Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 06-19 Adopting a Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Valley Christian Center RESOLUTION NO. 06 — 19 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN * * * * * * * ** * ** * * ADOPTING A SUPPLEMENTAL MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE VALLEY CHRISTIAN CENTER PROJECT PLPA 2014-00052 (APN 941-0022-003, 004, 005 & 006) WHEREAS, the Applicant, the Valley Christian Center, has requested approval of an amendment to the existing Planned Development Zoning District, and a Site Development Review Permit to construct a lighted athletic field with sound amplification, a concession stand/ticket booth and associated site improvements including a plaza and landscaping. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the "Valley Christian Center project" or the "Project"; and WHEREAS, the project site is approximately 51 acres and is located at 7500 Inspiration Drive in the westerly portion of Dublin; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City environmental regulations, require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, in 2003, the City Council adopted a Resolution certifying an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and adopted findings and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Valley Christian Center Expansion/Master Plan project (Resolution No. 92-03, incorporated herein by reference); and WHEREAS, the City prepared a modified Initial Study to determine whether supplemental environmental review was required for the currently proposed Valley Christian Center project under CEQA standards. The Initial Study examined whether there were substantial changes to the proposed development, substantial changes in circumstances, or new information, any of which would result in new or more severe significant impacts than analyzed in the prior Valley Christian Center EIR or whether any other standards for supplemental environmental review were met; and WHEREAS, upon completion of the Initial Study it was determined that there were new potentially significant impacts associated with the project related to aesthetics, biological resources, noise, and transportation/traffic; therefore, a Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared to analyze those impacts and included mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to less than significant; and WHEREAS, the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study was circulated for public review from June 12, 2018 to July 12, 2018; and WHEREAS, the City of Dublin received two comment letters during the public review period and five additional comment letters during the public review period closed; and WHEREAS, on August 14, 2018, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on the project, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and Reso No. 06-19, Item 6.1, Adopted 2/5/19 Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated August 14, 2018, and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the project and related Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Planning Commission and recommended adoption of the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approval of the project; and WHEREAS, on August 14, 2018, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 18-18 (incorporated herein by reference) recommending that the City Council adopt the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project; and WHEREAS, on September 4, 2018, the City Council was scheduled to hold a properly noticed public hearing on the project and the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration and upon a request by the Applicant, continued the item to October 2, 2018; and WHEREAS, on October 2, 2018, the City Council was scheduled to hold a properly noticed public hearing on the project and the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration and upon a request by the Applicant, continued the item to a date uncertain; and WHEREAS, on February 5, 2019, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the project and Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated September 4, 2018, October 2, and February 5, 2019 and incorporated herein by reference described and analyzed the project and related Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration for the City Council and recommended adoption of the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approval of the project; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration, as well as the prior Valley Christian Center EIR and all above-referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony before taking any action on the project. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this Resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin finds the following: A. The Dublin City Council has reviewed and considered the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration including comments received during the public review period, prior to taking action on the project. B. The Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately describes the environmental impacts of the project. On the basis of the whole record before it, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project as approved with mitigation will have a significant effect on the environment. C. The Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin Environmental Regulations. D. The Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration is complete and adequate and reflects the City's independent judgement and analysis as to the environmental effects of the project. Reso No. 06-19, Item 6.1, Adopted 2/5/19 Page 2 of 3 E. Following adoption of this Resolution, City staff is authorized and directed to file with the County of Alameda a Notice of Determination pursuant to CEQA. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that based on the above findings, the Dublin City Council adopts the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration (attached as Exhibit A) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (attached as Exhibit B) for the project and the mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are imposed as conditions of approval for the project. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of February 2019 by the following vote: AYES: Cms. Hernandez, Josey and Mayor Haubert NOES: Cms. Goel and Kumagai ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None • yor ATTEST: 614,0 g 6CD City Clerk Reso No. 06-19, Item 6.1,Adopted 2/5/19 Page 3 of 3 Valley Christian Center Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study June 8, 2018 Planning Application Number: PLPA-2014-00052 City of Dublin Page 2 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Table of Contents Background & Project Description 3 Environmental Checklist 12 Determination 13 Explanation of Environmental Checklist Responses 14 Environmental Impacts Checklist 16 Discussion of Checklist 28 Initial Study Preparers & Agencies/Organizations Contacted 91 Attachments 1 Biological Resources Assessment Report & Update (WRA, 2015 & 2018) 2 Noise Assessment (Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc., 2018) 3 Traffic & Parking Analysis (Omni-Means, Ltd., 2015) List of Exhibits Exhibit 1: Regional Location Exhibit 2: Site Context Exhibit 3: Parcelization Exhibit 4: Proposed Athletic Stadium Exhibit 5: Preliminary Landscape Plan Exhibit 6: Building Sections Exhibit 7: Proposed Master Plan Note: All exhibits are included at the end of the document. List of Tables Table 1. Existing and Proposed Land Uses Table 2. Relevant California and National Ambient Air Quality Standards Table 3. Highest Measured Air Pollutant Concentrations at Livermore Station Table 4. Summary of Long-Term & Short-Term Noise Measurements (dBA) Table 5. City of Dublin Land Use/Noise Compatibility Standards Table 6. Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurements, Football game at Santa Teresa High School, San Jose, CA, 10/20/12 Table 7. Projected Noise Levels at Nearest Residences During Capacity Crowd Varsity Football Game at the Proposed Multi-purpose Field City of Dublin Page 3 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Valley Christian Center Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study PLPA-2014-00052 June 8, 2018 Introduction This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”, Pub. Res. Code §§ 21000 et seq.,) and the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs. title 14, §§ 15000-15387). This Initial Study analyzes whether any further environmental review is required for the proposed expansion of Valley Christian Center (“VCC”) under the standards of Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163. Development of the project site has been previously analyzed in an Environmental Impact Report titled “Valley Christian Center Expansion Program (State Clearinghouse No. 200212070).” This EIR was certified by the City of Dublin on May 20, 2003 by City Council Resolution No. 92-03. This Initial Study analyzes whether proposed changes to the development program for the VCC would result in any new or substantially more severe significant environmental impacts than those analyzed in the prior CEQA document or whether any of the other standards requiring further environmental review under CEQA are met. This Initial Study assesses program changes and development level activities to implement that program through a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan Amendment, Site Development Review (SDR) and other related entitlements for the property. Prior Environmental Impact Report In 2003, the City of Dublin certified an Environmental Impact Report for the VCC property. The VCC includes a church and related activities as well as a pre- school through grade 12 private school. The EIR analyzed the following improvements on the site, which would be phased over a number of years. • Expansion of the previously approved building area on the site to include up to a 90,000 square foot sanctuary building (with a seating capacity of 2,000), a pre-school, a fellowship hall and administration building (which could extend to 3 stories) a 1,000 square foot expansion to an existing pre- school, construction of a 45,000 square foot junior and senior high school administration building (3 stories), construction of a 15,000 square foot sports building, construction of a 30,000 square foo t senior activity center City of Dublin Page 4 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 (2 stories) and construction of a 6,000 square foot chapel building (2 stories). • Construction of up to 22 multi-family dwellings on the northwest corner of Dublin Boulevard and Inspiration Drive. This component was withdrawn from the project by the Applicant and was not approved by the City. • Construction of paved parking areas along the west side of Inspiration Drive near existing parking areas. • Installation of an LED-readout changeable message board sign on the south side of the administration building and mounted on the building. The sign was approved at a dimension of 12 feet wide and 30 inches tall. The 2003 EIR addressed the following environmental topics: • Aesthetics and Light and Glare • Air Quality • Biological resources • Cultural Resources • Geology and Soils • Hydrology and Water Quality • Land Use • Noise • Population, Housing and Employment • Transportation and Circulation • Utilities and Public Services • Parks and Recreation The 2003 EIR analyzed the potential effects of developing the site with residential uses and an alternative configuration of the VCC facility. The EIR found that the proposed residential development alternative would not meet the objectives of the project and was rejected as infeasible. The alternative that would relocate certain uses to the central and northern portions of the site was found to be the Environmentally Superior Alternative compared to the proposed project. The EIR identified a number of potentially significant impacts, but also recommended mitigation measures to reduce all impacts to a less-than- significant level. These are identified in the following Initial Study. No significant and unavoidable impacts were found. Applicant/Contact Person Valley Christian Center Attn: James Goring, Goring & Straja, project architect 7500 Inspiration Drive City of Dublin Page 5 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Dublin, CA 94568 Phone: (510) 848-0895 Project Description Project location and context. The project site consists of approximately 51 acres of land located in the western portion of Dublin. Exhibit 1 shows the regional location of Dublin in the Bay area and Exhibit 2 shows the project site location in the context of the local roadways, freeways and other features. The site is generally rectangularly shaped and is located on the north side of Dublin Boulevard. Inspiration Drive provides access into the project site and extends through the site in a north-south direction. The site address is 7500 Inspiration Drive. Dublin Boulevard is the southern boundary of the site with the I -580 freeway located south of Dublin Boulevard. A combination of residential uses (located on Glengarry Lane, McPeak Lane and Brigadoon Lane) and open space exists west of the site. Single-family homes on Inspiration Circle and open spaces are located north of the site and single-family homes are located east of the site along Las Palmas Way and Bay Laurel Street. Project background and prior planning approvals. The Valley Christian Center was approved under a Conditional Use Permit issued by Alameda County in 1978, prior to the incorporation of Dublin in 1982. Following incorporation, the City granted approval for an elementary school in 1994, and expansion of a playfield in 1995. In 1998, the City approved a Site Design Review (SDR) application for placement of two temporary classrooms. As described above, the City approved a Master Plan for the site in 2003. Existing On-Site Development. Following approval of the Master Plan by the City in 2003, a number of buildings and other improvements have been constructed on the site. Table 1, below, summarizes exiting land uses on the site as well as proposed uses. VCC currently operates church facilities on the site on Sundays and some weekday evenings. Peak attendance for Sunday services is approximately 520 visitors with 40 employees also on the site. The private school on the site provides for pre-school through grade 12 educational services with an estimated enrollment of 790 students and a faculty and staff of 129. City of Dublin Page 6 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Project Characteristics Overview. The application includes a request to the City of Dublin for amendments to the Valley Christian Center Master Plan that would include a lighted athletic field for football, soccer, track and other sports; construction of new buildings on the campus; expansion of existing buildings; and changes to on-site parking and landscaping. These are described below. Proposed Master Plan Changes. The Applicant is requesting the following changes to the Master Plan that would allow additional development on the VCC site. Table 1 summarizes existing land uses shown in square footage, the amount of development allowed under the approved Master Plan and the amount of development that would be allowed if the amended Master Plan is approved. As shown in the table, a number of approved uses would be rearranged on the site to allow the facility to meet current and future needs. There would be up to a 1,300 square foot addition in the total amount of development square footage from what is currently permitted. The ultimate size of the church sanctuary would be reduced by 42,600 square feet. School, fellowship, and administrative floor space would increase by up to 23,600 square feet. Space devoted to daycare use would expand by 11,300 square feet, and middle school and high school space would increase by 9,000 square feet. No increase in the student population is anticipated. Table 1. Existing and Proposed Land Uses Source: Project Applicant, 2018 Building (see Ex. 4) Land Use Existing Sq. Ft. Proposed Additional Sq. Ft. Proposed Total Sq. Ft. Approved Sq. Ft. (2003) Difference (Sq. Ft.) A Sanctuary 15,700 31,700 47,400 90,000 -42,600 A1 Pre-School/Day Care/Fellowship/ Admin. 14,400 16,200 30,600 14,400 +16,200 A2 Fellowship/Sanctuary/ Admin. 0 7,400 7,400 0 +7,400 D, 2 Pre-School/Daycare 10,000 12,300 22,300 11,000 +11,300 3 Jr. /Sr. High School 10,725 0 10,725 8,800 +1,925 4 Jr./Sr. High School 32,600 0 32,600 32,600 0 5 Elementary School 52,500 0 52,500 52,500 0 B Jr. & Sr. High School/Admin./Sports 0 52,075 52,075 45,000 +7,075 C Sports/School 0 15,000 15,000 15,000 0 E Senior Center/Counseling/ Club/Activity Center 0 30,000 30,000 30,000 0 F Church/School Assembly 0 6,000 6,000 6,000 0 Total 135,925 170,675 306,600 305,300 +1,300 City of Dublin Page 7 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 The Applicant is also proposing to add one caretaker dwelling unit on the site in the future. A Site Development Review Permit will be required prior to the caretaker unit being constructed. The site has been divided into four parcels as depicted on Exhibit 3. Parcel 1 (APN 941-0022-0040) is the largest parcel consisting of 33.3 acres of land located in the approximate center of the site. This parcel contains all school improvements, including buildings, athletic fields and parking. Parcel 1-A (APN 941-0022-003) is located on the northwest corner of the site and contains 3.7 acres of land that would be devoted to open space but would be converted to a baseball field as part of Phase 3. Parcel 2 (APN 941-0022-005) is located on the northwest corner of Inspiration Drive and Dublin Boulevard and contains 1.4 acres of land. Parcel 3 (APN 941- 0022-006) contains 12.7 acres of land located east of Inspiration Drive. This parcel includes 8.02 acres of land that has been dedicated as a conservation easement that precludes development. Parcels 2 and 3 are undeveloped and no development is proposed as a part of the project. Features of the proposed changes to the Master Plan include: • Football/Athletic Field. A major portion of the project would include converting an existing softball field and parking lot on the northeast portion of the campus to a football athletic field. The field would be constructed in an oval configuration as shown on Exhibit 4. The field would accommodate soccer, track and field and other similar outdoor activities. Improvements would include grading the site to construct a flat playing field with raised edges to accommodate seating. Metal bleacher seating for up to 1,100 people would be located on the southwest side of the field, nearest to the main campus. The main field would be synthetic material with a gravel running track on the outside of the playing field. It is anticipated that the field would be used during the academic year for a variety of sports activities, with the main use being football. The football season runs from approximately mid-August until mid-November. Up to six home games would be played; however, if the school qualifies for playoffs, an additional three games could for a total of nine games. Football practice would occur on Monday through Thursday from 3:00 pm to 5:30 pm with games scheduled for Friday evenings from 4:00 pm to 9:00 pm. Some Saturday evening games could be played between those hours as well. Attendance at football games is expected to average 400 visitors for most games. The attendance could increase to 600 visitors for homecoming and playoff games. The VCC junior varsity team would play at 4:00 pm. City of Dublin Page 8 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Other sports including men’s varsity soccer and middle school soccer would be played throughout the year. These sporting events would most likely not result in major attendance. Men’s and women’s soccer practice would occur three days per week from 3:00 pm to 5:00 pm. Additionally, there would be one to two homes games per week from 3:30 pm to 5:30 pm with occasional Saturday afternoon games. The varsity soccer team would play five homes games per season with the possibility of additional playoff games. There would also be middle school soccer matches. Maximum attendance at these non-football events is anticipated to include up to 40 visitors and 40 players and coaches. Junior varsity men’s soccer games would occur between 3:30 and 5:30 pm. Invitation track meets would occur on Saturdays. These events could involve visitation by multiple schools. Track practice would occur Monday through Friday from 3:00 pm to 5:00 pm. One track meet per month is anticipated, which would occur on a weekday from 2:00 pm to 6:00 pm. Attendance is expected to include 40-60 athletes and 40-60 visitors. There would also be a maximum of two all-day track events per year that would include up to 100-200 athletes and 200 visitors. These invitational track meets would occur on Saturdays. VCC proposes using sound amplification during football games, track meets and other sporting events held on the proposed field. This would include the use of exterior speakers that would generally be directed onto the field. Use of amplified would cease no later than 10:00 pm. Exterior lights would be installed as part of the proposed athletic field to allow for nighttime activities. It is anticipated that lights would be used during football games, soccer matches and track and field events, generally on Friday and Saturday evenings. A condition of approval will be applied to the project requiring that the lights be turned off by 10:00 pm. • Softball/Athletic Field. The existing athletic field in the northwest portion of the site would be expanded to accommodate the existing softball field that would be relocated from the football field site. A small outdoor play area would be constructed just north of the softball field. This facility would only accommodate future VCC events. No permanent bleacher seats are proposed. • Central plaza. A plaza would be created in the approximate center of the campus, to be located north of Building 3 and east of Building 4. The intent of this feature is to serve as a central campus focal point and will include a mixture of hardscape and landscape features. A tall cross would be installed in the approximate center of the plaza. City of Dublin Page 9 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 • On-site school enrollment. School enrollment is not anticipated to increase above current enrollment levels. The estimated high school enrollment would be up to 750 students. Enrollment at the elementary and middle school is expected to be up to 400 students and the day care component would be capped at 156 students. • Parking. An existing parking lot would be removed in the northeast portion of the site to accommodate the proposed multi-sports field. Other portions of the site would be converted to permanent parking. There are currently 510 parking spaces on the site. With implementation of t he Master Plan, there would be 600 spaces on the site (540 permanent spaces on the site and 60 overflow spaces located east of Building B). The supply of parking spaces would vary with each phase of development. An existing parking lot will be eliminated to allow construction of the stadium facility; however, the Applicant will be providing additional parking at a new parking area. A total of 511 parking spaces are provided for Phases 1 & 2, 530 parking spaces for Phase 3 and 600 parking spaces for Phase 4. • Landscaping. The updated campus would include planting of trees, shrubs and groundcover around the periphery of the campus as well as adjacent to buildings and within parking lots. Exhibit 5 depicts the preliminary landscape plan for the campus. A number of existing trees would be removed to accommodate proposed improvements, but replacement tree plantings would occur. • On-site dwelling. One caretaker dwelling would be constructed on the site as part of later phases of development. The Stage 2 Development Plan is being amended as part of the current project to approve the use; however, a Site Development Review Permit will be required prior to construction of the unit. Buildings. Buildings on the site are subject to Site Development Review (SDR) by the Dublin Planning Commission. SDR approval is required prior to issuance of a building permit. SDR approval is also required for landscaping, walls and fences, signs and similar improvements. The Applicant has requested SDR approval for the football/athletic field facility, central plaza, and site modifications including landscaping. Exhibit 6 depicts building sections. Access and Circulation. Access to and from the site would continue to be provided by Inspiration Drive. Inspiration Drive provides two vehicular access City of Dublin Page 10 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 points to and from the site via Dublin Boulevard to the south and Bay Laurel Drive to the north. Water and Sewer Services: Utility services to support the proposed land use changes would continue to be supplied by the Dublin San Ramon Services District. This topic is described in the following Initial Study. Water Quality Protection. Proposed improvements on the project site will continue to be subject to Best Management Practices to support water quality standards as enforced by the City of Dublin. Project Grading. Portions of the project site, especially the proposed football field, would be graded to provide for a generally flat athletic field. Other portions of the site would also be graded to accommodate proposed improvements. Given the moderate to steep topography of the site, one or more retaining walls may be constructed. Preliminarily, it is anticipated that walls could extent to a height of 11 feet. Phasing. Proposed improvements would be constructed over a number of years that would extend until the year 2030. Exhibit 7 shows the proposed build-out of site improvements under the amended Master Plan. Requested land use entitlements. The following land use entitlements have been requested to allow implementation of the proposed project: • Planned Development Rezoning and Stage 1 & Stage 2 Development Plan amendment; • Conditional Use Permit to establish the parking requirement for the football/athletic field; • Minor Use Permit for Shared Parking; and • Site Development Review approval (football/athletic field, central plaza, parking lot modifications and landscaping). City of Dublin Page 11 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 1. Project description: The Applicant requests approval of an amendment to the approved Valley Christian Center Master Plan to allow for a lighted multi-purpose athletic field on the northeast portion of the existing campus, construction of a central plaza/quad area, construction of other new buildings on the campus and changes to on-site parking and landscaping. 2. Lead agency: City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94583 3. Contact person: Martha Battaglia, Dublin Planning Department (925) 833-6610 4. Project location: North of Dublin Boulevard at Inspiration Drive at 7500 Inspiration Drive 5. Project contact person: James Goring, Goring & Straja Architects (510) 848-0895 6. General Plan Land Use Public/Semi Public Designation: 8. Zoning PD-Planned Development 9. Other public agency necessary, potential and/or desired approvals: • Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan Amendment, Conditional Use Permit, Minor Use Permit and Site Development Review Permit (City of Dublin) • Grading Plans, Improvement Plans, and Building Permits (City of Dublin) • Sewer and water connections (DSRSD) • Encroachment permits (City of Dublin) • Notice of Intent (State Water Resources Control Board) City of Dublin Page 12 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below may be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "potentially significant impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages requiring preparation of a Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration. X Aesthetics - Agricultural Resources - Air Quality X Biological Resources - Cultural Resources - Geology/Soils - Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials - Hydrology/Water Quality - Land Use/ Planning - Mineral Resources X Noise - Population/ Housing - Public Services - Recreation X Transportation/ Traffic - Utilities/Service Systems - Tribal Cultural Resources - Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: ___ I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. ___ I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Addendum will be prepared. ___ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared. City of Dublin Page 13 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 _X__I find that although the proposed project may have a potentially significant effect, or a potentially significant effect unless mitigated, on the environment, but at least one or more effects: 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards; and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on the attached sheets. A focused Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration is required, but it must only analyze the effects that meet the CEQA standards for supplemental review as identified in attached checklist. Signature: _______________________________ Date: __________ Printed Name: Martha Battaglia, Associate Planner For: City of Dublin Community Development Department City of Dublin Page 14 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers. Certain "no impact" answers are supported by the information sources the lead agency cites in the parenthesis following each question. A "no impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone), or, in this case, there is no impact of the proposed project beyond that which was considered previously in the certified 2003 EIR (see explanation under Earlier Analysis section below). A "no impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general factors (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. It there are one or more "potentially significant impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" implies elsewhere the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "potentially significant effect" to a "less-than- significant impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less-than- significant level. 5. Earlier Analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a. Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less-than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which City of Dublin Page 15 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. d. A “No New Impact” finding means that there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to the impact area beyond what has been analyzed in 2003 EIR, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for the impact area. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be at tached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9. The explanation of each issue should identify: a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question. b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less- than-significant. Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality. City of Dublin Page 16 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Environmental Impacts (Note: Source of determination listed in parenthesis. See listing of sources used to determine each potential impact at the end of the checklist) Note: A full discussion of each item is found following the checklist. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact 1. Aesthetics. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (Source: 2, 6) X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Source: 2, 6) X c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Source: 6) X d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Source: 2, 6) X 2. Agricultural Resources . Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non- agricultural use? (Source: 2) X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Source: 2) X c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use? (Source: 2) X 3. Air Quality (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district may be relied on to make the following determinations). Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Source: 1,4) X b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (Source: 2, 8) X City of Dublin Page 17 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? (2, 8) X d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Source: 2, 8) X e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Source: 2, 6) X 4. Biological Resources . Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?(Source: 2,3) X b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Source: 2,3) X c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means? (Source: Source: 2,3) X d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Source: 2, 3) X City of Dublin Page 18 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree protection ordinances? (Source: 2, 3) X f) Conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? (Source: 2, 8) X 5. Cultural Resources. Would the project a) Cause a substantial adverse impact in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Sec. 15064.5 or listed or eligible for listing on the CA Register of Historic Places? (2) X b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to Sec. 15064.5 (Source: 2) X c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource, site or unique geologic feature? (Source: 2) X 6. Geology and Soils. Would the project a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: X i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault (Source: 2) X ii) Strong seismic ground shaking (2) X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? (2) X iv) Landslides? (2) X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (Source: 2) X City of Dublin Page 19 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or similar hazards (2) X d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (2)(Source: 2) X e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? (Source: 1, 2) X 7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? (9) X b) Conflict with applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. X 8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials (Source: 2) X b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Source: 2) X c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Source: 2) X d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Sec. 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Source: 2, 8) X City of Dublin Page 20 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted within two miles of a public airport of public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (Source: 1, 2) X f) For a project within the vicinity of private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with the adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (1.2) X h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (Source: 2, 7) X 9. Hydrology and Water Quality . Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Source: 2) X b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? (2) X c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? (Source: , 72) X City of Dublin Page 21 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or areas, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? (Source: 2, 7) X e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (Source: 2) X f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? (Source: 2) X g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? (Source: 2, 7) X h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Source: 2, 7) X i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, and death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? (2, 7) X j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? (2) X 10. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? (Source: 1, 2,) X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Source: 1, 2) X c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (1, 2) X City of Dublin Page 22 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact 11. Mineral Resources . Would the project a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Source: 1, 2) X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general Plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Source:1, 2) X 12. Noise. Would the proposal result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (1, 2,4) X b) Exposure of persons or to generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (Source:2, 3) X c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above existing levels without the project? (2,4) X d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (2, 4) X e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working n the project area to excessive noise levels? (2, 4) X f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Source: 2, 4) X 13. Population and Housing. Would the project City of Dublin Page 23 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (Source: 1, 2) X b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (1, 2) X c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement of housing elsewhere? (Source: 6) X 14. Public Services. Would the proposal: a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service rations, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services? (Sources: 2,7) Fire protection X Police protection X Schools X Parks X Other public facilities X Solid Waste X 15. Recreation: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated (Source: 1, 2) X b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Source: 1, 2) X 16. Transportation and Traffic. Would the project: City of Dublin Page 24 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads or congestion at intersections)? (2,5) X b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the County Congestion Management Agency for designated roads or highways? (2,5) X c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (2, 5) X d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses, such as farm equipment? (5) X e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (5) X f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (5) X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (such as bus turnouts and bicycle facilities) (1,2) X 17. Tribal Cultural Resources. Would the project: a) Be listed or eligible for listing on the California Register of Historic Resources or be listed in a local register of historic resources, as defied in Pub. Resources Code sec. 5020.1 (k)? (2, 7) X b) Be a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria in subdivision (c) of Pub. Resources Code sec. 5024.1, including potential significance to any resources associated with a California Native American Tribe? (2, 7) X 18. Utilities and Service Systems. Would the project: City of Dublin Page 25 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (2, 7) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (2, 7) X c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (4, 7) X d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing water entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (2, 7) X e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments? (2, 7) X f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? (2) X g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (2) X 18. Mandatory Findings of Significance a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X City of Dublin Page 26 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). X c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X Sources used to determine potential environmental impacts 1. Dublin General Plan Amendment 2. VCC Final EIR, City of Dublin 2003 3. Biological Reconnaissance, WRA, July 2015, Updated March, 2018 4. Acoustic Analysis, Illingworth & Rodkin, June 2018 5. Parking & Traffic Analysis, Omni-Means, November 2015 6. Site Visit 7 Information from Service Provider 8. Other Source XVII. Earlier Analyses and Incorporation By Reference a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. The following Environmental Impact Report has been used in the preparation of the Initial Study. All are available for review at the City of Dublin Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA, during normal business hours. Each of the following documents are incorporated by reference into this Initial Study. Valley Christian Center Expansion Program EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 200212070). March 2003. City of Dublin Page 27 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 This Initial Study analyzes whether any further environmental review than that performed in this prior certified EIR are required for the proposed project under the standards of Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines section 15162 and 15163. This Initial Study analyzes whether the proposed changes to the VCC Master Plan Project will result in any new or substantially more severe significant environmental impacts than those analyzed in the prior EIR or whether any other of the standards requiring further environmental review under CEQA are met. If the Initial Study determines that there are no new or substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the prior EIR and no CEQA standard for subsequent or supplemental review is met, then the impact is identified as “No New Impact.” City of Dublin Page 28 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Discussion of Checklist 1. Aesthetics Environmental Setting The project is located on a prominent knoll north of the Interstate 580 (I -580) freeway and Dublin Boulevard in the western portion of Dublin. The site has steeply sloping hillsides rising to an elevation of approximately 830 feet above sea level at the highest elevation on the site. Major features of the site include a number of buildings at the top of the knoll devoted to existing VCC operations. Buildings are largely screened by mature vegetation which has been planted on the campus. Inspiration Drive, the major access road to the site from Dublin Boulevard, is also noticeable from passers -by on the I-580 freeway and Dublin Boulevard. Views of the roadway are softened by mature trees planted adjacent to the road alignment. Lower portions of the site more visible from adjacent roadways are vacant and include native grasslands and low vegetation. Eastern facing side slopes are also vegetated with grasses. The project site is not located adjacent to an officially designed state highway, although I-580 is considered by Caltrans to be eligible for listing as a state scenic highway (source: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways). Existing light sources include streetlights along Inspiration Drive, parking lot lighting, building exterior lights and pathway lights. 2003 EIR The 2003 EIR identified the following potentially significant aesthetic impacts and mitigation measures: • Impact 4.1-1 identified a significant impact with respect to views of the project site from the I-580 freeway and from Dublin Boulevard since building proposed in the complex would be out of scale with other existing development in the western portion of Dublin. Mitigation Measure 4.1-1 required that the proposed senior center and chapel buildings on the site be restricted to one story constructed and set back from the top of the slope on the site. Consideration should also be given to reducing the apparent height by use of low rooflines use of earth tone colors and non-reflective surfaces. This mitigation also required that the residential component of the project be setback from Dublin Boulevard, restricted to single story construction on the south side of the site and City of Dublin Page 29 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 using extensive landscaping near the entrance and using earth tome colors and non-reflective surfaces. These measures reduced this impact to a less- than-significant level. • Impact 4.1-3 found that construction of the proposed project would increase the amount of light and potential glare due to parking and building lights. Lighting of the playfields would be an additional source of light and glare that could impact nearby residential areas. Mitigation Measure 4.1-2 required that exterior light fixtures be equipped with cut- off lenses, directed downward and limited in height to minimize excess light and glare. Future lighting of playfields is subject to a publicly noticed Planning Commission hearing. Adherence to these measures reduced this impact to a less-than-significant level. The proposed project will be required to adhere to all applicable mitigation measures identified above and other land use regulations dealing with aesthetics, visual conditions and light and glare. Project Impacts a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista? No New Impact. Approval and implementation of the proposed project would increase the amount of future buildings on the site above existing land use approvals by an estimated 1,300 square feet. Existing open sports fields would also be expanded to accommodate a wider variety of sports and outdoor activities. Since the higher elevations of the site have previously been developed for Valley Christian Center, the addition of approximately 1,300 square feet would not represent a significant impact. The Applicant is also proposing to preserve approximately 8 acres of the eastern-facing slope as a permanent non-buildable open space conservation area. With adherence to previous applicable mitigation measures and applicable regulations, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to scenic vistas beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including visual resources within state scenic highway? No New Impact. Future development under the amended Master Plan would largely occur within or adjacent to the existing development portion of the site at the top of the knoll. New development would not be significantly noticeable from the I-580 freeway or Dublin Boulevard due to the lower elevation of roadways as compared to the top of the knoll. City of Dublin Page 30 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 As noted in the Biological Resources section of this Initial Study, a small wetland area with associated riparian vegetation is located on the southwest corner of the site. Based on the proposed development plan, this existing scenic resource would not be developed or otherwise impacted by the proposed development. With adherence to previous applicable mitigation measures and applicable regulations, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to scenic resources beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. c) Substantially degrade existing visual character or the quality of the site? No New Impact. The proposed project would include limited new building construction (approximately 1,300 square feet), athletic fields, a central plaza and related improvements in close proximity to the existing VCC campus and at the top of the knoll. The Applicant is proposing to preserve approximately 8 acres of the eastern-facing slope as a permanent non- buildable open space conservation area. With the open space conservation easement to preclude additional development of buildings or improvements, there would be no new or more severe significant impact with respect to degradation of the visual character or quality of the site that was analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. d) Create light or glare? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation. The issue of light and glare was analyzed in the 2003 EIR. The EIR contained Mitigation Measure 4.1-2 that requires that exterior light fixtures be equipped with cut-off lenses, directed downward and limited in height to minimize excess light and glare. Future lighting of playfields is subject to a publically noticed Planning Commission and City Council hearings. The current project includes lighted playfields on the northeast portion of the main campus that would be used at night several times per year, which was not included in the 2003 approved Master Plan. There are residences just east of the project site that could be impacted by lighting at the currently proposed playfield. Therefore, the following mitigation measure would augment the existing Mitigation Measure 4.1-2 by requiring documentation that there will be no spillover of light and glare from the site onto adjacent residences: City of Dublin Page 31 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Mitigation Measure AES-1. In addition to the requirements contained in 2003 EIR Mitigation Measure 4.1-2 to equip all exterior lighting with cut-off lenses, directed downward, limited in height and that lighting of playfields, the following shall also apply: a) Submittal of final playfield lighting plans to the City of Dublin Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit for the sports stadium to include detailed photometric drawings documenting that no spill over of light or glare would occur off the VCC project site. The photometric drawings shall be approved prior to the issuance of the building permit. The previous requirement for Planning Commission approval of lighting plans is no longer applicable. 2. Agricultural & Forestry Resources Environmental Setting The project site has been largely developed with the Valley Christian C enter for more than thirty years. The site is zoned “Planned Development” which is not an agricultural zoning district and no Williamson Act Land Conservation Agreement has been signed on the property. No crop production occurs on the site. Other than introduced, ornamental trees, no significant trees or forestry resources exist on the site. Previous EIR The topic of agricultural and forestry resources was identified as a less-than- significant impact in the 2003 EIR. Project Impacts a-c) Convert prime farmland to a non-agricultural use or involve other changes which could result in conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use? No New Impact. As noted in the Environmental Setting Section, the site is not used for agricultural production, is not zoned for agriculture and is not subject to a agricultural conservation easement. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to agricultural resources beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. City of Dublin Page 32 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 d,e) Involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use or conversion of forestland to a non-forest use? No New Impact. No significant forest resources exist on the site. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to forestry resources beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. 3. Air Quality Background. The project is located in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. Ambient air quality standards have been established at both the state and federal level. The Bay Area meets all ambient air quality standards with the exception of ground-level ozone, respirable particulate matter (PM10) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). High ozone levels are caused by the cumulative emissions of reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). These precursor pollutants react under certain meteorological conditions to form high ozone levels. Controlling the emissions of these precursor pollutants is the focus of the Bay Area’s attempts to reduce ozone levels. Highest ozone levels in the Bay Area occur in the eastern and southern inland valleys that are downwind of air pollutant sources. High ozone levels aggravate respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, reduce lung function, and increase coughing and chest discomfort. Particulate matter is another problematic air pollutant in the Bay Area. Particulate matter is assessed and measured in terms of respirable particulate matter or particles that have a diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PM10) and fine particulate matter where particles have a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5). Elevated concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 are the result of both region-wide (or cumulative) emissions and localized emissions. High particulate matter levels aggravate respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, reduce lung function, increase mortality (e.g., lung cancer), and result in reduced lung function growth in children. The ambient air quality in a given area depends on the quantities of pollutants emitted within the area, transport of pollutants to and from surrounding areas, local and regional meteorological conditions, and the surrounding topography of the air basin. Air quality is described by the concentration of various pollutants in the atmosphere. Units of concentration are generally expressed in parts per million (ppm) or micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3). The project is located within the Livermore Valley. The Livermore Valley forms a small sub regional City of Dublin Page 33 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 air basin distinct from the larger San Francisco Bay Area air basin. The Livermore Valley air basin is surrounded on all sides by high hills or mountains. Significant breaks in the hills surrounding the air basin are Niles Canyon and the San Ramon Valley, which extends northward into Contra Costa County. The terrain of the Livermore-Amador Valley influences both the climate and air pollution potential of the sub-regional air basin. As an inland, protected valley, the area has generally lighter winds and a higher frequency of calm conditions compared to the greater Bay Area. The occurrence of episodes of high atmospheric stability, known as inversion conditions, severely limits the ability of the atmosphere to disperse pollutants vertically. Inversions can be found during all seasons in the Bay Area, but are particularly prevalent in the summer months when they are present about 90% of the time in both morning and afternoon. According to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), air pollution potential is high in the Livermore Valley, especially for ozone in the summer and fall. High temperatures increase the potential for ozone, and the valley not only traps locally generated pollutants but can be the receptor of ozone and ozone precursors from upwind portions of the greater Bay Area. Transport of pollutants also occurs between the Livermore Valley and the San Joaquin Valley to the east. During the winter, the sheltering effect of terrain and its inland location results in frequent surface-based inversions. Under these conditions pollutants such as carbon monoxide from automobiles and particulate matter generated by fireplaces and agricultural burning can become concentrated. National and state ambient air quality standards. As required by the Federal Clean Air Act, National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) have been established for six major air pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), particulate matter, including respirable particulate matter (PM10) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5), sulfur oxides, and lead. Pursuant to the California Clean Air Act, the State of California has established the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). Relevant current state and federal standards are summarized in Table 2. CAAQS are generally the same or more stringent than NAAQS. Air Quality Monitoring Data. The significance of a pollutant concentration is determined by comparing the concentration to an appropriate ambient air quality standard. The standards represent the allowable pollutant concentrations designed to ensure that the public health and welfare are protected, while including a reasonable margin of safety to protect the more sensitive individuals City of Dublin Page 34 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 in the population. BAAQMD monitors air quality conditions at more than 20 locations throughout the Bay Area. The closest monitoring station to the project site is in Livermore at the 793 Rincon Avenue monitoring station. Summarized air pollutant data for this station is provided in Table 3. This table shows the highest air pollutant concentrations measured at the station over the three -year period from 2012 through 2014. Note that BAAQMD discontinued monitoring of carbon monoxide in 2009 at this station. The data shows that ozone levels exceeded state or federal standards from 2012 through 2014. The PM2.5 24-hour standard was exceeded in 2013 and 2014. Ambient Air Quality Status. Areas with air pollutant levels that exceed adopted air quality standards are designated as “nonattainment” areas for the relevant air pollutants. Nonattainment areas are sometimes further classified by degree (marginal, moderate, serious, severe, and extreme for ozone, and moderate and serious for carbon monoxide and PM10) or status (“nonattainment-transitional”). Areas that comply with air quality standards are designated as “attainment” areas for the relevant air pollutants. “Unclassified” areas are those with insufficient air quality monitoring data to support a designation of attainment or nonattainment, but are generally presumed to meet the ambient air quality standard. State Implementation Plans must be prepared by states for areas designated as federal nonattainment areas to demonstrate how the area will come into attainment of the exceeded federal ambient air quality standard. The Bay Area is considered a marginal nonattainment area for ozone under the NAAQS and nonattainment for ozone under the CAAQS (both 1 -hour and 8- hour standards). The Bay Area is also designated as nonattainment for the 24- hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The Bay Area is also considered nonattainment for the State annual PM2.5 standard and the 24-hour PM10 standard. The region is designated attainment or unclassified for all other ambient air quality standards. Sensitive Receptors. There are groups of people more affected by air pollution than others. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has identified the following persons who are most likely to be affected by air pollution: children under 14, the elderly over 65, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. These groups are classified as sensitive receptors. Locations that may contain a high concentration of these sensitive population groups include residential areas, hospitals, daycare facilities, elder care facilities, elementary schools, and parks. The Valley Christian Center site itself is the closest sensitive receptor since it currently contains a day care facility, elementary school and outdoor playgrounds. City of Dublin Page 35 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Table 2. Relevant California and National Ambient Air Quality Standards Pollutant Averaging Time California Standards National Standards Ozone 8-hour 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) 0.075 ppm (147µg/m3) 1-hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3) — Carbon monoxide 1-hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3) 35 ppm (40 mg/m3) 8-hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) Nitrogen dioxide 1-hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3) 0.100 ppm (188 µg/m3) Annual 0.030 ppm (57 µg/m3) 0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3) Sulfur Dioxide 1-hour 0.25 ppm (655 µg/m3) 0.075 ppm (196 µg/m3) 24-hour 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m3) 0.14 ppm (365 µg/m3) Annual — 0.03 ppm (56 µg/m3) Particulate Matter (PM10) Annual 20 µg/m3 — 24-hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3 Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Annual 12 µg/m3 12 µg/m3 24-hour — 35 µg/m3 Source: BAAQMD and EPA, 2015. Notes: ppm = parts per million mg/m3 = mil ligrams per cubic meter µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter Toxic Air Contaminants. Toxic air contaminants (TAC) are a broad class of compounds known to cause morbidity or mortality (usually because they cause cancer). TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, fuel combustion, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). TACs are typically found in low concentrations, even near their source (e.g., diesel particulate matter near a freeway). Because chronic exposure can result in adverse health effects, TACs are regulated at the regional, state, and federal level. City of Dublin Page 36 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Table. 3. Highest Measured Air Pollutant Concentrations at Livermore Station Pollutant Average Time Measured Air Pollutant Levels 2012 2013 2014 Ozone (O3) 1-Hour 0.102 ppm 0.096 ppm 0.093 ppm 8-Hour 0.090 ppm 0.077 ppm 0.080 ppm Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8-Hour ND ND ND Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 1-Hour 0.053 ppm 0.051 ppm 0.049 ppm Annual 0.010 ppm 0.011 ppm 0.010 ppm Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) 24-Hour ND ND ND Annual ND ND ND Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 24-Hour 31.1 ug/m3 40.1 ug/m3 42.9 ug/m3 Annual 6.6 ug/m3 8.4 ug/m3 7.6 ug/m3 Source: CARB, 2015. Notes: ppm = parts per million and ug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter. Values reported in bold exceed ambient air quality standard. ND = No data. Diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about three-quarters of the cancer risk from TACs (based on the Bay Area average). According to CARB, diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of gases, vapors and fine particles. This complexity makes the evaluation of health effects of diesel exhaust a complex scientific issue. Some of the chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and formaldehyde, have been previously identified as TACs by CARB, and are listed as carcinogens either under the state's Proposition 65 or under the Federal Hazardous Air Pollutants programs. CARB has adopted and implemented a number of regulations for stationary and mobile sources to reduce emissions of diesel particulate matter. Several of these regulatory programs affect medium and heavy duty diesel trucks that represent the bulk of diesel particulate matter emissions from California highways. These regulations include the solid waste collection vehicle rule, in-use public and utility fleets, and the heavy-duty diesel truck and bus regulations. In 2008, CARB approved a new regulation to reduce emissions of diesel particulate matter and nitrogen oxides from existing on-road heavy-duty diesel fueled vehicles. The regulation requires affected vehicles to meet specific performance requirements between 2012 and 2023, with all affected diesel vehicles required to have 2010 model-year engines or equivalent by 2023. These requirements are phased in over the compliance period and depend on the model year of the vehicle. City of Dublin Page 37 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 BAAQMD. The BAAQMD is the regional agency tasked with managing air quality in the region. At the state level, CARB (a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency) oversees regional air district activities and regulates air quality at the state level. The BAAQMD published CEQA Air Quality Guidelines are used in this assessment to evaluate air quality impacts of projects. Previous EIR The 2003 EIR identified the following potentially significant air quality impact and mitigation measure: • Impact 4.2-1 identified a significant short-term construction impact that included increased dustfall and locally elevated emissions of PM10 for downwind properties. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.2-1 reduced this impact to a less-than-significant level by requiring watering of active construction sites, watering of covering of stockpiled material, covering of haul trucks, paving or stabilizing unpaved access roads, sweeping all paved access roads, sweeping nearby streets on a daily basis, hydroseeding inactive construction areas, limiting on-site truck speeds to 15 miles per hour, installing sandbags to limit silt runoff onto adjacent streets, and replanting vegetation on disturbed areas as soon as possible. These measures reduced this impact to a less-than-significant level. The proposed project will be required to comply with the above mitigation measure as modified below in Mitigation Measure AIR-1. Project Impacts a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of an air quality plan? No New Impact. The proposed project would allow for a redistribution of uses on the site, many of which have been approved by the City for more than ten years. Limited expansion of school facilities would be allowed should the project be approved. The project also includes a new football and track stadium which was not been previously approved by the City. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Clean Air Plan is predicated on population projections for local agencies within the region based on ABAG’s regional population projections. The population projections are based on a compilation of local agency general plan documents. Development allowed under the proposed project would be generally consistent with the type and amount of development allowed under the Dublin General Plan and the approved VCC Master Plan. City of Dublin Page 38 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 The Applicant is proposing the construction of one on-site dwelling unit. The proposed dwelling would be occupied by VCC staff (caretakers), which would have the effect of slightly reducing vehicle trips to and from the site. With adherence to mitigation measures and other local and regional requirements, there would be no new or more severe significant impact with respect to a potential conflict with or obstruction of the regional Clean Air Plan than was analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. b) Would the project violate any air quality standards? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation. The 2003 EIR found that construction of the VCC project could violate air quality standards, which could be a potentially significant impact. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.2-1 reduced this impact to a less-than-significant level by requiring project grading contractors to comply with then current BAAQMD’s standards to minimize emission of dust and construction vehicle emission during grading operations. The BAAQMD has since adopted newer and more restrictive standards to reduce construction dust and construction vehicle emission and, as an additional mitigation measure; the Applicant shall adhere to the following to reduce this construction impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure AIR-1. The Applicant’s grading contractor(s) shall adhere to the most current Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD) construction mitigation measures (Tables 8-1 and 8-2 or as may be updated at the time a grading permit is requested) as set forth in the May 2017 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, or as may be amended in the future and in effect at time of issuance of grading permit. Operational and mobile air quality impacts were analyzed in the 2003 EIR. The 2003 EIR found that construction of the project would fall below the BAAQMD daily emission threshold of 80 pounds per day and that this was a less-than-significant impact (Impact 4.2-2). The current project would include an additional 1,300 square feet of floor space above the amount of development analyzed in the 2003 EIR and approved by the City. This amount of development falls below the screening thresholds for pollutant screening size adopted by the BAAQMD (see Table 3-1 of the 2017 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines). Table 3.1 notes that high schools (the closest land use type shown on this table) with less than 311,000 square feet falls below the level of significance as adopted by the BAAQMD. City of Dublin Page 39 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 In addition to the above, and as documented in the Transportation and Traffic section of this Initial Study, implementation of the proposed project would generate 15 fewer vehicle trips in the am peak hour and 19 fewer trips in the pm peak hour period that was set forth in the 2003 EIR. With adherence to other local and regional requirements, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to violation of any air quality standard from operations than was analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for the impact from operations on this area. c) Would the project result in cumulatively considerable air pollutants? Less-than- Significant with Mitigation for construction and No New Impact for operations. See item “b.” d,e) Expose sensitive receptors to significant pollutant concentrations or create objectionable odors? No New Impact. Existing users on the site include young children that are sensitive receptors, surrounded by single-family residential uses that would likely also contain sensitive air quality receptors. Proposed changes to the Master Plan as requested by the Applicant are generally minor in nature and would not generate significantly greater pollution concentrations that previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR. As documented in subsection “b” above, implementation of the proposed project would generate slightly fewer am and pm peak hour vehicle trips that was documented in the 2003 EIR. None of the existing or proposed uses would generate objectionable odors. Proposed uses would consist of new educational facilities, athletic fields and parking lots. With adherence to previous applicable mitigation measures and applicable regulations, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to scenic resources due to odors beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. 4. Biological Resources Environmental Setting A Biological Reconnaissance Analysis of the project site was completed in July 2015 by WRA. The WRA report is incorporated by reference into this Initial Study and is included as Attachment 1. The findings and conclusions of WRA’s 2015 report were reviewed and reconfirmed by WRA in March, 2018. City of Dublin Page 40 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Biological communities. Six biological communities have been identified on the site, as follows: Developed Land. Developed land on the project site consists of all portions of the site not mapped as a natural community type, comprising approximately 35.68 acres. Developed land on the site includes school, church, and administrative buildings, sports facilities, parking areas, Inspiration Drive, and associated landscaping. Much of these developed areas contain planted exotic vegetation, including common landscape tree and shrub species such as Bradford pear (Pyrus calleryana ‘Bradford’), Raywood ash (Fraxinus angustifolia ‘Raywood’), Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), and oleander (Nerium oleander). Non-Native Annual Grassland/Ruderal Vegetation. Non-native annual grassland comprises the majority of the site (32.33 acres of the site) and is composed of a mix of non-native annual grasses and other predominantly non-native herbaceous species. This community is similar to the non-native grassland community described by Holland (1986). Non-native annual grassland site is dominated by slender oats (Avena barbata), Italian rye grass (Festuca perennis [Lolium multiflorum]), mouse barley (Hordeum murinum ssp. leporinum), and longbeak stork’s bill (Erodium botrys). Non-native grassland mapped on the site also includes dense stands of ruderal herbaceous species, including black mustard (Brassica nigra), short podded mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus) and poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), all of which are listed as having “moderate” potential to cause negative ecological impacts by the Cal -IPC (2015). Native plant cover is less than 5% within the non-native annual grassland. Wildlife species observed in this community on the site were turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), common raven (Corvus corax), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), and black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus). Coyote Brush Scrub. Coyote brush scrub is scattered in small, fragmented portions throughout the site, on both natural slopes and disturbed, previously graded areas. This community contains approximately 1.4 acres. The dominant plant in this community is coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis ssp. consanguinea) and the understory is dominated by the non-native grasses and forbs also observed non-native annual grassland/ruderal vegetation community. This community is similar to the Northern coyote brush scrub community described by Holland (1986) and the coyote brush scrub series described by Sawyer et al. (2009). City of Dublin Page 41 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Riparian Woodland. The riparian woodland occupies a small area (approximately 0.57 acres of the site) near the southwest corner of the site. This community is considered a sensitive community in that it may contain protected species, similar to the central coast live oak riparian forest community described by Holland (1986). The riparian woodland consists of coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus lobata), arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), and red willow (Salix laevigata). The understory consists of a mixture of native and non-native herbaceous species including California bulrush (Schoenoplectus californicus), tall flatsedge (Cyperus eragrostis), and fiddle dock (Rumex pulcher). Riparian woodland is considered sensitive under the CEQA and is protected by the California Fish and Game Code (Section 1600 et seq.). Coast Live Oak Woodland. Coast live oak woodland occupies a small (approximately 1.29 acre), fragmented area in the northeast corner of the site. This community is similar to the coast live oak woodland communit y described by Holland (1986) and is considered a sensitive biological community. Coast live oak woodland is dominated by coast live oak, but also consists of California bay (Umbellularia californica), valley oak, and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). The understory is dominated by non-native grasses and forbs also observed non-native annual grassland/ruderal vegetation community. A portion of the area mapped as coast live oak woodland in the west part of the site consists of planted oaks. Ephemeral Stream. An ephemeral stream exists within the southwestern corner of the site. The ephemeral stream is located in a concave, north to south drainage to the south and downhill from the baseball field and is approximately 462 lineal feet. The ephemeral stream appears to be the result of a culvert system that drains the hillside to the north, and could also potentially be fed by a seep. Water was present in the ephemeral stream during the site visit; however, the presence of a seep could not be confirmed, as the water appeared to originate from under a dense patch of poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus). The ephemeral stream was intermittent during the time of the site visit, flowing down the south-facing hill and into a rock-lined trapezoidal ditch, at which point the water appeared to become subsurface flow. The trapezoidal ditch parallels the property boundary and feeds into a culvert where it flows into Dublin Creek. This community is also considered to be significant. Special-status species. The project site does not contain woodland or scrub habitats or rocky outcroppings to support this species, nor is it adjacent to these necessary physical and biological conditions. Additionally, the site does not serve as a City of Dublin Page 42 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 corridor to existing suitable habitat because it is surrounded on three sides by suburban development, an effective barrier to dispersal that isolates the site from access by this species. In summary, no special-status wildlife species were observed during the May 20, 2015 site visit by WRA field biologists, and six special-status wildlife species have a moderate potential to occur on the project site. Previous CEQA documents The 2003 EIR identified the following significant biological impacts and contains the following mitigation measures. • Impact 4.3-1 found that development of the proposed residential component of the project on the southwest corner of the site would impact an existing wetland area. Other wetlands may also be found on the site. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.3-1 reduced this impact to a less-than- significant level by requiring a protocol level wetland delineation on the site. Based on the delineation, the development plan may be modified to avoid wetlands. If avoidance is not possible, alternative replacement wetlands shall be identified and secured at a 2:1 ratio with issuance of necessary permits from regulatory agencies. The current project does not include development on the southwest corner of the site. However, due to the potential of wetlands on-site, a new mitigation measure Mitigation Measure BIO-5 is included below. Project Impacts a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation. Most of the project site is comprised of developed land and non-native annual grassland/ruderal vegetation. Although non-native annual grassland and developed land are not sensitive biological communities under CEQA, they may provide habitat for special status plant and wildlife species. Such species will require mitigation if found on the site. The site contains 1.29 acres of coast live oak woodland, which is potentially sensitive under the Oak Woodland Conservation Act and 0.57 acre of riparian woodland, which is potentially within the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW) under Sections 1600-1616 of California Fish and Game Code. Construction of proposed project improvements could result in both direct and indirect impacts to sensitive on-site biological resources. Construction of the proposed project could directly or indirectly impact on-site sensitive biological resources on the site, as follows: City of Dublin Page 43 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Development of non-native grasslands. Future development of non-native grasslands could impact habitat for special-status birds and other mammals that forage or nest in this type of community. The following mitigation will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-1. No more than 14 days prior to ground disturbance and vegetation removal during the nesting season (February 1-August 31), the project Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to perform pre-construction breeding bird surveys. If nests are found, they shall be flagged and protected with a suitable buffer. Buffer distance would vary based on species and conditions at the project site, but would usually be at least 50 feet and up to 250 feet for raptors. This measure shall not apply to ground disturbance of vegetation removal outside of the nesting season (September 1 to January 31). Removal of Coast Live Oak Woodland. Impacts to coast live oak woodlands as a result of construction could be significant and such impacts will be reduced to a less-than-significant impact by adherence to the following. Mitigation Measure BIO-2. Any on-site coast live oak lost or impacted as a result of project construction shall be replaced on site or in the immediate vicinity at a 2:1 (replacement: impacted) ratio. A Replacement Plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist identifying the location of replacement habitat, replanting plans and long-term monitoring to ensure the success of the replacement habitat area. Necessary permits shall be obtained from local, state and federal biological resource agencies prior to commencement of replantings. Impacts to Special-Status plants. Of the 42 special-status plant species known to occur in the vicinity of the project site, one species, Congdon’s tarplant, has a moderate potential to occur on the site. Most of the species found in the review of background literature occur in high quality vernal pool habitat, in different plant communities, often at higher elevations, or in high quality grassland habitat. Due to the history of disturbance, and predominance of non-native ruderal species, the grassland and woodlands on the site are likely of too low quality to support the majority of these other special-status plant species. Congdon’s tarplant is considered to have a moderate potential to occur on the project site. Two tarplant individuals (Centromadia sp.) were observed in the northeast portion on the site in a disturbed ruderal field used for City of Dublin Page 44 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 heavy equipment storage. This area is an “island” of non-native annual grassland/ruderal vegetation surrounded by developed land. The tarplant individuals observed in this area during the site visit were unidentifiable to species level due to the timing of the site visit and the absence of mature inflorescences. Given the presence of Centromadia species in the region, it is unlikely, all though not impossible, that these individuals are not Condon’s tarplant and instead common tarweed, (Centromadia pungens ssp. pungens), a non- listed species. Due to the very low number of individuals present, and the presence of larger populations in the region, these two individuals do not represent a significant population and loss of these plants would not be considered significant. To ensure absence of a greater population on site, rare plant surveys for this species is recommended during the blooming season. The following measure is recommended to reduce this impact to a less-than- significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-3. The project Applicant shall retain a qualified botanist to conduct rare plant surveys within construction zones on the site for Congdon’s Tarplant or for other species within the project site during the appropriate time of year in accordance with agency protocols. Impacts to special-status plants shall be avoided to the fullest extent feasible and habitat that supports special-status plant species shall be preserved. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted at the proper time of year when rare or endangered species are both evident and identifiable. Field surveys shall be scheduled to coincide with known blooming periods and/or during periods of physiological development that are necessary to identify the plant species of concern. If no special- status plant species are found, the proposed project would not have a significant impact to species and no additional mitigation is needed. If any of the species are found on-site and cannot be avoided, the following measures shall be required: a) Where surveys determine that special-status plant species are present within or adjacent to the proposed project site, direct and indirect impacts of the project on the species (e.g., Congdon’s tarplant and/or San Joaquin spearscale) shall be avoided where feasible through the establishment of activity exclusion zones, where no ground-disturbing activities shall City of Dublin Page 45 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 take place, including construction of new facilities, construction staging, or other temporary work areas. Activity exclusion zones for special-status plant species shall be established prior to construction activities around each occupied habitat site, the boundaries of which shall be clearly marked with standard orange plastic construction exclusion fencing or its equivalent. The establishment of activity exclusion zones shall not be required if no construction related disturbances would occur within 250 feet of the occupied habitat site. The size of activity exclusion zones may be reduced through consultation with a qualified biologist and with concurrence from California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW) based on site-specific conditions. b) If exclusion zones and avoidance of impacts on a special- status plant species are not feasible, then the loss of individuals or occupied habitat of a special-status plant species shall be compensated for through the acquisition, protection, and subsequent management of other existing occurrences. Before the implementation of compensation measures, the project’s Applicant shall provide detailed information to the CDFW and lead agency on the quality of preserved habitat, location of the preserved occurrences, provisions for protecting and managing the areas, the responsible parties involved, and the other pertinent information that demonstrates the feasibility of the compensation. A mitigation plan identifying appropriate mitigation ratios shall be developed in consultation with, and approved by, the CDFW and the City prior to the commencement of any activities that would impact any special status plants. Impacts to California red-legged frog. There is no aquatic breeding for the California red-legged frog (CRLF) on the project site. However, CRLF may inhabit the wetland/riparian areas and uplands within the Study Area 200 feet of these wet areas. Construction of project improvements near or on riparian areas may be a significant impact on this protected species. The following measure shall be implemented for development near potential wetland areas of the site. Mitigation Measure BIO-4. For any development near on-site riparian areas, the project Applicant shall conduct pre-construction surveys for CRLF species. The survey shall be completed no more than 30 days prior to work within 200 feet of potential City of Dublin Page 46 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 wetland/wet areas on the site. If no species are found, no mitigation shall be required. If CRFL are found on the project site then the project Applicant shall provide information to support Section 7 consultation with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the project Applicant shall ensure no net loss of habitat that shall be achieved through avoidance, preservation, creation and/or purchase of credits. The final selected measures may be part of the Section 7 permitting process. The project Applicant shall obtain a biological opinion from the USFWS and comply with the conditions and mitigation requirements under the opinion to ensure that no net loss of habitat occurs. Mitigation may include, but would not be limited to on-site and off-site preservation and creation of CRLF habitat, purchase of credits at mitigation banks, payment of in-lieu fees approved by the agencies, or other agency approved and required mitigation measures. Avoidance measures may include the following or equivalent protective measures: a) To minimize disturbance of breeding and dispersing CRLF construction activity within CRLF upland habitat shall be conducted during the dry season between April 15 and October 15 or before the onset of the rainy season, whichever occurs first. If construction activities are necessary in CRLF upland habitat between October 15 and April 15, the project Applicant would contact the USFWS for approval to extend the work period. b) To minimize disturbance and mortality of adult and juvenile CRLF in aquatic habitat and underground burrows, the project Applicants should minimize the extent of ground- disturbing activities within these habitats by requiring the contractor to limit the work area to the minimum necessary for construction. In addition, the project Applicant should ensure that the contractor installs temporary exclusion fence between the construction work area and potential aquatic habitat for all construction within grasslands near aquatic habitat. A minimum buffer zone of 150 feet shall be maintained around CRLF aquatic habitat during construction. No staging, parking, material storage or ground disturbance shall be allowed in the buffer zone. The City of Dublin Page 47 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 buffer zone will be clearly defined with construction fencing prior to the initiation of construction activities and shall be maintained until completion of construction. c) The project Applicant should ensure that a qualified wildlife biologist monitors all construction activities within CRLF upland habitat to ensure no take of individual CRLF occurs during project construction. If a CRLF is found, then the monitor would immediately stop construction in that area and contact USFWS for development of a plan for how to proceed with construction. b, c) Have a substantial adverse impact on riparian habitat or federally protected wetlands? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation. The project contains an ephemeral stream that could be within the jurisdiction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) under the Porter Cologne Act and Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The conversion of ephemeral streams to developed land is a potentially significant impact under CEQA that could require mitigation efforts. Therefore, before continuing development on portions of the project area, a formal jurisdictional wetlands delineation is recommended to determine whether the potential seasonal wetlands are jurisdictional wetlands. The creek may also be subject to jurisdiction by CDFW under Sections 1600-1616 of California Fish and Game Code Mitigation Measure BIO-5. Prior to commencement of ground disturbing activities on Parcel 1 of the project site, the Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to determine the potential presence of wetlands or other waters. If wetlands are found, the Applicant shall prepare a wetland mitigation plan acceptable to the Community Development Department that demonstrates compliance with the following: a) The project Applicant shall obtain all required resource agency permits and shall prepare and obtain approval of a wetland mitigation plan that ensures no net loss of wetland and water habitat. b) The wetland mitigation plan shall include measures for avoidance, minimization and compensation for wetland impacts. Avoidance and minimization measures may include the designation of buffers around wetland features to be avoided or project design measures. Compensation measures shall include the preservation and/or creation of wetlands or other waters. The final mitigation ratio (the amount of wetlands and other water created or preserved compared to the amount City of Dublin Page 48 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 impacted) shall be determined by the applicable resource agency(s). The wetland mitigation and monitoring plan shall include the following: - Description of wetland types and their expected functions and values; - Performance standards and monitoring protocol to ensure the success of the mitigation wetlands over a period of time to be determined by the resource agencies; - Engineering plans showing the location, size and configuration of wetlands to be created or preserved; -An implementation schedule showing the construction or preservation of mitigation areas shall commence prior to or concurrently with the initiation of construction; and -A description of legal protection of the preserved wetlands (such as dedication of fee title, conservation easement and/or an endowment held by an approved conservation organization, government agency or mitigation bank). d) Interfere with movement of native fish or wildlife species? No New Impact. The project site is located in an urban area of western Dublin that consists of a patchwork of developed residential areas interspersed with undeveloped, open areas. The site is bordered to the north by residential development and open space, to the east by residential development, to the south by I- 580 and to the west by residential development and open space. Since surrounding properties are largely developed, there is a very low probability that the site is used for wildlife or fish migration. No migratory corridors were observed on the site as part of the biological reconnaissance performed by WRA. With adherence to other local and regional requirements, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to interference with fish or wildlife corridors than was analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. e, f) Conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources or any adopted Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans? No New Impact. The project site lies within the Eastern Alameda County Conservation Strategy (EACCS) planning area. The City of Dublin utilizes the Conservation Strategy as guidance for environmental permitting for public projects, and private development projects are encouraged to use the EACCS as a resource. The Conservation Strategy embodies a regional approach to permitting and mitigation for wildlife habitat impacts City of Dublin Page 49 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 associated with land development, infrastructure, and other activities. The Conservation Strategy is neither a Habitat Conservation Plan nor a Natural Community Conservation Plan, but is a document intended to provide guidance during the project planning and permitting process to ensure that impacts are offset in a biologically effective manner. A number of trees are present on the site, some likely protected under the provisions of the Dublin Heritage Tree Ordinance. Future individual development projects will be reviewed as part of Site Development Review (SDR) applications to ensure compliance with the Heritage Tree Ordinance. There may be a requirement for planting of replacement trees to satisfy the requirements of the ordinance. Compliance with the regulatory requirements of the Dublin Heritage Tree Ordinance will ensure impacts are less than significant. With adherence to other local and regional requirements, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to conflicts with local ordinances and policies as well as local Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans than was analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. 5. Cultural Resources Environmental Setting The 2003 EIR did not identify significant impacts on historic, cultural, Native American or other cultural resources. This conclusion was based on a cultural records search conducted at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) at Sonoma State University in 2002. The NWIC is affiliated with the California Office of Historic Preservation and is a repository for cultural reports in the Bay Area and coastal Northern California. The project site has been largely disturbed for the construction of buildings, parking lots, on-site roads and other improvements. Much of the undeveloped portions of the site will remain as undisturbed open space as part of the proposed project, as noted in the Project Description. On October 31, 2017, the Dublin Community Development Department sent a letter to Mr. Randy Yonemura of the Ione Band of Miwok Indian tribe informing the tribe of the City of Dublin’s intent to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project as required by AB 52. As of the public date of this Initial Study, no response has been received by the City. This letter is hereby City of Dublin Page 50 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 incorporated by reference into this document and is available for review at the Dublin Community Development Department during normal business hours. Previous EIR. Two cultural resource impacts and an associated mitigation measure were contained in the 2003 EIR. • Impact 4.4-1 noted that on-site construction, including building foundations, utility lines and similar improvements could disturb archeological and/or Native American underground resources. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4-1.1 reduced this impact to a less-than- significant level by requiring that work on the project shall cease until a resource protection plan prepared by a qualified archeologist consistent with CEQA Guideline Section 15064.5 (e) is prepared and implemented. If human remains are identified, the County Coroner was to be contacted. The proposed project will be required to comply with the above cultural resource mitigation measure. Project Impacts a) Cause substantial adverse change to significant historic resources or be listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources? No New Impact. All buildings on the site have been constructed since 1978 and would not qualify as historic resources. Generally, structures 50 years old and regional requirements and EIR Mitigation Measures, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to historic resources beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. b-d) Cause a substantial adverse impact or destruction to archeological or paleontological resources, human remain or disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of a formal cemetery? No New Impact. A remote possibility exists that underground historic, pre -historic or human resources could be uncovered as part of project implementation. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.4-1 included in the 2003 EIR will be required as part of the project approval to reduce this impact to a less- than-significant level. With adherence to local requirements and EIR Mitigation Measures, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to impacts to archeological resources, paleontological or human remains outside of a formal cemetery than was analyzed in the 2003 EIR. City of Dublin Page 51 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 6. Geology and Soils Environmental Setting Soils, geologic and seismic conditions on the site and the immediate vicinity were analyzed in Chapter 4.5 of the 2003 EIR. The Geology section of the previous EIR noted that the project site is subject to moderate to severe ground shaking as a result of movement on regional faults including the Dublin Fault, believed to exist just east of the site; however, the project site is not located within an Earthquake Fault. The 2003 EIR also noted that portions of the site exhibite d characteristics of a large landslide. Landslide damage on the site were generally remediated by previous grading on the site for current site improvements. The EIR noted that previous landslide may not have been fully remediated. Previous CEQA documents The 2003 EIR contained two impacts and associated impacts dealing with geology and soils, as follows. • Impact 4-5-1 identified the potential for moderate to strong ground shaking on the project site during a seismic event. This could damage buildings, roads and other improvements with a risk to residents, employees and visitors. This was reduced to a less-than significant level by adherence to Mitigation Measure 4-5.1 that required completion of a site-specific geotechnical investigation for each future building on the site. Report(s) must address potential for seismic ground shaking, expansive site soils and the potential for future landslides. • Impact 4-5-2 found an impact with respect to the presence of expansive soils and landslides on the site that could damage foundations and other improvements. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 reduced this impact to a less-than-significant level. The proposed project will be required to comply with the above mitigation measures. Project Impacts a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse impacts, including loss, injury or death related to ground rupture, seismic ground shaking, ground failure, or landslides? No New Impact. The previous 2003 EIR noted a significant impact (Impact 4-5-1) with respect to seismic ground shaking on the site that could result in damage to buildings and risk to residences, employees and visitors to the site. The same impact also referenced City of Dublin Page 52 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 potential damage to future site buildings and occupants from previous landslides that may have not been fully remediated. Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 contained in the 2003 EIR reduced impacts related to seismic activity, landsliding, ground failure and similar soil hazards to a less-than-significant level. Provisions included in this Mitigation Measure will be applied to the current project to reduce soil and seismic hazards to a less-than-significant level. With adherence to previous applicable mitigation measures and regulations, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to seismic hazards beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. b) Is the site subject to substantial erosion and/or the loss of topsoil? No New Impact. Construction of the proposed project would modify the existing ground surface and alter patterns of surface runoff and infiltration. These actions could result in a short-term increase in erosion and sedimentation off of the site into the local and regional drainage system. The Applicant will be required to prepare an erosion control plan, consistent with City of Dublin and Regional Water Quality Control Board standards to ensure that impacts related to substantial erosion and loss of topsoil would not be significant. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will also be required to be submitted to the Public Works Department to assure that there would be no long-term significant impacts with respect to erosion of polluted material. With adherence to previous applicable mitigation measures and applicable regulations, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to loss of top soil or significant erosion beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. c,d) Is the site located on soil that is unstable or expansive or result in poten tial lateral spreading, liquefaction, landslide or collapse? No New Impact. The 2003 EIR noted that portions of the project site may be subject to liquefaction during seismic events. As noted in subsection “a,” the site contains a historic landslide that may not have been fully repaired as a result of previous site grading. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.5 -1 will reduce impacts related to expansive soil, liquefaction, landslides and other soil hazards will be reduced to a less-than-significant level. With adherence to previous applicable mitigation measures and applicable regulations, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to City of Dublin Page 53 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 lateral spreading, liquefaction, landslide or similar hazards beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. e) Have soils incapable of supporting on-site septic tanks if sewers are not available? No New Impact. The proposed caretaker unit and other non-residential land uses that would be approved as part of this project would be connected to sanitary sewers provided by DSRSD, so there would be no impacts with regard to septic systems. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this topic than has been previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. 7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Environmental Setting Since certification of the Valley Christian Center EIR in 2003, the issue of contribution of greenhouse gasses to climate change has become a more prominent issue of concern as evidenced by passage of AB 32 in 2006. On March 18, 2010, amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines took effect which set forth requirements for the analysis of greenhouse gasses. The topic of the project’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change was not analyzed in the 2003 EIR. Since the VCC EIR has been certified, the determination of whether greenhouse gasses and climate change needs to be analyzed for this proposed project is governed by the law on supplemental or subsequent EIRs (Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15162 and 15163). Greenhouse gas and climate change is not required to be analyzed under those standards unless it constitutes “new information of substantial importance,” which was not known and could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete (CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15162 (a) (3).) Greenhouse gas and climate change impacts is not new information that was not known or could not have been known at the time the VCC EIR was certified. The issue of climate change and greenhouse gasses was widely known prior to the certification of the 2003 EIR. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was established in 1992. The regulation of greenhouse gas emissions to reduce climate change impacts was extensively debated and analyzed throughout the early 1990s. The studies and analyses of this issue resulted in the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. In the early and mid - 2000s, GHGs and climate change were extensively discussed and analyzed in California. In 2000, SB 1771 established the California Climate Action Registry for the recordation of greenhouse gas emissions to provide information about potential environmental impacts. Therefore, the impact of greenhouse gases on City of Dublin Page 54 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 climate change was known at the time of the certification of the VCC EIR in 2003. Under CEQA standards, it is not new information that requires analysis in a supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration. No supplemental environmental analysis of the project’s impacts on this issue is required under CEQA. Project Impacts a,b Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment or conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? No New Impacts. As discussed above, no additional environmental analysis is required under CEQA Section 21166. 8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Environmental Setting The VCC site is currently developed with a church, private school and associated land uses pursuant to permits granted by Alameda County (prior to City of Dublin incorporation) and the City of Dublin. Approximately half of the site has been disturbed to allow for development, which has occurred. The project site is located in western Dublin and is surrounded primarily by residential and open space areas. There are no industrial or similar uses near the site that could have the potential for use, transport or storage of hazardous materials. The facility currently uses small quantities of lawn and landscape care materials as well as building maintenance substances such as paints, solvents and similar materials. Such materials are normally and customarily used by this type of land use. The project site was not listed on the Cortese List of hazardous sites as of February 7, 2018. No public or private airports or airstrips exist near the site. Previous EIR The topic of hazards and hazardous materials was not included in the scope of the previous EIR for this project. Project Impacts a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? No Impact. There would be no impact with regard to transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials, City of Dublin Page 55 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 since the proposed project involves expansion of church and school uses and activities. There would be continued limited use, storage and transport of hazardous materials associated with the facility as is typical of these types of facilities which will be conducted in compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements. There would therefore be no significant impact with respect to this topic. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less-than-Significant Impact. The project site has been largely developed with buildings, parking lots, on-site roads, pathways and similar improvements. The proposed project would result in 1,300 square feet of new building area and expanded athletic fields. Proposed improvements would generally be located in areas of the site that have been previously disturbed. The possibility of the release of contaminated soil and/or groundwater during future site grading would be low and less-than-significant. The project site is not listed by the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA) as a contaminated site as of February 28, 2018, nor is the site located near a major polluting land use, such as industrial facility, dry cleaning establishment or a similar use. The potential for release of hazardous materials from the use, storage or transport of hazardous materials would also be less-than-significant since only limited quantities of such materials are used, stored or transported on the site, which will be conducted in compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements. c) Emit hazardous materials or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less-than-Significant Impact. Approval and implementation of the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact with respect to this topic. The site itself contains a school. However, as noted in subsection “b” above, there would be limited new ground disturbance and limited use of on-site hazardous materials. The site is not listed as a contaminated site on the Cal EPA Cortese List. This impact would be less-than-significant. d) Is the site listed as a hazardous materials site? No Impact. The VCC project site is not listed on the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control as an identified hazardous site as of February 28, 2018. There is therefore no impact with regard to this topic. City of Dublin Page 56 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 e,f) Is the site located within an airport land use plan of a public airport or private airstrip? No Impact. The nearest airport to the site is Livermore Municipal Airport, located several miles southeast of the site. The VCC project site is not located in any airport safety or referral zones for a public or private airport or airstrip. There would be no impact with respect to this topic. g) Interference with an emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. The proposed project would include the expansion of an existing church and school complex on private land. No emergency evacuation plan would be affected since no roadways would be blocked. There would therefore be no impact with respect to this topic. h) Expose people and structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. The project site is located in western Dublin and is substantially surrounded by roadways, residential land uses and open space. The proposed expansion will be reviewed by the Alameda County Fire Department to ensure that required fire protection elements are incorporated into final building plans, including but not limited to provision of adequate water supply and pressure, installation of new fire hydrants that may be required, use of fire resistance building and landscape materials and other features. With adherence to the California Fire and Building Codes, there would be no impact with respect to this topic. 9. Hydrology and Water Quality Environmental Setting Local and regional drainage. The site is located on a relatively steep hill. The site is connected to the City of Dublin and Zone 7 regional drainage system. Stormwater from the project site is collected and transported off-site and ultimately flows south and west to San Francisco Bay. The project area is located within the jurisdiction of Zone 7 of the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 7). Zone 7 provides maintenance of regional drainage facilities within this portion of Alameda County. Surface water quality Water quality in California is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), which controls the discharge of pollutants to water bodies from point and non -point sources. In the San Francisco Bay area, this program is administered by the San City of Dublin Page 57 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Federal regulations issued in November 1990 expanded the authority of the RWQCB to include permitting of stormwater discharges from municipal storm sewer systems, industrial processes, and construction sites that disturb areas larger than one acre of land area. The City of Dublin is a co-permittee of the Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program (CWP). The CWP provides guidance to cities with respect to establishing programs to implement RWQCB requirements. The City of Dublin participates in the CWP and adheres to the regionally established guidelines. In 1994, the RWQCB issued a set of recommendations for New and Redevelopment Controls for Storm Water Programs. These recommendations include policies that define watershed protection goals, set forth minimum non- point source pollutant control requirements for site planning, construction and post-construction activities, and establish criteria for ongoing reporting of water quality construction activities. Watershed protection goals are based on policies identified in the San Francisco Bay Basin Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), and the entire program relies on the implementation of Best Management Practices to limit pollutant contact with stormwater runoff at its source and to remove pollutants before they are discharged into receiving waters. The California Stormwater Quality Task Force has published a series of Best Management Practices handbooks for use in the design of source control; and treatment programs to achieve the water quality objectives identified by the Basin Plan for the beneficial uses of surface waters, groundwaters, wetland and marshes. Pursuant to Section 402 of the Clean Water Act and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, municipal stormwater discharges in the City of Dublin are regulated under the San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems NPDES Permit (MRP), Order No. R2-2015-0049, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008, adopted November 19, 2015. The MRP is overseen by the San Francisco RWQCB. Prov ision C.3 (New Development & Redevelopment) of the MRP addresses post -construction stormwater management requirements for new development and redevelopment projects that meet certain impervious surface area thresholds. Provision C.3 requires the incorporation of site design, source control, and low impact development stormwater treatment measures in development projects to minimize the discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff and prevent non- stormwater discharges. Surface water quality is affected by a number of pollutants generated from existing structures, parking areas and open space uses on the project area, including but not limited to petrochemicals (oil and grease), yard and landscape chemicals (herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers), and similar sources. City of Dublin Page 58 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Flooding The site lies approximately 540 feet above the valley floor and is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area. City of Dublin Public Works staff note no recent issues with drainage problems or flooding on or near the site (source: Michael O’Connor, Dublin Public Works Department, 3/6/18). Previous EIR The following impacts and mitigation measures were included in the 2003 EIR. • Impact 4-6.1 noted an impact with respect to short-term increases in the amount of soil erosion from the site as natural vegetation is removed for project improvements with the potential for wind and water erosion. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4-6-1 reduced this impact to a less-than- significant level by requiring the preparation of an erosion and sedimentation control plan consistent with City of Dublin and Regional Water Quality Control Board standards. • Impact 4-6.2 identified an impact on surface water quality through the deposition of oil, grease and other chemicals from parking areas into nearby surface waters. This impact was reduced to a less-than-significant level by adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.6-2 that required the project developer to prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan to ensure that Best Management Practices will be employed. • Impact 4.6-3 stated that construction of the project could impact downstream drainage facilities by increasing overall and peak storm flows. This impact was reduced to a less-than-significant level by adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.6-3 which required that the Applicant prepare a hydrology study for the project that documents the amount of current stormwater from the site, estimated amounts of increased flow and the ability of downstream facilities to accommodate any increases. If needed, improvements to downstream drainage facilities are to be identified as well as the Applicant’s financial responsibility to make needed improvements. The proposed project will be required to adhere to the above mitigation measures. Project Impacts a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? No New Impact. Adherence to mitigation measures set forth in the 2003 EIR and the Alameda County Clean Water Program as enforced by the City of Dublin will ensure that construction allowed by the proposed project would not City of Dublin Page 59 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 violate water quality standards or any waste discharge requirements. The project developer has installed on-site facilities to protect water quality including but not limited to use of bioretention areas, water quality basins and similar elements. With adherence to applicable regulations and mitigation measures, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to water quality standards or waste discharge requirements than what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. b) Substantially deplete groundwater recharge areas or lowering of water table? No New Impact. The project site is substantially developed. The Applicant has committed to retaining an existing 8 acre vacant portion of the site located on the west side of Inspiration Drive in a conservation easement that would preclude future development. There would be no substantial depletion of existing groundwater recharge areas with adherence to previous Mitigation Measures, and other local and regional requirements. Therefore, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to depletion of groundwater recharge areas or lowering of the water table than was analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. c) Substantially alter drainage patterns, including streambed courses such that substantial siltation or erosion would occur? No New Impact. New impervious surfaces would be added to the project site to accommodate new buildings, parking areas, athletic fields and related improvements. Proposed improvements would be constructed of impervious surfaces that could increase stormwater runoff from the site that could change existing drainage patterns. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.6-3 will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level by requiring completion of a hydrology study to ensure that downstream drainage facilities can accommodate future runoff. The Mitigation Measure also requires the project developer to assist in funding any downstream improvements. Mitigation Measure 4.6-2 requires the project developer to prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan to reduce the amount of polluted runoff from the site. With adherence to applicable EIR Mitigation Measures and other local and regional requirements, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to this topic than was analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no City of Dublin Page 60 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. d) Substantially alter drainage patterns or substantially increase surface water runoff that would result in flooding, either on or off the project site? No New Impact. As noted in subsection “c,” Mitigation Measure 4.6-3 contained in the 2003 EIR requires the developer to prepare a hydrology study to ensure that drainage facilities can accommodate downstream runoff and requires the developer to assist in financing any needed improvements to ensure that no on-site or off-site flooding would occur. With adherence to previous applicable mitigation measures and applicable regulations, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. e) Create stormwater runoff that would exceed the capacity of drainage systems or add substantial amounts of polluted runoff? No New Impact. See subsections “c” and “d,” above. With adherence to EIR Mitigation Measures and other local and regional requirements, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to stormwater impacts and the local and regional drainage systems than was analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. f) Substantially degrade water quality? No New Impact. Refer to item “a” above. g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped by a Flood Insurance Rate Map? No New Impact. The project site lies outside of a 100-year flood hazard zone as mapped by FEMA. The only housing proposed on the site is a single caretaker unit. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in the previous CEQA documents. h, i) Place within a 100-year flood hazard boundary structures that impeded or redirect flood flow, including dam failures? No New Impact. Refer to item “g,” above. j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflows? No New Impact. The project site is located well inland from San Francisco Bay or other major bodies of water to be impacted by a tsunami or seiche. The project site is located at the approximate summit of a local hill and would not be subject to mudflows from other adjacent properties. With adherence to applicable regulations, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to this topic beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no City of Dublin Page 61 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. 10. Land Use and Planning Environmental Setting The project site is occupied by the existing Valley Christian Center complex which includes a church, private school and similar accessory uses. Approximately one-half of the site is vacant. Surrounding uses are generally attached and detached dwellings. The City of Dublin General Plan designates this site as Public/Semi-Public. This land use designation allows for facilities and uses operated by a public agency or non-profit organization which can include but are not limited to schools, libraries, fire stations, post offices and similar uses. The site is zoned PD-Planned Development which permits a specific list of uses as contained in the PD-Planned Development Ordinance for this site. Previous EIR No significant land use impacts were identified in the 2003 EIR. Project Impacts a) Physically divide an established community? No New Impact. The VCC site is self-contained, with direct vehicular access from Dublin Boulevard via Inspiration Drive. The existing use has been on the site since the late 1970’s and none of the existing neighborhoods near the site would be physically divided should the project application be approved. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in the previous CEQA document. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation? No New Impact. Proposed land uses are fully consistent with the City of Dublin General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and no changes to these documents have been requested. The Applicant will be required to comply with all other land use policies and regulations as a condition of project approval. No impact would result. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in previous CEQA documents. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. City of Dublin Page 62 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 c) Conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No New Impact. No such plan has been adopted within the General Plan. There would therefore be no impact to a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan for the proposed project. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to applicable habitat conservation plan(s) beyond what has been analyzed in the VCC EIR, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is require d for this impact area. 11. Mineral Resources Environmental Setting No significant quantities of mineral resources exist on the project site according to the Dublin General Plan or the previous EIR that affects the project site. Project Impacts a, b) Result in the loss of availability of regionally or locally significant mineral resources? No New Impact. None of the City of Dublin land use regulatory documents or the 2003 EIR indicates that significant deposits of minerals exist on the project site, therefore no impacts would occur. 12. Noise Environmental Setting Noise background. Noise may be defined as unwanted sound. Noise is usually objectionable because it is disturbing or annoying. The objectionable nature of sound could be caused by its pitch or its loudness. Pitch is the height or depth of a tone or sound, depending on the relative rapidity (frequency) of the vibrations by which it is produced. Higher pitched signals sound louder to humans than sounds with a lower pitch. Loudness is intensity of sound waves combined with the reception characteristics of the ear. Intensity may be compared with the height of an ocean wave in that it is a measure of the amplitude of the sound wave. In addition to the concepts of pitch and loudness, there are several noise measurement scales which are used to describe noise in a particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement which indicates the relative amplitude of a sound. The zero on the decibel scale is based on the lowest sound level that th e healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Sound levels in decibels are City of Dublin Page 63 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 decibels represents a ten-fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 decibels is 100 times more intense, 30 decibels is 1,000 times more intense, etc. There is a relationship between the subjective noisiness or loudness of a sound and its intensity. Each 10 decibel increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness over a fairly wide range of intensities. Technical terms are defined in Table 1 of the full acoustic report (see Attachment 2). There are several methods of characterizing sound. The most common in California is the A-weighted sound level (dBA). This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. Representative outdoor and indoor noise levels in units of dBA are shown in Table 2. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time, a method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statistical behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-varying events. This energy-equivalent sound/noise descriptor is called Leq. The most common averaging period is hourly, but Leq can describe any series of noise events of arbitrary duration. The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters can accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about plus or minus 1 dBA. Various computer models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such as roadways and airports. The accuracy of the predicted models depends upon the distance the receptor is from the noise source. When the receptor is close to the noise source, the models are accurate to within about plus or minus 1 to 2 dBA. Since the sensitivity to noise increases during the evening and at night (because excessive noise interferes with the ability to sleep) 24-hour descriptors have been developed that incorporate artificial noise penalties added to quiet -time noise events. The Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure in a community, with a 5 dB penalty added to evening (7:00 pm - 10:00 pm) and a 10 dB addition to nocturnal (10:00 pm - 7:00 am) noise levels. The Day/Night Average Sound Level (Ldn) is essentially the same as CNEL, with the exception that the evening time period is dropped and all occurrences during this three-hour period are grouped into the daytime period. Background on vibration. Ground vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or waves with an average motion of zero. Several different methods ar e typically used to quantify vibration amplitude. One method is the Peak Particle Velocity (PPV). The PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration wave. In this report, a PPV descriptor with units of mm/sec City of Dublin Page 64 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 or in/sec is used to evaluate construction generated vibration for building damage and human complaints. Table 3 displays the reactions of people and the effects on buildings that continuous vibration levels produce. The annoyance levels shown in Table 3 should be interpreted with care since vibration may be found to be annoying at much lower levels than those shown, depending on the level of activity or the sensitivity of the individual. To sensitive individuals, vibrations approaching the threshold of perception can be annoying. Low-level vibrations frequently cause irritating secondary vibration, such as a slight rattling of windows, doors, or stacked dishes. The rattling sound can give rise to exaggerated vibration complaints, even though there is very little risk of actual structural damage. Construction activities can cause vibration that varies in intensity depending on several factors. The use of pile driving and vibratory compaction equipment typically generates the highest construction related groundbo rne vibration levels. Because of the impulsive nature of such activities, the use of the PPV descriptor has been routinely used to measure and assess groundborne vibration and almost exclusively to assess the potential of vibration to induce structural damage and the degree of annoyance for humans. The two primary concerns with construction induced vibration is the potential to damage a structure and the potential to interfere with the enjoyment of life . These concerns are evaluated against different vibration limits. Studies have shown that the threshold of perception for average persons is in the range of 0.008 to 0.012 in/sec PPV. Human perception to vibration varies with the individual and is a function of physical setting and the type of vibration. Persons exposed to elevated ambient vibration levels, such as people in an urban environment, may tolerate a higher vibration level. Structural damage can be classified as cosmetic only, such as minor cracking of building elements, or may threaten the integrity of the building. Safe vibration limits that can be applied to assess the potential for damaging a structure vary by researcher and there is no general consensus as to what amount of vibration may pose a threat for structural damage to the building. Construction induced vibration that can be detrimental to the building is very rare and has only been observed in instances where the structure is at a high state of disrepair and the construction activity occurs immediately adjacent to the structure. Existing noise environment. The Valley Christian Center is located west of Inspiration Drive and north of Dublin Boulevard in the western part of the City of Dublin. Currently, there are five buildings on the project site with existing sports fields located to the west of the buildings that are used for football, soccer, and baseball. Parking lots are located to the east, to the north, and to the south of City of Dublin Page 65 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 existing buildings. To the north and to the east of the project site, opposite Inspiration Drive, are single-family residences. Multi-family housing developments are located approximately 510 feet southwest of the project site. Designated open space is located to the northwest of the project site. Open parcels of land are also located along the southern boundary of the project site. A noise monitoring survey, consisting of two long-term and three short-term measurements, was performed at the site beginning on Wednesday May 6, 2015 and concluding on Monday May 11, 2015. Each measurement location is shown in the Acoustic Report (Attachment 2). The noise environment at the site and in the surrounding areas results primarily from vehicular traffic along I-580, as well as neighborhood traffic along Inspiration Drive and connecting roadways. Occasional aircraft associated with the Livermore Municipal Airport also contribute to the noise environment at the project site. Long-term noise measurement LT-1 was made along the northern boundary of the project site, approximately 75 feet south of the centerline of Inspirat ion Dive. LT-1 represented the existing noise environment near the location of the proposed multi-purpose recreation field. Hourly average noise levels at this location typically ranged from 48 to 60 dBA Leq during the day, and from 39 to 55 dBA Leq at night. The average community noise equivalent level from Wednesday May 6, 2015 through Monday May 11, 2015 ranged from 57 to 58 dBA CNEL during the weekdays and was 55 dBA CNEL on weekend days. LT-2 was positioned in the single-family residential development to the east of the project site. LT-2 was approximately 65 feet west of the intersection of Betlen Drive and Las Palmas Way and was approximately 210 feet east of the centerline of Inspiration Drive. This measurement represented the noise-sensitive receptors located to the east and to the north of the project site. Hourly average noise levels at this location typically ranged from 41 to 54 dBA Leq during the day, and from 37 to 52 dBA Leq at night. The average community noise equivalent level from Wednesday May 6, 2015 through Monday May 11, 2015 ranged from 52 to 54 dBA CNEL during the weekdays and ranged from 50 to 51 dBA CNEL on weekend days. The short-term noise measurements were made on Monday May 11, 2015 in ten- minute intervals starting at 12:20 pm. ST-1 was measured in the multi-family residential development located to the southwest of the project site. This measurement was made approximately 20 feet east of the intersection of Brigadoon Way and Sornoway Lane. The ten-minute average noise level measured at ST-1 was 53 dBA Leq(10), and the estimated average community noise equivalent level was 55 dBA CNEL. ST-2 was made in the single-family development to the northwest of the project site, approximately 30 feet south of the centerline of Mountain Rise Place. The ten-minute average noise level at ST-2 City of Dublin Page 66 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 was 50 dBA Leq(10), and the estimated average community noise equivalent level was 50 dBA CNEL. The final short-term measurement, ST-3, was made opposite Inspiration Drive from LT-1 and represented the single-family development located north of the project site. ST-3 was approximately 125 feet north of the centerline of Inspiration Drive, and the ten-minute average noise level measured at this location was 56 dBA Leq(10). The estimated average community noise equivalent level at ST-3 was 56 dBA CNEL. Table 4 summarizes the results for the short-term measurements. Table 4. Summary of Long-Term and Short-Term Noise Measurements (dBA) Noise Measurement Location (Date, Time) Lmax L(1) L(10) L(50) L(90) Leq(10) CNEL LT-1:northern boundary of the site, ~75 feet south of the centerline of Inspiration Drive (5/6/2015, 16:20- 5/11/2015, 13:10) 58-81a 56-74a 45-67a 41-57a 39-54a 47-62a 57- 58c 55d 40-72b 39-66b 38-62b 37-54b 35-52b 37-57b LT-2: ~65 feet from intersection of Betlen Drive and Las Palmas Way (5/6/2015, 16:40- 5/11/2015, 13:20) 43-79a 42-71a 40-64a 39-58a 37-54a 39-59a 52- 54c 50- 51d 37-69b 37-66b 37-57b 35-54b 33-52b 36-54b ST-1: ~20 feet east of the intersection of Brigadoon Way and Sornoway Lane (5/11/2015, 12:20- 12:30) 69 64 53 50 48 53 55 ST-2: ~30 feet south of the centerline of Mountain Rise Place (5/11/2015, 12:40- 12:50) 66 62 52 47 44 50 50 ST-3: ~125 feet north of the centerline of Inspiration Drive (5/11/2015, 13:00- 13:10) 71 67 57 53 51 56 56 a Range of noise levels measured during daytime hours (between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.). b Range of noise levels measured during nighttime hours (between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.). c CNEL measured on weekdays. d CNEL measured on weekends. Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, 2016 City of Dublin Page 67 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Based on the measurements made in the vicinity of the project site, existing noise levels are below 60 dBA CNEL, which meets the City of Dublin’s noise exposure limits for residential land uses and schools. Regulatory setting The Noise Element of the Dublin General Plan identifies the following primary sources of noise in Dublin: traffic noise from freeways and major roadways within the community and noise generated by the BART line adjacent to the I-580 freeway. The Noise Element identifies the following maximum noise exposure levels by land use type. Table 5. City of Dublin Land Use/Noise Compatibility Standards (decibels) Land Use Normally Acceptable Conditionally Acceptable Normally Unacceptable Clearly Unacceptable Residential 60 or less 60-70 70-75 75+ Lodging Facilities 60-70 70-80 80+ -- Schools, churches, nursing homes 60-70 70-80 80+ -- Neighborhood parks 60 or less 60-65 65-70 70+ Office/Retail 70 or less 70-75 75-80 80+ Industrial 70 or less 70-75 75+ -- Source: Dublin General Plan Noise Element, Table 9-1 The City of Dublin also enforces an interior noise standard of 45 decibels for residential dwellings. Previous EIR The 2003 VCC EIR identified the following noise impacts and mitigation measures. • Impact 4.8-1 found a short-term impact on surrounding residential projects due to construction noise. Mitigation Measure 4.8 -1 limited project construction noise by requiring future construction activities to adhere to a number of specific features, including but not limited to specific hours of construction, keeping noisy equipment away from nearby residences, ensuring that construction equipment is in good working order and designating a site noise coordinator to respond to complaints. Adherence to this measure reduced construction noise to a less-than-significant level. • Impact 4.8-2 noted a potentially significant impact with respect to noise impacts on residences that were previously proposed as part of project. City of Dublin Page 68 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Mitigation Measure 4.8-2 reduced this impact to a less-than-significant level by requiring a site-specific acoustic study for all future Site Development Review applications and including any noise reduction recommendations into that portion of the project. • Impact 4.8-3 found that the main campus would be subject to potentially significant noise from the I-580 freeway. This was reduced to a less-than- significant level by adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.8-3, which required the completion of an acoustic analysis for the chapel portion o f the site and incorporation of report recommendations into the final design of the chapel. • Impact 4.8-4 identified a potentially significant impact with respect to future noise levels on surrounding uses during evening hours if night lighting were to be installed. Mitigation Measure 4.8-4 reduced this impact to a less-than-significant level by requiring an acoustic analysis prior to the commencement of evening activities and incorporation of report recommendations during future evening activities. The proposed project will be required to comply with applicable noise mitigation measures contained in the previous EIR. Project Impacts a,c) Would the project expose persons or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established by the General Plan or other applicable standard and result in a substantial increases in permanent in ambient noise levels? Less-than- Significant with Mitigation. The City of Dublin does not define a stationary equipment noise level standard. Therefore, for the purpose of this project, project-generated operational noise is compared to existing ambient conditions at the surrounding noise-sensitive receptors. Under conditions of the proposed project, a new baseball field would be located in the northwestern corner of the campus and a new multipurpose recreational field would be located in the northeastern corner of campus adjacent to Inspiration Drive. The new baseball field would be relocated approximately 360 feet northwest from the location of the existing multipurpose sports field. The new multipurpose recreational field would host football, soccer, and track and field sports activities. Currently, football practices are played on the existing multipurpose baseball field, while track and field activities occur off site. As part of the proposed project, a sound amplification system and lighting standards would also be installed at the new multipurpose recreational field. City of Dublin Page 69 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 An outdoor amphitheater is proposed on the interior of the site, southwest of the new multipurpose recreation field. This amphitheater can be used during the school year for lectures during regular school hours and for Northern California Bible College lectures during evening hours. These lectures would not require amplification or lighting. Sunday serv ices may elect to hold church services at the amphitheater, which would require amplification, and the amphitheater may also be used for outdoor theatrical plays during summer months. Following is an analysis of potential noise impacts from major project elements. Multipurpose sports field. The proposed plan for the new multipurpose recreational sports field includes hosting football games, as well as track and field events, that would include seating for spectators. From mid- August through mid-November, football practices would be held Monday through Thursday from 3:00 pm to 5:30 pm. Organized football games would include one scrimmage and up to six regular season games with the potential for an additional three playoff games. Football games would be held on Friday nights from 4:00 pm to 9:00 pm. The field is proposed to be lighted for night games until 10:00 pm and would require amplified sound until 10:00 pm. Football games would occasionally occur on Saturday nights from 4:00 pm to 9:00 pm. Lighting and amplified sound would be required for the Saturday night games as well. A Condition of Approval has been added to the project that allows the use of amplified sound and lighting on Friday and Saturday nights until 10:00 pm. The proposed stadium bleacher capacity is 1,100 seats. Two speakers for the public address (PA) system would be located at both ends of the bleachers on the southwestern side of the track. Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. (I&R) monitored noise levels during activities at the Santa Teresa High School football stadium in San Jose, CA. Noise measurements of a football game were made on October 20, 2012. The varsity football game between Santa Teresa High School and Oak Grove High School was considered to be the “rivalry” game of the football season. The attendance was estimated by the high school to be approximately 1,600 people. Measurements of 15-minute durations were made at several locations on the Santa Teresa High School campus and in the adjacent single-family neighborhoods at distances ranging from 425 to 740 feet from the center of the football field. These measurements were attended by a qualified noise technician who documented maximum noise levels resulting from the various sources of noise generated during a varsity football game on October 20, 2012, and during band practice on October 22, 2012. Football game activities were generally the primary noise City of Dublin Page 70 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 sources at measurement locations during the varsity game. During band practice, the band was audible and measurable in the absence of local traffic at all short-term measurement locations, but was typically at levels below other noise sources in the area. Table 6 summarizes the measurement results at the nearest locations about 425 feet from the center of the field during noisy interval s at the varsity football game on Saturday, October 20, 2012, including the average noise level (Leq) and background noise level (L90) measured during each interval, and the maximum noise levels measured during various noise-generating activities. Table 6. Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurements, Football Game at Santa Teresa High School, San Jose CA, 10/20/12 Location Average Noise Level, dBA Leq Typical Maximum Instantaneous Noise Levels, dBA Lmax Cheering/ Crowd PA System Whistles 425 feet, as measured from the center of the field 60 57 to 73 53 to 59 56 to 63 Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, 2016 The nearest residences to the proposed field are residences on Bay Laurel Street located about 490 feet north of the center of the field, and residences on Las Palmas Way located about 580 feet east of the center of the field. These residences are located substantially below the elevation of the proposed field. The intervening grading associated with the school itself and Inspiration Drive provides acoustical barriers created by the tops of the slopes between the proposed field and the residences. The attenuation provided by distance and the intervening topography was calculated using standard methods. Projected noise levels are summarized in Table 7. The existing average noise levels during the evening in the residential areas range from 48 to 50 dBA Leq. Noise from the football games would increase the average level by up to 1 dBA Leq at the nearest residences. The cheers would be intermittently audible because the levels would exceed the existing background level, but would fall within the overall range of existing ambient levels. Noise from football games would not cause a substantial increase in noise levels at the most affected residences. This is a less-than-significant impact. For the proposed project, calculations were made to assign a performance standard to the PA system selected by the Applicant, since a specific system has not yet been chosen. It is assumed that both speakers would be City of Dublin Page 71 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 operating simultaneously and that the noise levels from each speaker would be the same. Two speakers would be located at the multipurpose field. The speaker nearest the Bay Laurel Street residences would be approximately 500 feet south of the nearest rear yard. The speaker nearest to the Las Palmas Way residences would be approximately 500 west of the nearest rear yard. To ensure that the PA system would not exceed 55 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences, assuming attenuation provided by distance and the intervening topography, the amplification system should not exceed 75 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. This limitation is required as a mitigation measure. Table 7. Projected Noise Levels at Nearest Residences During Capacity Crowd Varsity Football Game at the Proposed Multipurpose Recreational Field Location Average Noise Level, dBA Leq Typical Maximum Instantaneous Noise Levels, dBA Lmax Cheering/ Crowd PA System Whistles Bay Laurel home, 490 feet from the center of the field 42 39 to 55 35 to 41 38 to 45 Las Palmas home, 580 feet from the center of the field 40 37 to 53 33 to 39 36 to 43 Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, 2016 From mid-November to mid-February, men’s soccer would utilize the proposed multipurpose field. Practices would typically occur three days per week from 3:00 pm to 5:00 pm. Junior varsity and varsity games would be played one to two nights per week from 3:30 pm to 7:30 pm. While nighttime lighting would be required for these activities, these events would have a lower attendance than football games. The noise sources are similar in character to the football game, but with lower average and maximum instantaneous levels. VCC has indicated that they do not plan to use the amplification system for soccer games, but if they choose to in the future, the impact would be less-than-significant as long as the amplification system does not exceed 75 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet, as stated above. This limitation is required as a mitigation measure. Varsity soccer games would occasionally occur on Saturdays from 1:30 pm to 3:30 pm. Varsity women’s soccer would occur during the spring between mid- February and mid-May. Practices would typically occur Monday through Friday (depending upon game schedule) from 3:00 pm to 5:00 pm. A total of 12 home games would occur between 4:00 pm to 6:00 pm. Occasionally, a Saturday game would occur from 1:30 pm to 3:30. All soccer events would have significantly lower attendance than football games. Average City of Dublin Page 72 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 hourly noise levels resulting from soccer games are anticipated to be about 60 dBA Leq at a distance of 100 feet from the center of the field, with maximum noise levels from cheering and whistles as high as 67 dBA Lmax. At the nearest residences along Bay Laurel Street and Las Palmas Way, average hourly noise levels due to soccer games would be below 30 dBA Leq, with maximum instantaneous noise levels up to 36 dBA Lmax. This would not exceed the existing ambient levels and would be a less-than- significant impact. The field would also be used for track and field events during the springtime from mid-February to mid-May. Practices would occur on weekdays from 3:00 pm to 5:00 pm. One track meet per month is anticipated, which would occur on a weekday from 2:00 pm to 6:00 pm. Additionally, one invitational per month is anticipated on Saturday from 9:00 am to 6:00 pm. Track meets would require amplified sound, but not lighting. These events have much lower attendance than football games. The noise sources are similar in character to the football game, but with lower average and maximum instantaneous levels. It is assumed that a starter pistol would be used during track meets and track invitationals. Typical noise levels produced by a .22 caliber starter pistol would be approximately 79 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. From the approximate positions on the multipurpose field where the starter pistol would be used, the distances to the nearest residences would be approximately 435 feet to the Bay Laurel Street residences and approximately 475 feet to the Las Palmas Way residences. At these distances and assuming attenuation from intervening topography, the maximum instantaneous noise levels expected from the starter pistol would range from 42 to 43 dBA Lmax, which would not exceed range of existing ambient noise levels. This would be a less- than-significant impact. Noise from sports activities on the proposed multipurpose recreational sports field would cause a less-than-significant impact on residents in the area. Graduation ceremonies, which are currently held off-campus, could occur at the new multipurpose field. These special occasions would occur on Saturdays in the early afternoon. Noise from graduations would include cheering from the crowd and amplified sound. Attendance is expected to be less than football games; therefore, average and maximum instantaneous noise levels would be lower than those discussed for football games. Graduation ceremonies are not expected to increase existing ambient noise levels. This would be a less-than-significant impact. Relocated baseball field. The primary use for this field would be baseball. Baseball is currently played on the existing multi-purpose field. The new field would be relocated from the south side of Building 5 to the west side City of Dublin Page 73 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 of Building 5. The level of baseball activities on the field would be similar to existing, but football and soccer would be relocated to the new multipurpose recreational field. The nearest residences to the proposed location of the baseball field are located about 500 feet to the north on Inspiration Circle. An intervening hill would continue to buffer the residences. Noise levels from activities on the field would not change from the existing conditions. Neighbors to the southwest would be located further from the new field than from the existing field. Noise levels from the new field would be equal to or lower than from the existing field. The relocation of the baseball field would cause no additional noise impacts on residents in the area over existing conditions. Amphitheater Activities. Three types of events are anticipated at the outdoor amphitheater: theatrical plays during the summertime; daytime lectures during the school year by the Valley Christian Center schools and evening lectures by the Northern California Bible College; and church sermons on Sundays. Amplified sound would be required for the sermons and potentially during the theatrical plays. Locations around the amphitheater for the amplification system speakers were not provided at the time of this study, but for worst-case scenario calculation purposes, it is expected that a speaker would be located on each side of the seating area and at the stage. Figure 5, contained in the full acoustic report, shows the assumed worst- case scenario locations used for this study. The nearest residence along Bay Laurel Street would be approximately 540 feet from the outdoor amphitheater, and the nearest residence along Las Palmas Way would be approximately 860 feet from the outdoor amphitheater. At these distances and assuming attenuation from intervening topography, maximum instantaneous noise levels would remain at or below 55 dBA Lmax if the performance standard for the amplification system would not exceed 75 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. This limitation is required as a mitigation measure. The following mitigation measure shall be followed to ensure consistency with City of Dublin exterior noise standards. Mitigation Measure NOISE-1. The following noise performance standard for Public Address (PA) systems shall be met by the Applicant. a. To ensure that a PA system would not exceed 55 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences, the amplification system at the new multipurpose field should not exceed 75 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from each speaker. b. To ensure that the PA system would not exceed 55 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences, the amplification system at the new City of Dublin Page 74 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 outdoor amphitheater should not exceed 75 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from each speaker. b) Exposure of people to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? No New Impact. The construction of the project may generate perceptible vibration when heavy equipment or impact tools (e.g. jackhammers, hoe rams) are used. Construction activities would include site demolition, preparation work, foundation work, and new building framing and finishing. The proposed project would not require pile driving, which can cause excessive vibration. Ground-borne vibration levels exceeding 0.3 in/sec PPV would have the potential to result in a significant vibration impact. Table 7 contained in the full acoustic report (Attachment 2) presents typical vibration levels that could be expected from construction equipment at a distance of 25 feet. Construction activities, such as drilling, the use of jackhammers, rock drills and other high-power or vibratory tools, and rolling stock equipment (tracked vehicles, compactors, etc.) may generate substantial vibration in the immediate vicinity. Vibration levels would vary depending on soil conditions, construction methods, and equipment used. The single-family residences located to the east and to the north of the project site, opposite Inspiration Drive, are at least 160 feet from the project site . The multi- family residences located to the southwest are at least 385 feet from the project site. At these distances, vibration levels would be expected to be less than 0.1 in/sec PPV, which is below the 0.3 in/sec PPV significance threshold. According to the project Applicant, normal construction methods would be used to build the proposed project so there would be limited and less-than- significant generation of groundborne noise or vibration. With adherence to applicable regulations, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to ground vibration beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. d) Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels without the project? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation. Noise impacts resulting from construction depend upon the noise generated by various pieces of construction equipment, the timing and duration of noise-generating activities, and the distance between construction noise sources and noise-sensitive areas. Construction noise impacts primarily result when construction activities occur during noise- sensitive times of the day (e.g., early morning, evening, or nighttime City of Dublin Page 75 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 hours), the construction occurs in areas immediately adjoining noise- sensitive land uses, or when construction lasts over extended periods of time. Where noise from construction activities exceeds 60 dBA Leq and exceeds the ambient noise environment by at least 5 dBA Leq at noise- sensitive uses in the project vicinity, the impact would be considered significant. Construction activities generate considerable amounts of noise, especially during earth-moving activities when heavy equipment is used. Table 8 contained in the full acoustic report (see Attachment 2) presents the typical range of hourly average noise levels generated by different phases of construction measured at a distance of 50 feet. Hourly average noise levels generated by excavation equipment associated with the project are calculated to range from 71 to 89 dBA Leq measured at a distance of 50 feet. Construction generated noise levels drop off at a rate of about 6 dBA per doubling of the distance between the source and receptor. Shielding by buildings or terrain can provide an additional 5 to 10 dBA noise reduction at distant receptors. Construction for the proposed project would include excavation, possibly some minor building construction, and foundation work for the lighting standards and the sound amplification system. Noise generated by construction activities would temporarily elevate noise levels at adjacent noise sensitive receptors. Conservatively, this would be considered a more severe impact than was included in the 2003 EIR since the current project includes an increase of up to 1,300 square feet of floor space over the approved Master Plan and a football stadium. The 2003 EIR contains Mitigation Measure 4.8-1 that mandates a number of features to reduce construction noise, including limitations on construction activities, placing noisy stationary equipment away from nearby residences, installation of mufflers and designation of a noise coordinator to respond to issues raised by neighbors. Mitigation Measure 4.8 -1 has been augmented to include the following additional measures to ensure construction noise impacts are mitigated to less-than-significant. Mitigation Measure NOISE-2. In addition to the measures required by 2003 EIR 4.9-1, the project Applicant shall prepare a construction noise management plan that identifies measures to be taken to minimize construction noise on surrounding sensitive receptors (e.g., residential uses and schools) and includes specific noise management measures to be included into project plans and specifications subject to review and approval by the City. These measures shall include, but not be limited to the following: City of Dublin Page 76 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 a) All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and sound control devices (e.g., intake silencers and noise shrouds) no less effective than those provided on the original equipment and no equipment shall have an un- muffled exhaust. b) The contractor shall maintain and tune-up all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions. c) Stationary equipment shall be placed so as to maintain the greatest possible distance to the sensitive receptors. d) All equipment servicing shall be performed so as to maintain the greatest possible distance to the sensitive receptors. e) The project Applicant(s) shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City of Dublin Planning Department, a qualified “Noise Disturbance Coordinator.” The Noise Disturbance Coordinator shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. When a complaint is received, the Noise Disturbance Coordinator shall notify the City within 24 hours of the complaint and determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, malfunctioning muffler, etc.) and shall implement reasonable measures to resolve the compliant, as deemed acceptable by the Dublin Planning Department. If any notices are sent to residential units immediately surrounding the construction site by the City and all signs posted at the construction site shall include the contact name and the telephone number for the Noise Disturbance Coordinator. f) Select demolition method to minimize vibration, where possible (e.g. sawing masonry into sections rather than demolishing it by pavement breakers). g) The construction contractor shall limit all on-site noise producing construction activities, including deliveries and warming up of equipment, to the daytime hours of 7:30 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday (excluding holidays) unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. e, f) For a project located within an airport land use plan, would the project expose people to excessive noise levels? No New Impact. The project site is not located within the planning area of any nearby airport land use plan. The closest airport to the project site is Livermore Municipal Airport, located several miles southeast of the site. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in the previous CEQA document. City of Dublin Page 77 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 13. Population and Housing Environmental Setting The project site is partially developed with the Valley Christian Church and school. Other portions of the site remain vacant. Previous EIR The 2003 EIR identified no specific population or housing impacts associated with the project. Project Impacts a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly? No New Impact. The project site has been planned for a combination of a religious facility, private school and related uses since 1978. The current proposal could result in construction of an increase of up to 1,300 square feet of floor space over the approved Master Plan. The previous EIR also analyzed the development of up to 22 dwellings on the site; however, the approved Master Plan does not include a residential component. The only residential use proposed as part of this project is a caretaker unit, which will not induce population growth; therefore, the impact is less significant. Proposed uses would include a new multi-use sports stadium, a baseball field, vehicle parking and similar uses. There would be no new or more severe impact with respect than was previously analyzed in the pervious CEQA document, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. b,c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing units or people ? No New Impact. The project site does not include any dwelling units and no impact would result with regard to displacement of dwellings or population on the site. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. 14. Public Services Environmental Setting The following provide essential services to the project site: City of Dublin Page 78 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 • Fire Protection. Fire protection services are provided by the Alameda County Fire Department. Alameda County provides fire suppression, emergency medical response, fire prevention, education, building inspection services and hazardous material control. The nearest station is Station 16, located northwest of the project area at 74940 Donohue Drive near downtown Dublin. • Police Protection: Police and security protection is provided by the Dublin Police Services. • Schools. The Dublin Unified School District provides public K-12 educational services for properties in the Dublin area. • Library Services: Alameda County Library service. • Maintenance. Maintenance of streets, roads and other governmental facilities are the responsibility of the City of Dublin. Previous CEQA document There is no applicable mitigation measures contained in 2003 VCC EIR addressing potential impacts to public services, since the previously proposed residential units were not approved as part of the project. Project Impacts a) Fire protection? No New Impact. Approval and implementation of the proposed project could increase the number of fire and emergency medical calls for service that would need to be responded to by the Alameda County Fire Department. The proposed project is required to adhere to the California Building Code, the California Fire Code and other state and local fire protection standards to minimize fire hazards. The existing complex currently includes water service for firefighting purposes, fire hydrants, fire extinguishers and similar fire protection features. The proposed project represents a minor increase in development compared to the approved Master Plan; therefore, the project would not result in a substantial change from the analyses and conclusions in the prior CEQA documents. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to fire protection than has been previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR. Based on discussions with Alameda County Fire Department Staff, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to fire service beyond that analyzed in previous CEQA documents (source: Bonnie Terra, Alameda County Fire Department, 8/28/17). City of Dublin Page 79 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 b) Police protection? No New Impact. Similar to fire protection, there could be a small increase in the number of calls for service to the Dublin Police Services; however, the amount of proposed additional square footage is relatively small. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to police protection than has been previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR. Based on discussions with Dublin Police Services Staff, there would be no new or substantially more severe impacts with respect to police service beyond that analyzed in the previous CEQA document (source: Chief Dennis Houghtelling, Dublin Police Services, 10/24/17). c) Schools? No New Impact. The only residential included as part of the project is one caretaker unit. Therefore, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR. d) Other governmental service, including maintenance of public facilities? No New Impact. Maintenance of public facilities would continue to be provided by the City of Dublin. New public facilities will be required to be designed to meet City of Dublin standards to ensure that no excessive wear or other impacts would occur with respect to public facilities. Therefore, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR. e) Adequate wastewater capacity to serve the project and other projects? No New Impact. See subsection 17 “a” and “b,” below. f, g) Solid waste generation? This impact was found to be less-than-significant in the 2003 EIR. The proposed project includes a small increase in the amount of allowable development on the site. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR. 15. Recreation Environmental Setting No City parks or other recreational facilities are located on the project site. Similarly, no parks or other recreational facilities are designated on the site in the Dublin General Plan. City of Dublin Page 80 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 The City of Dublin offers a range of park, recreation and cultural services to the public. Nearby City parks include the Dublin Heritage Park and Museum, Dolan Park and Mape Memorial Park. Regional park facilities are provided by the East Bay Regional Park Dist rict (EBRPD). The EBRPD maintains a large number of regional parks, trails and similar recreation facilities in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. Previous EIR No significant impacts with respect to parks or recreation were identified in the 2003 EIR. Project Impacts a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks? No New Impact. The proposed project would not increase the on-site permanent population, since the project would primarily involve recreational facilities. The one exception would be the future construction of one on-site caretaker unit. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of recreational facilities? No New Impact. See item “a,” above. As noted in the Project Description, the Applicant is proposing to construct a major athletic field and improve other existing facilities for students of the private school. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR. 16. Transportation/Traffic Environmental Setting This section of the Initial Study is based on traffic analysis of the proposed project completed by the firm of Omni Means Planners and Engineers. The Omni Means report is hereby incorporated by reference into this Initial Study and is included as Attachment 3. Existing roadways Regional access to and from the site is provided by the I-680 freeway that provides north and south regional vehicular transportation and the I-580 freeway that provides east and west service. City of Dublin Page 81 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Local roads serving the VCC project include Dublin Boulevard, Amador Valley Boulevard, San Ramon Road, Bay Laurel Street and Inspiration Drive. Existing transit service Transit service to the project area is provided by Livermore-Amador Valley Transit Authority (Wheels). Wheels that provides localized service to the site and surrounding communities. Regional access throughout the Bay Area is provided by the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) with a station located in West Dublin. Previous EIR The 2003 EIR identified the following impacts and mitigation measures with respect to traffic and transportation • Impact 4.10-1 noted an impact with respect to traffic congestion at the Silvergate Avenue and Dublin Boulevard intersection. Mitigation Measure 4.10-1 required the project Applicant to make a fair share contribution to funding traffic signals at Dublin Boulevard and Silvergate Drive and Dublin Boulevard and Inspiration Drive. With this action, Impact 4.10-1 was deemed to be less-than-significant. Both signals have been installed and are operational. • Impact 4.10-2 found an impact with respect to project traffic causing increased traffic on local streets near the project site. Mitigation Measure 4.10-2 reduced this impact to a less-than-significant level by requiring the Applicant to monitor peak hour turning movements at project driveways during a typical school day at six month periods to ensure that the project vehicles do not violate turning restrictions. If turning violations are found, more restrictions shall be imposed, as approved by the Public Works Director. • Impact 4.10-3 identified an impact with the project’s contribution to cumulative traffic, especially on Dublin Boulevard. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.10-3 reduced this impact to a less-than-significant level by requiring the project Applicant to widen Dublin Boulevard between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive from two to four lanes. This mitigation measure has been completed. Project Impacts a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial to existing traffic load and street capacity? No New Impact. The proposed updated Master Plan includes construction of a sports field which would host football games and other sporting events. Trip generation for football games, based on survey data of other high schools, indicates the proposed seating capacity of 1,100 seats City of Dublin Page 82 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 would generate 451 trips temporarily before and after the games. Football game trips would occur during time periods when background traffic volumes are low and the volumes would remain within the carrying capacity of the street network. Trip generation for non -football sporting events, including softball, soccer, lacrosse and track and field, would be low and would not be expected to have a substantial effect on traffic operating conditions. Based on the findings of the traffic analysis for the project (see Attachment 3), the proposed changes to the Master Plan would not result in new or more severe significant impacts than were analyzed in the 2003 EIR. Mitigation Measures included in the 2003 EIR have been implemented to minimize traffic at Dublin Boulevard intersections with Inspiration Drive and Hansen Drive. The widening of Dublin Boulevard near the project site has also been completed; therefore, no new or more severe impacts would occur from the project, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a LOS standard established by the County CMA for designated roads)? No New Impact. The 2003 EIR found a potentially significant impact with respect to cumulative traffic (see Impact 4.10-3 in the 2003 EIR). With adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.10 -3, also included in the 2003 EIR, this impact was deemed to be less-than- significant. Mitigation Measure 4.10-3 required the Applicant to make a fair share contribution to the widening of Dublin Boulevard near the project site to accommodate additional project traffic. This measure has been fulfilled. Proposed changes to the VCC Master Plan would generate the same or fewer peak hour trips as analyzed in the 2003 EIR based on the project traffic analysis. No new or more significant impacts would result with respect to cumulative traffic than previously analyzed in the 200 3 EIR. The major sporting events at the proposed stadium would occur after weekday peak hours or during weekends, so there will be no new impacts. A Condition of Approval has been added to the project that prohibits varsity football games from occurring during peak hours. c) Change in air traffic patterns? No New Impact. The proposed project would have no impact on air traffic patterns, since it involves the expansion of an approved church, school and similar semi-public facilities. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or an incompatible use ? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation. In order to minimize school traffic City of Dublin Page 83 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 from intruding on the local neighborhood streets north of the school, vehicle turn restrictions are in place at two of the school’s three driveways (the north and middle driveways). Specifically, signs are posted prohibiting right turns in and left turns out on school days from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm. There are no turn restrictions at the school’s south driveway. Observations of vehicle turning movements during the am peak hour were conducted in 2001 for the 2003 draft EIR. The observed trips were 50 turns to/from the north (20 illegal turns from the north and middle driveways plus 30 legal turns from the south driveway). Recent (2015) traffic counts completed by Omni Means staff observed 29 turns to/from the north (14 illegal plus 15 legal) during the am peak hour. The current volume is lower than 2001, but accounting for a lower existing school population compared to the 2001 population, the percentage of trips to/from the north is nearly equal for both surveys: approximately 4.5 % of the total peak hour trips. This indicates the cut-through rate has not been increasing. It would also appear to reflect a fairly low cut-through rate, given that some of the trips are likely from residents of the neighborhood. Future school operations could increase the possibility of greater cut- through traffic. This could be a potentially significant impact and the following measure is recommended to reduce this impact to a less-than- significant level. Mitigation Measure TRA-1. The following steps shall be taken to ensure that project related traffic does not cut through adjacent neighborhoods as part of school operations: a) The school administration shall issue a letter to all students a minimum of one time per year advising household driver s not to use routes through adjacent neighborhoods. b) The Applicant shall continue monitoring local driving activities as required in the 2003 EIR Mitigation Measure 4.10-2 at the completion of development phases 2, 3 and 4 to ensure that the rate of cut though traffic does not increase. c) If it is determined that cut-through traffic has increased based on additional construction, increased enforcement of the illegal turns and/or prohibiting turns to/from the north at the southern driveway shall be implemented by the school with the oversight of the Dublin Public Works Department. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? No New Impact. The proposed project would maintain two driveways which provide adequate emergency access. No new or significantly more severe impacts are therefore anticipated with City of Dublin Page 84 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 respect to this topic than have been previously analyzed in prior CEQA documents. f) Inadequate parking capacity? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation. The proposed revised Master Plan would consist of three separate parking generating components: the sanctuary, the school facilities, and the new sports field activities. The parking requirements for each component have been calculated independently. A Conditional Use Permit is required by the Dublin Zoning Ordinance to establish a parking requirement for the football and multi-use sports field, since parking for this specific use is not established in the Zoning Ordinance. It is assumed the church, school, and sports field games would not be in use concurrently. To ensure this, a Minor Use Permit for shared parking is also being processed. The 2003 EIR for the approved expansion evaluated parking based on the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. The parking requirements were evaluated for the Sunday worship space and for the weekday school uses. The highest parking space requirement was associated with the Sunday worship service. The required parking was calculated to be 667 spaces for the worship service based on 2,000 seats (at 1 required space per 3 seats). The existing parking supply consists of 510 striped spaces and the approved plan was to add 250 new paved and 100 unpaved overflow spaces for a total of 860 spaces. Therefore the parking supply met the Zoning Ordinance requirement, with a surplus of 193 spaces. For the current application, the City of Dublin Planning Staff has calculated the required number of parking spaces based on the current Zoning Ordinance requirements (see Table A-3 in Attachment 3). Pursuant to Chapter 8.76 (Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations) of the Zoning Ordinance, a sanctuary facility requires 1 space per 3 fixed seats plus 1 space per Sunday service classroom. The existing sanctuary containing 763 seats and requires 258 parking spaces, which is met with the current supply of 510 spaces An existing parking lot will be eliminated to allow construction of the stadium facility; however, the Applicant will be providing additional parking at a new parking area. The total number of parking spaces provided for Phases 1 and 2 is 511 parking spaces. Proposed Phase 3 would include the construction of the baseball field in the western side of the campus and would also add additional paved parking spaces for a total of 530 spaces. City of Dublin Page 85 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 The sanctuary expansion to 1,500 seats would occur in Development Phase 4. The Zoning Ordinance requires 504 spaces for the proposed sanctuary. The parking supply would increase from 530 spaces in Phase 3 to 600 spaces in Phase 4. Therefore, the parking requirement would be met, with a surplus of 96 spaces. Per Chapter 8.76 of the Zoning Ordinance, the parking requirement for the sanctuary is 0.33 parking spaces per seat. Recent parking surveys of the church identified a higher demand of 0.40 vehicles per person (220 vehicles for 560 people). Applying the surveyed rate to the proposed 1,500 seats equates to a parking demand of 600 vehicles if the church is fully occupied. With 600 spaces provided in Phase 4, demand based on the surveyed rate would be accommodated with maximum attendance. For the weekday school related parking demand, without the operation of a sports stadium, the proposed plan after build-out would require 395 parking spaces to satisfy the weekday school parking requirement. The proposed plan would provide a minimum of 511 spaces (Phases 1 and 2) and up to 600 spaces (Phase 4). Therefore, the proposed plan would meet the weekday parking requirement during all of the Development Phases. In summary, at full build-out, the proposed Master Plan revision would provide sufficient on-site paved parking that would be consistent with the Dublin Zoning Ordinance and the calculated parking for the football stadium, per the Omni-Means site specific study. Mitigation Measure TRA-2. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the football stadium, the Applicant shall retain a California- registered Traffic Engineer to prepare a Parking Management for the operation of football games and other large activities (such as graduations) held at the proposed stadium. The Parking Management Plan shall demonstrate that all parking for football games and other large activities can be safely accommodated on the site and avoid spill-over of parking on adjacent streets. Methods that could be included in the Parking Management Plan could include but are not limited to use of parking attendants before and during games and other large activities to implement valet parking, promotion of carpooling to games and limiting sales of admission tickets to correspond with estimated parking supply. The Parking Management Plan shall be approved by the City of Dublin Community Development Department and Public Works Department prior to the issuance of the building permit for the stadium. City of Dublin Page 86 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 g) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? No New Impact. The proposed project includes on-site pedestrian pathways and sidewalks as well as a sidewalk along Inspiration Drive from Dublin Boulevard to the main campus. Additionally, a Condition of Approval requires that bicycle parking be provided at each phase of development consistent with CAL Green Building Code. No new or more severe significant impacts to this topic would result than was previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR. 17. Tribal Cultural Resources Environmental Setting As noted in the Cultural Resources section of this Initial Study, the 2003 EIR did not identify significant impacts on historic, cultural, Native American or other cultural resources. The project site has been largely disturbed for the construction of buildings, parking lots, on-site roads and other improvements. Much of the undeveloped portions of the site will remain as undisturbed open space as part of the proposed project, as noted in the Project Description. Also, as noted in the Cultural Resources section of this document, on October 31, 2017, the Dublin Community Development Department sent a letter to Mr. Randy Yonemura of the Ione Band of Miwok Indian tribe informing the tribe of the City of Dublin’s intent to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project as required by AB 52. As of the public date of this Initial Study, no response has been received by the City. This letter is hereby incorporated by reference into this document and is available for review at the Dublin Community Development Department during normal business hours. Previous EIR. Two cultural resource impacts and an associated mitigation measure were contained in the 2003 EIR. • Impact 4.4-1 noted that on-site construction, including building foundations, utility lines and similar improvements could disturb archeological and/or Native American underground resources. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4-1.1 reduced this impact to a less-than- significant level by requiring that work on the project shall cease until a resource protection plan prepared by a qualified archeologist consistent with CEQA Guideline Section 15064.5 (e) is prepared and implemented. If human remains are identified, the County Coroner was to be contacted. The proposed project will be required to comply with the above cultural resource mitigation measure. City of Dublin Page 87 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Project Impacts a) Listed or be eligible in the California Register of Historic Resources or in a local register of historic resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1 (k)? No New Impact. The project site contains an existing church and school complex with no record of historic or Native American resources present. Future development will be required to adhere to Mitigation Measure 4.4-1 contained in the 2003 EIR. No new or more severe significant impacts to this topic would result than was previously analyzed in the 2003 EIR. b) Be a resource determined by the lead agency to be significant pursuant to subdivision (c) of the PRC section 5024.1, including the significance to a California Native American Tribe? No New Impact. The City contacted the tribal representative of the Ione Band of Miwok Indians (Ltr. from M. Battaglia to R. Yonemura dated October 31, 2017). No response was received. There are no known significant Tribal Cultural Resources on the project site. If Native American artifacts are encountered during construction, work on the project shall cease until compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 is demonstrated. Work on the project may commence under the guidelines of an approved resource protection plan. The County Coroner is to be contacted if human remains are uncovered as required by State Law. With adherence to required regulatory requirements, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts to this topic beyond what has been analyzed in the 2003 EIR. 18. Utilities and Service Systems Environmental Setting The project area is served by the following service providers: • Water supply: Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD). • Sewage collection and treatment; recycled water: DSRSD. • Storm drainage: City of Dublin and Zone 7. • Solid waste service: Amador Valley Industries • Electrical and natural gas power: Pacific Gas and Electric Co. City of Dublin Page 88 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Previous EIR No significant utility impacts were identified in the 2003 EIR. Project Impacts a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB? No New Impact The project site is located within the service area of DSRSD. The current campus receives water and wastewater service from DSRSD. Representatives of DSRSD have indicated that DSRSD facilities are adequate to accommo date any increased amount of wastewater generated by project construction (source: Stan Kolodzie, DSRSD, 9/13/17). With adherence to local and regional requirements, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to exceedances of wastewater treatment requirements than was analyzed in the 2003 EIR and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. b) Require new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities? No New Impact. The water and wastewater facilities needed to serve the proposed project have been constructed as part of previous development on the project site. It is anticipated that minimal upsizing will be needed to accommodate proposed project changes. The surface of the proposed athletic field would be constructed of synthetic material to minimize water demand. Based on discussions with DSRSD, it has been determined that there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to new water or wastewater facilities than has been previously analyzed in the prior EIR, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. c) Require new storm drainage facilities? No New Impact. A local storm drain system currently exists on the site, as required by the City of Dublin as part of construction of previous development phases. The Applicant may be required to construct expansions or enlargements to the existing system, which would be minor. With adherence to local and regional requirements regarding drainage flows that would be applied by the City at the time of permit issuance, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to drainage facilities was analyzed in the 2003 EIR , and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. d) Are sufficient water supplies available? No New Impact. The current project receives domestic water from DSRSD. The proposed expansion of the campus may require small increases in the amount of water delivered to the site, but according to DSRSD, the District can provide addit ional water with City of Dublin Page 89 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 no significant impacts (source: Stan Kolodzie, DSRSD, 9/13/17). There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to water supply than has been previously analyzed in the prior EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. e) Adequate wastewater capacity to serve the proposed project? No New Impact. See response to “a,” above. f) Solid waste disposal? No New Impact. The site is within the franchise area of Amador Valley Industries (AVI). AVI provides residential and commercial solid waste pick-up and recycling services within the City of Dublin. The Applicant is currently receiving solid waste and recycling service from AVI and the amount of increased generation resulting from the proposed project would be minor and less-than-significant. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to solid waste disposal than has been previously analyzed in the prior EIR , and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area. g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No New Impact. The existing service provider will ensure adherence to federal, state and local solid waste regulations. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in the prior EIR. 18. Mandatory Findings of Significance a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fis h or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less than Significant with Mitigation. Potential impacts related to substantial reduction of fish or wildlife species or their respective species, reduce the range or number of endangered plant or animal species or eliminate examples of major period of California history or prehistory have been analyzed and mitigated in the 2003 VCC EIR. See subsection 4 of this Initial Study for a discussion of potential of impacts to biological resources and mitigation measures. With the implementation of mitigations measures under the 2003 Valley Christian Center EIR and this Supplemental MND, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact on these resources. City of Dublin Page 90 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). Less Than Significant with Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable impacts were identified with the VCC project in 2004, as documented in the final EIR. The current project would make minor changes to the development program of the facility to replace an existing parking lot and undeveloped portions of the campus to a multi-use sports stadium and other minor changes. Based on the analysis in this Initial Study and with the implementation of mitigations measures under the 2003 Valley Christian Center EIR and this Supplemental MND, the project impact would be less than cumulatively considerable. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less-than-Significant with Mitigation. With the implementation of mitigations measures under the 2003 Valley Christian Center EIR and this Supplemental MND, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact on human beings. City of Dublin Page 91 Initial Study/Valley Christian Center June 2018 Initial Study Preparers Jerry Haag, Urban Planner, project manager & author Robert Tuma, graphics Peter Galloway, Omni Means, traffic and parking Michael Thill, Illingworth & Rodkin, acoustics Carrie Janello, Illingworth & Rodkin, acoustics Sean Avent, WRA, biological resources. Agencies and Organizations Consulted The following agencies and organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial Study: City of Dublin Luke Sims, AICP, Community Development Director Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director Marnie Delgado, Senior Planner (former) Martha Battaglia, Associate Planner Andrew Russell, City Engineer Obaid Khan, Transportation & Operations Manager Tim Cremin, Assistant City Attorney Bonnie Terra, Alameda County Fire Department Chief Dennis Houghtelling, Dublin Police Services (former) California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Website Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) Stan Kolodzie, Senior Engineer Applicant Representatives Jim Goring, Goring & Straja Architects, project architects References Bay Area Air Quality Management District CEQA Guidelines, Revised May 2017 Dublin General Plan, City of Dublin, Updated through 9/17 Valley Christian Center (VCC) Draft and Final EIRs, City of Dublin, 2003 i Biological Resources Assessment DUBLIN VALLEY CHRISTIAN CENTER DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared For: Mr. Jerry Haag, Urban Planner 2029 University Ave Berkeley, California 94704 (510) 644-2016 WRA Contact: Sean Avent avent@wra-ca.com (415) 454-8868 x1120 Date: June 15, 2015 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... iv 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 REGULATORY BACKGROUND ......................................................................................... 1 2.1 Special-Status Species ............................................................................................ 1 2.2 Sensitive Biological Communities ............................................................................ 4 2.3 Relevant Local Policies, Ordinances, Regulations ................................................... 5 3.0 METHODS .......................................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Biological Communities ........................................................................................... 7 3.1.1 Non-Sensitive Biological Communities ...................................................... 7 3.1.2 Sensitive Biological Communities .............................................................. 7 3.2 Special-Status Species ............................................................................................ 8 3.2.1 Literature Review ...................................................................................... 8 3.2.2 Site Assessment ....................................................................................... 8 4.0 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................... 9 4.1 Biological Communities ........................................................................................... 9 4.1.1 Non-Sensitive Biological Communities .................................................... 10 4.2 Special-Status Species ...........................................................................................14 4.2.1 Plants ...................................................................................................... 14 4.2.2 Wildlife .................................................................................................... 14 5.0 SUMMARY AND RECCOMENDATIONS .......................................................................... 20 5.1 Biological Communities ..........................................................................................20 5.2 Special-Status Plant Species ..................................................................................20 5.3 Special-Status Wildlife Species ..............................................................................21 5.3.1 Special-Status Birds and Other Avian Species ........................................ 21 5.3.2 California red-legged frog ........................................................................ 22 6.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 22 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A – List of Observed Plant and Wildlife Species Appendix B – Potential for Special-Status Species to Occur in the Study Area Appendix C – Site Photographs iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Description of CNPS Ranks and Threat Codes ........................................................... 2 Table 2. Summary of Biological Communities in the Study Area ............................................. 10 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Location map. ............................................................................................................. 3 Figure 2. Biological communities within the Study Area. .......................................................... 11 Figure 3. Special-status plants within a five-mile radius of the Study Area. .............................. 15 Figure 4. Special-status plants within a five-mile radius of the Study Area. .............................. 16 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AWS Alameda whipsnake CCR California Code of Regulations CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife (formerly California Department of Fish and Game [CDFG]) CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CESA California Endangered Species Act CFR Code of Federal Regulations CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CNPS California Native Plant Society Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CRLF California red-legged frog CTS California tiger salamander EIR Environmental Impact Report ESA Federal Endangered Species Act Inventory CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants OWHM Ordinary High Water Mark Rank California Rare Plant Rank RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SJKF San Joaquin kit fox USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service WRA WRA, Inc. iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to provide an analysis of natural community and special-status species at the Valley Christian Center located in Dublin, California. On May 20, 2015, WRA, Inc. (WRA) conducted a biological resources assessment within the Valley Christian Center. WRA observed five biological communities, 61 plant species and seven wildlife species. Two sensitive biological community types covering 1.86 acres in the Study Area were identified. No special-status wildlife or plant species were observed within the Study Area. Six special-status wildlife species and one special-status plant species have a moderate potential to occur within the Study Area. 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION On May 20, 2015, WRA, Inc. performed an assessment of biological resources at the approximately 54-acre Valley Christian Center (Project Area) and surrounding environs (Study Area) in Dublin, Alameda County, California (Figure 1). The Study Area is located in an urban area that consists of a patchwork of developed residential areas interspersed with undeveloped, open areas. The Study Area consists of an existing developed campus including pre-school through high school, church, and administrative buildings, sports facilities, and parking areas. The existing development is bordered to the north residential development and open space, to the east by residential development, to the south by the Interstate 580 Freeway, and to the west by residential development and open space. Valley Christian Center was originally developed under a Conditional Use Permit granted by Alameda County in 1978, prior to the incorporation of the area by the City of Dublin in 1982. The current development was approved under an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in 2003. The Valley Christian Center is proposing a modification of its Planned Development, including the rearrangement of its play fields and construction of new buildings and parking facilities. The purpose of the assessment was to gather information necessary to complete a review of biological resources under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This report describes the results of the site visit, which assessed the Study Area for the (1) potential to support special-status species; and (2) presence of other sensitive biological resources protected by local, state, and federal laws and regulations. If special-status species were observed during the site visit, they were recorded. Specific findings on the habitat suitability or presence of special-status species or sensitive habitats may require that protocol-level surveys be conducted. A biological resources assessment provides general information on the potential presence of sensitive species and habitats. The biological assessment is not an official protocol-level survey for listed species that may be required for project approval by local, state, or federal agencies. This assessment is based on information available at the time of the study and on-site conditions that were observed on the date of the site visit. 2.0 REGULATORY BACKGROUND The following sections explain the regulatory context of the biological assessment, including applicable laws and regulations that were applied to the field investigations and analysis of potential project impacts. 2.1 Special-Status Species Special-status species include those plant and wildlife species that have been formally listed, are proposed as endangered or threatened, or are candidates for such listing under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) or California Endangered Species Act (CESA). These acts afford protection to both listed and proposed species. In addition, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW, formerly the California Department of Fish and Game, CDFG) Species of Special Concern, which are species that face extirpation in California if current population and habitat trends continue, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Birds of Conservation Concern, and CDFW special-status invertebrates, are all considered special-status species. Bat species are also evaluated for conservation status by the Western Bat Working Group (WBW G), a non-governmental entity. Although CDFW Species of Special Concern and WBWG- evaluated bats generally have no special legal status, they are given special consideration under CEQA. In addition to regulations for special-status species, most native birds in the 2 United States, including non-status species, are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA). Under this legislation, destroying active nests, eggs, and young is illegal. Plant species on the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory (Inventory) with California Rare Plant Ranks (Rank) of 1 and 2 are also considered special- status plant species and must be considered under CEQA. Rank 3 and Rank 4 species are afforded little or no protection under CEQA, but are included in this analysis for completeness. A description of the CNPS Ranks is provided below in Table 1. Table 1. Description of CNPS Ranks and Threat Codes California Rare Plant Ranks (formerly known as CNPS Lists) Rank 1A Presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere Rank 1B Rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere Rank 2A Presumed extirpated in California, but more common elsewhere Rank 2B Rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere Rank 3 Plants about which more information is needed - A review list Rank 4 Plants of limited distribution - A watch list Threat Ranks 0.1 Seriously threatened in California 0.2 Moderately threatened in California 0.3 Not very threatened in California Critical Habitat Critical habitat is a term defined in the ESA as a specific geographic area that contains features essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require special management and protection. The ESA requires federal agencies to consult with the USFWS to conserve listed species on their lands and to ensure that any activities or projects they fund, authorize, or carry out will not jeopardize the survival of a threatened or endangered species. In consultation for those species with critical habitat, federal agencies must also ensure that activities or projects do not adversely modify critical habitat to the point that it will no longer aid in the species’ recovery. In many cases, this level of protection is similar to that already provided to species by the ESA jeopardy standard. However, areas that are currently unoccupied by the species but which are needed for the species’ recovery are protected by the prohibition against adverse modification of critical habitat. Figure 1. Study Area Location Map Dublin Valley Christian Center Alameda County, California Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\24000\24337\GIS\ArcMap\Location Map.mxd Map Prepared Date: 6/4/2015 Map Prepared By: MRochelle Base Source: Esri, National Geographic Data Source(s): WRA 0 1 20.5 Miles Map Extent Study Area 580 4 2.2 Sensitive Biological Communities Sensitive biological communities include habitats that fulfill special functions or have special values, such as wetlands, streams, or riparian habitat. These habitats are protected under federal regulations such as the Clean Water Act; state regulations such as the Porter-Cologne Act, the CDFW Streambed Alteration Program, and CEQA; or local ordinances or policies such as city or county tree ordinances, Special Habitat Management Areas, and General Plan Elements. Waters of the United States The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulates “Waters of the United States” under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Waters of the U.S. are defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) as waters susceptible to use in commerce, including interstate waters and wetlands, all other waters (intrastate waterbodies, including wetlands), and their tributaries (33 CFR 328.3). Potential wetland areas, according to the three criteria used to delineate wetlands as defined in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), are identified by the presence of (1) hydrophytic vegetation, (2) hydric soils, and (3) wetland hydrology. Areas that are inundated at a sufficient depth and for a sufficient duration to exclude growth of hydrophytic vegetation are subject to Section 404 jurisdiction as “other waters” and are often characterized by an ordinary high water mark (OHWM). Other waters, for example, generally include lakes, rivers, and streams. The placement of fill material into Waters of the U.S generally requires an individual or nationwide permit from the Corps under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Waters of the State The term “Waters of the State” is defined by the Porter-Cologne Act as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state.” The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) protects all waters in its regulatory scope and has special responsibility for wetlands, riparian areas, and headwaters. These waterbodies have high resource value and are vulnerable to filling. RWQCB jurisdiction includes “isolated” wetlands and waters that may not be regulated by the Corps under Section 404. Waters of the State are regulated by the RWQCB under the State Water Quality Certification Program which regulates discharges of fill and dredged material under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Projects that require a Corps permit, or fall under other federal jurisdiction, and have the potential to impact Waters of the State, are required to comply with the terms of the Water Quality Certification determination. If a proposed project does not require a federal permit, but does involve dredge or fill activities that may result in a discharge to Waters of the State, the RWQCB has the option to regulate the dredge and fill activities under its state authority in the form of Waste Discharge Requirements. Streams, Lakes, and Riparian Habitat Streams and lakes, as habitat for fish and wildlife species, are subject to jurisdiction by CDFW under Sections 1600-1616 of California Fish and Game Code. Alterations to or work within or adjacent to streambeds or lakes generally require a 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement. The term “stream”, which includes creeks and rivers, is defined in the California Code of Regulations (CCR) as “a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life [including] 5 watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation” (14 CCR 1.72). In addition, the term “stream” can include ephemeral streams, dry washes, watercourses with subsurface flows, canals, aqueducts, irrigation ditches, and other means of water conveyance if they support aquatic life, riparian vegetation, or stream- dependent terrestrial wildlife (CDFG 1994). “Riparian” is defined as “on, or pertaining to, the banks of a stream.” Riparian vegetation is defined as “vegetation which occurs in and/or adjacent to a stream and is dependent on, and occurs because of, the stream itself” (CDFG 1994). Removal of riparian vegetation also requires a Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW . Oak Woodlands Conservation Act California Public Resources Code (PRC) 21083.4 requires each county in California to implement an oak woodland protection policy to mitigate for the loss of oak woodlands resultant from approved projects within their jurisdiction. In this policy, oak trees are defined as all native species of oaks larger than five inches DBH (diameter at breast height, or 4.5 feet above grade). At least one of four mitigation alternatives for significant conversions of oak woodlands are required in this regulation: 1) conserve oak woodlands through the use of a conservation easement, 2) plant an appropriate number of trees, including maintaining plantings and replacing dead or diseased trees, 3) contribute funds to the Oak Woodlands Conservation Fund, as established under Section 1363 (a) of the Fish and Game Code, and 4) other mitigation measures developed by the County. Other Sensitive Biological Communities Other sensitive biological communities not discussed above include habitats that fulfill special functions or have special values. Natural communities considered sensitive are those identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFW. The CDFW ranks sensitive communities as "threatened" or "very threatened" and keeps records of their occurrences in its California Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2015). Sensitive plant communities are also identified by CDFW (CDFG 2003, 2007, 2009). CNDDB vegetation alliances are ranked 1 through 5 based on NatureServe's (2010) methodology, with those alliances ranked globally (G) or statewide (S) as 1 through 3 considered sensitive. Impacts to sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or those identified by the CDFW or USFWS must be considered and evaluated under CEQA (CCR Title 14, Div. 6, Chap. 3, Appendix G). Specific habitats may also be identified as sensitive in city or county general plans or ordinances. 2.3 Relevant Local Policies, Ordinances, Regulations City of Dublin General Plan Further documentation is required to satisfy the requirements of CEQA. The Study Area is located in the Primary Planning Area of the Dublin General Plan. The City of Dublin adopted a General Plan in 1985 to regulate land use and development in the community. The General Plan contains goals and guiding policies related to development. The Conservation Element (Chapter 7) of the Dublin General Plan contains policies that may apply to the Project, including stream corridor and riparian vegetation, and oak woodland protection. East Alameda County Conservation Strategy The Study Area is located in Conservation Zone 1 of the East Alameda County Conservation 6 Strategy (ICF 2010; EACCS). The EACCS is intended to provide an effective framework to protect, enhance, and restore natural resources in eastern Alameda County, while improving and streamlining the environmental permitting process for impacts resulting from infrastructure and development projects. The City of Dublin is a partner in the EACCS and uses the document to provide a baseline inventory of biological resources and conservation priorities during project-level planning and environmental permitting. However, the EACCS is a framework for guidance by regulatory agencies, and does not include incidental take permits for threatened or endangered species similar to that provided by a Habitat Conservation Plan. The EACCS includes provisions for “focal species”—species that are protected under federal and state laws. An objective of the EACCS is to protect and enhance the habitats of these species. City of Dublin Watercourse Protection Ordinance The City of Dublin regulates watercourses within the incorporated area of the City under Chapter 7.2 “Watercourse Protection” (Ord. 52-87 § 1), of the Dublin Municipal Code. The Watercourse Protection Ordinance requires development setbacks from watercourses, and prohibits a variety of activities within the floodway, bank or setback of a watercourse. City of Dublin Heritage Tree Ordinance The City of Dublin defines heritage trees as any oak, bay, cypress, maple, redwood, buckeye or sycamore tree having a trunk or main stem of twenty-four inches or more in diameter measured at four feet six inches above natural grade. Additionally, any tree preserved as part of an approved development plan, zoning permit, use permit, site development review, or subdivision map is protected as a heritage tree as is any tree planted as a replacement for an unlawfully removed tree. Heritage trees may not be removed unless a tree removal permit is granted or the removal is approved as part of other approved development permits. If a development site contains heritage trees that are to be preserved under an approved development plan, these trees must be protected during site development. A tree protection plan must be approved prior to commencement of work unless the Community Development Director of the City of Dublin has specifically waived this requirement (City of Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter 5.60, inclusive). 3.0 METHODS On May 20, 2015 the Study Area was traversed on foot to determine (1) plant communities present within the Study Area, (2) if existing conditions provided suitable habitat for any special- status plant or wildlife species, and (3) if sensitive habitats are present. All plant and wildlife species encountered were recorded, and are summarized in Appendix A. Plant nomenclature follows Baldwin et al. (2012) and subsequent revisions by the Jepson Flora Project (2013), except where noted. Because of recent changes in classification for many of the taxa treated by Baldwin et al. and the Jepson Flora Project, relevant synonyms are provided in brackets. For cases in which regulatory agencies, CNPS, or other entities base rarity on older taxonomic treatments, precedence was given to the treatment used by those entities. 7 3.1 Biological Communities Prior to the site visit, the Soil Survey of Alameda County, California [U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) web soil surveys], aerial imagery and previous reports from the site were examined to determine if any aquatic features were present in the Study Area examined to determine if any unique soil types that could support sensitive plant communities and/or aquatic features were present in the Study Area. Biological communities present in the Study Area were classified based on existing plant community descriptions described in the Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California (Holland 1986). However, in some cases it is necessary to identify variants of community types or to describe non-vegetated areas that are not described in the literature. Biological communities were classified as sensitive or non-sensitive as defined by CEQA and other applicable laws and regulations. 3.1.1 Non-Sensitive Biological Communities Non-sensitive biological communities are those communities that are not afforded special protection under CEQA, and other state, federal, and local laws, regulations and ordinances. These communities may, however, provide suitable habitat for some special-status plant or wildlife species and are identified or described in Section 4.1.1 below. 3.1.2 Sensitive Biological Communities Sensitive biological communities are defined as those communities that are given special protection under CEQA and other applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations and ordinances. Applicable laws and ordinances are discussed above in Section 2.2. Special methods used to identify sensitive biological communities are discussed below. Wetlands and Waters The Study Area was surveyed to determine if any wetlands and waters potentially subject to jurisdiction by the Corps, RWQCB, or CDFW were present. The assessment was based primarily on the presence of wetland plant indicators, but may also include any observed indicators of wetland hydrology or wetland soils. Any potential wetland areas were identified as areas dominated by plant species with a wetland indicator status1 of OBL, FACW, or FAC as given on the Corps’ National Wetlands Plant List (Lichvar 2014). Evidence of wetland hydrology can include direct evidence (primary indicators), such as visible inundation or saturation, algal mats, and oxidized root channels, or indirect (secondary) indicators, such as a water table within two feet of the soil surface during the dry season. Some indicators of wetland soils include dark colored soils, soils with a sulfidic odor, and soils that contain redoximorphic features as defined by the Corps Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (NRCS 2010). The preliminary waters assessment was based primarily on the presence of unvegetated, ponded areas or flowing water, or evidence indicating their presence such as a high water mark or a defined drainage course. Collection of additional data will be necessary to prepare a delineation report suitable for submission to the Corps. 1 OBL = Obligate, always found in wetlands (> 99% frequency of occurrence); FACW = Facultative wetland, usually found in wetlands (67-99% frequency of occurrence); FAC = Facultative, equal occurrence in wetland or non- wetlands (34-66% frequency of occurrence). 8 Other Sensitive Biological Communities The Study Area was evaluated for the presence of other sensitive biological communities, including riparian areas, sensitive plant communities recognized by CDFW and EACCS, and heritage trees. Prior to the site visit, aerial photographs, the List of Vegetation Alliances (CDFG 2009), and A Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer et al. 2009) were reviewed to assess the potential for sensitive biological communities to occur in the Study Area. All alliances within the Study Area with a ranking of 1 through 3 were considered sensitive biological communities and mapped. These communities are described in Section 4.1.2 below. 3.2 Special-Status Species 3.2.1 Literature Review Potential occurrence of special-status species in the Study Area was evaluated by first determining which special-status species occur in the vicinity of the Study Area through a literature and database search. Database searches for known occurrences of special-status species focused on the Dublin, Diablo, Livermore, Las Trampas Ridge, and Hayward USGS 7.5' quadrangles. The following sources were reviewed to determine which special-status plant and wildlife species have been documented to occur in the vicinity of the Study Area: •California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) records (CDFW 2015) •USFWS IpaC search •CNPS Inventory records (CNPS 2015) •eBird records •Fairy Shrimps of California’s Puddles, Pools and Playas (Eriksen and Belk 1999) •CDFG publication “California’s Wildlife, Volumes I-III” (Zeiner et al. 1990) •CDFG publication “Amphibians and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California” (Jennings 1994) •CDFG publication “California Bird Species of Special Concern” (Shuford and Gardali 2008) •A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins 2003) •Alameda County Breeding Bird Atlas (Richmond et al. 2011) •The East Alameda County Conservation Strategy (ICF 2010) 3.2.2 Site Assessment A site visit was made to the Study Area to search for suitable habitats for special-status species. Habitat conditions observed in the Study Area were used to evaluate the potential for presence of special-status species based on these searches and the professional expertise of the investigating biologists. The potential for each special-status species to occur in the Study Area was then evaluated according to the following criteria: •No Potential. Habitat on and adjacent to the site is clearly unsuitable for the species requirements (foraging, breeding, cover, substrate, elevation, hydrology, plant community, site history, disturbance regime). •Unlikely. Few of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are present, and/or the majority of habitat on and adjacent to the site is unsuitable or of very poor quality. The species is not likely to be found on the site. 9 •Moderate Potential. Some of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are present, and/or only some of the habitat on or adjacent to the site is unsuitable. The species has a moderate probability of being found on the site. •High Potential. All of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are present and/or most of the habitat on or adjacent to the site is highly suitable. The species has a high probability of being found on the site. •Present. Species is observed on the site or has been recorded (i.e. CNDDB, other reports) on the site recently. The site assessment is intended to identify the presence or absence of suitable habitat for each special-status species known to occur in the vicinity in order to determine its potential to occur in the Study Area. The site visit does not constitute a protocol-level survey and is not intended to determine the actual presence or absence of a species; however, if a special-status species is observed during the site visit, its presence was recorded and discussed. In cases where little information is known about species occurrences and habitat requirements, the species evaluation was based on best professional judgment of WRA biologists with experience working with the species and habitats. If necessary, recognized experts in individual species biology were contacted to obtain the most up to date information regarding species biology and ecology. If a special-status species was observed during the site visit, its presence is recorded and discussed in Section 4.2. For some species, a site assessment visit at the level conducted for this report may not be sufficient to determine presence or absence of a species to the specifications of regulatory agencies. In these cases, a species may be assumed to be present or further protocol-level special-status species surveys may be necessary. Special-status species for which further protocol-level surveys may be necessary are described in Section 5.0. 4.0 RESULTS The Study Area is located in an urban area that consists of a patchwork of developed residential areas interspersed with undeveloped, open areas. The Study Area is bordered to the north residential development and open space, to the east by residential development, to the south by the Interstate 580 Freeway, and to the west by residential development and open space. The majority of the site consists of developed land including school, church, and administrative buildings, sports facilities, parking areas and associated landscaping. The undeveloped portion of the Study Area is characterized by non-native annual grassland with ruderal stands of non- native mustards (Brassica nigra, and Hirschfeldia incana), and small portions of coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis ssp. consanguinea) scrub. The majority of the undeveloped portions of the Study Area have been previously disturbed, graded or mowed. Elevations of the Study Area range from approximately 820 to approximately 550 feet above sea level. The following sections present the results and discussion of the biological resources assessment within the Study Area. 4.1 Biological Communities Table 2 summarizes the area of each biological community type observed in the Study Area. There are six non-sensitive biological communities in the Study Area. Three sensitive biological communities are found in the Study Area: Riparian Woodland, Coast Live Oak Woodland, 10 and Ephemeral Stream. A description for each biological community is contained in the following sections. Biological communities within the Study Area are shown in Figure 2. Table 2. Summary of Biological Communities in the Study Area Community Type Area (acres) Non-Native Annual Grassland/Ruderal Vegetation 32.33 Developed Land 35.86 Coyote Brush Scrub 1.40 Riparian W oodland 0.57 Coast Live Oak W oodland 1.29 Ephemeral Stream 462 LF* Total Study Area Size 71.45 *this measurement is included within the 0.57-acre of riparian woodland 4.1.1 Non-Sensitive Biological Communities Developed Land Developed land within the Study Area consists of all portions of the Study Area not mapped as a natural community type. Developed land within the Study Area includes school, church, and administrative buildings, sports facilities, parking areas, Inspiration Drive, and associated landscaping. Much of these developed areas contain planted exotic vegetation, including common landscape tree and shrub species such as Bradford pear (Pyrus calleryana ‘Bradford’), Raywood ash (Fraxinus angustifolia ‘Raywood’), Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), and oleander (Nerium oleander). Non-Native Annual Grassland/Ruderal Vegetation Non-native annual grassland comprises the majority of the Study Area and is composed of a mix of non-native annual grasses and other predominantly non-native herbaceous species. This community is similar to the non-native grassland community described by Holland (1986). Non-native annual grassland within the Study Area is dominated by slender oats (Avena barbata), Italian rye grass (Festuca perennis [Lolium multiflorum]), mouse barley (Hordeum murinum ssp. leporinum), and longbeak stork’s bill (Erodium botrys). Non-native grassland mapped within the Study Area also includes dense stands of ruderal herbaceous species, including black mustard (Brassica nigra), short podded mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus) and poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), all of which are listed as having “moderate” potential to cause negative ecological impacts by the Cal-IPC (2015). Native plant cover is less than 5% within the non-native annual Dublin Valley Christian Center Alameda County, California Figure 2. Biological Communities within the Study Area Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\24000\24337\GIS\ArcMap\Biological Communties.mxd Map Prepared Date: 6/4/2015 Map Prepared By: MRochelle Base Source: Microsoft, 2010 Aerial Data Source(s): WRA Study Area (71.45 acres) Ephemeral Stream (462 linear ft.) Developed Land (35.86 acres) Non-native Annual Grassland/ Ruderal Vegetation (32.33 acres) Coyote Brush Scrub (1.40 acres) Coast Live Oak Woodland (1.29 acres) Riparian Woodland (0.57 acre) 0 150 300 Feet This page left blank intentionally 13 grassland. Wildlife species observed in this community in the Study Area were turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), common raven (Corvus corax), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), and black- tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus). Coyote Brush Scrub Coyote brush scrub is scattered in small, fragmented portions throughout the Study Area, on both natural slopes and disturbed, previously graded areas. This community is similar to the Northern coyote brush scrub community described by Holland (1986) and the coyote brush scrub series described by Sawyer et al. (2009). The dominant plant in this community is coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis ssp. consanguinea) and the understory is dominated by the non- native grasses and forbs also observed non-native annual grassland/ruderal vegetation community. This community is similar to the Northern coyote brush scrub community described by Holland (1986) and the coyote brush scrub series described by Sawyer et al. (2009). 4.1.2 Sensitive Biological Communities Riparian Woodland The riparian woodland occupies a small area near the southwest corner of the Study Area. This community is similar to the central coast live oak riparian forest community described by Holland (1986). The riparian woodland consists of coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus lobata), arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), and red willow (Salix laevigata). The understory consists of a mixture and native and non-native herbaceous species including California bulrush (Schoenoplectus californicus), tall flatsedge (Cyperus eragrostis), and fiddle dock (Rumex pulcher). Riparian woodland is considered sensitive under the CEQA and is protected by the California Fish and Game Code (Section 1600 et seq.). Coast Live Oak Woodland Coast live oak woodland occupies a small, fragmented area in the northeast corner of the Study Area. This community is similar to the coast live oak woodland community described by Holland (1986). Coast live oak woodland is dominated by coast live oak, but also consists of California bay (Umbellularia californica), valley oak, and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). The understory is dominated by non-native grasses and forbs also observed non-native annual grassland/ruderal vegetation community. A portion of the area mapped as coast live oak woodland in the west part of the Study Area consists of planted oaks. Ephemeral Stream An ephemeral stream exists within the southwestern corner of the Study Area. The ephemeral stream is located in a concave, north to south drainage to the south and downhill from the baseball field. The ephemeral stream appears to be the result of a culvert system that drains the hillside to the north, and could potentially be fed by a seep as well. Water was present in the ephemeral stream during the site visit; however, the presence of a seep could not be confirmed, as the water appeared to originate from under a dense patch of poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus). The ephemeral stream was intermittent during the time of the site visit, flowing down the south-facing hill and into a rock-lined trapezoidal ditch, at which point the water appeared to become subsurface flow. The trapezoidal ditch parallels the property boundary and feeds into a culvert where it flows into Dublin Creek. 14 4.2 Special-Status Species 4.2.1 Plants Based upon a review of the resources and databases given in Section 3.2.1, 42 special-status plant species have been documented in the vicinity of the Study Area (Figure 3). The Study Area has the potential to support one of these species. Appendix B summarizes the potential for occurrence for each special-status plant species occurring in the vicinity of the Study Area. One special-status plant species, Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii) has a moderate potential to occur in the Study Area. The remaining species documented to occur in the vicinity of the Study Area are unlikely or have no potential to occur. The special-status plant species with moderate potential to occur in the Study Area is discussed below. Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii). CNPS Rank 1B.1. EACCS Focal Species. Moderate Potential. Congdon’s tarplant is an annual forb in the sunflower family (Asteraceae) that blooms from June to November. It occurs in terraces, swales, floodplains, grassland, and disturbed sites, sometimes alkaline, at elevations ranging from 0-990 feet (Baldwin et al. 2012, CDFW 2013, CNPS 2013). Congdon’s tarplant is known from 31 USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles in Alameda, Contra Costa, Monterey, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, and Solano counties (CNPS 2013). Two tarplant individuals (Centromadia sp.) were observed in the northeast portion of the Study Area in a disturbed ruderal field used for heavy equipment storage. This area is mapped on Figure 2 as an island of non-native annual grassland/ruderal vegetation surrounded by developed land. The tarplant individuals observed in this area during the site visit were unidentifiable due to the timing of the site visit and the absence of mature inflorescences. To assure absence, rare plant surveys are recommended. 4.2.2 Wildlife Thirty-five special-status species of wildlife have been recorded in the vicinity of the Study Area (Figure 4). Appendix B summarizes the potential for each of these species to occur in the Study Area. No special-status wildlife species were observed in the Study Area during the site assessment. No special-status wildlife species have a high potential to occur in the Study Area, and six special-status wildlife species have a moderate potential to occur in the Study Area, including one EACCS focal species. Special-status wildlife species that have a moderate potential to occur in the Study Area are discussed below. In addition, Federal-listed species unlikely to occur within the Study Area but that are known to the region are further discussed. Species with a Moderate Potential to Occur within the Study Area White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), CDFW Fully Protected Species. Kites occur in low elevation grassland, agricultural, wetland, oak woodland, and savannah habitats. Riparian zones adjacent to open areas are also used. Vegetative structure and prey availability seem to be more important than specific associations with plant species or vegetative communities. Lightly grazed or ungrazed fields generally support large prey populations and are often preferred to other habitats. Kites primarily feed on small mammals, although, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and insects are also taken. Nest trees range from single isolated trees to trees within large contiguous forests. Preferred nest trees are extremely variable, ranging from small shrubs (less than 10 ft. tall), to large trees (greater than 150 ft. tall). (Dunk 1995). The Study Figure 3. Special Status Plant Species Occurrences within 5-miles of Study Area Dublin Valley Christian Center Alameda County, California Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\24000\24337\GIS\ArcMap\CNDDB Plant.mxd Map Prepared Date: 6/4/2015 Map Prepared By: MRochelle Base Source: Esri, National Geographic Data Source(s): CNDDB June 2015 0 1 20.5 Miles Study Area 5-mile B u f f e r Congdon's tarplant Diablo helianthella hairless popcornflower Mt. Diablo buckwheat Oregon polemonium saline clover San Joaquin spearscale Figure 4. Special Status Wildlife Species Occurrences within 5-miles of Study Area Dublin Valley Christian Center Alameda County, California Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\24000\24337\GIS\ArcMap\CNDDB Wildlife.mxd Map Prepared Date: 6/4/2015 Map Prepared By: MRochelle Base Source: Esri, National Geographic Data Source(s): CNDDB June 2015 0 1 20.5 Miles Study Area Sensitive Occurrence #'s - Alameda whipsnake 7,10,17,21-23,31,32,35,38-44,46,50 64-67,71,73,75-81,83-85,90,91,94,124-127,135-144,154 - prairie falcon 468,470,491 5-mile B u f f e r American badger burrowing owl California horned lark California linderiella California red-legged frog California tiger salamander pallid bat San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat San Joaquin kit fox sharp-shinned hawk tricolored blackbird western pond turtle Yuma myotis white-tailed kite 17 Area contains grassland foraging habitat for this species, and shrubs and riparian vegetation may support nesting. Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), CDFW Species of Special Concern, USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern. A common resident of lowlands and foothills throughout California, this species prefers open habitats with scattered trees, shrubs, posts, fences, utility lines, or other perches. Nests are usually built on a stable branch in a densely-foliaged shrub or small tree. This species is found most often in open-canopied valley foothill hardwood, conifer, pinyon-juniper, or desert riparian habitats. While this species eats mostly arthropods, it also takes amphibians, small reptiles, small mammals or birds, and is also known to scavenge on carrion (Yosef 1996). The grasslands within the Study Area provide suitable foraging habitat for this species, and there is a moderate potential for this species to nest in shrubs or other dense woody vegetation. Grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum), CDFW Species of Special Concern. Grasshopper sparrow generally prefers moderately open grasslands and prairies with patchy bare ground. It selects different components of vegetation, depending on grassland ecosystem. This sparrow typically avoids grasslands with extensive shrub cover, although some level of shrub cover is important for birds in western regions (Vickery 1996). Grasshopper sparrow is a ground-nesting bird. This species feeds primarily on insects (Vickery 1996). This species has the potential to forage and nest within the grassland portions of the Study Area that are not mowed and provide suitable cover to conceal ground nests. Nuttall’s woodpecker (Picoides nuttallii), USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern. Nuttall’s Woodpecker, common in much of its range, is a year-round resident throughout most of California west of the Sierra Nevada. Typical habitat is oak or mixed woodland, and riparian areas (Lowther 2000). Nesting occurs in tree cavities, principally those of oaks and larger riparian trees. This species forages on a variety of arboreal invertebrates. The riparian habitats and coast live oak trees within the Study Area provide suitable habitat for foraging and nesting in this species. Oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern. This relatively common species is year-round resident throughout much of California including most of the coastal slope, the Central Valley and the western Sierra Nevada foothills. Its primary habitat is woodland dominated by oaks. Local populations have adapted to woodlands of pines and/or junipers in some areas (Cicero 2000). The oak titmouse nests in tree cavities, usually natural cavities or those excavated by woodpeckers, though they may partially excavate their own (Cicero 2000). Seeds and arboreal invertebrates make up the birds’ diet. The riparian habitats and coast live oak trees within the Study Area provide suitable habitat for foraging and nesting in this species. California red-legged frog (CRLF; Rana draytonii). Federal Threatened, CDFW Species of Special Concern, EACCS Focal Species. The current distribution of this species includes only isolated localities in the Sierra Nevada, northern Coast and Northern Traverse Ranges. It is still common in the San Francisco Bay Area and along the central coast (USFWS 2002). Aquatic breeding habitat consists of low-gradient fresh water bodies, including natural and manmade (e.g., stock) ponds, backwaters within streams and creeks, and marshes. Upland habitats include areas within 200 feet of aquatic and riparian habitat and are comprised of grasslands, woodlands, and/or vegetation that provide shelter, forage, and predator avoidance. These upland features provide feeding, and sheltering habitat for juvenile and adult frogs (e.g., shelter, shade, moisture, cooler temperatures, a prey base, foraging opportunities, and areas for 18 predator avoidance). Upland habitat can include structural features such as boulders, rocks, and organic debris (e.g. downed trees, logs), as well as small mammal burrows and moist leaf litter (USFWS 2010). Dispersal habitat includes upland or riparian habitats within 1 mile of each other that allow for movement between these sites. Dispersal habitat includes various natural and altered habitats such as agricultural fields, which do not contain barriers to dispersal. Moderate to high density urban or industrial developments, large reservoirs and heavily traveled roads without bridges or culverts are considered barriers to dispersal (USFWS 2010). The Study Area does not contain suitable pools for CRLF breeding habitat. However, the nearest breeding habitat is a stock pond 0.6 mile west of the Study Area, which contained CRLF tadpoles in 1995 (CDFW 2015). The riparian areas along the southern portion of the Study Area connect to this breeding pond, and CRLF may use this area as aquatic non breeding habitat. Additionally, CRLF may be found in adjacent uplands that provide shade or other shelter up to 200 feet from the wet portions of the riparian areas. Federal-listed Species Documented in the Vicinity but Unlikely to Occur within the Study Area San Joaquin kit fox (SJKF; Vulpes macrotis mutica). Federal Endangered, State Threatened, EACCS Focal Species. SJKF is found in the San Joaquin Valley and in surrounding foothills, from Alameda County east to Stanislaus County. It is a desert-adapted species which occurs mainly in arid, flat grasslands, scrublands, and alkali meadows where the vegetation structure is relatively short (generally less than 1.5 feet tall) (USFWS 1998). This species uses dens year-round and needs loose-textured soils suitable for burrowing (Grinnell et al. 1937). Kit fox prey consists primarily of kangaroo rats and other small rodents, as well as large insects and occasionally rabbits (USFWS 1998). SJKF has been extirpated from much of its historic range and is now only found in the southern and eastern portions of its historic range and a study by Sproul and Flett (1993) indicates that the species is absent west of the Altamont Hills. Although portions of the grassland habitat may be suitable for SJKF, there are no recent occurrences or observations in the area (CDFW 2015, Sproul and Flett 1993). Additionally, the Study Area is surrounded on three sides by development, rendering the site unlikely to be colonized by this species. Furthermore, no potential dens were observed during the May 2015 site visit. California Tiger Salamander (CTS; Ambystoma californiense), Federal Threatened, State Threatened Species, EACCS Focal Species. CTS is a California endemic species and historically occurred in grassland habitats throughout much of the state. This species inhabits valley and foothill grasslands and the grassy understory of open woodlands, usually within 1 mile of water (Jennings and Hayes 1994). CTS requires two primary habitat components: aquatic breeding sites and upland terrestrial refuge sites. Adult CTS spend most of their time underground in upland subterranean refugia. Underground retreats usually consist of ground- squirrel burrows, but also under logs and piles of lumber (Holland et al. 1990, Trenham 2001). CTS emerges from underground to breed and lay eggs primarily in vernal pools and other ephemeral water bodies. Adults migrate from upland habitats to aquatic breeding sites during the first major rainfall events, between November and February (Shaffer and Fisher 1991, Barry and Shaffer 1994), and return to upland habitats after breeding. Vehicular related mortality is an important threat to CTS populations (Barry and Shaffer 1994, Jennings and Hayes 1994). CTS will readily attempt to cross roads during migration, and roads 19 that sustain heavy vehicle traffic or barriers that impede seasonal migrations may have impacted CTS populations in some areas (Shaffer and Fisher 1991, Shaffer and Stanley 1992, Barry and Shaffer 1994). This species is unlikely to occur within the Study Area. Generally, CTS is rare in the hills west of Dublin (CDFW 2015). The nearest documented occurrence of this species to the Study Area is 2.5 miles southwest of the Study Area, across the insurmountable barrier to dispersal that is Interstate 580 (CDFW 2015). All other documented occurrences of the species within 5 miles of the Study Area are across the City of Dublin and are at least 4.3 miles from the site. CTS has been found a maximum of 1.3 miles from the nearest available breeding habitat, so these distant occurrences are not applicable to the Study Area (USFWS 2004). The nearest potential breeding pond is a stock pond 0.6 mile to the west of the Study Area. However, this pond and other ponds within 2.5 miles of this pond do not have any documented occurrences of CTS. Additionally, 95 % of non-dispersing CTS are found within 640 meters (0.4 mile) of breeding pools (Trenham and Shaffer 2005). If CTS is present at this stock pond, it is first unlikely that resident individuals of the pond will venture into the Study Area because the Study Area is over 0.4 mile from the pond. Second, it is also unlikely that CTS will successfully disperse into or through the Study Area due to distance from the pond to the Study Area, lack of suitable burrows within the Study Area to support aestivation (none were observed during the May 2015 site visit), and lack of connectivity to other breeding pools because the Study Area is surrounded by development in all directions except to the west. Therefore, it is unlikely that CTS will occur within the Study Area, and in the unlikely event that CTS does occur, avoidance and minimization measures for CRLF will be sufficient to avoid and minimize impacts to CTS individuals. Alameda Whipsnake (AWS; Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus), Federal Threatened Species, State Threatened Species, EACCS Focal Species. The range of the Alameda whipsnake is restricted to the inner Coast Range in western and central Contra Costa and Alameda Counties (USFWS 2006). The historical range of AWS has been fragmented into 5 disjunct populations: Tilden-Briones, Oakland-Las Trampas, Hayward-Pleasanton Ridge, Sunol- Cedar Mountain, and the Mount Diablo-Black Hills (USFWS 2006). The Alameda whipsnake is associated with scrub communities with a mosaic of open and closed canopy; woodland or annual grassland plant communities including mixed chaparral, chamise-redshank chaparral, coastal scrub; and annual grassland and oak woodlands that lie adjacent to scrub habitats that contain areas of rock outcroppings. Rock outcroppings are important as they are a favored location for lizard prey. Whipsnakes frequently venture into adjacent habitats, including grassland, oak savanna, and occasionally oak-bay woodland. The Study Area does not contain woodland or scrub habitats or rocky outcroppings to support this species, nor is it adjacent to these necessary physical and biological conditions. Additionally, the Study Area does not serve as a corridor to existing suitable habitat because it is surrounded on three sides by suburban development, an effective barrier to dispersal that isolates the Study Area from access by this species. In summary, no special-status wildlife species were observed during the May 20, 2015 site visit, and six special-status wildlife species have a moderate potential to occur within the Study Area. 20 5.0 SUMMARY AND RECCOMENDATIONS Three sensitive biological communities were identified within the Study Area: riparian woodland, coast live oak woodland and ephemeral stream. No special-status plant species and no special-status wildlife species were observed within the Study Area. One special-status plant species and six special-status wildlife species have a moderate potential to occur within the Study Area, one of which is an EACCS focal species. Most of the Study Area is dominated by non-native annual grassland and ruderal herbaceous stands, which are not sensitive habitats under CEQA. However, non-native annual grassland and ruderal herbaceous stands do provide habitat for some special-status plant and wildlife species. Institutional development is proposed to occur within the Study Area, though final plans have not yet been provided to WRA. Recommendations to avoid impacts to sensitive species and communities, including further studies, are therefore general in nature. Recommendations are discussed in the following sections. 5.1 Biological Communities Most of the Study Area is comprised of developed land and non-native annual grassland/ruderal vegetation. Although non-native annual grassland and developed land are not sensitive biological communities under CEQA, they may provide habitat for special-status plant and wildlife species. Such species will require mitigation if found on the site. However, the Study Area does contain 1.29 acres of coast live oak woodland, which is potentially sensitive under the Oak Woodland Conservation Act; 0.57 acre of riparian woodland, which is potentially within the jurisdiction of CDFW under Sections 1600-1616 of California Fish and Game Code; and 462 linear feet of ephemeral stream, which is potentially within the jurisdiction of the Corps under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the RWQCB under the Porter Cologne Act and Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Additionally, trees within the riparian woodland, coast live oak woodland and developed area may be subject to the City of Dublin Heritage Tree Ordinance if part of an “approved development plan, zoning permit, use permit, site development review, or subdivision map” or if planted as “replacement for an unlawfully removed tree.” The Study Area contains an ephemeral stream that could be within the jurisdiction of the RWQCB under the Porter Cologne Act and Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The conversion of ephemeral streams to developed land is a potentially significant impact under CEQA that could require mitigation efforts and regulatory permits. Therefore, before continuing development in the Study Area, a formal jurisdictional wetlands delineation is recommended to determine whether the potential seasonal wetlands in the Study Area are jurisdictional wetlands. The creek may also be subject to jurisdiction by CDFW under Sections 1600-1616 of California Fish and Game Code. 5.2 Special-Status Plant Species Of the 42 special-status plant species known to occur in the vicinity of the Study Area, one species, Congdon’s tarplant, has a moderate potential to occur in the Study Area. Most of the species found in the review of background literature occur in high quality vernal pool habitat, in different plant communities, often at higher elevations, or in high quality grassland habitat. Due to the history of disturbance, and predominance of non-native ruderal species, the grassland 21 and woodlands in the Study Area are likely of too low quality to support the majority of these other special-status plant species. Congdon’s tarplant is considered to have a moderate potential to occur within the Study Area. Two tarplant individuals (Centromadia sp.) were observed in the northeast portion of the Study Area in a disturbed ruderal field used for heavy equipment storage. This area is mapped on Figure 2 as an island of non-native annual grassland/ruderal vegetation surrounded by developed land. The tarplant individuals observed in this area during the site visit were unidentifiable to species level due to the timing of the site visit and the absence of mature inflorescences. Given the presence of other Centromadia species in the region, it is likely that these individuals are not Condon’s tarplant and instead common tarweed, (Centromadia pungens ssp. pungens), a non-listed species. Due to the very low number of individuals present, and the presence of larger populations of Congdon’s tarplant in the region, these two individuals do not represent a significant population and loss of these plants would not be considered significant under CEQA. To ensure absence of a greater population on-site, rare plant surveys for this species is recommended during the blooming season (May through October, peaking in August). 5.3 Special-Status Wildlife Species Of the 35 special-status wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity of the Study Area, six were determined to have the potential to occur in the Study Area. Most of the species found in the review of background literature occur in habitats not found in the Study Area. Habitat suitability for many grassland-associated species in the Study Area is reduced due to the sloped nature of the site, and surrounding development and Interstate 580 acting as a barrier to dispersal. These factors have also dramatically reduced or eliminated the potential for many riparian and aquatic species to occur on the site. Bats are also unlikely to roost within the Study Area due to the lack of suitable roost structures present, and the few trees that may support roosting are located in the riparian areas in the southern portion of the Study Area and will not be affected by future project activities. No vernal pool or equivalent habitats are present to support vernal pool crustaceans. Recommendations to reduce potential impacts to special- status species to a less-than-significant level are described below. 5.3.1 Special-Status Birds and Other Avian Species This assessment determined that seven additional special-status bird species may use the Study Area and immediately adjacent areas for either breeding and/or foraging. In addition, most commonly found native bird species are protected by the MBTA, California Fish and Game Code, and CEQA during the nesting season. If work is to be conducted during the nesting season (February 1 - August 31), pre-construction nesting bird surveys should be conducted no more than 14 days prior to initial ground disturbance to avoid impacting active nests, eggs, and/or young of ground-nesting birds. Nesting habitat may include grasslands, shrubs, trees, snags and buildings. If any active nests are found, a suitable buffer is established for protection of the nest and young. Buffer distance will vary based on species and conditions at the site, but is usually at least 50 feet, and up to 250 feet for raptors. Impacts to nesting birds can be 22 avoided if activities which may affect nesting are initiated outside of the nesting season (September 1 - January 31). 5.3.2 California red-legged frog There is no aquatic breeding or for CRLF within the Study Area. However, CRLF may inhabit the wet riparian areas and uplands within the Study Area 200 feet of these wet areas. Avoidance measures may include a worker education program and installation of a wildlife exclusion fence around the areas that could potentially contain CRLF. Impacts to these areas may require consultation with the USFWS and compensatory mitigation. 6.0 REFERENCES Baldwin, BG, DH Goldman, DJ Keil, R Patterson, TJ Rosatti, and DH Wilken (eds.). 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, second edition. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. Barry, S. J. and H. B. Shaffer. 1994. The status of the California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense) at Lagunita: a 50-year update. Journal of Herpetology 28:159-164. California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2010. List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations. Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program, Sacramento, CA. California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1994. A Field Guide to Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements, Sections 1600-1607, California Fish and Game Code. Environmental Services Division, Sacramento, CA. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2015. California Natural Diversity Database. Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch, Sacramento, CA. California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC). 2015. California Invasive Plant Inventory Database. California Invasive Plant Council, Berkeley, CA. Online at: http://www.cal- ipc.org/ip/inventory/index.php; most recently accessed: June 1, 2015. California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2015. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. Online at: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org; most recently accessed: June 1, 2015. California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2015. A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition. http://www.cnps.org/cnps/vegetation/; searched on June 1, 2015. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. City of Dublin. 2015. Dublin Municipal Code Heritage Tree Ordinance. Chapter 5.6 (Ord. 5-02 § 2 (part): Ord. 29-99 § 1 (part)). Online at: http://www.codepublishing.com/ca/dublin.html; most recently accessed June 1, 2015 City of Dublin. 2014. City of Dublin General Plan. Community Development Department. 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA. Adopted February 11, 1985. Amended as of November 18, 2014. 23 Dunk, J. R. 1995. White-tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus). In The Birds of North America, No. 178 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and The American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. eBird. 2015. eBird: An online database of bird distribution and abundance [web application]. eBird, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Available: http://www.ebird.org; most recently accessed; May 2015. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Department of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180- 0631. Erikson, CH and D Belk. 1999. Fairy Shrimps of California’s Puddles, Ponds and Playas. Mad River Press, Inc., Eureka, CA. Google Earth. 2015. Aerial Imagery 1993-2015. Most recently accessed: May 2015. Holland, RF. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA. ICF International. 2010. East Alameda County Conservation Strategy. Final Draft. October. (ICF 00906.08.) San Jose, CA. Prepared for: East Alameda County Conservation Strategy Steering Committee, Livermore, CA. Holland, D. C., M. P. Hayes, and E. McMillan. 1990. Late summer movement and mass mortality in the California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense). Southwestern Naturalist 35:217-220. Jennings, M. R., and M. P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and reptile species of special concern in California. Final Report to the California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division, Rancho Cordova, CA. 225 pp. Jepson Flora Project (eds.). 2015. Jepson eFlora. Online at: http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html; most recently accessed June 1, 2015. Lichvar, R.W., M. Butterwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014. The National Wetland Plant List: 2014 Update of Wetland Ratings. Phytoneuron 2014-41: 1-42 Lichvar, RW. 2012. The National Wetland Plant List. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Research and Development Center. Hanover, NH. October 2012. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, version 7.0. In cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, Fort Worth, TX. NatureServe. 2010. NatureServe Conservation Status. Available online at: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/ranking. 24 Richmond, B., H. Green, and D.C. Rice. 2011. Alameda County Breeding Bird Atlas. Golden Gate Audubon Society and Ohlone Audubon Society. Dakota Press, San Leandro, CA. Sawyer, J, T Keeler-Wolf and J Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation. California Native Plant Society, Berkeley, CA. Shaffer, H. B., and R. Fisher. 1991. Final report to the California Department of Fish and Game; California Tiger Salamander surveys, 1990-Contract (FG 9422). California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division, Rancho Cordova, California. Shaffer, H. B., and S. Stanley. 1992. Final report to California Department of Fish and Game; California Tiger Salamander Surveys, 1991-Contract (FG 9422). California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division, Rancho Cordova, California. Shuford, WD, and T Gardali (eds). 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and CDFG, Sacramento. Sproul, M.J. and M.A. Flett. 1993. Status of the San Joaquin kit fox in the northwest margin of its range. 1993 Transactions of the Western Section of the Wildlife Society 29:61-69. Stebbins, RC. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians, third edition. The Peterson Field Guide Series, Houghton Mifflin Company, NY. Trenham, P.C. 2001. Terrestrial habitat use by adult California Tiger Salamanders. Journal of Herpetology 35:343-346. Trenham, P.C. and H.B. Shaffer. 2005. Amphibian upland habitat use and its consequences for population viability. Ecological Applications 15(4):1158-1168. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Determination Form Instructional Guidebook. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2015. Web Soil Survey. Online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov; most recently accessed: June 3, 2015.. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0. G. W. Hurt and L. M. Vasilas (eds.). In cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. [USFWS] United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Information for Conservation and Planning Database. Available online at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/; most recently accessed: May 2015. 25 USFWS. 2010. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for California Red-legged Frog; Final Rule. Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 51. 12815-12959. USFWS. 2002. Recovery plan for the California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR. USFWS. 1998. Recovery plan for upland species of the San Joaquin Valley, California, Region 1, Portland Oregon. 295 pp. Vickery, Peter D. 1996. Grasshopper Sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/239 Zeiner, DC, WF Laudenslayer, Jr., KE Mayer, and M White. 1990. California's Wildlife, Volume I-III: Amphibians and Reptiles, Birds, Mammals. California Statewide Wildlife Habitat Relationships System, California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA. APPENDIX A LIST OF OBSERVED PLANT AND WILDLIFE SPECIES B-1 Appendix B. Species observed in the Study Area on May 20, 2015 Family Scientific Name Common Name Origin Plants Adoxaceae (Caprifoliaceae) Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea [S. mexicana] blue elderberry native Agavaceae (Liliaceae) Chlorogalum pomeridianum var. pomeridianum common soap plant native Anacardiaceae Toxicodendron diversilobum poison oak native Apiaceae Conium maculatum poison hemlock non-native Apiaceae Foeniculum vulgare fennel non-native Apiaceae Torilis arvensis hedge parsley non-native Asteraceae Achillea millefolium common yarrow native Asteraceae Baccharis pilularis ssp. consanguinea coyote brush native Asteraceae Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle non-native Asteraceae Centaurea melitensis tocalote non-native Asteraceae Centaurea solstitialis yellow star thistle non-native Asteraceae Centromadia sp. tarweed native Asteraceae Cirsium vulgare bull thistle non-native Asteraceae Dittrichia graveolens stinkwort non-native Asteraceae Helminthotheca echioides [Picris e.] bristly ox-tongue non-native B-2 Family Scientific Name Common Name Origin Asteraceae Hypochaeris radicata hairy catsear non-native Asteraceae Lactuca serriola prickly lettuce non-native Asteraceae Pseudognaphalium luteoalbum [Gnaphalium l.] Jersey cudweed non-native Asteraceae Silybum marianum milk thistle non-native Asteraceae Sonchus asper ssp. asper prickly sow thistle non-native Asteraceae Sonchus oleraceus common sow thistle non-native Boraginaceae Amsinckia retrorsa rigid fiddleneck native Brassicaceae Brassica nigra black mustard non-native Brassicaceae Hirschfeldia incana short podded mustard non-native Brassicaceae Nasturtium officinale [Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum] watercress native Caryophyllaceae Herniaria hirsuta var. cinerea hairy rupturewort non-native Cyperaceae Cyperus eragrostis tall flatsedge native Cyperaceae Schoenoplectus californicus California bulrush native Fabaceae Acmispon sp. lotus native Fabaceae Lupinus albifrons var. collinus silver lupine native Fabaceae Lupinus succulentus hollowleaf annual lupine native B-3 Family Scientific Name Common Name Origin Fabaceae Medicago polymorpha bur medic non-native Fabaceae Vicia villosa ssp. villosa winter vetch non-native Fagaceae Quercus agrifolia var. agrifolia coast live oak native Fagaceae Quercus lobata valley oak native Geraniaceae Erodium botrys longbeak stork's bill non-native Geraniaceae Geranium dissectum cutleaf geranium non-naitve Lauraceae Umbellularia californica California bay native Malvaceae Malva nicaeensis bull mallow non-native Myrsinaceae Lysimachia arvensis [Anagallis a.] scarlet pimpernel non-native Oleaceae Olea europaea olive non-native Orobanchaceae (Scrophulariaceae) Bellardia trixago Mediterranean lineseed non-native Papaveraceae Eschscholzia californica California poppy native Plantaginaceae Plantago lanceolata English plantain non-native Plantaginaceae Plantago major common plantain non-native Poaceae Avena barbata slender oat non-native Poaceae Cortaderia jubata Pampas grass non-native Poaceae Festuca arundinacea tall fescue non-native Poaceae Festuca perennis [Lolium multiflorum; L. perenne] Italian rye grass non-native B-4 Family Scientific Name Common Name Origin Poaceae Hordeum marinum ssp. gussoneanum Mediterranean barley non-native Poaceae Hordeum murinum ssp. leporinum mouse barley non-native Poaceae Polypogon monspeliensis rabbit's-foot grass non-native Poaceae Stipa pulchra purple needlegrass native Polygonaceae Rumex crispus curly dock non-native Polygonaceae Rumex pulcher fiddle dock non-native Rosaceae Prunus cerasifera cherry plum non-native Rosaceae Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry non-native Rosaceae Rubus ursinus California blackberry native Salicaceae Salix laevigata red willow native Salicaceae Salix lasiolepis arroyo willow native Sapindaceae (Hippocastanaceae) Aesculus californica California buckeye native Animals Scientific Name Common Name Cathartes aura turkey vulture Corvus corax common raven Meleagris gallopavo wild turkey Melospiza melodia song sparrow B-5 Odocoileus hemonius black-tailed deer Sciurius niger fox squirrel Zenaida macroura mourning dove APPENDIX B POTENTIAL FOR SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES TO OCCUR IN THE STUDY AREA B-1 Appendix B. Potential for special-status plant and wildlife species to occur in the Study Area. List compiled from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Conservation and Planning Database, a search of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2015) and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants for the Dublin, Diablo, Livermore, Las Trampas Ridge, and Hayward USGS 7.5' quadrangles (CNPS 2015), a review of historical and current satellite imagery via Google Earth (2015) and a review of the East Alameda County Conservation Strategy (EACCS 2010), and other CDFW lists and publications (Jennings and Hayes 1994, Zeiner et al. 1990, and Jameson and Peters 2004). SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS Mammals San Joaquin kit fox Vulpes macrotis mutica FE, ST, RP, EACCS Annual grasslands or grassy open stages with scattered shrubby vegetation. Need loose-textured sandy soils for burrowing, and suitable prey base. Unlikely. The Study Area contains and is adjacent to potentially suitable grassland habitat, and relatively recent (i.e., 1990s) CNDDB occurrences are present within ten miles of the Study Area to the northeast . However, a study in the general vicinity of the Study Area found this species to be absent west of the Altamont Hills (Sproul and Flett 1993). No further actions are recommended for this species. B-2 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS American badger Taxidea taxus SSC, EACCS Most abundant in drier open stages of most shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats, with friable soils. Requires friable soils and open, uncultivated ground. Preys on burrowing rodents. Unlikely. Suitable grassland habitat for this species is located in portions of the Study Area. However, no signs of badger or California ground squirrels (a primary prey source) were observed during the May 2015 site visit. Additionally, the Study Area is surrounded on three sides by suburban development, rendering the site unlikely to be colonized, and the nearest documented occurrence is 4.7 miles northeast of the Study Area across the City of Dublin (CDFW 2015). No further actions are recommended for this species. Ringtail (ring-tailed cat) Bassariscus astutus CFP Is widely distributed throughout most of California, but absent from some portions of the Central Valley and northeastern California. The species is nocturnal, primarily carnivorous and is associated with a mixture of dry forest and shrubland in close association with rocky areas and riparian habitat, using hollow trees and cavities for shelter. Usually not found more than 1 km (0.6 mi) from permanent water. Unlikely. The riparian areas within the Study Area are scattered and not connected with larger contiguous riparian habitats favored by this species. No further actions are recommended for this species. B-3 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat Neotoma fuscipes annectens SSC Found in both chaparral and forest habitats with a moderate canopy and moderate to dense understory. Constructs nests of shredded grass, leaves, and other material. May be limited by availability of nest-building materials. Unlikely. Riparian habitats within the Study Area are fragmented and do not contain large areas of canopy cover. No woodrat nests were observed during the May 2015 site visit. No further actions are recommended for this species. Berkeley kangaroo rat Dipodomys heermanni berkeleyenis SSC Open grassy hilltops and open spaces in chaparral and blue oak/digger pine woodland. Needs fine, deep, well-drained soil for burrowing. No Potential. Presumed extinct. No further actions are recommended for this species. pallid bat Antrozous pallidus SSC, WBWG: High Occupies a variety of habitats at low elevation including grassland, shrubland, woodland, and forest. Most common in open, dry habitats and commonly roosts in fissures in cliffs, abandoned buildings, and under bridges Unlikely. Most trees in the Study Area are too small to be considered potential roosts, and all of the largest trees are located in the southern riparian areas and will not be affected by the Project. This species may forage over the Study Area. No further actions are recommended for this species. hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus WBWG: Medium Prefers open habitats or habitat mosaics, with access to trees for cover and open areas or habitat edges for feeding. Roosts in dense foliage of medium to large trees. Feeds primarily on moths. Requires water. Unlikely. Most trees in the Study Area are too small to be considered potential roosts, and all of the largest trees are located in the southern riparian areas and will not be affected by the Project. This species may forage over the Study Area. No further actions are recommended for this species. B-4 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS Townsend’s big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii SC, SSC, WBWG: High Primarily found in rural settings in a wide variety of habitats including oak woodland and mixed coniferous- deciduous forest. Day roosts highly associated with caves and mines. Building roost sites must be cave like. Very sensitive to human disturbance. Unlikely. Typical undisturbed cavernous roost sites are not present in the Study Area; however, the species may forage over the Study Area. No further actions are recommended for this species. western mastiff bat Eumops perotis californicus SSC, WBWG: High Found in a wide variety of open, arid and semi-arid habitats. Distribution appears to be tied to large rock structures which provide suitable roosting sites, including cliff crevices and cracks in boulders. Unlikely. Typical rocky roost sites are not present in the Study Area; however, this species may forage over the Study Area. No further actions are recommended for this species. Birds golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos CFP, EPA, BCC, EACCS Resident in rolling foothills, mountain areas, sage-juniper flats, and desert. Cliff-walled canyons provide nesting habitat in most parts of range; also nests in large trees in open areas. Unlikely. The Study Area and surrounding areas do not contain rocky areas or large trees that comprise suitable nesting habitat. Additionally, the Study Area is over 5 miles from the nearest documented nesting occurrence (CDFW 2015). However, the Study Area provides foraging habitat, therefore individuals may occasionally fly over the Study Area. No further actions are recommended for this species. B-5 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS ferruginous hawk Buteo regalis BCC Winter visitor. Frequents open habitats including grasslands, sagebrush flats, desert scrub, low foothills surrounding valleys and fringes of pinyon-juniper habitats. Preys on rodents and other vertebrates. Unlikely. The Study Area provides suitable foraging habitat for wintering birds; however this species does not breed in the region. No further actions are recommended for this species. Swainson’s hawk Buteo swainsonii ST, BCC Summer resident in the region. Forages in grasslands and nests in the immediate vicinity, often in relatively isolated, trees or tree groves. Most of the California population breeds in the Central Valley. Forages on insects and rodents, also other vertebrates. Unlikely. The trees within the Study Area are generally too small to support nesting by this species. The Study Area is also west of this species’ typical range. No further actions are recommended for this species. northern harrier Circus cyaneus SSC Nests and forages in grassland habitats, usually in association with coastal salt and freshwater marshes. Nests on ground in shrubby vegetation, usually at marsh edge; nest built of a large mound of sticks in wet areas. May also occur in alkali desert sinks. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain typical flat wetland habitats associated with nesting in the species. However, the Study Area provides foraging habitat, therefore individuals may occasionally fly over the Study Area. No further actions are recommended for this species. white-tailed kite Elanus leucurus CFP Year-round resident in coastal and valley lowlands with scattered trees and large shrubs, including grasslands, marshes and agricultural areas. Nests in trees, of which the type and setting are highly variable. Preys on small mammals and other vertebrates. Moderate Potential. The Study Area provides open foraging habitat, and the shrubs and riparian vegetation may support nesting. Work windows and/or pre-construction surveys. B-6 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS prairie falcon Falco mexicanus BCC Inhabits dry, open terrain, either level or hilly. Breeding sites located on cliffs. Forages far afield, even to marshlands and ocean shores. Unlikely. The Study Area and surrounding areas do not provide typical cliff nesting habitat. This species may forage within the vicinity of the Study Area. No further actions are recommended for this species. burrowing owl Athene cunicularia BCC, SSC, EACCS Inhabits, dry annual or perennial grassland, desert and scrubland characterized by low-growing vegetation. Subterranean nester, dependent upon burrowing mammals, most notably California ground squirrel. Unlikely. While the Study Area contains some flat mowed grassland suitable for burrowing owl, no suitably-sized burrows or ground squirrels were observed within the Study Area during the May 2015 site visit, effectively precluding presence. The majority of the grassland on the site is not short and is sloped, reducing its quality. Additionally, all documented burrowing owl occurrences in the vicinity of the Study Area are in the eastern portion of the City of Dublin in lowland areas; none are in the East Bay Hills where the Study Area is located, suggesting this species does not inhabit the region (CDFW 2015, Ebird 2015). No further actions are recommended for this species. B-7 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus BCC, SSC Found in broken woodlands, savannah, pinyon-juniper, Joshua tree and riparian woodlands, and desert oases, scrub, and washes. Prefers open country for hunting, with perches for scanning, and fairly dense shrubs and brush for nesting. Moderate Potential. Grassland foraging habitat is available within the Study Area and the Study Area contains some marginal shrub nesting habitat. Work windows and/or pre-construction surveys. tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor BCC, SSC, RP, EACCS Usually nests over or near freshwater in dense cattails, tules, or thickets of willow, blackberry, wild rose or other tall herbs. Nesting area must be large enough to support about 50 pairs. Unlikely. The Study Area provides no wetland nesting habitat for this species. This species may occur with other blackbird species in mixed flocks during the non-breeding season and may use the Study Area for foraging. No further actions are recommended for this species. grasshopper sparrow Ammodramus savannarum SSC Summer resident in the region. Breeds in open grassland habitats, generally with low- to moderate- height grasses and scattered shrubs. Moderate Potential. Suitable grassland habitat for breeding and foraging is located in the unmowed portions of the Study Area. Work windows and/or pre-construction surveys. yellow warbler Setophaga (Dendroica) petechia brewsteri BCC, SSC Frequents riparian plant associations. Prefers willows, cottonwoods, aspens, sycamores and alders for nesting and foraging. Also nests in montane shrubbery in open conifer forests. Unlikely. This species may fly through the Study Area, but there are no dense riparian areas to support nesting. No further actions are recommended for this species. B-8 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS yellow-billed magpie Pica nuttalli BCC Oak savanna with large trees and large expanses of open ground. The Central Valley floor, gentle slopes, and open park-like areas including along stream courses. Grasslands, pasture, or cultivated fields are needed for foraging. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain the flat, grassland or savannah habitats typically associated with this species. No further actions are recommended for this species. oak titmouse Baeolophus inornatus BCC Oak woodland and savannah, open broad-leaved evergreen forests containing oaks, and riparian woodlands. Associated with oak and pine-oak woodland and arborescent chaparral. Moderate Potential. The oak trees at the southern portion of the Study Area provide foraging and nesting habitat for this species. Work windows and/or pre-construction surveys. Nuttall’s woodpecker Picoides nuttallii BCC Resident in lowland woodlands throughout much of California west of the Sierra Nevada. Typical habitat is dominated by oaks. Moderate Potential. The oak trees at the southern portion of the Study Area provide foraging and nesting habitat for this species. Work windows and/or pre-construction surveys. Lawrence's goldfinch Spinus (= Carduelis) lawrencei BCC Nests in open oak or other arid woodland and chaparral, near water. Nearby herbaceous habitats used for feeding. Closely associated with oaks. Unlikely. This species may fly through and occasionally forage in the Study Area, the Study Area does not contain extensive woodland or chaparral habitat to support nesting No further actions are recommended for this species. B-9 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS Reptiles and Amphibians California red-legged frog Rana draytonii FT, SSC, RP, EACCS Lowlands and foothills in or near permanent sources of deep water with dense, shrubby or emergent riparian vegetation. Requires 11 to 20 weeks of permanent water for larval development. Must have access to estivation habitat. Moderate Potential. The Study Area does not contain breeding habitat for this species, and the nearest breeding habitat is a stock pond 0.6 mile west of the Study Area. This species may use the wet within the Study Area as non-breeding habitat and may also be found in sheltered areas up to 200 feet from these wet areas (USFWS 2010). Avoidance and minimization measures and/or consultation with the USFWS. foothill yellow-legged frog Rana boylii SSC, EACCS Found in or near rocky streams in a variety of habitats. Feeds on both aquatic and terrestrial invertebrates. Unlikely. There is no suitable permanent stream habitat for this species in or adjacent to the Study Area. No further actions are recommended for this species. B-10 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS California tiger salamander Ambystoma californiense FE/FT, ST, RP, EACCS Populations in Santa Barbara and Sonoma Counties are currently listed as endangered, and the Central Valley populations are listed as threatened. Inhabits grassland, oak woodland, ruderal and seasonal pool habitats. Seasonal ponds and vernal pools are crucial to breeding. Adults utilize mammal burrows as estivation habitat. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain suitable ponding aquatic features for breeding in this species, and the nearest potential breeding habitat is over 0.6 mile west of the Study Area. The Study Area does not lie within a corridor connecting breeding pools. This species is rare in the hills west of Dublin and the nearest docum ented occurrence is 2.5 miles south of the Study Area and across Interstate 580, a significant barrier to dispersal (Barry and Shaffer 1994, CDFW 2015). No further actions are recommended for this species. Pacific pond turtle Actinemys marmorata SSC Occurs in perennial ponds, lakes, rivers and streams with suitable basking habitat (mud banks, mats of floating vegetation, partially submerged logs) and submerged shelter. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain aquatic habitat to support this species, and the nearest documented occurrence is 4.6 miles northeast of the Study Area, across the City of Dublin (CDFW 2015). No further actions are recommended for this species. B-11 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS Alameda whipsnake Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus FT, ST, RP EACCS Inhabits chaparral and foothill- hardwood habitats in the eastern Bay Area. Prefers south-facing slopes and ravines with rock outcroppings where shrubs form a vegetative mosaic with oak trees and grasses. Unlikely. No chaparral or foothill- hardwood habitat exists within or immediately around the Study Area, and the Study Area does not serve as a corridor to existing suitable habitat because it is surrounded on three sides by suburban development, creating an effective barrier to dispersal for this species. No further actions are recommended for this species. Blainville’s (coast) horned lizard Phrynosoma blainvillii (coronatum) SSC Frequents a wide variety of habitats, most common in lowlands along sandy washes with scattered low bushes. Prefers friable, rocky, or shallow sandy soils for burial; open areas for sunning; bushes for cover; and an abundant supply of ants and other insects. No Potential. The Study Area and vicinity do not contain any scrub-type habitats to support this species, and the Study Area is outside of this’ species current range (Zeiner et al. 1990). No further actions are recommended for this species. Invertebrates Valley elderberry longhorn beetle Desmocerus californicus dimorphus FT, SSI, RP Occurs only in the central valley of California, in association with blue elderberry (Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea). Prefers to lay eggs in elderberry 2 to 8 inches in diameter; some preference shown for "stressed" elderberry. No Potential. While the Study Area does contain some elderberry bushes, all were recently planted, small, and in poor health. Additionally, the Study Area is outside of this species’ known range. No further actions are recommended for this species. B-12 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS vernal pool fairy shrimp Branchinecta lynchi FT, SSI, RP, EACCS Endemic to the grasslands of the Central Valley, central coast mountains, and south coast mountains, in astatic rain-filled pools. Inhabits small, clear-water sandstone-depression pools and grassed swale, earth slump, or basalt-flow depression pools. No Potential. The Study Area does not contain vernal pool habitat and the nearest documented occurrence is over 10 miles east of the Study Area (CDFW 2015). No further actions are recommended for this species. California linderiella Linderiella occidentalis SSI Seasonal pools in unplowed grasslands with old alluvial soils underlain by hardpan or in sandstone depressions. Water in the pools has very low alkalinity, conductivity, and TDS No Potential. The Study Area does not contain vernal pool habitat and the nearest documented occurrence of this species is 4.3 miles to the east across the City of Dublin (CDFW 2015). No further actions are recommended for this species. San Bruno elfin butterfly Callophrys mossii bayensis FE, SSI Inhabits coastal mountainous areas with grassy ground cover, mainly in the vicinity of San Bruno Mountain, San Mateo County. Colonies are located on steep, north-facing slopes within the fog belt. Larval host plant is Sedum spathulifolium. No Potential. The Study Area does not provide suitable habitat or host plants and is outside of the species’ normal range. No further actions are recommended for this species. Antioch efferian robberfly Efferia antiochi SSI Known only from Contra Costa County (Antioch) and Fresno County (Fresno). No Potential. The Study Area does not provide suitable habitat and is outside of the species’ known range No further actions are recommended for this species. Plants B-13 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS bent-flowered fiddleneck Amsinckia lunaris Rank 1B.2 Coastal bluff scrub, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Elevation ranges from 10 to 1640 feet (3 to 500 meters). Blooms March-June. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain coastal bluff scrub, gravelly slopes or serpentine substrate. The existing grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. Potentially suitable cismontane woodland is small and fragmented. No further actions are recommended for this species. California androsace Androsace elongata ssp. acuta Rank 4.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, meadows and seeps, pinyon and juniper woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Elevation ranges from 490 to 3940 feet (150 to 1200 meters). Blooms March-June. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral, seeps, pinyon or juniper woodland. Potentially suitable coastal scrub habitat is small and fragmented, occurs in heavily disturbed areas, and is dominated by coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis ssp. consanguinea). The existing grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. Potentially suitable cismontane woodland habitat is small and fragmented. No further actions are recommended for this species. slender silver moss Anomobryum julaceum Rank 4.2 Broadleafed upland forest, lower montane coniferous forest, north coast coniferous forest/damp rock and soil on outcrops, usually on roadcuts. Elevation ranges from 330 to 3280 feet (100 to 1000 meters). Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain coniferous forest, damp rock outcrops, or roadcuts. Potentially suitable broadleaved upland forest habitat is small and fragmented. No further action recommended for this species. B-14 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS Mount Diablo manzanita Arctostaphylos auriculata FE, SE, Rank 1B.3 Chaparral (sandstone), cismontane woodland. Elevation ranges from 440 to 2130 feet (135 to 650 meters). Blooms January-March. No Potential. No chaparral habitat or sandstone substrate exists within the Study Area. Potentially suitable cismontane woodland habitat is small and fragmented. In addition, this large perennial shrub was not observed during the site visit. No further action recommended for this species. Contra Costa manzanita Arctostaphylos manzanita ssp. laevigata Rank 1B.2 Chaparral (rocky). Elevation ranges from 1410 to 3610 feet (430 to 1100 meters). Blooms January-March (April). No Potential. The Study Area does not contain chaparral or rocky substrate, and it is out of the known elevation range of this species. The Study Area is well below the documented elevation range of the species. In addition, this large perennial shrub was not observed during the site visit. No further action recommended for this species. alkali milk-vetch Astragalus tener var. tener Rank 1B.2 Playas, valley and foothill grassland (adobe clay), vernal pools/alkaline. Elevation ranges from 0 to 200 feet (1 to 60 meters). Blooms March- June. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain playa or vernal pool habitat. Undeveloped areas are generally on slopes. The existing grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. No further action recommended for this species. B-15 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS crownscale Atriplex coronata var. coronata Rank 4.2 Chenopod scrub, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools/alkaline, often clay. Elevation ranges from 0 to 1940 feet (1 to 590 meters). Blooms March-October. No Potential. The Study Area does not contain chenopod scrub, or vernal pool habitat. The existing grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. No further action recommended for this species. brittlescale Atriplex depressa Rank 1B.2 Chenopod scrub, meadows and seeps, playas, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools/alkaline, clay. Elevation ranges from 0 to 1050 feet (1 to 320 meters). Blooms April-October. No Potential. The Study Area does not contain chenopod scrub, meadow, seep, playa or vernal pool habitat. The existing grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. No further action recommended for this species. lesser saltscale Atriplex minuscula Rank 1B.1 Chenopod scrub, playas, valley and foothill grassland/alkaline, sandy. Elevation ranges from 50 to 660 feet (15 to 200 meters). Blooms May- October. No Potential. The Study Area does not contain chenopod scrub, meadow, seep, playa, or alkali sink habitat. The existing grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. No further action recommended for this species. B-16 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS big-scale balsamroot Balsamorhiza macrolepis Rank 1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland/sometimes serpentine. Elevation ranges from 300 to 5100 feet (90 to 1555 meters). Blooms March-June. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral habitat. Potentially suitable grassland habitat in the Study Area is heavily disturbed and of low quality. Potentially suitable cismontane woodland habitat is small and fragmented. Additionally the species was not observed during the site visit which was conducted during the species’ blooming period. No further action recommended for this species. Mt. Diablo fairy-lantern Calochortus pulchellus Rank 1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, riparian woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Elevation ranges from 100 to 2760 feet (30 to 840 meters). Blooms April-June. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral habitat. The existing grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. Potentially suitable riparian woodland and cismontane woodland is small and fragmented. This species was not observed during the site visit which was conducted during the species’ blooming period. No further action recommended for this species. B-17 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS Oakland star-tulip Calochortus umbellatus Rank 4.2 Broadleafed upland forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous forest, valley and foothill grassland/often serpentine. Elevation ranges from 330 to 2300 feet (100 to 700 meters). Blooms March-May. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral, coniferous forest, or serpentine substrate. Potentially suitable woodland habitat is small and fragmented. This species was not observed during the site visit. No further action recommended for this species. chaparral harebell Campanula exigua Rank 1B.2 Chaparral (rocky, usually serpentine). Elevation ranges from 900 to 4100 feet (275 to 1250 meters). Blooms May-June. No Potential. The Study Area does not contain chaparral habitat or serpentine soil. No further action recommended for this species. Congdon’s tarplant Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii Rank 1B.1, EACCS Valley and foothill grassland (alkaline). Elevation ranges from 0 to 750 feet (0 to 230 meters). Blooms May-October (November). Moderate Potential. A Centromadia species was observed but was unidentifiable at the time of the site visit. The closest occurrence of the species is approximately 2.6 miles from the Study Area. Rare plant surveys during the species’ blooming period are recommended. palmate-bracted bird's-beak Chloropyron palmatum FE, SE, Rank 1B.1 Chenopod scrub, alkaline flats, valley and foothill grassland/alkaline. Elevation ranges from 20 to 510 feet (5 to 155 meters). Blooms May- October. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chenopod scrub or alkaline flats. The existing grassland habitat is highly disturbed and of poor quality. No further action recommended for this species. B-18 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS Santa Clara red ribbons Clarkia concinna ssp. automixa Rank 4.3, County list Chaparral, cismontane woodland. Elevation ranges from 300 to 4920 feet (90 to 1500 meters). Blooms (April), May-June (July). Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain suitable evergreen forest habitat. Potentially suitable oak woodland habitat is small and fragmented. The species was not observed during the site visit. No further action recommended for this species. Hospital Canyon larkspur Delphinium californicum ssp. interius Rank 1B.2 Chaparral (openings), cismontane woodland (mesic), coastal scrub. Elevation ranges from 640 to 3590 feet (195 to 1095 meters). Blooms April-June. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral or coastal scrub habitat. Potentially suitable cismontane woodland is small and fragmented. The species was not observed during the site visit. No further action recommended for this species. Mt. Diablo buckwheat Eriogonum truncatum Rank 1B.1 Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland/sandy. Elevation ranges from 10 to 1150 feet (3 to 350 meters). Blooms April- September (November), (December). Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral habitat or sandy soils. Potentially suitable coastal scrub habitat occurs in heavily disturbed areas, and is dominated by coyote brush. The existing grassland in the Study Area is heavily disturbed and of low quality. No further action recommended for this species. B-19 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS San Joaquin spearscale Extriplex joaquiniana [Atriplex j.] Rank 1B.2, EACCS Valley and foothill grassland (alkaline, clay). Elevation ranges from 0 to 3200 feet (0 to 975 meters). Blooms March-April. Unlikely. Potentially suitable grassland in the Study Area is heavily disturbed and of low quality, and lacks sufficiently alkaline substrate. Study Area soils are neutral to mildly alkaline (USDA 2015). The species was not observed during the site visit. No further action recommended for this species. fragrant fritillary Fritillaria liliacea Rank 1B.2 Cismontane woodland, coastal prairie, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland/often serpentine. Elevation ranges from 10 to 1350 feet (3 to 410 meters). Blooms February-April. Unlikely. The Study Area lacks coastal prairie habitat, or serpentine substrate. Potentially suitable coastal scrub habitat is small and fragmented, occurs in heavily disturbed areas, and is dominated by coyote brush. Potentially suitable cismontane woodland is small and fragmented. Potentially suitable grassland is heavily disturbed and of low quality No further action recommended for this species. B-20 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS Diablo helianthella Helianthella castanea Rank 1B.2 Broadleafed upland forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, riparian woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Elevation ranges from 200 to 4270 feet (60 to 1300 meters). Blooms March-June. Unlikely. The Study Area does not chaparral habitat. Potentially suitable coastal scrub habitat is small and fragmented, occurs in heavily disturbed areas, and is dominated by coyote brush. Potentially suitable woodland habitat is small and fragmented. The existing grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. This species was not observed during the site visit. No further action recommended for this species. Brewer’s western flax Hesperolinon breweri Rank 1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland/usually serpentine. Elevation ranges from 100 to 3100 feet (30 to 945 meters). Blooms May-July. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral or serpentine substrate. Potentially suitable cismontane woodland habitat is small and fragmented. The existing grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. No further action recommended for this species. Loma Prieta hoita Hoita strobilina Rank 1B.1 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, riparian woodland/usually serpentine, mesic. Elevation ranges from 100 to 2820 feet (30 to 860 meters). Blooms May-July (August), (October). Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral or serpentine substrate. Potentially suitable woodland habitat is small and fragmented. The existing grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. No further action recommended for this species. B-21 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS Santa Cruz tarplant Holocarpha macradenia FT, SE, Rank 1B.1 Coastal prairie, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland/often clay, sandy. Elevation ranges from 30 to 720 feet (10 to 220 meters). Blooms June-October. No Potential. The Study Area does not contain coastal prairie, or sandy soils. Potentially suitable coastal scrub habitat is small and fragmented, occurs in heavily disturbed areas, and is dominated by coyote brush. Potentially suitable grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. All known Contra Costa County occurences are introduced; nearly half have failed (CDFW 2015). No further action recommended for this species. coast iris Iris longipetala Rank 4.2 Coastal prairie, lower montane coniferous forest, meadows and seeps/mesic. Elevation ranges from 0 to 1970 feet (0 to 600 meters). Blooms March-May. No Potential. The Study Area does not contain coastal prairie, coniferous forest, meadows or seeps. No further action recommended for this species. Northern California black walnut Juglans hindsii Rank 1B.1 Riparian forest, riparian woodland. Elevation ranges from 0 to 1440 feet (0 to 440 meters). Blooms April- May. Not Present. The species was not observed during the site visit. Only one confirmed, native occurrence appears viable as of 2003 (CDFW 2015). No further action recommended for this species. B-22 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS bristly Leptosiphon Leptosiphon acicularis Rank 4.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal prairie, valley and foothill grassland. Elevation ranges from 180 to 4920 feet (55 to 1500 meters). Blooms April-July. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral or coastal prairie. Potentially suitable woodland habitat is small and fragmented. The existing grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. This species was not observed during the site visit. No further action recommended for this species. Hall's bush-mallow Malacothamnus hallii Rank 1B.2 Chaparral, coastal scrub. Elevation ranges from 30 to 2490 feet (10 to 760 meters). Blooms May- September (October). Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral habitat. Potentially suitable coastal scrub habitat is small and fragmented, occurs in heavily disturbed areas, and is dominated by coyote brush. The perennial shrub species was not observed during the site visit. No further action recommended for this species. woodland woolythreads Monolopia gracilens Rank 1B.2 Broadleafed upland forest (openings), chaparral (openings), cismontane woodland, north coast coniferous forest (openings), valley and foothill grassland/serpentine. Elevation ranges from 330 to 3940 feet (100 to 1200 meters). Blooms (February), March-July. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral, coniferous forest or serpentine substrate. Potentially suitable woodland habitat is small and fragmented. The existing grassland habitat is heavily disturbed and of low quality. This species was not observed during the site visit. No further action recommended for this species. B-23 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS shining navarretia Navarretia nigelliformis ssp. radians Rank 1B.2 Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools/sometimes clay. Elevation ranges from 250 to 3280 feet (76 to 1000 meters). Blooms April-July. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain vernal pool habitat. The existing grassland is heavily disturbed and of low quality. Potentially suitable coastal scrub habitat is small and fragmented, occurs in heavily disturbed areas, and is dominated by coyote brush. Potentially suitable woodland habitat is small and fragmented. No further action recommended for this species. prostrate vernal pool navarretia Navarretia prostrata Rank 1B.1 Coastal scrub, meadows and seeps, valley and foothill grassland (alkaline), vernal pools/mesic. Elevation ranges from 10 to 3970 feet (3 to 1210 meters). Blooms April-July. No Potential. The Study Area does not contain, meadows, seeps or vernal pools, and lacks sufficiently alkaline substrate. The existing grassland habitat in the Study Area is heavily disturbed and of low quality. Potentially suitable coastal scrub habitat is small and fragmented, occurs in heavily disturbed areas, and is dominated by coyote brush. No further action recommended for this species. B-24 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS Mt. Diablo Phacelia Phacelia phacelioides Rank 1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland/rocky. Elevation ranges from 1640 to 4490 feet (500 to 1370 meters). Blooms April-May. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral habitat. Potentially suitable woodland habitat is small and fragmented. The Study Area is well below the documented elevation range for the species. hairless popcorn flower Plagiobothrys glaber Rank 1A Meadows and seeps (alkaline), marshes and swamps (coastal salt). Elevation ranges from 50 to 590 feet (15 to 180 meters). Blooms March- May. No Potential. The Study Area does not contain alkaline meadows, seeps, or coastal salt marshes and swamps. Repeated site disturbance renders occurrences of this species unlikely. This species is presumed extinct and has not been found since 1954 (CDFW 2015). No further action recommended for this species. Oregon polemonium Polemonium carneum Rank 2B.2 Coastal prairie, coastal scrub, lower montane coniferous forest. Elevation ranges from 0 to 6000 feet (0 to 1830 meters). Blooms April- September. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain coastal prairie or coniferous forest. Potentially suitable coastal scrub habitat is small and fragmented, occurs in heavily disturbed areas, and is dominated by coyote brush. B-25 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS Lobb's aquatic buttercup Ranunculus lobbii Rank 4.2 Cismontane woodland, north coast coniferous forest, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools/mesic. Elevation ranges from 50 to 1540 feet (15 to 470 meters). Blooms February-May. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain coniferous forest or vernal pool habitat. Potentially suitable mesic woodland habitat is small and fragmented. The existing grassland habitat is xeric, heavily disturbed and of low quality. most beautiful jewel-flower Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus Rank 1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland/serpentine. Elevation ranges from 310 to 3280 feet (95 to 1000 meters). Blooms (March), April-September (October). No Potential. The Study Area does not contain serpentine substrate. Mt. Diablo jewelflower Streptanthus hispidus Rank 1B.3 Chaparral, valley and foothill grassland/rocky. Elevation ranges from 1200 to 3940 feet (365 to 1200 meters). Blooms March-June. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral, or rocky soils. The grassland in the Study Area is heavily disturbed and of low quality. No further action recommended for this species. slender leaved pondweed Stuckenia filiformis ssp. alpina [Potamogeton f.] Rank 2B.2 Marshes and swamps (assorted shallow freshwater). Elevation ranges from 980 to 7050 feet (300 to 2150 meters). Blooms May-July. No Potential. The Study Area does not contain freshwater marshes or swamps. No further action recommended for this species. saline clover Trifolium hydrophilum [T. depauperatum var. hydrophilum] Rank 1B.2 Marshes and swamps, valley and foothill grassland (mesic, alkaline), vernal pools. Elevation ranges from 0 to 980 feet (0 to 300 meters). Blooms April-June. No Potential. The Study Area does not contain vernal pools, marshes, swamps or sufficiently alkaline substrate. Existing grassland habitat is xeric, heavily disturbed and of low quality. No further action recommended for this species. B-26 SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT POTENTIAL FOR OCCURRENCE RECOMMENDATIONS coastal triquetrella Triquetrella californica Rank 1B.2 Coastal bluff scrub, coastal scrub on gravel or thin soil over outcrops. Elevation ranges from 30 to 330 feet (10 to 100 meters). Unlikely The Study Area does not contain coastal bluff scrub or gravelly soil. Potentially suitable coastal scrub occurs in heavily disturbed areas. No further action recommended for this species. caperfruit tropidocarpum Tropidocarpum capparideum Rank 1B.1 Coastal bluff scrub, coastal scrub/soil. Elevation ranges from 30 to 330 feet (10 to 100 meters). Unlikely. The existing grassland is heavily disturbed and of low quality, and lacks sufficiently alkaline soil. The closest documented occurrences are in the hills east of Livermore, and none are more recent than the 1930s. No further action recommended for this species. oval-leaved viburnum Viburnum ellipticum Rank 2B.3 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous forest. Elevation ranges from 710 to 4590 feet (215 to 1400 meters). Blooms May-June. Unlikely. The Study Area does not contain chaparral or coniferous forest. Potentially suitable woodland habitat is small and fragmented. No further action recommended for this species. * Key to status codes: FE Federal Endangered FT Federal Threatened BCC USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern SE State Endangered ST State Threatened SC State Candidate SSC CDFW Species of Special Concern SSI CDFW Special-Status Invertebrate B-27 CFP CDFW Fully Protected Animal WBWG Western Bat Working Group (High or Medium) Priority species RP Species included in a USFWS Recovery Plan or Draft Recovery Plan Rank 1A CRPR Rank 1A: Presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere Rank 1B CRPR Rank 1B: Plants rare, threatened or endangered in California and elsewhere Rank 2B CRPR Rank 2B: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere Rank 3 CRPR Rank 3: Plants about which CNPS needs more information (a review list) EACCS Final East Alameda County Conservation Strategy (2010) Proposed Focal Species Species Evaluations: See evaluation definitions in Section 3.2.2 of the report. MEMORANDUM To: Jerry Haag, Urban Planner From: Sean Avent, WRA, Inc. avent@wra-ca.com cc: Date: March 5, 2018 Subject: Dublin Valley Christian Center Biological Site Conditions Update Background The purpose of this memorandum is to present the results of a site survey at the Valley Christian Center, in Dublin, Alameda County, California (Study Area) to determine the current state of the Study Area as compared to a prior survey in 2015. On May 20, 2015, WRA, Inc. (WRA) conducted a biological resources assessment (BRA) at the Study Area in support of the proposed Multi-purpose Sports Field Site Development Project (Project). The site visit assessed the Study Area for the (1) potential to support special-status species and (2) presence of other sensitive biological resources protected by local, state, and federal laws and regulations. During the 2015 assessment, WRA observed five biological communities, 61 plant species and seven wildlife species. Three sensitive biological community types covering 1.86 acres in the Study Area were identified, including ephemeral stream, and riparian woodland. However, no special-status wildlife or plant species were observed within the Study Area. Six special-status wildlife species and one special-status plant species were determined to have a moderate potential to occur within the Study Area. Given that over two and a half years have passed since the preparation of the BRA report, the City of Dublin, as CEQA Lead Agency, requested an update to confirm if existing conditions observed during the 2015 assessment had changed significantly. This memorandum is in direct response to the City’s request. Methods On March 5, 2018, WRA biologist Scott Yarger, who had conducted the 2015 site assessment, returned to the site to assess whether existing conditions had changed significantly since the 2015 site visit. Prior to the site visit, publically available aerial imagery (Google Earth 2018) was reviewed to investigate whether any observable substantive changes to the Study Area had occurred. During the site visit, the Study Area was traversed on foot to observe and document any significant changes to biological communities or habitats on site, with a particular focus on undeveloped areas, and areas containing potentially sensitive habitats including wetlands, streams and riparian areas. The site was additionally investigated for the presence of special- status plant and wildlife species during the site visit. Results Overall site conditions have not changed significantly since the 2015 site visit. The distribution and extent of sensitive biological communities, including ephemeral stream, riparian woodland, and coast live oak woodland have neither expanded nor decreased. Additional areas within the original Study Area but outside of the Project footprint were investigated for potential wetland conditions, in particular within the manmade stormwater detention basins along Inspiration Drive to the south of the existing campus facilities. However, based on percent cover of hydrophytic vegetation, lack of hydrology, and/or hydric soil parameters none of these areas were determined to be potential wetlands. No sensitive habitats or special-status plant or wildlife species were observed within the Project footprint. One special-status plant, Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii, CNPS Rank 1B), was observed inside the Study Area, but outside of the Project footprint, and is discussed below: Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii). CNPS Rank 1B.1. East Alameda County Conservation Strategy (EACCS) Focal Species. Present. Congdon’s tarplant is an annual forb in the sunflower family (Asteraceae) that blooms from June to November. It occurs in terraces, swales, floodplains, grassland, and disturbed sites, sometimes alkaline, at elevations ranging from 0-990 feet (Baldwin et al. 2012, CDFW 2018, CNPS 2018). Congdon’s tarplant is known from 31 USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles in Alameda, Contra Costa, Monterey, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, and Solano counties (CNPS 2018). During the 2015 site visit two tarplant individuals (Centromadia sp.) were observed in the northeast portion of the Study Area, within the Project footprint, in a disturbed ruderal field used for heavy equipment storage. The tarplant individuals observed in this area during the site visit were unidentifiable due to the timing of the site visit and the absence of mature inflorescences. The area where the two previous Centromadia sp. individuals were observed in 2015 was checked again in 2018 and no individuals were found at that location. During the 2018 site visit, approximately five individuals of the genus were observed in a man-made stormwater detention basin south of Inspiration Drive, between Inspiration Drive and Dublin Boulevard, outside of the Project footprint. A portion of one of the senesced annual plants was collected for identification, and it was determined to be Congdon’s tarplant. This population is located outside of the Project footprint, and is not anticipated to be impacted by the Project. Literature Cited Baldwin, BG, DH Goldman, DJ Keil, R Patterson, TJ Rosatti, and DH Wilken (eds.). 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, second edition. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. [CDFW] California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2018. California Natural Diversity Database. Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch, Sacramento, CA. [CNPS] California Native Plant Society. 2018. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. Online at: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org; most recently accessed: March. Google Earth. 2018. Aerial Imagery 1993-2015. Most recently accessed: May 2015. [WRA] WRA, Inc. 2015. Biological Resources Assessment, Dublin Valley Christian Center, Dublin, Alameda County, California. Prepared for Jerry Haag, Urban Planner. June 15. VALLEY CHRISTIAN CENTER SPORTS FIELDS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE ASSESSMENT Dublin, California June 4, 2018 Prepared for: Jerry Haag Urban Planner 2029 University Avenue Berkeley, CA 94704 Prepared by: Carrie J. Janello and Michael S. Thill 1 Willowbrook Court, Suite 120 Petaluma, CA 94954 (707) 794-0400 Project: 15-090 1 INTRODUCTION As part of the Valley Christian Center Sports Fields Improvement Project, the existing sports fields would be expanded and relocated on the campus in Dublin, California. Currently, the multipurpose sports field is used for baseball and football and is located on the southwestern corner of the campus. The new proposed multipurpose baseball field would be relocated to the northwestern corner of the campus. A new multipurpose recreation field, which would include football, soccer, and track and field, would be relocated to the northeastern corner of campus, adjacent to Inspiration Drive. The new multipurpose recreation field would have light standards for winter soccer games running past 5:00 p.m. A sound amplification system would also be installed at the sports fields. Additionally, an outdoor amphitheater used for theatrical performances is proposed on the interior of the site, located southwest of the new multipurpose recreation field. The area surrounding the project site includes single- and multi-family residential land uses. In 2002, a CEQA study was conducted for the Valley Christian Expansion Project, which proposed to expand existing buildings on the site, to construct 22 multi-family dwelling units on the northwest corner of Dublin Boulevard and Inspiration Drive, to construct a new parking area along the west side of Inspiration Drive, and to add one LED-readout changeable message sign on the south side of the school administration building. As part of the 2002 project, a noise assessment was conducted, and the results of that assessment were reviewed as part of the proposed project. This report evaluates the project’s potential to result in significant impacts with respect to applicable CEQA guidelines. The report is divided into three sections: 1) the Setting Section provides a brief description of the fundamentals of environmental noise and vibration, summarizes applicable regulatory criteria, and discusses the results of the ambient noise monitoring survey completed to document existing noise conditions; 2) the General Plan Consistency Section discusses noise and land use compatibility utilizing policies in the City’s General Plan; and 3) the Impacts and Mitigation Measures Section describes the significance criteria used to evaluate project impacts, provides a discussion of each project impact, and presents mitigation measures , where necessary, to provide a compatible project in relation to adjacent noise sources and land uses. SETTING Fundamentals of Environmental Noise Noise may be defined as unwanted sound. Noise is usually objectionable because it is disturbing or annoying. The objectionable nature of sound could be caused by its pitch or its loudness. Pitch is the height or depth of a tone or sound, depending on the relative rapidity (frequency) of the vibrations by which it is produced. Higher pitched signals sound louder to humans than sounds with a lower pitch. Loudness is intensity of sound waves combined with the reception characteristics of the ear. Intensity may be compared with the height of an ocean wave in that it is a measure of the amplitude of the sound wave. In addition to the concepts of pitch and loudness, there are several noise measurement scales which are used to describe noise in a particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement which 2 indicates the relative amplitude of a sound. The zero on the decibel scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Sound levels in decibels are calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 decibels represents a ten-fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 decibels is 100 times more intense, 30 decibels is 1,000 times more intense, etc. There is a relationship between the subjective noisiness or loudness of a sound and its intensity. Each 10 decibel increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness over a fairly wide range of intensities. Technical terms are defined in Table 1. There are several methods of characterizing sound. The most common in California is the A- weighted sound level (dBA). This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. Representative outdoor and indoor noise levels in units of dBA are shown in Table 2. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time, a method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statistical behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-varying events. This energy-equivalent sound/noise descriptor is called Leq. The most common averaging period is hourly, but Leq can describe any series of noise events of arbitrary duration. The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters can accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about plus or minus 1 dBA. Various computer models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such as roadways and airports. The accuracy of the predicted models depends upon the distance the receptor is from the noise source. Close to the noise source, the models are accurate to within about plus or minus 1 to 2 dBA. Since the sensitivity to noise increases during the evening and at night -- because excessive noise interferes with the ability to sleep -- 24-hour descriptors have been developed that incorporate artificial noise penalties added to quiet-time noise events. The Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure in a community, with a 5 dB penalty added to evening noise levels (7:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m.) and a 10 dB addition to nocturnal (10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m.) noise levels. The Day/Night Average Sound Level (Ldn) is essentially the same as CNEL, with the exception that the evening time period is dropped and all occurrences during this three - hour period are grouped into the daytime period. Fundamentals of Groundborne Vibration Ground vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or waves with an average motion of zero. Several different methods are typically used to quantify vibration amplitude. One method is the Peak Particle Velocity (PPV). The PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration wave. In this report, a PPV descriptor with units of mm/sec or in/sec is used to evaluate construction generated vibration for building damage and human complaints. Table 3 displays the reactions of people and the effects on buildings that continuous vibration levels produce. The annoyance levels shown in Table 3 should be interpreted with care since vibration may be found to be annoying at much lower levels than those shown, depending on the level of activity or 3 the sensitivity of the individual. To sensitive indi viduals, vibrations approaching the threshold of perception can be annoying. Low-level vibrations frequently cause irritating secondary vibration, such as a slight rattling of windows, doors, or stacked dishes. The rattling sound can give rise to exaggerated vibration complaints, even though there is very little risk of actual structural damage. Construction activities can cause vibration that varies in intensity depending on several factors. The use of pile driving and vibratory compaction equipment typically generates the highest construction related groundborne vibration levels. Because of the impulsive nature of such activities, the use of the PPV descriptor has been routinely used to measure and assess groundborne vibration and almost exclusively to assess the potential of vibration to induce structural damage and the degree of annoyance for humans. The two primary concerns with construction-induced vibration is the potential to damage a structure and the potential to interfere with the enjoyment of li fe. These concerns are evaluated against different vibration limits. Studies have shown that the threshold of perception for average persons is in the range of 0.008 to 0.012 in/sec PPV. Human perception to vibration varies with the individual and is a function of physical setting and the type of vibration. Persons exposed to elevated ambient vibration levels, such as people in an urban environment, may tolerate a higher vibration level. Structural damage can be classified as cosmetic only, such as minor cracking of building elements, or may threaten the integrity of the building. Safe vibration limits that can be applied to assess the potential for damaging a structure vary by researcher and there is no general consensus as to what amount of vibration may pose a threat for structural damage to the building. Construction-induced vibration that can be detrimental to the building is very rare and has only been observed in instances where the structure is at a high state of disrepair and the construction activity occurs immediately adjacent to the structure. 4 TABLE 1 Definition of Acoustical Terms Used in this Report Term Definition Decibel, dB A unit describing, the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure. The reference pressure for air is 20 micro Pascals. Sound Pressure Level Sound pressure is the sound force per unit area, usually expressed in micro Pascals (or 20 micro Newtons per square meter), where 1 Pascal is the pressure resulting from a force of 1 Newton exerted over an area of 1 square meter. The sound pressure level is expressed in decibels as 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio between the pressures exerted by the sound to a reference sound pressure (e. g., 20 micro Pascals). Sound pressure level is the quantity that is directly measured by a sound level meter. Frequency, Hz The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below atmospheric pressure. Normal human hearing is between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz. Infrasonic sound are below 20 Hz and Ultrasonic sounds are above 20,000 Hz. A-Weighted Sound Level, dBA The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighting filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise. Equivalent Noise Level, Leq The average A-weighted noise level during the measurement period. Lmax, Lmin The maximum and minimum A-weighted noise level during the measurement period. L01, L10, L50, L90 The A-weighted noise levels that are exceeded 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of the time during the measurement period. Day/Night Noise Level, Ldn or DNL The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 10 decibels to levels measured in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Community Noise Equivalent Level, CNEL The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 5 decibels in the evening from 7:00 p.m.to 10:00 p.m. and after addition of 10 decibels to sound levels measured in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location. Intrusive That noise which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content as well as the prevailing ambient noise level. Source: Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control, Harris, 1998. 5 TABLE 2 Typical Noise Levels in the Environment Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dBA) Common Indoor Activities 110 dBA Rock band Jet fly-over at 1,000 feet 100 dBA Gas lawn mower at 3 feet 90 dBA Diesel truck at 50 feet at 50 mph Food blender at 3 feet 80 dBA Garbage disposal at 3 feet Noisy urban area, daytime Gas lawn mower, 100 feet 70 dBA Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet Commercial area Normal speech at 3 feet Heavy traffic at 300 feet 60 dBA Large business office Quiet urban daytime 50 dBA Dishwasher in next room Quiet urban nighttime 40 dBA Theater, large conference room Quiet suburban nighttime 30 dBA Library Quiet rural nighttime Bedroom at night, concert hall (background) 20 dBA Broadcast/recording studio 10 dBA 0 dBA Source: Technical Noise Supplement (TeNS), California Department of Transportation, September 2013. 6 TABLE 3 Reactions of People and Damage to Buildings from Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Vibration Levels Velocity Level, PPV (in/sec) Human Reaction Effect on Buildings 0.01 Barely perceptible No effect 0.04 Distinctly perceptible Vibration unlikely to cause damage of any type to any structure 0.08 Distinctly perceptible to strongly perceptible Recommended upper level of the vibration to which ruins and ancient monuments should be subjected 0.1 Strongly perceptible Virtually no risk of damage to normal buildings 0.3 Strongly perceptible to severe Threshold at which there is a risk of damage to older residential dwellings such as plastered walls or ceilings 0.5 Severe - Vibrations considered unpleasant Threshold at which there is a risk of damage to newer residential structures Source: Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, California Department of Transportation, September 2013. Regulatory Background - Noise The State of California and the City of Dublin have established regulatory criteria that are applicable in this assessment. The State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Appendix G, are used to assess the potential significance of impacts pursuant to local General Plan policies, Municipal Code standards, or the applicable standards of other agencies. A summary of the applicable regulatory criteria is provided below. State CEQA Guidelines. CEQA contains guidelines to evaluate the significance of effects of environmental noise attributable to a proposed project. Under CEQA, noise impacts would be considered significant if the project would result in: (a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; (b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; (c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project; (d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project; 7 (e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, if the project would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels; or (f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, if the project would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Of these guidelines, items (e) and (f) are not applicable because the project is not located within an airport land use plan or in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, checklist items (e), and (f) are not carried forward for further analysis. CEQA does not define what noise level increase would be considered substantial. Typically, project-generated noise level increases of 3 dBA Ldn/CNEL or greater would be considered significant where exterior noise levels would exceed the normally acceptable noise level standard (60 dBA Ldn/CNEL for residential land uses). Where noise levels would remain at or below the normally acceptable noise level standard with the project, noise level increases of 5 dBA Ldn/CNEL or greater would be considered significant. City of Dublin General Plan. The City of Dublin’s General Plan Noise Element, which was amended in April 2013, establishes policies and methods of implementation for traffic noise, which the Noise Element identifies as the main source of noise in the City. Applicable policies and implementation measures presented in the General Plan are as follows: 9.2.1.A Guiding Policy 1. Where feasible, mitigate traffic noise to levels indicated by Table 9.1: Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments. Please note the following table is Table 9.1 contained in the Environmental Resources Management: Noise Element, amended as of October 6, 2015. 8 9.2.1.B Implementing Policies 4. Noise impacts related to all new development shall be analyzed by a certified acoustic consultant. 7. Review all non-residential development proposals within the projected CNEL 65 dBA contour for compliance with exterior noise transmission standards as required by the California Green Building Standards Code. City of Dublin Municipal Code. The City’s Municipal Code provides a definition for a noise violation and unreasonable noise within the City. The portions of the Municipal Code that are relevant for this project are as follows: Chapter 5.28.010 Findings. The City Council finds that the making, creation or maintenance of loud, unnecessary, unnatural, unusual or habitual noises which are prolonged, unusual, and unnatural in their time, place and use affect and are a detriment to the public health, comfort, safety, welfare, and prosperity of the residents of the city. The provisions of this chapter are enacted for the purpose of securing and promoting the public health, comfort, safety, welfare, and prosperity and the peace and quiet of the city and its inhabitants. (Ord. 4-84 § 1) Chapter 5.28.020 Unreasonable noise prohibited. A. It is unlawful and a nuisance for any person within the city persistently to maintain, emit, cause, mechanically or otherwise, or permit any animal owned by him or in his possession or control to make any loud, or disturbing, or unnecessary, or unusual or habitual noise or any noise which annoys or disturbs or injures or endangers the health, repose, peace or safety of any reasonable person of normal sensitivity present in the area. B. The standards which shall be considered in determining whether a violation of the provisions of this chapter exists shall include, but shall not be limited to the following: 1. The level, intensity, character and duration of the noise; 2. The level, intensity and character of background noise, if any; 3. The time when and the place and zoning district where the noise occurred; 4. The proximity of the noise to residential sleeping facilities; and 5. Whether the noise is recurrent, intermittent or constant. (Ord. 4-84 § 2) Chapter 5.28.030 Violation – Penalty. Each violation of this chapter shall constitute a separate offense, and persons violating this chapter shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500) or by imprisonment in the county jail for a period not exceeding thirty (30) days, or both such fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 4-84 § 3) 9 Existing Noise Environment The Valley Christian Center is located west of Inspiration Drive and north of Dublin Boulevard in the western part of the City of Dublin. Currently, there are five buildings on the project site with existing sports fields located to the west of the buildings that are used for football, soccer, and baseball. Parking lots are located to the east, to the north, and to the south of existing buildings. To the north and to the east of the project site, opposite Inspiration Drive, are single-family residences. Multi-family housing developments are located approximately 510 feet southwest of the project site. Designated open space is located to the northwest of the project site. Open parcels of land are also located along the southern boundary of the project site. A noise monitoring survey, consisting of two long-term and three short-term measurements, was performed at the site beginning on Wednesday May 6, 2015 and concluding on Monday May 11, 2015. Each measurement location is shown in Figure 1. The noise environment at the site and in the surrounding areas results primarily from vehicular traffic along I-580, as well as neighborhood traffic along Inspiration Drive and connecting roadways. Occasional aircraft associated with the Livermore Municipal Airport also contribute to the noise environment at the project site. Long-term noise measurement LT-1 was made along the northern boundary of the project site, approximately 75 feet south of the centerline of Inspiration Dive. LT-1 represented the existing noise environment near the location of the proposed multi-purpose recreation field. Hourly average noise levels at this location typically ranged from 48 to 60 dBA Leq during the day, and from 39 to 55 dBA Leq at night. The average community noise equivalent level from Wednesday May 6, 2015 through Monday May 11, 2015 ranged from 57 to 58 dBA CNEL during the weekdays and was 55 dBA CNEL on weekend days. The daily trend in noise levels at LT-1 is shown in Figure 2. LT-2 was positioned in the single-family residential development to the east of the project site. LT-2 was approximately 65 feet west of the intersection of Betlen Drive and Las Palmas Way and was approximately 210 feet east of the centerline of Inspiration Drive. This measurement represented the noise-sensitive receptors located to the east and to the north of the project site. Hourly average noise levels at this location typically ranged from 41 to 54 dBA Leq during the day, and from 37 to 52 dBA Leq at night. The average community noise equivalent level from Wednesday May 6, 2015 through Monday May 11, 2015 ranged from 52 to 54 dBA CNEL during the weekdays and ranged from 50 to 51 dBA CNEL on weekend days. The daily trend in noise levels at LT-2 is shown in Figure 3. The short-term noise measurements were made on Monday May 11, 2015 in ten-minute intervals starting at 12:20 p.m. ST-1 was measured in the multi-family residential development located to the southwest of the project site. This measurement was made approximately 20 feet east of the intersection of Brigadoon Way and Sornoway Lane. The ten-minute average noise level measured at ST-1 was 53 dBA Leq(10), and the estimated average community noise equivalent level was 55 dBA CNEL. ST-2 was made in the single-family development to the northwest of the project site, approximately 30 feet south of the centerline of Mountain Rise Place. The ten-minute average noise level at ST-2 was 50 dBA Leq(10), and the estimated average community noise equivalent level was 50 dBA CNEL. The final short-term measurement, ST-3, was made opposite Inspiration Drive from LT-1 and represented the single-family development located north of the project site. 10 ST-3 was approximately 125 feet north of the centerline of Inspiration Drive, and the ten-minute average noise level measured at this location was 56 dBA Leq(10). The estimated average community noise equivalent level at ST-3 was 56 dBA CNEL. Table 4 summarizes the results for the short-term measurements. FIGURE 1 Proposed Plan Showing Noise Measurement Locations 11 FIGURE 2 Daily Variation in Noise Levels at LT-1 on the Northern Site Boundary, May 6 through May 11, 2015 FIGURE 3 Daily Variation in Noise Levels at LT-2 at Betlen Drive and Las Palmas Way, May 6 through May 11, 2015 12 TABLE 4 Summary of Long-Term and Short-Term Noise Measurements (dBA) Noise Measurement Location (Date, Time) Lmax L(1) L(10) L(50) L(90) Leq(10) CNEL LT-1: northern boundary of the site, ~75 feet south of the centerline of Inspiration Drive (5/6/2015, 16:20-5/11/2015, 13:10) 58- 81a 56- 74a 45- 67a 41- 57a 39- 54a 47- 62a 57-58c 55d 40- 72b 39- 66b 38- 62b 37- 54b 35- 52b 37- 57b LT-2: ~65 feet from intersection of Betlen Drive and Las Palmas Way (5/6/2015, 16:40-5/11/2015, 13:20) 43- 79a 42- 71a 40- 64a 39- 58a 37- 54a 39- 59a 52-54c 50-51d 37- 69b 37- 66b 37- 57b 35- 54b 33- 52b 36- 54b ST-1: ~20 feet east of the intersection of Brigadoon Way and Sornoway Lane (5/11/2015, 12:20-12:30) 69 64 53 50 48 53 55 ST-2: ~30 feet south of the centerline of Mountain Rise Place (5/11/2015, 12:40- 12:50) 66 62 52 47 44 50 50 ST-3: ~125 feet north of the centerline of Inspiration Drive (5/11/2015, 13:00-13:10) 71 67 57 53 51 56 56 a Range of noise levels measured during daytime hours (between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.). b Range of noise levels measured during nighttime hours (between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.). c CNEL measured on weekdays. d CNEL measured on weekends. Based on the measurements made in the vicinity of the project site, existing noise levels are below 60 dBA CNEL, which meets the City of Dublin’s noise exposure limits for residential land uses and schools. PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS Noise and Land Use Compatibility Future Exterior Noise Environment The future noise environment would continue to be dominated by traffic noise from I-580, Inspiration Drive, and the surrounding residential streets. In addition to the local traffic noise, Valley Christian Center has several activities on its campus that would also affect the noise environment, including church services on the weekends and school and sports during the weekdays. All of these existing activities would continue to affect the future noise environment. The proposed project changes to Valley Christian Center Sports Fields would not alter the noise environment, since as the nature of the activities and the hours of operation would not significantly change. Therefore, the noise environment would continue to range from 57 to 58 dBA CNEL during the weekdays and be 55 dBA CNEL during the weekends under future conditions, which meets the noise threshold for schools. No additional noise control measures are required. 13 NOISE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Significance Criteria The following criteria were used to evaluate the significance of environmental noise impacts resulting from the project: • A significant noise impact would be identified if the project would expose persons to or generate noise levels that would exceed applicable noise standards presented in the General Plan or Municipal Code. • A significant impact would be identified if the construction of the project would expose persons to excessive vibration levels. Groundborne vibration levels exceeding 0.3 in/sec PPV would have the potential to result in cosmetic damage to normal buildings. • A significant impact would be identified if traffic generated by the project or project improvements/operations would substantially increase noise levels at sensitive receivers in the vicinity. A substantial increase would occur if: a) the noise level increase is 5 dBA CNEL or greater, with a future noise level of less than 60 dBA CNEL, or b) the noise level increase is 3 dBA CNEL or greater, with a future noise level of 60 dBA CNEL or greater. • A significant noise impact would be identified if construction-related noise would temporarily increase ambient noise levels at sensitive receptors. Hourly average noise levels exceeding 60 dBA Leq, and the ambient by at least 5 dBA Leq, for a period of more than one year would constitute a significant temporary noise increase at adjacent residential land uses. Impact 1: Noise Levels in Excess of Standards. The proposed project is not expected to generate noise levels in excess of the standards established in the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code at nearby sensitive receptors. This is a less-than- significant impact. The City of Dublin does not define noise level standards for stationary sources of noise such as playfields or public address systems (PA systems). Therefore, for the purpose of this project, project-generated operational noise is compared to existing ambient conditions at the surrounding noise-sensitive receptors. Under conditions of the proposed project, a new baseball field would be located in the northwestern corner of the campus and a new multipurpose recreational field would be located in the northeastern corner of campus adjacent to Inspiration Drive. The new baseball field would be relocated approximately 360 feet northwest from the location of the existing multipurpose sports field. The new multipurpose recreational field would host football, soccer, and track and field sports activities. Currently, football practices occur on the existing multipurpose baseball field, while track and field activities occur off site. As part of the proposed project, a sound amplification system and lighting standards would also be installed at the new multipurpose recreational field. 14 An outdoor amphitheater is proposed on the interior of the site, southwest of the new multipurpose recreation field. This amphitheater can be used during the school year for lectures during regular school hours and for Northern California Bible College lectures during evening hours. These lectures would not require amplification or lighting. Sunday services may elect to hold church services at the amphitheater, which would require amplification, and the amphitheater may also be used for outdoor theatrical plays during the summertime months. Multipurpose Recreational Sports Field The proposed plan for the new multipurpose recreational sports field includes hosting football games, as well as track and field events, that would include seating for spectators. From mid- August through mid-November, football practices would be held Monday through Thursday from 3:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. Organized football games would include one scrimmage and up to six regular season games with the potential for an additional three playoff games. Football games would be held on Friday nights from 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. The field is proposed to be lighted for night games until 10:00 p.m. and would require amplified sound until 9:45 p.m. Football games would occasionally occur on Saturday nights from 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Lighting and amplified sound would be required for the Saturday night games as well. The proposed stadium bleacher capacity is 1,100 seats. Two speakers for the public address (PA) system would be located at both ends of the bleachers on the southwestern side of the track. Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. (I&R) monitored noise levels during activities at the Santa Teresa High School football stadium in San Jose, CA. Noise measurements of a football game were made on October 20, 2012. The varsity football game between Santa Teresa High School and Oak Grove High School was considered to be the “rivalry” game of the football season . The attendance was estimated by the high school to be approximately 1,600 people. Measurements of 15-minute durations were made at several locations on the Santa Teresa High School campus and in the adjacent single-family neighborhoods at distances ranging from 425 to 740 feet from the center of the football field. These measurements were attended by a qualified noise technician who documented maximum noise levels resulting from the various sources of noise generated during a varsity football game on October 20, 2012 and during band practice on October 22, 2012. Football game activities were generally the primary noise sources at the measurement locations during the varsity game. During band practice, the band was audible and measurable in the absence of local traffic at all short-term measurement locations but was typically at levels below other noise sources in the area. Table 5 summarizes the measurement results at the nearest locations about 425 feet from the center of the field during noisy intervals at the varsity football game on Saturday, October 20, 2012, including the average noise level (Leq) and background noise level (L90) measured during each interval, and the maximum noise levels measured during various noise-generating activities. 15 TABLE 5 Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurement Results, Football Game at Santa Teresa High School, San Jose, CA - October 20, 2012 Location Average Noise Level, dBA Leq Typical Maximum Instantaneous Noise Levels, dBA Lmax Cheering/ Crowd PA System Whistles 425 feet, as measured from the center of the field 60 57 to 73 53 to 59 56 to 63 The nearest residences to the proposed field are residences on Bay Laurel Street located about 490 feet north of the center of the field, and residences on Las Palmas Way located about 580 feet east of the center of the field. These residences are located substantially below the elevation of the field. The intervening grading associated with the school itself and Inspiration Drive provides acoustical barriers created by the tops of the slopes between the site for the proposed field and the residences. The attenuation provided by distance and the intervening topography was calculated using standard methods. Projected noise levels are summarized in Table 6. The existing average noise levels during the evening in the residential areas range from 48 to 50 dBA Leq. Noise from the football games would increase the average level by up to 1 dBA Leq at the nearest residences. The cheers would be intermittently audible because the levels would exceed the existing background level but would fall within the overall range of existing ambient levels. Noise from football games would not cause a substantial increase in noise levels at the most affected residences. This is a less-than-significant impact. For the proposed project, specific noise information regarding the PA system was not provided at the time of this study, and while the results estimated from the previous study indicates a less- than-significant impact due to the PA system, additional calculations were made to assign a performance standard to the selected PA system. It is assumed that both speakers would be operating simultaneously and that the noise levels from each speaker would be the same. Two speakers would be located at the multipurpose field, as shown in Figure 4. The speaker nearest the Bay Laurel Street residences would be approximately 500 feet south of the nearest rear yard. The speaker nearest to the Las Palmas Way residences would be approximately 500 west of the nearest rear yard. To ensure that the PA system would not exceed 55 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences, assuming attenuation provided by distance and the intervening topography, the amplification system should not exceed 75 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. This limitation is required as a mitigation measure. 16 TABLE 6 Projected Noise Levels at Nearest Residences During Capacity Crowd Varsity Football Game at the Proposed Multipurpose Recreational Field Location Average Noise Level, dBA Leq Typical Maximum Instantaneous Noise Levels, dBA Lmax Cheering/ Crowd PA System Whistles Bay Laurel home, 490 feet from the center of the field 42 39 to 55 35 to 41 38 to 45 Las Palmas home, 580 feet from the center of the field 40 37 to 53 33 to 39 36 to 43 From mid-November to mid-February, men’s soccer would utilize the proposed multipurpose field. Practices would typically occur three days per week from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Junior varsity and varsity games would be played one to two nights per week from 3:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. While nighttime lighting would be required for these activities, these events would have a lower attendance than football games. The noise sources are similar in character to the football game, but with lower average and maximum instantaneous levels. VCC has indicated that they do not plan to use the amplification system for soccer games, but if they choose to in the future, the impact would be less-than-significant as long as the amplification system does not exceed 75 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet, as stated above. This limitation is required as a mitigation measure. Varsity soccer games would occasionally occur on Saturdays from 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m., and these games would require nighttime lighting only. Varsity women’s soccer would occur during the spring between mid-February and mid-May. Practices would typically occur Monday through Friday (depending upon game schedule) from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. A total of 12 home games would occur from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Occasionally, a Saturday game between 1:30 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. would occur. All soccer events would have significantly lower attendance than football games. Average hourly noise levels resulting from soccer games are anticipated to be about 60 dBA Leq at a distance of 100 feet from the center of the field, with maximum noise levels from cheering and whistles as high as 67 dBA Lmax. At the nearest residences along Bay Laurel Street and Las Palmas Way, average hourly noise levels due to soccer games would be below 30 dBA Leq, with maximum instantaneous noise levels up to 36 dBA Lmax. This would not exceed the existing ambient levels. This would be a less-than-significant impact. 17 FIGURE 4 Speaker Locations at the Proposed Multipurpose Field The field would also be used for track and field events during the springtime from mid-February to mid-May. Practices would occur on weekdays from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. One track meet per month is anticipated, which would be from 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Additionally, one invitational per month is anticipated from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Track meets would require both nighttime lighting and amplified sound. These events have much lower attendance than football games. The noise sources are similar in character to the football game, but with lower average and maximum instantaneous levels. It is assumed that a starter pistol would be used during track meets and track invitationals. Typical noise levels produced by a .22 caliber starter pistol would be approximately 79 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. From the approximate positions on the multipurpose field where the starter pistol would be used, the distances to the nearest residences would be approximately 435 feet to the Bay Laurel Street residences and approximately 475 feet to the Las Palmas Way residences. At these distances and assuming attenuation from intervening topography, the maximum instantaneous noise levels expected from the starter pistol would range from 42 to 43 dBA Lmax, which would not exceed range of existing ambient noise levels. This would be a less-than- significant impact. Noise from sports activities on the proposed multipurpose recreational sports field would cause a less-than-significant impact on residents in the area. 18 Graduation ceremonies, which are currently held off-campus, could occur at the new multipurpose field. These special occasions would occur on Saturdays in the early afternoon. Noise from graduations would include cheering from the crowd and amplified sound. Attendance is expected to be less than football games; therefore, average and maximum instantaneous noise levels would be lower than those discussed for football games. Graduation ceremonies are not expected to increase existing ambient noise levels. This would be a less-than-significant impact. Relocated Baseball Field The primary use for this field would be baseball. Baseball is currently played on the existing multi- purpose field. The new field would be relocated from the south side of Building 5 to the west side of Building 5. The level of baseball activities on the field would be similar to existing, but football and soccer would be relocated to the new multipurpose recreational field. The nearest residences to the proposed location of the baseball field are located about 500 feet to the north on Inspiration Circle. An intervening hill would continue to buffer the residences. Noise levels from activities on the field would not change from the existing conditions. Neighbors to the southwest would be located further from the new field than from the existing field. Noise levels from the new field would be equal to or lower than from the existing field. The relocation of the baseball field would cause no additional noise impacts on residents in the area over existing conditions. Amphitheater Activities Three types of events are anticipated at the outdoor amphitheater: theatrical plays during the summertime; daytime lectures during the school year by the Valley Christian Center schools and evening lectures by the Northern California Bible College; and church sermons on Sundays. Amplified sound would be required for the sermons and potentially during the theatrical plays. Locations around the amphitheater for the amplification system speakers were not provided at the time of this study, but for worst-case scenario calculation purposes, it is expected that a speaker would be located on each side of the seating area and at the stage. Figure 5 shows the assumed worst-case scenario locations used for this study. The nearest residence along Bay Laurel Street would be approximately 540 feet from the outdoor amphitheater, and the nearest residence along Las Palmas Way would be approximately 860 feet from the outdoor amphitheater. At these distances and assuming attenuation from intervening topography, maximum instantaneous noise levels would remain at or below 55 dBA Lmax if the performance standard for the amplification system would not exceed 76 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. This limitation is required as a mitigation measure. Parking Lot Activity Currently, the Valley Christian Center has four main parking lots on site. With the proposed project, a portion of the parking lot located in the northeastern corner of campus would be used for the new multipurpose recreation field, reducing the size of the existing parking lot. Additionally, two new parking lots would be constructed near the new multi-purpose recreational field and near building E in the southeastern corner of campus, as shown in Figure 1. The expected parking lot traffic increase would be insignificant. Omni-Means Engineers & Planners, Ltd. provided existing and future projections of parking lot activity. With the increase in operational hours at the new 19 multi-purpose recreation field, the total increase in number of vehicles for the worst-case scenario is expected to be approximately 90 vehicles. This would result in a noise level increase of less than 1 dBA at the noise-sensitive receptors surrounding the project site near the multi-purpose recreation field. FIGURE 5 Assumed Speaker Locations at the Proposed Amphitheater 20 Mitigation Measure 1: The following noise performance standards for proposed PA systems shall be adhered to: • To ensure that the PA system would not exceed 55 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences, the amplification system at the new multipurpose field should not exceed 75 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. • To ensure that the PA system would not exceed 55 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences, the amplification system at the new outdoor amphitheater should not exceed 76 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. The incorporation of Mitigation Measure 1 would reduce the noise impact to a less-than-significant level. Impact 2: Exposure to Excessive Groundborne Vibration. Construction-related vibration would not be in excess of 0.3 in/sec PPV at the single- and multi-family residences in the vicinity of the project site. This is a less-than-significant impact. The construction of the project may generate perceptible vibration when heavy equipment or impact tools (e.g. jackhammers, hoe rams) are used. Construction activities would include site demolition, preparation work, foundation work, and new building framing and finishing. The proposed project would not require pile driving, which can cause excessive vibration. Ground-borne vibration levels exceeding 0.3 in/sec PPV would have the potential to result in a significant vibration impact. Table 7 presents typical vibration levels that could be expected from construction equipment at a distance of 25 feet. Construction activities, such as drilling, the use of jackhammers, rock drills and other high-power or vibratory tools, and rolling stock equipment (tracked vehicles, compactors, etc.) may generate substantial vibration in the immediate vicinity. Vibration levels would vary depending on soil conditions, construction methods, and equipment used. The single-family residences located to the east and to the north of the project site, opposite Inspiration Drive, are at least 160 feet from the project site. The multi-family residences located to the southwest are at least 385 feet from the project site. At these distances, vibration levels would be expected to be less than 0.1 in/sec PPV, which is below the 0.3 in/sec PPV significance threshold. This is a less-than-significant impact. 21 TABLE 7 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment PPV at 25 ft. (in/sec) Approximate Lv at 25 ft. (VdB) Pile Driver (Impact) upper range 1.158 112 typical 0.644 104 Pile Driver (Sonic) upper range 0.734 105 typical 0.170 93 Clam shovel drop 0.202 94 Hydromill (slurry wall) in soil 0.008 66 in rock 0.017 75 Vibratory Roller 0.210 94 Hoe Ram 0.089 87 Large bulldozer 0.089 87 Caisson drilling 0.089 87 Loaded trucks 0.076 86 Jackhammer 0.035 79 Small bulldozer 0.003 58 Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, United States Department of Transportation, Office of Planning and Environment, Federal Transit Administration, May 2006. Mitigation Measure 2: None required. Impact 3: Project-Generated Traffic Noise. The project-generated traffic would not result in a permanent noise level increase at the existing residential land uses in the project vicinity. This is a less-than-significant impact. A significant permanent noise increase would occur if the project would increase traffic noise levels at noise-sensitive receptors by 3 dBA CNEL or greater where ambient noise levels exceed the normally acceptable noise level standard. Where ambient noise levels are at or below the normally acceptable noise level standard, noise level increases of 5 dBA CNEL or greater would be considered significant. Ambient noise levels at the nearest single- and multi-family residences in the project vicinity are currently below 60 dBA CNEL, which meets the normally acceptable standard established in the City’s General Plan. So, a significant impact would occur if the noise levels increased by 5 dBA CNEL or greater. Trip generation information was reviewed1 to calculate the permanent noise increase attributable to project-generated traffic. Using the most conservative figures from the traffic report, the project is projected to generate 139 total new a.m. and 78 p.m. peak hour trips. Project trips under the 2002 EIR scenario were compared to the 2001 existing scenario to calculate the relative increase in traffic noise attributable to the proposed project. The comparison of the project trips under this scenario indicates that the project would increase traffic noise levels by less than 1 dBA Leq during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Daily average noise levels are also calculated to increase by less than 1 dBA CNEL. 1 Revised Draft Report, Trip Generation, Traffic, Circulation, and Parking Analysis for the Proposed Plan Changes at the Valley Christian Center in Dublin, CA. Omni – Means, Ltd. November 3, 2015. 22 Based on the trip generations prepared for the project, the greatest increases in traffic would occur during large events such as football games at the multi-purpose recreational field. The projected increase in average noise levels at a capacity football game was calculated by comparing traffic with the project to existing traffic volumes. Football event traffic noise levels are calculated to reach 43 dBA Leq at adjacent residential receptors located near the north school driveway during the 6:00 to 7:00 p.m. period as spectators arrive for football games on Inspiration Drive. Predicted noise levels at the south driveway are calculated to reach 41 dBA Leq at the school boundary nearest residential receptors located along Las Palmas Way. Existing ambient levels at these receptors during the same time period are approximately 50 dBA Leq. During the 10:00 to 11:00 p.m. hour, when spectators are leaving the game, existing ambient noise levels are slightly lower, typically about 48 dBA Leq at adjacent residential receptors. Predicted traffic noise levels at residential receptors near both the north and south driveway during the 10:00 to 11:00 p.m. hour would be the same as described above, reaching 43 dBA Leq and 41 dBA Leq, respectively. There will not be a noticeable increase during peak and evening traffic hours on the occasional nights per year when maximum attendance football games occur because predicted traffic noise from these events will be below existing ambient levels at adjacent residential receptors. The day/night average noise levels on event days would also not be substantially increased over existing conditions (increase would be less than 1 dBA CNEL). The increase in traffic noise levels associated with a typical football game, soccer game, or track and field meet would be lower. This is a less-than-significant impact. Mitigation Measure 3: None required. Impact 4: Temporary Construction Noise. Existing noise-sensitive land uses would potentially be exposed to a temporary increase in ambient noise levels due to project construction activities. The incorporation of construction best management practices as project conditions of approval would result in a less-than-significant temporary noise impact. Noise impacts resulting from construction depend upon the noise generated by various pieces of construction equipment, the timing and duration of noise-generating activities, and the distance between construction noise sources and noise-sensitive areas. Construction noise impacts primarily result when construction activities occur during noise-sensitive times of the day (e.g., early morning, evening, or nighttime hours), the construction occurs in areas immediately adjoining noise-sensitive land uses, or when construction lasts over extended periods of time. Where noise from construction activities exceeds 60 dBA Leq and exceeds the ambient noise environment by at least 5 dBA Leq at noise-sensitive uses in the project vicinity for a period exceeding one year, the impact would be considered significant. Construction activities generate considerable amounts of noise, especially during earth-moving activities when heavy equipment is used. Table 8 presents the typical range of hourly average noise levels generated by different phases of construction measured at a distance of 50 feet. Hourly average noise levels generated by excavation equipment associated with the project are calculated to range from 71 to 89 dBA Leq measured at a distance of 50 feet. Construction-generated noise levels drop off at a rate of about 6 dBA per doubling of the distance between the source and 23 receptor. Shielding by buildings or terrain can provide an additional 5 to 10 dBA noise reduction at distant receptors. Construction for the proposed project would include excavation, possibly some minor building construction, and foundation work for the lighting standards and the sound amplification system. Noise generated by construction activities would temporarily elevate noise levels at adjacent noise- sensitive receptors. Conservatively, this would be considered a significant impact. TABLE 8 Typical Range of Construction Noise Levels Domestic Housing Office Building, Hotel, Hospital, School, Public Works Industrial Parking Garage, Religious Amusement & Recreations, Store, Service Station Public Works Roads & Highways, Sewers, and Trenches I II I II I II I II Ground Clearing 83 83 84 84 84 83 84 84 Excavation 88 75 89 79 89 71 88 78 Foundations 81 81 78 78 77 77 88 88 Erection 81 65 87 75 84 72 79 78 Finishing 88 72 89 75 89 74 84 84 I – All pertinent equipment present at site. II – Minimum required equipment present at site. Source: United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1973, Legal Compilation on Noise, Vol. 1, p. 2-104. Mitigation Measure 4: In the Valley Christian Center Expansion Draft EIR from October 2002, the following mitigation measures were provided to reduce construction noise levels: • Limit construction time to be 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday-Saturday, except state and federal holidays. Exceptions may be grated in writing by the City Building Official for emergency or extenuating circumstances. • Noisy stationary equipment should be located away from the homes. • All construction equipment should be in good working order and the mufflers should be inspected for proper functioning. • Designate a construction noise coordinator. This coordinator shall be available to respond to complaints from neighbors and take appropriate measures to reduce noise. Additionally, the construction contractor shall implement the following construction best management practices to further reduce construction noise levels: 24 • Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines should be strictly prohibited. • Utilize "quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. • Control noise from construction workers’ radios to a point where they are not audible at existing residences bordering the project site. • The contractor shall prepare a detailed construction plan identifying the schedule for major noise-generating construction activities. The construction plan shall identify a procedure for coordination with adjacent residential land uses so that construction activities can be scheduled to minimize noise disturbance. Implementation of all of the above measures would reduce construction noise levels emanating from the site, limit construction hours, and minimize disruption and annoyance. With the implementation of these measures, and recognizing that noise generated by construction activities would occur over a temporary period, the temporary increase in ambient noise levels would be less-than-significant. TRIP GENERATION, TRAFFIC CIRCULATION, AND PARKING ANALYSIS FOR THE PROPOSED PLAN CHANGES At The VALLEY CHRISTIAN CENTER In DUBLIN, CA Prepared For THE CITY OF DUBLIN FINAL REPORT November 17, 2015 Prepared by: Omni-Means, Ltd. Engineers & Planners 1901 Olympic Blvd., Suite 120 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 R6835TIA003 / 35-2272-39 Trip Generation, Traffic Circulation, & Parking Analysis For The Proposed Plan Changes At The Valley Christian Center In The City of Dublin, CA. FINAL REPORT PREPARED FOR: THE CITY OF DUBLIN November 17, 2015 PREPARED BY: OMNI-MEANS, LTD. ENGINEERS & PLANNERS 1901 OLYMPIC BOULEVARD, SUITE 120 WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596 (925) 935-2230 www.omnimeans.com 35-3526-34 (R2006TIA003.DOC) Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 1 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) INTRODUCTION / SUMMARY The following report outlines the findings of a focused traffic analysis prepared for the City of Dublin regarding the proposed plan changes at the Valley Christian Center located at 7500 Inspiration Drive in the City of Dublin, CA. The Valley Christian Center comprises church and school facilities consisting of existing worship space, classrooms (K-12th grades), preschool/daycare service, administrative offices, and sports fields, as well as yet un-built components of the facilities approved in 2002. The applicant is seeking to amend the approved Master Plan that would change some aspects of the approved facilities. In order to identify likely vehicle traffic changes that would be associated with the proposed plan change, this study has compared the approved expansion with the proposed expansion in terms of trip generation and parking demand. Traffic circulation regarding possible intrusion into neighborhood streets and regional trip distribution were also evaluated. The proposed plan changes would primarily consist of reducing the approved sanctuary size, increasing the school size by a corresponding amount, and construction of a sports field. The net change in total building square footage between the currently approved plan and the proposed plan is approximately 1,300 additional square feet. Current published vehicle trip rates and surveyed rates of the existing school and Sunday service were compared to the trip rates used in the 2002 EIR. The calculated peak hour trip generation for the proposed plan is equal to or lower than the trips calculated for the approved plan. Therefore, the level of service analysis conducted for the 2002 report also addresses the proposed plan. The number of school driveways would decrease from three to two with the proposed plan. The school trips were reallocated to two driveways and evaluated. Level of service and queuing conditions would remain acceptable (LOS C or better). The school proposes to build a recreational sports field capable of hosting football games with spectator seating. Although infrequent, football games would temporarily generate up to 451 new trips before and after games based on maximum seating capacity of 1,100 persons. These trips would occur during off-peak hours when background traffic volumes are low and the volumes would remain within the carrying capacity of nearby roadways. The proposed plan would be constructed in a series of four Development Phases. Phase 1 would consist of the football stadium, while Phases 2-4 would consist of the school and sanctuary facilities. The supply of parking spaces will also vary with each Development Phase. The existing parking supply of 510 spaces will be reduced to 395 spaces for Phases 1 and 2. The supply will increase to 530 spaces in Phase 3 and to 600 spaces in Phase 4. Based on the City parking ordinances, adequate parking supply would be provided for the school and sanctuary facilities. Our surveys found a slightly higher parking demand rate for the Sanctuary worship service than the city code, but the demand would still be accommodated by the proposed total of 600 spaces since the Sanctuary would not be expanded until Phase 4. For the football games, the parking demand is calculated to be 506 vehicles based on a seating capacity of 1,100 persons. This would exceed the parking supply of 395 spaces in Phases 1 and 2 by 111 spaces. Although school personnel anticipate attendance of only 500-600 people during the first two Development Phases, in order to ensure adequate supply is provided the project should be conditioned to match parking supply to seating capacity by increasing the parking supply and/or reducing the number of seats in Phases 1 and 2. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 2 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) The regional distribution of trips based on zip codes of students indicates 73% are regional trips likely coming from I-580 via San Ramon Road and Dublin Boulevard and 275 are locally distributed trips. This distribution corresponds almost identically with the previous study which found 74% of trips were regional trips likely traveling to/from I-580. In order to minimize vehicle cut-through traffic in the neighborhood north of the school, turning restrictions are in place at two of the school’s three driveways. Surveys conducted in 2001 and again for this study identified approximately 4½ % of school trips (29 existing a.m. peak hour trips) travel through the neighborhood. The volumes are low, and it is likely some of the trips originate in the neighborhood, but future student population growth could increase the possibility of greater cut- through traffic. Therefore it has been recommended that the school provide an informational letter to parents at least once per year advising them to avoid using cut-through routes, and for the school to re-monitor cut-through traffic after completion of Phases 2, 3, and 4. Similar measures have also been recommended to address potential cut-through traffic during football games. Based on the findings of the traffic analysis, the proposed plan would not significantly impact traffic operating conditions with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. WEEKDAY TRIP GENERATION Comparison of Trip Generation Rates for Approved Plan Trip generation associated with the approved expansion was previously calculated in the traffic section of the Valley Christian Center Expansion Program (PA #00-017) Draft EIR.1 The trip generation table from the EIR is provided in Table A-1 attached. The EIR was prepared in 2002 and utilized the 6th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, which was current at the time of the report.2 The 9th Edition of the Trip Generation Manual now reflects the most up to date information.3 In order to evenly compare the original expansion plan to the proposed plan, the original plan trip generation has been recalculated using the ITE 9th Edition trip rates. The change in trips for the approved plan between the 6th Edition and 9th Edition is shown in Table 1. The 6th Edition rates resulted in 139 a.m. and 78 p.m. peak hour new trips. Based on current 9th Edition ITE trip rates, the originally approved expansion would generate 128 a.m. and 72 p.m. peak hour new trips, or 11 fewer am trips and 6 fewer pm trips. Therefore, the trip generation rate used in the 2002 EIR based on 6th Edition ITE rates remains the most conservative. Proposed Master Plan Changes from Approved Plan A table comparing the square footages associated with the existing facility, approved plan, and the proposed plan is provided in Table A-2 attached. (The proposed plan change would also include construction of a new multi-purpose sports field, which is evaluated in the following section.) In parcel 1, the proposed changes would result in a net increase of 1,300 square feet between the approved total of 305,300 square feet and the proposed total of 306,600 square feet. Overall, the proposed change would reduce the approved sanctuary size of 90,000 sq. ft. to 41,700 sq. ft. (a reduction of 32,600 sq. ft.) and increase the approved size of school and fellowship hall buildings by 33,900 sq. ft., for a net increase of 1,300 sq. ft. However, there would be no change in the anticipated student population (1,300 students) between the approved plan and proposed plan. The proposed master plan would be developed in four Development Phases. Phase 1 would consist of the football field. Phase 2 would consist of 41,000 sq. ft. of building space (Buildings C, A1, and D2). Phase 3 would consist of 29,200 sq. ft., (Building B South and B1). And Phase 4 would finish the plan with 96,975 sq. ft. (Building A, A2, E, B, & F). 1 City of Dublin, Valley Christian Center Expansion Program Draft EIR, October 2, 2002. 2 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition, 1997. 3 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, 2012. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 3 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) Trip Generation for Approved Plan and Proposed Plan The 2002 EIR utilized ITE 6th Edition trip rates (the most current at the time) to generate vehicle trips for the school expansion. The ITE rates were selected after comparing them to a surveyed trip rate based on traffic counts conducted in 2001 at the Valley Christian Center school. The 2001 counts identified an a.m. peak hour trip rate of 0.83 trips per student. The EIR compared their surveyed rate to the ITE 6th Edition rate for a private K-12th grade school, which was 0.92 trips per student for the a.m. peak hour. The 2002 EIR used the ITE rates since they were higher in order to be conservative. The EIR applied the ITE rate for a High School land use since the school expansion would add only junior and senior high students. To identify the existing school trip rates, vehicle counts were conducted again for this study at the Valley Christian Center.4 The weekday morning surveys identified a total of 652 a.m. peak hour trips generated by the facility. At the time of the counts, the existing school population consisted of 792 students. The surveyed rate equates to 0.82 a.m. peak hour trips per student. The existing school trip rate is less than the previous surveyed rate, as well as the ITE rate used for the 2002 EIR traffic analysis. Since the 2002 EIR trip rate remains the most conservative rate, and the future student population is to remain unchanged from the 2002 EIR, the proposed plan is calculated to generate the same number of school trips as the approved plan. The school population and vehicle trips have decreased since the 2002 EIR, therefore the proposed plan change would increase trips compared to existing volumes, but would remain equal to the buildout trips calculated and evaluated for the level-of-service analysis in the 2002 EIR. The approved plan trips compared to the proposed plan trips are shown in Table 2. With the proposed plan, the north school driveway would be eliminated as a result of the new sports field. The driveway vehicle trips from this driveway were redistributed to the two remaining driveways and the operating conditions were evaluated. Levels of service would continue to operate acceptably (LOS C or better) and vehicle queues would continue to be accommodated within available lane storage lengths. It is noted that several components of the approved plan have been removed from the proposed plan, therefore the proposed plan will likely generate fewer trips than the approved plan. The 2002 EIR calculated 10 peak hour trips based on 10 additional administrative employees associated with the expansion. School personnel no longer anticipate an increase in administration employees above the 35 employees. Therefore, this component of the proposed plan would have 10 fewer peak hour trips compared to the 2002 EIR. The 2002 EIR also included trip generation for 30 apartment units intended for church staff housing in Parcel 2. The apartments were eventually withdrawn from the 2002 plan change request, but the apartment trips were included in the traffic study. The apartments were calculated to generate 15 a.m. peak hour trips and 19 p.m. peak hour trips. Since development of Parcel 2 is not included in the proposed plan, the proposed plan trips would be reduced by 15 a.m. peak hour trips and 19 p.m. peak hour trips than evaluated in the 2002 EIR. The trip generation findings are based on a student population of 1,300 students. Population levels above 1,300 students could generate higher trips than evaluated in the 2002 EIR traffic analysis. • If the population increases above 1,300 students, the number of vehicle trips could exceed the level evaluated in the 2002 EIR, therefore additional traffic impact analyses could be required. 4 Omni-Means, Surveys of existing Valley Christian Center AM, Afternoon, and Sunday site trips, May 12, 13,17, 2015. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 4 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) TABLE 1 COMPARISON OF APPROVED PLAN’S WEEKDAY TRIP GENERATION BASED ON 6TH EDITION ITE RATES (USED IN 2002 EIR) AND CURRENT 9TH EDITION ITE RATES Total New New Description Size A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour 2002 Approved Plan New Trips Based on ITE 6th Edition Rates (Used in 2002 EIR): Parcel 1: 325,300 sf 124 (86 in, 38 out) 59 (22 in, 37 out) Parcel 2: 30 units 15 (2 in, 13 out) 19 (13 in, 6 out) Total New Trips 139 (88 in, 51 out)* 78 (35 in, 43 out)* 2002 Approved Plan New Trips Based on ITE 9th Edition Rates (Current): Parcel 1: 325,300 sf 113 (79 in, 34 out) 53 (20 in, 33 out) Parcel 2: 30 units 15 (3 in, 12 out) 19 (12 in, 7 out) Total 128 (82 in, 46 out) 72 (32 in, 40 out) *ITE 6th Edition Rates Remain Most Conservative 2002 Approved Plan Total Trips: Existing 2001 Volumes: 1,063 (637 in, 426 out) 347 (208 in, 139 out) Parcel 1 Approved Trips (ITE 6th Edition): 124 (86 in, 38 out) 59 (22 in, 37 out) Parcel 2 Approved Trips (ITE 6th Edition): 15 (2 in, 13 out) 19 (13 in, 6 out) Total 2002 EIR Approved Plan Trips: 1,202 (725 in, 477 out) 425 (243 in, 182 out) Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 5 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) TABLE 2 COMPARISON OF APPROVED PLAN TO PROPOSED PLAN WEEKDAY TRIP GENERATION BASED ON ITE RATES AND SURVEYED RATE TRIP GENERATION A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Approved Plan: Existing 2001 Volumes: 1,063 (637 in, 426 out) 347 (208 in, 139 out) Parcel 1 Approved Trips (ITE 6th Edition): 124 (86 in, 38 out) 59 (22 in, 37 out) Parcel 2 Approved Trips (ITE 6th Edition): 15 (2 in, 13 out) 19 (13 in, 6 out) 2002 EIR Approved Plan Trips:* 1,202 (725 in, 477 out) 425 (243 in, 182 out) Proposed Plan Based on ITE Rates: No change in population from Approved Plan (1,300 students); ITE 6th Edition more conservative than ITE 9th Edition; Therefore no change in trips from Approved Plan for Parcel 1. Parcel 2 withdrawn from Proposed Plan request. Existing 2001 Volumes: 1,063 (637 in, 426 out) 347 (208 in, 139 out) Parcel 1 Approved Trips (ITE 6th Edition): 124 (86 in, 38 out)_ 59 (22 in, 37 out) Proposed Plan Trips Based on the Most Conservative ITE Rates: 1,187 (723 in, 464 out) 406 (267 in, 176) Total Proposed Plan Trips Based on Surveyed Rates: 0.82 A.M. & 0.27 P.M. trips/student x 1,300 students Proposed Plan Trips Based on Surveyed Rates 1,066 (647 in, 419 out) 351 (211 in, 140 out) *2002 EIR Trips Remain Most Conservative Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 6 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) SANCTUARY TRIP GENERATION The 2002 approved plan’s sanctuary size was 90,000 square feet with 2,000 seats. The proposed plan’s sanctuary size has been reduced to 57,400 square feet with 1,500 seats. Sunday trips were generated for the approved sanctuary size based on the ITE 6th Edition rates, then compared to the proposed plan using current ITE rates and surveyed rates. ITE 6th Edition rates for Sunday service were only available based on gross floor area. Applying the ITE 6th Edition rate of 9.49 trips per 1,000 square feet gross floor area (ksf gfa) to 90,000 square feet results in 854 Sunday peak hour trips for the approved sanctuary size. The current ITE 9th Edition trip rate is 12.04 trips per ksf gfa. Based on the change in ITE trip rates, the approved sanctuary size would generate 1,084 peak hour trips, or 230 additional trips compared to the old rate. The current ITE manual also now provides a rate based on the number of seats, which is 0.61 trips per seat. With an approved capacity of 2,000 seats, the approved sanctuary would be calculated to generate 1,220 trips based on the number of seats. With the proposed plan sanctuary size decreasing to 57,400 square feet and 1,500 seats, trip generation will be lower than the approved sanctuary size. Based on the current ITE rate per square foot, the proposed sanctuary size of 57,400 square feet would generate 691 trips, or 393 fewer trips than the approved sanctuary size. Based on the current ITE rate per seat, the proposed sanctuary size of 1,500 seats would generate 915 trips, for a decrease of 305 trips compared to the approved sanctuary size. Trip generation surveys we conducted of the Valley Christian Sunday service identified a substantially lower trip rate than the ITE rates. Our field surveys observed that the church trips tend to be spread over time beyond one hour. It is also likely that some of the ITE data reflects trip generation occurring between two services, when outbound and inbound trips for each service are creating a higher trip rate. Our surveys identified 196 Sunday peak hour trips with existing church attendance of 560 people. Therefore, the service has a surveyed trip rate of 0.35 peak hour trips per person, which is approximately one-half of the ITE rate per seat. Applying the surveyed rate to the approved plans’ 2,000 seat maximum results in 700 Sunday peak hour trips. Applying the surveyed rate to the proposed plans’ 1,500 seat maximum equates to 525 peak hour church trips, or 175 fewer trips with the proposed plan compared to the approved plan. The Sunday trip generation is shown in Table 3. • The proposed plan sanctuary size of 57,400 square feet and 1,500 seats is lower than the approved plan’s size of 90,000 square feet and 2,000 seats. Based on ITE rates and surveyed rates, the proposed sanctuary size will generate fewer trips than the approved sanctuary size, therefore no impacts would be associated with the sanctuary trip generation. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 7 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) TABLE 3 SUNDAY CHANGE IN TRIPS FOR PROPOSED PLAN FROM APPROVED PLAN Sunday Peak Hour Description Size Trip Rate Trips Approved Sanctuary (per ksf gfa) ITE 6th Edition Rate: 90,000 sf 9.49 trips/ksf 854 (435 in, 419 out) ITE 9th Edition Rate: 90,000 sf 12.04 trips/ksf 1,084 (531 in, 553 out) Proposed Sanctuary (per ksf gfa) ITE 9th Edition Rate: 57,400 sf 12.04 trips/ksf 691 (339 in, 352 out) Change from Approved: -32,600 sf -393 (-192 in, -201 out) _______________________________ Approved Sanctuary (per seat) ITE 9th Edition Rate: 2,000 seats 0.61 trips/seat 1,220 (610 in, 610 out) Proposed Sanctuary (per seat) ITE 9th Edition Rate per seat: 1,500 seats 0.61 trips/seat 915 (458 in, 457 out) Change from Approved: -305 (-152 in, -153 out) _______________________________ Approved Sanctuary (Surveyed Rate) Surveyed Rate: 2,000 persons 0.35 trips/person 700 (50 in, 650 out) Proposed Sanctuary (Surveyed Rate) Surveyed Rate: 1,500 persons 0.35 trips/person 525 (38 in, 487 out) Change from Approved: -175 (-12 in, -163 out) Proposed Sanctuary Size Reduction Results In Lower Trip Generation with Proposed Plan Than 2002 EIR Approved Plan. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 8 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) TRIP GENERATION FOR SPORTS FIELD COMPONENT OF PROPOSED PLAN The proposed plan includes construction of a multi-sports playing field capable of hosting football games as well as track and field events that would provide seating for spectators. Information regarding the sports activities was provided by school personnel. Organized football games would include 1 scrimmage and up to 6 regular season home games with the potential for an additional 3 playoff games between August and November. The field is proposed to be lighted for night games. If lighted, games would be played on Friday, with a junior varsity game beginning at 4:00 p.m. and a varsity game at 7:00 p.m.. Without lights, school personnel have indicated games would be played on a Saturday afternoon (junior varsity 11:00 a.m. and varsity 1:00 p.m.).5 The proposed stadium capacity is 1,100 seats. Based on trip generation surveys we have conducted for high school football stadiums, attendance of 1,100 people would generate the following trips before and after a game:6 1,100 attendees: 451 trips (pregame = 316 in, 135 out); (post-game = 75 in, 340 out). The outbound trips before games and inbound trips after games reflect dropping off and picking up of persons who attend the game. It is noted that the survey data is based on counts conducted at the highest attended games of the season (Homecoming) with about 1,500 persons. The counts therefore represent “worst case” maximum estimates for night football games. Also, the counts were conducted at high schools with established football programs. Valley Christian school personnel expect regular attendance to be considerably less due to the fact that they are part of a much smaller private league. Currently games are played offsite and draw approximately 200-500 attendees. Homecoming currently attracts 600 attendees. Attendance is expected to remain 500-600 persons for several years, then possibly increase to 600-1,000 persons in the future. Trip generation for night football games would occur during off-peak hours (6-7 p.m. and 9-10 p.m.). During these hours, volume increases would be noticeable to residents living on access roads, but background volumes are low at these times and the total volumes would remain within the capacity of the streets. Two intersections evaluated in the 2002 EIR that were not signalized (Dublin Bl./Silvergate Dr. and Dublin Bl./Inspiration Dr.) are now signalized and operating at optimal level of service conditions. As noted, football games would be limited to 7-10 evenings per year. Although limited in number, night games would occur when the turn restrictions intended to minimize cut-through traffic through the neighborhood to the north are not active (M-F 7 a.m. to 5 p.m.). Existing school cut-through traffic appears to be fairly low (refer to section below). However, it is possible some cut-through traffic could occur in the neighborhood before and after games. • In order to minimize the potential for cut-through traffic during football games, any of the following options could be implemented: Provide an informational letter to parents before the football season advising them to avoid using cut-through routes. Install temporary signing on football game days at the school driveways which activate the turn restrictions during football game times. Provide traffic control personnel at the school driveways to direct traffic toward the south on Inspiration Drive. 5 Valley Christian Center, Meeting with school personnel and athletic director, May 6, 2015. 6 George W. Nickelson, P.E., Concord High School Stadium Project, November 2005. Mills Associates, Clayton Valley High School Stadium Lighting Project Final Environmental Impact Report, April 2003. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 9 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) Sports events other than organized football games would generate a lower number of vehicle trips than football games. The field would be used for soccer matches and track & field events which currently use the school’s existing play fields. The men’s soccer season (November-February) and women’s soccer season (February-May) host approximately 12 varsity matches and 5 junior varsity matches per season.7 The matches are played in the afternoon/evening (3:00-5:00 p.m.). School personnel indicate soccer matches have historically drawn up to 60 offsite attendees. The track & field season (February- May) hosts approximately 1 meet per month (4 total), consisting of up to 60 athletes and 60 non-students in attendance. Regular track meets are usually held 2:00- 6:00 p.m. The proposed sports field’s 8-lane track would allow the school to host an Invitational track meet (one per season). These consist of up to 200 athletes and up to 200 attendees (400 total) and are held on a Saturday (9:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.). The sports field would be used for practices for football (fall), soccer (winter/spring), and track & field (spring). All practices are held in the afternoon/evening (approximately 3:00-5:30 p.m.). These would not be expected to generate any new trips, since these activities already occur on existing fields. Only the football games and Invitational track meets (if held) would generate new sports activity related vehicle trips. It is possible there would be one or two special event occasions per year, such as a graduation ceremony, which would draw high attendance. However, these would be very infrequent. 7 Valley Christian Center, email correspondence describing sports activities, May 28, 2015. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 10 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) EVALUATION OF TRAFFIC INTRUSION ONTO NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS In order to minimize school traffic from intruding on the local neighborhood streets north of the school as much as possible, vehicle turn restrictions are in place at two of the school’s three driveways (the north and middle driveways). Specifically, signs are posted prohibiting right turns in and left turns out on school days from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm. There are no turn restrictions at the school’s south driveway. Observations of vehicle turning movements during the a.m. peak hour were conducted in 2001 for the 2002 draft EIR. The observed trips were 50 turns to/from the north (20 illegal turns from the north and middle driveways plus 30 legal turns from the south driveway). Our recent counts observed 29 turns to/from the north (14 illegal plus 15 legal) during the a.m. peak hour. The current volume is lower than 2001, but accounting for a lower existing school population compared to the 2001 population, the percentage of trips to/from the north is nearly equal for both surveys: approximately 4½ % of the total peak hour trips. This indicates the cut-through rate has not been increasing. It would also appear to reflect a fairly low cut-through rate, given that some of the trips are likely from residents of the neighborhood. However, future student population growth could increase the possibility of greater cut-through traffic. In order to maintain as low a cut-through rate as possible, a combination of notification and monitoring procedures is recommended. • It is recommended that the school provide an informational letter to parents at least once per year advising them to avoid using cut-through routes. • The 2002 EIR recommended monitoring of the peak hour turning movements at the project driveways every six months (Mitigation Measure 4.10-2 (local streets)). Based on our recent surveys, the cut through rate does not appear to be increasing. However, it is recommended that the conditions be monitored again after the completion of Phases 2, 3, and 4. • If the cut-through rate goes up, increased enforcement of the illegal turns and/or prohibiting turns to/from the north at the southern driveway could be considered. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 11 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) REGIONAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION COMPARISON BETWEEN APPROVED & PROPOSED PLANS The regional distribution of vehicle trips evaluated in the 2002 EIR was based in part on church member and student residence locations provided by Valley Christian personnel. For comparison, student residence locations based on recent information were evaluated. The trip distribution based on the 2002 demographic data resulted in 28% to/from the north via I- 680, 13% to/from the south via I-680, 25% to/from the east via I-580, and 8% to/from the west via I- 580. There were 26% from within the City of Dublin. The total equates to 74% of the school traffic traveling to/from I-580 and likely traveling on San Ramon Road (between I-580 and Dublin Boulevard) and on Dublin Boulevard (between San Ramon Road and Inspiration Drive). Our evaluation of the recent zip code data indicates a nearly identical distribution of Valley Christian members. Approximately 28% of trips are via I-680 to/from the north, 12% via I-680 to/from the south, 24% are via I-580 to/from the east, and 9% are via I-580 to/from the west, and 27% are from within the City of Dublin. The total regional trips equates to 73% of the school trips traveling between I-580 and the school via San Ramon Road and Dublin Boulevard west of San Ramon Road. With the remaining 27% constituting local traffic distributed throughout the area. Although the percentage of trips to/from the freeway is high (73%) compared to local trips (27%), the distribution with the proposed plan would be similar to the approved expansion. Therefore, the level of service conditions evaluated in the 2002 EIR would also remain valid. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 12 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) PARKING ANALYSIS The proposed plan would consist of three separate parking generating components: the sanctuary, the school facilities, and the new sports field activities. The parking requirements for each component have been calculated independently. It is assumed the church, school, and sports field games will not be in use concurrently. The 2002 EIR for the approved expansion evaluated parking based on the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. The parking requirements were evaluated for the Sunday worship space and for the weekday school uses. The highest parking space requirement was associated with the Sunday worship service. The required parking was calculated to be 667 spaces for the worship service based on 2,000 seats (at 1 required space per 3 seats). The existing parking supply consists of 510 striped spaces and the approved plan was to add 250 new paved and 100 unpaved overflow spaces for a total of 860 spaces. Therefore the parking supply met the zoning ordinance requirement, with a surplus of 193 spaces. For the proposed plan, the supply of parking spaces will vary with each phase of development. The existing parking supply of 510 spaces will be reduced to 395 spaces for Phases 1 and 2. The supply will increase to 530 spaces in Phase 3 and to 600 spaces in Phase 4.8 City of Dublin Planning Staff have calculated the required number of parking spaces based on the current zoning ordinance (see Table A-3 attached). The parking ordinance for sanctuary facilities requires 1 space per 3 seats plus 1 space per Sunday service classroom. The existing sanctuary containing 763 seats requires 258 parking spaces, which is met with the current supply of 510 spaces as well as the reduced supply of 395 spaces during Phases 1 and 2. The sanctuary expansion to 1,500 seats would occur in Development Phase 4. The Zoning Ordinance requires 504 spaces for the proposed sanctuary. The parking supply would increase from 530 spaces in Phase 3 to 600 spaces in Phase 4. Therefore, the parking requirement would be met, with a surplus of 96 spaces. The sanctuary parking requirement per the Dublin Zoning Ordinance equates to 0.33 parked vehicles per seat. It is noted, however, that our parking surveys of the church identified a higher demand of 0.40 vehicles per person (220 vehicles for 560 people). Applying the surveyed rate to the proposed 1,500 seats equates to a parking demand of 600 vehicles if the church is fully occupied. With 600 spaces provided in Phase 4, demand based on the surveyed rate would be accommodated with maximum attendance. For the weekday school related parking demand, the proposed plan after buildout would require 395 parking spaces to satisfy the weekday school parking requirement. The proposed plan would provide a minimum of 395 spaces (Phases 1 and 2) and up to 600 spaces (Phase 4). Therefore, the proposed plan would meet the weekday parking requirement during all of the Development Phases. 8 Goring & Straja Architects, Modification of Planned Development Valley Christian Center, Conceptual Phasing Plan, Sheet No. A1.4, 6/16/2015. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 13 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) TABLE 4 PARKING SUPPLY AND ZONING REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVED & PROPOSED PLANS PARKING SUPPLY AND REQUIREMENTS Existing Supply: 510 Approved Plan Supply: Proposed Plan Supply: Existing 510 Existing 510 New Paved 250 Phases 1 & 2 395 Overflow 100 Phase 3 530 Total 860 Phase 4 600 Proposed Plan Parking Requirements: Zoning Ordinance Required Spaces Supply Sanctuary (Developed in Phase 4) 1,500 seats 1 space/seat = 500 spaces 4 Sunday Service Classrooms 1 space/classroom = 4 spaces = 504 spaces 600 spaces Surveyed Parking Rate 1,500 seats (people) 0.4 spaces/person = 600 spaces 600 spaces School (At buildout in Phase 4): = 395 spaces 395 spaces (Phase 1 &2 ) 600 spaces (Phase 4) Sports Field Football Games (Developed in Phase 1) No City Ordinance; parking rate is based on our surveys of football games at other schools. 1,100 seats 0.46 spaces/seat = 506 spaces *395 spaces Phases 1 & 2 530 spaces Phase 3 600 spaces Phase 4 *Parking space deficit of 111 spaces in Phases 1 & 2. See mitigation measures in report. Source: Goring & Straja Architects, Modification of Planned Development Valley Christian Center, Conceptual Phasing Plan, Sheet No. A1.4, 6/16/2015. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 14 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) PARKING DEMAND FOR SPORTS FIELD COMPONENT OF THE PROPOSED PLAN Parking demand associated with night football games has been evaluated based on parking surveys we have conducted in conjunction with other high school stadium projects. The surveys found a peak parking demand of 0.46 vehicles per attendee for football games. The stadium capacity is currently designed to be 1,100 seats. This results in a parking demand of 506 spaces based on maximum capacity. The sports field would be built in Phase 1 of the proposed plan, when the parking supply would consist of 395 spaces. The supply would not increase until Phase 3 (Year 2025) when 530 spaces would be provided. The total supply of 600 spaces would not be available until Phase 4 (Year 2030). Therefore a parking deficit of 111 spaces (506 – 395 = 111) would occur during Phases 1 & 2 based on maximum occupancy. Football games are currently played offsite. Valley Christian personnel state existing football games draw approximately 200-500 attendees for regular games and up to 600 attendees for special games such as Homecoming. Valley Christian personnel expect attendance to remain approximately 500-600 persons for several years, then possibly increase to 600-1,000 persons in the future. Although attendance is expected to be less than the stadium capacity of 1,100 seats for some time, football games would nevertheless be under parked based on the number of seats and the supply of 395 spaces through Phase 2 of the proposed plan. • In order to match the seating capacity parking demand with the parking supply, three alternative options are presented which would mitigate the stadium parking deficit: Construct the needed additional parking spaces in Phase 1 instead of later Phases. For example, building the parking lot adjacent to Building E would yield 53 spaces. Constructing an additional 58 spaces elsewhere would provide 506 spaces (395 Phase 2 spaces + 53 Building E spaces + 58 other spaces = 506 spaces). Or, Construct the stadium initially with a lower number of seats that matches the supply of 395 spaces in Phases 1 & 2, then expand the stadium seating to 1,100 seats after the Phase 3 parking supply of 530 spaces is constructed. With 395 spaces, the stadium could be constructed with a seating capacity of 859 seats (395 spaces / 0.46 spaces per seat = 859 seats). (Any combination of increased parking supply and fewer seats could be constructed as long as the parking demand rate of 0.46 vehicles per seat is accommodated.) Or, Since attendance is expected to be considerably less than 1,100 people initially, the available supply per Development Phase would appear to adequately serve the anticipated attendance growth projections. However, in order to be prepared to provide adequate parking conditions in the event attendance does increase sooner than expected, the school could prepare a Parking Management Plan, subject to City approval, for football games that could be implemented if necessary. Such plans could include providing parking attendants to manage parking in overflow areas to maximize parking efficiency; actively promote carpooling through school literature; altering game times to earlier in the day (when students are still on campus); or monitoring attendance and limiting tickets to the corresponding supply of parking spaces. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 15 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) Football games would generate the highest parking demand by the stadium on a regular basis. Only a special event, such as graduation, would be expected to draw similar attendance. Graduation ceremonies are currently held off site. School personnel indicate attendance is 600-850 attendees. Football games have a parking rate of 0.46 cars per attendee and the sanctuary has a surveyed parking rate of 0.40 spaces per attendee. Graduation ceremonies would be expected to have a similar parking demand rate. With 850 attendees, the highest parking rate equates to 391 spaces. With a minimum parking supply of 395 spaces (Phases 1 & 2), the expected maximum attendance of 850 attendees would be accommodated during all development phases. Moreover, the mitigation measures recommended above for football games to match the stadium seating capacity with the parking supply would also ensure the parking supply is adequate for graduation ceremonies and similar special events. Valley Christian Center Plan Change Traffic Review Page 16 City of Dublin (R2006TIA003.DOC/35-3526-34) FINDINGS The vehicle trip generation for the proposed plan was compared to the trips calculated in the 2002 EIR. The proposed plan trips were calculated using the 2002 EIR methodology, which was based on earlier ITE published data, as well as current ITE rates. The ITE rates were also compared to surveyed rates of the existing Valley Christian Center conducted for this study. There is no change in the proposed student population with the proposed plan and the 2002 EIR trip rates remain the most conservative, therefore the level of service analysis in the 2002 EIR also applies to the proposed plan. The proposed plan includes construction of a sports field which would host football games and other sports events. Trip generation for football games, based on survey data of other high schools, indicates the proposed seating capacity of 1,100 seats would generate 451 trips temporarily before and after the games. Football game trips would occur during time periods when background traffic volumes are low and the volumes would remain within the carrying capacity of the street network. Trip generation for non-football sporting events would be low and would not be expected to have a substantial effect on traffic operating conditions. School related traffic intrusion onto neighborhood streets north of the school was surveyed in the 2002 EIR and also in this study. Both surveys found the number of trips to/from the north to be relatively low (approximately 4½ % of the total school trips). Recommendations have been made to regularly remind parents to avoid cut-through routes. It is also recommended the conditions be monitored after each development phase is completed and, if necessary, implement additional turn restriction and/or enforcement measures. Similarly for football games, it is recommended the school notify parents and, if necessary, provide traffic control personnel to direct traffic away from the neighborhood. The distribution of vehicle trips was evaluated in the 2002 EIR based on zip code data of Valley Christian member zip codes. The 2002 report found that a majority (74%) of trips were regional trips to/from I-580 and I-680. The member demographics were evaluated again for this study based on zip codes for current members. The current data indicates a nearly identical distribution pattern, with 73% likely traveling to/from I-580 via San Ramon Road and Dublin Boulevard west of San Ramon Road, with the remaining 27% comprised of local trips. The proposed plan change was evaluated for parking space supply based on the City Zoning Ordinances as well as surveyed parking rates. The proposed plan’s parking supply will be different with each phase of development. The existing parking supply of 510 spaces will be reduced to 395 spaces for Phases 1 and 2, then increased to 530 spaces in Phase 3 and 600 spaces in Phase 4. The parking supply in each development phase would meet the zoning ordinance for the school and sanctuary. However, for football games, the parking demand with a stadium capacity of 1,100 seats is calculated to be 506 spaces. This would not be accommodated during development phases 1 or 2, when only 395 spaces would be provided. Recommendations to increase the parking supply, reduce the seating capacity, or provide a Parking Management Plan for Phases 1 and 2 have been made. The trip generation and parking demand findings, in conjunction with the recommended improvement measures, would mitigate the proposed plan traffic conditions to less than significant levels. Valley Christian Center Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Date August 2018 Project Name Valley Christian Center PLPA-2014-00052 Project Location The project site is located at 7500 Inspiration Drive (APN 941-0022-003, 004, 005 & 006) in the City of Dublin, CA in Alameda County. Project Applicant Roger Valci Valley Christian Center 7500 Inspiration Drive Dublin, CA 94568 State Clearinghouse Number 2002012070 Contact Martha Battaglia Associate Planner City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Phone: 925-833-6610 martha.battaglia@dublin.ca.gov EXHIBIT B City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that all public agencies establish monitoring and/or reporting procedures for mitigation measures (MMs) adopted as part of the project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant project impacts. The MMRP identifies the following for each MM: Timing. In each case, a timeframe for performance of the mitigation measure, or review of evidence that mitigation has taken place, is provided. The measures are designed to ensure that impact-related components of project implementation do not proceed without establishing that the mitigation is implemented or assured. All activities are subject to the approval of all required permits from local, state, and federal agencies with permitting authority over the specific activity. Responsible Party or Designated Representative. In each case, unless otherwise indicated, the Applicant is the Responsible Party for implementing the mitigation. The City or a Designated Representative will also monitor the performance and implementation of the mitigation measures. To guarantee that the mitigation measure will not be inadvertently overlooked, a supervising public official acting as the Designated Representative is the official who grants the permit or authorization called for in the performance. Where more than one official is identified, permits or authorization from all officials shall be required. The numbering system corresponds with the numbering system used in the Valley Christian Center Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study (dated June 2018) and the Valley Christian Center Environmental Impact Report (dated October 2002). The last column of the MMRP table will be used by the parties responsible for documenting when implementation of the MM has been completed. The ongoing documentation and monitoring of mitigation compliance will be completed by the City of Dublin. The completed MMRP will be kept on file at the City of Dublin Community Development Department. Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Aesthetics, Light & Glare Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.1-1. The proposed senior center and chapel buildings should be restricted to one story construction consistent with the County Scenic Route Element, and set back from the top of slope and distance of the building height to reduce visibility from the I-580 freeway. Consideration should also be given to reducing the apparent heights of the two buildings by designing low rooflines, using earth tone building colors, using non-reflective surfaces and appropriate landscape screening. For the residential component of the proposed project, consideration shall be given to providing a greater building setback from the Dublin Boulevard/Inspiration Drive intersection, limiting the building on the south side of the complex to a single story, using intensive landscaping on the corner to screen the residences and using earth tone colors and non-reflective surfaces. Site Development Review process Prior to approval of Site Development Review Permit for senior center and chapel City of Dublin Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.1-2. Ensure that all exterior light fixtures be equipped with cut-off lenses, directed downward, and limited in height to the maximum necessary for adequate illumination to minimize excess light and glare. Notes on construction plans; site inspection Prior to issuance of building permit or other permit for development activities City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 4 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Valley Christian Center Supplemental MND (June 2018): AES-1. The final playfield lighting plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit for the sports stadium and shall include detailed photometric drawings documenting that no spillover of light or glare would occur off the VCC project site. Submittal of documentation, including photometric drawings Prior to issuance of building permit City of Dublin Air Quality Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.2-1: The following measures are recommended, based on BAAQMD standards, to reduce construction impacts to a less-than-significant level. The following construction practices should be required during all phases of construction on the project site: a) Water all active construction areas as needed. b) Watering or covering of stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that can be blown away by wind. c) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. d) Pave, apply water three times a daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. e) Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. Notes on construction plans; site inspections Prior to first grading, building or other permit for development activities; during construction City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 5 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial f) Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. g) Hydroseed or apply non-toxic soil. h) Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non- toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.). i) Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph. j) Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff. k) Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. Valley Christian Center Supplemental MND (June 2018): AIR-1: The Applicant’s grading contractor(s) shall adhere to the most current Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s construction mitigation measures (Tables 8-1 and 8-2 or as may be updated at the time a grading permit is requested) as set forth in the May 2017 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, or as may be amended in the future and in effect at time of issuance of grading permit. Notes on construction plans; site inspection Prior to first grading, building or other permit for development activities; during construction City of Dublin Biological Resources Valley Christian Center Supplemental MND (June 2018): MM Bio-1. Prior to the first grading, building, or other permit for development activities, the project Applicant shall prepare the documentation acceptable to the Community Development Department that Submittal of documentation; notes on construction plans Prior to first grading building, or other permit for development activities City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 6 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial demonstrates compliance with the following: a) No more than 14 days prior to initial ground disturbance and vegetation removal during nesting season (February 1 – August 31), the project Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to perform pre-construction breeding bird surveys. If any nests are found, they shall be flagged and protected with a suitable buffer. Buffer distances would vary based on species and conditions at the project site, but is usually at least 50 feet, and up to 250 feet for raptors. This mitigation measure does not apply to ground disturbance and vegetation removal activities that occur outside of the nesting season (September 1 – January 31). Valley Christian Center Supplemental MND (June 2018): MM Bio-2. Any on-site coast live oak lost or impacted as a result of project construction shall be replaced on site or in the immediate vicinity at a 2:1 (replacement: impacted) ratio. A Replacement Plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist identifying the location of replacement habitat, replanting plans and long-term monitoring to ensure the success of the replacement habitat area. Necessary permits shall be obtained from local, state and federal biological resource agencies prior to commencement of replantings. Submittal of documentation; notes on construction plans; site inspection Prior to the first grading, building or other permit for development activities City of Dublin Valley Christian Center Supplemental MND (June 2018): MM Bio-3. Prior to obtaining the first grading or building Submittal of documentation; notes on construction plans; site Prior to the first grading, building or other permit for City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 7 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial permit for development activities involving ground disturbance, the project Applicant shall prepare the documentation acceptable to the Community Development Department that demonstrates compliance with the following: a) Retain a qualified botanist to conduct rare plant surveys within the construction zone for Congdon’s tarplant or other species with potential habitat within the project area during the appropriate time of year in accordance with agency protocols. Impacts to special-status plant species shall be avoided to the fullest extent feasible and habitat that supports special-status plant species shall be preserved. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted at the proper time of year when rare or endangered species are both evident and identifiable. Field surveys shall be scheduled to coincide with known blooming periods, and/or during periods of physiological development that are necessary to identify the plant species of concern. If no special-status plant species are found, then the proposed project would not have any impacts to the species and no additional mitigation is needed. b) Where surveys determine that special-status plant species are present within or adjacent to the proposed project site, direct and indirect impacts of the project on the species (e.g. Congdon’s tarplant and/or San Joaquin spearscale) shall be avoided where feasible inspection development activities; during construction; City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 8 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial through the establishment of activity exclusion zones, where no ground-disturbing activities shall take place, including construction of new facilities, construction staging, or other temporary work areas. Activity exclusion zones for special-status plant species shall be established prior to construction activities around each occupied habitat site, the boundaries of which shall be clearly marked with standard orange plastic construction exclusion fencing or its equivalent. The establishment of activity exclusion zones shall not be required if no construction related disturbances would occur within 250 feet of the occupied habitat site. The size of activity exclusion zones may be reduced through consultation with a qualified biologist and with concurrence from the California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW) based on site-specific conditions. c) If exclusion zones and avoidance of impacts on a special-status plant species are not feasible, then the loss of individuals or occupied habitat of a special-status plant species shall be compensated for through the acquisition, protection, and subsequent management of other existing occurrences. Before the implementation of compensation measures, the project’s Applicant shall provide detailed information to the CDFW and lead agency on City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 9 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial the quality of preserved habitat, location of the preserved occurrences, provisions for protecting and managing the areas, the responsible parties involved, and other pertinent information that demonstrates the feasibility of the compensation. A Mitigation Plan identifying appropriate mitigation measures shall be developed in consultation with and approved by, the CDFW and the City prior to the commencement of any activities that would impact any special status plants. Valley Christian Center Supplemental MND (June 2018): MM BIO-4. For any development near on-site riparian areas, the project Applicant shall conduct pre- construction surveys for California red-legged frog (CRLF) species. The survey shall be completed no more than 30 days prior to work within 200 feet of potential wetland/wet areas on the site. If no species are found, no mitigation shall be required. If CRLF are found on the project site, then the project Applicant shall provide information to support Section 7 consultation with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the project Applicant shall ensure no net loss of habitat that shall be achieved through avoidance, preservation, creation, and/or purchase of credits. The final selected measures may be part of the Section 7 permitting process. Submittal of documentation; notes on construction plans; site inspection Prior to the first grading, building or other permit for development activities; during construction City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 10 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial The project Applicant shall obtain a biological opinion from the USFWS and comply with the conditions and mitigation requirements under the opinion to ensure that no net loss of habitat occurs. Mitigation may include, but would not be limited to on-site and off-site preservation and creation of CRLF habitat, purchase of credits at mitigation banks, payment of in-lieu fees approved by the agencies, or other agency approved and required mitigation measures. Avoidance measures may include the following or equivalent protective measures: a) To minimize disturbance of breeding and dispersing CRLF construction activity within CRLF upland habitat shall be conducted during the dry season between April 15 and October 15 or before the onset of the rainy season, whichever occurs first. If construction activities are necessary in CRLF upland habitat between October 15 and April 15, the project Applicant would contact the USFWS for approval to extend the work period. b) To minimize disturbance and mortality of adult and juvenile CRLF in aquatic habitat and underground burrows, the project Applicants should minimize the extent of ground-disturbing activities within the work area to the minimum necessary for construction. In addition, the project Applicant should ensure that the contractor installs temporary exclusion fence City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 11 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial between the construction work area and the potential aquatic habitat for all construction within grasslands near aquatic habitat. A minimum buffer zone of 150 feet shall be maintained around CRLF aquatic habitat during construction. No staging, parking, material storage or ground disturbance shall be allowed in the buffer zone. The buffer zone will be clearly defined with construction fencing prior to the initiation of construction activities and shall be maintained until completion of construction. c) The project Applicant should ensure that a qualified wildlife biologist monitors all construction activities within CRLF upland habitat to ensure no take of individual CRLF occurs during project construction. If a CRLF is found, then the monitor would immediately stop construction in that area and contact USFWS for development of a plan for how to proceed with construction. Valley Christian Center Supplemental MND (June 2018): MM BIO-5. Prior to commencement of ground disturbing activities on the undeveloped and undisturbed portions of Parcel 1 of the project site, the Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to determine the potential presence of wetlands or other waters. If wetlands are found, the Applicant shall prepare a wetland mitigation plan acceptable to the Community Submittal of documentation; notes on construction plans Prior to first site grading or building permit for the southern portion of Parcel 1 City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 12 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Development Department that demonstrates compliance with the following: a) Project Applicant shall obtain all required resource agency permits and shall prepare and obtain resource agency approval of a wetland mitigation plan that ensures no-net loss of wetland and water habitats. b) The wetland mitigation plan shall include measures for avoidance, minimization, and compensation for wetland impacts. Avoidance and minimization measures may include the designation of buffers around wetland features to be avoided, or project design measures. Compensation measures shall include the preservation and/or creation of wetland or other waters. The final mitigation ratios (the amount of wetlands and waters created or preserved compared to the amount impacted) shall be determined by the applicable resource agency(s). The wetland and mitigation monitoring plan shall include the following: a. Descriptions of wetland types, and their expected functions and values. b. Performance standards and monitoring protocol to ensure the success of the mitigation wetlands over a period to be determined by the resource agencies. c. Engineering plans showing the location, size and configuration of wetlands to be created or preserved. City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 13 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial d. An implementation schedule showing that construction or preservation of mitigation areas shall commence prior to or concurrently with initiation of construction. e. A description of legal protection measures for the preserved wetlands (i.e. dedication of fee title, conservation easement and/or an endowment held by an approved conservation organization, government agency or mitigation bank). Cultural Resources Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.4-1. If an archeological or Native American artifact is identified, work on the project site shall cease immediately until a resource protection plan conforming to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) is prepared by a qualified archeologist and approved by the Community Development Director. Project work may be resumed in compliance with such plan. If human remains are encountered, the Country Coroner shall be contacted immediately. Notes on construction plans; site inspection During construction City of Dublin Geology and Soils Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.5-1. A site specific geotechnical investigation shall be required for each building constructed as part of the Submittal of documentation Prior to first site grading or building permit City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 14 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial proposed expansion by a California registered geologist or California registered engineering geologist. The report(s) shall address the potential for extension of the Dublin fault on the site, expansive soils and the potential for future landslides on the site. Specific measures to reduce seismic hazards, expansive soils and landslide hazards to a less-than-significant level shall be included in the report(s). Hydrology & Water Quality Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.6-1. An erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer for implementation throughout all phases of project construction. The plan should be prepared in accordance with the City of Dublin and RWQCB design standards and shall be approved by the Public Works Director prior to issuance of a grading permit. It is recommended that this plan, at a minimum include the following provisions: a) Existing vegetated areas should be left undisturbed until construction of improvements on each portion of the development site is actually ready to commence. b) All disturbed areas should be immediately revegetated or otherwise protected from both wind and water erosion upon the completion of grading activities. c) Stormwater runoff should be collected into Submittal of documentation; notes on construction plans Prior to issuance of grading permit. City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 15 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial stable drainage channels, from small drainage basins, to prevent the buildup of large, potentially erosive stormwater flows. d) Specific measures should be implemented to control erosion from stockpiled earth and exposed soil. e) Runoff should be directed away from all areas disturbed by construction. f) Sediment ponds or siltation basins should be used to trap eroded soils before runoff is discharged into on-site or off-site drainage culverts and channels. g) To the extent possible, major site development work involving excavation and earth moving shall be scheduled during the dry season. Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.6-2. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer to RWQCB and City of Dublin standards to ensure Best Management Practices will be employed to reduce surface water pollution to a less-than-significant level. The SWPPP shall be approved by the Public Works Director prior to issuance of a grading permit. Submittal of documentation; notes on construction plans Prior to issuance of grading permit City of Dublin Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.6-3. The project Applicant shall submit a hydrology study for the proposed project, prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer, documenting the Submittal of documentation; notes on construction plans Prior to issuance of grading permit City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 16 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial amount of current stormwater runoff from the site, estimated future quantities of runoff, and the ability of downstream facilities to accommodate increased stormwater quantities. The report shall also identify needed downstream improvements needed to accommodate increased storm flows and the Applicant’s financial participation in funding needed improvements, if required. Noise Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.8-1. The construction noise reduction measures included in the Valley Christian Center EIR have been augmented by a revised Noise Mitigation Measure in the Valley Christian Center Supplemental MND (June 2018). Refer to MM NOISE-2 below. N/A N/A N/A Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM. 4.8-3. As part of the Site Development Review application for the chapel, an acoustic study shall be performed to identify specific noise exposure of the building and identify measures to reduce interior and exterior noise to acceptable levels. Appropriate mitigation may include, but is not limited to sound rated windows, construction of sound walls or berms or using the building as a shield for outdoor spaces. Submittal of documentation Prior to building permit City of Dublin Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.8-4. An acoustical analysis shall be completed prior to commencement of evening outdoor activities to Submittal of documentation Prior to commencement of evening outdoor activities City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 17 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial estimate noise effects on surrounding residential areas. If the anticipated noise levels would exceed City noise exposure levels, the acoustic report shall contain specific methods to reduce noise levels to acceptable levels. Valley Christian Center Supplemental MND (June 2018): MM NOISE-1. The following noise performance standard for Public Address (PA) systems shall be met by the Applicant: a) To ensure that the PA system would not exceed 55 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences, the amplification system at the new multipurpose field should not exceed 75 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from each speaker. b) To ensure that the PA system would not exceed 55 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences, the amplification system at the new outdoor amphitheater should not exceed 75 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from each speaker. Notes on construction plans; site inspections Prior to City approval of the Public Address system; on-going City of Dublin Valley Christian Center Supplemental MND (June 2018): MM NOISE-2. The project Applicant shall prepare a construction noise management plan that identifies measures to be taken to minimize construction noise on surrounding sensitive receptors (e.g., residential uses and schools) and includes a site specific noise management measures to be included into project plans and specifications subject to review and approval by the City. These measures shall include, but not be limited to Submittal of documentation; notes on construction plans; site inspections Prior to first grading or building permit; during construction City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 18 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial the following: a) All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and sound control devices (e.g. intake silencers and noise shrouds) no less effective than those provided on the original equipment and no equipment shall have an un- muffled exhaust. b) The contractor shall maintain and tune-up all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions. c) Stationary equipment shall be placed so as to maintain the greatest possible distance to sensitive receptors. d) All equipment servicing shall be performed so as to maintain the greatest distance to the sensitive receptors. e) The project Applicant shall provide to the satisfaction of the Dublin Planning Division, a qualified “Noise Disturbance Coordinator.” The Noise Disturbance Coordinator shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. When a complaint is received, the Noise Disturbance Coordinator shall notify the City within 24 hours of the complaint and determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, malfunctioning muffler, etc.) and shall implement reasonable measures to resolve the complaint, as deemed acceptable by the Dublin Planning Division. If any notices are sent to City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 19 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial residential units immediately surrounding the construction site by the City and all signs posted at the construction site shall include the contact name and the telephone number for the Noise Disturbance Coordinator. f) Select demolition method to minimize vibration, where possible (e.g. sawing masonry into sections rather than demolishing it by pavement breakers). g) The construction contractor shall limit all on-site noise producing construction activities, including deliveries and warming up of equipment, to the daytime hours of 7:30 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday (excluding holidays) unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Public Services Transportation/Traffic Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.10-1. The project sponsor shall contribute a fair- share contribution to the funding of traffic signals at the Dublin Boulevard/Silvergate Drive and Dublin Boulevard/Inspiration Drive. (Completed) COMPLETED N/A N/A Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.10-2. Monitoring of the peak hour turning movements at project driveways shall be conducted on one typical school day every six months following the Submittal of data to City Every 6 months (following completion of school expansion) City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 20 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial completion of the school expansion and reported to the City, to demonstrate that the expansion does not increase the rate of vehicles violating these restrictions. If the number of violators increases after the expansion, more stringent enforcement or other measures may be required by the school administration to limit the number of vehicles accessing the project site to or from Bay Laurel Street, as determined by the City of Dublin Public Works Director. Valley Christian Center EIR (October 2002): MM 4.10-3. The project sponsor shall make a fair share contribution toward the funding of the future widening of Dublin Boulevard between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive from two to four lanes. (Completed) COMPLETED N/A N/A Valley Christian Center Supplemental MND (June 2018): MM TRA-1. The following steps shall be taken to ensure that project related traffic does not cut through adjacent neighborhoods as part of the school operations: a) The school administration shall issue a letter to all students a minimum of one time per year advising household drivers not to use routes through adjacent neighborhoods. b) The Applicant shall continue monitoring local driving activities as required in the 2003 EIR Mitigation Measure 4.10-2 at the completion of development phase 2, 3 and 4 to ensure that the rate of cut through traffic does not increase. Submittal of letter sent to the students to the City; submittal of data to City Minimum of one time per year City of Dublin City of Dublin Valley Christian Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 21 Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial c) If it is determined that cut-through traffic has increased based on additional construction, increased enforcement of the illegal turns and/or prohibiting turns to/from the north at the southern driveway shall be implemented by the school with oversight by the Public Works Department. Valley Christian Center Supplemental MND (June 2018): MM TRA-2. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the football stadium, the Applicant shall retain a California- registered Traffic Engineer to prepare a Parking Management for the operation of football games and other large activities (such as graduations) held at the proposed stadium. The Parking Management Plan shall demonstrate that all parking for football games and other large activities can be safely accommodated on the site and avoid spill-over of parking on adjacent streets. Methods that could be included in the Parking Management Plan could include but are not limited to use of parking attendants before and during games and other large activities to implement valet parking, promotion of carpooling to games and limiting sales of admission tickets to correspond with estimated parking supply. The Parking Management Plan shall be approved by the City of Dublin Community Development Department and Public Works Department prior to the issuance of the building permit for the stadium. Submittal of documentation Prior to building permit for the athletic field City of Dublin