HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso 92-049 PA 92-034 Findings pursuant to CEQA and approving Mit. Neg Dec for Taco Bell Restaurant RESOLUTION NO. 92 - 049
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AND
APPROVING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PA 92-034 TACO BELL
RESTAURANT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Recitals
1. Ed Owen ("Applicant"), on behalf of Taco Bell Restaurant, has
made an application to the City of Dublin for Conditional Use
Permit/Site Development Review approval to construct a new 1,989
square foot Taco Bell Restaurant with a drive through window and
associated on-site parking and circulation modifications at 7123
Village Parkway (the "Project").
2. The Project includes a condition of approval to submit an
alternate drive through drive aisle design for review and
approval of the Public Works Department.
3. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City
Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 92-050, A RESOLUTION
ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR PA 92-034 Taco Bell Restaurant CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT/SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW approved on September 21, 1992 to
provide for the implementation of a mitigation monitoring program
covering the project.
4. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.1 and Section
15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California
Administrative Code), an initial study dated August 14, 1992 (the
"Initial Study"), was prepared to determine whether there are
effects on the environment peculiar to the proposed Project.
5. The Initial Study, based in part on an August 6, 1992 memorandum
prepared by Mehran Sepehri, Senior Civil Engineer of the Dublin
Public Works Department (the "Traffic Report") identified the
following effects on the environment as being peculiar to the
proposed Project:
Potential for increase in traffic accidents and reduction in
Level of Service on Village Parkway between Amador Valley
Boulevard and Lewis Avenue and the Village Parkway and
Amador Valley Boulevard intersection.
6. The Initial Study indicated that the significant environmental
effects listed in paragraph 5 could be mitigated by requiring the
Applicant to submit, prior to issuance of building permits, an
alternate drive through drive aisle design for review and
approval by the Planning and Public Works Departments. If the
Public Works Director determines that the proposed new driveway
has caused either a minimum of two traffic accidents in a
calendar year, or that the Level of Service on Village Parkway
between Amador Valley Boulevard and Lewis Avenue has been
reduced, within 60 days of written notice from the Public Works
Director the Applicant shall close the new driveway and install
the alternate drive through aisle. If the Applicant fails to
close the driveway and install the alternate drive through drive
aisle within 60 days, the Public Works Director shall close the
driveway.
7. The proposed Project has been modified to include provisions for
requiring the Applicant to submit an alternate drive through
drive aisle design for review and approval by the Planning and
Public Works Departments prior to issuance of building permits
for mitigating the effects described in paragraph 5 above (the
"traffic mitigation measure") in the manner described in the
Traffic Report.
8. Based on the information contained in the Traffic Report, the
Initial Study and the September 21, 1992 Staff Report (the "Staff
Report") all of which are incorporated herein by this reference,
a Mitigated Negative Declaration, incorporating the traffic
mitigation measure, was prepared for the proposed Project.
Notice of the Mitigated Negative Declaration was duly given prior
to the Planning Commission hearing on September 21, 1992.
9. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on the proposed
Project on September 21, 1992, at which time the Planning
Commission took testimony from interested persons regarding the
proposed Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning
Commission does hereby resolve that:
A. The foregoing Recitals are true and correct and are made a
part hereof.
B. The Planning Commission finds, on the basis of the record
before it and the foregoing Recitals, (1) that feasible
mitigation measures, including without limitation the
traffic mitigation measure, has been incorporated into the
Project to mitigate the significant environmental effects
identified in paragraph 5 above; (2) that such mitigation
measures will eliminate or reduce to a level of
insignificance the significant environmental effects
identified in paragraph 5; and (3) that uniformly applied
development policies or standards will not mitigate the
significant environmental effects identified in paragraph 5
above.
C. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all comments
received during the public comment period and all testimony
at the public hearing. The Planning Commission hereby finds
that there is no substantial evidence that the Project, as
modified to incorporate the traffic mitigation measures,
-2-
will have a significant effect on the environment and
approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of September, 1992.
AYES: Commissioners Barnes, Burnham, North, Rafanelli and Zika
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
151annin ommissioa Chairperson
ATTEST: 1/42 7;73
Planning Director
-3-