Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEastern Dublin Draft EIR PC Agenda Statement 12/21/1992SUBJECT: PREPARED BY: Jvt AGENDA STATEMENT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: DECEMBER 21, 1992 Eastern Dublin: Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR, Part II; Resolutions Recommending City Council Certification of the Final EIR and Adoption of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Brenda A. Gillarde, Project Coordinator ATTACHMENTS: 1. Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR, Part II, dated December 21, 1992 2. Resolution Recommending City Council Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan 3. Resolution Recommending City Council Adoption of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment 4. Resolution Recommending City Council Adoption of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan 5. Letter from DIGS Associates 6. Revisions to General Plan Amendment 7. Revisions to Specific Plan RECOMMENDATION: 1. Hear Staff presentation 2. Review the attached Responses to Comments for adequacy and direct Staff whether additional information is needed 3. Review and discuss the attached Revisions to the General Plan Amendment text and the Specific Plan text 4. Review and discuss the attached resolution recommending City Council certification of the Final EIR; adopt the resolution 5. Review and discuss the attached resolution recommending City Council approval of the Draft General Plan Amendment with the changes recommended by the Planning Commission; adopt the resolution 6. Review and discuss the attached resolution recommending City Council approval of the Draft Specific Plan with the changes recommended by the Planning Commission; adopt the resolution 1 BACKGROUND The purpose of this meeting is to 1) review and discuss Part II of the Responses to Comments; and 2) review, discuss and adopt the attached resolutions. The responses are outlined below in two categories: 1) Staff recommended text changes to the Draft EIR; and 2) responses to comments addressing major adequacy issues. The format is the same as that used at the previous December 7, 1992 meeting. Some responses have been included that were left blank in the previous packet (Part I of the Responses to Comments, dated December 7, 1992). They are located in the beginning of the Responses section attached to this agenda statement, and are indicated in grey shading. These responses address traffic and kit fox concerns raised by various commentors. The Planning Commission is requested to review all of the Responses to Comments, paying particular attention to those outlined in this agenda statement. The Commission should ask questions of Staff about any of the responses and raise any concerns about the adequacy of the responses or related information in the Draft EIR. After review and discussion of the Responses, the Commission should review the text changes to the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan. The resolutions recommend City Council certification of the Final EIR and adoption of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan. The Final EIR consists of the 1) Draft EIR, dated August 28, 1992; and 2) the Responses to Comments, dated December 7 and December 21, 1992. Adoption of the attached resolution regarding the Final EIR would recommend City Council adoption of these two parts. Adoption of the resolutions for the General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Specific Plan (SP) would recommend City Council adoption of the draft GPA and SP, dated May 27, 1992 and the text revisions recommended by Staff and informally approved, by straw vote, by the Planning Commission. These revisions are attached as Attachment 6 and 7 of this report. DISCUSSION 1. Comments/Responses Recommendina Text Chances to the Draft EIR The following statements include those comments which resulted in text or map revisions to the Draft EIR. The number of each comment is noted along with a brief description of the change. The Planning Commission is requested to review the recommended changes and direct Staff to incorporate them into the Final EIR. The full text of the change is provided in the attached Responses to Comments. Comment/Response # Summary of Staff Recommended Chances 7-6, Revise pages 3.3-16 to 3.3-28 to clarify responsibility 34-11 for funding of improvements and to clarify nature of improvements (see Attachment 5) 2 15-54 Change to Appendix D regarding potential for impacts to a federally listed species 15=57 Deletion of requirement for annual surveys included in the Kit Fox protection plan and clarification of consultation with appropriate agencies prior to construction in Appendix E. 20=5 Addition of Mitigation Measure 3.7/18.1 and change to Appendix E whereby City agrees to work with appropriate agencies and jurisdictions to develop a management plan to protect viable habitat for the Kit Fox. 26=3 Revise housing unit figure for Specific Plan 26=6 Revise acreage, square footage and unit figures for 26=7 Dougherty Valley plan 26=9 Revise Figure 3.1 E to adjust City of San Ramon boundary 26=10 Revise square footage for Bishop Ranch 26=26 Revise text for mitigation regarding preparation of wildfire management plan Add information regarding Dublin BART extension 29=2, 29=3, 30=2, 30-8, 30=7, 30-9, 30=15 32®1 Change reference to ultimate buildout of planning area 32=2 Add reference to DSRSD sphere of influence 32=3 Add references to DSRSD recycling policies, plans and programs 32=4 Add reference to DSRSD sphere of influence expansion 32=14 Add language regarding construction of TWA disposal facilities 32=17 Add section on on -site wastewater storage 32=18 Revise discussion of indirect impacts from lack of a wastewater service provider; add an additional mitigation measure to require annexation into DSRSD's service area 32=19 Slightly revise mitigation regarding connection to public services 3 32-20 32=21 32-22 32-23 Revise mitigation regarding wastewater collection system Revise discussion of impact disposal capacity Add a mitigation to require wastewater service on DSRSD treatment and "will -serve" letter for Slightly revise discussion of mitigation for of DSRSD treatment plant 32=24 Slightly revise mitigation for efficient use for the wastewater treatment plant 32-25 Modify mitigation to emphasize use of recycled water for landscape irrigation 32=26 Slightly revise mitigation for recycled water distribution system 32=27 Slightly revise mitigation for wastewater recycling 32=29 Revise text to discuss TWA Alternative North 3 and storage requirements 32=30 Clarify impact discussion of loss of system pressure 32=31 Revise mitigation for emergency power generation for recycled pump station 32-33 Correct spelling of Del Valle 32-34 32=36 32=37 32=38 32-39 32=41 32-42 expansion of energy Revise text to clarify Zone 7 is the only current water supplier Add text to discuss DSRSD Water Resources Acquisition Study Modify text to delete reference to DSRSD Revise text to include discussion of DSRSD urban water conservation efforts Revise text to include discussion of DSRSD Water Management Plan Update Revise text regarding the modelling of the conceptual water system Revise text regarding DSRSD policy on wells 4 The purpose for reviewing the comments/responses is to consider the adequacy of the Eastern Dublin EIR. Adequacy is based on whether the information has been presented in accordance with State requirements and whether there has been sufficient analysis to inform decision -makers of the environmental consequences of a project. Adequacy is not affected by the presence of significant impacts which cannot be mitigated and require a statement of overriding considerations. Also, disagreement among professionals about the severity of an impact does not affect adequacy. Comment/Response # Adeauacv Issue Raised 25=7 Discussion of traffic impacts under a different buildout scenario 25-12 Local plus cumulative regional growth on I=580 25=14 Underestimation of future traffic levels 25=15 Effectiveness of mitigations for sewer export and water supply 26=14 Lack of discussion of impacted intersections in San Ramon 26=17 Viability of traffic counts at unsignalized intersections 26-19 Additional cumulative buildout analysis 26=32 Revision of noise analysis based on requested traffic adjustments 27®6 Analysis of job types envisioned for the Specific Plan 27=16 Expand discussion of Camp Park operations 30-20 Traffic impacts on Dublin Boulevard 32-16 Inclusion of a separate section on recycled water 34=1 Significance of alteration to existing land use 34=3 Evaluation of impacts on farmers wishing to remain in agriculture 34=43 Evaluation of "Greenbelt Alternative" 35=7 Effect of project on Williamson Act Contract non® renewals 35=31 Adequacy of visual analysis 6 36®1 Adequacy of Program EIR 37-20 Adequacy of impact analysis for sewer and water 37-31 Cumulative air quality impacts 38-8 Geologic hazards as described by the 1991 survey published by CDMG 38®9 Kit fox surveys 41-38 Additional impacts that should be addressed 3. Attached Resolutions The Planning Commission is requested to review and discuss each of the attached resolutions in the order they appear in the agenda statement. Recommended Planning Commission changes to the Draft General Plan Amendment and the Draft Specific Plan are attached to the appropriate resolution. The Commission may raise any questions about these text changes and/or the resolutions, and direct Staff to make any desired changes. After discussion of a resolution the Planning Commission is requested to adopt it before moving on to the next one. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1. Review the attached Responses to Comments for adequacy and direct Staff whether information should be added or clarified. 2. Review and discuss the attached resolution recommending City Council certification of the Final EIR; adopt the resolution. 3. Review and discuss the attached resolution recommending City Council approval of the Draft General Plan Amendment with the changes recommended by the Planning Commission dated December 21, 1992 (Attachment 6); adopt the resolution. 4. Review and discuss the attached resolution recommending City Council approval of the Draft Specific Plan with the changes recommended by the Planning Commission dated December 21, 1992 (Attachment 7); adopt the resolution. s/eddec2la 7 RESOLUTION NO. 92= A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE EASTERN DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN Recitals 1. In response to a proposal for residential development of the Dublin Ranch property, the City of Dublin undertook the Eastern Dublin Study to plan for the future development of the eastern Dublin area. 2. The City Council and Planning Commission conducted three joint public study sessions and three workshops relating to planning issues in eastern Dublin. a. The April 18, 1990, study session considered a land use concept report containing four land use scenarios and the consistency of each land use concept with existing general plan policies. Alternative #4 was considered the preferred land use concept for environmental study by informal consensus. b. The August 22, 1990, study session considered Alternative #4 and a fifth concept (based on the 1986 annexation agreement with Alameda County). The "Town Center" concept, types of streets, location and types of parks were discussed. c. The November 15, 1990, workshop solicited comments from the public regarding the existing and desired life style qualities in Dublin and what the public wanted to see in a new community. d. The December 6, 1990, workshop continued with a similar discussion of desired types of commercial development and discussed circulation systems and parks and open space. e. The December 18, 1990, workshop presented a preliminary conceptual land use plan. Input was received on the transit spine, location of town center, types of residential uses, location of commercial uses, the concentration of high density residential uses, and jobs/housing balance. f. The February 14, 1991, study session considered a land use plan that incorporated comments made at the three workshops and included a discussion of major issues, such as the location of a high school, connection to existing Dublin, size of streets and types of parks. 1 ATrACHMEHT a 3. With the identification of a preferred alternative on February 14, 1991, the City prepared a Draft General Plan Amendment for approximately 6,920 acres and a Draft Specific Plan for approximately 3,328 acres. 4. The City completed an Initial Study on the project and determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was required. A Notice of Preparation dated September 12, 1988, was prepared, published in a newspaper of general circulation and mailed to Responsible Agencies and various other interested parties. A subsequent Notice of Preparation, dated October 16, 1991, was distributed in the same manner. 5. A Draft Environmental Impact Report was prepared on the project, including the General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan, sphere of influence changes, prezoning, annexation to the City and the Dublin San Ramon Services District, detachment from the Livermore Area Recreation and Park District, and approval of specific development projects. The Draft Environmental Impact Report consisted of two volumes ®s a Draft Environmental Impact Report (Part I) and the Draft Environmental Impact Report Appendix (Part II), both volumes dated August 28, 1992. A Notice of Completion was filed with the State Secretary of Resources via the State Clearinghouse on August 28, 1992 (SCH No. 91103064). 6. The Draft Environmental Impact Report was initially circulated for a 45-day public/agency review period beginning on August 28, 1992, and ending on October 13, 1992, and was extended for an additional 16-day period to October 29, 1992. Public notice of the availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Report was published in a newspaper of general circulation and posted on and off the project site. 7. The City of Dublin Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on September 21, 1992, which hearing was continued to September 23, 1992, September 29, 1992 and October 1, 1992. At these hearings, and through submitted written comments, the Planning Commission received comments on the Draft EIR from the public, responsible agencies, other governmental and private organizations, as well as from City staff and its consultants and property owners and their consultants. 8. The City prepared responses to comments on environmental issues received during the public review period and at the public hearings, which responses clarify and amplify the information contained in the Draft EIR, providing good faith reasoned analysis supported by factual information. The comments and responses to comments were published in two parts, on December 7, 1992, and December 21, 1992, and were distributed to or otherwise made available to the Planning Commission, Responsible Agencies, and other interested parties. 2 9. The Planning Commission reviewed specific text revisions to the Draft EIR, and directed that portions of the comments and responses be incorporated into the Final EIR. 10. A Final Environmental Impact Report was prepared by the City, which consists of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Parts I and II) dated August 28, 1992, and Responses to Comments dated December 7, 1992 and December 21, 1992. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: A. The foregoing Recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. B. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the Final Environmental Impact Report. The Planning Commission hereby finds and recommends to the City Council that it certify the Final Environmental Impact Report as complete, adequate, and in compliance with CEQA and the City of Dublin's Environmental Guidelines. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 21st day of December, 1992, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR 114\reso1\29\certify.eir 3 PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIRPERSON RESOLUTION NO. 92= A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF THE EASTERN DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT Recitals 1. In response to a proposal for residential development of the Dublin Ranch property, the City of Dublin undertook the Eastern Dublin Study to plan for the future development of the eastern Dublin area. 2. The City Council and Planning Commission conducted three joint public study sessions and three workshops relating to planning issues in eastern Dublin. a. The April 18, 1990, study session considered a land use concept report containing four land use scenarios and the consistency of each land use concept with existing general plan policies. Alternative #4 was considered the preferred land use concept for environmental study by informal consensus. b. The August 22, 1990, study session considered Alternative #4 and a fifth concept (based on the 1986 annexation agreement with Alameda County). The "Town Center" concept, types of streets, location and types of parks were discussed. c. The November 15, 1990, workshop solicited comments from the public regarding the existing and desired life style qualities in Dublin and what the public wanted to see in a new community. d. The December 6, 1990, workshop continued with a similar discussion of desired types of commercial development and discussed circulation systems and parks and open space. e. The December 18, 1990, workshop presented a preliminary conceptual land use plan. Input was received on the transit spine, location of town center, types of residential uses, location of commercial uses, the concentration of high density residential uses, and jobs/housing balance. f. The February 14, 1991, study session considered a land use plan that incorporated comments made at the three workshops and included a discussion of major issues, such as the location of a high school, connection to existing Dublin, size of streets and types of parks. 1 ATTACHMENT 3 3. With the identification of a preferred alternative on February 14, 1991, the City prepared a Draft General Plan Amendment for approximately 6,920 acres to plan for future development of a mixed use community of single= and multiple -family residences, commercial uses (general commercial, neighborhood commercial and campus office), public and semipublic facilities (including schools), industrial park and open space. 4. The Draft General Plan Amendment, dated May 27, 1992, designates the proposed general distribution and general location and extent of the uses of Eastern Dublin for residential, commercial, industrial, public, open space and parks, and other categories of public and private uses of land. 5. The Draft General Plan Amendment includes a statement of standards of population density and standards of building intensity for Eastern Dublin. 6. Pursuant to the provisions of State Planning and Zoning Law, it is the function and duty of the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin to review and recommend action on proposed amendments to the City's General Plan. 7. A Staff Report dated September 23, 1992, was prepared for the Eastern Dublin Draft General Plan Amendment, which report described the amendment and identified issues related to the amendment. 8. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the Eastern Dublin Draft General Plan Amendment on October 1, 1992, which hearing was continued to October 6, 1992, October 12, 1992, and October 15, 1992. 9. Based on comments received during the public hearings, related text revisions, dated December 21, 1992, were made to the Draft General Plan Amendment and were reviewed by the Planning Commission on December 21, 1992. 10. The Draft General Plan Amendment was reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act through the preparation and review of an Environmental Impact Report. On December 21, 1992, by Resolution No. 92- the Planning Commission recommended certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 11. The Planning Commission considered all written and oral testimony submitted at the public hearings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Dublin Planning Commission recommends City Council approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment dated May 27, 1992, as revised by the Revisions dated December 21, 1992, and recommends that the Council 2 make all findings regarding significant and potentially significant impacts as required under the California Environmental Quality Act. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 21st day of December, 1992, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR 114\resol\29\adopt.gpa 3 PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIRPERSON RESOLUTION NO. 92= A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF THE EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN Recitals 1. In response to a proposal for residential development of the Dublin Ranch property, the City of Dublin undertook the Eastern Dublin Study to plan for the future development of the eastern Dublin area. 2. The City Council and Planning Commission conducted three joint public study sessions and three workshops relating to planning issues in eastern Dublin. a. The April 18, 1990, study session considered a land use concept report containing four land use scenarios and the consistency of each land use concept with existing general plan policies. Alternative #4 was considered the preferred land use concept for environmental study by informal consensus. b. The August 22, 1990, study session considered Alternative #4 and a fifth concept (based on the 1986 annexation agreement with Alameda County). The "Town Center" concept, types of streets, location and types of parks were discussed. c. The November 15, 1990, workshop solicited comments from the public regarding the existing and desired life style qualities in Dublin and what the public wanted to see in a new community. d. The December 6, 1990, workshop continued with a similar discussion of desired types of commercial development and discussed curculation systems and parks and open space. e. The December 18, 1990, workshop presented a preliminary conceptual land use plan. Input was received on the transit spine, location of town center, types of residential uses, location of commercial uses, the concentration of high density residential uses, and jobs/housing balance. f. The February 14, 1991, study session considered a land use plan that incorporated comments made at the three workshops and included a discussion of major issues, such as the location of a high school, connection to existing Dublin, size of streets and types of parks. 1 'furl 4 3. With the identification of a preferred alternative on February 14, 1991, the City prepared a Draft General Plan Amendment for approximately 6,920 acres to plan for future development of a mixed use community of single- and multiple -family residences, commercial use (general commercial, neighborhood commercial, and campus office), public and semi-public facilities (including schools), industrial park and open space. 4. The Draft Specific Plan, dated May 27, 1992, implements an approximately 3,328-acre portion of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment by providing a detailed framework, including policies, standards and implementation programs, for evaluation of development projects proposed in the portion of eastern Dublin covered by the Draft Specific Plan. 5. Pursuant to State Law, the Eastern Dublin Draft Specific Plan was prepared and reviewed in the same manner as a general plan amendment. 6. A Staff Report dated October 6, 1992, was prepared for the Eastern Dublin Draft Specific Plan, which report summarized the Specific Plan and identified related discussion topics. 7. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the Eastern Dublin Draft Specific Plan on October 6, 1992, which hearing was continued to October 12, 1992, and October 15, 1992. 8. Based on comments received during the public hearings, related text revisions, dated December 21, 1992, were made to the Draft Specific Plan and were reviewed by the Planning Commission on December 21, 1992. 9. The Draft Specific Plan was reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act through the preparation and review of a Final Environmental Impact Report. On December 21, 1992, by Resolution No. 92- , the Planning Commission recommended certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 10. The Planning Commission considered all written and oral testimony submitted at the public hearings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: A. The Dublin Planning Commission recommends the City Council find the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan consistent with the Dublin General Plan, as revised by the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment. B. The Dublin Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan dated May 27, 2 1992, as revised by Revisions dated December 21, 1992, and recommends that the Council make all findings regarding significant and potentially significant impacts as required under the California Environmental Quality Act. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 21st day of December, 1992, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR 114\resol\29\adopt.sp 3 PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIRPERSON DKS Associates 1956 Webster Street, Suite 300 Oakland, CA 94612-2939 (510) 763-2061 Fax: (510) 268-1739 December 15, 1992 Mr. Laurence Tong Planning Director City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 ,RECEIVED :UBLIN PLANNING Subject: Eastern Dublin GPA/SP EIR PSS209x0 Dear Mr. Tong: DKS Associates has reviewed the comments submitted on the Traffic and Circulation section of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan, dated August 28, 1992. Based on these comments, and subsequent discussions with City of Dublin staff, it was determined that additional clarification is needed for certain sections of the DEIR. Additional information will be included in the Final EIR primarily in the form of responses to individual comments and questions. However, modifications to selected portions of the DEIR Traffic and Circulation text are attached to provide additional clarification. The attached pages include text modifications to the "Future Road Improvement Assumptions" section, pages 3.3-16 to 3.3-18, and the "Impacts and Mitigation Measures" section, pages 3.3- 19 to 3.3-28. Text which is deleted is shown in strikeout. Text which is added is shown in bold italics. Explanatory notes (which are not to be considered part of the revised EIR text) are shown in [small type within brackets]. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, DKS ASSOCIATES A California Corporation Michael N. Aronson, P.E. Project Manager mna/disk24/p8820918.1et ATTACHMENT 5 Mr. Laurence Tong December 15, 1992 Page 2 REVISIONS TO DEIR TEXT ON PAGES 3.3-16 TO 3.3-18 Future Road Improvement Assumptions Project Site The Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan includes the following road improvements which were assumed in the "with Project" analysis scenarios. These improvements would be financed and implemented by development within the General Plan Amendment area: 0 ct Fallon Road and El Ghar@ Road, cinnilar in design to the interchange at Hacienda Drive, with a separate ramp for truck movements from mound El Charro to westbound 1580. [NOTE: The Eastern Dublin Project would provide significant funding for these interchange improvements, but should not necessarily be required to fully fund all of the proposed improvements including the special provisions for quarry trucks. This improvement has been moved to the next section which describes regional road improvemen ts.] • Hacienda Drive extended as a four -lane arterial north to Gleason Road, with six to eight lanes between I-580 and Dublin Boulevard. • Tassajara Road improved to a four -lane arterial between I-580 and the Contra Costa County line, with six to eight lanes between 1-580 and Dublin Boulevard. • Fallon Road extended as a four -lane arterial to Tassajara Road, with six to eight lanes between I-580 and Dublin Boulevard. • Doolan Road extended as a two-lane major collector to Tassajara Road. • Dublin Boulevard extended as a six -lane major arterial street from Dougherty Road the western Project boundary to North Canyons Parkway at Airway Boulevard. • Transit Spine as a two or four lane transit -oriented major collector street from Dublin Boulevard to Fallon Road. • Gleason Road as a four -lane arterial street from Hacienda Drive to Doolan Road. 1 Revised Text 12/15/92 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA EIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation Tri-Valley Area Future road improvements in the Tri-Valley area were assumed for the future traffic projections if they are committed for construction, tied directly to assumed future land uses, or included in general plan circulation elements. The Eastern Dublin project would contribute to funding for these regional road improvements, with the funding share to be determined by a regional transportation study such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. The following road improvements are assumed in all future scenarios: I-680 HOV Lanes. The future analysis includes widening of 1-680 to eight lanes to provide one high -occupancy vehicle lane in each direction between Rudgear Road and I-580. Ca!trans is currently constructing this improvement. I-580/I-680 Interchange. A two-lane freeway -to -freeway flyover from southbound I-680 to eastbound I-580 is assumed to replace the existing one -lane loop -ramp connection. Hook ramps to City of Dublin are also required. I-580 Improvements. Eight lanes plus two auxiliary lanes are assumed on I-580 from I-680 to Tassajara Road. These auxiliary lanes have been partially completed, and the remaining section between Dougherty Road and Hacienda Drive will be completed in conjunction with construction of the BART extension project. I-580/FallonlEl Charro Interchange. The I-580 interchange at Fallon Road and El Charro Road would be improved to a partial cloverleaf design, similar in design to the interchange at Hacienda Drive. Separate ramps would be included to provide uninterrupted truck movements to and from El Charro Road. Dougherty Road. Widening of Dougherty Road to six lanes between Dublin Boulevard and Old Ranch Road is assumed, consistent with the Land Use and Circulation Section of the Dublin General Plan and the proposed Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. North of Old Ranch Road, Dougherty Road is assumed to be realigned and improved as a four -lane arterial as proposed in the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. Dublin Boulevard. Extension of Dublin Boulevard as a two-lane street between Dougherty Road and Tassajara Road is assumed currently being constructed, with a connection to Hacienda Drive north of the new interchange. The vehicle access for the proposed East Dublin/Pleasanton BART station is assumed to connect to the Dublin Boulevard extension between the Southern Pacific right-of-way and Hacienda Drive. With the Eastern Dublin Project, the section of Dublin Boulevard between Dougherty Road and the western Project boundary would be improved as a six -lane arterial street. 2 Revised Text 12/15/92 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA EIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation Southern Pacific Right -of -Way Connector. A new four -lane street is assumed parallel to the Southern Pacific right-of-way, connecting Dougherty Road north of Dublin Boulevard with the Dublin Boulevard extension between Dougherty Road and Hacienda Drive. This connection is shown as a future road in the Circulation Section of the Dublin General Plan. State Route 84. Completion of State Route 84 as a four -lane highway between I-680 and I- 580 is assumed, with construction of a new interchange at I-580. This assumption is consistent with the Caltrans Route Concept Report for SR 84 and with the Livermore General Plan Circulation Element. Current funding levels only provide for construction of a two-lane extension of Isabel Avenue. North Canyons Parkway. Extension of North Canyons Parkway to Vasco Road is assumed as included in the Livermore General Plan Circulation Element and the higher population alternatives for the North Livermore General Plan Amendment. Bollinger Canyon Road. Bollinger Canyon Road is assumed to be extended as a four -lane arterial to Dougherty Road, consistent with the adopted San Ramon General Plan and the Dougherty Valley General Plan Amendment. Tassajara Connection. A connection between Dougherty Road in Dougherty Valley and Tassajara Road was assumed only for the cumulative buildout scenario. This connection would not be warranted by Year 2010 development levels. I-580 Overcrossings. Based on preliminary analysis of the cumulative buildout scenario, it was determined that traffic demand would exceed the total capacities of the existing and planned overcrossings of I-580 in the eastern Dublin area. The cumulative buildout scenario includes evaluated an additional overcrossing of I-580, without ramps to and from the freeway, between Hacienda Drive and Tassajara Road, and an additional overcrossing between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road. Upon further analysis, it was determined that these overcrossings would not eliminate all of the significant traffic impacts identified, and would require further study by the cities of Dublin and Pleasanton to determine feasibility. These additional overcrossings are not included in the proposed circulation system for Eastern Dublin, pending further regional studies such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. Other Local Improvements. Additional local street improvements in San Ramon, Pleasanton, and Livermore south of I-580 were assumed consistent with adopted general plan circulation elements. 3 Revised Text 12/15/92 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA EIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation REVISIONS TO DEIR TEXT ON PAGES 3.3-19 TO 3.3-28 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES: DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES (YEAR 2010 WITHOUT PROJECT) Daily traffic volumes on various freeway and street segments were projected for Year 2010 conditions without and with the Project, and for cumulative buildout conditions with the Project (Figure 3.3-E). These volumes were compared to estimated daily capacities of each type of roadway, as described in Table 3.3-1. The resultant levels of service were estimated based on the daily traffic volumes (Table 3.3-9). IM 3.3/A I-580 Freeway, Tassajara-Fallon Year 2010 growth without the Project would cause freeway volumes to exceed Ievel of service E on I-580 between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road. This is a significant cumulative impact. Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/1.0 Caltrans, in cooperation with local jurisdictions, could construct auxiliary lanes on I-580 between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road to provide a total of 10 lanes in that section, consistent with the Caltrans Route Concept Report for 1-580. Implementation of MM 3.3/1.0 would provide LOS D operations and reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 4 Revised Text 12/15/92 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA DIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES: DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES (YEAR 2010 WITH PROJECT) IM 3.3/B I-580 Freeway, I-680-Hacienda Year 2010 growth with the Project would cause I-580 between I-680 and Hacienda Drive to exceed level of service E. This freeway section has been widened to its maximum practical capacity within Caltrans' right-of-way. This is a significant impact. This impact is also a significant cumulative impact and an unavoidable adverse impact as discussed in Chapter 5. Mitigation Measure of the Specific Plan MM 3.3/2.0 (Policy 5-21) Require all non-residential projects with 50 or more employees within the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan area to participate in a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) program. A TSM program would include strategies to reduce the use of single -occupant vehicles such as on - site distribution of transit information and passes, provision of shuttle services to and from BART stations, participation in regional ridesharing services, preferential parking for vanpools and carpools, and flexible or staggered work hours. Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/2.1 The Project shall contribute a proportionate amount to regional transportation mitigation programs as determined by regional transportation studies such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. Regional mitigation measures may include implementation of enhanced rail and feeder bus transit services, construction or upgrading of alternative road corridors to relieve demand on the I-580 and I-680 freeways. MM's 3.3/2.0-3.3/2.1 are applicable to the total Project site. Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce the impact, but the impact would remain significant. 5 Revised Text 12115192 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA EIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation IM 3.3/C I-580 Freeway, Tassajara-Fallon-Airway Year 2010 growth with the Project would cause freeway volumes to exceed level of service E on I-580 between Tassajara Road and Airway Boulevard. This is a significant impact. This impact is also a significant cumulative impact as discussed in Chapter 5. Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/3.0 The City of Dublin shall coordinate with Ca!trans and the City of Pleasanton to construct Project shall contribute to the construction of auxiliary lanes on I-580 between Tassajara Road and Airway Boulevard. The auxiliary lanes would provide a total of 10 lanes on this section (8 through lanes and 2 auxiliary lanes), consistent with the Ca!trans Route Concept Report for 1-580. The Project shall contribute a proportionate amount to the cost of improvements, as determined by a regional transportation study such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. The auxiliary lanes would provide LOS E operations between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road, and LOS D operations between Fallon Road and Airway Boulevard. MM 3.3/3.0 is applicable to the total Project site. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact to a level of insignificance on the Fallon Air!Kry eegment but LOS on the Tcaacjnxt Fallon Road segment would remain potentially significant. [NOTE: MM 3.3/3.0 would provide LOS E operations between Tassajara and Fallon, which is considered acceptable according to the Alameda County Congestion Management Program. The mitigation measure would reduce IM 3.3/C to a level of insignificance.] 6 Revised Tevt 12/15/92 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA RIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation IM 3.3/D I-680 Freeway, North of I-580 Year 2010 growth with the Project would cause freeway volumes to exceed level of service E on I-680 north of the I-580 interchange. This is a significant impact. This impact is also a significant cumulative impact as discussed in Chapter 5. Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/4.0 The Project shed shall contribute a proportionate share to planned ultimate improvements at the I-580/I-680 interchange as implemented by Ca!trans. The assessed costs of freeway interchange improvements shall include the costs of revised freeway ramp connections to Dublin (such as hook ramps) and the associated mitigation on local streets. The proportionate share of costs attributable to the Project shall be determined through a regional transportation study such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. The improvements would provide additional capacity on I-680 north of I-580 and would provide LOS D operations. MM 3.3/4.0 is applicable to the total Project site. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 7 Revised Text 12/15/92 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA EIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES: DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES (CUMULATIVE BUILDOUT WITH PROJECT) IM 3.3/E Cumulative Freeway Impacts Cumulative Buildout with the Project would cause additional freeway sections to exceed level of service E compared to Year 2010 With Project, including I 580 west of 1680 (from E to F), and I-580 east of Airway Boulevard (from E to F). This is a significant cumulative impact and an unavoidable adverse impact as discussed in Chapter 5. [NOTE: Caltrans has indicated in their comments on the DEIR that I-580 west of I-680 can be evaluated as a ten -lane section due to the two auxiliary merging/weaving lanes which supplement the eight through lanes. Therefore, the LOS on I-580 would not exceed the LOS E standard.] Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/5.0 The Project shall contribute a proportionate amount to the construction of auxiliary lanes on 1-580 east of Airway Boulevard, as implemented by Caltrans. The improvement would provide ten lanes on 1-580, consistent with the Caltrans Route Concept Report for 1-580. The City of Dublin shall coordinate with other Llocal jurisdictions steal-1 to require that all future developments participate in regional transportation mitigation programs as determined by regional transportation studies such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. Implementation of MM 3.3/5.0 would reduce the impact to a level of insignificance., but the impact would rain significant. [NOTE: Widening of I-580 east of Airway Boulevard, within the City of Livermore, is not currently programmed for construction by Caltrans. Widening to ten lanes is consistent with the Route Concept Report.] IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION Detailed P.M. peak hour turn movement traffic volumes were projected at intersections which would be significantly impacted by Project traffic (Figure 3.3-F). Levels of service were evaluated at these intersections (Table 3.3-10) and mitigation measures were identified for each intersection which is projected to exceed the LOS D standard. (Projected intersection turn volumes and capacity calculations are on file at the City of Dublin Department of Public Works.) 8 Revised Text 12/15/92 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA EIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATION (YEAR 2010 WITH PROJECT) IM 3.3/F Dougherty Road & Dublin Boulevard Year 2010 development with the Project would cause level of service F operations at the intersection of Dougherty Road with Dublin Boulevard. This is a significant impact. Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/6.0 The City of Dublin shall coordinate monitor traffic conditions at this intersection and implement construction of additional lanes on all approaches at the intersection when required to maintain LOS D operations. The required lanes on the northbound approach on Dougherty Road include two left -turn lanes, three through lanes (one more than existing) and one right -turn lane (one more than existing). The required lanes on the southbound approach on Dougherty Road include two left -turn lanes (one more than existing), three through lanes (one more than existing) and one right -turn lane. The required lanes on the eastbound approach on Dublin Boulevard include one left -turn lane, three through lanes (one more than existing) and one right -turn lane. The required lanes on the westbound approach on Dublin Boulevard include two left -turn lanes, three through lanes and one right -turn lane. The Project shall contribute a proportionate share of the improvement costs as determined by a regional transportation study such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. These improvements would provide LOS D operations. MM 3.3/6.0 is applicable to the total Project site. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 9 Revised Text 12115192 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA EIR 3.3 Trafific and Circulation IM 3.3/G Hacienda Drive & I-580 Eastbound Ramps Year 2010 development with the Project would cause level of service F operations at the intersection of Hacienda Drive with the I-580 eastbound ramps. This is a significant impact. Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/7.0 The City of Dublin shall implement improvements in coordination coordinate with the City of Pleasanton and Caltrans to restripe widen the I-580 eastbound off -ramp to provide two left -turn lanes and one two right -turn lanes (existing lanes are one left -turn lane and two right -turn lanes). The Project shall contribute a proportionate share of the improvement costs as determined by a regional transportation study such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. The improvements would provide LOS C operations. MM 3.3/7.0 is applicable to the total Project site. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. IM 3.3/H Tassajara Road & I-5S0 Westbound Ramps Year 2010 development with the Project would cause level of service F operations at the intersection of Tassajara Road with the I-580 westbound ramps. This is a significant impact. Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/8.0 The City of Dublin shall implement improvements in coordination coordinate with Caltrans to widen the 1-580 westbound off -ramp to provide two left -turn lanes and two right -turn lanes, and to modify the northbound approach to provide three through lanes. The Project shall contribute a proportionate share of the improvement costs as determined by a regional transportation study such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. The improvements would provide LOS B operations. MM 3.3/8.0 is applicable to the total Project site. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 10 Revised Text 12/15/92 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA EIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation IM 3.3/1 Santa Rita Road & I-580 Eastbound Ramps Year 2010 development with the Project would cause level of service F operations at the intersection of Santa Rita Road with the I-580 eastbound ramps. This is a significant impact. This impact is also an unavoidable adverse impact as discussed in Chapter 5. Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/9.0 The City of Dublin shall implement improvements in coordination coordinate with the City of Pleasanton and Caltrans to widen the I- 580 eastbound off -ramp to provide two left -turn lanes, one through lane and one two right -turn lanes. These improvements would provide LOS E operations. Further improvement to the level of service could be provided by p ohihiting left turns from southbound Santa n t n a t t a i r� iye wring pod: per-iedo. Thic left turn prohibition would require. out of direction travel for drivers wishing to accoao Pimlico Drive, but would provide level of service D operations. The Project shall be required to contribute a proportionate share of the improvement costs as determined by a regional transportation study such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. The City of Dublin shall continue to work with the City of Pleasanton to monitor level of service at this intersection and participate in implementing improvements which may be identified in the future to improve track operations. [NOTE: Further improvement to the level of service could be provided by prohibiting left turns from southbound Santa Rita Road to eastbound Pimlico Drive during the P.M. peak period (4:00 to 6:00 P.M.). This left -turn prohibition would require out -of -direction travel for drivers wishing to access Pimlico Drive during the P.M. peak period, but would provide level of service D operations. The City of Pleasanton has indicated that such a left -turn prohibition would not be acceptable.] MM 3.3/9.0 is applicable to the total Project site. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the impact but will introduce out of direction travel for certain dr1' o o, thereby resulting in a potmtkik significant impact the impact will remain significant. 11 Revised Text 12/15/92 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA EIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation IM 3.3/J Airway Boulevard & Dublin Boulevard Year 2010 development with the Project would cause level of service E operations at the intersection of Airway Boulevard with Dublin Boulevard/North Canyons Parkway. This is a significant impact. Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/10.0 The City of Dublin shall implement improvements in coordination coordinate with the City of Livermore to modify the intersection to provide three through lanes and a right -turn lane eastbound, and two left -turn lanes and two through lanes westbound. The Project shall contribute a proportionate share of the improvement costs as determined by a regional transportation study such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. These improvements would provide LOS C operations. MM 3.3/10.0 is applicable to the total Project site. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. IM 3.3/K Airway Boulevard & I-580 Westbound Ramps Year 2010 development with the Project would cause level of service F operations at the intersection of Airway Boulevard with the I-580 westbound ramps. This is a significant impact. Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/11.0 The City of Dublin shall implement improvements in coordination coordinate with the City of Livermore and Caltrans to replace or widen the Airway Boulevard overcrossing of I-580 by 12 feet to provide adequate storage for northbound left -turns, and widen ef the off -ramp to provide one left and one left -right lane. The Project shall contribute a proportionate share toward the cost of these improvements as determined by a regional transportation study such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. The improvements would provide LOS D operations. MM 3.3/11.0 is applicable to the total Project site. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 12 Revised Text 12115/92 Eastern Dublin SP/GI'A EIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation IM 3.3/L El Charro Road Project traffic could introduce stops and delays for loaded trucks from the quarries on El Charro Road south of I-580. This is a potentially significant impact and an unavoidable adverse impact as discussed in Chapter 5. [NOTE: This impact can be mitigated to a level of insignificance through proper design of the interchange improvements. Alternative interchange designs prepared by Bissell and Karn Engineers are currently under review.] Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/12.0 The City of Dublin shall implement improvements in coordination coordinate with Caltrans, the City of Pleasanton and Alameda County to ensure that modifications to the I-580 interchange at Fallon Road/El Charro Road include provisions for unimpeded truck movements to and from El Charro Road. The Project shall contribute a proportionate share of improvement costs as determined by a regional transportation study such as the current study by the Tri- Valley Transportation Council and additional studies of relative costs and benefits associated with the special design of this interchange. Implementation of MM 3.3/12.0 would reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 13 Revised Text 12/15/92 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA EIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATIONS (CUMULATIVE BUILDOUT WITH PROJECT) IM 3.3/M Cumulative Impacts on Dublin Boulevard Cumulative buildout with the Project would cause level of service F operations at the intersection of Hacienda Drive with Dublin Boulevard and level of service E operations at the intersection of Tassajara Road with Dublin Boulevard. No further widening of these intersections would be feasible. This is a significant cumulative impact. Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/13.0 The City of Dublin shall continue to participate in regional studies of future transportation requirements, improvement alternatives and funding programs, such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. No further widening of these intersections would be feasible. Buildout of proposed non -Project. related development (i.e. outside Eastern Dublin) beyond Year 2010 levels would require the construction of grade -separated interchanges on Dublin Boulevard and/or establishment of alternative routes to redistribute traffic flow. The Project shall participate in the implementation and funding of; and participation in regional transportation improvement programs as determined by the ongoing 'Fri Vally Tm:t&portation Council these regional studies. Implementation of MM 3.3/13.0 would reduce the impact, but the impact would remain significant. 14 Revised Text 12115192 Eastern Dublin SP/GPA EIR 3.3 Traffic and Circulation IM 3.3/N Cumulative Impacts on Tassajara Road Cumulative buildout with the Project would cause level of service F operations at the intersections of Tassajara Road with Fallon Road, Gleason Road and the Transit Spine. These impacts would be caused primarily by traffic from the Tassajara connection to Dougherty Valley, and full buildout of the Tassajara Valley. This is a significant cumulative impact and an unavoidable adverse impact as discussed in Chapter 5. Mitigation Measure of the EIR MM 3.3/14.0 Buildout of proposed non -Project related development (i.e. outside Eastern Dublin) beyond Year 2010 levels would require the widening of Tassajara Road to six lanes between Dublin Boulevard and the Contra Costa County line. The City of Dublin shall reserve right-of- way for up to six lanes on Tassajara Road between Dublin Boulevard and the Contra Costa County line. The City of Dublin shall monitor traffic conditions at key intersections and segments on Tassajara Road, and implement widening projects as required to maintain the LOS D standard. The Project shall contribute a proportionate amount to the costs of improvements on Tassajara Road, as determined by a regional transportation study such as the current study by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. Widening of Tuaxajcra Road would mitigate the projected traffic impact, but would not be compatible with planned land uses in the Eastarnn Dublin ge-Fwm1 Nrxx A.. and Specific Plan, partic\Aarly in the Town Center a is between Dublin Boulevard and Gleason Road. [NOTE: The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan will be modified to ensure that right-of-way is reserved for six lanes on Tassajara Road between Dublin Boulevard and the Contra Costa County line. The Specific Plan will also ensure that pedestrian and vehicle access can be provided to proposed commercial development on Tassajara Road in the Town Center area between Dublin Boulevard and Gleason Road in the event that this section is widened to six lanes.] [NOTE: The Specific Plan provides for Project implementation of road improvements including four lanes on Tassajara Road. Regional calculations of funding shares for the potential widening of Tassajara Road to six lanes should consider any prior contributions of Eastern Dublin developments towards the costs of the four lane roadway.] Implementation of MM 3.3/14.0 would reduce the impact, but would not be compatible with planned land uses, resulting in a potentially significant impact to a level of insignificance. 15 Revised Text 12/15/92 Q w w w w w w w w w w w O 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 '0 O ON 00 0000 COCN h ,N.1 r-+ N r-) .-, r I .-1 ,-1 1-4 r-4 r. r- c o A w w w W Q w A w .c a) a w w w lac' <S w_ a o p,E. W N ,>~ a,) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • w 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6� c VI CT ON 00 0' oi '0. Av > r-1 .-) .-) ,-4 .-1 .-1 ,-4 r-4 2.6) U u 2 U W cu A W A A A W Q W A "o g•0-. a w vo. E� op,_ be Z o o~ r 6 N F, E 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O y N Q O O O C O O O 0 0 h o zZ H 0 N c 50 E..' el - Q .et enp, 7o a, 1U -, O A A A U A A A A U A$ 0.54E-3 1.4 b,, CT 4)g .3 W 44 - .X a) 0 0. 0 C 0 0 0 0 . 4 z W W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 om W t� N N N ,-r 00 is .-) O v o C7 C d v1 �t *t M N N .-+ 0 CO 2 c'" Z L a -- ca 00 T• W 'u A coz C © .O 0 p a—, O O O V W '—' .--) .--I �.. �.. �... L.....0 u 0 00 00 00 00 y 0 :v_ 9 c m Oa O C C U 0 00 3 NCa c ❑ '3 11 V v, 0 C T �" .n 0i+ o C �. cd Cd C O O .d ` -. o co ` mo o � s Lod V0 V0 cel 0.ta al W G Q O•0 i C 12 INTERSTA': West of I-680 D H Tassaj< Fallon East of INTERSTA North South II Q. cip II p II Z Ov r P88209-05(wp5l).tbi/A