Newark City Council
October 26, 2023

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2022b. What is storm surge? https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/stormsurge-stormtide.html.

NPD (Newark Police Department). 2021. 2021 Citizens Police Academy. https://www.newark.org/departments/citizen-police-academy.

NPD (Newark Police Department). 2022. Police Crime Reports & Statistics. https://www.newark.org/departments/police/protect-yourself/police-crime-reports-statistics.

NPD (Newark Police Department). n.d. Newark Police Department Crime Map. https://npd.crimegraphics.com/2013/default.aspx.

OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2021. Cal EnviroScreen 4.0. October 2021. https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen-40.

PHASoCal (Public Health Alliance of Southern California). 2018. Healthy Places Index (HPI). Selected indicators for Newark census tracts. https://map.healthyplacesindex.org/.

SF DPH (San Francisco Department of Public Health). 2014. San Francisco Climate & Health Profile.

November 2014. https://sfclimatehealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/SFDPH_ ClimateHealthProfile_FinalDraft.pdf.

State of California, Natural Resources Agency, and California Department of Water Resources. 2010.

California Drought Contingency Plan. November 2010. https://drought.unl.edu/archive/plans/ Drought/state/CA_2010.pdf.

State of California, Natural Resources Agency, and California Department of Water Resources. 2019.

California Water Plan Update 2018: Managing Water Resources for Sustainability. June 2019. https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/Web-Pages/Programs/California-WaterPlan/Docs/Update2018/Final/California-Water-Plan-Update-2018.pdf.

StopWaste. 2022. About StopWaste. https://www.stopwaste.org/about-stopwaste.

SWRCB (State Water Resources Control Board). 2018a. Permitted Underground Storage Tanks. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/datadownload.

SWRCB (State Water Resources Control Board). 2018b. Cleanup Sites. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/datadownload.

Packet Page No. 802

3. References
City of Newark General Plan 81 ESA / D202100549.00
Safety Element – Existing Conditions Memorandum May 2022 SWRCB (State Water Resources Control Board). 2021. Site Cleanup Program (SCP). November 4, 2021. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/site_cleanup_program/#:~:
text=The%20Site%20Cleanup%20Program%20(SCP,%2C%20and%20sediment%2C%20have%20oc curred.

U.S. Fire Administration. 2021. What is the WUI? July 9, 2021. https://www.usfa.fema.gov/wui/what-isthe-wui.html.

USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2013. National Inventory of Dams National Map. National Inventory of Dams. https://nid.usace.army.mil/#/.

USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2022. Extreme Weather. https://www.climatehubs.usda.gov/content/extreme-weather.

USDM (United States Drought Monitor). 2022a. Current Map for California. April 12, 2022. https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/CurrentMap/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?CA.

USDM (United States Drought Monitor). 2022b. Historical Conditions for Alameda County. Graph.

March 22, 2022. https://www.drought.gov/states/california/county/alameda.

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2003. Earthquake Probabilities in the San Francisco Bay Region:
2002–2031. http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2003/of03-214/OFR-03-214_FullText.pdf.

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2013. Water Basics Glossary. https://water.usgs.gov/waterbasics_glossary.html.

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2019. The Severity of an Earthquake. https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/ earthq4/severitygip.html.

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2022. Earthquake Glossary. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/ glossary/?alpha=ALL.

Zeise, L., and J. Blumenfeld. 2021. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Report. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). October 2021. https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen40reportf2021.pdf #page=113.

Packet Page No. 803
Memorandum
Date: July 10, 2023
To: Luke Evans, ESA
From: Matthew Ridgway, Meredith Milam
Subject: Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
DC22-0095
Fehr & Peers has completed a general, programmatic assessment of emergency evacuation routes for the City of Newark. This assessment is consistent with Assembly Bill 747 (AB 747) and Senate Bill 99 (SB 99) requirements to disclose information in the Safety and Housing Elements related to evacuation routes. This is not a CEQA requirement, nor does this memorandum constitute a CEQA document.

This document is intended to provide an assessment of roadway capacity under the described scenarios and should not be considered an evacuation plan. Please note that emergency evacuation can occur due to any number of events. As such, this assessment is intended to provide the City with a broad “planning level” assessment of the capacity of the transportation system during an evacuation scenario; it does not provide guarantees as to the adequacy of the system nor can it guarantee that the findings are applicable to any or all situations.

Moreover, as emergency evacuation assessment is an emerging field, there is no established standard methodology. We have adopted existing methodologies in transportation planning that, in our knowledge and experience, we believe are the most appropriate. Nevertheless, such methodologies are necessarily also limited by scope constraints and state of knowledge. In no way can Fehr & Peers guarantee the efficacy of any of the information used for this assessment, as such would be beyond our professional duty and capability.

Background
The following are recent pieces of legislation related to emergency access that are addressed in this assessment.

Attachment B
Packet Page No. 804
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

• AB 747 requires that the safety element be reviewed and updated to identify evacuation routes and their capacity, safety, and viability under a range of emergency scenarios. This is a requirement for all safety elements or updates to a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LMHP) completed after January of 2022.
• SB 99 requires review and update of the safety element to include information identifying residential developments in hazard areas that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes.

Approach
Consistent with requirements for SB 99, residential parcels with only one access route in or out are identified and mapped in Figure 1. The three scenarios differ based on the availability of access to arterial roadways and highway overpasses, shown in Table 1.

The City is bound by topography and other features which limit the direction and number of evacuation routes. These are described below:
• Topography (Salt harvesting, refining, and production facilities and the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge limits access to the west) limits access to the west and southwest such that emergency access is limited to the following facilities:
o Thornton Ave. at Highway 84
o Newark Blvd. at Highway 84
o Thornton Ave. at I-880
o Mowry Ave. at I-880
o Balentine Dr. at Stevenson Blvd.
o Cedar Blvd. at Stevenson Blvd.
o Cherry St. at Stevenson Blvd.

Figure 2, Figure 3, and Figure 4 overlay the hazards identified in the safety element with residential parcels that do not have at least two evacuation routes, including earthquake fault zones, sea level rise, and dam inundation zones.

Packet Page No. 805
SB 99 - Residential Parcels With Only One Access Route
Figure 1
Cities
>=30 Parcels
< 30 Parcels
Thornton Ave
Fircrest St
Enterprise Dr
Paseo Padre Pkwy
Cedar Blvd
Jarvis Ave
Boyce Rd
Ash St
Commerce Dr
Haley St
Blacow Rd
Cherry St
Locust St
Newark Blvd
Sycamore St
Mowry Ave
Ardenwood Blvd
Fremont Blvd
Stevenson Blvd
Gateway Blvd
Lake Blvd
Willow St
George Ave
Olive St
Argonaut Wy
Nimitz Fwy
Arden St
Milani Ave
Rockspray St
Luma Te
Argonne St
Hickory St
Tupelo St
Laurel St
Baine Ave
Kiote Dr
Mahogany Pl
Norris Rd
Vernon Ave
Filbert St
Spring Tide Rd
Morton Ave
Market Ave
Silver Reef Dr
Thomas Ave
Larkspur St
Lido Blvd
Clark Ave
Burning Tree Dr
Sandalwood St
Campus Dr
Capitol Ave
Christine St
Parkshore Dr
Hafner St
Manzanita St
Blackburn Dr
Dumbarton Cr
Darvon St
Gertrude Dr
Civic Terrace Ave
Coronado Dr
Wells Ave
Orleans Dr
Kaiser Dr
Moores Ave
Dairy Ave
Bettencourt St
Lafayette Ave
Edgewater Dr
Country Dr
Hansen Ave
Smith Ave
Birch St
Patterson Ranch Rd
Spruce St
Mayhews Landing Rd
Don
Edwards
NWR
Coyote
Hills RP
Packet Page No. 806
SB 99 - Residential Parcels With Only One Access Route
Earthquake Fault Zones
Figure 2
San Francisco
Watershed Lands
Don
Edwards NWR
>=30 Parcels Cities
< 30 Parcels Fault Zones
San Andreas Fault
Hayward Fault
Calaveras Fault
Packet Page No. 807
SB 99 - Residential Parcels With Only One Access Route
Sea Level Rise
Figure 3
Cities
>=30 Parcels
< 30 Parcels
Thornton Ave
Fircrest St
Enterprise Dr
Paseo Padre Pkwy
Cedar Blvd
Jarvis Ave
Boyce Rd
Ash St
Commerce Dr
Haley St
Blacow Rd
Cherry St
Locust St
Newark Blvd
Sycamore St
Mowry Ave
Ardenwood Blvd
Fremont Blvd
Stevenson Blvd
Gateway Blvd
Lake Blvd
Willow St
George Ave
Olive St
Argonaut Wy
Nimitz Fwy
Arden St
Milani Ave
Rockspray St
Luma Te
Argonne St
Hickory St
Tupelo St
Laurel St
Baine Ave
Kiote Dr
Mahogany Pl
Norris Rd
Vernon Ave
Filbert St
Spring Tide Rd
Morton Ave
Market Ave
Silver Reef Dr
Thomas Ave
Larkspur St
Lido Blvd
Clark Ave
Burning Tree Dr
Sandalwood St
Campus Dr
Capitol Ave
Christine St
Parkshore Dr
Hafner St
Manzanita St
Blackburn Dr
Dumbarton Cr
Darvon St
Gertrude Dr
Civic Terrace Ave
Coronado Dr
Wells Ave
Orleans Dr
Kaiser Dr
Moores Ave
Dairy Ave
Bettencourt St
Lafayette Ave
Edgewater Dr
Country Dr
Hansen Ave
Smith Ave
Birch St
Patterson Ranch Rd
Spruce St
Mayhews Landing Rd
Don
Edwards
NWR
Coyote
Hills RP

4.0m +

3.5 - 4.0m

3.0 - 3.5m

2.5 - 3.0m

2.0 - 2.5m

1.5 - 2.0m

1.0 - 1.5m

0.5 - 1.0m
0 - 0.5m
Depth
Packet Page No. 808
SB 99 - Residential Parcels With Only One Access Route
Dam Inundation Zones
Figure 4
Christy St
Thornton Ave
Cushing Pkwy
Fircrest St
Enterprise Dr
Paseo Padre Pkwy
Cedar Blvd
Jarvis Ave
Walnut Ave
Boyce Rd
Albrae St
Ash St
Commerce Dr
Haley St
Osgood Rd
Blacow Rd
Boscell Rd
Cherry St
Locust St
Newark Blvd
Washington Blvd Bay St
Sycamore St
Bunche Dr
Mowry Ave
Ardenwood Blvd
Fremont Blvd
Stevenson Blvd
Mission Blvd
Gateway Blvd
Curie St
Lake Blvd
Willow St
George Ave
Olive St
Argonaut Wy
Braun St
Colby St
Alice St
Oro Dr
Nimitz Fwy
Arden St
Milani Ave
Rockspray St
Luma Te
Argonne St
Hickory St
Tupelo St
Creston St
Laurel St
Adams Ave Baine Ave
Tehama Ave
Kiote Dr
Mahogany Pl
Norris Rd
Vernon Ave
Filbert St
Eugene St
Spring Tide Rd
Morton Ave
Thurston St
Auto Mall Pkwy
Rockett Dr
Market Ave
Silver Reef Dr
Thomas Ave
Larkspur St
Lido Blvd
Clark Ave
Burning Tree Dr
Sandalwood St
Hamilton Wy
Campus Dr
Capitol Ave
Christine St
Parkshore Dr
Northport Loop W
Enterprise St
Union St
Hafner St
Montrose Ave
Industrial Dr
Farallon Common
Manzanita St
Blackburn Dr
Dumbarton Cr
Darvon St
Gertrude Dr
Civic Terrace Ave
High St
Coronado Dr
Wells Ave
Grimmer Blvd
Orleans Dr
Kaiser Dr
Moores Ave
Dairy Ave
Gatewood St
Robin St
Omar St
Margery Dr
Bettencourt St
Carol Ave
Lafayette Ave
Edgewater Dr
Country Dr
Hansen Ave
Smith Ave
Birch St
Patterson Ranch Rd
Spruce St
Mayhews Landing Rd
Don
Edwards
NWR
Coyote
Hills RP
Middlefield
Reservoir
Patterson
Cities
>=30 Parcels
< 30 Parcels
Dams
Extremely High
Significant
Low
High
Dam Inundation Zones
Hazard Clearance
Packet Page No. 809
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

AB 747: Evacuation Capacity Analysis
Consistent with the requirements of AB 747, this memo reviews the capacity of the transportation system during an evacuation event. This assessment assumes access to/from the west and south are not available due to blockages that are the product of the evacuation event (such as earthquake or flood). This assessment assumes that access to/from the Dumbarton Bridge is not available.

This assessment makes the following assumptions:
• The entire city is evacuated in all scenarios
• The need for evacuation is assumed to be a flood
• No “shelter in place” is assumed – all residents, employees, and visitors are assumed to evacuate from these zones.
• 100 percent occupancy of households is assumed. This assumption is discussed further in latter parts of this section and in Table 2.
• No capacity reduction of roadways is assumed, nor is contraflow assumed. • Socioeconomic data from the Alameda CTC model was used for population, households, and employment.

This memo presents three evacuation scenarios separated into three sub-scenarios to represent the availability to use roadways during an evacuation. Evacuation is analyzed under two study conditions - existing conditions and existing conditions plus the housing element allocation. The scenarios are summarized in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Evacuation Scenarios
Criteria
Scenario

1.1 1.2 1.3 2.1 2.2 2.3
Study Year Baseline
(2020)
Baseline
(2020)
Baseline
(2020)
Baseline +
Housing
Element
Baseline +
Housing
Element
Baseline +
Housing
Element
Conditions All Access Limited Access (no
overpasses)
Only One Access
(Cherry St) All Access
Limited
Access (no
overpasses)
Only One
Access
(Cherry St)
Time of
Day 8:00 AM 8:00 AM 8:00 AM 8:00 AM 8:00 AM 8:00 AM
Source: Fehr & Peers.

The evacuation routes for each of these scenarios are discussed further in the subsequent sections and evacuation gateways and destinations are shown in Table 4.

Packet Page No. 810
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

The number of residents, anticipated vehicle ownership per household, and employees in the area were referenced to estimate the number of vehicles that could need to evacuate. These are worst-case scenarios assuming that all households and non-residential uses would evacuate at once. Table 2 summarizes land use information and vehicle ownership data for the evacuation zones for the two study conditions.

Packet Page No. 811
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

Table 2: Land Use and Evacuation Demand of Evacuation Zones (Baseline 2020) Evacuation
Zone ID Evacuation Zone (TAZs) Households Population Employment Household Vehicle Ownership
Estimated
Evacuation
Demand* 0 1 2 3 4+
1 929, 930, 932, 1545, 1546, 1547 2,954 10,466 4,352 74 521 1,250 786 323 10,258 2 923 (half), 924, 925, 926, 927 4,052 12,942 3,370 133 375 1,825 878 840 12,148 3 918, 919, 920, 921, 922, 923 (half), 931 4,056 14,168 3,814 139 710 1,642 878 687 12,094 4 928, 933, 934, 935 (half), 936 (half), 937,
938 2,125 6,429 5,539 57 393 1,026 320 414 9,927
5 935 (east half) 85 257 1,013 0 0 0 0 0 985
6 936 (east half) 1,177 3,559 159 19 368 633 102 54 2,225 7 939, 940 385 1,164 1,609 6 121 207 33 18 2,241
Total 14,833 48,985 19,856 428 2,488 6,584 2,997 2,336 49,879 Source: Alameda CTC 2020, American Community Survey 2020 5-year Note: *Assumption of number of vehicles that will evacuate:
• zero-vehicle household: 1 vehicle
• one-vehicle household: 1 vehicle
• two-vehicle household: 2 vehicles
• three-vehicle household: 2.5 vehicles
• four-or-more-vehicle household: 3 vehicles
• employee: 0.97 vehicle (there are 3% zero-vehicle households in evacuation zones) Packet Page No. 812
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

The number of households in the area that would potentially have mobility constraints due to the lack of a personal vehicle during an evacuation event is summarized in Table 3. As shown, approximately three percent of households across the seven zones do not have access to a vehicle. It should be noted that this information does not constitute a specific analysis of households with mobility challenges as it does not specifically account for people who have mobility impairments that preclude them from using a vehicle; it also does not specifically account for households that own one or more vehicles, but where not all members of the household may necessarily have access to them at all times (for example, a household with one vehicle which a household member drives to work, leaving other members of the household staying at home with no available vehicle).

Table 3: Zero-Vehicle Households
Evacuation
Zone ID Evacuation Zone (TAZs) Households Zero-Vehicle Households Percent ZeroVehicle
Households
1 929, 930, 932, 1545, 1546, 1547 2,954 74 3%
2 923 (half), 924, 925, 926, 927 4,052 133 3%
3 918, 919, 920, 921, 922, 923 (half), 931 4,056 139 3% 4 928, 933, 934, 935 (half), 936 (half), 937, 938 2,125 57 3% 5 935 (east half) 85 0 0%
6 936 (east half) 1,177 19 2%
7 939, 940 385 6 2%
Total 14,833 428 3%
Source: Alameda CTC 2020, American Community Survey 2020 5-year In the absence of detailed data for the evacuation zones, this assessment uses zero-vehicle households as a proxy to provide an estimate of persons with mobility constraints that may need evacuation assistance. The zero-vehicle households would require outside assistance, and although outside the scope of this assessment, the City may want to consider a program that ensures a more accurate accounting of households needing assistance, and that evacuation of these households is achievable via public transit, special shuttle vehicles sent during evacuations, or other neighborhood programs that promotes advanced coordination of ridesharing during evacuations between neighbors. This estimate also assumes that employment centers would provide evacuation assistance to employees without access to a vehicle. Additionally, it was assumed that some households with more than two vehicles would not be able to evacuate all of Packet Page No. 813
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

their vehicles during an event (e.g. homes with three or four vehicles but with only two licensed drivers).

Evacuation Routes and Gateways
Roadways with Capacity Constraints
Due to potential closure of structures due to damage or need for inspection during/following an event, Fehr & Peers assumes that the following roadways could be inaccessible for general evacuation planning purposes:
• SR-84 west of Thornton Avenue
• Central Avenue
• Dumbarton Bridge
These roadways were not considered as potential gateway links or routes for general evacuation in the AB 747 analysis. Similarly, structures providing access over freeways or to freeway ramps are assumed to be inaccessible. Scenario three assumes residents must all evacuate to I-880 southbound via Cherry Street.

Evacuation Routes and Gateways
A critical factor in the success of an evacuation is how long it takes all evacuees to clear an area under threat. Conceptually, the time it takes to evacuate is fundamentally constrained by capacity constraints along the roadway system, otherwise known as “bottlenecks.” Note that multiple bottlenecks may be present over the course of an evacuation route, and the high-level programmatic analysis in this assessment only considers a limited number of regional bottlenecks, which are selected as they are likely to represent the most significant constraints.

Routes to their respective evacuation destinations were identified for each of seven evacuation zones. For each zone, a roadway link from the Alameda County CTC Model that represents the bottleneck segment on its evacuation route was identified as its “evacuation gateway.” For example, in Scenarios 1 and 2, Thornton Avenue to SR-84 is considered the evacuation gateway for Evacuation Zone 1, as the sole egress for all evacuees from Evacuation Zone 1 heading to I880 Southbound just southeast of the I-880 and SR-84 interchange. The list of evacuation gateways and their capacities are shown in Table 4.

The roadway capacities presented in Table 4 and used by this analysis are based on those found in the Alameda CTC Model 2020. This assessment conservatively assumes that roadway capacities during evacuation events will be as they are in normal conditions, and not be increased by measures such as the implementation of contraflow lanes or dedicated traffic control officers.

Packet Page No. 814
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

Table 4: Total Outbound Capacity of Evacuation Links
Roadway Outbound
Lanes
Total Outbound
Capacity (vehicles
per hour)
Thornton Ave. at Highway 84 (northeast on SR-84 towards SB I-880 ramps) 3 3,150
Newark Blvd. at Highway 84 (northeast on SR-84 towards SB I-880 ramps) 3 3,150 Thornton Ave. at I-880 (northeast on Thornton Ave. towards SB I-880 ramps) 2 2,100
Mowry Ave. at I-880 (northeast on Mowry Ave. towards SB I-880 ramps) 3 3,150 Balentine Dr. at Stevenson Blvd. (southeast on Balentine Dr. towards Stevenson Blvd. to SB I-880 ramps) 2 2,100
Cedar Blvd. at Stevenson Blvd. (southeast on Cedar Ave. towards Stevenson Blvd. to SB I-880 ramps) 2 2,100
Cherry St. at Stevenson Blvd. (southeast on Cherry St. towards Stevenson Blvd. to SB I-880 ramps) 2 2,100
Source: Alameda County CTC 2020
Table 5 presents the evacuation gateway links and the zones each gateway is associated with for each scenario – note that evacuation gateways can be associated with multiple zones that use it to evacuate; similarly, depending on the evacuation scenario, an evacuation zone can be associated with multiple evacuation gateways if the evacuation route from that zone passes through multiple gateways to reach its evacuation destination. The table also shows the combined number of households and vehicle demand for all zones associated with each evacuation gateway.

Each evacuation gateway has a fixed capacity (usually noted in vehicles per hour) which when dividing by the evacuation vehicle demand yields an estimate of the time it takes for all vehicles to pass through the gateway. Using the estimated vehicle demand at each gateway and dividing by the estimated hourly outbound capacity for that gateway, Table 5 also presents an estimated time required to clear all vehicles at the gateway. Note that this time estimate is not an estimated average travel time for evacuees traveling from the evacuation zone to the evacuation destination, nor is it the estimated travel time through the roadway link segment that makes up the gateway. Instead, it reflects the comparison between the evacuation demand of the zones served by that gateway and provides a rough estimate for the time it would take for the specified number of vehicles to pass through the gateway given its roadway capacity. Moreover, this Packet Page No. 815
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

assessment only takes account of the vehicle demand from the seven evacuation zones, and not other traffic that may be present.

As shown, the total vehicle demand at many of the evacuation gateways would require multiple hours to meet evacuation demand. Table 5 also presents an alternative scenario, in which the vehicle demand is equivalent to an average of one vehicle per household, which produces much shorter and more manageable time estimates for clearing the gateways. In a major event, this seems a more likely means by which people would evacuate.

Packet Page No. 816
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

Table 5: Time Required Under Each Evacuation Scenarios
Evacuation
Zone ID Evacuation Zone (TAZs) Evacuation Gateway Link
Evacuation
Destination
Estimated
Evacuation
Demand
Number of
Households
Total
Outbound
Capacity
(vehicles
per hour)
Time Required on the
Gateway Link to Evacuate
(hours)
Total
Evacuation
Demand
One Vehicle
per
Household
Scenario 1.1 - Existing Conditions City evacuates all access 1 929, 930, 932, 1545, 1546, 1547 Thornton Ave.
at Highway 84
I-880 Southbound
(SE of SR-84) 10,258 2,954 3,150 3.26 0.94
2 923 (half), 924, 925, 926, 927 Newark Blvd. at
Highway 84
I-880 Southbound
(SE of SR-84) 12,148 4,052 3,150 3.86 1.29
3 918, 919, 920, 921, 922, 923 (half),
931
Thornton Ave.
at I-880
I-880 Southbound
(SE of Thornton
Ave.)
12,094 4,056 2,100 5.76 1.93
4 928, 933, 934, 935 (half), 936
(half), 937, 938
Mowry Ave. at
I-880
I-880 Southbound
(SE of Mowry Ave.) 9,927 2,125 3,150 3.15 0.67
5 935 (east half) Balentine Dr. at
Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
985 85 2,100 0.47 0.04
6 936 (east half) Cedar Blvd. at
Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
2,225 1,177 2,100 1.06 0.56
7 939, 940 Cherry St. at
Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
2,241 385 2,100 1.07 0.18
Packet Page No. 817
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

Scenario 1.2 - Existing Conditions City evacuates partial access (no overpasses) 1 929, 930, 932, 1545, 1546, 1547 Thornton Ave.
at Highway 84
I-880 Southbound
(SE of SR-84) 10,258 2,954 3,150 3.26 0.94
2 923 (half), 924, 925, 926, 927 Newark Blvd. at
Highway 84
I-880 Southbound
(SE of SR-84) 12,148 4,052 3,150 3.86 1.29
3 918, 919, 920, 921, 922, 923 (half),
931
Thornton Ave.
at I-880
I-880 Southbound
(SE of Thornton
Ave.)
12,094 4,056 2,100 5.76 1.93
4 928, 933, 934, 935 (half), 936
(half), 937, 938
Mowry Ave. at
I-880
I-880 Southbound
(SE of Mowry Ave.) 9,927 2,125 3,150 3.15 0.67
5 935 (east half) Balentine Dr. at
Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
985 85 2,100 0.47 0.04
6 936 (east half) Cedar Blvd. at
Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
2,225 1,177 2,100 1.06 0.56
7 939, 940 Cherry St. at
Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
2,241 385 2,100 1.07 0.18
Scenario 1.3 - Existing Conditions City evacuates only one access (Cherry St) 1-7 918-940, 1545-1547 (Entire City) Cherry St. at
Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
49,879 14,833 2,100 23.75 7.06
Packet Page No. 818
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

It is important to note that emergency scenarios are often unpredictable and driver behavior can be disorderly. Additionally, evacuation events are not linear in nature (e.g. even distribution during the evacuation time period) and it is anticipated that evacuees would vacate at a rate that more closely resembles a bell curve from the time that an evacuation order is issued. These are conditions which would affect the total evacuation time estimated in this assessment that are beyond the scope of this assessment. There is also general unpredictability in operational issues, such as power issues that could trigger traffic signals to operate in “red flash mode” in which traffic would need to proceed through intersections in an all-way stop configuration.

Buildout Scenarios
The Housing Inventory Site locations identified as part of the Housing Element process are shown in Table 6. Additional housing identified in this table is permitted within the current City General Plan Land Use and Zoning Code so does not represent additional development potential, but rather the results of a hypothetical buildout based on current land use regulations.

Table 6: Housing Inventory Sites
Evacuation
Zone ID Evacuation Zones (TAZs) Number of Housing Units Proposed 1 929, 930, 932, 1545, 1546, 1547 1424
2 923 (half), 924, 925, 926, 927 6
3 918, 919, 920, 921, 922, 923 (half), 931 946
4 928, 933, 934, 935 (half), 936 (half), 937, 938 706
5 935 (east half) 1644
6 936 (east half) 0
7 939, 940 469
Source: Newark City staff
This analysis assumes that each proposed unit at the sites will generate one household in the corresponding evacuation area with similar characteristics as the existing households. Table 6 summarizes the changes to the number of households and vehicles in the applicable zones with buildout of the General Plan, and Table 7 shows the resulting changes in estimated evacuation times.

Packet Page No. 819
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

Table 7: Land Use and Evacuation Demand of Evacuation Zones (Buildout of General Plan) Evacuation
Zone ID Evacuation Zone (TAZs) Households Population Employment Household Vehicle Ownership Estimated
Evacuation
Demand* 0 1 2 3 4+
1 929, 930, 932, 1545, 1546, 1547 4,378 15,222 4,352 115 780 1,855 1,168 459 13,133 2 923 (half), 924, 925, 926, 927 4,058 12,962 3,370 133 376 1,828 879 841 12,161 3 918, 919, 920, 921, 922, 923
(half), 931 5,002 17,328 3,814 180 870 2,009 1,090 853 14,058 4 928, 933, 934, 935 (half), 936
(half), 937, 938 2,831 13,861 5,539 75 465 1,294 426 571 11,287 5 935 (east half) 1,729 675 1,044 28 541 930 150 79 4,057 6 936 (east half) 1,177 3,559 159 19 368 633 102 54 2,225 7 939, 940 854 2,730 1,609 14 267 460 74 39 3,066
Total 20,028 66,336 19,887 564 3,669 9,010 3,890 2,895 59,988 Source: Alameda CTC 2020, American Community Survey 2020 5-year *A conversion factor for households to population is assumed to be 3.34 based on average household size in the American Community Survey 2020 5-year **The housing element households are assumed to be added on top of the existing households Packet Page No. 820
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

Table 8: Time Required Under Each Evacuation Scenarios
Evacuation
Zone ID Evacuation Zone (TAZs) Evacuation Gateway Link
Evacuation
Destination
Estimated
Evacuation
Demand
Number of
Households
Total
Outbound
Capacity
(vehicles
per hour)
Time Required on the
Gateway Link to Evacuate
(hours)
Total
Evacuation
Demand
One Vehicle
per
Household
Scenario 2.1 - W/ Housing Element - City evacuates all access 1 929, 930, 932, 1545, 1546, 1547 Thornton Ave. at
Highway 84
I-880 Southbound
(SE of SR-84) 13,133 4,378 3,150 4.17 1.39
2 923 (half), 924, 925, 926, 927 Newark Blvd. at
Highway 84
I-880 Southbound
(SE of SR-84) 12,161 4,058 3,150 3.86 1.29
3 918, 919, 920, 921, 922, 923 (half),
931
Thornton Ave. at I880I-880 Southbound
(SE of Thornton Ave.) 14,058 5,002 2,100 6.69 2.38
4 928, 933, 934, 935 (half), 936
(half), 937, 938
Mowry Ave. at I880I-880 Southbound
(SE of Mowry Ave.) 11,287 2,831 3,150 3.58 0.90
5 935 (east half) Balentine Dr. at
Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
4,057 1,729 2,100 1.93 0.82
6 936 (east half) Cedar Blvd. at
Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
2,225 1,177 2,100 1.06 0.56
7 939, 940 Cherry St. at
Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
3,066 854 2,100 1.46 0.41
Scenario 2.2 - W/ Housing Element - City evacuates partial access (no overpasses) Packet Page No. 821
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

1 Thornton Ave. at Highway 84 I-880 Southbound
(SE of SR-84)
I-880 Southbound
(SE of SR-84) 13,133 4,378 3,150 4.17 1.39
2 Newark Blvd. at Highway 84 I-880 Southbound
(SE of SR-84)
I-880 Southbound
(SE of SR-84) 12,161 4,058 3,150 3.86 1.29
3 Thornton Ave. at I-880
I-880 Southbound
(SE of Thornton
Ave.)
I-880 Southbound
(SE of Thornton Ave.) 14,058 5,002 2,100 6.69 2.38
4 Mowry Ave. at I-880 I-880 Southbound
(SE of Mowry Ave.)
I-880 Southbound
(SE of Mowry Ave.) 11,287 2,831 3,150 3.58 0.90
5 Balentine Dr. at Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
4,057 1,729 2,100 1.93 0.82
6 Cedar Blvd. at Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
2,225 1,177 2,100 1.06 0.56
7 Cherry St. at Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd.)
3,066 854 2,100 1.46 0.41
Scenario 2.3 W/ Housing Element - City evacuates only one access (Cherry St) 1-7 918-940, 1545-1547 (Entire City) Cherry St. at
Stevenson Blvd.

I-880 Southbound
(SE of Stevenson
Blvd)
59,988 20,028 2,100 28.57 9.54
Packet Page No. 822
Newark Emergency Evacuation Assessment
July 10, 2023

Next Steps
As a target for further investigation and study, the following lists provide potential measures that can enhance the evacuation process through both the supply side (increasing evacuation capacity) and demand side (managing evacuation volumes).

Supply-side Strategies
• Increasing capacity through the use of contraflow lanes or shoulders • Managed traffic control, including turn restrictions and route or ramp closures, to maximize outflows from evacuation areas
• Street parking management on high hazard days
Demand-side and Information-side Strategies
• Communication systems and strategies that improve disaster alerts • Dynamic route guidance and monitoring
• A program that ensures a more accurate accounting of households needing assistance • Coordination with public transit on special shuttle vehicles sent during evacuations • A neighborhood program that promotes advanced coordination of ridesharing during evacuations between neighbors
• Phased evacuations
• Reducing vehicle volumes during evacuations, such as by requiring households to evacuate in as few vehicles as possible
Packet Page No. 823
1 Attachment 2: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Analysis Summary Targeted Community Outreach
The City must demonstrate “meaningful, frequent, and ongoing community participation, consultation and coordination” as part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update process. This is intended to ensure that input has been received from groups historically and presently most impacted by fair housing issues and that local knowledge is incorporated into Housing Elements. Accordingly, the City’s targeted community outreach efforts included:
• Creating a housing element update website that is accessible in several languages • Providing Spanish translations of selected portions of the housing element • Working with community partners to bring information about the housing element update to community events and locations, including Newark Family Day, a food pantry, the public library and the senior center
Assessment of Fair Housing
The City must also describe and analyze the unique housing circumstances of the City. This analysis is referred to as an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) and analyzes circumstances within the City pertaining to Fair Housing issues including:

Fair Housing Outreach Capacity and Enforcement
Newark works with ECHO Housing for fair housing enforcement. ECHO provides fair housing counseling and education, tenant/landlord counseling and mediation, and other housing-related programs. To address the needs of Limited English Proficient speakers, ECHO provides services and classes in Spanish, has online information available in multiple languages, and has access to interpretation and translation services. ECHO programs include:
• Fair housing counseling, investigation, education, and enforcement • Tenant/landlord counseling and mediation
• Rental Assistance Program
• Home Seeking Services
• Shared Housing Counseling & Placement
• Homebuyer Education Workshops
ECHO Housing has compiled fair housing complaints in Newark that align with those at the county level, with the majority regarding race and disability. In Newark, disability has the highest share of complaints filed from 2016 to 2021 at 27, with race at 16 complaints.

Packet Page No. 824
2 Figure 1: City of Newark Fair Housing Complaints (2016-2021) Fiscal
Year Race National Origin Disability Familial Status
Marital
Status Religion Sex
Source
of
Income
Age Other TOTAL
2016-
2017 10 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
2017-
2018 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
2018-
2019 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
2019-
2020 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
2020-
2021 0 4 10 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 14
Source: ECHO Housing
Segregation and Integration Patterns
The City’s AFH also analyzes segregation and integration patterns within the jurisdiction as well as regionally. Segregation and integration patterns are analyzed by evaluating the concentration (or lack thereof) of protected groups within the community, relative to their distribution across a larger geography.

To understand how Newark is connected to the total segregation of the Bay Area, one can look at the difference in the racial composition of a jurisdiction compared to the racial composition of the region as a whole. The racial demographics in Newark for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020 can be found in Figure 4 below. The table also provides the racial composition of the nine-county Bay Area. As of 2020, Newark has a lower share of white residents than the Bay Area as a whole, a higher share of Latinx residents, a lower share of Black residents, and a significantly higher share of Asian/Pacific Islander residents.

Latinx residents are primarily in close proximity to major highways and arterial roads such as Thornton Avenue, with White and Asian populations predominantly living to the North and South of Newark. The highest non white populations at 80 to 100 percent are concentrated along Thornton Ave in Old Town.

Figure 4: Population by Racial Group, Newark and the Region Race Newark Bay Area
2000 2010 2020 2020
Asian/Pacific Islander 21.1% 28.2% 42.6% 28.2%
Black/African American 3.9% 4.5% 3.1% 5.6%
Packet Page No. 825
3 Latinx 28.6% 35.2% 30.2% 24.4%
Other or Multiple Races 6.2% 4.6% 5.3% 5.9%
White 40.3% 27.5% 18.8% 35.8%
Source: Universe: Population. Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010, Table P4. Data for 2000 is standardized to 2010 census tract geographies and is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

Figure 1: Racial Demographics of Newark
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

Packet Page No. 826
4 Racially and/or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) or Affluence (RCAAs)
The City’s AFH includes an analysis of Racially and or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPS) which are areas in the City defined by HUD as (1) having a non-White population of 50 percent or more, and (2) having extreme levels of poverty, meaning either: (a) at least 40 percent of the population lives at or below the federal poverty line, or (b) the poverty rate is three times the average census tract level poverty rate in the region, whichever is less. No R/ECAPs were identified in Newark.

The City’s AFH also includes an analysis of Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs), which are neighborhoods in which there are both high concentrations of non-Hispanic white households and high household income rates. There are no RCAAs within Newark based on this methodology.

Although Newark does not have areas that have been identified as Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence through this methodology, there are areas of concentrated affluence in Newark, where residents are making more than $141,000, but do not have the levels of white population to identify as an area of Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Area of Influence.

Disparities In Access to Opportunity
The City’s AFH also evaluates disparities in access to opportunity within the City which are areas within the City that have substantial differences in access to education, transportation, economic and environmental outcomes than other areas as identified by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC).

For this assessment, the opportunity indices prepared by HUD and HCD/TCAC are used to analyze access to opportunity in the City of Newark. Access to opportunity is measured by access to healthy neighborhoods, education, employment, and transportation. At the county level, Alameda County is close to equal in the percentage of the county that is high resourced (36%) and the percentage that is low resourced (39%). A large portion of the county is classified as low to moderate opportunity. Higher opportunity areas are found in Berkeley, Alameda, San Leandro, and Fremont. The majority of the city of Newark is identified as moderate and high resourced, with no low resource areas or areas of high segregation and poverty.

Asian residents comprise the majority of Newark residents in the high resource areas at 63.8 percent, followed by White residents (16%), and Hispanic/ Latinx (11.5%). Low resourced or high segregation and poverty areas are primarily populated by Hispanic/ Latinx (39.7%) and Asian (38.3%) residents.

Moderate resource areas are representative of the population with 36.9 percent of Hispanic/ Latinx residents, Asian residents (29.7%) and African American (3.5%). • Economic Opportunity: The TCAC/HCD Economic Opportunity map measures economic opportunity through poverty, levels of adult education, employment, proximity to employment, and median home values. The majority of Newark has an economic score of less than .25 and .25 to .50, indicating less than positive economic opportunity. The southern corner of the city has higher economic opportunity with a score of .50 - .75. The area has a predominant Asian population and a median income greater than 125,000. Economic opportunity was not cited Packet Page No. 827
5 though community engagement as a concern. Newark has a relatively low unemployment rate of 3.5 percent, but it does have a larger percentage of residents leaving the city for work than remaining in the city.
• Environmental Opportunity: Newark has a mixed classification of environmental impacts, with portions of the city identified as having more positive environmental outcomes and others with less. As a whole, Newark has fine particulate matter rates of 7.2 micrometers, which are higher than the World Health Organization guideline of 5 micrometers, but lower than the US EPA standard of 12 micrometers. These levels can be attributed to industrial outputs, diesel exhaust from major arterials, and two freeways that border Newark. The city halso has a patchwork distribution of outcomes, with the lowest environmental outcomes in central Newark and a portion of the Old Town area that is also home to a majority of BIPOC and low income residents.

The Old Town area has an overall pollution burden percentile of 61 and 76th percentile for asthma, while areas with higher environmental outcomes are in the Northwestern corner of the city.
• Educational Opportunity: Equitable access to culturally relevant and engaging educational opportunities is foundational in increasing opportunities for all residents. The racial and ethnic makeup of the district is highly diverse, with Hispanic/Latinx students comprising the majority of the population at 51.9 percent, followed by Asian at 16.8 percent, White at 10 percent and Filipino at 8.9 percent. Students in the Newark Unified School District have a comparable percentage of students qualifying for free or reduced lunch as Alameda County, at 40.5 percent and 40.7 percent respectively. Both are below the state average at 57.8 percent. Within the district there is a wide range of students that qualify for free and reduced lunch. • Transportation Access and Cost: To better understand housing affordability, it is important to look at transportation costs associated with a location. Figure 3-19 shows the combined housing and transportation costs in Newark. Due to Newark being low density and auto oriented, with a lack of high frequency public transportation options, the majority of households spend more than 45% of their income on housing and transportation.

Disproportionate Housing Needs (For Low-Income Households and Protected Classes)
The City’s AFH also evaluates disproportionate housing needs among low-income households and protected classes within the City. Disproportionate housing needs are evident when members of a protected group disproportionately experience a housing need in comparison to other groups or the total population. Disproportionate housing needs typically refer to the risk of displacement, overcrowding, or cost-burdened, among others. • Newark has many family households with an average family size of 3.61 people (ACS 2016- 2020). The city has 37 percent of households with a child under 18 years of age. This rate is higher than both Alameda County (32%) and the Bay Area (30.5%). Although discrimination based upon family status has not been reported in Newark, it has been reported at the county level. Households with children face additional challenges accessing housing that meets their needs for both size and cost. Survey results found that when asked what are the most urgent housing needs at this time, 50 percent responded that housing for families was the greatest need.

Packet Page No. 828
6 • Female-headed households with children may face particular housing challenges, with pervasive gender inequality resulting in lower wages for women. Moreover, the added need for childcare can make finding a home that is affordable even more challenging. • In Newark, 22.8% of female-headed households with children fall below the Federal Poverty Line, while 5.7% of female-headed households without children live in poverty • Seniors in Newark are overwhelmingly home owners at all income levels, with seniors at the lowest income level having the highest percentage of renters at 37 percent. Housing needs change as we move through life, and due to seniors living on fixed incomes in smaller households, Newark needs housing types and programs to support seniors to age in place and remain in their community.
• Seniors in Newark also have the highest rates of disability of all age groups at 52 percent.

Ambulatory difficulty and independent living were the highest for seniors at 23 and 22 percent, followed by hearing difficulty (13%). African Americans have significantly higher rates of disability compared to other racial and ethnic groups in the city at 22 percent, followed by White residents at 13 percent.
• In Newark, 44 percent of households spend 30%-50% of their income on housing, while 14 percent of households are severely cost burdened and use the majority of their income for housing. While residents are cost burdened and severely cost burdened at all income levels, residents making below 50 percent area median income experience the highest levels. • Renters are more likely to be cost burdened, with twice the number of renters (30%) spending more than 30 percent of their income on housing compared to 16 percent of homeowners, and 14 percent of renters are severely cost burdened. This places renters at a greater risk of living in overcrowded housing, displacement and homelessness.
• Black (41%), Indigenous (46%), Multi Racial (46%), and Latinx (47%) residents are the highest cost burdened, and most vulnerable to displacement, overcrowding and homelessness. • Renters experience overcrowding at 3 times the rate as homeowners at 18 percent, and severe overcrowding at 9 percent.
• Homeowners in Newark are predominantly identified as White and Asian, with the lowest rates of homeownership being found with Indigenous, Black and Hispanic or Latinx residents. This corresponds with rates of acceptance for mortgages. White and Asian residents have the highest rate of loan approval with Indigenous and Hispanic/ Latinx residents having the highest rates of loan applications denied.
• While rates of substandard housing, including housing without kitchen or bathroom facilities, is less than one percent, these units could be underreported. • The city of Newark has a documented reduction from 89 people experiencing homelessness in 2019, to 58 people in 2022.
• The number of farmworkers living in Newark has declined over the years, with the student population at 57 students for the 2019-2020 school year Sites Inventory
State Law requires the City to evaluate whether Housing Sites identified as suitable for accommodation of the City’s RHNA requirements are identified relative to the full scope of the assessment of fair housing (e.g., segregation and integration, racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and Packet Page No. 829
7 affluence, access to opportunity, etc.). A summary of how Housing Sites were identified consistent with AFFH requirements is included below.

Newark has several physical constraints that present challenges in developing the sites inventory and planning for future growth. These constraints include sensitive wetland habitat and flood plains along the western city boundary and limited vacant land. Because of these constraints, sites included in the 2023-2031 Housing Element inventory are largely located in specific plan areas that are redeveloping existing shopping malls and former industrial lands, with several additional sites located in the Old Town/ Central area.

Race and Ethnicity
Newark is a racially and ethnically diverse city, with higher levels of segregation than neighboring jurisdictions such as Union City. BIPOC residents are the majority of the population in all census tracts.

Residents identifying as Hispanic/ Latinx compose the largest segments of the population in Bayside/ Old Town, and Old Town/ Central Newark. The sites inventory provides some opportunity to balance the distribution of the various racial/ethnic groups in the city as well as access to opportunity, as sites at all income levels are found in areas with high opportunity and lower predominance of Hispanic/ Latino populations. The sites in NewPark Place, Birchwood, Bayside /Old Town, and Old Town/Central Newark open up opportunities to diversify the area through income and race/ethnicity.

Although there are no sites included in the inventory in the Northern portion of the city, proposed programs will work to address the concentration in specific neighborhoods and open up single family neighborhoods to new missing middle housing types identified through community engagement as filling a crucial need for large and small households throughout the city.

Generally, the sites inventory will provide some opportunity to balance the distribution of the various racial/ethnic groups in the city. As described above, Hispanic/ Latinx residents are the most segregated group and Asian residents are the most isolated compared to other groups. The sites inventory will not exacerbate segregation by race and ethnicity in Newark due to the high numbers of housing sites in areas that are predominantly Hispanic/ Latinx and Asian, providing new opportunities for housing mobility in the city.

Income
Using the residential sites identified in the site inventory, we look to understand how new housing will impact segregation and integration of race, ethnicity and income level. The majority of identified sites are concentrated in the areas with a predominantly Latinx/Hispanic population. These areas correspond with the Old Town Specific Plan, which increases zoning to encourage investment in affordable housing and the transit oriented nature of Bayside Newark. In the Birchwood area, with the highest median incomes in the city, two housing projects, one the Timber Affordable senior housing project and the second, the E-Z 8 Motel site will provide 184 low and moderate income homes, and opportunities for those of other races with lower incomes in an area that has a slim white majority. The redevelopment of New Park Mall, within the NewPark Place area, will provide 174 low and moderate income units in a high resource neighborhood with a predominantly Asian population.

While the increase in above moderate income housing in areas that are predominantly low and moderate income will increase the diversity of incomes and increased investment in the area, it can also Packet Page No. 830
8 lead to higher rents for the surrounding households, and displacement. In response to the concentration of housing opportunity sites located in the central and southern portions of the city, Newark will be implementing a number of programs to expand housing development and housing choice for multiple incomes throughout the city.

Newark has a population with a high median income, with 50% of residents making more than 100 percent of the median income. Despite this, there is still a large population of residents who are low income, with 10 percent of residents making less than 30 percent of the median income and 13 percent with moderate incomes. Through a variety of programs, the City is working to increase the development of housing for all income types, including housing for those with extremely low incomes, seniors, large families and those with moderate incomes.

Fifty percent of sites are located within the New ParkPlace and the Sanctuary West areas, which have a median income of $139,000. The New ParkPlace / Sanctuary West developments have 28 percent of the total low income units, the largest number of low income units in the city, along with the largest percentage of above moderate units at 58 percent.

Although the lower income sites are distributed amongst The Old Town/ Central, Bayside, Birch Grove and New ParkPlace areas, these census tracts have a range of median incomes and account for 91 percent of the lower-income capacity, 84 percent of the moderate-income capacity, and a majority of the above-moderate income capacity. The sites in the Bayside /Old Town area are zoned for a variety of housing options to be built, with the greatest capacity of low and moderate income sites which will in turn help to diversify income levels in the area. Twenty-three percent of the lower-income sites are in census tracts with incomes below $93,000. This is driven by the capacity on sites in the Old Town/ Central area along Thornton Boulevard and works to ensure that housing is affordable to existing residents in order to support them to stay in place as investments come to the area.

The sites inventory for all other income levels (i.e., lower-income sites, moderate income sites, mixed income sites, and pipeline projects) will not have a significant impact on patterns of segregation and integration by the remaining fair housing indicators including familial status and disability status due the even distribution of those populations in the City.

Goals, Policies, and Actions
The table with a Summary of Contributing Factors and Actions Regarding Housing Issues in Newark in Section 3.I of the Housing Element summarizes the policies and programs required by State Law to demonstrate the City’s commitment to affirmatively further fair housing as part of the Housing Element Update process.

Packet Page No. 831

CITY OF NEWARK HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR
Prepared for October 2023
City of Newark
Attachment 3
Packet Page No. 832
Packet Page No. 833

CITY OF NEWARK HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR
Prepared for October 2023
City of Newark
575 Market Street
Suite 3700
San Francisco, CA 94105
415.896.5900
esassoc.com
Atlanta
Bend
Irvine
Los Angeles
Mobile
Oakland
Orlando
Palm Beach County
Pasadena
Pensacola
Petaluma
Portland
Rancho Cucamonga
Sacramento
San Diego
San Francisco
San Jose
Sarasota
Seattle
Tampa
Thousand Oaks
D202100917
Packet Page No. 834
Packet Page No. 835
City of Newark Housing Element Update i ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Introduction....................................................................................................................... 1 CEQA Requirements for an EIR Addendum.................................................................... 1 Certified General Plan EIR...................................................................................... 2 Project Description ........................................................................................................... 3 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 3 Project Location and Setting................................................................................... 5 Project Purpose....................................................................................................... 5 Project Components ............................................................................................... 7 Impact Analysis ..............................................................................................................11 Aesthetics..............................................................................................................12 Air Quality..............................................................................................................15 Biological Resources ............................................................................................16 Cultural Resources................................................................................................20 Energy...................................................................................................................26 Geology, Soils, and Seismicity .............................................................................28 Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................................................29 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .......................................................................30 Hydrology and Water Quality................................................................................32 Land Use and Planning.........................................................................................34 Noise and Vibration...............................................................................................34 Population and Housing........................................................................................37 Public Services and Recreation............................................................................38 Transportation.......................................................................................................40 Tribal Cultural Resources .....................................................................................41 Utilities and Service Systems ...............................................................................44 Wildfire ..................................................................................................................46 Conclusion......................................................................................................................46 List of Tables
Table 1 Regional Housing Needs Allocation............................................................................. 6 Table 2 Potential Housing Opportunity Sites...........................................................................10 Table 3 City of Newark Combined Housing Inventory ............................................................11 Packet Page No. 836
Packet Page No. 837
City of Newark Housing Element Update 1 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
Introduction
The City of Newark is proposing to update its General Plan Housing Element in accordance with State law. Concurrently, the City will be updating its General Plan Safety Element and adopting .

Other conforming amendments will be made to the General Plan as needed to ensure internal consistency within the General Plan. Collectively, these actions are hereafter referred to as the “proposed project” or the “HEU.” This Addendum assesses whether the impacts generated by the HEU would create any new or substantially greater significant impacts than those that were assessed in the 2013 General Plan Tune Up Environmental Impact Report (“General Plan EIR”).

The General Plan EIR analyzed whether implementation of the goals, policies, and programs of the General Plan would result in significant impacts to the environment and imposed mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts. This Addendum finds that the HEU would not result in any new or substantially greater significant impacts than those which were identified and assessed in the General Plan EIR. This Addendum also reaffirms that the General Plan EIR’s mitigation measures, which reduce significant impacts, would continue to be implemented as part of the HEU. Consequently, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, a subsequent EIR is not required for the HEU and the City Council may adopt this Addendum in fulfillment of its obligations under CEQA.

CEQA Requirements for an EIR Addendum
As described in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, a lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously adopted EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. The following identifies the standards set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, for which the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR would be required:

1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or

3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:

Packet Page No. 838
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 2 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

Thus, if the HEU would not result in any of the circumstances listed in Section 15162 (i.e., no new or substantially greater significant impacts), an Addendum to the General Plan EIR would be appropriate. As demonstrated in the analysis herein, this assessment concludes that an Addendum to the General Plan EIR is appropriate.

Certified General Plan EIR
The City of Newark certified an EIR for the General Plan Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2013012052) in December 2013.1 The General Plan EIR concluded that, at a program level, the impacts of future development and policies included in the General Plan would all be reduced to less‐than‐significant levels given the policies and programs of the General Plan, except for:
• Aesthetic impacts related to the visual character of Southwest Newark Residential and Recreational Focus Area.2
• Air quality impacts inconsistent with Clean Air Plan assumptions for population growth. • Cultural resource impacts to archeological resources and Native American human remains are possible in the Southwest Newark Residential and Recreational Focus Area. • Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impacts in excess of the long‐term 2050 GHG emissions reduction targets.
1 The General Plan EIR comprises the Draft General Plan EIR and the Final EIR. City of Newark, 2013a. General Plan Tune Up Program EIR. Available: https://www.newark.org/departments/community-development/newarkgeneral-plan. 2 The Southwest Newark Residential and Recreational Focus Area evaluated in the General Plan EIR is made up of two non-contiguous sectors in the southwest portion of the City, as shown in Figure 3-7 on page 3-19 of the General Plan Draft EIR. Together, these two sectors cover an area of 637 acres. The boundaries of the larger of the two sectors correspond to the boundaries of Area 4, as delineated in the Area 3 and 4 Specific Plan adopted by the City in 2010. See pages 3-20 to 3-21 of the General Plan Draft EIR for a detailed description of this Focus Area.

Packet Page No. 839
City of Newark Housing Element Update 3 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
• Noise impacts due to a permanent increase in ambient noise levels. • Traffic impacts due to several intersections operating at unacceptable levels of service.

No feasible mitigation measures were identified for these impacts that could reduce impacts to less-than‐significant levels. Therefore, the City Council approved a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 when certifying the General Plan EIR to explain why the General Plan was being approved, despite significant and unavoidable impacts.

Project Description
Introduction
Housing Element Update
State law requires every city and county in California to have an adopted comprehensive longrange general plan with specific contents in order to provide a vision for the jurisdiction’s future.

The general plan is an overarching policy document that informs local decisions about land use and development. The City of Newark General Plan is comprised of eleven chapters. Except for the Housing Element, which was updated to be consistent with other elements, the other Newark General Plan Elements were adopted by the Newark City Council on December 12, 2013.3 The City began the process to update their Housing Element in 2021. The City maintains an ongoing commitment to providing meaningful community engagement and has been using social media, posters and flyers, a website, in-person engagement, one-on-one interviews and listening sessions, surveys, and meetings to share information and gather insights for the update of the Housing Element. The Housing Element was last updated in 2015 and covers the “5th Cycle” Housing Element planning period from 2015 through 2023. Because this period is drawing to a close, State law [Government Code Section 65588] requires the City to update its Housing Element. Once adopted, and in accordance with State law, the planning period for the updated Housing Element will extend through January 31, 2031.

Upon adoption, the Housing Element will be incorporated into the 2013 General Plan, updating the existing 2015 Housing Element. The updated Housing Element was prepared to maintain internal consistency with other elements of the General Plan. The project location and setting, the purpose for the HEU, and a detailed description of the proposed project components are provided below.

Safety Element Update
State law requires that other General Plan elements be reviewed and/or modified upon adoption of the Housing Element. Senate Bill (SB) 1035 requires the safety element to be revised upon update of the Housing Element to include new information on fire hazards, flood hazards, and 3 City of Newark, 2013b. Newark California General Plan. Adopted December 12, 2013. Available:
https://www.newark.org/departments/community-development/newark-general-plan.

Packet Page No. 840
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 4 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
climate adaptation and resilience strategies. Accordingly, the City will be updating the Environmental Hazards Element (to be renamed the Safety Element) in conjunction with the 2023-2031 Housing Element update. The City will maintain consistency between the Housing Element and the other General Plan elements so that policies introduced in one element are consistent with other elements.

Adoption and implementation of the HEU component of the project could result in physical environmental impacts that can be identified and predicted. Most notably, the HEU would reaffirm the City’s commitment to development of more housing in the City, the development of which could have direct physical effects on the environment. In the case of the HEU’s impacts, some degree of specificity is possible in identifying environmental effects since the potential development on the housing opportunity sites and the environmental effects thereof are generally predictable and are well understood and the impacts of potential future development can therefore be known. For this reason, this Addendum has evaluated the environmental effects of the HEU’s implementation that could exceed those already evaluated in the General Plan EIR.

Conversely, the updated Safety Element is primarily a policy document that does not identify or propose specific actions in particular locations that could impact the physical environment in those locations. This would make attempting to identify and evaluate potential impacts associated with those polices too general and highly speculative. Doing so would require overly broad speculation as to the type and locations of activities that could arise from those policies, which would run counter to the directives of CEQA and its overall purpose of identifying and analyzing the known environmental effects of a proposal while avoiding undue speculation.

Similarly, the proposed policies in the updated Safety Element have been developed to identify general areas of potential safety risk and to encourage effective City decisions around those risks.

The updated Safety Element provides broad conceptual direction about the way the City should approach safety challenges and provides general direction to the City to consider aspects of safety in its decisions. No specific projects are identified in the Safety Element, nor are specific locations of possible future activities. In other words, none of the proposed policies make CEQA analysis possible in anything but a general and highly speculative manner.

The CEQA Guidelines provide clear direction on how lead agencies should approach analysis of environmental effects for general policy measures and speculative activities. CEQA Guidelines Section 15146 notes:

The degree of specificity required in an EIR will correspond to the degree of specificity involved in the underlying activity which is described in the EIR…an EIR on a construction project will necessarily be more detailed in the specific effects of the project than will be an EIR on the adoption of a local general plan or comprehensive zoning ordinance because the effects of the construction can be predicted with greater accuracy.

While the environmental effects of the new housing potentially facilitated by the HEU can be predicted with some accuracy, this is not the case with the updated Safety Element. The Packet Page No. 841
City of Newark Housing Element Update 5 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
environmental discussion of both elements can only be provided in the most general terms, and their potential environmental effects cannot be accurately known or assessed without resorting to speculation. CEQA Guidelines Section 15145 is specific in how a lead agency should treat these situations:

If, after thorough investigation, a lead agency finds that a particular impact is too speculative for evaluation, the agency should note its conclusion and terminate discussion of the impact.

Based upon this direction, the City has determined that evaluation of the potential environmental effects of the updated Safety Element is neither appropriate nor required. As stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15187(d), a lead agency “is not required to, nor should it, engage in speculation or conjecture.” Recent case law has further affirmed that “CEQA does not require an environmental document to discuss future developments which are unspecified or uncertain.”4 Attempting such evaluation would not be productive or provide results that would be useful or relevant in considering whether to approve the updated Safety Element. Further, if any future physical action associated with implementation of either element is required at some point in the future, such actions would be required to undergo their own environmental analysis per the requirements of CEQA.

Based upon these considerations, this Addendum does not include any evaluation of potential environmental effects of the updated Safety Element. The City’s decision not to attempt such evaluation is based on the purpose and characteristics of each element, and is informed and supported by statute, regulation, and applicable case law indicating that it is not required by CEQA under these circumstances.

Project Location and Setting
The City of Newark is located in southern Alameda County, between Interstate 880 (I-880) and San Francisco Bay, south of State Route 84 (SR-84). The City of Newark is an enclave, surrounded on three sides by land within the limits of the City of Fremont. The Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge is located along the western perimeter of Newark on the shore of San Francisco Bay. The City's sphere of influence (SOI), the planning boundary set by the Alameda County Local Agency Formation Commission to designate the City's future service area, is coterminous with the Newark City limit, which is also the geographic extent of the “Plan Area” referenced in the General Plan EIR and in this Addendum.

Project Purpose
Purpose of the General Plan Housing Element Update
The overall purpose of the update to the Housing Element is to address the housing needs of all types of households and income levels for current and future Newark residents. State law requires that the City’s updated Housing Element contain specific contents, including an inventory or list of housing sites at sufficient densities to accommodate a specific number of units at various levels 4 Environmental Council of Sacramento v. County of Sacramento. March 2, 2020. 45 Cal.App.5th 1020.

Packet Page No. 842
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 6 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
of affordability assigned to the City by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).

ABAG assigns unit amounts to Bay Area jurisdictions based on a regional housing production target set by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). This assignment is referred to as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).

On December 16, 2021, ABAG adopted the Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031, which distributed the regional housing need of 441,176 units across all local jurisdictions in the nine-county Bay Area. The 14 jurisdictions and unincorporated areas within Alameda County received a total of 88,997 units, or about 20.2 percent of the regional allocation, and Newark received an allocation of 1,874 units. This allocation is higher than the number addressed in the City’s current Housing Element in part because the Bay Area region’s overall allocation of 441,176 units from HCD is more than double the prior RHNA cycle allocation, which was approximately 189,000 units.

Within the update of the Housing Element, the City is required to plan for its allocation of housing units by income group. Income groups are defined based on area median household income, or AMI, updated annually by HCD. Alameda County’s 2021 AMI is $83,450 for a single person, $95,350 for a household of two, and $119,200 for a family of four.

Income categories include very low income (0-50 percent of AMI), low income (51-80 percent of AMI), moderate income (81-120 percent of AMI), and above moderate income (greater than 120 percent of AMI). Providing housing to meet the needs of all income levels is critical to the social and economic health of Newark. The City must plan for its income-based housing allocation to address its share of the Bay Area region’s housing needs.

Table 1 shows the RHNA distribution of required units in Newark across the four income categories with and without additional units as a buffer.

TABLE 1

REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION
Very Low
Income Unitsa
(0-50% AMI)
Low Income
Units
(51-80% AMI)
Moderate
Income Units
(81-120% AMI)
Above
Moderate
Income Units
(>120% AMI) Total New Units
6th Cycle RHNA
without buffer 464 268 318 824 1,874
6th Cycle RHNA
with buffera
523
(464+59)
295
(268+27)
374
(318+56)
1,662
(824+838)
2,854
(1,874+980)
NOTES:
a The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) recommends a buffer of additional units above the RHNA. With a buffer included (980 units), Newark’s RHNA is 2,854 total new units.

SOURCE: Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031 adopted December 2021.

A buffer is necessary to ensure that if one or more of the identified housing sites are developed with non-housing uses or at lower housing unit densities than projected, or then there would be remaining capacity elsewhere in the City to provide an ongoing supply of sites for housing during Packet Page No. 843
City of Newark Housing Element Update 7 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
the eight-year planning period/cycle of the Housing Element. If there were no buffer and an identified housing site was developed with a non-housing project or developed at a density less than that anticipated in the Housing Element, then the City could be obliged to identify new housing opportunity sites and amend the Housing Element prior to the end of the planning period/cycle.

The need for a substantial buffer is increasingly important because of new rules in the Housing Accountability Act’s “no net loss” provisions. California State Senate Bill 166 (2017) adopted Government Code section 65589.5 which requires that the land inventory and site identification programs in the Housing Element always include sufficient sites to accommodate unmet RHNA.

This means that if a housing site is identified in the Housing Element as having the potential for housing development that could accommodate lower‐income units but is actually developed with units at a higher income level, or with fewer units than expected, or with non-residential uses, then the locality must either: 1) identify and rezone, if necessary, an adequate substitute site; or 2) demonstrate that the land inventory already contains an adequate substitute site. An adequate buffer will be critical to ensure that the City remains compliant with these provisions without having to identify and rezone sites prior to the end of the planning period on January 31, 2031.

While State law requires the Housing Element to include an inventory of housing sites and requires the City to appropriately zone sites to meet its RHNA, the law does not require the City to develop/construct housing on these sites. Future development on identified sites will be at the discretion of individual property owners and will be largely dependent on market forces, and in the case of affordable housing, available funding through subsidies and/or other incentives.

Nonetheless, this Addendum considers potential impacts of development that may result from adoption of the HEU.

Project Components
The project analyzed in this Addendum would include adoption of General Plan amendments that would add or modify goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs related to housing.

Amendments to the Housing Element would address, among other things, the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing in the City. In addition, the proposed project would include a housing sites inventory with sufficient existing housing sites at appropriate densities to meet the City’s RHNA requirement plus an ample buffer.

Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs
The proposed Housing Element would include a Housing Plan with goals, objectives, and policies to further affordable housing production and housing mobility, increase opportunity, and protect residents from displacement. The Housing Plan was informed by extensive community engagement; a community profile evaluating Newark's demographic, household, and housing characteristics; and related housing needs. The Housing Plan was also crafted to address an analysis of governmental and non-governmental constraints on housing production and maintenance. For more information, including the definition of these terms, and the proposed Packet Page No. 844
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 8 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
Housing Plan, please see the Public Review Draft Housing Element, which can be found on the City’s Housing Element Update webpage.5
Housing Sites Inventory
Site Selection Process
Using guidance provided by HCD, an inventory of available sites was conducted by closely examining site characteristics and other HCD-established criteria. Primarily, sites were identified by using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping software from multiple datasets to identify parcels that fit the HCD-specified criteria as adequate housing sites. Sites were further refined over a series of working sessions and through input from City staff, the City Council, and community and development sector stakeholders through the community engagement process.

To meet the City’s RHNA requirement, three primary project types are identified in the sites inventory, as described below.

Pipeline Projects
Pipeline projects include projects that have been proposed and are undergoing entitlement review, have been approved, or have been approved and are currently under construction. At the time the Public Review Draft Housing Element was published in October 2023, there were 13 major residential projects in the “pipeline” that would provide approximately 1,257 new units. Per HCD guidance, these units, as well as smaller projects in the City, could potentially count towards Newark’s RHNA requirement if the residential units were not completed and occupied prior to June 30, 2022. Pipeline projects are listed and described in Appendix C of the Public Draft Review Housing Element. For the purposes of this Addendum, pipeline projects are considered part of the baseline since they are already going through their own separate environmental review processes, independent of the HEU, and implementation of the HEU will have no bearing on and will not facilitate their development or make any changes to their current zoning or land use status. As discussed below under Impact Analysis, the primary focus of this Addendum are the housing opportunity sites listed below in Table 2.

Sites Zoned for Housing
Sites zoned for housing comprise the second main type of site to accommodate the City’s RHNA, including both vacant and non-vacant sites with available infrastructure that meet a variety of criteria that make them candidates for residential development during the 6th cycle planning period. These sites are considered vacant or underutilized and are eligible for residential development as is currently allowed under the existing zoning in the General Plan or in one of the City’s adopted specific plans.

Accessory Dwelling Unit,SB 9/SB10 Units, and Missing Middle Housing Accessory Dwelling Units are considered opportunities for residential development and are based on projected development during the planning period as is currently allowed under the existing zoning or General Plan. The site inventory assumes that Newark will continue to approve on the 5 The Public Draft Review Housing Element is available here: https:www.newarkhousingupdate.org Packet Page No. 845
City of Newark Housing Element Update 9 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
order of 20 accessory dwelling units per year. In addition, it is anticipated that homeowners in Newark will begin to take advantage of the opportunities to add additional housing units through the addition of new units on existing residential lots or through urban lot splits as provided in SB 9 and additional homes on parcels in transit-rich areas as provided in SB 10.The HEU includes programs to promote “missing middle” type housing (courtyard housing, duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes) to create housing for middle-and moderate-income households.

Housing Opportunity Site Evaluation Considerations
As most of Newark is already built with limited vacant parcels remaining, opportunity sites in the inventory primarily include non-vacant parcels that already have access to infrastructure and meet a variety of HCD criteria that make them suitable candidates for housing redevelopment. While sites not included in the sites inventory can also be developed for housing to meet RHNA targets, those sites identified in the inventory are considered optimal and most likely to develop and contribute to housing production in the 6th cycle. The following considerations were evaluated:
• General Site Evaluation Considerations
o Infrastructure Availability
o Environmental Constraints
o Site Status and Capacity
o Site Size
o Permitted Density
o Evaluating Sites from Prior Housing Element(s)
o Sites for Rezoning
• Realistic Capacity Evaluation
• Mixed-Use Areas and Sites
• Evaluation of Sites to Accommodate Varied Income Levels • Suitability of Non-Vacant Sites for Development
• Lower Income RHNA vis-a-vis Non-Vacant Sites
The City also undertook an Assessment of Fair Housing analysis of sites. Government Code Section 65583(c)(10) requires the sites to be analyzed to ensure that affordable housing is dispersed equitably throughout the City rather than concentrated in areas of high segregation and poverty or low resource areas that have historically been underserved.

The total realistic development capacity of all opportunity sites in the land inventory is detailed in Table 2 below, which lists all consolidated opportunity sites in the sites inventory and total residential capacity against the City’s 6th cycle RHNA.

Packet Page No. 846
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 10 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
TABLE 2

POTENTIAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITY SITES
Site No. Name
Income Level Total
Units
Very Low Low Moderate Above
Moderate
14 NewPark Mall (Phases B to D) 36 318 18 535 607
15 Grocery Outlet Shopping Center 27 26 0 0 53
16 Thornton Avenue Sites (within Old
Town Specific Plan boundary)
41 41 40 40 162
17 Cedar Boulevard & Timber Street
IndustrialSites
0 0 0 61 61
18 E-Z 8 Motel 39 38 0 0 77
19 CherryPlaza 15 15 0 0 30
20 Thornton Avenue Sites (outside of
Old Town Specific Plan
boundary)
18 18 18 17 71
21 Sycamore St. Vacant Lot 25 25 24 0 74
22 Cedar Blvd. Public Storage Sites 0 0 0 41 41
23 Filbert Villas – 37243 & 37257
Filbert Street
0 0 0 16 16
24 Filbert Ave. Sits 0 0 0 7 7
25 Mayhews Place – 36589 Newark
Blvd.
0 0 0 9 9
26 Locust & Railroad – 37093
Locust St.
0 0 0 6 6
27 Fahmy Homes 37503 & 37511
Cherry St.
0 0 0 6 6
28 Neighborhood Infill Lots 0 0 0 17 17
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) 48 48 48 16 160
Middle Housing Units 0 0 200 0 200
SB9Units 0 0 80 0 80
Total Opportunity Site Units 249 229 348 771 1,597
While these sites and their allowable residential densities may be refined by the City Council based on additional public input and analysis, the final housing sites inventory is expected to result in potential production of approximately 1,597 housing units over the eight-year planning period from January 31, 2023 to January 31, 2031, including ADUs, SB9/SB10 Units “missing middle” housing, and opportunity sites. When major pipeline projects are added in, the overall Packet Page No. 847
City of Newark Housing Element Update 11 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
inventory would provide for potential production of2,854 units. Table 3 below shows the combined totals of all units in the overall inventory.

TABLE 3

CITY OF NEWARK COMBINED HOUSING INVENTORY
Income Level Total
Very Low Low Moderate Above
Moderate
Major Pipeline Projects 274 66 26 891 1,257
Opportunity Sites 249 229 348 771 1,597
Total Capacity 523 295 374 1,662 2,854
Newark RHNA 464 268 318 824 1,874
Surplus % 12% 10% 18% 102% 152%
Surplus Units 59 27 56 838 980
Combining pipeline projects with vacant and non-vacant opportunity sites that are zoned for housing provides the potential to accommodate 2,854 units, representing 152 percent of the City’s RHNA. This number substantially exceeds the net target of 1,874 units the City is required to plan to accommodate for its RHNA, and supplements that allocation by providing a buffer of the required RHNA for all income levels. This includes a 12 percent buffer for very low-income units and 10 percent for low-income units.

It is important to note that changes to existing zoning and land use designations are not contemplated as part of the HEU’s adoption. This is because the above-noted potential housing production in the City could already occur under the City’s existing zoning, particularly with respect to the densities already provided for on the identified parcels. As such, no “upzoning” or increases in allowed densities will be required to meet the City’s RHNA allocation and the substantial buffer provided for in the housing inventory. These existing zonings and land use designations were already evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Essentially, the development potential provided for under existing conditions would not change with implementation of the HEU. This also means that the HEU would not result in any intensification of development potential or associated environmental effects beyond those evaluated in the General Plan EIR.

Impact Analysis
As described above, the final housing sites inventory is expected to result in potential production of approximately 2,854 housing units over the eight-year planning period from January 31, 2023 to January 31, 2031. This includes 1,257 new units that would be provided by pipeline projects that have been proposed and are undergoing entitlement review, have been approved, or have Packet Page No. 848
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 12 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
been approved and are currently under construction, and 1,597 new units accommodated by vacant and non-vacant opportunity sites that are already zoned for housing. As discussed above, for the purposes of this Addendum, pipeline projects are considered part of the environmental baseline since they are already going through their own separate environmental review processes, independent of the HEU, and implementation of the HEU will have no bearing on and will not facilitate their development or make any changes to their current zoning or land use status.

Accordingly, this Addendum focuses on impacts associated with the potential development of up to 1,597 new housing units that would be accommodated by vacant and non-vacant opportunity sites already zoned for housing and further identified by the HEU. The update to the Housing Element would address, among other things, the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing in the City.

The analysis in this Addendum addresses whether changes introduced by the HEU and/or new circumstances relevant to the project would, as compared to the previously-certified 2013 General Plan EIR, result in a new significant impact or significant impacts that are substantially more severe than the significant impacts previously disclosed and/or if there is new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not previously discussed or that any previously examined significant effects would be substantially more severe than significant effects shown in the General Plan EIR, necessitating preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

This Addendum evaluates each topic addressed in the General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR determined that impacts to agricultural, forestry, and mineral resources potentially resulting from buildout of the General Plan would be less than significant. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15128, the General Plan EIR included a brief discussion indicating the reasons why these topics were therefore not discussed in detail in the EIR (General Plan Draft EIR pp. 7-1 to 7-2).

Accordingly, this Addendum does not include impact analysis sections for agricultural, forestry, and mineral resources since there would be no change that would necessitate preparation of these analyses. This Addendum includes three new impact analysis sections—energy, wildfire and tribal cultural resources—since these topics were added to CEQA Guidelines since certification of the General Plan EIR.

Aesthetics
The General Plan EIR determined that there are no officially designated scenic vistas or view corridors in Newark. However, views of the Coyote Hills to the northeast, of Mission Peak to the east, and of the East Bay Hills to the east and southeast are available from open spaces within the City. Additionally, views of low-lying wetland areas fronting San Francisco Bay are available from vantage points along the western perimeter of Newark. The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan could potentially affect these scenic vistas.

However, the General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would be subject to City policies and regulations that serve to protect scenic vistas. For example, General Plan Policy LU-4.14 identifies actions that support the protection and enhancement of panoramic views and vistas of horizon features such as Coyote Hills, Mission Peak, the East Bay and Peninsula Hills, and San Francisco Bay. Policy LU-4.13 reinforces Newark’s identity as a Packet Page No. 849
City of Newark Housing Element Update 13 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
bayfront city by orienting new development on the western and southern edges of the City toward the bay and shoreline areas. In addition, the City's Zoning Ordinance, contained in Title 17 of the Municipal Code, includes provisions to ensure that the architecture and urban design of new developments would protect the City’s visual environment, including scenic vistas and scenic resources. Chapter 17.34, Design Review, of the Zoning Ordinance establishes the City’s design review procedure that is implemented to ensure that new development supports the goals and objectives of the General Plan and other adopted plans and guidelines. To obtain design review approval, projects must, among other criteria specified in Section 17.34.060, Design Review Criteria, demonstrate that the overall design of the project including its scale, massing, site plan, exterior design, and landscaping will enhance the appearance and features of the project site and surrounding natural and built environment. The General Plan EIR determined that required adherence to applicable City policies, regulations, and development standards governing scenic quality would ensure that impacts to scenic vistas and scenic resources would be less than significant.

The General Plan EIR determined that there are no State-designated scenic highways in or adjacent to Newark. As discussed in the General Plan EIR, and as remains accurate as of the preparation of this Addendum, the closest State-designated scenic highway segment (SR-84) is located approximately 2.3 miles from the eastern edge of the Newark City limits and is entirely screened by intervening development in the City of Fremont.6 The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would have no impact on scenic resources within a State scenic highway.

The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would have a significant environmental impact if it would considerably diminish the existing visual character of a neighborhood, district, or area within the City. However, the General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would be subject to City policies and regulations that serve to protect visual character and quality. For example, General Plan Policy LU-2.1 addresses the protection of single-family neighborhoods from substantial increases in density and new land uses which would adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. Policy LU-2.2 requires that new structures, additions, and major renovations are aesthetically compatible with existing structures and the surrounding context, and contribute positively to the visual quality of neighborhoods. In addition, as described above the City's Zoning Ordinance, contained in Title 17 of the Municipal Code, includes provisions to ensure that the architecture and urban design of new developments would protect the City’s visual environment. Chapter 17.34, Design Review, of the Zoning Ordinance establishes the City’s design review procedure that is implemented to ensure that new development supports the goals and objectives of the General Plan and other adopted plans and guidelines. To obtain design review approval, projects must, among other criteria specified in Section 17.34.060, Design Review Criteria, demonstrate that the overall design of the project including its scale, massing, site plan, exterior design, and landscaping will enhance the appearance and features of the project site and surrounding natural and built environment. The General Plan EIR determined that required adherence to applicable City 6 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2023. California State Scenic Highways. Available:
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways.

Accessed July 13, 2023.

Packet Page No. 850
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 14 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
policies, regulations, and development standards governing scenic quality would ensure that impacts on scenic visual character and quality would be less than significant.

With regard to light and glare, the General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would create new sources of light and glare; however, in the urbanized context of Newark this increase would not substantially and adversely affect daytime or nighttime views.

In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would be subject to City policies and regulations that serve to minimize impacts related to light and glare. For example, General Plan Policy LU-4.7 directs the management of exterior lighting to reduce potential light and glare impacts, improve public safety, and enhance the character of the streetscape. Action LU-4.B under Policy LU-4.14 directs the use of development regulations and design review procedures to reduce light and glare impacts from new development. Action LU-4.B specifies that design review procedures should encourage less intense lighting where security needs allow, restricting the height and direction of exterior fixtures to minimize light spill, shielding for exterior lights, and minimizing the use of highly reflective exterior materials.

In addition, Section 17.17.060, Lighting and Illumination, of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that outdoor lighting shall be designed to be an integral part of the built environment, reflecting a balance for the lighting needs with the contextual ambient light level and surrounding nighttime characteristics of the community. Finally, as previously described, the City’s design review process ensures that the architecture and urban design of new developments would protect the City’s visual environment, including ensuring that new development does not generate adverse light and glare. The General Plan EIR determined that required adherence to applicable City policies, regulations, and development standards would ensure that impacts related to light and glare would be less than significant.

The proposed project would include adoption of General Plan amendments that would add or modify goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs related to housing. Amendments to the Housing Element would address, among other things, the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing in the City. In addition, the proposed project would include a housing sites inventory with sufficient existing housing sites at appropriate densities to meet the City’s RHNA requirement plus an ample buffer. The housing sites inventory includes 2,689 new units that would be provided by pipeline projects that have been proposed and are undergoing entitlement review, have been approved, or have been approved and are currently under construction, and 2,552 new units accommodated by vacant and non-vacant opportunity sites that are already zoned for housing. As discussed in the Project Description, changes to existing zoning and land use designations are not contemplated as part of the HEU’s adoption, as potential housing production in the City required to meet the City’s RHNA allocation and the substantial buffer could already occur under the City’s existing zoning, particularly with respect to the densities already provided for on the identified parcels that comprise the housing opportunity sites. The environmental effects of development under these existing zonings and land use designations were already evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the HEU would not result in any intensification of development potential or associated visual or aesthetic change beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to aesthetics than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new Packet Page No. 851
City of Newark Housing Element Update 15 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects related to aesthetics not previously discussed in the General Plan EIR. For these reasons, impacts related to aesthetics from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Air Quality
The General Plan EIR determined that, although growth under the General Plan would come incrementally over a period of approximately 25 years and would be guided by a policy framework in the General Plan that is generally consistent with many of the principal goals and objectives established in regional planning initiatives for the Bay Area, growth under the General Plan would exceed regional projections for the Plan Area (i.e., the Newark City limits). The General Plan EIR determined that the projected growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the Plan Area could lead to a regional VMT increase beyond that anticipated in Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) clean air planning efforts. As a result, the General Plan EIR determined that buildout of the General Plan would contribute to ongoing air quality issues in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFAAB), including non-attainment of ambient air quality standards. The General Plan EIR determined that, even with implementation of applicable measures and policies identified in the General Plan EIR, the impact would be significant and unavoidable.

The General Plan EIR determined that operational emissions associated with buildout of the General Plan would generate an increase in criteria air pollutants in the Plan Area, and that numerous General Plan policies would reduce criteria air pollutants from development projects.7 The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of the identified policies would reduce operational emissions from development projects under the General Plan to the maximum extent practicable. In addition, the General Plan EIR identified that future development projects under the General Plan would be subject to subsequent environmental review pursuant to CEQA and would be required to assess potential impacts under BAAQMD’s project-level thresholds.

Therefore, the General Plan EIR determined that impacts associated with operational emissions of criteria air pollutants from future development under the General Plan would be less than significant.

With regard to construction emissions, the General Plan EIR identified that BAAQMD’s planlevel guidelines do not require an evaluation of construction emissions for plan-level projects.

Nevertheless, the General Plan EIR determined that construction emissions associated with individual development projects under the General Plan would generate an increase in criteria air pollutants. The General Plan EIR identified that subsequent environmental review of future development projects would be required to assess potential impacts under BAAQMD’s projectlevel thresholds. The General Plan EIR determined that construction emissions from buildout of future projects within the City of Newark would primarily be exhaust emissions from off-road diesel-powered construction equipment; dust generated by demolition, grading, earthmoving, and other construction activities; exhaust emissions from on-road vehicles and off-gas emissions from 7 See Impact AIR-2 on pages 4.2-35 to 4.2-39 of the General Plan Draft EIR for a discussion of this impact and the General Plan policies that were identified to reduce criteria air pollutants from development projects.

Packet Page No. 852
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 16 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
application of asphalt, paints, and coatings. The General Plan EIR determined that construction activities associated with development under the General Plan would also be required to include BAAQMD’s “Basic Control Measures” for fugitive dust control pursuant to General Plan Action HW-1.G. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that exhaust emissions generated during construction of projects under the General Plan would also result in construction emissions; however, General Plan Action HW-1.I would require that project applicants implement measures to reduce emissions to the maximum extent feasible. The General Plan EIR determined that compliance with BAAQMD Basic Control Measures and implementation of applicable General Plan policies and actions would reduce construction emissions from development under the General Plan to the maximum extent practicable. The General Plan EIR further determined that future development under the General Plan would be subject to separate environmental review pursuant to CEQA in order to identify and mitigate potential air quality impacts. Therefore, the General Plan EIR concluded that impacts from construction emissions from future development under the General Plan would be less than significant.

The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts with respect to the placement of sensitive receptors proximate to major sources of air pollution or odors or the siting of new sources of air pollution odors proximate to sensitive receptors in the City.

The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Consequently, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to air quality than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not previously discussed or that any previously examined significant effects would be substantially more severe than significant effects shown in the General Plan EIR. Nor is there new information of substantial importance showing that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed project. For these reasons, impacts related to air quality from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Biological Resources
The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would have a less-than-significant environmental impact to special-status plant and animal species, riparian habitat, and sensitive natural communities in the Plan Area. The General Plan EIR also determined that future development under the General Plan would not 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.

Lastly, the General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not conflict with the City of Newark tree preservation ordinance or the Basin Plan and the Habitat Goals and would result in less-than-significant cumulative impacts related to biological resources.

Packet Page No. 853
City of Newark Housing Element Update 17 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
The General Plan EIR references several mechanisms that would reduce potential impacts to special-status plant and animal species to less than significant:
• Compliance with federal, State, and local regulations such as the federal and California Endangered Species Acts, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Fish and Game Code, and California Native Plant Protection Act.
• Mitigation measures (MMs) identified as part of previous environmental review conducted for the Dumbarton Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Specific Plan EIR, the Area 3 and 4 Specific Plan, and the 2009-2014 Housing Element.

Specifically, the Dumbarton TOD Specific Plan EIR, which overlaps with portions of the HEU’s opportunity sites, includes the following MMs that are relevant to potential impacts to specialstatus species as a result of development that could occur with implementation of the proposed project.
• MM 4.3-2 In order to avoid impacts on nesting raptors, a nesting bird survey shall be conducted on individual project site parcels prior to commencing with earth-moving or construction work if this work would occur during the nesting bird season (February 15 – August 31).

If nesting raptors are identified during the surveys, orange construction fence shall be installed to establish a 300-foot radius around the nest unless a qualified biologist determines that a lesser distance will adequately protect the nest (refer to discussion below for more detail).

If the buffer is reduced, the qualified biologist shall remain onsite to monitor the raptors’ behavior during heavy construction in order to ensure that the reduced buffer doesn’t result in take of eggs or nestlings. No construction or earth-moving activity shall occur within the established buffer until it is determined by a qualified raptor biologist that the young have fledged (that is, left the nest) and have attained sufficient flight skills to avoid project construction zones. This typically occurs by August 1. This date may be earlier or later, and would have to be determined by a qualified biologist. If a qualified biologist is not hired to monitor the nesting raptors, then the full 300-foot buffers shall be maintained in place from February 1 through the month of August. The buffer may be removed and work may proceed as otherwise planned within the buffer on September 1. • MM 4.3-3. Western burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted by a qualified western burrowing owl biologist 90 days prior to construction of any project within the project site and again 30 days prior to construction of a project to ensure there are no impacts on burrowing owls in accordance with the methodologies prescribed by CDFG in their 1995 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation, which are more likely to be accepted by CDFG. If burrowing owls are detected on the site during the breeding season (peak of the breeding season is April 15 through July 15), and appear to be engaged in nesting behavior, a fenced 250-foot buffer shall be required between the nest site(s) (i.e., the active burrow(s)) and any earth-moving activity or other disturbance in the project area.

Packet Page No. 854
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 18 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
This 250-foot buffer could be decreased to 160 feet once it is determined by a qualified burrowing owl biologist that the young have fledged (that is, left the nest). Typically, the young fledge by August 31. This date may be earlier than August 31, or later, and would have to be determined by a qualified burrowing owl biologist. If burrowing owls were found on the project site, a qualified biologist shall delineate the extent of burrowing owl habitat on the site and prepare a Mitigation Plan in consultation with CDFG for review and approval by the City that shall identify the mitigation site and any activities proposed to enhance the site.

Monitoring and management of any lands identified for mitigation purposes shall be the responsibility of the applicant for at least five years. An annual report shall be prepared for submittal to CDFG and the City by December 31 of each monitoring year.

Contingency measures for any anticipated problems should be identified in the plan. • MM 4.3-4 In order to avoid impacts on nesting passerines, a nesting survey shall be conducted on individual project site parcels and within 100 feet of the parcel being developed prior to commencing initial earthmoving or construction work on that parcel if this work would occur during the passerine nesting season, that is, between March 1 and September 1. The nesting surveys shall be completed approximately 15 days prior to commencing work. If special-status birds are identified nesting on or near the project site, a 100-foot radius around all identified active nests shall be demarcated with orange construction fencing to establish a non-disturbance buffer. If an active nest is found offsite, the intersecting portion of the buffer that is onsite shall be fenced. No construction or earth-moving activity shall occur within this 100-foot staked buffer until it is determined by a qualified biologist that the young have fledged (that is, left the nest) and have attained sufficient flight skills to avoid project construction zones.

If common (that is, not special-status) birds, for example, red-winged blackbird, are identified nesting on or adjacent to the project site, a non-disturbance buffer of 75 feet shall be established or as otherwise prescribed by a qualified ornithologist. The buffer shall be demarcated with orange construction fencing. Disturbance around an active nest shall be postponed until it is determined by the qualified wildlife biologist that the young have fledged and have attained sufficient flight skills to leave the area.

Typically, most birds in the region of the project site are expected to complete nesting by August 1. However, in the region many species can complete nesting by the end of June or in early to mid-July. Regardless, nesting buffers shall be maintained until August 1 unless a qualified wildlife biologist determines that young have fledged and are independent of their nests at an earlier date. If buffers are removed prior to August 1st, the biologist conducting the nesting surveys shall prepare a report that provides details about the nesting outcome and the removal of buffers. This report shall be submitted to the City project planner prior to the time that buffers are removed if the date is before August 1.

Packet Page No. 855
City of Newark Housing Element Update 19 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
• MM 4.3-5. Prior to City approval of any specific development, special-status plant surveys shall be conducted in appropriate habitats during the appropriate period in which the species are most identifiable in compliance with all CDFG (2000), USFWS (1996), and CNPS (2001) published survey guidelines. Project construction shall not be initiated until all special-status plant surveys are completed and subsequent mitigation, if necessary, is implemented.

If special-status plant species are found during surveys, those individuals or populations shall be avoided to the maximum degree possible. If avoidance is not possible while otherwise obtaining the project’s objectives, then other suitable measures and mitigation shall be developed in consultation with the agencies that are responsible for protection of that plant species based on its protection status.

In addition, the Dumbarton TOD Specific Plan EIR includes the following MM that is relevant to potential impacts to wetlands and waters of the State or U.S. as a result of construction for the City of Newark HEU:
• 4.3.6. Wetland mitigation shall, to the extent not already completed, require a wetland delineation conducted according to the 1987 USACE Wetland Delineation Manual (U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual: Coast Region (Corps 2008) prior to City approval of any specific development proposal. This delineation shall be submitted to the USACE for verification.

Once that map is “verified,” the full extent of waters of the U.S./State would be known and the extent of impacts on regulated areas ascertained.

Authorization from the Corps and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) (for example, a Nationwide Permit and a Certification of Water Quality) shall be obtained as necessary/required by these agencies prior to filling any waters of the U.S./State on the project site.

As approved by the USACE and the RWQCB, the project sponsor may purchase mitigation credits from an approved mitigation bank or an approved in-lieu fee mitigation entity at a minimum 1:1 ratio or as required by the permitting regulatory agencies. As an alternative to the purchase of credits in a mitigation bank, wetlands may be created onsite and, if so, shall have an equal or higher functional value than those wetlands affected by the project (known as in-kind replacement).

Impacts shall also be minimized by the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to protect preserved waters of the U.S./State and to ensure that water quality standards are not compromised in preserved wetlands and other waters within the watershed.

Lastly, the Dumbarton TOD Specific Plan EIR includes the following MM that is relevant to tree removal associated with construction for the City of Newark HEU:
• MM 4.3-8. A tree permit shall be obtained from the City prior to the removal of any tree protected by City ordinance on project site parcels. To offset impacts resulting from the Packet Page No. 856
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 20 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
removal of these trees, replacement trees shall be planted in designated open space areas on the subject parcel. Tree replacement shall be at a 1:1 ratio (that is, for each tree removed, one tree shall be planted as a replacement). Replacement trees shall be native California species that are native to the Newark area.

A Tree Management Plan shall be prepared for any project on any project site parcel where tree removal occurs. Preparation of this plan and subsequent planting and monitoring shall be a condition of project approval and shall be tied to a security bond or cash deposit posted by the developer with the City to pay for any remedial work that might need to occur, if the prior effort fails.

The General Plan EIR documented that potentially suitable habitat for the federally endangered tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) is present in Areas 2 and 4 of the Dumbarton TOD Area Specific Plan. The General Plan EIR also states that the species has been documented on the Warm Springs Unit of San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge and that it has been introduced into created vernal pools at Pacific Commons Preserve, a 440-acre mitigation project contiguous with the Warm Springs Unit east of the Stevenson Boulevard crossing of the Southern Pacific railroad tracks. Since the General Plan EIR was authored, tadpole shrimp were documented in 2016 in a parcel near the Warm Springs Unit and the Pacific Commons Preserve.8 However, none of the HEU’s opportunity sites contain suitable habitat for the species. As a rule, all the HEU’s opportunity sites are infill in nature, and all are already developed with existing uses or are surrounded on all sides by existing urban development. None of the sites contain suitable habitat for sensitive plant or wildlife species.

The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. With implementation of applicable MMs from the General Plan EIR, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to biological resources than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not previously discussed or that any previously examined significant effects would be substantially more severe than significant effects shown in the General Plan EIR. Nor is there new information of substantial importance showing that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed project.

For these reasons, impacts related to biological resources from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Cultural Resources
Historical Resources
The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would have a significant environmental impact if it would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, which the General Plan EIR identified as any building, 8 California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Natural Diversity Database. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/BIOS. Accessed August 4, 2023.

Packet Page No. 857
City of Newark Housing Element Update 21 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
structure, feature, object, or site of historic or cultural importance, as listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or designated as a historical resource by the City of Newark. The General Plan EIR noted that, while the act of adopting the General Plan would not directly result in impacts to historical resources, it would allow development and redevelopment that could potentially impact historical resources through direct alteration, damage, or demolition of listed or registered historic structures or historic sites.

The General Plan EIR identified that there are no buildings in the City of Newark listed on the NRHP or CRHR. However, the General Plan EIR identified that City of Newark’s list of historic resources contains two buildings: St. Edward’s Church (Rose of Sharon Chapel) and the James Graham residence in Old Town.9 The General Plan EIR determined that, since the General Plan supports Citywide infill projects, and such infill projects could be located in Old Town, if any future projects under the General Plan include these buildings, such a project would have the potential to alter or destroy these listed historic buildings or modify their settings, which would be considered a potentially significant impact.

The General Plan EIR further identified that Old Town, as of 1989, contained 42 buildings referred to as of “historic merit” as defined in Chapter 17.20, Historical Resources, of the Newark Municipal Code,10 and other structures with potential eligibility for government registers or lists (but that were not presently listed on such lists or registers) are located in the vicinity of the Dumbarton Bridge. These features included the Dumbarton Cutoff train bridge, industrial buildings in the southwestern portion of Newark, and the Union Pacific Railroad corridor between Wells and Thornton Avenue. The General Plan EIR identified that the General Plan allows development and redevelopment of the Dumbarton Bridge vicinity, where these features “of historic merit” may exist.

The General Plan EIR determined that several existing regulations would help to ensure that development and redevelopment activities allowed under the General Plan do not cause a substantial adverse change to a historical resource. The General Plan EIR identified that Title 24, Part 8 of the California Code of Regulations directs that historic buildings and structures are rehabilitated, preserved, restored, and relocated in an appropriate manner. The General Plan EIR further identified that Chapter 17.20, Historical Resources, of the Newark Municipal Code protects City-designated historic resources under its Historic Preservation Program by providing standards for and review of modification, alteration, demolition, or removal of historical resources.

The General Plan EIR noted that previous CEQA analysis identified potential impacts to historical resources and developed mitigation measures. For example, the Newark 2009-2014 9 Old Town is the historic center of Newark. It includes a commercial district along Thornton Avenue and a residential area with a variety of housing types and densities. The Old Town Focus Area evaluated in the General Plan EIR is generally located along Thornton Avenue on both sides of the street, south from Cherry Street to the Union Pacific railroad tracks, as shown on Figure 3-7 on page 3-19 of the General Plan Draft EIR. See page 3-21 of the General Plan Draft EIR for a detailed description of this Focus Area. 10 The Historic Resources chapter of the Newark Municipal Code was Chapter 17.39 at the time the General Plan EIR was prepared but has since been relocated to Chapter 17.20.

Packet Page No. 858
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 22 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
Housing Element EIR provided additional review and consideration for unlisted historic resources in Mitigation Measure 4.4-2 which requires that specific housing development proposals on housing sites in or adjacent to the Old Town portion of Newark that involve any structure older than 45 years shall be reviewed by the Newark Planning Division to ensure consistency with the City’s Historic Resource Ordinance and applicable CEQA Guidelines provisions. The mitigation measure states that if a substantial change to a historic resource is proposed, modifications may be required in the design of such project to ensure consistency with the Historic Resource Ordinance. Future construction on a housing site adjacent to any identified historic structure shall be complementary to the historic structure in terms of providing appropriate setbacks, consistent design and use of colors, determined by the Newark Planning Division.

The General Plan EIR further identified that for the Dumbarton Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Focus Area,11 Dumbarton TOD EIR Mitigation Measure 4.4-1b requires that if construction is proposed within 100 meters of Union Pacific Railroad buildings or structures, that these structures shall be evaluated for inclusion on the National Register by a qualified professional. If the Union Pacific Railroad structures are found eligible for inclusion in the National Register, then the project sponsor shall submit a study prepared by a qualified historian or architectural historian to determine whether the proposed project would materially alter in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of the known historical resource that conveys its historical significance.

In addition, the General Plan EIR identified the following General Plan goals, policies, and actions that address potential impacts to historical resources:
• GOAL LU-5: Identify, preserve, and maintain historic structures and sites to enhance Newark’s sense of place and create living reminders of the city’s heritage. • Policy LU-5.1: Preserving Important Buildings. Encourage the preservation of historically and architecturally important buildings that help enhance Newark’s character and sense of identity. The demolition of historically important buildings is strongly discouraged.
• Policy LU-5.2: Context-Sensitive Design. Ensure that the repair, maintenance, and expansion of Newark’s historically important structures uses building materials and architectural details which respect historic context.
• Policy LU-5.3: Adaptive Reuse. Where it is no longer feasible to continue to use an older building for its originally intended use, encourage adaptive reuse of the structure rather than demolition and replacement.
11 The Dumbarton TOD Focus Area evaluated in the General Plan EIR covers approximately 200 acres of formerly industrial land in the western portion of Newark, as shown on Figure 3-7 on page 3-19 of the General Plan Draft EIR. See page 3-20 of the General Plan Draft EIR for a detailed description of this Focus Area.

Packet Page No. 859
City of Newark Housing Element Update 23 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
• Policy LU-5.4: Historic Landscapes. Consider the historic value of landscape features, such as trees, gardens, and fences when evaluating the historical significance or importance of a property.
• Action LU-5.A: Evaluating Historic Resource Impacts. Evaluate applications for demolition, alteration, or relocation of structures more than 50 years old to determine if the structure has sufficient significance and integrity to merit its designation as a historic resource. In the event alterations to a historic resource are proposed, use the Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties to guide application review.
• Action LU-5.B: Historic Building Code. Allow the use of the State Historic Building Code to achieve the preservation of important historic structures. • Action LU-5.C: Incentives for Restoration. Work with property owners seeking to use state and federal incentives for the restoration and maintenance of historic properties, including historic tax credits and tax relief programs such as Mills Act preservation contracts.
• Action LU-5.D: Historic Inventory. Maintain and periodically update a list of Newark’s historic sites and structures. Action LU-5.E State and Federal Register Listings. Work with property owners seeking to place their properties on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Points of Historical Interest, California Historical Landmarks, or the California Register of Historical Resources. • Action LU-5.E: State and Federal Register Listings. Work with property owners seeking to place their properties on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Points of Historical Interest, California Historical Landmarks, or the California Register of Historical Resources.
• Action LU-5.F: Preservation on the Web. Use the City’s website to distribute information about Newark’s history and historic resources.
• Action LU-5.G: Preservation Advocacy. Support the creation of local groups that advocate for greater recognition of Newark’s history and the preservation of important historic buildings, places, and resources.

The General Plan EIR determined that these policies would further reduce any potential impacts to a historical resource to a less-than-significant level.

Archaeological Resources
The General Plan EIR determined that the developable area of Newark is largely built out and that buildout of the General Plan would largely consist of redevelopment of previously disturbed sites in the Plan Area (i.e., the Newark City limits). As such, the General Plan EIR determined that the potential for encountering as yet undiscovered archeological resources is low in much of the Plan Area. However, the General Plan EIR determined that the Dumbarton TOD Focus Area Packet Page No. 860
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 24 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
includes undeveloped land, and that sector of the City is considered moderately sensitive for archaeological resources. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that the Southwest Newark Residential and Recreational Focus Area12 contains a large area of undeveloped land, some of which would be developed with buildout of the General Plan. The General Plan EIR determined that archaeological resources are known to be present in the Southwest Newark Residential and Recreational Focus Area, and development in this area under the General Plan could potentially result in accidental disturbance or damage to archaeological resources.

The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of General Plan Policy LU-5.5 would reduce the potential for damage to archaeological resources in Newark associated with implementation of the General Plan:
• Policy LU-5.5: Native American Resources. Coordinate with local tribal representatives and the Native American Heritage Commission to ensure the protection of Newark’s Native American resources and to follow appropriate mitigation, preservation, and recovery procedures in the event that important resources are identified during development.

In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that previous environmental review conducted for the 2007-2014 General Plan Housing Element and the Area 3 and 4 Specific Plan identified mitigation measures to address potential impacts to archaeological resources that have been adopted by the City. Specifically, Mitigation Measure 4.4-1 from the 2009-2014 Housing Element EIR requires that in the event an archeological Native American artifact is identified during residential development, work will cease in the immediate vicinity of the artifact until a resource protection plan conforming to CEQA Guidelines is prepared by a qualified archaeologist and approved by the City of Newark. Previous environmental review concluded that implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce associated impacts to a less-thansignificant level. The Area 3 and 4 Specific Plan EIR also contains mitigation measures that reduce impacts to archaeological resources. Mitigation Measure CUL-2.1 requires before construction activities begin that a hand excavation led by a professional archaeologist be used to determine the extent of archaeological resources in the area. Mitigation Measures CUL-2.2 and CUL-2.3 require that site development plans and grading then use this information to avoid known cultural resources. Mitigation Measure CUL-2.4 requires that where known archaeological resources are present and cannot be avoided, preservation in place methods or a program of data recovery will be implemented, following CEQA Guidelines. This would involve a combination of limited hand excavation to remove known human remains to prevent additional damage, as well as heavy equipment under the direction of a professional archaeologist. Mitigation Measure CUL2.4 requires a certified professional archaeologist to observe during all construction that causes ground disturbance with specific authority to direct and halt earthmoving activities if cultural materials are encountered, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines. In addition, mitigation measure 12 The Southwest Newark Residential and Recreational Focus Area evaluated in the General Plan EIR is made up of two non-contiguous sectors in the southwest portion of the City, as shown in Figure 3-7 on page 3-19 of the General Plan Draft EIR. Together, these two sectors cover an area of 637 acres. The boundaries of the larger of the two sectors correspond to the boundaries of Area 4, as delineated in the Area 3 and 4 Specific Plan adopted by the City in 2010. See pages 3-20 to 3-21 of the General Plan Draft EIR for a detailed description of this Focus Area.

Packet Page No. 861
City of Newark Housing Element Update 25 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
CUL-2.4 requires construction to stop within a 100-foot radius if and when such resources are found, until the archaeologist evaluates the significance of the find and suggests the appropriate mitigation to protect the resources.

The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of these mitigation measures would further reduce the potential for impacts related to accidental damage to or disturbance of archaeological resources. Nevertheless, as described in the Area 3 and 4 Specific Plan EIR, given the known extent of unique archeological resources in the Southwest Newark Residential and Recreational Focus Area, it is unlikely that total avoidance of impacts is possible during future development associated with buildout of the General Plan. The General Plan EIR determined that, while the implementation of mitigation measures from the Area 3 and 4 Specific Plan EIR would partially reduce impacts to these cultural resources, development in the Southwest Newark Residential and Recreational Focus Area could still damage or disturb archaeological deposits through the placement of fill and soil compression. Consequently, the General Plan EIR determined that impacts to archaeological resources under buildout of the General Plan would be significant and unavoidable.

Human Remains
The General Plan EIR determined that, while the potential for encountering as yet undiscovered archeological resources is low in much of the Plan Area, the salt marshlands in the western portion of the City, including the vicinity of the Dumbarton TOD Focus Area, are considered moderately sensitive for Native American remains and other archaeological resources, and the Southwest Newark Residential and Recreational Focus Area is known to contain Native American remains. The General Plan EIR determined that development in these areas under the General Plan could potentially result in accidental disturbance or damage to human remains. The General Plan EIR determined that compliance with the provisions for Native American consultation pursuant to Senate Bill 18 (SB 18) as well as with the regulations pertaining to procedures in the event of discovery of human remains contained in California Health and Safety Code Section 7052 and 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097 and 15064.5 would reduce potential impacts. The General Plan EIR further determined that implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.4-1 from the 2009-2014 Housing Element EIR, and Mitigation Measures CUL-2.1 through CUL-2.4 from the Area 3 and 4 Specific Plan EIR, described above, would also further reduce the potential for accidental damage or disturbance of human remains during construction activities associated with buildout of the General Plan.

The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of General Plan Policy LU-5.5 also would reduce the potential for damage or disturbance of human remains associated with implementation of the General Plan:
• Policy LU-5.5: Native American Resources. Coordinate with local tribal representatives and the Native American Heritage Commission to ensure the protection of Newark’s Native American resources and to follow appropriate mitigation, preservation, and recovery procedures in the event that important resources are identified during development.

Packet Page No. 862
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 26 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
Nevertheless, the General Plan EIR determined that damage or disturbance of human remains through the placement of fill and soil compression could still result during construction activities associated with buildout of the General Plan. Consequently, the General Plan EIR determined that impacts to human remains under buildout of the General Plan would be significant and unavoidable.

Proposed HEU
The proposed project would include adoption of General Plan amendments that would add or modify goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs related to housing. Amendments to the Housing Element would address, among other things, the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing in the City. In addition, the proposed project would include a housing sites inventory with sufficient existing housing sites at appropriate densities to meet the City’s RHNA requirement plus a buffer. The housing sites inventory includes 1,257 new units that would be provided by pipeline projects that have been proposed and are undergoing entitlement review, have been approved, or have been approved and are currently under construction, and 1,597 new units accommodated by vacant and non-vacant opportunity sites that are already zoned for housing. As discussed in the Project Description, changes to existing zoning and land use designations are not contemplated as part of the HEU’s adoption, as potential housing production in the City required to meet the City’s RHNA allocation and the substantial buffer could already occur under the City’s existing zoning, particularly with respect to the densities already provided for on the identified parcels that comprise the housing opportunity sites. The environmental effects of development under these existing zonings and land use designations were already evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the HEU would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to cultural resources than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects related to cultural resources not previously discussed in the General Plan EIR. For these reasons, impacts related to cultural resources from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Energy
The General Plan EIR did not evaluate potential impacts to energy resources as an individual section since it was prepared and certified prior to the 2018 addition of energy as a new resource category in Appendix G, Environmental Checklist, of the State CEQA Guidelines. However, the General Plan EIR did include a discussion of energy in the context of energy resource efficiency in the General Plan’s sustainability policies and analysis of greenhouse gas emissions and air quality. In addition, the Significant and Irreversible Changes section on page 7‐4 of the General Plan EIR stated that “development allowed by the proposed Plan would irretrievably commit nonrenewable resources for the construction of buildings, infrastructure, and roadway improvements.”
Packet Page No. 863
City of Newark Housing Element Update 27 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Further, future development under the HEU would be required to comply with the State Building Energy Efficiency Standards specified in Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). In addition to the State Building Energy Efficiency Standards, the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) specified in Title 24, Part 11 of the CCR is mandatory for all residential and non-residential buildings constructed in the state and includes mandatory measures for energy efficiency, water conservation, material conservation, planning and design, and overall environmental quality. The current CALGreen standards (2022) are adopted by reference in the Newark Municipal Code. future development under the HEU would be required to comply with the applicable requirements of the Municipal Code and the Conservation and Sustainability policies of the General Plan, which include:
• Policy CS-7.1: Reducing Energy Use. Support measures to reduce energy consumption and increase energy efficiency in residential, commercial, industrial, and public buildings.
• Policy CS-7.2: Renewable Energy Sources. Support the expanded use of renewable energy sources such as wind and solar by Newark residents and businesses, the City of Newark, and other government agencies.
• Policy CS-7. 3: Designing for Energy Efficiency. Support building design, site planning, and subdivision design methods that reduce heating and cooling costs and achieve greater energy efficiency.

In addition, the City of Newark adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2010 to identify and evaluate feasible and effective policies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in order to reduce energy use and costs, protect air quality, and improve the economy and the environment.

The Newark CAP identifies the following GHG reduction targets for the City:
• Municipal: 5% Reduction from 2005 Municipal Emissions by July 2012 • Communitywide: 5% Reduction in City and Community Emissions by July 2015; 15% Decrease in Communitywide Emissions from 2005 Levels by 2020 The City has not yet updated these target dates. The General Plan EIR analyzes compliance with CAP policies regarding energy efficiency and reduction in energy use within the chapter on greenhouse gas emissions. It concludes that the General Plan is generally consistent with CAP policies and that it would further implement these policies through additional General Plan policies (Table 4.6‐6 of the General Plan EIR).

The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR and therefore would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to energy resources than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR.

Packet Page No. 864
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 28 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to geology, soils, and seismicity. The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of General Plan policies and compliance with local and California Building Code (CBC) regulations would reduce exposure of people and structures to seismic hazards, soil erosion, and unstable or expansive soils.

The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving surface rupture along a known active fault; strong seismic ground shaking; seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; and landslides. No Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones have been established by the California Geological Survey (CGS) within the City of Newark, nor have any seismically induced landslide hazard zones been mapped by CGS in the City.13 Further, the General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would be required to adhere to the requirements of detailed, site-specific geotechnical evaluations prior to implementation. It would also adhere to applicable building code and building permit requirements to help ensure that impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking are minimized to the maximum extent possible. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that General Plan policies would serve to minimize impacts related to geology, soils, and seismicity. For example, General Plan Policy EH-1.1 supports the establishment and enforcement of development regulations and building code requirements to protect residents and workers from flooding, liquefaction, earthquakes, fires, and other hazards. Policy EH-2.1 requires new development to meet structural integrity standards which minimize the potential for damage during earthquakes. Policy EH-2.2 encourages the retrofitting of existing structures to reduce the potential for damage during earthquakes. The General Plan EIR determined that required adherence to applicable City policies, regulations, and development standards would ensure that impacts related to geology, soils, and seismicity would be less than significant.

The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, such as implementation of erosion control measures specified in Title 15, Chapter

15.50, Grading and Excavation, of the City of Newark Municipal Code, would reduce impacts from erosion and the loss of topsoil. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that General Plan policies would serve to minimize impacts related to soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. For example, General Plan Policy CS-1.4 directs the identification and elimination of erosion problems on public and private lands and provides that the potential for erosion should be considered as a design and engineering factor in new development. The General Plan EIR determined that required adherence to applicable City policies, regulations, and development standards would ensure that impacts related to substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil would be less than significant.
13 California Department of Conservation, 2023. Geologic Hazards Data & Maps. Available:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/geologichazards/#dataviewer. Accessed July 18, 2023.

Packet Page No. 865
City of Newark Housing Element Update 29 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not result in a significant impact related to development on unstable geologic units and soils or result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. The General Plan EIR determined that required adherence to the City of Newark Municipal Code would ensure that construction, grading, and related activities meet CBC standards, implement erosion control methods, and provide, where required, a professionally prepared soils engineering report, engineering geology report, and liquefaction study. Further, the California Public Resources Code establishes that development located in a seismic hazard zone requires a geotechnical report identifying seismic hazards. The General Plan also contains applicable policies which would ensure that impacts from unstable geologic units are minimized. Policies EH-1.1 and EH-1.2 establish and enforce development regulations to protect residents from hazards as well as prohibit development in areas where there is risk from hazards.

The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not create substantial risks to life or property as a result of its location on expansive soil. As mentioned previously, geotechnical evaluations are required for development, and required adherence to the City of Newark Municipal Code would ensure that development meets CBC standards and undergo appropriate precautions. General Plan Policies EH-1.1 and EH-1.2, as described above, would also reduce any impacts related to expansive soil. The General Plan EIR also noted that future development under the General Plan would not require the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems, so there would be no related impacts. The General Plan EIR determined that required adherence to applicable policies, regulations, and development standards would ensure that impacts related to geology, soils, and seismicity would be less than significant.

The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Consequently, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to geology and soils than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not previously discussed or that any previously examined significant effects would be substantially more severe than significant effects shown in the General Plan EIR. Nor is there new information of substantial importance showing that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed project. For these reasons, impacts related to geology and soils from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would generate substantial GHG emissions in excess of the long‐term 2050 GHG reduction target interpolated from Executive Order S‐03‐05, and therefore identified a significant and unavoidable impact with respect to the increase in GHG emissions.

Packet Page No. 866
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 30 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
The General Plan EIR determined that cumulative development would contribute to global climate change through GHG emissions from transportation, energy, water/wastewater, waste generation, and other off‐road equipment. The General Plan EIR found that community‐wide GHG emissions at 2035 buildout of the General Plan would exceed the quantified threshold of significance for that year. The General Plan EIR determined that the General Plan would be generally consistent with many of the principal goals and objectives in the State and local plans, including the City’s Climate Action Plan (see Table 4.6‐6 of the General Plan EIR).

The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Consequently, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to GHG emissions than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not previously discussed or that any previously examined significant effects would be substantially more severe than significant effects shown in the General Plan EIR. Nor is there new information of substantial importance showing that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed project. For these reasons, impacts related to GHG emissions from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The General Plan EIR determined that compliance with applicable federal, State, and local laws would ensure that future development under the General Plan would not result in any significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. The General Plan EIR determined that impacts of future development under the General Plan related to creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; creation of 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; exposure to or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within ¼- mile of an existing or proposed school; or development on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with compliance with applicable federal, State, and local laws and policies identified in the General Plan EIR and discussed below.

As discussed in the General Plan and General Plan EIR, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets national standards for hazardous materials management. The EPA also controls the generation, handling, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. The Clean Water Act governs hazardous material discharges into bodies of water. Other federal agencies with jurisdiction over hazardous materials include the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which ensures safe working conditions, and the US Department of Transportation (US DOT), which regulates the transportation of hazardous materials. At the State level, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) manage lists of hazardous wastes subject to regulation. Both Packet Page No. 867
City of Newark Housing Element Update 31 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
agencies also track the location of sites requiring hazardous material clean-up to ensure safe future development. the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) also monitors activities involving hazardous material within the State. The Department of Industrial Relations Division of Occupational Safety and Health, better known as Cal- OSHA, was established under the California Code of Regulations, Title 8, to serve as an organization that oversees policies for workplace safety, including exposure to hazardous materials. The California Emergency Management Agency (CEMA) prepares hazardous materials release response plans and assists local government in disaster preparedness, response, and recovery. At the local level, the Alameda County Department of Environment Health (ACDEH) has developed a Hazardous Waste Management Plan. ACDEH has been designated as the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) for Newark and as such, it coordinates and enforces environmental protection and hazardous material management, handling, and storage programs from the local to the federal level. These programs include the Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) Program; Hazardous Waste Generator Program; and California Accidental Release Program. Other County programs applicable to Newark include an underground storage tank program, an aboveground storage tank program, a tiered permitting program, and a risk management program. Fire codes, which are enforced by the Alameda County Fire Department (ACFD), also address the handling of hazardous materials, and the Newark Municipal Code requires Hazardous Materials Storage Permits. The Alameda County Water District addresses hazardous materials as they relate to the potential contamination of groundwater. The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) monitors hazardous materials issues relating to urban runoff and stormwater. Construction plans that disturb one acre of soil or more require that a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be filed with the RWQCB. The SWPPP includes hazardous materials discharge regulations, sediment and erosion control measures, and detailed construction schedules.

In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that General Plan policies would serve to minimize impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. For example, General Plan Policy EH-4.1 seeks to reduce the risk of hazardous materials accidents, spills, and vapor releases, and minimize the effects of such incidents if they occur. Policy EH-4.5 directs the provision of the means for Newark residents and businesses to obtain information about hazardous materials handling, storage, and regulations in the community. Policy EH-4.6 seeks to reduce the risk of accidents in the transportation of hazardous materials and requires compliance with all hazardous waste transport standards established by State and federal agencies.

As described in the General Plan EIR, there would be no impacts related to safety hazards resulting from development within an airport land use plan, proximity to a public airport or public use airport, or development in the vicinity of a private airstrip. The nearest airports are across the bay from Newark and are all greater than two miles away from proposed future development under the General Plan.

The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not interfere with any adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that there would be no significant impact resulting from risks associated with wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. The General Plan EIR determined that adherence Packet Page No. 868
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 32 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
to applicable regulations and policies would ensure that risks of impaired evacuation or emergency response would be less than significant. For example, General Plan Policy EH-5.1 provides for a traffic circulation system that assures the City's capacity to deliver emergency services. Policy EH-5.3 seeks to avoid placing new development in areas where emergency response and evacuation cannot be provided within acceptable levels. Policy EH-5.4 directs the City to maintain and regularly update emergency plans for floods, earthquakes, fires, hazardous materials, and other disasters in cooperation with the fire service provider consistent with Standard Emergency Management System (SEMS) Plan protocol. The General Plan EIR determined that required adherence to applicable policies, regulations, and development standards would ensure that impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant.

The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Consequently, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not previously discussed or that any previously examined significant effects would be substantially more severe than significant effects shown in the General Plan EIR. Nor is there new information of substantial importance showing that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed project. For these reasons, impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Hydrology and Water Quality
The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not result in any significant impacts with regard to hydrology and water quality. Specifically, future development under the General Plan would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Such development would be required to comply with State and local water quality regulations designed to control erosion and protect water quality during construction. This includes compliance with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit, which requires preparation and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP would include Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would prevent or minimize environmental impacts and ensure that discharges during the construction phase of future projects would not cause or contribute to the degradation of water quality in receiving waters, reducing construction-related water quality impacts to less than significant. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that General Plan policies would serve to minimize impacts related to hydrology and water quality. For example, General Plan Policies CS-3.1, CS-3.4, CS3.5, and Actions CS-3.G and CS-3.H, and others would protect water resources in the Plan Area (i.e., the Newark city limit).

The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, Packet Page No. 869
City of Newark Housing Element Update 33 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, create runoff water which would exceed the capacity of stormwater drainage systems, or otherwise substantially degrade water quality. The General Plan EIR determined that future development would comply with applicable regulations such as ACWD’s Well Ordinance, the Low Impact Development (LID) guidelines, and the water use efficiency measures mandated by the Water Conservation Act of 2009. In addition, pursuant to the City of Newark Municipal Code, the City would require that plans submitted for grading permits include a detailed hydrology report to demonstrate that adequate stormwater conveyance and capacity is available to convey the stormwater flow from the site. Future development may also be required a fair share of improvements to the storm drain system necessary to accommodate increased flows from development. The General Plan EIR determined that adherence to General Plan goals, policies, and actions would further ensure that future development under the General Plan does not create runoff, erosion, flooding, or otherwise substantially degrade water quality in the Plan Area. Policies CS-5.5, CS-5.6, CS-5.7, CS-5.8, and Actions EH-3.D, EH-3.E, in addition to other relevant measures such as those listed above, would establish processes to ensure potential impacts to existing water systems would be less than significant.

The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to flooding, with respect to the placement of structures within a 100-year flood hazard area, the failure of a levee or dam, or other adverse effects related to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Though future development could result in the placement of residential structures in existing FEMA-designated 100-year Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs), construction within SFHAs is governed by the City’s Municipal Code Chapter

15.40, Construction in Flood Hazard Areas, which sets forth standards for development that would minimize flood hazard risks. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that General Plan policies would serve to minimize impacts related to impacts related to flooding. For example, General Plan Policy EH-1.1 supports the establishment and enforcement of development regulations and building code requirements to protect residents and workers from flooding, liquefaction, earthquakes, fires, and other hazards. Policy EH-1.2 prohibits development in any area where it is determined that the potential risk from natural hazards cannot be mitigated to acceptable levels. Policy EH-3.3 requires that new residential development, including streets and other surface improvements, be constructed above the 100-year flood elevation. The General Plan EIR determined that required adherence to applicable policies, regulations, and development standards would ensure that impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant.

The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Consequently, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to hydrology and water quality than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not previously discussed or that any previously examined significant effects would be substantially more severe than significant effects shown in the General Plan EIR. Nor is there new information of substantial importance showing that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would Packet Page No. 870
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 34 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed project. For these reasons, impacts related to hydrology and water quality from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Land Use and Planning
The General Plan EIR determined that development under the General Plan would not result in any significant impacts with regard to land use and planning. The proposed project would include adoption of General Plan amendments that would add or modify goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs related to housing. Amendments to the Housing Element would address, among other things, the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing in the City. In addition, the proposed project would include a housing sites inventory with sufficient existing housing sites at appropriate densities to meet the City’s RHNA requirement plus an ample buffer. The housing sites inventory includes 1,257 new units that would be provided by pipeline projects that have been proposed and are undergoing entitlement review, have been approved, or have been approved and are currently under construction, and 1,597 new units accommodated by vacant and non-vacant opportunity sites that are already zoned for housing. As discussed in the Project Description, changes to existing zoning and land use designations are not contemplated as part of the HEU’s adoption, as potential housing production in the City required to meet the City’s RHNA allocation and the substantial buffer could already occur under the City’s existing zoning, particularly with respect to the densities already provided for on the identified parcels that comprise the housing opportunity sites. The environmental effects of development under these existing zonings and land use designations were already evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the HEU would not result in any intensification of development potential or associated visual or aesthetic change beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to land use and planning than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects related to land use and planning not previously discussed in the General Plan EIR. For these reasons, impacts related to land use and planning from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Noise and Vibration
The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan could result in significant noise impacts, including where development would be located near noise sources or when development would generate noise that could impact nearby sensitive receptors. The General Plan EIR also addressed impacts from future development under the General Plan related to exposure of people to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.

The General Plan EIR identified that standards for noise generation and exposure in the City of Newark are determined primarily through the Land Use Noise Compatibility Guidelines included in the General Plan, as well as by the exterior and interior noise standards set by Title 24 of the Packet Page No. 871
City of Newark Housing Element Update 35 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
California Building Code. The General Plan EIR also identified General Plan policies and actions that address noise and vibration impacts, including but not limited to the following:
• Policy EH-7.4:Residential Noise Standard – Exterior. Plan for and implement strategies to maintain exterior noise levels that are consistent with the noise compatibility guidelines in Table EH-2.14 For residential areas, this limit is 60 dBA Ldn for outdoor living areas. Where this level is exceeded due to freeways, arterials, and/or railroads, the construction of berms, walls, buffer zones, and other noise-reduction measures to reduce noise to the greatest extent feasible will be required. • Policy EH-7.5: Residential Noise Standard – Interior. Use site planning and architectural design to protect occupants of new buildings from excessive noise, per California State Noise Insulation Standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 24) and Chapter 35 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). For example, site planning should place bedrooms and other noise-sensitive rooms away from exterior noise sources, and architectural design should use double-paned windows and other insulating measures to reduce interior noise.
• Policy EH-7.7: Acoustical Study Requirement. Require acoustical studies for new developments in areas where the noise levels exceed the ‘normally acceptable’ levels for the proposed land use; based on Table EH-2. For residential uses, the analysis should include mitigation measures to limit the noise exposure in interior living spaces to 45 dB Ldn, consistent with Title 24.
• Action EH-6.A: Noise Ordinance – Limits on Noise Levels. Draft and adopt a Noise Ordinance that establishes acceptable noise levels and standards, as well as provisions for enforcement and penalties in the event these levels are exceeded. The Ordinance should include a requirement that no person shall be allowed to cause any noise beyond his/her property line that exceeds prescribed noise levels limits. These limits should be consistent with and promote the implementation of the land use compatibility standards, as shown in Table EH-2.
• Action EH-6.B: Noise Ordinance – Limits on Hours of Operation. Draft the Noise Ordinance (described in Action EH-6.A above) to include limits on the intensity and hours of use for selected noise sources such as construction equipment, manufacturing equipment, motors, delivery trucks, and parking lot vacuum equipment. Limits on hours of operation should be consistent with and achieve the goals of the land use compatibility standards (as shown in Table EH-2).
• Policy EH-6.1: Vehicle Roadway Noise. Actively coordinate with Caltrans, neighboring jurisdictions, and other transportation providers during the planning and design phases of 14 Table EH-2 on page EH-21of the adopted 2013 Newark General Plan provides interior and exterior noise compatibility guidelines for different land uses. The General Plan is available at https://www.newark.org/departments/community-development/newark-general-plan.

Packet Page No. 872
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 36 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
proposed roadway projects so that noise impacts are minimized and appropriate noise mitigation measures are provided.
• Policy EH-6.6: Construction Noise – Regulating Construction Hours. Reduce noise associated with construction activities by prohibiting construction in residential neighborhoods between the hours of 7 PM and 7 AM Monday through Friday and at all times on Saturdays, Sundays, and State/federal holidays. • Action EH-7.D: Vibration-Intensive Construction. Implement a standard operating procedure that requires the evaluation of vibration impacts for individual projects which use vibration-intensive construction activities, such as pile drivers, jack hammers, and vibratory rollers, near sensitive receptors. If construction-related vibration is determined to be perceptible (i.e., in excess of the Federal Transit Administration’s vibration annoyance criterion) at vibration-sensitive uses, then additional requirements, such as the use of less-vibration-intensive equipment or construction techniques, shall be implemented during construction.
• Action EH-7.E: New Development Near Railroads. Implement a standard operating procedure that requires the evaluation of potential vibration impacts for new development that occurs within 200 feet of a railroad track, in accordance with the FTA’s vibration screening distances. In such instances, the project property owner/developers shall retain an acoustical engineer to conduct an acoustic analysis and identify, where appropriate, site design features and/or required building construction improvements to ensure that vibration impacts would remain below acceptable levels for residential uses.

The General Plan EIR determined that compliance with the standards established in Title 24 and the General Plan together with implementation of relevant General Plan policies and actions would ensure that impacts related to excessive interior or exterior noise, construction noise, and vibration would be less than significant. The General Plan EIR also determined that future development under the General Plan would not result in exposure of people to excessive aircraft noise levels from a public airport or private airstrip, as all public airports or public use airports are located a distance of five miles or greater from the City, and there are no private airstrips within the City. However, the General Plan EIR concluded that future development under the General Plan would cause increases in traffic that would result in a significant noise impact at sensitive uses along several roadways in the City.15 The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of General Plan actions such as Action EH-6.E, Street Resurfacing to Reduce Noise, and Action EH-6.H, Sound Wall Improvements, could, in certain cases, reduce or prevent significant increases in ambient noise at sensitive land uses under implementation of the General Plan, but the measures described in these actions would not be universally feasible, and some of the most effective noise-attenuation measures, including sound walls and berms, would be infeasible or inappropriate in a majority of locations where sensitive land uses already exist. Therefore, the 15 See Impact NOISE-3 on pages 4.10-27 to 4.10-32 of the General Plan Draft EIR for a discussion of this impact and a list of roadway segments anticipated to experience increases in ambient noise levels Packet Page No. 873
City of Newark Housing Element Update 37 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
General Plan EIR determined that a significant noise impact to sensitive uses related to increased traffic would remain.

The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Consequently, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to noise and vibration than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not previously discussed or that any previously examined significant effects would be substantially more severe than significant effects shown in the General Plan EIR. Nor is there new information of substantial importance showing that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed project. For these reasons, impacts related to noise and vibration from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Population and Housing
The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not result in any significant impacts with regard to population and housing. It would not induce substantial unexpected population growth, or growth for which inadequate planning has occurred, either directly or indirectly, and it would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing units, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

The General Plan EIR determined that the General Plan contains multiple policies for the accommodation of future growth that would occur under implementation of the General Plan.

Policies LU-1.2 and LU-1.4 establish growth focus areas within the City as well as coordinate land use and development decisions within the capacity of the transportation system. Policies LU1.8 and LU-1.10 ensure that adequate sites are provided for the private and non-profit sectors as well as encourage the development of the City’s remaining vacant and underutilized sites for their highest and best use. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.9-1 from the Newark 2009-2014 Housing Element EIR, requiring that the City report estimated population increases to ABAG, would also help ensure that future planning efforts are coordinated and that additional growth under the General Plan would be accommodated.

The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Consequently, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to population and housing than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not previously discussed or that any previously examined significant effects would be substantially more severe than significant effects shown in the General Plan EIR. Nor is there new information of substantial importance showing that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed project. For these reasons, impacts related Packet Page No. 874
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 38 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
to population and housing from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Public Services and Recreation
The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not result in any significant impacts with regard to public services. This determination includes impacts related to the provision of fire protection facilities, police facilities, school facilities, and parks and recreational facilities.

As described in the General Plan EIR, future development under the General Plan would create an increased demand for fire, rescue, and emergency medical services in the Alameda County Fire Department (ACFD) service area. However, the General Plan EIR determined that this increase would be incremental and would not be expected to require the construction or expansion of facilities. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that General Plan policies would reduce risks associated with fire hazards and minimize calls for fire and emergency medical response services in Newark. For example, General Plan Policy CSF-4.2 ensures the provision of high-quality emergency medical response services, including paramedics and emergency medical technicians. Policy CSF-4.4 ensures the provision of fire prevention and response services which minimize fire risks and protect life and property. Policy CSF-4.8 reduces the risk of urban and grassland fires by enforcing the fire code, abating weed problems along railroads and on vacant lots, and controlling access into open space areas with high fire risk. The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of the applicable goals and compliance with the provisions of the California Building Code and California Fire Code would ensure that future development under the General Plan would result in a less-than-significant impact with respect to fire protection services.

With regard to police protection services, the General Plan EIR determined that the increase in service population that would result from buildout of the General Plan would further strain police resources, causing a need for additional officers and police facilities, resulting in a potentially significant impact. The General Plan EIR determined that General Plan policies and actions would address the need for new or expanded police facilities on an ongoing basis through 2035.

For example, Policy CSF-4.1 supports the maintenance of professional, efficient, and effective police department activities which promote a high level of public safety. Action CSF-4.A directs the preparation and periodical update of a Police Department Strategic Plan, which lays out the Department's priorities, and identifies strategies for technology, communication, training, and performance management, and plans for resources adequate to meet the need for police protection services in Newark. Action CSF-4.D supports the engagement of the Police Department in the review of major new development plans to ensure that projects are designed to minimize the potential for criminal activity and maximize the potential for responsive police services. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that continued implementation of Capital Facilities Fee Program requiring residential, commercial, and industrial developments to pay impact fees would provide funding for the construction or expansion police facilities. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that future construction or expansion of Police Department facilities would be subject to separate CEQA review in order to identify potential environmental impacts and Packet Page No. 875
City of Newark Housing Element Update 39 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
mitigation measures as needed. Therefore, the General Plan EIR determined that impacts to police protection services related to future development under the General Plan would be less than significant.

The General Plan EIR determined that the General Plan includes a policy framework that would allow for the accommodation of increased Newark Unified School District enrollment as it occurs incrementally over a period of 20 years. These policies and actions include Policy CSF-2.1:

Planning for School Facilities, Policy CSF-2.2: Mitigation of School Impacts, Action CSF-2.A:

School District Review of Development Projects, and Action CSF-2.B: Coordinating Long-Range Planning. The General Plan EIR determined that adherence to the General Plan policies as well as compliance with the payment of school impact fees under Senate Bill 50 would result in a lessthan-significant impact with respect to the provision of school facilities.

The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would result in population increases and associated demand for park and recreation facilities. However, the General Plan EIR identified that the General Plan does not directly propose the construction of any parks or recreational facilities, and it includes numerous goals, policies, and actions that seek to promote and encourage the development of parks in the Plan Area (i.e., the Newark city limit).

For example, Policy PR-2.1 supports the development of new neighborhood parks in locations where there is an existing or anticipated need. Policy PR-2.2 requires new parks to be provided within large-scale new development. Where the provision of an on-site park is infeasible, the policy requires payment of an in-lieu fee for parkland acquisition to serve that development.

Action PR-2.A requires continued implementation of the provisions of the Quimby Act, which enables the City to collect in-lieu fees for park acquisition. In addition, the General Plan EIR identified that future development of park and recreation facilities would be subject to separate project-level CEQA review at the time they are proposed for construction in order to identify and mitigate associated impacts as needed. Therefore, the General Plan EIR determined that impacts related to parks and recreation associated with future development under the General Plan would be less than significant.

The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Consequently, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related to public services and recreation than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not previously discussed or that any previously examined significant effects would be substantially more severe than significant effects shown in the General Plan EIR. Nor is there new information of substantial importance showing that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed project. For these reasons, impacts related to public services and recreation from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Packet Page No. 876
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 40 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
Transportation
The General Plan EIR identified potentially significant transportation impacts due to intersections operating at unacceptable levels of service (LOS). The General Plan EIR determined that the seven study intersections identified below would operate at unacceptable LOS in 2035 with buildout of the General Plan.

1. Ardenwood Boulevard and SR-84 westbound ramps

2. Newark Boulevard and SR-84 eastbound ramps

3. Thornton Avenue and Gateway Boulevard

4. Cherry Street and Thornton Avenue

5. Cedar Boulevard and Smith Avenue

6. Cherry Street and Mowry Avenue

7. Cherry Street and Stevenson Boulevard
The General Plan EIR determined that all other study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable levels of service under General Plan buildout conditions in 2035.

The General Plan EIR determined that improvements identified in the General Plan would remedy deficiencies at the seven impacted intersections and ensure acceptable intersection LOS in 2035. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that the General Plan Action T-5.J requires the City to implement necessary intersection improvements when LOS falls to unacceptable levels:
• Action T-5.J: Improvements to Maintain LOS “D.” In the event that future traffic monitoring data indicates that the intersections of Cherry Street and Thornton Avenue, Cherry Street and Mowry Avenue, Thornton Avenue and Gateway Boulevard, or Cedar Boulevard and Smith Avenue are operating at LOS E or F, undertake the improvements listed in Table T-4 so that service levels can be restored to acceptable levels at the affected intersection(s). Funding would be provided through the City’s Capital Improvements Fee.

The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would be subject to the City's Capital Facilities Fee established in the Newark Municipal Code, and as such new commercial, industrial, and single- and multi-family residential developments in the City would make a fair share contribution to funding as development is approved by the City. The General Plan EIR determined that, with implementation of Action T-5.J, all seven impacted intersections would operate at acceptable LOS in 2035. However, the General Plan EIR determined that the Cherry Street/Boyce Road and Stevenson Boulevard intersection and the Ardenwood Boulevard and SR-84 eastbound ramps intersection are located in the City of Fremont and additionally the Ardenwood Boulevard and SR-84 westbound ramps and the Newark Boulevard and SR-84 eastbound ramps intersections are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans. Therefore, implementation of improvements at these three intersections is outside the Packet Page No. 877
City of Newark Housing Element Update 41 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
jurisdiction of the City of Newark. Consequently, the General Plan EIR determined that impacts at these three intersections in 2035 would be significant and unavoidable.

Since the certification of the General Plan EIR, requirements for transportation analysis have changed from evaluation of LOS to vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) provides guidance on VMT analysis requirements and states that agencies may use screening thresholds to quickly identify when a project should be expected to cause a less‐than‐significant impact without conducting a detailed study (see CEQA Guidelines Sections 15063(c)(3)(C), 15128, and Appendix G.).

OPR’s guidance on VMT specifies a number of considerations that would apply to the proposed HEU. Infill projects, projects located within one-half-mile of transit, and projects located within identified low-VMT areas are generally exempt from detailed VMT analysis and are assumed to result in a less than significant impact. Further, projects that would generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day, generally may be assumed to cause a less-than‐significant transportation impact. This threshold is normally evaluated by calculating the trip generation for the project (i.e., a certain number of residential units or an increase in commercial space) to provide evidence the resulting trip generation increase is below the threshold. It can also be calculated for an increase in roadway capacity (i.e., when adding one or more through lanes to a roadway). Regardless, the proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. There would be no increase in potential residential units or non-residential uses (e.g., commercial, office) compared to what was previously evaluated in the General Plan and General Plan EIR. In addition, the HEU does not propose to increase roadway capacity. Therefore, no new VMT impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project.

Tribal Cultural Resources
The General Plan EIR did not include a separate evaluation of impacts to tribal cultural resources, as the legislation requiring lead agencies to analyze project impacts on tribal cultural resources had not been enacted at the time the Newark General Plan EIR was prepared and certified.

In September 2014, subsequent to the certification of the General Plan EIR in 2013, the California Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), which added provisions to the Public Resources Code (PRC) regarding the evaluation of impacts on tribal cultural resources under CEQA, and consultation requirements with California Native American tribes. In particular, AB 52 requires lead agencies to analyze project impacts on tribal cultural resources (PRC Sections 21074 and 21083.09). The law defines tribal cultural resources in a new section, PRC Section 21074. AB 52 also requires lead agencies to engage in additional consultation procedures with respect to California Native American tribes (PRC Sections 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, and 21082.3).

PRC Section 21084.3 addresses mitigation for tribal cultural resources impacts as follows:
a) Public agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects to any tribal cultural resource.

Packet Page No. 878
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 42 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
b) If the lead agency determines that a project may cause a substantial adverse change to a tribal cultural resource, and measures are not otherwise identified in the consultation process provided in Section 21080.3.2, the following are examples of mitigation measures that, if feasible, may be considered to avoid or minimize the significant adverse impacts:

1. Avoidance and preservation of the resources in place, including, but not limited to, planning and construction to avoid the resources and protect the cultural and natural context, or planning greenspace, parks, or other open space, to incorporate the resources with culturally appropriate protection and management criteria.

2. Treating the resource with culturally appropriate dignity, taking into account the tribal cultural values and meaning of the resource, including, but not limited to, the following:
• Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource. • Protecting the traditional use of the resource.
• Protecting the confidentiality of the resource.

3. Permanent conservation easements or other interests in real property, with culturally appropriate management criteria for the purposes of preserving or utilizing the resources or places.

4. Protecting the resource.

A tribal cultural resource is defined in PRC Section 21074 and includes the following:
• Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe that are either of the following: included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1;
• A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purpose of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resources to a California American tribe; • A cultural landscape that meets the criteria of subdivision (a) is a tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape;
• A historical resource described in Section 21084.1, a unique archaeological resource as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 21083.2, or a “non-unique archaeological resource” as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 21083.2 may also be a tribal resource if it conforms with the criteria of subdivision (a).

As discussed in the Cultural Resources section of this Addendum, the General Plan EIR determined that the developable area of Newark is largely built out and that buildout of the General Plan would largely consist of redevelopment of previously disturbed sites in the Plan Area (i.e., the Newark city limit). As such, the General Plan EIR determined that the potential for encountering as yet undiscovered archeological resources and human remains is low in much of the Plan Area. However, the General Plan EIR determined that the salt marshlands in the western Packet Page No. 879
City of Newark Housing Element Update 43 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
portion of the City, including the vicinity of the Dumbarton TOD Focus Area, are considered moderately sensitive for Native American remains and other archaeological resources, and the Southwest Newark Residential and Recreational Focus Area is known to contain Native American remains. The General Plan EIR determined that development in these areas under the General Plan could potentially result in accidental disturbance or damage to archaeological resources and human remains. The General Plan EIR determined that compliance with the provisions for Native American consultation pursuant to Senate Bill 18 (SB 18) as well as with the regulations pertaining to procedures in the event of discovery of human remains contained in California Health and Safety Code Section 7052 and 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097 and 15064.5 would reduce potential impacts. The General Plan EIR further determined that implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.4-1 from the 2009-2014 Housing Element EIR, and Mitigation Measures CUL-2.1 through CUL-2.4 from the Area 3 and 4 Specific Plan EIR, described above, would also further reduce the potential for accidental damage or disturbance of archaeological resources and human remains during construction activities associated with buildout of the General Plan.

The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of General Plan Policy LU-5.5 also would reduce the potential for damage or disturbance of archaeological resources and human remains associated with implementation of the General Plan:
• Policy LU-5.5: Native American Resources. Coordinate with local tribal representatives and the Native American Heritage Commission to ensure the protection of Newark’s Native American resources and to follow appropriate mitigation, preservation, and recovery procedures in the event that important resources are identified during development.

Nevertheless, the General Plan EIR determined that damage or disturbance of archaeological resources and human remains could still result during construction activities associated with buildout of the General Plan. Consequently, the General Plan EIR determined that impacts to archaeological resources and human remains under buildout of the General Plan would be significant and unavoidable.

In compliance with its responsibilities under AB 52 and SB 18, the City sent letters to tribal contacts identified by the Native American Heritage Commission. The letters provided an overview of the proposed project and invited tribal representatives to consult with the City regarding any issues of concern. Letters were sent onMay 4, 2023 to representatives from the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista, Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe, Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan, Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, North Valley Yokuts Tribe, Ohlone Indian Tribe, Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, Confederated Villages of Lisjan, and Tamien Nation. No responses were received during the consultation period.

As previously discussed, the HEU would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts related Packet Page No. 880
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 44 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
to tribal cultural resources than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects related to tribal cultural resources not previously discussed in the General Plan EIR. For these reasons, impacts related to tribal cultural resources from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Utilities and Service Systems
The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not result in any significant impacts related to utilities and service systems, including those pertaining to water, wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste.

Water
The General Plan EIR described that future development under the General Plan would increase water demand; however, the General Plan EIR determined that sufficient water supplies are available to serve development from existing entitlements and resources, and future development under the General Plan would not require or result in the construction of new water facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Nonetheless, the General Plan EIR acknowledged that the Alameda County Water District (ACWD) may experience water supply shortages during single and multiple dry years.

The General Plan EIR determined that General Plan policies would serve to minimize impacts related to water supply. For example, General Plan Policy CS- 3.1 ensures that land use decisions consider the availability of water for domestic and non-domestic uses, potential impacts on groundwater quality and groundwater recharge capacity, and potential off-site impacts on water quality. Policy CS- 3.2 promotes water conservation through development standards, building requirements, irrigation requirements, landscape design guidelines, and other applicable City policies and programs. Policy CS- 3.3 supports ACWD incentives, which encourage Newark residents and businesses to conserve water. Action CS-3.B promotes the use of the development review process to ensure that water conservation measures are incorporated in new projects.

Action CS-3.C directs the City to coordinate with ACWD on the review of proposed development, and the identification of necessary measures to mitigate potential impacts on groundwater and water supply. The General Plan EIR determined that required adherence to applicable policies, regulations, and development standards would ensure that impacts related to water supply would be less than significant.

Wastewater
The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and impacts related to that significance criterion would be less than significant.

However, the General Plan EIR indicated that the Union Sanitary District’s (USD) sewer collection system may not be sufficient to accommodate buildout of the General Plan, particularly in new development areas. The General Plan EIR determined that General Plan Policy CSF-5.2 would help to minimize this potential impact, as the policy directs the City to work with the USD to ensure that the sewer system is expanded to serve Newark's new development areas, ensure Packet Page No. 881
City of Newark Housing Element Update 45 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
that existing facilities are regularly maintained, ensure that sufficient wastewater capacity is provided to meet projected growth, and ensure that wastewater effluent is treated to meet all state and federal standards. Furthermore, General Plan EIR determined that all development applicants would be required to comply with the USD’s Capacity Charge Ordinance and the City of Newark’s Municipal Code Chapter 3.24, Development Impact Fees. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that any impacts from collection system improvements or relating to the expansion of existing and construction of new facilities would be project-specific, and would require permitting and review in accordance with CEQA, which would ensure that any environmental impacts are disclosed and mitigated to the extent possible. Therefore, the General Plan EIR determined that impacts related to wastewater treatment service would be less than significant.

Stormwater
As described in the General Plan EIR, future development under the General Plan would not require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. The General Plan EIR determined that project applicants would be required to comply with the requirements of the SWRCB Construction General Permit by preparing a SWPPP and implementing BMPs to prevent excessive stormwater runoff from construction activity. As a result, the General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would not substantially increase either the volume or the velocity of stormwater flowing into the existing storm drain system. In addition, the General Plan EIR determined that General Plan policies would serve to minimize impacts related to stormwater and drainage. For example, General Plan Policy CSF-5.4 supports coordination with the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (ACFCWCD) and Alameda County Public Works to ensure that stormwater runoff is managed in a way that reduces flood hazards. Policy CSF-5.5 ensures that new development provides drainage and flood protection improvements which reduce on-site and downstream hazards such as ponding, flooding, and erosion. Policy CSF-5.5 also directs that new development areas should be designed to minimize impervious surfaces in order to reduce associated site runoff and maximize groundwater recharge. Therefore, the General Plan EIR determined that impacts related to stormwater and drainage would be less than significant.

Solid Waste
The General Plan EIR determined that future development under the General Plan would be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate its solid waste disposal needs. The General Plan EIR determined that the Altamont Landfill would have sufficient capacity to accommodate the General Plan’s solid waste disposal needs through 2035, and in compliance with General Plan Policies CS-8.1 and CS-8.3, which promote recycling, and Action CS-8.A, which sets waste reduction targets. Therefore, the General Plan EIR determined that impacts related to solid waste would be less than significant.

With respect to each of the above issues, the proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Consequently, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or Packet Page No. 882
Table of Contents
City of Newark Housing Element Update 46 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
substantially more severe impacts related to utilities and service systems than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not previously discussed or that any previously examined significant effects would be substantially more severe than significant effects shown in the General Plan EIR. Nor is there new information of substantial importance showing that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed project. For these reasons, impacts related to utilities and service systems from the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Wildfire
The General Plan EIR did not address the issue of wildfire separately from the discussion in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials chapter. The EIR’s publication preceded the 2018 CEQA Guidelines update, which expanded CEQA by defining this issue area as a stand‐alone resource category. The General Plan EIR described the City’s Emergency Operations Plan, which provides operational procedures for responding to a variety of emergency conditions. The General Plan EIR concluded that through General Plan policy implementation and adherence to existing local and State regulations, the General Plan would not impair implementation or physically interfere with the Emergency Operations Plan.

In accordance with California Public Resource Code Section 4201-4204 and Government Code Section 51175-51189, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has mapped areas of significant fire hazards based on fuels, terrain, weather, and other relevant factors. These zones, referred to as Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ), represent the risks associated with wildland fires. The City of Newark is not located in or near a State Responsibility Area (SRA) or lands classified as very high fire severity zones (VHFSZ).16 Not unlike other urbanized areas, the City does face the risk of urban structure fires. Preventative measures in the City’s Fire Code (Newark Municipal Code Chapter 15.17) and Building Code (Newark Municipal Code Chapter 15.08) reduce the risk of fire and ensure the ability to detect and respond to fires when they occur. The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Required adherence to existing local and State regulations would ensure that impacts related to wildfire would be less than significant.

Conclusion
The proposed project would not result in any intensification of development potential beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Consequently, the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or substantially more severe impacts than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In addition, there is no new information of substantial importance showing that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not 16 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), 2023. FHSZ Viewer Map. Available:
https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. Accessed June 14, 2023.

Packet Page No. 883
City of Newark Housing Element Update 47 ESA / D202100917 Addendum to the General Plan Tune Up Program EIR October 2023 Preliminary − Subject to Revision
previously discussed or that any previously examined significant effects would be substantially more severe than significant effects shown in the General Plan EIR. Nor is there new information of substantial importance showing that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed project. For these reasons, the proposed project would not require the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration or EIR.

Packet Page No. 884
2023-2031 Housing Element and
Environmental Hazards/Safety
Element Update
City of Newark City Council Meeting
October 26, 2023
Packet Page No. 885
Agenda
2 1. General Plan Overview – Housing and Safety Elements

2. 2023-2031 Housing Element Overview

3. Safety Element Overview

4. Staff Recommendation
Packet Page No. 886
Presenters
• Steven Turner, Community Development Director, City of Newark • Paul Peninger, Principal, Bay Area Economics
• Kristy Wang, Principal, Community Planning Collaborative • Shannon Wages, Principal Planner, Environmental Science Associates Packet Page No. 887
3 General Plan Refresher
• Required/Mandatory Chapters of “Elements” • Land Use • Transportation (Circulation) • Housing • Conservation and Sustainability (Conservation) • Environmental Hazards (Safety, Noise) • Parks, Recreation & Open Space (Open Space)
• Optional Elements – in the Newark General
Plan• Economic Development- business focus • Community Services & Facilities - administrative
• Health and Wellness – healthy community
Packet Page No. 888
4 Newark General Plan - 2013
 Describes long-term vision,
goals, policies, and actions
 Framework for planning and
development decisions
 Identifies priorities of the city
 Guide for the Capital
Improvement Program
Packet Page No. 889
5 Newark’s Housing Element
• A plan for the housing needed in a community
• Cities don’t build housing but create the rules for where it should go and how much
• Includes housing policies and programs
• Required by state law and guided by target numbers (RHNA) • Updated every 8 years
• The Housing Element is the only part of the General Plan that must be reviewed and approved by the State
Packet Page No. 890
6 Where does the RHNA number come from?
State of California  Region share
(ABAG/MTC)
Based on population, factoring in:
• People in dorms, prisons, military,
others who “do not require housing”
• Vacancy rates
• Overcrowding
• Demolition
• People overpaying for housing
Region (ABAG/MTC)  Jurisdiction
share (Newark)
Based on expected number of
households, factoring in:
• Access to high opportunity areas
• Access to jobs (both by car and by
transit)
441,176 housing units 1,874 housing units
7 Packet Page No. 891
Newark’s 2023-2031 RHNA
Source: ABAG 8
Packet Page No. 892
Timeline
9 Packet Page No. 893
Newark Natural Hazards (Safety) Element
• One of the required general plan elements
• Goals, policies, and actions meant to protect the community from unreasonable environmental risks
• Adopted with the general plan in 2013 – unchanged since then • State law requires that a jurisdiction updates the Safety Element with an update to the Housing Element.
10 Packet Page No. 894
2023-2031 Housing Element
11 Packet Page No. 895
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution for a General Plan Amendment to repeal the Fifth Cycle Housing Element for the period of 2015-2023 and adopt the Housing Element of the General Plan for the Period 2023-2031 and repeal the existing Natural Hazards Element and adopt the Safety Element of the General Plan, in compliance with State Housing Element Law.

Packet Page No. 896
12 Community Engagement
How we reached the community:
• Social media
• Posters and flyers
• Website
• In-person engagement (including Family Day, the
public library, bingo at the senior center, Tri City
mobile pantry)
• 1:1 interviews and listening sessions
• Community survey (342 responses)
13 Packet Page No. 897
What’s included in a Housing Element?
• Community Engagement
• Housing Needs
• Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH)
• Constraints
• Resources
• Housing Plan
• Sites Inventory
14 Packet Page No. 898
What we heard
• Residents are very concerned about housing
affordability
• Housing prices have risen, making housing
unaffordable to many
• Not everyone feels that they live in a
neighborhood of opportunity
• People are interested in a variety of housing types
• Newark needs to plan for climate change
• Residents want to stay in their communities, and
right now it’s challenging, with many facing
displacement
15 Packet Page No. 899
What we heard
“We all deserve housing”
“Developing a shared housing program with others that need a room to rent, connect seniors with single people who need affordable housing. Helps seniors on limited incomes”
“Rents increase but our incomes do not. The median income is really very high for Newark, so you have a lot of people who need housing at the low and very low incomes.”
“It is very hard to move people who have been homeless into permanent housing, we need more options for those that are on SSI and extremely low incomes”
16 Packet Page No. 900
Housing Needs in Newark
2020 Population: 47,529, an increase of 11.6% from 2010.

Age: People aged 25-34 have increased by 14 percent since 2000. Residents are also living longer, with those 65 and over making up 13 percent of Newark’s population.

Special Needs: In addition to seniors, many Newark residents have special housing needs, including large families, single parent households, and persons with disabilities.

Race and Ethnicity: The community’s population has become more racially and ethnically diverse over time. The Asian and Hispanic/Latinx populations increased significantly over the past 20 years, and the Black population decreased slightly (by 0.2%).

Language: More than one-third of Newark residents are foreign-born, and over half speak a language other than English at home. 17 Packet Page No. 901
Housing Needs: Key Trends
2019 Households: 14,047 households. The population of Newark increased by 15.3% from 2000 to 2020, which is above the growth rate of the Bay Area.
2018 Jobs: 17,168 jobs. Since 2010, the number of jobs located in the jurisdiction has increased by 4,650 (29.9%). Additionally, the jobs-household ratio in Newark has increased from 1.33 in 2002 to 1.49 jobs per household in 2018.
2020 Housing Units: 15,371 housing units. The number of homes in Newark increased, 11.2% from 2010 to 2020, which is above the growth rate for Alameda County and above the growth rate of the region’s housing stock during this time period.

Cost Burden: In Newark, 19.2% of households spend 30%-50% of their income on housing, while 12.4% of households are severely cost burdened and use the majority of their income for housing.

Packet Page No. 902
18 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
Components of the AFFH Analysis:
• Inclusive and Equitable Outreach
• Assessment of Fair Housing
• Analysis of Sites Inventory
• Identification of Contributing Factors
• Goals and Meaningful Actions to AFFH
Packet Page No. 903
19 AFFH +
Sites Inventory
Packet Page No. 904
20 Constraints
• Governmental Constraints
• Land Use and Zoning
• Permit Processing Times
• Permit Fees and Exactions
• Available Infrastructure
• Development Standards, Parking
and Open Space Requirements
• Building Codes and Enforcement
• Non-Governmental Constraints
• Availability of Financing
• Land Costs
• Construction Costs
• Environmental Constraints
• Geologic Hazards
• Sea Level Rise, Flooding
• Hazardous Materials
• Sensitive Ecological Areas
Packet Page No. 905
21 Preserve and improve existing housing
• Support the maintenance, rehabilitation, and preservation of existing rental and ownership housing (Policy H1)
22 Packet Page No. 906
Goals and Policies
GOAL H1: Preserve and improve existing housing
GOAL H2: Facilitate the development of more homes for more people GOAL H3: Reduce and remove constraints to affordable housing development GOAL H4: Help people stay in their homes and communities GOAL H5: Increase access to affordable housing
GOAL H6: Enhance quality of life | Equity and environmental justice GOAL H7: Further fair housing throughout the City
23 Packet Page No. 907
Facilitate the development of more homes for more people • Create opportunities for missing middle housing (Policy H2.1) • Continue to support accessory dwelling units. (Policy H2.2) • Promote and facilitate affordable housing partnerships with nonprofits, Newark Unified School District, and community colleges. (Policy H2.3) • Revisit a community visioning plan for the Four Corners area (Policy H2.4) • Support housing programs for vulnerable and special populations (Policy H2.5) • Support regional homeless initiatives and develop a local plan (Policy 2.8) • Evaluate housing production to ensure the city meets RHNA goals (Policy H2.10) 24 Packet Page No. 908
Reduce and remove constraints to affordable housing development • Allow by-right approval of projects with 20 percent affordable units on “reused” sites (Policy H3.1)
• Increase certainty of entitlement procedures and accessibility to resource information for developers (Policy H3.2)
• Ensure there is a sufficient supply of multifamily and single-family zoned land to meet the housing needs identified in the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) (Policy H3.3)
25 Packet Page No. 909
GOAL H4: Help people stay in their homes and communities • Develop programs that support homeowners and tenants to remain in their homes and communities with a focus on low and moderate-income residents and BIPOC households (Policy H4.1)
• Work to identify opportunities for partnering with other local public sector agencies and private landowners to acquire sites for affordable housing, as well as to seek creative ways of partnering with developers to include affordable units in market-rate projects (Policy H4.3)
26 Packet Page No. 910
GOAL H5: Increase access to affordable housing
• Continue to generate funding for affordable housing and seek additional opportunities (Policy H5.1)
• Develop a BMR homeownership program and down payment assistance programs, with a focus on first time home buyers (Policy H5.2) • Prioritize the use of City-owned property for affordable housing over other uses (Policy H5.3)
• Amend the existing Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to require on-site production of units (Policy H5.4)
• Develop an affordable notice of funding availability (NOFA) that will be released regularly (Policy H5.5)
27 Packet Page No. 911
GOAL H6: Enhance quality of life | Equity and environmental justice Implement existing specific plans for NewPark Place and Old Town, creating urban and pedestrian-oriented mixed-use centers in Newark (Policy H6.2) Make land use and transportation decisions that reduce emissions, including promotion of walking and bicycling (Policy H6.3)
Promote energy efficiency and wise water use to reduce energy costs, provide resilient housing, improve building comfort, and reduce emissions (Policy H6.4)
Limit development within low-lying areas at high risk from flooding (Policy H6.7)
28 Packet Page No. 912
GOAL H7: Further fair housing throughout the city
• Improve awareness, access, and use of education, training, complaint investigation, and mediation services, particularly in areas sensitive to displacement, low-income, racial/ethnic concentration, disability, or other fair housing considerations (Policy H7.1)
• Promote affirmative marketing in affordable housing programs to enable mobility among low-income residents and BIPOC residents in areas of poverty and segregated neighborhoods (Policy H7.2) • Address barriers to renting and increase tenant support. Low-income households and people experiencing homelessness face obstacles that prevent them from accessing housing that is affordable to them (Policy H7.3)
29 Packet Page No. 913
Highlighted Programs: Preservation
Program H1.1: Facilitate place-based revitalization by focusing on lowerincome households with housing rehabilitation and repair programs Program H1.2: Develop citywide rental inspection program to maintain high quality housing throughout the city.
30 Packet Page No. 914
Highlighted Programs: Missing Middle Housing
Program H2.1: Develop new “missing middle” housing options in areas of the city close to services
Program H2.2: Develop tools to support uptake of accessory dwelling unit production
Program H2.8: Encourage and promote a mix of dwelling types and sizes, specifically missing middle-density housing types
31 Packet Page No. 915
Highlighted Programs: Special Needs Housing
Program H2.5: Develop a local response to support people experiencing homelessness
Program H2.10: Support the development of Single Room Occupancy Units
Program H4.7: Identify Housing Opportunities For those With Developmental Disabilities
32 Packet Page No. 916
Highlighted Programs: Addressing Government Constraints Program H3.1: Streamline Ministerial Approval Permit Procedures Program H3.2: Develop objective design standards for single-family and multi-family developments and infill housing
Program H3.3: Assess and update impact fees
Program H3.4: Adjust zoning to allow mixed uses (commercial and residential) in current Commercial zones
Program H3.5: Parking standards study and update
33 Packet Page No. 917
Highlighted Programs: Partnerships/Public Lands
Program H2.6: Develop a strategy in collaboration with the Newark Unified School District and the community on a long-term development plan and funding for the redevelopment of school district-owned sites.

Program H5.3: Develop and implement programs and policies to further increase the utilization of public land for affordable housing. 34 Packet Page No. 918
Highlighted Programs: Anti-Displacement and Tenant Support Program H4.1: Develop Anti-Displacement Programs for the Old-Town Newark Specific Plan Area
Program H4.3: Develop a Just Cause Eviction Ordinance
Program H4.5: Connect Residents to Existing Shared Housing Programs Program H4.6: Support Tenant Stability Though Minimum Lease Terms and Relocation Assistance
35 Packet Page No. 919
Highlighted Program: Affordable Housing Development
Program H5.2: Ensure an adequate amount of affordable housing through three programs:

1. Percentage of Affordable Units to mitigate the effects of new development

2. Density Bonus Law

3. Affordable Housing Fee Program
36 Packet Page No. 920
Highlighted Program: First Time Homebuyer Program
Program H5.1: Develop a BMR homeownership program, and down payment assistance programs, with a focus on first-time home buyers and BIPOC residents with low homeownership rates
37 Packet Page No. 921
Sites Inventory
38 Packet Page No. 922
Profiled Site: Site 18 (EZ-8 Motel)
• Zoning: Residential High Density
• General Plan Designation: High Density Residential
• APN: 92A-2585-32
• Size: 2.24 acres
• Max Allowable Density 60 units per acre.
39 Packet Page No. 923
Profiled Site: Site 21 (Sycamore Vacant Lot)
• Zoning: Residential High Density
• General Plan Designation: High Density
Residential
• APN: 92-255-11
• Size: 1.81 acres
• Max Allowable Density: 60 units per acre.
40 Packet Page No. 924
Safety Element
41 Packet Page No. 925
Statutory Framework
CA state law requires a Safety Element that
• Protects the community from any unreasonable environmental risks • Is updated with the Housing Element update.
• Includes goals, policies, and actions to address each hazard and increase the community's resilience to climate impacts.

New requirements
• Identification of residential developments with less than two evacuation routes- Senate Bill 99 (2019)
• Identification of evacuation routes and their capacity safety and viability under a range of emergency scenarios- Assembly Bill 747 (2019)
42 Packet Page No. 926
Safety Element Background
• The Safety Element is a chapter of the City's
General Plan that identifies safety issues and needs
anticipated to be of ongoing concern
• Ensures that the City takes action to reduce natural
and man-made hazards and safety threats and
responds quickly to any public safety incident
• 2013 Environmental Hazards Element; updated
element renamed Safety Element
City of Newark General Plan Environmental Hazards Element (2013) 43 Packet Page No. 927
Safety Element Update Process
Review of
Plans
Existing
Conditions
Analysis
Community
Survey
Drafting of
Element
44 Packet Page No. 928
Review of Plans
• Environmental Hazards Element (2013)
• Union City/Newark Multi-Jurisdictional Local
Hazard Mitigation Plan (2017)
• Alameda County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
(2021)
• Climate Action Plan Initial Framework (2010)
• Emergency Operation Plan
City of Newark Climate Action Plan Initial Framework (2010) 45 Packet Page No. 929
Existing Conditions Analysis
Air Quality Drought and
Water Quality
Extreme
Weather Dam Failure
Geologic
Hazards
Hazardous
Materials Flood Hazards Fire Hazards
Emergency
Preparedness
Noise and
Vibration
46 Packet Page No. 930
Community Survey
• Distribution of a community
survey via the SurveyMonkey
platform to solicit feedback on
each Safety Element topic
• Findings were used to inform
the development of goals,
policies, and actions in Section
3 of the Safety Element
Q.13 results from Community Survey
47 Packet Page No. 931
Safety Element Preparation
• Information from relevant plans, existing
conditions analysis, and community
survey results were compiled into the
draft Safety Element.
• Combined findings were used to inform
the development of goals, policies, and
actions in Section 3.

Draft Updated Safety Element
48 Packet Page No. 932
Summary of Updates
The following slides for each hazard are organized as follows:
• Status of topic in 2013 General Plan
• Key Findings
• Select Policy Topics
49 Packet Page No. 933
Air Quality
Findings:
• High asthma rates, especially near
I-880 & SR 84
• Prevalence of diesel particulate
matter & PM2.5
Select policies include:
• Guidelines for implementing the
forthcoming Climate Action Plan
• Guidelines for land use planning
to promote improved air quality City of Newark Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Pollution SOURCE: OSM; OEHHA, 2021; ESA, 2022.
50 Packet Page No. 934
Drought and Water Quality
Findings:
• Urban runoff from hazardous sites
impacts both surface water and
groundwater
• Saltwater intrusion, and
hazardous material leakage also
contribute to water pollution.

Select policies include:
• Addressing and preventing water
pollution
• Investing in water security
Groundwater Threats in Newark
SOURCE: OEHHA (2021)
51 Packet Page No. 935
Flooding Hazards
Findings:
•Areas of the city are within the 100-
year flood zone
•Smaller areas throughout the city, are
within the 500-year flood zone
Select policies include:
•Guidance for mitigating the impacts of
flood hazards
•Investments in infrastructure to
withstand impacts of floods
FEMA Flood Zone Exposure Map
SOURCE: CEC; FEMA; Google Maps; HIFLD; OSM; UrbanFootprint; USGS; ESRI; ESA, 2021.
52 Packet Page No. 936
Hazardous Materials
Findings:
•Sizeable number of industries where
hazardous materials are used
•Rail and freeway networks on which
hazardous materials are frequently
transported
Select policies include:
•Protection of both existing and new
developments Hazardous Materials Sites
SOURCE: DTSC; EPA; SWRCB; ESRI; ESA, 2022
53 Packet Page No. 937
Emergency Preparedness
Findings:
•Hazards of earthquakes, floods, and
hazardous materials make emergency
preparedness essential
Select policies include:
•Informing community members of
resources to prepare for emergencies
•Guidance on evacuation planning and
notification
Emergency Preparedness and Resilience
SOURCE: Google Maps; HIFLD; OSM; ESA, 2022.
54 Packet Page No. 938
SB 99 and AB 747
Findings from SB 99 and AB 747 analysis:
• Due to cul de sacs many residential parcels in the city are constrained to only one evacuation route
• Topographical features like the San Francisco Bay limit the direction and number of evacuation routes available
Select policies include:
• Increase roadway capacity during hazards like storms, including highrisk day street parking management • Encourage households to use one vehicle during evacuations Complete evacuation analysis included in the Safety Element as Appendix B. 55 Packet Page No. 939
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
• The City has prepared the necessary environmental review, consistent with the CEQA for the Draft 2023– 2031 Housing Element and the Safety Element. • An Addendum to the Newark General Plan Tune Up Environmental Impact Report was prepared.
• No subsequent EIR is required to be prepared, as no substantial changes have been proposed or the conditions that require major revisions of the General Plan Tune-Up EIR. • No new significant environmental impacts have been identified, and no substantial increases in the severity of previously identified impacts were discovered. • The Housing Element and Safety Element remain subject to all previously adopted mitigation measures, as applicable, and no new mitigation measures or alternatives are required.
56 Packet Page No. 940
Planning Commission Recommendation
• October 24, 2023- Planning Commission public hearing to consider the staff recommendation.
• The Planning Commission's recommendation, transmitted through a resolution, will be provided at the October 26, 2023, City Council meeting.
57 Packet Page No. 941
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution for a General Plan Amendment to repeal the Fifth Cycle Housing Element for the period of 2015-2023 and adopt the Housing Element of the General Plan for the Period 2023-2031 and repeal the existing Natural Hazards Element and adopt the Safety Element of the General Plan, in compliance with State Housing Element Law
58 Packet Page No. 942
Conclusion
Thank You
&
Questions
59 Packet Page No. 943
Item  F. 1.

DATE 10/26/2023
TO Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM Diana Cangco, Principal Civil Engineer
SUBJECT    Waive full reading and, by title only, introduce an ordinance to repeal and replace Title 16 “Subdivisions” of the Newark Municipal Code
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION
Staff initiated an evaluation of potential revisions to Title 16, “Subdivisions”, of the Newark Municipal Code for the purpose of adding language to clarify decision-making processes, to streamline procedures, and to ensure consistency with the Subdivision Map Act.  A multi-department process was completed to develop an update to the City's Subdivision Ordinance.  While the proposed repeal and replacement of the Subdivision Ordinance generally follows the same sequence of Chapters found in the current ordinance, there are significant additions and modifications.  A detailed summary of the substantive changes are provided in this report.

The recommended changes to the City's Subdivision Ordinance, while significant, are generally technical and only impact the processing of subdivision maps.  The changes do not impact the Planning Commission's or City Council's authority to consider applications for entitlements for residential or commercial projects as the vast majority of those projects involving mapping are subject to concurrent land-use applications and processing under the City's current Zoning Ordinance.  The proposed Subdivision Ordinance specifically stipulates, for example, that all tentative parcel maps and tentative tract maps with concurrent processing are subject to approval by the City Council.

Staff recommends that the City Council waive full reading and, by title only, introduce an ordinance to repeal and replace Title 16, “Subdivisions”, of the Newark Municipal Code.

BACKGROUND
Staff is recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance to repeal and replace Title 16, “Subdivisions”, of the Newark Municipal Code, commonly referred to as the Subdivision Ordinance.  The existing Subdivision Ordinance was adopted by the City Council on August 11, 1977.  Staff conducted an examination of the existing Subdivision Ordinance for the following reasons: 1) to provide clear and concise Packet Page No. 944
language for decision-making and review processes; 2) to incorporate streamlined language by simplifying processes and procedures; and 3) to ensure that the Ordinance reflects the City's current practices consistent with the latest version of the Subdivision Map Act.

While the additions and modifications to the proposed Subdivision Ordinance may be significant, the changes do not significantly impact the Planning Commission's or City Council's review of projects.  Most subdivision applications require concurrent land-use applications, including, for example, applications for: Design Reviews, Rezonings, Text Amendments, Planned Development Plans, and Minor Use Permits.  The proposed Subdivision Ordinance does not alter how other land-use applications are processed under the City's current Zoning Ordinance.  However, the proposed Subdivision Ordinance does clarify the subdivision application process in these situations.  As detailed in the Discussion/Analysis, the subdivision map associated with these applications would be subject to approval by the Planning Commission or City Council, thus allowing the project to be reviewed together and decisions made concurrently.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
Staff from the City Attorney's Office, the City Manager's Office, the Community Development Department and the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department developed the revised Subdivision Ordinance through a coordinated iterative process.   A summary of substantive changes in the proposed Subdivision Ordinance are listed below:

1. The Chapters of the proposed Subdivision Ordinance generally follow the same sequencing of the current ordinance.  Additional chapters are incorporated to provide additional information about processes consistent with the Subdivision Map Act.

Current Title 16
Subdivision Chapters
Proposed Title 16
Subdivision Chapters

16.04 General Provisions 16.04 General Provisions

16.08 Tentative Map 16.06 Maps Required

16.12 Streets and Lots 16.08 Tentative Tract and Tentative Parcel Maps

16.16 Subdivision
Improvements 16.12 Design

16.20 Surveys and Monuments 16.16 Improvements

16.24 Final Maps 16.20 Surveys and Monuments

16.28 Parcel Maps 16.24 Final Maps and Parcels Maps

16.30 RESERVED 16.32 Underground Utilities

16.32 Violation - Penalty 16.40 Vesting Tentative Map

16.44 Map Amendments and
Certificates of Correction

16.48 Reversion to Acreage and
Resubdivision
Packet Page No. 945

16.52 Lot Line Adjustment

16.56 Enforcement
The words "Subdivision," "Tentative Map," "Parcel Map," and "Final Map" are a few words that are defined in the General Provisions of the proposed Subdivision Ordinance.  These words are used throughout this staff report.  For easy reference, their definitions are provided below:
"Subdivision" means the division, by any subdivider, of any unit or units of improved or unimproved land, or any portion thereof, as shown on the latest equalized county assessment roll as a unit or as contiguous units, for the purpose of sale, lease or financing, whether immediate or future, and as further defined in Government Code Section 66424.
"Tentative map" means a map made for the purpose of showing the design and improvement of a proposed subdivision and the existing conditions in and around it. "Tentative map" includes a tentative parcel map and a tentative tract map. "Parcel map" means a map showing a subdivision of four or fewer parcels, prepared in accordance with the provisions of this title and the Subdivision Map Act and designed to be recorded in the office of the Alameda County Recorder. A parcel map also means a map showing a subdivision of five (5) or more parcels under the final map exemption in Government Code Sections 66426 (a) through (e). "Final map" means a map showing a subdivision prepared in accordance with the provisions of this title and the Subdivision Map Act and designed to be recorded in the office of the Alameda County Recorder.

2.  Table 16-1, Subdivision Review Authority, shown below, is added to the proposed Subdivision Ordinance to clearly identify decision-making authority for all types of subdivision applications.  Subdivision applications involving residential or commercial construction are required to have concurrent land-use applications under the current City Zoning Ordinance, and are therefore subject to approval by the City Council (see note 3 below).

Table 16-1 Subdivision Review Authority
Issue/Document
Applicable
Code
Chapter
Role of Review Authority(1)
Community
Development
Director
City
Engineer
Planning
Commission
City
Council
Tentative parcel map 16.08 Decision(2)(3) Appeal
Tentative parcel map
waiver 16.06 Decision(2) Appeal
Parcel map 16.24 Decision(2) Appeal
Tentative tract map 16.08 Decision(2)(3) Appeal
Final map 16.24 Decision(2) Appeal
Certificate of
Packet Page No. 946
Certificate of
compliance 16.56 Decision(2) Appeal
Lot line adjustment 16.52 Decision(2) Appeal
Parcel map waiver 16.06 Decision(2) Appeal
Reversion to acreage 16.48     Decision
Time extension 16.40  Decision(2)  Appeal
Notes:
(1) “Decision” means that the review authority makes the final decision on the matter; “Appeal” means that the review authority may consider and decide upon appeals of the decision of an earlier decision-making body in accordance with Government Code Section 66452.5.
(2) At its sole discretion, the review authority may transfer original hearing jurisdiction to a higher body.
(3) For tentative maps subject to concurrent processing, the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council.

3. Decision-making authorities are revised in the proposed Subdivision Ordinance to simplify processes and procedures.  Details are provided below regarding the specific changes in approval authority.  As part of the proposed Subdivision Ordinance, an "Advisory Agency" is re-defined as a designated official or an official body charged with the duty of reviewing the design and improvement of proposed divisions of real property, the imposing of requirements or conditions thereon, or having the authority to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove map.  Under the current Subdivision Ordinance, the designated Advisory Agency has similar authority for tentative parcel maps, but is limited to making recommendations only for tentative tract maps.  The changes affect various mapping processes as described below:
a. Tentative Tract Maps (Chapter 16.08) – The current Subdivision Ordinance identifies the Planning Commission as the Advisory Agency and the City Council with the authority to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove tentative tract maps.  With the proposed Subdivision Ordinance, the Planning Commission remains as the Advisory Agency, but would also approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove the tentative tract maps, with certain stipulations related to concurrent processing.  The decision of the Planning Commission would be subject to appeal to the City Council. b. Tentative Parcel Maps (Chapter 16.08) – The current Subdivision Ordinance identifies the Public Works Director as the Advisory Agency with the authority to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove maps.  In the proposed Subdivision Ordinance, the Community Development Director would be the Advisory Agency with the authority to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove tentative parcel maps, with certain stipulations related to concurrent processing.  The decision of the Community Development Director would be subject to appeal to the Planning Commission.
c. Final Maps (Chapter 16.24) – In the current Subdivision Ordinance, the City Council has the authority to approve final maps and associated Subdivision Improvement Agreements.  Per the Subdivision Map Act, the review and approval of final maps is Packet Page No. 947
Agreements.  Per the Subdivision Map Act, the review and approval of final maps is limited to technical accuracy and conformance to the approved tentative map; no additional discretionary approvals are granted at the final map stage.  Therefore, to streamline the approval process, the proposed Subdivision Ordinance delegates the authority to approve final maps and Subdivision Improvement Agreements to the City Engineer.  Prior to the approval of any final map, consistent with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act, the City Engineer would notify the City Council at regular meetings of the pending decision.  The decision of the City Engineer is also subject to appeal to the City Council.
d. Concurrent Processing and Transfer of Authority for Tentative Tract Maps and Tentative Parcel Maps (Chapters 16.04 and 16.08) – With the proposed Subdivision Ordinance, tentative tract map and tentative parcel map approval may be transferred to a higher approval authority under certain qualifying circumstances.  For example, for tentative tract maps the higher approving agency is the City Council, and for tentative parcel maps the higher approving agency is the Planning Commission.  Additionally, when tentative tract maps are processed with other land use applications that require City Council approval, the authority for approval, conditional approval, or disapproval of the tentative maps is transferred to the City Council.
e. Effective Period of Approved Tentative Map and Discretionary Extensions (Chapter

16.08) – The effective period of an approved or conditionally approved tentative map is twenty-four (24) months from the date of its approval.  The current Subdivision Ordinance allows an extension of time to be granted as allowed by the Subdivision Map Act, which allows up to six (6) additional years to be added to the effective period of a tentative map, subject to local ordinance.  The proposed Subdivision Ordinance will limit the extension(s) of time that can be added to the effective period of an approved or conditionally approved tentative map to up to two (2) years.  The two (2) year period under the proposed Subdivision Ordinance would supersede the six (6) year period of the Subdivision Map Act.  The decision-making authority for consideration of an extension of time would be the original approving body (i.e. Community Development Director or Planning Commission).  For tentative maps originally approved by the City Council, the decision-making authority for discretionary extensions would be the Planning Commission.
f. Release of Securities (Chapter 16.24) – Under the current Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision improvement acceptance is recommended by the City Engineer and formally accepted by the City Council.  Through this action, securities to insure construction of the improvements are released.  In the proposed Subdivision Ordinance, the City Engineer would be designated as the official for acceptance, release, and partial release of securities, which currently requires City Council action. g. Added Sections – The proposed Subdivision Ordinance contains added sections to clarify the processes for tentative parcel map waivers, map amendments, certificate of corrections, and lot line adjustments and to align with the City's current procedures and requirements.

FISCAL IMPACT
Packet Page No. 948
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

REVIEW AND APPROVAL
Prepared by - Diana Cangco, Principal Civil Engineer
Reviewed by - Jayson Imai, City Engineer
Reviewed by - Soren Fajeau, Public Works Director
Reviewed by - Krysten Lee, Finance Director
Reviewed by - Kristopher J. Kokotaylo, City Attorney
Approved by - David J. Benoun, City Manager
Attachments
Title 16 Subdivision Ordinance
Title 16 Subdivision Ordinance Exhibit A
Title 16 Subdivision Ordinance Presentation
Packet Page No. 949
ORDINANCE NO. ______

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWARK
REPEALING AND REPLACING TITLE 16 “SUBDIVISIONS” OF

OF THE CITY OF NEWARK MUNICIPAL CODE IN ITS ENTIRETY
WHEREAS, the California Constitution, Article XI, Section 7, provides cities and counties with the authority to enact ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws; and WHEREAS, the Subdivision Map Act, Sections 66411 et. seq. of the Government Code, allows cities with flexibility in enacting local subdivision ordinances; and WHEREAS, Title 16 “Subdivisions” of the City of Newark Municipal Code (“NMC”) regulates and control the division of land and each part thereof within the City, supplements the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, and sets forth the procedure to be followed in securing the official approval of the planning director, city engineer, public works director, city manager, planning commission and city council regarding divisions of land; and
WHEREAS, Title 16 was last significantly updated in 1977 pursuant to Ordinance No. 143; and WHEREAS, the City Council, on the recommendation of the City Manager and the City Attorney, desires to repeal and replace Title 16 to update and revise the local subdivision ordinance; and WHEREAS, the amendments to the Municipal Code propose to repeal and replace Title 16 “Subdivisions” of the NMC in its entirety, as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWARK DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and made a part of this Ordinance.

SECTION 2. CEQA. The subdivision ordinance update is exempt from environmental review under the general exemption in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) for projects where it can be seen with certainty that there is no potential for significant environmental effects. The subdivision ordinance update does not approve any development project or other physical activity; nor does it change any land use or density designations that would affect development potential.

Instead it updates the policies, standards and procedures through which subdivision applications for development would be considered. Any future development application would be reviewed for compliance with CEQA.

SECTION 3. Municipal Code Amendment. The City Council hereby approves the amendments to the NMC, more particularly, repealing Title 16 “Subdivisions” of the NMC in its entirety, and replacing it with the text shown in attached Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference and available for review in the City Clerk’s office during normal business hours.

Packet Page No. 950
SECTION 4. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable.

SECTION 5. Publication and effective date. Within fifteen (15) days from and after adoption, this Ordinance shall be published once in the Tri-City Voice, a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in Alameda County and circulated in the City of Newark, in accordance with California Government Code Section 36933. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after its adoption.

Packet Page No. 951

EXHIBIT A
Title 16 SUBDIVISIONS
Chapter 16.04 General Provisions

16.04.010 Title

16.04.020 Purpose and Authority

16.04.030 Intent

16.04.004 Consistency

16.04.050 Application of Chapter

16.04.060 Exclusions

16.04.070 Fees and Deposits

16.04.080 General Responsibilities

16.04.090 Definitions

16.04.100 Authority for Subdivision Decisions
Chapter 16.06 Maps Required

16.06.010 General

16.06.020 Division of Land – Five (5) or More Parcels

16.06.030 Division of Land – Four (4) or Fewer Parcels
Chapter 16.08 Tentative Tract and Tentative Parcel Maps

16.08.010 General.

16.08.020 Persons Authorized to Prepare

16.08.030 Tentative Map Number

16.08.040 Filing

16.08.050 Form and Contents

16.08.060 Accompanying Data and Reports

16.08.070 Noticed Public Hearing

16.08.080 Public Notice

16.08.090 Action -Tentative Tract Maps

16.08.100 Action -Tentative Parcel Maps

16.08.110 Appeals

16.08.120 Extension of Time for Action or Report

16.08.130 Effective Period of Approved Tentative Map
Chapter 16.12 Design

16.12.010 General Requirements

16.12.020 Street Alignment

16.12.030 Street and Alley Grades and Widths
Packet Page No. 952

16.12.040 Blocks

16.12.050 Parcels

16.12.060 Grading

16.12.070 Erosion and Siltation Control

16.12.080 Flood Hazards

16.12.090 Exceptions
Chapter 16.16 Improvements

16.16.010 Duty of Subdivider to Improve Streets

16.16.020 Required Improvements

16.16.030 Standards for Improvements

16.16.040 Improvement Plans

16.16.050 Inspection by City Engineer

16.16.060 Cost of Inspection

16.16.070 Completion of Improvements
Chapter 16.20 Surveys and Monuments

16.20.010 Field Survey

16.20.020 Discrepancy

16.20.030 Compiled Map

16.20.040 Accuracy Required

16.20.050 Remainder

16.20.060 Ties to Centerlines

16.20.070 Boundary Monuments

16.20.080 Street Monuments

16.20.090 Monuments - Interior Lots

16.20.100 Monuments -Time for Setting

16.20.110 Monuments -Inspection and Approval

16.20.120 California Coordinate System
Chapter 16.24 Final Maps and Parcel Maps

16.24.010 General

16.24.020 Phasing of Final Maps or Parcel Maps

16.24.030 Form

16.24.040 Contents

16.24.050 Procedure

16.24.060 Data and Material to Accompany Final Map or Parcel Map Submittal

16.24.070 Improvement Agreements

16.24.080 Action on Final Map

16.24.090 Action on Parcel Map

16.24.100 Appeal to City Council
Packet Page No. 953

16.24.110 Action on Final Map or Parcel Map Appeal by City Council Chapter 16.28 Reserved
Chapter 16.32 Underground Utilities

16.32.010 Intent

16.32.020 Utility Distribution Facilities to be Placed Underground

16.32.030 Duty of Subdivider

16.32.040 Request for Exception
Chapter 16.40 Vesting Tentative Map

16.40.010 Authority and Purpose

16.40.020 Consistency

16.40.030 Application

16.40.040 Filing and Processing

16.40.050 Vesting of Development Rights

16.40.060 Development Inconsistent with Zoning – Conditional Approval

16.40.070 Applications inconsistent with Applicable Ordinances, Policies and Standards

16.40.080 Amendment to Vesting Tentative Map

16.40.090 Findings Required for Vesting Tentative Map Approval Chapter 16.44 Map Amendments and Certificates of Correction

16.44.010 Map Amendments and Certificates of Correction Chapter 16.48 Reversion to Acreage and Resubdivision

16.48.010 Reversion to Acreage

16.48.020 Resubdivision
Chapter 16.52 Lot Line Adjustments

16.52.010 Lot Line Adjustments

Chapter 16.56 Enforcement

16.56.010 Enforcement

16.56.020 Effect of Approval or Conditional Approval of Map Packet Page No. 954

Chapter 16.04 General Provisions

16.04.010 Title
This title shall be known as the Subdivision Ordinance of the city of Newark.

16.04.020 Purpose and Authority
This title shall regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions of land within the city and supplement the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California set forth at Government Code Sections 66410 et seq. concerning the design, improvement and survey data of subdivisions, the form and content of all maps provided for by the Subdivision Map Act, and the procedure to be followed in securing the official approval of the city regarding the maps.

16.04.030 Intent
The intent of this title is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare; to promote orderly growth and development within the city; to coordinate lot design, street patterns, rightsof-way, traffic circulation, utilities and public facilities with the general plan and any specific plans; to assure that areas dedicated for public purposes will be properly improved initially so as not to be a future burden upon the community; to preserve natural resources and prevent environmental damage; to maintain suitable standards to ensure adequate, safe building sites; and to prevent hazard to life and property.

16.04.040 Consistency
No land shall be subdivided for any purpose that is inconsistent with the city’s general plan or any applicable specific plan of the city or that is not permitted by the zoning ordinance (Title 17) or other applicable provisions of this Code. It is the intent of this title to comply in every regard to the latest edition of the Subdivision Map Act. If any provision of this title is in conflict with the Subdivision Map Act, the provisions in the Subdivision Map Act shall prevail.

The type and intensity of land use as shown on the general plan and any applicable specific plan shall determine the type of streets, roads, highways, utilities and public services, and other public improvements that shall be provided by the subdivider.

16.04.050 Application of Title
The regulations set forth in this title shall apply to all or parts of subdivisions within the city and to the preparation of subdivision maps and to other maps provided for by the Subdivision Map Act and this title. All subdivisions and any part thereof lying within the city shall be made and all subdivision maps shall be prepared and presented for approval in accordance with this title.

16.04.060 Exclusions
Packet Page No. 955

This title shall not apply to actions exempted by Government Code Section 66412 and any others specifically exempted by the State Subdivision Map Act, except that the procedures for the application, review and approval of lot line adjustments shall be as outlined in Chapter 16.52.

16.04.070 Fees and Deposits
All applicants for the approval of maps or for other approvals as required by this title shall pay all fees and/or deposits as established by City Council resolution.

16.04.080 General Responsibilities
In addition to the specific responsibilities set forth elsewhere in this title, the following agencies and officers, or their duly authorized representatives, shall have the general responsibilities hereby designated.

A. City Attorney. The City Attorney is responsible for approving as to form all subdivision improvement agreements and security and governing documents for a common interest development.

B. City Clerk. The City Clerk is responsible for filing and maintaining all official documents.

C. City Council. The City Council responsibilities shall be as follows:

1. The City Council shall act as the appeal board for subdivision decisions or actions of the Planning Commission.

2. The City Council shall act as the appeal board for subdivision decisions or actions of the City Engineer on final maps, parcel maps, improvement agreements and/or dedications.

3. When tentative maps are processed concurrently with other land use applications requiring City Council action, the City Council shall have authority for approval, conditional approval, or disapproval of the tentative map application.

D. City Engineer. The City Engineer or their designated representative, as specified in the Subdivision Map Act, shall have the following responsibilities:

1. The City Engineer shall have final approval or disapproval authority for final maps, parcel maps, improvement agreements, and the acceptance or rejection by the city of lands, easements, and/or improvements as may be offered for dedication to the city under Government Code Sections 66458, 66463, 66477.1, 66477.2 and 66477.3. The City Engineer shall sign the City Engineer’s certificate, and release the map to the county clerk or a title insurance company for transmittal to the county recorder for recordation.

Packet Page No. 956

2. The City Engineer is responsible for determining if proposed subdivisions comply with provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and this title.

3. The City Engineer is responsible for the approval or disapproval of requests for parcel map waivers under Section 16.06.030.

4. The City Engineer is responsible for determining whether the proposed improvements are consistent with the design and improvement standards specified or referred to in this title, and for the inspection and approval of all such improvements, and for making recommendations on granting exceptions requested under Section 16.12.090.

5. The City Engineer shall, on a regular basis, report to the City Council on consideration and action on final maps, parcel maps, improvement agreements, and the acceptance or rejection by the City Engineer of lands and/or improvements offered for dedication.

E. Community Development Director. The Community Development Director responsibilities shall be as follows:

1. The Community Development Director is responsible for the approval, conditional approval or disapproval of tentative parcel maps and lot line adjustments, except for tentative parcel maps subject to concurrent processing under subsection (C)(3) of this section.

2. Reviewing, distributing, and processing tentative tract, tentative parcel map and tentative parcel map waiver applications and making a recommendation on compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

3. The Community Development Director shall have the power to direct the issuance of citations, cease and desist orders and other appropriate orders involving violations of provisions of this title.

4. At any point in the review process and at their sole discretion, the Community Development Director may transfer original hearing jurisdiction to the Planning Commission because of policy implications, unique or unusual circumstances, or the magnitude of the project.

F. Planning Commission. The Planning Commission responsibilities shall be as follows:

1. The Planning Commission is responsible for the approval, conditional approval, or disapproval of tentative tract maps and discretionary extensions.

2. At any point in the review process and at its sole discretion, the Planning Commission may transfer original hearing jurisdiction to the City Council because of policy implications, unique or unusual circumstances, or the magnitude of the project.

Packet Page No. 957

3. The Planning Commission shall act as the appeal board for decisions of the Community Development Director.

4. When tentative maps are processed concurrently with other land use applications requiring City Council action, the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation on the maps to the City Council.

16.04.090 Definitions
All words and terms used in this title shall have the same meaning as defined in the Subdivision Map Act, except as expressly defined in this section.
“Advisory agency” means a designated official or an official body charged with the duty of reviewing the design and improvement of proposed divisions of real property, the imposing of requirements or conditions thereon, or having the authority under this title to approve, conditionally approve or disapprove maps.
“Final map” means a map showing a subdivision prepared in accordance with the provisions of this title and the Subdivision Map Act and designed to be recorded in the office of the Alameda County Recorder.
“Parcel map” means a map showing a subdivision of four or fewer parcels, prepared in accordance with the provisions of this title and the Subdivision Map Act and designed to be recorded in the office of the Alameda County Recorder. A parcel map also means a map showing a subdivision of five (5) or more parcels under the final map exemption in Government Code Sections 66426(a) through (e).
“Subdivider” means a person, firm, corporation, partnership, or association, who proposes to divide, divides or causes to be divided real property into a subdivision for him or herself or for others except that employees and consultants of such persons or entities, acting in such capacity, are not “subdividers.”
“Subdivision” means the division, by any subdivider, of any unit or units of improved or unimproved land, or any portion thereof, as shown on the latest equalized county assessment roll as a unit or as contiguous units, for the purpose of sale, lease or financing, whether immediate or future, and as further defined in Government Code Section 66424. “Tentative map” means a map made for the purpose of showing the design and improvement of a proposed subdivision and the existing conditions in and around it. “Tentative map” includes a tentative parcel map and a tentative tract map.
“Tentative parcel map” means a tentative map prepared in connection with a subdivision of four (4) or fewer parcels.

Packet Page No. 958

“Tentative tract map” means a tentative map prepared in connection with a subdivision of five (5) or more lots.
“Vesting tentative map” means a tentative map that meets the requirements set forth in Chapter

16.40. 16.04.100 Authority for Subdivision Decisions
Table 16-1 (Subdivision Review Authority) identifies the city official or authority responsible for reviewing and making decisions on each type of subdivision application or other decision required by this title.

Table 16-1 Subdivision Review Authority
Issue/Document
Applicable
Code
Chapter
Role of Review Authority(1)
Community
Development
Director
City
Engineer
Planning
Commission
City
Council
Tentative parcel map 16.08 Decision(2)(3) Appeal
Tentative parcel map
waiver

16.06 Decision(2) Appeal
Parcel map 16.24 Decision(2) Appeal
Tentative tract map 16.08 Decision(2)(3) Appeal
Final map 16.24 Decision(2) Appeal
Certificate of
compliance

16.56 Decision(2) Appeal
Lot line adjustment 16.52 Decision(2) Appeal
Parcel map waiver 16.06 Decision(2) Appeal
Reversion to acreage 16.48 Decision
Time extension 16.40 Decision(2) Appeal
Notes:
(1) “Decision” means that the review authority makes the final decision on the matter; “Appeal” means that the review authority may consider and decide upon appeals of the decision of an earlier decision-making body in accordance with Government Code Section 66452.5. (2) At its sole discretion, the review authority may transfer original hearing jurisdiction to a higher body.
(3) For tentative maps subject to concurrent processing, the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council.

Chapter 16.06 Maps Required

16.06.010 General
Packet Page No. 959

The necessity for tentative, final, and parcel maps shall be governed by the provisions of this chapter.

16.06.020 Division of Land – Five (5) or More Parcels
A tentative tract map and final map shall be required for all divisions of land creating five (5) or more parcels, five (5) or more condominiums as defined in Section 783 of the Civil Code, a community apartment project containing five (5) or more parcels, or for the conversion of a dwelling to a stock cooperative containing five (5) or more dwelling units, except where any one (1) of the following occurs:

A. The land before division contains less than five (5) acres, each parcel created by the division abuts upon a maintained public street or highway, and no dedications or improvements are required by the Planning Commission or City Council.

B. Each parcel created by the division has a gross area of twenty (20) acres or more and has an approved access to a maintained public street or highway.

C. The land consists of a parcel or parcels of land having approved access to a public street or highway, which comprises part of a tract of land zoned for industrial or commercial development, and which has the approval of the Planning Commission or City Council as to street alignments and widths.

D. Each parcel created by the division has a gross area of not less than forty (40) acres or is not less than a quarter of a quarter section.

E. The land is being subdivided solely for the creation of an environmental subdivision pursuant to Government Code Section 66418.2.

F. A tentative parcel map shall be required for the subdivisions described in subsections A through E of this section, and a parcel map shall be required rather than a final map unless the parcel map is waived by the City Engineer in accordance with Section 16.06.030(C).

16.06.030 Division of Land – Four (4) or Fewer Parcels
A. General. A tentative parcel map and parcel map shall be required for all divisions of land into four (4) or fewer parcels, except as provided below.

B. No Parcel Map Required. No parcel map shall be required for the following:

1. Subdivisions of a portion of the operating right-of-way of a railroad corporation, defined by Public Utilities Code Section 230, that are created by short-term leases (terminable by either party on not more than thirty (30) days’ notice in writing).

Packet Page No. 960

2. Land conveyed to or from a governmental agency, public entity or public utility, or for land conveyed to a subsidiary of a public utility for conveyance to that public utility for rights-of-way, unless a showing is made in individual cases, upon substantial evidence, that public policy necessitates a parcel map. For purposes of this section, land conveyed to or from a governmental agency shall include a fee interest, a leasehold interest, an easement, or a license.

C. Tentative Parcel Map Waiver. The Community Development Director may waive the requirement for filing a tentative parcel map, as provided below and in conformance with Government Code Section 66428.

1. A subdivider wishing to request a waiver of the tentative parcel map requirement shall submit a waiver request in writing to the Community Development Director.

2. The Community Developer Director may waive the requirements for a tentative parcel map when all required public improvements are existing; public improvements are not necessary; or public improvements may be deferred by agreement, so long as said deferred improvements are not immediately required for public health and safety or for the orderly growth and development of the surrounding area. The tentative parcel map waiver does not apply to airspace subdivision for the purpose of residential condominium conversion.

3. The tentative parcel map requirement may be waived upon a finding that the proposed subdivision complies with the requirements of this title as to lot area, improvement and design, floodwater drainage control, appropriate improved public roads, sanitary disposal facilities, water supply availability, environmental protection, other requirements of the Subdivision Map Act, and this title.

4. The Community Development Director shall act upon the application for a tentative parcel map waiver within sixty (60) days after the waiver application is deemed complete.

5. A tentative parcel map waiver may be conditioned to provide for the payment of park land dedication and any other fees generally applied to subdivision projects.

D. Parcel Map Waiver. The City Engineer may waive the requirement for filing a parcel map, as provided below and in conformance with Government Code Section 66428.

1. A subdivider wishing to request a waiver of the parcel map requirement shall submit a waiver request in writing to the City Engineer.

2. The City Engineer may waive the requirements of the parcel map for subdivisions of a portion of the operating right-of-way of a railroad corporation, as defined by Section 230 of the Public Utilities Code, that are created by short-term leases; or for land conveyed to or from a governmental agency, public entity, public utility, or for land conveyed to a subsidiary of a public utility for conveyance to that public utility for rights-of-way, unless a showing is made in individual cases, upon substantial evidence, that public policy Packet Page No. 961

necessitates a parcel map. “Land conveyed to or from a governmental agency” includes a fee interest, a leasehold interest, an easement or a license.

3. The parcel map requirement may be waived upon a finding that the proposed subdivision complies with the requirements of this title as to lot area, improvement and design, floodwater drainage control, appropriate improved public roads, sanitary disposal facilities, water supply availability, environmental protection, other requirements of the Subdivision Map Act, and this title.

4. The City Engineer shall act upon the application for a parcel map waiver within sixty (60) days after the waiver application is deemed complete.

5. A parcel map waiver may be conditioned to provide for the payment of park land dedication and any other fees generally applied to subdivision projects.

Chapter 16.08 Tentative Tract and Tentative Parcel Maps

16.08.010 General.

The form and contents, submittal and approval of tentative tract maps for the subdivision of five (5) or more parcels and tentative parcel maps for the subdivision of four (4) or fewer parcels shall be governed by the provisions of this chapter.

16.08.020 Persons Authorized to Prepare
All tentative maps shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor.

16.08.030 Tentative Map Number
The tentative map number shall be assigned by and obtained from the County Recorder.

16.08.040 Filing
All tentative map applications shall be filed with the Community Development Director and submitted in accordance with Chapter 17.31 (Common Procedures).

16.08.050 Form and Contents
The form and contents of the tentative map and the number of copies required for the application shall be prescribed by the Community Development Director and in accordance with the application submittal requirements for tentative maps. The Community Development Director may authorize deletion or reduction of map requirements on the determination that the map contains sufficient information to be evaluated adequately.

16.08.060 Accompanying Data and Reports
Packet Page No. 962

The tentative map shall be accompanied by the materials identified in the city application submittal requirements for tentative maps, including, but not limited to:

A. A preliminary grading plan prepared by a civil engineer registered by the state of California.

B. A preliminary soils report prepared by a civil engineer or geotechnical engineer registered by the state of California. For subdivisions within a seismic hazard zone, the report shall include supplemental data and analysis consistent with the requirements and specifications of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act and/or the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act. If the preliminary soils report indicates the presence of critically expansive soils, corrosive soils, or other soil problems that, if not corrected, could lead to structural defects, a soils investigation of each lot in the subdivision may be required. If the investigation and civil engineer’s report recommends corrective action, building permits can be conditioned to incorporate the recommendations.

C. Additional reports and data may be required by the City Engineer when deemed necessary due to scale of the proposed subdivision or presence of potential hazardous or environmentally sensitive conditions.

D. A “will serve” letter from the waste management service provider to provide waste collection to the proposed subdivision indicating and committing that the service can be provided to the proposed subdivision.

16.08.070 Noticed Public Hearing
The advisory agency shall conduct a noticed public hearing on tentative tract maps. The Community Development Director shall conduct a noticed public hearing on tentative parcel maps.

Notice and hearing procedures shall be as set forth in Chapter 17.31 (Common Procedures).

16.08.080 Public Notice
The city shall provide notice of the hearing on a tentative map in accordance with Chapter 17.31 (Common Procedures).

16.08.090 Action -Tentative Tract Maps
A. Advisory Agency, Timing. The Planning Commission is the advisory agency, and shall approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove tentative tract maps within fifty (50) days after certification of the environmental impact report, adoption of a negative declaration, or a final determination that the project is exempt from the requirements of Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code.

B. Conditions. Conditions of approval may include, but are not limited to, dedication and improvement of streets, alleys, including access rights and abutters’ rights, drainage, public Packet Page No. 963

utility easements and other public easements; reservations; the design and improvement of subdivisions; requirements to implement CEQA mitigation measures; ensuring proper grading and erosion control, ensuring prevention of sedimentation or damage to off-site property; energy conservation; and ensuring compliance with adopted development standards. Conditions of approval related to indemnification shall be in conformance with Government Code Section 66474.9.

1. Dedications. Conditions of approval may require dedications or offers of dedication for any purpose specified in the Subdivision Map Act, including but not limited to Government Code Sections 66473.3, 66475 through 66478, and 66478.5.

2. Reservations. The subdivider, as a condition of approval of a tentative tract map, may be required to reserve areas of real property for fire stations, libraries, parks, or other public uses, in compliance with the requirements of Government Code Sections 66479 through 66482.

3. Water Supply. Any tentative tract map for a subdivision as defined in Government Code Section 66473.7 shall be conditioned to show that a sufficient water supply shall be available, as further provided in that section.

C. Findings for Approval. All of the following findings shall be made in order to approve a tentative tract map and shall be supported by substantial evidence in the public record:

1. The proposed subdivision map together with the provisions for its design and improvement is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan. (Government Code Sections 66474(a), (b))

2. The subdivision site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development. (Government Code Sections 66474(c), (d))

3. The tentative tract map is consistent with the intent of applicable subdivision design or improvements of the tentative tract map are consistent with the city’s general plan and any applicable specific plan.

4. The subdivision design and proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. (Government Code Section 66474(e))

5. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not cause serious public health concerns. (Government Code Section 66474(f))

6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or alternate easements are provided pursuant to Government Code Section 66474(g).

Packet Page No. 964

7. The design or improvements of the tentative map are consistent with the city’s general plan and any applicable specific plan.

8. The subdivision is designed to provide for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. (Government Code Section 66473.1)

9. The tentative tract map, including design and improvement, shall comply with all the applicable provisions and requirements of Title 17, the latest municipal stormwater permit issued to the city by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, this title, any other ordinance of the city, and the Subdivision Map Act.

D. Conformance to City Ordinance.

1. General. The approval, conditional approval or disapproval of the tentative tract map shall be based on the ordinances, policies, and standards in effect on the date the application was determined to be complete.

2. Requirements of Other Agencies. The applicant shall be responsible for complying with the tentative map requirements of other agencies, as appropriate.

E. Referral. At any point in the review process and at its sole discretion, the Planning Commission may transfer original hearing jurisdiction to the City Council because of policy implications, unique or unusual circumstances, or the magnitude of the project.

16.08.100 Action -Tentative Parcel Maps
A. Advisory Agency, Timing. The Community Development Director is the advisory agency and shall approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove tentative parcel maps within fifty (50) days after certification of the environmental impact report, adoption of a negative declaration, or a final determination that the project is exempt from the requirements of Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code unless another time period is required by the Subdivision Map Act.

B. Conditions. Conditions of approval shall be limited to the dedication of rights-of-way, easements, and construction of reasonable off-site and on-site improvements for the parcels being created. Conditions of approval related to indemnification shall be in conformance with Government Code Section 66474.9.

1. Dedications. Conditions of approval may require dedications or offers of dedication for any purpose specified in the Subdivision Map Act, including but not limited to Government Code Sections 66473.3, 66475 through 66478, and 66478.5.

2. Reservations. The subdivider, as a condition of approval of a tentative parcel map, may be required to reserve areas of real property for fire stations, libraries, parks, or other public Packet Page No. 965

uses, in compliance with the requirements of Government Code Sections 66479 through 66482.

3. Timing. Fulfillment of any construction requirements shall not be required until the time a permit or other grant of approval for development of the parcel is issued, or as otherwise authorized under Government Code Section 66411.1(b).

C. Findings for Approval. All of the following findings shall be made in order to approve a tentative parcel map and shall be supported by substantial evidence in the public record:

1. The proposed subdivision map together with the provisions for its design and improvement is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan. (Government Code Section 66474(a), (b))

2. The subdivision site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development. (Government Code Section 66474(c), (d))

3. The tentative parcel map is consistent with the intent of applicable subdivision design or improvements of the tentative parcel map are consistent with the city’s general plan and any applicable specific plan.

4. The subdivision design and proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. (Government Code Section 66474(e))

5. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not cause serious public health concerns. (Government Code Section 66474(f))

6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision; or alternate easements are provided pursuant to Government Code Section 66474(g).

7. The design or improvements of the tentative map are consistent with the city’s general plan and any applicable specific plan.

8. The subdivision is designed to provide for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. (Government Code Section 66473.1)

9. The tentative parcel map, including design and improvement, shall comply with all the applicable provisions and requirements of the zoning ordinance, the latest municipal stormwater permit issued to the city by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, this title, any other ordinance of the city, and the Subdivision Map Act.

Packet Page No. 966

D. Conformance to City Ordinance.

1. General. The approval, conditional approval or disapproval of the tentative parcel map shall be based on the ordinances, policies, and standards in effect on the date the application was determined to be complete.

2. Requirements of Other Agencies. The applicant shall be responsible for complying with the tentative map requirements of other agencies, as appropriate.

E. Referral. At any point in the review process and at their sole discretion, the Community Development Director may transfer original hearing jurisdiction to the Planning Commission because of policy implications, unique or unusual circumstances, or the magnitude of the project.

16.08.110 Appeals
Appeals may be filed with, considered, and acted upon by the appeal body specified in Chapter 16.04 in accordance with Government Code Section 66452.5.

16.08.120 Extension of Time for Action or Report
Any of the time limits for action or report may be extended by mutual consent of the subdivider and the Community Development Director, Planning Commission or, if applicable, the City Council in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act.

16.08.130 Effective Period of Approved Tentative Map
A. Effective Period. The approval or conditional approval of a tentative map shall be effective for twenty-four (24) months from the date of its approval by the Planning Commission, for tentative tract maps, or by the Community Development Director, for tentative parcel maps.

Expiration of a tentative map shall terminate all proceedings.

B. Statutory Extensions and Stays. The effective period of an approved or conditionally approved tentative map, or a tentative tract map with multiple final maps, or a tentative map that is subject to a development moratorium, or as otherwise provided in the Subdivision Map Act, shall be extended or stayed in accordance with applicable provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, including but not limited to Government Code Section 66452.6.

C. Litigation Stay. The period of time specified above shall not include any period of time during which a lawsuit has been filed and is pending in a court of competent jurisdiction involving the approval or conditional approval of a tentative map only if a stay of the time period is approved by the City Council.

Within ten (10) days of the service of the initial petition or complaint upon the city, the subdivider shall, in writing, to the Community Development Director, request a stay in the time period of the tentative map. Within forty (40) days after receiving the request, the City Council Packet Page No. 967