosion control structures.
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Ongoing monitoring
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department and GHAD
Mitigation Measures 9-15 through 9-17: Fill Settlement
Who: Developers and their geotechnical and civil engineering consultants
What: Analyze fill settlement potential,provide fill design recommendations to minimize
damage to the development and monitor fill placement for quality of construction
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval (plans)
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 9-18: Removal and Replacement of Compressible Soils
Who: Developers, their geotechnical consultants and grading contractor
What: Removal of compressible soils in fill areas
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: At end of grading
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 9-19: Settlement Monitoring
Who: Developers and their geotechnical and civil engineering consultants
What: Monitoring of fill settlement before building construction if needed
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Issuance of building permits for structures in areas of deep fill
Who Verifies: City of Dublin Public Works Department
1:\8914-EIW914.MM 25
Mitigation Measure 9-20: Expansion Potential Evaluation
Who: Developers and their geotechnical engineering consultants
What: Assessment of earth material expansion potential
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 9-21: Foundation and Pavement Design
Who: Developers and their engineering consultants
What: Design of foundations,pavement sections and flatwork for minimizing damage due to
expanding subgrade materials
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Prior to submittal of building plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department/Building Department
Mitigation Measure 9-22: Moisture Control
Who: Developers, their geotechnical engineering consultants and their contractors
What: Selective removal and/or moisture conditioning of expansive subgrade materials
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Commencement of building construction
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 9-23: Detailed Seismic Hazard Evaluation
Who: Developers and their geologic consultants
What: Evaluation of seismic hazards including; fault mapping, fault activity, ground shaking,
seismically-induced slope failures, liquefaction and lurching
When: Prior to submittal of tentative map
Completion: Tentative map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measures 9-24 and 9-26: Earthquake Resistant Design and Inactive Faults
Who: Developers and their geotechnical and engineering consultants
What: Design of structures and grading for minimizing damage to improvements caused by
ground shaking, fault rupture and fault gouge
When: Prior to submittal of tentative map (9-26); building permit submittal (9-24)
Completion: Tentative map approval (9-26); building permit issuance (9-24)
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 9-25: Dublin Fault Setback
Who: Cronin Ranch developers and their geotechnical and engineering consultants
What: Establish precise setback line
When: Before submittal of tentative map
Completion: Tentative map approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
1\8914-EIR\8914.MM 26
Mitigation Measures 9-27 and 9-28 Identification of Ground Water Conditions and Utilization of
Ground Water Data
Who: Developers and their geotechnical consultants
What: Characterize ground water conditions within the Planning Area and provide
recommendations for minimizing damage to the development due to undesirable effects of
ground water
When: Conditions of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department geotechnical engineering staff
Mitigation Measure 9-29: Subdrainage
Who: Developers, their geotechnical engineering consultants and contractors
What: Provide recommendations for subdrain locations and monitor subdrain construction for
quality assurance
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval (plans); after review of final grading reports (monitoring)
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 9-30: Irrigation Control
Who: Developer's landscape architect,homeowners and development associations/maintenance
personnel
What: Design and control of irrigation practices to minimize impacts on groundwater regime
When: Prior to final inspection of building permits
Completion: Ongoing monitoring
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department/GHAD/Homeowners' Association
Mitigation Measure 9-31: Excavation
Who: Developers and their geotechnical engineering consultants and contractors
What: Evaluate bedrock excavation characteristics and determine excavation methodology to
minimize environmental impacts
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading permit approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Chapter 10: Fiscal Impacts
Mitigation Measures 10-1 through 10-7: Financing Policies
Who: City of Dublin
What: Adopt a financing program
When: During project approval process
Completion: Before construction begins
Who Verifies: Dublin City Manager's Office
1 V914EIR\8914.MM 27
Chapter 11: Noise
Mitigation Measure 11-1: Measures included in the Specific Plan
Who: Applicant
What: Provide noise control performance standards
When: Conditions of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Prior to final map or conditional use permit approval
Who Verifies: City Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 11-2: Construction Noise Mitigation
Who: Applicant
What: Designate berms and phasing of grading operations
When: Conditions of tentative map approval
Completion: End of grading operations and road construction
Who Verifies: City Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 11-3: Transmission Line Noise Mitigation
Who: Developer
What: Provide setbacks or ventilation systems for homes near transmission lines
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Appropriate plans prepared before issuance of building permit.
Who Verifies: City Planning Department/Building Department
Mitigation Measure 11-4: Schaefer Basin Noise Mitigation
Who: Applicant
What: Provide noise mitigation measures
When: Condition of approval for planned development prezoning
Completion: Before approval of SDR permit/grading plans in Schaefer Basin
Who Verifies: City Planning Department/Building Department
Mitigation Measure 11-5: Hollis Canyon Boulevard Noise Mitigation
Who: Developer
What: Provide setbacks and berms or alternatives as specified
When: Before submittal of tentative map
Completion: Appropriate plans shall be prepared before issuance of building permits
Who Verifies: City Planning Department/Building Department
Mitigation Measure 11-6: Shell Ridge Road and North Ridge Dr. Noise Mitigation
Who: Developer
What: Provide setbacks or ventilation systems as specified
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Appropriate plans shall be prepared before issuance of building permit
Who Verifies: City Planning Department/Building Department
1\8914-EUM914.MM 28
Mitigation Measure 11-7• Mixed Use Village Center/Neighborhood Center Noise Mitigation
Who: Developer
What: Prepare noise management plan for mixed use areas
When: In conjunction with conditional use permit submittal
Completion: Conditional use permit approvals for Village Center/Neighborhood Center
Who Verifies: City Planning Department
Chapter 12: Air Ouality
Mitigation Measure 12-1: Permit Processing Priority
Who: City of Dublin
What: Provide permit processing priority for uses encouraged in the Specific Plan
When: At time of permit applications
Completion: Permit approval
Who Verifies: City Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 12-2: Zoning and Other.Land Use Regulation
Who: City Planning Department/City Attorney
What: Permit favorable uses in zoning provisions for Western Dublin
When: Prepare/review zoning provisions as part of planning process
Completion: Before detailed plan approvals in Planning Area
Who Verifies: Dublin City Attorney
Mitigation Measure 12-3: Building Permit Processing
Who: Applicants
What: Meet standards for efficient wood stoves/outlets for electric cars
When: Provide information on building plans
Completion: Building plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Building Department
Mitigation Measure 12-4: Public Works Standards for Golf Carts
Who: Eden applicant (provide facilities); City Public Works Dept. (provide permission)
What: Facilitate use of certain public streets by golf carts
When: Before submittal of detailed street improvement plans
Completion: Street improvement plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 12-5: Grading Permit Processing- Dust Control (see also 12-7, 12-8)
Who: City of Dublin applies measures for applicants
What: Strict dust control measures for grading
When: In conjunction with submittal of detailed grading plans
Completion: Detailed grading plan approval
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
1:\8914-EIR\S914.MM 29
Mitigation Measure 12-6: Other Conditions of Approval
Who: Applicants
What: Transportation Management Plan and explanatory pamphlet
When: Conditions of tentative map approval
Completion: Prior to occupancy
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 12-7 and 12-8: Construction Dust
Who: Applicant
What: Detailed construction dust control measures
When: Conditions of tentative map approval
Completion: Completion of grading
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 12-9: Vehicle Trip Reduction. See Mitigation Measure 13-1.
Mitigation Measure 12-10: Construction Equipment Emissions
Who: Applicants, under direction of City
What: Monitor construction equipment to assure compliance with existing emission stds.
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Completion of construction
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Chapter 13: Energy Conservation
Mitigation Measure 13-1: Energy Conserving Transportation Measures
Who: Applicants
What: Provide energy conserving land uses and other features
When: In conjunction with planned development submittal
Completion: SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 13-2: Demonstration Projects
Who: Applicants
What: Provide demonstrations of cost-effective energy conservation techniques
When: At time of SDR permit applications for clubhouse, school, model homes, Village Center,
and/or fire station
Completion: Before approval of building plans for these facilities
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department/Building Department
1:\8914-E0S914.MM 30
Mitigation Measure 13-3: Review of Deed Restrictions
Who: City Planning Department
What: Review CC&Rs for proposed projects to assure flexibility for energy conservation
applications
When: At time of CC&R submittal to City
Completion: Before approval of CC&Rs
Who Verifies: City Attorney/Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 13-4: Review of District Site Plans
Who: Applicants
What: Provide energy conservation benefits in site plans
When: At time of site plan review by City
Completion: Before approval of SDR permit
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 13-5: Review of Building Plans
Who: City of Dublin
What: Check for energy conservation measures
When: At time of building plan submittal to City
Completion: Before approval of building plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Building Department
Mitigation Measure 13-6: Review of Landscape Plans
Who: City of Dublin
What: Check for energy conservation measures
When: At time of detailed landscape plan submittal to City
Completion: Before approval of landscape plans
Who Verifies: Dublin Planning Department
Chapter 14: Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measure 14-1: Prehistoric Resources
Who: Applicants
What: Provide monitoring by an archaeologist during construction in key areas
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: End of sensitive construction period
Who Verifies: City Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 14-2: Notification Procedures
Who: City Inspector
What: Procedures to follow if archaeological materials are found
When: Condition of PD prezoning
Completion: End of construction period
Who Verifies: City Public Works Department/Building Department
1:\8914-EIR\8914.MM 31
Mitigation Measure 14-3: Rock Walls
Who: Applicant's consultant who prepares the Open Space Management Plan
What: Include protection measures for rock walls in Open Space Management Plan
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: City Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 14-4: Rock Walls - Grading on Rock Ridge
Who: Applicant's consultant- civil engineer
What: Adjust limit of grading on Rock Ridge to minimize damage to rock walls
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: City Planning Department/Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 14-5: Historic Settlement Areas
Who: Applicants' consultants - archaeologists
What: Complete research and prepare mitigation plan for historic resources
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Grading plan approval
Who Verifies: City Planning Department/Public Works Department
Chapter 15: Other Environmental Issues
Mitigation Measure 15.1-1 and 15.1-2: Removal of Hazardous Materials
Who: Developers' consultants
What: Remove hazardous materials from site
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Before general site grading begins
Who Verifies: City Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 15.1-3: Wells and Septic Tanks
See monitoring program for Mitigation Measure 7.2-12.
Mitigation Measure 15.1-4: Further Assessment of Hazardous Materials
Who: Applicant
What: Assess hazardous materials encountered during grading
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: End of construction
Who Verifies: City Public Works Department
I.NS914-EI RM914MM 32
Mitigation Measure 15.1-5: Morris and Cronin Properties
Who: Applicant for Cronin Ranch; applicant for Morris property (if development proposed)
What: Perform detailed hazardous materials assessment
When: Condition of tentative map approval for specific property
Completion: Approval of grading plan
Who Verifies: City Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 15.2-1 and 15.2-2: Transmission Lines
Who: Applicant
What: Require disclosure statement
When: Condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Before occupancy of individual parcels
Who Verifies: City Building Department
(Chapters 16 and 17 do not have mitigation measures requiring monitoring.)
Chapter 18: Cumulative Impacts
Mitigation Measure 18.2-1: Eden Canyon Road Ramps/I-580
Who: Developer, under direction of Caltrans
What: Deposit monies or meet other City requirements to fund design and construction of
required improvements
When: Include construction of interchange improvements as condition of approval
Completion: Per Development Agreement
Who Verifies: Caltrans and Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 18.2-2: San Ramon Road/Dublin Boulevard
Who: Developer, under direction of City of Dublin
What: Deposit monies or meet other City requirements to fund design and construction (by
Assessment District or traffic impact fee)
When: Include as condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Per Development Agreement
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 18.2-3: Foothill Road/Dublin Canyon Road
Who: Developer, under direction of City (Dublin and Pleasanton)
What: Deposit monies or meet other City requirements to help fund design and construction (by
Assessment District or traffic impact fee)
When: Include as condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Prior to project buildout
Who Verifies: Dublin and Pleasanton Public Works Department
1:\8914-EGN914.MM 33
Mitigation Measure 18.2-4: Schaefer Ranch Road Interchange
Who: Developer, under direction of Caltrans
What: Deposit monies or meet other City requirements to fund design and construction
When: Include as condition of approval for tentative map
Completion: Construction required in keeping with Development Agreement
Who Verifies: Caltrans and Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 18.2-5: Eden Canyon Road/Dublin Canyon Road
See monitoring program for Mitigation Measure 18.2-1.
Mitigation Measure 18.2-6: Dublin Boulevard and Silvergate Drive
Who: Applicants
What: Contribute fair share to improvements
When: Include as condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Per development agreement with City
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 18.2-7: Other Cumulative Traffic Impacts
Who: Applicants
What: Contribute fair share to improvements
When: Include as condition of tentative map approval
Completion: Per development agreement with City
Who Verifies: Dublin Public Works Department
Mitigation Measures 18.3-1 and 18.3-2: Water Supply - Cumulative Impacts
Who: City of Dublin
What: Support and coordinate areawide efforts to address water supply impacts
When: Ongoing
Completion: Ongoing
Who Verifies: Public Works Department/DSRSD
Mitigation Measure 18.3-3: Water Recycling
Who: Applicant
What: Incorporate water recycling facilities into project(part of Specific Plan)
When: Include in adopted Specific Plan
Completion: Adoption of Specific Plan
Who Verifies: City Planning Department/DSRSD
1:\8914-EH;N914.MM 34
Mitigation Measure 18.3-4: Coordinate with and support DSRSD Master Planning
Who: City of Dublin
What: Coordinate and support DSRSD master planning efforts
When: ongoing
Completion: Ongoing
Who Verifies: City Public Works Department
Mitigation Measure 18.3-5: Solid Waste
Who: City of Dublin
What: Continue to comply with the requirements of the Calif. Integrated Waste Management Act
When: Ongoing
Completion: Ongoing
Who Verifies: City Manager's Office
Mitigation Measure 18.3-6: Police and Fire Protection
Who: City Police Department/DRFA
What: Continue to require improvements and assess fees
When: Ongoing
Completion: Ongoing
Who Verifies: Police Department/DRFA
Mitigation Measure 18.3-7: Parks and Recreation
Who: City Recreation Department
What: Continue master planning efforts to assess recreation needs
When: Ongoing
Completion: Ongoing
Who Verifies: City Recreation Department
Mitigation Measure 18.3-8: Schools
Who: City of Dublin
What: Continue to coordinate efforts with the Dublin Unified School District
When: Ongoing
Completion: Ongoing
Who Verifies: City Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 18.3-9: Other Cumulative Issues
Who: City of Dublin
What: Continue to monitor other cumulative impacts on public facilities
When: Ongoing
Completion: Ongoing
Who Verifies: City Manager's Office
1\$914-EIR�S914.MM 35
Mitigation Measure 18.4-1: Cumulative Loss of Open Space
Who: City of Dublin
What: Support efforts of the East Bay Regional Park District and other entities to secure open
space
When: Ongoing
Completion: Ongoing
Who Verifies: City Recreation Department
Mitigation Measure 18.4-2: Cumulative Night Lighting
Who: City of Dublin
What: Review ordinances to identify ways to reduce cumulative light and glare impacts
When: Ongoing
Completion: Ongoing
Who Verifies: City Attorney/Planning Department
Mitigation Measure 18.4-3: Heritage Tree Protection
Who: City of Dublin
What: Adopt a heritage tree ordinance or take equivalent measures
When: At time of Western Dublin zoning provision preparation, or as directed by City Attorney
Completion: Prior to commencement of construction
Who Verifies: City Attorney
1\8914-EIM914.MM 36
Appendix M-1
Sample Mitigation Monitoring Forms
Note: these sample forms have been included for general reference purposes only.The City may
use other forms or revise these forms as needed to meet specific needs.
Tracking CEQA Mitigation Measures -AB 3180
MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST
Monitoring
Phase: ❑ Pre-Construction ❑ Construction ❑ Post-Occupancy
Project Case Name/Number:
Brief Description of Project:
Project Location:
Requirement Met or Is Continuing To Be Met:
Date Yes No Description of Project Mitigation Measures
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Comments:
10
Trac' ':EQA Mitigation Measures Under AB 3180
Trustee Agency Monitoring Program/Report:
Program/Report Complete
Trustee Agency Date Yes No
Copies of This Form Distributed to:
—City Council Members —Planning Director —Project Planner
—Public Works Director —Fire Chief —Trustee Agencies
—Responsible Agencies —Other
I hereby certify that I have inspected the project site and that the above information is true to the best of my
knowledge.
Name (Print)
Representing(Agency/Firm)
Signature
Date
11
Tracking CEQA Mitigation Measures Un 33180
VERIFICATION REPORT
DATE: ARRIVAL TIME: DEPARTURE TIME:
LOCATION: DISCIPLINE:
0 Archaeology
0 Biology
0 Soils/Geology
Construction Sheet No.: 0 Other
CONDITION: -
COMPLIANCE: O ACCEPTABLE 0 UNACCEPTABLE:
0 Remedial Action Implemented
0 Require Work Stop
0 Follow-up Required
ACTIVITY:
II
OBSERVATIONS:
-
I
� I
RECOMMENDATIONS:
BY: REPORT APPROVAL (MM):
RECEIPT BY PROJECT SUPERVISOR:
Signature: Date: Time:
C-crnments/Actions:
COPIES ISSUES: 0 MM 0 Others (list):
Date Entered To Environmental Monitcring File: By:
14
1
►.A ►�
N e
PROJECT NAME: FILE HUMl1ERS: °O
n
APPROVAL DATES EIR OR CONDITIONAL KEG. DEC.: '>
3
WQ
The following environmental mitigation mensurea were incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this project in c
order to mitigate identified environmental impacts to a level of Insignificance. A completed and signed checklist for
each mitigation measure Indic,tes that this mitigation measure has been complied with and implemented, and fulfills the
City's monitoring requirements with respect to Assembly Dill 3100 (Public Resources Code Section 21001.6).
m �
r
C
Monitoring Verified
Mitigation Measure Type Dept. Shown on Plans Implementation _ Remarks 3
tz
TT 1 1 1 rn
°
2. ( 1 1 3
3• l 1 1 1 -- 1
T
4• 1 1 1
O
z
6.
7. ...(numbered as necessary)
c,
m
n
' r
to
Explanation of Headings
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plana = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure hue been Implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other information.
RD-AppendxP