HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 43-04 Dublin Ranch Area F RESOLUTION NO. 43 - 04
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
ADOPTING A CEQA ADDENDUM AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR GENERAL PLAN AND EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS,
PD REZONING WITH RELATED STAGE 1 AND STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLANS,
MASTER VESTING TENTATIVE MAP, VESTING TENTATIVE MAPS, AND
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE AREA F NORTH PROJECT IN DUBLIN RANCH
PA 01-037
WHEREAS, James Tong, on behalf of Chang Su-O-Lin, $. Yao Lin and J.L. Lin, has requested
a General Plan/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, a PD rezoning and related Stage 1
Development Plan for the entire Project area, and Stage 2 Development Plan for a portion of the Project
area, a Master Vesting Tentative Map for the entire Project area, Vesting Tentative Maps for portions
of the Project area, and Site Development Review for a portion of the Project area, which applications
are on file in the Planning Division. These applications are collectively referred to herein as "the
project", "Area F/B/E Project" or "Area F North Project"; and
WHEREAS, the Area F North Project consists of approximately 285.4 acres north of Central
Parkway and west of the planned Fallon Road extension, in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area; and
WHEREAS, the project is within the General Plan Eastern Extended Planning Area and the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, for which a Program EIR was certified pursuant to the California
Env~mental Quality Act (CEQA) (SCH No. 91-103064). The Eastern Dublin EIR identified
significant unavoidable impacts from development of the Eastern Dublin area, some of which would apply
to the Project. Pursuant to the Communities for a Better Environment case, approval of the project must
be supported by a new Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
WHEREAS, portions of the project are in Dublin Ranch Areas B and E for which the City
Council previously approved a General Plan/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, PD-Planned
Development Rezoning and related Negative Declaration on November 18, 1997 (Resolutions No. 140-
97, 141-97, Ordinance No. 24-97, incorporated herein by reference); and
WHEREAS, portions of the project are in Dublin Ranch Area F for which the City Council
previously approved a General Plan/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, PD rezoning and related
Stage 1 Development Plan and related Mitigated Negative Declaration on March 7, 2000 (Resolutions No.
34-00, 35-00; Ordinance No. 6-00, incorporated herein by reference); and
WHEREAS, the City prepared an Initial Study to determine if adch'tional review of the current
project was required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162. The Initial Study, dated February 2004
is attached as Exhibit A. and incorporated herein by reference. Based on the Initial Study, the City
prepared an Addendum dated February 23, 2004 (attached as ~xhibi.t B and incorporated herein by
reference) describing minor changes from the previous approvals and finding that the impacts of the
current project have been adequately addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the 1997 Negative Declaration
and the 2000 Mitigated Negative Declaration, all of which documents are incorporated herein by
reference; and
WItEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a properly noticed public hearing on the project
on February 24, 2004, and adopted Resolution 04-I 1 recommending approval of the CEQA Addendum;
and
WItEREAS, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the project on March 16,
2004, at which time interested parties had the oppommity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated March 16, 2004 was submitted to the City Council analyzing
the project and recommending approval of the CEQA Addendum and the project applications; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Addendum with the previously certified Eastern
Dublin EIR, Mitigated Negative Declaration for Area F and Negative Declaration for Areas B-E before
making a decision on the project. The City Council further used its independent judgment and considered
all reports, recommendations and testimony before taking action on the project.
NOW, TItEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and
made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTItER RESOLVED that the City Council adopts the CEQA Addendum and related
Initial Study, attached as Exhibits A and B, for the Area F North project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
section 15164.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the City Council adopts the Statement of Overriding
Considerations attached as Exhibit C.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this l& day of March 2004 by the following votes:
AYES: Councilmembers McCormick, Oravelz, Sbranti and Zika and Mayor Lockhart
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST:
-- ~i~ Cler~k
K:/G/3-16-04/reso-ceqa-areaF.doc (Item 6.3 )
(3:~P A~X2001 \01-037 Dub Ranch Ama FkCCkadoptingaddendumformeaFnor thproject- DOC
682987-~ 2
CEQA ADDENDUM TO DUBLIN RANCH PLANNING AREA F/B/E
PA 01-037
February 23, 2004
On May 10, 1993, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No. 51-93, certifying an
Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific
Plan ("Eastern Dublin EIR, SCH #91103064). The certified EIR consisted of a Draft EIR and
Responses to Comments bound volumes, as well as an Addendum dated May 4, 1993,
assessing a reduced developrffent and project alternative. The City Council adopted
Resolution No. 53-93 approving a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan for the reduced
area alternative on May 10, 1993. On August 22, 1994, the Cit3 Council adopted a second
Addendum updating wastewater disposal plans for Eastern Dublin. The Eastern Dublin EIR
evaluated the potential environmental effects of urbanizing Eastern Dublin over a 20 to 30
year period. Since certification of the EIR, many implementing projects such as Dublin Ranch
have been proposed, relying to various degrees on the first-tier certified E!R. A subsequent
Negative Declaration was adopted for the Dublin RanCh Planning Areas B-E November 18,
1997 (City CounCil Resolution No. 140-97). A Mitigated Negative Declaration was later
approved for Planning Area F of Dublin Ranch in 2000 (SCH # 99112040, PA #98-068,
adopted by Dublin City Council Resolution No. 34-00 on February 15, 2000.
· This Addendum has been prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 for the
current DUblin Ranch Planning Area B, F and E project, as described below.
Project Description and Prior Approvals
The City of Dublin approved development of Dublin Ranch Planning Areas B through E in
November 1997. The approvals included a General Plan and Specific Plan Amendment, and
PD-Planned Development rezoning/Stage 1 Development Plan for up to 1875 dwellings units
and other non-residential land uses. Subsequent subdivision maps were later approved to
subdivide the land into smaller lots.
A Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved by the City of Dublin on February 15, 2000
for Dublin Ranch Planning Area F. This project included an amendment to the Dublin General
Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to reconfigure land uses within Planning Area F, as
well as a Stage 1 Planned Development rezoning, a Tentative Tract Map, formation of an
assessment district, and modifications to an exiSting Development Agreement.
This Addendum refers to these approvals as "Dublin Ranch Planning Area B, F and E
approvals."
The current application proposed a further Amendment to the General Plan and Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan to reallocate land uses within the three Planning Areas totaling 289.3
acres of land, approval of a Stage 1 PD-Planned Development for this area and a Stage 2
EXHIBIT
ATTACHMENT I
Planned Development for approximately 88.5- acres of the project area. This Addendum
refers to these applications collectively as "the Project", which is further described in the
Initial Study referenced below.
Prior CEQA Analyses and Determinations
Eastern Dublin EIR. The Project is within the Eastern Dublin planning area, which was the
subject of the Eastern Dublin EIR, certified in 1993. The EIR analyzed the potential effects of
future urban development planned for a then-largely undeveloped area east of the then-
existing city of Dublin. Numerous environmental impacts were identified and numerous
mitigations adopted upon approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan. For identified impacts that could not be mitigated to insignificance, the City
Council adopted a Statement ,of Overriding Considerations, All previously adopted mitigation
measures for development of Eastern Dublin that are applicable to the Project and Project site
continue to apply to the currently proposed Project. The Eastern Dublin EIR is incorporated
herein by reference.
Dublin Ranch Planning Area B-E Negative Declaration. Development of Planning Areas
B-E of the Dublin Ranch was further reviewed in a Negative Declaration assessing the
potential for site-specific impacts of the proposed development. Tiering from the program-
level review in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the ND examined the potential for significant impacts
not addressed n the prior EIR. The City of Dublin approved the Negative Declaration through
Resolution No. 140-97 on November 18, 1997, which resolution is incorporated herein by
reference. Relying on the Eastern Dublin EIR and Dublin Ranch Planning Area B-E Negative
Declaration, the City Council approved the Dublin Ranch proposal. Portions of Dublin Ranch
PAs B-E have been developed and~or are currently under construction.
The development program associated with Dublin Ranch Planning Areas B-E includes a
variety of land use types, including campus office, community commercial, residential at
varying densities, schools, parks, open spaces and rural residential/agricultural uses. The
current Project includes the westerly portion of Area E, and residential and community park
portions of Area B north of Central Parkway. City Council Resolution No. 140-97, that
approved the Negative Declaration for these Dublin Ranch Planning Areas, contained findings
that the Project did not constitute a change from the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan and that there wase no new information of substantial importance to the
GPA, the EDSP or the Project that could not have been known when the Eastern Dublin
Program EIR was certified in 1993.
Dublin Ranch Planning Area F Mitigated Negative Declaration. Development of Planning
Area F of the Dublin Ranch was reviewed in a Mitigated Negative Declaration assessing the
potential for site-specific impacts of the proposed development. Tiering from the program-
level review in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the MND examined the potential for significant
impacts not addressed in the prior EIR. The City of Dublin approved the Mitigated Negative
Declaration through Resolution No. No. 34-00 on February 15, 2000, which resolution is
incorporated herein by reference. Relying on the Eastern Dublin EIR and Dublin Ranch
Page 2
I
Planning Area F Mitigated Negative Declaration, the City Council approvecl the Dublin Ranch
Planning Area F proposal.
The development program associated with Dublin Ranch Planning Area F included minor
modifications to land uses and the location of roadways through the Planning Area. City
Council Resolution No. 34-00, that approved the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Planning
Area F, contained findings that the Project did not constitute a change from the Eastern
Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan and that there was no new information of
substantial importance to the GPA, the EDSP or the Project that could not have been known
when the Eastern Dublin Program EIR was certified in 1993.
Current CEQA Analysis and Determination that an Addendum is Appropriate for this
Project.
Updated Initial Study. The City of Dublin has determined that an Addendum is the
appropriate CEQA review for the proposed Project. Prior to making this determination, the
City reviewed the Eastern Dublin Ell[, the previous Negative Declaration for Pas B-E and the
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Planning Area F, to determine if any further
environmental review was required for the proposed General Plan/EDSP Amendment and
Stage 1 and Stage 2 Planned Development rezonings.
The City prepared an updated Initial Study dated February 9, 2004, and incorporated herein
by reference. Through this Initi.al Study, the City has determined that no subsequent EIR, or
negative declaration is required for this Project.
No Subsequent Review is Required per CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. CEQA
Guidelines Section 15162 identifies the conditions requiring subsequent environmental
review. After a review of these conditions, the City has determined that no subsequent EIR or
negative declaration is required for this Project. This is based on the following analysis:
a) Are there substantial changes to the Project involving new or more severe significant
impacts? There are no substantial changes to the Project analyzed in the Eastern Dublin
EIR, the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Dublin Ranch PA F, and the Dublin Ranch
PA B-E Negative Declaration. The Project proposes to reconfigure approved uses, but is
consistent with the overall types of land uses and densities allowed in the Dublin General
Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. These changes would include:
1. This General Plan Amendment/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment
proposes to redesignate land slated for-High School use to Middle School use.
The High School site originally designated for Areas E and F has been deemed
unnecessary by Dublin Unified School District (DUSD). In accordance with the
prior wishes of DUSD, the land use designation for the portion of the High School
site occurring in Area F, consisting of 30.6 gross acres, was previously changed to
Middle School in conjunction with PA-98-068, leaving the remainder of the High
School site (20.0 acres in Area E) unchanged. DUSD would now tike to develop
Page 3
a Middle School on a site further to the north, on a portion of the remnant High
School-designated parcel abutting South Dublin Ranch Drive and a portion of the
previously planned Middle School Site. As a result of this change, a 24.2-acre site
designated for Middle School use would be created.
2. This GPA/EDSP Amendment proposes to redesignate land slated for High School
use to Public/Semi-Public use. The portion of the previouslY designated High
School parcel located south of the newly proposed Middle School site would
serve as a replacement parcel for the Public/Semi-Public sites at the intersection
of Central Parkway and Grafton Street.' The 6.3-acre replacement parcel allows a
larger range of potential uses by Providing a larger land area and consolidating
two smaller parcels of land.
3. This GPA/EDSP Amendment proposes to redesignate land at the Central
Parkway/Grafton Street intersection currently slated for Public/Semi-Public use to
Medium Density Residential use. Concerns have been raised about the physical
suitability of the two Public/Semi-Public parcels of approximately two acres each
planned and approved for the intersection of Central Parkway and Grafton Street
to accommodate a wide enough range of potential public/semi-public uses due to
their small size. To remedy this, theSe parcels are proposed to be replaced by one
larger parcel to the north of Gleason Drive.
4. This GPA/EDSP Amendment proposes to redesignate land slated for Middle
School use to Medium Density Residential use. With DUSD interested in
developing the new Middle School on the northerly portion of the land originally
slated for a high school, the land abutting Gleason Drive would be changed to a
Medium Density Residential use designation and developed as a neighborhood.
This land use redesignation would be Consistent with adjacent residential land use
designations and the neighborhood CNeighborhood Fl) will contribute to the
residential nature of the school setting and serve as a buffer between the Middle
School and Gleason Drive, an east-west arterial road connecting Tassajara Road
and Fallon Road.
5. This GPA/EDSP Amendment proposes to redesignate land within Area B, which
is north of Gleason and west of Fallon (presently slated for Medium Density
Residential use) to Low Density Residential use. The small size and hillside
nature of the approximately 1 O-acre parcel near the intersection of Fatlon Road
and Gleason Drive greatly limit the viability of Medium Density development in
the area. This parcel would be combined with the land designated Low Density
Residential immediately to the west, allowing it to be developed as a more
efficient and cohesive neighborhood. This neighborhood (Neighborhood F2)
would be consistent in density and character with existing neighborhoods to the
north and east.
6. This GPA/EDSP Amendment proposes to reconfigure land within Area B slated
for Open Space/Stream Corridor use, Community Park use and Medium Density
Page 4
Residential use south of Gleason Drive. Recent revisions to the configuration of
the Community Park adjacent to Fallon Road have necessitated changes to the
alignment of both Fallon Road and the north-south collector (Lockhart Street)
along the western park boundary and to the configuration of the Open
Space/Stream Corridor and the Medium Density Residential Neighborhoods west
of the park. The Dublin City Council approved the changes to the size and
configuration of the Community Park on October 7, 2003. Based on this, the
Community Park portion of the Amendment Area would be expanded from 52.0
gross acres to approximately 65.9 gross acres; the Open Space/Stream Corridor
will be expanded from 4.8 gross acres to 7.9 gross acres. With the westward
realigament of Fallon Road and the expansion of the Community Park and
adjacent Open Space/Stream Corridor, Medium Density Residential
neighborhoods in the eastern portion of the Amendment Area south of Gleason
Drive would be reduced by approximately 7.6 gross acres. The reduction in
Medium Density Residential use in this area is necessary to accommodate the
entire Community Park and Stream Corridor programs as well as a re-aligned
north-south collector street (Lockhart Street) west of Fallon Road. Based on the
land use changes encompassed in this amendment, Keegan Street would no longer
be extended north from Central Parkway to Gleason Drive.
b) Are there substantial changes in the conditions which the Project is undertaken invOlving
new or more severe significant impacts? There are no substantial changes in the
conditions assumed in the Eastern Dublin EIR, 1997 Negative Declaration for PA B-E and
the 2000 Mitigated Negative Declaration for PA F. Although special-status species are
present on a portion of the Project site, numerous previous biological studies have been
conducted to identify their respective locations, and related mitigations have already been
implemented. The Corps of Engineers has also issued necessary 404 permits to allow
filling of wetlands within the Project area subject to mitigation for loss of these wetlands.
c) Is there new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not
have been known at the time of the previous EIR that shows the Project will have a
significant effect not addressed in the previous EIR; or previous effects are more severe;
or, previously infeasible mitigation measures are now feasible but the applicant declined
' to adopt them; or mitigation measures considerably different from those in the previous
EIR would substantially reduce significant effects but the applicant declines to adopt
them? There is no new information showing a new or more severe significant effect. The
applicant's plans for Planning Areas B, F and E would be consistent with Eastern Dublin
EIR mitigation measures, mitigation measures previously adopted, and U. S. Army Corps
of Engineer and other agency permits.
d) If no subsequent EIR-level review is required, shoUld a subsequent negative declaration
be prepared? No subsequent negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration is
required because there are no impacts, significant or otherwise, of the Project beyond
those identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and previous negative declarations.
Page 5
Conclusion. This Addendum is adopted pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 based
on an Initial Study dated February 9, 2004. The Addendum and Initial Study reviews the
proposed redesignation and reconfiguration of land uses as discussed above. Through the
adoption of this Addendum and related Initial Study, the City determines that the above minor
changes in land uses do not require a subsequent EIR or negative declaration under Guidelines
Section 15162. The City further determines that the Eastern Dublin EIR, previous negative
declarations and this Addendum/Initial Study adequately address the potential environmental
impacts of the Proposed Project.
As provided in Section 15164 of the Guidelines, the Addendum need not be circulated for
public review, but shall be considered with the prior environmental documents before making
a decision on this project.
The Initial Study, Eastern Dublin EIR, Dublin Ranch Planning Area B-E Negative
Declaration, Dublin Ranch Planning Area F Mitigated Negative Declaration are all available
for public review in the Community Development Department, Dublin City Hall, 100 Civic
Plaza, Dublin CA.
Page 6
Initial Study
Project
Dublin Ranch Planning Areas F~/E
PA 01-037
Lead Agency:
City of Dublin
February 2004
EXH!B!T
~ ATTACHMEN
Table of Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 2
Applicant ...................................................................................................................................... 2
Contact Person ............................................................................................................................. 2
Project Location and Context ....................................................................................................... 2
Project Description ....................................................................................................................... 3
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .......................................................................................... i7
Attachment to Initial Study .............. ............................................................................................. 30
1. Aesthetics ...................................... · ............................................................................... 30
2. Agricultural Resources ........................... ~ ..................................................................... 31
3. Air Quality ................................................................................................................... 32
4. Biological Resources .................................................................................................... 34
5. Cultural Resources ....................................................................................................... 36
6. Geology and Soils ........................................................................ ; ............................... 38
?. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................................................ 40
8. Hydrology and Water Quality ...................................................................................... 41
9. Land Use and Planning ................ ' ................................................................................ 44
10. Mineral Resources ......................... ............................................................................. 45
11. Noise .......................................................................................................................... 45
12. Population and Housing ............................................................................................. 47
13. Public Services ........................................................................................................... 4'7
14. Recreation .................................................................................................................. 49
15. Transportation/Traffic ................................................................................................ 51
16. Utilities and Service Systems ..................................................................................... 56
Mandatory Findings of Significance ............................................................................................ 57
Agencies and Organizations Consulted ....................................................................................... 58
References .................................................................................................................................... 58
Appendix .......................... .' ........................................................................................................... 59
City of Dublin
Environmental Checklist/
Initial Study
Introduction
This Initial Study has been prepared in accord with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and assesses the potential environmental impacts of
implementing the proposed Project described below. The.Initial Study consists of a completed
environmental checklist and a brief exPlanation of the environmental topics addressed in the
checklist.~
Applicant
Chang Su-O-Lin, H. Yao Lin and H. L:":Lin
C/O James Tong
4690 Chabot Drive, Suite 100
Pleasanton, CA 94588
Contact Person
MacKay & Somps
5142 Fr~anklin Drive, Suite B
Pleasanton CA 94588
Attn: Dave Chadbourne
Project Location and Context
The project site is comprised of portiOns of Area B, F and E of Dublin Ranch. The Project is
located within the larger East Dublin area, located south of Dublin Ranch Phase 1 development
and north of Central Parkway. The Project area consists of approximately 285 acres of land and
is a part of a larger portion of the Dublin Ranch, which also includes Planning Areas G and H to
the south. '
Exhibit 1 depicts the location of the Project area in context of the larger City of Dublin and
Exhibit 2 depicts its relation to Eastern DUblin as well as neighboring Planning Areas.
The Project site is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan area. This
Specific Plan/General Plan was adopted by the City of Dublin in 1993 for the purpose of
directing long-term land use, CircUlation, infrastructure and environmental protection for 3,328
acres of land located east of the central portion of Dublin and north of the 1-580 freeway. At full
build-out, the Eastern Dublin planning area would allow a range of residential, commercial
office, employment and open space uses.
The Project area is also part of Dublin Ranch, the largest landholding within the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan area. Dublin Ranch contains approximately 1,310 acres of land and is being
planned to accommodate approximately 5,760 residential dwellings and approximately 2.5
City of Dublin Page 2
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
million square feet of office and retail floor space. Dublin Ranch is also being planned to contain . ..
a range of schools, parks and other public areas. ~
The Project area is currently vacant land. No residences or other structures exist within the
boundaries of the Project Area. The low rolling hills are covered primarily with non-native
grassland. The existing topography across the site is varied with the greatest elevation difference
occurring towards the eastern side of the project, south of Neighborhoods L4 and L5 of Dublin
Ranch Phase I. At this location, a hillside exists along the boundary with Phase I with elevation
differences of 30 to 50 feet. Elevations across the Project area generally fall from north to south.
Construction of Medium High and High Density Residential projects associated with the planned
Village Center are currently occurring to the south of the Project area. To the east, development
associated with Dublin Ranch Area A is currently in progress, including single family residential
neighborhoods, an 18-hole golf course, and the expansion of Fallon Road. To the north and
west, the construction of Dublin Ranch Phase I is nearly complete, with Low and Medium
Density Residential neighborhoods, an elementary school parcel (not yet developed), a
neighborhood park, open space/stream corridor, and other recreational amenities.
Project Description
The proposed Project would include two separate but related actions: a) an amendment to the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan and consideration of a PD rezoning/Stage 1
Development plan for portions of Planning Areas B, F and E that would include approximately
289 acres of land (the "Amendment Area"), and b) a PD rezoning/Stage 2 PD-Development Plan
for Area F North that would include approximately 86.9 acres of the larger area described in "a."
(the "Development Area"). These are described more fully below. ~
Specific Plan~General Plan Amendment
Several Amendments are proposed to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan that would
slightly reconfigure and reorient previously approved land uses in Planning Areas B, F and E.
The effect of the proposed amendments would be to reduce the total number of dwellings units
by 136 units and the size of the three Planning Areas by 3.9 acres of land, as shown in Table 1.
Previous environmental review and analysis has been completed in terms of a Program EIR for
all of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area as well as individual Negative Declarations and
Mitigated Negative Declarations for each of the Dublin Ranch Planning Areas affected by this
proposed Project. Mitigation measures have been established in these previous environmental
documents that would continue to apply to this Project.
More specifically, the Amendments would include the following:
1. This General Plan Amendment/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment proposes to
redesignate land slated for High School use to Middle School use. The High School site
originally designated for Areas E and F has been deemed unnecessary by Dublin Unified
School District (DUSD). In accordance with the prior wishes of DUSD, the land use
designation for the portion of the High School site occurring in Area F, consisting of 30.6
gross acres, was previously changed to Middle School in conjunction with PA-98-068,
leaving the remainder of the High School site I20.0 acres in Area E) unchanged. DUSD
would now like to develop a Middle School on a site further to the north, on a portion of the
remnant High School-designated parcel abutting South Dublin Ranch Drive and a portion of ..~
City of Dublin Page 3
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
the previously planned Middle School Site. As a result of this change, a 24.2-acre site
designated for Middle School use would be created.
2. This GPA/EDSP Amendment proposes to redesignate land slated for High School use to
Public/Semi-Public use. The portion of the previously designated High School parcel located
south of the newly proposed Middle School site would serve as a replacement parcel for the
Public/Semi-Public sites at the intersection of Central Parkway and Grafton Street. The 6.3-
acre replacement parcel allows a larger range of potential uses by providing a larger land area
and consolidating two smaller parcels of land.
3. This GPA/EDSP Amendment proposes to redesignate land at the Central Parkway/Grafton
Street intersection currently slated for Public/Semi-Public use to Medium Density Residential
use. Concerns have been raised about the physical suitability of the two Public/Semi-Public
parcels of approximately two acres each planned and approved for the intersection of Central
Parkway and Grafton Street to accommodate a wide enough range of potential public/semi-
public uses due to their small size. To remedy this, these parcels are proposed to be replaced
by one larger parcel to the north of Gleason Drive.
4. This GPA/EDSP Amendment proposes to redesignate land slated for Middle School use to
Medium Density Residential use. With DUSD interested in developing the new Middle
School on the northerly portion of the land originally slated for a high school, the land
abutting Gleason Drive would be changed to a Medium Density Residential use designation
and. developed as a neighborhood. This land use redesignation would be consistent with
adjacent residential land use designations and the neighborhood (Neighborhood Fl) will
contribute to the residential nature of the schoo!.s~tfing and serve as a buffer between the
Middle School and Gleas~h' Drive, an east-west arterial road connecting Tassajara Road and
Fallon Road.
5. This GPA/EDSP Amendment proposes to redesignate land within Area B, which is north of
Gleason and west of Fallon (presently slated for Medium Density Residential use) to Low
Density Residential use. The small size and hillside nature of the approximately 10-acre
parcel near the intersection of Fallon Road and Gleason Drive greatly limit the viability of
Medium Density development in the area. This parcel would be combined with the land
designated Low Density Residential immediately to the west, allowing it to be developed as a
more efficient and cohesive neighborhood. This neighborhood (Neighborhood F2) would be
consistent in density and character with existing neighborhoods to the north and east.
6. This GPA/EDSP Amendment proposes to reconfigure land within Area B slated for Open
Space/Stream Corridor use, Community Park use and Medium Density Residential use south
of Gleason Drive. Recent revisions to the configuration of the Community Park adjacent to
Fallon Road have necessitated changes to the alignment of both Fallon Road and the north-
south collector (Lockhart Street) along the western park boundary and to the configuration of
the Open Space/Stream Corridor and the Medium Density Residential Neighborhoods west
of the park. The Dublin City Council approved the changes to the size and configuration of
the Community Park on October 7, 2003. Based on this, the Community Park portion of the
Amendment Area would be expanded from 52.0 gross acres to approximately 65.9 gross
acres; the Open Space/Stream Corridor will be expanded from 4.8 gross acres to 7.9 gross
acres. With the westward realignment of Fallon Road and the expansion of the Community
Park and adjacent Open Space/Stream Corridor, Medium Density Residential neighborhoods
CitY of Dublin Page 4
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
in the eastern portion of the Amendment Area south of Gleason Drive would be reduced by
approximately 7.6 gross acres. The reduction in Medium Density Residential use in this area
is necessary to accommodate the entire Community Park and Stream Corridor programs as
well as a re-aligned north-south collector street (Lockhart Street) west of Fallon Road. Based
on the land use changes encompassed in this amendment, Keegan Street would no longer be
extended north from Central Parkway to Gleason Drive.'
Table 1 shows aPproved land uses in the Project area compared with land uses proposed as part
of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment. Exhibit 4 depicts the location
and extent of the requested change as well. Land use acreages have been somewhat reduced in
this application due to a re-alignment of Fallon Road to protect biological resources on the
Jordan property and more accurate base mapping of the Project site.
Table 1. Planned and Proposed Land Use-Planning Area B/F/E
Approved Proposed
Eastern Dublin General Plan/
Land Use Category General Plan/ Specific plan Net Difference
Specific Plan Amendment
Low Density Residential (L) 22.7 acres 91 du* 33.4 acres 121 du +10.7 ac/+30 du
Medium Density Residential (M)
Development Area (N. of 9.9 acres 99 du* 20.0 acres 119 du +10.1 ac/+20 du
Gleason)
South of Gleason Drive 110.6 acres 1106 du* 105.0 acres 1050 du* -5.6 ac/-56 du
Medium Density Residential/ 13.0 acres 130 du* 0.0 acres -13.0 ac/-130 du
Community Park (M/CP)
Community Park (CP) 52.0 acres 65.9 acres +13.9
Neighborhood Park (NP) 5.6 acres 5.6 acres
Neighborhood Square (NS) 2.0 acres 2.0 acres
High School (HS) ~'~ 20.0 acres 0.0 acres -20.0
Middle School (MS) 30.6 acres 25.2 acres -5.4
Elementary School (ES) 10.0 acres 10.0 acres
Open Space (OS) 9.0 acres 12.0 acres +3.0
Public/Semi-Public (P/SP) 3.9 acres 6.3 acre +2.4
SUb-Total (Development Area 86.9 acres 190 du 88.5 acs 240 du +1.6 ac/_50 du
Only)
Total (Specific Plan 289.3 acres 1426 du 285.4 acres 1290 du -3.9 ac/-136 du
Amendment Area)
* Unit counts based on Specific Plan mid-point densities.
PD Rezoning/Stage 1 Development Plan (Planning Areas B, F & E)
An application has also been filed for a PD rezoning/Stage 1 Development Plan apProval
pursuant to the City of Dublin planned Development (PD) Zoning District. Pursuant to the PD
Ordinance, property owners must submit a request for Stage 1 Development Plan approval. A
Stage 1 Development Plan establishes land uses within a distinct geographic area, includes a plan
of proposed land uses by type and density of use, contains a master landscape plan and
development Phasing plan.
City of Dublin Page 5
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
The Stage 1 Planned Development Rezone covers approximately 289 acres of land,
encompassing portions of Areas B, F, and E of Dublin Ranch. This area is bordered by existing
Phase 1 residential neighborhoods to the north, an existing neighborhood (Mi) and Dublin Land
Company lands to the west, Central Parkway to the south, and Fallon Road to the east. This land
(referred to in the General Plan/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment (GP/EDSPA)
application booklet as the Amendment Area) is shown in greater detail in the Vesting Tentative
Subdivision Map and Site Development Review sections.
The Stage 1 Development Plan submitted for the Project indicates that the planning area would
have an "upscale rural" theme, which would reflect the agrarian past of eastern Dublin. Planned
design details would include use of rail fencing, stone pilasters, plantings of tree groves to
reinforce the rural theme.
The Stage 1 PD-Planned Development area is composed of five distinct sub-areas. These are
separated from each other by Gleason Drive, an arterial running east-west through the project
area, and north-south collector streets including Lockhart, running south from Gleason to Central
Parkway, and Grafton Street, running through the Stage 1 Area from Antone Way north of the
Stage 1 area to the Village Center to the south.
There are two sub-areas north of Gleason Drive. Of these, the sub-area west of Grafton contains
approximately 25.2 acres (gross*) for a Middle School site, a 6.3-acre parcel for Public/Semi-
Public uses, 2.2 acres of Open Space/Stream Corridor, and a 20.0-acre Medium Density
Residential neighborhood. The sub-area east of Grafton contains a 33.4-acre Low Density
Residential neighborhood and an Open Space/Stream Corridor of 1.4 acres.
The rer~aining three sub-areas are located south of ~leason Drive and are separated by Grafton
and Lockhart Streets. The sub-area west of Grafton consists of approximately 42.0 acres of
Medium Density Residential, with a 2.0-acre Neighborhood Square centrally located within the
residential area, and approximately _-acre of Open Space Corridor (multi-use trail) along the
western side of Grafton Street. The sub-area between Grafton and Lockhart Streets contains
approximately 63.0 acres of Medium Density Residential, a 10.0-acre Elementary School site,
and a 5.6-acre Neighborhood Park. The sub-area east of Lockhart Street contains a Community
Park (65.9 gross acres) and a 7.9-acre Open Space/Stream Corridor area.
Grading activities would occur within the Project Area to accommodate planned land uses, roads
and utilities. Mass grading of a portion of the Project site is currently underway or has been
recently completed based on issuance of a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers fill permit.
Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) will provide water and wastewater service for the
Amendment Area. These services are planned in accordance with the DSRSD Eastern Dublin
Facilities Master Plan (and/or subsequent revisions). An existing water storage reservoir provides
water service for the Amendment area. Distribution mains are planned to be located in all streets.
Final locations and sizing of these facilities will be in accordance with the standards and
recommendations of DSRSD.
* Acreage figures given for land uses are gross acreages unless otherwise noted. Gross acreage is measured to the
centerline of arterial/collector streets.
City of Dublin Page 6
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
Sewer service for the Amendment Area will require connection to DSRSD's existing sewer
system. Gravity sewer mains have been extended easterly in Gleason Drive from Tassajara Road
into the Development Area. Final sizing and location of sewer facilities will be determined
during final design.
The storm drain system for the Amendment Area will consist of major backbone facilities and
local facilities as defined by the Master Storm Drain Study for Dublin Ranch. The backbone
facilities will generally consist of larger diameter pipes networked throughout the site located in
the major streets. These larger collector pipes will ultimately connect to box culverts that will
direct the flow towards the existing G-3 channel, a Zone 7 facility located at the south end of
Dublin Ranch. Local facilities will generally consist of smaller diameter pipes connecting
individual neighborhoods to the collector system. The locations of proposed storm drain
facilities are shown on the tentative maps for the individual neighborhoods.
Dublin's Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance currently requires 12.5% of all housing to be affordable
to those of very low, low and moderate incomes. This project will comply with the Inclusionary
Zoning Ordinance requirements by constructing a proportionate share of the affordable units
within the Fairway Ranch Residential Community. Construction of the Fairway Ranch project,
located within Area B of Dublin Ranch between Central Parkway and Dublin Boulevard, will
commence in 2004.
The project applicant indicates that land uses and infrastructure would be phased over a number
of years to ensure that roads and other infrastructure facilities would be available to support land
uses as they are needed. Preliminarily, construction of initial phases would commence in 2004
with construction anticipated to be completed over the next several years.
PD Rezoning/Stage 2 Development Plan (portion of Planning Area F North)
The Stage 2 Planned Development Rezone (referred to as the Development Area in the
GP/EDSPA section) covers an area of approximately 88.5 acres comprised of the portion of the
Stage 1 Planned Development Area north of and including Gleason Drive, within Planning Area
F North.
The Stage 2 PD-Planned Development area would be comprised of five different land uses: Open
Space/Stream Corridor, Medium Density Residential, Low Density Residential, Middle School
and Public/Semi Public. There are two proposed Open Space corridors in the Project Area, each
with a stream and a 12' wide multi-use trail running through it. The Open Space/Stream
Corridor area on the west side of Fallon Road is 1.4 acres* and is a continuation of the existing
corridor located adjacent to Fallon Road and Phase 1 neighborhoods; the one west of Grafton
Street is 2.2 acres and continues the existing corridor on the west side of Grafton. The
Development Area also contains two residential neighborhoods. The F1 Medium Density
Residential neighborhood is proposed to consist of 119 single-family detached homes on
approximately 20.0 acres, at a'density of 6.0 dwelling units to the acre (du/ac). The F2 Low
Density Residential neighborhood is proposed as 121 single-family detached homes on
approximately 33.4 acres at a density of approximately 3.5 du/ac. A Middle School site occupies
25.2 acres in the northwest corner of the Stage 2 Planned Development Area. Finally, a parcel of
6.3 acres in the southeastern area of the Stage 2 Planned Development Area is to be reserved for
* Acreage figures given for land uses are gross acreages unless otherwise noted. Gross acreage is measured to the
centerline of arterial/collector streets.
City of Dublin Page 7
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/F: February 2004
PA 01-037
Public/Semi-Public uses. This Public/Semi-Public (P/SP) site is to replace two P/SP sites totaling
3.9 acres, at the intersection of Grafton Street and Central Parkway, which are proposed to be
rezoned to Medium Density Residential under the Stage 1 P.D.
A comparison of acreages allocated to designated land uses within the proposed Stage 2 Planned
Development Land Use Plan and the same area of the approved Specific Plan is included in
Table 2.
Table 2. Planned and Proposed Land Use - Area F North
Approved Eastern Dublin Proposed General Plan/
Land Use Category General Plan/Specific Plan Specific Plan Amendment Net Difference
Low Density Residential (L) ~2.7 acres 91 du** 33.4 acres 121 du +10.7/+30
Medium Density Residential (M) 9.9 acres 99 du** 20.0 acres 119 du _10.1/+20
Open Space (OS) 3.7 acres 3.6 acres -. 1
Public/Semi-Public 0.0 acres 6.3 acres +6.3
High School (HS) 20.0 acres 0.0 acres -20.0
Middle School (MS) 30.6 acres 25, 2 acres -5.4
Total (Area F North) 86.9 acres 190 du 88.5 acres 240 du +1.6ac/+50 du
** Unit counts based on Specific Plan mid-point densities.
The increase in acreage of the Stage 2 Planned Development area may be due to inaccuracies in previous acreage
measurements and refinements to the alignment of Gleason Drive.
City of Dublin Page 8
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
Other Entitlements
The applicant has also requested approval of a master tentative tract map to subdivide the Project
Area into smaller parcels of land for sale to future builders. In addition, individual vesting
tentative maps for two neighborhood within Area F North (north of Gleason Drive) have also
been submitted for review and approval. A tentative map package is being reviewed concurrently
with the Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment application and PD rezone, however, the
tentative maps may not be acted upon until other applications have been acted upon.
Site Development Reviews (SDRs) applications have also been submitted for the Development
Area.
City of Dublin Page 9
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
Fran¢i
Detail
Exhibit 1-Regional Context
~ECEIVED
Dublin Ranch: Initial Study- I~,~[~ 0 9 2004
Planning Areag B/E/F
0 City of Dublin DUBLIN
January 2004
~onalContent.tif
NOT
DUBLIN RANCH DRIVE DUBLIN ~kNCH
DUBLIN
CENTRAL
PARKWAY
DUBL1N
\ BOULEVARD
1-580
Exhibit 2-Site Location ?£EASANTON
Dublin Ranch: Initial Smdy-Plamng ,~eas B~/F
City of Dublin
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT/
EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT
DUBLIN RANCH
AREA F NORTH
EASTERN DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
STAGE I & STAGE 2'DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONE
MASTER VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
Fl & F2 VESTING TENTATIVE MAPS
SITE OEmOPmNT REVIEW
December 2003
North 0 100 300 500 750 1000
F.xistin~ TonoeraDhv MacKay & Scraps* Engineering & Planning
Exhibit
3-
William Hemalhalch Architects. Inc.- Architecture & Planning
Dublin Ranch- Initial Study - Planning Areas B, E, F .~:~¢EFVaD· NIJVISoLan&capeArchitecture
City of Dublin {~SR 0 }) ~[~[~4 GLSArchilectureoLandscapeArd~ite .....
ENERAL PLAN AMENDME~>I'/
· EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT EXHIBIT
PAGE 1 OF 2 '
to- O_q--r-(0-q ~_~i"i ,_.~:~--~,% [ ..... >' %' ~ !~' 'M~ Proposed Planned Oevelopment
t , ""-~ Approved Specific Plan Land U'ses
~5'~ ] MffNo~) 9.9ac. · 10.0 99 20.0~. 6.0 '119
~ OS 9.0 ac. 12.0 a~.
Notes: ~ Dxember
1. Heaw lines on laud use boundaries indicate Specific Plan components affected by proposed changes.~
2, Topo~phy is {'rom before the fire station was built on Fallen Road and docs not reflect mass ~ading completed as of I De.tuber 2003.
3. %e plan amen~ent area for ~ea F No~h includes a 6.3-acre parcel for Public/Semi-Public nses. replaci~ the ~o p~cels in Area F at the~
intersection of C~Nal and (}ration. ~e larger parcel allows a greater range of potential uses than thc odginal proposed parcels. ~e ~o
Public/Semi-Public parcels in Area F are proposed to be re-designated to a Mcdium Density Residential use. The Communi~ Park and S~eam Nogh 0 100 300 500 750 1000
Lockh~, To accommodate the changes to the Community Park while prcse~ing viable neighborhoods, Keegan Street is uo longer planned to
MacKay &Somps * Engineering & Planning
PlaWSpecific Plan Land Uses continue no.h of Ccntral. {Sec following page For proposed land uses-) [~ ~,~ ~=}~.)~ William Hemal~lch Architects, Inc.* Architec~re & Planning
Dublin Ranch: Initial Study - Planning Meas B~/F ~e:,R. t} ',.~ Z~O~' N~IS-Landscape~chiteemm
CiW of Dublin .... ~=, }¢~ ~- ff&~P~¢ GLS Architec~re*L~dscape Archi~ture
GENERAL PLAN AMEN~'I~E~I~/
EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT EXHIBIT
PAGE 2 OF 2
PROPOSED LAND USES
'---~-~ Land Use Summary
Approved Specific Plan Land Uses Pr_..qpoced P armed Developmep. t
~'~'-~1 ................. Land Us.es
................. Midpoint
' _LandUseGrossAc.* ~ Units GrossAc.* ~ Units
L 22.'/ac. 4.0 91 33.4 an. 3,6 121
M (F North) 0.9 ac. 10.0~ 99 20.0 ac. 6.0 119
M (other) /10,6 ac. 10,0 1106'* 105.0 ac. 10.0'* 1050'*
lv~CP 13.0 ac. 10.0 130'* 0.0 ac. - - -
CP 52.0 ac. 65.9 ac.
NP 5.6 ac. 5.6 ac.
NS 2.0 ac. 2.0 ac.
0 ac,
HS 20.0 ac.
MS 30.6 ac. 25.2 ac,
ES 10.0 ac. 10.0 ac,
OS 9.0 ac, 12.0 ac.
P/SP 3.9 ac. 6.3 ac.
TOTAL 289.3 ac. 1426 285.4 ac, 1290
~ * Gross acreage is measured to center line of arterialkolkctor streets.
'"~'~.~. ** Projected unit figures are based on Specific Plan midpoint density.
/ Legend
L Single Family Residential
~'~J ~2 M Medium Density Residential
_ MH Medium High Density Reaidenfial
f~,, NS Neighborhoood Square
'NP Neighborhood Park '
~ x~_~___~ CP Community Park
~ ~ '~ ,_ OS Open Space / St/earn Conidor
ES ElementaE/School
~ N.. MS Middle School
/ /~ HS High School
5 . VC ¥illage Center
?- DUBLIN RANCH
AREA F NORTH
..~.C----~jx'r°~ [ EASTERN DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN' AMENDMENT
~ ' / bf ~ STAGE 1 & STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONE
MASTER V~S'r NO TENTATIVE
~'- ~., ~i ~ ' Fl & 1/2 VESTING TENTATIVE MAPS
JT SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
l .... ~ Dubff~, California
Notes: ~ ' December 2005
1, Heavy lines on land usc boundaries indicate Specific Plan componcnts affected by proposed changes; ghost lines show existing land nsc boundaries. ~l~ll~lllm~lll~lll~
2. Topography is from before thc fire station was built on Fallon Road and does not reflect mass grading completed as of 1 December 2003.
3. The plan amendment fnr Area F North includes a 6.3-acre parcel for Public/Semi-Public uses to replace the two parcels in Area F at the intersection of Central
and Grafton. allowing a greater range of PUblic/Semi-Public Uses in the area, Thc Two smaller Public/Semi-Public parcels are proposed to be rc-des~gmated to a
Medium Density Residential usc under this GPA/SPA request. The City Park and Stream Corridor in thc eastern portion of thc project area are proposed to be No~ 0 100 300 500 750 1000
reconfigured to follow current plans for area roads, including Fatlon and Lockhart, To accommodate thc changes to the Community Park while preserving viable . ·
Exhibit 4B - Proposed Planned Development Land Uses neighborhoods, Kecgan Street is no longer planned to corn .... uorth of Central. Discrepanmcs m land usc areas are duc to imprecise land calculations in
previous y approved plans and realignment of area roads.(Sce previous page for previously approved General Plan/Speclfic Plan land uses.) MacKay & 8Drops · Engineering & Planning
. William Hezmalhalch Architects, Inc.- Architecture & Planning
Dublin Ranch: Initial Study - Planning Areas B/E/Fr-~Ec.:~tv~[7 NlJVISoLandscapeArchitecture
City of Dublin ~' P,iS~ (~ t~ ZL~k GLS Architecture°Landscape Architecture
NORTH
Exhibit 5-Wetlands Areas
Dublin Ranch: Initial Study - Planning Areas B/E/F ,,u~[,~ 0 Ii 2004. o 25o
'
Citv of Dublin
· 1. Project description: Pr0P°sed Eastern DUbiin sPeCific plan/DUblin General
Plan Amendment for portions of Dublin Ranch Planning
Areas B, E and F, consideration of a PD rezoning and Stage
1 and Stage 2 Development Plans, Master Vesting
Tentative Map, Individual Vesting Tentative Maps and Site
Development Review application for 285.4-acre site within
Dublin Ranch master planned community.
2. Lead agency: City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin CA 94588
3. Contact person: Mike Porto, Dublin Planning Department
(925) 833-6610
4. Project location: North of Interstate 580 and east of Tassajara Road
5. Project sponsor: James Tong
Authorized Representative
4690 Chabot Drive, Suite 100
Pleasanton, CA 94566
~ 6. General Plan designations: Existing: Low Density Residential, Medium Density
Residential, Public/Semi-Public, Community Park,
Neighborhood Park, Neighborhood Square, Open Space,
Elementary School, Middle School, High School
7. Zoning: PD-Single Family Residential, PD-Medium Density
Residential, PD-Middle School, PD- Neighborhood Park,
PD~Neighborhood Square, PD-Open Space, and PD-Public
and Semi-Public
8. Other public agency required approvals:
Tentative and Final Subdivision Maps (City of Dublin)
Site Development Review (City of Dublin)
Grading and Building permits (City of Dublin)
Sewer and water connections (DSRSD)
Encroachment permits (City of Dublin)
City of Dublin Page 14
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/FIE February 2004
PA 01-037
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "potentially significant impact" as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
- Aesthetics Agricultural Air Quality
Resources
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils
- Hazards and Hydrology/Water - Land Use/Planning
Hazardous Materials Quality
Mineral Resources - Noise - Population/Housing
Public Services - Recreation - Transportation/
Circulation
Utilities/Service - Mandatory Findings
Systems of Significance
Determination (to be completed by Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
__ I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a
Negative Declaration will be prepared.
__ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A Negative Declaration will be prepared.
~ I find that although the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment,
but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier
analysis as described on the attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated." An Environmental Impact Report is required, but'
must only analyze the effects that remain to be addressed.
X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a)
have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR, Negative Declaration and Mitigated Negative
Declaration pursuant to applicable standards, (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that
earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that' are imposed on the proposed project,
or (c) a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted by the Dublin City Council.
An Addendum has been prepared to the previous CEQA reviews. (reference "Earlier Analysis"
section of this Initial Study on page __).
Signature: Date:
City of Dublin Page 15
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
Printed Name: For:
City of Dublin Page 16
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "no impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parenthesis
following each question. A "no impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone); or, in this case, there is no
impact beyond those identified in prior CEQA reviews. A "no imPact" answer should be
explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general factors (e.g. the
project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific
screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect
is significant. If there are one or more "potentially significant impact" entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" implies
elsewhere the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "potentially
significant effect" to a "less than significant impact." The lead agency must describe the
mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant
level.
City of Dublin Page 17
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
Environmental Impacts (Note: Source of determination listed in parenthesis. See listing
of sources used to determine each potential impact at the end of the checklist)
Note: A full discussion of each item is found Potentially Less Than Less than No
following the checklist. Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
I. Aesthetics. Would th~ project:
a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic X
vista? (Source: 2,9)
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including but not limited to trees, rock X
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway? (Source: 9)
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its X
surroundings? (Source: 9)
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or X
nighttime views in the area? (Source: 9,15)
II. Agricultural Resources
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or
Farmland of Statewide Importance, as
showing on the maps prepared pursuant to X
the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to a non-agricultural use? (Source:
2)
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture
use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Source: X
2)
c) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of X
farmland to a non-agricultural use? (Source:
2)
III. Air Quality (Where available, the
significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management district
may be relied on to make the following
determinations). Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of X
the applicable air quality plan? (Source: 2,
15)
b) Violate any air quality standard, or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air X
quality violation? (Source: 2, 15)
City of Dublin ~ Page 18
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
Potentially Less Than Less than No
SignificantSignificantSignificant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
C) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air X
quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative ,
threshOlds for ozone precursors? (Source:2)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial X
pollutant concentrations? (Source:2)
e) Create objectionable odors? (Source: 2) X
IV. Biological Resources. Would the project
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate, X
sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game
or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
(Source: 2, 3, 10,11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any~
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional .X
plans, policies or regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Source:
2, 3, 10,11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
c) Have a substantial adverse impact on
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act X
(including but not limited to marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption or other
means?
(Source: 2, 3, 10,11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native X
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or.
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites? (Source: 2, 3, 10,11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as tree X
protection ordinances? (Source: 2, 17)
City of Dublin Page 19
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
PotentiallyLess Than Less than No
SignificantSignificantSignificant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
f) Conflict with the provision of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan or other X
approved local, regional or state habitat
conservation plan? (Source: 2)
V. Cultural Resources. Would the project
a) Cause a substantial adverse impact in the
significance of a historical resource as X
defined in Sec. 15064.5? (Source: 2, 4,15)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archeological resource X
pursuant to Sec. 15064.5 (Source: 2, 4,15)
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or unique geologic X
feature? (Source: 2, 4,15)
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of a formal cemetery? ' X
(Source: 2, 4,15)
VI.. Geology and Soils. Would the project
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, inclu~ding the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Fault Zoning Map issued by the State X
Geologist or based on other known evidence
of a known fault (Source: 5)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking (5) X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including X
liquefaction? (5)
iv) Landslides? (5) X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of X
topsoil? (5)
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project and potentially result in X
on- and off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or similar hazards
(Source: 5)
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 13-1-B of the Uniform Building Code X
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property? (Source: 5)
City of Dublin Page 20
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
PotentiallyLess Than Less than No
SignificantSignificant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
e) Have soils capable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers X
are not available for the disposal of waste?
(Source: 5)
VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would
the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, X
use or disp6sal of hazardous materials
(Source: 6)
b)'Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the X
release of hazardous into the environment?
(Source: 6)
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or X
proposed school? (Source: 6) .
d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites complied
pursuant to Government Code Sec. 65962.5 X
and, as a result, would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment?
(Source: 6)
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such plan has not been
adopted, would the project result in a safety X
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? (Source: 6)
f) For a project within the vicinity of private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety X
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? (Source: 6)
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with the adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation X
plan?
(Source: 2)
City of Dublin Page 21
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-O37
PotentiallyLess Than Less than No
SignificantSignificantSignificant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
h) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires, including where wildlands X
are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
i-esidences are intermixed with wildlands?
(Source: 2)
IX. Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the
project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste X
discharge requirements? (Source: 2, 7,15) I
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net
deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g. the X
production rate of existing nearby wells
would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses
for which permits have been granted?
(Source: 2, 7, 15)
' c)~ Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the aeration of the course of a stream or X
river, in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site? (Source: 7, 15)
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or areas, including through
the alteration of a course or stream or river, X
or substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or off-site? (Source: 7)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or X
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff? (Source: 2, 7,15)
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water X
quality? (Source: 2,15)
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard
area as mapped on a Flood Hazard Boundary X
or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood
delineation map? (Source: 7)
City of Dublin ?age 22
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/FIE February 2004
PA 01-037
PotentiallyLess Than Less than No
SignificantSignificant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which impede or redirect flood X
flows? (Source: 2, 7)
i) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury, and death involving X
flooding, including flooding as a result of
the failure of a levee or dam? (7)
j) Inundation by seichel tsunami or mudflow? X
(7)
IX. Land Use and Planning. WouM the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? I X
(Source: t, 2, 9)
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including but X
not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect? (Source: 2)
c) Conflict with any applica~ie habitat
'conservation plan or natural community X
conservation plan? (1, 2)
X. Mineral Resources. Would the project
a) Result in the loss of aVailability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to X
.the region and the residents of the state?
(Source: 2)
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general Plan, specific X
plan or other land use plan? (Source: 2)
XI. Noise. Would the proposal result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in
the general plan or noise ordinance, or X
applicable standards of other agencies?
(Source: 2, 9)
b) Exposure of persons or to generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or X
groundborne noise levels? (Source: 2, 5)
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above ! I X
existing levels without the project? (Source:
2,9)
City of Dublin Page 23
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-O37
PotentiallyLess Than Less than No
f'-" SignificantSignificantSignificant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase
in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity X
above levels without the project? (Source: 9)
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport I X
or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working n the
project area to excessive noise levels?
(Source: 9)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to X
excessive noise levels? (Source: 9)
XlI. Population and Housing. Would the project
a) Induce substantial population growth in an
area, either directly or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other X
infrastructure)? (Source: 1, 2)
f-% b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of X
r~.placement housing elsewhere? (Source: 2)
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the replacement of housing X
elsewhere? (Source: 2)
XIII. Public Services. Would the proposal:
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service rations, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services? (Sources: 2, 10, 15, 16)
Fire protection X
Police protection X
Schools X
Parks ! X
Other public facilities
! x
City of Dublin Page 24
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/FIE February 2004
PA 01-037
PotentiallyLess Than Less than No
SignificantSignificant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
XIV. Recreation:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood or regionaI facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the ~ X
facility would occur or be accelerated
(Source: 2)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an X
adverse physical effect on the environment?
(Source: ~2)
XV. Transportation and Traffic. Would the
project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is
substantial in relation to the existing traffic
load and capacity of the street system (i.e. i X
result in a substantial increase in either the
number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads or congestion at
intersections)? (8,15)
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a
level of service standard established by the
County Congestion Management Agency for X
designated roads or highways? (8,15)
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels X
or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks? (2)
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses, such as X
farm equipment? (8)
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (8) X
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (8) X
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or
programs supporting alternative transportation
(such as bus turnouts and bicycle facilities) X
(8)
City of Dublin Page 25
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-O37
~ Potentially Less Than ! Less than No
-- Significant Significant Significant Impact
. Impact With Impact
Mitigation
XVI. Utilities and Service Systems. Would the
project
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Regional Water Quality X
Control Board? (2)
b) Require or result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the X
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects? (2,16)
c) Require or result in the construction of new
storm water drainage facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction of X
which could cause significant environmental
effects? (2, 7)
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project from existing water X
entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed ? (2, 16)
~ e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may
serve the project that it has adequate X
capacity to serve [he project's projected
demand in addition to the providers existing
commitments? (2, 16)
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the X
project's solid waste disposal needs? (2)
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes X
and regulations related to solid waste? (2)
XVI. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to X
drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number of or restrict the range of
a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
City of Dublin Page 26
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-O37
PotentiallyLess Than Less than No
SignificantSignificantSignificant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" X
means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects and the
effects of probable future projects).
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects X
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly? ~
Sources used to determine potential environmental impacts
1. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan (1993)
2. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan EIR (1993)
3. Special-Status Species Survey, Pao Yeh Lin Property, H.T. Harvey Associates (October
1999)
4, Cultural Resource Survey, Dublin Ranch, Holman & Associates (June, 1999)
5 Geotechnical Investigation of Lin Property, Berlogar Geotechnical Consultants (November,
1997)
6 Phase One and Two Hazardous Materials Survey of Lin Property, Berlogar Geotechnical
Consultants (November 1997)
7. Drainage and Hydrology Study for Dublin Ranch, MacKay & Somps (November 2003)
8. Project Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TJKM Associates (October1999)
9. Site Visit
10. Individual Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program - Area B-E (1997)
11. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Fill Permit (dated May 23, 2003)
12. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Biological Opinion (dated July 1, 2002)
13. Regional Water Quality Control Board Water Quality Certification Order (dated April 22,
2003)
14. California Department of Fish & Game 1603 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement
(dated June 5,2003)
15 Individual Mitigated Negative Declaration for Dublin Ranch PA F (2000)
16. Discussion with City of Dublin staff or affected special districts
17. Other source
City of Dublin Page 27
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
XVII. Earlier Analyses
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed m an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Reference Section 15063 (c)(3)(d).
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
Portions of the environmental setting, project impacts and mitigation measures for this
Initial Study refer to environmental information contained in the 1993 Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment Environmental Impact Report. (SCH 91103064).
This document is referred to in this Initial Study as the "Eastern Dublin EIR." Copies of
this document are available for public review at the City of Dublin Planning Department,
100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA, during normal business hours.
A Negative Declaration was previously approved for Planning Areas B through E of the
Dublin Ranch in 1997 (PA #96-039, adopted by Dublin City Council Resolution No.
140-97). A Mitigated Negative Declaration was subsequently approved for PI anning Area
F of Dublin Ranch in 2000 (SCH # 99112040, PA #98-068, adopted by Dublin City
Council Resolution No. 34-00 on February 15, 2000. Both documents were also used in
the preparation of this Initial Study and are incorporated herein by reference.
' Mitigation measures included in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the Mitigated Negative
Declaration approved in 2000 for Planning Area F continue to apply to the proposed .
Project.
As part of the certification of the EIR and approval of the Eastern DUblin Specific Plan
and General Plan Amendment, the Dublin City Council adopted a Statement of
Overriding Considerations for the following impacts: cumulative traffic, extension of
certain community facilities (natural gas, electric and telephone service), regional air '
quality, noise and visual, and other impacts identified in Resolution 53-93, dated May 10,
1993 and incorporated herein by reference.
Copies of these previous environmental documents are available for review at the Dublin
Planning Department during normal business hours.
The Project is consistent with the residential, public/semi public, open space and park
land use designations of the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The purpose
of the proposed amendments to these plans is to reconfigure the uses within the
Amendment Area. The primary result of the Project will be to reduce the amount of
potential residential uses across the Amendment Area by approximately 136 units, and
increase the amount of Community Park from 52 acres to 65.9 acres. All of the
Amendment Area has been the subject of prior CEQA reviews, initially through the 1993
Eastern Dublin EIR, a program-level review of the potential urbanization of Eastern
Dublin. Numerous mitigation measures were adopted with the Eastern Dublin general
plan and specific plan approvals on May 10, 1993. All of the mitigation measures
continue to apply, as appropriate, to implementing projects, including this Project. For the
significant and unavoidable impacts, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding
City of Dublin Page 28
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
Considerations. (See Resolution 53-93). Pursuant to the recent Communities for a Better
Environment case, approval of the Project would require that the City reweigh the
identified unavoidable impacts and adopt a new Statement of Overriding Considerations.
The Project site was later reviewed in connection with approval of two separate land use
revisions and adoption of a PD reZoning and Stage 1 Development Plans. The Dublin
Ranch Area F portion of the Project was reviewed in a subsequent Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND). The MND tiered from the Eastern Dublin EIR, and identified
additional potentially significant impacts and mitigation measures. Ail of the adopted
mitigation measures continue to apply to the Project. The Dublin Ranch Area B and E
portions of the Project were reviewed in a subsequent Negative Declaration (ND). No
additional significant impacts were identified for these areas and no additional mitigation
measures beyond those previously adopted.
The following discussions track the environmental checklist above. Where possible, the
discussion describes the prior relevant analyses and the prior adopted mitigation
measures. The discussions are summary only; the prior EIR, MND and ND should be
consulted for full discussion of related impacts and mitigations. The discussions also
examine whether the reconfiguration of land uses will have any new or more severe
significant impacts that would require preparation of a subsequent EIR, MND or ND
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162. Because the Project does not propose new
or different development, i.e., the type and extent of land uses is similar to those assumed
in the previous reviews, most impacts are unchanged for the Project. The Project also
includes a net reduction in the number of dwelling units across the Amendment Area,
therefore, some impacts could actually be reduced compared to the existing approvals.
Finally, many of the prior impacts related to biology, soils, drainage and other similar
terrain-related impacts no longer apply to the Development Area since this area has been
mass graded pursuant to USACE and DFG permits.
City of Dublin Page 29
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
Attachment to Initial Study
Discussion of Checklist
Legend
PS: Potentially Significant
LS/M: Less Than Significant After Mitigation
LS: Less Than Significant Impact
NI: NO Impact
1. Aesthetics
Environmental Setting
.The Project area (comprised.of portions of Area F, B and E) is vacant and consists of gently
rolling to relatively steep hillsides. The Eastern Dublin EIR classifies the project site as "valley
grasslands," which are located on the areas near 1-580 in the south and southwest portion of
Eastern Dublin. Where agricultural activity, including grazing, has historically taken place (such
as within the Project area), the visual image of lands is formed by patterns of the soil that have
been furrowed.
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified the following impacts to visual resources and aesthetics
applicable to this Project:
· IM 3.8/A: Standardized "tract" development, whereby generic subdivision design could
~.- obscure existing natural features, such as landforms, vegetation and watercourses.
-: · IM 3.8/B, C, and D: Alteration of the rural/open space visual character of the area
whereby new development allowed under the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment
would change the visual open space area of the Project area, including hillsides.
· IM 3.8/F: alteration of the visual character of the flatlands, whereby future urban
development on the flatland portion of the Project site would alter views of valley grasses
and agricultural fields.
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of Mitigation Measures that are applicable to this
project to assist in reducing aesthetic impacts to a less-than-significant level, including
Mitigation Measures 3.8/1.0 through 8.1.
The 1997 Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E did not identify new or supplemental
impacts or mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR.
The 2000 Mitigated Negative Declaration for Planning Area F identified supplemental
Mitigation Measure 1 that required pole mounted streetlights to be equipped with cut-off lenses
or directed downward to minimize spill over of lights.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista? LS. Approval and construction of the
proposed project would convert existing vacant, former agricultural fields to urban uses,
City of Dublin Page 30
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
including residential and similar uses. This potential impact was addressed in the Eastern
Dublin EIR (Impact IM 3.8/C, Obscuring of Distinctive Natural Features) and it was
determined that no measures would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
Other mitigation measures (3.8/4.0 through 4.5, 5.0 and 5.1) have been included in the
Eastern Dublin EIR to reduce impacts to hillside development. The EIR concluded this
impact would be a potentially significant irreversible change and a Statement of Overriding
Considerations was.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including state scenic highway? NI. The project
site is not located adjacent to a state designated scenic highway.
c) Substantially degrade existing visual character or the quality of the site? LS. This impact
was addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
d) Create light or glare? LS. As addressed in the 2000 MND, construction of the proposed
project would increase the amount of light and glare due to new street lighting and building
security lighting. In some instances, the additional lighting could result in negative
aesthetic impacts through the "spill over" of unwanted lighting onto adjacent properties,
parks and other areas that are not intended to be lighted.
Overall, no impacts to visual resources not previously identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the
1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are expected to occur as a
result of this Project.
2. Agricultural ResoUrces
Environmental Setting
According to information contained in the Phase One Hazardous Materials study prepared by
Berlogar Geotechnical Consultants for the site, the property has been used exclusively for
farming and cattle grazing for the past 40 years, although it is currently fallow.
The Eastern Dublin EIR notes that the site is charaCterized by soils of locally important
farmland, although not of prime or unique farmland.
Based on information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Figure 3. l-C), no portion of the
Project Area is encumbered with a Williamson Act Land Conservation Agreement contract.
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified the folloWing impacts with regard to agricultural resources:
· IM 3. l/C: Discontinuation of agricultural uses, which was a less-than-significant impact
due to the high percentage of Williamson Act contracts that were either non-renewed or
cancelled.
· IM 3. l/D: Loss of farmlands of local importance, which was identified as a less-than-
significant since no prime agricultural soils were identified on the Project site.
No mitigation measures were contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, since no potentially
significant impacts were identified.
City of Dublin Page 31
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
The 1997 Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E and the Mitigated Negative Declaration
for PA F did not identify new or supplemental impacts or mitigation measures from the Eastern
Dublin EIR related to agricultural resources.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a-c) Convert Prime Farmland, conflict with agricultural zoning or conYert prime farmIand to a
non-agricultural use? LS. Although the site has historically been used for agricultural crop
production, the underlying soil is not considered primary agricultural soil and no
Williamson Act Land Conservation Agreement exists on the project site.
The Eastern Dublin EIR found that discontinuance of agricultural operations is an
insignificant impact based on the large number of non-renewal notices being filed on
Williamson Act Agreements within the Eastern Dublin area (Impact 3. l/C). Similarly, loss
of farmland of local importance, such as the project site, were considered a less-than-
significant impact due to the fact that on-site soils are not prime 'agricultural soils (Impact
3.l/D).
Overall, no impacts to agricultural lands and resources not previously identified in the Eastern
Dublin EIR, the 1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E. or the 2000 MND for PA F are
expected to occur as a result of this Project.
3. Air Quality
' Environmental Setting
Dublin is located in the Tri-Valley Air Basin. Within the Basin, state and federal standards for
nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and lead are met. Standards for other airborne pollutants,
including ozone, carbon monoxide and suspended particulate matter (PM-10) are not met in at
least a portion of the Basin.
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified the following impacts with regard to air quality:
· IM 3.1 l/A: Dust deposition soiling nuisance from construction activities, which was
identified as a potentially significant cumulative impact.
· IM 3.11/B: Air emission from construction equipment, which was identified as a
potentially significant impact.
· IM 3.11/C: Air quality impacts related to mobile emissions of reactive organic gasses and
nitrogen monoxide, which was identified as a potentially cumulative significant impact.
· IM 3.11/D: Mobile source emission of carbon monoxide, which was identified as a less-
than-significant impact.
· IM 3.11/E: Stationary source emissions from HVAC and other sources, which was a
potentially significant cumulative impact.
City of Dublin Page 32
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
'Mitigation Measures 3.11/1.0 through 13.0 were included in the Eastern Dublin EIR to assist in
reducing long- and short-term air quality impacts. Impacts related to emission from construction
vehicles~ mObile source emission of reactive Organic gasses and nitrogen dioxide and stationary
source emissions were identified as significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding
Considerations were adopted by the City of Dublin for these impacts.
The 1997 Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E and 2000 Mitigated Negative
Declaration for PA F did not identify new or supplemental impacts or mitigation measures from
the EaStern Dublin EIR related to air qualityl
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Would the project conflict or obstruct implementation of an air quality plan? LS. The
proposed project would not conflict with the local Clean Air Plan adopted by the Bay Area
Air Quality Management District, since the proposed number of dwelling units have been
included in Dublin's planned growth as part of Eastem Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan.
b) Would the project violate any air quality standards? LS. Short-term construction imPacts
related to implementation of the project, including grading and excavation, could result in
exceedances of air quality standards established by the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District (Eastern Dublin EIR, Impacts 3.11/A and B). Adherence to Mitigation Measure
3.11/1.0 and Mitigation Measure 3.11/2.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR will reduce
short-term air quality impacts to a less-than-significant level. These measures minimize the
creation of fugitive dust during grading and construction activities and also mandate that
construction equipment be kept in proper running order. The Eastern Dublin EIR concludes
that potential air quality impacts related to construction equipment could not be mitigated
to a less-than-significant impact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted
for this impact. If this project were to be approved, a new Statement of Overriding
Considerations would need to be adopted by the City of Dublin.
Similarly, potential air quality impacts related to mobile source emissions of Reactive
Organic Gasses and Nitrogen Oxide, both precursor indicators of smog, and stationary
source emissions were found to exceed regional air quality standards even with mitigation
measures, and were included in the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Eastern
Dublin EIR Impacts 3.11/C and E). If this project were to be approved, a new Statement of
Overriding Considerations would need to be adopted by the City of Dublin.
c) Would the project result in cum~datively considerable air pollutants? LS. The Eastern
Dublin EIR identifies Mobile Source Emissions and Stationary Source Emissions as
significant irreversible impacts. Generally such impacts are based on vehicular emission
from future traffic within the sub-region as well as stationary sources. A Statement of
Overriding Considerations was adopted for long-term impacts. If this project were to be
approved, a Statement of Overriding Considerations would need to be adopted by the City
of Dublin.
d, e) Expose sensitive receptors to significant pollutant concentrations or create objectionable
odors? LS. The majority of land uses proposed for the Project Area include residential land
uses, which are not considered as sensitive .receptors. As noted in the 2000 MND, the
Project includes both an elementary school and middle school, Which could be considered
City of Dublin Page 33
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-O37
sensitive receptors; however no additional impacts were identified beyond the Eastern
Dublin EIR.
Overall, no impacts to air quality not previously identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the 1997
Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are expected to occur as a result
of this Project.
4. Biological Resources
Environmental Setting
The Eastern Dublin EIR indicates that the Project Area is dominated by non-native grassland and
dryland-farmed (grain crops) habitats. Fields are typically cropped at various seasonal and
annual rotations followed by fallow years at a rate of one in every five years. Crops are not
irrigated. Biological analyses and wetland delineations were conducted for the Eastern Dublin
EIR as well as the MND and ND, describing both habitat and species present in the Project area,
and information on wetland resources. As noted earlier, the Development Area portion of the
Project site has been mass graded pursuant to USACE and DFC permits. The graded area
included ponds with habitat value and species as identified in the prior CEQA reviews; however,
species such as California red-legged frog and California Tiger Salamander were relocated to
offsite mitigation areas, again, in conformance will applicable permits and requirements. A copy
of the Corps permit is appended to this Initial Study.
· ~.;'~.. Plants :'
- Based on the history of cultivation of the Project Area, most of the 23 special-status plant species
identified as potentially occurring in the project area are not expected to be present. Previous
" agricultural activities, including livestock grazing and crop production, have deglmded potential
habitat for these species, and existing predominant plant species include invasive forbs and
grasses indicative of disturbed habitats. Although neither the Congdon's tarplant (Hemizonia
parryi ssp. congdonii) nor San Joaquin spearscale (Atriplex joaquiniana) has been observed in
the Project Area, Congdon's tarplant has been observed on Area H to the south, and San Joaquin
spearscale has been observed on a nearby parcel to the southeast.
Animals
The Eastern Dublin EIR, the MND and the ND provide background information on the potential
for special-status and sensitive animal species that could potentially occur in the Project area.
With the permitted grading on the Project site and related offsite mitigation and species
relocation, many of the species are no longer expected to occur in the Project area
Mitigation measures addressing these species have been incorporated into the wetland fill permit
issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on May 23, 2003. In accordance with the permit
conditions, red-legged frogs and tiger salamanders have been relocated to an off-site mitigation
area.
Wetlands
Jurisdictional wetlands were addressed in the Project area in the Eastern Dublin EIR, MND and
ND. As noted above, a wetland fill permit was issued by the USACE and the wetlands have
been filled
City of Dublin Page 34
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified a number of potentially significant impacts to biological
resources, including IM 3.7/A (direct habitat loss), IM 3.7/B (indirect impacts of vegetation
removal), IM 3.7/C (loss or degradation of botanically sensitive habitat), IM 3.7/D (impacts to
San Joaquin kit fox), IM 3.7/E (impacts to bald eagle, peregrine falcon and Alameda whipsnake),
IM 3.7/F (impacts to red-legged frog), IM 3.7/G (California tiger salamander), IM 3.7/H
(impacts to western pond turtle), IM 3.7/I (impacts tri-colored blackbirds), IM 3.7/J (destruction
of Golden eagle nesting sites, IM 3.7/K (elimination of Golden eagle foraging sites), IM3.7/L
(Golden eagle and other raptor electrocution), IM 3.7/M impacts to burrowing owl), IM 3.7/N
(impacts to American badger), IM 3.7/0 (impacts to prairie falcon, northern harrier and black-
shouldered kite), IM 3.7/P (impacts to sharp-shinned hawk and Cooper's hawk), IM 3.7 Q
(impacts to short-eared owl), IM 3.7/R impacts to California horned lizard), IM 3.7/S (impacts to
special-status invertebrates).
A number of mitigation measures are included in the Eastern Dublin EIR to reduce all of the
above impacts to less-than-significant levels, except for the loss of botanically sensitive habitat.
These are Mitigation Measures 3/7/1.0 to 28.0. These mitigation measures continue to apply to
this project.
The 1997 Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E did not identify new or supplemental
impacts or mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR related to biological resources.
The 2000 Mitigated Negative Declaration for Planning Area F contained Supplemental
Mitigation Measures 2 and 3 to protect special-status species and wetlands in this Planning Area.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species? LS.
Development of the Project area would have impacts on the California red-legged frog and
California tiger salamander that are less than significant with mitigation incorporation. This
development could potentially have impacts on the Congdon's tarplant, San Joaquin
spearscale, Burrowing Owl, White-tailed Kite (and other tree-nesting raptors), and
American badger that are less than significant with mitigation incorporation. Site clearing
and grading could result in direct loss of individuals of Congdon's tarplant and San Joaquin
spearscale if these species are present on the site. Clearing and grading could result in the
loss of individual tiger salamanders and their estivation habitat, and filling of the stock pond
would result in the boss of 0.7 acres of red-legged frog and tiger salamander breeding habitat
and could potentially result in the loss of individuals. Clearing and grading could result in
the loss of individual burrowing owls, their occupied burrows, and occupied Burrowing Owl
habitat; and individual American badgers. Tree removal or indirect disturbance during the
breeding season could result in the loss of eggs, young, or active nests of the White-tailed
Kite and other tree-nesting raptors.
In accordance with the approval conditions of the USACE wetland fill permit (dated May
23, 2003); U.S.F.&W.S. Biological Option (dated July 1, 2002); RWQCB Water Quality
Certification Order (dated April 22, 2003); and CDF&G 1603 Lake and Streambed
Alteration Agreement (dated June 5, 2003) mitigation measures addressing impacts on
candidate, sensitive or special status species have already been implemented. Based on
implementation of these measures, the above noted species impacts are no longer considered
to be applicable to this Project.
City of Dublin Page 35
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-O37
As part of the project, project builders and developers have obtained necessary permits from
'apprOPriate state and federal environmental permits prior to grading operations, including
but not limited to permits from the United States Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and .Game and Regional Water Quality
Control Board.
b, c) Have a substantial adverse impact on riparian habitat or federally protected wetlands? LS.
Approximately 1.47 acres of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)jurisdictional habitats
(including 0.48 acres of wetlands), based on the draft jurisdictional delineation and verified
by the Corps, and 1.6 acres of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG)
jurisdictional habitats, have been identified within the Project Area and required mitigation,
as established by the appropriate agency, has been provided.
In accordance with the approval conditions of the USACE wetland fill permit (dated May
23, 2003); U.S.F.&W.S. Biological Option (dated July 1, 2002); RWQCB Water Quality
Certification Order (dated April 22, 2003); and CDF&G 1603 Lake and Streambed
Alteration Agreement (dated June 5, 2003), mitigation measures addressing impacts on
candidate, sensitive or special status species have been or currently are being implemented.
As part of the project, project builders and developers have obtained necessary permits from
appropriate state and federal environmental permits prior to mass grading operations,
including but not limited to permits from the United States Army Corps of Engineers, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game and Regional Water
Quality Control Board.
d) Interfere with movement of native fish or WiMl~fe species? NI. Two small intermittefit
.... drainage channels formerly traversed the site, but have been filled as part of Corps- and
' CDFG-permitted mass grading operations n the Project area. However, no significant
wildlife movement occurs on or across the site, and therefore, development is not expected
to preclude any significant wildlife movements.
e, f) Conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources or any adopted
Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans? NI. No significant
stands of trees are present on the site, and there are no impacts with regard to local tree
preservation ordinances or policies. The site is not located within the boundaries of any
Habitat Conservation Plans.
Overall, no impacts to biological resources not previously identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR,
the 1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are expected to occur as
a result of this Project.
5. Cultural Resources
Environmental Setting
The Eastern Dublin area was surveyed in 1988 as part of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and
associated EIR. Several potentially significant archeological resources were identified in the
project area and the Eastern Dublin EIR mandated additional project-level archeological surveys.
City of Dublin Page 36
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
In May, 1999, Holman and Associates resurveyed the site by means of a mechanical backhoe .....
Several battered petrified wood fragments were discovered, however, later laboratory
investigation indicated the fragments likely resulted from natural tumbling or damage from farm
equipment. In .summary, no potentially significant prehistoric archeological materials or
indicators were found on the property during the study.
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified the following impacts with regard to cultural resources:
· IM 3.9/A: Disruption or destruction of identified prehistoric resources, which was
identified as a potentially significant impact.
· IM 3.9/B: Disruption or destruction of unidentified pre-historic resources, which was
identified as a potentially significant impact.
· IM 3.9/C: Disruption or destruction of identified historic resources, which was identified
as a potentially significant impact.
· IM 3.9/D: Disruption or destruction of unidentified historic resources, which was
identified as a potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures 3.9/1.0 to 12.0 were adopted to reduce impacts to historic and pre-historic
resources to a less-than-significant level.
The 1997 Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E did not identify new or supplemental
impacts or mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR related to cultural resources.
The Mitigated Negative Declaration for Planning Area F (2000) identified Supplemental
Mitigation Measure 4, intended to protect unrecorded cultural resources.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Cause substantial adverse change to significant historic resources? NI. The site is vacant
and no historic resources have been identified on the site. Therefore, the possibility of
encountering historic resources is considered remote and no impact is expected.
b, c) Cause a substantial adverse impact or destruction to archeological or paleontological
resources? LS. The 2000 MND identified a remote but potentially significant possibility
that construction activities, including site grading, trenching and excavation may uncover
significant paleontological resources. Mitigation Measures 3.9/5.0 and 6.0, cOntained in
the Eastern Dublin EIR were adopted to reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level
and will be implemented with Project development.
d) Disturb any human resources? LS. A remote possibility exists that human resources could
be uncovered on the site during construction activities. Mitigation Measures 3.9 5.0 and 6.0
contained in the eastern Dublin EIR were adopted to reduce such impacts to a level of less-
than-significance.
Overall, no impacts to cultural resources not previously identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the
1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are expected to occur as a
result of this Project.
City of Dublin Page 37
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
6. Geology and Soils
(This section is based on a preliminary geotechnical reports cited in the 1997 ND and the 2000.
The reports are on file in the City of Dublin Planning Department)
Environmental Setting
This section of the Initial Study addresses seismic safety issues, topography and landforml
drainage and erosion and potential impacts .to localized soil types.
SeiSmic
The Project Area is a part of the San Francisco Bay area, one of the most seismically active
regions in nation. The Eastern Dublin EIR notes the presence of several nearby significant faults,
including the Calaveras Fault, Greenville Fault, Hayward Fault, and San Andreas Fault. The
likelihood of a major seismic event on one or more of these faults within the near future is
believed to be high. The project site is not part of a Special Studies ZOne for faults as identified
by the State of California, however, previous geotechnical investigations of the area show
inferred faults along the northerly portion of the Project Area (identified as the "Mocho Fault"). ,
The Mocho Fault was mapped by the California Division of Mines and Geology in 1974 and was
':later evaluated as part of the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. As part of this evaluation it
was concluded that the existence of the Mocho Fault was questionable and geomorphic features
could be caused by differential erosion.
'A SecO~d thrust fault System has been inferred in the Coast Ranges of the Bay Area that may be
seisimi~ally active. A belt of faults and folds has been mapped in sedimentary rocks south of
Mount Diablo, including one identified as the "leading edge-blind thrust, Mount Diablo
Domain," Further inVeStigation of this inferred fault by Berlogar Geologic Consultants has
concluded that the risk of ground rupture from this inferred fault is low within the Project Area.
Site Soils
Site soils are characterized as c011uvium, which is highly expansive and consists of dark gray,
very stiff to hard silty clay. Artificial fill has been placed on the site to create a stock pond (see
below), with the fill material consisting of a stiff, light gray-brown, clayey silt.
Landform and Topo grqP hy
The Project Area is part of a broad nOrth-South trending plain known as the Livermore-Amador
Valley. Existing elevations on the site range from approximately 450 to 500 feet above sea level.
Since the prior CEQA reviews, portions of the Project site have been graded in accordance with
USACE and other permits and requirements. The grading eliminated ponds on the Project site,
subject to offsite mitigation.
The preliminary geOtechnical report indicates a history of landslides on the site. Five slide areas
have been identified, all of Which are relatively shallow, on the order of 5 to 10 feet each.
LandSlides have occurred within deposits of highly expansive colluvium soils.
Drainage
City of Dublin page :38
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
The permitted grading eliminated a number of small, unnamed north-sOuth trending intermittent
streams that were described in the prior CEQA reviews. Drainage patterns generally follow a
north-to -south direction, consistent with the overall topography of the East Dublin area.
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified the following impacts with regard to soil and geological
resources as applicable to this Project:
· IM 3.6/A: Ground fault rupture, which was identified as a less-than-significant impact.
· IM 3.6/B: Primary impacts of groundshaking due to earthquake activity, which was
identified as a potentially significant impact.
· IM 3.6/C: Secondary impacts ofgroundshaking due to earthquake activity, which was
identified as a potentially significant impact.
· IM 3.6/D: Substantial alteration to site landforms, which was identified as a potentially
significant impact.
· IM 3.6/F: Impacts to grotmdwater resources, which would be a potentially significant
impact.
· IM 3.6/G: Impacts to groundwater resources due to irrigation, which would be a
potentially significant impact.
· IM 3.6/H: Shrink and swell impacts related to expansive soils, which would be a
potentially significant impact.
· IM 3.6/K: & L: Construction and long-term erosion and sedimentation, which would be
potentially significant impacts.
Mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR were adopted to reduce the above
imPacts to less-than-significant levels except IM 3.6/B regarding groUndshaking, which was
significant and unavoidable.
The 1997 Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E and the 2000 PA F MND did not identify
new or supplemental impacts or mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR related to soils
or geotechnical issues.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse impacts, including loss, injury
or death related to ground rupture, seismic ground shaking, ground failure, or landslides?
LS. The Project site is subject to ground shaking caused by a number of regional faults
identified above. Under moderate to severe seismic events which are probable in the Bay
Area over the next 30 years, buildings, utilities and other improvements constructed in the
Project Area would be subject to damage caused by ground shaking.
Since the Project Area is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Safety Zone and
the potential for ground rupture is anticipated to be minimal. Mitigation Measures 3.6/1.0
City of Dublin Page 39
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
through 8.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR were.adopted to ensure that new
: structures built within the Project Area will comply with generally recognized seismic
safety standards so that ground shaking impacts would be reduced to a level of less-than-
significant.
Portions of Project area are hilly and have a history of landslides. As anticipated in the
prior MND, the site has been graded and re-contoured to accommodate building pads,
roads, parking areas and other development areas and to improve and control site drainage.
Mitigation Measures 3.6/17.0-26.0 were adopted as part of the Eastern Dublin Plan EIR to
reduce potential impacts to slopes to a level of less-than-significant. These' mitigation
measures require the preparation of site-specific soils and geotechnical reports, minimizing
grading on steep slopes and adherence to Uniform Building Code and other City
requirements for grading.
b) Is the site subject to substantial erosion and/or the loss of topsoil? LS. The Eastern Dublin
EIR notes that an impact of constructing all of the land uses identified in the Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan would be an increase of erosion and sedimentation
caused by grading activities. Consistent with adopted Mitigation Measures 3.6/27.0 and
3.6/28.0, conditions of approval require the Project to prepare and implement interim
erosion plans as part of grading permits. With adherence to these mitigation measures,
potential erosion impacts will be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
c-d) Is the site located on soil that is unstable or expansive or result in potential lateral
spreading, liquefaction, landslide or collapxe? LS. Portions of the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan/General Plan, including the Project Area, are subject to soil types with high shrink-
:~ swell potential. Mitigation Measures 3.6/14.0 through 16.0 were adopted to reduce
potential shrink-swell impacts to a level of less-than-significance by requiring appropriate
structural foundations and other techniques to overcome shrink-swell effects. No additional
mitigation measures are required.
e) Have soils incapable of supporting on-site septic tanks if sewers are not available? NI. The
project developer has indicated that each dwelling would be connected to a sanitary sewer
provided by Dublin San Ramon Services District. Therefore, no impact is anticipated with
regard to septic tanks.
Overall, no impacts tO soils and geology not previously identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the
1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are expected to occur as a
result of this Project.
7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Environmental Setting
The site has been partially graded; the remaining area is primarily open grasslands and currently
contains no structures. Phase I and Phase II hazardous materials studies were completed for the
site by Berlogar Geotechnical Consultants in 1996 and 1997 with the finding that no hazardous
materials has been identified on the site. The site has not been listed as containing a hazardous
site, hazardous material generator or transporter or having known underground storage tanks.
City of Dublin Page 40
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified IM 3.4/E (exposure to wildfire hazards) as a potentially
significant impact, which could be reduced to a less-than-significant level through adherence to
Mitigation Measures 3.4/6.0 trough 11.0. ~
The 1997 Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E and PA F MND (2000) did not identify
new or supplemental impacts or mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR related to
hazards or hazardous materials.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a-c) Create a significant hazard through transport of hazardous materials or release or
emission of hazardous materials? LS. Proposed uses of the site would include residential,
schools, parks and open spaces. There is no change from the 1997 MN and 2000 MND
conclusions that only minor and less-than-significant quantities of potentially hazardous
materials would be associated with such uses. Materials would include normal and
customary such as lawn chemicals, household solvents and similar items.
d) Is the site listed as a hazardous materials site? NI. A previously completed Phase II
hazardous materials analysis indicates that the site is free of hazardous materials. No
impacts are therefore anticipated.
e, f) Is the site located within an airport land use plan ora public airport or private airstrip?
LS. The Project Area is located northwesterly of the Livermore Municipal Airport. The
City of Dublin referred the Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment applications for
Planning Areas F-H to the Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). At
the ALUC meeting on April 14, 1999, the Commission noted that Planning Areas F,G & H
all lie outside of the referral area for Livermore Municipal Airport and the ALUC has no
jurisdiction over land uses within the Project Area. The rest of the Project area is similarly
outside of the referral area.
g) Interference with an emergency evacuation plan? NI. Adequate emergency access has been
provided via the proposed collector street system to and from the site to the satisfaction of
the Alameda County Fire Department. Due to the provision of adequate access, there would
be no impact with regard to emergency evacuation plans.
h) Expose people and structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wiMland fires or where residences are intermixed with wiMlands? LS. The Project Area is
currently a vacant field and is subject to grassland fires. However, the long-term plan for
the area is for urbanization. Although parks and open spaces would be part of the long-term
land use plans, such areas would generally be irrigated. Development of the area would
include adding new water lines for firefighting purposes as well as new fire stations and
personnel.
Overall, no impacts to hazards and hazardous materials not previously identified in the Eastern
Dublin EIR, the 1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are
expected to occur as a result of this Project.
8, Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Dublin Page 41
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
("" Environmental Setting
Portions of the Project area were formerly hilly with two intermittent creeks flowing through.
The area was recently graded and the drainages filled pursuant to appropriate permits. Based on
information contained in the Eastern Du~bl. in ~EIR, none of the Project Area is located within a
100-year flood plain as identified on the applicable Flood Insurance Rate Map published by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency.
See earlier discussion in Section V, Geology, regarding the history of landslides within Planning
Area F.
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified the following impacts with regard to hydrology and water
quality as applicable to this Project:
· IM 3.5/Y: Potential flooding, which was identified as a less-than-significant impact.
· IM 3.5/Z: Reduced groundwater recharge, which was identified as a potentially
significant impact.
· IM 3.5/AA: Non-point sources of pollution, which was identified as a potentially
significant impact.
Mitigation Measures 3.5/44.0 to 55.0 were included in the Eastern Dublin EIR to reduce the
above impacts to a less-than-significant level
The 1997 Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E did not identify new or supplemental
impacts or mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR related to hydrology and water
quality:
The Mitigated Negative Declaration for Dublin Ranch PA F contained Supplemental Mitigation
Measures 5 and 6 to ensure that potential surface water quality and flooding impacts are reduced
to a less-than-significant level.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? LS. Construction of
improvements anticipated within the Project Area plan would necessitate grading and
overcovering of the soil in order to construct roadways, building pads, utility connections
and similar features. The amount of grading is not known at this time, however, proposed
grading is anticipated to increase the possibility of soil erosion into creeks and other bodies
of water, on and off the project site. As noted in the 2000 MND, standard City of Dublin
development conditions of approval require erosion control plans and preparation of a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. No additional water quality impacts are anticipated
beyond those previously described.
b) Substantially deplete groundwater recharge areas or lowering of water table? LS.
Although currently vacant sites would be converted to urban uses, this impact has been
addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Impact 3.5) and Mitigation Measures 3.5/49.0 and
ff---, 50.0, so no further analysis is reqUired.
City of Dublin Page 42
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-O37
c) Substantially alter drainage patterns, including streambed courses such that substantial
siltation or erosion wouM occur? LS. The Eastern Dublin EIR acknowledges that
implementation of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan would change existing natural drainage
patterns. PropOsed changes would include grading and re-contouring much of the site and
filling existing intermittent streams and the existing stock pond and replacing these with
underground pipes and culverts to accommodate storm water runoff, some of which
activity has already occurred with appropriate permits. Stormwater runoff would eventually
flow to the Alameda County Flood Control District and Water Conservation District G-3
facility immediately north of the 1-580 freeway. Two areas where natural drainage is
proposed to be recreated are a revegtated stream/open space corridor on the west side of
Grafton Street adjacent to the middle school site and an extension of the existing stream
corridor on the west side of Fallen Road.
Based on preliminary hydrological information for the Project Area prepared by the
applicant's engineer, adequate downstream facilities currently exist or will be constructed
to accommodate anticipated storm water runoff from the fully improved Project Area.
Approval of the proposed project and implementation of construction projects pursuant to
the amended Specific Plan/General Plan and other entitlements would increase stormwater
runoff from the site and, at the same time, increase erosion off of the site. The City of
Dublin requires individual project developers within the Project Area to prepare and
implement Stormwater Pollution Prevention Programs to control erosion from the site for
both construction and post construction periods. Approvals of such SWPPPs by the City of
Dublin and State Water Resources Control Board are required for individual developments
greater than one acre.
d) Substantially alter drainage patterns or result in flooding, either on or off the project site?
LS. Approval of the proposed project and construction of neW housing units and other
improvements would change drainage patterns within the Project Area. Existing natural
streams, swales and other surface drainage flows would be altered due to anticipated site
grading, some of which has already Occurred with appropriate permits. Drainage would be
routed through newly constructed underground pipes, culverts and similar facilities A
master drainage plan has been submitted by the applicant, indicating that storm drain
improvements would be constructed to connect with existing and planned drainage
improvements within the Eastern Dublin area.
e) Create stormwater runoff that would exceed the capacity of drainage systems or add
substantial amounts of polluted runoff?. LS. Construction of on-site improvements, as well
as new improvements upstream of the Project Area, is anticipated to lead to greater
quantities of storm water runoff. As noted in the 2000 MND, standard City of Dublin
development conditions of approval require erosion control plans and preparation of a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
f) Substantially degrade water quality? LS. Refer to the analysis under "a," ~bove.
g) Place housing within a lO0-year flood hazard area as mapped by a Flood Insurance Rate
Map? NI. None of the Project Area is located within a 100-year flood plan as mapped by
FEMA and no new dwellings would be located in a flood hazard area. There would
therefore be no impact in regard to flooding hazards.
City of Dublin Page 4:3
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
h, i) Place within a lO0-year flood hazard boundary structures that impeded or redirect flood
flow, including dam failures? NI. As noted in the response to "g," above, none of the
Project Area is located within a flood hazard area as defined by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency. Proposed drainage on and off the project site would transport
stormwater runoff into approved City or regional drainage facilities for apPropriate
disposal, so there would be no impact with regard to anticipated drainage facilities.. No
impact is anticipated related to dam or levee break, since the existing stock pond within the
Project Area has been removed as noted above.
j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflows? LS. The site is not located near a
major body of water that could result in a seiche. The risk of potential mudflow is
considered low based on the Berlogar Geotechnical report. Mitigation Measures adopted
as part of the Eastern Dublin EIR will reduce potential impacts of natural and engineered
slope stability, and erosion and sedimentation impacts to a level of less-than-significance.
These mitigation measure include MM's 3.6/17-28. Briefly, these mitigation measures
require site-specific geotechnical analyses of each proposed development, appropriate
siting of new construction, use of appropriate engineered fill with proper compaction and
limiting the slope of grading.
Overall, no impacts to hydrology and water quality not previously identified in the Eastern
Dublin EIR, the 1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are
expeCted to occur as a result of this Project.
9. Land Use and Planning
Environmental Setting
The Project proposes to reorient some uses and improvements on the Project site; however, the
nature and extent of development will not substantially change. Density overall is proposed at
lower levels than existing approvals, and no new development areas are proposed compared to
those assumed in prior reviews.
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified the following impacts with regard to land use as appliCable to
this Project:
· IM 3. l/A: Substantial alteration to existing land use, which was identified as a less-than-
significant impact.
· IM 3. I/B: On-site land use impacts, which was identified as a less-than-significant
impact.
The 1997 Negative Declaration fOr Planning Areas B-E and the 2000 MND for PA F did not
identify new or supplemental impacts or mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR
related to land use.
City of Dublin Page 44
I.nitial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Physically divide an established community? NI. The project is vacant and has been ~
planned for uses similar to the Project since the original adoption of the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan/General Plan in 1993. Therefore there would be no disruption of any
establiShed community.
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation? LS. The proposed project
would be consistent with goals and policies contained in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/
General Plan. The extent of the proposed amendment includes relocating various land uses
within the Project Area to respond to changed real estate market conditions, land use
revisions requested by the City to create additional public/semi-public sites and DUSD
school site selection requirements for the middle school.
The proposed land use changes to the Project Area would result in a decrease of
approximately 136 dwellings over the Amendment Area.
c) Conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? NI. No
such plan has been adopted within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan area.
There would therefore be no impact to a habitat conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan for the Project Area.
Overall,' no impacts to land use and planning not previously identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR,
the 1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E or the 2000 MND for PA F are expected to occur as
a result of this Project.
10. Mineral Resources '~
Environmental Setting
The Project area contains no known mineral resources.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a, b) Result in the loss of availability of regionally or locally significant mineral resources? NI.
The Eastern Dublin EIR does not indicate that significant deposits of minerals exist on the
site, so no impacts would occur.
Overall, no impacts to mineral resources not previously identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the
1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are expected to occur as a
result of this Project.
11. Noise
Environmental Setting
Major sources of noise on and adjacent to the project site include distant noise generated by
vehicles passing through the Eastern Dublin Planning Area on 1-580, traffic sources on Tassajara
Road and from aircraft flyovers
Based on Figure 3.10 B contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, minor portions of Planning Area F
would be subject to significant long-term noise exposure, defined as 60 decibels CNEL for
City of Dublin Page 45
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
exterior noise.. As noted in the 1997 ND, proposed housing along Fallon Road, Central
Parkway and Gleason Road could also be affected. Since major noise sources are from both
Tassajara Road and 1-580, construction of permanent buildings and sound walls in adjacent
planning areas would reduce exterior noise levels to 60 decibels CNEL or less at the southerly
and westerly boundary of the Project Area.
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified the following impacts with regard to noise as applicable to
this Project:
· IM 3.10/A: Exposure of proposed housing to future roadway noise, which was identified
as a potentially significant impact.
· IM 3.10/C: Exposure of existing and proposed development to airport noise, which would
be a less-than-significant impact.
· IM 3.10/E: Exposure of existing and proposed residences to construction noise, which
would be a potentially significant impact.
· IM 3.10/F: Noise conflicts due to adjacency of diverse land uses permitted by Specific
Plan policies, which would be a potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures 3.10/1.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, and 6.0 were adopted to reduce noise impacts to a
less-than-significant level, primarily through project specific acoustical analysis to reduce indoor
residential noise exposure to 45dB.
The 1997 Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E and the 2000 MND prepared for Dublin
Ranch PA. F did not identify new'or supplemental impacts or mitigation measures from the
Eastern Dublin EIR related j;o noise.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a, d) Would the project expose persons or generation of noise levels in excess of standards
established by the General Plan or other applicable srandard: LS. Construction of future
individual development projects within the Project Area would result in short term noise
during construction of proposed dwellings, parks and other improvements outlined in the
proposal. Mitigation Measures 3.10/4.0 and 5.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR
require individual project builders to prepare construction noise management plans to
minimize noise as well as adhere to construction hour limitations.
Mitigation Measures 3.10/1.0-3.0 require that individual acoustical analysis be prepared as
part of individual residential subdivisions and mixed use projects within a 60 decibel or
greater CNEL contour.
b, e-f) Exposure of peopIe to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? NI
No impacts are anticipated for groundborne vibration or noise, since no sources of
vibration currently exist within or adjacent to the Project Area, such as heavy industrial
facilities or railroads.
City of Dublin Page 46
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-O37
c) Substantial permanent increases in permanent in ambient noise levels? LS. The Eastern
Dublin EIR addressed exposure of proposed housing to future roadway and construction
noise and adopted related mitigation measures. The EIR also discussed ambient noise
increases for existing housing due to future roadway noise. No housing exists on the
Project site that would be affect by increased ambient noise. Housing in the general area is
newer housing built pursuant to prior Dublin Ranch approvals
Overall, no impacts to noise not previously identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the 1997
Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are expected to occur as a result
of this Project.
12. Population and Housing
Environmental Setting
The State Department of Finance has determined that Dublin's population was 35,500 as of
January 1, 2003.
The adopted Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan anticipates an ultimate population of
12,458 dwelling units in the Eastern Dublin planning area at full buildout of all land uses within
the Planning Area. The Project is within the area planned for development.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly? LS. The
Project proposes to reorient land uses, but is substantially consistent with the existing,
approved Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan. The proposed amendment to the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan would redesignate a portion of the
neighborhood east of Grafton (F2) from medium density residential to Iow density
residential to be consistent with the current low density residential designated portiOn to the
west. The neighborhood west of Grafton (Fl) is to be redesignated from low density to
medium density residential. Based upon an average person-per-household occupancy of 2.0
persons per dwelling for Medium Density Residential and 3.2 persons per dwelling for
Low Density Residential, approval and implementation of the amendment would result in
an ultimate total Project Area population of 2,725 persons at project buildout. This
population number is less than the population buildout the same area under the existing
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan which was anticipated to have a total poPulation of 2,961
persons.
b, c) WouM the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing units or people? NI.
The site is vacant. Implementation of the proposed project would therefore displace neither
housing units or people.
Overall, no impacts to population or housing resources not previously identified in the Eastern
Dublin EIR, the 1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are
expected to occur as a result of this Project.
13. Public Services
Environmental Setting
City of Dublin Page 47
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
· Fire Protection. Fire protection services are handled by the Alameda County Fire
Department, which contracts with the City of Dublin for fire suppression, fire
prevention, education, inspection services and hazardous material control to the
community.
· Police Protection: Police and security protection is provided by Alameda County
Sheriff Department, which contracts to the City of Dublin for 24-hour security
patrols throughout the community in addition to crime prevention, crime
suppression and traffic safety.
· Schools. The Dublin Unified School District (DUSD) provides educational services
to the City of Dublin.
· Maintenance. Maintenance of streets, roads and other governmental facilities are the
responsibility of the City of Dublin Public Works Department.
· Solid Waste Service: Livermore Dublin Disposal Company.
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified the following impacts with regard to public services as
applicable to this Project: IM 3.4/A (demand for increased police services), IM 3.4/B (police
service accessibility), IM 3.4/C (demand for increased fire services), IM 3.4/E (exposure to
wildland fire), IM 3.4/F (demand for new classroom space), IM 3.4/G (demand for junior high
schools), IM 3.4/H (overcrowding of schools), IM 3.4/0 (increased solid waste production), and
IM 3.4/P (impact on solid waste disposal facilities). All of the above were identified as
potentially significant impacts.
EIR Mitigation Measures were adopted to reduce public service impacts to a less-than-significant
level.
The 1997 Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E and the 2000 MND prepared for Dublin
Ranch PA F did not identify new or supplemental impacts or mitigation measures from the
Eastern Dublin EIR related to public services.
Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Fire protection? LS. Construction of the proposed project would increase demand for fire
and emergency services by increasing the amount of permanent population on the site.
This impact was previously addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the 1997 ND and the
2000 MND. Features which would be incorporated into specific subdivisions as part of
existing City ordinances and development requirements and to assist in reducing impacts
would require installation of on-site fire protection measures such as fire sprinklers,
installation of new fire hydrants and meeting minimum fire flow requirements contained in
the Uniform Building Code and Uniform Fire Code.
Developers within the Project Area must also adhere to Mitigation Measures 3.4/6.0-13.0
contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR. These mitigation measures relate to funding new fire
facilities in eastern Dublin, ensuring adequate water supplies and pressure for fire
suppression, and minimizing wildland fire hazards.
City of Dublin Page 48
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
b) Police protection? LS. Incremental increases in the demand for police service could be
expected should the Project be approved and future development constructed. Impacts
would generally include increases in home burglary and theft.
Project developers would also be required to adhere to Mitigation Measures 3.4/1.0-5.0 set
forth in Eastern Dublin EIR. These measures deal with establishing funding mechanisms
for additional police personnel and facilities and require the inclusion of security provisions
into individual development projects.
c) Schools? LS. Approval of the proposed the Project and construction of individual
residential development projects would increase demand for school facilities. The Eastern
Dublin EIR requires project developers to adhere to Mitigation Measures 3.4/13.0-19.0.
Since the approval of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan, the property owners
of the Dublin Ranch have entered into a mitigation agreement with the Dublin Unified
School District to ensure that full mitigation is provided for new development occurring
within Dublin Ranch.
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? LS. Approval of the project and
construction of follow-on development projects would incrementally increase the long-term
maintenance demand for rOads and other public facilities. However, such additional
maintenance demands will be offset by additional City fees and property tax revenues
accruing to the City of Dublin.
e) Solid waste generation? LS. Approval of the project and construction of individual
development projects under the auspices of an amended Specific Plan/General Plan would
incrementally increase generation of solid waste. The Eastern Dublin EIR requires
adherence to MitigatiOn Measures 3.4/37.0-40.0. These measures require the preparation of
a solid waste management plan and assurances that adequate solid waste landfill capacity
exists prior to approval of individual development projects.
Overall, no impacts to provision of public services not previously identified in the Eastern
Dublin EIR, the 1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are
expected to occur as a result of this Project.
14. Recreation
Environmental Setting
The Project Area is currently vacant and contains no parks or other recreational amenities.
Nearby community and regional parks include: Emerald Glen Park, a 50-acre City park being
developed by the City of Dublin in Eastern Dublin and two community parks slated for
development within the Dublin Ranch deveiopment one of which is in the Area B portion of the
Amendment Area. The combined area of the two community parks is 126 acres. Each of these
parks would allow for organized sports activities, individual sports as well as passive recreation.
The East Bay Regional Parks District has developed a staging area on the west side of Tassajara
Road as part of a regional recreational trail system.
City of Dublin Page 49
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified the following impacts with regard to recreation facilities as
applicable to this Project:
· IM 3.4/K: Increased demand for park facilities, which would be a potentially significant
impact.
· IM 3.4/L: Park facilities fiscal impact, which would be a potentially significant impact.
· IM 3.4/M: Impact on regional trail system, which would be a potentially significant
impact.
· IM 3 ~4/N: Impact on open space connectors, which would be a potentially significant
impact.
Mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR were adopted to reduce all of the
above impacts to a less-than-significant level.
The 1997 Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E and the 2000 MND prepared for Dublin
Ranch PA F did not identify new or supplemental impacts or mitigation measures from the
Eastern Dublin EIR related to recreational facilities.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) WouM the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks? LS. The
~.. proposed development would cause an increase in demand for neighborhood, community
~i~' and regional park facilities due to an increase in the number of people within the Project
Area. As part of the entire Dublin Ranch project, the developer has provided one 60-acre
i~~ (net) community park facility, including active play fields as well as passive nature parks.
':~' Residents of the Project Area could be expected to use these community and regional
facilities.
For potential impacts to neighborhood parks, see the response to "b," below.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of recreational
facilities? LS. Based on an estimated total population of 2,725 for the Project Area (see
Section 11, Population), and with a standard requirement of 5.0 acres of park land per 1,000
residents (1.5 acres for neighborhood parks and 3.5 acres for community parks), there would
be a need for 4.1 acres of neighborhood parks and 9.5 acres of community parks within the
Project Area. The proposed Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment makes provision for
both a 5.6-acre neighborhood park and a 2.0-acre neighborhood square. Totaling 7.6 acres,
construction of both the park and square would be consistent with the City neighborhood
park requirement. A 60-acre (net) community park site is proposed within the Project Area,
which would exceed the community park requirement.
Overall, no impacts to provision of recreational facilities or services not previously identified in
the Eastern Dublin EIR, the 1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F
are expected to occur as a result of this Project.
City of Dublin Page 50
Initial Study/Dub in Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
15. Transportation/Traffic
(Refer to Letter regarding potential Project traffic and transportation impacts from TJKM
Transportation Consultants in the Appendix.)
~xisting Transportation Network
The project site is served by a number of regional freeways and sub-r~egional arterial and
collector roadways, including:
Interstate 580, an eight-lane east-west freeway that connects Dublin with local cities such
as Livermore and Tracy to the east and Oakland, San Francisco and other cities to the
west. In the vicinity of the project, Interstate 580 carries between 169,000 and 187,000
vehicles per day. Interchanges near the project site include Dougherty/Hopyard Road,
Hacienda Drive, Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road and Fallon Road/E1 Charro Road.
Dougherty Road is a two-lane rural road with its northern section located in Contra Costa
County. Dougherty Road has four lanes between the Alameda County/Contra Costa
County border and Dublin Boulevard and six lanes between Dublin Boulevard and 1-580.
South of 1-580, it continues with six lanes as Hopyard Road in Pleasanton. Average Daily
Traffic is approximately 43,500 south of Dublin Boulevard.
Dublin Boulevard is a major east-west arterial roadway in the City of Dublin. It contains
four lanes largely fronted by retail and commercial uses west of Dougherty Road.
Between Dougherty Road and Tassajara Road, Dublin Boulevard is a two-lane road with
an exception between Hacienda Drive and Tassajara Creek, where it is a four-lane road.
Average Daily Traffic varies from .approximately 29,300 vehicles east of San Ramon
Road to 5,300 vehicles west of Tassajara Road.
Hacienda Drive is an arterial designed to provide access to 1-580. It contains six lanes
south of 1-580 and four lanes north of 1-580, extending as far north as Dublin Boulevard.
As part of the Santa Rita Business Center, Hacienda Drive is currently being extended
northward to Gleason Drive as a two-lane roadway. Between 1-580 and Dublin, the
existing vehicle count is approximately 11,300.
Arnold Road is a north-south two-lane road parallel to and west of Hacienda Drive. It
currently connects Gleason Drive and existing Dublin Boulevard (future Central
Parkway). This road is planned to be extended southward to Dublin Boulevard (ultimate
alignment. The existing average daily traffic flow on Arnold Drive is approximately
3,500 vehicles per day.
Gleason Drive is an east-west two-lane road parallel to and north of Dublin Boulevard. It
serves the Santa Rita Rehabilitation Center, Federal Correctional Institute and existing
developments along Gleason Drive. Gleason Drive connects Tassajara Road with Arnold
Road and carries between 5,100 vehicles per day (west of Tassajara Road) to
apProximately 1,000 vehicles per day (west of Hacienda Drive). Portions of Gleason
Drive are being widened to four lanes2
Tassajara Road is a two-lane rural road connecting Santa Rita Road at 1-580 to the south
and continues north to the Town of Danville. North of Contra Costa County line, it is
named Cameo Tassajara and is used primarily for local traffic in the Tassajara Valley,
City of Dublin Page 51
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
with some through traffic. The average daily traffic volume on Tassajara Road is
F"' approximately 9,990 vehicles per day between Dublin Boulevard and Gleason Drive, and
7,500 vehicles per day north of Gleason Drive.
Santa Rita Road is a six-lane divided urban arterial roadway from the 1-580 interchange
south to Valley Boulevard. It serves the east side of Pleasanton, including the Hacienda
Business Park and provides access to downtown Pleasanton.
Fallon Road is a two-lane rural road that terminates approximately 1.1 mile north of 1-
580. Fallon Road provides access to several parcels in the East Dublin area. Traffic
volumes on this road are relatively small.
The Boulevard is a private driveway providing access into Hacienda Crossings, a major
commercial development within Eastern Dublin.
Existing Interxection Operations
The traffic analysis prepared by TJKM found that existing intersections near the Project Area
currently operate at acceptable levels of service, defined by the City of Dublin as Level of
Service "D" or better. This analysis included counts of existing traffic at major intersections near
the proposed project as well as intersections throughout the Eastern Dublin area.
Future Baseline Conditions
To implement the transportation and circulation aspects of the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan/General Plan, the City of Dublin has undertaken a comprehensive program of transportation
improvements in the community. The purpose of this program ss to accommodate anticipated
traffic from the Eastern Dublin area. Overall, the program includes upgrades to 1-580. freeway
intersections, construction of new roads and improvements to existing roads. The program is
primarily funded by fees levied on new development in eastern Dublin.
A summary of major components of the Transportation Improvement Program [Mike, Jerry: I
don't recall hearing about this specific program, is this the same as the TIF program?] adopted
by the City is as follows. A full description of improvements is contained in the traffic analysis.
· Hacienda Drive extension
· Tassajara Road widening
· Dublin Boulevard widening
· Improvements to the following intersections, including adding additional travel lanes
and/or modifying existing lane geometrics: :Tassajara Road/Dublin Boulevard, Tassajara
Road/Central Parkway, Tassajara Road/Gleason Drive, Main Street/Central Parkway,
Main Street/Gleason Drive. Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard and Fallon Road/Gleason
Drive.
Future Baseline Intersection Operations
The traffic impact analysis for this proposed project also analyzed the future baseline intersection'
operations with existing traffic, traffic from approved but not yet built or occupied development
and traffic from other pending developments in the area. The traffic analysis included various
mitigation measures which would be the responsibility of these other developments and which
would be consistent with the City's Traffic Improvement Program, described above. With this
futUre development in the eastern Dublin area and appropriate traffic improvements, the traffic
City of Dublin Page 52
Initial Study/Dublin Flanch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
analysis found that the operation of all study intersections could be maintained at LOS "D" or
better.
Previous environmental documents
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified 16 potentially significant and potentially cumulative
significant impacts related to the development of the EDSP. These include impacts to nearby
freeways, local streets, transit service and similar transportation facilities. Although many of
these impacts could be reduced to level of less-than-significance, a Statement of Overriding
Consideration was adopted for the following impacts:
· IM 3.3/B: Impacts to mainline 1-580 and 1-680 freeways
· IM 3.3/E; Cumulative Freeway impacts
· IM 3.3/I: Santa Rita & 1-580 Eastbound freeway ramps
· IM 3.3/M: Cumulative Impacts on Dublin Boulevard
The 1997 Mitigated Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E did not identify new or
supplemental impacts or mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR related to
transportation.
The 2000 MND prepared for Dublin Ranch PA F identified a number of new or supplemental
impacts and mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR related to transportation.
Supplemental Mitigation Measures 7 and 8 set forth in the MND would still apply to the
proposed Project.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures ~i~
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial to existing traffic load and street capacity?
LS. The traffic analyses for Planning Areas F, B and concluded that potentially significant
impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level other than the four unavoidable
impacts noted above.
With the traffic improvements and mitigation measures associated with future approved
and pending developments, all study intersections would operate at satisfactory LOS "D"
or better conditions. However, with the additional trips generated by the development
proposed in the Project Area, potentially significant impacts would occur at the following
intersections:
· Iron Horse Pkwy./Dublin Blvd.: LOS "E," PM peak;
· Dougherty Rd./Dublin Blvd.: LOS "F," AM and PM peak;
· Hacienda Dr./The Boulevard: LOS "F," PM peak;
· Tassajara Rd/I-580 WB ramps: LOS "E," PM peak
Adherence to Supplemental Mitigation Measure 7 and 8 contained in the Planning Area F
Mitigated Negative Declaration will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
In addition, the project traffic impact analysis found that A new Statement of Overriding
Consideration will be required if the proposed project is approved by the City of Dublin
full development of the three Planning Areas (F-H) under the auspices of an approved
General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan Amendment would potentially impact Tassajara ~
City of Dublin Page 53
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-O37
Road between 1-580 and Dublin Boulevard by exceeding the maximum capacity of this
roadway segment. The maximum capacity of the roadway segment is estimated to be
50,000 vehicles per day. Future volumes along this roadway link could generate between
50,450 to 55,900 vehicles per day, depending on construction of other roadway
1. Project description: Proposed Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/Dublin General
Plan Amendment for portions of Dublin Ranch Planning
Areas B, E and F, consideration of a PD rezoning and Stage
1 and Stage 2 Development Plans, Master Vesting
Tentative Map, Individual Vesting Tentative Maps and Site
Development Review application for 285.4-acre site within
Dublin Ranch master planned community.
2. Lead agency: City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin CA 94588
3. Contact person: Mike Porto, Dublin Planning Department
(925) 833-6610
4. Project location: North of Interstate 580 and east of Tassajara Road
5. Project sponsor: James Tong
Authorized Representative
4690 Chabot Drive, Suite 100
Pleasanton, CA 94566
~"-- 6. General Plan designations: Existing: Low Density Residential, Medium Density
Residential, Public/Semi-Public, Community Park,
Neighborhood Park, Neighborhood Square, Open Space,
· Elementary School, Middle School, High School
7. Zoning: PD-Single Family Residential, PD-Medium Density
Residential, PD-Middle School, PD- Neighborhood Park,
PD-Neighborhood Square, PD-Open Space, and PD-Public
and SemizPublic
8. Other public agency required approvals:
Tentative and Final Subdivision Maps (City of Dublin)
Site Development Review (City of Dublin)
Grading and Building permits (City of Dublin)
Sewer and water connections (DSRSD)
Encroachment permits (City of Dublin)
minimize potential hazards to pedestrians and bicyclists. These improvements will be
confirmed at the time each individual development project is reviewed by the City.
Individual project developers must also comply with Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation
Measure 3.3/16.1,.requiring pedestrian and bicycle paths cross arterial roadways at
signalized intersections. With construction of pedestrian and bicycle improvements,
impacts related to non-vehicular modes of transit would be reduced to a less-than-
significant level.
Overall, no impacts related to traffic and transportation not previously identified in the Eastern
Dublin EIR, the 1997 Negative Declaration or PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are expected
to occur as a result of this Project.
City of Dublin Page 55
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E ~ February 2004
PA 01 ~037
16. Utilities and Service Systems
Environmental Setting
The project site is served by the following service providers:
· Sewage treatment and local water supply: Dublin San Ramon Services District and
Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Zone 7.
· Water supply and distribution: Alameda County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District, Zone 7
° Storm drainage: city of Dublin/Alameda County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District, Zone 7.
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains 23 impacts related to provision of utilities to the Eastern
Dublin area. All were considered potentially significant impacts and mitigation measures were
included in the EIR to reduce these impacts to less-than-significant levels.
.The 1997 Negative Declaration for Planning Areas B-E and the 2000 MND for Planning Area F
did not identify new or supplemental impacts or mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin
EIR related to utilities.
Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB? LS. The regional wastewater
treatment plant is currently operating in compliance with local, state and federal water
quality standards. The addition of wastewater flows from the project would not cause the
plant to exceed such standards, based on discussions with DSRSD staff. Mitigation
measures 3.5/1.0 through 22.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR deal with wastewater
treatment collection, treatment and disposal.
b) Require new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities?
LS. Existing water and sewer lines would need to be extended into the Planning Area from
the east. Such extensions have been planned as part of the East Dublin Specific
Plan/General Plan and have been anatyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
c) Require new storm drainage facilities? LS. The project applicant has indicated that a new
· drainage system would be constructed as part of the Project Area construction. Adopted
mitigations will ensure that the proposed drainage system would accommodate Project
storm water runoff.
d) Are sufficient water supplies available? LS. Approval of the proposed project and
implementation of new residences and other uses under the auspices of the Specific
Plan/General Plan Amendment would result in an increased demand for water for domestic
and irrigation purposes. This amount of increased water demand could be accommodated
by DSRSD and Zone 7 facilities and long-term supplies. The project developer would be
required to provide any local extensions and connections to nearby facilities. This
Conclusion is based on information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Consistent with
Government Code section 65302.2, the DSRSD Eastern Dublin Facilities Master Plan has
been considered in preparation of this Initial Study.
City of Dublin Page 56
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
e) Adequate wastewater capacity to serve the proposed project? LS. Approval of the proposed
Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment and construction of new residences and other land
uses would increase the demand for wastewater treatment over present conditions.
Presently, the Planning Area site is vacant and there is no demand for wastewater treatment
service. Based on information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, DSRSD has indicated
that the local wastewater treatment plant has adequate capacity to serve the proposed
project.
f) Solid waste disposal? LS. Construction of proposed land uses in the Project Area under the
auspices of an approVed General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan Amendment would
incrementally increase generation of solid waste. Over the long term, the amount of solid
waste reaching landfill would decrease as statewide regulations mandating increased
recycling take effect. Information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR indicates that the
solid waste hauler can accommodate this project.
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? NI.
The City of Dublin and the solid waste hauler would ensure that developers of individual
projects constructed under the auspices of an amended Specific Plan and General Plan
would adhere to federal, state and local solid waste regulations.
Overall, no impacts related to utility provision not previously identified in the Eastern Dublin
EIR, the 1997 Negative Declaration for PAs B-E, or the 2000 MND for PA F are expected to
occur as a result of this Project.
XV. Mandatory Findings of Significance "
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wiMlife species, cause a fish or wiMlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the
number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No. The
preceding analysis indicates that the .proposed Project will not have a significant adverse
impact on overall environmental quality, including biological resources or cultural
resources with the implementation of mitigation measures recommended in the Initial
Study.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects and the effects of probable future projects): No, although incremental
and less-than-significant increases in certain areas can be expected as a result of
constructing this project, including additional traffic, air emissions, noise, light and glare,
the Project site lies within an area with an approved specific plan.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly? No. No such impacts have been discovered in
the course of preparing this Initial Study.
City of Dublin Page 57
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
Agencies and Organizations Consulted
The following agencies and organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial Study:
City of Dublin
Eddie Peabody Jr., AICP, Community Development Director
Mike Porto, Consulting Planner
Kathleen "Kit" Faubion, AICP, Assistant City Attorney
Jerry Haag, Consulting Planner
Applicant Planning a'nd Engineering Consultants
Dave Chadbourne, MacKay & Somps
References
Negative Declaration for Dublin Ranch Planning Areas B-E, City of Dublin, 1997
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Dublin Ranch Planning Area F, City of Dublin,
1999
Dublin Ranch Areas F, G and H Ecological Impacts and Mitigation, H.T. Harvey &
Associates, 1999
..... Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Environmental Impact Report, Wallace
Roberts and Todd, 1994.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Areas F-H, TJKM Associates, 2001.
Assessment of a Possible Archeological Resource within Dublin Ranch Areas F-H,
Dublin CA, Holman & Associates, 1999
City of Dublin Page 58
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
Appendix
City of Dublin Page 59
Initial Study/Dublin Ranch Areas B/F/E February 2004
PA 01-037
EXHIBIT C
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1. General. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the City Council of
the City of Dublin adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for those
impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR as significant and unavoidable.
(Resolution 53-93, May 10, 1993.) The City Council carefully considered each
impact in its decision to approve urbanization of Eastern Dublin through approval
of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan project. The
City Council later approved land use applications for Dublin Ranch, including
Dublin Ranch Areas F, B and E. The City Council is cUrrently considering the
Area F North project in Dublin Ranch. The project includes portions of Areas F,
B, and E, and proposes residential, school, public/semi-public, and community
park uses, generally consistent with prior approvals. The project area consists of
approximately 285 acres, identified in the applications as the Amendment Area.
The project proposes to reconfigure the uses in the Amendment Area, resulting
in increased acreage for the Community Park, and reducing the overall number
of residences. Approximately 88.5 acres of the Amendment Area is identified as
the Development Area, for which permit level approvals are requested.
Consistent with the prior approvals, the applicant obtained a Section 404 permit
from the Corps of Engineers and has completed grading of the Development
Area pursuant to the Corps permit.
The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with the
original land use approvals for urbanization of Eastern Dublin. Pursuant to a
recent court decision, the City Council hereby adopts specific overriding
considerations for the Area F North project. 1 The City Council believes that
many of the unavoidable environmental effects identified in the Eastern Dublin
EIR that are applicable to the Area F North site will be sUbstantially lessened by
mitigation measures adopted with the original approval and by the environmental
protection measures adopted through the Area F, B and E project approvals, and
the related Conditions of Approval, to be implemented with the development of
the project. Even with mitigation, the City Council recognizes that the
implementation of the project carries with it unavoidable adverse environmental
effects as identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The City Council specifically finds
that to the extent that the identified adverse or potentially adverse impacts for the
Area F North project have not been mitigated to acceptable levels, there are
specific economic, social, environmental, land use, and other considerations that
support approval of the project.
1 ,,...public officials must still go on the record and explain specifical'ly why they are approving the
later project despite its significant unavoidable impacts." (emphasis original.) Communities for a
Better Environment v. California Resources Agency 103 Cai.App. 4th 98, __ (2002).
ATTACHMENT/
2. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts. The following unavoidable
significant environmental impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin Eli=, for future
development of Eastern Dublin apply to the Area F North project:
Land Use Impact 3.1/F. Cumulative Loss of Agricultural and Open Space Lands;
Visual Impacts 3.8/B; and, Alteration of Rural/Open Space Character. Although
considerable development has occurred throughout Dublin Ranch, and a
substantial amount of the project site will be maintained as a community park,
much of the site is presently undeveloped land, and has some open space
character. Future development of the Area F North site will contribute to the
cumulative loss of open space land.
Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.3/B, 3.3/E. 1-580 Freeway, Cumulative Freeway
Impacts: The Traffic Study prepared for the Area F North project and the Dublin
Transit Center Eli=, update cumulative impacts to the 1-580 and 1-680 freeways
from development in Eastern Dublin. While city street and interchange impacts
can be mitigated through planned improvements, transportation demand
management, the 1-580 Smart Corridor program, and the extension of Fallon
Road to Tassajara Road and other similar measures, mainline freeway impacts
continue to be identified as unavoidable, as anticipated in the Eastern Dublin
Eli=,. Future development on the Area F North site will incrementally contribute to
the unavoidable freeway impacts.
Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.3/I, 3.3/M. Santa Rita Road/I-580 Ramps,
Cumulative Dublin Boulevard Impacts: The Area F North project will be required
to implement all applicable adopted traffic mitigation measures, including
contributions to the City's TIF program; however even with mitigation these
impacts continue to be identified as unavoidable, as anticipated in the Eastern
Dublin Ell=,.
Community Services and Facilities Impact 3.4/S. Consumption of Non-
Renewable Natural Resources and Sewer, Water; and Storm Drainage Impact
3.5/F, H, U. Increases in Energy Usage Through Increased Water Treatment,
Disposal and Operation of Water Distribution System: Future development of the
Area F North project will contribute to increased energy consumption.
Soils, Geology, and Seismicity Impact 3.6/B. Earthquake Ground Shaking,
Primary Effects: Even with seismic design, future development of the Area F
North project could be subject to damage from large earthquakes, much like the
rest of the Eastern Dublin planning area.
Air Quality Impacts 3.11/A, B, C, and E: Future development of the Area F North
project will contribute to cumulative dust deposition, construction equipment
emissions, mobile and stationary source emissions.
3. Overriding Considerations. The City Council previously balanced the
benefits of the Eastern Dublin project approvals against the significant and
682986-1 2
potentially significant adverse impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The
City Council now balances those unavoidable impacts that apply to future
development on the Area F North site against its benefits, and hereby determines
that such unavoidable impacts are outweighed by the benefits of the Area F
North project as further set forth below.
The project will further the urbanization of Eastern Dublin as planned through the
comprehensive framework established in the original Eastern Dublin approvals.
Future development would provide planned housing as well as a 65 acre
Community Park and land for Public/Semi Public uses. The project provides the
potential for approximately 1,290 dwelling units at Iow and medium densities, as
well as construction jobs, in an area convenient to major transit facilities, schools,
and proposed parks. Area F North is also convenient to existing and future
housing in Dublin, will provide affordable housing through the Fairway Ranch
project, and could substantially increase property tax revenues.
Mydocuments\areaFnorth.soc.030204
Imanage: 682986
682986-1 3