SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL - Laserfiche WebLink

November 8, 2024 Page 9 7357-013acp printed on recycled paper The DEIR mentions the Senior East County Lakes Project in the Cumulative Projects section and provides that the Senior East County Lakes Project proposes a “Gated age-restricted mixed density residential and support services” project which is currently “Under Review” by the County of Alameda.44 The DEIR provides that the quantity of units will be 569 with 10,000 square feet of support services.45 The Senior East County Lakes Project also proposes a 6,000 sq. ft. clubhouse amenity space for residents to congregate and dine, as well as an open space courtyard and activity space for outdoor recreational uses (e.g., potentially an amphitheater, bocce ball court, pool and pool house) on a 6.5-acre portion of the site.46 However, the County did not analyze the impacts of the Senior East County Lakes Project in the DEIR pursuant to CEQA. The Senior East County Lakes Project will result in reasonably foreseeable potential environmental impacts, requiring analysis and mitigation concurrently with the instant Project, in a revised and recirculated EIR. The Arroyo Lago Project and Senior East County Lakes Project share a common property owner and would occupy the same parcel, APN 946-4634-2. Although the projects are being processed under separate applications, they represent a single combined use of the Project sites owned by a common entity. Combined, the projects would add 763 new residential units and associated uses requiring the construction of new infrastructure and the addition of public services. The Applicant’s two projects proposed on APN 946-4634-2 are similar to the piecemealed developments overturned by the court in Arviv Enterprises, Inc. v. South Valley Area Planning Commission.47 There, the developer, Arviv, received permits to develop three houses, then additional two houses, a categorical exemption to develop two additional houses across the street, and a mitigated negative declaration to build 14 additional houses on an adjacent street.48 The City of Los Angeles came to realize the cumulative effects from what was in reality a development project for 21 hillside houses that required environmental review of the project as a whole.49 The City required that an EIR be prepared and certified that covered all 21 proposed houses, even those already constructed, due to their 44 DEIR, p. 3-7. 45 Id. 46 Letter from Holland & Knight USL Pleasanton Lakes L.P. to Planning Director Albert Lopez, Submittal of SB 330 Preliminary Application for “Builder’s Remedy” Project at Busch Rd., Alameda County, APN 946-4634-002 (June 4, 2024). 47 (2002) 101 CA4th 1333, 1336. 48 Arviv Enters., Inc. v. South Area Planning Comm’n (2002) 101 CA4th 1333, 1336. 49 Id.