HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.3 PA 84-009 Blancarte Rezoning �6 —act
CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 23 , 1984
SUBJECT: PA 84-009 , Blancarte Rezoning, A
Proposal to Rezone a Parcel located at
7900 Dublin Boulevard from a Highway
Frontage District (H-1 ) to a Retail
Business District (C-1) .
EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1 ) Exhibit A: Resolution adopting a
Negative Declaration.
2 ) Exhibit B: Resolution approving the
rezoning .
3 ) Exhibit C : Ordinance Amending
Zoning Ordinance.
4 ) Planning Commission Staff Report of
April 2, 1984 , with background
attachments .
RECOMMENDATION: 1 . Hear Staff presentation.
2 . Open Public Hearing.
3 . Take testimony from applicant and
public .
4 . Close Public Hearing.
5 . Adopt resolution regarding Negative
Declaration.
6 . Adopt resolution regarding rezoning.
7 . Waive reading and introduce
ordinance amending Zoning Ordinance .
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None .
DESCRIPTION: I . BACKGROUND
Mark Blancarte, representing Retail
Property Development, is proposing to rezone an
approximately 40 , 000 sq. ft . parcel located at the southwest
corner of Dublin Boulevard and Regional Street from H-1
(Highway Frontage) to C-1 (Retail Business) . The purpose of
the rezoning is to facilitate the development of a small
retail building which is presently not permitted under the
H-1 zoning classification .
The general intent of the H-1 District
is to provide areas limited to highway-oriented businesses .
The C-1 District is intended to provide areas for comparison
retail shopping and office uses .
The surrounding uses are retail or
office in nature and are zoned C-1 . The proposed General
Plan designates the property for retail and office uses .
The major issue associated with the
rezoning request relates to the Dublin Boulevard Traffic
Study, which calls for an additional 12 feet of street
frontage for a right-turn lane . The applicant should be
aware that the necessary dedication and improvements to this
vehicular lane could become a condition of approval during
the Site Development Review process .
------------------------------------------------------------------
ITEM NO. COPIES TO: Mark Blancarte
II . RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council :
1 . Adopt the Negative Declaration
2 . Approve the rezoning
3 . Waive the reading and introduce the
ordinance amending the Zoning
Ordinance .
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CONCERNING PA 84-009 BLANCARTE REZONING
WHEREAS, Mark Blancarte submitted a planning
application to rezone a parcel , located at 7900 Dublin Blvd, from
H-1 (Highway Frontage) to C-1 (Retail Commercial) ; and,
WHEREAS, The California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) , as amended together with the State ' s administrative
guidelines for implementation of the California Environmental
Quality Act and City environmental regulations, requires that
certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact, and that
environmental documents be prepared; and,
WHEREAS, public notice of the decision to prepare a
Negative Declaration was given in all respects as required by law;
and,
WHEREAS, Staff has completed an Initial Study which
indicated that the proposed rezoning would not have a significant
effect on the environment; and,
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration has been prepared by
the Dublin Planning Department; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review, and
recommend that the Negative Declaration be adopted at a public
hearing on April 2 , 1984 ; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did review the Negative
Declaration and considered it at a public hearing on April 23 ,
1984 .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City
Council does hereby find that the Negative Declaration has been
prepared and processed in accordance with State and local
environmental law and guideline regulations, and that it is
adequate and complete . Therefore, the City Council hereby adopts
the Negative Declaration.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this th day of
1984 .
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT:
Mayor.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
DP 83-20
EXHIBIT B
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
-----------------------------------------------------------------
APPROVING A REZONING CONCERNING
PA 84-009 BLANCARTE REZONING
WHEREAS, Mark Blancarte filed an application to rezone
a parcel , located at 7900 Dublin Blvd. , from H-1 (Highway
Frontage ) to C-1 (Retail Commercial ) ; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the City of Dublin
is in the process of preparing and adopting a general plan, and
that there is a reasonable probability that the proposed rezoning
will be consistent with the future general plan; and,
WHEREAS, there is little or no probability that the
rezoning will be a detriment to, or interfere with the future
general plan, should the new zoning ultimately be inconsistent
with the future general plan; and,
WHEREAS, the rezoning will not have a significant
environmental impact; and,
WHEREAS, the rezoning is appropriate for the subject
properties , in terms of being compatible to existing and permitted
land uses, transportation, and service facilities ; and,
WHEREAS, the rezoning will not have substantial adverse
effects on health or safety, or be substantially detrimental to
the public welfare, or be injurious to property or public
improvements ; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a public hearing on
April 2 , 1984 , has recommended that the City Council adopt a
Negative Declaration for this rezoning and that the rezoning be
approved; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did review and consider the
staff report at a public hearing on April 23, 1984 ;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City
Council does hereby approve the rezoning request .
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this th day of
1984 .
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
DP 83-20
EXHIBIT C
ORDINANCE NO_
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
-----------------------------------------------------------------
AMENDING TIME ZONING ORDINANCE TO PERMIT THE
REZONING OF REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF DUBLIN
The City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as
follows :
Section 1 . Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Dublin Ordinance Code
is hereby amended in the following manner :
A parcel , located at 7900 Dublin Boulevard
(APN 941-1500-17-5 ) , is hereby rezoned from H-1 (Highwav
Frontage ) to C-1 (Retail Commercial ) . The C-1 zoning regulations
are hereby adopted as the regulations for the use, improvement
and maintenance of the subject property . A map of the property
is as follows :
\O' J
•\ N 1
� N ,
Section 2 . This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force
thirty ( 30 ) days from and after its passage . Before the
expiration of fifteen ( 15) days after its passage, it shall be
published once with the names of the Councilmembers voting for
and against the same, in the Tri-Valley Herald, a newspaper
published in Alameda County and available in the City of Dublin.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Dublin on this th day of 1984 , by
the following votes :
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
Citv Clerk
CITY OF DUBLIN
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date : April 2, 1984
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Staff
SUBJECT: PA 84-009 Blancarte Rezoning A proposal to
rezone a parcel from a Highway Frontage (H-1 )
District to a Retail Business (C-1) District
GENERAL INFORMATION
PROJECT: . A proposal to rezone an approximately 40, 000 sq.ft.
parcel , located at 7900 Dublin Blvd. , from H-1 to C-1 .
APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE: Mark Blancarte
Retail Property Development Co.
1 Harwick Walk
Pleasant Hill CA 94523
PROPERTY OWNER: Atlantic Richfield Co.
c/o 7900 Dublin Blvd.
Dublin CA 94568 '
LOCATION: 7900 Dublin Blvd.
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: 941-1500-17-5
PARCEL SIZE : Approximately 40, 000 sq.ft.
EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USE: H-1, Site contains an abandoned
ARCO Gas Station
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND .ZONING:
North- Grand Auto - C-1
South - Offices - C-1
West —Cousin ' s Furniture Store - C-1
East - Levitz Furniture Store - C-1 —
ZONING HISTORY: The records from Alameda County do not
indicate when the site was originally zoned H-1. 'It is
likely, however, that this zoning district was established
in the 1950 ' s or 1960 ' s . The building permit for the ARCO
Station was issued on 10/7/69 .
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
Section 8-45 . 0 states, in part, that the intent of the H-1
District is to provide highway-oriented types of uses (gas
stations, motels , restaurants, etc.. )
Section 8-48-0 states , in part, that the intent of the C-1
District" is to provide comparison shopping and office uses .
Section 8-103 . 6 states, in part, that the Planning
Commission shall make a recommmendation to the City .Council
when a petition to reclassify property has been properly
heard.
' I
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: A draft Negative Declaration has been
prepared on the basis that the rezoning will not have a
significant effect on the environment.
--------------------"---------------------------------------------
ITEM NO.
NOTIFICATION : Public Notice of the April 2 , 1984 , hearing was
published in the Tri-Valley Herald, mailed to adjacent
property owners, and posted in public buildings
ANALYSIS :
The applicant is requesting a rezoning for the purpose of
developing a small retail building (the abandoned gas
station would be demolished) . The existing zoning is
oriented to highway uses such as restaurants , motels ,
taverns , and service stations and does not permit the full
range of light retail uses .
The surrounding uses are retail or office in nature, and are
zoned C-1 . As noted above, the intent of the C-1 District
is to provide for comparison shopping . The proposed General
Plan designates the property for retail and office uses . it
appears that the best use of the property would be for light
commercial development .
The only real issue associated with the rezoning request
relates to the Dublin Blvd. traffic study, which calls for
an additional 14 feet of street frontage for a right-turn-
lane . The applicant should be aware that the necessary
dedication and improvements to this vehicular lane will
become a condition of approval during the Site Development
Review process .
RECOMMENDATION
FORMAT: 1 ) Hear Staff presentation
2 ) Open public hearing
3 ) Hear applicant and public presentations
4 ) Close public hearing
5 ) Make a recommendation to the City Council on the
Negative Declara�ion
6 ) Make a recommendation to the City Council on the
rezoning request .
ACTION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the
following actions :
1) Adopt Resolution (Exhibit A) recommending that a
Negative Declaration be adopted.
2 ) Adopt Resolution (Exhibit B) recommending that the
subject site be rezoned from H-1 to C-1 .
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A - Resolution recommending that the Negative
Declaration be adopted
Exhibit B - Resolution recommending that the site be rezoned
to C-1
Background Attachments :
1 ) Location map
2 ) Statement from applicant
3 ) Negative Declaration
4 ) Draft Ordinance
COPIES TO
Applicant
-2-
NEIISEN v \
SCHOOL
• 'w�ppR
-
C
01' \
/ \ r
z
9
r
c
0
tic
C ,
0 ,11
pJ
O
S.
M S
a
1 �
Z O '
v
r =
u
pP• A
�•n 4S�JN ,
*,Y
J p.
9�
Ct.
t
RCt`�
OJ 6 l0 o 1 O
O
G
A 111
t
R
_�-'--`f
_\—/-------------------_---__—__---__—_---___-------_----
It-------------------
n /
L C, M a
P '� y - OD f E3 10-h co-r-+Cl ReZOne�
. N
() ClDO DUh11 ,-j Blvd
0 zoo' 400'
The intention of this application is to transform what currently
is an abandoned service station along Dublin ' s main retail
arterial , into a desirable shopping center complex. The develop-
ment will consist of a single story building of approximately
12 ,000 sq . ft . , positioned near the rear property line facing
Dublin Blvd. , with ample parking in front of the premises .
Numberous promotional retailers noticeably absent from Dublin ' s
centralized retail activity along Dublin Blvd . have expressed
interest in this project .
This applicant intends to redevelop the property from an obsolete
zoning designation into a retail shopping environment that will
benefit the city and its residents through additional sales tax
revenues (projection : $30-35 ,000 per year) and increase the
number of quality retailers in the city.
,J
• � i
CITY OF DUBLIN
11.0. 13ox 2340
Duhlin. CA 9468 (415) 829-4000
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR: PA 84-009 Blancarte Rezone
A Proposal to Rezone a Parcel from a Highway Frontage
(H-1 ) District to a Retail Business (C-1) District
(Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. )
LOCATION: 7900 Dublin Blvd. , southwest corner of Regional Street
and Dublin Blvd.
PROPONENT: Mark Blancarte
0WNER: Atlantic Richfield
DESCRIPTION: A proposal to rezone an approximately 40, 000 sq. ft.
parcel , from H-1 to C-1, for the purpose of developing a
small retail building .
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: 941-1500-17-5
FINDINGS : The project will not have a significant effect on the
environment .
INITIAL STUDY: The Initial Study is attached with a brief
discussion of the following environmental components :
MITIGATION MEASURES : None required
PREPARATION: This Negative Declaration was prepared by the City
of Dublin Planning Staff, ( 415 ) 829-4916 .
SIGNATURE : I/1� _ ( DATE:�'LSI {
Lclurence L. Tong,__
Planning Director
DP 83-11
CITY OF t?UaLli4 PA Na. y-GG
iN'%/IR0r4 MF-A-J-r ,.I. ASS a-9 ilkF-ojr-,J 7 F0F;s-VI , (1�1:12tlM
(Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000 et se—)
Based on the project information submitted in Section 1 General Data, the Planning Staff
will use Section 3, Initial Study, to determine whether a Negative Declaration or an
Environmental Impact Report is required.
SECTION 3. INITIAL STUDY - - to be completed by the PLANNING STAFF
Name of Project or Applicant: At-Go -.s rezohe, 14 1 :h2 C-- 1
A... ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING - Descrip}ion of project site before the project, including
information on: topography; soil stability; plants and animals; historical, cultural, and
scenic aspects; existing structures; and use of structures �r QSAI 4 :2 rc
a,., O o00 f r e- O
.. ti c..r
-e
wov h2 l�000 , 14.
Description of surrounding properties, including information an: plants and animals;
historical, cultural, and scenic aspects; type and intensity of land use; and scale or
development. 1 S ri1Dv.,
' mar.'.-•� rC..► �:r
B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - Factual explanations of all a:u-Ners except "no" are re- .
quired on attached sheets.
Cam,g -�'T FACTS SC= OF IMPACT
to QomT- YES =Cwy
1`e
F
10
1.0 WATER -
1.1 Hydrologic Balance Will construction of the project alter the hydro-
logic bolonce?
1.2 Ground Water Will the project affect the quality or quantity of I
ground water supplies?
1.3 Depth to Water Tablo Will the rate of water vr;thdro-al change the d..pth
or gradient of tha venter table?
1.4 Drainoge and aonneI Form Will construction impedo the natural drainage pattern
or cause alteration of stream channel form? 1
1.5 Sedimentation Will construction in on area result in major sediment I '
Influx into adjacent water bodies?
t
1.6 Flnoding Will there be risk of loss of life or property due
In rloa.fin 7
A-5
SCALE OF 7i TACT
NO QUALIFIM YES
NO
E-
0 10 1?, 15
1.7 Water Qwlity Does drinking water supply foil to meet state oral I
federal standards?
Will sewage be inaje7•�otely cccommc?afed and
'
treated?
Will receiving voters foil to inert local, st•:'c and I I
federal standards?
Will ground water suffer contamination by s-:rFu:e I I
seeps}t, intrusion of soil or polluted water from
adjacent water bodies or from another r:nn!.ir.;anrcd
o .rifer?
' I I I •
2.0 AIR
2,1 Air Pollution Will there be generation and dispersion of p-Mufonts I I
by project related acti.itics or in pro :r.it r tr, t!:e I
project whit%s•rill er^ecd s:a:c n:r:.::i-^o
quality stocdards?
2.2 Wind Alteration Will structure and terrr]in'impede prc%-c:ilire wins I I
flow causing channeling along certain orri:s's or V, I I
obstruction of wind movements?
. I I I
3.0 EARTH ( I
3.1 Slope Stability Are there potential dong-rs related to clape r.30.)res?
Will there be risk to life or property of
3.2 Foundation Support
excessive deformation of mc:eriols? I
3.3 Consolidation Will there be risk to life or property%ccow.t:of
excessive consolidation or foundati•]r nntr•iois?
3.4 Subsidence Is there risk of major ground subsidi:n.:rs ns:-)ciated I I
With the project? I
3.5 Seismic Activity Is there risk of damage or loss res ibiijo frrm earth- I .
quo:cc activity? f t
3.6 Liquefaction Will the project taus^of Se r!>nos-i to Uqu-rcction I I
of soils in slcpes cr under founcolirns?
3.7 Erodibility Will there be s•:bstantiol loss of so;!c!-:n!a cr.- 41-1 I I I I
struction practices? I I
3.8 Permeability Will the permeability of soils ossociot'f!svi!%the I I
project present oiverso conditionsrelot;ve IC dc- I '
velopment of wells? i
3.9 U%ique Feolures Will any unique geological features brs do
mo�ed I I
or destroyed by p:oject activities?
3.10 Mineral Resources Are there geologic deposits of potcntial r»-:ercinl I I
„i value close to the project?
4.0 PLANTS AND ANIMALS
4.1 Plant and Animal Species Are there rare or endangered species present?
Are there species pre=-
t w%icis are p-3'tic'rlarly
susceptiole to impact from human activity?
Is there vegetation pros^nt. the!as;of s•:%i4. will
deny food or hobitot to imparfonr wild:ife s?eci-s?
Are there nuisance :necies or plant or n-iimz!s for
whit%conditions will be improved by tl-e project?
4.2 Vegetative Community Types Are there any unusual populations of plants that may
be of scientific intcre:t? I
Are there veg_ra6ve comnunity tyres v,hich arc ( I
portieularly su:eeptiblc to impact firm human cc:lvlty?
Are th::c major trees or major vcgrtntioi that will ( I
ho cj:•c:r.ly nf`rr.tc-I by th-rsroj^cl? _
O.rr, there v^ 7Ca:icn rnmmunity tyn r'^r^rr. dr. t,a I I I
of which v:ill deny fra 1 or has ita'to i ^^'ar; s•:i',lli I I
3pe..eies, rr to o:U!];l.allot nvml] or r�'••• r'^`_'r•'•t7I• .
4,7 Diversity
Is there subston:inl diversity in tit., n^t••-n: -•sr.:n-n:ly I I
I
as reflected in the ns.m%n•and tyrsr•,f i]l—t :r nr.i-r-1 I I I
species p•esent or the thrcr.-dim,:nsinrr.l
of plant species present?
I I I •
I I I
• I I 1
I I I
A-6 _
MTON err SOUS or DTACr
No QC.MIFIED YES
NO
I I to
of 101
5.0 FACILITIES AND SERVICES
5.1 Educational Facilities Will projected enrollments adversely affect the ex- I
(sting w proposed facilities in terms of spacing for
all activities, Including classrooms, recreational I I
oreos, end staffing needs?
Will the project impoct tha pvpiVteocher ratio so 1 1
as to impede the learning process?
Is the school located such that it presents a hardship
for o portion of the enrollment in terms of travel time, I I
distance, or safety hazards? I I I
• 5.2 Commercial Facilities Will there be on inadequate supply of and access to
commercial facilities for the project? I
5.3 Liquid Waste Disposal Are provisions for sewage capacity inadequate for I ( 1
the needs of the project without exceeding quality I I
standards?
Will the project be exposed to nuisances and odors 1
associated with wastewater treatment plants?
5.4 Solid Waste Disposal Is there inadequate provision for disposal of solid I I 1
wastes generated by the project?
5.5 Water Supply Is there inodequnta quantity or quality of water I I I
supply to meet the needs of thn•project?
5.6 Storm Water Drainage `Hill storm water drainage be inadequate to prevent I I I
downstream flooding and to meet Federal State and I I
local storsdords?
5.7 Police Will the project's additional population, facilities, 1
or other features generate an increase in police service 1 1 I
or create a police hazard? I
5.8 Fire Will the project's additional populotion, facilities, 1 I I
or other featvres generate on increase in fire services I I I
or create a fire hazard? I 1 I
5.9 Recreation Will the project have inodegwte facilities to meet
the recreational needs of the residents? I I I
5.10 Cultural Facilities Will cultural facilities be unavailable to the project I I I
residents?
6.0 TRANSPORTATION
I 1 I
6.1 Transportation Facilities Are the traffic demands on adjacent roads currently
at or above capacity? If not, will the traffic gen- I 1
crated by the project cause the adjacent roods to I I I
I t 1
reach or exceed capacity?
Are the other transportation facilities which serve the
project inadequate to accommodete the project's I I ( -
travel demands?
6.2'Circulation Conflicts Will design of tha project or conditions in the surround- 1 1
ing or"increase accidents due to circulation conflicts
6.3 Road Safety and Design Will project residents and users be exposed to increased
accident risks dun to roadway and street design or tack
of traffic controls? I 1
7.0 HEALTH I I 1
7.1 Odors Will the project be exposed to or genorote any intense V111 I I 1
odors?
7.2 Crowding and Density Will the residents and users be exposed to crowding or 1 1 1
high density in their physical living environment?
7.3 Nuisances Will the project be exposed to or generate factors that 1
may be considered as nuisances? ( 1 I
7.4 Structural Sofery Will design and proposed construction techniques fail '
to meet state and loco[building codes? 1 1
8.0 NOISE I 1 1
I I I
8.1 Noise Levels Will the project be expos•sd to rr generate adverse
noise levris? ( 1 I
8.2 lrbrotions Will the prnjact bo cxposerf to v hrotinns nnnoying to
• humans? I 1 1
1 I
1 I
CIF o�1 r IMPACTS .n t1IE OF L�1F'r�CT
No CkMIFIED YES CtruQla ry
NO
1P 1 10
1 1 IF
01 101
� I" 1 , I �
9.0 COMMUNITY CHARACTER I I
9.1 Community Organization Will the project disrupt an existing set of
organizations or groups within fire community?
9.2 Homogeneity and Diversity Will the project change the character of the I {
community in terms of distribution or concentration I I
of income, ethnic, housing, or age group?
9.3 Community Stability and Will the project be exposed to or generate on I
• Physical Conditions oreo of poor stability onJ physicol conditions? I I
10,0 VISUAL QUALITY
10.1 Views Will residents of the surrounding area be adversely
affected by views of or from the project? I
Will the project residents be adversely affected by I I
views of a from the surrounding nrca? '
10.2 Shodow Will the project be exposed to or generate excessive { I
. sbodows?
• I I I
11.0 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL
RE50UK Z5 I I I
I I I -
11.1 Historic and Cultural Will ilso project involve the destruction or alter- I I
Resources otion of a historic resource?
Will the project result in isolation of a historic I {
resource from its surrounding environment?
Will the project introduce physical, visual, audible I { I
or a!mo:pherie elements thnt are not in c!soractcr with I I
o historic resource or ids setting?
11.2 Archoeo!ogicol Sites Will the project involve the destruction or alteration
and Structures of on orchccolo:.)ical resource?
Will the project result in 4-notion of co archaeological I I {
• resource?
Wili the project inlro•l,jcc physical, visual, audible I { {
or atmospheric elements that are not in character with I I I
an archoeological resource or its setting? I I I
I 1
• I I I
12.0 ENERGY I
12.1 Energy Requirements Are there potential problems with the supply of
energy required for tine project?
Will the eaorgy requirements exceed the capacity I I I
of toe scrvica utility company?
Will there be a net increase in energy used for the I {
project camp-3red to the no prof:=t alternative?
12.2 Conservation Measures Does the project planning onrf dtrsirn inii to include I
ovai(zb!c energy con;crvotion mca:urn;?
15.0 LAND USE I {
13.1 Site Hazards Do conditions of the site, proposed site development,
or svrrounding area create potentially hazardous situ-
' otions? --�.—�
17.2 Ph;sicol Threat. Viril! the project or the surrounding or create a feeling
of insecurity and physical threat omnnj the residents
oral uses? I I I
13.3 Sonitery Landfill Wil! !!sc project b-. !xpose-1 to strv!turn!damngc, I I {
noise, air, or vuface nrd Ground water pollution I., I I I
ar other nuixrncr.;ossocioteJ wits a sanitary landfill?
13.4 \r.aterwoys Wi:l Ota project affect on existing w_•tcr+ y throu3h I { I
filling, dredging, druiniug, culy•:rting, v.�);tc dis-
chargcs, loss of visual gvoliry or oth.-r land u:c I I
practices?
i I I I
I I I
A-8 —
OLI TaNSNT SCALE. OF LNIPt1C r
NO QUALIFIED YES UmllavNk
. NO
tit Io
� IQ1� 1 °
5 •
Other En—,onmental Componentr.
C. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE QL"1LIFIED
NO NO YES UIQF4 CM,
(�) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish cr wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important exa..-nples of the major periods
or California history cr prehistory?
(2) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals?
(3) Does the project have impacts which are individually
limited but cumulateively considercble? (A project
may impact on two or more separate resources where
the impact on each resource is relatively small, but
where the effect o` the total of those impacts on the
environment is significant.)
(4) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial advers? effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
A-9 -
r
D. MITIGATION MEASURES - Discussion of the ways to mitiga`e tle significant effects
identified, if any: tQ !ns ri; + f nc� 4a�l.�
E. DETERMINATION - On the basis of this initial evaluation:
The City of Vublih _ ;finds that there will not be any significant effect. The par-
ticular characteristics of this project and the mitigation measures incorporated into
the design of the project provid-; thn `actual basis for the finding. A NECATIVE
DECLARATION IS QUIRED.
0 The City of Dublin ;finds that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect
on the environment. AN ENVIRONtv1ENTAL IMPACT REPORT 1S REQUIRED**
Signature and date:
Name and title: PIChrft.�
**NOT': Where a project is revised in resocnse to an Initial Study so !hay adverse
effects are mitigated to a point where no significant environmental effects would occur, a
revised Initial Study will be prepared and a Negative Declaration will be retjuired iis•ead of
nn FIR