Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 096-89 DonlanCany EIRRESOLUTION NO. 096 - 89 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AND CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, FOR PA 87-012 DONLAN CANYON GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held five public hearings on PA 87-012 Donlan Canyon General Plan Amendment and EIR on May 1 and 15, 1989, June 19, 1989, July 5, 1989, and July 17, 1989; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State CEQA guidelines, require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on the project has been prepared pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA guidelines; and WHEREAS, on July 17, 1989, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 89-042 recommending City Council certification of the Donlan Canyon EIR (PA 87~012) as complete and adequate; and WHEREAS, on August 14, 1989, the City Council held a public hearing to consider Donlan Canyon EIR (PA 87-012) and General Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the written and oral testimony submitted at the public hearings; and WHEREAS, the City Council received and reviewed the Staff analysis and recommendation and the Planning Commission recommendation on the environmental effects of Donlan Canyon General Plan Amendment (PA 87-012); and WHEREAS, the Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR dated March 24, 1989 and Final EIR Responses toComments on the Draft EIR dated June 15, 1989, which documents are incorporated herein by this reference. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby find as follows: The City Council has reviewed and considered the Final EIR and hereby finds and certifies that the Final EIR has been completed in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and the State EIR guidelines. The City Council hereby finds that there are significant adverse impacts which can be mitigated, avoided, or substantially lessened by changes or alterations required in or incorporated into the project, as follows: -1- The General Plan Amendment would allow certain growth and land use changes and intensification in the project area. However, changes and intensification must be consistent with and conform with the land use designations and policies of the City's existing General Plan and the General P.lanAmen~Lments. Project construction could impact oak/bay woodland vegetation on site. However, mitigation measures will be incorporated into the development phase of the project which will reduce these impacts. Mitigation will include: i. Temporary fencing shall be provided during construction for those areas not to be graded. ii. Detailed tree survey/horticultural report, tree preservation study and tree replacement plan and revegetation plan shall be undertaken and recommendations implemented. iii. Grading study shall try to save as many trees as possible. Trees with trunk diameter greater than 6 inches shall be replaced with similar native species on a 3 to 1 basis. iv. Oak woodlands located within the proposed low density single family residential area shall be preserved as open space. PD Prozoning regulations and CC&R's shall restrict development, prohibit grading and prohibit tree removal. Project construction would disturb riparian habitat areas. However, impacts will be minimized in that the following mitigation will be implemented with project development: A new riparian habitat corridor as approved by the California Department of Fish & Game shall be created with minimum 20 to 40 feet width. ii. Revegetation with native species shall be undertaken within riparian habitat and graded areas. Project construction could impact wildlife with culverting the lower portion of Donlan Creek through proposed Lot 1 and removal of riparian and oak woodlands will reduce wildlife habitats and reduce availability of water for wildlife. However, the following mitigation will reduce this impact: i. Disturbed areas shall be revegetated. ii. An additional length of new habitat shall be established on the west side of Lot 1. Project construction could impact visual quality. However, the following mitigation will reduce this impact: i. Site specific visual impact study shall be undertaken and recommendation implemented. -2- ii. A visual berm shall be incorporated to effectively screen views of single family area from 1-580. iii. Mature trees shall be planted along visual berm to screen single-family residential and water tanks. iv. PD Prezoning regulations shall restrict development within areas of high visual constraints. Project construction could impact soils and geology conditions resulting in react,vat,on or initiation of slope instability with grading activities, landscaping and related irrigation associated with the proposed development. However, the following mitigation will reduce this impact: Project specific grading plans, detailed geotechnical reports and soils engineer recommendations concerning slides and other soils and geologic conditions shall be reviewed and implemented at the subdivision stage of the planning process. ii. All construction shall comply with Uniform Building Gode. Project construction could increase flooding potential· However, the following mitigation minimize the impact to an insignificant level: i. A maintenance program for the culvert and upstream open creek shall be established. ii. A detention basin and on-site upstream, from the 1-580 culvert shall be constructed. iii. Erosion and sediment control measures shall be implemented during construction. Project construction could increase fire risk. However, the impacts will be reduced by the following mitigation: The project development will incorporate mitigation measures. DRFA (Fire Department) requirements including non-combustible roofs, automatic fire suppression system. ii. Payment of fire impact fee as contribution to fund construction of future fire station. Project construction could result in noise impacts· However, the following mitigation will reduce the impacts to an insignificant level: i. The proposed multi-family development shall comply to Title 25 requirements relating to noise insulation. ii. Construction work activities shall be limited to weekday daylight hours. -3- Project development when combined with the cumulative impacts of other projects have the potential for decrease in the level of service (LOS) at Dublin Boulevard/San Ramon Road to LOS F and will impact the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Silvergate drive. However, implementation of mitigation to widen the eastbound intersection to have two right turn lanes, two left turn lanes and two through lanes will minimize the potential impact and reduce LOS to an acceptable level. In addition, mitigation to rodesign the Dublin Boulevard and Silvergate Drive intersection and to widen Dublin Boulevard will minimize the impacts. The City Council hereby finds that there are identified insignificant impacts, as follows: Development within the project site could impact parks, recreation, telephone, gas, electric and other utilities. However, the potential impacts are considered insignificant in that project specific mitigation will be established and implemented at subsequent levels of review. Additionally, costs for utilities will be borne by the developer and homeowner. Development in the project site would generate an increase in demand for water and sewer services. However, the capacity of the facilities are anticipated to be adequate to accommodate the increased demand so as to render the potential impacts insignificant. Development within the project site will generate an increase in school enrollment and a corresponding increase in school operating costs. However, the potential impact is considered insignificant in that the student increase is considered within the facilities capacity and State law allows school districts to impose development impact fees. Development of the project site will result in an insignificant impact to historic and archaeological resources in that there are no known historic or archaeological resources on the site. Additionally, mitigation will be implemented during the construction stage of development requiring construction activity to stop and retention of a qualified archaeologist to examine the site if archaeological material is encountered during the project construction· The City Council hereby finds that six (6) alternatives, as more fully set forth in the Final EIR, were considered and are found to be infeasible, for specific economic, social or other considerations, as follows: Alternative #1 - No Project The "no project" alternative assumes that the site would remain in open space, allowing one dwelling unit on the site. The "no project" alternative fails to provide needed housing, along with the associated increase in property tax revenues, and is thus considered infeasible. -4- Alternative #2 - Mitigation Alternative This alternative assumes 171 acres of proposed open space. Single family lots would be reduced to 6 due to visual constraints. Multi-family would remain as proposed. Public service impacts would be slightly reduced. There would be a small reduction in traffic flow on proposed Hanson Hill Ranch site. This alternative is infeasible in that it would not meet the housing needs or associated tax revenue. Alternative #3 - Neighborhood Context This alternative assumes restrictions to development according to lot size, slope and biotic resources. The proposed 171 acres of open space would be eliminated as the entire 197 acre site would be open for development consideration. Only single family would be considered with a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Allowable density would be 3.3 to 3.5 du/acre. Development would be scattered throughout the site on approximately 60 acres considered developable. Traffic generated would be less. There would be a decrease in continguous wildlife habitat, a decrease in visual quality. This alternative is infeasible in that it would not provide an adequate number of housing units and the associated increase in the property tax revenues. Alternative #4 - Single Family Low Density This alternative assumes single family development over the entire 197 acre site. Density range would be .5 to 2.8 DU/acre. The 171 acres of open space would be eliminated. Developable acreage would be similar to Alternative 3. Total number of units would range from 30 to 168. Impacts would be similar to neighborhood context alternative with exception of a decrease in visual impact due to reduction in number of units. This alternative is infeasible in that it would not meet housing needs or associated tax revenue. Alternative #5 - Medium Low Density Mutli-Family This alternative assumes multi-family on the site. A density of 6.1 to 8.0 DU/acre on 16 acres would be allowed resulting in 98 to 128 units. This alternative would result in slight decreases in traffic flow, noise, required public services. This alternative is infeasible in that it would not meet the housing needs or associated tax revenue. Alternative #6 Medium Density Multi-Family This alternative assumes 6.1 to 14 DU/Acre on 16 acres with a unit yield of 98 to 224. Single family development would not be considered. Impacts would be similar to Alternative #5. This alternative is infeasible in that it would not meet the housing needs or property tax revenues. -5- BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE City Council does hereby certify that the Final EIR for General Plan Amendment PA 87-012 Donlan Canyon is complete and adequate with the mitigation measures, stipulations and corrections, and directs that the mitigation measures set forth in the Final EIR be incorporated in the implementation of the General Plan, as amended. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of August, 1989. AYES: Councilmembers Jeffrey, Snyder, Vonheeder and Mayor Moffatt NOES: ABSENT: Councilmember Hegarty None ~~~ Mayor City Clerk -6-