Pleasanton City Council
July 21, 2026

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 147
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx conflict with applicable land use plans or policies, and land use impacts would remain less than significant and consistent with the Prior FEIR.

Mitigation Measures
None.

Conclusion
There is no new information of substantial importance, changes in the project, or changes in circumstances under which it will be undertaken, identifying new significant effects, nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts related to land use and planning. The conclusions from the Prior FEIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the proposed project. No further environmental review is required.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
148 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Prior
FEIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XII. Mineral Resources
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of
availability of a
known mineral
resource that would
be of value to the
region and the
residents of the
State?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
b) Result in the loss of
availability of a
locally important
mineral resource
recovery site
delineated on a
local general plan,
specific plan or
other land use
plan?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
Discussion
a-b) Loss of Minerals Resources of Statewide or Local Importance Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR determined that although the project site and proposed off-site improvement areas are located in an MRZ-2 zone, indicating potential for significant aggregate materials, the associated mining permit (SMP-31) is inactive, and the project site has already been graded and filled. No known

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 149
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx mineral resources of Statewide, regional, or local importance are present, and the project site and offsite improvement areas are not designated for mineral resource recovery in the County’s General Plan, ECAP, or other applicable land use plans. The County Project would not interfere with existing or planned mineral extraction activities, nor would it preclude access to or extraction from adjacent parcels. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.11-11, 3.11-12, 6-17).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Mineral resource conditions at the proposed project site remain the same as previously evaluated in the Prior FEIR. As previously determined, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of regional, Statewide, or local value.

Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.

Zone 7 Stormwater Option
The Zone 7 Stormwater Option would have no impact with respect to mineral resources.

Mitigation Measures
None.

Conclusion
There is no new information of substantial importance, changes in the project, or changes in circumstances under which it will be undertaken, identifying new significant effects, nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts related to mineral resources. The conclusions from the Prior FEIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the proposed project. No further environmental review is required.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
150 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion in
Prior FEIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XIII. Noise
Would the project:
a) Generation of a
substantial
temporary or
permanent increase
in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity
of the project in
excess of standards
established in the
local general plan or
noise ordinance, or
applicable standards
of other agencies?
Less than
significant
impact with
mitigation
incorporated
No No No MM NOI-1
b) Generation of
excessive
groundborne
vibration or
groundborne noise
levels?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
c) For a project located
within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an
airport land use plan
or, where such a
plan has not been
adopted, within two
miles of a public
airport or public use
airport, would the
project expose
people residing or
working in the project
area to excessive
noise levels?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 151
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Discussion
a) Noise Levels in Excess of Adopted Standards
Would the project result in: Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR found that construction activities, particularly grading and site preparation, would generate temporary noise levels up to 78 dBA 8-hour equivalent sound level (Leq(8-hr)) at the nearest sensitive receptor, located approximately 35 feet from the construction zone. These levels would be intermittent and would decrease as equipment moves across the project site. These reasonable worst-case construction noise levels are below the adopted Federal Transit Administration (FTA) daytime 8-hour average threshold for receiving residential land uses of 80 dBA Leq(8-hr) but would exceed the nighttime threshold of 70 dBA Leq(8-hr). Therefore, MM NOI-1 was imposed, which requires restricting construction to daytime hours and implementing BMPs, such as mufflers, equipment maintenance, and strategic placement of staging areas. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that construction noise impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

The Prior FEIR also determined that operational impacts would be less than significant because project operational noise levels would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of established standards, which consisted of compliance with General Plan Policy EC-1.2. This policy identifies that a significant noise impact would occur if a project would result in an increase by 5 dBA Ldn or more where noise levels would remain “Normally Acceptable”; or result in an increase by 3 dBA Ldn or more where noise levels would equal or exceed the “Normally Acceptable” level. Stationary source noise impacts would also occur if they exceeded daytime or nighttime noise performance standards of 50 dBA and 45 dBA Leq, respectively. The analysis identified that mobile noise source increases would be below the applicable 5 dBA increase threshold and the stationary noise sources would range up to 44 dBA Leq outside of the nearest receiving residential land uses, which is less than the noise performance thresholds. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that operational noise impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.12-19, 6-17).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Construction Noise Impacts
The project site is proposed to be annexed into the City. According to Section 9.04.100 of the Municipal Code, construction noise is exempt from the noise performance standards of the Noise Ordinance between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. daily, except Sunday and holidays, when the exemption shall apply between 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., provided the construction activity meets at least one of the following noise limitations:

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
152 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx A. No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding 83 dBA at a distance of 25 feet. If the device is housed within a structure on the property, the measurement shall be made outside the structure at a distance as close to 25 feet from the equipment as possible; or
B. The noise level at any point outside of the property plane of the project shall not exceed 86 dBA.

However, the Prior FEIR utilized the FTA thresholds for evaluating construction noise impacts.

Therefore, the FTA thresholds used in the Prior FEIR remain appropriate for evaluating construction noise impacts for the proposed project, and the City has determined, in its discretion, to utilize both the City’s standards and the FTA threshold here; thus, the analysis remains consistent with the methodology used in the Prior FEIR.

For residential uses, which are the only noise-sensitive land use types within 1,000 feet of the proposed project, the FTA’s criteria are an 80 dBA Leq(8-hr) daytime limit, a 70 dBA Leq(8-hr) nighttime limit, and a 75 dBA Ldn 30-day average. The closest sensitive receptor is located approximately 35 feet from the acoustical center of construction activity. Because construction would not occur during nighttime hours pursuant to implementation of MM NOI-1, the analysis in the Prior FEIR focused on the 80 dBA Leq(8-hr) daytime limit to evaluate the significance of the proposed project’s constructionrelated noise impacts at nearby residential uses.

The City’s construction noise standards are outlined in Section 9.04.100 of the Municipal Code, which identifies that construction noise is exempt from the noise performance standards of the Noise Ordinance between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. daily, except Sunday and holidays, when the exemption shall apply between 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., provided the construction activity meets at least one of the following noise limitations:

A. No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding 83 dBA at a distance of 25 feet. If the device is housed within a structure on the property, the measurement shall be made outside the structure at a distance as close to 25 feet from the equipment as possible; or
B. The noise level at any point outside of the property plane of the project shall not exceed 86 dBA.

Construction activities under the proposed project would be similar to those under the County Project, albeit reduced in intensity to a certain degree due to the reduced project footprint. Construction noise impacts were found to be intermittent and variable under the Prior FEIR, reaching a maximum 8-hour average of 78 dBA Leq(8-hr). Given the substantial similarities between the proposed project and the County Project, it is reasonable to conclude that the proposed project would result in substantially the same levels of noise, if not slightly reduced. As such, estimated maximum construction noise levels would not exceed the City’s construction noise standard of 86 dBA Leq as measured at the property plane. Additionally, MM NOI-1 would still be implemented to ensure adherence to the permissible construction hours and to ensure implementation of best management noise reduction techniques

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 153
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx and practices. Implementation of MM NOI-1 would ensure that construction noise levels would not result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in excess of the FTA’s thresholds for construction noise impacts. Therefore, with implementation of MM NOI-1, consistent with the impact conclusions of the Prior FEIR, temporary construction noise impacts would be reduced to less than significant.

Operational Stationary Noise Impacts
Operational Traffic Noise Impacts
A significant impact would occur if operational noise levels generated by mobile noise sources at the project site would result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of the applicable noise standards established in the City’s General Plan. The City’s General Plan Noise Element Program 1.3 states that a significant noise impact would occur if exterior noise increased by more than 4 dBA over ambient levels. Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, an increase of more than 4 dBA above ambient noise levels that would exist without the proposed project would be considered a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise.

According to the Prior FEIR, implementation of the County Project would result in traffic noise levels of up to 59.1 dBA CNEL under existing plus project conditions. However, the measured existing ambient noise levels adjacent to this roadway segment are 59 dBA CNEL. 40 Accordingly, project traffic
noise levels would result in a 0.1 dBA increase over existing ambient noise levels. The analysis also showed that future plus project traffic noise levels would only result in a 0.6 dBA increase over future traffic noise levels that would exist without the project. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in traffic noise levels above the City’s adopted threshold.

The proposed project would be located on the same site and would include substantially the same residential uses (with slightly fewer units as well as a substantial reduction in off-site utility infrastructure) as compared with the County Project. Further, the proposed project anticipates a slight reduction in traffic noise from what was previously analyzed due to the nominally lower trip generation from the reduction in proposed residential units. As such, consistent with the impact conclusions in the Prior FEIR, the proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in traffic noise levels compared with traffic noise levels existing without the project, and this impact would be less than significant.

Mechanical Equipment Operations
A significant impact would occur if operational noise levels generated by stationary noise sources at the project site would result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of the applicable noise standards established in the City’s General Plan. Program 1.3 of the City’s 40 The 59.5 dBA noise level presented is in a Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), which is weighted by applying a 5 dBA penalty to noise between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. and a 10 dBA penalty between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The day/night equivalent noise level only applies a 10 dBA penalty to noise between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Because of this weighting, a noise level that is weighted in a CNEL would always remain higher than the same noise level weighted over a day/night equivalent noise level.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
154 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx General Plan Noise Element identifies that an increase of 4 dBA over existing ambient conditions is considered a threshold for significance.

The proposed project would result in substantially the same mechanical ventilation equipment compared to the County Project albeit with a nominal decrease given the slight reduction in units.

Based on noise measurements, ambient noise levels are documented as being 59 dBA CNEL near the southwest portion of the project site, with daytime short-term ambient noise measurements ranging from 45.2 dBA to 57.1 dBA Leq across the site. Based on the proposed site plan, none of the mechanical systems would be located closer to off-site receptors than what was previously analyzed as the reasonable worst-case scenario. The modeled noise level for mechanical equipment was 44 dBA Leq as measured at the exterior of the nearest sensitive receptor. This reasonable worst-case stationary source operational noise level would not result in an increase of more than 4 dBA over documented existing ambient noise conditions identified above and is therefore consistent with the noise performance standard of Program 1.3. Therefore, consistent with the impact conclusions of the Prior FEIR, the proposed project’s mechanical ventilation equipment operational noise impacts would be less than significant.

The proposed project’s construction and operational noise impact would continue to be less than significant, and the proposed project would not introduce any new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.
b) Groundborne Vibration
Would the project result in: Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR evaluated vibration impacts using FTA criteria because the County does not have any quantitative applicable standards for construction or operational vibration thresholds. As detailed more fully therein, the nearest residences are not expected to experience vibration levels exceeding the thresholds for structural damage or annoyance. Construction equipment such as graders and trucks would operate at distances sufficient to avoid excessive vibration. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that groundborne vibration impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.12-24, 6-17).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Construction Vibration Impacts
Pleasanton General Plan Noise Element Program 1.6 requires preparation of a vibration study by a qualified vibration consultant, with a site-specific engineering assessment for any proposed construction project that would require pile driving or similar vibration causing impacts. The assessment would minimize potential vibration impacts through such measures as pre-drilling pile hoses, driving piles hydraulically or enclosing sheet piles with rubber aprons. The City Engineer would review and approve all vibration studies. However, the proposed project would not include use

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 155
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx of pile driving or similar vibration causing construction methods, and therefore this requirement would not apply to the proposed project under its current application.

The City does not establish numeric thresholds for other types of construction-related groundborne vibration impacts; therefore, for purposes of this analysis, the City, in its discretion, has elected to apply FTA construction vibration criteria, consistent with the Prior FEIR. A peak particle velocity (PPV) of 0.2 in/sec at the nearest structure is used as the threshold for potential building damage.

The proposed project would involve substantially the same construction period, equipment, and processes as the County Project, with a reduced footprint and slightly reduced unit count. The nearest existing residential structures are approximately 25 feet west of the construction footprint where the heaviest vibration generating equipment could operate. At this distance, vibration from bulldozers would be approximately 0.089 in/sec PPV, well below the 0.2 in/sec threshold. Vibratory rollers, used for internal streets, would operate approximately 100 feet away, generating up to 0.013 in/sec PPV as measured at the nearest receiving structure, also well below the threshold. Given that equipment types and distances from construction footprints to receptors remain comparable, construction vibration would not exceed the applicable criteria, and the impact would remain less than significant consistent with the Prior FEIR’s impact conclusion.

Operational Vibration Impacts
Similar to the County Project, implementation of the proposed project would not include any permanent sources of vibration that would expose persons in the project vicinity to groundborne vibration levels that could be perceptible without instruments at any existing sensitive land use in the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels in excess of established standards and, similar to the conclusions of the Prior FEIR, would result in a similar less than significant impact related to operational groundborne vibration. Given these considerations, the proposed project’s groundborne vibration impact from operations would be less than significant.

Therefore, the project construction and operational groundborne vibration impact would continue to be less than significant consistent with the impact conclusions of the Prior FEIR, and the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
156 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx c) Airport or Private Airstrip Noise
Would the project result in: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR determined that a significant impact would occur if the County Project were located in the vicinity of a private airstrip or within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or a public use airport and exposed people residing or working in the vicinity to excessive noise levels. The project site is approximately 1.6 miles southwest of Livermore Municipal Airport and is subject to the ALUCP. The project site is located outside the 55, 60, and 65 dBA CNEL noise contours shown in the ALUCP (Figure 3-2, Noise Compatibility Zones).

Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that implementation of the County Project would not expose residents to airport-related noise levels that exceed normally acceptable standards for residential development. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.12-25, 6-17).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
As discussed in the Prior FEIR, a significant impact would occur if the proposed project would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels for a project located in the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport.

The proposed project would occupy the same site as the County Project evaluated in the Prior FEIR and would remain approximately 1.6 miles southwest of Livermore Municipal Airport, within the area subject to the Livermore ALUCP. The project site continues to be located well outside the 55, 60, and 65 dBA CNEL noise contours shown in the ALUCP. Exposure to aircraft-related noise would therefore be the same as previously evaluated in the Prior FEIR (although there would be a slight reduction of people exposed, given the nominal reduction in unit count). As such, consistent with the impact conclusions of the Prior FEIR, implementation of the proposed project would not expose persons residing or working in the vicinity to noise levels from airport activity that would be in excess of normally acceptable standards, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified. No additional analysis is required.

Zone 7 Stormwater Option
The Zone 7 Stormwater Option would not result in any new or more severe noise impacts compared to those previously analyzed since it was considered in the Prior FEIR. By eliminating construction and operation of the detention basin, pump facilities, and storm drain force main (as contemplated in the City Stormwater Option), this option would incrementally reduce construction-related equipment

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 157
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx noise and would avoid operational noise associated with mechanical pumping infrastructure.

Consistent with the impact conclusions in the Prior FEIR, this option would not introduce new stationary noise sources or increase traffic noise levels, and all applicable noise-related mitigation measures from the Prior FEIR would continue to apply. Accordingly, noise impacts would remain less than significant and consistent with the conclusions of the Prior FEIR.

Mitigation Measures
MM NOI-1 Prior to issuance of construction permits, the following language shall be included, verbatim, in the general notes section of all the civil plan construction documents. • The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
• The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. • The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. • At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from adjacent residences.
• The construction contractor shall ensure that the construction staging areas shall be located to create the greatest feasible distance between the staging area and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site.
• The construction contractor shall ensure that all on-site construction activities, including the operation of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, grading, or demolition work, are limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on any day except Saturday or Sunday, or 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday or Sunday.

Implementing Measure for MM NOI-1
Upon annexation of the proposed project into the City of Pleasanton (City) and prior to issuance of construction permits, the language identified in MM NOI-1 shall be included in the general notes section of all civil plan construction documents, except that the last bullet point shall be replaced with the following, to reflect the City’s allowed construction hours:
• “The construction contractor shall ensure that all on-site construction activities, including the operation of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, grading, or demolition work, are limited to between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. daily, and between 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Sunday and holidays” to reflect the City’s allowed construction hours.”

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
158 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Conclusion
There is no new information of substantial importance, changes in the project, or changes in circumstances under which it will be undertaken, identifying new significant effects, nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts related to noise. The conclusions from the Prior FEIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the proposed project. No further environmental review is required.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 159
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Prior
FEIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XIV. Population and Housing
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial
unplanned
population growth
in an area, either
directly (for
example, by
proposing new
homes and
businesses) or
indirectly (for
example, through
extension of roads
or other
infrastructure)?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
b) Displace substantial
numbers of existing
people or housing,
necessitating the
construction of
replacement
housing elsewhere?
No impact No No No NA
Discussion
a) Growth Inducement
Would the project: Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR determined that the County Project would result in direct population growth by constructing 194 single-family homes, including 49 deed-restricted junior ADUs, totaling 243 dwelling

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
160 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx units.41 Based on the County’s average household size of 2.84 persons, the County Project is expected to generate approximately 691 new residents. However, this growth is consistent with the County’s Housing Element and the Sixth Cycle RHNA targets and represents an increase of less than 1 percent relative to the County’s 2023 population. The project site is designated for MDR in the ECAP, and the County Project’s density of 7.3 du/acre falls within the MDR range of 4.1 to 8.0 du/acre. The County Project would not require rezoning due to consistency with the Alameda County General Plan land use designation, and it would not extend roads or other infrastructure in a way that induces unplanned growth. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.13-11, 6-18).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
The proposed project would result in an estimated population increase of approximately 588 residents using the City’s average household size of 2.48 persons per household. Although the project site would be annexed into the City and would therefore sustain growth not accounted for in the General Plan, the proposed project would be within the density range allowed by the City’s General Plan (2 to 8 du/acre). Furthermore, the estimated 588 residents would account for less than 1 percent of the City’s 2024 population of approximately 75,664 persons. 42,43
The proposed project would include slightly fewer units than what was evaluated in the Prior FEIR:
189 homes and 48 junior ADUs versus 194 homes and 49 junior ADUs. The proposed project does not include new commercial or employment-generating uses that would attract additional population, nor does it propose substantial off-site infrastructure improvements that could facilitate further unplanned growth beyond the project site.

Subject to annexation approval (reflecting a logical extension of the City’s municipal boundaries), all utility connections (water, sewer, stormwater) would be tied into existing City systems, and roadway improvements would be limited to those necessary for project access and connectivity, rather than opening up undeveloped areas for future growth. As such, the proposed project would not induce substantial population growth in the area, either directly through new homes or businesses, or indirectly through extension of infrastructure, and would not result in growth beyond what is already anticipated in local plans and policies. In addition, in the event of annexation, the installation of a WWTP would be unnecessary, thereby avoiding any growth inducement that may be associated therewith. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.
41 As detailed in Section 2.2.1, Arroyo Lago Residential Project Environmental Impact Report, the Prior FEIR evaluated development of up to 194 dwelling units and 49 junior ADUs. However, prior to project approval, the Planning Commission and applicant agreed to revise the County Project to include up to 190 dwelling units with 48 junior ADUs.

This analysis evaluates the proposed project in comparison to the County Project as evaluated in the Prior FEIR. 42 United States Census Bureau. 2024. QuickFacts: Pleasanton City, California. July 1. Website:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/pleasantoncitycalifornia/PST045224. Accessed March 3, 2026. 43 (588 residents / 75,664 persons) * 100 = approximately 0.78 percent

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 161
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx b) Displacement of Persons or Housing
Would the project: Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR found that the project site is currently vacant, and there are no existing housing units or permanent residents on the project site. As such, development of the County Project would not result in the displacement of existing residents or housing or necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that there would be no impact. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.13-12, 6-18).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
As the project site for the proposed project remains the same project site as the County Project, the project site does not contain existing housing or residents. As such, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s impact conclusion, the proposed project would not displace existing residents or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing, and no impact would occur. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.

Zone 7 Stormwater Option
Because the Zone 7 Stormwater Option is limited to a modification in stormwater management infrastructure and does not alter the proposed project’s residential development program, it would have no impact with respect to population or housing.

Mitigation Measures
None.

Conclusion
There is no new information of substantial importance, changes in the project, or changes in circumstances under which it will be undertaken, identifying new significant effects, nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts related to population and housing. The conclusions from the Prior FEIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the proposed project. No further environmental review is required.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
162 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Prior FEIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XV. Public Services
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
b) Police protection? Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
c) Schools? Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
d) Parks? Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
e) Other public facilities? Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
Discussion
a) Fire Protection and Emergency Response Services
Would the project: Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection?

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 163
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR found that, through current automatic aid agreements with ACFD, the County Project would be served primarily by the LPFD, which has five fire stations and a daily staffing level of 18 personnel. The County Project would provide initial emergency response from LPFD’s Fire Station 1, located approximately 0.64 mile south of the project site. Further, the County Project would be required to comply with applicable provisions of the CBC and the California Fire Code. In compliance with the California Fire Code, Part 9 of the CBC, during construction, the County Project would be required to follow fire safety standards related to the provision of fire apparatus access as part of the acquisition of building permits. This would include LPFD’s review and approval of proposed fire apparatus access, fire lanes, security gates, and fire hydrant systems to ensure compliance with applicable standards. The County Project would also pay required fees charged by the County and ACFD, which would contribute funding for increased staffing and fire protection resources. The County Project would not include or otherwise trigger the construction of new or physically altered governmental facilities with respect to fire protection and emergency medical services.

In evaluating annexation of the project site to the City, the Prior FEIR, in Alternative 2, determined that demand for public services, including fire protection and emergency medical services, would be the same as the County Project based on an equivalent number of residences and junior ADUs, and impacts would remain less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 6-18, 6-19). Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.13-11, 6-18, 6-19).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Even with the annexation of the project site into the City, the proposed project would be served by LPFD for fire protection and emergency medical services, and the proposed project would be substantially the same as the County Project with respect to residential uses, albeit with a slightly fewer number and a corresponding nominal decrease in new residents.

As with the County Project, the proposed project would be required to comply with applicable provisions of the CBC and California Fire Code regulations during construction, as well as undergo review by LPFD to confirm compliance with same. The proposed project would also be required to pay applicable capital facilities fees as outlined in Municipal Code Chapter 3.22. Through the capital facilities fee, the project applicant would be making its pro rata fair share payment toward planned future fire protection/emergency response services/facilities. Similar to the County Project, the proposed project would not include or otherwise trigger the construction of new or physically altered governmental facilities with respect to fire protection and emergency medical services. Based on the foregoing and consistent with the impact conclusions of the Prior FEIR, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
164 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx b) Police Protection
Would the project: Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Police protection?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR determined that the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office would provide law enforcement services from its Eden Township Substation. Although the substation has limited staffing and response times exceed the County’s performance objective, the Sheriff’s Office did not identify a need for new or expanded physical facilities to serve the County Project. While the County Project would incrementally increase demand for police services, CEQA does not consider staffing deficiencies alone to be a physical environmental impact; rather, it is only when the subject project demand would trigger the need for new or physically altered facilities in order to maintain acceptable response times, the construction of which could cause significant impacts, which is not the case with respect to the County Project.

In evaluating annexation of the project site to the City, the Prior FEIR, in Alternative 2, determined that demand for public services would be the same as the County Project, but some service providers would change to those of the City, and impacts would remain less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 6- 18, 6-19). Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.13-13, 6-18, 6-19).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
The proposed project would be served by the Pleasanton PD. While the proposed project could result in an increased demand for police protection services to a certain degree as compared to existing conditions, as was previously evaluated in the Prior FEIR, the proposed project would be required to comply with the applicable policies and programs of the General Plan that would ensure that police protection services keep pace with new development. For example, Program 2.1 of Policy 2 under Goal 3 in Chapter 6 (Public Facilities and Community Programs Element) and Program 26.2 of Policy 26 under Goal 8 in Chapter 5 (Public Safety Element) require new development to pay its fair share of costs associated with site acquisition and facility improvements for municipal services, as well as police safety improvements. The proposed project would also be required to pay the capital facilities fee outlined in Chapter 3.22 of the Municipal Code, which would ensure that the proposed project contributes its pro rata fair share toward future planned police services/facilities.

The addition of approximately 588 residents would not, by itself, necessitate the construction of new police stations or substantial expansion of existing police facilities. Police service demands associated with population growth in the City are generally addressed at this new level of demand through long-range planning, staffing adjustments, and incremental facility upgrades funded

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 165
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx through citywide development fees and General Plan-mandated financing mechanisms, rather than through project-specific construction of new police facilities. As a result, the proposed project would not directly induce new police facility construction that could result in significant environmental impacts.

Furthermore, all development requiring a discretionary use permit, such as the proposed project, would be submitted and reviewed by Pleasanton PD, which allows Pleasanton PD an opportunity to provide recommendations that would reduce impacts on police services (Program 29.2). As such, potential impacts would be less than significant, consistent with the impact conclusions of the Prior FEIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.
c) Schools
Would the project: Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Schools?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The project site is located within the jurisdiction of the Pleasanton Unified School District (PUSD) and would be served by Alisal Elementary School, Harvest Park Middle School, and Amador Valley High School. As discussed in the Prior FEIR, the County Project would increase the number of residential units as compared to existing conditions, thereby increasing the need for school services for the County Project and its residents. Although Alisal Elementary may be impacted as it is nearing capacity (the other schools were found to have available capacity), the County Project would pay applicable school impact fees pursuant to Government Code Section 65996, which constitutes full and complete mitigation under CEQA. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.13-14, 6-18, 6-19).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
The proposed project would still be served by PUSD, but it would slightly reduce the number of units and corresponding number of students generated compared to that evaluated in the Prior FEIR. The Prior FEIR’s analysis remains applicable to the proposed project, which would generate approximately 145 students, nominally less than the 148 students estimated for the County Project. 44 Based on current available data regarding school capacity and communications with PUSD, the proposed project would have the potential to impact Alisal Elementary School. However, the proposed 44 Sheikholeslami, Ahmad. Assistant Superintendent of Business Services. Pleasanton Unified School District. Personal communication: email. May 16, 2023.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
166 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx project would still be required to pay applicable school impact fees pursuant to Government Code Section 65996, which constitutes full and complete mitigation under CEQA. Therefore, consistent with the impact conclusions of the Prior FEIR, the proposed project’s impacts would be less than significant and would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.
d) Parks
Would the project: Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Parks?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
As detailed in the Prior FEIR, the County Project includes the development of an approximately 0.7- acre private park that would be open to the public, and approximately 0.5 mile of multiuse trails.

Although the County Project would increase demand for park facilities due to population growth as compared to existing conditions, the County Project would either dedicate parkland or pay applicable development fees to offset this demand pursuant to applicable County and State law requirements.

The County currently exceeds its goal of 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, and the County Project would not decrease that ratio below the threshold. Except for the proposed on-site park, no new or expanded park facilities would be required by the County Project, and the impacts of that park development were contemplated in the relevant environmental topic areas throughout the Prior FEIR.

Because of the project site’s location relative to the City, the Prior FEIR determined that residents of the proposed project would also likely utilize City park facilities; accordingly, the Prior FEIR included an evaluation of City park land and standards. The City’s park standard is 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. (Draft EIR, p. 3.14-15). According to the City’s 2023-2031 (6th Cycle) Housing Element Update Program EIR, the City maintains 46 developed park sites that total 385 acres of parkland;
45 this acreage translates to approximately 5.09 acres per 1,000 residents.46,47 Therefore, because the City maintains a park service standard over its 5 acres of park and recreational uses per 45 City of Pleasanton. 2022. Program Environmental Impact Report City of Pleasanton 2023-2031 (6th Cycle) Housing Element Update. Website: https://files.ceqanet.lci.ca.gov/277712-3/attachment/-bwDNIbsCtS27yQFn3dCFDFxvAATXvXAuUCWntLOWyyE9xYwOCV3-nixSHdoCaK6829Yoe_cKtAK_Xs0. Accessed March 10, 2026.
46 United States Census Bureau. 2026. QuickFacts: Pleasanton City, California. Website:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/pleasantoncitycalifornia/PST045224. Accessed April 20, 2026. 47 Based on a population of 75,664 persons as of July 1, 2024.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 167
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx 1,000 residents, the additional use by project residents would not cause the ratio to lower such that it would be inconsistent with Program 10.18 of the City’s General Plan.

Additionally, the proposed project would be required to comply with the County’s Park Dedication Ordinance (Chapter 12.20 of the County Code of Ordinance), the purpose of which is to assure that each new residential unit in the unincorporated area bears the burden of its individual, incremental share of improvements needed to accommodate the cumulative demand for park and recreation facilities caused by all new residential development, and to ensure that the current level of park and recreation facilities is maintained (County Code Section 12.20.030). The proposed project would be required to comply with the Ordinance through a combination of on-site park dedications and a payment of an in lieu fee, as set forth in an enforceable COA. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.13-15, 6-18, 6-19).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
As previously stated, the City maintains approximately 385 acres of parks, translating to approximately 5.09 acres per 1,000 residents, above its park service standard of 5 acres of park and recreational uses per 1,000 residents.

Consistent with the County Project, the proposed project would still provide an approximately 0.7-acre private park and approximately 0.5 mile of multiuse trails. Additionally, the proposed project would provide a Public Access Easement to allow the public to use its on-site park amenities. With the proposed project’s anticipated increase of approximately 588 residents48 (slightly lower than the County Project) and the inclusion of an approximately 0.7-acre private park, the ratio of parklands per 1,000 residents for the City would be approximately 5.06 acres per 1,000 residents.

However, as evaluated in the Prior FEIR, improvements identified in the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan were planned independent of the proposed project. The proposed project would not necessitate these planned park improvements, which have already been identified, planned, and analyzed at a program level. The impacts associated with the proposed on-site park facilities were thoroughly evaluated in the Prior FEIR in the appropriate environmental topic areas.

Furthermore, the proposed project would be required to pay applicable capital facilities fees as outlined in Chapter 3.22 of the Municipal Code, which would further contribute to the City’s planned park facilities. Finally, the applicant would be responsible for satisfaction of the City's parkland dedication requirements. Therefore, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s impact conclusion, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact in this regard and, as such, would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required. 48 (189 dwelling units + 48 junior ADUs) * 2.48 (City’s average persons per household) = approximately 588 persons

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
168 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx e) Other Public Services
Would the project: Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Other public services?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR determined that the County Project would increase demand for library services as compared to existing conditions. Consultation with the Alameda County Library and Pleasanton Public Library indicated that the additional demand would be minimal and could be accommodated without the need for new or expanded facilities. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.13-16, 6-18, 6-19).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Consistent with the County Project, the proposed project could result in an increased demand for library services as compared to existing conditions. However, the proposed project would slightly reduce the number of units from that proposed by the County Project and would result in a corresponding nominal decrease in new residents generated.

As stated in the Prior FEIR, the Pleasanton Public Library was consulted in a letter dated May 19, 2023 and confirmed that the proposed project would not have a substantial impact on the library and that the library would be able to accommodate the proposed project as part of the existing facilities.

The City identified the need for expansion of the Pleasanton Library. However, the City’s General Plan and Library Master Plan indicate a planned expansion of the Pleasanton Public Library. Pleasanton Public Library is supported by the City’s General Fund and grant funding at approximately $4 million annually. Thus, the need for an expansion of the library facilities is not necessitated by the proposed project and is an existing deficiency. The need for additional library services have already been analyzed in the General Plan EIR and the Housing Element Update Program EIR. Therefore, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s impact conclusion, the proposed project’s impact in this regard would be less than significant and, as such, would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.

Zone 7 Stormwater Option
Because the Zone 7 Stormwater Option is limited to a modification in stormwater management infrastructure and does not alter the proposed project’s residential development program or the scale or nature of development, impacts would remain less than significant with respect to public services.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 169
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Mitigation Measures
None.

Conclusion
There is no new information of substantial importance, changes in the project, or changes in circumstances under which it will be undertaken, identifying new significant effects, nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts related to public services. The conclusions from the Prior FEIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the proposed project. No further environmental review is required.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
170 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Prior FEIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XVI. Recreation
Would the project:
a) Would the project
increase the use of
existing
neighborhood and
regional parks or
other recreational
facilities such that
substantial physical
deterioration of the
facility would occur
or be accelerated?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
b) Does the project
include recreational
facilities or require
the construction or
expansion of
recreational
facilities, which
might have an
adverse physical
effect on the
environment?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
Discussion
a-b) Existing Neighborhood and Regional Parks and Recreational Facilities Would the project: a) increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 171
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR evaluated the addition of up to approximately 691 new residents,49 potentially increasing demand for recreational facilities as compared to existing conditions. However, the County Project would include a centrally located approximately 0.7-acre private park and approximately 0.5 mile of multiuse trails, designed to serve both new residents and the surrounding community, thereby reducing pressure on existing public parks. These amenities are integrated into the project design and would be constructed on-site, eliminating the need for new or expanded off-site recreational facilities, the impacts of which were fully evaluated in the relevant environmental topic areas throughout the Prior FEIR.

The County Project would be subject to applicable development impact fees per Alameda County requirements, which would further support maintenance and improvements to existing and planned facilities. Additionally, the Prior FEIR determined that both the County and the City currently exceed their park service standards of 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.15-7 -3.15-9, 6-20).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Residents of the proposed project during operation would have access to local parkland operated by the City, as well as nearby regional parkland operated by the East Bay Regional Parks District (EBRPD). As described in the Prior FEIR, the EBRPD and the City each have a target park service standard of at least 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The EBRPD currently provides approximately 109 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, while the City provides approximately 5.09 acres per 1,000 residents.
50,51,52 As the EBRPD and the City both currently exceed their target park service standards, the estimated 588 new residents53 that would result from the proposed project would not be enough to trigger an increase in use of these existing facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of such facilities would occur or be accelerated.

Additionally, consistent with the County Project, the proposed project would include an approximately

0.7-acre private park with a Public Access Easement, as well as approximately 0.5 acre of multiuse trails, the construction of which would be subject to relevant local policies and regulations; as discussed above, the potential environmental impacts of these recreational amenities were fully evaluated in the relevant environmental topic areas throughout the Prior FEIR. 49 (194 units + 49 junior ADUs) * 2.84 (County’s average persons per household) = approximately 691 persons 50 East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD). 2026. About Us. Website: https://www.ebparks.org/about-us. Accessed March 10, 2026.
51 California Department of Finance (DOF). 2025. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020-2025. Website: https://dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5-population-and-housingestimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2025/. Accessed March 10, 2026. 52 City of Pleasanton. 2022. Program Environmental Impact Report City of Pleasanton 2023-2031 (6th Cycle) Housing Element Update. Website: https://files.ceqanet.lci.ca.gov/277712-3/attachment/-bwDNIbsCtS27yQFn3dCFDFxvAATXvXAuUCWntLOWyyE9xYwOCV3-nixSHdoCaK6829Yoe_cKtAK_Xs0. Accessed March 10, 2026.
53 (189 units + 48 junior ADUs) * 2.48 (City’s average persons per household) = approximately 588 persons

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
172 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx As the proposed project involves annexation into the City, the project applicant would be required to pay the City’s applicable capital facilities fee, which would further support the City’s planned recreational facilities through this pro rata fair share contribution. Consistent with the Prior FEIR’s impact conclusions, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact related to existing recreational facilities and the construction of new or expanded recreational facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.

Zone 7 Stormwater Option
Because the Zone 7 Stormwater Option is limited to a modification in stormwater management infrastructure and does not alter the proposed project’s residential development program or the scale or nature of development, impacts would remain less than significant with respect to recreation.

Mitigation Measures
None.

Conclusion
There is no new information of substantial importance, changes in the project, or changes in circumstances under which it will be undertaken, identifying new significant effects, nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts related to recreation.

The conclusions from the Prior FEIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the proposed project. No further environmental review is required.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 173
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Prior
FEIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XVII. Transportation
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a
program plan,
ordinance or policy
of the circulation
system, including
transit, roadway,
bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
b) Would the project
conflict or be
inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
Significant
and
unavoidable
impact
No No No MM TRANS-2
c) Substantially
increase hazards
due to a geometric
design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or
dangerous
intersections) or
incompatible uses
(e.g., farm
equipment)?
Significant
and
unavoidable
impact
No No No NA
d) Result in
inadequate
emergency access?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
174 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Discussion
a) Conflict with Circulation System Plan, Ordinance, or Policy Would the project: Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy of the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR found that the County Project would generate bicycle, pedestrian, and transit trips and includes infrastructure to support these modes. The County Project proposes a sidewalk along Busch Road connecting to Ironwood Drive, internal pedestrian pathways, and bicycle storage at a central park. Although the project site is more than 0.5-mile walking distance from the nearest transit stop,54 residents could access Wheels Route 10R and the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station via the Iron Horse Regional Trail. These features align with ECAP Policy 189, which promotes transit, bicycle, and pedestrian systems in major projects. Therefore, the County Project would not conflict with applicable circulation system policies. The Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.16-19, 6-20, 6-21).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Consistent with the analysis in the Prior FEIR, the proposed project would generate bicycle, pedestrian, and transit trips and includes infrastructure to support these modes of transportation.

Currently, there are no pedestrian or bicycle facilities that provide access to the project site. However, a separate approved and entitled project (the Villages at the Quarry Project) is required to make various roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian improvements to Busch Road, including bike lanes, sidewalks, a Class IV multiuse path, a roundabout that provides access to both the Villages at the Quarry Project and the proposed project’s entrances, and a dedicated queueing lane for the PGS, all of which would be available for the benefit of the proposed project’s residents as well. If the Villages at the Quarry Project does not proceed, the proposed project would be required to implement the applicable Busch Road bicycle and pedestrian improvements to ensure adequate multimodal access to the project site as addressed in the proposed project’s PADA, as described in Section 2.3.4, above.

The proposed project would include the construction of approximately 0.5 mile of multiuse trails on the northern boundary of the project site and the western side of Street A in accordance with applicable City standards, including the design guidelines outlined in the City’s Trails Master Plan.

The Trails Master Plan envisions a new Class I Trail along El Charro Road connecting Busch Road and the existing Arroyo Mocho Trail to the north of the project site across the Chain of Lakes. 55 54 Although certain transit stops are located within approximately 0.5 mile of the project site when measured as a straight-line (“as-the-crow-flies”) distance, the actual pedestrian travel distance exceeds 0.5 mile due to the absence of direct walking routes and the need to follow the existing street and path network. 55 City of Pleasanton. 2019. Trails Master Plan. Website: https://www.cityofpleasantonca.gov/assets/our-government/publicworks/engineering/landscape-ordinance/trails/trails-master-plan.pdf. Accessed March 10, 2026.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 175
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Development of the proposed project would not interfere with the construction of this trail and would provide additional trails to enhance connectivity in the project vicinity.

All proposed roads on the project site would contain 5-foot sidewalks on both sides, except for the eastern side of Street A, and would also provide crosswalks at all internal intersections except for adjacent to Street A’s roundabout, in accordance with the City’s Standard Specifications and Details.

The proposed pedestrian facilities would comply with the applicable pedestrian pathway and crosswalk design guidelines of the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, which are intended to help ensure pedestrian safety.

The City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan also envisions future expansions to the City’s pedestrian and bicycle facility network, such as a Class I Shared Use Path along El Charro Road, as outlined above.
56 The proposed project would not interfere with the City’s implementation of its Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, or the development of facilities envisioned under the plan.

Therefore, the proposed project would have adequate on-site and off-site pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and impacts related to pedestrian and bicycle facilities would be less than significant, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s impact conclusions.

As discussed in the Prior FEIR, the LAVTA Tri-Valley Wheels bus service provides fixed route bus service in Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore. The closest bus stops to the project site are Martin Avenue and Mohr Avenue, and Stanley Boulevard and Valley Avenue, approximately 0.3 mile northwest and 0.45 mile southwest of the project site, respectively. 57 The Dublin/Pleasanton BART
station is approximately 2.6 miles from the project site. BART is a regional rail transit service that operates within the County and provides connections to Contra Costa, San Francisco, and San Mateo counties. ACE is a regional transit service that operates from Stockton to San José, passing through Tracy, Livermore, Pleasanton, and Fremont. The closest station, Pleasanton Station, is located approximately 2.10 miles southwest of the project site. While some amount of transit ridership would be generated by the proposed project, it would not include a degree of demand or any design features that would significantly impact the operation of these transit systems.

The proposed project would increase pedestrian and bicycle connectivity to the surrounding area via the off-site improvements described above, and future residents could bike from the project site to these transit stops and board with their bikes. Possible routes include the Class I Iron Horse Regional Trail, which would offer residents a low-stress bicycle route from the nearby intersection of Valley Avenue/Busch Road to the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. 56 City of Pleasanton. 2018. City of Pleasanton Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan. Website:
https://www.cityofpleasantonca.gov/assets/your-community/getting-around/pleasanton-bicycle-pedestrian-masterplan.pdf. Accessed March 10, 2026. 57 Although certain transit stops are located within approximately 0.5 mile of the project site when measured as a straight-line (“as-the-crow-flies”) distance, the actual pedestrian travel distance exceeds 0.5 mile due to the absence of direct walking routes and the need to follow the existing street and path network.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
176 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx In summary, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s impact conclusions, the proposed project would not conflict with any plans or policies for transportation facilities and would provide adequate on-site pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Thus, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.
b) Inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) Would the project: Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR determined that the average daily VMT for residents of the East Planning Area of Alameda County is 30.5 miles per capita. The associated VMT threshold is 15 percent below the County average, i.e., 25.9 VMT. The Prior FEIR determined that the County Project would generate

29.9 VMT per capita, exceeding the threshold of 25.9 VMT per capita for the East Planning Area of Alameda County. The Prior FEIR determined that a 13.4 percent reduction in VMT would be required for the County Project to achieve compliance with the County’s VMT threshold.

The County Project incorporates several Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures, including:
• 25 percent deed-restricted junior ADUs, contributing an approximately 0.4–1.2 percent VMT reduction.
• Traffic calming features on all project streets (1 percent reduction), which was required as MM TRANS-2.
• 1,000 feet of off-site sidewalk and bicycle lane improvements (0.5 percent reduction).

These reduction values are derived from the County’s TDM/VMT Reduction program and together would provide a maximum reduction of 2.7 percent, which would be insufficient to meet the required

13.4 percent reduction. The project site’s distance from transit and lack of full-time employment limits the applicability of other TDMs.

Similarly, for Alternative 2, the Prior FEIR determined that VMT per resident would remain above the City’s significance threshold of 25.9, resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be significant and unavoidable. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.16-22, 6- 20–6-21; FEIR, p. 5-1).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Fehr & Peers prepared a VMT Assessment for the proposed project (Appendix D), dated March 9, 2026. The VMT Assessment uses a Countywide average VMT (19.4 miles per capita) as its baseline rather than the Prior FEIR’s use of average VMT for the East Planning Area of Alameda County (30.5

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 177
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx miles per capita). Accordingly, the VMT Assessment prepared for the proposed project identifies a VMT threshold of 16.5, which is 15 percent below the Countywide average VMT of 19.4 percent.

The proposed project’s total baseline Home-based VMT per resident is 33.7, which is well above the identified threshold of 16.5; therefore, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s analysis, the proposed project’s effects on VMT are considered a significant impact.

Similar to the County Project, the proposed project incorporates several project design features that would reduce VMT, such as sidewalks throughout the subdivision and along the Busch Road frontage, as well as pedestrian trails, and traffic calming measures on internal streets, as required by the Prior FEIR’s MM TRANS-2. These measures are derived from the County’s TDM/VMT Reduction program, consistent with the City’s certified Housing Element Update EIR’s MM TRANS-2, and would reduce VMT to the greatest extent feasible; however, according to Fehr & Peers, sufficient VMT reduction strategies do not exist to reduce the proposed project’s daily VMT per resident from 33.7 to

16.5 as required to mitigate the impact.

Even with implementation of MM TRANS-2, and the incorporation of the project design features described above, the proposed project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact, consistent with the impact conclusions in the Prior FEIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required. c) Roadway Safety Hazards
Would the project: Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The potential for the County Project to impact safety was evaluated in the Prior FEIR in terms of the adequacy of sight distance and need for turn lanes at the project access points, as well as the adequacy of stacking space in dedicated turn lanes at the study intersections to accommodate additional queueing from project-generated trips and the need for additional right-of-way controls.

Sightlines throughout the project site have been measured in each direction and satisfy the minimum corner sight distance recommendations. Additionally, any new landscaping, signage, or other structures placed near the project entrances would be positioned outside of the driver's vision triangle. Further, under both Existing and Future conditions, left-turn lanes are warranted at both proposed street connections to Busch Road upon the addition of project traffic, as well as traffic associated with the planned future extension of El Charro Road. The County Project would include channelized left-turn lanes to accommodate the eastbound drivers turning left into the western project street and eastern project street out of the way of through traffic as design features. This represents a beneficial impact to safety, as left-turn lanes would enable turning vehicles to wait out of the way of through traffic, reducing congestion and the likelihood of rear-end collisions. Additionally, traffic signal

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
178 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx calculations found that the estimated AM and PM peak traffic would not warrant a traffic signal installation.

The Prior FEIR found that while some hazard areas (sight distance, left-turn lanes, and traffic signals) would not constitute significant hazards, there would be a significant impact in regard to queueing.

Specifically, the Prior FEIR found that the County Project would result in queueing impacts at several intersections, including Santa Rita Road/Valley Avenue and Stanley Boulevard/Valley Avenue–Bernal Avenue. These impacts could be mitigated by retiming traffic signals; however, because the intersections are under the jurisdiction of the City and the City was not the lead agency for purposes of that analysis, the mitigation was deemed unenforceable with respect to the County Project.

In discussing Alternative 2, the Prior FEIR determined that, as the City would be the agency responsible for implementation of the development under Alternative 2, it could implement the identified mitigation (retiming signals) to reduce geometric design hazards to less than significant and determined that queueing impacts could be mitigated. Nonetheless, the Prior FEIR concluded that queueing impacts related to the County Project would be significant and unavoidable. (Draft EIR, pp.

3.16-25, 6-20, 6-21).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
The proposed project is anticipated to generate traffic volumes comparable to those of the County Project, with a marginal decrease resulting from the slight reduction in the number of housing units proposed, while maintaining substantially the same street design and circulation plan. As such, impacts related to sight distance, left-turn lanes, and traffic signals would be similarly less than significant under the proposed project.

Additionally, it is expected that impacts related to queueing in the westbound right-turn lane at Santa Rita Road/Valley Avenue and the northbound right-turn lane at Stanley Boulevard/Valley Avenue– Bernal Avenue would be substantially the same as the impacts identified in the Prior FEIR for the County Project. However, as discussed in the Project Description, the Villages at the Quarry Project, which was separately approved and entitled, is anticipated to implement roadway improvements that would reduce potential impacts at these intersections. If the Villages at the Quarry Project does not proceed, the proposed project would be required to implement the applicable improvements to ensure impacts would be less than significant as addressed in the proposed project’s PADA as discussed in Section 2.3.4, above. As such, impacts under the proposed project were fully evaluated in the Prior FEIR and would be less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.
d) Inadequate Emergency Access
Would the project: Result in inadequate emergency access? Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR evaluated emergency access and found that the County Project includes adequate internal circulation and access points. Emergency access routes are incorporated into the design, and

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 179
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx sight distance and turning movements at intersections were evaluated and found to meet Caltrans standards. No deficiencies were identified that would impede emergency response. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.16-29, 6-20, 6-21).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Consistent with the analysis in the Prior FEIR, emergency access to the project site would be provided via two different access routes via Busch Road from Valley Avenue, and emergency vehicles would enter the project site through the western project driveway along Busch Road. The proposed project does not propose any permanent lane closures or obstructions that could impede emergency response to or from the project site from the surrounding streets.

The proposed project provides adequate internal circulation and emergency access, with all proposed roadways and access points designed to meet applicable City and fire department standards for emergency vehicles. Emergency response to and from the project site would also be supported by the surrounding arterial roadway network, including El Charro Road. The applicant would financially contribute to any identified improvements to El Charro Road to ensure it operates in accordance with emergency access standards. The proposed project would not obstruct or alter any major roadways that may serve as evacuation routes, such as Stanley Boulevard or I-680, and any temporary construction-related road closures would be minor and short-term. Furthermore, the proposed project would be reviewed by the LPFD to ensure compliance with all emergency access requirements.

As the proposed circulation network and street design would be substantially the same as the County Project, sight distance and turning movements at intersections would meet applicable City standards under the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.

Zone 7 Stormwater Option
The Zone 7 Stormwater Option is limited to a modification of stormwater management infrastructure and would not change the number of residential units, trip generation, roadway access points, or circulation patterns evaluated for the proposed project. By eliminating construction of the detention basin, pump facilities, and storm drain force main (as contemplated by the City Stormwater Option), this option would incrementally reduce construction-related vehicle trips and equipment hauling, while long-term operational traffic conditions would remain unchanged. Accordingly, consistent with the impact conclusions in the Prior FEIR, traffic impacts would remain less than significant and consistent with the conclusions of the Prior FEIR.

Mitigation Measures
MM TRANS-2 Prior to project operation, the proposed project would implement traffic calming elements on all of the street improvements included in the proposed project.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
180 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Conclusion
There is no new information of substantial importance, changes in the project, or changes in circumstances under which it will be undertaken, identifying new significant effects, nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts related to transportation. The conclusions from the Prior FEIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the proposed project. No further environmental review is required.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 181
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Prior FEIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XVIII. Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project:
a) Require or result in
the relocation or
construction of new
or expanded water,
wastewater
treatment or
stormwater
drainage, electric
power, natural gas,
or
telecommunications
facilities, the
construction or
relocation of which
could cause
significant
environmental
effects?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
b) Have sufficient
water supplies
available to serve
the project and
reasonably
foreseeable future
development during
normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
c) Result in a
determination by
the wastewater
treatment provider
which serves or
may serve the
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
182 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Prior FEIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
project that it has
adequate capacity
to serve the
project’s projected
demand in addition
to the provider’s
existing
commitments?
d) Generate solid
waste in excess of
State or local
standards, or in
excess of the
capacity of local
infrastructure, or
otherwise impair
the attainment of
solid waste
reduction goals?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
e) Comply with
federal, State, and
local management
and reduction
statutes and
regulations related
to solid waste?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 183
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Discussion
a) Water, Wastewater, Stormwater, Electric, Natural Gas, or Telecommunications Facilities
Would the project: Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR considered that the County Project includes construction of new utility infrastructure, including a 1-acre WWTP, a 0.4-acre water storage and booster pump facility, a 2.5-acre recycled water storage facility, and related agricultural irrigation fields. These facilities are designed to serve the County Project and would not require expansion of existing municipal systems. The County Project also includes stormwater drainage improvements, such as bioretention areas and new storm drainpipes, which would adhere to all applicable standards and requirements.

Potable water and wastewater distribution lines would be installed and connected to existing infrastructure. Electricity services would be provided by PG&E, and existing overhead lines would be placed underground. Further, phone and internet services would be provided through AT&T and Comcast, respectively. The foregoing services and utilities would be sufficient to serve the County Project and would not require the construction or expansion of new or relocated facilities as the project site is located by existing urban development, which already houses these facilities. As such, no new or expanded facilities would be required. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.17-1–3.17-16, 6-22–6.24).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Water
Water service for the proposed project would be provided by the City via a connection to an existing 12-inch diameter water line along Busch Road and an off-site existing 16-inch diameter water line on Mohr Avenue. To access the existing water line on Mohr Avenue, the proposed project would construct a new 12-inch diameter water line extending from the northwest corner of the project site, following the existing utility road, to Mohr Avenue (Exhibit 9c). Water service throughout the project site would be provided in water lines under the proposed internal streets. A Hydraulic Analysis prepared by Akel Engineering Group dated November 2025 evaluated the proposed water network using the City’s calibrated domestic water system hydraulic model to assess system performance under maximum day demand, peak-hour demand, and maximum day demand plus fire flow conditions (Appendix E). The hydraulic analysis concluded that the proposed water distribution network, including the recommended 12-inch pipeline connection between Mohr Avenue and Busch Road, would provide adequate service pressures and fire flow to serve the proposed subdivision, consistent with the City’s adopted performance criteria. Specifically, the analysis demonstrated that

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
184 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx service pressures would remain above the City’s minimum standards and that required fire flows could be met while maintaining acceptable pressures and pipeline velocities. Additionally, the proposed improvements would not result in pump station impacts and would not require additional off-site water system improvements beyond those identified as part of the proposed project and the shared East Pleasanton pipeline connection. These findings are consistent with the City’s Water Distribution System Capacity Master Plan which establishes systemwide criteria for water supply, distribution, and fire flow performance. Accordingly, the City has adequate water distribution capacity to serve the proposed project, and the proposed project would not require construction of new or expanded water supply, storage, or distribution facilities beyond those already planned and evaluated. Thus, as described in Impact UTIL-b, the City would have adequate water supplies available to accommodate the proposed project.

Wastewater
Wastewater services would be provided to the proposed project by the City. The City owns and operates sanitary sewer lines and conveys wastewater throughout the City to the DSRSD regional WWTP. Through a contract agreement with the City, DSRSD provides wastewater treatment services to the City.

The proposed project would include a connection to an existing off-site 8-inch diameter sewer line on Mohr Avenue, northwest of the project site. Similar to the proposed water and stormwater lines contemplated in the County Project, the proposed project would construct a new 8-inch diameter sewer line extending from the northwest corner of the project site, following the existing utility road, to Mohr Avenue to access the existing sewer line (Exhibit 9c). Sanitary sewer service throughout the project site would be provided in 8-inch diameter sanitary sewer lines under the proposed internal streets.

With respect to wastewater conveyance capacity, the City commissioned a Technical Memorandum by Woodard & Curran (dated November 12, 2025, included as Appendix E), to evaluate the existing network under several scenarios, including the addition of four future planned projects, and to identify improvements that could be funded by future development thus ensuring adequate capacity of downstream sewer lines exist to accommodate planned growth. The four projects evaluated in the Technical Memorandum include: Villages at the Quarry (Kiewit); Arroyo Lago; East Lakes; and Amazon.

The Technical Memorandum identifies several Capital Improvement Program (CIP) strategies and associated pro rata costs to be assumed by the proposed project and future development to ensure adequacy of the system to accommodate future flows under dry and wet weather scenarios. The proposed project would include construction of needed downstream sewer improvements according to the Technical Memorandum and would seek reimbursement as appropriate from future development according to the pro rata share methodology. The proposed project would also contribute funding for future water and wastewater infrastructure through payment of applicable City development impact fees, which are intended to support planned facilities operated by DSRSD.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 185
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Stormwater
Stormwater generated by the proposed project would be collected via storm gutters along the proposed internal streets and conveyed through an on-site network of 18-inch underground storm drainpipes. Under normal operating conditions, stormwater would be conveyed east from the project site using an approximately 45-inch diameter pipe that would be constructed east of Street F. The stormwater would be conveyed to a proposed primary bioretention area located approximately 0.45 mile east of the project site, adjacent to El Charro Road (Exhibit 9b).

The proposed project would include a primary bioretention area, which would include a treatment area of approximately 40,000 square feet. The bioretention area would contain two layers: an approximately 18-inch layer of bioretention soil mix and an approximately 12-inch layer of Class II permeable rock. After being treated, the stormwater would be pumped out of the bioretention basin into a storm drain force main that would be located in El Charro Road that would flow south until turning west and following Busch Road to a connection to an existing City storm drainpipe in Busch Road. In larger storm events, stormwater would be temporarily stored in a detention basin just northeast of the bioretention area. The detention basin has been sized to hold back-to-back 100-year storm events before providing metered outflow into the City’s storm drain system to ensure that the capacity of the City’s system is not exceeded.

In addition to the normal stormwater system, the proposed project is also designed with overland release, which includes a path for surface floodwater to flow through a development in a manner that protects structures should the underground storm drain system be blocked or overwhelmed.

In order to protect structures from flooding at the project site, the overland release would direct most of the surface flow south to Busch Road, but a portion of the project site starting from approximately Lot 118 and proceeding north has been designed to be captured in a secondary overland release inlet which would convey the stormwater into an approximately 24-inch diameter pipe that would connect with an existing storm drain line in Mohr Avenue.

All stormwater infrastructure improvements would be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Pleasanton’s Standard Specifications and Details and implemented through the City’s COAs for the proposed project.

Based on the foregoing, the proposed project would not require relocation or construction of new or expanded stormwater facilities beyond what is proposed under the proposed project, and the proposed bioretention area, stormwater detention basin, and other City stormwater facilities would have adequate capacity to serve the proposed project. The proposed project would also be subject to the San Francisco Bay MRP, which includes LID standards and post-construction monitoring to encourage stormwater infiltration and retention.

Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications
Electric and gas services for the proposed project would be provided by PG&E, while AT&T would provide phone services, and Comcast would provide phone and high-speed internet services. The

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
186 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx proposed project would be served by existing utility lines on the north side of the project site and along Busch Road. Both power lines are currently located above ground but would be moved underground as part of the proposed project. As such, the proposed project would not require relocation or construction of new or expanded electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities beyond what is proposed under the proposed project.

Conclusion
In summary, consistent with the impact conclusions in the Prior FEIR, impacts related to the need for relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities would be less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.
b) Water Supply
Would the project: Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR found that the County Project would receive water supply from Cal Water through its Livermore District. Approximately 70 percent of the Livermore District’s water is purchased from Zone 7, with the remaining 30 percent coming from groundwater. The Livermore District 2020 UWMP concluded that Zone 7 could meet all its obligations to provide adequate water supplies for the Livermore District on average in normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry years.58 The County Project would construct approximately 400,000 gallons of water storage, including 360,000 gallons intended for fire use and 20,046 gallons intended for emergency water storage. Further, based on the Livermore District UWMP, it was found that it would be able to fully serve its service area (existing and future users), including the County Project, in normal, single dry, and all multi-year drought scenarios.

The project-specific Water Supply Evaluation (WSE) determined that there would be adequate water supplies to meet the demands of the County Project in normal, single dry, and multiple dry years through 2045. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.17-1, 6-22–6.24).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Rather than being served potable water by Cal Water through its Livermore District, water supply would be provided to the project site by the City. The City receives 100 percent of its water from Zone

7.59 While the City previously obtained a portion of its supply from City-owned groundwater wells, those wells are no longer in operation. The City is actively evaluating future supply alternatives, 58 California Water Service (Cal Water). 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June. 59 City of Pleasanton. 2026. About our Water. Website: https://www.cityofpleasantonca.gov/our-government/pleasantonwater/about-our-water/. Accessed March 10, 2026.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 187
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx including potential joint groundwater wells in coordination with Zone 7; however, at present, all water supplies are purchased from Zone 7.The Zone 7 2020 UWMP indicates that the district can meet retailer demands through normal, single dry, and multiple dry years.60 The proposed project would include construction of 189 single-family residential units and 48 junior ADUs, which would trigger substantially the same demand to that evaluated in the WSE, which analyzed 194 single-family residential units and 49 junior ADUs. The proposed project would have an estimated water demand of approximately 43 acre-feet per year (AFY), which is consistent with and slightly reduced from the water demand evaluated and disclosed in the County Project’s WSE (See Table 1 of the WSE). 61 According to the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the City’s projected water demand during normal years is expected to increase from 18,240 AFY in 2025, to 20,036 AFY in 2045.62 Based on the projected water demand evaluated in the Prior FEIR for the County Project, this would equate to approximately 0.23 percent of the projected City water supply totals forecasted for the year 2045, with the proposed project likely constituting substantially the same, albeit a nominally lower, percentage. Consistent with the Housing Element Update Program EIR and subsequent water supply evaluations, this level of demand would be accommodated within the City’s diversified water supply portfolio, including Zone 7 contractual supplies, even under conditions where certain local groundwater sources remain unavailable. Furthermore, based on the City’s 2020 UWMP, the City would be able to fully serve its service area (existing and future users), as well as the proposed project, in normal, single dry and all multi-year drought scenarios, including the highest water demand scenario (5-year drought in 2045), which would result in an expected water demand of 20,036 AFY for the full service area of the City.
63 As discussed above, the proposed project would produce a demand similar to, if not less than, the County Project, which estimates a total demand of 47 AFY. The 2020 UWMP projects that its total supply would meet the demand of the normal year scenario and that the purchased water and groundwater supply derived from the Zone 7 is expected to be able to meet the projected demands through 2045, even if there is a 5-year drought.64 Therefore, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s impact conclusions, impacts related to sufficient water supply availability would be less than significant. Thus, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.
60 Zone 7 Water Agency (Zone 7). 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June. 61 The proposed project’s estimated water demand includes three components: residential water use, landscaping, and distribution system losses. The residential water demand calculation uses a factor of 52.3 gallons per capita per day (gpcd), multiplied by 588 residents, totaling approximately 30,752.4 gpd, or approximately 34.4 AFY. The proposed project’s estimated total water use from landscaping is approximately 5.89 AFY for the 3.7 acres of landscaped areas.

This analysis also uses the same additional demand of 2.8 AFY for distribution system losses as the County Project’s WSE. Therefore, the proposed project would have a total annual water demand of approximately 43.09 AFY. 62 City of Pleasanton. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June. 63 Ibid.
64 Ibid.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
188 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx c) Wastewater Treatment Capacity
Would the project: Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR found that the County Project would construct its own on-site WWTP with a capacity to treat approximately 50,000 gpd. The Prior FEIR determined that this treatment capacity would have enough capacity to serve the proposed project’s expected wastewater generation, and no new or expanded wastewater treatment or conveyance facilities would be required beyond those provided in the County Project. The WWTP would be a membrane bioreactor treatment plant capable of producing disinfected tertiary recycled water as defined in California Code of Regulation, Title 22, Section 60301.230. Disinfected tertiary recycled water produced by the wastewater treatment facility would be stored in lined storage ponds and would be disposed of through irrigation of agricultural irrigation fields. The WWTP would be sized to meet the County Project’s needs and would not rely on external wastewater providers. Regulatory compliance with the RWQCB would be required.

Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.17- 17, 6-22–6.24).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Wastewater treatment and conveyance services for the proposed project would be provided by the City. As discussed above, the City owns and operates sanitary sewer lines throughout the City, and conveys wastewater to the DSRSD regional WWTP. Through a contract agreement with the City, DSRSD provides wastewater treatment services to the City.

The proposed project would be expected to generate 27,677 gpd, which is less wastewater than the County Project’s estimated 32,667 gpd, given the nominal reduction in units. 65 The DSRSD’s current
WWTP has a maximum treatment capacity of 17 million gallons per day (mgd), with an average dry weather flow of 9.7 mgd. As such, consistent with the analysis in the Prior FEIR, it is anticipated that the wastewater generation rate for the proposed project would equate to only approximately 0.19 percent (or perhaps a bit less given the slight reduction in unit count) of the maximum treatment capacity of the WWTP.

The DSRSD has observed that as water conservation measures have become more widely adopted, flow rates have not increased; however, the reduced flow has resulted in an increase in nutrient content loading that will be addressed through refinements to DSRSD’s treatment process. As part of its ongoing master planning process, DSRSD will identify actions that will need to be implemented to accommodate the increased loading generated by customers within its service area through the future planning horizon year (2050). Any identified changes to the DSRSD treatment process will be 65 Assumes wastewater generation is equivalent to 90 percent of water demand.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 189
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx funded through increases in customer service rates and through connection fees imposed upon future projects.

Nutrient loading refers to the mass of nutrients (primarily nitrogen and phosphorus) that is discharged in treated effluent and is regulated through NPDES permits and regional water quality control programs. Regional wastewater treatment facilities serving the City operate under permits issued by the San Francisco Bay RWQCB that require ongoing monitoring, reporting, and compliance with nutrient management requirements. These programs address cumulative nutrient contributions on a regional scale and are not dependent on individualized CEQA analysis for each incremental development project. The proposed project would not alter wastewater treatment processes, effluent discharge points, or permit conditions, nor would it interfere with regional nutrient management programs.

The proposed project would be required to pay applicable fees to reflect its fair share contribution to the DSRSD in support of maintenance of its existing facilities and any planned equipment or process refinements identified as part of its master planning. Since Section 15.16.010 of the City’s Municipal Code requires sewer connections, all residential uses under the proposed project would be required to connect to the City’s wastewater disposal system prior to issuance of building permits. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required. d) Solid Waste Reduction Goals Consistency
Would the project: Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR estimated that the County Project would generate approximately 3,700 tons of solid waste during construction and 378 tons annually during operation. These amounts are within the capacity of the PGS, which serves the area. The County Project would comply with Alameda County’s Integrated Waste Management Plan and implement recycling and waste diversion measures consistent with State mandates, including SB 1383. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.17-18–3.17-19, 6-22–6.24).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
The proposed project would result in substantially the same levels of solid waste generation compared to the waste generation rates identified for the County Project in the Prior FEIR, although slightly reduced due to the nominal unit count and substantial reduction in off-site utility improvements. Using a standard operational waste generation rate of 3.0 pounds per capita per day as analyzed in the Prior FEIR, the proposed project would generate approximately 1,764 pounds of waste per day or approximately 322 tons of operational waste per year, reduced compared to that of the County Project. The proposed project would be served by the Vasco Road Sanitary Landfill, which

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
190 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx has a remaining capacity of 11.56 million tons and an estimated closure date of December 31, 2051. 66 Because the estimated waste generation for the proposed project would constitute substantially the same percentage as compared to the County Project—approximately 0.03 percent of the remaining capacity of the Vasco Road Sanitary Landfill for construction debris and approximately 0.004 percent for operational debris—impacts related to solid waste generation would be less than significant, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s impact conclusions. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required. e) Solid Waste Regulations Consistency
Would the project: Comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR confirmed that the County Project would comply with all applicable regulations, including the California Integrated Waste Management Act, SB 1383, which mandates organic waste diversion and recycling, and local ordinances. Waste sorting, recycling, and disposal practices would be implemented during construction and operation. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.17-19, 6-22–6.24).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Consistent with the analysis in the Prior FEIR, the proposed project would generate solid waste during construction and operation. Common construction waste may include metals, masonry, plastic pipes, rocks, dirt, cardboard, or green waste related to land development. During construction, the proposed project would be required to comply with applicable provisions of the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 9.21 relating to construction debris, which outlines construction waste diversion requirements and aims to achieve a 75 percent reduction of waste going to landfills. These measures would ensure compliance with the Integrated Waste Management Act by ensuring project construction waste is appropriately handled and transferred to facilities that can adequately recycle solid waste.

Additionally, local and Statewide laws and regulations, including Assembly Bill (AB) 341, AB 939, and SB 1016, require waste reduction, recycling, and diversion, with which the proposed project would be required to comply, including those set forth in the California Health and Safety Code, California Code of Regulations, California Public Resources Code, and Pleasanton Municipal Code. Thus, consistent with the impact conclusions in the Prior FEIR, the impact would be less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.
66 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details: Vasco Road Sanitary Landfill (01-AA-0010). Website:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/9?siteID=8. Accessed March 10, 2026.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 191
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Zone 7 Stormwater Option
The Zone 7 Stormwater Option would not increase demand for water supply, wastewater treatment, solid waste, energy, or other utility services, and would not require expansion or modification of existing utility infrastructure, because it was considered in the Prior FEIR. Stormwater would continue to be collected and treated through the proposed bioretention facilities in compliance with applicable City, RWQCB and Zone 7 requirements, and would be subject to Zone 7 approval, eliminating the detention basin, pump facilities, and storm drain force main (as contemplated by the City Stormwater Option), which would reduce reliance on mechanical infrastructure without increasing maintenance demands or system capacity requirements, thereby maintaining the same level of utility service and regulatory compliance. Eliminating the detention basin, pump facilities, and storm drain force main (as contemplated by the City Stormwater Option) would reduce reliance on mechanical stormwater infrastructure, avoiding the need for electrical power, pump operations, and long-term mechanical maintenance, without shifting service demands to other utility systems. Consistent with the impact conclusions in the Prior FEIR, this option would not require expansion of existing stormwater infrastructure, upgrades to downstream facilities, or new utility connections. Accordingly, this option would not conflict with applicable utility plans or policies, and utility impacts would remain less than significant and consistent with the conclusions of the Prior FEIR.

Mitigation Measures
None.

Conclusion
There is no new information of substantial importance, changes in the project, or changes in circumstances under which it will be undertaken, identifying new significant effects, nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts related to utilities and service systems. The conclusions from the Prior FEIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the proposed project. No further environmental review is required.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
192 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Prior FEIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XIX.Wildfire
If located in or near State Responsibility Areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair
an adopted
emergency
response plan or
emergency
evacuation plan?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
b) Due to slope,
prevailing winds,
and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby
expose project
occupants to,
pollutant
concentrations from
a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread
of a wildfire?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA
c) Require the
installation or
maintenance of
associated
infrastructure (such
as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency
water sources,
power lines or other
utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk
or that may result in
temporary or
Less than
significant
impact
No No No NA

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 193
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Prior FEIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
ongoing impacts to
the environment?
d) Expose people or
structures to
significant risks,
including
downslope or
downstream
flooding or
landslides, as a
result of runoff,
post-fire slope
instability, or
drainage changes?
Less than
significant
impact with
mitigation
incorporated
No No No MM GEO-1
Discussion
a-d) Emergency Response/Evacuation Plan Consistency; Expose Project Occupants to Pollutant Concentrations from Wildfire; Infrastructure that Exacerbates Fire Risk; Flooding and Landslide Hazards Due To Post-fire Slope Instability/Drainage Changes
Would the project: a) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
194 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx d) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR explained that the project site and the off-site improvement areas are not located in an SRA or a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) FHSZ. The Prior FEIR found that the nearest FHSZ is approximately 1.55 miles north of the project site, north of I-580, and is designated as a Moderate FHSZ in an SRA. The nearest VHFHSZ is located in an LRA approximately 3.06 miles southwest of the project site. Therefore, impacts related to wildfire would be less than significant. The following analysis is provided for informational purposes only.

Emergency Response/Evacuation Plan Consistency
The Prior FEIR found that during construction, equipment and vehicles may impede evacuation or emergency vehicle access. However, these blockages would be temporary and would not hinder access to and from the major roads surrounding the project site. The Prior FEIR determined that the County Project would not impair or interfere with any adopted emergency response or evacuation plans. The County Project includes adequate emergency access routes and internal circulation, and it would be reviewed by the appropriate fire and emergency service providers to ensure compliance with applicable safety standards. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.

Expose Project Occupants to Pollutant Concentrations from Wildfire The project site is located in an unincorporated area of the County, between the Cities of Livermore and Pleasanton, adjacent to the Zone 7 Chain of Lakes. The project site is relatively flat and is surrounded by urbanized uses to the west and south, as well as lakes and open grassland to the east and north. These areas are lacking in woodlands or vegetation that could provide fuel load for wildfire, or steep slopes that could cause fire to spread more rapidly. Furthermore, features such as the Zone 7 Chain of Lakes and Busch Road serve as fuel breaks in the event of a fire. The open space adjacent to the east of the project site contains a similarly flat slope, lack of fuel load for wildfire, and has the same adjacent features to serve as fuel breaks in the event of a fire. Further, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), the project site is not located in or near a VHFHSZ or a SRA. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.

Infrastructure that Exacerbates Fire Risk
The Prior FEIR found that the County Project would include emergency access routes on Busch Road and via the private El Charro Road. The project site is in an urban area with existing roadways to the south and west and is adjacent to a lake and vegetation open space area with minimal fuel loading to the west and north. The County Project would not require the installation of firebreaks because it is in an urban area surrounded by existing developments with little natural vegetation.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 195
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Furthermore, the vegetated open space east of the project site would be maintained with fuel reduction projects, such as pruning, utility management, removal of understory, and biomass removal.

While the County Project would include new infrastructure such as roads and utility lines, these improvements are not located in areas of elevated fire risk and would not exacerbate wildfire hazards.

The infrastructure is designed to meet fire safety standards and would be reviewed by the appropriate agencies. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.

Flooding and Landslide Hazards Due To Post-fire Slope Instability/Drainage Changes The Prior FEIR found that the project site is generally flat and not located in a landslide-prone area.

However, to address potential geotechnical risks, MM GEO-1 requires a design-level geotechnical study to ensure slope stability and proper drainage design, which would reduce the risk of post-fire flooding or slope instability. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.18-14–3.18-15, 6-24).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Because the project site location and boundaries of the proposed project would be consistent with the project site and off-site areas evaluated in the Prior FEIR, and because the project site is not within or near an SRA or VHFHSZ, impacts in this regard would be less than significant. For informational purposes, the following is noted.

As previously determined, the proposed project would not be located in or near an SRA or lands classified as VHFHSZ, nor would it substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, including the City’s EOP. As described above, the proposed project provides adequate internal circulation and emergency access, with all proposed roadways and access points designed to meet applicable City and fire department standards for emergency vehicles.

The proposed project would not obstruct or alter any major roadways that may serve as evacuation routes, such as Stanley Boulevard or I-680, and any temporary construction-related road closures would be minor and short-term. Furthermore, the proposed project would be reviewed by the LPFD to ensure compliance with all emergency access requirements. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or impede the City’s EOP or evacuation procedures, and impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

As previously discussed, the project site is generally flat and not located in a landslide-prone area.

Therefore, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s impact conclusions, the proposed project’s impacts in this regard would be less than significant, and as such, it would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR.

No additional analysis is required.

Zone 7 Stormwater Option
The Zone 7 Stormwater Option would not increase the proposed project’s population, building intensity, or access constraints, nor would it introduce new ignition sources or interfere with

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
196 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx emergency access or evacuation routes because it was considered in the Prior FEIR. Eliminating the detention basin, pump facilities, and associated mechanical equipment (as contemplated by the City Stormwater Option) would reduce the presence of utility infrastructure that could otherwise require power supply or maintenance activities, without altering fire hazard conditions. Accordingly, consistent with the impact conclusions in the Prior FEIR, wildfire impacts would remain less than significant and consistent with the conclusions of the Prior FEIR.

Mitigation Measures
None.

Conclusion
There is no new information of substantial importance, changes in the project, or changes in circumstances under which it will be undertaken, identifying new significant effects, nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts related to wildfire. The conclusions from the Prior FEIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the proposed project. No further environmental review is required.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 197
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Prior FEIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XX. Mandatory Findings of Significance
a) Does the project
have the potential
to substantially
degrade the quality
of the environment,
substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species,
cause a fish or
wildlife population
to drop below selfsustaining levels,
threaten to
eliminate a plant or
animal community,
substantially reduce
the number or
restrict the range of
a rare or
endangered plant
or animal, or
eliminate important
examples of the
major periods of
California history or
prehistory?
Less than
significant
impact with
mitigation
incorporated
No No No MM BIO-1a,
MM BIO-1b,
MM BIO-2a,
MM BIO-2b,
MM CUL-2a,
MM CUL-2b,
and
MM CUL-3
b) Does the project
have impacts that
are individually
limited, but
cumulatively
considerable?
(“Cumulatively
considerable”
Significant
and
unavoidable
impact
No No No MM AIR-1,
MM AIR-3,
MM BIO-1a,
MM BIO-1b,
MM BIO-2a,
MM BIO-2b,
MM CUL-2a,
MM CUL-2b,
MM CUL-3,

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
198 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Prior FEIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
means that the
incremental effects
of a project are
considerable when
viewed in
connection with the
effects of past
projects, the effects
of other current
projects, and the
effects of probable
future projects)?
MM GEO 1,
MM GEO-6,
MM GHG-1,
MM GHG-2,
MM NOI-1,
and
MM TRANS-2
c) Does the project
have environmental
effects, which will
cause substantial
adverse effects on
human beings,
either directly or
indirectly?
Less than
significant
impact with
mitigation
incorporated
No No No MM AIR-1,
MM AIR-3,
MM GEO 1,
and
MM NOI-1.

Discussion
a) Potential Degradation to Environment and Examples of California History or Prehistory
Does the project: Have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 199
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR found that the County Project could result in potentially significant impacts to specialstatus species and sensitive habitats, including burrowing owls and riparian vegetation. MMs BIO-1a through BIO-2b would reduce these impacts to less than significant. The County Project would also include mitigation for potentially significant impacts to cultural resources and TCRs through MMs CUL-2a through CUL-3. These measures include pre-construction surveys, buffer zones, and procedures for unanticipated discoveries, as detailed more fully in the MMRP. The Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. (Draft EIR, p. 5-6).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Consistent with the analysis in the Prior FEIR, the proposed project could result in potentially significant impacts to special-status species and sensitive habitats, including burrowing owls and riparian vegetation, and would require the implementation of MMs BIO-1a through BIO-2b to reduce these impacts to less than significant. The proposed project would also include mitigation for potentially significant impacts to cultural resources and TCRs through MMs CUL-2a through CUL-3, which would help reduce impacts on examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory to less than significant. As such and as detailed more fully herein and in the Prior FEIR, the proposed project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment, reduce fish or wildlife habitat, reduce fish or wildlife populations below self-sustaining levels, eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Impacts would be less than significant with the incorporation of MM BIO-1a, MM BIO-1b, MM BIO-2a, MM BIO-2b, MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, and MM CUL-3. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required.
b) Cumulatively Considerable Impacts
Does the project: Have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR’s cumulative impacts analysis was based on a list of past, present, and probable future projects within an appropriate geographic scope (including projects in the vicinity of the project site and within the City), and included the adjacent Senior East County Lakes Project, located directly east of the project site. Accordingly, the cumulative analyses for each topical section considered not only broader regional development (where relevant), but also nearby cumulative development within the local Study Area, including the adjacent East Lakes/Senior East County Lakes development, to the extent it fell within the applicable geographic scope for the impact being analyzed.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
200 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Potentially significant cumulative impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources and TCRs, geology and soils, and noise would be mitigated to less than significant levels with the implementation of MM AIR-1, MM AIR-3, MM BIO-1a, MM BIO-1b, MM BIO-2a, MM BIO-2b, MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-3, MM GEO- 1, MM GEO-6, and MM NOI-1. Significant and unavoidable impacts would occur related to GHG emissions and transportation. While implementation of MM GHG-1, MM GHG-2, and MM TRANS-2 would reduce impacts to these topical sections, there is no feasible mitigation available that would fully bring these impacts to less than significant levels.

Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that the County Project would have some impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. (Draft EIR, p. 5-6).

Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Accordingly, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s analysis, potentially significant cumulative impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources and TCRs, geology and soils, and noise would be mitigated to less than significant levels with the implementation of MM AIR-1, MM AIR-3, MM BIO-1a, MM BIO-1b, MM BIO-2a, MM BIO-2b, MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-3, MM GEO1, MM GEO-6, and MM NOI-1. The implementation of other projects in the City would be required to demonstrate regulatory compliance and implement similar mitigation measures, as applicable.

However, significant and unavoidable impacts would occur related to GHG emissions and transportation. While implementation of MM GHG-1, MM GHG-2, and MM TRANS-2 would reduce impacts to these topical sections, there is no feasible mitigation available that would fully bring these impacts to less than significant levels. Overall, with implementation of the mitigation measures outlined above, impacts associated with the proposed project would remain significant and unavoidable for GHG emissions and transportation. Therefore, the proposed project would have some impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable, consistent with the evaluation of the Prior FEIR. Therefore, the proposed project’s cumulative impacts would be consistent with the impact conclusions of the Prior FEIR, and as such, it would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required. c) Adverse Effects on Human Beings?
Does the project: Have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Prior FEIR Conclusions
The Prior FEIR found that compliance with and implementation of the mitigation measures, adherence to the robust set of applicable regulatory requirements, and adherence to the County’s standard permit conditions, would ensure that the County Project would not result in substantial adverse effects on human beings, including effects related to air pollution, seismic and geologic hazards, hazardous materials, flooding and natural disasters, or noise and vibration. Therefore, it was determined that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, p. 5-7).

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

ADDENDUM
FCS 201
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion
Consistent with the analysis in the Prior FEIR, compliance with and implementation of the mitigation measures listed above, adherence to the robust set of applicable regulatory requirements, and adherence with the City’s applicable General Plan and Municipal Code provisions, as well as standard permit conditions, would ensure that the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse effects on human beings, including effects related to air pollution, seismic and geologic hazards, hazardous materials, flooding and natural disasters, or noise and vibration. Therefore, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s impact conclusions, impacts associated with the proposed project would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
Implement MM AIR-1, MM AIR-3, MM BIO-1a, MM BIO-1b, MM BIO-2a, MM BIO-2b, MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-3, MM GEO-1, MM GEO-6, MM GHG-1, MM GHG-2, MM NOI-1, and MM TRANS-2.

Conclusion
There is no new information of substantial importance, changes in the project, or changes in circumstances under which it will be undertaken, identifying new significant effects, nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts related to any mandatory findings of significance. The conclusions from the Prior FEIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the proposed project. No further environmental review is required.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Arroyo Lago Residential Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Pleasanton, Alameda County, California
State Clearinghouse Number 2023050339
PREPARED FOR:

City of Pleasanton
Community and Economic Development Department
200 Old Bernal Avenue
Pleasanton, CA 94566
925.931.5630
Contact: Jenny Soo, Associate Planner
PREPARED BY:

FirstCarbon Solutions
2999 Oak Road, Suite 250
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
925.357.2562
Contact: Mary Bean, Project Director
Laura Campion, Project Manager
May 15, 2026

EXHIBIT B
ATTACHMENT 1

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Arroyo Lago Residential Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
FCS 1
Https://adecinnovations-my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs-intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx

PREFACE
Section 21081.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 requires a Lead Agency to adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) in conjunction with a project approval. The purpose of the MMRP is to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures occurs during project implementation.

The Addendum to the County of Alameda Environmental Impact Report prepared for the proposed Arroyo Lago Residential Project (proposed project) concluded that project implementation could result in potentially significant effects on the environment, and mitigation measures were incorporated into the proposed project or are required as a condition of project approval that reduce these potential impacts to a less than significant level. This MMRP documents how and when the mitigation measures adopted by the Lead Agency will be implemented and confirms that potential environmental impacts are reduced to less than significant levels as identified in the Addendum.

This document does not discuss those subjects that the environmental analysis demonstrates would result in less than significant impacts and for which no mitigation was proposed or necessary.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 3
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Table 1: Arroyo Lago Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
III. Air Quality
MM AIR-1: Implement Bay Area Air District Best
Management Practices to Control Dust During
Construction
The following dust control measures, as recommended by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (Bay Area Air
District), shall be included in the design of the proposed project and implemented during construction:
• All exposed nonpaved surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and access roads) shall be watered at least two times per day and/or non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to exposed nonpaved surfaces. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered and/or shall maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard.
• All visible mud or dirt tracked out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
• All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour.
• All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
• Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 Incorporation into project
construction documents
On-site inspection
Submittal of proof of
implementation during
construction
Prior to issuance of
a grading permit or
building permit
During construction
During construction
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 4
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
minutes, as required by the California Airborne Toxics
Control Measure (ATCM) Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations. Clear signage regarding idling
restrictions shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.
• All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications.

All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to
operation.
• The prime construction contractor shall post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to
contact regarding dust complaints. The construction
contractor shall take corrective action within 48 hours. The Bay Area Air District’s and the County’s phone numbers
shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Implementing Measure for MM AIR-1
Upon annexation of the proposed project into the City of Pleasanton (City), the applicant shall update the publicly visible sign required by MM AIR-1 to display the City’s phone number in place of the County’s phone number. The sign shall include the contact person for dust complaints and the Bay Area Air District’s phone number, as required. The applicant shall ensure that all Bay Area Air District Best Management
Practices (BMPs) for dust control listed in MM AIR-1 are incorporated into the construction plans and implemented during construction and shall submit these plans to the City for approval prior to construction.

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 5
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
MM AIR-3: The following measure shall be implemented
during mass grading, paving, and building construction phases of construction to reduce potential exposure of diesel
particulate matter (DPM) and particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5) emissions to nearby sensitive receptors:
• Prior to the issuance of any demolition, grading, or building permits (whichever occurs earliest), the project applicant and/or construction contractor shall prepare a construction operations plan that, during construction activities, requires all off-road equipment with engines greater than 50
horsepower to meet particulate matter emissions standards for Tier 4 interim engines. The construction contractor shall maintain records documenting its efforts to comply with this requirement, including equipment lists. Off-road equipment descriptions and information shall include, but are not limited to, equipment type, equipment manufacturer, equipment
identification number, engine model year, engine certification (Tier rating), horsepower, and engine serial number. The project applicant and/or construction contractor shall submit the construction operations plan and records of compliance to the County.

Implementing Measure for MM AIR-3
Upon annexation of the proposed project into the City of Pleasanton (City), the applicant shall submit the construction operations plan required by MM AIR-3 to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of any demolition, grading, or building permits (whichever occurs earliest). The plan shall include documentation demonstrating that all off-road
Incorporation into project
construction documents
On-site inspection
Submittal of proof of
implementation during
construction
Prior to issuance of
demolition, grading,
paving, and building
construction permits
During construction
During construction
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 6
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
equipment with engines greater than 50 horsepower meets the particulate matter emissions standards for Tier 4 interim engines (or equivalent), consistent with MM AIR-3, and shall include the equipment lists and records described in MM AIR3. All submittals, notifications, and approvals previously directed to the County shall instead be directed to the City.

IV. Biological Resources
MM BIO-1a: Burrowing Owl
• To avoid potential impacts to active burrowing owl nests and adult owls, a qualified Biologist shall conduct protocol-level burrowing owl surveys in accordance with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) 2012 Staff Report. • If an active nest is identified near a proposed work area and work cannot be conducted outside of the nesting season
(March 15 to September 1), a no-activity zone will be
established by a qualified Biologist. The no-activity zone shall be large enough to avoid nest abandonment and shall, at a minimum, be a 250-feet radius from the nest.
• If the burrowing owls are present at the site during the nonbreeding period, a qualified Biologist shall establish a no-activity zone of at least 150 feet.
• If an effective no-activity zone cannot be established in either case, an experienced burrowing owl Biologist shall develop a site-specific plan (i.e., a plan that considers the type and extent of the proposed activity, the duration and timing of the activity, the sensitive and habituation of the owls, and the dissimilarity of the proposed activity with background activities) to minimize the potential to affect the reproductive success of the owls.

Qualified Biologist’s preconstruction survey and
submittal of survey
documents
Prior to grounddisturbing activitiesCity of Pleasanton Community and
Economic
Development
Department

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 7
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
MM BIO-1b: Protection of Active Bird Nests (includes preconstruction survey and implementation of avoidance buffer, if found).

1. Removal of trees shall be limited to only those necessary to construct the proposed project as reflected in the relevant project approval documents.

2. If the proposed project requires vegetation to be removed during the nesting season (February 1 to August 31), preconstruction surveys shall be conducted no more than 7 days prior to the start of ground or vegetation disturbance (including tree removal) to determine whether or not active nests are present.

3. If an active nest is located during pre-construction surveys, a qualified Biologist shall determine an appropriately sized avoidance buffer based on the species and anticipated
disturbance level. (The California Department of Fish and Wildlife [CDFW] recommends a minimum no-disturbance
buffer of 250 feet around active nests of non-listed bird species and a 500-foot no-disturbance buffer around active nests of non-listed raptors.) A qualified Biologist shall delineate the avoidance buffer using Environmentally
Sensitive Area fencing, pin flags, and/or yellow caution tape. The buffer zone shall be maintained around the active nest site(s) until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. No construction activities or construction foot traffic is allowed to occur within the avoidance buffer(s).

4. The qualified Biologist shall monitor the active nest during construction activities and modify the protection zone
accordingly to prevent project-related nest disturbance, until the young have fledged.

Qualified Biologist’s preconstruction survey and
submittal of survey
documents; on-site
monitoring by the
qualified Biologist if
survey finds active bird
or raptor nests
Prior to grounddisturbing activities
during nesting
season (February 1
to August 31)
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 8
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
MM BIO-2a: Avoidance and Minimization of Indirect
Temporary Impacts to Water Quality and Riparian
Vegetation (Design Option B)
The project applicant shall obtain a Construction General Permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) if Design Option B is selected. The applicant shall ensure that the project Civil Engineer prepares all required stormwater planning documents consistent with the
requirements of the RWQCB (e.g., a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan [SWPPP] that complies with current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System [NPDES]; Best
Management Practices [BMPs] to control the pollutants in stormwater runoff; and/or a Storm Water Management Plan [SWMP]) shall be developed and integrated into the project plan.

Incorporation into project
construction documents
Submittal of proof of
implementation during
construction
Prior to issuance of
demolition, grading,
paving, and building
construction permits
During construction
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department
MM BIO-2b: Avoidance and Minimization of Indirect
Permanent Impacts to Water Quality and Riparian
Vegetation (Design Option B)
Prior to construction the applicant shall install silt fencing including the placement of straw wattles between all
construction areas and the adjacent drainage swales to avoid impacts to water quality by grading and construction if Design Option B is selected. A qualified Biologist shall be on-site to monitor the installation of fencing. Fencing shall be in place and regularly maintained during project implementation.

The project applicant shall install post-construction stormwater management measures and establish a long-term
maintenance plan. This requirement is intended to ensure that the post-construction conditions at the Study Area do not Incorporation into project
construction documents
Monitoring compliance
by a qualified Biologist
on-site
Field verification of postconstruction stormwater
management measures
and submittal of longterm maintenance plan
Prior to grading
Prior to construction
Post construction
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 9
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
cause or contribute to direct or indirect water quality impacts (i.e., pollution and/or hydromodification) upstream and downstream. Specifically, the discharger shall demonstrate compliance with the post-construction standards set forth in the General Permit.

V. Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
MM CUL-2a: Prior to the initiation of construction activities, all construction personnel directly involved with project-related ground disturbance within the residential project site and offsite improvement areas, both west and east of El Charro Road, attend a “tailgate” Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training for archaeological resources. The training should include visual aids, a discussion of applicable laws and statutes relating to archaeological resources, types of resources that may be found within the limit of disturbance areas, and procedures to be followed in the event such
resources are encountered. The training should be conducted by an Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology.

FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) recommends that a qualified Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of Interior’s
Professional Qualification Standards for Archaeology be present to monitor during the clearing and grubbing phases of ground disturbance within the limit of disturbance areas east of El Charro Road to check for the inadvertent exposure of cultural materials. In the event exposed soils indicate cultural materials may be present, this may be followed by regular or periodic archaeological monitoring as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist’s
WEAP training and
submittal of
documentation
Qualified Archaeologist’s
on-site monitoring
Prior to ground
disturbance or
construction
During clearing and
grubbing within of
disturbance areas
east of El Charro
Road
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 10
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
Archaeologist, but full‐time archaeological monitoring is not recommended at this time.

Implementing Measure for MM CUL-2a
In addition to the WEAP training prescribed in MM CUL-2a, upon annexation of the proposed project into the City of Pleasanton (City), a qualified Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Archaeology shall be present to monitor during the clearing and grubbing phases of ground disturbance within the limit of disturbance areas east of El Charro Road to check for the inadvertent exposure of cultural materials. In the event exposed soils indicate cultural materials may be present, the qualified Archaeologist shall determine if regular or periodic archaeological monitoring is required and shall monitor as determined necessary.

MM CUL-2b: In the event that buried cultural resources are discovered during construction, operations shall stop within a 100-foot radius of the find and a qualified Archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified Archaeologist shall make
recommendations to the Lead Agency on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction within the project area shall be Inclusion of discovery
clause in all construction
contracts
Qualified Archaeologist’s
data recovery plan if any
cultural or historical
resources are found
County notification if
historical or
archaeological materials
Prior to ground
disturbing activities
In the event that
buried cultural
resources are
discovered during
construction prior to
excavation
During ground
disturbing activities
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 11
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria.

If the resources are determined to be unique historic resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be identified by the Archaeological Monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds.

No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these
resources. Any archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be donated to a qualified scientific institution approved by the Lead Agency where they would be afforded long-term preservation to allow future scientific study. encountered
Provision of Section
15064.5 permit(s) and
copy of DPR 523 forms;
Qualified Archaeologist’s
submittal of findings and
documentation
During ground
disturbing activities
MM CUL-3: In the event of an accidental discovery or
recognition of any human remains, Public Resource Code
Section 5097.98 must be followed. In this instance, once project-related earthmoving begins and if there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken:

1. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site where human remains are discovered and/or any
nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent
human remains until the County Coroner is contacted to
determine whether the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the Inclusion of discovery
clause in all construction
contracts
County notification if
human remains
encountered
County Coroner contacts
Prior to ground
disturbing activities
In the event of an
accidental discovery
or recognition of any
human remains
during ground
disturbing activities
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department;
Alameda County
Coroner

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 12
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall
identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American.

The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or
the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any associated grave goods as
provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or

2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his/her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with
appropriate dignity either in accordance with the
recommendations of the MLD or on the project area in a
location not subject to further subsurface disturbance:
• The NAHC is unable to identify an MLD, or the MLD
failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after
being notified by the commission.
• The descendant identified fails to make a
recommendation; or
• The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and the
mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures
acceptable to the landowner.

NAHC and submits
NAHC correspondence
to County
During ground
disturbing activities
VII. Geology, Seismicity, and Soils
MM GEO-1: Design-Level Geotechnical Study
Prior to issuance of building and grading permits, an updated design-level geotechnical exploration and assessment shall be Incorporation into project
construction documents
Prior to issuance of
building and grading
permits
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 13
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
performed by a qualified Geotechnical Engineer. The designlevel exploration and reporting shall include (but would not be limited to) the following items:
• Hollow-stem auger borings, including matched-pair borings. • Soil sample collection at depths relevant to building-specific foundation design.
• Laboratory testing, including (but not limited to) moisture content, unit weight, gradation, Atterberg Limits, strength, consolidation, and corrosivity testing.
• Design-level assessment of geologic and geotechnical
hazards, including (but not limited to) the following:
- Characterization of subsurface conditions.
- Consolidation of compressible soil based on in situ
structural loading.
• Design recommendations for foundation system design.
• Design-level subexcavation, ground improvement, and/or surcharging recommendations.
• Foundation constructability recommendations.
• Design-level earthwork and improvement design and
construction recommendations.
• Design-level features required for landslides.

The recommendations included in the Design-level
Geotechnical Report shall be implemented during construction activities, including grading and excavation.

MM GEO-1 has been partially satisfied via the preparation of a Design-level Geotechnical Report prepared by ENGEO and
included herein. In accordance with the analysis, and to demonstrate full compliance with MM GEO-1, prior to the On-site inspection
Submittal of report from
the project Geotechnical
Engineer
During construction
Prior to issuance of
building and grading
permits
Development
Department

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 14
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
issuance of building and grading permits, the applicant shall incorporate the recommendations included in the Design-level Geotechnical Report in all application materials and plan check submittals and shall thereafter implement the same during project construction.

MM GEO-6: Prior to the start of any ground-disturbing activity, a qualified Paleontologist meeting Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standards and best practices shall be retained to prepare and conduct a project-wide Worker
Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training. The
WEAP shall contain unanticipated discovery measures to be followed in the event that paleontological resources are encountered while the qualified Paleontologist or qualified Paleontological Monitor is not present (i.e., during excavations within the first 6 feet below the existing grade). The WEAP shall be conducted by a qualified environmental trainer, under the supervision of a qualified Paleontologist. In the event construction crews are phased in, additional training shall be conducted for new construction personnel. The training
session shall focus on the recognition of the types of
paleontological resources that could be encountered within the proposed project site and the procedures to be followed if they are found.

Paleontological monitoring shall be conducted by a qualified Paleontological Monitor meeting SVP standards and best
practices, under the supervision of the qualified Paleontologist.

Monitoring would be required for excavations at the project site that exceed 6 feet below the existing grade east of El Charro Road, in previously undisturbed deposits. Full-time monitoring Qualified Paleontologist’s
WEAP training and
submittal of
documentation
Qualified Paleontologist’s
on-site monitoring
Notification of Qualified
Paleontologist if fossils or
fossil-bearing deposits
are discovered; if
avoidance is not feasible,
the Qualified
Paleontologist shall
Prior to ground
disturbing activities
During excavations
that exceed 6 feet
below the existing
grade in previously
undisturbed
deposits east of El
Charro Road and
into previously
undisturbed
Pleistocene-age
deposits
During construction
prior to excavation
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 15
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
shall be required for all excavation into previously undisturbed Pleistocene-age deposits. If earth-disturbing constructionrelated activities uncover any paleontological resources (i.e., bones or teeth), those activities shall be diverted at least 15 feet away from the discovery until a qualified Paleontologist is brought on-site to assess the find for possible salvage, consistent with the standards and best practices set by the SVP. Construction workers shall not attempt to remove such finds. Depending on the conditions encountered, full-time monitoring can be reduced to part-time inspections or ceased entirely if determined adequate by the qualified Paleontologist.

In the event that paleontological resources are encountered while monitoring is not occurring (i.e., during excavations within the first 6 feet below the existing grade), excavations within 50 feet of the find shall be temporarily halted or diverted until the qualified Paleontologist can assess the find and determine its significance. Depending on the conditions encountered, monitoring activities may be increased at the discretion of the qualified Paleontologist if he or she deems it appropriate. The qualified Paleontologist may spot check the excavation on an intermittent basis and recommend whether the depth of required monitoring should be revised based on his/her observations.

The qualified Paleontologist shall document the discovery as needed and assess the significance of the find under the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.

Salvaged fossils should be deposited in an appropriate
repository (i.e., University of California Museum of
Paleontology [UCMP]), where they will be properly curated and prepare an excavation
plan

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 16
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
made available for future research. The qualified
Paleontologist shall notify the appropriate agencies to determine procedures that would be followed before
construction activities are allowed to resume at the location of the discovery. If the applicant determines that avoidance is not feasible, the qualified Paleontologist shall prepare an excavation plan for mitigating the effect of construction activities on the discovery.

The plan shall be submitted to the appropriate repository and to the County for review and approval prior to implementation.

The applicant shall adhere to the recommendations in the approved plan.

Implementing Measure for MM GEO-6
Upon annexation of the proposed project into the City of Pleasanton (City), the applicant shall submit all documents, plans, and materials required under MM GEO-6 to the City for review and approval, in lieu of the County.

VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
MM GHG-1: Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall provide documentation (e.g., site plan) to the County to demonstrate that the proposed residential units would include pre-wiring so that each building is ready for a future retrofit to all-electric (e.g., such that electric space heating, water heating, drying, and cooking appliances) could be installed.

Implementing Measure for MM GHG-1
Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide documentation (e.g., site plan) to the City of
Incorporation into project
construction documents
Submittal of
documentation to the
City
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Prior to issuance of
building permits
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 17
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
Pleasanton (City) demonstrating that all proposed residential units include pre-wiring to allow future retrofit to all-electric appliances (e.g., electric space heating, water heating, drying, and cooking).

MM GHG-2: Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide documentation to the County to demonstrate purchase of carbon offsets that reduce the project’s
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions due to natural gas use,
which is estimated to be 478 metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e), if no other on-site measures are
implemented to further reduce emissions. Based on estimated project life of 30 years, total credits needed to offset emissions below the applicable thresholds would be 14,341 MT CO2e for the life of the proposed project (or a reduced amount estimated based on implementation of other measures or preparation of refined emission modeling).

The project developer or its designee may purchase and retire carbon credits that have been issued by a recognized and reputable, accredited carbon registry in a quantity equal to the operational GHG emissions from natural gas use. For an offset to be considered viable, it must exhibit “permanence.” To adequately reduce emissions of GHGs, carbon offsets must be able to demonstrate the ability to counterbalance GHG
emissions over the lifespan of a project or “in perpetuity.” The purchase of GHG credits through voluntary participation in an approved registry must meet the following criteria:
• Real—represent reductions actually achieved (not based on maximum permit levels),
Incorporation into project
construction documents
Submittal of
documentation to the
City
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Prior to issuance of
building permits
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 18
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
• Additional/Surplus—not already planned or required by regulation or policy (i.e., not double counted),
• Quantifiable—readily accounted for through process
information and other reliable data,
• Enforceable—acquired through legally-binding
commitments/agreements,
• Validated—verified through accurate means by a reliable third party, and
• Permanent—will remain as GHG reductions in perpetuity.

Implementing Measure for MM GHG-2
Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide documentation to the City of Pleasanton (City)
demonstrating purchase and retirement of carbon offsets from a recognized and reputable, accredited carbon registry in a quantity sufficient to offset the proposed project’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from natural gas use, as specified in MM GHG-2. Documentation shall confirm that offsets meet the required criteria (real, additional, quantifiable, enforceable, validated, and permanent).

XIII. Noise
MM NOI-1: Prior to issuance of construction permits, the following language shall be included, verbatim, in the general notes section of all the civil plan construction documents. • The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.

Incorporation into project
construction documents
On-site inspection
Prior to issuance of
construction permit
During grading and
construction
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 19
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
• The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited.
• The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where
technology exists.
• At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noisegenerating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from adjacent residences.
• The construction contractor shall ensure that the
construction staging areas shall be located to create the greatest feasible distance between the staging area and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site.
• The construction contractor shall ensure that all on-site construction activities, including the operation of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, grading, or demolition work, are limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on any day except Saturday or Sunday, or 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday or Sunday.

Implementing Measure for MM NOI-1
Upon annexation of the proposed project into the City of Pleasanton (City) and prior to issuance of construction permits, the language identified in MM NOI-1 shall be included in the general notes section of all civil plan construction documents, except that the last bullet point shall be replaced with the following, to reflect the City’s allowed construction hours:

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FCS 20
https://adecinnovations - my.sharepoint.com/personal/mramirez_fcs - intl_com/Documents/Desktop/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project MMRP.docx Mitigation Measures Method of Verification
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
• “The construction contractor shall ensure that all on-site construction activities, including the operation of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, grading, or demolition work, are limited to between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. daily, and between 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Sunday and holidays” to reflect the City’s allowed construction hours.

XVII. Transportation
MM TRANS-2: Prior to project operation, the proposed project would implement traffic calming elements on all of the street improvements included in the proposed project.

Incorporation into project
construction documents
On-site inspection
Prior to construction
Prior to operation
City of Pleasanton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department

ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON APPROVING (1) INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS FOR ANNEXATION (P25-0115), (2) GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS (P25-0116), (3) REZONING (P25-0118), (4) A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD-154) PLAN FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH RELATED ON- AND OFF-SITE INFRASTRUCTURE, AND (5) A VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP (TRACT 8423) ASSOCIATED WITH THE

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
WHEREAS, on February 25, 2026, 330 Land Company (the “Applicant”), on behalf of USL Pleasanton Lakes LP, (the “Property Owner”), applied for: (1) Annexation (P25-0115) of APN 946-4634-1 and an approximately 3.4-acre portion of APN 946-4634-2, totaling approximately 30 acres (the Project Site) from unincorporated Alameda County to the City of Pleasanton (“City”); (2) General Plan Amendments (P25-0116) to designate land uses Medium Density Residential; (3) Pre-zoning (P25-0118) said parcels in County to PUD–MDR (Planned Unit Development - Medium Density Residential) District; (4) a rezoning and Planned Unit Development (PUD-154) to construct 189 detached single-family residences with 48 deedrestricted Junior Accessory Dwelling Units, and install related on- and off-site improvements and infrastructure; (5) a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8423 to subdivide said parcels totaling approximately 30 acres into single-family lots, private open space and private access easements; and (6) a Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement (“PADA”) (collectively, hereinafter “the Project”); and
WHEREAS, the Project site is a vacant site located on the north side of Busch Road consisting of APN 946-4634-1 and an approximately 3.4-acre portion of APN 946-4634-2; and WHEREAS, the Project site is part of the area to be regulated by the East Pleasanton Specific Plan (when adopted), and currently has no General Plan land use designation; and WHEREAS, the Project site is proposed to be pre- and re-zoned to Medium Density Residential; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant and the City have negotiated a proposed Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement (“PADA”) to strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, secure certain community benefits, and reduce the economic risk of development of the Project; and WHEREAS, the City of Pleasanton, as Lead Agency for the Project’s compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), prepared an Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) (SCH 2023050339) prepared and certified by the County of Alameda for the Project, in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, addressing minor revisions to the proposed annexation of the Project to the City; and WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public meeting of June 24, 2026, and prior to making a recommendation on the Project, the Planning Commission considered the Addendum and ATTACHMENT 2

Ordinance No.

adopted Resolution No. PC-2026-15, recommending that the City Council adopt the Addendum as prepared in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, and finding that the Addendum adequately described the Project, its significant environmental impacts, and mitigation measures; and
WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public meeting of June 24, 2026, the Planning Commission considered the Project and all public testimony, and adopted Resolution No. PC2026-16, recommending that the City Council approve the (1) Annexation (P25-0115) of APN 946-4634-1 and an approximately 3.4-acre portion of APN 946-4634-2, totaling approximately 30 acres (the Project Site) from unincorporated Alameda County to the City of Pleasanton (“City”); (2) General Plan Amendments (P25-0116) to designate land uses Medium Density Residential; (3) Pre-zoning (P25-0118) said parcels in County to PUD–MDR (Planned Unit Development - Medium Density Residential) District; (4) a rezoning and Planned Unit Development (PUD-154) to construct 189 detached single-family residences with 48 deedrestricted Junior Accessory Dwelling Units, and install related on- and off-site improvements and infrastructure; and (5) a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8423 to subdivide said parcels totaling approximately 30 acres into single-family lots, private open space and private access easements; and
WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public meeting of June 24, 2026, the Planning Commission considered the Project and all public testimony, and adopted Resolution No. PC2026-17, recommending that the City Council approve the Project Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public meeting on July 21, 2026 meeting, and prior to taking action on the Project, the City Council considered the Addendum and adopted Resolution No. 2026-XX, finding the Addendum as prepared in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, and finding that the Addendum adequately described the Project, its significant environmental impacts, and mitigation measures; and WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public meeting July 21, 2026, the City Council considered (1) Annexation (P25-0115) of APN 946-4634-1 and an approximately 3.4-acre portion of APN 946-4634-2, totaling approximately 30 acres (the Project Site) from unincorporated Alameda County to the City of Pleasanton (“City”); (2) General Plan Amendments (P25-0116) to designate land uses Medium Density Residential; (3) Pre-zoning (P25-0118) said parcels in County to PUD–MDR (Planned Unit Development - Medium Density Residential) District; (4) a rezoning and Planned Unit Development (PUD-154) to construct 189 detached single-family residences with 48 deed-restricted Junior Accessory Dwelling Units, and install related on- and off-site improvements and infrastructure; and (5) a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8423 to subdivide said parcels totaling approximately 30 acres into single-family lots, private open space and private access easements as recommended by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public meeting July 21, 2026, the City Council also considered the PADA as recommended by the Planning Commission; and

Ordinance No.

WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public meeting of July 21, 2026, the City Council considered the written agenda report, all public testimony, relevant exhibits, and staff/Planning Commission recommendations.

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

Section 1: Findings for Approval of Initiation of Annexation Proceedings With respect to the requested initiation of annexation proceedings (P25-0115), the City Council makes the following findings:

A. LAFCO promotes the timely conversion of land to urban uses and will effectuate this goal through encouraging infill development on incorporated vacant lands located adjacent to already developed areas.

The Project promotes the timely conversion of land to an urban residential use consisting of 189 single-family homes and will effectuate this by developing infill parcels on vacant lands located adjacent to the already-developed Pleasanton residential community of Village at the Ironwood.

B. The fundamental policy of LAFCO in considering the development status of land, located in or adjacent to an established city SOI boundary and contiguous to a city boundary, shall be that such urban development is preferred in cities.

Annexing the Project Site into the boundaries of the City of Pleasanton would ensure that the proposed urban development is located within the city, not unincorporated County lands.

C. Developed lands that benefit from municipal services, and are contiguous to a city boundary, should be annexed to the city providing such services.

The proposed Project is contiguous to city boundaries on both its western and southern property lines, and will benefit from municipal services, including water service and sanitary sewer conveyance.

D. Land may not be annexed to a city unless it is contiguous to the city at the time the proposal is initiated unless the land is owned by the city, is being used for municipal purposes at the time proceedings are initiated, is within the same county as the city, and does not exceed 300 acres in area.

The Project site is contiguous to the City of Pleasanton on its western and southern boundaries.

E. A city shall prezone undeveloped property to be annexed before the Commission takes action on the annexation.

Ordinance No.

The Project includes a request to prezone the property, which is undeveloped, to Planned Unit Development - Medium Density Residential, to accommodate the proposed development.

F. The city shall be the Lead Agency and LAFCo shall be the Responsible Agency, for environmental review of any prezone and related change of organization.

The City of Pleasanton, in its role as lead agency for the Project, has conducted environmental review of the proposed pre-zone and annexation of the Project site and has documented its analysis in an Addendum to the EIR that was prepared and certified by Alameda County.

G. Applications for annexation of islands subject to Williamson Act Land Conservation contracts will not be deemed complete unless a meeting to consider the proposal has been conducted by the affected city and related minutes, staff reports, or written comments are included.

The Project site is not an island and is not subject to a Williamson Act Land Conservation contract.

H. Applications for annexation of tidelands or submerged lands owned by the State Lands Commission or its trustees will not be deemed complete unless a determination of boundaries and issues by the State Lands Commission is provided to LAFCO.

The Project site does not consist of tidelands or submerged lands owned by the State Lands Commission or its trustees.

Section 2: Findings for Approval of Pre-Zoning
With respect to Case No. P25-0118, the City Council makes the following findings and determinations with respect to each of the considerations for a prezoning as required by Sections 18.136.090 and 18.04.010 of the PMC:

A. To provide a precise guide for the physical development of the city in such a manner as to achieve progressively the arrangement of land uses depicted in the general plan adopted by the city council;
Insomuch as the Project requests a General Plan amendment to designate Project land uses Medium Density Residential, the Project will achieve the land uses depicted in the General Plan.

B. To foster a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses; The pre-zoning of the Project site to PUD will foster a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses by allowing for new residential development to locate immediately adjacent to the existing residential community of the Villages at the Ironwood.

Ordinance No.

C. To promote the stability of existing land uses that conform with the general plan and to protect them from inharmonious influences and harmful intrusions; The pre-zoning of the Project site will promote the stability of existing land uses that conform to the General Plan through its accompanying requested General Plan amendment to reflect the Project’s proposed development and will protect from inharmonious influences and harmful intrusions by setting the stage to allow the Project site to be developed with homes.

D. To insure that public and private lands ultimately are used for the purposes which are most appropriate and most beneficial from the standpoint of the city as a whole;
The pre-zoning of the Project site to PUD will ensure that these privately owned lands are used for residential uses, which are most appropriate and beneficial at this location from the standpoint of the city as a whole.

E. To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the land with structures;
The Project will prevent excessive population densities by developing at approximately

6.3 dwelling units per acre, which is within the density range permitted by General Plan land use designation ‘Medium Density Residential’ (2-8 dwelling units per acre).

Similarly, the Project will prevent overcrowding of the land with structures insomuch as it will observe the proposed setback requirements (10’ minimum front setback to structure, 18’ minimum front setback to garage, 8-15’ minimum rear setback to living area, and 5’ minimum side setbacks to structure), as well as satisfy the proposed floor area ratio requirements (ranging from 47%-85%).

F. To promote a safe, effective traffic circulation system; The Project proposes a safe, effective traffic circulation system in its proposed network of new public streets, private drive aisles, and improvements to existing streets, including Busch Road and El Charro Road.

G. To foster the provision of adequate off-street parking and off-street truck-loading facilities;
The Project will foster the provision of adequate off-street parking with each proposed residential unit. There is no off-street truck-loading facility requirement for this residential development.

H. To facilitate the appropriate location of community facilities and institutions; The Project facilitates the appropriate location of community facilities and institutions by including a 0.7-acre park in the center of the development that will be open to both

Ordinance No.

Project residents and members of the public. In addition, the Project includes a Class 1 trail extension from the Project’s proposed Street D to existing Mohr Avenue.

I. To promote commercial and industrial activities in order to strengthen the city's tax base;
This finding does not apply to this Project.

J. To protect and enhance real property values;
The Project will protect and enhance property values by adding new, quality housing stock to the City of Pleasanton, developing a currently vacant site into attractive homes, landscaped parks and frontages, and adding a trail extension to the area.

K. To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the city.

As proposed, the Project will include 189 single-family homes developed in Farmhouse, Craftsman, Modern Ranch, and Prairie architectural styles in a variety of exterior color schemes. It will likewise include the development of a 0.7-acre public park landscaped with drought-resistant grasses and shrubs and ornamental fencing, the extension of a public trail, and the improvement of Busch Road, including street trees and landscaping along the Project frontage, thus safeguarding and enhancing the appearance of the city.

Section 3: Findings for Approval of PUD Development Plan (PUD-154).

With respect to Case No. PUD-154, the City Council makes the following findings and determinations with respect to each of the considerations for a PUD Development Plan as required by Section 18.68.110 of the PMC:

A. Whether the plan is in the best interests of the public health, safety, and general welfare:

The Project, as conditioned, meets applicable City standards concerning public health, safety, and welfare. The Project includes installation of all required infrastructure and utilities to serve the development, as well as roadway and traffic improvements along Busch Road, including sidewalks and travel lane striping to enhance safety and access.

The design incorporates emergency vehicle access, fire protection measures, and compliance with applicable Building and Fire Codes. The design of the project includes grading design that minimizes grade differences between the project and adjacent homes to the west, and improves conditions relative to the light, privacy and enjoyment of those homes.

Stormwater runoff would be managed through an off-site drainage facility and water quality treatment measures consistent with City and regional requirements. Construction impacts would be minimized through standard conditions of approval, including construction-hour limitations and dust-control measures. While the Project would result in significant and unavoidable vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impacts and vehicle queueing, as documented in the Findings for Approval of the CEQA Addendum these

Ordinance No.

impacts are typical of residential development in similar locations and are outweighed by the Project’s public benefits, including housing production, open space preservation, and public access improvements. Therefore, the Project is in the best interests of the public health, safety, and general welfare, and this finding can be made.

B. Whether the plan is consistent with the City's General Plan and any applicable specific plan:

The Project is consistent with the General Plan, as amended, including the land use designation of Medium Density Residential. The proposed medium density is comparable to the existing residential neighborhoods to the west. The proposed development would contribute toward meeting the City’s regional housing needs allocation (RHNA). The Project also supports General Plan policies related to land use, sustainability and community character. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the General Plan, and this finding can be made.

C. Whether the plan is compatible with previously developed properties in the vicinity and the natural, topographic features of the site:

The Project site is located in the East Pleasanton area. The proposed development is designed to be compatible with this setting by medium-density homes.

The site layout considers the existing neighborhood in that the pad elevation, building height, in the form of single-story homes, and rear yard setback of the homes along the westerly property line are comparable to those of the existing residences. Architectural design and landscaping further ensure compatibility with the surrounding environment.

Therefore, the Project is compatible with surrounding development and site characteristics, and this finding can be made.

D. Whether grading takes into account environmental characteristics and is designed in keeping with the best engineering practices to avoid erosion, slides, or flooding to have as minimal an effect upon the environment as possible.

The amount of grading has been designed to respond to existing topography while providing a suitable relationship between the proposed development and existing development to the west. Drainage improvements, including off-site stormwater treatment facilities, would be implemented to ensure that post-development runoff does not exceed pre-development conditions and to prevent flooding or erosion. Erosion control and dust suppression measures would be implemented during construction per applicable regulations and Project conditions of approval. Mitigation measures identified in the Addendum address geology, soils, and hydrology to ensure impacts are reduced to less than significant levels. Therefore, grading is appropriately designed, and this finding can be made.

E. Whether streets, buildings, and other manmade structures have been designed and located in such a manner to complement the natural terrain and landscape:

Ordinance No.

The area comprises a relatively flat, open site with minimal existing natural vegetation and without substantial topographic variation or prominent land features. The project is compatible with this context, providing a regular layout of lots and homes, with a variety of architectural features and a mix of single- and two-story designs that fit the landscape and topography. The Project’s internal circulation system forms a looped system that facilitates an easy, unobstructed flow pattern.

Building placement, orientation, and design have been carefully considered to reduce visual prominence and integrate with the surrounding landscape. Landscaping with native and drought-tolerant species further enhances the site’s natural character.

Therefore, streets and buildings have been designed to complement the natural terrain, and this finding can be made.

F. Whether adequate public safety measures have been incorporated into the design of the plan:

The Project includes multiple public safety features, including roadway improvements and site access designed to meet City and Livermore Pleasanton Fire District standards for visibility and emergency response, ingress and egress. Internal roadways are designed to accommodate emergency vehicles, including adequate turning radii and access to all structures.

The Project incorporates fire protection measures. All structures would be constructed in accordance with applicable Building and Fire Codes and would include fire suppression systems. Therefore, adequate public safety measures have been incorporated into the Project design, and this finding can be made.

G. Whether the plan conforms to the purposes of the PUD District:

The proposed PUD Development Plan conforms to the purposes of the PUD District by allowing flexibility in site design to achieve a development that is responsive to the site’s environmental constraints while meeting City goals and policies. The Project provides public benefits, such as a private park with a public access easement, and provides housing at a density consistent with the applicable land use designations of the East Pleasanton area.

Through the PUD process, the Project has been designed to balance development with environmental preservation, infrastructure improvements, and community benefits. This approach reflects the intent of the PUD ordinance to encourage innovative and sensitive site planning. Therefore, the Project conforms to the purposes of the PUD District, and this finding can be made.

Section 4: Findings for Approval of Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8423.

With respect to Tract 8423, the City Council makes the following findings and determinations with respect to Pleasanton Municipal Code Section 19.20.110(A):

Ordinance No.

A. The tentative subdivision map is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan.

The proposed vesting tentative map for Tract 8423 is consistent with the General Plan insomuch as it implements the following General Plan goals, programs, and/or policies:

1. Sustainability Program 2.6 (“Require design features in new development and redevelopment areas to encourage transit, bicycle, and pedestrian access, such as connections between activity centers and residential areas, and road design that accommodates transit vehicles, where feasible”) in that it will include a Class 1 trail extension between the Project site and Mohr Avenue to facilitate transit, bicycle, and pedestrian access.

2. Land Use Policy 25 (“Annex urbanized pockets of unincorporated land adjacent to the city limits in areas where landowners are willing to accept City services and development standards”) as it will annex a portion of unincorporated land immediately adjacent to city limits where the applicant is willing to accept City services and comply with City development standards, as reflected in the requested PUD for the Project.

3. Land Use Policy 23 (“Maintain a permanent Urban Growth Boundary [UGB] beyond which urban development shall not be permitted”) as the Project site is within the City’s UGB.

B. The findings for denial of a tentative map set forth in Government Code § 66474 cannot be made with respect to the proposed tentative map.

The proposed tentative map for Tract 8423 is not inconsistent with the General Plan, as set forth in finding 4(A) above, and no Specific Plan applies to it. Moreover, the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not inconsistent with applicable general and specific plans, as set forth in finding 4(A) above. The Project site is not physically unsuitable for the type of development proposed, as analyzed in the Addendum prepared for the Project. The Project site is likewise not physically unsuitable for the proposed density of development (6.3 dwelling units per acre), as the proposed General Plan land use designation allows development of 2-8 dwelling units per acre. As analyzed in the EIR and the subsequent Addendum, the design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Similarly, the design of the subdivision and type of improvements (single-family homes) are not likely to cause serious public health problems. Finally, the design of the proposed subdivision and 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, as no such easements are located on the Project site.

C. The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community sewer system would not result in violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California regional water quality control board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000) of the Water Code.

Ordinance No.

The discharge of waste from the proposed Tract 8423 would not result in a violation of applicable regional water quality control board requirements, as analyzed in the EIR and subsequent Addendum.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES FURTHER ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the conditions of project approval set forth herein include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservations requirements, and other exactions, and that pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), these conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions.

2. That the Applicant is hereby further notified that the ninety (90) days approval period in which a protest of these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a) can be filed, begins on July 21, 2026, and that if a protest is not filed within this ninety (90)-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, the Applicant will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions.

Section 5: The City Council has considered the findings made and hereby:

1. Adopts the findings set forth in Sections1-4 of this Ordinance, subject to the attached Draft Conditions of Approval in Exhibit A; and

2. Approves: (1) Initiation of proceedings for Annexations (P25-0115), (2) General Plan Amendments (P25-0116), (3) Rezoning (P25-0118) (4) a Planned Unit Development (PUD-154) plan for residential development with related on- and off-site infrastructure, and (5) a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map (Tract 8423), subject to the draft conditions of approval listed in the attached Exhibit B.

Section 6: The Zoning Map of the City of Pleasanton, on file with the City Clerk, designating and dividing the City into zoning districts, is hereby amended by the Zoning Unit Map attached hereto as Exhibit C, incorporated herein by this reference. The General Plan Land Use Map will be updated as a part of the East Pleasanton land use update.

Section 7: A summary of this ordinance shall be published once within fifteen (15) days after its adoption in “The Valley Times,” a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Pleasanton, and the complete ordinance shall be posted for fifteen (15) days in the City Clerk’s office within fifteen (15) days after its adoption.

Section 8: This ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption.

Ordinance No.

The foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pleasanton on July 21, 2026 by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Jack Balch, Mayor
ATTEST:

Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026

EXHIBIT A

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
P25-0115 (Annexation), P25-0116 (General Plan Amendment), P25-0118 (Prezoning), PUD-154 (Planned Unit Development and Rezoning), and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8423
APN 946-4634-1 and an approximately 3.4-acre portion of APN 946-4634-2 July 21, 2026
The applicant, including all successors in interest (collectively, “Applicant”), is hereby notified, as part of this approval, that (s)he is required to satisfy and maintain compliance with the conditions of approval below. Where approval by the Director of Community and Economic Development, Planning Division, City Engineer, City Attorney, Chief Building and Safety Official, Fire Department or other City staff is required, review shall be for compliance with all applicable conditions of approval, adopted policies and guidelines, ordinances, laws and regulations, and accepted practices related to the approval. In addition to complying with the conditions below, the Applicant is required to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws that pertain to this project, whether or not specifically noted herein.

The recommendations from the Planning Commission to the City Council are for the following development on an approximately 30-acre site to the immediate east of 3333 Busch Road: (1) Adopting an Addendum to an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH 2023050339) in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164; (2) Approving a resolution to initiate the proceedings for annexation (P25-0115) totaling approximately 30 acres from unincorporated Alameda County to the City of Pleasanton; (3) Adopting General Plan Amendments (P25-0116) to designate land uses Medium Density Residential; (4) Approving the Pre-Zone (P25-0018) of said parcels in County to PUD–MDR (Planned Unit Development - Medium Density Residential) District; (5) Adopting a Planned Unit Development and Rezoning (PUD-154) to construct 189 detached single-family residences with 48 deed-restricted Junior Accessory Dwelling Units, and install related on- and off-site improvements and infrastructure; (6) Approving Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8423 to subdivide said parcels totaling approximately 30 acres into single-family lots, private open space and private access easements; and (7) Approving a Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement; located on vacant parcels identified as Assessor’s Parcel Number APN 946-4634-1 and an approximately 3.4-acre portion of APN 946-4634-2.

Development shall be substantially as shown on the project materials listed below:
a. Project plans, Vesting Tentative Map, and Architectural plans, Exhibit B, prepared by KTGY and CBG, for USL Pleasanton Lakes LP’s Arroyo Lago Residential Development, dated “Received” on February 26, 2026, and kept on

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
file in the Planning Division of the Community and Economic Development Department (CEDD).
b. Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2023050339) prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions, for Arroyo Lago, dated June 2026, and kept on file with the Planning Division of the Community and Economic Development Department.
c. Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement between the City of Pleasanton and 330 Land Company, LLC.

The project materials listed above are collectively the “Approved Plans”.

THIS APPROVAL IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

1. APPROVAL AND REVISIONS: The proposed development shall be constructed and operated in substantial conformance with the “Approved Plans”, except as modified by the following conditions. Minor changes to the plans may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director of Community and Economic Development if found to be in substantial conformance with the approved exhibits. Planning Division approval is required before any changes are implemented in site design, grading, architectural design, building/house colors or materials, green building measures, landscape material, etc.

2. EXPIRATION: The PUD development plan shall lapse concurrently with the termination of the Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement. If the final map is recorded, then the PUD development approval shall not lapse. Project Specific Condition.

3. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CHECKLIST: The Applicant shall submit a “Conditions of Approval Checklist” indicating all conditions in Exhibit A have been satisfied, incorporated into the building permit plans or improvement plans, and/or addressed. Said checklist shall be incorporated as one of the first four plan sheets of all building permit and engineering permit plan submittals for review by the City prior to issuance of permits.

4. PUD PERIOD: The Vesting Tentative Tract Map, building and/or improvement permit submittals will only be accepted after annexation has been granted by LAFCo. Project Specific Condition.

5. LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION: To the extent permitted by law, the project Applicant shall hold harmless, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), and indemnify the City, its City Council, its officers, commissions, employee and agents (the “Indemnified Parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the Indemnified Parties and/or the Applicant to attack, set aside, or void the approval of the project or any permit

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
authorized hereby for the project, including any environmental determination made with regard thereto. This indemnification shall be included, but not be limited to, reimbursing the City for attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation on a monthly basis. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice. City shall promptly notify the Applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding and shall engage cooperate fully in the defense. To the extent the above indemnification is limited by Government Code Section 66474.9, any limitations shall only apply to the Vesting Tentative Tract Map (Tract 8423), and the remainder of this obligation shall be unaffected by said Government Code section.

6. ANNEXATION: The proposed development approvals shall be null and void if Annexation with Alameda County Local Agency Formation Commission (Alameda LAFCO) fails. No permit application shall be accepted until the annexation process is completed. Project Specific Condition

7. PRE-ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (PADA): Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for the first residential unit, the Applicant shall execute the City Council-approved Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement. Project Specific Condition

8. COMMUNITY FACILITY DISTRICT (CFD): The project shall annex into a community facilities district (“CFD”) prior to issuance of a Building Permit for the first residential unit the project. The CFD shall provide adequate annual funding for maintenance (consistent with typical City service levels), in perpetuity, of intract public streets, sidewalks, lighting, in-tract utility facilities, and storm drainage (proposed to be located on private property to the east of the Project Site).

Project Specific Condition

ENVIRONMENTAL

9. MITIGATION MEASURES: As identified in the Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2023050339)(EIR), Findings of Fact (FOF), and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) as part of the Addendum to the EIR (SCH No. 2023050339), implementation of mitigation measures is required to reduce environmental impacts to the extent feasible. The adopted mitigation measures applicable to the Project include, but are not limited to, those related to Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology/Soils, Hydrology/Water Quality, Noise, Transportation, and Utilities.

All mitigation measures identified in the certified EIR and adopted MMRP shall be fully implemented by the Applicant. These measures shall be incorporated into all applicable improvement plans, grading plans, building plans, and construction documents, and shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Community and Economic Development and/or applicable City departments prior to issuance of grading or building permits, as specified in the MMRP.

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
Ongoing Monitoring and Enforcement: All mitigation measures shall be monitored in accordance with the adopted MMRP. The Applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with implementation, monitoring, and reporting. The Applicant shall create and provide a mitigation measures checklist indicating all mitigation measures have been satisfied, incorporated into the building permit plans or improvements plans, and/or addressed. Said checklist shall be incorporated as one of the first four plan sheets of all building permit and engineering permit plan submittals for review by the City prior to issuance of permits. Compliance shall be verified by the City prior to issuance of applicable permits and throughout construction and operation, as specified. Project Specific Condition

10. HAZARD AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL HANDLING: The following conditions were identified for implementation in the EIR prepared with regard to the Arroyo Lago Residential Project (SCH 2023050339) and apply to the Project:
a. During site redevelopment, the Applicant shall implement corrective actions and soils management protocols identified in the Final Soil Report submitted to the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (“ACDEH”) for review and approval.
b. Prior to the start of site grading, the Applicant shall submit the project schedule to the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (“ACDEH”) for review and approval.
c. Prior to the import of soil to the project site, the Applicant shall submit soil import documentation to the ACDEH for review and approval. d. Prior to the reuse of excavated stockpile material on the project site, the Applicant shall submit a Stockpile Characterization Sampling, Evaluation, and Reuse Plan to the ACDEH for review and approval.
e. Prior to the beginning of construction, the Applicant shall submit a soil excavation report to the ACDEH for review and approval. Project Specific Conditions
PLANNING DIVISION – 925-931-5600

11. USES: Uses allowed and conditionally allowed within the Project shall be those of the One-Family Residential zoning district.

12. RECORDED DISCLOSURES: The recorded Declaration of Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions of the Project (the “CC&Rs”) shall contain the following:

A clause indicating the close proximity of the Pleasanton Garbage Services Transfer Facility, Vulcan Materials Company, City’s Public Works – Operation Services, Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department training facility, Pleasanton Police training facility, and Union Pacific Railroad; the possible impacts to homes due to activities at these facilities; and a notification of the potential for noise, odor, dust and vibration generated from the operations at these facilities.

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
In addition, all lots covered by this approval shall include separately recorded disclosure statements or restrictive covenants indicating the following:
a. Any modifications to the structures are subject to prior approval by the CEDD.
b. Parking on the driveway apron of each home is prohibited. c. Boats, trailers, campers, motor homes, and other recreational vehicles are not allowed to be parked or stored on-site.
d. Garages shall not be modified or used for storage in a manner that would interfere with the ability to park cars within the garages of the units
Wording for these disclosures and covenants shall be written in plain language and shall be recorded over the project site by separate instrument. Project Specific Condition

13. HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION: The applicant shall prepare the CC&Rs, and shall create a Homeowners’ Association (“HOA”) to govern the Project. The CC&Rs shall include a copy of the final conditions of approval. In addition, the CC&Rs shall describe the maintenance areas and responsibilities of the Project.

The portions of the CC&Rs relevant to condition compliance hereunder are subject to review by the Public Works Department and the Community and Economic Development Department to confirm compliance with conditions prior to the recordation of the final map. The CC&Rs shall describe the maintenance responsibilities of the privately-owned driveways, as well as the HOA-owned park that primarily serves the residential development but shall also be open to the public, and landscaped area within the Project and in the off-site storm drainage facility. The CC&Rs shall include exhibits showing the location of all the improvements to be maintained by the HOA. Project Specific Condition.

Site Development and Building Design

14. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: No additions or accessory structures, detached or attached, shall be allowed except for the 29.5’ x 97’ lots (Lots 131-161) where Class II structures may be allowed. Project Specific Condition

15. BUILDING MATERIALS AND COLORS: The building materials and colors in the Project Plans shall be stated on the building permit plans.

16. PAVING MATERIALS: The color, material, design, and product specifications for the paving materials used on-site shall be in conformance with the Project Plans and included with the building permit submittal. Any proposed modifications to the final paving design details shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits.

17. WINDOWS: Manufacturer type, design, material, and installation details for all windows within the Project shall be specified for each unit/building in

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
conformance with the Project Plans and included in the building permit submittal.

Any proposed modifications shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits.

18. SIGNAGE: The construction plans submitted for issuance of a building permit shall include design details of any site monument sign(s). Any site wayfinding shall be designed in compliance with Section 18.96.040. of the Pleasanton Municipal Code, unless otherwise approved by the Director of Community and Ecomonic Development. Said sign designs are subject to review and approval by the Director of Community and Economic Development prior to issuance of a building permit. Project Specific Condition

19. FENCE/WALL: All fencing and walls shall be in compliance with the Project plans and shall be shown on the construction plans with the building permit submittal.

The design and location must be approved by the Planning Division and comply with all applicable setback requirements.

20. MOCK-UP: The Applicant shall set up a large material and color mock-up (36’x48”) on site to confirm conformance with the Approved Plans prior to issuance of the grading permit and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Division.

21. LIGHTING AND PHOTOMETRICS PLAN: The Applicant shall submit a lighting and photometrics plan with the building permit submittal. The plan shall include photometric contours, manufacturer’s specifications on the fixtures, and mounting heights. All exterior lighting including landscape lighting shall be directed downward and designed or shielded so as to not shine onto neighboring properties or streets. The photometrics shall be reviewed and approved by the City Traffic Engineer and Director of Community and Economic Development prior to building permit issuance. The type and location of all exterior light fixtures shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community and Economic Development prior to building permit issuance.

22. FINAL INSPECTION: Final inspection of each residence by the Planning Division is required prior to occupancy.

23. TRANSFORMERS: New electrical transformers shall be either (a) placed underground, or (b) placed above ground and screened from view. Details of the new electrical transformers, and any screening for aboveground transformers shall be architecturally compatible with the building, shall be included in the building permit submittal, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of Engineering/City Engineer and Director of Community and Economic Development prior to issuance of the relevant building permit.

24. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT – SCREENING: The Applicant shall effectively and feasibly screen from public view all ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment,

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
and any other mechanical equipment, whether on the structure, on the ground, or on the roof, with materials architecturally compatible with the relevant building.

Screening details shall be shown on the plans submitted for the relevant building permit, the adequacy of which shall be determined by the City Engineer and Director of Community and Economic Development. All required screening shall be installed prior to final occupancy of the relevant building permit.

Recycling and Composting

25. RECYCLING AND COMPOSTING PROGRAMS: The Project shall comply with the current City/Pleasanton Garbage Service recycling and composting programs.

Green Building and Sustainability Measures

26. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN (“CAP”) 2.0 COMPLIANCE: The Project shall comply with CAP 2.0 requirements of providing all electric homes and providing battery storage backup system. Prior to building permit issuance for the first residential building, a GHG Emission Compliance Checklist shall be provided in compliance with CAP 2.0 to the Planning Division for review and approval by the Director of Community and Economic Development. The measures shall be shown on the building permit plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division.

The Checklist shall include notation indicating the sheet(s) the measure can be found. Prior to the relevant building permit final, all of the relevant measures indicated on the approved checklist shall be inspected and approved by the City of Pleasanton.

27. GREEN BUILDING; The applicant shall submit GreenPoint Rated Checklist from BuildItGreen.org:((https://archive.builditgreen.org/greenpoint-rated/documentschecklists) and is subject to review and approval by the Director of Community and Economic Deveclopment prior to issuance of a building permit.

Construction Practices and Noticing

28. WORK HOURS: All demolition and construction activities, inspections, plan checking, material delivery, staff assignment or coordination, etc., shall be limited to the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. No construction shall be allowed on State or Federal Holidays or Saturdays or Sundays. The Director of Community and Economic Development may allow earlier “start times” or later “stop times” for specific construction activities, e.g., concrete pouring. All construction equipment shall meet Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”) noise standards and shall be equipped with muffling devices. Prior to construction, the hours of construction shall be posted on site.

29. CONSTRUCTION PARKING: Campers, trailers, motor homes, or any other similar vehicles are not allowed on the construction site except when needed as

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
sleeping quarters for a security guard subject to receipt of a temporary conditional use permit (per PMC 18.116.010.E).

30. CONSTRUCTION TRAILERS: A construction trailer shall be allowed to be placed on the Project site for daily administration/coordination purposes during the construction period.

31. CONSTRUCTION PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN: The Applicant shall prepare a construction parking management plan to address construction parking demands during the construction phase of the Project. The construction parking management plan shall be subject to the review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer and Director of Community and Economic Development prior to issuance of a grading permit or the first building permit, whichever comes first.

The following items shall be incorporated into the construction and parking management plan:
a. Show truck route for construction and delivery trucks that does not include neighborhood residential streets, unless approved by the City Traffic Engineer.
b. Show construction vehicles and equipment parking area, materials storage, temporary fencing, construction trailer location, and construction contractors/workers parking area.
c. Sidewalk closure or narrowing is not allowed during on-site construction activities without prior approval by the City.

For purposes of this COA, Santa Rita Road, Busch Road, Stanley Boulevard, Valley Avenue and Boulder Street extension through Villages at the Quarry project shall not be considered “neighborhood residential streets.”

32. NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION: Prior to construction, the Applicant shall notify the owners and occupants within the Ironwood Community, i.e. the Village at Ironwood, Meridian at Ironwood, Ponderosa Homes, and Ponderosa Apartments, Villages at the Quarry (located at 3300 Busch Road), and Pleasanton Garbage Services (located at 3310 Busch Road) of the construction schedule in writing.

Such notice shall include contact names and numbers for the Applicant and contractor. Project Specific Condition.

33. DISTURBANCE COORDINATOR: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall designate a “disturbance coordinator” who shall be responsible for responding to any complaints regarding construction noise, dust, construction parking, etc. The coordinator (who may be an employee of the general contractor) shall determine the cause of the complaint and shall require the implementation of measures warranted to correct the problem. A telephone number of the disturbance coordinator shall be posted on the construction site fence and on the notification sent to neighbors adjacent to the Project site. The

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
sign shall also list an emergency after-hours contact number for the disturbance coordinator or designee.

Fees

34. FEES: Unless otherwise specified by the Project Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement, the Applicant shall pay any and all fees to which the property may be subject, prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, or prior to recordation of the final map, whichever is applicable. The type and amount of the fees shall be those in effect at the time the permit is issued and/or as stipulated in the Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement. Project Specific Condition.

35. SCHOOL IMPACT FEES: Applicant shall pay school fees as required by the Pleasanton Unified School District (“PUSD”) prior to building permit issuance.

Applicant shall provide written proof of compliance with this condition to the City, on a form generated by the PUSD, prior to building permit issuance.

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION – 925-931-5300

36. PHASED OCCUPANCY: If building occupancy is proposed to be phased, the Applicant shall submit a phasing plan to the Chief Building and Safety Official for review and approval.

37. BUILDING SURVEY: The Applicant shall submit a building survey and/or record of survey and a site development plan in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.68 of the PMC. These plans shall be approved by the Chief Building Official prior to building permit issuance. The site development plan shall include all required information to design and construct site, grading, paving, drainage, and utilities.

38. PAD AND SETBACK CERTIFICATION: The Applicant shall submit a pad elevation certification prepared by a California licensed land surveyor or registered civil engineer to the Chief Building Official and Director of Community and Economic Development certifying the pad elevations and building locations (setbacks) are conforming to the approved plans, prior to receiving a foundation inspection for the structures.

39. WINDOWS/NOISE: Interior noise levels shall conform to the noise level specified in the Noise Element of the Pleasanton General Plan. The construction plans submitted for permit issuance shall include the window’s Sound Transmission Class (STC) ratings to ensure compliance with the General Plan. Project Specific Condition

40. AIR FILTERS: The construction plans submitted for issuance of a building permit shall include the installation of an air filtration system on any heating, ventilation,

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
and air conditioning (“HVAC”) system of the air intakes (i.e. outside air) serving the new residences. The air filtration system shall be a Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (“MERV”) 13 air filtration system. Project Specific Condition

41. EXCESS SOIL AND SOIL STOCKPILING: All excess soil from the Project site shall be off-hauled from the site and disposed of in a lawful manner. No temporary stockpiling of dirt on the Project site shall occur without the specific review and approval by the Director of Community and Economic Development or unless approved as part of a grading permit. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the foregoing, on-site surcharging that is necessary to allow for the proposed geotechnical remediation shall be permitted, provided that it is subject to a valid permit. Project Specific Condition

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMEMNT

42. GEOTRACKER: According to the State of California’s GeoTracker website, Case #RO0003228 remains open in long-term management status with Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH), the agency providing regulatory oversight. The specific area of concern within the property was labeled AOC 6 on a Project Location map by Haley Aldrich in July 2020 comprising the southern portion of the subject property (also known as the “Busch Pit”). ACDEH imposed conditions of site redevelopment activities including corrective actions and soil management protocols as presented in their letter dated 7-18-2017.

Those conditions include:
a. Prior to the start of site grading, provide a project schedule including details of the sequencing of corrective actions.
b. Prior to import of soil, submit documentation of proposed fill materials including sources, sampling, profiling protocols, and analytical reports with relevant environmental screening levels.

Applicant shall fulfill these ACDEH requirements. (Condition to be fulfilled prior to issuance of a Grading Permit.)

43. PG&E EASEMENTS. Sheet C1.0 of the VTM illustrates two easements held by PG&E (99-370054 and 2013-097366) with notes indicating these easements will be quitclaimed and that the facilities will be removed/undergrounded. Provide evidence that PG&E consents to the relinquishment of these easement rights and the removal/undergrounding of their facilities or redesign portions of the subdivision such that said easements can remain. (Condition to be fulfilled prior to issuance of a Site Improvement Permit.)

44. EASTERN BUSCH ROAD. According to the City of Pleasanton General Plan’s circulation element (Chapter 3, Table 3-8), Busch Road is intended to be a 4-lane divided roadway between Valley Avenue and El Charro Road to support anticipated development in East Pleasanton. According to Parcel Map 11230

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
(354 PM 91), the Busch Road public right-of-way is currently 100’-wide along the property frontage. The road improvements along the frontage do not currently conform to City standards. Section 19.40.010 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code requires subdividers to improve streets adjacent to the subdivision. The list of improvements to be installed by the Applicant are listed in this code section.

Section 19.36.050 defines the subdivider’s obligations with respect to right-ofway improvements. (Condition to be fulfilled prior to issuance of a Site Improvement Permit.)

45. PSE DEDICATION. The Applicant shall dedicate a 10’-wide Public Service Easement (PSE) abutting the northern side of the Busch Road right-of-way consistent with Pleasanton Municipal Code §19.36.110. Similarly, Applicant shall dedicate a 5’-wide PSE across the south side of Parcel W where it abuts Street D, as well as other areas shown on the tentative map. Said PSEs shall be available for utility infrastructure such as meters, vaults, boxes, pedestals, etc.

All PSEs shall be granted pursuant to California Government Code Section 66439(d)(3). (Condition to be fulfilled prior to issuance of a Site Improvement Permit.)

46. PUBLIC TRAIL. According to the City’s adopted Trails Master Plan dated 5-07- 2019, Figure 3-2 on Page 63, a Class 1 multi-use trail connection between the development and the existing Mohr Avenue and Martin Avenue trail is desired by the community. A trail extension will require an easement granted by Zone 7 Water Agency across APNs 946-1250-6-5 and 946-1250-41 (Lake “I” properties).

The City currently has no easement rights across Zone 7 property, so the Applicant will be required to obtain rights on behalf of the City to construct the trail or enter into an agreement whereby the City may opt to procure such rights.

The trail connection shall have an all-weather and disabled-compliant surface similar to the illustrations on Page 81 of the Master Plan thus providing a reliable public route to Mohr Elementary School. (Condition to be fulfilled prior to issuance of a Site Improvement Permit.)

47. SECURITY FENCING FOR LAKE “I”. Lake “I” and the surrounding Chain of Lakes properties owned by Zone 7 are currently protected from unauthorized public access by fencing and gates. This fencing will be removed with the subdivision improvements. If Zone 7 desires replacement fencing and gates, the Applicant shall collaborate with said agency on features needed to secure the Zone 7 properties. (Condition to be fulfilled prior to issuance of a Site Improvement Permit.)

48. TITLE DISCLOSURE. The following title disclosure must be included with the sale of each lot within the subdivision: (Condition to be fulfilled prior to issuance of occupancy permits for each home.)
“The City of Pleasanton Public Works campus is located immediately west of the Arroyo Lago subdivision. Operations within the campus may result in traffic

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
noise, dust and/or odor impacts. The City has an outdoor shooting range which is used solely by law enforcement personnel during day and nighttime hours, including weekends, which may result in noise and other impacts from discharging firearms. Noise levels from the gun range may reach or exceed 70 dBA. The Livermore-Pleasanton Fire District has a training tower and facility site which is used periodically for fire suppression and emergency rescue exercises; noise from emergency vehicle equipment, as well as smoke may result in impacts to residents within the Arroyo Lago subdivision. The campus’ normal hours of operation are currently Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 3:30 pm, although after-hours operations occur periodically.”

49. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT. Because the proposed improvements extend to the east beyond the boundary of Parcel A of PM 11230, a lot line adjustment must be processed to transfer a portion of Parcel B to Parcel A. Said LLA shall be accomplished ahead of the final map. The applicant shall apply for said process through the Community Development Department. (Condition to be fulfilled prior to final map approval.)

50. CORROSION POTENTIAL. The Design Level Geotechnical Report identified soil corrosion as a potential threat to buried metal piping. Specific recommendations for the protection of buried metal pipes shall be provided with the construction plans and shall thereafter be adhered to. (Condition to be fulfilled prior to final improvement plan approval.)

51. WATER: The City’s consultant, Akel Engineering Group, prepared a site-specific hydraulic analysis (dated November 2025) of the water network shown on the VTM. The analysis revealed that pipe sizes/alignments are necessary to provide flow and pressure for the development. The installed pipe sizes for the needed water network shall be consistent with this analysis.

Because this water pipeline could serve properties other than Arroyo Lago, the analysis also included a methodology for shared infrastructure costs with other neighboring undeveloped properties that would benefit from the proposed water main. The total estimated cost of the water pipeline needed to serve Arroyo Lago is $1,967,000. The fair share allocation of this total cost to Arroyo Lago is estimated to be $439,000 with the remaining $1,528,000 allocated to other neighboring developments. Pleasanton Municipal Code §19.40.060 states, “…the city may require that improvements installed by the subdivider for the benefit of the subdivision contain supplemental size, capacity, number, or length for the benefit of property not within the subdivision, and that those improvements be dedicated to the public.

In the event of the installation of improvements required by this section, the city shall enter into an agreement with the subdivider for reimbursement for that

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
portion of the costs of those improvements, including an amount attributable to interest, in excess of the construction required for the subdivision.” It shall be the Applicant’s obligation to pursue said agreement with the City. In the absence of an agreement, the Applicant shall accept full financial responsibility for the total cost of the water pipeline.

The Applicant shall note that a segment of the pipeline crosses Lake “I” properties as owned by Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (Zone 7): APNs 946-1250-6-5 and 946-1250-41. The City currently has no easement rights across Zone 7 property, so the applicant will be required to either obtain rights on behalf of the City to implement the water pipeline as shown or enter into an agreement whereby the City may opt to procure such rights.

Maintenance of the installed water pipeline can be performed by the City assuming the network is constructed according to Pleasanton standards, accepted by the City Council, and incorporated into an on-going funding district such as a Community Facilities District. (Condition to be fulfilled prior to final improvement plan approval.)

52. SANITARY SEWER: The City’s consultant, Woodard & Curran, prepared a sitespecific hydraulic analysis dated June 9, 2026, of the sanitary sewer network shown on the VTM. The analysis revealed that pipe improvements/upgrades are necessary to provide adequate sewer conveyance and freeboard for the development. To serve Arroyo Lago alone, approximately 1,100 lineal feet of sewer pipe upgrades are needed along Kamp Drive from Head Way to Stoneridge Drive (upgrade from 10”-diameter to 12”) and along Santa Rita Road under Arroyo Mocho via installation of an additional 15”-diameter siphon. The sewer network shall be improved/upgraded consistent with this analysis.

Because this sewer network could serve properties other than Arroyo Lago, the analysis included a methodology for shared infrastructure costs with other neighboring undeveloped properties that would benefit from the sewer improvements. The cost allocation should reflect the $222,275 contribution already secured via Conditions of Approval from the Tract 8680 (Seefried Industrial) development.

Pleasanton Municipal Code §19.40.060 allows the Applicant to enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City for supplemental sizing of required infrastructure. It shall be the Applicant’s obligation to pursue said agreement with the City. In the absence of an agreement, the Applicant shall accept full financial responsibility for the total cost of the sanitary sewer improvements needed to serve Arroyo Lago.

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
The Applicant shall note that a segment of the pipe crosses Lake “I” properties as owned by Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (Zone 7):

APNs 946-1250-6-5 and 946-1250-41. The City currently has no easement rights across Zone 7 property, so the applicant will be required to obtain rights on behalf of the City or enter into an agreement whereby the City may opt to procure such rights to implement the sewer design as shown.

Maintenance of the installed sewer network can be performed by the City assuming the network is constructed according to Pleasanton standards, accepted by the City Council, and incorporated into an on-going funding district such as a Community Facilities District. (Condition to be fulfilled prior to final improvement plan approval.)

53. ACCENT PAVING. Accent paving is proposed within the public road network in addition to traditional hot-mix asphalt (HMA) surfacing. The type of accent paving is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer to assure any future maintenance of this surfacing does not burden the City’s Operations staff.

If the City Engineer determines that a burden will exist, the accent paving shall either be removed from the project, or an alternative funding mechanism created to address this potential maintenance burden. (Condition to be fulfilled prior to final improvement plan approval).

54. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: These Conditions of Approval shall be depicted on a plan sheet(s) in the submitted plans for construction. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

55. ENGINEERING DIVISION FEES FOR SERVICE: The Engineering Division assesses fees for services including plan-check, permit issuance, and inspection according to the City’s adopted Master Fee Schedule. These fees are separate and distinct from fees assessed by the Community Development Department (including Planning and Building Division fees). The Applicant is responsible for payment of all Engineering Division fees prior to services rendered or permit issuance, whichever is first. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

56. CITY ENGINEER SIGNATURE BLOCK: The following signature block shall be depicted on the first sheet of the plans submitted for construction: “Approval of these plans is for work within the street right-of-way and public utility systems within Public Services Easements unless otherwise noted. Approval of these plans does not release the developer of the responsibility for the correction of mistakes, errors, or omissions contained therein. If during the course of construction of the improvements public interest requires a modification or a departure from the specification and details of the City of Pleasanton or these plans, the City Engineer shall have the authority to require such modification or departure and to specify the manner in which same is to be made. Approved as to design only based upon information submitted hereon this [DAY] of [MONTH],

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
[YEAR]. [NAME], P.E., City Engineer, [DATE] (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

57. ADHERENCE TO CITY STANDARDS: All public improvements shall be designed and constructed in conformance with the City of Pleasanton Municipal Code and the City’s adopted Standard Specifications and Details in effect at the time of issuance of the permit(s). Said standards are available for download at:
https://www.cityofpleasantonca.gov/our-government/public-works/engineering/ (Fulfill this condition during all aspects of design and construction.)

58. ROADWAY DESIGN STANDARDS: All roads constructed or improved by the Applicant shall conform to the design standards contained in Pleasanton Municipal Code Chapter 19.36. For standards not explicitly described in the Code, the following State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards shall be followed: Highway Design Manual, and the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD), latest editions. The City also references design standards from “A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets” (latest edition) as published by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Any deviations from standards must be approved by the City Engineer. (Address this condition prior to plan approval.)

59. HOT-MIX ASPHALT PAVEMENT DESIGN STANDARDS: Public roadways and parking lots shall be surfaced with hot-mix asphalt (HMA) as designed according to Chapter 630 “Flexible Pavement” of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The following minimum standards shall apply to the design:
a. Minimum design life = 20 years
b. R-value of the underlying soil shall be R = 5 minimum. A higher R-value will be allowed only through analytic testing by a licensed geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist.
c. Asphalt Binder classification shall be PG 64-10
d. Minimum Traffic Index (TI) shall be as follows. A lower TI will be considered only when justified by analytic calculations performed by a licensed civil or traffic engineer according to the Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 613
i. Local Street: TImin = 5.0
ii. Residential collector street: TImin = 6.0
iii. Arterial street: TImin = 9.0
e. Minimum thickness of HMA layer = 3 inches

60. STREETLIGHTS: Streetlights to be owned and maintained by the City shall include a light-emitting diode (LED) lamp and driver compliant with UL 1598. The luminaire must be dark-sky compliant with correlated color temperature (CCT) not greater than 4,000K.

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
For free-standing streetlights on dedicated poles, the electricity shall be fed from an unmetered secondary electrical circuit provided by PG&E. A photocell on each fixture shall control operation of the lamp. Free-standing fixtures are subject to PG&E’s LS2A “Customer-owned Street and Highway Lighting” rate schedule.

The applicant shall provide verification of total energy consumption of luminaire to PG&E prior to connection. Billing for LS2A electricity consumption must be transferred to the City upon acceptance of the streetlight installation.

Streetlights must have an electronic type photo control meeting ANSI standard C136.10 with a turn on value of 1.0 foot-candles and a turn off value of 1.5 footcandles. Electro-mechanical or thermal type photo controls and not allowed.

Streetlights must have badge numbers on each pole. Badge numbers must be affixed to the pole 9 feet from ground level facing the street-side and be legible from the ground.

A streetlight wattage sticker needs to identify the actual total wattage consumed, be visible from the ground, be of a size and type acceptable to PG&E showing total fixture energy use in watts and must be installed on each fixture. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

61. CLEAN WATER PROGRAM (HYDROMODIFICATION PROJECTS): Because the project creates and/or replaces more than 43,560 square feet (1.00 acre) of impervious surface, increases impervious surface over pre-project conditions, and is located in a susceptible area, it is considered a Hydromodification (HM) Project according to Provision C.3.g of the Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. Said permit regulates stormwater runoff in Pleasanton. The Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program developed a C.3 Guidance Manual to assist applicants in addressing these regulations. The Guidance Manual is available for download at:
https://www.cleanwaterprogram.org/businesses/development.html HM projects must include stormwater treatment measures in the site design to cause no increase in the erosion potential of the receiving stream over the preproject (existing) condition. To demonstrate compliance, the City encourages use of the Bay Area Hydraulic Model (BAHM). The model software can be downloaded at no cost from Clear Creek Solutions. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval)

62. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: Regulated projects are subject to a Stormwater Treatment Measure Maintenance Agreement between the City and property owner to assure long-term maintenance of the installed measures. The City will provide a template agreement. Once executed, the

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
agreement must be recorded against the property. (Fulfill this condition prior to project acceptance.)

63. GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommendations from the project’s geotechnical investigation, as prepared by a California-licensed Geotechnical Engineer or Certified Engineering Geologist, shall be incorporated into the design of the improvements and/or explicitly noted on the plans. The author(s) of the geotechnical investigation shall certify on the plans that the design complies with their recommendations. During construction, the Applicant must follow all such recommendations. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

64. SUBDIVISION MAPS: The subdivision of land is governed by Pleasanton Municipal Code Title 19, as well as the California Government Code §§66410- 66499.85 (Subdivision Map Act). All maps are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. Recordation of the subdivision map shall be coordinated by the Applicant’s title company, with one full-sized mylar copy of the recorded map returned to the City.

The following statement shall be included on the cover sheet of the map: “I, [NAME ], P.E., City Engineer of the City of Pleasanton, County of Alameda, State of California, do hereby state that I have examined the herein embodied map entitled “[MAP NAME/NUMBER]” consisting of [NUMBER OF SHEETS] sheets, this statement being on Sheet 1 thereof and that the [PARCEL OR TRACT] map was presented to me as provided by local ordinance. This map conforms with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and of any local ordinances applicable at the time of approval of the tentative map, and the subdivision as shown is substantially the same as it appeared on the tentative map, if any, and any approved alterations thereof. The name of the subdivider is as shown on the statement of owner upon this sheet.”
[NAME], P.E., Registration No. [TO BE PROVIDED BY CITY], City Engineer, City of Pleasanton, County of Alameda, State of California [SIGNATURE LINE], [DATE], [SPACE FOR STAMP]” (Fulfill this condition prior to map approval.)

65. CITY CLERK’S STATEMENT: For final maps, the following statement shall be included on the cover sheet of the map: “I, Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk and Clerk of the Council of the City of Pleasanton, County of Alameda, State of California, do hereby state that this final map entitled “[MAP NAME/NUMBER]” consisting of [NUMBER OF SHEETS] sheets, this statement being on Sheet [NUMBER] thereof, was presented to said Council of the City of Pleasanton, as provided by law at a regular meeting held on the [DAY] day of [MONTH], [YEAR] and that said Council of the City of Pleasanton did thereupon by motion duly passed and adopted at said meeting, approved said map and accepted on behalf of the public all parcels of land and easements as offered for dedication to the City of Pleasanton for public use in conformity with the terms of the offer of dedication.

The names of the subdividers are as shown on the Owner’s Statement upon

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
Sheet 1. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this [DAY] of [MONTH], [YEAR]. Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk, City of Pleasanton, Alameda County, State of California [SIGNATURE LINE]”. (Fulfill this condition prior to map approval.)

66. SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT: Subdivision improvements required as part of the subdivision, both onsite and offsite, must be either completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to map approval, or guaranteed by a Subdivision Agreement. The agreement requires the Applicant to post financial security in the form of either a cash deposit, letter of credit, or surety bonds in amounts equivalent to the value of the public improvements. If surety bonds are utilized, the form of the bond language shall be consistent with California Government Code §66499.1 for faithful performance and §66499.2 for labor and materials. The amounts of the bonds shall be 100% of the total estimated value of required subdivision improvements consistent with §66499.3.

In addition, the City requires a warranty bond (often referred to as a maintenance bond) for 10% of the estimated value. The warranty bond shall be active for 1 year following formal acceptance of the improvements. All submitted securities are subject to review and approval by the City Attorney. In addition, final maps and the associated Subdivision Agreement are subject to approval by the City Council. (Fulfill this condition prior to map approval.)

67. CITY SURVEYOR: The City utilizes the services of an outside consultant to certify the technical accuracy of subdivision maps as City Land Surveyor pursuant to California Government Code §66451.1. In order to provide this service, the consultant will submit a proposal to the City for the estimated cost of the work. The estimate will be presented to the Applicant together with the City’s administrative markup according to the City’s adopted Master Fee Schedule.

Review of the subdivision map cannot commence until the Applicant has submitted payment to the City for these costs. If the ultimate fee at the conclusion of the work is less than this payment, the Applicant will be refunded the difference. If the ultimate fee is more than this payment, then the Applicant shall submit payment for the difference before the consultant certifies the map.

The following statement shall be included on the cover sheet of the map: “I, [NAME PROVIDED BY CITY], P.L.S, Acting City Surveyor for the City of Pleasanton, Alameda County, California, do hereby state that I have examined this map entitled “[MAP NAME/NUMBER]”, and I am satisfied that said map is technically correct. [SIGNATURE LINE], [DATE], [SPACE FOR STAMP]” (Address this condition prior to map approval.)

68. DEDICATIONS TO THE CITY: Dedications to the City shall conform to the following standards whether dedicated on a subdivision map or by recorded separate instrument: (Fulfill this condition prior to recordation of map or separate instrument title documents granting rights to the City.)

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
For final maps, right-of-way dedications for roadways or similar access shall be offered irrevocably to the City in fee for public purposes pursuant to California Government Code Section 66439(d)(3) including the right to install and operate public utilities. Right-of-way is defined in Pleasanton Municipal Code §13.04.010 Public Service Easements (PSE) shall be granted to the City in accordance with Pleasanton Municipal Code §19.24.190 and 19.36.110. PSEs shall be offered as an easement for public purposes including but not limited to installation, construction, access, and maintenance of all public services facilities above and below the ground surface including poles, wires, conduits, vaults, cabinets, sanitary sewers, storm drains, gas lines, and water lines as well as all those public utilities and appurtenances thereto as subject to regulation under Pleasanton Municipal Code Chapter 13.04. Consistent with California Government Code Section 66439(d)(3), the offer shall include the statement, “The real property described below is dedicated as an easement for public purposes…”

69. DATUM FOR VERTICAL CONTROL: Vertical control surveying for all improvements to be constructed shall be based on the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). Any benchmarks used that relied on the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29) shall be converted to NAVD 88 when presented on plans. The location of the benchmark and source of data must also be disclosed on the plans. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

70. SURVEY MONUMENTS FOR HORIZONTAL CONTROL: Final maps shall include sufficient durable survey monuments to allow the subdivision to be retraced in conformance with Pleasanton Municipal Code §19.24.220. Setting of monuments shall be in accordance with California Government Code §66495- 66498. The surveyor shall give notice to the City Engineer when final monuments have been set, and when payment for said work has been received from the subdivider. (Fulfill this condition prior to acceptance of improvements.)

71. STORMWATER HYDRAULICS: The City’s storm drainage network has been designed in accordance with the Alameda County Hydrology and Hydraulics Manual published by the Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservation District. Said manual is available for download at:
https://acfloodcontrol.org/the-work-we-do/the-work-we-do/resources/ The City is located in Zone 7, and its storm drain pipe network is considered a secondary facility. Any connections to, additions, or upgrades to the City’s pipe network shall be designed in accordance with the manual. Calculations submitted for review/approval shall be presented in a format consistent with the “Calculation Form – District Rational Method” available in the manual. The calculations shall demonstrate adequate freeboard given the design storm event assuming all bioretention areas are overflowing. Said calculations shall be prepared, stamped,

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
and signed by a California-licensed civil engineer. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

72. EMERGENCY OVERLAND STORMWATER FLOW/SUMP PROPERTIES: All properties shall be designed with an emergency overland flow path to direct storm runoff to the nearest public street or open flood control facility in the event on-site pipes become plugged. The flow path shall be lower than the finish floor elevation of all habitable structures. The flow path cannot rely on neighboring properties unless a storm drain easement across the neighbor is obtained.

Sump properties must be designed to discharge the 50-year recurrence interval storm event through the pipe network before habitable structures become inundated. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

73. STORM DRAIN FORCE MAIN: The SDFM intended to discharge stormwater from the detention basin to the City pipe network on Busch Road is shown extending across property owned by Amazon (APN 946-1250-19-6). The Applicant shall provide evidence of property rights acquired from Amazon for this private pipeline. Alternatively, the Applicant shall relocate the pipeline onto property where easement rights can be obtained. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

74. STORM DRAIN PUMP EQUIPMENT: The planned bioretention area and detention basin to be located east of the current El Charro Road alignment will be served by pumping equipment. Said equipment could be damaged if the controls become inundated. Because this area is identified as Zone A on FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps and is thus subject to floodwaters, any pump equipment associated with the storm drain network shall be elevated at least one foot above the expected flood elevation. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

75. STORM DRAIN BEYOND SUBDIVISION BOUNDARY: The Applicant shall grant a storm drain easement (SDE) to the City for any portion of the storm drain network that extends beyond the subdivision boundary including the pipe network, bioretention area, detention basin, pump system, and force main to the east.

Maintenance of these improvements shall be by the City with funding from the Community Facilities District except as follows: Any weed abatement or ornamental landscaping maintenance within the bioretention or surrounding/appurtenant areas shall be the responsibility of a private entity such as the homeowner’s association or underlying property owner. (Fulfill this condition prior to map approval.)

76. SANITARY SEWER DESIGN STANDARDS: Connections to the City’s sanitary sewer network shall conform to Pleasanton Municipal Code Title 15 “Sewerage”.

All buildings inhabited by human beings which are not more than 250 feet from the City’s sewer network shall be connected. All premises, parcels, and/or lots shall have independent connections to the City’s sewer network. The public

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
sanitary sewer system shall be designed to satisfy the following minimum standards:

Minimum Manning Coefficient (n) within the pipe = 0.013 Minimum flow velocity = 2 feet per second at least once per day Maximum flow velocity = 10 feet per second
Maximum depth of flow to pipe diameter (d/D) = 0.75 for dry weather flow conditions
Minimum pipe sizes:

Laterals = 4 inches diameter
Main = 8 inches diameter
Force main = 6 inches diameter
Minimum slope per table:

Pipe size in
diameter
Minimum slope
4 inches 0.02 (lateral)
6 inches 0.005 (lateral)
8 inches 0.003
10 inches 0.0025
12 inches 0.0020
15 inches or larger 0.0015
Maximum manhole spacing = 350 feet
Minimum curvature for curved sewer mains: 200 feet or not less than recommended by pipe manufacturer
Minimum pipe cover = 5 feet
Backflow prevention devices must be installed if the lowest plumbing fixture if the building is lower than the downstream cleanout overflow device or manhole to assure effluent discharge outside of the building in case the downstream pipe network becomes obstructed.

77. POTABLE WATER SYSTEM DESIGN STANDARDS: All permanent connections to the City’s potable water network shall conform to Pleasanton Municipal Code §14.04.050. Any required water pressure and/or flow needed by the applicant beyond that available from the network at the point-of-connection must be provided by the applicant as a private improvement on the customer side of the meter or backflow prevention device. All extensions or upgrades to the potable water network shall be designed to satisfy the following minimum standards:
(Address this condition prior to plan approval)
Minimum number of valves:
3 at cross intersections
2 at “T” intersections
500 feet maximum spacing
1 valve at each fire hydrant lateral

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
Minimum number of fire hydrants (subject to approval by Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department (LPFD) Fire Marshal: 1 hydrant within 250 feet of any existing or proposed structure
Minimum pipe size: 8-inch diameter
Minimum depth of cover over pipe: 42 inches
Blowoff requirements:

At all dead ends whether temporary or permanent
At all low points in the line
Minimum fire flows in gallons per minute (gpm): 2,000 to 2,500 gpm for 2 hours (single family residential)
Minimum pressures:
40 psi (peak hour demand)
20 psi (maximum day demand plus fire flows)
Dwelling unit equivalent flows: 160 gallons per day (single family residential)

78. BACKFLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLIES: Backflow preventer assemblies shall be designed and installed in accordance with current City Standard Drawings 704, 705, 706; Pleasanton Municipal Code Chapter 14.16, State Health and Safety Code; State Water Resources Control Board adopted Cross-Connection Control Policy Handbook (CCCPH); and as required by the Public Works Department. Backflow Preventers (BFP) shall be selected from the latest “List of Approved Backflow Prevention Assemblies” available from the Foundation for Cross-Connection Control and Hydraulic Research at the University of Southern California. All backflow preventer assemblies shall be tested and certified by a City approved tester with the certification submitted to the City. Testing will be performed at the time City water is turned on to the site. If an existing backflow preventer is on the site, it shall be tested and certified by a City-approved tester with the certification submitted to the City before project water is drawn through it. An all-weather cover shall be placed over all backflow prevention assemblies 4 inches and smaller, and follow City Standard Specification 19-02N for backflow enclosure requirements. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

79. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS AND BACKFLOW PREVENTION: Single-family residential water services which include a fire protection system must be equipped with either Double Check (DC) valve backflow protection (requiring annual testing) or satisfy CCCPH section

3.2.2(e)(3) with pass-through/purge design of fire protection system with signage posted at fixture to bring attention to the system design with pass-through/purge.

If applicant selects to install DC, assembly shall be designed and installed in accordance with current City Standards 704, 705, and PMC 14.16; including installation as close as possible to the service line before the first branch line leading off the service line. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026

80. UTILITY ENCLOSURES: Proposed utility enclosures including vaults, meter boxes, splice boxes, and pedestals shall be installed in the public right-of-way, in a public service easement (PSE), or in a utility company specific easement. The locations for utility enclosures shall be considered in the following order of preference: (1) PSE area behind public sidewalk; (2) parkstrip area between the roadway curb & gutter and the sidewalk; (3) within the public sidewalk set flush to grade; (4) within driveway approach areas set flush to the surface with trafficrated lids. In no case shall an above-ground pedestal or utility cabinet obstruct sight-line visibility for vehicle drivers at intersections or driveways. Above-ground pedestals or utility cabinets are preferred within the side-yard area of a corner residential lot rather than the front-yard. Deviations from this standard must be approved by the City Engineer. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

81. DRY UTILITIES (ELECTRICITY, CATV, TELECOM): All dry utilities including electricity, telecommunications, cable television, street lights, alarm systems, etc. required to serve the project shall be installed underground from the point-ofconnection at the utility purveyor’s network to the service point. Aerial drops from utility poles will not be allowed without prior approval of the City Engineer. (Fulfill this condition prior to plan approval.)

82. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT: Any work performed within the City’s right-of-way, City easements, or City-owned property shall be subject to an Encroachment Permit as defined in Pleasanton Municipal Code Chapter 13.04. All encroachment permit work is subject to adopted City of Pleasanton Standard Specifications and Details, and shall be performed by properly-licensed contractors as determined by the City Engineer. Said contractors must provide evidence of proper licensure (typically a Class “A” General Engineering Contractor license or appropriate Class “C” Specialty Contractor license as issued by the California Contractors State License Board), insurance and Cityissued Business License upon application for a permit. (Fulfill this condition prior to permit issuance.)

83. HAUL ROUTE: Deliveries to and from the project site shall conform to the Commercial Vehicle Regulations included in Pleasanton Municipal Code Chapter

11.48. Vehicles with gross weights exceeding 3 tons but less than 8 tons are prohibited on any City roadway other than those designated a Commercial Vehicle Route unless a Transportation Permit has first been obtained. Said Commercial Vehicle Routes include First Street, Stanley Boulevard, and Sunol Boulevard. In addition to weight restrictions, vehicles that exceed 96 inches in width and/or 60 feet in length are also required to obtain a Transportation Permit.

For information about Transportation Permits call 925-931-5677. (Fulfill this condition prior to permit issuance.)

84. CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT: This application is subject to a Construction General Permit according to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit No. CAS000002. The general

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
permit is applicable to development sites that disturb one or more acres of land surface. The Applicant will be required to register the project with the State Water Board’s Stormwater Multi-Application and Report Tracking System (SMARTS) website. A Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD) and a Qualified SWPPP Practitioner (QSP) must be responsible for permit compliance. The SMARTS system will generate a Waste Dischargers Identification (WDID) number, which must be printed on the grading and/or erosion control plans. (Fulfill this condition prior to permit issuance.)

85. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL: Work in the public right-of-way or publiclyaccessible easement areas require submittal, review, approval, and implementation of a temporary traffic control plan. The plan shall be in writing and subject to review and approval of the City’s Traffic Engineer. The plan must conform to the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD), with specific emphasis on Part 6 “Temporary Traffic Control”.

If Flaggers will be utilized, said personnel must be trained in the proper fundamentals of flagging moving traffic before entering the right-of-way. The City may demand to see evidence of said training before allowing said personnel into the right-of-way.

86. HIGH VISIBILITY SAFETY APPAREL: All workers on foot who are exposed to the hazard of vehicular traffic shall wear warning garments such as vests, jackets, or shirts manufactured in accordance with the requirements of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/International Safety Equipment Association (ISEA) 107-2004 Performance Class 2, high visibility safety apparel and headwear, or any updates adopted by Cal OSHA. During hours of darkness, warning garments shall be retroreflective with visibility from a minimum 1,000 feet. (Fulfill this condition during construction.)

87. EXCAVATION SAFETY: All excavations must be performed in conformance with California Government Code Sections 4216, et seq. No excavation shall occur until proper notice is provided to Underground Service Alert (usanorth811.org) by calling either 811 or 800-642-2444 at least 72-hours prior to the work so buried utilities can be marked. All excavations shall be covered or barricaded to prevent entry when work is inactive. Open excavations in the public right-of-way must be covered by skid-resistant steel plates that are firmly affixed to the surface with leading edges ramped. Excavations 5-feet and deeper require a protective system as defined by Cal-OSHA. If a shoring system or trench boxes will be utilized as the protective system, said system shall either be manufactured and installed according to manufacturer recommendations, or designed by a registered professional engineer and installed according to approved plans. No excavation shall be performed atop or adjacent to a high-risk facility until authorized by the owner of the facility. High-risk facilities are defined as gas transmission pipelines and hazardous liquid pipelines as regulated by the U.S.

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (US DOT PHMSA)

88. POLLUTANT REDUCTION IN STORMWATER: At no time during construction of the project shall pollutants be allowed to enter, clog, or contaminate storm drain pipe networks or open stormwater channels in violation of Pleasanton Municipal Code §9.14.080 et seq. The Applicant shall contain all trash and debris for proper disposal to authorized landfills or recyclers. Erosion control features shall be deployed during the rainy season that extends from October 1st to April 15th each year, or any time rain is forecast outside of this period. Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be strictly followed. Street sweepers must be employed if soil or debris is tracked onto the public roads from vehicles exiting the site.

Standard BMPs are available from the California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Caltrans, and others. Notes and/or illustrations shall be added to the plans that describe the BMPs to be utilized during construction. The use of manufactured erosion control woven blankets and straw wattles that utilize plastic monofilament netting is specifically prohibited. (Fulfill this condition during construction.)

89. SWPPP REPORTING: Copies of any monitoring and/or sampling reports required by the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and submitted by the Legally Responsible Person (LRP) to the State of California’s SMARTS database shall also be submitted to the City of Pleasanton inspector assigned to the project. The LRP shall also submit to the City a copy of the required Annual Report no later than September 1st of each year that construction is active or when erosion control features have been deployed. The report must include a summary of all sampling and analysis performed (Risk Levels 2 and 3 only), a log of all inspections performed, a summary of any required corrective actions taken, and a summary of any violations. (Fulfill this condition during construction.)

90. DUST CONTROL: Dust control measures must be employed during all phases of construction to prevent airborne nuisance to neighboring properties. All stockpiles or unused materials that can create dust shall be covered or removed.

Exposed soil areas shall be routinely watered until surfacing materials or landscaping is installed. Use of dust palliatives shall conform to Caltrans Standard Specification Section 18. Any damage caused by airborne dust to neighboring properties shall be cleaned with costs paid by the Applicant. If the Applicant fails the address dust as directed by the City, the City shall have the right to enter the property to effectuate the correction, with all costs paid by the applicant or levied as a lien against the Applicant’s property. (Fulfill this condition during construction.)

91. PROPERTY NUISANCE: At no time during construction of the project shall the condition of the property become a nuisance as defined in Pleasanton Municipal Code §9.28.020. The City shall have the right to inspect the property for conditions that violate the code standard. If a nuisance is found, the Applicant

Ordinance No. July 21, 2026
shall immediately submit a plan of correction. Depending on the severity of the nuisance, the City may suspend all construction work until the condition is corrected. Any of the following conditions shall be considered severe: leaking chemicals that can cause environmental damage; open excavations or any excavation deeper than 4 feet that lacks proper shoring; unsecured materials that can fall to the ground causing damage or injury; open or exposed utilities that could cause electrical shock or contamination of sewer, potable water systems, groundwater wells, or storm drainage networks. If the Applicant fails the address the nuisance as directed by the City, the City shall have the right to enter the property to effectuate the correction, with all costs paid by the applicant or levied as a lien against the applicant’s property. (Fulfill this condition during construction.)

92. NOISE: Construction noise is regulated under Pleasanton Municipal Code Chapter 9.04. Noise is prohibited outside of the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. daily except Sundays and holidays when noise is prohibited outside the hours of 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. Noise is defined as a level exceeding 83 dBA at a distance of 25 feet or 86 dBA at any point beyond the boundary of the property under construction. If the Applicant fails to address the noise as directed by the City, the City shall have the right to enter the property to effectuate the correction, with all costs paid by the Applicant or levied as a lien against the Applicant’s property.

Exceptions to these regulations require a special permit granted by the City for circumstances when strict compliance would be impractical or unreasonable, and contingent upon proper noticing to surrounding property owners that includes the dates and times when noise levels will be exceeded and the specific reasons why an exception to the regulation has been granted. (Fulfill this condition during construction.)

93. DROUGHT RESTRICTIONS: If the City Council declares a drought during a time when this development is under construction, as described in § 9.30.010, et seq., of the Pleasanton Municipal Code, the Applicant shall utilize only recycled water under Stage 1 or greater restrictions for all non-potable construction-related water needs. Recycled water is available at designated locations within the City, subject to the Applicant’s receipt of a temporary hydrant meter from the Operations Service Center located at 3333 Busch Road. The Applicant is responsible for all water costs based on current billing rates. (Address this condition during construction)

94. GEOTECHNICAL FINAL REPORT: At the conclusion of construction, the Applicant shall submit to the City a final report from the Geotechnical Engineer or Certified Engineering Geologist testifying to the successful completion of all material testing and/or observation work performed. The final report must provide assurance that all recommendations had been strictly followed. The Applicant shall bear all costs associated with this condition. (Fulfill this condition prior to acceptance of improvement or issuance of an Occupancy Permit.)