Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout*September 17, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting PacketCOUNCILMEMBERS Michael McCorriston, Mayor Dr. Sherry Hu, Vice Mayor Jean Josey, Councilmember Kashef Qaadri, Councilmember Janine Thalblum, Councilmember DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Regular Meeting of the DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, September I7, 2024 City Council Chamber Dublin Civic Center 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 www.dublin.ca.gov Location: City Council Chamber I00 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 CLOSED SESSION 6:30 PM REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM Additional Meeting Procedures This City Council meeting will be broadcast live on Comcast T.V. channel 28 beginning at 7:00 p.m. This meeting will also be livestreamed at www.tv30.otg and on the City's website at: https://dublin.ca.gov/ccmeetings For the convenience of the City and as a courtesy to the public, members of the public who wish to offer comments electronically have the option of giving public comment via Zoom, subject to the following procedures: ❑ Fill out an online speaker slip available at www.dublin.ca.gov. The speaker slip will be made available at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, September 17, 2024. Upon submission, you will receive Zoom link information from the City Clerk. Speakers slips will be accepted until the staff presentation ends, or until the public comment period on non -agenda items is closed. ❑ Once connected to the Zoom platform using the Zoom link information from the City Clerk, the public speaker will be added to the Zoom webinar as an attendee and muted. The speaker will be able to observe the meeting from the Zoom platform. ❑ When the agenda item upon which the individual would like to comment is addressed, the City Clerk will announce the speaker in the meeting when it is their time to give public comment. The speaker will then be unmuted to give public comment via Zoom. September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 1 ❑ Technical difficulties may occur that make the option unavailable, and, in such event, the meeting will continue despite the inability to provide the option. CLOSED SESSION 6:30 PM I. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Agency Designated Representatives: Councilmembers Josey and Qaadri Unrepresented Employee: City Manager REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION 3. PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS 3.1 Recognition of Dublin Little League I0s and 1 2s Girls Softball Teams The City Council will recognize Dublin Little League's Girls Softball teams for their achievements in their State Tournaments and beyond. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recognize the teams. Staff Report Attachment 1- Certificate of Recognition - Dublin Little League 10U Girls Softball Team Attachment 2 - Certificate of Recognition - Dublin Little League 12U Girls Softball Team 4. PUBLIC COMMENT At this time, the public is permitted to address the City Council on non-agendized items. Please step to the podium and clearly state your name for the record. COMMENTS SHOULD NOT EXCEED THREE (3) MINUTES. In accordance with State Law, no action or discussion may take place on any item not appearing on the posted agenda. The Council may respond to statements made or questions asked, or may request Staff to report back at a future meeting concerning the matter. Any member of the public may contact the City Clerk's Office related to the proper procedure to place an item on a future City Council agenda. The exceptions under which the City Council MAY discuss and/or take action on items not appearing on the agenda are contained in Government Code Section 54954.2(b)(1)(2)(3). 5. CONSENT CALENDAR Consent Calendar items are typically non -controversial in nature and are considered for approval by the City Council with one single action. Members of the audience, Staff or the City Council who would like an item removed from the Consent Calendar for purposes of public input may request the Mayor to remove the item. September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 2 5.1 Approval of the September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes The City Council will consider approval of the minutes of the September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the minutes of the September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting. Staff Report Attachment 1 - September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 5.2 2024 Development Agreement Review The City Council will receive a report on the annual review of active Development Agreements to ensure compliance with the terms and provisions of the Agreements pursuant to the California Government Code, Sections 65864 - 65869.5, and to Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution Finding that Developers Having Obligations Under Active Development Agreements and Supplemental Agreements as Amended, Have Complied in Good Faith With the Terms and Provisions of the Agreements. Staff Report Attachment 1- Resolution Finding that Developers Having Obligations Under Active Development Agreements and Supplemental Agreements as Amended, Have Complied in Good Faith with the Terms and Provisions of the Agreements 5.3 Tract 8649 Francis Ranch — Final Map Notice and Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features The City Council will receive a notification of the City Engineer's pending approval of the Final Map for Tract 8649, Francis Ranch. The City Council will consider approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features for Tract 8649, Francis Ranch. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive the notification and adopt the Resolution Approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features with Tract 8649, Francis Ranch. Staff Report Attachment 1- Resolution Approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features with Tract 8649, Francis Ranch Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to Resolution - Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features with Tract 8649, Francis Ranch Attachment 3 - Tract 8649 Final Map 5.4 Payment Issuance Report and Electronic Funds Transfers The City Council will receive a listing of payments issued from August 1, 2024 - August 31, 2024, totaling $8,799,312.47. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive the report. Staff Report Attachment 1- Payment Issuance Report for August 2024 September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 3 5.5 Delegation of Authority to the City Manager to Purchase Fleet Vehicles Exceeding $45,000 The City Council will consider delegating purchasing authority of fleet vehicles exceeding $45,000 to the City Manager for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2024-25. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution Delegating Authority to the City Manager to Purchase Fleet Vehicles Exceeding $45,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25. Staff Report Attachment 1- Resolution Delegating Authority to the City Manager to Purchase Fleet Vehicles Exceeding $45,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25 Attachment 2 - Administrative Policy 3.6 - Fleet Life Cycle/Replacement 5.6 Ordinance Adding a Low Carbon Concrete Requirement to the City's Green Building Code in Coordination with the City's Climate Action Plan The City Council will consider waiving the second reading and adopting the Ordinance amending the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete). The City Council waived the first reading and introduced the ordinance at the meeting on September 3, 2024. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Waive the second reading and adopt the Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete). Staff Report Attachment 1- Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete) Attachment 2 - September 3, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments) 5.7 Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.24.020 of the Dublin Municipal Code Pertaining to the City's Conflict of Interest Code At the June 4, 2024, City Council meeting, the City Council directed Staff to review the City's Conflict of Interest Code and determine if it needs to be updated. Staff conducted a review of the Code and determined that several positions should be added or deleted. The City Council will consider introducing an ordinance to update the list of designated positions that must file a Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Waive the reading and INTRODUCE the Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.24.020 of the Dublin Municipal Code Relating to the City's Conflict of Interest Code, and direct Staff to file the 2024 Local Agency Biennial Notice. Staff Report Attachment 1 - Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.24.020 of the Dublin Municipal Code Relating to the City's Conflict of Interest Code Attachment 2 - 2024 Local Agency Notice September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 4 4 5.8 Agreement to Employ Colleen Tribby as City Manager The City Council will consider approval of an agreement to employ Colleen Tribby as the next City Manager of the City of Dublin. The terms and conditions of her employment were discussed with the appointed Negotiating Committee, consisting of Councilmembers Josey and Qaadri. The Negotiating Committee is recommending the approval of the agreement. The City Council will consider an amendment to the City Salary Plan to establish the flat monthly salary for the position of City Manager, effective October 11, 2024, to conform with the proposed Agreement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Negotiating Committee recommends that the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the Agreement with Colleen Tribby for employment as City Manager and adopt the Resolution Amending the Salary Plan. Staff Report - Agreement to Employ Colleen Tribby as City Manager Attachment 1- Agreement between the City of Dublin and Colleen Tribby for Employment as City Manager Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to the Agreement Attachment 3 - Resolution Amending the Salary Plan 6. PUBLIC HEARING 6.1 Hexcel Redevelopment (PLPA-2022-00038) The City Council will consider the Hexcel Redevelopment Project, which redevelops an 8.81-acre site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The project would demolish the existing 62,175-square-foot former Hexcel research and development building and construct a new 125,532-square-foot light industrial building with 217 parking stalls and related site improvements. The project was first presented to the City Council on March 19, 2024, and the City Council continued the project to a date uncertain so the Applicant could address City Council comments related to the overall project design, compatibility with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, and landscape buffer to adjacent properties. The Applicant has since revised the project design and landscaping in response to comments. Requested approvals include a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. The City Council will also consider certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing, deliberate, and take the following actions: 1) adopt the Resolution Certifying an Environmental Impact Report and Adopting Environmental Impact Findings, Findings Regarding Alternatives, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project; 2) waive the reading and INTRODUCE the Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map and Approving a Planned Development Zoning District with Related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project; and 3) adopt the Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. Staff Report September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 5 Attachment 1- Resolution Certifying an Environmental Impact Report and Adopting Environmental Impact Findings, Findings Regarding Alternatives, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to the Resolution - Final Environmental Impact Report Attachment 3 - Exhibit B to the Resolution - Findings Concerning Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures Attachment 4 - Exhibit C to the Resolution - Findings Concerning Infeasiblity of Alternatives and Potential Additional Mitigation Measures Attachment 5 - Exhibit D to the Resolution - Statement of Overriding Considerations Attachment 6 - Exhibit E to the Resolution - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Attachment 7 - Ordinance Amending Zoning Map and Approving a Planned Development Zoning District with Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project Attachment 8 - Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project Attachment 9 - Exhibit A to the Resolution - Hexcel Redevelopment Project Plans Attachment 10 - Arborist Report Attachment 11 - Planning Commission Resolution 23-11 Attachment 12 - March 19, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments) Item 6.1- PowerPoint Presentation SB 343 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 7.1 Draft Economic Development Strategy The City Council will review the draft Economic Development Strategy. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Review and provide direction on the draft Economic Development Strategy. Staff Report Attachment 1- Draft Economic Development Strategy Attachment 2 - Economic Development Strategy Implementation Matrix Item 7.1- PowerPoint Presentation 8. NEW BUSINESS 8.1 Annual Review of the City's Statement of Investment Policy The City Council will consider a resolution completing the annual review of the Statement of Investment Policy. The Policy has been updated to clarify the Delegation of Authority and Authorized and Suitable Investments and remove language to the Prohibited Investment Practices to provide more flexibility in the City's investment strategy. While not required by statute, annual review of a local agency's investment policy is recommended by the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission and is included as a requirement in the City Policy. Additionally, the City Council will consider and provide feedback on the establishment of a Finance and Investment Subcommittee, which would be responsible for reviewing and making recommendations to the City Council on financial matters including the City's investment strategy. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 6 Adopt the Resolution Approving the Annual Review of the Statement of Investment Policy and Delegation of Authority to Complete Investment Transactions and provide feedback and direction on the establishment of a Finance and Investment Subcommittee. Staff Report Attachment 1- Resolution Approving the Annual Review of the Statement of Investment Policy and Delegation of Authority to Complete Investment Transactions Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to the Resolution - Statement of Investment Policy for City of Dublin Attachment 3 - Statement of Investment Policy for the City of Dublin (Redline) Item 8.1- PowerPoint Presentation 8.2 Overview of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Transit Oriented Communities Policy The City Council will receive an initial overview of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy. The TOC Policy is designed to support the region's transit investment by encouraging jurisdictions to adopt transit - supportive land use policies for areas within a half -mile radius of existing or planned transit stops or stations, and to adopt additional policies they intend to further equitable transit -oriented communities. The TOC Policy lays out a menu of policy options for local jurisdictions to choose from. Compliance with the TOC Policy is required to qualify for future One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) transportation funding. Additionally, funding for Valley Link is tied to compliance by the local jurisdictions served by them. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive the staff presentation. Staff Report Attachment 1- Alameda CTC CIP Five Year Programming with Two-year Allocation for the City of Dublin Attachment 2 - MTC's Transit Oriented Development Draft Administrative Guidance Item 8.2 - PowerPoint Presentation 9. CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Brief information only reports from City Council and/or Staff, including committee reports and reports by City Council related to meetings attended at City expense (AB1234). 10. ADJOURNMENT This AGENDA is posted in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2(a) If requested, pursuant to Government Code Section 54953.2, this agenda shall be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Section 12132) (ADA), and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. To make a request for disability -related modification or accommodation, please contact the City Clerk's Office (925) 833-6650 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Upon receiving a request, the City will swiftly resolve requests for reasonable accommodation for individuals with disabilities, consistent with the federal ADA, and resolve any doubt in favor of accessibility. September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 7 Agenda materials that become available within 72 hours in advance of the meeting, and after publishing of the agenda, will be available at Civic Center, 100 Civic Plaza, and will be posted on the City's website at www.dublin.ca.gov/ccmeetings. Mission The City of Dublin promotes and supports a high quality of life, ensures a safe, secure, and sustainable environment, fosters new opportunities, and champions a culture of equity, diversity, and inclusion. September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 8 8 sus DUBLIN STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 3.1 DATE: September 17, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.ECT: Recognition of Dublin Little League 10s and 12s Girls Softball Teams Prepared by: Colleen Tribby, Assistant City Manager EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will recognize Dublin Little League's Girls Softball teams for their achievements in their State Tournaments and beyond. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recognize the teams. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. DESCRIPTION: Two Dublin Little League Girls Softball teams recently represented the community at the top levels in their divisions. The 10-year-olds ("10s") won the NorCal State Championship, and the 12's All Star Team won the California Major League State Championship and moved on to the Western Regional Tournament in San Bernadino. While they lost to Arizona in the championship game, they won three games leading up to the championship in an exciting event that was broadcast on ESPN. Both teams are composed nearly entirely of Dublin players. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: The City Council Agenda was posted. Page 1 of 2 9 ATTACHMENTS: 1) Certificate of Recognition - Dublin Little League 10U Girls Softball Team 2) Certificate of Recognition - Dublin Little League 12U Girls Softball Team Page 2 of 2 10 Attachment I CTR17yICYLTT OJ RTCOjJVT27OJf Given to D UBLIN LITTLE LEAGUE Y o U GIRLS SOFTBALL TEAM In recognition of winning the NorCal State Championship. Presented by the The City of Dublin Dated: September 17, 2024 Mayor Michael McCorriston Vice Mayor Sherry Hu Councilmember Jean Josey Councilmember Kashef Qaadri Councilmember Janine Thalblum 11 Attachment 2 CTR17yICYLTT OF RTCOjJVT27OJf Given to D UBLIN LITTLE LEAGUE 12 U GIRLS SOFTBALL TEAM In recognition of winning the California Major League State Championship and competing in the championship game of the Western Regional Tournament. Presented by the The City of Dublin Dated: September 17, 2024 Mayor Michael McCorriston Vice Mayor Sherry Hu Councilmember Jean Josey Councilmember Kashef Qaadri Councilmember Janine Thalblum 12 r DUBLIN CALIFORNIA STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 5.1 DATE: September 17, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.JECT: Approval of September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes Prepared by: Marsha Moore, MMC, City Clerk EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will consider approval of the minutes of the September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the minutes of the September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. DESCRIPTION: The City Council will consider approval of the minutes of the September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: The City Council Agenda was posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1) September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 1 13 DUBLIN CALIFORNIA iL MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN Regular Meeting: September 3, 2024 Attachment I The following are minutes of the actions taken by the City of Dublin City Council. A full video recording of the meeting with the agenda items indexed and time stamped is available on the City's website at: https://dublin.ca.gov/ccmeetings CLOSED SESSION 6:30 PM I. CONFERENCE W ITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Agency Designated Representatives: Councilmembers Josey and Qaadri Unrepresented Employee: City Manager REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM A Regular Meeting of the Dublin City Council was held on Tuesday, September 3, 2024, in the City Council Chamber. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM, by Mayor McCorriston. 1) CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Attendee Name Status Michael McCorriston, Mayor Present Dr. Sherry Hu, Vice Mayor Present Jean Josey, Councilmember Present Kashef Qaadri, Councilmember Present Janine Thalblum, Councilmember Present 2) REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION Mayor McCorriston reported there was no reportable action out of Closed Session. 3) PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS 3.1) Presentation of the Constitution Week Proclamation The City Council presented the Constitution Week Proclamation to the Daughters of the American Revolution. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING SEPT EM BER 3, 2024 14 3.2) Preview of Splatter 2024 The City Council received a presentation previewing Splatter 2024, taking place September 14, 2024, at Emerald Glen Park. 4) PUBLIC COMMENT No public comment. 5) CONSENT CALENDAR 5.1) Approved the minutes of the August 20, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting. 5.2) Adopted Resolution No. 98-24 titled, "Approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features With 6797 Pearl Place." 5.3) Waived the second reading and adopted Ordinance No. 07-24 titled, "Amending Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.74 (Stormwater Management and Discharge Control);" and waived the second reading and adopted Ordinance No. 08-24 titled, "Amending Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.29 (Management of PCBs During Building Demolition Projects)." On a motion by Vice Mayor Hu, seconded by Councilmember Qaadri, and by unanimous vote, the City Council adopted the Consent Calendar. RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVED BY: Dr. Sherry Hu, Vice Mayor SECOND: Kashef Qaadri, Councilmember AYES: McCorriston, Josey, Hu, Qaadri, Thalblum 6) PUBLIC HEARING 6.1) Adding a Low Carbon Concrete Requirement to the City's Green Building Code in Coordination with the City's Climate Action Plan The City Council received a presentation regarding the low carbon concrete requirements, which are in alignment with the City of Dublin Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond, Measure MM-2, Reduce the Embodied Greenhouse Gas Emissions Associated with Building Materials. Mayor McCorriston opened the Public Hearing. Upon receiving no public comment, Mayor McCorriston closed the Public Hearing. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING SEPT EM BER 3, 2024 15 On a motion by Councilmember Qaadri, seconded by Councilmember Josey, and by unanimous vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 99-24 titled, "Approving Findings Regarding the Need for Local Amendments to Provisions in the California Building Standards Code as Adopted by the City;" and introduced Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete). RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVED BY: Kashef Qaadri, Councilmember SECOND: Jean Josey, Councilmember AYES: McCorriston, Josey, Hu, Qaadri, Thalblum 7) UNFINISHED BUSINESS 7.1) Two -Year Strategic Plan Update and Final Report for Fiscal Years2022-23 and 2023-24 The City Council received a presentation with an update and final report on the City's Two - Year Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2022-23 and 2023-24. 7.2) Dublin CommonsAffordable Housing Proposal The City Council received a presentation regarding the Dublin Commons Affordable Housing proposal for the future development of the site. Mayor McCorriston called for a break at 8:14 PM. Mayor McCorriston reconvened the meeting at 8:22 PM. Mayor McCorriston opened the public comment period. Upon receiving no public comment, Mayor McCorriston closed the public comment period. By consensus, the City Council directed Staff to include the following in the development agreement: 1) 60 moderate income units spread through the project proportionally developed; 2) 24 lower -income units spread through the project proportionally developed; 3) land site for parcel H1 prepared and dedicated; 4) affordable housing credits to the developer for each affordable unit above 80 on parcel H1; and 5) flexibility to evaluate for - sale units by including language around the cadence of review for potential condo conversions. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING SEPT EM BER 3, 2024 16 8) NEW BUSINESS 8.1) Amendments to the First -Time Homebuyer Loan Program Guidelines The City Council received a presentation regarding proposed amendments to the First Time Homebuyer Loan Program Guidelines. On a motion by Councilmember Josey, seconded by Councilmember Thalblum, and by unanimous vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 100-24 titled, "Amending the First Time Homebuyer Loan Program Guidelines," and approved the budget change. RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVED BY: Jean Josey, Councilmember SECOND: Janine Thalblum, Councilmember AYES: McCorriston, Josey, Hu, Qaadri, Thalblum 9) CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL REPORTS The City Council and Staff provided brief information -only reports, including committee reports and reports related to meetings attended at City expense (AB1234). By consensus, the City Council directed Staff to explore an e-bike and e-scooter safety education program. 10) ADJOURNMENT Mayor McCorriston adjourned the meeting at 9:51 PM. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING SEPT EM BER 3, 2024 17 r DUBLIN CALIFORNIA STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 5.2 DATE: September 17, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.ECT : 2024 Development Agreement Review Prepared by: Jeff Baker, Comm unity Development Director and Anastasia Nelson, Administrative Aide EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will receive a report on the annual review of active Development Agreements to ensure compliance with the terms and provisions of the Agreements pursuant to the California Government Code, Sections 65864 - 65869.5, and to Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution Finding that Developers Having Obligations Under Active Development Agreements and Supplemental Agreements as Amended, Have Complied in Good Faith With the Terms and Provisions of the Agreements. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The fiscal impacts of these projects were addressed as part of a fiscal analysis performed for each approved project. All financial obligations of the subject developers have been met pursuant to the terms provided in their respective Development Agreements. DESCRIPTION: Background An annual review of active Development Agreements is required by California Government Code Section 65865.1 and Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code. During the review period, occurring in July and August of each year, Staff reviews each active Development Agreement to ensure compliance with the terms and provisions of the agreement. The burden of demonstrating good faith compliance is on the respective developer and/or property owner. Staff from the Finance, Community Development, Fire Prevention, Parks and Community Services, and Public Works departments complete a thorough and detailed assessment of the developer's compliance with the requirements contained in the applicable agreements. Page 1 of 2 18 Following the review, Staff presents the findings and recommends to the City Council to either: (1) determine that the parties are in compliance and conclude the review; or (2) determine that the parties have not complied in good faith, in which case the City Council must request that the matter of compliance be considered at a noticed public hearing. At said public hearing, the City Council may modify or terminate the Development Agreement upon making certain findings based on substantial evidence that the developer has not complied in good faith with the Agreement. Analysis The following active Development Agreements, identified in Table 1 below, were subject to the 2024 annual review. Based on Staff's review, all required public improvements, payments, and scheduled financial obligations have been satisfied by each of the developers and property owners. Staff concluded that each of the developers/owners are proceeding in good faith with the terms of their Development Agreement, and is therefore recommending that the report be accepted by the City Council and the annual review be concluded. Table 1: Active Development Agreements No. Development Project Expiration Date Compliant 1. Bex Development (Branaugh Property) 04/20/2033 Yes 2. Dublin Crossings (Boulevard) 12/20/2033 Yes 3. Kaiser Dublin Medical Center 11/04/2041 Yes 4. SCS Dublin Project (The DC) 01/05/2028 Yes STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: No public notice is required. However, a formal notification of the 2024 Development Agreement Annual Review was sent to the parties of the Development Agreements. The City Council Agenda was posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Resolution Finding that Developers Having Obligations Under Active Development Agreements and Supplemental Agreements as Amended, Have Complied in Good Faith With the Terms and Provisions of the Agreements Page 2 of 2 19 Attachment I RESOLUTION NO. XX — 24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN FINDING THAT DEVELOPERS HAVING OBLIGATIONS UNDER ACTIVE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENTS AS AMENDED, HAVE COMPLIED IN GOOD FAITH WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENTS WHEREAS, as of July 1, 2024, the following projects have active Development Agreements with the City of Dublin: Bex Development (Branaugh Property), Dublin Crossings (Boulevard), Kaiser Dublin Medical Center and SCS Dublin Project (The DC); and WHEREAS, the annual review of active Development Agreements is required by California Government Code Sections 65864 — 65869.5, and Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, during the review period, occurring in July and August of each year, Staff reviews the development agreements to ensure compliance with the terms and provisions of the Agreements; and WHEREAS, the burden of demonstrating good faith compliance with the Agreements rests with the Developers; and WHEREAS, the appropriate City Departments have reviewed each of the active Development Agreements, and confirmed that the developers are in compliance with the terms of the Agreements; and WHEREAS, Staff presents and recommends the City Council determine the parties are in compliance and conclude the review. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin concludes its review of the above referenced active Development Agreements and Supplemental Agreements as Amended, and determines that the Developers having obligations under said Agreements have complied in good faith with the terms and provisions of the Agreements. {Signatures on the following page} Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted 09/17/2024 Page 1 of 2 20 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September 2024, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted 09/17/24 Page 2 of 2 21 II DUBLIN CALIFORNIA STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 5.3 DATE: September 17, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.ECT: Tract 8649 Francis Ranch - Final Map Notice and Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features Prepared by: Laurie Sucgang, City Engineer EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will receive a notification of the City Engineer's pending approval of the Final Map for Tract 8649, Francis Ranch. The City Council will consider approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features for Tract 8649, Francis Ranch. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive the notification and adopt the Resolution Approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features with Tract 8649, Francis Ranch. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no impact to the General Fund. All costs associated with the agreements are borne by the developer. DESCRIPTION: The Francis Ranch development (formerly known as East Ranch) is located north of Interstate 580, east of Fallon Road and the Jordan Ranch development, south of the Positano development, and adjacent to the City's eastern city boundary. The development is being subdivided into six neighborhoods. The developer has prepared a final map, Tract 8649, for Neighborhood 5. In accordance with Chapter 9.24.080 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code, this is notice of the following: Page 1 of 2 22 City Engineer's pending decision on the following Final Map: Tract Location Developer Number of Units/Lots Type Proposed Decision 8649 Francis Ranch, Neighborhood 5 TH East Ranch Dublin, LLC 98 Lots Single Family Approve Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features The Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features provides for the Homeowners' Association to maintain project -related landscape and decorative features within the public street rights -of -way along all public streets within the neighborhood, including landscape plantings, irrigation, sidewalks, street trees, and decorative or stamped pavement. The project conditions of approval require this agreement prior to approval of the final map. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: The City Council Agenda was posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Resolution Approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features with Tract 8649, Francis Ranch 2) Exhibit A to the Resolution - Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features with Tract 8649, Francis Ranch 3) Tract 8649 Final Map Page 2 of 2 23 Attachment I RESOLUTION NO. XX — 24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING THE AGREEMENT FOR LONG TERM ENCROACHMENT FOR LANDSCAPE FEATURES WITH TRACT 8649, FRANCIS RANCH WHEREAS, a Vesting Tentative Map for Tract 8563, Francis Ranch was approved by City Council Resolution No. 140-21 on December 7, 2021, with Conditions of Approval; and WHEREAS, said Conditions of Approval required the developer to construct project -related landscape features within the public street rights -of -way; and WHEREAS, said Conditions of Approval required the developer to enter into an Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for the maintenance of said landscape features; and WHEREAS, the developer has executed and filed with the City of Dublin a Tract Improvement Agreement to construct the required Tract improvements, including said landscape features; and WHEREAS, the developer has executed and filed with the City of Dublin an Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features for Tract 8649, Francis Ranch, attached hereto as Exhibit A, which will be recorded against the property concurrently with the Tract 8649 Final Map. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby approve the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features for Tract 8649, Francis Ranch, attached hereto as Exhibit A to this Resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager, or designee, is authorized to execute Exhibit A and make any necessary, non -substantive changes to Exhibit A to carry out the intent of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September 2024, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted 09/17/24 Page 1 of 1 24 Docusign Envelope ID: 86B2AE6D-CC40-48C0-B87E-6503AB10AF24 Attachment 2 Recording Requested By: CITY OF DUBLIN When Recorded Mail To: City Clerk City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Fee Waived per GC 27383 AGREEMENT FOR LONG TERM ENCROACHMENT FOR LANDSCAPE FEATURES WITH TRACT 8649, Francis Ranch THIS AGREEMENT FOR LONG TERM ENCROACHMENT FOR LANDSCAPE FEATURES WITH TRACT 8649 ("Agreement") is made between the City of Dublin ("City") on the one hand, and TH East Ranch Dublin LLC, a California limited liability company (the "Contractor"), and Arroyo Cap IV-3, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the "Owner"), on the other hand. 1. Property: The subject property is Tract 8649 as filed in Book of Maps at Pages , in the Official Records of the County of Alameda, State of California ("Property"). 2. Owner: Owner is the owner of Tract 8649, Francis Ranch ("Project"). 3. Contractor: Owner has contracted with Contractor to construct various infrastructure and related improvements consistent with Vesting Tentative Map and Improvement Plans for Francis Ranch Tract 8649, including the Landscape Features (as defined below). 4. Landscape Features: Owner or Contractor, as part of the Project, anticipates the construction of Project related landscape features within the City's rights of ways on the following streets within Tract 8649: Holstein Avenue, Shorthorn Street, Kinzel Way, Hereford Road, Gallagher Lane, (collectively, the "Landscape Features"). Construction details for these Landscape Features are shown on the following plans: a. Improvement Plans for Francis Ranch, Tract 8649 Neighborhood 5, prepared by MacKay & Somps, approved by the City Engineer on ; and b. East Ranch — Tract 8649 — Neighborhood 5 Production Home Landscape Plans , prepared by Gates +Associates, approved by the City Engineer on ; and 1 25 Docusign Envelope ID: 86B2AE6D-CC40-48C0-B87E-6503AB10AF24 The scope of the improvements covered under the agreement is shown on the attached Exhibit "A". For avoidance of doubt, the parties agree that Owner and Contractor are each separately obligated to construct, operate and maintain the Landscape Features in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. "Developer", as used herein, is the person that actually constructs, operates and maintains the Landscape Features. 5. Encroachment Permit: Developer shall apply to the City for an encroachment permit for work to be performed pursuant to this Agreement. The City must grant the encroachment permit for all work to install, operate and maintain the Landscape Features improvements and all the conditions imposed by the City must be consistent with the provisions of this Agreement. If there is a conflict between any provisions of this Agreement and the encroachment permit, the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail over the conditions of the encroachment permit. 6. Ownership: Owner shall own all special Landscape Features, including but not limited to sidewalk, plantings, irrigation, street trees, etc. 7. Operations and Maintenance: Developer shall maintain and repair all the Landscape Features, including all frontage landscape plantings, irrigation, sidewalks, street trees, and decorative/stamped pavement within the designated areas, in a safe manner consistent with the approved plans to the reasonable satisfaction of the City at its sole cost and expense, including electric power and water cost. Developer will be responsible at its sole cost to replace or repair any Landscape Feature damaged or removed during the maintenance or repair of sewer, water, drainage or utility improvements by the City, Dublin San Ramon Services District or utility company, unless such damage or removal is caused by the negligence, gross negligence or willful misconduct of the City, Dublin San Ramon Services District or utility company. The City will maintain at its sole cost all asphalt concrete pavement, concrete curb and gutter, drainage improvements, traffic signs and striping, and streetlights in the public right of way. 8. Removal or Relocation: If future improvements proposed by the City conflict with any of the Landscape Features, the City may remove or reasonably relocate the Landscape Feature to another location within the Property, at its sole cost. If any of the Landscape Features are relocated, the City, Owner, and Contractor will execute a modification to this Agreement to reflect the maintenance and operations at its new location. Provided, however, the City is under no obligation to relocate any of the Landscape Features. 9. Insurance: Developer shall obtain and maintain in effect a combined single limit policy of liability insurance not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) covering the Landscape Features improvements and shall name the City as an additional insured. 2 26 Docusign Envelope ID: 86B2AE6D-CC40-48C0-B87E-6503AB10AF24 10. Indemnification: Developer shall indemnify, defend and hold the City harmless from and against any and all loss, claims, liability damage or expense or cost the City may incur or become liable for or for which a claim is made by a third party, directly arising from the negligence, gross negligence or willful misconduct of Developer arising out of Developer's construction, maintenance or operations of the Landscape Features unless caused by the negligence, gross negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its agents, contractors or employees. 11. Permanent: The Landscape Features and the rights appurtenant thereto as set forth in this Agreement shall exist in perpetuity and are appurtenant to the Property. 12. Right to Assign: Following the completion of the construction and installation of the Landscape Features, Owner and Developer may assign any or all of their rights, interests and obligations arising under this Agreement to the Homeowners' Association for Tract 8649 or to a successor in interest of Owner (including Contractor) with respect to all or a portion of the Project; provided, however, that no such assignment of the rights interests and obligations under this Agreement shall occur without prior written notice to the City and written approval by the City Manager, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. The City Manager shall consider and decide on any assignment within ten (10) days after Owner's notice thereof, provided all necessary documents and other information are provided to the City Manager to enable the City Manager to assess the assignment. 13. Successors and Assigns: Each reference to the "City" in this Agreement shall be deemed to refer to and include the City and all successors and assigns of City. All references to the "Owner" in this Agreement shall be deemed to refer to and include any successors in ownership and title. 14. Notices: Any notices, requests, demands or other communications required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given on the date of delivery if delivered personally to the party to whom notice is to be given (including messenger or recognized delivery or courier service), upon delivery if given by electronic mail (email) or on the second day after mailing, if mailed to the party to whom notice is to be given, by first-class mail, postage prepaid, and properly addressed as follows: City: City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, California 94568 Fax No. (925) 833-6651 Attn: City Manager 3 27 Docusign Envelope ID: 86B2AE6D-CC40-48C0-B87E-6503AB10AF24 Owner: c/o Arroyo Cap IV-3, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Attn: Jeffrey Brouelette Email: jrouelette@arroyocapital.com 18575 Jamboree Road, Suite 350 Irvine, CA 92612 Contractor: TH East Ranch LLC Attn: Legal Department Email: legal.notices@trumarkco.com 3001 Bishop Dr. 3100 San Ramon, CA 94583 With a copy to: Jackson Tidus Attn: Sonia Lister, Esq. 2030 Main Street, 12th Floor Irvine, CA 92614 15. Exhibits: All exhibits attached to this Agreement are incorporated herein as though they were set forth in full body of this Agreement. 16. Partial Invalidity: If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect and shall in no way be impaired or invalidated, and the parties agree to substitute for the invalid or unenforceable provision a valid and enforceable provision that most closely approximates the intent and economic effect of the invalid or unenforceable provision. 17. Entire Agreement: This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and cannot be amended or modified except by a written agreement, executed by each of the parties hereto. 18. Counterparts: This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall, for all purposes, be deemed an original and all such counterparts, taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. 4 28 Docusign Envelope ID: 86B2AE6D-CC40-48C0-B87E-6503AB10AF24 Dated this day of , 2024. CITY: THE CITY OF DUBLIN, a municipal corporation By: City Manager CONTRACTOR: By: TH EAST RANCH DUBLIN LLC, a California limited liability company !7 SbWSdi Tony BUSUWSI Name: Title: Authorized Agent Dated: 08/21/24 I 4:22 PM PDT OWNER: ARROYO CAP IV-3, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: Arroyo Cap IV-2, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company its sole member By: Arroyo Capital IV, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company its sole member By: Jeffrey BroueleLLe Name: Title: President Dated: 08/22/24 1 8:44 AM PDT 5 29 NORTH4 0 300 600 1200 SCALE: 1 "=600' FRANCIS RANCH -TRACT 8649 MACKAY & 50MPS LONG TERM ENCROACHT IBIAMENT AGREEMENT EXH ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA PLEASANTON, CA (925)225-0690 DRAWN BY: MB JOB NO:19343.NH5 DATE: 5-29-24 LEGEND: - CITY OWNED AND MASTER HOA MAINTAINED HARDSCAPE (AREA =13,836± SF) — - - — TRACT BOUNDARY SHEET 1 of 2 05-29-2024 11:37am Mike Brill P:\19343—T\DES\OVERALL EXHIBITS \D—EXH — LONG TERM ENCROACHMENT — NH5 — 2024-05-29.DWG LEGEND: CITY OWNED AND MASTER HOA MAINTAINED HARDSCAPE (AREA =13,836± SF) — - - — TRACT BOUNDARY NORTH 0 100 200 400 SCALE: 1 "=200' 47 MACKAY & somps ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS PLEASANTON, CA (925)225-0690 FRANCIS RANCH - TRACT 8649 LONG TERM ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT A DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA DRAWN BY: MB JOB NO:19343.NH5 DATE: 5-29-24 Y 7 SHEET 2 of 2 05-29-2024 11:37am Mike Brill P:\19343—T\DES\OVERALL EXHIBITS \D—EXH — LONG TERM ENCROACHMENT — NH5 — 2024-05-29.DWG Attachment 3 OWNER'S STATEMENT: THE UNDERSIGNED DOES HEREBY STATE THAT HE/SHE/THEY IS/ARE THE OWNER OF ALL THE LANDS DELINEATED AND EMBRACED WITHIN THE TRACT BOUNDARY LINE OF THIS FINAL MAP ENTITLED: "TRACT 8649, FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5, CROAK PROPERTY", CITY OF DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA", CONSISTING OF NINE (9) SHEETS, THIS STATEMENT BEING UPON SHEET ONE (1) THEREOF; THAT HE/SHE/THEY CONSENT(S) TO THE PREPARATION AND FILING OF SAID MAP; THAT SAID MAP DOES PARTICULARLY SETS FORTH AND DESCRIBES ALL THE LOTS INTENDED FOR SALE BY THEIR NUMBER AND PRECISE LENGTH AND WIDTH; AND THAT SAID MAP PARTICULARLY SETS FORTH AND DESCRIBES THE PARCELS OF LAND SO RESERVED FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES BY THEIR BOUNDARIES, COURSES, AND EXTENT. THE REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED BELOW IS DEDICATED IN FEE TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES: 1. THE REAL PROPERTY DESIGNATED AS HEREFORD ROAD, HOLSTEIN AVENUE, SHORTHORN STREET, KINZEL WAY AND GALLAGHER LANE FOR PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PURPOSES. THE REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED BELOW IS DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN AS EASEMENTS FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES: 1. THE AREAS IN, UNDER, ALONG, AND ACROSS ANY AREA OR STRIP OF LAND DESIGNATED AS PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTS (PSE), AS DELINEATED AND EMBRACED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE HEREIN EMBODIED MAP, ARE DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN FOREVER FOR THE "PURPOSES OF PUBLIC SERVICES" (AS HEREIN DEFINED). THE "PURPOSES OF PUBLIC SERVICES" SHALL INCLUDE THE CONSTRUCTION, RECONSTRUCTION, REMOVING, REPLACING, REPAIRING, MAINTAINING, OPERATING, AND USING "PUBLIC SERVICE FACILITIES" (AS DEFINED HEREIN), AND ACCESS THROUGH THE PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT FOR THESE PURPOSES. "PUBLIC SERVICE FACILITIES" SHALL INCLUDE PUBLIC UTILITIES, FIRE HYDRANTS, ELECTROLIERS, IRRIGATION SYSTEMS, SIGNS AND TRAFFIC SIGNALS, AND ALL NECESSARY APPURTENANCES THERETO SUCH AS BRACES, CONNECTIONS, FASTENINGS, APPLIANCES, AND FIXTURES FOR USE IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. ALL PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTS SHALL BE KEPT OPEN AND FREE FROM BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES OF ANY KIND, WITH THE SOLE EXCEPTION OF PUBLIC SERVICE FACILITIES. ALL PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTS SHALL BE CONSIDERED PUBLIC "WAYS" AS THAT TERM IS USED IN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE SECTION 6202, AND ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES HOLDING A VALID FRANCHISE FROM THE CITY SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO USE THE PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THE FRANCHISE. 2. THE AREAS DESIGNATED AS EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT (EVAE) AS SHOWN UPON SAID MAP, FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OF PUBLIC SAFETY VEHICLES AND EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT. 3. THE AREAS DESIGNATED AS STORM DRAIN EASEMENT (SDE) AS SHOWN UPON SAID MAP, FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF APPLICABLE STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES AND APPURTENANCES THERETO. SAID EASEMENT SHALL BE KEPT OPEN AND FREE FROM ALL BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES OF ANY KIND. THE AREAS DESIGNATED AS DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT (DSRSD) ARE HEREBY IRREVOCABLY OFFERED FOR DEDICATION BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT TO DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT (DSRSD), OR ITS DESIGNEE IN GROSS, AS A SUBSURFACE EASEMENT AND SURFACE EASEMENT FOR POTABLE AND RECYCLED WATER AND SANITARY SEWER PURPOSES, INCLUDING ACCESS THERETO, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND REPLACEMENTS OF WORKS, IMPROVEMENTS, AND STRUCTURES, AND THE CLEARING OF OBSTRUCTIONS AND VEGETATION. NO BUILDING OR STRUCTURE MAY BE PLACED ON SAID EASEMENT, NOR SHALL ANYTHING BE DONE THEREIN, NOR ACCESS RESTRICTED THERETO WHICH MAY INTERFERE WITH DSRSD'S FULL ENJOYMENT OF SAID EASEMENT. AND THE UNDERSIGNED DOES HEREBY RESERVE TO ITSELF AND TO THE OWNERS, RESIDENTS, CUSTOMERS AND OTHERS DESIGNATED BY THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION OF TRACT 8649, THE AREAS MARKED AS PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT (PAE) AS SHOWN UPON SAID MAP. SAID AREAS ARE FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PRIVATE INGRESS AND EGRESS, PRIVATE STREETS, PRIVATE UTILITIES, PRIVATE STORM DRAINS, OVERLAND DRAINAGE RELEASE, LANDSCAPING AND ALL APPURTENANCES. MAINTENANCE OF SAID PRIVATE ACCESS WAYS IS TO BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION GOVERNING TRACT 8649, ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SUBDIVISION RESTRICTIONS GOVERNING TRACT 8649. SAID AREAS ARE NOT OFFERED FOR DEDICATION TO THE PUBLIC AND ARE TO BE CONVEYED TO THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION GOVERNING TRACT 8649 BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT. AND THE UNDERSIGNED DOES HEREBY RESERVE FOR FUTURE DEDICATION TO THE FALLON VILLAGE GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT (GHAD), PARCELS D, W, AND X, AS SHOWN UPON SAID MAP, FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE ONGOING MAINTENANCE OF OPEN SPACES AND REQUIRED GHAD ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE MAINTENANCE OF STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES, BENCHES, BROW DITCHES, ROADS OR TRAILS, FENCING, WATER QUALITY CONTROL PONDS, AND SLOPES. SAID PARCELS D, W, AND X ARE TO BE CONVEYED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT TO THE FALLON VILLAGE GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT (GHAD) SUBSEQUENT TO THE FILING OF THIS FINAL MAP. AND THE UNDERSIGNED DOES HEREBY RESERVE FOR FUTURE DEDICATION TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION PARCELS A THROUGH C, AND E THROUGH V, AS SHOWN UPON SAID MAP. SAID PARCELS A THROUGH C, AND E THROUGH V TO BE CONVEYED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION SUBSEQUENT TO THE FILING OF THIS FINAL MAP. THIS MAP SHOWS ALL EASEMENTS ON THE PREMISES AND/OR OF RECORD, WITHIN THE BOUNDARY LINES OF THE HEREIN EMBODIED MAP. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE UNDERSIGNED HAVE EXECUTED THIS STATEMENT ON THE DAY OF , 2024. AS OWNERS: ARROYO CAP IV-3, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY BY: ARROYO CAP IV-2, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ITS SOLE MEMBER BY: ARROYO CAPITAL IV, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ITS SOLE MEMBER BY: NAME: TITLE: SOILS REPORT NOTE: A GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, DATED DECEMBER 10, 2021, REVISED FEBRUARY 17, 2022 HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ENGEO INCORPORATED, JOB NO. 5101.001.002 "GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION", FOR THIS SUBDIVISION AND IS ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF DUBLIN. TRACT 8649 FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5 CROAK PROPERTY A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563, RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS CITY OF DUBLIN ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA mAcKAY 8c soms ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS 5142E FRANKLIN DR, PLEASANTON, CA 94588 (925)225-0690 AUGUST 2024 OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT: A NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICER COMPLETING THIS CERTIFICATE VERIFIES ONLY THE IDENTITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED THE DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE IS ATTACHED, AND NOT THE TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY, OR VALIDITY OF THAT DOCUMENT. STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ON , 2024, BEFORE ME A NOTARY PUBLIC, PERSONALLY APPEARED WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S) WHOSE NAME(S) IS/ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE/SHE/THEY EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED CAPACITY(IES), AND THAT BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT THE PERSON(S), OR ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT. I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT. WITNESS MY HAND: SIGNATURE: PRINTED NAME, NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID COUNTY AND STATE PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS: COMMISSION EXPIRES: COMMISSION # OF NOTARY: OPTIONEE'S STATEMENT: THE UNDERSIGNED, TH EAST RANCH DUBLIN LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AS OPTIONEE UNDER THE DOCUMENTS RECORDED ON SEPTEMBER 29, 2023, AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023111607 ON MARCH 29, 2024, AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 2024041809, AND ON MARCH 29, 2024, AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 2024041810 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY JOIN IN AND CONSENT TO THE FOREGOING OWNERS' STATEMENT AND ALL DEDICATIONS SHOWN HEREIN. BY: NAME: TITLE: OPTIONEE'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT: A NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICER COMPLETING THIS CERTIFICATE VERIFIES ONLY THE IDENTITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED THE DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE IS ATTACHED, AND NOT THE TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY, OR VALIDITY OF THAT DOCUMENT. STATE OF CALIFORNIA} COUNTY OF } ON , 2024, BEFORE ME PERSONALLY APPEARED , A NOTARY PUBLIC, WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S) WHOSE NAME(S) IS SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED CAPACITY(IES), AND BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT THE PERSON(S), OR ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT. I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT. WITNESS MY HAND: SIGNATURE: PRINTED NAME, NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID COUNTY AND STATE PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS: COMMISSION EXPIRES: COMMISSION # OF NOTARY: CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' STATEMENT: STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF ALAMEDA) I, ANIKA CAMPBELL-BELTON, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY STATE, AS CHECKED BELOW, THAT: ❑ AN APPROVED BOND HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE SUPERVISORS OF SAID COUNTY AND STATE IN THE AMOUNT OF $ CONDITIONED FOR THE PAYMENT OF ALL TAXES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED AS TAXES, APPROVED BY SAID LOCAL BOARD IN SAID AMOUNT. ❑ ALL TAXES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED AS TAXES HAVE BEEN PAID AS CERTIFIED BY THE TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR OF THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND THIS DAY OF , 2024. ANIKA CAMPBELL-BELTON CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY RECORDER'S STATEMENT: BY: DEPUTY COUNTY CLERK FILED FOR RECORD THIS DAY OF , 2024 AT M., IN BOOK OF MAPS AT PAGES _ THROUGH _, UNDER SERIES NO. 2024 AT THE REQUEST OF FIRST AMERICAN COMPANY IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. FEE: $ MELISSA WILK COUNTY RECORDER IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA BY: DEPUTY TITLE 08-19-2024 9:28am Ian MacDonald P:\19343—T\SRV\MAPPING\FM\NH 5\19343—NH5—FM-01-02.DWG SHEET 1 OF 9 19343.NH5.D 32 CITY ENGINEER'S STATEMENT: I, LAURIE L. SUCGANG, CITY ENGINEER OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THE HEREIN EMBODIED FINAL MAP ENTITLED "TRACT 8649, FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5, CROAK PROPERTY", CITY OF DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA", CONSISTING OF NINE (9) SHEETS, THIS STATEMENT BEING UPON SHEET TWO (2) THEREOF, AND THAT THE FINAL MAP WAS PRESENTED TO ME AS PROVIDED BY LOCAL ORDINANCE THIS DAY OF 20 , AND THAT THIS MAP CONFORMS WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCES APPLICABLE AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL OF THE VESTING TENTATIVE MAP AND THE SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN IS SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME AS IT APPEARED ON THE VESTING TENTATIVE MAP AND ANY APPROVED ALTERATIONS THEREOF, AND THAT I APPROVE SAID MAP AND ACCEPT, SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENT, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN, HEREFORD ROAD, HOLSTEIN AVENUE, SHORTHORN STREET, KINZEL WAY AND GALLAGHER LANE, EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT (EVAE), PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT (PSE), AND STORM DRAIN EASEMENT (SDE) OFFERED FOR DEDICATION FOR PUBLIC USE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE TERMS OF THE OFFER OF DEDICATION . I FURTHER STATE THAT ALL AGREEMENTS AND SURETY REQUIRED BY LAW TO ACCOMPANY THE WITHIN FINAL MAP ARE APPROVED AND ARE FILED WITH THE CITY. LAURIE L. SUCGANG, RCE 73022 CITY ENGINEER CITY OF DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DATED: , 2024 ACTING CITY SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT: OF ESS/ ��EL. SU R.C.E. 73022 I HEREBY STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THIS FINAL MAP ENTITLED "TRACT 8649, FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5, CROAK PROPERTY", AND I AM SATISFIED THAT THIS FINAL MAP IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT. SETH H. IRISH, PLS 5922, ACTING CITY SURVEYOR CITY OF DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT: DATED: , 2024 cIV . ��;� OF Cj THIS MAP WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION AND IS BASED UPON A FIELD SURVEY IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCES AT THE REQUEST OF TRUMARK HOMES, LLC IN JANUARY OF 2022. I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS FINAL MAP SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO THE CONDITIONALLY APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP, IF ANY, AND THAT ALL THE MONUMENTS INDICATED HEREON ARE OF THE CHARACTER AND OCCUPY POSITIONS INDICATED HEREON OR WILL BE SET WITHIN TWENTY FOUR MONTHS FROM RECORDATION OF THIS FINAL MAP, AND THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS, AND WILL BE SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE THE SURVEY TO BE RETRACED, AND THE SURVEY IS TRUE AND COMPLETE AS SHOWN, AND THAT THE GROSS AREA WITHIN THE TRACT IS 16.40 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. IAN BRUCE MACDONALD LS NO. 8817 DATED: , 2024 BENEFICIARY'S STATEMENT: THE UNDERSIGNED, WESTERN ALLIANCE BANK, AN ARIZONA CORPORATION, AS BENEFICIARY UNDER THE DOCUMENT RECORDED ON MARCH 29, 2024, AS DOCUMENT NO. 2024041808 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY JOIN IN AND CONSENT TO THE FOREGOING OWNERS' STATEMENT AND ALL DEDICATIONS SHOWN HEREIN. BY: NAME: TITLE: BENEFICIARY'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT: A NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICER COMPLETING THIS CERTIFICATE VERIFIES ONLY THE IDENTITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED THE DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE IS ATTACHED, AND NOT THE TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY, OR VALIDITY OF THAT DOCUMENT. STATE OF ARIZONA} COUNTY OF } ON , 2024, BEFORE ME PERSONALLY APPEARED , A NOTARY PUBLIC, WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S) WHOSE NAME(S) IS SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED CAPACITY(IES), AND BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT THE PERSON(S), OR ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT. I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT. WITNESS MY HAND: SIGNATURE: PRINTED NAME, NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID COUNTY AND STATE PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS: COMMISSION EXPIRES: COMMISSION # OF NOTARY: TRACT 8649 FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5 CROAK PROPERTY A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563, RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS CITY OF DUBLIN ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MACKAY & soms ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS 5142B FRANKLIN DR, PLEASANTON, CA 94588 (925)225-0690 AUGUST 2024 08-19-2024 9:29am Ian MacDonald P:\19343—T\SRV\MAPPING\FM\NH 5\19343—NH5—FM-01-02.DWG SHEET 2 OF 9 19343.NH5.D 33 MARGARET WAY 28.5' 124 C/) z EX. 6' PSE 56' 28.5' M - tine Table Line # Bearing _er{gth N90°00'00"E 46.00' L1 BNDY L2 BNDY N90°9940"W 6.00' T PARCEL V 97 T T J90°00'00"W 259.50' M-M N90°00'00"E 1 164.00' BNDY 1C3 _BNDY] L — I[BNDY 76 0 X LJJ w 75 95 0 94 1-9; PARCEL U m� m LL, 91 0 96 93 PARCEL Q 77 0 78 79 92 PARCEL R 81 82 O 1 0 O 90 PARCEL 1+- 1 87 27.5 89 84 T ; 3, -d PARCEL S 88 85 83 86 CENTRAL PARKWAY N89°03'50"W 455.68' M-M 08-19-2024 9:29am Ian MacDonald PARCEL W ME IM L1(R) BNDY 0 HEREFORD Curvy Table ' Cuive # Rad±1Fs Detta Length C1 BNDY 25.0Q' 90 O '0O 327' ' 90°00'00m 39.27' C2 BNDY 25.0 C3 BNDY 25.00' 90°00'000 39.27'- C4 BNDY 25.OJ' 90/00'00" 39.27' C5 71.0 ' 17'143'22" 21.96' L TRACT 852171 (R-2) N90°00'00"W 319.00' -I L t f 18'_--I �28'- N OI z C� BASIS OF BEARINGS M-M N90°00'00"W 277.50' M-M 1 0 (R-1 ) �\ N90°00'00"W 164.64' BNDY 62.64' 17.5 46' — I MARGARET WAY -r I SEE DETAIL A THIS SHEET W ' z tLf) 0 1 O1 01 0 z rLJJ 0 0 17�0 46' z 2 PARCEL A 5 6 28.5 ' PARCEL B 8 7 z i-• >- • 4 1 - 1 ♦ -i CD o; 10 9 WALSH AVENUE N90°00' 00"E-501 .00' BNDY CO 62 62 63 61 J W U m 64 65 Ln r ----N-< 66 67 -" 70 0 w 71 a 74 U CO L_ L m -71 6, ♦ .# 42 60 1 PARCEL M 58 59 43 44 45 57 56 PARCEL L 54 53 55 47 46 PARCEL K 48 49 • , 1 • 52 51 50 L HOLSTEIN AVENUE PARCEL X TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT DOC. NO. 2023111604 BEX DEVELOPMENT LLC DOC. /VO. 202003541 P:\19343-T\SRV\MAPPING\FM\NH 5\19343-NH5-FM-03.DWG 68 41 W U CC 0- X LJJ 7 69 38 E- W 04 E- SHORTHORN 40 39 72 73 '51 1 37 34 36 CO ti w 0 11 12 co rn LJJ PARCEL C o 14 13 r-28 5 1' 1 I 1 PARCEL E 18 BNDY z w M 35 <LS zl a KINZEL WAY N41°48'37"WLRL 29 28 27 30 31 PARCEL H 26 J w CC 0 24 25 23 16 17 19 20 PARCEL F 22 21 33 32 LJJ 0 0 CV CV N90°00'00"E 218.00' N90°00'00"E 111 80' LJJ 0 0 -N41°48'37"W 25.00' LC) v PARCEL D 4.06±AC -' N90°00'00"E 112.00'(' TEMPORARY NO°00'00"E 7.00' CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT DOC. NO. 2023111604 �R=71.00' L=90°00'00' L=111.53' - r --NO°00'00"E(R) 28.85' 551.76' N89 93"50 W 1000.82 BNDY TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT DOC. NO. 2023111604 NM IM i 1 1 i i i 1 1 1 i i i m LC) W = 1- 1 i 1 L A CA CIAI FARMERS I LLC DOC. /VO. P005037857 LIVBOR MANNING LLC PTA' DOC. NO. 201 40372941 r 17.50' 1 N90°00'00'W 277.50' M-M WALSH AVENUE LO CO N 74 z..0; L_ LJJ 0 0 0 W 0 0 0 0 LO ti O N -J d 0 Ln LO 1 1 1 I 28.50' 1 I 1 0_ 1 L) 15 I N V 031 I O 28.5' o, W o PARCEL E w W I z o' d d p1 1- o I 0 zl 17.50' I- - 28.50' L2(R) BNDY 18 1 1 1 1 J DETAIL A SCALE: 1"=30' NOTE • THIS MAP IS SUBJECT TO A TEMPORARY RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED ON DECEMBER 27, 2023 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 2023150569, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS. SAID EASEMENT AUTOMATICALLY TERMINATES UPON THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS REFERENCED IN SAID DOCUMENT BY THE CITY OF DUBLIN. • THERE ARE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS THAT BENEFIT THE PROPERTY RECORDED ON SEPTEMBER 29, 2023 AS DOCUMENT NUMBERS 2023111603, 2023111604 AND 2023111605. SEE RECORDED DOCUMENTS FOR INFORMATION RELATED TO THE TERMINATION OF SAID EASEMENTS. REFERENCES (R-1) TRACT 8563, BK. 371 OF MAPS, PG. 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS (R-2) TRACT 8647, BK. __ OF MAPS, PG. __ ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS BASIS OF BEARINGS THE BEARING OF NORTH 90'00'00" WEST BETWEEN MONUMENTS WALSH AVENUE TO BE SET PER TRACT 8563, FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS, PAGE 12-22, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS IS TAKEN AS THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS MAP. LEGEND O BNDY DSRSD EVAE EX. IP M PL PAE PSE SDE (R) (R-1) REFERENCE 41 INDICATES SHEET NUMBER 0 50 100 BOUNDARY LINE RIGHT OF WAY LINE LOT LINE/PARCEL LINE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE EXISTING EASEMENT LINE MONUMENT LINE CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT SET PER (R-1) SET CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT C STAMPED "LS 8817" FOUND STANDARD STREET MONUMENT ANGLE POINT (NO MONUMENT SET) BOUNDARY DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT EXISTING IRON PIPE MONUMENT PROPERTY LINE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT STORM DRAIN EASEMENT RADIAL BEARING 200 SCALE: 1 "=100' TRACT 8649 FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5 CROAK PROPERTY A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563, RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS CITY OF DUBLIN ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA INACKAY & soms ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS 5142E FRANKLIN DR, PLEASANTON, CA 94588 (925)225-0690 AUGUST 2024 SHEET 3 OF 9 19343.NH5.D 34 H 17.5' 17.5' MARGARET0 WAY 28.5' GALLAGHER LANE 10 4328± SF 54.00' 6' PSE 1 3780± SF O w 0 1 (R-1) N90°00'00'W 164.64' BNDY - -_54.00'--- 48 00' 2 3606± SF - T 27.50'_ N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL A 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' a7 CC cn 0 N a w w w - - Oo N 0 - --54.00'- 6' PSE 4 3780± SF 1 N90°00'00"E 54.00' O r` w 0 O w 0_ d 27.50'- 0 N 3 3606± SF O N CO N90°00'00"E 48.00' 01 0 oI zI i I L 5 4590± SF - -54.00' O LCD CO w 0 0 0 6 4326± SF _27.50'- 1 I- N N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL B 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' 0 CC 0 N w a w > w O 0 r 0 0 r- rn 0 0 N 01 O - 54.00' 8 3780± SF 6' PSE N90°00'00"E 54.00' O 0 w 0 0 0 O O -27.50'- 7 3606± SF 48.00' 0 N CO w 0 0 0 N90°00'00"E 68.75' N90°00'00"W 9 10.50' 3322± SF N90°00'00"W NO°00'00"E__/1 25.58' 3.83' NO°00'00"EJ 4.00' O 77) N90°00'00"E 32.67' 1 62.64' 20EVAE) SDE 1 N90°00'00"E 20.50' J 1- 0 1- 0 0 0 CO O w O O 0 O O PARCEL D 4.06±AC N90°00'00"E 20.50' 20' EVAE N90°00'00"E 102.00' O O N 11 12 SDE i 1 1 i i i 1 1 1 i i ACACIA 1 PARTNERS I I //r 1 DOC. /VO. 2005037867 i 08-19-2024 9:30am Ian MacDonald SEE RIGHT P:\19343-T\SRV\MAPPING\FM\NH 5\19343-NH5-FM-04.DWG SEE LEFT MARGARET WAY \ T SEE DETAIL A SHEET 3 r_ / / I 17.5' 17.5 T WALSH AVENUE to 1 I c N 10 N w O 0 0 J 0_ LID CO 10 28.5' GALLAGHER LANE 28.5' N90°00'00"W 28.50' O O 6 10 N90°00'00"E 102.00' 54.00' 1 101 1091 6' PSE IN L -54.00' I- 11 4320± SF 0 CO w 0 0 O O 0 N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL C 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' 48.00' 12 4086± SF 27.50'_ w a CO 0 N w w O 0 r 0 0 0 �w 0 N 54.00' 14 3780± SF 6' PSE N90°00'00"E 54.00' O O 0 w 0 0 0 O 27.50'- 0 0 N 13 3606± SF 0 O N 0 N90°00'00"E 48.00' z r-� GALLAGHER 115 4320± SF N 1 _54.00'_ 0 CO w O 0 0 0 16 4086± SF - _27.50'_ N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL E 11956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' 454.00' - - - 18 0 3780± SF OL--J .101 O OI 6' PSE N90°00'00"E 54.00' 19 CO CC CO 0 N w a w > w w p O r 0 CV 0 - -27.50' - O O N 17 3606± SF N90°00'00"E 48.00' SEE SHEET 5 20 0 O CV CO 20' EVAE,1 SDE N90°00'OO"E 20.50' NO°00'00"E 930.00' FIARCEL D 4.06±AC N90°00'00"E 20.50' 20' EVAE,I SDE 1 1 i i i i 1> 0 m w ti 1d- Io IC) i i 1 1 ACACIA FARMERS 1 r DOC. /VO. ?O0✓037867 LEGEND BNDY DSRSD EVAE EX. IP M PL PAE PSE SDE (R) (R-1) 41 REFERENCES BOUNDARY LINE RIGHT OF WAY LINE LOT LINE/PARCEL LINE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE EXISTING EASEMENT LINE MONUMENT LINE CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT SET PER (R-1) SET CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT 0 STAMPED "LS 8817" FOUND STANDARD STREET MONUMENT ANGLE POINT (NO MONUMENT SET) BOUNDARY DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT EXISTING IRON PIPE MONUMENT PROPERTY LINE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT STORM DRAIN EASEMENT RADIAL BEARING REFERENCE INDICATES SHEET NUMBER (R-1) TRACT 8563, BK. 371 OF MAPS, PG. 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS (R-2) TRACT 8647, BK. __ OF MAPS, PG. -- ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS BASIS OF BEARINGS THE BEARING OF NORTH 90'00'00" WEST BETWEEN MONUMENTS WALSH AVENUE TO BE SET PER TRACT 8563, FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS, PAGE 12-22, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS IS TAKEN AS THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS MAP. 0 30 60 SCALE: 1 "=30' TRACT 8649 FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5 CROAK PROPERTY A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563, RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS CITY OF DUBLIN ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ACKAY & soms ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS 5142E FRANKLIN DR, PLEASANTON, CA 94588 (925)225-0690 AUGUST 2024 SHEET 4 OF 9 19343.NH5.D 35 SEE SHEET 6 O N90°00'00"E 319.00' M-M z Q z � O 24.00' 70.00' N90°00'00"E 277.50' M-M WALSH AVENUE mnn°nnInnIIE Cni nn' Dmnv IVJV VV VV L JV I . VV UIVV I 70.00' - - _ 24.00'_ 2' r 28' Ps� 67 68 L co w O ,l _ c/) W +I U CC CO 0 r 2' w 70 3780± SF CO x w CC w a 71 3780± SF 2' T 28' PsSE 0 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE N90°00'00"W 24.00' O 0 N N90°00'00"W 70.00' 69 3606± SF 12.0 ' NO°00'00"E N90°00'00"W 82.00' N90°00'00"W 70.00' 72 3606± SF 82.00' 0 N co d co cm'9p?SO 3g0 _ R ,0, 50.00' �•�k 0 LC) CO w w JM W +I Occ ULo <cr) 24' DSRSD, NO°00'00"E 81.50 2' 0 LO 74 3916± SF CO x w CC w 0- ° 28.5' J 10 CO 10 �` 17.50' 0 CS) N EVAE, PAE N90°00'00"W 24.00' N 12.00' N90°00'00"W 75.00' 6' PSE 73 3846± SF 12.00' -NO°00'00"E 20.50' 87.00' O CO 41 O CO w 0 O 0 0 82.00' 38 4426± SF N90°00'00"E 70.00' w O 0 O 10 CO 12.00' 88.00' N90°00'00"W 551.00' (TOTAL) 12.00' N N90°00'00"E 24.00' 24' DSRSD, SHORTHORN 08-19-2024 9:30am 40 0 W a CO 39 3780± SF 28' PSE I 2' 10 N 00 29 SEE SHEET 7 70.00' EVAE, PAE 10 C w 0 O NO°00'00"E 81.50' 24.00' N 37 4774± SF N90°00'00"E 76.00' O 0 10 N90°00'00"W 75.00' 34 4200± SF N90°00'00"W 75.00' CID 0 W 0_ CO KINZEL WAY 36 4104± SF 5.26' 76.00' O 10 4.9' 35 4066± SF w 0_ CSD N90°00'00"W 241.00' A N90°00'00"E 241.00' M-M 70.00 28 31 30 w CU CO 27 3780± SF w N90°00'00"E 241.00' J 2' 7 28' PSE N90°00'00"E 70.00' Cr) 0 26 4426± SF 82.00' 10 N 00'00"E 81.50 50.00' 24.00' 60.00' J C/) W +I UCO CC i0 0 NO°00'00"E 81.50' 24' DSRSD, C- O N 0 C- O r 2' w CO 0 Cr) A=8°05'48" L=10.03' 24 3782± SF N90°00'00"E 70.00' • EVAE, PAE N90°00'00"E 24.00' 10 ti N 12.00' 12.00' 25 4426± SF NO°00'00"E 30.50' 82.00' 0 O CO M N08°0548"WO," W 0 0 28.50' N90°00'00"W 46.00' BNDY 17.5' 23 6461± SF 54.00' z GALLAGHER 28.5' , I 15 L PARCEL E 18 6' PSE SEE SHEET 4 17 20' EVAE, SDE N90°00'00"E 54.00' 19 3780± SF I I L �L-54.00'_ - - - N90°00'00"E 48.00' 20 3606± SF N90°00'00"E 20.50' - .27.50'_ f N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL F 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' 0 CC (ID N w w w w 0 O 0 O N 0 O 0 N CO N TT 54.00'- IN % cI M n, I 6' PSE 22 3894± SF 63.80' 27.50' - 21 3606± SF 48.00' 0 N CO `l N90°00'00"E 111.80' `. N59°31'59"W(R) / L=17°43'22" L=21.96' r- N41°48'37"W(R) 25.00' Ian MacDonald P:\19343-T\SRV\MAPPING\FM\NH 5\19343-NH5-FM-05.DWG N90°00'00"E 218.00' 20' EVAE, SDE O CD w w PARCEL D SEE SHEET 3 J LEGEND O BNDY DSRSD EVAE EX. IP M PL PAE PSE SDE (R) (R-1) '4s BOUNDARY LINE RIGHT OF WAY LINE LOT LINE/PARCEL LINE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE EXISTING EASEMENT LINE MONUMENT LINE CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT ° SET PER (R-1) SET CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT STAMPED "LS 8817" FOUND STANDARD STREET MONUMENT ANGLE POINT (NO MONUMENT SET) BOUNDARY DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT EXISTING IRON PIPE MONUMENT PROPERTY LINE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT STORM DRAIN EASEMENT RADIAL BEARING REFERENCE INDICATES SHEET NUMBER REFERENCES (R-1) TRACT 8563, BK. 371 OF MAPS, PG. 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS (R-2) TRACT 8647, BK. __ OF MAPS, PG. __ ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS BASIS OF BEARINGS THE BEARING OF NORTH 90'00'00" WEST BETWEEN MONUMENTS WALSH AVENUE TO BE SET PER TRACT 8563, FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS, PAGE 12-22, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS IS TAKEN AS THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS MAP. 0 30 60 SCALE: 1"=30' TRACT 8649 FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5 CROAK PROPERTY A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563, RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS CITY OF DUBLIN ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ACKAY & soms ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS 5142E FRANKLIN DR, PLEASANTON, CA 94588 (925)225-0690 AUGUST 2024 SHEET 5 OF 9 19343.NH5.D 36 LEGEND SEE SHEET 9 O ti ° N90°00'00"E 259.50' M-M 75 • J 0- 10 CO LO 18.00' PARCEL Q 78 79 PARCEL R 18' 82 p0� \\ 0 `°' V3 /`L � v��'. J 28.00' N90°00'00"E 46.00' BNDY Line Tabl Line # Bearing . L ngth L1 N36°10'31"W 8 37' L2 N36°10'31"W 4.37' L3 N1°33'36"W 2.00' L4 N90°00'00"E 8.07' L5 NO°00'00"E 2.00' L6 N90°00'00"W 12 93' L7 NO°00'00"E 6.00' J a CDLO 0) N 10 w 6' PSE 8' PSE 124 HEREFORD 28' CO w 10 CO N 62 5374± SF 54.00' 61 4320± SF ( 6' PSE 0 N O w 0 CO w 0 O 0 0 N90°00'00"E 319.00' M-M 0 LO 0 CD X w CC 70.00' w 63 CO 3780± SF IN L L - 54.00'- - - 2' 28' PS L N90°00'00"W 70.00' 64 3606± SF 58.00' 60 5006± SF - - 27.50'- f O N N N90°00'00"E 81.50' o PARCEL M o 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' w o_ w w w 0 0 O N 0 82.00' N 0) w 0 9 N90°00'00"E r 30.50' O Co 0 ti N 10 24.00' w O <O) O 0-0 O o z z 24' DSRSD, WALSH AVENUE mononninnur IVI V= = = V L 1 2' O 10 LO Gr i 00 1 DMr V UVI.VV UIVUI 70.00' 66 3780± SF 10 70.00' T CO X w w 67 CO 3780± SF Co N 2' r 28' PS 0 O LO EVAE, PAE N90°00'00"W 24.00' 0 N 12.00' N90°00'00"W 70.00' 65 3606± SF 12.00' NO°00'00"E -----20.50' 82.00' 112.00' N90°00'00"E 551.00' (TOTAL) 42 6166± SF N90°00'00"E 100.00' 0 0 CO d- w 0 O 2.00' 12.00' N90°00'00"W 70.00' 0 N N90°00'00"E 24.00' 24' DSRSD, 0 0 N if'cti 54.00'- 58 3888± SF 6' PSE N90°00'00"E 54.00' 57 uhve Table Curve # adius Delta Length C1 49.50' 36°10'31" 31.25' C2 25.50' 36°10'31" 16.10' C3 71.00' 19°43'56" 24.45' C4 79.00' 1°33'36" 2.15' -27.50' 59 4542± SF N90°00'00"E 58.00' NO°00'00"E 84.00' CO CO CO C) SEE DETAIL B THIS SHEET 43 4800± SF N90°00'00"E 100.00'1 66.92' 44 2749± SF NO°00'00"E N90°00'00"W 10.50'N N90°00'00"E 30.84' N90°00'00"W 214.35' (TOTAL) 56 SEE SHEET 7 47 N90°00'00"W 1 3.83' Coo 28' PSE' y 2' 1 33.08' w - O M CO CO 0.81' o ,t O EVAE, PAE M NO°00'00"E 76. "NO°00' 00"W-/- 25.58' N90°00'00"E 1 4648± SF 102.35' 1 45 N cri CV i? in 10 z v II _, I N84°20'31 6' PSE 46 0 // CC- 30 w 0 O O 0 N 68 3606± SF 19 N 24.00' w 0 0 O z N90°00'00"E 277.50' M-M r 2' O 70 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE N90°00'00"W 24.00' 2.00' NO°00'00"E 82.00' 20.50' 82.00' 41 4426± SF r" 2 N90°00'00"E 70.00' 12.00' CO w 0 0 69 38 O Co o I 40 4013± SF CO L2 N 1a„ L=44.33' 35 �6 3\ 0 0 D 60 SCALE: 1 "=30' co N KINZEL ,WAY LLJ 0_ d 10 LO w LLJ d o z ICO N900- 00 00 W ' 241.00' N90°00'00E,41.00' M-M 39 CO O SEE SHEET 5 r 144 BOUNDARY LINE RIGHT OF WAY LINE LOT LINE/PARCEL LINE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE EXISTING EASEMENT LINE MONUMENT LINE CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT ° SET PER (R-1) BNDY DSRSD EVAE EX. IP M PL PAE PSE SDE (R) (R-1) SET CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT STAMPED "LS 8817" FOUND STANDARD STREET MONUMENT ANGLE POINT (NO MONUMENT SET) BOUNDARY DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT EXISTING IRON PIPE MONUMENT PROPERTY LINE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT STORM DRAIN EASEMENT RADIAL BEARING REFERENCE INDICATES SHEET NUMBER 43 2' PSE CO CO I- O J O H w o_ PARCEL J DSRSD, PSE, EVAE, PAE N25°47'491WLR1 C2). PRIVATE- \ UTILITY EASEMENT N90°00'00"E 11.13' N11°15'00"W� \ / 16.87' / 45 0 ^ / / ° CCTI II T iI II J N84°47'03"W(R) v F 46 N90°00'00"W 6.03' 41 N90°00'00"E 2.00' I NO°00'00"E 48 8 1' 40 1-N0°00'00"E 42.20' L3(R) sr p,,T1.001 ` o 2041 4 PSE /y i L-44.33' 1a (- --- 35° 46 `. N57°49'40"WLRj R=77.00' L=13°39'28" L=18.35' `. N71 °29'08"WLRJ 6' PSE \N 84°20'31 "WLRJ N35°4618"WLRJ 39 L5 L6 21.00' J N90°00'00"E 241.00' KINZEL 29 PG. 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS (R-2) TRACT 8647, BK. __ OF MAPS, PG. __ ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS BASIS OF BEARINGS THE BEARING OF NORTH 90'00'00" WEST BETWEEN MONUMENTS WALSH AVENUE TO BE SET PER TRACT 8563, FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS, PAGE 12-22, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS IS TAKEN AS THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS MAP. DETAIL B SCALE: 1"=20' TRACT 8649 FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5 CROAK PROPERTY A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563, RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS CITY OF DUBLIN ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA INACKAY & soms ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS 5142E FRANKLIN DR, PLEASANTON, CA 94588 (925)225-0690 AUGUST 2024 J 08-19-2024 9:30am Ian MacDonald P:\19343-T\SRV\MAPPING\FM\NH 5\19343-NH5-FM-06.DWG SHEET 6 OF 9 19343.NH5.D 37 SEE SHEET 8 79 J PARCEL R 82 7 83 J PARCEL S 86 18' 18' PARCEL W LO OD N LO w 0 0 O 28' HEREFORD 6' PSE PARCEL M 1956± SF 4800± SF 58 44 SEE SHEET 6 59 N90°00'00"E 214 35' (TOTAL) 45 N84°201311NLRI, `.I \ 54.00' 6' PSE 57 3780± SF I N1 L L L - 54.00'- - - 58.00' 56 4426± SF - _27.50'- - f N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL L 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' CC CC w a w 0 r 30.50' 48.00' 47 3606± SF 0 20.50' `T' 0 0 w 0 0 O 0 -.27.50'-- 54.35' A=5°39'29" L=7.011 46 3781± SF 6' PSE --54.00'. J O N 8' PSE 1 w O d CO N -54.00'- 54 3780± SF 54.00' 27.50' 55 4426± SF 58.00' N90°00'00"E o 51.00' (TOTAL) 0 CC N w w > w N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL K 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' f 27.50'- 48 3606± SF 48.00' 54.00 w O d CO N 49 3780± SF 6' PSE 54.00' N Ln 57.00' 53 4654± SF 6' PSE I 28' I R=25.00' A=90°00'00" L=39.27' sts0 \ 08-19-2024 9:32am Ian MacDonald 285.04' 50.00' 50.00' N90°00'00"E 214.00' (TOTAL) 52 4200± SF O O CO w 0 0 0 O z 51 4200± SF 57.00' CD T I 50 4654± SF 6' PSE R=25.00' L=90°00'00"� L=39.27' 32.00' 50.00' 50.00' 32.00' C- O N 0 C- O N90°00'00"E 164.00' HOLSTEIN AVENUE N90°00'00"E 164.00' M-M N90°00'00"E 164.00' CO N 0 MN NO°00'00"E(R) SEX DEVELOPMENT l--l_C DOC. NO. 202003841 5 NM MN MN P:\19343-T\SRV\MAPPING\FM\NH 5\19343-NH5-FM-07.DWG PARCEL X 4512± SF 164.02' N89°03'S0"W 1000.82' BNDY NO°00'00"E(R) 28.85'----~` ME MN NM MN 0 c J W U cc 28' e 18' SHORTHORN 8' PSE 28' O Ln 40 _s2 39 SEE SHEET 5 J PARCEL I L_ KINZEL WAY N90°00'00"E 241.00' M-M N90°00'00"E 241.00' O 34.00' i LU R=25.00' 0=90°00'00" L=39.27' 29 3996± SF 5' PSE r O CO N w 0 18' 551.76' N90°00'00"E 59.00' 53.00' w 0- CO 28 3710± SF 53.00' O r 27 54.00' N90°00'00"E 58.00' N90°00'00"W 112.00' (TOTAL) I_ 6' PSE 1 0 0 oI 30 3780± SF 31 4426± SF - _27.50'_ f 0 0 N N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL H 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' 0 OD OC UD w ¢ a w O N CO J 0 H O 0 P▪ ') N w 0 0 O 0 o N90°00'00"E z -- 30.50' O w CO N -54.00'- - 33 3780± SF 6' PSE 54.00' O 0 O w 0 O O 0 - -27.50'- O O N 32 4426± SF 58.00' 26 20' EVAE, 7.00' NM N90°00'00"E 112.00' PARCEL D SEE SHEET 3 MN MN SDE SEE SHEET 5 LEGEND BNDY DSRSD EVAE EX. IP M PL PAE PSE SDE (R) (R-1) 4s BOUNDARY LINE RIGHT OF WAY LINE LOT LINE/PARCEL LINE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE EXISTING EASEMENT LINE MONUMENT LINE CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT SET PER (R-1) SET CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT 0 STAMPED "LS 8817" FOUND STANDARD STREET MONUMENT ANGLE POINT (NO MONUMENT SET) BOUNDARY DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT EXISTING IRON PIPE MONUMENT PROPERTY LINE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT STORM DRAIN EASEMENT RADIAL BEARING REFERENCE INDICATES SHEET NUMBER REFERENCES (R-1) TRACT 8563, BK. 371 OF MAPS, PG. 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS (R-2) TRACT 8647, BK. __ OF MAPS, PG. __ ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS BASIS OF BEARINGS THE BEARING OF NORTH 90'00'00" WEST BETWEEN MONUMENTS WALSH AVENUE TO BE SET PER TRACT 8563, FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS, PAGE 12-22, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS IS TAKEN AS THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS MAP. 0 30 60 SCALE: 1"=30' TRACT 8649 FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5 CROAK PROPERTY A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563, RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS CITY OF DUBLIN ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ACKAY & soms ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS 5142E FRANKLIN DR, PLEASANTON, CA 94588 (925)225-0690 AUGUST 2024 SHEET 7 OF 9 19343.NH5.D 38 28.5' LO CO CO 28.5' CENTRAL PARKWAY N89°03'50"W 455.68' M-M RIGHETTI PARTNERS, LP DOC. NO. 1992075343 08-19-2024 9:32am Ian MacDonald 27.5' KEVIN STREET 94 N T --54.00'. - 93 - _27.50' - f N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL U 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' w CID N 0- CO CV - -54.00' - - 91 3780± SF 54.00' O w 0 CID CC w a w SEE SHEET 9 o N90°00'00"E 30.50' 80 N90°00'00"E 20.50' O O _ _27.50' - 79 - -54.00'- - - -27.50'" - 0 N 92 4426± SF 58.00' O N CO w 0 0 N w 0 O 0 0 N CO CC CO N w a w w N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL R 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' f O CN --27.50' - 81 3606± SF 48.00' - --54.00'--- w CI) C1 O w 0 O 82 3780± SF 54.00' N 1- I9 90 3780± SF 54.00' N90°00'00"W 214.00' (TOTAL) 89 4426± SF - _27.50'. - N- I- LC O co N LO w = 1 01 O O O 0 f N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL T 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' CID CC N w w w N90°00'00"E r 30.50' 84 3606± SF N90°00'00"E 20.50' _ 6' PSE 83 3780± SF -54.00'- - �� CO CV - -54.00' - 87 3780± SF 54.00' - -27.50' - O O N 88 4426± SF 58.00' 0 N w 0 O O 0 0 v N CO CC CO N w a w > w N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL S 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' f 0 CO V w 0 O 85 3606± SF 48.00' - -54.001--�- w 0- N 86 3780± SF 6' PSE 54.00' 27.5' NM P:\19343-T\SRV\MAPPING\FM\NH 5\19343-NH5-FM-08.DWG IM MN N90°00'00"E(R) 214.00' PARCEL W 0.53±AC 285.04' N89°03'50"W 1000.82' BNDY BEX DEVELOPMENT LLC DOC. NO. 2020038415 MI 18' 18' ME MN Q LCD N Liz w 0 0 oo 28' 0 1 HEREFORD 777 58 57 L- PARCEL L 54 6' PSE NO°00'00"E(R) 26.17' 53 CO PARCEL X SEE SHEET 7 LEGEND BNDY DSRSD EVAE EX. IP M PL PAE PSE SDE (R) (R-1) 41 BOUNDARY LINE RIGHT OF WAY LINE LOT LINE/PARCEL LINE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE EXISTING EASEMENT LINE MONUMENT LINE CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT SET PER (R-1) SET CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT C STAMPED "LS 8817" FOUND STANDARD STREET MONUMENT ANGLE POINT (NO MONUMENT SET) BOUNDARY DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT EXISTING IRON PIPE MONUMENT PROPERTY LINE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT STORM DRAIN EASEMENT RADIAL BEARING REFERENCE INDICATES SHEET NUMBER REFERENCES (R-1) TRACT 8563, BK. 371 OF MAPS, PG. 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS (R-2) TRACT 8647, BK. __ OF MAPS, PG. -- ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS BASIS OF BEARINGS THE BEARING OF NORTH 90'00'00" WEST BETWEEN MONUMENTS WALSH AVENUE TO BE SET PER TRACT 8563, FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS, PAGE 12-22, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS IS TAKEN AS THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS MAP. 0 30 60 SCALE: 1 "=30' TRACT 8649 FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5 CROAK PROPERTY A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563, RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS CITY OF DUBLIN ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ACKAY & soms ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS 5142E FRANKLIN DR, PLEASANTON, CA 94588 (925)225-0690 AUGUST 2024 SHEET 8 OF 9 19343.NH5.D 39 08-19-2024 9:32am 28.5' 27.5' I 1 Io 10 1 1 >1 m \O Q �O 1, r ♦ (''';'). J / L O c▪ o N 98 4132± SF N�- 54.00' f O Cr w 0 O 12 (R-1) N90°00'00"E 259.50' M-M N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL V o 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' N CO I CV CO E~ LC) 1 w L L W -"' ` — - - I� LOOfS4.00' Co i� 0 CD -CO CO o 1 N w z �1 CD1-7 z 1 0 W 95 o 3780± SF I:D2:- CO 28.5' 27.5' 1 1 EX. 6' PSE (R-1) 54.00' WALSH AVENUE N90°00'00"E 164.00' BNDY 48.0- 58.00 0' 97 4948± SF 27.50'- 0 w o N90°00'00"E r 30.50' w w 0 0 0) w 76 0 4038± SF 0 0 CO X w N90°00'00"E 20.50' O O r w 0- 27.50' O 0 75 I Lu 4132± SF 1 o O O Ic I�a, z 6' PSE I 1 1 54.00' J 0 O N - -27.50' - T 96 4426± SF NO°00'00"E N O O CO w 77 CD 0 3606± SF 58.00' 48.00' CC CC ✓ N w N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL 0 Q 1956± SF N90°00'00"E 81.50' f -f w C/) N17 C O N O I w 78 10 3780± SF 10 6' PSE 54.00' 94 3780± SF r - f -54.00'. - - - N90°00'00"E 81. PARCEL U N90°00'00"W 214.00' (TOTAL) 93 4426± SF - _27.50'- - _ 50' o L1J o N90°00'00"E CC •7- 1- N w Q a w > > w NO°00'00"E r 30.50' N O w 80 0 3606± SF 0 0 r - - 27.50'- O w 79 0 3780± SF 0 0 0 - --54.00'- 91 92 Ian MacDonald P:\19343—T\SRV\MAPPING\FM\NH 5\ 19343—NH5—FM-09.DWG SEE SHEET 8 0 CO o CC - 0 O Z N w N90°00'00"E 81.50' PARCEL R w Q w 5 f 7 N90°00'00"E 81 82 20.50' LC) LO CO N 4, \� 9004, os o ▪ 29.00' &/>, O, • a N90°00'00"E N90°00'00"E 319.00' M-M O • LO 46.00' BNDY 18' 28' 18' O LO d M N LO - CD W o 0 0 0 c0 O 12 HEREFORD 28' ♦ ♦ ♦ 1 00000....111 62 61 L PARCEL M 58 SEE SHEET 6 LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE RIGHT OF WAY LINE LOT LINE/PARCEL LINE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE EXISTING EASEMENT LINE MONUMENT LINE CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT ° SET PER (R-1) SET CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARD STREET MONUMENT 0 STAMPED "LS 8817" FOUND STANDARD STREET MONUMENT ANGLE POINT (NO MONUMENT SET) BNDY BOUNDARY DSRSD DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT EVAE EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT EX. EXISTING IP IRON PIPE M MONUMENT PL PROPERTY LINE PAE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT PSE PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT SDE STORM DRAIN EASEMENT (R) RADIAL BEARING (R-1) REFERENCE 4 ; INDICATES SHEET NUMBER REFERENCES (R-1) TRACT 8563, BK. 371 OF MAPS, PG. 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS (R-2) TRACT 8647, BK. __ OF MAPS, PG. __ ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS BASIS OF BEARINGS THE BEARING OF NORTH 90'00'00" WEST BETWEEN MONUMENTS WALSH AVENUE TO BE SET PER TRACT 8563, FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS, PAGE 12-22, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS IS TAKEN AS THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS MAP. 0 30 60 SCALE: 1 "=30' TRACT 8649 FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5 CROAK PROPERTY A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563, RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22 ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS CITY OF DUBLIN ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ACKAY & soms ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS 5142E FRANKLIN DR, PLEASANTON, CA 94588 (925)225-0690 AUGUST 2024 SHEET 9 OF 9 19343.NH5.D 40 r DUBLIN CALIFORNIA STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 5.4 DATE: TO: FROM: SU B,ECT: September 17, 2024 Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Linda Smith, City Manager Payment Issuance Report and Electronic Funds Transfer Prepared by: Darlynn Haas, Management Analyst II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will receive a listing of payments issued from August 1, 2024 - August 31, 2024, totaling $8,799,312.47 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive the report. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Summary of Payments Issued Report Period August 1, 2024 - August 31, 2024 Total Number of Payments: 379 Total Amount of Payments: $8,799,312.47 DESCRIPTION: The Payment Issuance Report (Attachment 1) provides a listing of all payments for the period beginning August 1, 2024, through August 31, 2024. This report is provided in accordance with the policy adopted November 15, 2011, in Resolution No.189-11. The listing of payments has been reviewed in accordance with the policies for processing payments and expenditures. The City's practice of reporting payments to the City Council after the payments have been made is in compliance with California Government Code Sections 37208 (b) and (c), which allow for an agency to make payments without first being audited by the legislative body, as long as such payments are: 1) conforming to a budget approved by ordinance or resolution of the legislative body; and 2) presented to the legislative body for ratification and approval in the form of an Page 1 of 2 41 audited comprehensive annual financial report. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: The City Council Agenda was posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Payment Issuance Report for August 2024 Page 2 of 2 42 Attachment 1 Print Date: 9/3/2024 Page 1 of 9 Date Issued Payee City of Dublin Payment Issuance Report Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024 Description 8/1/2024 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING: PE 7/26/24 8/2/2024 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT CA STATE WITHHOLDING: PE 7/26/24 Payments Issued 8/1/2024 Total: Payments Issued 8/2/2024 Total: 8/5/2024 A4 PROMOTIONS & INCENTIVES DPS ENVELOPES 8/5/2024 A4 PROMOTIONS & INCENTIVES PW BUSINESS CARDS 8/5/2024 AASKA PATEL REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 8/5/2024 ADVANCED MOBILITY GROUP ANNUAL TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM SUPPORT FEB 2024 8/5/2024 AKSHAY ARORA ARORA TENNIS & FITNESS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 8/5/2024 ALAMEDA CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE BUSINESS CARDS 8/5/2024 ALAMEDA CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE VICTIMS BILL OF RIGHTS CARDS 8/5/2024 ALAMEDA CO SURPLUS PROP AUTHOR BART GARAGE FEES COLLECTED - ANNUAL DISBURSEMENT 8/5/2024 ALAMEDA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE SERVICES FY23-24 JUN 2024 8/5/2024 ALAMEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL LIVING ARROYOS PARTNERSHIP JUN 2024 8/5/2024 ALAMEDA COUNTY WASTE MGMT AUTH REGIONAL MEDIA CAMPAIGN-FY23/24 USED OIL GRANT FUNDS 8/5/2024 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SVCS INC CROSSING GUARD SERVICES - MAY - JULY 24 8/5/2024 ALMETEK INDUSTRIES INC STORM DRAIN MARKERS 8/5/2024 ALYSSA WU STORM DRAIN ART 8/5/2024 AMY'S ENGRAVED SIGNS & AWARDS NAMEPLATES 8/5/2024 ANGEL HOUZE CLAY ART C/O JULIE P. KARTONO REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO PSC 07/01/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO CIVIC FIRE ALARM 07/01/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO CY FAX 7/14/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO CY 07/14/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO LIBRARY 911 07/14/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO CY 7/14/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO BLDG INSP 7/14/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO ELEVATOR 07/14/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO PSC FIRE ALARM 07/14/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO FSP FAX 07/14/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO FS18 07/14/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 HERITAGE 9391018979 07/14/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 HERITAGE CENTER BACKUP 07/06/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO 800 07/12/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO WAVE 07/12/24 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO SHANNON 07/12/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO CIVIC 07/13/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SHANNON CENTER ALARM 9391063350 07/12/2024 8/5/2024 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO SR ALARM 07/12/2024 8/5/2024 AXIS COMMUNITY HEALTH HUMAN SERVICES GRANTEE - ARPA 8/5/2024 BAY AREA NEWS GROUP EAST BAY LEGAL NOTICES - JUN 2024 8/5/2024 BIG O'TIRES #7 POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS 8/5/2024 BLUEBEAM, INC. TRAINING 7/8/24 - 7/7/25 8/5/2024 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC. DPS EVIDENCE SUPPLIES 8/5/2024 BSK ASSOCIATES INC. GEOTECHNICAL PEER REVIEW JUN 2024 8/5/2024 CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION GREEN BUILDING FEES FY23-24 8/5/2024 CALIFORNIA SPIRIT ELITE, INC. REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 8/5/2024 CASCADIA CONSULTING GROUP, INC SB 1383 IMPLEMENTATION ASSISTANCE JUN 2024 8/5/2024 CASTRO VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 8/5/2024 CHRISTINE PETIT REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 8/5/2024 CINTAS CORPORATION NO.2 FIRST AID RESTOCK 8/5/2024 CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS, LLC RECYCLIST PROGRAM TRACKER JUN 2024 8/5/2024 CLAUDIA M. DUARTE-FLORES DPS WINDOW TINT D45 8/5/2024 CODE FOR FUN REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 8/5/2024 COMMUNITY RESOURCES FOR INDEPENDENT FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (ARPA) 8/5/2024 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA, INC. BRIDGE & STRUCTURE INSPECTION TRAINING MAY 2024 8/5/2024 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA, INC. KOOPMAN CANYON CREEK CHANNEL & BANK REPAIR JUN 2024 Amount 81,140.12 81,140.12 24,725.27 24,725.27 231.68 62.40 5,133.00 1,437.50 7,882.00 30.68 262.33 2.70 1,037,997.16 6,275.53 2,040.00 60,730.71 279.16 500.00 135.06 3,300.00 111.81 56.69 88.31 57.87 58.96 234.71 29.71 114.17 57.87 57.87 82.02 29.71 61.76 0.01 111.81 249.64 111.70 29.12 198.59 6,148.00 1,473.43 2,289.35 6,250.00 636.69 920.50 9.90 1,519.00 22,179.55 717.60 2,164.80 59.47 900.00 760.00 3,181.50 3,507.54 268.00 15, 641.75 43 Print Date: 9/3/2024 Page 2 of 9 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 8/5/2024 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA, INC. CONSOR NORTH AMERICA, INC. CONSOR NORTH AMERICA, INC. CORODATA SHREDDING, INC. COUNTY OF MARIN/CAL-SLA COVANTA ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, LLC CSW/STUBER-STROEH ENGINEERING GROUP, CSW/STUBER-STROEH ENGINEERING GROUP, DEPT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS DIV OF THE STATE ARCHITECT DLT SOLUTIONS LLC DOROTHY DEMONTEVERDE DREAM RIDE ELEVATOR DSRSD DUBLIN CROSSING, LLC DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT DUTCHOVER & ASSOCIATES EASTERSEALS NORTHERN CA ECS IMAGING INC. EOA, INC. EOA, INC. EOA, INC. EUROPEAN MOBILE WERKS GANNETT FLEMING, INC. GOODFELLOW BROS. CALIFORNIA, LLC GOODFELLOW SEQUOIA AJV GRAFIX SHOPPE GRAINGER GUIDA GUIDA GURUS EDUCATION EAST BAY HERC RENTALS INC. HF&H CONSULTANTS, LLC HIVELY HOPE HOSPICE, INC. ISH AMITOJ KAUR JCJCJ, INC JENNIFER B. HUBER KIDZ LOVE SOCCER KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOC. INC. KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOC. INC. KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. LANLOGIC INC. LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOR SENIORS LIONS CENTER FOR THE VISUALLY IMPAIRED MAKE ME A PRO SPORTS MCE CORPORATION MCE CORPORATION MOST DEPENDABLE FOUNTAINS, INC. NANOGAN SCIENCE & SERVICES, LLC NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, CHTD NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, CHTD OLBERDING ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. PAKPOUR CONSULTING GROUP, INC. PARK ENGINEERING, INC. PETER GARELLICK PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E City of Dublin Payment Issuance Report Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024 STRUCTURAL PEER REVIEW SERVICES JUN 2024 ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW MAY 2024 ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW JUN 2024 SHRED BIN PICKUP JUN 2024 CAL. CITY -COUNTY STREET LIGHT ASSOC. DUES FY24-25 DPS EVIDENCE DISPOSAL PLANNING & PRELIM ENGINEERING VILLAGE PKWY JUN 2024 GREEN STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE ENG SVCS MAY 2024 THE WAVE SLIDES INSPECTION FEE CASP FEES REPORT FY23-24 ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE - JUN 2024 REFUND FOR PWEN-2023-00143 DON BIDDLE COMMUNITY PARK UTILITY USE AT STAGER GYM ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW APR 2024 FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (GF) CLERK/RECORDS DOCUMENT SCANNING SERVICES STORMWATER NPDES IMPLEMENTATION ASSIST JUN 2024 STORMWATER NPDES IMPLEMENTATION ASSIST MAY 2024 STORMWATER NPDES IMPLEMENTATION ASSIST APR 2024 POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS CONSTRUCTION MGT IRON HORSE NATURE PARK PHASE 1 JUN 2024 IRON HORSE NATURE PARK AND OPEN SPACE - PHASE 1 IRON HORSE TRAIL BRIDGE AT DUBLIN BLVD PROJ INSTALLATION OF POLICE VEHICLE DECALS THE WAVE WATERPARK SUPPLIES ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW - APR 2024 SURVEYING SVCS IRONHORSE TRL JUN 2024 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR PCS EVENTS SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT JUN 2024 FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (ARPA) FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (GF) REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR PEOPLE OF THE PARKS ORGANIZATION SHAMROCK AWARD PREP PAINTING & SEALING OF STORM DRAIN ART REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR DUBLIN HINES PROJECT TRANSP. ANALYSIS - JUN 2024 DESIGN SERVICES - SLIDE REPAIR JUN 2024 LTA ANALYSIS PACVEST JUN 2024 ON DEMAND, ON -SITE & REMOTE IT ENGINEERING SUPPORT 6/1/2024-6/13/2024 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT FY2023-24 - LAS FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (GF) REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR SHANNON COMMUNITY CENTER PARKING LOT APR 2024 MAINTENANCE SERVICES - JUN 2024 WATER BOTTLE FILLERS APR 2024 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 2025 & 2026 PAVING WORK PLAN JUN 2024 DESIGN SVCS-IRON HORSE NATURE PARK JUN 2024 FALLON VILLAGE GHAD PROFESSIONAL SVCS - OCT 2023 EDTIF UPDATE - PHASE 2 - JUN 2024 ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT MANAGEMENT JUN 2024 FAMILY CAMPOUT PERFORMANCE TC1 SERVICE TO 6795 DOUGHERTY 07/02/2024 SERVICE TO FALLON IRRIG 07/10/2024 SERVICE TO GLEASON IRRIG 06/24/2024 TC1 SERVICE TO FALLON 07/15/2024 B1 ART LIGHT 7401 DUBLIN BLVD 07/01/2024 4,412.00 2,370.00 3,436.50 43.29 1,260.00 996.00 1,458.00 6,234.00 243.75 3.70 3,469.60 462.00 516.00 1,187.00 211,068.27 366.55 1,476.25 6,147.50 2,426.28 12, 583.75 12,073.50 6,605.75 2,167.56 16,737.67 374,461.50 465,806.85 238.00 340.01 4,763.66 3,450.00 8,055.00 1,395.44 10,746.25 12, 397.00 6,297.50 11,442.60 69.59 500.00 3,993.00 18,619.50 5,456.00 13,062.50 2,340.00 9,795.00 3,545.00 4,500.00 123,720.74 921,440.21 28,176.48 10, 830.00 22,364.99 16,167.73 3,300.00 617.50 9,632.72 599.00 231.35 98.44 378.19 192.93 632.55 44 City of Dublin Payment Issuance Report Print Date: 9/3/2024 Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024 Page 3 of 9 8/5/2024 PG&E A6 SERVICE TO FS17 07/07/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E B1 7341 ROSAMOND HILLS CT 07/06/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO WAVE 07/07/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E IRRIGATION SERVICE TO 07/01/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E B1 IRRIG 2979 THREE CASTLES 07/14/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E 6020 DUBLIN BLVD 1010865440 07/14/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO FALLON 07/10/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E 6196 HORIZON PKWY M DONBIDDLE 07/15/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO DB 07/05/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E B10S SERVICE TO CIVIC CENTER 07/01/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO CORP YARD 06/30/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO SHANNON CENTER 06/28/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO SCH RNCH PARK 06/27/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E B6 SERVICE TO FSP 07/07/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E B10S SERVICE TO EGP 07/09/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E B1 SERVICE TO PASSATEMPO 06/24/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E B1 SERVICE TO SEAN DIAMOND 06/26/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E B1 SERVICE TO POSITANO IRRIG 06/30/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E B6 SERVICE TO BRAY CMMN 07/11/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E B1 SERVICE TO DEVANY 07/11/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO DB DOUGH IRRIG 06/30/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO 3142 CENTRAL PKWY 07/11/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO VARIOUS IRRIG 07/11/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO ART LIGHTING AVB 06/24/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO PSC 07/14/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO FALLON 06/25/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO FALLON 06/25/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO AVB 06/27/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO POSITANO 07/01/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO FALLON 07/12/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO 3544 DB 07/12/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E LS2-A SERVICE TO AVB 07/01/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E B1 SERVICE TO VARIOUS 1997-1 06/10/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E LS2-A SERVICE TO ARN & MART 07/15/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E LS2-A SERVICE TO CENTRAL 07/15/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO SR CTR 05/21/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO HCP 06/27/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO PSC 07/15/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO FS16 06/10/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E A6 SERVICE TO FS18 07/11/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E B6 SERVICE TO LIBRARY 06/30/2024 8/5/2024 PG&E SERVICE TO HPM 06/28/2024 8/5/2024 PHOENIX GROUP INFO SYS. DPS PARKING CITATIONS COLLECTED 8/5/2024 PLEASANTON VIP SENIOR CLUB SENIOR CENTER TRIPS & TOURS PROGRAM 8/5/2024 PROLIFIC CONSTRUCTION, LLC PERMIT #BLDG-2024-03201 - REFUND 8/5/2024 QUADIENT FINANCE USA, INC. POSTAGE FEES FOR JUN 2024 8/5/2024 QUADIENT LEASING USA, INC. NEOPOST MAIL MACHINE LEASE APR 2024-JUN 2024 8/5/2024 R. YOUNAN LLC REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 8/5/2024 RON HSI TRI-VALLEY AIKIDO REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 8/5/2024 RRM DESIGN GROUP, A CA CORP ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW MAY 2024 8/5/2024 RRM DESIGN GROUP, A CA CORP ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW JUN 2024 8/5/2024 RRM DESIGN GROUP, A CA CORP LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK & INSPECTIONS JUN & JUL 2024 8/5/2024 S & J ADVERTISING INC SPLATTER EVENT ADS 8/5/2024 SHAMROCK OFFICE SOLUTIONS, LLC FILE 2399 COPIER SUPPLY AND SERVICE AGREEMENT JUL & AUG 2024 8/5/2024 SHIR MARTIAL ARTS, LLC REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 8/5/2024 SNG & ASSOCIATES INC. ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW MAY 2024 8/5/2024 SNG & ASSOCIATES INC. ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW JUN 2024 8/5/2024 SPECTRUM COMMUNITY SVCS INC. FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (CDBG/ARPA) 8/5/2024 SQUAD SPORTS INC. REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 8/5/2024 SURF TO SNOW ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE MRP STORMWATER INSPECTIONS APR 2024 8/5/2024 SURF TO SNOW ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE MRP STORMWATER INSPECTIONS MAR 2024 100.28 7.99 32,199.43 407.44 49.26 7.91 47.68 666.43 201.42 4,154.27 1,882.98 91.63 453.36 6,813.21 7,268.21 92.49 182.97 250.34 118.46 27.98 5.67 143.60 69.44 304.18 1,483.02 96.49 111.43 84.70 415.66 154.22 273.61 1,870.73 56.16 102.24 4.80 10,883.09 2,990.40 5,879.45 9,893.34 107.12 738.99 778.88 405.90 960.00 351.00 303.24 1,282.75 1,614.60 72.00 712.50 1,057.75 4,695.25 535.00 5,665.48 877.10 6,630.50 12,736.50 1,965.95 5,019.00 11,465.25 2,370.00 45 Print Date: 9/3/2024 Page 4 of 9 8/5/2024 SURF TO SNOW ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE 8/5/2024 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC 8/5/2024 TETRA TECH, INC. 8/5/2024 TETRA TECH, INC. 8/5/2024 TIMOTHY DANA BOWEN 8/5/2024 TREASURER ALAMEDA COUNTY 8/5/2024 TREASURER ALAMEDA COUNTY 8/5/2024 TREASURER ALAMEDA COUNTY PW AGENCY- 8/5/2024 TRI-VALLEY HAVEN FOR WOMEN 8/5/2024 TRIVALLEY MINOR HOCKEY ASSOCIATION 8/5/2024 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF NO. 8/5/2024 UNIVAR SOLUTIONS 8/5/2024 VANESSA MEDVE 8/5/2024 WEE HOOP, INC. 8/5/2024 WILLDAN ENERGY SOLUTIONS 8/5/2024 WILLDAN ENERGY SOLUTIONS 8/5/2024 WORLD CUP SOCCER CAMPS CLINICS 8/6/2024 CAL PERS 8/6/2024 CRYSTAL DE CASTRO 8/6/2024 DSRSD 8/6/2024 GASPARE ANNIBALE 8/6/2024 GASPARE ANNIBALE 8/6/2024 NICOLE WANZENRIED 8/6/2024 TOMMY COOK 8/6/2024 U.S. BANK CORPORATE PMT SYSTEM 8/7/2024 HEALTHEQUITY, INC. 8/7/2024 ICMA 401 PLAN 8/7/2024 ICMA 457 PLAN 8/7/2024 UNUM LIFE INS CO OF AMERICA 8/7/2024 US BANK - PARS 8/9/2024 DELTA DENTAL OF CALIFORNIA 8/9/2024 VISION SERVICE PLAN - (CA) 8/13/2024 4IMPRINT INC 8/13/2024 4LEAF INC. 8/13/2024 ABOVE AND BEYOND LEADERSHIP AND 8/13/2024 AKSHAY ARORA ARORA TENNIS & FITNESS 8/13/2024 ALAMEDA CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE 8/13/2024 ALAMEDA COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 8/13/2024 ALAMEDA COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 8/13/2024 ALAMEDA COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 8/13/2024 AMY L. JONES 8/13/2024 ASSOC BAY AREA GOVMT ABAG 8/13/2024 BIG O'TIRES #7 8/13/2024 BLUETOAD, INC. 8/13/2024 BRINKS, INC. 8/13/2024 BRINKS, INC. 8/13/2024 BYOG 8/13/2024 CARBONIC SERVICE 8/13/2024 CASTRO VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS 8/13/2024 CHANDLER ASSET MANAGEMENT 8/13/2024 CHRISTINE PETIT 8/13/2024 CITY OF PLEASANTON 8/13/2024 CODE FOR FUN City of Dublin Payment Issuance Report Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024 MRP STORMWATER INSPECTIONS JUN 2024 SPIDERMAN MOVIE NIGHT RENTAL 8/2/24 DISASTER PREP GAP ANALYSIS CONTRACT SERVICES DISASTER PREPAREDNESS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR CAL -ID REMOTE ACCESS NETWORK FY23-24 DPS PARKING CITATIONS COLLECTED TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND STREETLIGHT MAINTENANCE SVCS JUN 2024 FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (ARPA) 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT MEMBERSHIP FEE 2024 THE WAVE POOL CHEMICALS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR BLDG ELECTRIFICATION & CODE ASSISTANCE APR 2024 BLDG ELECTRIFICATION & CODE ASSISTANCE MAY 2024 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR PERS RETIREMENT PLAN: PE 7/26/24 MILEAGE REIMUBURSEMENT - TRAINING SERVICE TO 7/31/2024 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT - JUL 2024 DENSITY BONUS TRAINING - WALNUT CREEK MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT - JUL 2024 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT - JUL 2024 PURCHASE CARD STATEMENT JUL 2024 HEALTHEQUITY: PE 7/26/24 DEFERRED COMP 401A: PE 6/28/24 DEFERRED COMP 457: PE 7/26/24 LIFE AND AD&D PREMIUM - JUL 2024 PARS: PE 7/26/24 DELTA DENTAL PREMIUM - JUL 2024 VISION INSURANCE PREMIUM - JUL 2024 Payments Issued 8/5/2024 Total: Payments Issued 8/6/2024 Total: Payments Issued 8/7/2024 Total: Payments Issued 8/9/2024 Total: COMMUNITY PROMOTION SUPPLIES BUILDING INSPECTION & PLAN CHECK SERVICES JUL 2024 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR EVIDENCE ENVELOPES FS16 HMBP PERMIT AUG 2024 PSC HMBP PERMIT JUL 2024 SHANNON WATER PLAY AREA HMBP AUG 2024 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP DUES FY 24/25 POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS 2024 FALL/WINTER ACTIVITY GUIDE ARMORED CAR SERVICE - JUL 2024 ARMORED CAR SERVICE - AUG 2024 PCS UNIFORM SUPPLIES THE WAVE POOL CHEMICALS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR INVESTMENT CONSULTING SERVICES JUL 2024 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR TVBID FEES COLLECTED FOR APR - JUN 2024 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 3,286.32 750.00 6,200.00 2,435.00 4,059.60 42,008.00 715.00 44,396.75 7,506.99 200.00 3,685.45 2,639.80 4,410.06 2,613.60 19, 723.70 8,906.50 6,459.00 3,904,257.97 100,591.66 22.78 540,328.83 4.69 23.85 63.45 35.38 50,021.96 691,092.60 3,393.95 1,321.00 32,740.12 11,922.66 10,075.48 59,453.21 13, 520.80 2,099.91 15,620.71 1,897.26 66,477.50 200.00 17, 394.00 430.53 889.00 889.00 889.00 201.60 20, 045.00 195.51 507.00 53.34 314.72 1,221.57 672.73 3,949.80 14,187.84 590.40 118, 545.96 997.50 46 Print Date: 9/3/2024 Page 5 of 9 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 8/13/2024 City of Dublin Payment Issuance Report Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024 COMCAST CORWOOD CAR WASH, INC. DENALECT ALARM COMPANY DSRSD DUBLIN HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETICS DUBLIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY DUBLIN IRISH GUARD BAND DUBLIN LITTLE LEAGUE DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT EAGLE VIEW TECHNOLOGIES, INC. EAST BAY POOL SERVICE, INC. EDEN I & R INC ENTERPRISE RENT A CAR EAN SERVICES, LLC EUROPEAN MOBILE WERKS EVERYTHING GROWS INTERIOR LANDSCAPING EVERYTHING GROWS INTERIOR LANDSCAPING FIELDMAN, ROLAPP & ASSOCIATES FIELDMAN, ROLAPP & ASSOCIATES GOODFELLOW BROS. CALIFORNIA, LLC GOODWIN CONSULTING GROUP, INC. GOODWIN CONSULTING GROUP, INC. GRAFIX SHOPPE GREEN POWERS AMERICA LLC GURUS EDUCATION EAST BAY HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY INTERACTIVE DATA, LLC IRON MOUNTAIN JOHN WHITE JONES HALL, APLC JOY LIU JOY LIU KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS LYNX TECHNOLOGIES, INC. MAKE ME A PRO SPORTS MATRIX CONSULTING GROUP, LTD MINUTEMAN PRESS NANOGAN SCIENCE & SERVICES, LLC PRO CYCLES LLC REDWOOD TOXICOLOGY LAB. INC. RENNE PUBLIC LAW GROUP, LLP ROBERT HALF ROTARY CLUB OF DUBLIN, CA RROOAR STRAWN CONSTRUCTION, INC. SUNRUN INSTALLATION SERVICES SUNRUN INSTALLATION SERVICES SUNRUN INSTALLATION SERVICES T-MOBILE USA, INC. T-MOBILE USA, INC. T-MOBILE USA, INC. TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, INC TRI-SIGNAL INTEGRATION INC TRI-SIGNAL INTEGRATION INC U.S. BANK ULINE, INC. UNIVAR SOLUTIONS UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES & SUPPLY CO. UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES & SUPPLY CO. CIVIC CENTER COMCAST 500M INTERNET 06/30/2024 CAR WASHES FOR POLICE VEHICLES MAY-JUL 2024 QUARTERLY ALARM CHARGE JUL 2024 SENIOR CENTER GREASE TRAP INSPECTION - MAY 2024 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND SHAMROCK GALA SPONSORSHIP 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND STAGER GYM UTILITY BILL JUL 2024 PICTOMETRY SOFTWARE THE WAVE POOL MAINTENANCE JUL 2024 OPS AND MAINT OF 211 ALCO COMMUNICATION SYSTEM DPS RENTAL CARS FOR SIU POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS INTERIOR PLANT CARE & MAINT - CIVIC - JUL 2024 INTERIOR PLANT CARE & MAINT - CIVIC - AUG 2024 DOWNTOWN FINANCING PLAN DUBLIN CENTRE CFD FORMATION IRON HORSE NATURE PARK AND OPEN SPACE - PHASE 1 DUBLIN BLVD MITIGATION CFD DUBLIN CENTRE CFD FORMATION INSTALLATION OF POLICE VEHICLE DECALS DPS RADIO BATTERIES REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES SATURDAY CLASSES PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES SUMMER CAMPS WEEK 7 PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES PICNIC FLIX PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES SUMMER CAMPS WEEK 8 DPS INVESTIGATIONS SOCIAL MEDIA SEARCH JUL 2024 POLICE RECORDS STORAGE 8/1/2024-8/31/2024 DPS PETTY CASH REPLENISH OPERATIONS FUND EAST RANCH CFD BOND COUNSEL PCS PICNIC FLIX 7-19 ELEMENTAL PCS PICNIC FLIX 8-2 SPIDER -MAN 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND GIS CONSULTING SERVICES - JUL 2024 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR USER FEE STUDY CONSULTING FEE FRANCIS RANCH SURVEY POSTCARDS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS DPS TOXICOLOGY SERVICES CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLANNING TEMP EMPLOYEE FOR FINANCE DEPARTMENT 7/5/2024-7/26/2024 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR CULTURAL ARTS REMODEL & CIVIC CTR IMPROV PERMIT REFUND #BLDG24-02599 CXLD PERMIT PERMIT REFUND #BLDG23-02310 CXLD PERMIT PERMIT REFUND #BLDG23-02554 CXLD PERMIT CELL PHONE SERVICES THROUGH 07/20/2024 PIO & PW CELL PHONE SERVICES THROUGH 07/20/2024 PHONE HARDWARE - ENERGOV GRANT STRATEGY AND WRITING SERVICES AUG 2024 FIRE ALARM TESTING - LIBRARY AUG 2024 FIRE ALARM TESTING - FIRE STATIONS 16-18 AUG-OCT 2024 ADMINISTRATION FEES - FY24/25 THE WAVE WATERPARK SUPPLIES THE WAVE POOL CHEMICAL WINDOW & CARPET CLEANING CIVIC JUL 2024 WINDOW & CARPET CLEANING LIBRARY JUL 2024 2,300.00 2,832.00 363.00 143.00 200.00 2,500.00 200.00 200.00 1,555.14 2,400.00 12,431.00 13,318.00 2,382.36 186.11 243.07 243.07 3,600.00 15,402.50 390,918.63 6,171.13 6,597.50 579.00 1,194.00 2,340.00 450.00 1,050.00 1,200.00 1,275.00 291.00 372.67 1,085.00 25,000.00 290.00 140.00 200.00 5,325.00 5,700.00 1,500.00 552.00 3,645.00 1,410.02 1,416.02 3,480.00 11,536.80 200.00 2,916.00 467, 618.78 190.00 300.40 190.00 652.89 438.40 20,448.61 5,000.00 323.75 126.00 1,700.00 1,522.27 2,512.59 635.17 269.52 47 City of Dublin Payment Issuance Report Print Date: 9/3/2024 Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024 Page 6 of 9 8/13/2024 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES & SUPPLY CO. 8/13/2024 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES & SUPPLY CO. 8/13/2024 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES & SUPPLY CO. 8/13/2024 US NAVAL SEA CADETS CORPS RADM CHARLES 8/13/2024 VERIZON WIRELESS 8/13/2024 VISIT TRI-VALLEY 8/13/2024 WORLD CUP SOCCER CAMPS CLINICS 8/15/2024 CAL PERS 8/15/2024 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE 8/16/2024 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT 8/16/2024 HEALTHEQUITY, INC. 8/16/2024 ICMA 401 PLAN 8/16/2024 ICMA 457 PLAN 8/16/2024 US BANK - PARS 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 8/19/2024 AILI DONG AKSHAY ARORA ARORA TENNIS & FITNESS ALAMEDA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT ANGELICA SMITH BAY AREA NEWS GROUP EAST BAY BICENTENNIAL SQUARE PARTNERS BIG O'TIRES #7 BKF ENGINEERS CALEHS ATTN: JOE MOULTON CARAHSOFT CARBONIC SERVICE CATHERYN M GRIER CHRISTINE PETIT CODE PUBLISHING, LLC CORODATA SHREDDING, INC. DAVID L. GATES & ASSOCIATES, INC. EAST BAY POOL SERVICE, INC. GREG W. MACK HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY HOME DEPOT USA, INC. JCJCJ, INC JCJCJ, INC LANLOGIC INC. LIVERMORE-PLEASANTON UMPIRES LPA, INC. MATRIX CONSULTING GROUP, LTD MATTHEW AINI MEGAN OLSON MISSION EDGE SAN DIEGO NICHOLAS OCHOA PAKPOUR CONSULTING GROUP, INC. PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PLAN JPA PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY WINDOW & CARPET CLEANING SENIOR JUL 2024 WINDOW & CARPET CLEANING SHANNON JUL 2024 WINDOW & CARPET CLEANING WAVE JUL 2024 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND DATA PLAN FOR LICENSE PLATE READERS 7/4/2024-8/3/2024 VISIT TRI-VALLEY CITY PARTNERSHIP 2024/2025 DUES REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR Payments Issued 8/13/2024 Total: PERS RETIREMENT PLAN: PE 8/9/24 FEDERAL WITHHOLDING: PE 8/9/24 & AUG COUNCIL Payments Issued 8/15/2024 Total: CA STATE WITHHOLDING: PE 8/9/24 & AUG COUNCIL HEALTHEQUITY: PE 8/9/24 DEFERRED COMP 401A: PE 8/9/24 DEFERRED COMP 457: PE 8/9/24 & AUG COUNCIL PARS: PE 8/9/24 & CM - AUG Payments Issued 8/16/2024 Total: PERMIT REFUND BLDG-2023-01877 CXLD PERMIT REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR FIRE SERVICES FY24-25 AUG 2024 HC/CMO EVENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT LEGAL NOTICES - JUL 2024 YEAR 4 SALES TAX REIMBURSEMENT POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS TASSAJARA RD GAP CLOSURE PROJECT - JUN 2024 DESIGNATED UST OPERATOR INSP. SRVCS JUL 2024 DOCUSIGN ENVELOPES THE WAVE POOL CHEMICALS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/13/2024 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR MUNI CODE UPDATES SHRED BIN PICKUP JUL 2024 IRRIGATION UPGRADES - JUN 2024 THE WAVE POOL MAINTENANCE CLOVER CARICATURES PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES FARMERS MARKET REFUND CXLD PERMIT #BLDG24-03256 (JOB #11283167) ADULT SOFTBALL AWARDS ART IN PUBLIC PLACES BRONZE PLAQUES WEB PROTECTION AUG 2024 SPORTS OFFICIATING SERVICES JUL 2024 LIBRARY CONCEPT DESIGN - JUN 2024 USER FEE STUDY CONSULTING FEE PLANNING COMMISSION 8/13/2024 STORM DRAIN ART SUMMER CAMP PRESENTATION PLANNING COMMISSION 8/13/2024 CONSTRUCTION MGMT-DON BIDDLE COMM PARK - JUL 2024 SERVICE TO VARIOUS IRRIG 07/08/2024 LS2-A EAST DUBLIN 07/15/2024 LS2-A EAST DUBLIN 06/13/2024 VAR PARK IRRIGATION 06/06/2024 SERVICE TO VARIOUS IRRIG 06/06/2024 SERVICE TO VARIOUS TC 06/28/2024 GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS - JUL 2024 MAT SERVICES PSC JUL 2024 MAT SERVICES WAVE JUL 2024 MAT SERVICES SENIOR JUL 2024 741.78 1,281.58 758.62 200.00 2,518.57 2,500.00 3,468.00 1,301,280.21 100, 932.10 78,919.17 179,851.27 24,171.08 3,893.95 1,276.83 35,893.08 7,213.95 72,448.89 188.80 864.00 1,483,859.50 327.61 744.96 40, 267.00 189.19 2,772.75 600.00 21,975.68 322.86 50.00 1,564.80 305.50 43.29 7,074.00 315.24 3,600.00 900.00 59.20 675.43 1,216.25 1,050.00 2,140.00 7,641.50 13, 950.00 50.00 500.00 200.00 50.00 990.00 1,376.17 21,309.86 4,370.53 132.44 79.88 11,237.16 6,106.00 155.61 80.90 159.60 48 City of Dublin Payment Issuance Report Print Date: 9/3/2024 Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024 Page 7 of 9 8/19/2024 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 8/19/2024 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 8/19/2024 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 8/19/2024 QUADIENT FINANCE USA, INC. 8/19/2024 QUALITY LOGO PRODUCTS, INC. 8/19/2024 QUALITY LOGO PRODUCTS, INC. 8/19/2024 RENATA FLECCHIA TYLER 8/19/2024 RESCUE ROOTER 8/19/2024 SHAMROCK OFFICE SOLUTIONS, LLC FILE 2399 8/19/2024 STANFORD HEALTH -VALLEYCARE 8/19/2024 STEPHEN WRIGHT 8/19/2024 TERRALINK COMMUNICATIONS INC. 8/19/2024 TESLA ENERGY 8/19/2024 VIDYA PILLAI 8/19/2024 WAHIDA I. RASHID 8/19/2024 WC3-WEST COAST CODE CONSULTANT 8/19/2024 WESCO GRAPHICS INC 8/19/2024 WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, 8/19/2024 WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, 8/21/2024 CAL PERS 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 4LEAF INC. AMADOR VALLEY INDUSTRIES LLC ARROW SIGN COMPANY AT&T - CALNET 3 AT&T - CALNET 3 AT&T - CALNET 3 AT&T - CALNET 3 AT&T - CALNET 3 AT&T - CALNET 3 AT&T - CALNET 3 BAY ALARM COMPANY BAY ALARM COMPANY BAY ALARM COMPANY BAY ALARM COMPANY BAY ALARM COMPANY BAY ALARM COMPANY BAY ALARM COMPANY BAY ALARM COMPANY BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MGMT DIST BEST VERSION MEDIA, LLC BLAISDELL'S BUSINESS PRODUCTS CARBONIC SERVICE CASTRO VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS CHARGE POINT, INC. CHRISTINE PETIT CIVICA LAW GROUP APC CIVICA LAW GROUP APC COMCAST CONSOLIDATED ENGINEERING CSW/STUBER-STROEH ENGINEERING GROUP, DELL MARKETING L.P. C/O DELL USA L.P. DSRSD DSRSD GANNETT FLEMING, INC. GANNETT FLEMING, INC. HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY MAT SERVICES SHANNON JUL 2024 MAT SERVICES CORP YARD JUL 2024 MAT SERVICES CIVIC JUL 2024 POSTAGE FEES FOR JUL 2024 WAVE BIRTHDAY PARTY SUPPLIES ADVERTISING SUPPLIES PLANNING COMMISSION 8/13/2024 PERMIT REFUND #BLDG-2024-03194 CXLD PERMIT CONTRACT USAGE CHARGE FOR 4/22/2024-7/21/2024 MEDICAL TEST FEES PLANNING COMMISSION 8/13/2024 REFUND TUP PLOC-2024-00119 DEPOSIT PERMIT REFUND #BLDG-2024-03274 CXLD PERMIT REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR PLANNING COMMISSION 8/13/2024 BUILDING PLAN REVIEW JUL 2024 ACTIVITY GUIDE, ANNUAL & CITY REPORT PRINTING TO6 - 2024 ANNUAL STREET RESURFACING - JUL 2024 TO6 - 2024 ANNUAL STREET RESURFACING - APR 2024 PERS RETIREMENT PLAN: AUG COUNCIL Payments Issued 8/19/2024 Total: Payments Issued 8/21/2024 Total: STRUCTURAL REVIEW-PK0422 IH NATURE PARK AUG 2024 TRASH SERVICES - CAMP PARKS - JUL 2024 MONUMENT SIGN DESIGN, MANUFT AND INSTALL AUG 2024 SERVICE TO PSC 08/01/2024 SERVICE TO FS2-3 7/26/2024 SERVICE TO SHANNON FAX 07/27/2024 SERVICE TO FS16 07/27/2024 SERVICE TO CIVIC 07/27/2024 CLARK AVE 07/27/2024 SERVICE TO CIVIC FIRE ALARM 08/01/2024 ALARM SERVICES HERITAGE JUL 2024 ALARM SERVICES CIVIC JUL 2024 ALARM SERVICES FS16 & 17 JUL 2024 ALARM SERVICES SENIOR JUL 2024 ALARM SERVICES CORP YARD JUL 2024 ALARM SERVICES SHANNON JUL 2024 ALARM SERVICES SENIOR JUL 2024 ALARM SERVICES WAVE JUL 2024 BAAQMD PSC ANNUAL PERMIT RENEWAL 2024-2025 THE WAVE MARKETING EAST DUBLIN LIVING OFFICE SUPPLIES JUL 2024 THE WAVE POOL CHEMICALS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR CHARGEPOINT FLEET RFID CARDS - JUL 2024 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 2061 COLLIER CANYON RD (LABOR) CODE ENF. JUL 2025 7461 BROOKDALE CT. (LABOR) -CODE ENF. JUL 2024 INTERNET/CABLE SVC WAV, SNC, PSC - 8/11-9/10/24 DAC SPECIAL INSPECT & TESTING JUL 2024 GREEN STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE ENG SVCS JUN 2024 OPTIPLEX MICRO FORM FACTOR PLUS 7020 LAPTOP PLAN REVIEW FEE - PK0322 MAY 2024 PERMIT INSPECTION FEES FOR PK0322 MAY 2024 MAP MEMORIAL PARK PATH RELO-CONST. JUN 2024 SHANNON PARKING LOT - INSPECTION SVCS JUN 2024 PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES SUMMER CAMPS PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES NATIONAL NIGHT OUT 151.00 102.40 92.38 349.06 2,073.72 2,892.94 50.00 57.40 2,783.41 222.00 50.00 500.00 300.40 1,740.00 50.00 12,023.00 8,081.82 772.50 595.83 1,672,383.57 1,003.89 1,003.89 5,520.00 37,633.52 22,286.50 114.17 345.24 29.95 58.35 29.95 29.95 58.47 2,277.57 264.00 375.75 369.30 741.78 1,269.27 207.00 2,762.34 617.00 408.30 1,315.86 629.44 1,440.00 108.20 633.60 28,195.77 7,692.72 602.90 9,456.24 4,942.50 1,096.18 5,670.00 1,900.00 6,231.50 9,075.14 2,100.00 1,050.00 49 City of Dublin Payment Issuance Report Print Date: 9/3/2024 Page 8 of 9 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 8/26/2024 Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024 HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY HINDERLITER, DE LLAMAS & ASSOC INCREDIFLIX, INC IPERMIT LANLOGIC INC. MINUTEMAN PRESS PAKPOUR CONSULTING GROUP, INC. PAKPOUR CONSULTING GROUP, INC. PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PG&E PRIME TIME ENTERTAINMENT PRIME TIME ENTERTAINMENT PRIME TIME ENTERTAINMENT PRIME TIME ENTERTAINMENT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL PRUDENTIAL OVERALL PRUDENTIAL OVERALL PRUDENTIAL OVERALL PRUDENTIAL OVERALL PRUDENTIAL OVERALL PRUDENTIAL OVERALL PRUDENTIAL OVERALL QUENCH USA, INC. RAYNE OF SAN JOSE RAYNE OF SAN JOSE RAYNE OF SAN JOSE RAYNE OF SAN JOSE RAYNE OF SAN JOSE RAYNE OF SAN JOSE RETIREE MEDICAL SAFECHECKS SHAW LAW GROUP PC SQUAD SPORTS INC. SWINERTON MANAGEMENT AND CONSULTING TRB AND ASSOCIATES, INC. TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITY TV TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF NO. WESCO GRAPHICS INC WESTEK SYSTEMS INC. WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, SUPPLY SUPPLY SUPPLY SUPPLY SUPPLY SUPPLY SUPPLY SUPPLY PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES THE WAVE AND KLS SOCCER PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT SERVICES - SALES TAX JUL-SEP 2024 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR PERMIT REFUND #BLDG-004199-2024 CXLD PERMIT 24/7 WAN INTERFACE FOR AT&T GOT WILDLIFE POSTCARD MAILING AND POSTAGE AUG 2024 IHT BRIDGE PROJECT MANAGEMENT JUL 2024 CM/INSP. SVCS. SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL JUL 2024 SERVICE TO GLEASON IRRIG 07/29/2024 BIOS SERVICE TO CIVIC CENTER 07/14/2024 SERVICE TO CORP YARD 07/29/2024 SERVICE TO SHANNON CENTER 07/29/2024 SERVICE TO SCH RNCH PARK 07/28/2024 B1 SERVICE TO PASSATEMPO 07/23/2024 B1 SERVICE TO SEAN DIAMOND 07/25/2024 B1 SERVICE TO POSITANO IRRIG 07/29/2024 SERVICE TO VARIOUS IRRIG 07/28/2024 B1 SERVICE TO VARIOUS IRRIG 07/11/2024 TC1 SERVICE TO 6795 DOUGHERTY 08/01/2024 LS2-A SERVICE TO AVB 07/30/2024 SERVICE TO HCP 07/28/2024 SERVICE TO FS16 07/11/2024 SERVICE TO HPM 7/28/2024 SOUND SERVICE AUG 1 SUMMER CONCERT SOUND SERVICE JUL 25 SUMMER CONCERT SOUND SERVICE JUL 18 SUMMER CONCERT SOUND SERVICE JUL 11 SUMMER CONCERT MAT SERVICES CIVIC JUL 2024 MAT SERVICES CIVIC AUG 2024 MAT SERVICES WAVE JUL 2024 MAT SERVICES SENIOR AUG 2024 MAT SERVICES SHANNON AUG 2024 MAT SERVICES CORP YARD AUG 2024 MAT SERVICES WAVE AUG 2024 MAT SERVICES PSC AUG 2024 WATER SERVICES D073045 AUG 2024 REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER SOFTENER SERV FS16 JUL 2024 REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER SOFTENER SERV FS17 JUL 2024 REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER SOFTENER SERV FS18 JUL 2024 REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER SOFTENER SERV FS16 AUG 2024 REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER SOFTENER SERV FS17 AUG 2024 REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER SOFTENER SERV FS18 AUG 2024 RETIREE MEDICAL CHECK STOCK CONFIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT SERVICE REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR PLAN/CONSTR REVIEW CULTURAL ARTS CENTER JUL 2024 PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION SERVICES JUL 2024 RECORD/TELEVISE CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMM MTGS ENERGOV PROJECT CA STATE FEE FOR REGULATORY COSTS JUL 2024-JUN 2025 ACTIVITY GUIDE, ANNUAL & CITY REPORT PRINTING TROUBLESHOOT THE WIRELESS LOCK AT WAVE CWA ADMIN-GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE JUN 2024 CWA ADMIN-GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE APR 2024 CWA ADMIN-GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE JUL 2024 CWA ADMIN-GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE MAY 2024 IRONHORSE NATURE PARK-CWA ADMIN JUL 2024 SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL - CWA ADMINISTRATION JUL2024 SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL - CWA ADMINISTRATION APR2024 1,875.00 600.00 3,121.49 3,963.60 30.40 637.50 736.68 8,715.00 6,897.50 1,019.69 4,183.45 1,633.40 93.49 485.81 79.74 186.95 410.74 61.73 361.54 222.85 1,703.20 2,972.52 1,088.76 1,211.09 1,650.00 1,650.00 1,650.00 1,650.00 92.38 184.76 80.90 159.50 75.50 102.40 161.80 51.87 634.15 236.90 259.60 204.30 236.90 259.60 204.30 3,091.45 693.69 355.50 6,166.20 46, 503.00 30,780.00 973.87 29,439.55 1,128.43 6,654.89 960.00 151.41 103.00 1,579.85 1,013.88 1,866.67 103.00 154.50 50 Print Date: 9/3/2024 Page 9 of 9 City of Dublin Payment Issuance Report Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024 8/26/2024 WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL - CWA ADMINISTRATION MAY2024 Payments Issued 8/26/2024 Total: 8/29/2024 CAL PERS 8/29/2024 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE 8/30/2024 RETIREE MEDICAL 8/30/2024 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT 8/30/2024 HEALTHEQUITY, INC. 8/30/2024 ICMA 401 PLAN 8/30/2024 ICMA 457 PLAN 8/30/2024 US BANK - PARS PERS RETIREMENT PLAN: PE 8/23/24 FEDERAL WITHHOLDING: PE 8/23/24 RETIREE MEDICAL CA STATE WITHHOLDING: PE 8/23/24 HEALTHEQUITY: PE 8/23/24 DEFERRED COMP 401A: PE 8/23/24 DEFERRED COMP 457: PE 8/23/24 PARS: PE 8/23/24 Payments Issued 8/29/2024 Total: Payments Issued 8/30/2024 Total: Grand Total for Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024: Total Number of Payments Issued: 379 753.01 341,847.35 102,746.28 77,892.98 180,639.26 206,439.06 24, 021.94 4,393.95 1,286.46 32,188.20 5,238.54 273,568.15 $8,799,312.47 51 sus DUBLIN STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 5.5 DATE: September 17, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.ECT : Delegation of Authority to the City Manager to Purchase Fleet Vehicles Exceeding $45,000 Prepared by: Jordan Foss, Management Analyst 11 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will consider delegating purchasing authority of fleet vehicles exceeding $45,000 to the City Manager for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2024-25. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution Delegating Authority to the City Manager to Purchase Fleet Vehicles Exceeding $45,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Replacement vehicles will be covered by the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Internal Service Fund (ISF) Budget. Any revenue generated from the auction of the retired vehicles will be deposited into the ISF to offset future replacement costs. Authority for the purchase of non -replacement vehicles will be sought either through the annual budgeting process or at a City Council meeting during the year. DESCRIPTION: Background The City's fleet is made up of general use, maintenance, police, and fire vehicles. Public Works manages the general use and maintenance fleet, made up of nine vehicles which are either hybrid or electric. Dublin Police Services manages a fleet of 38 police vehicles, including 13 unmarked vehicles and 25 marked vehicles for patrol, crime prevention, and school resource officers. Alameda County Fire Department manages a fleet of 11 fire vehicles, including seven apparatus (two of which are reserve units), two patrol vehicles, and two general use vehicles. The City Manager recently established a Fleet Life Cycle/Replacement Administrative Policy (Attachment 2) that identifies the metrics to be used when considering vehicle replacement (age, Page 1 of 2 52 mileage, and repair/maintenance data). For example, Police vehicles are now reviewed after four years (it was previously three years) or 75,000 miles, and general fleet vehicles are reviewed at six years or 75,000 miles. Generally, Staff reviews the vehicle inventory each year and budgets for anticipated replacements in the Internal Service Fund. Police Services budgets for and replaces between six and 10 police vehicles each year on average; Public Works and Fire replace vehicles much more infrequently, as vehicle usage is much lower, and maintenance needs are not as prevalent. Currently, Public Works and Fire have no active vehicles that are over the mileage or age benchmark set forth in the Fleet Life Cycle/Replacement Policy. Staff Request Recent purchases of replacement vehicles and equipment have exceeded the City Manager's purchasing authority of $45,000, requiring Staff to seek City Council approval. However, these transactions have been hindered by supply chain shortages and vehicle and equipment availability at various dealerships. By the time Staff obtains City Council approval, the vehicles are often no longer available, requiring Staff to begin the procurement process again. For this reason, Staff is seeking approval from the City Council to delegate purchasing authority to the City Manager for vehicles and equipment over $45,000 in accordance with the planned and budgeted vehicle replacement schedule. Scheduled purchases for Fiscal Year 2024-25 include the replacement of four marked police vehicles and two police motorcycles. The model and make of the replacement vehicles are subject to availability. It is anticipated the replacement motorcycles will be procured from Harley Davidson for consistency purposes. Staff will provide a report to the City Council on the replaced vehicles as well as the purchased vehicles once procurement has been completed. Staff is also requesting that the City Council authorize the disposal of any replaced vehicles by transferring them to a professional auction company for sale. Any revenue generated from the auction of the retired vehicles will be deposited into the fund to offset future replacement costs. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: The City Council Agenda was posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Resolution Delegating Authority to the City Manager to Purchase Fleet Vehicles Exceeding $45,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25 2) Administrative Policy 3.6 - Fleet Life Cycle/Replacement Page 2 of 2 53 Attachment I RESOLUTION NO. xx — 24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE CITY MANAGER TO PURCHASE FLEET VEHICLES EXCEEDING $45,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 WHEREAS, the City of Dublin's fleet is made up of general use, maintenance, police, and fire vehicles; and WHEREAS, Public Works manages a fleet of nine general use and maintenance vehicles, Dublin Police Services manages a fleet of 38 police vehicles, including 13 unmarked vehicles, and 25 marked vehicles for patrol, crime prevention, and school resource officers, and Alameda County Fire Department manages a fleet of 11 fire vehicles, including seven apparatus, two patrol vehicles, and two general use vehicles; and WHEREAS, to ensure reliability and to minimize repair expenses, the City reviews these vehicles in accordance with the City's Fleet Life Cycle/Replacement Policy for replacement with the most appropriate vehicles to maintain City operations; and WHEREAS, scheduled purchases for Fiscal Year 2024-25 include the replacement of four marked police vehicles and two police motorcycles; and WHEREAS, due to increased costs, it is expected the procurement of new and replacement vehicles will exceed the City Manager's purchasing limit of $45,000; and WHEREAS, due to supply chain shortages and reduced vehicle and equipment availability at various dealerships, the purchasing process has become time sensitive; and WHEREAS, with the City Council's delegation of authority to the City Manager to make vehicle purchases over $45,000, Staff will be able to work with dealerships to quickly purchase the appropriate vehicles as they are available; and WHEREAS, such purchases will be made in accordance with the vehicle replacement schedule and the availability of funds in the Internal Service Fund budget for Fiscal Year 2024- 25; and WHEREAS, Staff will provide a report to the City Council detailing the vehicles replaced and purchased once the procurement process is completed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that City Council approves delegation of authority to the City Manager to purchase fleet vehicles exceeding $45,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon placing the new vehicles in service, the replaced vehicles are declared surplus property and the City Manager and/or her designee shall be authorized to arrange for their auction in accordance with state and local laws and regulations. Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted 09/17/2024 Page 1 of 2 54 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September 2024, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 2 of 2 55 Attachment 2 City of Dublin, CA Administrative Policy 3.6 Fleet Replacement 3.6—Fleet Life Cycle/Replacement 1. Purpose: a. This policy's goal is to establish replacement metrics for the classes of vehicle by analyzing age, mileage, repair/maintenance data to be compared to depreciated value, and to provide direction to departments on replacement policy, scheduling, and funding procedures. 2. General: a. Service life is the amount of time a vehicle is capable of rendering service. Service life may be quite lengthy if a vehicle receives adequate maintenance and worn components are replaced. There is however a fatigue point for mechanical parts and structures that must be accounted for so as not to affect safety. b. Technological life is the relative decline in productivity of a unit when compared to a newer model. Technology advancements affect fuel usage and greenhouse gas emissions. c. Economic life is the length of time that a vehicles cost is at a minimum. As the age and mileage of a vehicle increase the maintenance and operating costs increase also. 3. Replacement Schedule: a. Vehicles become candidates for replacement when they reach either the age or the mileage replacement criteria, whichever comes first, as listed in the table below. The following chart will form the basis of a replacement cycle or schedule. This chart was developed using the City's current replacement standards, but also references the CA Department of General Services' Replacement Schedule Criteria, as well as research on other local agencies' programs. Specialized vehicles, such as undercover police vehicles, Fire Trucks, and Fire Engines, may be retained for additional life as a reserve unit but must be evaluated annually. Vehicle Type Age of Vehicle (in months) Vehicle Mileage Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles Law Enforcement Sedans (Patrol) 48 75,000 Law Enforcement SUVs (Patrol) 48 75,000 Motorcycles (Patrol) 60 75,000 Sedans 72 75,000 Pickup Trucks 72 75,000 Sport Utility Vehicles 72 75,000 Mini Vans 72 75,000 Cargo Vans 72 75,000 Fire Trucks 180 100,000 Fire Engines 180 100,000 Hybrid Vehicles Sedans 84 85,000 Pickup Trucks 84 85,000 Sport Utility Vehicles 84 85,000 Mini Vans 84 85,000 Cargo Vans 84 85,000 Original Effective Date: 9/9/2024 Page 1 of 4 56 City of Dublin, CA Administrative Policy 3.6 Fleet Replacement Electric (EV) Vehicles Motorcycles (Patrol) 60 75,000 Sedans 120 100,000 Pickup Trucks 120 100,000 Sport Utility Vehicles 120 100,000 Mini Vans 120 100,000 Cargo Vans 120 100,000 4. Vehicle Evaluations a. When a vehicle has met its expected life, the Department Fleet Manager utilizes an evaluation sheet that reports the overall condition of the vehicle. The evaluation data that is collected includes the overall visual and mechanical condition of the vehicle, total lifespan costs of repair, preventative maintenance costs, and lifespan fuel costs. b. The vehicle is evaluated and tracked on a scoring system. Excellent condition items are given a score of 5 and a score of 1 would indicate poor condition. Any vehicle that has an overall score of 21 or less points, replacement is recommended. If the vehicle has a score above the 21 points and other contributing factors are evaluated, the vehicle lifespan may be extended. c. In addition to the scoring system, there are other weighing factors such as maintenance repair costs, preventative maintenance costs and fuel costs based on the lifespan of the vehicle. As a vehicle ages, maintenance and repair costs increase. This data is evaluated and factored in on a case -by -case basis. d. Environment and sustainability outcomes are factored into evaluations (including measures outlined in the City's Climate Action Plan). At both Federal and State levels, emission standards for fleets have affected the future planning and purchases of vehicles. Changing emission standards may require vehicle replacement. e. Once the Department Fleet Manager has completed the evaluation, the Department Director and/or City Manager will be included in further discussions and debriefed on findings and recommendations moving forward. It may be necessary to evaluate the vehicle based on personnel changes, equipment needs, etc. 5. Procedure a. In January of each Fiscal Year, the Finance Department will distribute a fleet inventory list to Departments managing fleet vehicles (currently Fire Services & Prevention, Dublin Police Services, and Public Works). Departments will evaluate the fleet inventory list and prioritize vehicle replacement based upon this policy and with regards to budget building for the next Fiscal Year. The prioritized list will be shared with using departments to determine the correct replacement schedule as well as correct vehicle type and total vehicle inventory. Departments shall request budget for any vehicles to be replaced in or added to the fleet for the next Fiscal Year. b. Where operationally possible alternatively fueled vehicles will replace conventionally fueled vehicles. Alternative options include Compressed Natural Gas (CNG), Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEV), Plug in Hybrid Electric (PEHV) and all Electric Vehicles (EV). The Original Effective Date: 9/9/2024 Page 2 of 4 57 City of Dublin, CA Administrative Policy 3.6 Fleet Replacement prioritized list of replacement vehicles will be taken to City Council annually for approval, pending available funding in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. Replacement Specifications a. Once a vehicle has been met all prerequisites for replacement, the Department Fleet Manager will discuss the vehicle replacement with Department/Division Supervisors to verify that use and type of vehicle has not changed. Replacement policy of fleet is "like for like." If there is a need to purchase a replacement vehicle that differs in class from previous vehicle, discussion will be carried out case -by -case. Deviations from a "like for like" replacement on vehicle classification type (i.e. sedan for sedan) will require Director and/or City Manager approval. New Fleet Replacement Procedure a. Department Fleet Manager will receive units from vendor, verify that vehicle that arrived matches what was specified by Department/ Division b. Install or retrofit all necessary equipment needed based on vehicle use c. Apply City logos and all applicable decals d. Add asset to insurance pool agency e. Inform Department/Division of arrival of unit f. Obtain vehicle number and license tag number (if required) and provide to Finance for Asset Tracking g. Keys and necessary associated documents will be provided to the Department/Division personnel h. Department/Division will surrender the replaced vehicle to the Department Fleet Manager prior to taking possession of new vehicle 6. Summary a. This policy is to be used as guideline for cost effective vehicle replacement cycles. Other factors such available funding, incidents/accidents, or vehicle service level agreements may influence replacements. Increases in public health and safety measures requiring additional vehicles (New Needs) will also influence vehicle replacement schedules. In these cases, a vehicle may need to be retained past its life cycle, however these vehicles must be relinquished at the first opportunity in order to reduce operating costs and allow for adequate delivery of City services. 7. References a. CA GSA Replacement Schedule Criteria (https://www.dgs.ca.gov/Resources/SAM/TOC/4100/4126) b. Related Administrative Policies i. Vehicle Use Policy ii. Collision Investigation Policy iii. Safe Use of Cellular & Other Wireless Devices iv. Green Fleet Original Effective Date: 9/9/2024 Page 3 of 4 58 City of Dublin, CA Administrative Policy 3.6 Fleet Replacement Approved: ,2.)54,..t.,_i,Sn.,:t;6 Linda Smith, City Manager Summary of Revisions 2024--Adopted Original Effective Date: 9/9/2024 Page 4 of 4 59 ID # Div # Year Make City of Dublin Vehicle Evaluation Form Model III *Os DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Age of Vehicle Mileage/Hours LTD Repairs LTD PM Services LTD Fuel Cost Overall Condition Summary: Engine Transmission Axle(s) Suspension / Steering Interior and Electrical Exterior / Body Aux Engine / Components Total Score Description Score (Scale 5=Excellent - 1=Poor) Expected Life Span Original Purchase Cost Total Life to Date Operating Cost Est. Reconditioning Cost Est. Auction Value $ (Recommend replacement at 21 or lower) Recommended Action: Department Fleet Manager Date r DUBLIN CALIFORNIA STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 5.6 DATE: September 17, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.ECT : Ordinance Adding a Low Carbon Concrete Requirement to the City's Green Building Code in Coordination with the City's Climate Action Plan Prepared by: Nelson Pureco, Plan Check Engineer, and Shannan Young, Environmental & Sustainability Manager EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will consider waiving the second reading and adopting the Ordinance amending the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete). The City Council waived the first reading and introduced the ordinance at the meeting on September 3, 2024. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Waive the second reading and adopt the Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete). FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost associated with implementing the Ordinance is estimated to be approximately $85,000 to $140,000 per year, reflecting staff time to educate applicants on the Ordinance and additional plan check and inspection time commitments. The City will recover the costs via fees adopted in the Master Fee Schedule. Page 1 of 2 61 DESCRIPTION: The City of Dublin adopted the Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond (CAP 2030) on September 15, 2020 (Resolution 100-20). CAP 2030 includes five strategies with 22 measures intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and to put the City on the path to reach carbon neutrality by 2045. Included under Strategy 4 is Measure MM-2, Reduce the Embodied Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) Associated with Building Materials. The embodied GHG emissions of a building are carbon dioxide or other GHGs generated by making and transporting building materials to a site, including mining, refining, and shipping. According to the Rocky Mountain Institute, 11 percent of global GHG emissions are generated during the lifecycle of building materials and concrete production is responsible for approximately 8 percent of global carbon emissions. The GHG emissions associated with concrete can be reduced by minimizing cement use to the extent possible or by using cement alternatives called supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs). SCMs include but are not limited to fly ash, slag, and glass pozzolans. On September 3, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing and introduced an Ordinance amending the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to require the use of low carbon concrete. The Ordinance would amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete) (Ordinance). These requirements would be applicable to all projects that require a building permit and that use ready - mix concrete, and this requirement would go into effect on January 1, 2025. The City Council will consider waiving the second reading and adopting the Ordinance (Attachment 1) approving amendments to the DMC Green Building Code. Attachment 2 provides a complete description of the proposed Ordinance. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: The City Council Agenda was posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete) 2) September 3, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments) Page 2 of 2 62 Attachment I ORDINANCE NO. xx — 24 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 7.94 (GREEN BUILDING CODE) TO AMEND SECTION 7.94.050 (DEFINITIONS) AND TO ADD SECTION 7.94.085 (LOW CARBON CONCRETE) AND SECTION 7.94.120 (LOW CARBON CONCRETE) The Dublin City Council does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. RECITALS. A. Health and Safety Code Section 18938 makes provisions published in the California Building Standards Code pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17922 applicable to all occupancies throughout the State and effective one hundred and eighty days after publication by the California Building Standards Commission (the "Commission"), or at a later date established by the Commission. B. California Health and Safety Code Sections 17958, 17958.5, 17958.7 and 18941.5 establish the authority for a city to adopt and make local amendments and modifications to the building standards in the California Building Standards Code to establish more restrictive building standards than those contained in the California Building Standards Code. C. California Health and Safety Code Sections 17958, 17958.5, 17958.7 and 18941.5 permit a city to make such local amendments and modifications as the city determines are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions. D. California Health and Safety Code Sections 17958, 17958.5, 17958.7 and 18941.5 require a city, before making any amendments and modifications to the California Building Standards Code, make an express finding that such amendments and modifications are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions. E. Under Health and Safety Code Section 17958.7, changes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17958.5 may not become effective until the required findings, and the changes, have been filed with the California Building Standards Commission; and F. Government Code Section 50022.2 permits enactment of City Ordinances that adopt codes or statutes, including codes of the State of California, by reference. G. A Staff Report was submitted to the Dublin City Council recommending approval of the proposed amendments to Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code). H. The City Council held a public hearing on the proposed amendments to Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) on September 3, 2024, at which time all interested persons had an opportunity to be heard. I. Proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law. Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 1 of 13 63 J. The City Council did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations and testimony herein above set forth and used its independent judgement to evaluate the amendments. Section 2. EFFECT OF CODE ON PAST ACTIONS AND OBLIGATIONS. The adoption of the Dublin Building Code, 2022, does not affect any civil lawsuit instituted or filed or prosecutions for ordinance violations committed on or prior to the effective date of said Code, does not waive any fee or penalty due and unpaid prior to the effective date of said Code, and does not affect the validity of any bond or cash deposit posted, filed or deposited pursuant to the requirements of any ordinance. Section 3. REFERENCES TO PRIOR CODE. Unless superseded and expressly repealed, references in City forms, documents and regulations to the chapters and sections of the former Dublin Building Code, 2019, shall be construed to apply to the corresponding provisions contained within the Dublin Building Code, 2022. Section 4. No penalty clauses are adopted by reference pursuant to this Ordinance. While Chapter 7.94 of the Dublin Municipal Code remain in force, a reasonable supply of the incorporated codes shall be available in the office of the City Clerk for public purchase. Section 5. SEVERABILITY. The provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if any provision, clause, sentence, word or part thereof is held illegal, invalid, unconstitutional, or inapplicable to any person or circumstances, such illegality, invalidity, unconstitutionality, or inapplicability shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions, clauses, sentences, sections, words or parts thereof of the ordinance or their applicability to other persons or circumstances. Section 6. POSTING. This Ordinance shall take effect on January 1, 2025. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Government Code Section 36933. Section 7. CEQA FINDING. The City Council hereby finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 14, sections 15002 and 15378 as this Ordinance is not a "project" within the meaning of the State CEQA Guidelines. Specifically, this Ordinance will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment because it does not authorize the construction of any new large structures or other physical changes resulting in impacts to the environment. Section 8. AMENDMENT 7.94.050 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE. Section 7.94.050 of the Dublin Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 7.94.050 Section 202, Chapter 2, Definitions — Amended. Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 2 of 13 64 The following definitions are hereby added to Section 202 of the State Code to read as follows: ALL -ELECTRIC BUILDING. A building that contains no combustion equipment or plumbing for combustion equipment within the building or building property lines, and instead uses electric appliances for service. ASPHALTIC CONCRETE. Commonly called asphalt, bituminous asphalt concrete, and bituminous mixture), consists of any composite material composed of mineral aggregate adhered with a binder and commonly used to surface roads and parking lots. CALTRANS AUTHORIZED MATERIALS LIST. Cementitious Materials for use in concrete as updated from time to time. This list includes blended cement, Portland cement, fly ash, pozzolan, metakaolin pozzolan, silica fume, and slag materials. CARBON CURE CONCRETE. A technology that introduces recycled CO2 into fresh concrete to reduce its carbon footprint without compromising performance. Once injected, the CO2 undergoes a mineralization process and becomes permanently embedded. COMMERCIAL FOOD HEAT -PROCESSING EQUIPMENT. Equipment used in a food establishment for heat -processing food or utensils and that produces grease vapors, steam, fumes, smoke, or odors that are required to be removed through a local exhaust ventilation system, as defined in the California Mechanical Code. COMBUSTION EQUIPMENT. Any equipment or appliance used for space heating, water heating, cooking, clothes drying and/or lighting that uses fuel gas. CONCRETE. Any approved combination of mineral aggregates bound together into a hardened conglomerate in accordance with the requirements of this code. Concrete as defined in this Chapter does not include asphaltic concrete. CO2. Carbon Dioxide. CO2 INJECTION. The process of injecting CO2 into the cement mixture rather than water for purposes of curing the product. ELECTRIC HEATING APPLIANCE. A device that produces heat energy to create a warm environment by the application of electric power to resistance elements, refrigerant compressors, or dissimilar material junctions, as defined in the California Mechanical Code. ENVIRONMENTAL PRODUCT DECLARATION. Present quantified environmental information on the life cycle of a product based on the results of a comprehensive Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to enable comparisons between products fulfilling the same function. Environmental Product Declarations must conform to International Organization for Standardization 14025 accreditation and European Standard EN 15804, or International Organization for Standardization 21930 accreditation, and have at least a "cradle to grave" scope (which covers product life cycle from resource extraction to the factory). FUEL GAS. A gas that is natural, manufactured, liquefied petroleum, or a mixture of these. Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 3 of 13 65 GREENHOUSE GAS (GHG). Any gas that has the property of absorbing infrared radiation (net heat energy) emitted from Earth's surface and reradiating it back to Earth's surface, thus contributing to the greenhouse effect. GHG gasses include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxides, and water vapor. PLAIN CONCRETE. Concrete that contains no steel reinforcement in the form of rods, bars, or mesh or containing not more than two tenths of one percent of reinforcing. READY -MIX CONCRETE. Concrete that is batched for delivery from a central plant instead of being mixed on the job site. Each batch of ready -mixed concrete is tailor-made according to the specifics of the contractor and is delivered to the contractor in a plastic condition, usually in the cylindrical trucks often known as cement mixers. REINFORCED CONCRETE. Concrete in which reinforcing steel in the form of rods, bars, or mesh —is inserted into the concrete to absorb the tensile, shear, and sometimes compressive stresses in a concrete structure. SECONDARY CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS (SCM'S). Materials that include, but are not limited to, ground granulated blast furnace slag (ggbs), fly ash, metakaolin pozzolan, pozzolan, silica fume, and Belterra clay. UPFRONT EMBODIED CARBON (EMBODIED CARBON). The emissions, including greenhouse gasses, released before the built asset is used. The release of emissions occurs in material extraction, transportation, manufacturing, and installing building materials on site. Upfront embodied carbon also includes operational and end -of -life emissions associated with materials. Section 9. ADDITION OF 7.94.085 TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE. Section 7.94.085 is hereby added to the Dublin Municipal Code to read as follows: 7.94.085 Section 4.420, Division 4.4, Chapter 4, Low Carbon Concrete -Added. A new Section 4.420 is added to read: 4.420 Low Carbon Concrete Requirements. 4.420.1 Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide standards and requirements for the composition of concrete, as defined herein, that maintains adequate strength and durability for the intended application and at the same time reduces greenhouse gas emissions associated with concrete composition. 4.420.1.2 Applicability. The requirements of this section shall only be applicable to projects that require a building permit. 4.420.3 Compliance. Compliance with the requirements of this section shall be demonstrated through any of the compliance options in Sections 4.420.3.2 through 4.420.3.5. Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 4 of 13 66 Table 4.420.3: Cement and Embodied Carbon Limit Pathways Cement limits for use with any compliance method 4.420.3.2 through 4.420.3.5 Embodied Carbon limits for use with any compliance method 4.420.3.2 through 4.420.3.5 Minimum specified compressive strength f'c , psi Maximum ordinary Portland cement content, Ibs/yd3 (1) Maximum embodied carbon kg CO2e/m3, per Environmental Product Declaration up to 2500 362 260 2501-3000 410 289 3001-4000 456 313 4001-5000 503 338 5001-6000 531 356 6001-7000 594 394 Greater than 7000 657 433 up to 3000 light weight 512 578 Up to 4000 light weight 571 626 4001-5000 Tight weight 629 675 Notes (1) Portland cement of any type per ASTM C150. 4.420.3.1 Allowable Increases (1) Approved Cements. The maximum cement content may be increased proportionately above the tabulated value when using an approved cement, or blended cement, demonstrated by approved Environmental Product Declaration to have a plant -specific Environmental Product Declaration lower than 1040 kg CO2e/metric ton. The increase in allowable cement content is: 1040 / plant -specific Environmental Product Declaration %. (2) Cement and Embodied Carbon Limit Allowances. Cement or Embodied Carbon limits shown in Table 4.420.3 can be increased by 30% for concretes demonstrated to the Building Official as requiring high early strength. Such concretes may include but are not limited to, precast or prestressed concrete; beams and slabs above grade; and shotcrete. 4.420.3.2 Cement Limit Method — Mix Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 5 of 13 67 Cement content of a concrete mix using this method shall not exceed the value shown in Table 4.420.3. Use of this method is limited to concrete with specified compressive strength not exceeding 5,000 psi. 4.420.3.3. Cement Limit Method — Project Total cement content shall be based on total cement usage of all concrete mix designs within the same project. Total cement content for a project shall not exceed the value calculated according to Equation 4.420.3.3. Equation 4.420.3.3: Z(Cemn)(vn) < Z(Cemiim)(vn) Where, n = the total number of concrete mixtures for the project Cemn = the cement content for mixture n, kg/m3 or lb/yd3 Cemiim = the maximum cement content for mixture n per Table 4.420.3, kg/m3 or lb/yd3 vn = the volume of mixture n concrete to be placed, yd3 or m3 Calculations may use yd3 or m3 but must keep the same units throughout. 4.420.3.4 Embodied Carbon Method — Mix Mix embodied carbon of a concrete mix, based on an approved Environmental Product Declaration, shall not exceed the value given in Table 4.420.3. 4.420.3.5 Embodied Carbon Method — Project Total embodied carbon of all concrete mix designs within the same project (EC proj) shall not exceed the project limit (EC allowed) determined using Table 4.420.3 and Equation 4.420.3.5. Equation 4.420.3.5: Z(ECn )(vn) <_ Z(ECiim )(vn ) Where, n = the total number of concrete mixtures for the project ECn = the embodied carbon content for mixture n, per mixture Environmental Product Declaration, kgCO2e/m3 ECiim = the maximum embodied carbon content for mixture n per Table 4.420.3, kgCO2e/m3 vn = the volume of mixture n concrete to be placed, yd3 or m3 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 6 of 13 68 4.420.3.6 Verification and Enforcement Prior to the approval of the building permit application involving the placement of concrete, the permit applicant shall submit a completed Low -Carbon Concrete Compliance Form to the Building & Safety Division. If the permit applicant has not secured a concrete supplier at the time the permit application is submitted, the applicant may complete the Low -Carbon Concrete Compliance Form to calculate the maximum allowable cement and embodied carbon and shall certify by signature that they will meet maximum allowable limits at the time of construction. As a condition of such building permits, and prior to approving construction inspections and prior to placement of concrete, the permit applicant shall submit batch certificates and/or Environmental Product Declarations with an updated Low -Carbon Concrete Compliance Form to the Building & Safety Division. The batch certificates and/or Environmental Product Declarations, and the updated Low -Carbon Concrete Compliance Form shall be reviewed for compliance by the Building & Safety Division prior to performing further inspections or pouring concrete. When deviations from compliance with this section occur, the Building Official or their designee, is authorized to require the permit applicant to provide evidence of equivalent carbon reductions from the portions of remaining construction of the project to demonstrate alternative compliance with the intent of this chapter and payment of associated administrative fees. If the permit applicant is unable to provide evidence of equivalent carbon reductions, the Building & Safety Division reserves the right to penalize the permit applicant for the excess embodied carbon used in the project. Excess embodied carbon shall be determined by the amount of embodied carbon content in the project greater than ECiim per Equation 4.420.3.5, in metric tons. The maximum penalty shall be determined as follows: Pm = (ECX)($190) + A Where, Pm = the maximum penalty ($) ECX = the total excess embodied carbon content in the project, in metric tons determined from Equation 4.420.3.5. $190 = penalty per metric ton of excess embodied carbon ($/metric ton) A = Building and Safety Administrative Fee ($), refer to the City's Master Fee Schedule. For projects involving placement of concrete by, or on behalf of, the City of Dublin the City Project Manager for the project, or their designee, shall maintain accurate records of the total volume (in cubic yards) of all concrete placed, as well as the total compliant volume (in cubic yards) of all concrete placed. 4.420.3.7 Exemptions (a) Projects exempt from permits. Projects that do not require a building permit per Chapter 7.28, shall not be subject to the requirements in section 4.420 (b) Projects that do not involve the placement of ready -mix concrete. (c) Asphaltic concrete is not considered as concrete for the purposes of section 4.420 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 7 of 13 69 (d) Due to lack of commercial availability of low -carbon concrete options, shotcrete, gunite, and stucco are exempt from embodied carbon requirements. (e) Small projects as approved by the Building Official. (f) Hardship or infeasibility exemption. If an applicant for a project subject to section 4.420 believes that circumstances exist that make it a hardship or infeasible to meet the requirements of section 4.420, the applicant may request an exemption as set forth below. In applying for an exemption, the burden is on the applicant to show hardship or infeasibility. The applicant shall identify in writing the specific requirements of the standards for compliance that the project is unable to achieve and the circumstances that make it a hardship or infeasible for the project to comply with this chapter. Circumstances that constitute hardship or infeasibility may include, but are not limited to the following: (1) There is a lack of commercially available material necessary to comply with section 4.420; (2) The cost of achieving compliance is disproportionate to the overall cost of the project; (3) Compliance with the requirements would impair the historic integrity of buildings listed on a local, state or federal list or register of historic structures as regulated by the California Historic Building Code (Title 24, Part 8). (g) Granting of an exemption. If the Building Official determines that it is a hardship or infeasible for the applicant to fully meet the requirements of section 4.420 and that granting the requested exemption will not cause the building to fail to comply with the California Green Building Standards Code, the Building Official shall determine the maximum feasible threshold of compliance reasonably achievable for the project. In making this determination, the Building Official shall consider whether alternate, practical means of achieving the objectives of section 4.420 can be satisfied. If an exemption is granted, the applicant shall be required to comply with section 4.420 in all other respects and shall be required to achieve the threshold of compliance determined to be achievable by the Building Official. (h) Denial of exception. If the Building Official determines that it is reasonably possible for the applicant to fully meet the requirements of section 4.420, the request shall be denied, and the applicant shall be notified of the decision in writing within 60 days after receipt of the request for exemption. The project and compliance documentation shall be modified to comply with the standards for compliance. Section 10. ADDITION OF 7.94.120 TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE. Section 7.94.120 is hereby added to the Dublin Municipal Code to read as follows: 7.94.120 Section 5.420, Division 5.4, Chapter 5, Low Carbon Concrete -Added. A new Section 5.420 is added to read: 5.420 Low Carbon Concrete Requirements. 5.420.1 Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide standards and requirements for the composition of concrete, as defined herein, that maintains adequate strength and Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 8 of 13 70 durability for the intended application and at the same time reduces greenhouse gas emissions associated with concrete composition. 5.420.1.2 Applicability. The requirements of this section shall only be applicable to projects that require a building permit. 5.420.3 Compliance. Compliance with the requirements of this section shall be demonstrated through any of the compliance options in Sections 5.420.3.2 through 5.420.3.5. Table 5.420.3: Cement and Embodied Carbon Limit Pathways Cement limits for use with any compliance method 5.420.3.2 through 5.420.3.5 Embodied Carbon limits for use with any compliance method 5.420.3.2 through 5.420.3.5 Minimum specified compressive strength f'c , psi Maximum ordinary Portland cement content, Ibs/yd3 (1) Maximum embodied carbon kg CO2e/m3, per Environmental Product Declaration up to 2500 362 260 2501-3000 410 289 3001-4000 456 313 4001-5000 503 338 5001-6000 531 356 6001-7000 594 394 Greater than 7000 657 433 up to 3000 light weight 512 578 Up to 4000 light weight 571 626 4001-5000 Tight weight 629 675 Notes (1) Portland cement of any type per ASTM C150. 5.420.3.1 Allowable Increases (1) Approved Cements. The maximum cement content may be increased proportionately above the tabulated value when using an approved cement, or blended cement, demonstrated by approved Environmental Product Declaration to have a plant -specific Environmental Product Declaration lower than 1040 kg CO2e/metric ton. The increase in allowable cement content is: 1040 / plant -specific Environmental Product Declaration %. Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 9 of 13 71 (2) Cement and Embodied Carbon Limit Allowances. Cement or Embodied Carbon limits shown in Table 5.420.3 can be increased by 30% for concretes demonstrated to the Building Official as requiring high early strength. Such concretes may include but are not limited to, precast or prestressed concrete; beams and slabs above grade; and shotcrete. 5.420.3.2 Cement Limit Method — Mix Cement content of a concrete mix using this method shall not exceed the value shown in Table 5.420.3. Use of this method is limited to concrete with specified compressive strength not exceeding 5,000 psi. 5.420.3.3. Cement Limit Method — Project Total cement content shall be based on total cement usage of all concrete mix designs within the same project. Total cement content for a project shall not exceed the value calculated according to Equation 5.420.3.3. Equation 5.420.3.3: Z(Cemn)(vn) < Z(Cemiim)(vn) Where, n = the total number of concrete mixtures for the project Cemn = the cement content for mixture n, kg/m3 or lb/yd3 Cemiim = the maximum cement content for mixture n per Table 5.420.3, kg/m3 or lb/yd3 vn = the volume of mixture n concrete to be placed, yd3 or m3 Calculations may use yd3 or m3 but must keep the same units throughout. 5.420.3.4 Embodied Carbon Method — Mix Mix embodied carbon of a concrete mix, based on an approved Environmental Product Declaration, shall not exceed the value given in Table 5.420.3. 5.420.3.5 Embodied Carbon Method — Project Total embodied carbon of all concrete mix designs within the same project (EC proj) shall not exceed the project limit (EC allowed) determined using Table 5.420.3 and Equation 5.420.3.5. Equation 5.420.3.5: > (ECn )(vn) <_ I(ECiim )(vn ) Where, n = the total number of concrete mixtures for the project Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 10 of 13 72 ECn = the embodied carbon content for mixture n, per mixture Environmental Product Declaration, kgCO2e/m3 ECiim = the maximum embodied carbon content for mixture n per Table 4.420.3, kgCO2e/m3 vn = the volume of mixture n concrete to be placed, yd3 or m3 5.420.3.6 Verification and Enforcement Prior to the approval of the building permit application involving the placement of concrete, the permit applicant shall submit a completed Low -Carbon Concrete Compliance Form to the Building & Safety Division. If the permit applicant has not secured a concrete supplier at the time the permit application is submitted, the applicant may complete the Low -Carbon Concrete Compliance Form to calculate the maximum allowable cement and embodied carbon and shall certify by signature that they will meet maximum allowable limits at the time of construction. As a condition of such building permits, and prior to approving construction inspections and prior to placement of concrete, the permit applicant shall submit batch certificates and/or Environmental Product Declarations with an updated Low -Carbon Concrete Compliance Form to the Building & Safety Division. The batch certificates and/or Environmental Product Declarations, and the updated Low -Carbon Concrete Compliance Form shall be reviewed for compliance by the Building & Safety Division prior to performing further inspections or pouring concrete. When deviations from compliance with this section occur, the Building Official or their designee, is authorized to require the permit applicant to provide evidence of equivalent carbon reductions from the portions of remaining construction of the project to demonstrate alternative compliance with the intent of this chapter and payment of associated administrative fees. If the permit applicant is unable to provide evidence of equivalent carbon reductions, the Building & Safety Division reserves the right to penalize the permit applicant for the excess embodied carbon used in the project. Excess embodied carbon shall be determined by the amount of embodied carbon content in the project greater than ECiim per Equation 4.420.3.5, in metric tons. The maximum penalty shall be determined as follows: Pm = (ECX)($190) + A Where, Pm = the maximum penalty ($) ECX = the total excess embodied carbon content in the project, in metric tons determined from Equation 4.420.3.5. $190 = penalty per metric ton of excess embodied carbon ($/metric ton) A = Building and Safety Administrative Fee ($), refer to the City's Master Fee Schedule. For projects involving placement of concrete by, or on behalf of, the City of Dublin the City Project Manager for the project, or their designee, shall maintain accurate records of the total volume (in cubic yards) of all concrete placed, as well as the total compliant volume (in cubic yards) of all concrete placed. Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 11 of 13 73 5.420.3.7 Exemptions (a) Projects exempt from permits. Projects that do not require a building permit per Chapter 7.28, shall not be subject to the requirements in section 5.420. (b) Projects that do not involve the placement of ready -mix concrete. (c) Asphaltic concrete is not considered as concrete for the purposes of section 5.420 (d)Due to lack of commercial availability of low -carbon concrete options, shotcrete, gunite, and stucco are exempt from embodied carbon requirements. (e) Small projects as approved by the Building Official. (f) Hardship or infeasibility exemption. If an applicant for a project subject to section 5.420 believes that circumstances exist that make it a hardship or infeasible to meet the requirements of section 5.420, the applicant may request an exemption as set forth below. In applying for an exemption, the burden is on the applicant to show hardship or infeasibility. The applicant shall identify in writing the specific requirements of the standards for compliance that the project is unable to achieve and the circumstances that make it a hardship or infeasible for the project to comply with this chapter. Circumstances that constitute hardship or infeasibility may include, but are not limited to the following: (1) There is a lack of commercially available material necessary to comply with section 5.420; (2) The cost of achieving compliance is disproportionate to the overall cost of the project; (3) Compliance with the requirements would impair the historic integrity of buildings listed on a local, state, or federal list or register of historic structures as regulated by the California Historic Building Code (Title 24, Part 8). (g) Granting of an exemption. If the Building Official determines that it is a hardship or infeasible for the applicant to fully meet the requirements of section 5.420 and that granting the requested exemption will not cause the building to fail to comply with the California Green Building Standards Code, the Building Official shall determine the maximum feasible threshold of compliance reasonably achievable for the project. In making this determination, the Building Official shall consider whether alternate, practical means of achieving the objectives of section 5.420 can be satisfied. If an exemption is granted, the applicant shall be required to comply with section 5.420 in all other respects and shall be required to achieve the threshold of compliance determined to be achievable by the Building Official. (h) Denial of exception. If the Building Official determines that it is reasonably possible for the applicant to fully meet the requirements of section 5.420, the request shall be denied, and the applicant shall be notified of the decision in writing within 60 days after receipt of the request for exemption. The project and compliance documentation shall be modified to comply with the standards for compliance. {Signatures on the following page} Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 12 of 13 74 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin on this 17th day of September 2024, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 13 of 13 75 Attachment 2 II DUBLIN CALIFORNIA STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 6.1 DATE: September 3, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.ECT : Adding a Low Carbon Concrete Requirement to the City's Green Building Code in Coordination with the City's Climate Action Plan Prepared by: Nelson Pureco, Plan Check Engineer, and Shannan Young, Environmental & Sustainability Manager EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will consider introducing an ordinance amending the City's Green Building Code to add a requirement for the use of low carbon concrete and adopting a related resolution. The low carbon concrete requirements are in alignment with the City of Dublin Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond, Measure MM-2, Reduce the Embodied Greenhouse Gas Emissions Associated with Building Materials. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Take the following actions: 1) adopt the Resolution Approving Findings Regarding the Need for Local Amendments to Provisions in the California Green Building Standards Code as Adopted by the City; and 2) INTRODUCE the Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete). FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost associated with implementing the Ordinance is estimated to be approximately $85,000 to $140,000 per year for additional plan check and inspection time commitments. The costs may decrease over time as applicants become familiar with the requirements. These increased costs are accounted for in the City's Master Fee Schedule adopted in June 2024. Page 1 of 4 76 DESCRIPTION: Background The City of Dublin adopted the Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond (CAP 2030) on September 15, 2020 (Resolution 100-20). CAP 2030 includes five strategies with 22 measures intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and to put the City on the path to reach carbon neutrality by 2045. The five strategies in CAP 2030 are: Strategy 1 - Renewable and Carbon Free Electricity Strategy 2 - Building Efficiency and Electrification Strategy 3 - Sustainable Mobility and Land Use Strategy 4 - Materials and Waste Management Strategy 5 - Municipal Leadership Included under Strategy 4 is Measure MM-2, Reduce the Embodied Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) Associated with Building Materials. The embodied GHG emissions of a building are carbon dioxide or other GHGs generated by making and transporting building materials to a site, including mining, refining, and shipping. According to the Rocky Mountain Institute', 11 percent of global GHG emissions are generated during the lifecycle of building materials and concrete production is responsible for approximately 8 percent of global carbon emissions. Although CAP 2030 did not quantify the embodied GHG emissions from the consumption of building materials, the inclusion of Measure MM-2 acknowledges the importance of addressing embodied emission to achieve the 2045 carbon neutrality goal. Concrete is composed of an aggregate blend and cement. The GHG emissions associated with concrete can be reduced by minimizing cement use to the extent possible or by using cement alternatives called supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs). These include but are not limited to fly ash, slag, and glass pozzolans. Based on conversations with local ready -mix suppliers, Staff understands these cement alternatives to be locally available and have cost parity with cement. These low carbon concrete mixes are not new. The State of California Department of Transportation incorporated SCMs into the 2010 document "Guidelines for the Design & Inspection of Concrete" and noted that SCMs are cost effective and provide benefits to the strength, workability, permeability, and durability of concrete. Based on Staff's research and in alignment with the goals of CAP 2030, Staff proposes to amend the City's Green Building Code to add a requirement for the use of low carbon concrete. Analysis The proposed Ordinance would add Sections 7.94.085 and 7.94.120 to Chapter 7.94, Green Building Code, of the Dublin Municipal Code (DMC). The requirements are based on the low carbon concrete code adopted in 2019 by Marin County, who partnered with several entities and conducted robust stakeholder engagement to develop a 1 The Rocky Mountain Institute is an independent, non -partisan, non-profit organization of experts across disciplines working to accelerate the clean energy transition and improve lives. Page 2 of 4 77 regionally replicable building code amendment. Requirements would be applicable to all projects that require a building permit and that use ready -mix concrete. Projects that use bagged concrete, shotcrete, gunite, stucco, and asphaltic concrete (asphalt) would be exempt. Projects would demonstrate compliance with the low carbon concrete code by either using the cement limit equation or through the embodied carbon pathway. When using the embodied carbon method, the carbon in the concrete mix shall not exceed the values, as demonstrated via an Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) for the concrete mix. An EPD is a document that provides third -party verification of life -cycle analysis of products and goods. If an applicant is unable to meet the limits, the applicant has the option to use an alternative compliance pathway to demonstrate reduced equivalent carbon emissions reductions from the remaining portions of the project. If the applicant is unable to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate equivalent carbon emissions reductions, the Ordinance allows for the assessment of penalties based on the social cost of carbon as established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The Ordinance includes the calculation for assessing penalties. The current social cost of carbon is set at $190 per metric ton of carbon dioxide. The initial implementation of the proposed Ordinance would be an education and outreach effort led by the Public Works Department in conjunction with the Community Development Department. To ensure a successful launch of the low carbon concrete code, Staff recommends adoption with an effective date of January 1, 2025. The proposed modifications as described in Section 7.94.085 and 7.94.120 are necessary to limit carbon emissions associated with concrete construction, while ensuring adequate strength and durability for the intended use. Low carbon concrete is available locally and can be incorporated into projects occurring in the City. The reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from the use of low carbon concrete helps mitigate climate change and its negative effects such as extreme heat, droughts, intense storms, and flooding that may occur in the City, making these amendments reasonably necessary for local climatic reasons. In calendar year 2023, 2,903 building permits were issued. Of those permits, 11.6 percent (338 permits) would have been subject to this ordinance while 17.2 percent (499 permits) would require further review to determine if the project met an exemption. Therefore, at least 71.2 percent of permits issued met an exception and would not require a review for compliance. Based on the time it takes to review applications and enforce requirements during the plan check and inspection process, Staff estimates that the new requirements will add 45 minutes to the review time for smaller buildings, such as a single-family detached dwelling, to as much as four hours for a large commercial project. Review and inspection times will likely decrease over time as applicants, owners, contractors, and developers become more familiar with the standards. The effect on residential projects depends on the scope of the project. See examples listed below: • No Effect: o Work that is exempt from a Building permit Page 3 of 4 78 o Water heater replacement permits o Heating and air conditioning replacement permits o Electrical permits • Possible Minor Effect: o Repair work o New swimming pool permits without a concrete deck around the pool o Retaining walls • Moderate Effect: o New swimming pools with a concrete deck o Small additions o Accessory structures o New landscaping permits with concrete pathways • Full Effect: o New buildings o Accessory Dwellings Units o Additions Lastly, in order to amend our local Building Code, the City has to make certain legal findings that support the amendments to the State Code. Attached to this item is a resolution that makes those findings. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: Two community meetings were held on April 10, 2024 to inform stakeholders of the potential Ordinance and requirements. A combined 20 people attended, including both contractors and developers. A few questions were addressed regarding the documentation and the timeframe of the process. In accordance with State law, a public notice was published in the East Bay Times and posted at several locations throughout the City. The City Council Agenda was posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Resolution Approving Findings Regarding the Need for Local Amendments to Provisions in the California Green Building Standards Code as Adopted by the City 2) Exhibit A to the Resolution - California Green Building Standards Code Findings 3) Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete) 4) Underline Version of the Proposed Amendments to Chapter 7.94 of the Dublin Municipal Code Page 4 of 4 79 r DUBLIN CALIFORNIA STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 5.7 DATE: September 17, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.ECT: Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.24.020 of the Dublin Municipal Code Pertaining to the City's Conflict of Interest Code Prepared by: Camilla Getz, Assistant City Attorney EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At the June 4, 2024, City Council meeting, the City Council directed Staff to review the City's Conflict of Interest Code and determine if it needs to be updated. Staff conducted a review of the Code and determined that several positions should be added or deleted. The City Council will consider introducing an ordinance to update the list of designated positions that must file a Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Waive the reading and INTRODUCE the Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.24.020 of the Dublin Municipal Code Relating to the City's Conflict of Interest Code, and direct Staff to file the 2024 Local Agency Biennial Notice. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. DESCRIPTION: The Political Reform Act prohibits a public official from using their official position to influence a governmental decision in which they have a financial interest. The City must maintain a Conflict of Interest Code that identifies all officials and employees who make governmental decisions based on the positions they hold. The individuals identified in the Conflict of Interest Code must publicly disclose their designated financial interests by filing a Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700). The City's Conflict of Interest Code, Chapter 2.24 of the Dublin Municipal Code, identifies all positions within the City that participate in the making of governmental decisions. These Page 1 of 3 80 designated positions are required to disclose certain financial interests under state law. A local agency's conflict of interest code is not applicable to mayors, city councilmembers, planning commission members, city managers, or city attorneys, as Government Code Section 87200 requires full Form 700 disclosure for individuals holding these positions. The Political Reform Act requires the City to biennially review and determine whether amendments to the Code are required. (Gov. Code § 87306.5.) The last biennial revision to the City's Code was approved on November 1, 2022. The City Council is the code reviewing body for City agencies. Pursuant to Government Code Section 87306.5, City departments must determine whether amendments to the Code are necessary and notify the City Council if such amendments are required. (Gov. Code §§ 82011(c), 87306.5.) According to previous direction from the City Council and the requirements of the Political Reform Act, Staff completed a thorough review of the Conflict of Interest Code, the job specifications for all City employment positions, as well as the FPPC regulations governing the update process. Based on this review Staff recommends the following changes to Chapter 2.24.020: 1. Amend Section 2.24.020 of the Conflict of Interest Code entitled, "Designated Positions," to add four City positions determined by Staff to "make or participate in the making of governmental decisions." These positions (and accompanying disclosure categories) are: a. Accounting Manager (disclosure category 3) b. Principal Engineer (disclosure category 1) c. Deputy City Manager (disclosure category 3) d. Economic Development Manager (disclosure category 1) 2. Amend Section 2.24.020 of the Conflict of Interest Code entitled, "Designated Positions," to delete three City positions that have been eliminated. These positions are: a. City Clerk/Records Manager (deleted via Resolution No. 14-23) b. Heritage and Cultural Arts Manager (deleted via Resolution No. 72-23) c. Recreation Manager (deleted via Resolution No. 72-23) 3. Amend Section 2.24.020 of the Conflict of Interest Code titled "Designated Positions" to revise the title of three City positions already designated in the Code. Those positions, and accompanying disclosure category and revisions, are: a. Administrative Services Director (disclosure category 3). Revised to Finance Director (disclosure category 3). b. Assistant Director of Administrative Services (disclosure category 3). Revised to Assistant Finance Director (disclosure category 3). c. Recreation Manager (disclosure category 3). Revised to Parks and Community Services Manager (disclosure category 3). Page 2 of 3 81 4. Amend Section 2.24.020 of the Conflict of Interest Code titled "Designated Positions" to revise the disclosure category of the designated position Assistant Director of Parks and Community Services from disclosure categories "2, 3" to "1" to align with other similar designated positions in the Code. The City's amended Code will not be effective until it has been adopted by the City Council. (Gov. Code § 87303.) Staff recommends that the City Council waive the reading and introduce the ordinance amending the Conflict of Interest Code consistent with the changes described above, and direct Staff to file the 2024 Local Agency Biennial Notice. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: The City Council Agenda was posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.24.020 of the Dublin Municipal Code Relating to the City's Conflict of Interest Code 2) 2024 Local Agency Biennial Notice Page 3 of 3 82 Attachment I ORDINANCE NO. XX — 24 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN AMENDING CHAPTER 2.24.020 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE CITY'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act codified at Government Code Section 81000 et seq., requires every local government agency to review its Conflict of Interest Code biennially to determine whether amendments to the Code are required; and WHEREAS, following review of the Conflict of Interest Code, it was determined that the amendments contained in this Ordinance were appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, The City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows: Section 1. Chapter 2.24.020 is amended to read as follows (additions shown in italics and deletions shown in ctrikcthrough): For local officials specified in Government Code Section 87200 (including the Mayor, City Councilmembers, Planning Commissioners, City Manager, and City Attorney), no disclosure is required by this Conflict of Interest Code as full disclosure is required by Government Code Section 87200 et seq. The positions listed in this section are designated positions, and this section is hereby deemed the Appendix referenced in the provisions incorporated by Section 2.24.015. Officers and employees holding those positions are designated public officials, and are deemed to make, or participate in the making of, decisions which may foreseeably have a material financial effect on a financial interest of the designated public official. Each designated public official shall file an annual statement disclosing that public official's interests as required by the disclosure category applicable to that public official. Designated Position Disclosure Category Administrative Services Director 3 Accounting Manager 3 Assistant City Attorney 1 Assistant City Manager 1 Assistant to the City Manager 1 Assistant Director Administrativc Scrviccs 3 of Assistant Director of Community Development 1 Assistant Finance Director 3 Assistant Director of Parks and Community Services 1 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 1 of 4 83 Attachment I Designated Position Disclosure Category Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer 1 Associate Civil Engineer 1 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Manager 1 Chief Building Official 1 Chief Information Security Officer 1 City Clerk 3 City Clerk/Records Manager 3 Code Enforcement Officer 1 Communications Manager 1 Community Development Director 1 "Consultant"* as defined in FPPC Reg. sect. 18700.3 1 Deputy City Clerk 3 Deputy City Manager 3 Economic Development Director 1 Economic Development Manager 1 Environmental Coordinator 1 Environmental Sustainability Manager 1 Finance Director 3 Finance Analyst 1 Heritage Cultural Arts Manager 1- and Housing Specialist 1 Human Resources Director 3 Human Resources Manager 3 Information Services Manager 3 Management Analyst II 3 Parks and Community Services Director 1 Parks and Community Services Manager 3 Plan Check Engineer 1 Planning Manager 1 Principal Engineer 1 Principal Planner 1 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 2 of 4 84 Attachment I Designated Position Disclosure Category Public Works Director/Assistant City Engineer 1 Public Works Manager 1 Public Works Transportation and Operations Manager 1 Recreation Manager 3 Recreation Supervisor 2, 3 Senior Civil Engineer 1 Senior Code Enforcement Officer 1 Senior Management Analyst 3 Senior Planner 1 Special Projects Manager 1 Senior Public Works Inspector 1 Designated Boards and Commissions Disclosure Category Human Services Commission 1 Heritage and Cultural Arts Commission 1 Parks and Community Services Commission 1 * Consultants/new positions shall be included in the list of designated employees and shall disclose pursuant to the terms of the Disclosure Category 1, subject to the following limitation: The City Manager may determine in writing that a particular consultant or new position, although a "designated position," is hired to perform a range of duties that is limited in scope and thus is not required to fully comply with the disclosure requirements in this chapter. Such a written determination shall include a description of the consultant's or new position's duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of the disclosure requirements. The City Manager's determination is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this conflict of interest code. (Gov. Code Section 81008.) Section 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days following its final adoption. Section 3. Posting. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California. Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 3 of 4 85 Attachment I PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this th day of 2024, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 4 of 4 86 Attachment 2 2024 Local Agency Biennial Notice Name of Agency: Mailing Address: Contact Person Phone No. Email: Alternate Email. Accurate disclosure is essential to monitor whether officials have conflicts of interest and to help ensure public trust in government. The biennial review examines current programs to ensure that the agency's code includes disclosure by those agency officials who make or participate in making governmental decisions. This agency has reviewed its conflict of interest code and has determined that (check one BOX): ▪ An amendment is required. The following amendments are necessary: (Check all that apply.) ■ Include new positions ■ Revise disclosure categories ■ Revise the titles of existing positions ■ Delete titles of positions that have been abolished and/or positions that no longer make or participate in making governmental decisions ■ Other (describe) ▪ The code is currently under review by the code reviewing body. ▪ No amendment is required. (If your code is over five years old, amendments may be necessary.) Verification (to be completed if no amendment is required) This agency's code accurately designates all positions that make or participate in the making of governmental decisions. The disclosure assigned to those positions accurately requires that all investments, business positions, interests in real property, and sources of income that may foreseeably be affected materially by the decisions made by those holding designated positions are reported. The code includes all other provisions required by Government Code Section 87302. Signature of Chief Executive Officer Date All agencies must complete and return this notice regardless of how recently your code was approved or amended. Please return this notice no later than October 1, 2024, or by the date specified by your agency, if earlier, to: (PLACE RETURN ADDRESS OF CODE REVIEWING BODY HERE) PLEASE DO NOT RETURN THIS FORM TO THE FPPC. www.fppc.ca.gov FPPC Advice: advice@fppc.ca.gov (866.275.3772) Page 1 of 1 87 r DUBLIN CALIFORNIA STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 5.8 DATE: September 17, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.ECT : Agreement to Employ Colleen Tribby as City Manager Prepared by: Incoming City Manager Negotiating Committee (Councilmembers Josey and Qaadri) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will consider approval of an agreement to employ Colleen Tribby as the next City Manager of the City of Dublin. The terms and conditions of her employment were discussed with the appointed Negotiating Committee, consisting of Councilmembers Josey and Qaadri. The Negotiating Committee is recommending the approval of the agreement. The City Council will also consider an amendment to the City Salary Plan to establish the flat monthly salary for the position of City Manager, effective October 11, 2024, to conform with the proposed Agreement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Negotiating Committee recommends that the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the Agreement with Colleen Tribby for employment as City Manager and adopt the Resolution Amending the Salary Plan. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Sufficient funding is available in the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget. DESCRIPTION: At the August 20, 2024, regular meeting, the City Council reported that it had selected Colleen Tribby to succeed Linda Smith, contingent upon the City Council's approval of an employment agreement. At that meeting, the City Council also appointed a Negotiating Committee, consisting of Councilmembers Josey and Qaadri, to meet with the prospective manager to discuss the terms and conditions of her employment as City Manager. Since that time, the Committee and Ms. Tribby have discussed the terms and conditions of employment. As a result of those discussions, the Page 1 of 2 88 Committee is recommending that the City Council approve an agreement with Ms. Tribby for her employment as City Manager (Attachment 1). Included in the City's personnel system are Resolutions that address the salary ranges of full-time and part-time personnel. The attached resolution (Attachment 2) is a proposed amendment to the City Salary Plan for full-time personnel that would establish a flat monthly salary for the position of City Manager, effective October 11, 2024, to conform with the proposed Agreement. The basic terms of the proposed agreement are as follows: • Initial five-year term, beginning October 11, 2024 and ending October 10, 2029. • Base salary of $28,896 per month, with cost -of -living adjustments each July 1 beginning in 2025 of a minimum of 0.5% and a maximum of 3.5%. • Standard benefits package, including PERS classic retirement, medical, dental, and other benefits that accrue to City employees. • Automobile allowance of $450 per month. • Technology allowance of $1,500 per year. • City deferred compensation contribution of $5,000 per year. • 31 days of general leave and 12 days of management leave. • Severance: Except for termination for cause, City to pay a severance payment equal to 12 months of salary. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: The City Council Agenda was posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Agreement between the City of Dublin and Colleen Tribby for Employment as City Manager 2) Exhibit A to the Agreement 3) Resolution Amending the Salary Plan Page 2 of 2 89 Attachment I AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER This Agreement is entered as of September 17, 2024 by and between the City of Dublin, California, a municipal corporation and general law city (the "City"), and Colleen Tribby, an individual (the "City Manager"). The City and the City Manager are sometimes individually referred to as a "Party" and collectively as "Parties" in this Agreement. RECITALS WHEREAS, the City requires the services of a City Manager; and, WHEREAS, the City Manager has the necessary education, executive ability, and qualifications to serve as the City's City Manager; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Dublin (the "City Council) desires to employ the City Manager to serve as the City Manager of City. WHEREAS, in consideration of these Recitals and the performance by the Parties of the promises, covenants, and conditions contained in this Agreement, the Parties agree as follows: AGREEMENT I. EMPLOYMENT OF THE CITY MANAGER. The City, consistent with the provisions of City Municipal Code Chapter 2.04 (all subsequent Chapter or Section references are to the Municipal Code unless otherwise noted), appoints and employs, effective upon the separation of the City's current City Manager, which is anticipated to be on October 10, 2024, Colleen Tribby as its City Manager, and Colleen Tribby hereby accepts such employment effective on October 11, 2024 ("the Appointment Date"). During the term of employment, the City Manager shall not undertake any employment other than as City Manager of the City, except that she may also serve as the chief executive of other legal entities without violating this Agreement when appointed to such position or positions by the City Council and she may also coach youth basketball provided that it does not interfere with her role as City Manager. 1 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 90 Attachment I II. COMMITMENTS OF THE PARTIES. A. City Manager Commitments. 1. Duties and Authority. (a) The City Manager shall have those powers and perform all of the duties of the City Manager as set forth in the laws of the State of California, Municipal Code Chapter 2.04, and City policies and procedures approved by the City Council from time to time. (b) The City Manager shall administer and enforce policies established by the City Council and promulgate rules and regulations as necessary to implement City Council policies and direct the work of all appointive City officers and departments except those that are directly appointed by or report directly to the City Council. 2. Hours of Work. (a) The City Manager is an exempt, at -will employee but is expected to engage in those hours of work that are necessary to fulfill the obligations of the City Manager's position. The City Manager does not have set hours of work as the City Manager is expected to be available at all times. (b) It is recognized that the City Manager must devote a great deal of time to the business of the City outside of the City's customary office hours, and to that end the City Manager's schedule of work each day and week shall vary in accordance with the work required to be performed. The City Manager shall spend sufficient hours on site to perform the City Manager's duties; however, the City Manager has discretion over the City Manager's work schedule and work location. 3. Disability or inability to perform. In the event the City Manager becomes mentally or physically incapable of performing the City Manager's functions and duties with reasonable accommodation and it reasonably appears such incapacity will last for more than six months, the City Council may terminate the City Manager. If the City Council does elect to terminate the City Manager due to incapacity, the City Manager shall receive all severance benefits provided in Section V.0 below. 2 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 91 Attachment I B. City Commitments. 1. As of the Appointment Date, the City shall provide the City Manager with the compensation and benefits, as set forth in Section III below. 2. The City shall pay for or provide the City Manager reimbursement for all actual business expenses consistent with Government Code section 53234 et seq., also known as "AB 1234." The City shall provide the City Manager a City credit card to charge legally authorized and necessary City business expenses. 3. The City agrees to pay the professional dues or membership dues and subscriptions on behalf of the City Manager as may be agreed by City Manager and City Council, including the International City Manager's Association ("ICMA"). 4. The City agrees to pay the travel and subsistence expenses of the City Manager to pursue official and other functions for the City, and meetings and occasions to continue the professional development of the City Manager, including, but not limited to, national, regional, state, and local conferences, and governmental groups and committees upon which the City Manager serves as a member, subject to annual review by the City Council. 5. The City also agrees to pay for the travel and subsistence expenses of the City Manager for short courses, institutes and seminars that are necessary for the performance of City Manager duties as set forth in Municipal Code Section 2.04.060. C. City Council Commitments. 1. The City Council sets policy for the governance and administration of the City, and it implements its policies through the City Manager. 2. The City Council recognizes that to meet the challenges facing the City it must exercise decisive policy leadership. As one step in carrying out this leadership responsibility, the City Council commits to spending time each year outside of regular City Council meetings to work with the City Manager and staff on creating and revisiting the City's strategic plan, for setting goals and priorities for the City government, and to work on issues that may be inhibiting the maximal achievement of City goals. Likewise, each member of the City Council will make sufficient time available to the City Manager each week to provide an opportunity to be briefed on City issues. 3. The City Council agrees none of its individual members will order the appointment or removal of any person to any office or employment under the supervision and control of the City Manager. 3 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 92 Attachment I D. Mutual Commitments. 1. Strategic Workshops. (a) As soon as practicable after October 11, 2024, the City Council and the City Manager will meet to review the City's existing Strategic Plan and/or set out goals and priorities for the City Manager to implement prior to the City Manager's annual performance evaluation or such other dates as determined in the course of the meeting. (b) Thereafter the review and update of the City Council's Strategic Plan will occur bi-annually between January 1st and March 31st, in accordance with the City's budget cycle. For purposes of clarity, the City Council and the City Manager shall further establish a relative priority among those goals and objectives within the Strategic Plan. 2. Annual Performance Evaluation. (a) The City Council shall conduct an evaluation of the City Manager's performance at least once each year. The City Council and the City Manager agree that performance evaluations, for the purpose of mid -course corrections, may occur at any time. The parties agree that the initial evaluation shall occur approximately eight months following the Appointment Date and that subsequent evaluations shall occur shortly before or after June 1 of each year thereafter. (b) The annual review and evaluation shall be in accordance with specific criteria developed jointly by the City Council and the City Manager during the initial strategic planning and goal setting workshop described in Section II.D.1(a) above. Such criteria may from time to time be added to or deleted as the City Council determines in consultation with the City Manager. (c) In addition to the annual strategic plan workshops the City Council and the City Manager may further define such goals and performance objectives during the annual evaluation as they mutually determine are necessary for the proper operation of the City for the attainment of the City Council's policy objectives. The City Council and the City Manager shall further establish a relative priority among those goals and performance objectives. The Parties may use an outside facilitator paid for by City to assist them in conducting the City Manager's annual performance evaluation. (d) The City Manager shall hold annual team building retreats with key Departmental personnel. 4 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 93 Attachment I 3. ICMA Code of Ethics. (a) The Parties acknowledge that the City Manager is a member of the ICMA and desire that the City Manager be subject to and comply with the ICMA Code of Ethics, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A. (b) The City and the City Council agree that neither the City Council nor any of its members will give the City Manager any order, direction, or request that would require the City Manager to violate the ICMA Code of Ethics. III. COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS. The City agrees to provide the following compensation to the City Manager: A. Compensation and Required Employer Costs. 1. Base Salary. (a) The initial salary for the position of City Manager shall be $28,896 per month. On July 1, 2025 and each July 1 thereafter during the Initial Term (as defined in Section VI.A.1), the then -existing salary shall be increased (but not decreased) by the percentage change between February of the then -prior year and February of the then -current year in the consumer product index for urban wage earners and clerical workers in San Francisco -Oakland -Hayward, California. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, any automatic increase implemented pursuant to the foregoing sentence shall not be less than 0.5% nor more than 3.5%. The City agrees to reevaluate the salary after each performance evaluation following the initial performance evaluation described in Section II.D.2(a) above. (b) The City Manager shall be paid at the same intervals and in the same manner as regular City employees. (c) The City shall not at any time during the term of this Agreement reduce the base salary, compensation or other financial benefits of the City Manager, unless as part of a general City management salary reduction, and then in no greater percentage than the average reduction of all designated management employees. 2. Pay -for -Performance. (a) To provide a recognition for the City Manager to produce laudable results for the organization, the City Council agrees to consider providing a 5 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 94 Attachment I Pay -for -Performance payment for meeting or exceeding specific goals established by City Council that are achieved by the City Manager. The City Manager will be eligible at the sole discretion of the City Council for a Pay -for -Performance payment that is equivalent to the miscellaneous employees Pay -for -Performance program. (b) Any adjustment in earnings under this section shall be included as "compensation earnable" by the City Manager in reporting to the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) for annual pension credit, but only to the extent, if any, that Ca1PERS will consider it to be "compensation earnable." 3. Required State Costs. The following costs, to the extent they are applicable, shall be borne by the City: (a) Unemployment Compensation. (b) California Public Employees Retirement System (Ca1PERS). The City contracts with the CalPERS for retirement benefits. The City and the City Manager's contributions to CalPERS shall be the same as the contributions provided to and made by classic CalPERS miscellaneous employees of the City of Dublin. In addition, the City Manager shall be eligible for the CalPERS Third Level 1959 Survivor Benefits. The City shall pay the portion required by Ca1PERS, and the City Manager shall pay $2 per month. (c) The cost of any fidelity or other bonds required by law for the City Manager. (d) The cost to defend and indemnify the City Manager as provided in Section VI.E below. (e) Workers Compensation. B. Leave and Basic Benefits. 1. Holidays. The City Manager shall receive the same paid holidays as allocated to miscellaneous general City employees. 2. Leave Allowance: (a) General Leave: 6 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 95 Attachment I The City Manager shall be required to cashout all general leave as of October 11, 2024 at her Assistant City Manager rate. The City Manager shall then receive thirty-one (31) days of general leave on October 11, 2024 and the first day of the pay period following each October 11th thereafter so long as the Agreement remains in effect. Such leave shall be otherwise subject to the same rules applicable to City management employees. Annually, on the last day of the pay period in which October 11th falls each year, City Manager may elect to be compensated for any unused general leave granted the previous year not to exceed 160 hours. (b) Management Leave: On the first day of the pay period following October 11th of each year during the term of this agreement, City Manager shall receive twelve (12) days of "Management Leave." This leave is treated differently than other leave, in that if the City Manager is unable to use this leave by the last day of the pay period that includes October 11th of the year following the City Manager's receiving it, City Manager will be compensated for any unused Management Leave at that time. Such compensation shall be based upon the City Manager's base salary identified in Section III.A.1(a) above. (c) Sick Leave: The City Manager shall accrue sick leave subject to the same rules applicable to City management employees. (d) Payments upon Resignation or Termination: In the event that the City Manager's services are terminated for any reason, the City Manager shall be compensated for any unused general leave and management leave, but not for general leave that has been converted to sick leave. Such compensation shall be based upon the City Manager's base salary identified in Section III.A.1(a) above. 3. Automobile Allowance. Beginning October 11, 2024, the City Manager shall be provided a monthly automobile allowance of $450.00 for the use of a personal vehicle for CITY purposes. 4. Insurance The City Manager shall receive the same health, dental, vision, life, long term disability coverage available to the designated management employees of the City. 7 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 96 Attachment I 5. Benefits that Accrue to Other Employees. The City Manager shall be entitled to all compensation benefits, rights, and privileges accorded to City's designated management employees except as otherwise provided in this Agreement. If there is any conflict between this Agreement and any resolution fixing compensation and benefits for City's designated management employees or other unclassified/miscellaneous employees, this Agreement shall control. 6. Technology Allowance. Given the importance of technological tools to the effective and efficient business of City government, the City shall provide the City Manager with an annual $1,500 technology allowance. The technology allowance shall be paid with the first of the City's adopted pay periods that occur after October 11th of each year, beginning in 2024. IV. SECURITY. A. Pensions. 1. California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS). For the purposes of CalPERS reporting, the City shall treat as "compensation earnable" all payments that Ca1PERS will consider to be "compensation earnable." 2. Deferred Compensation. The City agrees to the City Manager's participation in a Deferred Compensation Plan. City shall contribute $5,000 annually to such a Plan on the City Manager's account commencing in October 2024. The annual contribution shall be prorated on a monthly basis. V. SEPARATION. A. Resignation. The City Manager may resign at any time and agrees to give the City at least 60 days advance written notice of the effective date of the City Manager's resignation, unless the Parties to this agreement mutually agree to other notice. B. Non -Renewal of Employment Agreement, Termination & Removal. 8 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 97 Attachment I 1. The City Manager is an at -will employee serving at the pleasure of the City Council, as provided in Government Code Section 36506. 2. The City Council may terminate the City Manager at any time, with or without cause, by a majority vote of its members. Notice of termination or non - renewal of this employment agreement shall be provided to the City Manager in writing consistent with this Agreement. 3. The City Manager shall not be removed during the 90-day period preceding or following any City election for membership on the City Council, or during the 90-day period following any change in membership of the City Council, except upon four -fifths vote of the City Council. 4. Given the at -will nature of the position of City Manager, an important element of the employment agreement pertains to termination. It is in both the City's interest and that of the City Manager that any separation of the City Manager is done in a businesslike manner. C. Severance Pay. 1. In the event that the City Council terminates the City Manager's employment for reasons other than for "cause" as further defined under subparagraph D below, the City shall pay to the City Manager a Severance Payment. The Severance Payment shall be equal to twelve (12) months of the base salary on the effective date of termination. In the event that the City is obligated to make the Severance Payment, the amount shall be paid to the City Manager, at the City Manager's option, in either equal monthly installments commencing on the 10th work day following the date of termination or in a lump sum. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the foregoing, the Parties agree that in no event shall the City Manager receive a cash settlement upon termination of this Agreement in excess of the maximum cash settlement authorized by subdivision (a) of Government Code section 53260. 2. In addition, in accordance with Government Code section 53261, the City will reimburse the City Manager for the premiums for the City Manager's medical and dental insurances for a period following the effective date of termination equal to the number of months then being used to calculate the amount of the Severance Payment under Section V.C.1. at the rates in effect on such dates, provided that such reimbursements will terminate upon the City Manager's retirement or when the City Manager finds other employment so long as the other employment includes paid coverage for medical and dental insurance. 9 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 98 Attachment I 3. In the event the City refuses, following written notice of noncompliance, to comply with any provision in this Employment Agreement benefiting the City Manager, or the City Manager resigns following a suggestion, whether formal or informal, by a majority of the City Council that the City Manager resign, or the City Council imposes a material reduction in the powers and authority of the City Manager, then, in that event, the City Manager may, at the City Manager's option, be deemed to be "terminated" as of the date of such refusal to comply or suggestion to resign and this severance pay provision shall be actuated. D. Separation for Cause. 1. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section V.0 above, the City Manager may be terminated for cause. For purposes of this Agreement, "cause" shall mean one or more the following: (a) Conviction of a felony, or conviction of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude; (b) Commission of an act of moral turpitude; (i) the City Council will not make a finding or determination about whether the City Manager has engaged in such conduct without first providing the City Manager a full, fair opportunity to rebut, defend and justify any such alleged act involving moral turpitude in an open or closed session, at the sole choice of the City Manager. (c) Abuse of non-prescription or prescription drugs, alcohol or controlled substances that affect the performance of the Manager's duties; (d) Repeated and extended absences from the City Manager's office and duties, which absences have not been approved by the City Council. (e) Violation of the City's policies concerning sexual (f) Material breach of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 2. In the event the City terminates the City Manager for cause, then the City may terminate this Agreement immediately, and the City Manager shall be harassment; 10 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 99 Attachment I entitled to only the compensation accrued up to the date of termination and such other termination benefits and payments as may be required by law. The City Manager shall not be entitled to any severance benefits provided by Section V.0 above. 3. In the event the City terminates the City Manager for cause, the City, the Mayor and/or the City Council members and the City Manager agree that neither Party shall make any written or oral statements to members of the public or the press concerning the City Manager's termination except in the form of a joint press release which is mutually agreeable to both Parties. The joint press release shall not contain any text or information that would be disparaging to either Party. Provided, however, that either Party may verbally repeat the substance of any such press release in response to inquiries by members of the press or public. E. Payment for Unused Leave Balance. In the event the City Manager dies while employed by the City under this Agreement, the City Manager's beneficiaries, or those entitled to the City Manager's estate, shall be entitled to the City Manager's earned but then -unpaid salary, and any in - lieu payments for then -accrued benefits, including compensation for any unused general and management leave in accordance with Section III.B.2(c) above. VI. GENERAL PROVISIONS. A. Term. 1. The Initial Term shall be for a period of 60 months commencing on October 11, 2024, and continuing until October 11, 2029 ("the Termination Date"). 2. This Agreement shall automatically renew as provided herein unless the City gives the City Manager timely notice of non -renewal. The City must give the City Manager written notice of non -renewal at least twelve (12) months prior to the Termination Date or any succeeding Termination Date, as defined in the next sentence. Unless such notice of non -renewal is timely given, this Agreement shall automatically renew for an additional three-year Term and a new Termination Date shall be accordingly established. B. Provisions that Survive Termination. Many sections of this Agreement are intended by their terms to survive the City Manager's termination of employment with the City, including but limited to Sections IV, V.C, V.E, and VI.E above. These sections, and the others so intended, shall survive termination of employment and termination of this Agreement. 11 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 100 Attachment I C. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended at any time by mutual written agreement of the City and the City Manager. D. Conflict of Interest. 1. The City Manager shall not engage in any business or transaction or shall have a financial or other personal interest or association, direct or indirect, which is in conflict with the proper discharge of official duties or would tend to impair independence of judgment or action in the performance of official duties. Personal as distinguished from financial interest includes an interest arising from blood or marriage relationships or close business, personal, or political associations. This section shall not serve to prohibit independent acts or other forms of enterprise during those hours not covered by active City employment, providing such acts do not constitute a conflict of interest as defined herein. 2. The City Manager shall also be subject to the conflict of interest provisions of the California Government Code and any conflict of interest code applicable to the City Manager's City employment. 3. The City Manager is solely responsible for submitting to the City Clerk the appropriate Conflict of Interest Statements at the time of appointment, annually thereafter, and at the time of separation from the position. E. Indemnification. 1. The City shall defend, save harmless and indemnify the City Manager against any claim or action to the extent required by, and subject to the limitations contained in, Government Code sections 825-825.6 and Government Code sections 995-996.6. The City may compromise and settle any such claim or suit and pay the amount of any settlement or judgment rendered thereon. 2. In the event that the City Manager shall serve as the chief executive of other City -controlled legal entities, then the City agrees, for the purposes of the indemnity and defense obligations under this section and Government Code sections 825-825.6 and 995-996.6, that any actions or omissions within the scope of those duties shall be treated as within the scope of City Manager's employment by the City. F. Severability. 12 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 101 Attachment I If any clause, sentence, part, section, or portion of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal or unenforceable, such clause, sentence, part, section, or portion so found shall be regarded as though it were not part of this Agreement and the remaining parts of this Agreement shall be fully binding and enforceable by the Parties hereto. G. Jurisdiction and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and the Parties agree that venue for legal action concerning any aspect of the Agreement in State Court shall be maintained in Alameda County Superior Court and for an action in Federal Court shall be in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. H. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the Parties, which has been jointly drafted by the Parties, and no representations have been made or relied upon except as set forth in this Agreement which may be amended or modified only by a written, fully executed agreement of the Parties. I. Notice. Any notice, amendments, or additions to this Agreement, including change of address of either party during the term of this Agreement, which the City Manager or the City shall be required, or may desire, to make shall be in writing and shall be sent by prepaid first class mail or hand -delivered to the respective Parties as follows: If to the City: City Clerk City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 If to the City Manager: Colleen Tribb 13 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 102 Attachment I VII. EXECUTION IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT in duplicate at Dublin, California, as of the date set forth above. CITY OF DUBLIN CITY MANAGER By: Michael McCorriston, Mayor Colleen Tribby ATTEST: Marsha Moore, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Bakker, City Attorney 14 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER 103 Attachment 2 - Exhibit A ICMA CODE OF ETHICS The mission of ICMA is to create excellence in local governance by developing and fostering professional local government management worldwide. To further this mission, certain principles, as enforced by the Rules of Procedure, shall govern the conduct of every member of ICMA, who shall: 1. We believe professional management is essential to effective, efficient, equitable, and democratic local government. 2. Affirm the dignity and worth of local government services and maintain a deep sense of social responsibility as a trusted public servant. 3. Be dedicated to the highest ideals of honor and integrity in all public and personal relationships in order that the member may merit the respect and confidence of the elected officials, of other officials and employees, and of the public. 4. Serve the best interests of all community members. 5. Submit policy proposals to elected officials; provide them with facts, and technical and professional advice about policy options; and collaborate with them in setting goals for the community and organization. 6. Recognize that elected representatives are accountable to their community for the decisions they make; members are responsible for implementing those decisions. 7. Refrain from all political activities which undermine public confidence in professional administrators. Refrain from participation in the election of the members of the employing legislative body. 8. Make it a duty continually to improve the member's professional ability and to develop the competence of associates in the use of management techniques. 9. Keep the community informed on local government affairs. Encourage and facilitate active engagement and constructive communication between community members and all local government officials. 10. Resist any encroachment on professional responsibilities, believing the member should be free to carry out official policies without interference, and handle each problem without discrimination on the basis of principle and justice. 11. Manage all personnel matters with fairness and impartiality. 12. Public office is a public trust. A member shall not leverage his or her position for personal gain or benefit. Adopted by the ICMA Executive Board in 1924, and most recently revised by the membership in April 2023. ICMA 104 Attachment 3 RESOLUTION NO. XXX-24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN AMENDING THE SALARY PLAN WHEREAS, in accordance with the City's Personnel System Rules, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 55-24 and subsequent Resolutions which comprise the Salary Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the position of City Manager shall be covered under Article I, Section A of the Plan: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said position shall be paid a flat monthly rate within the salary plan as follows: City Manager (Contract): $28,896 (flat rate) BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this document shall become a part of the official Salary Plan for the City of Dublin; and that the changes contained herein shall be effective October 11, 2024. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September, 2024, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted 09/17/2024 Page 1 of 1 105 Agenda Item 6.1 STAFF REPORT DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL CALIFORNIA DATE: TO: FROM: SU B,ECT: September 17, 2024 Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Linda Smith, City Manager Hexcel Redevelopment (PLPA-2022-00038) Prepared by: Gaspare Annibale, Associate Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will consider the Hexcel Redevelopment Project, which redevelops an 8.81-acre site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The project would demolish the existing 62,175-square- foot former Hexcel research and development building and construct a new 125,532-square-foot light industrial building with 217 parking stalls and related site improvements. The project was first presented to the City Council on March 19, 2024, and the City Council continued the project to a date uncertain so the Applicant could address City Council comments related to the overall project design, compatibility with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, and landscape buffer to adjacent properties. The Applicant has since revised the project design and landscaping in response to comments. Requested approvals include a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. The City Council will also consider certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing, deliberate, and take the following actions: 1) adopt the Resolution Certifying an Environmental Impact Report and Adopting Environmental Impact Findings, Findings Regarding Alternatives, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project; 2) waive the reading and INTRODUCE the Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map and Approving a Planned Development Zoning District with Related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project; and 3) adopt the Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost associated with processing the project application is borne by the Applicant. Page 1 of 7 106 DESCRIPTION: Background Overton Moore Properties is proposing to demolish the existing 62,175-square-foot Hexcel research and development building located 11711 Dublin Boulevard and construct a new 125,304-square-foot light industrial building to appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses. Requested approvals include a PD Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. Figure 1. Project Location On March 19, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. At the meeting, the City Council raised concerns with the project design and compatibility with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, and landscape screening to buffer uses to the north and east of the project site. At the conclusion of the discussion, the City Council continued the project to a date uncertain in order to provide time for the applicant to address these concerns. Revisions to the Project Since the March City Council meeting, the Applicant has made the following changes to the project to address the City Council's comments and concerns, and these changes have been incorporated into the Site Development Review Permit: • Revised the project design with the use of brick veneer and muted taupe and earth tones to complement the brick and soften the building. The massing of the building is broken up using reveals, paint color, material changes, and articulation, allowing the scale to reflect a pedestrian orientation. The exterior employs channel canopies with hanging rod details above the entrances inspired by historical industrial buildings, black channel trim around the storefront system featuring gray glazing carrying the theme of the canopy, brick wainscot flanking the main entrances and storefront glazing, accent paint to match the brick color and provide continuity across building facades, and recessed arch details inspired by historical brick arched windows. At the tenant locations and in the mezzanine areas, windows and glazing reflect a stronger vertical orientation with simple frames. The Page 2 of 7 107 building would have two-story glazing at the proposed office spaces on the north, east and northwestern elevations, primarily along Dublin Boulevard, maximizing natural light into the office and mezzanine spaces and providing distinct office entrances for multiple tenants. • Added a wood fencing element at the entrance to tie with Heritage Park, including a wood arbor, fences flanking the main entrance, and stone bases. • Refined the landscape plan to better match the existing landscape around Heritage Park. • Added more trees and shrubbery and modified the shrubbery to a fast-growing species to provide additional screening from Dublin Boulevard at the north and from Heritage Park to the east. • Included a stone monument commemorative plaque and located it at the northeast corner of site to provide high visibility. With this revised design the applicant proposes a slightly larger and taller building, 228 square feet larger and six inches taller. The planned development zoning limits the floor area ratio (FAR) to 0.33 and the maximum building height to 40 feet. Even with the minimal increase in the building area, the project would still meet the allowable FAR of 0.33. The new building height (40'6") is inclusive of the parapet, which is an architectural feature. Per the Dublin Municipal Code (DMC), architectural features may be a maximum of 15 percent higher than the height limit of the applicable zone, therefore, the new building design complies with the allowable height limit. Figure 3. Proposed Building Perspective Existing landscaping west of the main driveway and new landscaping east of the main driveway would provide a landscape buffer along Dublin Boulevard to help soften the project frontage. Furthermore, along the southern boundary of the project site, all existing landscaping would remain within Parcel 2, which provides a buffer from Interstate-580 and the rear of the building. Large shade trees in the parking lot area would provide shade and reduce the urban heat island effect. The landscape design preserves the existing heritage trees on site and incorporates them into the site design. New landscape screening which includes 48 trees and matches the plant pallet Page 3 of 7 108 found in the Historic Area is provided along Dublin Boulevard to screen and soften the building from public view. This includes preserving the existing trees and planting 38 new trees ranging from 15 feet to 70 feet tall at maturity and new fast-growing shrubbery. Figures 4 and 5 below are renderings of the landscaping. Figure 4. Proposed Dublin Boulevard Frontage Landscaping Figure 5. Proposed Parking Lot Landscaping The landscaping along the eastern property line provides new shrubbery and trees to screen the project from the adjacent properties. A total of 18 trees would be provided east of the proposed building, which includes one existing Chinese elm tree to remain and 17 new trees ranging in height from 30 feet to 50 feet at maturity. Shrubbery eight feet in height at maturity would also be planted to further buffer the site in addition to the existing landscaping on the adjacent property to the east between the project site and the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Pioneer Cemetery. A condition of approval has been provided to ensure this landscaping is protected during grading/construction activities. Specifically, the new landscaping southeast of the proposed building would provide screening Page 4 of 7 109 from the Dublin Pioneer Cemetery and the dense tree canopy on the cemetery property. In addition to the shrubbery noted above, 14 new trees would be planted in this area to screen the building from view of the cemetery. Figure 6 shows the proposed building perspective view from the Dublin Pioneer Cemetery. Figure 6. Proposed Project Site View from Dublin Pioneer Cemetery The draft Ordinance amending the Zoning Map and approving Planned Development Zoning with related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans is included as Attachment 7. The Resolution approving the Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit is included as Attachment 8, with the Project Plans (Attachment 9) and the Arborist Report (Attachment 10). A complete discussion of the project is provided in the Staff Report of March 19, 2024 (Attachment 12). ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed project. On May 15, 2023, the City issued a Notice of Preparation for an EIR and held a public scoping meeting on May 25, 2023. The City received three letters regarding the scope of the EIR. Subsequently, a Draft EIR was prepared for the proposed project and circulated for a 45-day public review period from August 21, 2023 to October 5, 2023. The City received three comment letters during the public review Page 5 of 7 110 period. In addition, a fourth letter was received after the public review period. Responses have been prepared for each of the comments received by the City. The Draft EIR, comments and associated responses, and changes and clarifications to the Draft EIR constitute the Final EIR (Attachment 2). The environmental document prepared for the project is a Focused EIR that evaluates potential impacts of a limited number of environmental issue areas that the City determined to be significant (CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(c)(3)). After preparation of an Initial Study, the City determined that the proposed project would have significant or potentially significant impacts in the following topic areas that require further analysis and are therefore discussed in the Draft EIR: • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources* • Energy • Geology and Soils • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Tribal Cultural Resources The Draft EIR concludes that the proposed project would have a significant and unavoidable impact on Cultural Resources (noted above with *). The remaining topic areas have mitigation measures that have been prepared to reduce impacts in these areas to a level that is less than significant. Attachment 12 provides an overview of all topic areas. After the EIR was prepared for the project, the applicant revised the architecture and landscape plan and increased the size of the building by 228 square feet and increased the height by six inches in response to City Council concerns, as discussed above. These changes would not affect any of the conclusions in the Initial Study and EIR because they are related to visual changes that would result in making the proposed building blend in better with the surrounding Historic Area. The minimal increase in the footprint and height would not substantially change the visual appearance or bulk/scale of the building such that the initial study conclusions regarding aesthetics would be affected. The minimal increase to the size of the building would not substantially change the required excavation and grading. The proposed changes would not result in any additional or more severe impacts from what was already analyzed, and no new mitigation measures are required. The City Council resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report is included as Attachment 1. To approve the project, the City Council must make findings regarding significant impacts and mitigation measures (Attachment 3), make findings concerning infeasibility of alternatives and potential additional mitigation measures (Attachment 4), and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) (Attachment 5) that identifies all environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated and explains why the benefits of the project outweigh its unavoidable environmental impacts. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is included as Attachment 6. Page 6 of 7 111 STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: Two City -led Community Meetings were held on October 25 and 26, 2023, to provide Dublin residents with information about the proposed Hexcel Redevelopment project. Staff provided a presentation that included an overview of the City's development review process and the proposed project. Questions were asked about the project's impact on infrastructure capacity and the general contractor that would be used for the project. Comments were also provided regarding the EIR and project design. In accordance with State law, a public notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the proposed project to advertise the project and upcoming public hearing. A public notice was also published in the East Bay Times and posted at several locations throughout the City. A Planning Application sign was posted on the project site and the project was also included on the City's Development Projects webpage. A copy of this Staff Report has been provided to the applicant. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Resolution Certifying an Environmental Impact Report and Adopting Environmental Impact Findings, Findings Regarding Alternatives, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project 2) Exhibit A to the Resolution - Final Environmental Impact Report 3) Exhibit B to the Resolution - Findings Concerning Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 4) Exhibit C to the Resolution - Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Potential Additional Mitigation Measures 5) Exhibit D to the Resolution - Statement of Overriding Considerations 6) Exhibit E to the Resolution - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7) Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map and Approving a Planned Development Zoning District with Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project 8) Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project 9) Exhibit A to the Resolution - Hexcel Redevelopment Project Plans 10) Arborist Report 11) Planning Commission Resolution No. 23-11 12) March 19, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments) Page 7 of 7 112 Attachment I RESOLUTION NO. XX — 24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN CERTIFYING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FINDINGS, FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLPA 2022-00038 (APNS 941-1560-009-01 AND 941-1560-003-04) WHEREAS, the property owner, Overton Moore Properties, proposes to redevelop an 8.81- acre site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The project would demolish the existing 62,175- square-foot Hexcel research and development building and construct a new 125,532-square-foot light industrial building to appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses with 217 parking stalls and related site improvements. Requested approvals include a Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the "Hexcel Redevelopment Project" or the "Project;" and WHEREAS, the Project site includes two parcels totaling approximately 8.81 acres located north of the 1-580, south of Dublin Boulevard and residential and commercial uses, east of existing office buildings, and west of the U.S. Bank Branch, Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the CEQA Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared. It was determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was required for the Project; and WHEREAS, the City circulated a Notice of Preparation, dated May 15, 2023, to public agencies and interested parties for consultation on the scope of the EIR. The City also conducted a public scoping meeting on May 25, 2023; and WHEREAS, the City prepared a Draft EIR, dated August 2023, for the proposed Project that reflected the City's independent judgment and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project (SCH No. 2023050372). The Draft EIR is included in the Final EIR attached as Exhibit A and is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day public review period from August 21, 2023, through October 5, 2023; and WHEREAS, the City received three comment letters from State, regional, and local agencies during the public review period and one additional letter from the public after the close of the comment period. In accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the City prepared written responses to all the comments received during the public comment period and also included the letter from the public; and WHEREAS, the City conducted tribal consultation as requested by the Confederated Villages of Lisjan Nation; and Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 1 of 3 113 WHEREAS, the City prepared a Final EIR, dated November 2023, for the proposed Project, which includes an annotated copy of each comment letter identifying specific comments, responses to each specific comment, and clarifications and minor corrections to information presented in the Draft EIR. The Final EIR is attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution and is incorporated herein by reference. The Draft EIR, comments and associated responses, and changes and clarifications to the Draft EIR constitute the Final EIR. The responses to comments provide the City's good faith, reasoned analysis of the environmental issues raised by the comments; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR identified potentially significant environmental effects anticipated as a result of the Project such as air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, and hazards/hazardous materials, most of which can be substantially reduced through mitigation measures; therefore, approval of the Project must include impact and mitigation findings as set forth in attached Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, some of the impacts cannot be lessened to a level of less than significant; therefore, approval of the Project must include findings regarding alternatives as set forth in attached Exhibit C, and must include a Statement of Overriding Considerations as set forth in attached Exhibit D; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the project on December 12, 2023, at which time they reviewed and considered the Draft and Final EIRs, and all reports, recommendations and testimony before them. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 23-11 recommending the City Council approve the project and certify the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Planning Commission minutes and recommendation, a staff report, the Draft and Final EIRs, and all written and oral testimony at a duly noticed public hearing on March 19, 2024, and continued the proposed project to a date uncertain; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated September 17, 2024, and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Project and Draft and Final EIR for the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Hexcel Redevelopment project on September 17, 2024, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Draft and Final EIRs reflect the City's independent judgment and analysis on the potential for environmental impacts and constitute the Environmental Impact Report for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project; and WHEREAS, the Draft and Final EIRs are bounded as one document, incorporated herein by reference, and are available for review in the City of Dublin Community Development Department, file PLPA-2022-00038. The custodian of the documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project is the City of Dublin Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA 94568; and WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as required by CEQA, is contained in attached Exhibit E. Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 2 of 3 114 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council certifies the following. A. The EIR for the Hexcel Redevelopment project has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures. B. The EIR for the Hexcel Redevelopment project was presented to and reviewed by the City Council prior to taking action on the Hexcel Redevelopment project. C. The EIR reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis as to the potential environmental effects of the Hexcel Redevelopment project. The EIR provides information to the decision -makers and the public on the environmental consequences of the Project. D. The EIR adequately describes the Project, its significant environmental impacts, mitigation measures and a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council certifies the EIR consisting of the Draft EIR and the Final EIR as set forth in Exhibit A, adopts the impact and mitigation findings set forth in Exhibit B, the findings regarding alternatives set forth in Exhibit C, the Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth in Exhibit D, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program set forth in Exhibit E, which Exhibits A, B, C, D and E are incorporated herein by reference. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September 2024, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 3 of 3 115 Attachment 2 DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Hexcel Redevelopment Project Focused Final EIR November 17, 2023 PROJECT APPLICATION PLPA-2022-00038 116 This page intentionally left blank 117 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page i Table of Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Document Organization and Framework 1 1.2 CEQA Requirements Regarding Comments and Responses 2 2 Responses to Comments 3 2.1 Comments on the Draft EIR 3 2.2 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR 3 2.2.1 COMMENT LETTER 1 (DSRSD) 3 2.2.2 COMMENT LETTER 2 (ZONE 7 WATER AGENCY) 3 2.2.3 COMMENT LETTER 3 (CALTRANS) 5 2.2.4 COMMENT LETTER 4 (STEVE MINNIEAR) 6 2.3 Comments Received on the Draft EIR 7 3 Changes to the Draft EIR 15 4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 19 Appendices A B Draft EIR Appendices to Draft EIR List of Tables Table 2-1: Comment Letters Received 3 Table 4-1. Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program Table 20 118 This page intentionally left blank 119 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page ii Acronyms ACDEH Alameda County Department of Environmental Health ADA American Disabilities Act BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District Caltrans California Department of Transportation CCR California Code of Regulations CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CHRIS California Historic Resources Information System City City of Dublin dBA A -weighted decibel Draft EIR Draft Environmental Impact Report DSRSD Dublin San Ramon Services District EIR Environmental Impact Report ESA Environmental Site Assessment Final EIR Final Environmental Impact Report FTA Federal Transit Administration GPR Ground Penetrating Radar HABS Historic American Building Survey HAER Historic American Engineering Record HALS Historic American Landscapes Survey I- Interstate in/sec inches per second Leg equivalent sound level Lincoln Highway later known as US Highway 50 MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MLD Most Likely Descendant MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program mph miles per hour NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NPS National Parks Service NWIC Northwest Information Center OPR Governor's Office of Planning and Research PM10 particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns PM2.5 particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns PPV peak particle velocity PRC Public Resources Code Project Hexcel Redevelopment Project R&D research and development ROW Right -of -Way RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SVP Society of Vertebrate Paleontology SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board TMP Transportation Management Plan VMT vehicle miles travelled 120 This page intentionally left blank 121 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 1 Hexcel Redevelopment Project Final Environmental Impact Report 1 Introduction The Hexcel Redevelopment Project (Project) Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) was circulated for a 45-day public review period from August 21, 2023, through October 5, 2023, as assigned by the State of California Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) State Clearinghouse and consistent with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) regulations. Copies of the document were distributed to federal, state, regional and local agencies, as well as organizations and individuals, for their review and comment. This Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) has been prepared in accordance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Dublin (City) CEQA Guidelines and Procedures. This document represents the independent judgment of the City of Dublin as CEQA Lead Agency. This document, together with the Draft EIR, technical appendices, and other written documentation prepared during the EIR process, will constitute the Final EIR. This includes any modifications to those documents made by the City Council at the time of certification. This is in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15132 and the City's CEQA Guidelines and Procedures. The Draft EIR and appendices to the Draft EIR are included in this Final EIR as Appendix A and Appendix B. 1.1 Document Organization and Framework This Final EIR is organized as follows: Chapter 1 provides a brief introduction to this document. Chapter 2 provides a list of agencies and interested persons who commented on the Draft EIR. This chapter provides responses to substantive comments related to CEQA and the Draft EIR that were received during the 45-day review period. To facilitate review of the responses, an index number has been assigned to each comment letter and each individual comment within the comment letter. This identifier is used to identify both the comment and the corresponding response. Chapter 2 also contains copies of all public comments received on the Draft EIR. Chapter 3 contains text changes to the Draft EIR that have been made in response to the comments received. Chapter 4 contains a Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program, a required component of the EIR process. CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 and Public Resources Code §21081.6 require a public agency to adopt a monitoring and reporting program to ensure efficacy and enforceability of any mitigation measures applied to a proposed project. City staff has reviewed the comment letters and information generated in the course of preparing responses and has determined that none of this material constitutes significant new information that requires a recirculation period for further public comment under CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. None of this material indicates that the project will result in a significant new environmental impact not previously disclosed in the Draft EIR. Additionally, none of this material indicates that there would be a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified environmental impact that would not be mitigated, or that there would be any of the other circumstances requiring recirculation as described in Section 15088.5. 122 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 2 1.2 CEQA Requirements Regarding Comments and Responses CEQA Guidelines Section 15204(a) outlines parameters for submitting comments and reminds persons and public agencies that the focus of review and comment of Draft EIRs should be, "on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing possible impacts on the environment and ways in which significant effects of the project might be avoided or mitigated. Comments are most helpful when they suggest additional specific alternatives or mitigation measures that would provide better ways to avoid or mitigate the significant environmental effects. At the same time, reviewers should be aware that the adequacy of an EIR is determined in terms of what is reasonably feasible, in light of factors such as the magnitude of the project at issue, the severity of its likely environmental impacts, and geographic scope of the project. CEQA does not require a lead agency to conduct every test or perform all research, study, and experimentation recommended or demanded by commenters. When responding to comments, lead agencies need only respond to significant environmental issues and do not need to provide all information requested by reviewers, as long as a good faith effort at full disclosure is made in the EIR." 123 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 3 2 Responses to Comments 2.1 Comments on the Draft EIR This section includes a list of all written comments received on the Draft EIR and the City's response to each comment. Comment letters and specific comments are given identifying numbers for reference purposes. Responses to comments are provided in Section 2.2, and copies of each comment letter received are provided in Section 2.3. Changes to the text of the Draft EIR, made in response to the comments received, are provided in Chapter 3. Table 2-1 contains the list of agencies and persons that submitted comments on the Draft EIR during the public review period: Table 2-1: Comment Letters Received Comment Letter No. Commenting Agency Date 1 Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) 9/19/2023 2 Zone 7 Water Agency 10/4/2023 3 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 10/4/2023 4 Steve Minniear 10/26/2023 2.2 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR 2.2.1 COMMENT LETTER 1 (DSRSD) Response to Comment 1-1: Thank you for your letter. The City has reviewed your comment regarding the requirement to contact DSRSD to coordinate the removal of any water meters on the Project site, if needed. The Draft EIR has been revised on pages 10 and 11 to reflect this requirement, as detailed in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR. 2.2.2 COMMENT LETTER 2 (ZONE 7 WATER AGENCY) Response to Comment 2-1: Thank you for your comment. This comment is regarding a lost well (3S1W02K001) and a destroyed well (3S1W02K012) on the Project site and drilling permit requirements. The City was not previously aware of these wells on the Project site. However, Zone 7 will be notified if these wells are found on the Project site. As discussed on pages 86 and 90 of the Initial Study, Appendix B of the Draft EIR, the Project site does not include any groundwater wells, nor does the Project propose drilling for new wells. While no drilling or boring for new water wells is proposed, the City acknowledges that any water well or soil boring work will require a drilling permit from Zone 7. Revisions have been made to pages 10 and 12 of the Draft EIR to clarify this potential requirement, as detailed in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR. Response to Comment 2-2: This comment is related to groundwater resources. The City acknowledges that the Project site is located within the basin area under sustainable groundwater management by Zone 7 and that the Project is subject to all relevant sustainable groundwater management actions set forth in the Alternative Groundwater Sustainability Plan. 124 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 4 Hydrology and water quality impacts were evaluated in the Initial Study, Appendix B of the Draft EIR. As discussed on page 90 of the Initial Study, no water wells are being proposed and water needs for the proposed Project would continue to be met by DSRSD, as they are now. Additionally, page 90 states that while the proposed Project would result in a higher amount of impervious surface at the site as compared to existing conditions, bioretention areas have been sized accordingly and, therefore, the Project would not result in a substantial decrease in the surface area of permeable soils that would allow rainwater to reach the aquifer. Therefore, less than significant impacts to groundwater supplies are expected. No revisions to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment. Response to Comment 2-3: This comment relates to potential hydrology and water quality impacts of development adjacent to a creek. Hydrology and water quality impacts of the Project, including impacts related to the proximity of the Project site to Dublin Creek, are discussed in Section 8 of the Initial Study, Appendix B, on pages 89 through 92. The Initial Study found that the Project would have less than significant impacts to hydrology and water quality. During project construction, the Project would be required to comply with California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit as discussed on page 89. No construction would occur on the southern approximately 0.56 acre of the Project site (Parcel 2), which is adjacent to Dublin Creek. During Project operation, the proposed on -site stormwater drainage system would be sufficient to detain and treat operational stormwater runoff generated by the proposed Project and runoff would not be discharged into Dublin Creek, as discussed on page 91. Development is prohibited within 30 feet of the centerline of any creek or 20 feet of the top of a bank, per Dublin Municipal Code Section 7.74.110[B], as stated on page 87. Page 91 states that no development associated with the Project would occur within 30 feet of the centerline of Dublin Creek or within 20 feet of the top of the creek bank. Therefore, the Project would be consistent with Zone 7's proposed methodology and potential failure of the creek bank would not be expected to impact infrastructure on the site. No revisions to the Initial Study are required in response to this comment. Response to Comment 2-4: This comment relates to assessment of impact fees for development projects that create new impervious areas. The City acknowledges development projects creating new impervious areas within the Livermore-Amador Valley are subject to the assessment of the Development Impact Fee for Flood Protection and Storm Water Drainage. Revisions have been made to the Draft EIR under Project Approvals on page 12, to identify Zone 7 as an additional agency whose approval may be required, as shown in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR. Response to Comment 2-5: This comment requests the use of drought -tolerant and climate adapted landscape. As discussed on page 9 of the Draft EIR, the Project would utilize native and drought tolerant plants, which would conserve water at the site. Therefore, the Project would 125 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 5 satisfy Zone 7's recommendation for water wise landscaping. No revisions to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment. 2.2.3 COMMENT LETTER 3 (CALTRANS) Response to Comment 3-1: Thank you for your letter. This comment describes the commenter's understanding of the Project and their agreement that the vehicle miles travelled (VMT) analysis and significance determination within the Initial Study were undertaken in a manner consistent with the OPR's Technical Advisory and the City's Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, and would contribute to meeting the State's VMT reduction goals. The City thanks the commenter for their concurrence. Response to Comment 3-2: This comment is related to construction impacts from the Project. The comment requests that potential impacts to the State Right -of -Way (ROW) from project - related temporary access points should be analyzed and that mitigation measures related to construction and noise should be identified for significant impacts. Additionally, this comment notes that coordination with Caltrans prior to construction to develop a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) and a transportation permit may be required. Transportation (Section 16) and noise (Section 12) impacts are evaluated in the Initial Study, Appendix B, of the Draft EIR. As described in the Transportation section on page 128, all construction and staging activities would occur on the Project site with no encroachment or alterations of public ROW, including State ROW. There is no direct access to the Project site from nearby State ROWs of Interstates 580 and 680 (1-580 and 1-680). However, it is assumed that access to the site would be via the 1-580 Foothill Road/San Ramon Road exit (Exit 44 A) to connect to Dublin Boulevard to the west. I-680 also could be used to connect to the 1-580 Exit 44 A to the west. Since State highways and their interchanges are designed to accommodate large trucks and higher traffic volumes than local roads, there would be less than significant impacts to State ROWs from project -related construction traffic, as these highways would be able to accommodate the slight temporary increase in construction vehicles. As discussed on page 129, Project construction would result in up to 128 traffic trips per day to and from the Project site from construction workers and deliveries of equipment and materials, and approximately 51 of these trips would be from trucks during peak construction periods. These trips would not be an incompatible use to the highways. Since the Initial Study concluded that these impacts would be less than significant, mitigation is not required. Impacts from construction noise and vibration were evaluated in the Noise section of the Initial Study and were determined to be less than significant. A construction noise assessment was conducted using construction prediction methodologies based on the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) manual. Tables 10 and 11 on pages 107 and 108 of the Initial Study show that Project construction activities would not exceed the FTA general assessment construction noise criteria of 90 dBA (A -weighted decibel), Leg (equivalent sound level) at the nearest noise - sensitive receptor. Furthermore, noise from construction vehicles is expected to be less than the construction activities analyzed in Tables 10 and 11. 126 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 6 As discussed on page 111 of the Initial Study, vibration associated with Project construction activities would occur most notably during major ground -disturbing activities, such as site grading. The piece of construction equipment generating the strongest vibration would be the dozer which, per the FTA Manual, can generate a vibration level of up to 0.089 peak particle velocity (PPV) inches per second (in/sec) at 25 feet. State ROW was not considered to be a sensitive receptor due to the already high levels of noise associated with vehicle traffic. Because the Project would have a less than significant impact from noise and vibration, mitigation is not required. The City acknowledges that the Project may require a TMP and that any required oversized or excessive load vehicles during construction operations would require a transportation permit from Caltrans before construction commences. Revisions have been made to the Project approvals list on page 12 of the Draft EIR, to acknowledge the need for such a permit, as shown in Chapter 3 in this Final EIR. Response to Comment 3-3: This comment is related to potential impacts to Caltrans facilities and American Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. As discussed in Section 16 of the Initial Study, no impact to Caltrans facilities would result from the proposed Project. No revisions to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment. 2.2.4 COMMENT LETTER 4 (STEVE MINNIEAR) Response to Comment 4-1: Thank you for your letter. This comment requests that the EIR acknowledge the potential for unmarked graves along the eastern edge of the Project site. The Draft EIR on page 55 acknowledges that Pioneer Cemetery is adjacent to the Hexcel property, and that historic documents suggest the cemetery could extend into the Project site. On page 62 in Section 3, Cultural Resources (Impact c), it is discussed that historic documents suggest that the cemetery was larger than the currently marked boundary, and that there is a high probability that portions of the cemetery extend to the west of the marked cemetery, beneath the Hexcel parking lot. On this page, it also states that if unmarked portions of the cemetery extend beneath the Hexcel property, the Project has the potential to disturb human remains during earthmoving and excavation activities to implement the Project. On page 97 in Section 7, Tribal Cultural Resources (Impact b), similar information to Section 3 is included regarding the extent of the cemetery, as well as an acknowledgement that the cemetery possibly includes Native American human remains. Mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR, including archaeological and tribal monitoring, and protocols for inadvertent/unanticipated tribal cultural resources discovery, would reduce potential impacts to less than significant. Please note that the exact location of potential unmarked gravesites was not specified in the Draft EIR, as they could extend well beyond the eastern edge of the Project site. No revisions to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment. Response to Comment 4-2: This comment requests that the EIR acknowledge that the western portion of the property is the original Lincoln Highway route from Dublin to what is now Dublin 127 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 7 Canyon Road. This statement has been added to the Draft EIR on page 42 in Section 3, Cultural Resources, as detailed in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR. Response to Comment 4-3: This comment requests that photographs and historical material should be given to the City of Dublin (Parks and Community Services), not the Dublin Historical Society as stated on page 57 in Section 3, Cultural Resources, of the Draft EIR. This statement in the Draft EIR has been revised to identify the correct entity to receive these materials, as detailed in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR. Response to Comment 4-4: This comment requests that the proposed light industrial building comply with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan architectural guidelines. As the commenter states, the applicant envisions wood paneling on exterior walls as an architectural element to honor the historic character of the area. Additionally, as noted in the Draft EIR on page 9, proposed landscaping would provide buffers between the site and adjacent properties, and plants would be strategically placed to screen the site's aboveground utilities from public streets. While the architectural design of the proposed building would not fully be consistent with the architectural guidelines outlined in Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, it would still be in conformance with the Specific Plan. This is because the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan provides discretion when implementing the guidelines as specified on page 31 in Section 7.1 of the Specific Plan, which states the following: During their review of proposed development projects, City Staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council may use discretion in applying various provisions in the design guidelines to specific projects. It is not anticipated that each guideline will apply equally to every project. In some cases, one or more of the guidelines may be relaxed to facilitate compliance with a more important or appropriate guideline for that project. When implementing the guidelines, the overall objective is to ensure that the intent and spirit of the design guidelines are followed and that the project respects its surroundings and honors the heritage and desired character of the area. City Staff has determined that the proposed Project would be in conformance with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and will be recommending approval to the Planning Commission and City Council. No revisions to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment. 2.3 Comments Received on the Draft EIR The following pages include copies of all comments received on the Draft EIR. Comment letters are presented in the same order as responses provided in Section 2.2 above. 128 This page intentionally left blank 129 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR 1 Page 8 COMMENT LETTER 1 (DSRSD) 1-1 Dublin San Ramon Services District W[irfr, iy(lSfr5wfler, eri vcrod ivot,!t September 19, 2023 Anne Hersch, Assistant Community Development Director City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 7051 Dublin aoulevartt Duthi+1,.CA 94568.301$ phone 1915) 82H, 0515 fax t9251 BN-1180 www.dsrsd.com SUBJECT: Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Report Hexcel Redevelopment Project, PLPA-2022-00038 Dear Ms_ Hersch: Thank you For providing Dublin San Ramon Services District (District) the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. The section related to Demolition on page 21 and 171 of the EIR states that water meters will be included as part of the demolition. The applicant should revise the information to state that water meters are owned by the District and shall not be demolished_ If the water meters need to be removed, then the applicant shall contact the District to coordinate the removal of the water meters. Questions regarding this comment should be directed to meat (925) 875-2258 or yeet-Ddsrsd.com Sincerely, 'Y2'b�A Jaclyn YeeY" Jaclyn Yee Senior Engineer JY/ST cc: Irene Surma, Senior Engineer Robert Thompson, Engineering Tech/GIS Spec I IALNG17LP1 ICab \LEUBUNIPLRA 202 2. 130038 Hexed RCdeyelopm. IINOAC LIR (urnm nu IN Lefler fur Or aft EIR I Iexoel.dou 130 This page intentionally left blank 131 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 9 COMMENT LETTER 2 (ZONE 7 WATER AGENCY) 2-1 2-2 2-3 WATER AGENCY Delivering Quality, Reliability and Safety October 4, 2023 Anne Hersch Assistant Community Development Department Director City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Anne.Hersch@dublin.ca.gov 100 North Canyons Parkway Livermore, CA 94551 (925) 454-5000 Re: Notice of Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Report — Hexcel Redevelopment Project Zone 7 Water Agency (Zone 7, or Zone 7 of the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District) has reviewed the referenced document in the context of Zone 7's mission to "Deliver safe, reliable, efficient, and sustainable water and flood protection services" within the Livermore-Amador Valley. Below are our comments for your consideration. 1. Wells - Our records indicate that there is one lost well (3S1W02K001) and one destroyed well (3S1W02K012) in the project area (Figure 1). Exact locations of wells are unknown. Please immediately notify Zone 7 if 3S1W02K001 is located or any other wells exist in the project area. If located, well 3S1W02K001 must be permitted by Zone 7 for destruction. Also, please be advised that a Zone 7 drilling permit is needed for any water well or soil boring work that may be planned for this project. The drilling permit application and permit fee schedule can be downloaded from our website: https://www.zone7water.com/post/well-drilling-and-soil-boring-permits. For additional information please email wellpermits@zone7water.com. 2. Groundwater Basin - Note that the subject property (or project) is located within the basin area under sustainable groundwater management by Zone 7 as per the Alternative Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the Livermore Valley Groundwater Basin (https: //www.zone7water.com/sites/main/files/file- attachments/alt gw sustainability plan-4.pdf?1656015908 ) and is subject to all relevant sustainable groundwater management actions. 3. Flood Protection / Channel ownership - EIR does not address any hydrology and water quality impacts of development adjacent to a creek. The site is located adjacent to Dublin Creek, which is to the south of the parcel. While Dublin Creek is not owned or zone7water.com 132 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 10 2-3 continued 2-4 2-5 WATER AGENCY Delivering Quality, Reliability and Safety maintained by Zone 7 at that location, it's unclear whether the channel bank may be susceptible to failure, which could potentially impact the parcel's infrastructure. In such cases, Zone 7 typically suggests implementing projected 2.5:1 slope from the toe of the bank to the top, to determine the top of bank, and include a minimum 20 foot setback from that point. 4. Flood Protection / Impervious areas - Developments creating new impervious areas within the Livermore-Amador Valley are subject to the assessment of the Development Impact Fee for Flood Protection and Storm Water Drainage. These fees are collected for Zone 7 by the local governing agency: 1) upon approval of final map for public improvements creating new impervious areas; and/or 2) upon issuance of a building or use permit required for site improvements creating new impervious areas. Fees are dependent on whether post -project impervious area conditions are greater than pre -project conditions. 5. Water -wise Landscaping - Zone 7 encourages the use of sustainable, climate - appropriate, and drought -tolerant plants, trees and grasses that thrive in the Tri-Valley area. Find more information at: httb://www.trivallevwaterwise.com, We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any questions on this letter, please feel free to contact me at (925) 454-5005 or via email at erankCa zone7water.com. Siinnce�rely, ivek W^ Elke Rank Water Resources Planner cc: Ken Minn, file Page 2 133 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 11 LEGEND p Site Lost Well Destroyed Well Figure 1 Referral E23-06 Groundwater Map Prepared by Zone 7 Waler Agency 134 This page intentionally left blank 135 City of Dublin COMMENT LETTER 3 (CALTRANS) CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY 3-1 HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR 1 Page 12 GAVIN NEWSOM. GOVERNOR California Department of Transportation DISTRICT 4 OFFICE OF REGIONAL AND COMMUNITY PLANNING P.O. BOX 23660, MS-10D OAKLAND, CA 94623-0660 www.dot.ca.gov October 4, 2023 SCH #: 2023050372 GTS #: 04-ALA-2023-00754 GTS ID: 29792 Co/Rt/Pm: ALA/580/R21.722 Anne Hersch, Assistant Community Development Department Director City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Re: Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) Dear Anne Hersch: Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environmental review process for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. We are committed to ensuring that impacts to the State's multimodal transportation system and to our natural environment are identified and mitigated to support a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system. The Local Development Review (LDR) Program reviews land use projects and plans to ensure consistency with our mission and state planning priorities. The following comments are based on our review of the August 2023 DEIR. Project Understanding The proposed project would construct a new 125,304-square-foot building. The existing Hexcel research and development (R&D) building would be demolished and replaced with the proposed building that caters to future tenants in the R&D and life sciences field. This 8.81-acre project site is located adjacent to an elevated portion of 1-580. Travel Demand Analysis With the enactment of Senate Bill (SB) 743, Caltrans is focused on maximizing efficient development patterns, innovative travel demand reduction strategies, and multimodal improvements. For more information on how Caltrans assesses Transportation Impact Studies, please review Caltrans` Transportation Impact Study Guide (link). "Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment" 136 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 13 3.7 Anne Hersch, Assistant Community Development Department Director October 4, 2023 Page 2 The project's Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis and significance determination are undertaken in a manner consistent with the Office of Planning and Research's (OPR) Technical Advisory and the City's Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines. Per the IS/MND, this project is found to have a less than significant VMT impact, therefore working towards meeting the State's VMT reduction goals. Construction -Related Impacts Potential impacts to the State Right -of -Way (ROW) from project -related temporary access points should be analyzed. Mitigation for significant impacts due to construction and noise should be identified. Project work that requires movement of oversized or excessive load vehicles on State roadways requires a transportation permit that is issued by Ca!trans. To apply, please visit Caltrans Transportation Permits [link). Prior to construction, coordination may be required with Caltrans to develop a Transportation Management Plan (IMP) to reduce construction traffic impacts to the State Transportation Network STNj. Equitable Access If any Caltrans facilities are impacted by the project, those facilities must meet American Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards after project completion. As well, the project must maintain bicycle and pedestrian access during construction. These access considerations support Ca!trans' equity mission to provide a safe, sustainable, and equitable transportation network for all users. Thank you again for including Ca!trans in the environmental review process. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, or for future project referrals, please contact LD?-D4':'dot.ca.gov. Sincerely, YUNSHEI' G LUO Branch Chief, Local Development Review Office of Regional and Community Planning c: State Clearinghouse "ProVide o sole end rclldble 11'drispotldlk7h Network Ihet serves 0I1 people end respects She onvIronnlerll' 137 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 14 COMMENT LETTER 4 (STEVE MINNIEAR) 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 Comments by Steve Minniear on Hexcel Development, Dublin Blvd., Dublin, CA Comments related to Environmental Impact Report The EIR should acknowledge that there is the possibility of unmarked graves along the eastern edge of the property. According to oral history interviews, there was a brush fire in the early 1960s that burned an unknown number of wooden crosses along the western side of the Dublin Pioneer Cemetery. (That property is now known as the Pioneer Cemetery, Dublin Heritage Park & Museums.) There is no information as to who might have been buried in that location or if remains were found (or removed) during the initial 1960s era Hexcel construction. The EIR should acknowledge that the western portion of the property is the original Lincoln Highway route from Dublin to what is now Dublin Canyon Road. The Lincoln Highway (later known as US Highway 50) was the major east/west land route from the San Francisco Bay Area to the Central Valley and the restof the county. This fact adds to the historic and cultural importance of the site. Page 57 of the EIR incorrectly identifies which entity should receive photographs and historical material developed as part of the research, planning and construction of the new buildings. Such material should not be given to the Dublin Historical Society. Rather, it should be given to the City of Dublin (Parks & Community Services Division) as the operator of the Dublin Heritage Park & Museums. Comments related to Building Design and Landscape The new construction should fully comply with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan since it is the governing document for the area as authorized by the City of Dublin. The existing drawings seem to envision wood panels on exterior wal Is as the only architectural elements needed to blend the new building into the area. The Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan lays out guidelines that indicate the new construction should be consistent with the early 1900s design aesthetic or something consistent with early buildings in this core historic area. While building a modern building for the uses intended for its proposed occupants is challenging, it is not impossible. Developers on the east side of the Historic Area were able to comply with the design criteria for residential and commercial buildings. There are many architectural models of 1900-1940 industrial buildings that could be used as inspiration. The Dublin Heritage Park & Museums and the Dublin Historian have period photographs of the area during that period that could be referred to as suggestions. Regardless of the final design of the building, the landscape plan should incorporate a visual separation, similar to the current ivy-covered fence line on the east side of the proposed development. Such a feature would visually separate the new construction from the Dublin Heritage Park & Museums. The current set of trees and the ivy-covered fence do a good job of reinforcing the park -like nature of the area. Thank you for the opportunity to provide written comments. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Steve Minniear October 26, 2023 m inniear@comcast.net 138 This page intentionally left blank 139 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 15 3 Changes to the Draft EIR Changes to the Draft EIR are shown on the following pages in the order that they appear in the EIR. New text is shown in underline, and removed text is shown in strikethrough. These text changes do not constitute substantial new information and do not result in a new significant new impact or increase the severity of an impact already disclosed in the Draft EIR. The following text is revised on page 9 of the Draft EIR due to minor changes in the number of trees identified on the Project site and number of trees being proposed for removal. Note: that the analysis within the Initial Study assumed that 85 trees would be removed, based on the project description at the time of analysis. The proposed reduction in tree removal described below compared to what was analyzed within the Initial Study would not alter the analysis or conclusions of the Initial Study. Parcel 1 of the Project site contains 89 8-7 trees, four of which are heritage trees. A total of 65 trees are proposed for removal, including one heritage tree. All trccs within this parcel would be removed cxccpt for two of the heritage trees; The heritage trees that would remain include one in the northeast corner along the project frontage; one in the southwest portion of the site; and one in the northwest portion of the site. A heritage tree directly in the southern portion of the site would be removed. Parcel 2 of the Project site contains 108 trees within the Dublin Creek riparian corridor. All trees in Parcel 2 would be retained, 19 of which are heritage trees. The following text is revised on page 10 of the Draft EIR in response to DSRSD Comment 1-2 and Zone 7 Comment 2-1. Utilities Systems The Project site is currently served by existing utilities for water, sanitary sewer, electricity, and gas. As discussed in the Initial Study in Section 18: Utilities and Service Systems, Dublin San Ramon Services District provides water and wastewater services to the site, and East Bay Community Energy provides electricity and gas to the site, which is distributed by Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Sanitary sewer, sanitary sewer manholes, a water meter, and electrical lines and cables would be removed and replaced with new lines that would connect to existing offsite service lines. If any water meters require removal, the applicant shall contact DSRSD to coordinate their removal. Additionally, an existing electrical cabinet, storm drain pipe, electrical transformer, and air conditioner unit are proposed for removal and would be replaced. Some of the existing stormwater lines will be left in place but abandoned. New utility lines would be buried below ground. No wells are known to be present on the Project site, however, the Zone 7 Water Agency has indicated that there is one lost well (3S1W02K001) and one destroyed well (3S1W02K012) in the Project area, but that the exact location of the wells is unknown. If any wells are encountered during construction, they would be destroyed in accordance with Zone 7 well destruction standards. 140 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 16 The following text is revised on page 11 of the Draft EIR in response to DSRSD Comment 1-2. Demolition — This stage would include the demolition of the existing facility, asphalt pavement (140,724 square feet), concrete curbs, landscape including trees and bushes, irrigation system, drainage system, sewer system, site lights, electrical boxes and other electrical equipment, gas, and water meters, fence, shed and gate. All water meters onsite are owned by DSRSD and shall not be demolished. If the water meters need to be removed, then the applicant shall contact DSRSD to coordinate their removal. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include concrete saws, excavators, loaders, tractors, backhoes, and rubber -tired dozers. The following text is revised on page 12 of the Draft EIR in response to DSRSD Comment 1-1, Zone 7 Comments 2-1 and 2-4, and Caltrans Comment 3-1. 1. Project Approvals The City of Dublin is the Lead Agency for the proposed Project under CEQA. The City is responsible for considering the Project's impacts as part of the Project approval. The City would require the applicant to obtain the following approvals and permits: approval of a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan; Site Development Review Permit; Heritage Tree Removal Permit; and demolition, building, grading, and encroachment permits. Other agencies whose approval may be required include: • Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD); a 4 • Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB); • Caltrans; • Zone7;and • Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) The following text is added on page 42 just before the History of the Hexcel Property and Hexcel Products, Inc. subsection of the Draft EIR in response to Steve Minniear Comment 4-2. Lincoln Highway (1913 to 19/1 The Lincoln Highway (later known as US Highway 50) was the major east/west land route from the San Francisco Bay Area to the Central Valley and the rest of the county. The western portion of the Project site is the original Lincoln Highway route from Dublin to what is now Dublin Canyon Road (Lincoln Highway Association 2023). The following text is revised on page 57 of the Draft EIR in response to Steve Minniear Comment 4-3. Following completion of the HABS documentation, including the short form historical report and large -format photographs, and approval by the City of Dublin, the materials 141 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 17 shall be placed on file with the City of Dublin Planning Division nd th„ D„blin Historical Society at the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums (Parks and Community Services ) as the operator of the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums. The following text is revised on page 59 of the Draft EIR and in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) in response to consultation with the Confederated Villages of Lisjan Nation. Also, an error related to what agency should receive archaeologist report has been revised. MM CUL-3: Archaeological and Tribal Monitoring A. A qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology shall be retained by the applicant prior to implementing construction or soil remediation activities that involve earthmoving or soil excavation, and the archaeologist shall be available for consultation or evaluation of any cultural resources uncovered by such activities. Prior to the start of excavation, the archaeologist shall produce an Archaeological Testing Plan and an Archaeological Treatment and Monitoring Plan Treatment and Monitoring Plan, in consultation with the City of Dublin, and through them, with any consulting Native American tribes. i. The Archaeological Testing Plan will define the following: • Methods and scope of archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction (e.g., GPR, hand excavated test units, trenching with flat edged bucket). • Treatment of any discoveries during testing. ii. The Treatment and Monitoring Plan will comply with mitigation measures 4, 5, 6, and 7, set forth in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B, and will specify the following: • Archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction. • Archaeological and Tribal monitoring requirements, which will be based on the results of archaeological testing and consultation with Native American tribes. • Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any historic -era or pre -contact era artifacts encountered during project activities. • Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any human remains from the historic era. {For human remains of Native Americans from any time period, treatment protocols would be established with the designated MLD}. B. If an archaeological resource or human burials are discovered during archaeological testing, consideration will be given to options that avoid or minimize impact. C. If an archaeological resource (or suspected resource) is discovered during monitoring of project activities, construction or excavation activities within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be temporarily halted or directed to other areas, pending the archaeologist's 142 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 18 evaluation of its significance. If the resource is significant, data collection, excavation, or other standard archaeological or historical procedures shall be implemented to mitigate impacts, pursuant to the Treatment and Monitoring Plan and the archaeologist's direction. If any human remains are encountered, the archaeologist shall contact the appropriate County Coroner immediately, and security measures shall be implemented to ensure that burials are not vandalized until the decision of burial deposition has been made pursuant to California law. If human remains are determined to be Native American interments, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and follow the procedures stated herein and other applicable laws. A report by the archaeologist evaluating the find and identifying mitigation actions taken shall be submitted to the CPUC the City and filed with the California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS). Where appropriate to protect the location and sensitivity of the cultural resources, the report may be submitted under Public Utilities Code Section 583 or other appropriate confidentiality provisions. New References to be added to the sources on page 89 of the Draft EIR. Lincoln Highway Association. 2023. The Lincoln Highway in California. Available: https://www.lincolnhighwayassoc.org/info/ca/. Accessed on November 13, 2023. 143 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT pRniFCT Final EIR I Page 19 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is a CEQA-required component of an EIR. CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 and Public Resources Code §21081.6 requires a public agency to adopt a monitoring and reporting program to ensure efficacy and enforceability of any mitigation measures applied to a proposed project. The Lead Agency must adopt an MMRP for mitigation measures incorporated into the project or proposed as conditions of approval. As stated in Public Resources Code §21081.6 (a)(1): "The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation." Table 4-1 represents the MMRP for the Project. This table lists each of the mitigation measures proposed in the EIR, including mitigation refined or updated in the Final EIR in Chapter 3, Changes to the Draft EIR, and specifies the timing and responsible party for each mitigation measure. 144 This page intentionally left blank 145 City of Dublin Table 4-1. Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program Table HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 20 Air Quality Responsible for Approval / Monitoring roject Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Implementation Completion Date Initials During MM AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices. • Responsible for construction The construction contractor shall comply with the following BAAQMD approval: City of Basic Construction Measures, as applicable, for reducing construction Dublin emissions of uncontrolled fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5): ■ Implementation: • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. Project applicant • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off -site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt track -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 (mph). • 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 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 21 Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for ompletion Initials Approval / Monitoring / Implementation be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. • Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The BAAQMD's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Biological Resources During construction MM BIO-1: Nesting Bird Avoidance Measures A. To the extent practicable, construction activities and any tree trimming/removal shall be performed from September 16 through February 15 to avoid the general nesting period for birds. If construction or tree trimming/removal cannot be performed during this period, nesting bird surveys and active nest buffers (as necessary) shall be implemented as follows: i. Nesting Bird Surveys: If Project -related work is scheduled during the nesting season (typically February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for active nests of such birds within 7 days prior to the beginning of Project construction. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding the work area shall be determined by the qualified biologist, but should be at least: i) 50 feet for passerines; ii) 300 feet for raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day and during appropriate nesting times, as determined by the qualified biologist. ii. Active Nest Buffers: If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the survey area, an appropriate buffer between the nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall Responsible for approval: City of Dublin Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified biologist City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 22 Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible forompletion Approval / Monitoring / Implementation Initials be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of the nest to characterize "normal" bird behavior and establish a buffer distance which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and shall increase the buffer if the birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Construction shall only be allowed to impact a migratory bird or its nest, including its young, if a permit from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is obtained in accordance with the MBTA and all permit conditions are adhered to. Prior to construction MM BIO-2: Roosting Bat Surveys and Avoidance A. The Project Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a bat habitat assessment in all project areas that require tree removal. The qualified biologist shall identify and document the location of potentially suitable bat roosting habitat prior to construction activities. If no suitable bat habitat is observed, the biologist shall inform the Project Applicant, and no further considerations are required. If bat roosting habitat is observed, the location of such habitat areas shall be provided to the Project Applicant, and the following requirements shall be implemented throughout the construction period: ■ Responsible for approval: City of Dublin • Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified biologist City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 23 Responsible forompletion Approval / Monitoring / Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Implementation Initials i. Removal of trees that provide suitable bat roosting habitat shall be conducted outside of the bat maternity season (April 15 to August 31) and overwintering season (October 16 to January 15) to the extent feasible. ii. Presence/absence surveys shall be conducted 2 to 3 days prior to removal of any trees in suitable bat habitat, at any time of year. If presence/absence surveys are negative, work may proceed with no restrictions. If presence/absence surveys detect bats within trees planned for removal, work should proceed in accordance with the following restrictions: • If a maternity colony of bats is observed during maternity season (April 15 to August 31), tree removal shall not occur until August 31 or when maternity season has ended based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist. • If bats are observed during overwintering season (October 16 to January 15), tree removal shall not occur until January 15 or until bats are no longer present based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist. • If bats are present outside of maternity or overwintering seasons, construction shall follow a two-phase tree removal system conducted over 2 consecutive days. On the first day (in the afternoon), limbs and branches will be removed using chainsaws or other hand tools. Limbs with cavities, crevices, or deep bark fissures will be avoided, and only branches or limbs without those features will be removed. On the second day, the entire tree shall be removed. Cultural Resources Prior to building demolition MM CUL-1: HABS Recordation In consultation with the City of Dublin Planning Division, the Project applicant shall document the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility prior to ■ Responsible for approval: City of Dublin City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 24 Timing Project Design Feature / Condition Responsiblecompletion Approval / Monitorin of Approval / Miti ate Initials demolition. Documentation shall be performed by a Secretary of Interior -qualified professionals (in history or architectural history) and be consistent with the standards of the National Parks Service (NPS) Historic American Building Survey (HABS) and shall consist of the following elements: 1. Historical Report: A qualified historian or architectural historian shall assemble historical background information relevant to the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility in short format Historic American Building Survey (HABS), based on HABS guidelines for historical reports. Much of this information may be drawn from the previous Historical Resource Evaluation and would detail critical information such as the property's significance, physical description, history, and a summary of information sources. 2. Photographs: Large -format, black and white photographs of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility shall be taken and processed for archival permanence in accordance with HABS, Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), and HALS (Historic American Landscapes Survey) Photography Guidelines in effect at the time of recording. The standards require large -format black -and -white photography, with the original negatives having a minimum size of 4"x5". Digital photography, roll film, film packs, and electronic manipulation of images are not acceptable. The photographs shall be taken by a professional with HABS photography experience. A minimum of 10 and a maximum of 24 photographs must be taken, detailing the site, building exteriors, and interiors, specifically the R&D portion of the building. Photographs must be identified and labeled using HABS/HALS standards. Following completion of the HABS documentation, including the short form historical report and large -format photographs, and approval by the City of Dublin, the materials shall be placed on file with the City of Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified historian or architectural historian City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 25 Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsibl Approval / Monitorin ompletion a e Initials Dublin Planning Division, and the Dublin Historical Society at the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums. Prior to building demolition MM CUL-2: Interpretive Displays In concert with HABS documentation (MM CUL-1), the Project applicant shall install permanent interpretive displays or signage for public exhibition detailing the history and significance of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility at the Project site. The interpretive displays or signage could be based on the photographs produced in the HABS documentation and the historic archival research previously prepared as part of the Project. The interpretive displays or signage shall be prepared by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards, in coordination with an exhibit designer. Interpretive displays or signage at the Project site shall be located outside of the new building, near the publicly accessible sidewalk and/or inside the new building in a prominent space, such as the lobby, where they may be viewed by employees and visitors. • Responsible for approval: City of Dublin • Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified historian or architectural historian Prior to construction MM CUL-3: Archaeological and Tribal Monitoring A. A qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology shall be retained by the applicant prior to implementing construction or soil remediation activities that involve earthmoving or soil excavation, and the archaeologist shall be available for consultation or evaluation of any cultural resources uncovered by such activities. Prior to the start of excavation, the archaeologist shall produce an Archaeological Testing Plan and an Archaeological Treatment and Monitoring Plan, in consultation with the City of Dublin, and through them, with any consulting Native American tribes. • Responsible for approval: City of Dublin • Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified archaeologist City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 26 Timing Responsibl completion Approval / Monitorin Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure ate Initials i. The Archaeological Testing Plan will define the following: • Methods and scope of archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction (e.g., GPR, hand excavated test units, trenching with flat edged bucket). • Treatment of any discoveries during testing. ii. The Treatment and Monitoring Plan will comply with mitigation measures 4, 5, 6, and 7, set forth in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B, and will specify the following: • Archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction. • Archaeological and Tribal monitoring requirements, which will be based on the results of archaeological testing and consultation with Native American tribes. • Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any historic -era or pre -contact era artifacts encountered during project activities. • Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any human remains from the historic era. For human remains of Native Americans from any time period, treatment protocols would be established with the designated MLD. B. If an archaeological resource or human burials are discovered during archaeological testing, consideration will be given to options that avoid or minimize impact. C. If an archaeological resource (or suspected resource) is discovered during monitoring of project activities, construction or excavation activities within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be temporarily halted or directed to other areas, pending the City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 27 Timing Responsibl completion Approval / Monitorin Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure ate Initials archaeologist's evaluation of its significance. If the resource is significant, data collection, excavation, or other standard archaeological or historical procedures shall be implemented to mitigate impacts, pursuant to the Treatment and Monitoring Plan and the archaeologist's direction. If any human remains are encountered, the archaeologist shall contact the appropriate County Coroner immediately, and security measures shall be implemented to ensure that burials are not vandalized until the decision of burial deposition has been made pursuant to California law. If human remains are determined to be Native American interments, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and follow the procedures stated herein and other applicable laws. A report by the archaeologist evaluating the find and identifying mitigation actions taken shall be submitted to the CPUC. Where appropriate to protect the location and sensitivity of the cultural resources, the report may be submitted under Public Utilities Code Section 583 or other appropriate confidentiality provisions. Prior and during construction MM CUL-4: Inadvertent Discovery Protocols A. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology to implement archaeological awareness training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities. The training shall include information regarding the possibility of encountering buried cultural resources, the appearance and types of resources likely to be seen during construction, notification procedures, and proper protocols to be followed should suspected or confirmed resources be encountered by the crew. This training ■ Responsible for approval: City of Dublin • Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified archaeologist City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 28 Responsibl completion Approval / Monitorin Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure ate Initials shall be provided once to each worker involved in ground -disturbing activities before they begin work, and shall be documented in training records. B. In the event that precontact or historic -age resources (or suspected resources) are inadvertently discovered during Project implementation, all activity within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the City of Dublin's Project Manager shall be notified, and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the City of Dublin to examine the find, pursuant to Mitigation Measure 7 set out in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B. Project personnel shall not collect or move any historic material. The archaeologist shall evaluate the find(s) within 48 hours to determine if it meets the definition of a historical or unique archaeological resource and follow the procedures outlined below: i. If the find(s) does not meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming Project implementation. ii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of a historical resource or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be avoided by Project activities and preserved in place. If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Dublin, the qualified archaeologist shall make appropriate recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of such find(s), and significant impacts to such resources shall be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the archaeologist prior to resuming construction activities within the 50-foot radius. iii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of both a tribal cultural resource and a historical or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be treated in accordance with MM CUL-3. City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 29 Responsible forompletion Approval / Monitoring / I= Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Implementation Initials C. Recommendations for treatment and disposition of find(s) could include, but are not limited to, archaeological monitoring, collection, recordation, and analysis of any significant cultural materials. A report of findings documenting any data recovery shall be submitted to NWIC. i. In the event that archaeological resource(s) are discovered during Project implementation, an archaeological monitor shall be retained to monitor all ground- disturbing activities in the vicinity (i.e., within 50 feet) of the find. Archaeological monitors have the authority, upon the finding of a potential resource, to request that work be slowed, diverted, or stopped if archaeological resources are identified within the direct impact area. If the resource is determined by an archaeologist to be a historical or unique archaeological resource, the archaeologist shall amend the Treatment and Monitoring Plan, with measures to avoid or reduce impacts to the resource. The treatment plan measures may include, but not be limited to, avoidance and preservation in place (the preferred method if feasible), capping, incorporation of the site within a park or other open space, or data recovery. If the resource is also a tribal cultural resource, then designated representatives from the consulting tribe(s) shall make appropriate recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of such find(s) in accordance with MM CUL-3 and these recommendations shall be incorporated into the treatment plan. Geology and Soils During construction MM GEO-1: Avoid Impacts to Unique Paleontological Resources To minimize the potential for destruction of or damage to previously unknown unique, scientifically important paleontological resources ■ Responsible for approval: City of Dublin City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 30 Responsible forompletion Approval / Monitoring / Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Implementation Initials during earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall do the following: • Prior to the start of earthmoving activities, retain either a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist to inform all construction personnel involved with earthmoving activities regarding the possibility of encountering fossils, the appearance and types of fossils likely to be seen during construction, and proper notification procedures should fossils be encountered. • If paleontological resources are discovered during earthmoving activities, the construction crew shall immediately cease work within 50 feet of the find and notify the Project applicant and the City. The Project applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist to evaluate the resource and prepare a recovery plan, based on SVP Guidelines. The recovery plan may include, but is not limited to, a field survey, construction monitoring, sampling and data recovery procedures, museum curation for any specimen recovered, and a report of findings. Recommendations in the recovery plan that are determined by the City (as the CEQA lead agency) to be necessary and feasible shall be implemented before construction activities can resume within 50 feet of the site where the paleontological resource or resources were discovered. ■ Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified archaeologist or paleontologist Hazards and Hazardous Materials Prior to construction MM HAZMAT-1: Perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment • Prior to the start of earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall retain the services of a qualified remediation firm to perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA). The Phase II ESA shall be limited to only those areas where chemical use, storage, and handling have previously occurred. Soil borings shall be obtained as part of the Phase II ESA, along with groundwater samples if necessary. The samples shall be submitted to a laboratory ■ Responsible for approval: City of Dublin ■ Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified remediation firm City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 31 Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible forompletion Approval / Monitoring / Implementation Initials for environmental testing and the results shall be reported in the Phase II ESA, copies of which shall be provided to the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH) and the City of Dublin Building Department. If there are no detections of constituents of concern, or the amounts are below regulatory agency threshold levels, no further actions shall be required. • If the results of laboratory analyses from the Phase II ESA demonstrate that constituents of concern are present at levels that exceed regulatory agency threshold levels, the Project applicant shall consult with ACDEH (and other regulatory agencies such as the SWRCB if necessary) regarding the necessary actions for remediation. All necessary remedial activities shall be completed by the Project applicant, with a certification by the lead agency with remedial oversight (e.g., ACDEH or SWRCB) that no further action is required, prior to the start of construction activities at the Project site. Prior to building demolition HAZMAT-2: Perform Sampling of Materials To Be Demolished. Prior to demolition of any building in the project area, the building shall be sampled to determine if the building contains lead paint and/or asbestos. If either of the materials are determined to be present, they shall be handled and disposed of as a hazardous material and in compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations. ■ Responsible: City of Dublin ■ Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified remediation firm Transportation and Traffic Project design Condition of Approval: • Requires vegetation maintenance for sight distance to achieve a minimum sight distance of 250 feet at each driveway access point • Prohibits trucks from accessing the eastern driveway ■ Responsible: City of Dublin ■ Implementation: Project applicant City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 32 Responsibl Approval / Monitorin Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure I Tribal Cultural Resources ompletion ate Initials Prior to and MM TR-1: Inadvertent/Unanticipated Tribal Cultural Resources • Responsible for during Discovery Protocols approval: City of construction The City of Dublin shall require the following steps to be taken, including as a part of all contracts related to construction of the Project, Dublin • Implementation: as applicable: Project applicant A. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall with assistance from retain representatives from consulting tribe(s), if available, to representatives from implement Tribal Cultural Resources Sensitivity Training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities. The training shall include information regarding the possibility of encountering buried tribal cultural resources, the appearance and types of tribal cultural resources that could potentially be seen during construction, notification procedures, and proper protocols to be followed should suspected or confirmed tribal cultural resources be encountered. This training shall be provided once to each worker involved in ground -disturbing activities before they begin work and shall be documented in training records. consulting tribe(s) B. If tribal cultural resources or potential tribal cultural resources are discovered during Project implementation, all activity within a 50- foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the City of Dublin's Project Manager shall be notified, and Tribal Representatives from the consulting tribe(s) shall be immediately notified. The Tribal Representative(s) shall evaluate the find(s) within 48 hours to determine if it meets the definition of a tribal cultural resource (PRC §21074) and follow the procedures outlined below: i. If the find(s) does not meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming Project implementation (but see MM CUL-3 and CUL-4) City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 33 Timing Responsibl completion Approval / Monitorin Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure ate Initials ii.lf the find(s) does meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, then it shall be avoided by Project activities and preserved in place. The contractor shall implement any measures deemed by the City of Dublin to be necessary and feasible to preserve in place, avoid, or minimize impacts to the tribal cultural resource. If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Dublin, Tribal Representatives from the consulting tribe(s) if available, shall make recommendations regarding the culturally appropriate treatment and disposition of such find(s) and significant impacts to such tribal cultural resources shall be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the consulting tribe(s), if they are available, prior to resuming construction activities within the 50-foot radius. iii. If the find meets the definition of both a tribal cultural resource and a historical or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be treated in accordance with the measures described in Section C. below and MM CUL-4. C. Culturally appropriate treatment may include, but is not limited to, minimal processing of materials for reburial, minimizing handling of tribal cultural resources objects, leaving objects in place within the landscape, or returning tribal cultural resources objects to a location within the Project area where they would not be subject to future disturbance. No cultural soil maybe removed from the Project site. Permanent curation, testing, or data collection of tribal cultural resources will not take place unless requested in writing by the consulting tribe(s). D. All fill soils imported and used for this Project must be clean, engineered fill. E. The applicant shall enter into a tribal monitoring agreement with the consulting tribe(s) prior to the start of ground disturbing activities. City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR 1 Page 34 Responsible forompletion Approval / Monitoring / Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Implementation Initials The tribal monitoring agreement shall form the terms and compensation for the tribal monitoring with the consulting tribe(s) and be utilized in combination with the tribal cultural resource treatment. Tribal Monitors have the authority to identify sites or objects of cultural significance and to request, upon the finding of a potential tribal cultural resource, that work be slowed, diverted, or stopped if such sites or objects are identified within the direct impact area. Only the consulting tribe(s) can recommend culturally appropriate treatment of such sites or objects, via their Tribal Monitor. Work within 50 feet of the discovery location cannot resume until all necessary investigation and evaluation of the discovery under the requirements of the tribal monitoring agreement have been implemented. Energy Conservation During construction See Air quality mitigation measure MM AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices. ■ Responsible for approval: City of Dublin • Implementation: Project applicant This page intentionally left blank 161 Appendix A Draft EIR This page intentionally left blank 163 11 sus DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Hexcel Redevelopment Project Focused EIR August 21, 2023 PROJECT APPLICATION 000688 164 This page intentionally left blank 165 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents 1 Page i Table of Contents Project Summary 1 Project Description 1 Alternatives 1 Issues of Concern 1 Environmental Review Process 3 Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report and Scoping Period 4 Draft EIR and Public Review Period 5 Final EIR and Responses to Comment 5 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 5 Scope of EIR 6 Topics Addressed in this EIR 6 Topics Not Addressed in Detail in this EIR Based on Preparation of the Initial Study 6 Project Description 7 Project Site and Vicinity 7 Project Objectives 7 Surrounding Land Uses 7 Project Characteristics 8 Proposed Building 8 Project Approvals 12 Environmental Analysis 13 Introduction 13 Environmental Topics 13 Impact Levels 13 Environmental Baseline 14 Source(s) 14 Section 1: Air Quality 15 Environmental Setting 15 Air Pollutants of Concern 16 Regulatory Framework 16 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 18 Source(s) 23 Section 2: Biological Resources 25 Environmental Setting 25 Regulatory Framework 26 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 28 Source(s) 35 166 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents 1 Page ii Section 3: Cultural Resources 37 Environmental Setting 37 Regulatory Framework 48 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 56 Source(s) 63 Section 4: Energy 67 Environmental Setting 67 Regulatory Framework 68 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 70 Source(s) 72 Section 5: Geology and Soils 75 Environmental Setting 76 Regulatory Framework 77 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 79 Source(s) 81 Section 6: Hazards and Hazardous Materials 83 Environmental Setting 83 Regulatory Framework 85 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 87 Source(s) 89 Section 7: Tribal Cultural Resources 91 Environmental Setting 91 Regulatory Framework 92 Context for Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 95 Project Impacts and Mitigation 97 Significance after Mitigation 99 Source(s) 100 Other CEQA Considerations 101 Cumulative Context 101 Cumulative Impact Analysis 102 Growth Context 108 Growth Inducing Analysis 109 Significant Irreversible Changes Context 109 Significant Irreversible Changes 110 Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Context 111 Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Analysis 111 Source(s) 111 Alternatives 113 Introduction 113 167 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page iii Factors Considered in the Selection of Alternatives 113 Description and Analysis of Alternatives Retained 114 No Project Alternative 114 Reduced Grading Alternative 115 Alternatives Considered but Rejected 117 Partial Preservation Alternative 117 Environmentally Superior Alternative 119 Report Preparers 121 Lead Agency 121 Consultant — AECOM 121 Appendices 133 Appendices A Initial Study B Notice of Preparation and Scoping Comments C Historical Resources Evaluation D CaIEEMod Output Sheets E Final Transportation Impact Study List of Figures Note: All figures are included at the end of the document. Figure 1. Project Location Figure 2. Project Site Figure 3. Site Plan Figure 4. Elevations Figure 5. Overall Floor Plan Figure 6A. Landscape Plan Figure 6B. Landscape Plan Detail Figure 7. Fire Access Route 168 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page iv List of Tables Table 1: Summary of Impacts and Mitigation 2 Table 2: Building Composition by Level 9 Table 3: Anticipated Construction Schedule 11 Table 4: Total and Average Daily Construction Emissions 21 Table 5: Annual and Average Daily Operational Emissions 22 Table 6: Special -Status Species Potential to Occur in the Project Area 30 Table 7: Construction and Operational Energy Consumption 71 Table 8: Cumulative Projects in the City of Dublin 105 Table 9: Comparison of Proposed Project and Alternatives 120 169 City of Dublin HEXCEL REPFVFI npMFNT PROJECT Table of Contents i Page v Acronyms 1,1,1-TCA 1,1,1-trichloroethane AB Assembly Bill ACDEH Alameda County Department of Environmental Health ACMs asbestos -containing materials A.D. Anno Domini ADA American With Disabilities Alquist-Priolo Act Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act APE Area of Potential Effects APN Assessor Parcel Numbers Ardent Ardent Environmental Group B.C. before present BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District bgs below the ground surface BL1 Green Buildings BL2 Decarbonize Buildings BMPs Best Management Practices Business Plans Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventories CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy cal B.C. calibrated years before the present Cal/OSHA California Occupational Safety and Health Administration CaIEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model CaIEPA California Environmental Protection Agency CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code Caltrans California Department of Transportation CAP Climate Action Plan CAP 2030 Climate Action Plan 2030 CARB California Air Resources Board CBC California Building Standards Code CCR California Code of Regulations CCTS Central California Taxonomic System CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CESA California Endangered Species Act CFR Code of Federal Regulations CGS California Geological Survey CHP California Highway Patrol City City of Dublin CNDDB California Natural Diversity Data Base CO carbon monoxide 170 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page vi CO2 carbon dioxide Cornerstone Cornerstone Earth Group county County of Alameda CRHR California Register of Historical Resources CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency CY cubic yard DOC California Department of Conservation DPR Department of Parks and Recreation DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control EBCE East Bay Community Energy EDR Environmental Database Report EIR Environmental Impact Report EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency ESA Environmental Site Assessment ESA Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 EV electric vehicle GGEs gasoline gallon equivalents of petroleum GHG greenhouse gas HABS Historic American Building Survey HAER Historic American Engineering Record HALS Historic American Landscapes Survey Hexcel Hexcel Products, Inc. Hi Bay laboratories were used for small-scale testing, while the building located south of the offices/laboratories HRI Historic Resources Inventory I- Interstate IPaC Information for Planning and Consulting IS Initial Study LED light emitting diode light industrial zoned M-1 MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MLD most likely descendant MLT Middle -to -Late Transition MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan MND Mitigated Negative Declaration mph miles per hour NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NHL National Historic Landmark NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NHSTA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 171 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents i Page vii NO2 nitrogen dioxide NOP Notice of Preparation NOx nitrogen oxides NPS National Parks Service NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NWIC Northwest Information Center OES Office of Emergency Services PD Planned Development PG&E Pacific Gas & Electric Company PM particulate matter PM10 PM equal to or less than 10 micrometers in diameter PM2.5 PM equal to or less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter Porter -Cologne Act Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act PRC Public Resources Code proposed project The proposed actions that would involve replacing existing building with a new building and other site improvements R&D research and development ROGs reactive organic gases Royal Research Royal Research Corporation RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SFBAAB San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin SIP State Implementation Plan SO2 sulfur dioxide SVP Society of Vertebrate Paleontology SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB California State Water Resources Control Board TACs toxic air contaminants TCE trichloroethene UBC Uniform Building Code UCMP University of California Museum of Paleontology USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service UST Underground Storage Tank VOCs volatile organic compounds WSA William Self Associates, Inc. 172 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page viii This page intentionally left blank 173 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 1 Hexcel Redevelopment Project Environmental Impact Report Project Summary Project Description Dublin Boulevard Owner, LP is proposing to construct a new 125,304 square foot building on the 8.81- acre project site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California. The project site is composed of two parcels (Assessor Parcel Numbers [APN] 941-1560-009-01 [Parcel 1] and 941-1560-003-04 [Parcel 2]) with an existing 62,715 square foot building on Parcel 1. The existing Hexcel research and development (R&D) building would be demolished and replaced with the proposed building. The proposed building would cater to future tenants in the R&D and life sciences field. Other site improvements would include landscaping; parking; a fire access road; circulation improvements for truck access and loading and unloading materials; utilities; pavement and grading to treat site drainage. Alternatives • No Project Alternative (existing conditions, no change) • Alternative 1: Reduced Grading Alternative The alternatives discussion of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared in accordance with Section 15126(d) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and focuses on alternatives that are capable of eliminating or reducing significant adverse effects associated with the proposed project while feasibly attaining most of the basic objectives. This EIR identifies the No Project Alternative as the "environmentally superior" alternative, because it would eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts to the Project site's historic resource, and would also eliminate less than significant (or less than significant with mitigation) impacts on other resource topics. While the No Project Alternative would eliminate the significant adverse effect of the proposed Project, it would not achieve the Project objectives. When the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, CEQA requires that an additional alternative be identified. In this case, Alternative 1 (Reduced Grading) would be the environmentally superior alternative, because it would accomplish most of the Project's objectives while reducing potential impacts to buried archeological and paleontological resources as described in the Alternatives section. Issues of Concern The main issue of concern regarding the proposed Project is the demolition of the site's historic resource, which is the existing building. This issue is fully addressed in the Environmental Analysis of this EIR. Table 1: Summary of Impacts and Mitigation below summarizes potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project. The table includes a list of impacts and mitigation measures identified in this EIR. The table lists impacts and mitigation measures in two major 174 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR l Page 2 categories: significant impacts that would remain significant even with mitigation (significant and unavoidable), and potentially significant impacts that could be mitigated to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures descriptions provided in Table 1 are abbreviated; for the complete description of these mitigation measures, please refer to their associated sections in this EIR. Refer to the Initial Study in Appendix A for further discussion of impacts that would have no impact or be less than significant without mitigation. Table 1: Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Impact Mitigation Level of Significance After Mitigation Impact AQ-1: The proposed Project could be inconsistent with BAAQMD's Basic Construction Mitigation during demolition and construction. Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices: The construction contractor shall comply with the following BAAQMD Basic Construction Measures, as applicable, for reducing construction emissions of uncontrolled fugitive dust (PMio and PM2.5). See Section 1 for complete description. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Impact AQ -2: The proposed Project could result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard during construction and operation. See Mitigation Measure AQ-1 in Impact AQ-1 above. See Section 1 for Less Than complete description. Significant with Mitigation Impact BIO-1: The proposed Project could result in nest destruction and failure to nesting birds during construction activities. Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Nesting Bird Avoidance Measures: To the extent practicable, construction activities and any tree trimming/removal shall be performed from September 16 through February 15 to avoid the general nesting period for birds. If construction or tree trimming/removal cannot be performed during this period, nesting bird surveys and active nest buffers. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the survey area, an appropriate buffer between the nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. See Section 2 for complete description. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Impact BIO-2: The proposed Project could result in mortality to bats during construction activities. Mitigation Measure BIO-2. Roosting Bat Surveys and Avoidance: The Project Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a bat habitat assessment in all project areas that require tree removal. The qualified biologist shall identify and document the location of potentially suitable bat roosting habitat prior to construction activities. If no suitable bat habitat is observed, the biologist shall inform the Project Applicant, and no further considerations are required. If bat roosting habitat is observed, the location of such habitat areas shall be provided to the Project Applicant. See Section 3 for the complete description. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Impact CR-1: The proposed Project would result in the demolition of the existing Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, which is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. Mitigation Measure CUL-1: HABS Recordation: The Project applicant shall document the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility prior to demolition. See Section 3 for the complete description. Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Interpretive Displays: The Project applicant shall install permanent interpretive displays for public exhibition detailing the history and significance of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility at the Project site. See Section 3 for the complete description. Significant and Unavoidable 175 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 3 Impact Mitigation Level of Significance After Mitigation Impact CR-2: The proposed Project could cause substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resources during excavation activities. Mitigation Measure CUL-3: Archaeological and Tribal Monitoring: A qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the applicant prior to implementing construction. See Section 3 for the complete description. Mitigation Measure CUL-4: Inadvertent Discovery Protocols: a number of protocols would be followed in the case of the discovery of archeological and tribal resources. See Section 3 for the complete description. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Impact EN-1: The proposed See Mitigation MeasureAQ-1 in ImpactAQ-1 above. Project could consume energy in a wasteful or inefficient way. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Impact GEO-1: The proposed Project could accidentally cause damage to, or destruction of unique paleontological resources during earthmoving activities. Mitigation Measure GEO-1. Avoid Impacts to Unique Paleontological Resources: To minimize the potential for destruction of or damage to previously unknown unique, scientifically important paleontological resources during earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall do the following: Prior to the start of earthmoving activities, retain either a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist to inform all construction personnel. If paleontological resources are discovered during earthmoving activities, the construction crew shall immediately cease work within 50 feet of the find and notify the Project applicant and the City. See Section 5 for the complete description. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Impact HAZMat-1: The proposed Project could expose people to contaminated soil or groundwater that exceed regulatory thresholds. Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-1. Perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment: Prior to the start of earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall retain the services of a qualified remediation firm to perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA). If the results of laboratory analyses from the Phase II ESA demonstrate that constituents of concern are present at levels that exceed regulatory agency threshold levels, the Project applicant shall consult with ACDEH (and other regulatory agencies such as the SWRCB if necessary) regarding the necessary actions for remediation. See Section 6 for complete description. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Impact TR-1: The Project could disturb Native American human remains during excavation activities. Mitigation Measure TR-1: Inadvertent/Unanticipated Tribal Cultural Resources Discovery Protocols: a number of protocols would be followed in the case of the discovery of tribal resources. See Mitigation Measures CUL-3 and CUL-4 in Impact CR-2 above. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Notes: ACDEH = Alameda County Department of Environmental Health, BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District, City = City of Dublin, ESA = Environmental Site Assessment, PMio = PM equal to or less than 10 micrometers in diameter, PM25= PM equal to or less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter, Project = The proposed actions that would involve replacing existing building with a new building and other site improvements, Project Applicant = Dublin Boulevard Owner, LP, Project site = 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California, SWRCB = California State Water Resources Control Board Environmental Review Process The City of Dublin (the City) is the lead agency responsible for administrating the environmental review under CEQA. After preparing an Initial Study, the City has determined that an EIR must be prepared to evaluate potentially significant effects that could result from implementation of the proposed Project. A Notice of Preparation was prepared and a scoping period held from May 15, 2023 to Jun 15, 2023. The full CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist is provided in the Initial Study (see Appendix A). 176 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 4 CEQA requires that, before a project with potentially significant environmental effects may be approved, an EIR must be prepared that fully describes the environmental effects of the project, identifies mitigation measures to lessen or eliminate adverse impacts, and examines feasible alternatives to the project. The information contained in the EIR is to be reviewed and considered by the lead agency prior to the ultimate decision to approve, disapprove, or modify the proposed project. Consistent with CEQA guidelines sections 15080 through 15097, the CEQA process has multiple phases, many of which require notification to the public and opportunity for public comments. The environmental review process for a focused EIR includes the following steps: publication of a notice of preparation (NOP) of an EIR and public scoping; publication of a Draft EIR for public review and comment; preparation and publication of responses to public and agency comments on the draft EIR; and certification of the final EIR. The EIR process provides an opportunity for the public to review and comment on the proposed Project's potential environmental effects and to further inform the environmental analysis. These steps are described in more detail in the following sections. Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report and Scoping Period An initial study is an analysis conducted by a lead agency to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment and aids in determining what type of environmental document the lead agency is required to prepare. An initial study was prepared for the proposed Project (see Appendix A). It analyzed the environmental topics included in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist to determine which topics would be less than significant. This EIR further evaluates environmental topics which would have significant impacts that could be mitigated to Tess -than -significant levels and other topics that would have significant and unavoidable impacts. Consistent with the requirements of CEQA guidelines sections 15063 and 15082, the City has made a good -faith effort during the preparation of the Draft EIR to contact all responsible and trustee agencies; organizations and persons who may have an interest in the proposed Project; and all applicable government agencies, including the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse. This outreach effort included the circulation of a NOP on May 15, 2023, which began a 30-day comment period that ended on June 15, 2023. The NOP requested that agencies and interested parties comment on environmental issues that should be addressed in the Draft EIR. A copy of the NOP is provided in Appendix B. The City sent out NOP and scoping period notices as follows: 1. Sent NOP via certified mail to the County clerk and public agencies on May 15, 2023. 2. Sent email blast to contacts on the City's universal mailing list on May 15, 2023. 3. Copy of NOP and noticing posted at Dublin Library and at the City Hall 4. Publication of NOP in the East Bay Times on May 17, 2023 5. Posting the NOP and noticing to the City website at https://dublin-development.icitywork.com/ The City held a virtual public scoping meeting on May 25, 2023, at 7:00 pm, with options for joining by phone or computer. The purpose of the scoping meeting was to inform the public about the proposed Project, explain the environmental review process, and provide an opportunity for the public to make 177 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 5 comments and express concerns related to the Project's environmental issues. No one called into the meeting and the meeting ended at 7:15 pm. Two comment letters were received during the public scoping period: one from the Native American Heritage Commission and one from the City of Pleasanton. Copies of these letters are contained in Appendix B. Draft EIR and Public Review Period This Draft EIR is available for a 45-day public review period as indicated on the Public Notice of Availability of this document, which ends on October 5, 2023. The purpose of public review of the EIR is to receive comments on the adequacy of the document in addressing adverse physical effects of the Project. This Draft EIR is being circulated to relevant local, regional and/or state agencies, and to interested organizations and individuals who may wish to review and comment on the report. During the public review period, written comments on the adequacy of the Draft EIR may be submitted to the City of Dublin at the following address: Gaspare Annibale, Associate Planner & Anne Hersch, Assistant Community Development Director City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Written comments may also be submitted via email to Gaspare.Annibale@dublin.ca.gov and Anne.Hersch@dublin.ca.gov with "Hexcel Redevelopment Project Draft EIR" noted in the subject line. Final EIR and Responses to Comment Responses to all substantive comments received on the adequacy of the Draft EIR and submitted within the specified review period will be prepared and included in the Responses to Comments/Final EIR, including any revisions to the EIR required in response to the comments. If the City decides to approve the Project, the City must first certify the Final EIR and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for mitigation measures identified in the EIR, in accordance with the requirements of California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21001. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program At the time of Project approval, CEQA and the CEQA guidelines require agencies to adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program and to make that program a condition of project approval, to mitigate or avoid significant impacts on the environment (CEQA section 21081.6; CEQA guidelines section 15097). Mitigation measures that have been recommended in this EIR to reduce the environmental impacts of the proposed Project in relation to the above topics will be included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) that the City of Dublin will prepare and adopt (pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15097) if the City determines that the proposed Project or one of the proposed alternatives should be approved. 178 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 6 Scope of EIR Topics Addressed in this EIR Pursuant to section 15143 of the state CEQA guidelines, a lead agency may focus an EIR's discussion on specific issue areas where significant impacts on the environment may occur: "[e]ffects dismissed in an Initial Study as clearly insignificant and unlikely to occur need not be discussed further in the EIR unless the Lead Agency subsequently receives information inconsistent with the finding in the Initial Study. A copy of the Initial Study may be attached to the EIR to provide the basis for limiting the impacts discussed." The initial study for the proposed Project is included in Appendix A of this Draft EIR. Pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15063(c)(3), and based on its review of existing information and the initial study completed for the proposed Project, the City determined that the proposed Project would have significant or potentially significant impacts in the following resource areas that require further analysis and are therefore discussed in this Draft EIR: • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Energy • Geology and Soils • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Tribal Cultural Resources Topics Not Addressed in Detail in this EIR Based on Preparation of the Initial Study The information and analysis presented in the Initial Study provides substantial evidence for the conclusion, for all the issues listed below (i.e., those not addressed in detail in this EIR), that: 1) CEQA standards triggering preparation of further environmental review do not exist for those issues; and 2) impacts under these topics would have no impact or be less than significant. Topics not addressed in this EIR in detail are listed below by impact determination category identified in Appendix G, the Environmental Checklist Form. These topics are, however, analyzed for full disclosure of the environmental determination, in the Initial Study, included within Appendix A of this EIR. In addition to the list below, impacts from the CEQA checklist that have a less than significant impact related to air quality, biological resources, energy, geology and soils, and hazards and hazardous materials are also included in the Initial Study. • Aesthetics • Agricultural and Forestry Resources • Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Hydrology and Water Quality • Land Use and Planning • Mineral Resources • Noise • Population and Housing • Public Services • Transportation • Utilities and Service Systems • Wildfire 179 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 7 Project Description Project Site and Vicinity The Project site is located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California. See Figure 1. Project Location. The site includes two parcels totaling 8.81 acres; APN 941-1560-009-01 [Parcel 1] is the larger parcel at 8.30 acres and is located adjacent to Dublin Boulevard, and [APN] 941- 1560-003-04 [Parcel 2] is the smaller parcel at 0.51 acre and is located toward the back (south) of the Project site adjacent to 1-580. The site slopes from a maximum elevation of approximately 395 feet above mean sea level near the southwest corner to about 382 feet at the northern corner. Parcel 1 is zoned M-1 (light industrial) and Planned Development (PD) (Ordinance No. 80-60) and Parcel 2 is zoned M-1 (light industrial). The site is also located in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan boundary. The Specific Plan intends to protect and preserve historical resources and further enhance this area with development that is compatible with the extant historic buildings and remnants in the area. The original historic buildings in this area include St. Raymond's church, the Murray Schoolhouse, Pioneer Cemetery, Green's Store, and two bungalow homes. These resources function together as the Dublin Heritage Center, a local history museum and cultural center. The Specific Plan boundary extends from Cronin Circle to Interstate (I-)580 and San Ramon Road to Hansen Drive, including portions west of Hansen Drive along Dublin Boulevard. The Dublin Village Historic Area encompasses approximately 40 acres (City of Dublin 2014). Parcel 1 (the northern and main portion of the site) is developed with a 62,715 square foot building, at - grade parking, underground and aboveground utilities, pavement, and ornamental landscaping. The existing building is being used as a R&D facility. The landscape consists of grass areas and mature trees. Parcel 2 (the southern parcel) is undeveloped and is surrounded by dense riparian vegetation including mature trees. The Dublin Creek runs along the approximate southern boundary and is approximately 13 to 18 feet below the adjacent site elevations. Project Objectives The proposed Project has the following objectives: 1. To redevelop the Hexcel site with a new and upgraded facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field. 2. To rezone Parcels 1 and 2 as a Planned Development, which provide development standards beyond those of the M-1 zoning, and adopt a new ordinance. Surrounding Land Uses As shown in Figure 2. Project Site, the Project site is immediately surrounded by commercial office uses including an R&D facility, medical and professional offices to the west, US Bank, Dublin Pioneer Cemetery, and the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums to the east; 1-580 to the south; and Dublin Boulevard to the north. To the north of Dublin Boulevard and to the east of the Dublin Heritage Park 180 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 8 and Museums and cemetery are single-family houses. Approximately a mile to the west is Dublin Hills Regional Open Space Preserve. Project Characteristics The proposed Project would result in the existing 62,715 square foot industrial building being demolished and a new 125,304 square foot building being developed on the 8.81-acre Project site. The new building would cater to future tenants in the R&D and life sciences field. Other site improvements would include landscaping; parking; a fire access road; circulation improvements for truck access and loading and unloading materials; utilities; pavement and grading to treat site drainage. Figure 3. Site Plan shows the proposed site layout. The following sections describe the proposed Project and project components. Proposed Building The proposed building would cover approximately 33 percent of Parcel 1 (see Figure 3. Site Plan). The building would be set back approximately 135 feet from Dublin Boulevard, separated by landscaped areas, parking stalls and a fire access route for aerial apparatus access (described in succeeding sections). As shown in Figure 4. Elevations, the building would be a single -story building with the potential addition of a second floor mezzanine office and would have a maximum height of 40 feet. The outside of the building would be made of concrete tilt -up panels painted in various colors including blue, white and gray. The north side (front) of the building would have separate entrances to the lower level of each of the four separate tenant spaces (i.e., Units A, B, C and D). Access to the upper mezzanine office spaces would be provided from the interior of the building via stairways. The double doors to the entrance would have aluminum framing with insulated tempered glazed windows. Units B and C would also have doors on the front of the building that would provide access to the industrial and warehouse spaces. Large, glazed windows with aluminum framing would be installed on both lower and upper levels of the building to provide for maximum light filtering from the outside into the office spaces. The west and northwest side of the building would provide for six separate points of ingress/egress into the Unit A industrial and warehouse space, and from the inside provide access outside to adjacent parking stalls and a large landscaped area at the west corner of the site. The east side of the building would provide for four points of ingress/egress into Unit D and would have large vision glass that would allow light to flow into the space from outside while keeping the inside of the building cool and private. The south side (rear) of the building would have 4 to 5 dock doors per unit for loading and unloading of materials from the warehouses. There would be four drive-in doors for truck access inside the warehouse. The interior design of the building would maximize natural light with mezzanine offices on the second floor overlooking the ground floor. The total square footage of the first floor would be 119,304 square feet and the second floor would be 6,000 square feet. As indicated in Table 2: Building Composition by Level, the space would be configured for different uses related to life sciences and advanced manufacturing. The overall building square footage could potentially be divided into four separate units (Units A, B, C and D), each with separate entrances, for four future tenants (see Figure 5. Overall Floor Plan). Each of the units would be between 26,000 to 34,000 square feet consisting of office, industrial, and warehouse space. 181 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 9 Table 2: Building Composition by Level Level Use Square Footage Level 1 Office 12,000 Level 1 Light industrial 30,000 Level 1 Warehouse 77,304 Level 2 Office 6,000 Other features of the building would include an interior bike rack, interior roof drain with pipe overflow, and an electrical room. All walking surfaces would be non -slip types. The floors would be a flat/tilt concrete slab and interior walls would be concrete. The building would be designed in compliance with fire codes related to fire access, internal sprinkler systems, electrical systems and fire - retardant materials. Additionally, the building would comply with American With Disabilities (ADA) standards related to access, ramps, breakrooms and bathrooms. Landscape Improvements Most of the existing landscape would be replaced, as illustrated in Figure 6A. Landscape Plan, except within the southern portion of the site (Parcel 2) where existing vegetation within the riparian corridor of Dublin Creek and along the 1-580 boundary would be retained. The total site landscape area would be 99,106 square feet, which includes new and existing landscape. A variety of evergreen shrubs, ornamental trees, grasses, and perennials would be planted around the perimeter of the site and at parking lot areas as listed in Figure 6B: Landscape Plan Details. A total of 85 trees would be added to the site along with other plant materials. Some of the proposed plants include sweet bay, strawberry tree, toyon, hopbush, coffeeberry, red yucca, agave, fort night lily, ceanothus and atlas fescue. Bark mulch would be placed in planters around shrubs. Native and drought tolerant plants would be utilized to enhance biodiversity and conserve water. Large ornamental trees planned for parking lot areas would provide shade and minimize radiating heat. The landscape would be designed to provide buffers between the site and adjacent properties, and plants would be strategically placed to screen the site's aboveground utilities from public streets. Temporary and permanent irrigation systems would be installed to establish plants. A 3,827 square foot grass bio- swale surrounded by trees and shrubs is proposed in the west corner of the site. Additional bio- swales/bioretention planters are proposed in the northeast and southeast areas of the site. The total bioretention areas would be 9,819 square feet. Parcel 1 of the Project site contains 87 trees, four of which are heritage trees. All trees within this parcel would be removed except for two of the heritage trees; one in the northeast corner along the project frontage and one in the southwest portion of the site. The heritage trees that would be removed in Parcel 1 include one in the northwest portion of the site and one near the center of the site. Parcel 2 of the Project site contains 109 trees within the Dublin Creek riparian corridor. All trees in Parcel 2 would be retained, 19 of which are heritage trees. Access, Circulation and Parking Vehicular access would be provided from two existing driveways off Dublin Boulevard, one near the center of the site frontage and the other at the eastern boundary. These driveways would be 182 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 10 connected by a 30 to 40-foot-wide fire access route around the perimeter of the proposed building (Figure 7. Fire Access Route). A total of six fire hydrants would be installed along this fire access road. The road would be designed to accommodate emergency response vehicles (i.e., fire trucks), delivery box trucks, and trash trucks. A 26-foot-wide fire access route along the northern side of the building would allow for aerial apparatus access. A total of 217 parking spaces would be provided for the Project. The parking spaces would be located around the perimeter of the building and at the edges of the site, and would include stalls for compact vehicles, standard vehicles, electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, and accessible parking. Compact parking would account for 27 percent of the overall parking spaces, while EV parking would account for 45 percent of the overall parking spaces. Additionally, 12 long-term and 12 short-term bicycle stalls would be provided onsite. Offsite loading spaces would be provided in the back (south) of the proposed building adjacent to the dock doors and facing Highway 580. No truck parking or loading will be facing the street. Utilities Systems The Project site is currently served by existing utilities for water, sanitary sewer, electricity, and gas. As discussed in the Initial Study in Section 18: Utilities and Service Systems, Dublin San Ramon Services District provides water and wastewater services to the site, and East Bay Community Energy provides electricity and gas to the site, which is distributed by Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Sanitary sewer, sanitary sewer manholes, a water meter, and electrical lines and cables would be removed and replaced with new lines that would connect to existing offsite service lines. Additionally, an existing electrical cabinet, storm drain pipe, electrical transformer, and air conditioner unit are proposed for removal and would be replaced. Some of the existing stormwater lines will be left in place but abandoned. New utility lines would be buried below ground. A fire service line would connect to a public water line, which would provide water to the fire hydrants located around the site. Irrigation lines would also connect to public water lines. Stormwater would be treated onsite via five bioretention treatment planter areas that would be implemented in the western corner, southeast corner and south and northeast portions of the site. The site would be graded to have water flow into these biorientation areas. Approximately 9,819 square feet of bioretention areas on the Project site would be used for stormwater control. The proposed Project would include catch basins and storm drains throughout the project site. Full trash capture devices would be installed in all storm drain catch basins. Other Improvements An approximately 6-foot-high retaining wall would be installed along the southern edge of the parking lot and bioretention area in the southwest portion of the site, and lower (approximately 1- to 2-feet- high) retaining walls would be constructed adjacent to the bioretention areas in the southeast and northeast portions of the site. Additional retaining walls would be constructed to create loading dock ramps along the southern fagade of the building. A trash enclosure is proposed immediately adjacent to the backside of the building to the west. The trash enclosure would be 10.5 feet tall and 25.75 feet wide. A metal screen would be installed on the top of the enclosure to prevent illegal dumping. Double doors to move dumpsters in and out of the 183 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 11 enclosure and an accessible gate would be provided in the front of the enclosure. The enclosure would store two 6-cubic yard (CY) dumpsters and one 2-CY bin for green waste. A pathway would be constructed that would extend from the front of the proposed building to the side of the building providing access to doors along the building, parking spaces and the trash enclosure. A trash container for trash, recycle and compost would be installed near the front entrance of the proposed building. Construction Activities and Schedule A detailed construction schedule has not been determined at this phase; however, all construction of the Project is anticipated to occur over a 12-month period with some of the phases overlapping. Work would occur during weekdays from 7 am to 4 pm. The anticipated (preliminary) construction schedule is provided in Table 3: Anticipated Construction Schedule, which may be updated subject to market conditions, regulatory approvals, and other factors. The number of onsite workers would vary depending on the construction phase, but it is anticipated for a Project of this scope to range from 7 to 64 workers. Typical grading depths throughout the site would be less than 2 to 3 feet below ground level. The maximum depth of excavation would be between 12 to 20 feet below the existing ground level at the storm drain pump, which would be located in the southern portion of Parcel 1. In the parking lot near the southwest corner, grading would extend to approximately 4.5 feet below ground level. Table 3: Anticipated Construction Schedule Construction Phase Schedule Duration Demolition Late fall 2023 to winter 2024 3 months Site preparation/grading Early spring 2024 1 month Trenching and foundation Spring 2024 1 month Exterior building construction Late spring 2024 to fall 2024 6 months Interior building construction Late fall 2024 2 months Paving/landscape Late fall 2024 to early winter 2 months Construction phases would include demolition, site preparation and grading, trenching and foundation work, exterior building construction, interior building construction, and outside paving/landscaping. A summary of each construction phase is described below. Demolition — This stage would include the demolition of the existing facility, asphalt pavement (140,724 square feet), concrete curbs, landscape including trees and bushes, irrigation system, drainage system, sewer system, site lights, electrical boxes and other electrical equipment, gas and water meters, fence, shed and gate. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include concrete saws, excavators, loaders, tractors, backhoes, and rubber -tired dozers. Site preparation/grading — After the demolition phase, the site would be cleared of all demolition waste and earthmoving activities such as excavation, grading and leveling would take place to prepare the site for the proposed building and other site improvements. Utility line trenching would also occur 184 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 12 during this stage. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include graders, rubber -tired dozers, tractors, loaders, and backhoes. Trenching and foundation — This phase would consist of excavating and trenching for footings, laying down reinforcing bars (rebar) for retaining walls, drilling piers, preparing beams for foundation, and pouring the foundation slab. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include tractors, loaders, backhoes, and excavators. Exterior building construction — This phase would include construction of framing, roof, and siding and installation of exterior windows and doors. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include cranes, forklifts, generator sets, welders and tractors, loaders, backhoes and excavators. Interior building construction — This stage would involve the interior rough out and interior finishes of the building. Walls, flooring, stairs, ceiling, windows, doors, interior electrical and plumbing would be developed at this phase. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include air compressors and aerial lift. Paving and landscape — This stage would include laying down the pavement for the parking, driveways, fire access road, and walkway areas. This stage also includes installation of landscaping and irrigation around the site. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include cement and mortar mixers, pavers, pavement equipment, rollers, tractors, loaders, and backhoes. Prujc‘,L ,approval The City of Dublin is the Lead Agency for the proposed Project under CEQA. The City would be responsible for considering the Project's impacts as part of the Project approval. The City would require the applicant to obtain the following approvals and permits: approval of a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan; Site Development Review Permit; Heritage Tree Removal Permit; and demolition, building, grading, and encroachment permits. Other agencies whose approval may be required include: • Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD); and • Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). 185 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 13 Environmental Analysis Introduction The Environmental Analysis chapter contains the analysis of the potential effects to environmental topics considered under CEQA from construction and operation of the proposed Project. This chapter describes the existing setting, relevant plans and policies that would minimize or avoid potential adverse environmental effects, the significance criteria used to determine environmental impacts, the approach to the analysis, and the potential impacts that could result from development of the property. This chapter also identifies mitigation measures necessary to reduce the potential impacts of the proposed Project. Environmental Topics This document is a Focused EIR in that it evaluates potential impacts on a limited number of environmental issue areas that the lead agency determined to be significant (CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(c)(3)). After preparation of the Initial Study Checklist (see Initial Study in Appendix A), the City of Dublin determined that the EIR would focus on the potentially significant impacts of the proposed Project including Cultural Resources and Tribal Resources and other impacts that could result in a less than significant impact with mitigation. Impact Levels The EIR uses the following terms to characterize environmental impacts of the proposed Project: • No impact indicates that the construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed Project would not have any direct or indirect effects on the physical environment. This designation means the proposed Project would not result in a change to existing conditions. This impact level does not need mitigation. • A less -than -significant impact is one that would not result in a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the physical environment. This designation means that the Project would result in some degree of change to existing conditions, but that change would not be considered "significant," as explained in the next impact designation. This impact level does not require mitigation under CEQA. • A significant impact is defined by California Public Resources Code Section 21068 as "a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment." Levels of significance can vary by project, based on the setting and the nature of the change in the existing physical condition. CEQA Guidelines Section 15382 defines a significant effect as a "substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. An economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment. A social or economic change related to a physical change may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significant." A designation of an impact as significant requires that feasible mitigation measures or alternatives to the proposed project must be identified, where necessary and applicable, to eliminate or reduce the magnitude of the significant impact. 186 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 14 • A potentially significant impact is one that, if it were to occur, would be considered a significant impact as described above; however, the occurrence of the impact cannot be immediately determined with certainty. For CEQA purposes, a potentially significant impact is treated as if it were a significant impact. Therefore, under CEQA, feasible mitigation measures or alternatives to the proposed project must be provided, where necessary and applicable, to eliminate or reduce the magnitude of potentially significant impacts. • A potentially significant and unavoidable impact or significant and unavoidable impact is one that would result in a potentially substantial or substantial adverse effect on the environment, and that could not be reduced to a less -than -significant level even with implementation of feasible mitigation. Under CEQA, a project with significant and unavoidable impacts could still be approved, but the lead agency would be required to: (i) conclude in findings that there are no feasible means of substantially lessening or avoiding the significant impact in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3); and (ii) prepare a statement of overriding considerations, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, explaining why the lead agency would proceed with a project, in spite of the potential for significant impacts. Environmental Baseline Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a), this EIR measures the physical impacts of the proposed project against a "baseline" of physical environmental conditions at and in the vicinity of the Project site. The environmental "baseline" is the combined circumstances existing at the time the NOP of the EIR was published; unless otherwise specified, this is considered the "existing" condition for this EIR. For this Project, the baseline is May 15, 2023. The baseline also includes the policy and planning context for the proposed Project, such as the existing design review policies and procedures that currently govern proposed development. Source(s) City of Dublin Community Development Department. 2014 (updated). Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. Adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006, Resolution No. 149-06. Available online: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7780/DVHASP-FULL-PDF- 10714?bidld=. Accessed April 2023. 187 City of Dublin Section 1: Air Quality HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 15 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 1. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people? x x x x Environmental Setting Air quality is defined by the concentration of pollutants in relation to their impact on human health and the environment. Concentrations of air pollutants are determined by the rate and location of pollutant emissions released by pollution sources, and the atmosphere's ability to transport and dilute such emissions. Natural factors that affect transport and dilution include terrain, wind, and sunlight. Therefore, ambient air quality conditions within the local air basin are influenced by natural factors such as topography, meteorology, and climate, in addition to the amount of air pollutant emissions released by existing air pollutant sources. The proposed Project is located in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB), which is comprised of complex terrain types, including coastal mountain ranges, inland valleys, and bays, which distort normal wind flow patterns. Along the County of Alameda's (the county) western coast, temperatures are moderated by the bay, which can act as a heat source during cold weather or cool the air by evaporation during warm weather. It is generally sunnier farther from the coast, although partly cloudy skies are common throughout the summer. Average summer temperatures are mild overnight and moderate during the day. Winter temperatures are typically cool overnight and mild during the day. Highest temperatures are more common inland. Wind speeds vary throughout the county, with the strongest gusts along the western coast, often aided by dominant westerly winds and a bay -breeze effect. Rainfall totals average about 14 to 23 inches per year, with the highest totals in the northern end of the county and atop the Oakland -Berkeley hills (BAAQMD 2021). 188 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 16 Air Pollutants of Concern Individual air pollutants at certain concentrations may adversely affect human or animal health, reduce visibility, damage property, and reduce the productivity or vigor of crops and natural vegetation. Six air pollutants have been identified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) as being of concern both on a nationwide and statewide level: ozone; carbon monoxide (CO); nitrogen dioxide (NO2); sulfur dioxide (SO2); lead; and particulate matter (PM), which is subdivided into two classes based on particle size: PM equal to or less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10) and PM equal to or less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5). Because the air quality standards for these air pollutants are regulated using human health and environmentally based criteria, they are commonly referred to as "criteria air pollutants." Ozone is not emitted directly into the air but is formed through a series of reactions involving reactive organic gases (ROGs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the presence of sunlight. ROG and NOx are referred to as "ozone precursors." Toxic Air Contaminants In addition to criteria air pollutants, EPA and CARB regulate hazardous air pollutants, also known as toxic air contaminants (TACs). TACs collectively refer to a diverse group of air pollutants that can cause chronic (i.e., long -duration) and acute (i.e., severe but short-term) adverse effects on human health, including carcinogenic effects. TACs can be separated into carcinogens and noncarcinogens based on the nature of the effects associated with exposure to the pollutant. For regulatory purposes, carcinogens are assumed to have no safe threshold below which health impacts would not occur. Noncarcinogens differ in that there is generally assumed to be a safe level of exposure below which no negative health impact is believed to occur. These levels are determined on a pollutant -by -pollutant basis. Sensitive Receptors Sensitive receptors are facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, people with illnesses, or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. Hospitals, schools, convalescent facilities, and residences are examples of sensitive receptors. The nearest sensitive receptors include residences located across Dublin Boulevard, approximately 200 feet north of the Project site, a daycare located approximately 300 feet north of the Project site, and residences located approximately 570 feet east of the Project site. Regulatory Framework Federal Clean Air Act and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Pursuant to the Clean Air Act, the EPA has established ambient air quality standards to protect public health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety. These federal standards, known as NAAQS, were developed for the six criteria pollutants described above. NAAQS represent safe levels of each pollutant to avoid specific adverse effects to human health and the environment. Two types of NAAQS have been established, primary and secondary standards. Primary standards set limits to protect public health, especially that of sensitive populations such as asthmatics, 189 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 17 children, and seniors. Secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare, including protections against decreased visibility and damage to animals, crops, and buildings. The Clean Air Act was amended in 1977 to require each state to maintain a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for achieving compliance with the NAAQS. In 1990, the Clean Air Act was amended again to strengthen regulation of both stationary and mobile emission sources. California Clean Air Act and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). In 1988, the state legislature adopted the California Clean Air Act, which established a statewide air pollution control program. The California Clean Air Act requires all air districts in the state to make progress towards meeting the CAAQS by the earliest practical date. The California Clean Air Act establishes increasingly stringent requirements over time. CAAQS are generally more stringent than NAAQS and incorporate additional standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, visibility -reducing particles, and vinyl chloride. The California Clean Air Act substantially adds to the authority and responsibilities of air districts. The California Clean Air Act designates air districts as lead air quality planning agencies, requires air districts to prepare air quality plans, and grants air districts authority to implement transportation control measures. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). BAAQMD is the agency responsible for protecting public health and welfare through the administration of federal and state air quality laws and policies in the SFBAAB. BAAQMD's tasks include air pollution monitoring, preparing air quality plans, and promulgating rules and regulations. BAAQMD rules and regulations relevant to the proposed Project include but are not limited to: Regulation 6 (Particulate Matter); Regulation 7 (Odorous Substances); Regulation 8, Rule 3 (Architectural Coatings); Regulation 11, Rule 2 (Asbestos Demolition, Renovation and Manufacturing). Additional rules and regulations may be applicable dependent upon the future specific tenants of the building. BAAQMD also maintains multiple air quality monitoring stations that continually measure the ambient concentrations of major air pollutants throughout the SFBAAB. Under the California Clean Air Act, BAAQMD is required to develop an air quality attainment plan for nonattainment criteria pollutants within the air district. The 2017 Bay Area Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air and Cool the Climate was adopted on April 19, 2017, and provides a regional strategy to protect public health and protect the climate. To fulfill state ozone planning requirements, the 2017 control strategy includes all feasible measures to reduce emissions of ozone precursors and reduce transport of ozone and its precursors to neighboring air basins. In addition, the 2017 Clean Air Plan builds upon and enhances BAAQMD's efforts to reduce emissions of fine PM and TACs (BAAQMD 2017a). Attainment of Federal and State Air Quality Standards Areas are classified under the Federal Clean Air Act and California Clean Air Act as attainment, non -attainment, or maintenance (areas that were previously non -attainment but are currently attainment) for each criteria pollutant based on whether the federal and state air quality standards have been achieved. With respect to the NAAQS, the SFBAAB is designated as a 190 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 18 nonattainment area for ozone and PM2.5, and as an attainment or unclassified area for all other pollutants. With respect to the CAAQS, the SFBAAB is designated as a nonattainment area for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5, and as an attainment or unclassified area for all other pollutants (BAAQMD 2017b). City of Dublin General Plan. The City of Dublin General Plan, adopted in 1985 and amended in 2022, includes an Environmental Resources Management: Conservation Element. The following policies related to air quality would be applicable to the proposed Project (City of Dublin 2022): • Request that the Bay Area Air Quality Management District establish an air quality monitoring station in Dublin. • Require an air quality analysis for new development projects that could generate significant air emissions on a project and cumulative level. Air quality analyses shall include specific feasible measures to reduce anticipated air quality emissions to a less -than -significant CEQA level. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Consistent with air quality plans (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) Air quality plans describe air pollution control strategies to be implemented by a city, county, or regional air district. The primary purpose of an air quality plan is to bring an area that does not attain NAAQS and CAAQS into compliance with those standards pursuant to the requirements of the Clean Air Act and California Clean Air Act. The most recent air quality plan is the BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan (BAAQMD 2017a). The 2017 Clean Air Plan identifies potential control measures and strategies, including rules and regulations that could be implemented to reduce air pollutant emissions from industrial facilities, commercial processes, on- and off -road motor vehicles, and other sources. BAAQMD implements these strategies through rules and regulations, grant and incentive programs, public education and outreach, and partnerships with other agencies and stakeholders. A project is determined to be consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan if it supports the goals of the Clean Air Plan, includes applicable control measures from the Clean Air Plan, and would not disrupt or hinder implementation of any control measures from the Clean Air Plan (BAAQMD 2017a). Consistency with the Clean Air Plan also is determined through evaluation of project - related air quality impacts and demonstration that project -related emissions would not increase the frequency or severity of existing violations or contribute to a new violation of the NAAQS or CAAQS. The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines include thresholds of significance that are applied to evaluate regional impacts of project -specific emissions of air pollutants and their impact on the BAAQMD's ability to reach attainment (BAAQMD 2017c). Emissions that are above these thresholds have not been accommodated in the air quality plans and would not be consistent with the air quality plans. Demolition activities and construction of the proposed Project would involve the use of off - road equipment, haul trucks, and worker commute trips that would generate short-term 191 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 19 criteria air pollutant emissions. Operation of the proposed Project would generate long-term emissions associated with daily employee vehicle trips, building energy consumption, reapplication of architectural coatings, use of consumer products, and maintenance/testing of the fire pump. As discussed in Impact (b) below, construction -related emissions of the proposed Project would not exceed the thresholds of significance recommended by BAAQMD. In addition, consistent with Stationary Source Control Measures SS36 (PM from Trackout) and SS38 (Fugitive Dust) of the 2017 Clean Air Plan, the proposed Project would implement BAAQMD's Basic Construction Mitigation Measures as noted in Mitigation Measure AQ-1 and be subject to BAAQMD Rules and Regulations for controlling fugitive dust emissions (Regulation 6 [Particulate Matter]), which would reduce fugitive dust emissions during demolition and construction. Further, as discussed in Impact (b) below, the proposed Project would result in a net reduction of emissions compared to existing conditions for NOx, PM10, and PM2.5, and ROG emissions would not exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance. The proposed Project would also comply with Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter 7.94.100 (Green Building Code), which requires that new construction buildings are all -electric buildings. Compliance with the Green Building Code would also be consistent with building control measures included in the 2017 Clean Air Plan, such as BL2 (Decarbonize Buildings). Furthermore, the proposed Project electrical and plumbing fixtures would be Title 24 and California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) compliant, which would be consistent with Building Control Measure BL1 (Green Buildings). Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan and this impact would be less than significant with mitigation. (b) Project emissions (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated) By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development within the SFBAAB, and this regional impact is cumulative rather than being attributable to any one source. A project's emissions may be individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when taken in combination with past, present, and future development projects. BAAQMD published the May 2017 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, which provides lead agencies assistance in evaluating air quality impacts of projects and plans proposed in the SFBAAB (BAAQMD 2017c). The guidelines provide recommended procedures for evaluating potential air impacts during the environmental review process, consistent with CEQA requirements, and include recommended thresholds of significance, mitigation measures, and background air quality information. BAAQMD has stated that the CEQA Guidelines are for informational purposes only and should be followed by local governments at their own discretion (BAAQMD 2017c). The BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines may inform environmental review for development projects in the Bay Area, but do not commit local governments or BAAQMD to any specific course of regulatory action. The thresholds for criteria pollutants were developed through a quantitative examination of the efficacy of fugitive dust mitigation measures and a quantitative examination of statewide nonattainment emissions and are used for the analysis of project - generated emissions. 192 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 20 Construction emissions are short term but have the potential to result in a significant impact on air quality. Demolition and construction activities would generate temporary emissions of precursors to ozone (ROG and NOx), CO, PM10, and PM2.5. ROG, NOx, and CO emissions are associated primarily with mobile equipment exhaust, including off -road construction equipment and on -road motor vehicles. Fugitive particulate matter dust emissions are associated primarily with site preparation and travel on unpaved roads and vary as a function of parameters such as soil silt content, soil moisture, wind speed, acreage of disturbance area, and miles traveled by construction vehicles. Demolition and construction activities are anticipated to begin in late fall 2023 and last approximately 12 months. Emissions associated with construction and operational activities were modeled using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) version 2020.4. CaIEEMod allows the user to enter project -specific construction and operational information, such as types, number and horsepower of construction equipment, number and length of off - site motor vehicle trips, project square footage, daily vehicle trips, and anticipated energy consumption details. Demolition of the existing building is anticipated to require approximately 608 total loaded haul truck trips. Construction activities would require the use of concrete/industrial saws, excavators, rubber -tired dozers, graders, tractors/loaders/backhoes, cement and mortar mixers, pavers, paving equipment, rollers, air compressors, aerial lifts, cranes, welders, and generator sets. Approximately 6,800 cubic yards of material are anticipated to be excavated and re -used onsite. The proposed Project would also require removal of approximately 141,000 square feet of asphalt pavement, which would be reused onsite. Additional modeling assumptions and details are provided in Appendix D. Operation of the proposed Project would generate criteria air pollutant emissions associated with mobile, area, and stationary sources. Mobile sources would include vehicle activity from employee commutes and miscellaneous truck deliveries associated with the proposed office, light industrial, and warehousing land uses. Area source emissions were based on CaIEEMod default data and would be associated with landscaping equipment usage, consumer product usage (i.e., cleaning supplies, parking surface degreasers), and periodic reapplication of architectural coatings. Stationary sources of emissions would include maintenance and testing of the diesel -fired 175-horsepower fire pump. As described previously, the building would be all -electric (i.e., no natural gas); therefore, there would be no onsite energy -related emissions. Additional modeling assumptions and details are provided in Appendix D. Table 4: Total and Average Daily Construction Emissions shows the total and average daily emissions associated with construction of the proposed Project. 193 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 21 Table 4: Total and Average Daily Construction Emissions Source/Description ROG NOx PMio (Exhaust) PM2.5 (Exhaust) Total Construction Emissions (tons)' 0.90 1.96 0.08 0.07 Average Daily Emissions (Ibs/day) 2 6.92 14.98 0.60 0.57 Threshold of Significance (lbs/day) 3 54 54 82 54 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No Notes: Ibs/day = pounds per day; NOx = nitrogen oxides; PMio = particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter; PM2.s = particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter; ROG = reactive organic gases 1The construction emissions modeling assumed the proposed Project would include 227 parking spaces. Based on the latest site plan, the proposed Project would include 217 parking spaces. As such, the emissions presented above related asphalt paving and striping activities are conservative and actual emissions are anticipated to be slightly lower. 2Average daily emissions estimated assuming 261 construction workdays based on a 5-day construction workweek and 12 months of construction. BAAQMD 2017c As shown in Table 4, construction -related emissions of ROG, NOx, PMio exhaust, and PM2.5 exhaust would not exceed the applicable thresholds of significance established by BAAQMD. Therefore, the impacts from emission of these criteria air pollutants during construction would be less than significant. BAAQMD does not have quantitative mass emissions thresholds for fugitive PMio and PM2.5 dust. Instead, BAAQMD recommends that all projects, regardless of the level of average daily emissions, implement applicable Best Management Practices (BMPs), including those listed as Basic Construction Measures in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines (BAAQMD 2017c). Without implementation of BAAQMD's Basic Construction Measures, the impact of fugitive dust emissions during Project construction would be potentially significant. In order to comply with the BAAQMD threshold for fugitive dust emissions, the following mitigation measure is needed: Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices. The construction contractor shall comply with the following BAAQMD Basic Construction Measures, as applicable, for reducing construction emissions of uncontrolled fugitive dust (Mho and PM2.5): • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off -site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt track -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 (mph). • 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. 194 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 22 • Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. • Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The BAAQMD's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. With implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the proposed Project would be consistent with BAAQMD guidance and the generation of fugitive dust emissions from Project construction would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation. As shown in Table 5: Annual and Average Daily Operational Emissions, operation of the proposed Project would result in a net reduction in emissions of NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 compared to existing conditions, and emissions of ROG would not exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance. Therefore, the impact of operational emissions would be less than significant. Table 5: Annual and Average Daily Operational Emissions Source/Description ROG NOx PMio PM2.5 Proposed Project Annual Emissions (tons/year) 1 0.68 0.26 0.54 0.15 Existing Conditions Annual Emissions (tons/year) 0.61 0.47 0.65 0.18 Net Emissions (tons/year) Threshold of Significance (tons/year) 2 0.08 (0.22) (0.12) (0.04) 10 10 15 10 Exceeds Annual Threshold? No No No No Average Daily Emissions (Ibs/day)3 Threshold of Significance (Ibs/day) 2 0.60 (1.69) (0.90) (0.27) 54 54 82 54 Exceeds Average Daily Threshold? No No No No Notes: Ibs/day = pounds per day; NOx = nitrogen oxides; PM. = particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter; PM2s = particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter; ROG = reactive organic gases; tons/year = tons per year 'The operational emissions modeling assumed the proposed Project would include 18,000 square feet of office space, 36,500 square feet of light industrial space, and 70,804 square feet of warehousing space. Based on the latest site plan, the proposed Project would actually include 18,000 square feet of office space, 30,000 square feet of light industrial space, and 77,304 square feet of warehousing space. As light industrial land uses generate higher daily vehicle trips than warehousing land uses, daily vehicle trips and the associated mobile source emissions are anticipated to be lower (i.e., the emissions modeling assumed the proposed Project would generate 494 daily trips, based on the 2022 Transportation Impact Study (W-Trans 2022); however, under the revised site plan, the proposed Project is anticipated to generate 473 daily trips). As such, the emissions presented above are conservative and actual emissions are anticipated to be lower. Implementation of the proposed Project would result in a higher net reduction in emissions compared to existing conditions. 2 BAAQM D 2017c 'Average daily emissions estimated 260 working days per year, based on a Monday through Friday operational schedule. 195 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 23 Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, construction and operation of the proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation. (c) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations (Less Than Significant Impact) Impact c was determined to be a less than significant impact, as the Project would not increase air emissions from existing conditions. Therefore, the full analysis for this impact is discussed in the Initial Study provided in Appendix A. (d) Odors (Less Than Significant) Impact d was determined be a less than significant impact. Since the proposed Project involves the redevelopment of an existing industrial building with a new industrial building, the proposed Project would not introduce a new odor -generating source. Therefore, the full analysis for this impact is discussed in the Initial Study provided in Appendix A. Source(s) Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017a. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air: Cool the Climate. Available online: https://www.baagmd.gov/"/media/files/planning-and-research/plans/2017-clean-air- plan/attachment-a -proposed-final-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed February 2023. . 2017b. Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status. Available online: https://www.baagmd.gov/about-air-quality/research-and-data/air-quality-standards- and-attainment-status. Accessed February 2023. . 2017c. California Environmental Quality Act: Air Quality Guidelines. Available online: https://www.baagmd.gov//media/files/planning-and- research/ceqa/cega guidelines may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed February 2023. . 2021. In Your Community: Alameda County. Available online: https://www.baagmd.gov/about-the-air-district/in-your-community/alameda-county. Accessed January 2021. City of Dublin. 2022. General Plan. Available online: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30287/General-Plan-Update- 04192022-WEB. Accessed March 2023. W Traffic Engineering Transportation Planning (W-Trans). 2022. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. December. 196 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 24 This page intentionally left blank 197 City of Dublin Section 2: Biological Resources HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 25 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 2. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special -status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? x x x x x x Environmental Setting This section describes the existing biological setting within the Project site, which consists of two adjacent parcels, Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. The focus of the analysis was based on the areas potentially directly or indirectly affected by construction of the Project, referred to herein as the Project footprint. The Project footprint is exclusively in Parcel 1. The City of Dublin is characterized by a diverse array of wildlife and plant species, with two discrete habitat types —the flatter urbanized portion of the City and the surrounding oak 198 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 26 woodland and California annual grassland. The Project site is located within the urbanized area, which exhibits plant and animal species typical of urbanized areas including a combination of native and introduced trees, grasses and shrubs used for landscaping purposes. The proposed Project footprint is completely developed with buildings, hardscape, and landscaped areas. Vegetation within landscaped areas of the footprint is comprised of sod, various ornamental shrubs, various ornamental tree species, as well as native trees such as California Bay (Umbellularia californica), coast live oak trees (Quercus agrifolia), and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). No natural habitats (habitats with naturally occurring vegetation) occur within the Project footprint. The Project site is primarily developed with buildings, hardscape, and landscaped areas associated with the existing Hexcel buildings; however, Dublin Creek is located to the south of the Project footprint approximately along the boundary of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. Dublin Creek in this location contained less than 1 foot of water during AECOM's site visit on December 12, 2022. The banks of this feature are natural, but this feature runs underground for long stretches immediately east and west of the project. Vegetation Communities Vegetation communities within the Project footprint are limited to landscaped areas comprised of sod, various ornamental shrubs, various ornamental tree species, as well as a large number of native trees such as coast live oak trees, California Bay, and California buckeye. To the south of the Project footprint and on Parcel 2, is riparian habitat associated with Dublin Creek. Wildlife Wildlife in the Project site is likely to be limited to those species easily habituated to human activity, and which typically occupy urban areas or interfaces between urban and open space areas. Larger fauna may include raccoon (Procyon lotor) and skunk (Mephitis mephitis), while smaller fauna would include species such as western fence lizards (Sceloporus occidentalis), southern alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata), deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), and Botta's pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae). A wide variety of bird species likely utilizes the riparian corridor of Dublin Creek to the south of the Project footprint, as well as the ornamental vegetation and trees within the Project footprint. These species include red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), western bluebird (Sialia mexicana), American robin (Turdus migratorius), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), among others. Regulatory Framework Migratory Bird Treaty Act The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 makes it illegal to take, possess, import, export, transport, sell, purchase, barter, or offer for sale, purchase, or barter any migratory bird, or the 199 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 27 parts, nests, or eggs of such bird, except under the terms of a valid federal permit. Migratory bird species protected by the act are listed in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in 50 CFR Part 10.13. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has statutory authority for enforcing the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 United States Code Sections 703-712). Federal Endangered Species Act The Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (16 United States Code Section 1531 et seq.) provides a regulatory program for the conservation of threatened and endangered plants and animals and the habitats in which they are found. The USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service are the lead agencies responsible for implementing the ESA. The USFWS maintains a list of endangered species that includes birds, insects, fish, reptiles, mammals, crustaceans, plants, and trees. The USFWS and/or National Marine Fisheries Service requires authorization for any actions that they authorize, carry out, or fund, that may jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. California Endangered Species Act The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) conserves and protects animals at risk of extinction. Plants and animals may be designated as threatened or endangered under CESA after a formal listing process by the California Fish and Game Commission. A CESA-listed species may not be killed, possessed, purchased, or sold without authorization from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. California Fish and Game Code Fully Protected Species Sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515 of the California Fish and Game Code designate 37 species of wildlife as Fully Protected in California. Fully Protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time, and no licenses or permits may be issued for their take, except for the authorized collection of these species for necessary scientific research and relocation of bird species for the protection of livestock. California Fish and Game Code Section 2081 Incidental Take Permits Section 2081(b) of the California Fish and Game Code allows the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to authorize take of CESA-listed species categorized as endangered, threatened, candidate, or rare plant species if that take is incidental to otherwise lawful activities, and if certain conditions are met. Section 2081(b) permits are commonly referred to as an Incidental Take Permit. City of Dublin Municipal Code The City of Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 5.60: "the Heritage Tree Ordinance" (Ord. 5-02 § 2 (part): Ord. 29-99 § 1 (part)), requires that a Tree Removal permit from the Director be acquired prior to the removal of heritage trees. Heritage trees include: 200 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 28 1. "Any oak, bay, cypress, maple, redwood, buckeye and sycamore tree having a trunk or main stem of twenty-four (24) inches or more in diameter measured at four (4) feet six (6) inches above natural grade; 2. A tree required to be preserved as part of an approved development plan, zoning permit, use permit, site development review or subdivision map; 3. A tree required to be planted as a replacement for an unlawfully removed tree." In addition, all applications for demolition, grading, or building permits on property containing one or more heritage trees shall prepare a tree protection plan pursuant to Section 5.60.090. Citv of Dublin ( rieral Plan The City of Dublin General Plan Chapter 7 Environmental Resources Management Conservation Element provides guidance for the protection of biological resources in Dublin and includes objectives, goals, and policies regarding biological resources. The following goals and policies from the City's General Plan relating to biological resources apply to the Project: • Guiding Policy 7.2.1A1: Protect riparian vegetation as a protective buffer for stream quality and for its value as a habitat and aesthetic resource • Implementing Policy 7.3.2B1: Require erosion control plans for proposed development. Erosion control plans shall include recommendations for preventing erosion and scour of drainageways, consistent with biological and visual values. • Implementing Policy 7.4.1B2: Enact and enforce the Heritage Tree Ordinance Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Substantial adverse effect on candidate, sensitive, or special status species (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) Special -Status Plants As discussed previously, the Project site is largely developed, and the entirety of the Project footprint is either paved or landscaped. There is no potential for special -status plant species to occur in the sod or landscaped areas present within the areas that would be disturbed during Project construction. Therefore, the Project would have no impact on special status plant species. Special -Status Wildlife A desktop analysis was conducted to identify special -status wildlife species that may be present in the vicinity of the Project site. Google Maps, Google Earth, and photographs of the site were used to identify potential habitats that may be impacted by the Project. In addition, the following online resources were used to identify special -status wildlife species with the potential to occur on or near the Project site: 201 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 29 • USFWS: Information for Planning and Consulting (IPaC) (USFWS 2023) • California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW): California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB): The search area consisted of a 5-mile buffer on the Project site. (CDFW 2023) As described in the Environmental Setting, natural habitats are absent from the Project footprint. None of the special -status species identified in the desktop analysis have life history requirements associated with buildings, hardscape, and landscape areas present in the Project footprint. As summarized in Table 6: Special -Status Species Potential to Occur in the Prole( Area, the Project footprint does not provide suitable habitat for any of the special -status wildlife species identified during the records search. The riparian corridor associated with Dublin Creek that runs immediately south of the Project footprint may provide suitable habitat for San Francisco dusky -footed woodrat and/or pallid bat. Because the Project would not involve direct disturbance within the riparian corridor, it would not directly destroy or alter such habitat, and there would be no impact to special -status species with potential to occur within the Project footprint area. The Project footprint is located within 5 feet of the riparian corridor associated with Dublin Creek; however, construction activities would occur on existing paved areas (parking lot), and no construction equipment will enter Dublin Creek and associated habitat. Disturbance from noise and vibration (see Section 12) on wildlife could result during construction activities. However, these impacts would be minimal and only for a temporary period of time during construction. Furthermore, construction of the Project does not have the potential to result in introduction of non-native weeds to the riparian corridor of Dublin Creek since no construction equipment would enter the creek. In the event that runoff from the Project or accidental spills entered species habitat within Dublin Creek, sedimentation or the introduction of pollutants to habitat within Dublin Creek would constitute a potentially significant impact. As discussed further in the Initial Study in Section 9, Hydrology (see Appendix A) the Project would avoid sedimentation or the introduction of pollutants to habitat within Dublin Creek through the required implementation of erosion and sediment control measures and the implementation of BMPs specified in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction, which would protect habitat within Dublin Creek. Thus, no substantial indirect impacts to status species would occur. 202 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR 1 Page 30 Table 6: Special -Status Species Potential to Occur in the Project Area Scientific Name Common Name Class Status Habitat Present Danaus plexippus Monarch Butterfly Invertebrate Federal Candidate None Branchinecta Iynchi Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Invertebrate FT None Hypomesus transpacificus Delta Smelt Invertebrate FT, SE None Ambystoma californiense pop. 1 California tiger salamander - Amphibian central California DPS FT, ST None Rana draytonii California red -legged frog Amphibian FT, SSC None Emys marmorata western pond turtle Reptile SSC None Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus Alameda whipsnake Bird FT, ST None Agelaius tricolor tricolored blackbird Bird ST, SSC None Aquila chrysaetos golden eagle Bird BGEPA, FP None Athene cunicularia burrowing owl Bird SSC None Contopus cooperi olive -sided flycatcher Bird SSC None Elanus leucurus white-tailed kite Bird FP None Falco peregrinus anatum American peregrine falcon Bird FP None Gymnogyps californianus California Condor Bird FE, SE, FP None Sterna antillarum browni California Least Tern Bird FE, SE, FP None Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle Bird BGEPA, SE, FP None Antrozous pallidus pallid bat Mammal SSC None in project footprint. Possible in riparian corridor. Neotoma fuscipes annectens San Francisco dusky -footed Mammal SSC woodrat None in project footprint. Possible in riparian corridor. Taxidea taxus American badger Mammal SSC None Vulpes macrotis mutica San Joaquin kit fox Mammal FE, ST None Centromadia parryi ssp. Congdon's tarplant Plant 1B.1 None congdonii Eryngium jepsonii Jepson's coyote -thistle Plant 16.2 None Extriplex joaquinana San Joaquin spearscale Plant 16.2 None Extriplex joaquinana San Joaquin spearscale Plant 16.2 None Helianthella castanea Diablo helianthella Plant 16.2 None Navarretia prostrata prostrate vernal pool Plant 16.2 None navarretia Status: Federal FE — listed as Endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act FT— listed as Threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act BGEPA— Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act State SE — Listed as Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act ST— Listed as Threatened under the California Endangered Species Act SSC — State species of special concern FP — Fully protected under California Fish and Game Code California Rare Plant Rank 16.1- Rare or endangered in California and elsewhere — seriously threatened in California (more than 80 percent of occurrences threatened) 1B.2 - Rare or endangered in California and elsewhere — moderately threatened in California (20 to 80 percent of occurrences threatened) 203 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 31 Migratory Birds The various shrubs, ornamental trees, and native trees in the Project footprint may provide suitable habitat for common nesting birds, such as house finch, mourning dove, common raven, and other birds that typically occupy urban environments. The USFWS IPaC tool also lists the following migratory bird species that could occur in the Project area: Allen's hummingbird (Selasphorus sasin), bald eagle (Haliaeetus Ieucocephalus), Belding's savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi), Bullock's oriole (Icterus bullockii), California gull (Larus californicus), California thrasher (Toxostoma redivivum), common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa), golden eagle, (Aquila chrysaetos), Lawrence's goldfinch (Carduelis Iawrencei), Nuttall's woodpecker (picoides nuttallii), oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), olive -sided flycatcher (Contopus cooperi), tricolor blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), Western grebe (Aechmophorus occidentatis), wrentit (Chamaea fasciata), and yellow -billed magpie (Pica nuttalli). As discussed in the regulatory section, these birds, their nests, and eggs are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Noise and vibration from proposed construction activities associated with the Project could disturb birds that are nesting on and near the Project site, for both common nesting birds and American peregrine falcon. Although nesting birds in this urban setting are typically habituated to human activity and associated noise, the increased level of human activity at the site during construction could temporarily disturb nesting birds. In addition, the Project would involve the removal of approximately 85 landscape trees within the Project footprint, which could be used by birds during the nesting season. If a tree containing an active nest were to be removed during construction, such removal would result in nest destruction and failure. Due to this potential for loss of nests, and due to potential disturbance of nesting birds from noise and vibration during Project construction, the impact to nesting birds would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measure BIO-1, detailed below, is recommended to address this potentially significant impact to nesting birds. Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Nesting Bird Avoidance Measures A. To the extent practicable, construction activities and any tree trimming/removal shall be performed from September 16 through February 15 to avoid the general nesting period for birds. If construction or tree trimming/removal cannot be performed during this period, nesting bird surveys and active nest buffers (as necessary) shall be implemented as follows: i. Nesting Bird Surveys: If Project -related work is scheduled during the nesting season (typically February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for active nests of such birds within 7 days prior to the beginning of Project construction. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding the work area shall be 204 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 32 determined by the qualified biologist, but should be at least: i) 50 feet for passerines; ii) 300 feet for raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day and during appropriate nesting times, as determined by the qualified biologist. ii. Active Nest Buffers: If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the survey area, an appropriate buffer between the nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of the nest to characterize "normal" bird behavior and establish a buffer distance which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and shall increase the buffer if the birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Construction shall only be allowed to impact a migratory bird or its nest, including its young, if a permit from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is obtained in accordance with the MTBA and all permit conditions are adhered to. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would protect nesting birds by ensuring that all active nests with the potential to be impacted by tree removal, construction noise, or human presence would be identified, appropriate avoidance buffers would be applied to active nests, and biologists would monitor active nests and bird behavior during construction so that the effectiveness of the buffer zone can be determined and the buffer distance can be adjusted if needed. Given the urban setting of the Project and presence of visual barriers such as other buildings and vegetation in the vicinity of the construction zone, the minimum search radii specified in Mitigation Measure BIO-1 (50 feet for passerines and 300 feet for raptors) are considered appropriate to reduce potential disturbance of nesting birds to a less than significant level. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, proposed construction and associated activities would not disturb nesting birds or destroy their nests; therefore, potential Project impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special status species would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation. (b) Substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other natural community (Less Than Significant Impact) No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities are located within the Project footprint; therefore, Project construction or operation would not directly impact riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities and is not expected to affect Dublin Creek. The Project would have less than significant impact on riparian habitat and sensitive natural communities. See Initial Study for the full analysis in Appendix A. 205 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 33 (c) Substantial adverse effect on wetlands (Less Than Significant Impact) No wetlands or other waters of the U.S. or state are located within the Project footprint; therefore, Project construction or operation would not directly impact wetlands and other waters. Furthermore, no substantial indirect impacts would occur to Dublin Creek from the Project. Therefore, the Project would have less than significant impact on wetlands and waters of the U.S. or state. See Initial Study for the full analysis in Appendix A. (d) Interfere or impede the movement of migratory fish or wildlife (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) There are no documented migratory wildlife corridors, wildlife nursery sites, or large waterbodies or rivers in the vicinity of the Project site. The Project site is located between commercial and residential development, and the 1-580 freeway. Resident and migratory waterfowl are not anticipated to use the Project site because it is already developed and contains no open waterbodies or other habitat frequented by such species. Therefore, the project would not interfere with or impede the movement of migratory waterfowl. As discussed previously under Impact BIO-1, above, the riparian habitat associated with Dublin Creek could be used as habitat for migratory birds. However, Dublin Creek is a highly urbanized creek that generally parallels I-580. The creek supports a riparian canopy of trees, but there is no understory vegetation in the vicinity of the project. The feature runs to the west of the project with no riparian canopy before going underground, and runs underground to the east of the project before emerging with wide concrete banks. As such, this section of Dublin Creek is less likely to be used as a migratory corridor for common and special -status wildlife species. Because the project would not impact the riparian habitat, it would not directly interfere with or impede the movement of common and special -status wildlife species. Indirect impacts to migratory birds from construction noise is addressed under Impact 810-1, above. The riparian corridor associated with Dublin Creek could be used as foraging habitat for common bats. As such, trees that would be removed as part of the Project outside of riparian areas may provide suitable day or night roosting habitat for bat species. Given the availability of alternative natural habitat for hibernaculum in the vicinity of the Project and based on planned tree replacement, impacts to habitat for bats are not expected to be significant. However, if construction were to remove trees containing bats during the maternity or winter season, bat mortality could occur, and the impact to common bat species would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measure BIO-2, detailed below, is recommended to address this potentially significant impact to roosting bats. Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Roosting Bat Surveys and Avoidance A. The Project Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a bat habitat assessment in all project areas that require tree removal. The qualified biologist shall identify and document the location of potentially suitable bat roosting habitat prior to construction activities. If no suitable bat habitat is observed, the biologist shall inform the Project Applicant, and no further considerations are required. If bat 206 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 34 roosting habitat is observed, the location of such habitat areas shall be provided to the Project Applicant, and the following requirements shall be implemented throughout the construction period: i. Removal of trees that provide suitable bat roosting habitat shall be conducted outside of the bat maternity season (April 15 to August 31) and overwintering season (October 16 to January 15) to the extent feasible. i. Presence/absence surveys shall be conducted 2 to 3 days prior to removal of any trees in suitable bat habitat, at any time of year. If presence/ absence surveys are negative, work may proceed with no restrictions. If presence/absence surveys detect bats within trees planned for removal, work should proceed in accordance with the following restrictions: • If a maternity colony of bats is observed during maternity season (April 15 to August 31), tree removal shall not occur until August 31 or when maternity season has ended based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist. • If bats are observed during overwintering season (October 16 to January 15), tree removal shall not occur until January 15 or until bats are no longer present based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist. • If bats are present outside of maternity or overwintering seasons, construction shall follow a two-phase tree removal system conducted over 2 consecutive days. On the first day (in the afternoon), limbs and branches will be removed using chainsaws or other hand tools. Limbs with cavities, crevices, or deep bark fissures will be avoided, and only branches or limbs without those features will be removed. On the second day, the entire tree shall be removed. Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would ensure that construction activities do not have the potential to result in significant impacts to roosting bats, by avoiding tree removal during times of the year when bats are most sensitive to disruption (maternity and overwintering seasons) to the extent feasible and by either confirming that bats are absent prior to tree removal and/or following protocols that provide an opportunity for bats to relocate prior to tree removal. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, potential Project impacts to wildlife movement, migration, or nursery sites would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation. (e) Conflict with local policies or ordinance include tree preservation (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed Project would adhere to the tree removal permit conditions, the Project would not conflict with the City's tree ordinance or the Dublin General Plan, and potential impacts would be less than significant. 207 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 35 (f) Conflict with adopted habitat conservation or natural community conservation plans (No Impact) There would be no impact since there are no Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Communities Conservation Plans that apply to the Project site. See Initial Study in Appendix A. Source(s) California Department of Fish and Wildlife Service (CDFW), 2023. Rarefind 5, a program created by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife that allows access to the California Natural Diversity Database. Reviewed January 17, 2023. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2023. IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation. Available online at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed on January 17, 2023. 208 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 36 This page intentionally left blank 209 City of Dublin Section 3: Cultural Resources HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 37 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Significant and Unavoidable Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 3. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5? c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? Environmental Setting The Project site is at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California and is approximately 8.81 acres. The project site is located south of Dublin Boulevard with the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery to the east; 1-580 to the south; and a business park to the west. Historic -age built environment resources on the Project site consist of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, landscaping, and parking. The Contemporary/Brutalist style facility has a roughly L- shaped plan and was largely constructed in two phases dating to 1962 and 1967, with small additions and alterations in the mid-1980s. Pre -contact Cultural Context Archaeological evidence demonstrates that people have lived in the San Francisco Bay Area for at least the past 10,000 years. The pre -contact history of the San Francisco Bay archaeological region is most commonly understood as a series of cultural and temporal periods defined by the Central California Taxonomic System (CCTS). The CCTS was developed by Beardsley (1948) and Gerow (Gerow with Force 1968), based on observations in the San Francisco Bay Area, the Sacramento Valley, and the Delta region. This system was further refined by Bennyhoff and Hughes (1987) and Groza (2002). The CCTS includes an Early Period, Middle Period, Middle -to - Late Transition (MLT), and a Late Period, defined by a combination of changes in climate, artifact types, habitation patterns, and mortuary patterns. The following discussion will briefly describe each of these cultural -temporal periods, following Milliken et al. (2007). Early Holocene (Lower Archaic): 8000-3500 B.C. The people of the Early Holocene were mobile foragers, with seasonal, temporary camps located near food resources. The earliest archaeological site in the San Francisco Bay Area is CA- CCO-696 at Los Vaqueros Reservoir in Contra Costa County, dating to 7920 calibrated years 210 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 38 before the present (cal B.C.) This site included millingslabs (metates) and handstones (manos), used together to grind seeds, nuts, or other foods. Large wide -stemmed projectile points of Napa Valley obsidian were also found at the site. This assemblage is typical of Early Holocene sites in the San Francisco Bay Area. Early Period (Middle Archaic): 3,500-500 B.C. During the Early Period, new milling technology is introduced, and shell beads first made their appearance. In addition to millingslabs and handstones, assemblages now include mortars and pestles, suggesting greater reliance on acorns. Grooved stone net sinkers are also present, pointing to new fishing technology. Shell beads made from abalone (Haliotis sp.) and olive snails (Olivella sp.) were placed in burials as tokens of tribute or prestige, along with red ochre and ceremonial and ornamental artifacts. Settlement patterns were semi -sedentary, featuring long-term villages with organized cemeteries. Lower Middle Period (Initial Upper Archaic): 500 B.C. - A.D. 430 During the Lower Middle Period, shell bead forms change abruptly, with new forms replacing the old. Bone tools were common, including awls made from deer bones, which were used for basketry. Barbless fish spears replace the net sinkers of the previous period. Mortars and pestles are more common than millingslabs and handstones. Large shell mounds are constructed, indicating further sedentism. Upper Middle Period (Late Upper Archaic): A.D. 430-1050 Major change occurred in 430 A.D. Half of the known settlement sites were abandoned. The trade in saucer shaped shell beads from southern California collapsed, but were replaced with saddle bead forms. Hunting of sea otters intensified. More stylized forms appear, including ear spools, obsidian show blades, and fishtail charmstones. A new population seems to have moved into the area, with elaborate grave goods and distinct, extended, burial styles, which contrasted with the flexed burial positions seen in earlier periods. This new pattern is called the Meganos complex, and may be a sign of invasion or of multi -cultural communities. Initial Late Period (Lower Emergent): A.D. 1050-1550 The Late Period was a time of increased social complexity. Status was earned, not inherited. Status objects became more elaborate, including large mortars with shell applique and straight sides ("flower pot" mortars) and many new forms of abalone shell ornaments. Mortuary practices included cremation and grave goods associated with social status. The bow and arrow was added to the hunting toolkit, and small projectile points were seen for the first time. Settlements were permanent, year-round villages. Terminal Late Period (Protohistoric): A.D. 1550-1776 During the Terminal Late Period, lives were already influenced by the arrival of European explorers. Disease spread in advance of newcomers, impacting the Native populations as they came into contact with pathogens they had never encountered before. Populations thinned, and grave goods were less plentiful. Clam shell beads were introduced and made locally. The 211 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR l Page 39 forms of projectile points shifted from elaborate Stockton serrated points to simpler corner - notched forms. In 1776, the first California Mission in the area was established by the Spanish in San Francisco, as well as a presidio. This was followed by the founding of Mission Santa Clara de Asis in 1777 and Mission San Jose in 1797. These marked the first European settlements in the San Francisco Bay Area, and led to major changes in the lives of Native Californians. Ethnographic Context An Ethnographic Context is provided within the Tribal Cultural Resources section of this EIR. Historic Cultural Context European Exploration (1542-1776 A.D.) During the period of exploration, Europeans from Spain and England visited the coastline of California and a few inland areas, but did not visit the Amador Valley until Sergeant Pedro Amador passed through in 1795. Amador was the first to use the word "Alameda" to describe the area, meaning "place where cottonwoods grow". Later that same year, Hermenegildo Sal and Father Antonio Danti began searching for locations to establish new Spanish Missions (Kyle et al. 2002). However, even before Europeans set foot in the Amador Valley, their presence affected the Native people through spread of trade and disease. The first European ship to explore the coast of California was captained by Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo in 1542. Cabrillo's party sailed as far north as Point Reyes, but only reported encounters with the Native population in Southern California. In 1579, the English explorer and pirate, Sir Francis Drake, anchored his ship, the Golden Hind, north of San Francisco in a small cove now known as Drake's Bay. During their five week stay, Drake and his crew interacted extensively with the local residents, the Coast Miwok. Sebastian Rodriguez Cermeno led an expedition to scout the California coast for safe ports in 1594, again anchoring in Drake's Bay. Cermerio's ship was wrecked by a storm as they left, and survivors walked south as far as San Luis Obispo before there was any account of their interactions with the Native people. In 1602, Sebastian Vizcaino led another expedition along the coast, searching for a good location for a port to support trade between New Spain (Mexico plus Alta and Baja California) and the Philippines. On finding Monterey Bay, Vizcaino proclaimed it "all that one could hope for" (Beebe and Senkewicz 2001:44-45). Nevertheless, King Felipe III of Spain issued a royal order prohibiting further exploration of Alta California, due to the presence of established ports in Baja California. The Spanish did not return to the Alta California Coast for 160 years (Beebe and Sekewicz 2001, Kyle et al. 2002). In 1770, the Spanish returned to establish a presidio (military base) and mission in Monterey, and then began to explore in search of other potential Mission locations. Expeditions set out in 1772, led by Captain Pedro Fages, in 1774, led by Captain Fernando Rivera, in 1775, led by Father Vincente Santa Maria, and in 1776, led by Juan Bautista de Anza and Pedro Font. While these expeditions reached Santa Clara, San Francisco, and portions of Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, they did not reach the Amador Valley (Beebe and Sekewicz 2001). 212 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 40 The Spanish Period (1776-1821 A.D.) Seven Spanish missions were founded in Ohlone territory from 1776 to 1797, the closest being Mission San Jose, 14 miles south of the Project and founded in 1797. The Ohlone were recruited to the Mission through trade and offering of foods. However, once baptized, they were not allowed to leave the Mission, and became the workforce to grow food and raise livestock to support the new Spanish settlements. Anyone who tried to leave the mission to return to their old way of life or even visit their villages was considered a runaway, and was tracked down and forcibly returned to the missions. Due to harsh living conditions, devastating disease, and reduced birth rates, the population of Native Americans living in Mission San Jose rapidly dwindled, and the Spanish needed to range further to recruit new neophytes. According to Mission baptismal records, the Pelnen came to Mission San Jose between 1798 and 1805 and the Seunen, being further north, joined between 1801 and 1804 (Milliken 1995). The Amador Valley was used as grazing land for livestock to support Mission San Jose. The introduction of cattle, horses, and sheep, and inadvertent introduction of invasive plant seeds, interrupted and changed the local ecosystem, depleting the resources that the Native Americans relied upon. The Mexican Period (1821-1848 A.D.) In 1821, Mexico gained independence from Spain, and Alta California became a Mexican province. By 1834, the Mexican government had begun a process of secularization of the Missions. Jose Maria Amador, having lived in the valley that would be named for him since at least 1830 (possibly 1826), received an official land grant from the Mexican governor of California in 1835. This vast grant of over 4 leagues (30,500 acres), became known as Rancho San Ramon. Amador's adobe home was constructed on the northwest side of the modern crossroad of Dublin Boulevard and San Ramon Road, within 0.25-miles of the Project location, and next to a natural spring called Almilla Springs (Kyle et al. 2002, VerPlanck 2003a). Amador's estate raised livestock, grew crops, and manufactured goods such as soap, leather goods, farm tools, and furniture, with the help of 150 Mexican and Native American employees (Minniear 2018). It is rumored that the burial ground for his workers was in the vicinity of the Pioneer Cemetery, although the cemetery was not officially consecrated until 1860 (VerPlanck 2003b). California Statehood and the Development of the City of Dublin (1848 A.D. to Present) Following the Mexican -American War (1846-1848), the Treaty of Guadalupe was signed, transferring control of Alta California officially from Mexico to the United States. California statehood soon followed in 1850. During the interim, gold was discovered in El Dorado County in 1848, leading to the California Gold Rush and a great influx of settlers (Kyle et al. 2002). Amador tried his hand at gold prospecting but was largely unsuccessful. By 1852, he began selling off some of his property to ease some financial stress. Michael Murray and Jeremiah Fallon were two of the first to purchase land from Amador, south of Dublin Boulevard. The farmsteads soon grew into a settlement, and the settlement into a town, which was organized in 1853 as Murray Township, but in the late 1850s was also referred to as Amador's or Amador 213 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 41 Valley. James Witt Dougherty, partnering with William Glaskins, purchased ten thousand acres from Amador in 1862 (Minniear 2018). In 1859, St. Raymond's Church was built in the location where it still stands on Donlan Way between Dublin Boulevard and 1-580. During construction of the church, Tom Donlan fell to his death. A Catholic cemetery was established immediately west of the church, and Tom was the first to be officially buried there. However, historian Virginia Smith Bennett notes that the cemetery location had been used for burials before Donlan's interment (Bennett 1978:2). The land for the church and the Catholic portion of the cemetery was donated by Michael Murry and Jeremiah Fallon. The land for the Protestant portion of the cemetery was donated by James W. Dougherty (Kyle et al. 2002, VerPlanck 2003b, 2003c). Existing grave markers give testament to the ongoing usage of the cemetery until present day. However, a fire in 1917 destroyed several wooden grave markers, which were not replaced (VerPlanck 2003b). Old St. Raymond's Church (P-01-010635) was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2006 (NPS 06000242), as eligible under Criteria A and C, with Pioneer Cemetery (P-01010637) as a contributing element (NPS 2006). St. Raymond's Church has also been found eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) under Criteria 1 and 3 (VerPlanck 2003c). The Old Murray School (P-01-010636) was built on land owned by Dougherty in 1856, and served all of Dublin and Pleasanton. When 1-580 was widened in 1975, the schoolhouse was moved to its present location, just south of Old St. Raymond's Church, and east of Pioneer Cemetery. It was restored by the Dublin Historic Preservation Association, and is now used as the Dublin Heritage Center (VerPlanck 2003d). In the 1860s, the portion of the town to the south of the road to Stockton (now the 1-580 corridor) was referred to as Dublin, reportedly based on a comment from James Witt Dougherty, saying that there were so many Irishmen south of the road to Stockton, it might as well be called Dublin (Kyle et al. 2003). By the 1870s, the name Dublin became common usage, however the name was not used officially until a post office was established in 1963. The City of Dublin was officially incorporated in 1982 (Minniear 2018). John Green established a store in 1860 at the southeast corner of what is now Dublin Boulevard and Donlan Way, within 0.25-miles of the project location; Green's Store (P-01-08150) was remodeled in the 1930s, but was restored to its 1914 condition in 1981 and now serves as the Tri-Valley Church of Christ (VerPlanck 2003e). Dublin was primarily an agricultural community through the early twentieth century, with much of the land tied up in just a few large farms. But in 1942 the community changed, as the U.S. Government purchased over 3,000 acres of land to establish Camp Parks, Camp Shoemaker, Shoemaker Naval Hospital, and a military prison, which later was relocated and became Santa Rita Jail (Minniear 2018). Hundreds of thousands of service members and their families passed through or moved into the Dublin area. Growth of Dublin took off in the 1960s, when the houses in the San Ramon Village area of Dublin were built, and supporting commercial development soon followed. 214 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 42 History of the Hexcel Property and Hexcel Products, Inc. The following historic context, specific to the Project location, was prepared as part of the Historical Resources Evaluation technical memorandum of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility at 11711 Dublin Boulevard, prepared by AECOM for the City of Dublin. The historic context, relevant figures, and full evaluation for eligibility for listing in the CRHR are in the memorandum appended to this Focused EIR as Appendix C. Property Development In October 1961, Royal Research Corporation (Royal Research), a scientific research and development enterprise, purchased 13 acres of undeveloped, agricultural -zoned land between Dublin Boulevard and Highway 50 from William T. and Alice K. Marsh. That same month Alameda County approved Royal Research's request to rezone the property into a special industrial zone to build a new research and development facility. At the time, Dublin was a small agricultural community with one school and one church, but a new 9,500-home development called San Ramon Village was underway on the north side of town. Royal Research surveyed the entire county to select a site to build their facility and chose this property because of the somewhat remote location. The company was already leasing a small office across the street at 11824 Dublin Avenue and were relying on the budding labor pool of new San Ramon Village residents (Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 1994 July 1: Appendix A; Oakland Tribune 1960 September 4; Oakland Tribune 1961 October 27; Oakland Tribune 1960 August 7). In 1962, Royal Research which manufactured enclosures for safe handling of radioactive and hazardous materials, commissioned construction of a 25,000-square-foot research and development facility on the subject property. The building housed offices and small laboratory spaces with a central courtyard in the north end, and the main laboratory area in the taller south end. Construction of the facility totaled nearly $350,000 with an additional $350,000 for equipment and was completed by the end of the year (Stockton Daily Evening Record 1962 July 31; Daily Review 1962 August 22). Royal Research continued to occupy the facility until 1966 when it was sold to Hexcel Products, Inc. (Hexcel). Based in Berkeley, Hexcel was the largest developer and manufacturer of honeycomb, a structural material used in a number of applications, primarily associated with the aeronautics and aerospace industries. When looking to relocate from Berkeley, the executives at Hexcel sought a site somewhere between Carquinez Strait and Palo Alto, preferably near a college campus to draw from a technical labor pool for research and development, with the former Royal Research facility fitting its needs. Soon after the purchase, Hexcel announced a million -dollar, 20,000-square foot expansion of the research and development facility with a new administrative headquarters designed by San Francisco architecture firm Lackey, Knorr, Elliott & Associates. Hexcel closed their headquarters in Berkeley and relocated to Dublin and moved their manufacturing plants in Berkeley and Oakland to plants in Arizona, Texas, and Maryland (Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 1994 July 1: Appendix A; Oakland Tribune 1966 May 18; Oakland Tribune 1967 November 12; San Francisco Examiner 1966 May 18; Contra Costa Times 1967 February 24). 215 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 43 Hexcel's new headquarters addition, completed in early 1967, housed the engineering, marketing, finance, and general administrative staff. The original 1962 section was utilized as laboratory space for further research and development. Hexcel president William S. Powell understood that technical employees were in great demand and wanted to entice new hires, so the building design included full -height tinted glass windows, courtyards, enclosed breezeways, and patios to provide outdoor views along with comfortable, carpeted workspaces, air conditioning, and taped music piped through an internal speaker system (Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26; Contra Costa Times 1967 February 24; Oakland Tribune 1967 November 12). The Hexcel facility remained the same until the 1980s. In 1984 construction of a two-story hyphen connected the 1962 and 1967 buildings, resulting in a central courtyard. A small lab and chemical storage addition was constructed at the southeast corner of the facility the following year (Oakland Tribune 1984 May 16; Oakland Tribune 1984 July 11; Oakland Tribune 1985 November 13). Royal Research Corporation Royal Research Corporation, originally called Dublin Industries, was founded in Berkeley in 1959 by former Lawrence Radiation Laboratory staff (now known as the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory). The company focused on producing custom-made mechanical devices to handle radioactive materials. General Electric served as their primary customer for handling material at the Vallecitos Atomic Laboratory in nearby Sunol. In 1960, the company expanded into research, hiring Dr. William W.T. Crane, who headed heavy elements processing at Lawrence Radiation Laboratory from 1948 to 1958. Crane would later become president of the company. Dublin Industries merged with the Pasadena -based Royal Industries in August 1960, which was an engineering firm. After the merger, Dublin Industries was renamed Royal Research Corporation, operating as a subsidiary to Royal Industries (Daily Review 1962 August 22; Los Angeles Times 1957 October 11). The first major research contract obtained by Royal Research was to develop an isotopic power supply for the Atomic Energy Commission that resulted in the creation of thermo-electric generators for underwater seismic stations that could last several years. Within two years, Royal Research expanded research into vacuum devices to handle reactive materials, energy conversion, and microwave technology; 90 percent of their contracts were with the U.S. government (Daily Review 1962 August 22). In June 1963, Royal Industries, Inc. sold Royal Research to General Technology Corporation which included use of the Dublin plant (subject facility). Royal Industries, Inc. retained ownership of the plant before selling the facility to Hexcel Products, Inc. in 1966 (Pasadena Independent 1963 June 5; Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 1994 July 1: Appendix A). Hexcel Corporation Hexcel Corporation can trace its formation to 1946 when two University of California alumni, Roger C. Steele and Roscoe T. "Bud" Hughes decided to experiment with new construction material technologies developed during World War II, including plastics, in Hughes' basement 216 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 44 at his house in Berkeley. Steele's experimentation led to the creation of structural honeycomb, which he demonstrated at a government -sponsored plastics conference as the California Reinforced Plastics Company. This demonstration secured a research and development contract of his expandable honeycomb for use in military aircraft radar domes in 1948. That same year, the company hired chemist Ken Holland to oversee resin research and development. The company furthered their ties with the military in 1949 when they won a low -bid contract to develop honeycomb fuel cell support panels for B-36 bombers (Pederson, ed. 1999: 193; Oakland Tribune 1967 May 22; Hexcel.com 2023; Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26). In 1954, the company changed its name to Hexcel Products Inc. and continued creating honeycomb in a variety of materials including plastic, aluminum, fiberglass and paper, resulting in the highest strength -to -weight ratio material on the market with excellent energy absorption properties. Although the technology was initially used in aerospace, implementation of paper materials expanded use into commercial and residential building materials for use in interior partitions and mobile homes, and well as furniture manufacturing. By the end of the decade, Hexcel ran its headquarters out of Berkeley in a shared warehouse building at 2332 Fourth Street and had opened manufacturing plants in Berkeley, Oakland, and Havre de Grace in Maryland (Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26; Pederson, ed. 1999: 193; Oakland Tribune 1959 September 17; San Francisco Examiner 1962 July 2). In the 1960s, Hexcel had several large contracts with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), military, and commercial aviation clients. In 1968 Hexcel acquired Coast Manufacturing and Supply Company in Livermore and diversified the company's product range beyond structural honeycomb to include reinforced plastics, industrial glass fabrics, structural adhesives, industrial resin compounds, and diffusion bonded assemblies. This shift occurred as the Federal government began to divest large-scale pursuits and the public's interest in government programs shifted following the moon landing and withdrawal from Vietnam in 1969. Using the new materials procured from the Coast acquisition, Hexcel designed and produced high-performance snow skis. These were the first commodity made for the direct retail market (Times Record News 1970 April 10; Hexcel.com 2023; Pederson, ed. 1999: 193- 194). Hexcel continued to diversify its portfolio in the 1970s with the acquisition of a graphite weaving company and a knee, hip, and shoulder joint replacement manufacturer. By the end of the decade only half of their sales were from honeycomb (Pederson, ed. 1999: 194). An economic downturn and oil crisis at the end of the 1970s led to the sale of the ski and medical products and a returned focus on aviation and aerospace. The company secured a number of high value contracts, for example with NASA for components in the Columbia Space Shuttle, with Boeing, their largest customer accounting for 20 percent of total sales, and with the U. S. Air Force for its new B-2 bomber program that prompted construction of a new 160,000-square-foot manufacturing plant in Arizona. However, deregulation of the airline industry by President Ronald Reagan cut airline profits, leading to reductions of Hexcel's Boeing and Airbus orders (Hexcel.com 2023; Oakland Tribune 1988 June 6). 217 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 45 The early 1990s were tumultuous for the company starting with a Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection filing in 1993. After layoffs and plant and asset sales, the company avoided bankruptcy. In 1996 Hexcel merged with two composites companies to improve vertical integration; the new combined firm had a total of 4,700 employees with 19 manufacturing plants in seven countries (Pederson, ed. 1999: 194-195). Since the late 1990s, Hexcel continued to lead research and development in honeycomb, carbon fiber, and resin structural materials. The company has contracts with a number of aerospace companies including Airbus, Boeing, SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Lockheed Martin. In May 2021, a groundbreaking ceremony was held in West Valley City, Utah for the company's new research and technology headquarters with plans to vacate the Dublin facility in 2023 (Hexcel.com 2023). Hexcel and NASA In 1958, NASA utilized Hexcel honeycomb in their first spacecraft, Pioneer 1. The satellite probe included eight square feet of fiberglass reinforced Hexcel honeycomb plastic that only weighed 15 ounces. At a press conference hosted by Hexcel president Roger C. Steele in October 1958, he lauded the company's honeycomb "structural sandwich" construction as the "highest strength to weight ratio of any material known to man" and could be used "to build a space vehicle of extraordinary strength with an absolute minimum of weight" (Oakland Tribune 1958 October 23). The special fiberglass reinforced plastic honeycomb was developed for radio and electrical transmission properties, and the structural sandwich construction created a heat resistant barrier to protect the internal instrumentation. Although Pioneer 1 was meant to orbit the moon, a programming error resulted in the satellite only traveling 71,300 of the 222,000 miles, but did collect data of the extent of the Earth's radiation belts (Concord Transcript 1958 December 8). Success of the structural integrity of Pioneer 1 led to more contracts between Hexcel and NASA. By the early 1960s, Hexcel developed cutting -edge materials for several space programs and missions including the Mariner Program satellites (1960-1975); Project Mercury spacecraft (1958-1961); Project Gemini spacecraft (1961-1966); and Apollo Program command and lunar module spacecraft (1960-1972). Hexcel honeycomb protected John Glen as he became the first American to orbit the earth in February 1962 in Friendship 7, part of the Mercury program (Oakland Tribune 1962 September 23; Hexcel.com 2023; Contra Costa Times 1970 June 21). Hexcel continued research and development for NASA through the 1960s and created several types of honeycomb for NASA spacecraft. The Apollo 8 capsule held three astronauts when it left Earth's and orbited the Moon ten times in December 1968 and contained layers of honeycomb to create the lightweight but high -strength structural capsule shell. A cylindrical honeycomb called "tube -core" was installed under the astronauts' seats to help absorb G-force energy loads. A heatshield made of stainless -steel honeycomb and steel alloy sheets and an internal reinforced plastic honeycomb ablative heat shield were placed on the inside and outside of the capsule (Contra Costa Times 1968 December 4). This same structural and heat protection honeycomb was used in subsequent capsules in the Apollo program, including 218 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 46 Apollo 9 and Apollo 11. Hexcel also developed a new honeycomb used on the Apollo 11 lunar module landing struts and footpads for the first moon landing in July 1969. This specific honeycomb design crushed and folded -in on itself to a absorb the impact of the landing and prevent bouncing (Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26; Contra Costa Times 1969 March 28; Times Record News 1970 April 10). After the moon landing, a local newspaper interviewed proud Hexcel employees at the headquarters in Dublin. While the newspaper noted that 300,000 people from 20,000 companies were involved in some capacity with the moon landing, Hexcel stood out because they "developed the best material NASA has found for use in spacecraft" (Argus 1969 July 24). Hexcel continued its NASA relationship into the 1970s and development of the Space Shuttle program. Hexcel honeycomb was used in the nose cap, payload doors, and wings in the first space shuttle Columbia that launched in April 1981. Columbia flew 28 missions during its 22 years in service (NASA.gov 2023; Hexcel.com 2023). Hexcel also supplied $1 million worth of materials for the Discovery Space Shuttle launched in August 1984. Honeycomb was used in the cargo bay doors, a new carbon composite heat shield material that could be used on several missions before needing to be replaced and wove high - temperature resistant ceramic fabric to line the flight crew's cabin to protect them from extreme heat upon earth re-entry (Seguin Gazette Enterprise 1988 September 30; Hexcel.com 2023). Lackey, Knorr & Elliott (1967 Hexcel addition) Hexcel commissioned the large headquarters addition to the 1962 former Royal Research facility in 1967 from architects Lackey, Knorr & Elliott, based out of San Francisco. Donald R. Knorr and Edward P. Elliott formed their first partnership Knorr -Elliott & Associates in 1958. The firm received awards of excellence from Architectural Record for residential designs in 1958 and 1963; a citation for the Dux Incorporated furniture company headquarters and warehouse in South San Francisco in 1963; a merit award for a dental plaza in Stanford in 1963; and an environmental award for the Koret of California distribution plant in South San Francisco in 1968 (PCAD 2023b; AIA 1970: 516). In 1967, the partnership included architect Lawrence Lackey, with the 1967 Hexcel addition appearing to be the only design produced by the collaboration (Oakland Tribune 1967 November 12). Lackey was an urban planner, architect, and landscape architect based out of San Francisco, active between the late 1950s and 1970s. He was best known for the Master Plan he designed for the University of Fairbanks in Alaska in 1965 (PCAD 2023a; Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26). Man in Space National Historic Landmark Theme Study Congress passed Public Law 96-344 in 1980 which directed the Secretary of the Interior to produce a study that identified events and locations associated with the "Man in Space" theme to be brought into the National Park system and ways to present these significant locations, structures, and objects to the public. It also required evaluation of the resources identified with the Man in Space theme for recommendation as National Historic Landmarks (NHLs). The resulting study was first published in 1984 as "Man in Space: A National Historic Landmark 219 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 47 Theme Study," prepared by Dr. Harry A. Butowsky. In it, Butowsky identified 23 research and development facilities, testing facilities and stands, astronaut training facilities, tracking stations, mission control centers, a launch pad, and the Saturn 5 Space Vehicle that he recommended as NHLs and prepared NRHP Nomination Forms for each resource (Butowsky 1984 May: passim). Butowsky acknowledges that undoubtedly contractor -owned facilities and sites played significant roles in the United States' pursuit to the moon and subsequent space programs, however this document in its first phase does not identify or provide guidance about these properties. The original report does however identify four significant themes for the Man in Space context which resources would be considered historically significant. They include: 1. Technical Foundations before 1958; 2. The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon; 3. The Exploration of the Planets and the Solar System; and 4. The Role of Scientific and Communications Satellites. These four subthemes provided a foundation for identification of significant properties. However, this early report lacks the details to clearly spell out what types of properties would or would not be significant under these subthemes for modern National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) analysis. A second phase of the report was published later in 1984 that identified another launch pad as well as three spacecrafts, which were not previously identified in the first report. The three spacecrafts, Mercury Friendship 7 (1962), Gemini 4 (1964), and the Apollo 11 Command Module (1969) were all located in the National Air and Space Museum at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. Butowsky declared the three spacecrafts as "nationally significant historic objects ... it is important to recognize the national significance of the objects having internal integrity which have contributed critically to the success of the space program and, together, form an integral chapter in that program's history" (Butowsky 1984 August:1-2). These spacecrafts represented a first, or breakthrough, for each program's mission. While the first phase of the report stated that the second phase would examine the importance of contractors, it was not included. Butowsky did not specifically call out any private company, but he described the use of Hexcel fiberglass honeycomb in the description of the Apollo 11 Command Module. All three of these spacecrafts contain honeycomb developed by Hexcel for NASA (Butowsky 1984 August: passim). Based on the results of AECOM's historical resource evaluation, the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility at 11711 Dublin Avenue (P-01-010656) is eligible for listing in the CRHR under Criterion 1 because it is significant at the national level for its association with the Man in Space historic context under subtheme 2. The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon and retains sufficient integrity to its period of significance (1967 and 1969). The property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code and is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. 220 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 48 Regulatory Framework Cultural resources in California are protected by a number of regulations. The following provides a brief outline of the regulations, policies, and ordinances that are applicable to the proposed project. Federal National Historic Preservation Act The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (16 United States Code 470) and its implementing regulations (36 CFR 800) establish a program for the preservation of historic properties throughout the United States and provides a framework for identifying and treating historical and archaeological resources under the CEQA. Section 106 of the NHPA requires that federal projects or projects under federal jurisdiction consider the effect of an undertaking on properties eligible for or included in the NRHP. Historic properties that are listed in or eligible for the NRHP are considered historical resources for the purposes of CEQA. National Register of Historic Places Historic properties are those significant cultural resources that are listed in or are eligible for listing in the NRHP per the criteria listed below (36 CFR 60.4): The quality of significance in American, state, and local history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and meet one or more of the following criteria: a. Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; b. Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; c. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of installation, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; d. Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Ordinarily, cemeteries, birthplaces, or graves of historic figures; properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes; structures that have been moved from their original locations; reconstructed historic buildings; and properties that are primarily commemorative in nature are not considered eligible for the NRHP, unless they satisfy certain conditions. In general, a resource must be 50 years of age to be considered for the NRHP, unless it satisfies a standard of exceptional importance. Listing in the NRHP does not entail specific protection of, or assistance for a property. However, listing does guarantee the property's recognition during planning for federal or federally assisted projects, eligibility for federal tax benefits, and qualification for federal historic 221 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 49 preservation assistance. Additionally, project effects on properties listed in the NRHP must be evaluated under CEQA. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties The "Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties" (Secretary's Standards), codified in 36 CFR 67, provide guidance for working with historic properties. The Secretary's Standards are used by lead agencies to evaluate proposed rehabilitative work on historic properties. The Secretary's Standards are a useful analytic tool for understanding and describing the potential impacts of proposed changes to historic resources. Projects that comply with the Secretary's Standards benefit from a regulatory presumption that they would not result in a significant impact to a historic resource. Projects that do not comply with the Secretary's Standards may or may not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic property. In 1992, the Secretary's Standards were revised so they could be applied to all types of historic resources, including landscapes. They were reduced to four sets of treatments to guide work on historic properties: Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration, and Reconstruction. Rehabilitation acknowledges the need to alter or add to a historic property to meet continuing or changing uses while retaining the property's historic character and is most applicable to this Project. The Rehabilitation standards are as follows: 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 222 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 50 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale, and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Generally, a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource per CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(b). State California Environmental Quality Act CEQA requires public agencies to consider the effects of their actions on "historical resources," "unique archeological resources," and "tribal cultural resources." Pursuant to PRC Section 21084.1, a "project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment." Section 21083.2 requires agencies to determine whether proposed projects would have effects on unique archeological resources. Historical Resources "Historical resource" is a term with a defined statutory meaning (PRC § 21084.1; determining significant impacts to historical and archeological resources is described in the CEQA Guidelines, § 15064.5[a] and [b]). Per the CEQA Guidelines, section 15064.5(a), historical resources include the following: (1) A resource listed in or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the CRHR (PRC § 5024.1). (2) A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in PRC § 5020.1(k) or identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of PRC § 5024.1(g), will be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant. (3) Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be a historical resource, provided the lead agency's determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. 223 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 51 (4) The fact that a resource is not listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR, not included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to Cal. Pub. Resources Code § 5020.1(k)), or identified in a historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in Cal. Pub. Resources Code § 5024.1(g)) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be a historical resource as defined in Cal. Pub. Resources Code§§ 5020.1(j) or 5024.1. Non -Unique Archeological Resources Under CEQA, archeological resources are presumed non -unique unless they meet the definition of "unique archeological resources" (Cal. Pub. Resources Code § 21083.2[g]). Under CEQA, an impact on a non -unique archeological resource is not considered a significant environmental impact. Unique Archeological Resources Archeological resources can sometimes qualify as "unique archeological resources" that are not "historical resources." (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(c)(3)). PRC, Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archeological resource as an artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: 1. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; or 2. Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or 3. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. If a project can be demonstrated to cause damage to a unique archeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that resources cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (PRC Section 21083.2[a], [b], and [c]). California Register of Historical Resources The CRHR is a guide to cultural resources that must be considered when a government agency undertakes a discretionary action subject to CEQA. The CRHR helps government agencies identify, evaluate, and protect California's historical resources, and indicates which properties are to be protected from substantial adverse change (Pub. Resources Code, Section 5024.1(a)). The CRHR is administered through the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) which is part of the California State Parks system. A cultural resource is evaluated under four CRHR criteria to determine its historical significance. A resource must be significant at the local, state, or national level in accordance with one or more of the following criteria set forth in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(3) and Public Resources Code section 5024.1: 224 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR l Page 52 1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of California's history and cultural heritage; 2. It is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; 3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or 4. It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. In addition to meeting one or more of the above criteria, the CRHR requires that sufficient time must have passed to allow a "scholarly perspective on the events or individuals associated with the resource." The CRHR also requires a resource to possess integrity, which is defined as "the authenticity of a historical resource's physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Codes Governing Human Remains Human remains are protected by several laws in the State of California, including Health and Safety Codes (HRC) 7050.5, 7051, 7052, and 7055. Together these laws define criminal consequences for disturbing, disinterring, mutilating, or removing human remains from their place of rest or discovery. Section 7050.5 of the Health & Safety Code requires that construction or excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the county coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner must then contact the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which has jurisdiction pursuant to Public Res. Code § 5097. The NAHC, pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98, will immediately notify the person it believes to be most likely descendant (MLD), of the deceased Native American person so they can inspect the burial site and make recommendations for appropriate treatment or disposition. Section 7051 makes it a crime, punishable by imprisonment, to remove any human remains from the place where they have been interred or deposited without authority of law. Section 7052 protects human remains from mutilation and disinterment. Section 7055 makes it a crime to remove interred human remains from a cemetery. Local City of Dublin General Plan The City of Dublin General Plan, Chapter 7 Environmental Resources Management Conservation Element, provides guidance for the protection of archaeological and historic resources in Dublin and guiding policies related to historic and cultural resources are as follows: Guiding Policy 7.7.1A.1: Preserve Dublin's historic structures. 225 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 53 Seven sites in the Primary Planning Area are listed in the California Archaeological Inventory, Northwest Information Center, at Sonoma State University including the church and school on the grounds of the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums. As many as a dozen potentially significant historic and prehistoric sites have been identified in the Eastern Extended Planning Area. Guiding Policy 7.7.1A.2: Follow State regulations as set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 regarding discovery of archaeological sites, and Historical Resources, as defined in Section 5020.1 of the Public Resources Code. Guiding Policy 7.7.1A.3: Preserve the Green Store. The Green Store is a recognized historical resource and has been used as a church since 1989. This use can remain as long as the landowner(s) wish to continue its operation. The Parks/ Public Recreation designation on the General Plan Land Use Map illustrates the long-term potential for expansion of the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums to include this historic structure and the property it is on and is not intended to affect or change the current church use or its continued operation as a religious land use under a valid conditional use permit. Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan The Project site is located within the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan boundary. The Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan (SP) was adopted in 2006 and updated in 2014. Applicable goals and objectives of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan related to historic and cultural resources are as follows: Goal 1: Preserve and protect the valuable historic resources within the Dublin Village Historic Area. Objective 1.1: Identify Dublin's historic resources and adopt a formal Historic Resources Inventory. Objective 1.2: Identify mechanisms to protect properties on the Historic Resources Inventory from being destroyed or altered to the point of removing their historic value. Objective 1.3: Identify incentives to encourage the preservation and enhancement of privately - owned historic resources. Objective 1.4: Pursue formal designation and recognition of Dublin's historic resources through the California State Office of Historic Preservation and National Registry. Objective 1.5: Work cooperatively with property owners to rehabilitate Alamilla Springs. Objective 1.6: Ensure that improvements and renovations to publicly -owned historic resources are done according to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. 226 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 54 Goal 2: Guide the design of future development to reinforce the unique historic qualities and design elements that once defined Dublin Village. Objective 2.1: Create design guidelines for residential, commercial, and mixed -use development on private property. Objective 2.2: Create design guidelines that provide direction for future streetscape improvements in the public right of way. Objective 2.3: Create guidelines that provide direction on the preferred preservation and rehabilitation techniques for properties on the Historic Resources Inventory. Additionally, the SP includes mitigation measures that apply to the treatment of historic resources within the Dublin Village Historic Area, drawn from the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) prepared by the City in 2006 (City of Dublin 2006). The mitigation measures for the Project will meet the requirements set forth in the SP and the associated IS/MND (City of Dublin 2014: Appendix B; City of Dublin 2006). SP Mitigation Measure 4: In High Archeological Probability Areas (including a 150 meter (493 foot) corridor centered on Dublin Creek and within the general vicinity of St. Raymond's Church, Pioneer Cemetery, and the Dublin Square Shopping Center site), the permitting of future ground disturbance shall include provisions for further archival and field study by an archeologist, archeological testing and, and, if necessary, archeological monitoring during construction. SP Mitigation Measure 5: Should preconstruction excavation or borings be conducted outside of the High Archeological Probability Areas, but within the project area, a qualified archeologist shall monitor the work to define the presence or absence of buried resources in order to promote advance planning for mitigation purposes. SP Mitigation Measure 6: If a Native American artifact or human remains are identified during any demolition or construction in the project area, work on the project shall cease immediately until those steps outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (e) can be taken to the satisfaction of the Dublin Community Development Director. Project work may be resumed in compliance with the requirements of Section 15064.5 (e). Additionally, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately and Section 7050.5(b) of the California Health and Safety Code (relating to the discovery of Native American remains) should be implemented. SP Mitigation Measure 7: If an archeological, prehistoric, or paleontological resource is discovered during any demolition or construction in the project area, work on the project shall cease immediately until a resource protection plan conforming to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (f) is prepared by a qualified archeologist and approved by the Dublin Community Development Director. Project work may be resumed in compliance with such plan. 227 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 55 Dublin Historic Resources Inventory The Dublin Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) was created when the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan was adopted by the Dublin City Council in 2006. The HRI was established to "recognize those few remaining resources that have a place in Dublin's history, including those resources that might be significant to the immediate community but not significant at the state or federal level" (City of Dublin Community Development Department 2014: 27). The HRI consists of resources that were found eligible for listing in the NRHP and the CRHR, or only having local significance, from the survey efforts undertaken in Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project that was finalized in 2004 by Page & Turnbull, Inc. The HRI includes only seven resources, three of which are near the 6600 block of Donlon Way: St. Raymond's Church, Murray Schoolhouse, and the Pioneer Cemetery, which have been combined as the "Dublin Heritage Center." The Pioneer Cemetery is adjacent to the Hexcel property, and historic documents suggest it extends into the Project parcel (VerPlanck 2003b). The Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan did not establish goals or policies for maintaining or adding properties to the HRI. No guidelines were provided to reevaluate properties in the Dublin Village Historic Area that were less than 50 years old at the time the survey was conducted in 2004, nor any significance criteria or mechanisms for nominating or adding properties to the HRI. Previous CEQA Documents The City of Dublin hired the archaeological firm William Self Associates, Inc. (WSA) in 2003 to prepare an Archaeological Assessment Report of the Donlon Way Specific Plan (later renamed the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan area). A record search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC), conducted by WSA, did not identify any previously recorded archaeological sites within the Specific Plan area boundaries, but one new archaeological site was recorded during the pedestrian survey and Archeological High Probability areas were also identified within the Specific Plan area boundaries. The Archaeological Assessment Report concluded that there is a moderate -to -high -probability of identifying Native American archeological resources and a high -probability of encountering historic -period archeological resources within the Specific Plan area boundaries. The City of Dublin hired the architectural firm Page & Turnbull, Inc. in 2003 to prepare the Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project that was finalized in 2004. The city contracted with Page & Turnbull to identify and map historic resources in an approximately 38-acre area for a future Specific Plan for the Donlon Way area (later renamed the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan) and to prepare preservation recommendations. Page & Turnbull prepared a historic context of the Dublin Village area and recorded all of the properties in the survey area on Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 A and B forms. The Hexcel Corporation R&D facility on the Project site was recorded as part of this effort on December 10, 20003 (VerPlanck 2003f). At that time, the facility was not considered old enough (at least 50 years old) to be considered a potential historical resource under CEQA. Additionally, while the historic evaluation did contain a thorough historic context statement, it did not address the four 228 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 56 eligibility criteria for either the NRHP or the CRHR, but merely concluded that the property lacked architectural or historical significance to be eligible. The Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan was adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006, under Resolution No. 149-06 and relied on the findings of the Archaeological Assessment Report of the Donlon Way Specific Plan and the Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project. The approximately 38-acre Specific Plan area included the two project site parcels. Subsequently, three Specific Plan addendum and amendments have been prepared for the Specific Plan. City Council determined that no new significant impacts were identified by the addendums or amendments, and no further environmental analysis was required. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5 (Significant and Unavoidable Impact) A historical resource evaluation was prepared for the Hexcel Corporation's 1960s-constructed R&D facility on the Project site to assess its eligibility for listing in the CRHR as a potential historical resource for the purposes of CEQA (see Appendix C). The facility was determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR under Criterion 1, because it is significant at the national level for its associations within the Man in Space historic context published by the National Park Service and is, therefore, considered a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. The significance of an historical resource is considered to be "materially impaired" when a project demolishes or materially alters the physical characteristics that justify the determination of an historical resources' significance. Because the proposed Project would result in the demolition of the existing Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, which is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable impact on a historical resource. CEQA requires that all feasible mitigation must be completed even if it does not mitigate project impacts below a level of significance. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(b), states that "In some circumstances, documentation of an historical resource, by way of historic narrative, photographs or architectural drawings, as mitigation for the effects of demolition of the resource will not mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur." Therefore, recordation of a resource prior to demolition does not typically mitigate the physical impact on the environment caused by demolition or destruction of an historical resource; however, it does serves a legitimate archival purpose. Therefore, the following mitigation measures are required , even though they would not fully offset the loss of the resource, and the impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure CUL-1: HABS Recordation In consultation with the City of Dublin Planning Division, the Project applicant shall document the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility prior to demolition. Documentation shall be performed by a Secretary of Interior -qualified professionals (in history or architectural 229 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 57 history) and be consistent with the standards of the National Parks Service (NPS) Historic American Building Survey (NABS) and shall consist of the following elements: 1. Historical Report: A qualified historian or architectural historian shall assemble historical background information relevant to the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility in short format Historic American Building Survey (HABS), based on HABS guidelines for historical reports. Much of this information may be drawn from the previous Historical Resource Evaluation and would detail critical information such as the property's significance, physical description, history, and a summary of information sources. 2. Photographs: Large format, black and white photographs of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility shall be taken and processed for archival permanence in accordance with HABS, Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), and HALS (Historic American Landscapes Survey) Photography Guidelines in effect at the time of recording. The standards require large format black -and -white photography, with the original negatives having a minimum size of 4"x5". Digital photography, roll film, film packs, and electronic manipulation of images are not acceptable. The photographs shall be taken by a professional with HABS photography experience. A minimum of 10 and a maximum of 24 photographs must be taken, detailing the site, building exteriors, and interiors, specifically the R&D portion of the building. Photographs must be identified and labeled using HABS/HALS standards. Following completion of the HABS documentation, including the short form historical report and large format photographs, and approval by the City of Dublin, the materials shall be placed on file with the City of Dublin Planning Division, and the Dublin Historical Society at the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums. Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Interpretive Displays In concert with HABS documentation (Mitigation Measure CUL-1), the Project applicant shall install permanent interpretive displays or signage for public exhibition detailing the history and significance of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility at the Project site. The interpretive displays or signage could be based on the photographs produced in the HABS documentation and the historic archival research previously prepared as part of the Project. The interpretive displays or signage shall be prepared by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards, in coordination with an exhibit designer. Interpretive displays or signage at the Project site shall be located outside of the new building, near the publicly accessible sidewalk and/or inside the new building in a prominent space, such as the lobby, where they may be viewed by employees and visitors. 230 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 58 Even with implementation of the mitigation measures identified above, the Project would still result in a significant and unavoidable impact to the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, as it would result in its demolition. Therefore, the Project would have a Significant and Unavoidable Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. A discussion of alternatives that would involve the partial preservation and adaptive reuse of the portion of the building where the NASA research took place is presented in Alternatives Considered but Rejected section of this EIR. (b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5 (Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated) The proposed Project would include excavation of much of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility property, which is adjacent to the Dublin Village Historic Settlement. The Dublin Village Historic Settlement is recorded as a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA (P-01-002127) and includes Old St. Raymond's Church, the Pioneer Cemetery, the Old Murray School, Green's Store, the site of the Green Mansion and Murray Homestead, and Donlon Way. St. Raymond's Church is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NPS 06000242), eligible under criteria A and C, with the Pioneer Cemetery listed as a contributing element. Additionally, the Hexcel property falls within the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, therefore the project must abide by the mitigation measures proposed in the associated IS/MND (City of Dublin 2014; City of Dublin 2006). Based on the existence of archeological resources within and adjacent to the Project area, there is a high probability of encountering historic -period archeological resources during ground disturbance at the Project site, particularly within those portions of the property closest to St. Raymond's Church and Pioneer Cemetery, and a high probability of identifying Native American archeological resources, particularly within a 150 meter (493 foot) corridor centered on Dublin Creek. Section 15126.4 of the CEQA Guidelines directs public agencies to avoid damaging effects on an archeological resource whenever possible. For a project that could impact an archeological resource, Section 15064.5 (Determining the Significance of Impacts on Historical and Unique Archeological resources) of the CEQA Guidelines applies and all requirements of this section shall be met in the course of reviewing and implementing the Project. In order to mitigate any potential impacts to resources in the Project area, further archival and field study by an archeologist shall be undertaken prior to the construction of any development projects in the area in accordance with the recommendations of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and associated IS/MND (City of Dublin 2014; City of Dublin 2006). In sum, there is a high potential for previously unrecorded archaeological resources associated with the historic settlement to be within the Hexcel Property. Additionally, the Hexcel property is adjacent to the marked boundary of the Pioneer Cemetery, a contributing element to the NRHP listed resource, St. Raymond's Church (P-01-010635 / CA-ALA-521H / NPS 06000242). 231 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 59 The High Archeological Probability Areas identified for this Project, per the guidance of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and associated IS/MND, are the areas most proximate to St. Raymond's Church and Pioneer Cemetery, and a 150 meter corridor centered on Dublin Creek. This includes the portion of the Project site to the east of the existing Hexcel building and much of the southern parking lot, approximately 115,763 square feet of the total project area of 383,764 square feet (30 percent). Per the proposed design, excavation within this High Archaeological Probability Area would exceed 1 foot below ground surface (bgs) in an area of approximately 61,850 square feet (53 percent) of the area, with a maximum depth of approximately 12 feet bgs. The possibility of encountering buried archaeological resources in the Project area outside of the High Archeological Probability Area, remains a concern as well, and per the mitigation measures in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and associated IS/MND, requires mitigation to avoid adverse impact. If previously unrecorded archaeological resources associated with historical resources are present within the Hexcel property and/or if burials extend beyond the marked boundary of the adjacent Pioneer Cemetery, earthmoving and excavation activities to implement the Project could damage or destroy these buried resources, and the Project impact to archaeological resources would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measure CUL-3: Archaeological and Tribal Monitoring A. A qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology shall be retained by the applicant prior to implementing construction or soil remediation activities that involve earthmoving or soil excavation, and the archaeologist shall be available for consultation or evaluation of any cultural resources uncovered by such activities. Prior to the start of excavation, the archaeologist shall produce a Treatment and Monitoring Plan, in consultation with the City of Dublin, and through them, with any consulting Native American tribes. The Treatment and Monitoring Plan will comply with mitigation measures 4, 5, 6, and 7, set forth in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B, and will specify the following: i. Archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction. ii. Archaeological and Tribal monitoring requirements, which will be based on the results of archaeological testing and consultation with Native American tribes. iii. Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any historic -era or pre -contact era artifacts encountered during project activities. iv. Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any human remains from the historic era. (For human remains of 232 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 60 Native Americans, treatment protocols would be established with the designated MLD). B. If an archaeological resource (or suspected resource) is discovered during monitoring of project activities, construction or excavation activities within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be temporarily halted or directed to other areas, pending the archaeologist's evaluation of its significance. If the resource is significant, data collection, excavation, or other standard archaeological or historical procedures shall be implemented to mitigate impacts, pursuant to the Treatment and Monitoring Plan and the archaeologist's direction. If any human remains are encountered, the archaeologist shall contact the appropriate County Coroner immediately, and security measures shall be implemented to ensure that burials are not vandalized until the decision of burial deposition has been made pursuant to California law. If human remains are determined to be Native American interments, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and follow the procedures stated herein and other applicable laws. A report by the archaeologist evaluating the find and identifying mitigation actions taken shall be submitted to the CPUC. Where appropriate to protect the location and sensitivity of the cultural resources, the report may be submitted under Public Utilities Code Section 583 or other appropriate confidentiality provisions. Mitigation Measure CUL-4: Inadvertent Discovery Protocols A. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology to implement archaeological awareness training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities. The training shall include information regarding the possibility of encountering buried cultural resources, the appearance and types of resources likely to be seen during construction, notification procedures, and proper protocols to be followed should suspected or confirmed resources be encountered by the crew. This training shall be provided once to each worker involved in ground -disturbing activities before they begin work, and shall be documented in training records. B. In the event that precontact or historic -age resources (or suspected resources) are inadvertently discovered during Project implementation, all activity within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the City of Dublin's Project Manager shall be notified, and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the City of Dublin to examine the find, pursuant to Mitigation Measure 7 set out in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B. Project personnel shall not collect or move any historic material. The archaeologist shall evaluate the find(s) within 48 hours to determine if it meets the definition of a historical or unique archaeological resource and follow the procedures outlined below: 233 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 61 i. If the find(s) does not meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming Project implementation. ii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of a historical resource or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be avoided by Project activities and preserved in place. If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Dublin, the qualified archaeologist shall make appropriate recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of such find(s), and significant impacts to such resources shall be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the archaeologist prior to resuming construction activities within the 50-foot radius. iii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of both a tribal cultural resource and a historical or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be treated in accordance with Mitigation Measure CUL-3. C. Recommendations for treatment and disposition of find(s) could include, but are not limited to, archaeological monitoring, collection, recordation, and analysis of any significant cultural materials. A report of findings documenting any data recovery shall be submitted to NWIC. i. In the event that archaeological resource(s) are discovered during Project implementation, an archaeological monitor shall be retained to monitor all ground- disturbing activities in the vicinity (i.e., within 50 feet) of the find. Archaeological monitors have the authority, upon the finding of a potential resource, to request that work be slowed, diverted, or stopped if archaeological resources are identified within the direct impact area. If the resource is determined by an archaeologist to be a historical or unique archaeological resource, the archaeologist shall amend the Treatment and Monitoring Plan, with measures to avoid or reduce impacts to the resource. The treatment plan measures may include, but not be limited to, avoidance and preservation in place (the preferred method if feasible), capping, incorporation of the site within a park or other open space, or data recovery. If the resource is also a tribal cultural resource, then designated representatives from the consulting tribe(s) shall make appropriate recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of such find(s) in accordance with Mitigation Measure CUL-3 and these recommendations shall be incorporated into the treatment plan. The mitigation measures require training for all construction workers so that they are aware of the potential for encountering buried resources and the procedures that need to be followed if potential precontact or historic period archaeological resources are encountered during on -site activities, as well as the regulations pertaining to discovery of human burials. Because the mitigation measures require stopping work within the area of any potential find(s), and require 234 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 62 that a qualified archaeologist inspect the find and make recommendations for avoiding or reducing impacts (in collaboration with tribal representatives), implementation of mitigations CUL-3 and CUL-4, would reduce the potential impact on archeological and buried resources to less -than -significant with mitigation. (c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries (Less Than Significant) The proposed Project would include excavation of the parking lot to the south of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, which is adjacent to the marked boundary of the Pioneer Cemetery. Marked grave sites in the cemetery are within five feet of the Hexcel property fence. Historic documents suggest that the cemetery was larger than the currently marked boundary, and was used as an Ohlone burial site and as a burial ground for Native American and Mexican farm workers on Jose Maria Amador's Ranchero San Ramon prior to consecration of the official cemetery in 1860 (Bennett 1978, VerPlanck 2003b). For these reasons, there is a high probability that portions of the cemetery extend to the west of the marked cemetery, beneath the Hexcel parking lot. As designed, excavation depths in the area outside the existing building footprint would range up to 10 feet below surface along the southern boundary of the Hexcel property. If unmarked portions of the cemetery extend beneath the Hexcel property, the Project has the potential to disturb human remains during earthmoving and excavation activities to implement the Project. The disturbance of human remains could be a potentially significant impact if measures are not taken to protect the remains from damage, destruction, or discretion. Human burials, in addition to being potential archaeological resources, have specific provisions for treatment in Section 5097 of the California Public Resources Code. The California Health and Safety Code (Sections 7050.5, 7051, 7052, and 7055) also has specific provisions for the protection of human burial remains. Existing regulations address the illegality of interfering with human burial remains, protect them from disturbance, vandalism, or destruction, and established procedures to be implemented if Native American skeletal remains are discovered. Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 also addresses the disposition of Native American burials, protects such remains, and established the NAHC to resolve any related disputes. Compliance with these regulations is mandatory for all projects; therefore, if human remains are encountered during Project implementation, work at the project site would stop, the Alameda County Coroner would be notified immediately, and no further disturbance would occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. The remains would be protected from disturbance, vandalism, or destruction until such decision is made. If the human remains are determined to be from the historic -era, treatment, including excavation, documentation, analysis, and curation, will follow the archaeological Treatment and Monitoring Plan, as per CUL-3.A.iv. If the human remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner is required to notify the NAHC, which would determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD) within 24 hours. The MLD must complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal 235 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 63 and non-destructive analysis of Native American human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Pre -activity archaeological testing is to be included as part of the Archaeological Treatment and Monitoring Plan, per CUL-3.A.i. Archaeological testing prior to any ground disturbing activities would reduce the potential for disturbance of human remains during construction. However, it should be noted, archaeological testing would not eliminate the potential or degree to impact human remains, but would give the contractor more information on whether the resources are present and at what depths they could be encountered. The Reduced Grading Alternative, described in the Alternatives section, would be the most effective way to reduce the potential for adverse impacts. In addition, Mitigation Measure CUL-4 specifically requires training for all construction workers on the required regulations and procedures to be followed in the event that human burials are encountered. Compliance with the mandatory regulations pertaining to human burials would reduce the potential for destruction or desecration of human remains, if encountered during project construction. Compliance with procedures defined in the archaeological Treatment and Monitoring Plan and/or in negotiation with the MLD will ensure that the treatment of human remains will be respectful, and will be mitigated to the satisfaction of consulting descendent populations. As a result, the impact would be less than significant with mitigation. Source(s) AIA Historical Directory of American Architects (AIA). 1970. "Knorr, Don Robert." Available at: https://content.aia.org/sites/default/files/2018-09/Bowker1970K.pdf. Accessed January 2023. Argus. 1969 July 24. "Honeybee Plays A Part In Apollo Moon Voyage." 5. Beardsley, Richard K. 1948. Culture Sequences in Central California Archaeology. American Antiquity 14(1):1-28. Beebe, Rose Marie, and Robert M. Senkewicz. 2001. Lands of Promise and Despair: Chronicles of Early California, 1535-1846. Berkeley: Heydey Books. Bennett, Virginia Smith. 1978. Dublin Reflections and Bits of Valley History. Published by Dublin Friends of the Library. Union City, CA: Mill Creek Press. Bennyhoff, James A., and Richard E. Hughes. 1987. Shell Bead and Ornament Exchange Networks Between California and the Western Great Basin. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History 64(2):79-175. Butowsky, Dr. Harry A. 1984 May. Man in Space: National Historic Landmark Theme Study. n.p. Available at: https://historicproperties.arc.nasa.gov/downloads/man in space butowsky.pdf. Accessed January 2023. 236 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 64 . 1984 August. Man in Space: National Historic Landmark Theme Study, Phase 11. n.p. Available at: http://npshistory.com/publications/nhl/theme-studies/man-in-space- 2.pdf. Accessed January 2023. City of Dublin. 2006. Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Mater Plan, and Dublin Village Historic Area Rezoning. Planning Application File No. PA 02-074. On file with the City of Dublin. City of Dublin Community Development Department. 2014 (updated). Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. Adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006, Resolution No. 149-06. Available online: https://www.dubiin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7780/DVHASP-FULL-PDF- 10714?bidld=. Accessed April 2023. . 2022 (amended). General Plan. Available online: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30287/General-Plan-Update- 04192022-WEB. Accessed April 2023. Concord Transcript. 1958 December 8. "Moon Rocket Fails, But Space Science Gains." 1. Contra Costa Times. 1967 February 24. "New Research Facility Set for SR Valley." 1-2. . 1967 March 26. "Hexcel in Dublin — Honeycomb Goes to Work." 30. . 1968 December 4. "Hexcel Honeycomb To Cushion Apollo 8." 4C. . 1969 March 28. "Honeycomb Cocoon" [caption]. 8. . 1970 June 21. "SR Valley Sets Pattern For County's New Space -Age Industry." 7. Daily Review (Hayward, CA). 1962 August 22. "Dublin Research Firm — New Industry Plan $350,000 Plant." 8. Gerow, Bert A., with Roland W. Force. 1968. An Analysis of the University Village Complex with a Reappraisal of Central California Archaeology. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Groza, Randall Gannon. 2002. An AMS Chronology for Central California Olivella Shell Beads. Master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, San Francisco State University. Hexcel.com. 2023. "History & Timeline." Available at: https://www.hexcel.com/About/History- and-Timeline. Accessed January 2023. 237 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 65 Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 1994 July 1. Results of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of the Hexcel Research and Development Facility, 11711 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California, Prepared for Hexcel Corporation. Kyle, Douglas E., Mildred Brooke Hoover, Hero Eugene Rensch, Ethel Grace Rensch, and William N. Abeloe. 2002. Historic Spots in California, Fifth Edition. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. Los Angeles Times. 1957 October 11. "Century Eng. Wil Change Name to Royal Industries." Part Five, Page 9. Minnear, Steven. 2018. Dublin California: A Brief History. Charleston, S.C.: The History Press. NASA.gov. 2023. "NASA Orbiter Fleet." Available at: https://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/shuttleoperations/orbiters/columbia info.htm. Accessed January 2023. National Park Service (NPS). 2006. National Register of Historic Places Registration Form for St. Raymond's Church, Record Number 06000242. Available at: https://catalog.archives.gov/search?page=1&q=%22national%20register%20of%20histo ric%20places%22%2006000242. Accessed June 2023. NPS. 2006. See National Park Service. Oakland Tribune. 1958. October 23. "Berkeley Form Has Tole in First Moon Probe Vehicle." 34. . 1959 September 17. "Notes on Bay Commerce." 62. . 1960 August 7. "Two Eastbay Atomic Firms Merge, Plan for Expansion." 26. . 1960 September 4. "San Ramon Village Grand Opening: Celebration Starts Today at Model City. 2-R. . 1961 October 27. "Supervisors OK Expansion in Dublin Area." 11-E. . 1962 September 23. "Button Pusher: Canaveral Just Fires Cal Creations." 43. . 1966 May 18. "$1 Million Headquarters For Hexcel in Dublin." 46. . 1967 May 22. "News of Business, Industry." 13. . 1967 November 12. "Courtyards and Patios Upgrade Environment." 10-CM - 11-CM. . 1984 July 11. "Building Permits - Dublin." 62. . 1984 May 16. "Building Permits - Dublin." 64. 238 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 66 . 1985 November 13. "Building Permits — Dublin." 16. . 1988 June 6. "Hexcel." B-3. Pasadena Independent. 1963 June 5. "Royal Industries Sells Subsidiary." 19. Pacific Coast Architecture Database (PCAD). 2023a. "Lawrence Lackey." Available at: https://pcad.lib.washington.edu/person/3022/. Accessed January 2023. . 2023b. "Knorr — Elliott and Associates, Architects (Partnership)." Available at: https://pcad.lib.washington.edu/firm/1030/. Accessed January 2023. Pederson, Jay P., Editor. 1999. International Directory of Company Histories, Volume 28. San Francisco, CA: St. James Press. San Francisco Examiner. 1962 July 2. "Industrial Engineer" [classified advertisement]. 36. . 1966 June 26. "Big Koret Shipping Center." 25. . 1966 May 18. "$1 Million Bay Unit for Hexcel." 71. Seguin Gazette -Enterprise (Seguin, Texas). 1988 September 30. "Discovery Carries Hexcel Products." 1-2. Stockton Daily Evening Record. 1962 July 31. "Work Starts on Bay Area Plant." 4. Times Record News (Wichita Falls, Texas). 1970 April 10. "Apollo 13 Flight Materials Produced In Graham Plant." 5A. VerPlanck, Christopher. 2003a. "Department of Parks and Recreation form: 7100 San Ramon Road, The Springs Apartments, Alamilla Springs." P-01-010634, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. . 2003b. "Department of Parks and Recreation form: Dublin Pioneer Cemetery." P-01- 010637, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. . 2003c. "Department of Parks and Recreation form: Old St. Raymond's Church." P-01- 010635, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. . 2003d "Department of Parks and Recreation form: Old Murray School." P-01- 010636, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. . 2003e "Department of Parks and Recreation form: Green's Store." P-01-008150, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. . 2003f "Department of Parks and Recreation form: 11711 Dublin Boulevard." P-01- 010656, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. 239 City of Dublin Section 4: Energy HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 67 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Less Than Significant Potentially Impact with Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 4. ENERGY. Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Environmental Setting The proposed Project is located in the City of Dublin within Alameda County. Electric and natural gas services to Alameda County are provided by Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). In 2021, PG&E delivered approximately 78,588 gigawatt-hours of electricity within its service area (California Energy Commission 2023a). PG&E's total natural gas throughput was approximately 4,467 million therms in 2021 (California Energy Commission 2023b). PG&E provides power from a variety of sources: biomass and biowaste, geothermal, small and large hydroelectric, solar, wind, natural gas, and nuclear (PG&E 2021). In 2018, East Bay Community Energy (EBCE) began serving Dublin residential, business, and municipal electricity customers. To help meet the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions goals set in the City of Dublin's Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond (discussed below), the Dublin City Council voted in January 2021 to set the default electricity option for Dublin residences to EBCE's Renewable 100 service, which began in January 2022, and is sourced from California wind and solar facilities, including a new wind farm in Livermore. Customers can change their EBCE service or return to PG&E service at any time. All municipal electric accounts in Dublin have been powered by Renewable 100 since July 2019 (City of Dublin 2023). Transportation, such as gasoline and diesel fuel consumption, is also an energy -consuming sector, and applicable to the proposed Project (diesel and gasoline fuel consumption during construction and operational activities). Transportation is the largest energy -consuming sector in California, accounting for approximately 34 percent of all energy use in the state in 2020 (EIA 2022a). Historically, gasoline and diesel fuel accounted for nearly all transportation -related energy demand; now, however, numerous transportation power options are available, including ethanol, natural gas, electricity, and hydrogen. Nonetheless, despite advancements in alternative fuels and clean -vehicle technologies, gasoline and diesel remain the primary fuels used for transportation in California, with 12.7 billion gasoline gallon equivalents of petroleum (GGEs) consumed in 2021 and 3.7 billion GGEs of diesel consumed in 2020 (DOE 2023). 240 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 68 Regulatory Framework Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975. The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 established the first fuel economy standards for on -road motor vehicles sold in the United States. The National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration is responsible for establishing standards for vehicles and revising the existing standards. The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program was created to determine vehicle manufacturers' compliance with the fuel economy standards. The EPA administers the testing program that generates the fuel economy data. Energy Policy Acts of 1992 and 2005. The Energy Policy Act of 1992 was enacted to reduce dependence on imported petroleum and improve air quality by addressing all aspects of energy supply and demand, including alternative fuels, renewable energy, and energy efficiency. This law requires certain federal, state, and local government and private fleets to purchase alternate fuel vehicles. The act also defines "alternative fuels" to include fuels such as ethanol, natural gas, propane, hydrogen, electricity, and biodiesel. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was enacted on August 8, 2005. This law set federal energy management requirements for energy -efficient product procurement, energy savings performance contracts, building performance standards, renewable energy requirements, and use of alternative fuels. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 also amends existing regulations, including fuel economy testing procedures. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Signed into law in December 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act was enacted to increase the production of clean renewable fuels; increase the efficiency of products, buildings, and vehicles; improve the federal government's energy performance; and increase U.S. energy security, develop renewable fuel production, and improve vehicle fuel economy. The Energy Independence and Security Act included the first increase in fuel economy standards for passenger cars since 1975. The act also included a new energy grant program for use by local governments in implementing energy - efficiency initiatives, as well as a variety of green building incentives and programs. Light -Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. On May 7, 2010, the final Light -Duty Vehicle GHG Emissions Standards and CAFE Standards were published in the Federal Register. Phase 1 of the emissions standards required that model year 2012-2016 vehicles meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide (CO2) per mile, which is equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon, if the automobile industry were to meet this CO2 level solely through fuel economy improvements. On March 31, 2022, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration finalized the CAFE Standards for model years 2024-2026. The final rule establishes standards that would require an industry -wide fleet average of approximately 49 miles per gallon for passenger cars and light trucks in model year 2026, by increasing fuel efficiency by 8 percent annually for model years 2024 and 2025, and 10 percent annually for model year 2026. 241 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 69 Heavy -Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards. In September 2011, in response to a Presidential Memorandum issued in May 2010, EPA in coordination with National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHSTA) issued GHG emissions and fuel economy standards for medium and heavy duty trucks manufactured in model years 2014-2018, known as Phase 1 GHG Rule. In October 2016, EPA and NHTSA jointly finalized Phase 2 standards for medium- and heavy- duty vehicles through model year 2027 that will improve fuel efficiency and cut carbon pollution to reduce the impacts of climate change, while bolstering energy security and spurring manufacturing innovation. On December 20, 2022, EPA adopted a final rule, "Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Heavy -Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards," that sets stronger emissions standards to further reduce air pollution, including pollutants that create ozone and particulate matter, from heavy-duty vehicles and engines starting in model year 2027. The final program includes new, more stringent emissions standards that cover a wider range of heavy-duty engine operating conditions compared to today's standards, and it requires these more stringent emissions standards to be met for a longer period of time of when these engines operate on the road. This final rule is consistent with President Biden's Executive Order, "Strengthening American Leadership in Clean Cars and Trucks" and is the first step in the Clean Trucks Plan. City of Dublin General Plan. The City of Dublin General Plan, adopted in 1985 and amended in 2022, includes an Environmental Resources Management: Energy Conservation Element. The following implementing policies related to energy efficiency and conservation in new development would be applicable to the proposed Project (City of Dublin 2022): • New development proposals shall be reviewed to ensure lighting levels needed for a safe and secure environment are provided —utilizing the most energy -efficient fixtures (in most cases, [light emitting diode] LED lights) —while avoiding over -lighting of sites. Smart lighting technology (e.g. sensors and/or timers) shall also be employed in interior and exterior lighting applications where appropriate. • New development projects shall install LED streetlights in compliance with the City's LED light standard. • In new commercial and residential parking lots, require the installation of conduit to serve EV parking spaces to enable the easier installation of future charging stations. • Encourage the installation of charging stations for commercial projects over a certain size and any new residential project that has open parking (i.e. not individual, enclosed garages). • Encourage buildings (and more substantially, whole neighborhoods) to be designed along an east -west axis to maximize solar exposure. Where feasible, require new development projects to take advantage of shade, prevailing winds, landscaping and sun screens to reduce energy use; and to use regenerative energy heating and cooling source alternatives to fossil fuels. • Continue to implement parking lot tree planting standards that would substantially cool parking areas and help cool the surrounding environment. Encourage landscaping conducive to solar panels in areas where appropriate. 242 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 70 • Promote and encourage photovoltaic demonstration projects in association with new development. City of Dublin Climate Action Plan 2030. The City of Dublin adopted its Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond (CAP 2030) in September 2020, as a guiding document to identify ways in which the community and City can reduce GHG emissions, meet Dublin's long-term climate action goals, and promote a healthy, prosperous community. The CAP 2030 focuses on the following strategies: 100 percent renewable and carbon -free electricity; building efficiency and electrification; sustainable mobility and land use; materials and waste management; and municipal leadership measures (City of Dublin 2020). Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated) Energy efficiency is a possible indicator of environmental impacts. The actual adverse physical environmental effects of energy use and the efficiency of energy use are detailed throughout this EIR and the Initial Study in Appendix A in the environmental topic -specific sections. For example, the use of energy for transportation sources (including construction equipment and haul trucks) leads to GHG emissions, the impacts of which are addressed in Section 3.9, Greenhouse Gas Emissions. There is no physical environmental effect associated with energy use that is not addressed in the environmental topic -specific sections of this EIR and the Initial Study in Appendix A. The proposed Project activities would increase energy consumption for the duration of construction in the form of fossil fuels (e.g., gasoline, diesel fuel). Transportation energy use during construction would come from the transport and use of construction equipment (off - road), delivery and haul trucks (on -road), and construction employee passenger vehicles (on - road). Construction -related transportation energy use depends on the type and number of trips, vehicle miles traveled, fuel efficiency of vehicles, and travel mode. Most of the construction equipment used during demolition and construction activities would be gas- or diesel -powered equipment. The use of fuel by on -road and off -road vehicles would be temporary and would fluctuate according to the phase of construction. Construction fuel use under the proposed Project would cease upon completion of construction activities. The annual energy consumption was estimated using the CalEEMod CO2 emissions calculations for the proposed construction activities, application of the U.S. Energy Information Administration's CO2 emissions coefficients (EIA 2022b) to estimate fuel consumption for construction activities, and The Climate Registry's 2022 Default Emission Factors (The Climate Registry 2022) to estimate the energy content per fuel type. Additional modeling assumptions and more details are provided in Section 3.4, Air Quality, and Appendix D. Construction and operational energy consumption associated with the proposed Project is summarized in Table 7: Construction and Operational Energy Consumption. 243 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 71 Table 7: Construction and Operational Energy Consumption Energy Consuming Activity Energy Requirement Unit Annual Energy Consumption (MMBtu) Construction Diesel Consumption (amortized)1 1,278 gal/year 176 Construction Gasoline Consumption (amortized)' 201 gal/year 25 Construction Fuel Subtotal (amortized) 202 Building Electricity Consumption 2 1,209,922 kWh/year 4,128 Building Operations Energy Subtotal 4,128 Transportation Electricity Consumption 2 32,528 kWh/year 111 Transportation Diesel Consumption 2 6,174 gal/year 852 Transportation Gasoline Consumption 2 49,324 gal/year 6,166 Transportation Subtotal 7,128 Total Project Energy Requirement 11,458 Existing Land Uses Energy Requirement 12,236 Net Project Total - - (778) Notes: gal/year = gallons per year; kWh/year = kilowatt hours per year; MMBtu = million British thermal units 1Since construction -related energy demand would cease upon completion of construction, energy demand associated with construction of the proposed Project was amortized over the proposed Project lifetime. The assumed amortization period is 30 years, based on the typically assumed project lifetime based on other air districts (e.g., South Coast Air Quality Management District [2008]). 'The operational energy consumption estimates assumed the proposed Project would include 18,000 square feet of office space, 36,500 square feet of light industrial space, and 70,804 square feet of warehousing space. Based on the latest site plan, it is anticipated the proposed Project would include 18,000 square feet of office space, 30,000 square feet of light industrial space, and 77,304 square feet of warehousing space. As light industrial land uses generate higher daily vehicle trips than warehousing land uses, daily vehicle trips and the associated energy consumption due to fuel usage is anticipated to be lower (i.e., the energy estimates assumed the proposed Project would generate 494 daily trips, based on the 2022 Transportation Impact Study (W-Trans 2022); however, the proposed Project based on the updated site plan is anticipated to generate approximately 468 daily trips). Similarly, based on California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) default data, building energy consumption rates for light industrial land uses are higher than building energy consumption rates for warehousing space. As such, the energy consumption presented above is conservative since fuel consumption and electricity consumption would be lower. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would result in a higher net reduction in energy consumption compared to existing conditions. Based on the anticipated phasing of the construction activities, the anticipated equipment and construction work staff, the temporary nature of construction, and the project type, the proposed Project would not include unusual characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment that is less energy -efficient than the equipment used at comparable construction sites. In addition, construction contractors are required, in accordance with Mitigation Measure AQ- 1 and the CARB Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Diesel -Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling, to minimize the idling time of construction equipment and trucks by shutting equipment off when it's not in use or reducing the idling time to 5 minutes. Per Mitigation Measure AQ-1, construction contractors would also be required to maintain and properly tune all construction equipment in accordance with the manufacturer's specification. These required practices would limit wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption. 244 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 72 The proposed Project would redevelop an existing industrial building consisting of research and development land uses, with a new building approximately double the size of the existing building, consisting of office, warehouse, and light industrial land uses. Although the proposed Project is approximately double the size of the existing building, as shown in Table 7 the proposed Project would result in a net reduction in energy consumption, primarily related to improved building energy standards and eliminating natural gas infrastructure. Therefore, energy consumption associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project would not be inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary with Mitigation Measure AQ-1 incorporated. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation. (b) Conflict with local plan for renewable energy (No Impact) The proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct any state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency and there would be no impact. See the Initial Study in Appendix A for the complete analysis. Source(s) California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023a. 2021 Electricity Consumption by Entity: Pacific Gas & Electric Company. Available online: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyutil.aspx. Accessed February 2023. . 2023b. 2021 Gas Consumption by Entity: Pacific Gas & Electric Company. Available online: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbyutil.aspx. Accessed February 2023. City of Dublin. 2020. Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond. September. Available online: https://dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/24447/Climate-Action-Plan-2030-And- Beyond. Accessed March 2023. . 2022. General Plan. Available online: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30287/General-Plan-Update- 04192022-WEB. Accessed March 2023. . 2023. Energy. Available online: https://dublin.ca.gov/2032/Energy. Accessed March 2023. Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). 2021. Power Content Label. Available online: https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/4653. Accessed February 2023. South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2008. Draft Guidance Document — Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold. Available online: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)- ceqa-significance-thresholds/ghgboardsynopsis.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed February 2023. The Climate Registry. 2022. Default Emission Factor Document. May. Available online: https://theclimateregistry.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/2022-Default-Emission- Factors-Final.pdf. Accessed February 2023. 245 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 73 United States Department of Energy (DOE). 2023. Alternative Fuels Data Center: California Transportation Data for Alternative Fuels and Vehicles. Available online: https://afdc.energy.gov/states/ca. Accessed April 2023. United States Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2022a. State Profile and Energy Estimates: California. Available online: https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2. Accessed February 2023. . 2022b. Carbon Dioxide Emissions Coefficients. October. Available online: https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/co2 vol mass.php. Accessed February 2023. W Traffic Engineering Transportation Planning (W-Trans). 2022. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. December. 246 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 74 This page intentionally left blank 247 City of Dublin Section 5: Geology and Soils HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 75 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Less Than Significant Potentially Impact with Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 5. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial advers effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineate on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Faul Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to lif or property? e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d X X X X X X X X X 248 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR l Page 76 Environmental Setting Seismic Hazards The Project site is situated in a seismically active area within the Diablo Range, along the margin of the eastern Diablo Hills and the western edge of the Livermore Valley. The fault trace of the active Calaveras Fault is approximately 965 feet east of the Project site, and the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone associated with the Calaveras Fault is approximately 450 feet east of the Project site (DOC 2023). The active Pleasanton Fault is approximately 2.4 miles east of the Project site (Jennings and Bryant 2010). Other active faults in the Project region include a portion of the Las Positas Fault (approximately 11.7 miles to the southeast), the Greenville Fault (approximately 12.5 miles to the northeast), and the Hayward Fault Zone (approximately 7.3 miles to the southwest). The Project site is located within an Earthquake Zone of Required Investigation for liquefaction as delineated by the California Geological Survey (CGS) (DOC 2023). Soils Based on a review of Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey data, native soil at the Project site consists of the Yolo loam (calcareous substratum, 0 to 6 percent slopes) soil type (NRCS 2022). A preliminary geotechnical investigation was prepared for the proposed Project, which included four soil borings in the developed portion of the Project site north of Dublin Creek (Cornerstone Earth Group [Cornerstone] 2022). The results of soil borings indicated that the near -surface soils consist of undocumented artificial fill consisting of clay with variable amounts of sand and gravel, and clayey sand with gravel, to depths ranging from 1.5 to 5 feet below the ground surface (bgs). Below the artificial fill, clay with sand and silt was present to the maximum soil boring depth of 40 feet bgs. Paleontological Resources The near -surface soils at the Project site consist of artificial fill material to depths ranging from 1.5 to 5 feet bgs (Cornerstone 2022). Native sediments at the Project site beneath the artificial fill consist of the late Miocene to early Pliocene -age Contra Costa Group, which includes the Orinda and Moraga Formations. The Contra Costa Group is comprised of nonmarine sedimentary rocks including sandstone, conglomerate, shale, and minor claystone, limestone, and tuff (Wagner et al. 1991). A search of the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP) database indicates there are over 40 recorded vertebrate fossil sites from within the Contra Costa Group (UCMP 2023). Most of these sites are in Contra Costa County; however, five of the sites are within Alameda County. The closest recorded vertebrate fossil site from within the Contra Costa Group is Bolenas Creek, approximately 6.5 miles northwest of the Project site (UCMP 2023). 249 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 77 Paleontological Sensitivity Analysis A paleontologically sensitive geologic formation is one that is rated high for potential paleontological productivity (i.e., the recorded abundance and types of fossil specimens, and the number of previously recorded fossil sites) and is known to have produced unique, scientifically important fossils. Exposures of a specific geologic formation at any given Project site are most likely to yield fossil remains representing particular species or quantities similar to those previously recorded from that geologic formation in other locations. Therefore, the paleontological sensitivity determination of a rock formation is based primarily on the types and numbers of fossils that have been previously recorded from that formation. In its standard guidelines for assessment and mitigation of adverse impacts on paleontological resources, the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP 2010) established four categories of sensitivity for paleontological resources: high, low, no, and undetermined. Areas where fossils have been previously found are considered to have a high sensitivity and a high potential to produce fossils. Areas that are not sedimentary in origin and that have not been known to produce fossils in the past typically are considered to have low sensitivity. Areas consisting of high-grade metamorphic rocks (e.g., gneisses and schists) and plutonic igneous rocks (e.g., granites and diorites) are considered to have no sensitivity. Areas that have not had any previous paleontological resource surveys or fossil finds are considered to be of undetermined sensitivity until surveys are performed. After reconnaissance surveys, a qualified paleontologist can determine whether the area of undetermined sensitivity should be categorized as having high, low, or no sensitivity. In keeping with the SVP significance criteria, all vertebrate fossils are generally categorized as being of potentially significant scientific value. The near -surface artificial fill consists of materials that were excavated from another location, transported to the Project site, and then graded and compacted. During the excavation and subsequent construction process, any fossils that may have been present in the original materials would have been destroyed. Therefore, the artificial fill is not paleontologically sensitive. Because of the large number of vertebrate fossils that have been recovered from the Contra Costa Group, it is considered to be of high paleontological sensitivity. Regulatory Framework Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Alquist-Priolo Act) (PRC Sections 2621-2630) was passed in 1972 to reduce the hazard of surface faulting to structures designed for human occupancy. The Alquist-Priolo Act requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones known as Earthquake Fault Zones around the surface traces of active faults and to issue appropriate maps. Before a project can be permitted in a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, cities and counties must require a geologic investigation to demonstrate that proposed structures would not be constructed across active faults. 250 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 78 Seismic Hazards Mapping Act The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 (PRC Sections 2690-2699.6) addresses earthquake hazards from non -surface fault rupture, including liquefaction and seismically induced landslides. The act established a mapping program for areas that have the potential for liquefaction, landslide, strong ground shaking, or other earthquake and geologic hazards. The act also specifies that the lead agency for a project may withhold development permits until geologic or soils investigations are conducted for specific sites and mitigation measures are incorporated into plans to reduce hazards associated with seismicity and unstable soils. California Building Standards Code The California Building Standards Code (CBC) (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) provides minimum standards for building design in California. The CBC applies to building design and construction in the state and is based on the federal Uniform Building Code (UBC) used widely throughout the country (generally adopted on a state -by -state or district -by -district basis). The CBC has been modified for California conditions with numerous more detailed or more stringent regulations. The State earthquake protection law (California Health and Safety Code, Section 19100 et seq.) requires that structures be designed to resist stresses produced by lateral forces caused by earthquakes. The CBC requires that any structure designed for a project site undergo a seismic design evaluation that assigns the structure to one of six categories, A—F; Category F structures require the most earthquake -resistant design. The CBC philosophy focuses on "collapse prevention," meaning that structures are to be designed to prevent collapse during the maximum level of ground shaking that could reasonably be expected to occur at a site. CBC Chapter 16 specifies exactly how each seismic -design category is to be determined on a site -specific basis, based on site -specific soil characteristics and proximity to potential seismic hazards. CBC Chapter 18 regulates the analysis of expansive soils, slope instability, liquefaction, and surface rupture attributable to faulting or lateral spreading, along with an evaluation of lateral pressures on basement and retaining walls, liquefaction and loss of soil strength, and lateral movement or reduction of the foundation's soil -bearing capacity. Dublin Municipal Code Section Chapter 7.16, Grading Regulations The City of Dublin Grading Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 7.16) requires a geologic/soil investigation report, preliminary grading plans, proposed provisions for storm drainage control, and any existing or proposed flood control in the vicinity of the grading. A conceptual plan for erosion and sediment control is also required, including both temporary facilities and long-term site stabilization features such as planting or seeding for the area affected by the proposed grading. Chapter 7.16 prohibits grading operations during the rainy season except upon a clear demonstration, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, that at no stage of the work will there be any substantial risk of increased sediment discharge from the site. Should grading be permitted during the rainy season, the smallest practicable area of erodible land must be exposed at any one time during grading operations and the time of exposure must be minimized. 251 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 79 City of Dublin General Plan Chapter 8.0 of the City of Dublin General Plan outlines policies and programs related to seismic safety, safety and emergency preparedness. The following policies related to geology and soils are applicable to the proposed project: • Guiding Policy 8.2.1.A.1. Geologic hazards shall be mitigated or development shall be located away from geologic hazards in order to preserve life, protect property, and reasonably limit the financial risks to the City of Dublin and other public agencies that would result from damage to poorly located public facilities. • Implementing Policy 8.2.1.B.1. Structural and Grading Requirements a. All structures shall be designed to the standards delineated in the Dublin Building Code and Dublin's Grading Ordinance. A "design earthquake" shall be established by an engineering geologist for each structure for which ground shaking is a significant design factor. b. Structures intended for human occupancy shall be at least 50 feet from any active fault trace; freestanding garages and storage structures may be as close as 25 feet. These distances may be reduced based on adequate exploration to accurately locate the fault trace. Generally, facilities should not be built astride potential rupture zones, although certain low risk facilities may be considered. Critical facilities that must cross a fault, such as oil, gas, and water lines, shall be designed to accommodate the maximum expected offset from fault rupture. Site specific evaluations shall determine the maximum credible offset. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Seismic hazards (No Impact to Less than Significant Impact) The impact from seismic hazards such as seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, lateral spreading, landslides and settlement would be less than significant. There would be no impact related to surface fault rupture as the Project site is not in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. See the Initial Study in Appendix A for the complete analysis. (b) Erosion/topsoil loss (Less than Significant) The Project applicant is required by law to prepare a SWPPP and implement site -specific BMPs specifically designed to prevent erosion. Furthermore, the Project applicant is required to implement the provisions of City Municipal Code Chapter 7.16, which require grading and drainage plans that identify measures to reduce erosion, and which generally prohibits grading activities during the winter rainy season. Therefore, impacts from construction -related soil erosion would be less than significant. See the Initial Study in Appendix A for the complete analysis. (c-d) Soil stability (Less Than Significant Impact) Design review performed through the City's permitting process would ensure compliance with the requirements of the CBC and the City's building standards. Therefore, because the Project 252 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 80 would implement measures to comply with the CBC and the City's building standards, impacts from construction and operation related to unstable soils and soil expansion would be less than significant. See the Initial Study in Appendix A for the complete analysis. (e) Soil capability to support wastewater disposal, including septic (No Impact) The proposed Project would not require installation of a septic system or alternative wastewater disposal system; therefore, there would be no impact from Project construction or operation. See the Initial Study in Appendix A for the complete analysis. (f) Unique geologic feature/paleontological resources (No Impact to Less Than Significant With Mitigation) Unique Geologic Feature A unique geologic feature consists of a major natural element that stands out in the landscape, such as a large and scenic river, gorge, waterfall, volcanic cinder cone, lava field, or glacier. There are no unique geologic features at the Project site or within the Project viewshed. Thus, there would be no impact to unique geologic features from Project construction or operation. Paleontological Resources — Construction As discussed previously, the Project site is composed of artificial fill to depths ranging from 1.5 to 5 feet, with native Contra Costa Group sediments below the fill. Most grading and earthmoving activities at the Project site would extend to a maximum depth of 2 to 3 feet below the ground surface, and therefore would generally be confined to the artificial fill material, which is not paleontologically sensitive. However, in areas where the artificial fill only extends to 1.5 feet, excavation and grading would encounter the native Contra Costa Group materials, which are of high paleontological sensitivity. Furthermore, excavation to a maximum depth of approximately 12 feet would occur at the proposed on -site stormwater drainage pumps, which would also encounter the paleontologically sensitive Contra Costa Group materials. Therefore, project -related earthmoving activities could result in accidental damage to, or destruction of unique paleontological resources, and this impact would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Avoid Impacts to Unique Paleontological Resources. To minimize the potential for destruction of or damage to previously unknown unique, scientifically important paleontological resources during earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall do the following: Prior to the start of earthmoving activities, retain either a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist to inform all construction personnel involved with earthmoving activities regarding the possibility of encountering fossils, the appearance and types of fossils likely to be seen during construction, and proper notification procedures should fossils be encountered. 253 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 81 If paleontological resources are discovered during earthmoving activities, the construction crew shall immediately cease work within 50 feet of the find and notify the Project applicant and the City. The Project applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist to evaluate the resource and prepare a recovery plan, based on SVP Guidelines. The recovery plan may include, but is not limited to, a field survey, construction monitoring, sampling and data recovery procedures, museum curation for any specimen recovered, and a report of findings. Recommendations in the recovery plan that are determined by the City (as the CEQA lead agency) to be necessary and feasible shall be implemented before construction activities can resume within 50 feet of the site where the paleontological resource or resources were discovered. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce potential impacts to unique paleontological resources because construction workers would be alerted to the possibility of encountering paleontological resources and, in the event that resources were discovered, construction would be halted, and fossil specimens would be recovered and recorded and would undergo appropriate curation. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, potential construction -related impacts to unique paleontological resources would be less than significant with mitigation. Paleontological Resources — Operation Because Project operation would not involve ground -disturbing activities, there would be no impact to unique paleontological resources. Source(s) California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2023. DOC Maps Data Viewer —Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, and Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones. Available: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/DataViewer/. Accessed January 11, 2023. Cornerstone Earth Group (Cornerstone). 2022. Geotechnical Investigation, Dublin Boulevard Industrial, 11711 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California. Cornerstone Project No. 681-12-1. Sunnyvale, CA. Jennings, C.W. and W.A. Bryant. 2010. 2010 Fault Activity Map of California. Available: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/App/index.html. Accessed January 11, 2022. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. Web Soil Survey. Available: http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm. Accessed January 11, 2022. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). 2010. Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee. 254 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 82 University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP). 2023. Paleontological Collections Database. Available: https://ucmpdb.berkeley.edu/about.shtml. Accessed January 25, 2022. Wagner, D.L., E.J. Bortugno, and R.D. McJunkin. 1991. Geologic Map of the San Francisco -San Jose Quadrangle, California, 1:250,000. Regional Geologic Map Series, Map No. 5A. California Division of Mines and Geology. Sacramento, CA. 255 City of Dublin Section 6: Hazards and Hazardous Materials HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 83 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Less Than Significant Potentially Impact with Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 6. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the proj a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 1/4 mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Environmental Setting ?ct: X X X X X X 1 x The Project site has been used since the 1960s as a research and development facility, which tests epoxy resins and composites primarily for aerospace and other applications. The laboratories were used for small-scale testing, while the building located south of the offices/laboratories (referred to by Hexcel as the "Hi Bay") was used to test larger quantities of carbon fiber plates. Part of the research activities include testing prefabricated prototype 256 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 84 carbon fiber plates. The research activities include chemical testing and reactions of the carbon fiber plates, as well as climate or extreme condition testing of the plates including extreme heat, cold, pressure, and electrical conditions, and stress testing. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was performed by Ardent Environmental Group (Ardent) in 2022. The main chemicals used at the site include petroleum oils and lubricants, non -chlorinated solvents, metals (such as chromium and aluminum), and acids. According to waste records and a 1994 chemical inventory, historical chemical uses included halogenated solvents, including 1,1,1- trichloroethane (1,1,1-TCA) and trichloroethene (TCE). Small containers of the different testing chemicals were stored in approximately 10 fire cabinets in a designated Hazardous Waste and Storage Area, while larger quantities of virgin chemicals and wastes were stored in 55-gallon drums in the Hazardous Waste and Storage Area. The following areas of concern were noted in the Phase I ESA (Ardent 2022). • Area of Chemical Use, Storage, and/or Handling. Chemicals are used, stored, and/or handled in the laboratories (existing and historical), Hi Bay area, and within the hazardous waste and storage area of the site. • Former 500-Gallon Waste Chromic Acid Underground Storage Tank (UST, Abandoned In - Place in 1988). This Underground Storage Tank (UST) was located immediately east of the Hi Bay portion of the building and was used to containerize waste acid wash reportedly consisting of deionized water, sulfuric acid, and sodium dichromate generated from the etching of aluminum panels. Soil and groundwater in the vicinity of this UST were investigated in the late 1980s under the direction and oversight of the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH). Laboratory results indicated no detectable to low concentrations of hexavalent chromium, trivalent chromium, and aluminum. Based on these results, ACDEH allowed Hexcel to abandon the UST in -place by filling the tank with a cement slurry. • Recently Removed 520-Gallon Waste Chromic Acid UST (2021). This UST was formerly located immediately east of the on -site hazardous waste and storage area and accepted waste from accidental spills from this area. Floor drains in the hazardous waste and storage area directed any accidental spills of chemicals to the tank. The UST was removed in April 2021 under the direction and oversight of the ACDEH. Following removal, two soil samples were collected from within the UST excavation. Laboratory results indicated no detectable concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons, and no detectable to low concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), namely acetone, at levels that were well below federal and state thresholds. Based on these results, the ACDEH issued a No Further Action letter dated July 20, 2021. • Asbestos and Lead -Based Paint. The eastern portion of the existing building was constructed in 1962, with subsequent additions over the years. Based on the age of the building, Ardent (2022) concluded that asbestos -containing materials (ACMs) and lead - based paint are likely present. As part of the Phase I ESA, Ardent (2022) retained Environmental Database Report (EDR) to perform a search of federal, State, and tribal hazardous materials databases, and retained Antea Group to perform a review of identified hazardous materials sites near the Project site. 257 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 85 The database searches included those sites that are identified as part of the Cortese List. The Project is listed in the SWRCB's GeoTracker database as a Cleanup Program Site; however, cleanup program sites are not considered part of the Cortese List. No hazardous materials sites were determined to represent a hazard for the proposed Project (Ardent 2022). Regulatory Framework California Occupational Safety and Health Administration The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) has the primary responsibility for developing and enforcing workplace safety regulations within California. The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration enforces hazard communication program regulations that contain training and information requirements, including procedures for identifying and labeling hazardous substances, communicating hazard information related to hazardous substances and their handling, and preparation of health and safety plans to protect workers and employees at hazardous waste sites. Cal/OSHA regulations also include requirements for protective clothing, training, and limits on exposure to hazardous materials. Cal/OSHA also enforces occupational health and safety regulations specific to lead (CCR Title 8 Section 1532.1) and asbestos (CCR Title 8 Section 1529) investigation and abatement. California Department of Toxic Substances Control The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) implements the State's hazardous waste management program for the California Environmental Protection Agency. DTSC has the primary regulatory responsibility, with delegation of enforcement to local jurisdictions that enter into agreements with DTSC, for the management of hazardous materials (including remediation) and the generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous waste under the authority of California's Hazardous Waste Control Law (California Health and Safety Code Section 25100, et seq.). San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board The San Francisco Bay RWQCB is authorized by the State Water Resources Control Board to enforce provisions of the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969. This act gives the San Francisco Bay RWQCB authority to require groundwater investigations when the quality of groundwater or surface waters of the state is threatened and to require remediation of the site, if necessary. Hazardous Waste Transportation Statutory requirements governing hazardous waste transportation in California are contained in the California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5, Articles 6.5, 6.6, and 13. Hazardous waste transporters must have a valid registration permit issued by DTSC. In addition, hazardous waste transporters must comply with a variety of other State and federal regulations, including the California Vehicle Code (CCR Title 13); California State Fire Marshal Regulations (CCR Title 19); U.S. Department of Transportation regulations (Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations); and USEPA regulations (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations). 258 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 86 Bay Area Air Quality Management District BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2, adopted December 15, 1976, regulates hazardous pollutants from asbestos demolition, renovation, and manufacturing activities. The purpose of the rule is to control emissions of asbestos to the atmosphere during demolition, renovation, milling and manufacturing and establish appropriate waste disposal procedures. The rule sets out specific procedures to be followed and methods for reducing hazards from asbestos -containing materials during such activities. Senate Bill 1082 — California Environmental Protection Agency's Unified Program In 1993, Senate Bill 1082 gave the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) the authority and responsibility to establish a unified hazardous waste and hazardous materials management and regulatory program, commonly referred to as the Unified Program. The Unified Program is overseen by CalEPA with support from DTSC, RWQCBs, the Office of Emergency Services (OES), and the State Fire Marshal. The purpose of this program is to consolidate and coordinate hazardous materials and hazardous waste programs, and to ensure that they are consistently implemented throughout the state. The Unified Program includes: Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventories (Business Plans), California Accidental Release Prevention Program, Underground Storage Tank Program, Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act Program, Hazardous Waste Generator and Onsite Hazardous Waste Treatment (tiered permitting) Programs, and California Uniform Fire Code Hazardous Material Management Plans and Hazardous Material Inventory Statements. State law requires county and local agencies to implement the Unified Program. The agency in charge of implementing the program is called the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). The Alameda County Department of Environmental Health is the designated CUPA for the county. In addition to the CUPA, other local agencies, such as the City of Dublin, help to implement the Unified Program. City of Dublin General Plan Section 8.3.4 of the General Plan outlines policies and programs related to hazards and hazardous materials. The following policies related to hazardous materials are applicable to the proposed Project: • Guiding Policy 8.3.4.1.A.1. Maintain and enhance the ability to regulate the use, transport, and storage of hazardous materials and to quickly identify substances and take appropriate action during emergencies. • Guiding Policy 8.3.4.1.A.2. Minimize the risk of exposure to hazardous materials from contaminated sites. • Implementing Policy 8.3.4.1.B.4. Require site -specific hazardous materials studies for new development projects where there is a potential for the presence of hazardous materials from previous uses on the site. If hazardous materials are found, require the clean-up of sites to acceptable regulatory standards prior to development. 259 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 87 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Exposure to hazardous materials (Less than Significant Impact) Since local, state and federal regulations will be complied with during project construction and operation, these impacts will be less than significant. See the Initial Study in Appendix A for the complete analysis. (b) Upset/Accident (Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated) GeoTracker case no. T0600191495 for Hexcel Corporation was related to the former 500-gallon waste chromic acid UST that was abandoned in place in 1988 (discussed above in the Environmental Setting). The case was closed in 2008. Per the ACDEH, when this UST is encountered during demolition it can be removed and disposed of as construction debris (Ardent 2022). With regards to the 520-gallon waste chromic acid UST that was removed in 2021, because contaminants in soil samples in the tank vicinity were very low (well below regulatory thresholds), the ACDEH issued a No Further Action letter. Thus, the very minor soil contamination does not represent a human health or environmental hazard. Ardent (2022) recommended that a subsurface investigation should be completed in the vicinity of the on -site areas of chemical use, storage, and handling to assess whether a release has occurred. If soil or groundwater have been previously contaminated at levels that exceed regulatory thresholds, this would represent a significant human health and environmental hazard because excavation work would be required during construction that could release these hazardous materials. Furthermore, the demolition of the existing building could expose workers and the environment to hazardous materials such as lead paint and/or asbestos. Therefore, these construction -related impacts are considered potentially significant. Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-1: Perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment. • Prior to the start of earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall retain the services of a qualified remediation firm to perform a Phase 11 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA). The Phase 11 ESA shall be limited to only those areas where chemical use, storage, and handling have previously occurred. Soil borings shall be obtained as part of the Phase 11 ESA, along with groundwater samples if necessary. The samples shall be submitted to a laboratory for environmental testing and the results shall be reported in the Phase 11 ESA, copies of which shall be provided to the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH) and the City of Dublin Building Department. If there are no detections of constituents of concern, or the amounts are below regulatory agency threshold levels, no further actions shall be required. 260 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 88 • If the results of laboratory analyses from the Phase 11 ESA demonstrate that constituents of concern are present at levels that exceed regulatory agency threshold levels, the Project applicant shall consult with ACDEH (and other regulatory agencies such as the SWRCB if necessary) regarding the necessary actions for remediation. All necessary remedial activities shall be completed by the Project applicant, with a certification by the lead agency with remedial oversight (e.g., ACDEH or SWRCB) that no further action is required, prior to the start of construction activities at the Project site. Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-2: Perform Sampling of Materials To Be Demolished. Prior to demolition of any building in the project area, the building shall be sampled to determine if the building contains lead paint and/or asbestos. If either of the materials are determined to be present, they shall be handled and disposed of as a hazardous material and in compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations. Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-1 would reduce potential impacts from exposure to on -site hazardous materials because soil (and groundwater, if necessary) testing would be performed, and if contamination is found to be present, any necessary remediation would be completed prior to the start of Project -related earthmoving activities. Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-2 would sample materials before demolition would occur, and if hazardous materials such as lead paint and asbestos are to be found, the would be handled and disposed in compliance to applicable regulations. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-1 and HAZMAT-2, potential construction -related impacts from accidental exposure to hazardous materials would be less than significant with mitigation. Any use of hazardous materials during project operation would be required to comply with the manufacturer's labeling instructions and (if applicable) would be required to prepare Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventories (Business Plans) comply with the requirements of Hazardous Waste Generator (tiered permitting) Programs. Therefore, upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment during Project operation would be less than significant during project operation. (c) Hazardous materials near schools (No Impact) There are no K-12 schools within 0.5 mile of the Project site. Thus, Project construction and operation would result in no impact from handling of hazardous materials near a school. See Initial Study in Appendix A. (d) Hazardous materials list (No Impact) Because the Project site is not listed on the Cortese list, there would be no impact. See Initial Study in Appendix A. (e) Proximity to a public airport (No Impact) The Livermore Municipal Airport is approximately 6 miles east of the Project site and outside of the airport's Airport Influence Area (Alameda County 2012). Thus, Project construction and 261 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 89 operation would result in no impact from airport safety or noise hazards. See Initial Study in Appendix A. (f) Impair implementation of an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan (No Impact) All construction materials would be staged on -site, and therefore no temporary lane closures along Dublin Boulevard would be required during Project construction that could impede emergency access or hinder emergency evacuation. For Project operation, planned emergency access throughout the Project site would be reviewed by the City of Dublin Building Department and the Fire Department to ensure that appropriate widths and turning radii area are provided for emergency vehicles. Thus, Project construction and operation would result in no impact from impairment of emergency response or evacuation plans. See Initial Study in Appendix A. (g) Expose people or structures to wildland fires (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed building would be constructed according to CBC, the California Fire Code and City of Dublin codes, and ordinances and regulations to minimize fire hazards, including fire prevention and suppression measures; fire hydrants and sprinkler systems; emergency access; and other similar requirements. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. See Initial Study in Appendix A. Source(s) Alameda County. 2012. Livermore Executive Airport. Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Ardent Environmental Group, Inc. 2022. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Hexcel Corporation Facility, 11711 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California. Ardent Project No. 101327001. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2023. GeoTracker. Available: https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/. Accessed January 17, 2023. 262 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 90 This page intentionally left blank 263 City of Dublin Section 7: Tribal Cultural Resources HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 91 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Significant Less Than and Significant Unavoidabl Impact with e Mitigation Impact Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact 7. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision I of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. x The analysis in this section considers impacts to tribal cultural resources associated with the implementation of the proposed Project. This section includes a brief summary of available ethnographic background information, the results of consultation with two California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the proposed Project area, and the Project's potential impacts on tribal cultural resources. Environmental Setting The Project site is located in the Amador Valley, along the north bank of Dublin Creek. The modern address is 11711 Dublin Boulevard, located in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California. The property is approximately 8.81 acres. The project site is located within the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, with the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery to the east; 1-580 to the south; and a business park to the west. Dublin Creek borders the north side of the property. Ethnographic Context The project area is within the tribal territory of the Chochenyo Ohlone (Milliken et al. 2007). The Ohlone are a linguistically defined group, comprised of several autonomous groups that spoke at least eight different but related languages. The territory of the Ohlone people extends along the coast from the San Francisco Bay to the Big Sur River and 50 to 60 miles east, 264 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 92 including the valleys that make up the Tri-Valley area, where the City of Dublin is now located (Levy 1978:485-486). At the time of contact, the Ohlone were semi -sedentary hunters and gatherers. Controlled burning was regularly conducted to modify the landscape and optimize resource production. The Ohlone used tule balsas for watercraft, and bows and arrows, cordage, and bone and groundstone tools to procure and process foodstuffs. They hunted terrestrial game, such as mule deer, tule elk, and pronghorn antelope. Traps were set for smaller game, such as rabbit and quail. Grasshoppers and other insect foods were collected during group drives. Waterfowl were a very important part of the diet and were trapped along the tidal marshes. Freshwater fish and marine resources, such as salmon, steelhead, school fish, shellfish, and kelp, were harvested and traded. Plant foods were also very important, including acorns, buckeyes, nuts, seeds, roots, tubers, berries, and fruits (Levy 1978:491-493, Lightfoot and Parrish 2009). The Ohlone were politically organized in autonomous, extended communities of approximately 200 to 400 people, each having a designated territory. Each group typically included three to five semi -permanent villages (Milliken et al. 2007). Kroeber referred to these groups as "tribelets" (Kroeber 1925). At the time of contact, the Pelnen Tribe lived in the western Livermore Valley, in the area of Pleasanton and south Dublin. The Seunen Tribe lived in north Dublin, up to the San Ramon area (Milliken 1995). Both the Pelnen and Seunen are part of the larger Chochenyo Ohlone linguistic group (Milliken et al. 2007). Despite independent governance, these "triblets" were a network for trade and were often interlinked by marriage. The role of chief could be held by a man or a woman. Duties of the chief included providing for visitors, directing ceremonial activities, and leading fishing, hunting, gathering, and warfare expeditions. The chief served as the leader of a council of elders, who were advisors to the community (Levy 1978). Ohlone villages in the Late Period included domed houses with central hearths, thatched with tule, grass, or other vegetal material and bound with strong, flexible willow branches. Permanent settlements were usually placed on high ground. Sweathouses were built along streambanks, and were semi -subterranean with a thatched domed roof. Dance houses were large, circular or oval domed structures, also with thatched walls and roof. Villages also typically included an assembly house which was large enough to accommodate all the inhabitants of the village (Levy 1978). Regulatory Framework Tribal cultural resources include sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects, with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, that are also included in or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or included in a local register of historical resources. (PRC 21074 (a)(1)). Tribal cultural resources may also be resources that are determined by a lead agency such as the City of Dublin, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to the historical register criteria. (PRC 21074 (a)(2), citing (PRC 5024.1). In those cases, the lead agency 265 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 93 considers the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe in making its determination. Tribal cultural resources may contain physical cultural items or may be places or contributing elements within a tribal cultural resources landscape, such as gathering places, sacred sites, landscape features, culturally significant plants, or other locations that are related to the religious and cultural practices, traditions, beliefs, lifeways, arts, crafts, or social institutions of a living tribal community. This category of resources under CEQA recognizes that tribes may have unique knowledge, expertise, and information about tribal cultural resources that are important to the self-identity of tribal nations that can only be identified by the relevant tribe, thus requiring consultation under CEQA pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 52. Historical resources, unique archaeological resources, or non -unique archaeological resources may also be tribal cultural resources if they meet the criteria of PRC 21074. State California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires lead agencies to consider whether projects would impact tribal cultural resources as a separate category of environmental analysis. Tribal cultural resources may or may not also be archaeological or historical resources. For clarity, archaeological and historical resources are addressed in the cultural resources chapter. In some cases, tribal cultural resources are viewsheds, cultural landscapes, plant gathering areas, or other sacred spaces that are not readily identifiable to people outside of the Tribe. In many cases, tribal cultural resources also include an archaeological component, such as artifacts, features, and sites (with or without human remains). PRC section 21074 states the following: a) "Tribal cultural resources" are either of the following: (1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following: (A) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources. (B) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1. (2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. b) A cultural landscape that meets the criteria of subdivision (a) is a tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape. c) A historical resource described in Section 21084.1, a unique archaeological resource as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 21083.2, or a "nonunique archaeological resource" 266 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 94 as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 21083.2 may also be a tribal cultural resource if it conforms with the criteria of subdivision (a). California Health and Safety Code California law protects Native American burials, skeletal remains, and associated grave goods, regardless of their antiquity, and provides for the sensitive treatment and disposition of those remains. Health and Safety Code section 7050.5 requires that if human remains are discovered in any place other than a dedicated cemetery, no further disturbance or excavation of the site or nearby area reasonably suspected to contain human remains can occur until the county coroner has examined the remains (Section 7050.5b). PRC sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 also outline the process to be followed in the event that human remains are discovered. If the coroner determines or has reason to believe the remains are those of a Native American, the coroner must contact the California NAHC within 24 hours (Section 7050.5c). The NAHC is responsible for the notification of the MLD. With the permission of the landowner, the MLD may inspect the site of discovery. The inspection must be completed within 48 hours of notification of the MLD by the NAHC. The MLD may recommend means of treating or disposition of, with appropriate dignity, the Native American human remains, and any cultural or funerary items associated with Native American people. Assembly Bill 52 AB 52 (effective July 1, 2015) added PRC sections 21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2, and 21084.3 to CEQA, relating to consultation with California Native American tribes, consideration of tribal cultural resources, and confidentiality. AB 52 provides procedural and substantive requirements for lead agency consultation with California Native American tribes and consideration of impacts on tribal cultural resources, as well as examples of mitigation measures to avoid or minimize impacts to tribal cultural resources. AB 52 establishes that if a project may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, that project may have a significant effect on the environment. Lead agencies must avoid damaging impacts to tribal cultural resources, when feasible, and shall keep information submitted by tribes confidential unless the information is deemed publicly available by the tribe. AB 52 requires a lead agency to consult with California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project, if the tribe requested to the lead agency, in writing, to be informed by the lead agency of proposed projects in that geographic area and the tribe requests consultation. Section 21080.3.1(d) states that within 14 days of determining that an application for a project is complete or a decision by a public agency to undertake a project, the lead agency shall provide formal notification to the designated contact of, or tribal representative of, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice, which shall be accomplished by means of at least one written notification that includes a brief description of the proposed project and its location, the lead agency's contact information, and a notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to request consultation. 267 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 95 Previous CEQA Documents The City of Dublin hired the archaeological firm WSA in 2003 to prepare an Archaeological Assessment Report of the Donlon Way Specific Plan (later renamed the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan area). A record search at the NWIC, conducted by WSA, did not identify any previously recorded archaeological sites within the Specific Plan area boundaries, but one new archaeological site was recorded during the pedestrian survey and Archeological High Probability areas were also identified within the Specific Plan area boundaries. The Archaeological Assessment Report concluded that there is a moderate -to -high -probability of identifying Native American archeological resources within the Specific Plan area boundaries. The City of Dublin hired the architectural firm Page & Turnbull, Inc. in 2003 to prepare the Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project that was finalized in 2004. The city contracted with Page & Turnbull to identify and map historic resources in an approximately 38-acre area for a future Specific Plan for the Donlon Way area (later renamed the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan) and to prepare preservation recommendations. Page & Turnbull prepared a historic context of the Dublin Village area and recorded all of the properties in the survey area on DPR 523 A and B forms. The Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan was adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006 under Resolution No. 149-06 and relied on the findings of the Archaeological Assessment Report of the Donlon Way Specific Plan and the Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project. The approximately 38-acre Specific Plan area included the two project site parcels. Subsequently, three Specific Plan addendum and amendments have been prepared for the Specific Plan. City Council determined that no new significant impacts were identified by the addendums or amendments, and no further environmental analysis was required. Context for Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures The impact analysis for tribal cultural resources for this proposed Project is based on government -to -government consultation with the City of Dublin and the Confederated Villages of Lisjan and lone Band of Miwok Indians tribes, both of whom had previously requested notification about projects within the City of Dublin, pursuant to AB 52. Additionally, the results of the records search and archaeological field survey were considered to help establish whether tribal cultural resources may be present in the proposed Project area and if so, if they would be impacted by Project development and implementation. The analysis is also informed by the provisions and requirements of federal and state laws and regulations that apply to tribal cultural resources. This section includes the thresholds of significance used in evaluating the impacts, the methods used in conducting the analysis, and the evaluation of proposed Project impacts. If significant impacts are identified, then appropriate mitigation measures are provided. Methods A records search was conducted on December 20, 2022, at the California Historical Resources Information System's NWIC in Rohnert Park, California to identify updates to previously 268 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 96 completed cultural resources reports or studies within a 0.25-mile radius of the proposed Project site. No tribal cultural resources or pre -contact archaeological resources were identified by the records search within the proposed Project site or within the 0.25-mile search buffer. An archaeological survey of the proposed Project site was conducted on December 16, 2022, by AECOM Archaeologist Karen Gardner. The survey focused on unpaved areas of proposed disturbance, to determine if pre -European contact, surficial resources (e.g., dark midden soils, processed shell or bone, lithics, or groundstone artifacts) were present. The backdirt of animal burrows was also examined for cultural constituents. No pre -European contact cultural resources were identified by the archaeological survey. Consultation with California Native American Tribes AB 52 provides procedural and substantive requirements for lead agency consultation with California Native American tribes and consideration of impacts on tribal cultural resources, as well as examples of mitigation measures to avoid or minimize impacts to tribal cultural resources. Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows Tribal Governments and lead agencies to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. The intent of consultation is to provide an opportunity for interested California Native American Tribal Governments to work together with the City of Dublin during the proposed Project planning process to identify, avoid, protect and mitigate impacts to tribal cultural resources. On April 10, 2023, the City of Dublin sent inquiry letters to the following Native American Tribal Governments, who had previously requested notification about projects in the City of Dublin, pursuant to AB 52: • The Confederated Villages of Lisjan • The lone Band of Miwuk Indians Neither tribe responded to the invitation to consultation on tribal cultural resources. Thresholds of Significance The significance criteria used to evaluate a Project's impacts to tribal cultural resources under CEQA are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, commonly known as the Initial Study Checklist. An impact is considered significant if development under the proposed Project would result in one or more of the following conditions: • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in PRC § 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: 269 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 97 Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC § 5020.1(k), or A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC § 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Project Impacts and Mitigation (a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (No Impact) On December 7, 2022, AECOM sent a request to the NAHC for a search of the Sacred Lands File, asking if there was any record of traditional cultural resources within the project area. On December 13, 2022, a response was received from the NAHC, indicating that the search had negative results. No listed Tribal Cultural Resources are within the Project Area of Potential Effects (APE)1, therefore there will be no impact to listed Tribal Cultural Resources, as discussed in the Initial Study in Appendix A. (b) Significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 (Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated) The proposed Project would include excavation of the parking lot to the south of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, which is adjacent to the marked boundary of the Pioneer Cemetery. Marked grave sites in the cemetery are within five feet of the Hexcel property fence. Historic documents suggest that the cemetery was larger than the currently marked boundary (Freudenhem 1977). Additionally, there is anecdotal evidence that the cemetery location was first used by the Ohlone, and may also include burials of Native American and Mexican farm laborers who worked for Jose Maria Amador, interred prior to formal consecration of the cemetery in 1859 (VerPlanck 2003). It is likely that the cemetery extends beneath the Hexcel parking lot, and possible that the cemetery includes Native American human remains. If so, the impact to Tribal Cultural Resources would be potentially significant during earthmoving and excavation activities to implement the Project. Mitigation Measure TR-1: Inadvertent/Unanticipated Tribal Cultural Resources Discovery Protocols The City of Dublin shall require the following steps to be taken, including as a part of all contracts related to construction of the Project, as applicable: 1 The APE means the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist. 270 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 98 A. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain representatives from consulting tribe(s), if available, to implement Tribal Cultural Resources Sensitivity Training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities. The training shall include information regarding the possibility of encountering buried tribal cultural resources, the appearance and types of tribal cultural resources that could potentially be seen during construction, notification procedures, and proper protocols to be followed should suspected or confirmed tribal cultural resources be encountered. This training shall be provided once to each worker involved in ground -disturbing activities before they begin work and shall be documented in training records. B. If tribal cultural resources or potential tribal cultural resources are discovered during Project implementation, all activity within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the City of Dublin's Project Manager shall be notified, and Tribal Representatives from the consulting tribe(s) shall be immediately notified. The Tribal Representative(s) shall evaluate the find(s) within 48 hours to determine if it meets the definition of a tribal cultural resource (PRC §21074) and follow the procedures outlined below: i. If the find(s) does not meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming Project implementation (but see Mitigation Measures CUL-3 and CUL-4) ii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, then it shall be avoided by Project activities and preserved in place. The contractor shall implement any measures deemed by the City of Dublin to be necessary and feasible to preserve in place, avoid, or minimize impacts to the tribal cultural resource. If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Dublin, Tribal Representatives from the consulting tribe(s) if available, shall make recommendations regarding the culturally appropriate treatment and disposition of such find(s) and significant impacts to such tribal cultural resources shall be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the consulting tribe(s), if they are available, prior to resuming construction activities within the 50-foot radius. iii. If the find meets the definition of both a tribal cultural resource and a historical or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be treated in accordance with the measures described in Section C. below and Mitigation Measure CUL-4. C. Culturally appropriate treatment may include, but is not limited to, minimal processing of materials for reburial, minimizing handling of tribal cultural resources objects, leaving objects in place within the landscape, or returning tribal cultural resources objects to a location within the Project area where they would not be subject to future disturbance. No cultural soil maybe removed from the Project site. 271 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 99 Permanent curation, testing, or data collection of tribal cultural resources will not take place unless requested in writing by the consulting tribe(s). D. All fill soils imported and used for this Project must be clean, engineered fill. E. The applicant shall enter into a tribal monitoring agreement with the consulting tribe(s) prior to the start of ground disturbing activities. The tribal monitoring agreement shall form the terms and compensation for the tribal monitoring with the consulting tribe(s) and be utilized in combination with the tribal cultural resource treatment. Tribal Monitors have the authority to identify sites or objects of cultural significance and to request, upon the finding of a potential tribal cultural resource, that work be slowed, diverted, or stopped if such sites or objects are identified within the direct impact area. Only the consulting tribe(s) can recommend culturally appropriate treatment of such sites or objects, via their Tribal Monitor. Work within 50 feet of the discovery location cannot resume until all necessary investigation and evaluation of the discovery under the requirements of the tribal monitoring agreement have been implemented. Regarding human remains, as described above, the adjacent Pioneer Cemetery likely extends beyond the currently marked property boundary into the Hexcel lot to the west. There is anecdotal evidence that the cemetery location was first used by the Ohlone, and may also include burials of Native American and Mexican farm laborers who worked for Jose Maria Amador, interred prior to formal consecration of the cemetery in 1859 (VerPlanck 2003). Therefore, human remains are likely to be encountered. Project implementation would involve tree and vegetation removal, grading, trenching, undergrounding of utilities, and potentially other earthmoving activities. In the event that human remains are discovered during ground - disturbing activities, they could be inadvertently damaged. This impact would be potentially significant. If human remains are found during Project implementation, the State of California Health and Safety Code section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to PRC section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the Alameda County Coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner is required to notify the NAHC, which would determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD) within 24 hours. The MLD must complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and non-destructive analysis of Native American human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Significance after Mitigation With the incorporation of Mitigation Measure TR-1 and adherence to State regulations, any tribal cultural resources encountered during construction would be treated in a culturally appropriate manner in consultation with Tribal Representatives, and the impact to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with mitigation. 272 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 100 In regards to human remains, compliance with California Health and Safety Code section 7050.5 and California PRC would reduce potential impacts on previously undiscovered human remains. Implementing this mitigation measure ensures that any potential human remains encountered during construction would be treated in an appropriate manner under CEQA and other applicable laws and regulations. By providing consultation with the MLD, this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. Source(s) Freudenheim, Richard. 1977. National Register of Historic Places Inventory — Nomination Form, Dublin Village Historic Settlement (CA-ALA-521H, P-01-002127). On file at the Northwest Information Center in Rohnert Park, California. Kroeber, A. L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. New York: Dover Publications, Inc. Levy, Richard. 1978. Costanoan. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, edited by Robert F. Heizer, 485-495. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institute. Lightfoot, Kent G., and Otis Parrish. 2009. California Indians and Their Environment: An Introduction. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Milliken, Randall T. 1995. A Time of Little Choice: the disintegration of tribal culture in the San Francisco Bay Area, 1769-1810. Menlo Park, CA: Malki-Ballena Press. Milliken, Randall, Richard T. Fitzgerald, Mark G. Hylkema, Randy Groza, Tom Origer, David Bieling, Alan Leventhal, Randy S. Wiberg, Andrew Gottsfield, Donna Gillette, Viviana Bellifemine, Eric Strother, Robert Cartier, and David A. Fredrickson. 2007. Punctuated Culture Change in the San Francisco Bay Area. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, 99-124. New York: AltaMira Press. VerPlanck, Christopher. 2003. Pioneer Cemetery Site Record (P-01-010637). On file at the Northwest Information Center in Rohnert Park, California. 273 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 101 Other CEQA Considerations Cumulative Context Cumulative impacts do not refer to project -related impacts, but to the impacts of a proposed project when considered with the impacts of past, present, and probable future projects producing related impacts, as required by Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines. Other past, present, and future projects that would contribute to environmental impacts of the proposed project are referred to as "related projects." As stated in CEQA Section 21083(b)(2), a project may have a significant effect on the environment if "its effects are individually limited but cumulatively considerable." According to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15355: "Cumulative impacts" refer to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. a) The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects. b) The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment, which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time. In addition, as per the CEQA Guidelines: "The mere existence of significant cumulative impacts caused by other projects alone shall not constitute substantial evidence that the proposed project's incremental effects are cumulatively considerable." The analysis in this section includes: • A determination of whether the long-term impacts of all related past, present, and future plans and projects would cause a cumulatively significant impact; and • A determination as to whether implementation of the proposed project would have a "cumulatively considerable" contribution to any significant cumulative impact. (See CEQA Guidelines Sections 15130[a]-[b], Section 15355[b], Section 15064[h], and Section 15065[c]). In other words, the required analysis intends to first create a broad context through which to assess the project's incremental contribution to anticipated cumulative impacts, viewed on a geographic scale well beyond the proposed project itself, and then to determine whether the project's incremental contribution to any significant cumulative impacts from all related projects is itself significant (i.e., "cumulatively considerable" according to CEQA). 274 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 102 Cumulative Impact Analysis The City's Development Project website and map provides a snapshot of projects that are at various stages of the development process around the limits (City of Dublin 2023). All proposed, recently constructed or foreseeable projects in the City that would contribute to cumulative impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils (paleontological resources), hazards and hazardous materials and tribal resources are identified in Table 8: Cumulative Projects in the City of Dublin below. 26 cumulative projects were identified in the City. The Project's potential impacts, with respect to air quality, could extend beyond the Project area to potentially combine with impacts from the other projects listed in Table 8: Cumulative Projects in the City of Dublin. This is because air pollutants are emitted into the atmosphere and drift to other locations, which can increase pollutant levels in those areas. Nonetheless, the BAAQMD considered the emission levels at which a Project's individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable in developing its CEQA significance thresholds. The BAAQMD considers projects that result in emissions that exceed its CEQA significance thresholds to result in individual impacts that are cumulatively considerable and significant. As discussed in the Air Quality section of this EIR, the Project's emissions would be below the BAAQMD cumulatively considerable thresholds. Furthermore, Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices would be implemented in compliance with the BAAQMD threshold for fugitive dust emissions (PM10 and PM2.$) during construction. During operation, the proposed Project would result in a net reduction of emissions compared to existing conditions for NOx, PM10, and PM2.5, and ROG emissions would not exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance. Because the emissions would be minimized during construction with mitigation incorporated and reduced during operation, the Project would not result in substantial cumulative impacts and the impact would be less than significant with mitigation. With respect to biological resources, a significant cumulative impact could occur if other cumulative projects identified in Table 8 would affect the same biological resources as the Project (e.g., nesting birds and roosting bats). The cumulative projects that may result in potential impacts to nesting birds would be subject to applicable federal, state, regional, and local regulations discussed previously in Section 2, including the Endangered Species Act and Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and, therefore, would also be required to implement typical nesting bird avoidance measures, similar to those described for the Project in mitigation measure BIO-1. Because these standard avoidance measures would reduce the impacts of all cumulative projects, the overall cumulative impact to nesting birds in the City would be less than significant. Because common bat species are not protected by other regulations such as the Endangered Species Act, it is possible that some cumulative projects could include removal of trees or structures that are used as bat roosting habitat without appropriate precautions being taken to prevent bat mortality. The overall cumulative impact could be potentially significant. However, 275 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 103 because the Project would include mitigation measure BIO-2 to avoid bat mortality, the Project's contribution to the cumulative impact would be less than cumulatively considerable with mitigation. The Project could contribute to cumulative impacts on cultural resources and tribal resources, if projects listed in Table 8: Cumulative Projects in the City of Dublin also contributed to a substantial loss of historical and tribal resources in the City. As described in Section 3, Cultural Resources, the Project would result in the complete demolition of the existing Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, which is a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5. This would be a significant and unavoidable impact. However, none of the other projects listed in Table 8: Cumulative Projects in the City of Dublin would result in the loss of a historical resource; therefore, the overall cumulative impact to historical resources in the City would be less than significant. As discussed in Sections 3 and 7, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources, respectively, based on the existence of the archeological resources within and adjacent to the Project area, there is a moderate to high probability of identifying Native American archeological resources and a high probability of encountering historic -period archeological resources in the vicinity of the Pioneer Cemetery and Dublin Creek. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL- 3 through CUL-4, impacts to these resources would be less than significant with mitigation. Therefore, the contribution of the Project to cumulative projects would be minimal and cumulative impacts are expected to be less than significant related to these resources. With respect to energy resources, the geographic context for cumulative energy impacts is the state of California, as standards for energy efficiency are promulgated at the state level. Past, present, and probable future projects throughout the state would result in the irreversible use of diesel and gasoline resources during construction, as well as the incremental increase in energy consumption from operational building energy and traffic associated with those projects. However, the use of such resources would be subject to the same regulatory framework relating to energy and fuel efficiency as the Project and would be anticipated to become more energy efficient over time as regulatory requirements change and technological advancements are made. Due to the urbanized nature of the City, future projects are expected to result in a similar development pattern —while the overall use of electricity and natural gas on the site and surrounding areas may increase, the energy use per square foot is expected to decrease due to compliance with modern standards and incorporation of modern technologies and design standards. Specifically, regarding petroleum use during construction, the Project and other future projects would consume energy associated with the off -road equipment, truck trips, and worker vehicle trips. However, construction of the Project and future projects would be temporary, and compliance with increasingly stringent local and state regulations for fleet efficiency, and construction best practices limiting vehicle idling would help reduce construction -related fuel usage. During operation of the Project and future projects, increased land use intensity would result in additional vehicles miles traveled in the area. However, over the lifetime of the Project and past, present, and future projects, the fuel efficiency of vehicles is expected to increase. Similarly, with increasingly stringent local and state regulations for 276 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 104 energy efficiency in buildings, such as Title 24 of the California Administrative Code and the Appliance Efficiency Regulations, operational building energy consumption is also expected to decrease. Therefore, the overall cumulative impact relating to energy consumption and consistency with energy plans would be less than significant. Impacts from the Project relating to hazardous materials could also potentially cause offsite impacts that could potentially combine with impacts from other past, present or foreseeable future projects. Impact could result from the release of hazardous materials into the environment such as the soil and water during demolition and construction activities. If this release was to cause widespread contamination to areas in addition to contamination from cumulative projects, the Project could result in significant cumulative impacts. However, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-1: Perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, the potential for existing contamination at the site would be investigated, and if present at levels exceeding regulatory agency thresholds, would be remediated under the oversight of the appropriate agency. Such remediation actions, if necessary, would take into account both on- and off -site receptors and potential for cumulative impacts with other nearby projects or other contaminated sites. Furthermore, all cumulative projects, including the proposed Project, are required to comply with local, state, and federal regulations for transport, use, disposal, and accidental release of hazardous materials, which would address impacts associated with both construction- and operation -related handling of hazardous materials. Although compliance with applicable regulations would not completely remove the potential for accidental releases, it would reduce the likelihood of such a spill and would generally mean that any spill would be limited in size and/or spread. Therefore, the effect of such incidents would not likely be additive to effects from other, similar incidents occurring elsewhere on different project sites. Application of these regulations is mandatory; therefore, cumulative impacts related to hazardous materials are expected to be less than significant. With respect to paleontological resources, due to the large number of vertebrate fossils that have been recovered from the Contra Costa Group, it is considered to be of high paleontological sensitivity. Therefore, earthmoving activities associated with the projects considered in this cumulative analysis could damage or destroy unique paleontological resources that may be present in these rock formations, and potentially within other paleontologically sensitive formations as well, if those projects do not include appropriate paleontological resource avoidance measures. Therefore, the overall cumulative impact to paleontological resources could be potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Avoid Impacts to Unique Paleontological Resources would reduce the potential of the proposed Project to directly impact paleontological resources and, if resources are encountered during construction, would require measures to ensure that any fossil specimens are recovered and recorded and undergo appropriate curation. Therefore, the Project's contribution to the overall cumulative impact would be less than cumulatively considerable with mitigation. 277 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 105 Table 8: Cumulative Projects in the City of Dublin Name Description Location (Distance from Project Site) Land Use Status BASIS Independent School Construct facade improvements to existing construct fagade improvements to the existing 81,985 square foot office building which will be converted to a school, and construct a 9,134 square foot gymnasium building, outdoor recreational play field, trash enclosure, and associated site improvements that would serve up to 800 middle and high school students 7950 Dublin Blvd. (1,660 feet) School Approved. Awaiting building permit submittal Francis Ranch (East Ranch) Development of a 573-unit residential project, 11.5 acres of public parks, a 2.6-acre, two -acre Semi -Public Site 4038 Croak Rd. (5.6 miles) Residential Approved. The building permit is currently under review. Grading permits issued. Downtown Hines North Demolition of the two existing commercial buildings totaling 35,427 square feet and construction of a new 34,995 square foot multi -tenant commercial building 7200 Amador Plaza Rd. (3,630 feet) Commercial Application under review Dublin Fallon 580 Vesting Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the 192-acre parcel, Planned Development Rezone and Development Agreement. 238 units and up to 4,400,605 square feet of General Commercial/Campus Office uses. Corner of Croak Road and Future Central Pkwy. (5.5 miles) Subdivision that could lead to future residential, commercial, public development Application under review. NOTE: No SDR, so no timing on construction. Quarry Lane School — Performing Arts Center Construct a new 13,800-square foot building comprised of a performing arts center and other support spaces, including a new parking lot, immediately south of the existing Quarry Lane School facilities 6237 Tassajara Rd. (2 miles) School Application under review The Whitford of 152-unit senior living project Dublin (Dublin consisting of 114 assisted living Senior Living) units, 38 memory care units and 174 beds 5751 Arnold Rd. (2.8 miles) Commercial Approved. The sitework permit and building permit are currently under review 278 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 106 Name Description Location (Distance from Project Site) Land Use Status Grafton Plaza Daycare & Retail (Tivoli Plaza) Construct three commercial buildings with a total of 31,860 square feet (sf), including two retail buildings (16,038 sf and 6,055 sf) and one daycare building (9,767 sf) on a 3.68-acre site Corner of Grafton St. and Dublin Blvd. (4 miles) Commercial Constructed Ashton at Dublin Station Construct a 220-unit apartment community and related amenities which include a fitness center, pool, roof top lounge, and 331 structured parking spaces DeMarcus Blvd. (2 miles) Residential Constructed Regional Street Senior affordable housing project Senior with 113 units Affordable Housing 6541 Regional St. (2,540 feet) Residential Approved. The sitework permit and building permit are currently under review H Mart Supermarket An expansion to an existing 27,237 square foot commercial tenant space to construct an 8,552 square foot addition for a food hall, 3,187 square foot outdoor seating area with play area, fagade modifications, new trash enclosure and related site improvements and repaint the existing warehouse building 7884 Dublin Blvd. (2,900 feet) Commercial Approved. The building permit is currently under review. Inspiration Drive Assisted Living Construct an assisted living facility 7500 Inspiration Dr. of 84 beds on Parcel 3 of the Valley (3,700 feet) Christian Center property. Commercial Approved. Awaiting building permit submittal Avalon West (St. Construction of a 499-unit Patrick Way) residential apartment complex. 6700 Golden Gate Dr. (2,890 feet) Residential Under construction The Dublin Center "The DC" Plus SCS Mix -use development on 54-acres Between Brannigan of the SCS Dublin site. 650 units St. and Tassajara Rd. and up to 265,000 sf of commercial (4 miles) Commercial and Application under residential review Righetti Property Establish zoning regulations and development standard for future development of up to 96 homes, approximately 372,350 square feet of industrial uses and approximately 321,125 square feet of campus office/light industrial Collier Canyon Rd. (5 miles) Planned residential and light industrial development Application under review. NOTE: No SDR, so no timing on construction. 279 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 107 Name Description Location (Distance from Project Site) Land Use Status uses. The proposed project would also subdivide the 49.6-acre site into four parcels to accommodate proposed residential and industrial development. Branaugh Property PD Rezone, Tentative Map and Development Agreement for 78-97 units and approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial development 1881 Collier Canyon Rd. (5 miles) Residential and industrial Approved. No SDR, so no timing on construction. Kaiser Commercial — Nissan Construct a Nissan auto dealership Corner of Dublin Commercial Blvd. and Keegan St. (4.4 miles) Under construction Inspiration Drive Memory Care Construct a 35,089 square 7500 Inspiration Dr. Commercial foot memory care facility consisting (3,740 feet) of55-beds Approved. Awaiting building permit submittal Infiniti Dealership Construct a 10,461 square foot Infiniti automobile showroom and service center 3200 Dublin Blvd. Commercial (4.6 miles) Under construction Hacienda Crossings Drive - Through Restaurant (Chick-fil-A) Demolition of an existing building and construction of a new 2,781- square-foot drive -through restaurant and related site improvements 4814 Dublin Blvd. Commercial (3 miles) Application under review Amador Station Development of an affordable housing project consisting of up to 300 affordable units 6501 Golden Gate Dr. (4,000 feet) Residential Approved. Awaiting sitework permit and building permit submittal Schaefer Ranch Unit 3 Proposal results in a total of 418 homes (a net increase of 12 homes) within the Schaefer Ranch project 9595 Dublin Blvd. Residential (1 mile) Constructed Moller Construct 370 single family Ranch/Tassajara detached dwellings and a private Hills clubhouse on 80 acres 6861 Tassajara Road Residential (4.7 miles) Constructed Boulevard (Dublin Crossing) Development of approximately 1,753 single and multi -family residential units Corner of Dublin Residential Blvd. and Scarlett Dr. (1.9 miles) Under construction 280 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 108 Name Description Location Land Use Status (Distance from Project Site) McDonald's SDR Demolition of existing McDonald's 7145 Dublin Blvd. Commercial Application under restaurant, and construction of (5,000 feet) review anew 4,394 sf building Dublin Transit Construct parking garage with a Campus Dr. Center Parking capacity approximately 500 parking (2.5 miles) Garage spaces Parking Under construction Nissan Construct a 3,574 square foot self- 3200 Dublin Blvd. Commercial Approved. The Commercial Car service car wash (4 miles) building permit is Wash currently under review Notes DC = Dublin Center, SCS = name of developer, SDR = site development review, sf-= square feet Growth Context The CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.2[d]) requires an examination of the direct and indirect impacts of the proposed project, including the potential of the project to induce growth leading to changes in land use patterns and population densities and related impacts on environmental resources. Direct growth -inducement would result if a project involved construction of new housing. Indirect growth -inducement would result, for instance, if implementing a project resulted in any of the following: • Substantial new permanent employment opportunities (e.g., commercial, industrial, or governmental enterprises); • A construction effort with substantial short-term employment opportunities that indirectly stimulates the need for additional housing and services to support the new temporary employment demand; or, • Removal of an obstacle to additional growth and development, such as removing a constraint on a required public utility or service (e.g., construction of a major sewer line with excess capacity through an undeveloped area) or adding development adjacent to undeveloped land. Growth -inducement itself is not an environmental effect, but it may foreseeably lead to environmental effects. These environmental effects may include increased demand on other community and public services and infrastructure, increased traffic and noise, degradation of air or water quality, degradation or loss of plant or animal habitats, or conversion of agricultural and open space land to urban uses. 281 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 109 Growth Inducing Analysis The proposed Project would not directly or indirectly induce unplanned population growth in the City of Dublin, as discussed in Section 13, Population and Housing of the Initial Study (Appendix A). Project construction activities would generate temporary and short-term employment, but these construction jobs are anticipated to be filled from the existing local employment pool. The number of onsite workers would vary depending on the construction phase, but it is anticipated for a Project of this scope to range from 7 to 64 workers over a 12- month period. Based on the availability of nearby construction workers, Project construction would not cause a substantial influx of construction personnel that would result in unplanned population growth in the region. Implementation of the Project would result in permanent employment opportunities. The existing employees onsite each day is 150 to 200. The proposed building would cater to future tenants in the R&D and life sciences field, and it is estimated that the proposed Project would have 200 employees 2 onsite each day. Therefore, it is expected that similar number of employees would be working at the Project site as compared to existing conditions. Furthermore, the Project would not remove any barriers to population growth such as providing housing, constructing transportation modes, increasing capacity of roadways or developing new roadways. Thus, the Project would not result in unplanned population growth or induce substantial growth in the City of Dublin. Therefore, there would be no impact from the Project. Significant Irreversible Changes Context CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21100[B][2]) provides that an EIR shall include a detailed statement setting forth "[i]n a separate section...[a]ny significant effects on the environment that would be irreversible if the project is implemented." State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(c) provides the following guidelines for analyzing the significant irreversible environmental changes of a project: Uses of nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the project may be irreversible since a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse thereafter unlikely. Primary impacts and, particularly, secondary impacts (such as highway improvement which provides access to a previously inaccessible area) generally commit future generations to similar uses. Also irretrievable damage can result from environmental accidents associated with the project. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified. 2 Based on ABAG average square feet per employee rates for each "principal building activity" (ABAG 2011). 282 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 110 Significant Irreversible Changes During Project implementation, the use of nonrenewable resources such as fossil fuels in the form of electricity, gasoline and diesel fuel from construction equipment and delivery trucks would occur. There are no unusual project characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment that would be less energy -efficient than at comparable construction sites in other parts of the City. Therefore, it is not expected that construction fuel consumption associated with the proposed Project would be more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than at other construction sites in the region. Other nonrenewable and slowly -renewable resources consumed as a result of Project development would include, but not necessarily be limited to, lumber and other forest products, sand and gravel, asphalt, petrochemical construction materials, and water. The use of these nonrenewable resources would account for only a small portion of the region's resources and would not affect the availability of these resources for other needs in the region. Furthermore, the proposed Project would not result in irreversible damage from environmental accidents, such as an accidental spill or explosion of a hazardous material. During construction, hazardous materials such as gasoline, paint, adhesives and other materials classified as hazardous, would be subject to federal, state, and local health and safety requirements. Transportation of hazardous materials on area roadways is regulated by the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and use of these materials is regulated by DTSC, as outlined in CCR Title 22. The Project applicant and its construction contractors would be required to use, store, and transport hazardous materials in compliance with applicable federal and State regulations during Project construction. Furthermore, as discussed in Section 9: Hydrology and Water Quality of the Initial Study (Appendix A), a SWPPP would be required for the Project. The SWPPP would contain Spill Response Plan to address minor spills of hazardous materials. The nature of construction — that for a conventional industrial/commercial building— would not involve unusual amounts or types of hazardous materials that could result in irreversible damage from an accidental release. Operation of the Project may involve the transport, use, and disposal of limited quantities of hazardous materials associated with the R&D and life sciences industry. If any hazardous materials are stored or handled at the Project site, either as a result of on -site businesses (similar to Hexcel) or from basic maintenance activities such as herbicides and cleaning products, the building tenants and maintenance staff would be required to follow manufacturer's instructions and (if applicable) would be required to prepare Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventories (Business Plans) and comply with the requirements of Hazardous Waste Generator (tiered permitting) Programs. 283 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 111 Implementation of the Project would not provide access to a previously inaccessible area, and the proposed infill redevelopment of an existing R&D facility would be expected to indirectly result in a reduction in the use of nonrenewable resources compared to new greenfield development. The Project would result in the permanent, irreversible loss of a historical resource, due to the demolition of the existing Hexcel facility, which would be a significant and unavoidable impact, as discussed in Section 3. While this loss would be permanent and irreversible, implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1: HABS Recordation and Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Interpretive Displays would require the historical resource to be recorded for archival purposes and that an interpretive display be created for public education. Whilst such mitigation cannot reverse or mitigate the loss of the historical resource, such interpretative and archival materials would memorialize the contribution of the Hexcel facility to the Man in Space historic context for future generations. Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Context California Code of Regulations Section 15216.2(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to include a discussion of any significant environmental impacts that cannot be avoided if the project is implemented. Chapter 3 of this EIR provides a detailed analysis of all significant and potentially significant environmental impacts related to implementing the proposed Project; identifies feasible mitigation measures, where available, that could avoid or reduce these significant and potentially significant impacts; and presents a determination whether these mitigation measures would reduce these impacts to less -than -significant levels. Section 4.1 above identifies the significant cumulative impacts resulting from the combined effects of the proposed Project and related projects. If a specific impact in either of these sections cannot be fully reduced to a less -than -significant level, it is considered a significant and unavoidable adverse impact. Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Analysis Implementing the proposed Project would result in the following significant adverse impacts: • Impact CR-1: The proposed Project would result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. As discussed in the Cultural section of this EIR, the Project would result in the complete demolition of the existing Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, which is a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5. The demolition of this facility would result in a significant direct impact even with the identified mitigation measures. Thus, this impact would be significant and unavoidable. Source(s) ABAG. 2011. ABAG Non Residential Buildings Analysis. Obtained March 8, 2023 from NonResidentialAnalysis 120511.pdf (ca.gov). 284 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 112 City of Dublin. 2023. Development Projects. Obtained June 6, 2023 from https://dublindevelopment.icitywork.com/. 285 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 113 Alternatives Introduction CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a) requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to a project, or the location of a project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather, a range of potentially feasible alternatives, governed by the "rule of reason," must be considered. This is intended to foster informed decision making and public participation (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f]). CEQA generally defines "feasible" to mean capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account environmental, social, technological, and legal factors. The following factors may also be taken into consideration when assessing the feasibility of alternatives: site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and the ability of a project proponent to attain site control (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][1]). CEQA also requires that a No Project Alternative be evaluated (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[e]). The analysis of a No Project Alternative is based on the assumption that a project would not be approved. In addition, an environmentally superior alternative must be identified among the alternatives considered. The environmentally superior alternative is generally defined as the alternative that would result in the least adverse environmental impacts to a project site and affected environment. If the No Project Alternative is found to be the environmentally superior alternative, the EIR must also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. The analysis of alternatives is of benefit to decision makers, because it provides more complete information about the potential impacts of land use decisions. Consequently, there is a better understanding of the interrelationship among all of the environmental topics under evaluation. Decision makers must consider approval of an alternative if it would substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental impacts identified for a proposed project and if it is determined to be feasible. Factors Considered in the Selection of Alternatives The CEQA Guidelines recommend that an EIR briefly describe the rationale for selecting the alternatives to be discussed, identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible, and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency's determination (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c)). The following factors were considered in identifying the range of reasonable alternatives to the Project for this Focused EIR: 286 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 114 • The extent to which the alternative would accomplish most of the basic objectives of the Project; • The extent to which the alternative would avoid or lessen the identified significant and/or unavoidable environmental effects of the Project; • The feasibility of the alternative; and • The extent to which an alternative contributes to a "reasonable range" of alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. Per Section 15126.6(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, the discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to a project (or its location) that are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening significant impacts of a project, even if the alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives or would be more costly. As discussed in the Initial Study (Appendix A), the proposed Project would result in significant adverse impacts on historical resources at the Project level. Mitigation measures are identified to reduce these Project impacts; however, none would reduce impacts to less than significant. Consequently, the Toss of the historical resource associated with the proposed Project would be significant and unavoidable. This alternatives analysis, therefore, focuses on Project alternatives that could avoid or substantially lessen impacts of the proposed Project on historical resources. The following alternatives that may avoid or substantially lessen impacts on the historical resource were identified: • No Project Alternative • Reduced Grading Alternative These alternatives are analyzed in turn below, followed by a brief discussion of those alternatives considered but rejected from further analysis. Description and Analysis of Alternatives Retained No Project Alternative The No Project Alternative assumes no development would occur on the Project site. The Hexcel Corporation R&D facility would not be demolished, the site would not be redeveloped with a new facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field, and Parcels 1 and 2 would not be rezoned. Analysis of No Project Alternative Compliance with Project Objectives The No Project Alternative would not meet any of the proposed Project's objectives because it would not redevelop the site with a new and upgraded facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field and would not rezone Parcels 1 and 2 as a Planned Development. 287 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 115 Analysis of Impacts With the No Project Alternative, the Project would not occur and the existing conditions would remain. The Hexcel Corporation R&D facility would not be demolished, therefore, there would be no impact to the historical resource. There also would be no ground disturbance, so there would be no potential impacts related to the discovery of previously unknown archaeological resources or human remains and paleontological resources. Furthermore, there would be no construction impacts associated with the Project on other resource areas evaluated in this EIR, including air quality, biological resources, energy, and hazards and hazardous materials. Reduced Grading Alternative The Reduced Grading Alternative would be similar to the proposed Project as it would still demolish the existing building and construct a new facility with other site improvements, as described in the Project Description. Where it differs from the proposed Project, is the depth and area of grading that would be required in the south and southeast portion of the site, which would be substantially reduced compared to the proposed Project. The reduced grading would be accomplished by importing soil to build up the southern periphery of the property and by treating stormwater onsite with a valley gutter catch basin and a Silva cell of approximately 3280 square feet rather than having to grade for stormwater to be gravity fed into bioretention planters. The Silva cell is a modular suspended pavement system that utilizes soil volumes to support large tree growth and provide onsite stormwater management. The Silva cell would replace 3280 square feet of the two bioretention planters proposed in the southeast corner of the site adjacent to the south parking areas (see Figure 6A. Landscape Plan and Figure 66: Landscape Plan Details); thereby, providing the same treatment area as the bioretention areas proposed in the proposed Project. Stormwater drainage would be provided by a shallow gutter, parallel to the south edge of the new structure, and a gentle slope along the eastern driveway of the new structure, both leading to conduits, which would drain to the Silva cell. The conduits would be installed by mechanical trenching at a minimum grade leading to the top of the Silva cell, which is 2 feet below ground surface. The top of the Silva cell dirt and landscape could be placed over it or asphalt to provide more parking space. Excavation depths for this Alternative would generally be limited to less than 1 foot below current grade, except for the following three locations: a) the Silva cell, which would be excavated to 7 feet below surface, with a surface area of approximately 468 feet (specific width and length are yet to be determined); b) two trenches to install culverts leading to the Silva cell, each approximately 2 feet wide, a maximum of 2 feet deep, and less than 100 feet long; and c) the southwest edge of the property, which would be excavated to a maximum of 7 feet below current surface, which is 2.5 feet less than in the original design. The Reduced Grading Alternative also eliminates the need for the wall, and associated footings, along the south edge of the property. 288 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 116 Analysis of Reduced Grading Alternative Compliance with Project Objectives The Reduced Grading Alternative would meet all of the proposed Project's objectives while minimizing the area, degree, and significance of potential impact to buried archaeological resources and possible human remains associated with the adjacent Pioneer Cemetery, in addition to reducing potential impacts to paleontological resources and air quality, and reducing energy consumption. Analysis of Impacts The Reduced Grading Alternative would still involve the demolition of the existing Hexcel building in its entirety, and therefore, for the same reasons discussed for the proposed Project in Section 3, would have a significant and unavoidable impact to historical resources, even with the implementation of mitigation measures Mitigation Measure CUL-1: HABS Recordation and Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Interpretive Displays. The use of a Silva cell for stormwater treatment is only being considered for this Reduced Grading Alternative, not for the proposed Project. The use of the Silva cell would dramatically reduce the amount of grading needed for stormwater management on the site, as described in the proceeding paragraphs. However, from an operational standpoint, the City has expressed concerns with the use of a Silva cell for this Project. The City is aware of other projects implementing Silva cells for stormwater treatment and those cells malfunctioning. Operational failure of these Silva cells can result in sewage getting mixed in to the stormwater treatment systems. Therefore, the City believes there is a risk implementing a Silva cell for stormwater treatment for this Project.3 With respect to buried cultural resources and tribal cultural resources, this analysis is focused on the area of the Project site with the highest sensitivity for buried historic era and pre -contact era archaeological resources (the High Archeological Probability Area), along the eastern property line and through the southern parking lot, an area of approximately 115,763 square feet (approximately 53 percent of the total project area). The maximum depth of excavation for this alternative would be approximately 7 feet below ground surface, which is reduced from up to 10 feet below surface for the proposed Project. Moreover, under this alternative only approximately 26,000 square feet of the High Archeological Probability Area (approximately 23 percent) would include excavation greater than 1 foot below the current ground surface, compared to 61,850 square feet (approximately 53 percent of the High Archaeological Probability Area) for the proposed Project. Therefore, this alternative would reduce the risk of impacts to buried cultural resources within the High Archeological Probability Area by more than 120 percent. While this design does not completely eliminate the risk of impact to archaeological resources or human remains, the area 3 Information provided during a phone call with Gaspare Annibale, Associate Planner at City of Dublin, on July 24, 2023. 289 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 117 and degree of potential impact are significantly reduced with the Reduced Grading Alternative. Nevertheless, the Project would still have the potential to impact archaeological resources and the potential disturb human remains, both of which could be potentially significant. All cultural and tribal mitigation measures would still apply, but the scope of archaeological testing and monitoring, and the potential for work stoppage due to archaeological discoveries, would all be significantly reduced. For the same reasons discussed for the proposed Project in Sections 3 and 7, implementation of mitigation measures Mitigation Measure CUL-3: Archaeological and Tribal Monitoring; Mitigation Measure CUL-4: Inadvertent Discovery Protocols; and Mitigation Measure TR-1: Inadvertent/Unanticipated Tribal Cultural Resources Discovery Protocols would reduce the impact to less than significant with mitigation. The Reduced Grading Alternative would also reduce the potential to impact paleontological resources, as it would be reducing the depths of excavation where these resources could occur. As discussed in the description of the Reduced Grading Alternative section above, the Alternative would avoid excavation of more than 1 foot below current grade in most of the locations in the south portion of the site. Since artificial fill ranges from depths of 1.5 to 5 feet, reducing the depth of excavation to less than 1 foot would greatly reduce the risk of damage to these resources (see Section 5). However, since there are areas where excavation would still exceed 1 foot, this Alternative would not completely avoid potential impacts to paleontological resources. Therefore, the impact would remain potentially significant and mitigation measure GEO-1 would still apply. For the same reasons discussed for the proposed Project in Section 5, implementation of mitigation measure GEO-1 would reduce the impact to less than significant with mitigation. Furthermore, by reducing the amount of grading, there would be less total construction equipment usage during the grading phase, which would reduce NOx, ROG, PM10 Exhaust and PM2.5 Exhaust emissions. This Alternative would also reduce the potential for fugitive PM compared to the proposed Project, but fugitive dust PM10 and PM2.5 is not quantified in BAAQMD since there are no quantitative thresholds for fugitive dust. Less grading equipment usage would also reduce energy -consumption during construction. Therefore, this Alternative would reduce impacts to air quality and reduce energy consumption compared to the proposed Project. Nonetheless, impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation incorporated, as fugitive dust control measures would still be required. Alternatives Considered but Rejected Two potential alternatives were considered for the Project but rejected from further consideration. They are described below. Partial Preservation Alternative The Partial Preservation Alternative would demolish the 1967-constructed administration area of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility and 1980s building additions, but would retain the approximately 25,000-square foot, 1962-constructed research and development laboratory building where the NASA research on the honeycomb took place. A new 114,141 square foot 290 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR l Page 118 building would be constructed in place of the demolished portions of the existing building and be used by future tenants in the life sciences and manufacturing field. The 25,000 square foot laboratory building would be adaptively reused as a commercial self -storage facility, resulting in a mixed -used site, rather than a site used for solely life sciences and manufacturing. With the Partial Preservation Alternative, the amount of square footage available for manufacturing/industrial uses would be greatly reduced from the proposed Project. This is because the City requires a certain amount of parking for different types of uses, and this Alternative would reduce the parking area by approximately 13,830 square feet to accommodate both the retained 25,000 square foot -lab and new 114,141 square foot -building. Because the retained laboratory with the new building would take up more space on the site than the Proposed project, there would be less space for the City -required parking, necessitating a shift in the proposed balance of manufacturing uses (which require higher levels of parking) and warehouse/distribution uses (which require less parking). Because of the decreased size of the new building and a slight shift towards greater warehouse/distribution uses from industrial uses, the new building would only accommodate two future tenants, opposed to four tenants for the proposed Project. The Partial Preservation Alternative would not meet the Project objective to redevelop the site with a new and upgraded facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field because it would be developed as a mixed -used site with the introduction of the commercial self -storage facility in the retained 1962-constructed research and development laboratory building, which would not be as appealing to future life sciences/manufacturing tenants. It is also very important to note that this Alternative would not be economically feasible for the Project applicant due to the reduction in the number of tenants, and the reduction in value of commercial self -storage and warehousing floorspace compared to life sciences/manufacturing. The applicant prepared a Pro Forma for financial feasibility of Partial Preservation Alternative (Dublin Boulevard Owner LP, 2023) and found that this Alternative would result in a loss of approximately $10.8 million over the life of the Project, while the total upfront costs (capitalization) would be approximately $55.7 million, which is approximately 40 percent higher than the proposed project. Therefore, this Alternative would result in a loss of profit to the applicant and as a result, would be financially infeasible. Whilst economic/financial matters are not considered to be an environmental impact under CEQA, Section 15126.6(a) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR consider "a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives" to the proposed project and Section 15126.6(f)(1) of the Guidelines specifically lists economic viability among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives. Furthermore, it is unlikely that the Partial Preservation Alternative would avoid the significant and unavoidable impact on the historical resource. Although this alternative would retain the most important portion of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility contributing to its eligibility as a historical resource, and would therefore have a reduced level of impact compared to the proposed Project, the alternative would still demolish more than half of the original structure and would also involve substantial changes to the setting of the historical resource. It is 291 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 119 considered unlikely that feasible mitigation measures could be implemented to fully mitigate the potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level. For all of these reasons, this Alternative has been rejected from further consideration within this EIR. Alternative Location An alternative site location was considered and rejected because the purpose of the proposed Project is specific to this property. The use of another site for this Project would not meet the project's purpose and need. As described in the Project Description, the purpose and need for this Project is to redevelop the Hexcel site with a new and upgraded facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field and to rezone Parcels 1 and 2 of this site as a Planned Development. Furthermore, the Project applicant already owns this site, which works for the scale and type of project that the applicant has proposed. Development of the Project on the proposed site will help ensure the construction of the Project is affordable and accomplished in a timely manner. A new site option would require applicant to sell this site and then find a new site in the City limits of a similar size designated for this type of use. Therefore, an alternative location was rejected from further consideration in this EIR. Environmentally Superior Alternative CEQA requires that, among the alternatives, an "environmentally superior" alternative be selected and that the reasons for such selection be disclosed. In general, the environmentally superior alternative is the alternative that would generate the fewest or least severe adverse impacts. Table 9: Comparison of Proposed Project and Alternatives below provides a comparison of the Project to the alternatives with respect to the potential to avoid or substantially reduce environmental impacts. 292 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 120 Table 9: Comparison of Proposed Project and Alternatives Environmental Topic Proposed Project No Project Alternative Reduced Grading Alternative Air Quality LTSM No Impact LTSM Biological Resources LTSM No Impact LTSM Historical Resources S&U No Impact S&U Archaeological Resources LTSM No Impact LTSM- Energy LTSM No Impact LTSM Geology & Soils LTSM No Impact LTSM- Hazardous Materials LTSM No Impact LTSM Tribal Cultural Resources LTSM No Impact LTSM- Number of topics with increased impact Number of topics with decreased impact N/A N/A 0 0 All 4 Source: compiled by AECOM in 2023. For each alternative, the significance determination shown in the table for a particular impact is the most severe of the construction or operational -phase impact. Acronyms: N/A = Not Applicable; LTSM = Less than Significant with Mitigation; S&U = Significant and Unavoidable. Bold indicates that impact is different level of significance than the Project. - indicates that although the overall level of significance for the Alternative would be the same as the proposed Project, the duration or intensity of the impact would be less, and/or fewer mitigation measures would be required. The No Project Alternative would be the environmentally superior alternative as it would avoid any impacts related to the construction of the proposed Project, including impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal resources, energy, hazardous materials, and paleontological resources. However, when the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, CEQA requires that an additional alternative be identified. In this case, the Reduced Grading Alternative is the environmentally superior build alternative, as it would reduce the potential to impact archeological and other buried resources such as paleontological resources due to reduced grading depths, while still meeting all of the Project objectives. All the other resource areas analyzed in this EIR and Initial Study in Appendix A would be the same or similar. Source(s) Dublin Boulevard Owner, LP. 2023. Pro Forma for Financial Feasibility of Partial Preservation Alternative. Provided by email from applicant on June 13, 2023. 293 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 121 Report Preparers Lead Agency Gaspare Annibale, Associate Planner Anne Hersch, Assistant Community Development Department Director Consultant — AECOM Emma Rawnsley, Project Director Stephanie Osby, Project Manager Paola Pena, Air Quality Scientist Peter Boice, Biologist Deborah Jew, Word Processor Trina Meiser, Senior Architectural Historian Karen Gardner, Archaeologist Wendy Copeland, Environmental Planner 294 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Page 122 This page intentionally left blank 295 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Figures Figures 296 This page intentionally left blank 297 City of Dublin Castro Valley Danville HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Figures n ackhaok-Camino Tassajara Contra Costa C o n n 1 y San Ramon �F Dublin G F Project Location Pleasanton Fremont .Ala m e cla County A 0 5 Miles Figure 1. Project Location Project Location J -%'San Jos@':' cpAu222 298 This page intentionally left blank 299 City of Dublin Cm* Figure 2. Project Site 1,000 HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Figures 300 This page intentionally left blank 301 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Figures AECQM3Rre>4C.uzz2O USERss.nePATH`MEeacapro, (s,A",FR,Pw -1,0,o S,,,,R,,aels1WERTS8ary .Du. Heuref,02M4p4,o2Repon_ �,� �,e s-ThIllustrator End 1 0 N Feet 90 DUBUN BOULEVARD (R/w u4PIES) (A RIIRIJP RUE) PROPOSE. SOLT.. ��/%� u►@ �uuunnun nnunuuui mnminun nunnn uuum►a- Source:AECOM,2022, Ear +Wrig,2022 Figure 3. Site Plan This page intentionally left blank 303 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR Figures 1 Dublin Blvd. Elevation - North Elevation ...15 Northwest Elevation 1 Arthur H. Breed, Jr. Frwy Elevation - South Elevation West Elevation East Elevation New Public St. Elevation - East Elevation A N 120 Feet Figure 4. Elevations Seu,ee: AECOM, 2022:Kier + Wriplt, 2022 This page intentionally left blank 305 City of Dublin A 0 N Feet 120 Figure 5. Overall Floor Plan HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR Figures Source: AECOM, 2022;;Ger • rgg+k 2022 This page intentionally left blank 307 City of Dublin UEL11 0 150 Feet HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR Figures �9n..ILi LI Dagelm: IdlsI 117iei 111111IIIIIi1 i"i 1'i' -I I N R.• • Source AECOM, 2022; I0er+6Yrlghi,2022 Figure 6A. Landscape Plan This page intentionally left blank 309 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR I Figures PLANT LIST CA. NATIVE SYM. NO. BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE WATER REGIME MATURE HABIT HYDROZONE H X W I5 LAAERG?E SreO Ro£MIA nmamrTE FED' CRAF£ MYRTLE XOr am L x 1 EVERGREEN SCREENING SHRUBS) u 5 GAL_ L 10 x w o 30 Al 51"�ADTA o ;:045ERRY 5 GAL, L IN 4 5' PL.,. 5. OC T N£TE V-1£L£5 Nm1.111F0.1A tc1a4 5 GAL L 1®' v S' PLANT Io' cc 25 �Arn4. [Iis PAY HM AIMAN' cFwlmlus 5 OAL L 5' PLO, 5' CC GRASSES x 0 Na ID Et LOMANDRA L.'Lcf1LON' LRE TUFFTUFFI GAL DROUGHT TOLERANT SHRUBS IO . 024 04.E4 LIm904.1.15oW. FaITLE30 GIVE 5GAL. 5 GAL. N 30 24-41< S C. MdNG 5N4 BRUNO' Cdi£3EIRR E 5 [WL. n uESFERALOE Pe.R✓ITLDRA RED rucce 5 GAL. 14 3I 930e51AROL5 O. nST.544 ELSE' LPRIG4 ROSE554Rr 5 GAL. C;J 06 5A11.16TE5CN 'LIMEJ0NN' DLL E MILE 56161 5GWL. N ®eo LSUcc55.6 454 F aemm445"lows 1.5v4e Purse 5544. N 20 GOE4O3353• FONT ROTES IA, LILAC 5 GAL. PERENNIALS ▪ 35 T'u F..a<.uIA v_ TRICOLOR 5Oc1ETr GARPG 16AL_ ▪ 12 Y£RH£NA LILACNA'D£ LA MINA' YERDPIA I GAL N e 1a ACNILLEA Mom1f»!Nf r RTm I GAL ▪ "IPTES v- v4R1Fa44rA' FORT NAHT LILT 1 GAL NDYe= RODt eA44e1556 54ALL 55 WALLED 514£R5 -4££5 ARE 51641411.5. 6 PAVREENT. 5%5 PLANT 2'a 5' RANT 5'K 5.04 MULCHES BARK MULCH -ALL PLANTERS NOT DESIGNATED FOR SOD MANIC RECYCLED CHIPPED WOOD NULCN- PLACE B" MIN PEP, 21- 3' LENGTH DECORA114E COLOR DARK BROWN OR EQUAL NO VISIBLE CONTAMINANTS PLACE 3' MIN. DEPTH OF BARK M ALL PLANT BASINS ALL MULCH AND coMPo9T USED IN THE GENERAL LANDSCAPE AREAS AND ANT BID-TREAMENT AREAS SHALL MEET 5H 1353 PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS. UPDATED LANDSCAPE PLAN SHEETS TNA1 SPECIFY MULCH ANTS COMPOST THAT MEET 951353 PROCUREMENT STANDARDS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR PERMIT REOO-TI-IENDATION WILL. 9PECIFr THE PURCHASE of MULCH AND caMPo9T BE FROM A SSIRELIER THAT INDICATES SE 1305 COMPLIANCE FOR EACH PRODUCT. 5 N€F-oR APPROVAL P0IoL0R To OELIvERY THE W To THE SITE. CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP AND MAINTAIN A COPY OF ALL RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE PROCUREMENT OF ES 1353 COMPLIANT COMPOST AND I-TULCH. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECORDS INDICATING THE TOTAL COMPOST AND MULCH PRoc4RE0 oR USED, THE *IANTITr of .oMPo91- f10N9 OR 0401c YARDS) AND MULCH (TONS, PROCURED FROM EACH FACILITY OR ENTITY, FACILITY OR VENDOR INFORMATION (NAME OF FACILITY, ADDRESS, CONTACT INFOR-1ATION/. A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE COMPOST AND/OR MULCH WAS USED, AND WHERE COMPOST AND MULCH WAS USED, AND INVOICES DEMONSTRSTMG PRoc4REMENt BIO-RETENTION PLANTING Blo-RETENTION NATIVE GRASS To BE 'Hlo-FILTRATIQN Soo. AS AVAILABLE Flsom DELTA 13LLEGRA55 co ca sous, soo 5HALL BE GRGINE IN A SPRDY SASS TOPSOIL T 111(06ARY IRRIGATION TO BE FROYIDED FOR ESTABLISHMENT. 000 01-ALL BE LAID 1'N(N A MINIMUM OF 10' OVERLAP BTr46EN ADJACENT ENDS AND SHALL DE LAID 0ORIZONTALFARALLEL TO ANY 5LOPE. son SHALL et LAID TIGHT To HEADER AND oR ADJACENT PAVEMENT THE MINIMUM PIINENSION OF ANY GUT PIECE SHALL BE 14', EX10111.a LANDSCAPE AREA TO REMAIN THE L4INDEC4PE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD PLACE PLANTS AROUND Aea4E SROUND UTILITIES To SCREEN UTILITIES FROM PUBLIC STREETS AND RARKINC. AREAS AFTER PLACEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF UTILITY. P1-4011405 €ER PLAN SHALL 0€ UTILIZED- PL4NT51.1AY 0€ RE -SPACED IN v10IN1TY OF MIL, To 4CoO-IODATE SCR€€NI1.rw CONTACT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IF PLANTING REQUIRES CLARIFICATIDN. LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS: TOTAL PARKING AREA . E1215 SF. 1'ARCIWa AREA INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING. I. PAVEMENT INCLUDING ISLANDS, STALLS, AISLES AND ACCESS DRIVES 2. ADJACENT BUILDING FRONTAGE LANDSCAPE AREA INC. WALKS PARKING AREA L4NDSCAFF REQUIRED . 12011 SF. (15, OF PARKIN. AREA1 PARKING AREA LANDSCAPE PROVIDED = 143S0 SF. (IT.) NO. OF STANDARD PARKING SPACES • 211 TREES REQUIRED - 55 (1l4 SPACES) TREES PROv1DED 55 TOTAL SITE LANDSCAPE: 99,106 SF. LANDSCAPE BY AREA: PARKING AREA. 14350 SF (145.1 SITE PERIMETER 1NEW1 N5390 SA. 0530 DUILDING FACADE (NOT INC IN PARKII10) 6660 SF. (1424) BID -RETENTION: 13936 SF. (TPA EXISTING TO REMAIN. 9.0,150 SF. (491,/ WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER WI E1 DATA REPEAT CYCLING IRRIGATION ZONES PER PLANT WATER REQUIREMENTS RAIN SENSOR TO BE SPECIFIED SOIL AMENDMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED PLANTER 51114*E AREAS To 0€ Im11,..1+€10 WATER U2Ac,E To MEET STATE LATLR EFFICIENT LAIo1C45PE STANDARD Source:AECOM, 2022; IOer + 'Wight, 2022 Figure 6B. Landscape Plan Details This page intentionally left blank 311 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Focused EIR 1 Figures DUBLIN \\\ 111 IlJuntiLLIi „I„11„ 1 111 BLVD Ir� lourrurrnirri c um.11.11.11.11. II 11111 I11111111t UTE (AERIAL APPARTUS ACCESS) a d FIRE. ACCESS ROUTE 0 N Feet 180 Source: AECOM, 2022, l0er *14510i, 2022 Figure 7. Fire Access Route This page intentionally left blank 313 Appendix B Appendices to Draft EIR This page intentionally left blank 315 Ap Appendix A: Initial Study Appendix B: Notice of Preparation and Scoping Comments Appendix C: Technical Memorandum — Historical Resources Evaluation Report Appendix D: CaIEEMod Output Sheets Appendix E: Final Transportation Impact Study 316 This page intentionally left blank 317 Appendix A: Initial Study This page intentionally left blank 319 11 sus DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Hexcel Redevelopment Project Initial Study July 26, 2023 PROJECT APPLICATION PLPA-2022-00038 320 This page intentionally left blank 321 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page i Table of Contents Background & Project Description 1 Project Title 1 Lead Agency Name and Address 1 Contact Person and Phone Number 1 Project Location 1 Project Applicant/Sponsor Name and Address 1 General Plan Designation 2 Zoning 2 Project Description 2 Proposed Project 2 Project Approvals 6 Environmental Setting 7 Project Site and Existing Facilities 7 Surrounding Land Uses 7 Environmental Checklist 8 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected by the Project 8 Determination 11 Explanation of Environmental Checklist Responses 13 Aesthetics 13 Environmental Setting 13 Regulatory Framework 16 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 19 Source(s) 24 Agricultural and Forestry Resources 25 Environmental Setting 25 Regulatory Framework 25 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 26 Source(s) 27 Air Quality 29 Environmental Setting 29 Regulatory Framework 30 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 32 Source(s) 35 Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 322 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page ii Biological Resources Environmental Setting 37 Regulatory Framework 38 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 40 Source(s) 43 Cultural Resources 45 Environmental Setting 45 Regulatory Framework 45 Previous CEQA Documents 50 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 51 Source(s) 52 Er Environmental Setting 53 Regulatory Framework 54 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 56 Source(s) 56 Geology and Soils 59 Environmental Setting 60 Regulatory Framework 61 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 63 Source(s) 66 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 67 Environmental Setting 67 Regulatory Framework 68 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 71 Source(s) 76 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 77 Environmental Setting 77 Regulatory Framework 79 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 81 Source(s) 83 Hydrology and Water Quality 85 Environmental Setting 85 Regulatory Framework 86 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 89 Source(s) 92 Land Use and Planning 95 Environmental Setting 95 Regulatory Framework 95 Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 323 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page iii Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 97 Source(s) 98 Mineral Resources 99 Environmental Setting 99 Regulatory Framework 99 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 100 Source(s) 100 Noise 101 Environmental Setting 101 Regulatory Framework 104 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 106 Source(s) 112 Population and Housing 113 Environmental Setting 113 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 113 Source(s) 114 Public Services 117 Environmental Setting 117 Regulatory Framework 118 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 118 Source(s) 120 Recreation 121 Environmental Setting 121 Regulatory Framework 121 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 122 Source(s) 122 Transportation 123 Environmental Setting 123 Regulatory Framework 125 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 127 Source(s) 131 Tribal Cultural Resources 1 R3 Environmental Setting 133 Regulatory Framework 134 Previous CEQA Documents 135 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 136 Source(s) 137 Utilities and Service Systems 139 Environmental Setting 139 Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 324 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page iv Regulatory Framework 141 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 143 Source(s) 147 Wildfire 149 Environmental Setting 149 Regulatory Framework 150 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures 152 Source(s) 154 Mandatory Findings of Significance 155 (a) Significant Impacts to Biological Resources or Important Examples of History or Prehistory 155 (b) Cumulative Impacts 155 (c) Substantial Adverse Effects on Human Beings 156 Source(s) 156 List of Figures Note: All figures are included at the end of the document. Figure 1 Project Location Figure 2 Project Site Figure 3 Site Plan Figure 4 Elevations Figure 5 Overall Floor Plan Figure 6A Landscape Plan Figure 6B Landscape Plan Details Figure 7 Fire Access Route Figure 8 Proposed Project Area, Noise Monitoring Locations and Worst -Case Noise -Sensitive Receptors Figure 9 Distribution of Modeled Noise Sources Assumed for Project Operations Figure 10 Perspective 1 Figure 11 Perspective 2 Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 325 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page v List of Tables Table 1: Building Composition by Level 3 Table 2: Anticipated Construction Schedule 6 Table 3: Project Consistency with Applicable CAP 2030 GHG Emissions Reduction Measures 71 Table 4: GHG Emissions Summary 74 Table 5: Summary of Measured Sound Levels 103 Table 6: Construction Vibration Damage Criteria 104 Table 7: FTA General Assessment Noise Criteria 104 Table 8: City of Dublin Land Use/Noise Compatibility Standards (dBA, CNEL) 105 Table 9: Alameda County Exterior Noise Level Standards 106 Table 10: Proposed Project Construction Equipment Reference Sound Pressure Levels 107 Table 11: Combined Construction Noise Levels per Construction Phase 108 Table 12: Modeled Noise Sources 108 Table 13: Predicted Proposed Facility Operational Sound Levels (dBA) 109 Table 14: Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes 110 Table 15: Predicted Existing and Future -with -Project Worst -Hour Traffic Noise Levels 110 Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 326 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page vi Acronyms 1,1,1-TCA 1,1,1-trichloroethane AB Assembly Bill ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments ACDEH Alameda County Department of Environmental Health ACFCWCD Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District ACFD Alameda County Fire Department ACMs asbestos -containing materials ADA American With Disabilities ADWF average dry weather flow AFY acre-feet per year Alameda CTC Alameda County Transportation Commission Alquist-Priolo Act Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act APN Assessor Parcel Numbers Ardent Ardent Environmental Group AUF acoustical usage factor AVI Amador Valley Industries BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District Basin Plan Water Quality Control Plan bgs below the ground surface BMPs Best Management Practices Business Plans Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventories C&D construction and demolition CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy Cal/OSHA California Occupational Safety and Health Administration CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code Caltrans California Department of Transportation CAP Climate Action Plan CARB California Air Resources Board CBC California Building Standards Code CCR California Code of Regulations CDMG California Department of Mines and Geology CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CESA California Endangered Species Act CF Carbon -Free Energy CFR Code of Federal Regulations Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 327 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page vii CGS California Geological Survey CH4 methane CHP California Highway Patrol City City of Dublin CMP Congestion Management Program CNDDB California Natural Diversity Data Base CO carbon monoxide CO2 carbon dioxide CO2e carbon dioxide -equivalents Cornerstone Cornerstone Earth Group county County of Alameda CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency CWA federal Clean Water Act CY cubic yard dB decibels dBA A -weighted decibel DBH diameter breast height DOC California Department of Conservation DOF California Department of Finance DSRSD Dublin San Ramon Services District DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control EBCE East Bay Community Energy EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District EBRPD East Bay Regional Park District EDR Environmental Database Report EE Efficiency and Electrification EIR Environmental Impact Report EO Executive Order EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency ESA Environmental Site Assessment ESA Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 EV electric vehicle FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration FTA Manual Federal Transit Administration Manual g gravity GGEs gasoline gallon equivalents of petroleum GHG greenhouse gas Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 328 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page viii gpd/ksf gallons of water per day per 1,000 square feet GWP Global warming potential Hi Bay laboratories were used for small-scale testing, while the building located south of the offices/laboratories HVAC heating, ventilation and air conditioning Hz Hertz Interstate in/sec inches per second IPaC Information for Planning and Consulting IS Initial Study ISO International Organization for Standardization LED light emitting diode Leg Equivalent Sound Level Lmax Maximum Noise Level LID Low Impact Development light industrial zoned M-1 LOS level of service LRAs local responsibility areas mg million gallons MGD million gallons per day MM Materials and Waste Management MND Mitigated Negative Declaration mph miles per hour MRZs Mineral Resource Zones MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission N20 nitrous oxide NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NFPA National Fire Protection Association NHSTA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NO2 nitrogen dioxide NOA Naturally Occurring Asbestos NOx nitrogen oxides NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service OES Office of Emergency Services OPR Governor's Office of Planning and Research PD Planned Development PG&E Pacific Gas & Electric Company PM particulate matter PM10 PM equal to or less than 10 micrometers in diameter Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 329 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table of Contents I Page ix PM2.5 PM equal to or less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter Porter -Cologne Act Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act PPV peak particle velocity PRC Public Resources Code proposed project The proposed actions that would involve replacing existing building with a new building and other site improvements R&D research and development R-5 single-family residence RCNM Roadway Construction Noise Model ROGs reactive organic gases RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SB Senate Bill SFBAAB San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin SIP State Implementation Plan SM Sustainable Mobility and Land Use SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1974 SO2 sulfur dioxide SRVRWP San Ramon Valley Water Program ST Short-term STAA Surface Transportation Assistance Act SVP Society of Vertebrate Paleontology SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB California State Water Resources Control Board TACs toxic air contaminants TCE trichloroethene TIA Traffic Impact Analysis UBC Uniform Building Code UCMP University of California Museum of Paleontology UST Underground Storage Tank UWMP Urban Water Management Plan VHFHSZ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones VMT vehicle miles traveled VOCs volatile organic compounds WB-62 Interstate Semi -Trailer Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 330 This page intentionally left blank 331 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 1 Hexcel Redevelopment Project Initial Study Background & Project Description Project Title Hexcel Redevelopment Project Lead Agency Name and Address City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Contact Person and Phone Number Gaspare Annibale Associate Planner Phone: 925/833-6610 Gaspare.Annibale@dublin.ca.gov Project Location The Project site is located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California. The site includes two parcels totaling 8.81 acres (Assessor Parcel Numbers [APN] 941-1560-009-01 [Parcel 1] and 941-1560-003-04 [Parcel 2]). Parcel 1 is the developed portion of the site and consists of the existing Hexcel research and development (R&D) building, landscaping and parking. Parcel 2 is located south of the Hexcel building and consists of a landscape area and the Dublin Creek riparian corridor. See Figure 1. Project Location. As shown in Figure 2. Project Site, the Project site is approximately 8.81 acres located south of Dublin Boulevard in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan with the U.S. Bank Branch and Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery to the east; Interstate (I-)580 to the south; and a business park to the west. Regional access to the project site is provided by 1-580 and 1-680, with local access provided by Dublin Boulevard. Project Applicant/Sponsor Name and Address Dublin Boulevard Owner, LP 19700 S. Vermont Ave Suite 101 Torrance, CA 90502 Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 332 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 2 General Plan Designation Business Park/Industrial Zoning M-1 - Light Industrial and Planned Development (PD) (Ordinance No. 80-60) Project Description This Initial Study, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), describes the proposed project and the project's potential impacts on the surrounding environment. The City of Dublin (the City) is the Lead Agency for review of the proposed project under CEQA. Proposed Project The proposed Project would result in the existing 62,715 square foot industrial building being demolished and a new 125,304 square foot building being developed on the 8.81-acre Project site. The new building would cater to future tenants in the R&D and life sciences field. Other site improvements would include landscaping; parking; a fire access road; circulation improvements for truck access and loading and unloading materials; utilities; pavement and grading to treat site drainage. Figure 3. Site Plan shows the proposed site layout. The following sections describe the proposed Project and project components. Proposed Building The proposed building would cover approximately 33 percent of Parcel 1 (see Figure 3. Site Plan). The building would be set back approximately 135 feet from Dublin Boulevard, separated by landscaped areas, parking stalls and a fire access route for aerial apparatus access (described in succeeding sections). As shown in Figure 4. Elevations, the building would be a single -story building with the potential addition of a second floor mezzanine office and would have a maximum height of 40 feet. The outside of the building would be made of concrete tilt -up panels painted in various colors including blue, white and gray. The north side (front) of the building would have separate entrances to the lower level of each of the four separate tenant spaces (i.e., Units A, B, C and D). Access to the upper mezzanine office spaces would be provided from the interior of the building via stairways. The double doors to the entrance would have aluminum framing with insulated tempered glazed windows. Units B and C would also have doors on the front of the building that would provide access to the industrial and warehouse spaces. Large, glazed windows with aluminum framing would be installed on both lower and upper levels of the building to provide for maximum light filtering from the outside into the office spaces. The west and northwest side of the building would provide for six separate points of ingress/egress into the Unit A industrial and warehouse space, and from the inside provide access outside to adjacent parking stalls and a large landscaped area at the west corner of the site. The east side of the building would provide for four points of ingress/egress into Unit D and would have large vision glass that would allow light to flow into the space from outside while keeping the inside of the building cool and private. The south side (rear) of the building would have 4 to 5 dock doors per unit for loading and unloading of materials from the warehouses. There would be four drive-in doors for truck access inside the warehouse. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 333 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 3 The interior design of the building would maximize natural light with mezzanine offices on the second floor overlooking the ground floor. The total square footage of the first floor would be 119,304 square feet and the second floor would be 6,000 square feet. As indicated in I -able 1: Building Composition by Lev€., the space would be configured for different uses related to life sciences and advanced manufacturing. The overall building square footage could potentially be divided into four separate units (Units A, B, C and D), each with separate entrances, for four future tenants (see Figure 5. Overall Floor Plan). Each of the units would be between 26,000 to 34,000 square feet consisting of office, industrial, and warehouse space. Table 1: Building Composition by Level Level Use Square Footage Level 1 Office 12,000 Level 1 Light industrial 30,000 Level 1 Warehouse 77,304 Level 2 Office 6,000 Other features of the building would include an interior bike rack, interior roof drain with pipe overflow, and an electrical room. All walking surfaces would be non -slip types. The floors would be a flat/tilt concrete slab and interior walls would be concrete. The building would be designed in compliance with fire codes related to fire access, internal sprinkler systems, electrical systems and fire -retardant materials. Additionally, the building would comply with American With Disabilities (ADA) standards related to access, ramps, breakrooms and bathrooms. Landscape Improvements Most of the existing landscape would be replaced, as illustrated in Figure 6A. Landscape Plan, except within the southern portion of the site (Parcel 2) where existing vegetation within the riparian corridor of Dublin Creek and along the 1-580 boundary would be retained. The total site landscape area would be 99,106 square feet, which includes new and existing landscape. A variety of evergreen shrubs, ornamental trees, grasses, and perennials would be planted around the perimeter of the site and at parking lot areas as listed in Figure 6B: Landscape Plan Details. A total of 85 trees would be added to the site along with other plant materials. Some of the proposed plants include sweet bay, strawberry tree, toyon, hopbush, coffeeberry, red yucca, agave, fort night lily, ceanothus and atlas fescue. Bark mulch would be placed in planters around shrubs. Native and drought tolerant plants would be utilized to enhance biodiversity and conserve water. Large ornamental trees planned for parking lot areas would provide shade and minimize radiating heat. The landscape would be designed to provide buffers between the site and adjacent properties, and plants would be strategically placed to screen the site's aboveground utilities from public streets. Temporary and permanent irrigation systems would be installed to establish plants. A 3,827 square foot grass bio-swale surrounded by trees and shrubs is proposed in the west corner of the site. Additional bio-swales/bioretention planters are Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 334 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 4 proposed in the northeast and southeast areas of the site. The total bioretention areas would be 9,819 square feet. Parcel 1 of the Project site contains 87 trees, four of which are heritage trees. All trees within this parcel would be removed except for two of the heritage trees; one in the northeast corner along the project frontage and one in the southwest portion of the site. The heritage trees that would be removed in Parcel 1 include one in the northwest portion of the site and one near the center of the site. Parcel 2 of the Project site contains 109 trees within the Dublin Creek riparian corridor. All trees in Parcel 2 would be retained, 19 of which are heritage trees. Access, Circulation and Parking Vehicular access would be provided from two existing driveways off Dublin Boulevard, one near the center of the site frontage and the other at the eastern boundary. These driveways would be connected by a 30 to 40-foot-wide fire access route around the perimeter of the proposed building (Figure 7. Fire Access Route). A total of six fire hydrants would be installed along this fire access road. The road would be designed to accommodate emergency response vehicles (i.e., fire trucks), delivery box trucks, and trash trucks. A 26-foot-wide fire access route along the northern side of the building would allow for aerial apparatus access. A total of 217 parking spaces would be provided for the Project. The parking spaces would be located around the perimeter of the building and at the edges of the site, and would include stalls for compact vehicles, standard vehicles, electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, and accessible parking. Compact parking would account for 27 percent of the overall parking spaces, while EV parking would account for 45 percent of the overall parking spaces. Additionally, 12 long-term and 12 short-term bicycle stalls would be provided onsite. Offsite loading spaces would be provided in the back (south) of the proposed building adjacent to the dock doors and facing Highway 580. No truck parking or loading will be facing the street. Utilities Systems The Project site is currently served by existing utilities for water, sanitary sewer, electricity, and gas. As discussed in Section 18: Utilities and Service Systems, Dublin San Ramon Services District provides water and wastewater services to the site, and East Bay Community Energy provides electricity and gas to the site, which is distributed by Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Sanitary sewer, sanitary sewer manholes, a water meter, and electrical lines and cables would be removed and replaced with new lines that would connect to existing offsite service lines. Additionally, an existing electrical cabinet, storm drain pipe, electrical transformer, and air conditioner unit are proposed for removal and would be replaced. Some of the existing stormwater lines will be left in place but abandoned. New utility lines would be buried below ground. A fire service line would connect to a public water line, which would provide water to the fire hydrants located around the site. Irrigation lines would also connect to public water lines. Stormwater would be treated onsite via five bioretention treatment planter areas that would be implemented in the western corner, southeast corner and south and northeast portions of the site. The site would be graded to have water flow into these biorientation areas. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 335 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 5 Approximately 9,819 square feet of bioretention areas on the Project site would be used for stormwater control. The proposed Project would include catch basins and storm drains throughout the project site. Full trash capture devices would be installed in all storm drain catch basins. Other Improvements An approximately 6-foot-high retaining wall would be installed along the southern edge of the parking lot and bioretention area in the southwest portion of the site, and lower (approximately 1- to 2-feet-high) retaining walls would be constructed adjacent to the bioretention areas in the southeast and northeast portions of the site. Additional retaining walls would be constructed to create loading dock ramps along the southern facade of the building. A trash enclosure is proposed immediately adjacent to the backside of the building to the west. The trash enclosure would be 10.5 feet tall and 25.75 feet wide. A metal screen would be installed on the top of the enclosure to prevent illegal dumping. Double doors to move dumpsters in and out of the enclosure and an accessible gate would be provided in the front of the enclosure. The enclosure would store two 6-cubic yard (CY) dumpsters and one 2-CY bin for green waste. A pathway would be constructed that would extend from the front of the proposed building to the side of the building providing access to doors along the building, parking spaces and the trash enclosure. A trash container for trash, recycle and compost would be installed near the front entrance of the proposed building. Construction Activities and Schedule A detailed construction schedule has not been determined at this phase; however, all construction of the Project is anticipated to occur over a 12-month period with some of the phases overlapping. Work would occur during weekdays from 7 am to 4 pm. The anticipated (preliminary) construction schedule is provided in Table 2: Anticipated Construction Schedule, which may be updated subject to market conditions, regulatory approvals, and other factors. The number of onsite workers would vary depending on the construction phase, but it is anticipated for a Project of this scope to range from 7 to 64 workers. Typical grading depths throughout the site would be less than 2 to 3 feet below ground level. The maximum depth of excavation would be between 12 to 20 feet below the existing ground level at the storm drain pump, which would be located in the southern portion of Parcel 1. In the parking lot near the southwest corner, grading would extend to approximately 4.5 feet below ground level. Construction phases would include demolition, site preparation and grading, trenching and foundation work, exterior building construction, interior building construction, and outside paving/landscaping. A summary of each construction phase is described below. Demolition —This stage would include the demolition of the existing facility, asphalt pavement (140,724 square feet), concrete curbs, landscape including trees and bushes, irrigation system, drainage system, sewer system, site lights, electrical boxes and other electrical equipment, gas Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 336 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 6 and water meters, fence, shed and gate. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include concrete saws, excavators, loaders, tractors, backhoes, and rubber -tired dozers. Site preparation/grading — After the demolition phase, the site would be cleared of all demolition waste and earthmoving activities such as excavation, grading and leveling would take place to prepare the site for the proposed building and other site improvements. Utility line trenching would also occur during this stage. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include graders, rubber -tired dozers, tractors, loaders, and backhoes. Trenching and foundation — This phase would consist of excavating and trenching for footings, laying down reinforcing bars (rebar) for retaining walls, drilling piers, preparing beams for foundation, and pouring the foundation slab. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include tractors, loaders, backhoes, and excavators. Exterior building construction — This phase would include construction of framing, roof, and siding and installation of exterior windows and doors. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include cranes, forklifts, generator sets, welders and tractors, loaders, backhoes and excavators. Interior building construction —This stage would involve the interior rough out and interior finishes of the building. Walls, flooring, stairs, ceiling, windows, doors, interior electrical and plumbing would be developed at this phase. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include air compressors and aerial lift. Paving and landscape — This stage would include laying down the pavement for the parking, driveways, fire access road, and walkway areas. This stage also includes installation of landscaping and irrigation around the site. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include cement and mortar mixers, pavers, pavement equipment, rollers, tractors, loaders, and backhoes. Table 2: Anticipated Construction Schedule Construction Phase Schedule Duration Demolition Late fall 2023 to winter 2024 3 months Site preparation/grading Early spring 2024 1 month Trenching and foundation Spring 2024 1 month Exterior building construction Late spring 2024 to fall 2024 6 months Interior building construction Late fall 2024 2 months Paving/landscape Late fall 2024 to early winter 2 months Project Approvals The City of Dublin is the Lead Agency for the proposed Project under CEQA. The City would be responsible for considering the Project's impacts as part of the Project approval. The City would require the applicant to obtain the following approvals and permits: approval of a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan; Site Development Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 337 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 7 Review Permit; Heritage Tree Removal Permit; and demolition, building, grading, and encroachment permits. Other agencies whose approval may be required include: • Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD); and • Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Environmental Setting Project Site and Existing Facilities The Project site is located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California. The site includes two parcels totaling 8.81 acres; APN 941-1560-009-01 [Parcel 1] is the larger parcel at 8.30 acres and is located adjacent to Dublin Boulevard, and [APN] 941-1560- 003-04 [Parcel 2] is the smaller parcel at 0.51 acre and is located toward the back (south) of the Project site adjacent to 1-580. The site slopes from a maximum elevation of approximately 395 feet above mean sea level near the southwest corner to about 382 feet at the northern corner. Parcel 1 is zoned M-1 (light industrial) and PD (Ordinance No. 80-60) and Parcel 2 is zoned M-1 (light industrial). The site is also located in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan boundary. The Specific Plan intends to protect and preserve historical resources and further enhance this area with development that is compatible with the extant historic buildings and remnants in the area. The original historic buildings in this area include St. Raymond's church, the Murray Schoolhouse, Pioneer Cemetery, Green's Store, and two bungalow homes. These resources function together as the Dublin Heritage Center, a local history museum and cultural center. The Specific Plan boundary extends from Cronin Circle to 1-580 and San Ramon Road to Hansen Drive, including portions west of Hansen Drive along Dublin Boulevard. The Dublin Village Historic Area encompasses approximately 40 acres (City of Dublin 2014). Parcel 1 (the northern and main portion of the site) is developed with a 62,715 square foot building, at -grade parking, underground and aboveground utilities, pavement, and ornamental landscaping. The existing building is being used as a R&D facility. The landscape consists of grass areas and mature trees. Parcel 2 (the southern parcel) is undeveloped and is surrounded by dense riparian vegetation including mature trees. The Dublin Creek runs along the approximate southern boundary and is approximately 13 to 18 feet below the adjacent site elevations. Surrounding Land Uses As shown in Figure 2. Project Site, the Project site is immediately surrounded by commercial office uses including an R&D facility, medical and professional offices to the west, US Bank, Dublin Pioneer Cemetery, and the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums to the east; 1-580 to the south; and Dublin Boulevard to the north. To the north of Dublin Boulevard and to the east of the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and cemetery are single-family houses. Approximately a mile to the west is Dublin Hills Regional Open Space Preserve. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 338 City of Dublin Environmental Checklist HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 8 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected by the Project The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this Project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" and/or a potentially significant impact that could be reduced to "Less than Significant with Mitigation", as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Impact summaries for all CEQA impacts with a less than significant impact with mitigation and a potentially significant impact are provided in this Initial Study and analyzed further in the Focused EIR. Aesthetics Agricultural and Forestry Resources X Air Quality X Biological Resources X Cultural Resources X Energy X Geology / Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions X Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology / Water Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population / Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation / Traffic X Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities / Service Systems Wildfire X Mandatory Findings of Significance Instructions 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question (see Source List, attached). A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that any effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: applies where incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 339 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 9 describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. 5. Earlier Analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a. Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9. The explanation of each issue should identify: o the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and o the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance 10. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun? Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 340 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 10 Public Resources Code section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission's Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 341 City of Dublin Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 11 I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. X I find that the proposed project MAY have a potentially significant or a potentially significant unless mitigated impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. CITY OF DUBLIN 7/26/23 Anne Hersch, Assistant Community Development Director Date Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 342 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 12 This page intentionally left blank Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 343 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 13 Explanation of Environmental Checklist Responses Aesthetics ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which X would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? L— — Environmental Setting The Project site is in the southwest portion of the City of Dublin surrounded by commercial and residential uses. The site includes two parcels totaling 8.81 acres. Parcel 1 (the northern and main portion of the site) is the larger parcel at 8.30 acres and is developed with a 62,715- square-foot building, at -grade parking, and underground and aboveground utilities. Photo 1 shows a view of the Project site from the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hansen Drive. The existing structure is one and two stories and generally white in color. The building setback varies from approximately 75 feet to 175 feet from Dublin Boulevard. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 344 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 14 Photo 1: View of the Project site from the Intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hansen Drive The Contemporary/Brutalist architectural style building has a roughly L-shaped plan and was largely constructed in two phases in 1962 and 1967, with small additions and alterations in the mid-1980s. The original 1962 portion of the facility is on the east half, has a roughly rectangular plan, and is constructed of tilt -up concrete panels in a north -south orientation. The north end of the building rests on a concrete foundation and is one story tall. The exterior is clad with scored concrete, and the flat roof parapet is lined with a louvered metal equipment screen. A privacy screen that uses vertically oriented, narrow wood slats lines the west side of the east half of the facility and terminates near the secondary entry, which consists of a pair of glazed, metal double doors. The 1967-constructed portion of the facility abuts the west side of the two-story building hyphen. This single -story building section has a T-shaped plan and an east -west orientation. The building is characterized by a flat roof with deep eaves and fascia that is supported by repeating narrow, concrete pylons with wood sheathing on all sides. A two-story building hyphen built in 1984 connects the 1962-constructed east half with the 1967-constructed west half. The hyphen has a flat roof and is clad with scored concrete. A single -story chemical storage addition, constructed in 1985, is at the southeast corner of the facility. The addition has a square plan, a flat roof, with scored panel lines in the concrete exterior. Parcel 1 of the Project site contains 87 trees, four of which are heritage trees. Landscaped areas within Parcel 1 are comprised of sod, various ornamental shrubs, various ornamental tree species, as well as a large number of native trees such as coast live oak trees, California Bay, and California buckeye. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 345 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 15 Dublin Creek is located to the south of the Project footprint on Parcel 2 and runs between the Project footprint and 1-580. Parcel 2 (the southern parcel) is undeveloped and is surrounded by dense riparian vegetation and contains 109 trees within the Dublin Creek riparian corridor. Dublin Creek is approximately 13 to 18 feet below the adjacent site elevations. The Project site is immediately surrounded by commercial office uses including an R&D facility, medical and professional offices to the west, and US Bank, Dublin Pioneer Cemetery, and the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums to the east. To the north of Dublin Boulevard and to the east of the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and cemetery are single-family houses. Approximately a mile to the west is Dublin Hills Regional Open Space Preserve. The buildings in the Project vicinity are generally one to three stories. These buildings vary in architectural style, height, color, and bulk. Landscaping associated with these buildings generally consists of mature trees, shrubs, and grass that provide visual contrast in terms of form, color, mass, and scale. Viewers of the Project site from these locations include motorists, employees and patrons of local businesses, residents, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Scenic Highways, Routes, and Corridors The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) manages the State's Scenic Highways Program. According to Caltrans' California Scenic Highway Mapping System, the nearest officially designated State scenic highway is 1-680, approximately 1 mile east of the Project site (Caltrans 2018). 1-580, located just south of the Project site, is an eligible State scenic highway (Caltrans 2018). 1-580, 1-680, and San Ramon Road were designated scenic routes by Alameda County in 1966. These are the places from which people traveling through Dublin gain their impression of the City (City of Dublin 2022). 1-580 is elevated higher than the Project site, and motorists traveling both directions on 1-580 would have peripheral views of the vegetation on Parcel 2 and motorists traveling westbound would have intermittent peripheral views of Parcel 1. Regional corridors are routes of regional significance and are generally defined as routes that connect Dublin to surrounding communities. Dublin has 12 features (including roadways, trails, and public transportation) that are considered regional corridors. In the vicinity of the Project site, Dublin Boulevard and San Ramon Road are identified by the City as a regional corridor (City of Dublin 2022). Scenic Vistas Scenic vistas consist of expansive, panoramic views of important, unique, or highly valued visual features that are seen from public viewing areas. This definition combines visual quality with information about view exposure to describe the level of interest or concern that viewers may have for the quality of a particular view or visual setting. There are no designated scenic vistas in Dublin. However, the City of Dublin General Plan identifies the visually sensitive ridgelines located in the open space areas in the Western and Eastern Extended Planning Areas of the City as scenic resources (City of Dublin 2022). In the vicinity of the Project site, ridgelines and open space areas are visible from Dublin Boulevard and 1-580. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 346 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 16 Light and Glare The Project area is located in a highly urbanized environment and is surrounded by existing sources of light and glare. These sources of light and glare include streetlights along Dublin Boulevard and 1-580; exterior lighting on office and residential buildings; outdoor lighting on surface parking lots; illuminated signage; reflective building material; and vehicular headlights. In addition, the Project site itself is developed and includes existing sources of light and glare from the parking lot and building facade lighting and interior illumination passing through windows. Glare can emanate from many different sources, some of which include direct sunlight, sunlight reflecting from buildings, and bright outdoor or indoor lighting. Currently, the existing building does not generate substantial glare, as most of the building is constructed of non -reflective materials. Regulatory Framework City of Dublin General Plan Per the City of Dublin General Plan policies, design review would be required for all projects visible from a designated scenic route in order to enhance a positive image of Dublin as seen by through travelers. The following policies related to visual resources are applicable to the proposed Project: • Implementing Policy 5.7.1.A.1. Incorporate County -designated scenic routes, and the Fallon Road extension, in the General Plan as adopted City -designated scenic routes, and work to enhance a positive image of Dublin as seen by through travelers. • Implementing Policy 5.7.1.B.1. Exercise design review of all projects visible from a designated scenic route. In addition, the Community Design and Sustainability Element of the City of Dublin General Plan contains goals and policies that provide a framework for community development and guidelines for new construction and improvements. The following policies are applicable to the proposed Project: • Policy 10.5.3.C. Incorporate visual screening techniques such as berms, dense and/or fast- growing landscaping, and appropriately designed fencing where feasible, to ensure that visually challenging features, such as parking lots, loading docks, storage areas, etc. are visually attractive as seen from regional corridors. • Policy 10.5.3.D. Provide landscaping and articulated design to soften the visual appearance of existing and new walls and fences that are adjacent to regional corridors, wherever feasible (reference: Streetscape Master Plan). • Policy 10.5.3.E. Encourage attractive and high -quality landscaping along the edge of the freeways and development surrounding on- and off -ramps to provide softer and more attractive views both to and from the freeways. Landscaping on private property should complement the buildings and overall site design. • Implementation Measure 10.5.4.C. Review development through the Planned Development Regulations and/or the Site Development Review Permit process. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 347 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 17 • Policy 10.7.3.1.A. Encourage diverse, high quality, attractive, and architecturally appealing buildings that create distinctive visual reference points, enrich the appearance of functional gathering spaces, and convey an excellence in architecture, workmanship, quality, and durability in building materials. • Policy 10.7.3.1.C. Ensure that building height, scale and design are compatible with the character of the surrounding natural and built environment, and are varied in their massing, scale and articulation • Policy 10.7.3.1.E. Avoid the use of long, continuous, straight (building) walls along roadways by designing appropriate articulation, massing, and architectural features • Policy 10.7.3.1.K. Minimize the visual impacts of service/loading areas, storage areas, trash enclosures, and ground mounted mechanical equipment. When feasible, these elements should be located behind or to the sides of buildings and screened from views through a combination of walls/ fencing, and/or landscaping. • Policy 10.7.3.1.L. Minimize the visual impacts of roof mounted mechanical equipment. When feasible, such elements should be consolidated and housed in architecturally articulated enclosures. • Policy 10.7.3.2.H. Preserve mature trees and vegetation, with special consideration given to the protection of groups of trees and associated undergrowth and specimen trees (reference: Heritage Tree Ordinance). • Policy 10.7.3.4.A. Ensure that perimeter areas incorporate appropriate planting, lighting, and signage. • Policy 10.7.3.4.E. Design and locate outdoor lighting around buildings, in parking lots, and along streets that minimize the effects of glare on adjacent properties, particularly in residential areas • Policy 10.7.3.5.A. Provide convenient but not visually dominating parking that incorporates extensive landscaping to provide shade, promote wayfinding, visually soften views from the street and surrounding properties, and reduce the heat island effect (generally characterized with large expanses of paved and under -landscaped surfaces). • Policy 10.7.3.5.B. Buffer and screen large expanses of parking areas from the street, where practical. City of Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.28, Industrial Zoning District Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 are zoned as Light Industrial (M1). The M-1 zoning district is intended to provide for the continued use, expansion, and new development of light industrial use types in proximity to major transportation corridors, and to ensure compatibility with adjacent residential and commercial uses. A landscape buffer 10 feet wide is required to be provided along all roadways which shall be adequately watered and maintained. Open areas used for storage or for parking and loading of vehicles are required to be enclosed by a solid wall or fence not less than 6 feet in height with solid entrance and exit gates. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 348 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 18 Chapter 8.32, Planned Development Zoning District Parcel 1 is further zoned as PD under Ordinance No. 80-60. The existing PD Ordinance No. 80-60 for the Project site was approved by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors on July 10, 1980. The purpose of Chapter 8.32 is to establish a Planned Development Zoning District through which one or more properties are planned as a unit with development standards tailored to the site; provides maximum flexibility and diversification in the development of property; maintains consistency with, and implement the provisions of, the Dublin General Plan and applicable Specific Plans; protects the integrity and character of both residential and non-residential areas of the City; encourages efficient use of land for preservation of sensitive environmental areas such as open space areas and topographic features; encourages use of design features to achieve development that is compatible with the area; and allows for creative and imaginative design that will promote amenities beyond those expected in conventional developments. Chapter 8.32 requires preparation of a Development Plan for the zoning district. The Development Plan shall establish regulations for the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the property within the requested Planned Development Zoning District, and may be adopted in stages, as follows: • Stage 1 Development Plan. A Stage 1 Development Plan shall be adopted for the entire Planned Development District site with the reclassification of the property to the Planned Development Zoning District. The plan shall establish the permitted, conditionally permitted, and accessory uses, Stage 1 site plan, site area and proposed densities, maximum number of residential units and non-residential square footages, a phasing plan and a Master Landscaping Plan; statements regarding consistency with General Plan and Specific Plans, and consistency with Inclusionary Zoning regulations, an aerial photo, other information necessary for the review of the proposed project. • Stage 2 Development Plan. A Stage 2 Development Plan for all or a portion of the entire Planned Development District site may be adopted with the Stage 1 Development Plan at the time of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment. A Stage 2 Development Plan shall establish permitted, conditionally permitted, and accessory uses, Stage 2 site plan, site area and maximum proposed densities, maximum numbers of residential units by type and non- residential square footages for each use, development regulations, architectural standards, preliminary landscape plan, other information necessary for the review of the proposed project. Chapter 8.36, Development Regulations Chapter 8.36, Development Regulations, of the City of Dublin Municipal Code is intended to secure the necessary provision for light, air, privacy, and safety from fire hazards, and to ensure that development within the City of Dublin provides a high -quality living and working environment consistent with the policies of the City General Plan. It sets forth development regulations relating to lot area, lot square footage per residence, lot width, lot frontage, lot depth, residential use, setbacks, distance between residences, lot coverage, lot lines, yards and height limits. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 349 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 19 Chapter 8.72, Landscaping and Fencing Regulations Chapter 8.72, Landscaping and Fencing Regulations, of the City of Dublin Municipal Code is intended to enhance the aesthetic appearance of developments in all areas of the City by providing standards relating to quality, quantity, and functional aspects of landscaping and landscape screening; increase compatibility between residential and abutting commercial and industrial land uses; reduce the heat and glare generated by development; and minimize visual pollution. Chapter 8.104, Site Development Review Chapter 8.104, Site Development Review, of the City of Dublin Municipal Code establishes the procedure for approving, conditionally approving, or denying Site Development Review Permits to promote orderly, attractive, and harmonious development for new development projects that are compatible with surrounding properties and neighborhoods. Adopted Site Development Review Guidelines are used to guide Site Development Review Permit applications. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Scenic vistas, views (No Impact) A scenic vista can be impacted by development projects in two ways: (1) the project could directly diminish the scenic quality of the vista by introducing new visual elements that are incompatible with the balance of built and open space, that substantially alter the landform, or that detract from the qualities that contribute to the scenic vista, or (2) the project could block the view corridors or "vista" of the scenic resource from public vantage points. Important factors in determining whether a proposed project would block scenic vistas include the project's proposed height, mass, and location relative to surrounding land uses and travel corridors, as well as to the number of viewers potentially affected and the length of exposure (e.g., residential land uses are typically more sensitive than land uses with only short-term occupants such as employees, students, or visitors). There are no designated scenic vistas in Dublin. However, the City General Plan identifies the visually sensitive ridgelines located in the open space areas in the Western and Eastern Extended Planning Areas of the City as scenic resources. In the vicinity of the Project site, ridgelines and open space areas are visible from Dublin Boulevard and 1-580. The proposed Project would demolish the existing 62,715 square foot building and develop a new 125,304 square foot building. Because the topography of the Project site, 1-580 is elevated above the Project site, and the surrounding area is generally flat, construction of the Project would not obstruct background views of scenic resources, such as views of ridgelines and open space. Distant views of the Project site would be indistinguishable from the surrounding area due to the density of urban development and flat topography along this portion of Dublin Boulevard. Overall, the Project would be consistent in height, size, and scale with existing buildings in the surrounding area. The new building would be taller and approximately double the size of the existing building. The proposed building may appear bigger and taller for motorists, Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 350 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 20 pedestrians, visitors to local businesses, or individual residents on neighboring properties; however, the increased building size and height would not substantially affect views of ridgelines located in the open space areas from public vantage points or for a substantial number of City residents. Therefore, the Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista and no impact would occur. (b) Scenic resources (Less Than Significant Impact) San Ramon Road and Dublin Boulevard are identified by the City as regional corridors. In addition, San Ramon Road is designated a scenic route by Alameda County. San Ramon Road is located approximately 0.3 mile east of the Project site; however, views of the Project site are not visible from this section of the roadway due to intervening urban development. As shown in Photo 1 above, the Project site is visible from Dublin Boulevard to motorists, pedestrians, visitors to local businesses, or individual residents on neighboring properties. The proposed Project would demolish the existing 62,715 square foot industrial building and develop a new 125,304 square foot building. The building would be set back approximately 135 feet from Dublin Boulevard, separated by landscaped areas and parking stalls. Figure 10. Perspective 1 shows an image of how the Project site would appear from Dublin Boulevard. While the new building may appear bigger and taller for motorists, pedestrians, visitors to local businesses, or individual residents on neighboring properties, the Project would be consistent in height, size, and scale with existing buildings in the surrounding area. Much of the existing landscape and trees on Parcel 1, closest to Dublin Boulevard, would be removed during project construction. However, a total of 85 trees would be added to the site along with other plants, such as sweet bay, strawberry tree, toyon, hopbush, coffeeberry, red yucca, agave, fort night lily, ceanothus and atlas fescue. Over time, as landscaping and trees mature, they would soften and obscure the visibility of the proposed building and parking lot. The nearest officially designated State scenic highway is 1-680, approximately 1 mile east of the Project site. However, views of the Project site are not visible from this section of the roadway due to intervening urban development. 1-580, located approximately 65 feet to the south of the Project site, is an eligible State scenic highway. Photos 2 and 3 illustrate existing views of the Project site from eastbound 1-580 and westbound 1-580, respectively. As shown in Photos 2 and 3, motorists traveling both directions 1-580 would have peripheral views of Parcel 2 and motorist traveling westbound would have intermittent peripheral views of Parcel 1. Existing vegetation on Parcel 2 within the riparian corridor of Dublin Creek and along the 1-580 boundary would be retained. Therefore, views of Parcel 2 from 1-580 would be the same as existing conditions. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 351 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 21 Photo 2: View of Parcel 2 by Motorists Traveling Eastbound on 1-580 Photo 3: View of the Project site by Motorists Traveling Westbound on 1-580 Views of Parcel 1 are peripheral to the viewer experience of motorists on 1-580. Motorists experience direct views of the asphalt roadway, light rail tracks with associated chain link fence dividing the eastbound and westbound lanes of traffic, metal guardrails, overhead lighting, and interstate signage. Figure 11. Perspective shows a view of the Project site with the proposed building from one vantage point of motorists traveling in the westbound direction. As shown in the figure, the southwest corner of the proposed building would be partially visible from this portion of the highway. However, vegetation would provide a soft screen against the building. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 352 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 22 As stated above, the Project would be consistent in height, size, and scale with the existing buildings in the surrounding area, and as landscaping and trees mature, they would soften and obscure the visibility of the building and parking lot. Views of the Project site from this location would be intermittent, viewed from above, and experienced at high speeds (generally 65 miles per hour). Therefore, the sensitivity of motorists along 1-580 to visual change is low. Thus, the proposed Project would not substantially damage scenic resources, and this impact would be less than significant. (c) Substantially degrade the visual character of public views of the site or surrounding area (No Impact) The threshold of significance for development in urbanized areas is limited to whether the Project would conflict with applicable zoning or other regulations governing scenic quality. Impacts to scenic quality within urbanized areas do not include degradation to visual character or the quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. The proposed Project would demolish the existing 62,715 square foot industrial building and development of a new 125,304 square foot building. Parcel 1 has split zoning with one half of the parcel zoned M-1 Light Industrial) and the other half zoned PD. Parcel 2 is zoned M-1 (Light Industrial). As discussed further in the Dublin Municipal Code (DM) Section 8.28.23, the M-1 zoning district is intended to provide for the continued use, expansion, and new development of light industrial use types. The proposed Project is a permitted use within the M-1 zoning district, however, is not a permitted use in the PD. A Planned Development Rezone would be required for Parcels 1 and 2, which provides development standards beyond those of the M-1 zoning, and a new ordinance would be adopted concurrently. In addition, the proposed Project would prepare Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans simultaneously.' With approval of a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan (DMC Chapter 8.32) and Site Development Review Permit (DMC 8.104), the proposed Project would not conflict with the zoning of the Project site. The Project would be consistent with the development standards and design criteria provided in DMC Chapter 8.36, including standards for setbacks, lot area, lot width, lot frontage, lot depth, lot coverage, lot lines, and height limits. The building would be set back approximately 135 feet from Dublin Boulevard and cover approximately 31 percent of the site (see Figure 3. Site Plan). The building would be two -stories, with a maximum height of 40 feet (see Figure 4. Elevations). In addition, the proposed Project would not exceed the Dublin Area Village Specific Plan's development potential for the Project site (maximum of 154,202 square feet). 1 The Stage 1 Development Plan establishes the permitted, conditionally permitted and accessory uses and discusses consistency with the General Plan. The Stage 2 Development Plan establishes development standards/regulations, as well as architectural/landscaping standards. The Planning Commission and the City Council would review the Development Plan, PD zoning district, and ordinance for approval (Gaspare pers. comm., 2023). Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 353 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 23 The Project would be consistent with General Plan policies regarding landscaping and visual screening (Policies 10.5.3.C, 10.5.3.D, 10.5.3.E, 10.7.3.2.H, 10.7.3.4.A, and 10.7.3.5.A of the Dublin General Plan) and the City's municipal code Chapter 8.28. The total site landscape area would be 99,106 square feet, which includes new and existing landscape. A variety of evergreen shrubs, ornamental trees, grasses, and perennials would be planted around the perimeter of the site and at parking lot areas (see Figure 6B. Landscape Plan Detail). A total of 85 trees would be added to the site along with a variety of other plants. Some of the proposed plants include sweet bay, strawberry tree, toyon, hopbush, coffeeberry, red yucca, agave, fort night lily, ceanothus and atlas fescue. A 3,827 square foot grass bio-swale surrounded by trees and shrubs is proposed in the west corner of the site, and additional bio-swales/bioretention planters are proposed in the northeast and southeast areas of the site. The Project would be consistent with General Plan policies regarding design of industrial buildings (Policies 10.7.3.1.A, 10.7.3.1.B, and 10.7.3.1.E of the Dublin General Plan). The outside of the building would be made of concrete tilt -up panels painted in various colors including blue, white, and gray. An approximately 6-foot-high retaining wall would be installed along the southern edge of the parking lot and bioretention area in the southwest portion of the site, and lower (approximately 1- to 2-feet-high) retaining walls would be constructed adjacent to the bioretention areas in the southeast and northeast portions of the site. Additional retaining walls would be constructed to create loading dock ramps along the southern facade of the building. As discussed in more detail in Section 4, "Biological Resources," the Project's proposed tree removal and replacement on Parcel 1 would also comply with the requirements of the City's Heritage Tree Ordinance (DMC Chapter 5.60). Although the proposed removal of trees would change the visual appearance of the Project site, the City's Heritage Tree Ordinance allows for tree removal to accommodate proposed development, provided certain conditions are met. With adherence to the tree removal permit conditions, the Project would not conflict with the City's tree ordinance. All heritage trees in Parcel 2 would be retained. There are no other regulations governing scenic quality that are applicable to the Project. Because the proposed Project would not conflict with applicable zoning or other regulations governing scenic quality, there would be no impact. (d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare (Less Than Significant) The light and glare created by development under the Project would be consistent with the levels of lighting and glare currently emitted by the on -site building and office buildings surrounding the Project site and street lighting. Exterior light sources would be designed so as not to create significant light and glare on adjacent properties through the use of concealed sources and/or downcast light fixtures. Because the Project would not introduce new sources of light substantially different from the existing on -site light and from surrounding uses and street lighting, the Project would not generate a substantial new source of light that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Glare is caused by light reflections from pavement, vehicles, and building materials such as reflective glass and polished surfaces. During daylight hours, the amount of glare depends on Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 354 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 24 intensity and direction of sunlight. The outside of the building would be made of concrete tilt - up panels painted in various colors including blue, white and gray. Glazed, non -reflective windows with aluminum framing would be installed on both lower and upper levels of the building. These non -reflective building materials would not result in potential glare impacts within the Project site or surrounding areas, and notably at the street level. For the reasons described above, the proposed Project would not create substantial new sources of light and glare, and this impact would be less than significant. Source(s) California Department of Transportation. 2018. California State Scenic Highway Map. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community- livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways. Accessed March 8, 2023. City of Dublin. City of Dublin General Plan, 2022. Amended February 15, 2022. Gaspare, Annibale. City of Dublin. Email with Stephanie Osby regarding Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan process and approval of a Planned Development zoning district ordinance. March 20, 2023. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 355 City of Dublin Agricultural and Forestry Resources HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 25 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in PRC Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by PRC Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? Environmental Setting The Project site is not used for agricultural production and is not designated Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (NRCS 2019). The surrounding area is characterized by commercial and residential uses. There are no forest or timberland on or near the Project site. Regulatory Framework State Regulations California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program The California Department of Conservation (DOC) manages the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program to assess the location, quality, and quantity of agricultural lands and conversion of these lands over time. In each county, the land is analyzed for soil and irrigation Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 356 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 26 quality, and the highest quality land is designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Based on the results of these analyses, the DOC issues maps every two years with the use of a computer mapping system, aerial imagery, public review, and field reconnaissance. Williamson Act The Williamson Act, also known as the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, enables local governments and private landowners to enter into contracts that restrict specific parcels of land to agricultural or related open space use. As a result, landowners receive reduced property tax assessments because they are based upon farming and open space uses rather than market value. Local Regulations City of Dublin General Plan • Guiding Policy A.1. States that the City will prevent the premature urbanization of agricultural lands. • Implementing Policy B.1. Requires the City to make findings that the land is suitable for the proposed use and will have adequate urban services and that conversion to an urban use will not have significant adverse effects on adjoining lands remaining under Williamson Act contract. Due to the location of the Project site and its proximity to existing development, existing policies aimed at preserving agricultural uses in the City are not applicable to the proposed Project. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (No Impact) As described in the Environmental Setting above, the Project site is not used for agricultural production and is not designated Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Therefore, the proposed Project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or any other type of farmland to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, there would be no impact. (b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a William Act contract (No Impact) The Project site is currently zoned as M-1 (Light Industrial) and PD on the City of Dublin Zoning Map (City of Dublin 2022). The Project site is not currently used for agricultural purposes, not zoned for agricultural uses, and is not protected by, or eligible for, a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with existing agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contracts. Therefore, there would be no impact. (c) Conflict with existing zoning for forest land or timberlands (No Impact) The Project site is currently zoned as M-1 (Light Industrial) and PD on the City of Dublin Zoning Map (City of Dublin 2022). The Project site is not currently used for forest or timberland Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 357 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study l Page 27 purposes, and is not zoned for forest land or timberland uses. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with existing forest or timberland zoning and there would be no impact. (d) Result in loss of forest land or conversion to non -forest use (No Impact) No forest land exists on the Project site or in the surrounding area. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in the loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Therefore, there would be no impact. (e) Other changes that could result in conversion of farmland or forest land (No Impact) The proposed Project would not result in other changes to the environment that could indirectly result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural purposes or conversion of forest land to non -forest uses. The Project site is in a highly urbanized area and the Project would replace the existing industrial uses at the site with similar industrial uses. Therefore, there would be no impact. Source(s) City of Dublin. 2022. Dublin Zoning Map as amended through June 21, 2022. Obtained January 24, 2023 from https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/31440/Zoning-Map- June-2022. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2019. Web Soil Survey. Obtained on February 2, 2023 from https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 358 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 28 This page intentionally left blank Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 359 City of Dublin Air Quality HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 29 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people? Environmental Setting Air quality is defined by the concentration of pollutants in relation to their impact on human health and the environment. Concentrations of air pollutants are determined by the rate and location of pollutant emissions released by pollution sources, and the atmosphere's ability to transport and dilute such emissions. Natural factors that affect transport and dilution include terrain, wind, and sunlight. Therefore, ambient air quality conditions within the local air basin are influenced by natural factors such as topography, meteorology, and climate, in addition to the amount of air pollutant emissions released by existing air pollutant sources. The proposed Project is located in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB), which is comprised of complex terrain types, including coastal mountain ranges, inland valleys, and bays, which distort normal wind flow patterns. Along the County of Alameda's (the county) western coast, temperatures are moderated by the bay, which can act as a heat source during cold weather or cool the air by evaporation during warm weather. It is generally sunnier farther from the coast, although partly cloudy skies are common throughout the summer. Average summer temperatures are mild overnight and moderate during the day. Winter temperatures are typically cool overnight and mild during the day. Highest temperatures are more common inland. Wind speeds vary throughout the county, with the strongest gusts along the western coast, often aided by dominant westerly winds and a bay -breeze effect. Rainfall totals average about 14 to 23 inches per year, with the highest totals in the northern end of the county and atop the Oakland -Berkeley hills (BAAQMD 2021). Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 360 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 30 Air Pollutants of Concern Individual air pollutants at certain concentrations may adversely affect human or animal health, reduce visibility, damage property, and reduce the productivity or vigor of crops and natural vegetation. Six air pollutants have been identified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) as being of concern both on a nationwide and statewide level: ozone; carbon monoxide (CO); nitrogen dioxide (NO2); sulfur dioxide (SO2); lead; and particulate matter (PM), which is subdivided into two classes based on particle size: PM equal to or less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10) and PM equal to or less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5). Because the air quality standards for these air pollutants are regulated using human health and environmentally based criteria, they are commonly referred to as "criteria air pollutants." Ozone is not emitted directly into the air but is formed through a series of reactions involving reactive organic gases (ROGs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the presence of sunlight. ROG and NOx are referred to as "ozone precursors." Toxic Air Contaminants In addition to criteria air pollutants, EPA and CARB regulate hazardous air pollutants, also known as toxic air contaminants (TACs). TACs collectively refer to a diverse group of air pollutants that can cause chronic (i.e., long -duration) and acute (i.e., severe but short-term) adverse effects on human health, including carcinogenic effects. TACs can be separated into carcinogens and noncarcinogens based on the nature of the effects associated with exposure to the pollutant. For regulatory purposes, carcinogens are assumed to have no safe threshold below which health impacts would not occur. Noncarcinogens differ in that there is generally assumed to be a safe level of exposure below which no negative health impact is believed to occur. These levels are determined on a pollutant -by -pollutant basis. Sensitive Receptors Sensitive receptors are facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, people with illnesses, or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. Hospitals, schools, convalescent facilities, and residences are examples of sensitive receptors. The nearest sensitive receptors include residences located across Dublin Boulevard, approximately 200 feet north of the Project site, a daycare located approximately 300 feet north of the Project site, and residences located approximately 570 feet east of the Project site. Regulatory Framework Federal Clean Air Act and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Pursuant to the Clean Air Act, the EPA has established ambient air quality standards to protect public health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety. These federal standards, known as NAAQS, were developed for the six criteria pollutants described above. NAAQS represent safe levels of each pollutant to avoid specific adverse effects to human health and the environment. Two types of NAAQS have been established, primary and secondary standards. Primary standards set limits to protect public health, especially that of sensitive populations such as asthmatics, children, and seniors. Secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare, including protections against decreased visibility and damage to animals, crops, and buildings. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 361 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 31 The Clean Air Act was amended in 1977 to require each state to maintain a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for achieving compliance with the NAAQS. In 1990, the Clean Air Act was amended again to strengthen regulation of both stationary and mobile emission sources. California Clean Air Act and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). In 1988, the state legislature adopted the California Clean Air Act, which established a statewide air pollution control program. The California Clean Air Act requires all air districts in the state to make progress towards meeting the CAAQS by the earliest practical date. The California Clean Air Act establishes increasingly stringent requirements over time. CAAQS are generally more stringent than NAAQS and incorporate additional standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, visibility -reducing particles, and vinyl chloride. The California Clean Air Act substantially adds to the authority and responsibilities of air districts. The California Clean Air Act designates air districts as lead air quality planning agencies, requires air districts to prepare air quality plans, and grants air districts authority to implement transportation control measures. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). BAAQMD is the agency responsible for protecting public health and welfare through the administration of federal and state air quality laws and policies in the SFBAAB. BAAQMD's tasks include air pollution monitoring, preparing air quality plans, and promulgating rules and regulations. BAAQMD rules and regulations relevant to the proposed Project include but are not limited to: Regulation 6 (Particulate Matter); Regulation 7 (Odorous Substances); Regulation 8, Rule 3 (Architectural Coatings); Regulation 11, Rule 2 (Asbestos Demolition, Renovation and Manufacturing). Additional rules and regulations may be applicable dependent upon the future specific tenants of the building. BAAQMD also maintains multiple air quality monitoring stations that continually measure the ambient concentrations of major air pollutants throughout the SFBAAB. Under the California Clean Air Act, BAAQMD is required to develop an air quality attainment plan for nonattainment criteria pollutants within the air district. The 2017 Bay Area Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air and Cool the Climate was adopted on April 19, 2017, and provides a regional strategy to protect public health and protect the climate. To fulfill state ozone planning requirements, the 2017 control strategy includes all feasible measures to reduce emissions of ozone precursors and reduce transport of ozone and its precursors to neighboring air basins. In addition, the 2017 Clean Air Plan builds upon and enhances BAAQMD's efforts to reduce emissions of fine PM and TACs (BAAQMD 2017a). Attainment of Federal and State Air Quality Standards Areas are classified under the Federal Clean Air Act and California Clean Air Act as attainment, non -attainment, or maintenance (areas that were previously non -attainment but are currently attainment) for each criteria pollutant based on whether the federal and state air quality standards have been achieved. With respect to the NAAQS, the SFBAAB is designated as a nonattainment area for ozone and PM2.5, and as an attainment or unclassified area for all other pollutants. With respect to the CAAQS, the SFBAAB is designated as a nonattainment area for ozone, PM10, and PM2.s, and as an attainment or unclassified area for all other pollutants (BAAQMD 2017b). Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 362 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 32 City of Dublin General Plan. The City of Dublin General Plan, adopted in 1985 and amended in 2022, includes an Environmental Resources Management: Conservation Element. The following policies related to air quality would be applicable to the proposed Project (City of Dublin 2022): • Request that the Bay Area Air Quality Management District establish an air quality monitoring station in Dublin. • Require an air quality analysis for new development projects that could generate significant air emissions on a project and cumulative level. Air quality analyses shall include specific feasible measures to reduce anticipated air quality emissions to a less -than -significant CEQA level. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Consistent with air quality plans (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) The Project would implement Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices to comply with BAAQMD's Basic Construction Mitigation Measures during demolition and construction. Therefore, this impact would be Tess than significant with mitigation. This impact is further analyzed in the Focused EIR. (b) Project emissions (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated) The Project would implement Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices to comply with BAAQMD's Basic Construction Mitigation Measures during demolition and construction. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, construction of the proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. During project operation, the proposed Project would result in a net reduction of emissions compared to existing conditions for NOx, PM10, and PM2.5, and ROG emissions would not exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance. Thus, this impact would be less than significant with mitigation. This impact is further analyzed in the Focused EIR. (c) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations (Less Than Significant Impact) Criteria Air Pollutants As previously discussed, criteria air pollutants may adversely affect human or animal health, reduce visibility, damage property, and reduce the productivity or vigor of crops and natural vegetation. As shown in Table 3: Project Consistency with Applicable CAP 2030 GHG Emissions Reduction Measures, construction activities would result in emissions of criteria air pollutants but at levels that would not exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance. Operation of the proposed Project would result in a net reduction in NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions compared to existing conditions because the proposed Project is an energy -efficient, all -electric, building that would generate fewer daily vehicle trips, while the slight increase in ROG emissions would not exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance. The construction and operational Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 363 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 33 thresholds of significance were designed to identify those projects that would result in significant levels of air pollution and to assist the region in attaining the applicable state and federal ambient air quality standards, which were established using health -based criteria to protect the public with a margin of safety from adverse health impacts due to exposure to air pollution. The proposed Project is estimated to generate approximately 2 tons of NOx emissions and less than 1 ton of ROG emissions during demolition and construction activities. As discussed above, NOx and ROG are ozone precursors. Individuals exercising outdoors, children, and people with lung disease, such as asthma and chronic pulmonary lung disease, are considered to be the most susceptible subgroups for ozone effects. Short-term ozone exposure (lasting for a few hours) can result in changes in breathing patterns, reductions in breathing capacity, increased susceptibility to infections, inflammation of lung tissue, and some immunological changes. Chronic exposure to high ozone levels can permanently damage lung tissue (BAAQMD 2017a). Because of the reaction time and other factors involved in ozone formation, ozone is considered a regional pollutant that is not linearly related to emissions (i.e., ozone impacts vary depending on the location of the emissions, the location of other precursor emissions, meteorology, and seasonal impacts). Peak ozone concentrations often occur far downwind of the precursor emissions. Thus, ozone is considered a regional pollutant that often affects large areas. There currently is no way to accurately quantify ozone -related health impacts from NOx and ROG emissions from small projects. These limitations are due to photochemistry and regional model limitations; it takes a large amount of additional precursor emissions to cause a modeled increase in ambient ozone levels (SCAQMD 2015). However, because the BAAQMD regional thresholds of significance for NOx and ROG were established with these factors in mind, the considering that the proposed Project's emissions would be less than the BAAQMD thresholds indicates that the project's NOx and ROG emissions would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of ozone. In addition, the proposed Project would comply with applicable BAAQMD rules, including but not limited to Regulation 6 (Particulate Matter), which reduces the amount of PM entrained in the ambient air. Furthermore, the existing building would be replaced with an energy -efficient, all -electric, building that would generate fewer daily vehicle trips; thus, operation of the proposed Project would also result in a net reduction in regional energy and mobile source criteria air pollutant emissions. Therefore, criteria air pollutant emissions associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial criteria pollutant concentrations. Toxic Air Contaminants The health effects associated with TACs are quite diverse and generally are assessed locally, rather than regionally. TACs can cause long-term health effects such as cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, asthma, bronchitis or genetic damage; or short-term acute affects such as eye watering, respiratory irritation (a cough), running nose, throat pain, and headaches. The greatest potential TAC emissions would be related to diesel PM emissions associated with activity by heavy-duty construction equipment. The total duration of construction activities is anticipated to be approximately 12 months; the exposure of sensitive receptors to construction emissions would be short term, intermittent, and temporary in nature. Health effects from TACs are often described in terms of individual cancer risk, which is based on a 30-year lifetime Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 364 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 34 exposure to TACs (OEHHA 2015). Therefore, the total exposure period for construction activities would be approximately 3 percent of the total exposure period used for typical health risk calculations (i.e., 30 years). As shown in , construction related PM2.5 exhaust, a proxy for diesel PM emissions, would be substantially below the thresholds of significance. Construction activities would vary and span across 8.30 acres of Parcel 1. For example, although the nearest sensitive receptors are the surrounding residences located 200 feet and 570 feet away from the Project boundaries, as construction activity occurs across the 8.30 acres of Parcel 1 of the Project site, construction -related emissions would occur at varying distances as far as 1,380 feet from receptors (when construction activities are occurring at the southwestern end of the Project site) and as close as 200 feet (when construction activities are occurring at the northern end of the Project site). Concentrations of mobile -source diesel PM emissions are typically reduced by approximately 60 percent at a distance of 300 feet (100 meters) (Zhu et al. 2002). Therefore, trucks and off -road equipment would not operate in the immediate vicinity of any sensitive receptor for an extended period of time and the potential exposure to TAC emission concentrations would be limited. Given the construction schedule, varying topography and buffer distances to the nearest sensitive receptors, and the highly dispersive nature of diesel PM emissions, construction of the proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial TAC concentrations that could cause short- or long-term health effects. In addition, TAC emission exposure would also be reduced with implementation of CARB regulations, such as the Airborne Toxic Control Measure, which limits idling of diesel -fueled commercial motor vehicles. The demolition and hazardous waste abatement activities would also comply with BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2 (Asbestos Demolition, Renovation and Manufacturing), which would control emissions of asbestos to the atmosphere and reduce exposure of receptors to this TAC. As discussed previously, the proposed Project would result in fewer daily vehicle trips compared to existing conditions; thus, TAC emissions associated with mobile source emissions (e.g., diesel PM from diesel -fueled vehicles) would be lower than existing conditions. The proposed Project includes a diesel -fired fire pump, which would be a source of TAC emissions. However, the fire pump would be permitted per BAAQMD rules and regulations and would not be operated for extended periods of time; thus, emissions would be limited to infrequent operation and during maintenance and testing activities. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in an increase in TAC emissions beyond existing conditions and the proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. (d) Odors (Less Than Significant) The occurrence and severity of odor impacts depend on numerous factors, including the nature, frequency, and intensity of the source; wind speed and direction; and the presence of sensitive receptors. While offensive odors rarely cause any physical harm, they still can be very unpleasant, leading to considerable distress and often generating citizen complaints to local governments and regulatory agencies. Projects with the potential to frequently expose individuals to objectionable odors are deemed to have a significant impact. Typical facilities that generate odors include wastewater treatment facilities, sanitary landfills, composting Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 365 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 35 facilities, petroleum refineries, chemical manufacturing plants, and food processing facilities (BAAQMD 2017c). Construction activities associated with the proposed Project could result in short-term odor emissions from asphalt paving activities and diesel exhaust associated with construction equipment. The proposed Project would use typical construction techniques; odors would be typical of most construction sites and limited to duration of construction. Furthermore, nuisance odors are regulated under the BAAQMD's Regulation 7, Odorous Substances, which requires abatement of any nuisance generating an odor complaint. Regulation 7 places general limitations on odorous substances, and specific emission limitations on certain odorous compounds. Since the proposed Project involves the redevelopment of an existing industrial building with a new industrial building, the proposed Project would not introduce a new odor - generating source. Thus, the proposed Project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) that would adversely affect a substantial number of people. This impact would be less than significant. Source(s) Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017a. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air: Cool the Climate. Available online: https://www.baagmd.govNmedia/files/planning-and-research/plans/2017-clean-air- plan/attachment-a -proposed-final-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed February 2023. . 2017b. Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status. Available online: https://www.baagmd.gov/about-air-quality/research-a nd-data/air-quality-standards- and-attainment-status. Accessed February 2023. . 2017c. California Environmental Quality Act: Air Quality Guidelines. Available online: https://www.baagmd.gov/"/media/files/planning-and- research/ceqa/ceqa guidelines may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed February 2023. . 2021. In Your Community: Alameda County. Available online: https://www.baagmd.gov/about-the-air-district/in-your-community/alameda-county. Accessed January 2021. City of Dublin. 2022. General Plan. Available online: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30287/General-Plan-Update- 04192022-WEB. Accessed March 2023. Office of Environmental Health Hazard (OEHHA). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program: Risk Assessment Guidelines. February. Available online: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf. Accessed February 2023. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2015. Sierra Club v. County of Fresno. Brief amicus curiae of South Coast Air Quality Management District. April 6, 2015. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 366 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 36 Available online: https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/9-s219783-ac-south-coast-air- quality-mgt-dist-041315.pdf. Accessed February 2023. W Traffic Engineering Transportation Planning (W-Trans). 2022. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. December. Zhu, Y., W. C. Hinds, S. Kim, and S. Shen. 2002. Study of Ultrafine Particles Near a Major Highway with Heavy-duty Diesel Traffic. Atmospheric Environment. 36:4323-4335. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 367 City of Dublin Biological Resources HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 37 Potentially Significant Impact 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special -status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Environmental Setting This section describes the existing biological setting within the Project site, which consists of two adjacent parcels, Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. The focus of the analysis was based on the areas potentially directly or indirectly affected by construction of the Project, referred to herein as the Project footprint. The Project footprint is exclusively in Parcel 1. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 368 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 38 The City of Dublin is characterized by a diverse array of wildlife and plant species, with two discrete habitat types —the flatter urbanized portion of the City and the surrounding oak woodland and California annual grassland. The Project site is located within the urbanized area, which exhibits plant and animal species typical of urbanized areas including a combination of native and introduced trees, grasses and shrubs used for landscaping purposes. The proposed Project footprint is completely developed with buildings, hardscape, and landscaped areas. Vegetation within landscaped areas of the footprint is comprised of sod, various ornamental shrubs, various ornamental tree species, as well as native trees such as California Bay (Umbellularia californica), coast live oak trees (Quercus agrifolia), and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). No natural habitats (habitats with naturally occurring vegetation) occur within the Project footprint. The Project site is primarily developed with buildings, hardscape, and landscaped areas associated with the existing Hexcel buildings; however, Dublin Creek is located to the south of the Project footprint approximately along the boundary of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. Dublin Creek in this location contained less than 1 foot of water during AECOM's site visit on December 12, 2022. The banks of this feature are natural, but this feature runs underground for long stretches immediately east and west of the project. Vegetation Communities Vegetation communities within the Project footprint are limited to landscaped areas comprised of sod, various ornamental shrubs, various ornamental tree species, as well as a large number of native trees such as coast live oak trees, California Bay, and California buckeye. To the south of the Project footprint and on Parcel 2, is riparian habitat associated with Dublin Creek. Wildlife Wildlife in the Project site is likely to be limited to those species easily habituated to human activity, and which typically occupy urban areas or interfaces between urban and open space areas. Larger fauna may include raccoon (Procyon lotor) and skunk (Mephitis mephitis), while smaller fauna would include species such as western fence lizards (Sceloporus occidentalis), southern alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata), deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), and Botta's pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae). A wide variety of bird species likely utilizes the riparian corridor of Dublin Creek to the south of the Project footprint, as well as the ornamental vegetation and trees within the Project footprint. These species include red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), western bluebird (Sialia mexicana), American robin (Turdus migratorius), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), among others. Regulatory Framework Migratory Bird Treaty Act The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 makes it illegal to take, possess, import, export, transport, sell, purchase, barter, or offer for sale, purchase, or barter any migratory bird, or the Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 369 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 39 parts, nests, or eggs of such bird, except under the terms of a valid federal permit. Migratory bird species protected by the act are listed in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in 50 CFR Part 10.13. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has statutory authority for enforcing the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 United States Code Sections 703-712). Federal Endangered Species Act The Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (16 United States Code Section 1531 et seq.) provides a regulatory program for the conservation of threatened and endangered plants and animals and the habitats in which they are found. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service are the lead agencies responsible for implementing the ESA. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service maintains a list of endangered species that includes birds, insects, fish, reptiles, mammals, crustaceans, plants, and trees. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or National Marine Fisheries Service requires authorization for any actions that they authorize, carry out, or fund, that may jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. California Endangered Species Act The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) conserves and protects animals at risk of extinction. Plants and animals may be designated as threatened or endangered under CESA after a formal listing process by the California Fish and Game Commission. A CESA-listed species may not be killed, possessed, purchased, or sold without authorization from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. California Fish and Game Code Fully Protected Species Sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515 of the California Fish and Game Code designate 37 species of wildlife as Fully Protected in California. Fully Protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time, and no licenses or permits may be issued for their take, except for the authorized collection of these species for necessary scientific research and relocation of bird species for the protection of livestock. California Fish and Game Code Section 2081 Incidental Take Permits Section 2081(b) of the California Fish and Game Code allows the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to authorize take of CESA-listed species categorized as endangered, threatened, candidate, or rare plant species if that take is incidental to otherwise lawful activities, and if certain conditions are met. Section 2081(b) permits are commonly referred to as an Incidental Take Permit. City of Dublin Municipal Code The City of Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 5.60: "the Heritage Tree Ordinance" (Ord. 5-02 § 2 (part): Ord. 29-99 § 1 (part)), requires that a Tree Removal permit from the Director be acquired prior to the removal of heritage trees. Heritage trees include: Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 370 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 40 1. "Any oak, bay, cypress, maple, redwood, buckeye and sycamore tree having a trunk or main stem of twenty-four (24) inches or more in diameter measured at four (4) feet six (6) inches above natural grade; 2. A tree required to be preserved as part of an approved development plan, zoning permit, use permit, site development review or subdivision map; 3. A tree required to be planted as a replacement for an unlawfully removed tree." In addition, all applications for demolition, grading, or building permits on property containing one or more heritage trees shall prepare a tree protection plan pursuant to Section 5.60.090. City of Dublin General Plan The City of Dublin General Plan Chapter 7 Environmental Resources Management Conservation Element provides guidance for the protection of biological resources in Dublin and includes objectives, goals, and policies regarding biological resources. The following goals and policies from the City's General Plan relating to biological resources apply to the Project: • Guiding Policy 7.2.1A1: Protect riparian vegetation as a protective buffer for stream quality and for its value as a habitat and aesthetic resource • Implementing Policy 7.3.261: Require erosion control plans for proposed development. Erosion control plans shall include recommendations for preventing erosion and scour of drainageways, consistent with biological and visual values. • Implementing Policy 7.4.162: Enact and enforce the Heritage Tree Ordinance Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Substantial adverse effect on candidate, sensitive, or special status species (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) Noise and vibration from proposed construction activities associated with the Project could disturb birds that are nesting on and near the Project site. In addition, the Project would involve the removal of approximately 85 landscape trees within the Project footprint, which could be used by birds during the nesting season. If a tree containing an active nest were to be removed during construction, such removal would result in nest destruction and failure. Due to this potential for loss of nests, and due to potential disturbance of nesting birds from noise and vibration during Project construction, the impact to nesting birds would be potentially significant. The implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Nesting Bird Avoidance Measures would bring this impact down to a less than significant impact. This impact is further analyzed in the Focused EIR. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 371 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 41 (b) Substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other natural community (Less Than Significant Impact) No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities are located within the Project footprint; therefore, Project construction or operation would not directly impact riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. Dublin Creek is located approximately 5 feet south of the Project footprint on Parcel 2; however, proposed construction activities and continued operation of the site would not remove, fill, or hydrologically interrupt this feature. Construction would occur within 5 feet of riparian trees within Dublin Creek; however, construction activities will occur on existing paved areas (parking lot), and no construction equipment will enter Dublin Creek and associated riparian habitat. No trees or vegetation along Dublin Creek would be disturbed during construction. In the event that runoff from the Project or accidental spills entered Dublin Creek, sedimentation or the introduction of pollutants to Dublin Creek would constitute a potentially significant impact. As discussed further in Section 9, Hydrology, the Project would avoid sedimentation or the introduction of pollutants to Dublin Creek through the required implementation of erosion and sediment control measures and the implementation of BMPs specified in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction, which would protect water quality. Disturbance from noise and vibration (see Section 12) on wildlife could result during construction activities. However, these impacts would be minimal and only for a temporary period of time during construction. Furthermore, construction of the Project does not have the potential to result in introduction of non-native weeds to the riparian corridor of Dublin Creek. Thus, no substantial indirect effects to the Dublin Creek Riparian corridor are expected. Therefore, the Project would have less than significant impact on riparian habitat and sensitive natural communities. No mitigation measures are required. (c) Substantial adverse effect on wetlands (Less Than Significant Impact) No wetlands or other waters of the U.S. or state are located within the Project footprint; therefore, Project construction or operation would not directly impact wetlands and other waters. Dublin Creek is a water of the U.S. and water of the State and is located immediately south of the Project footprint. However, the Project footprint adjacent to Dublin Creek is located in an existing paved parking lot. Proposed construction activities and continued operation of the site would not removal, fill, or hydrologically interrupt this feature. No development would occur within 5 feet of top of bank. As discussed in Impact b above, the Project would avoid sedimentation or the introduction of pollutants to Dublin Creek through the required implementation of erosion and sediment control measures and the implementation of BMPs specified in the SWPPP during construction, which would protect water quality. Construction of the Project does not have the potential to result in introduction of non-native weeds to the riparian corridor of Dublin Creek. Furthermore, vibration from construction would be minimal and temporary as described in Section 12. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 372 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 42 Therefore, the Project would have less than significant impact on wetlands and waters of the U.S. or state. (d) Interfere or impede the movement of migratory fish or wildlife (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) The riparian corridor associated with Dublin Creek could be used as foraging habitat for common bats. If construction were to remove trees containing bats during the maternity or winter season, bat mortality could occur, and the impact to common bat species would be potentially significant. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Roosting Bat Surveys and Avoidance, potential Project impacts to wildlife movement, migration, or nursery sites would be reduced to a less than significant impact. This impact is further analyzed in the Focused EIR. (e) Conflict with local policies or ordinance include tree preservation (Less Than Significant Impact) Construction of the Project would require the removal of 85 trees. Of those trees, two trees are "Heritage Trees" as defined by the City of Dublin's municipal code and "Heritage Tree Ordinance." These trees are located at the northwest boundary of the Project footprint and at the center of the project footprint. The tree at the northwest boundary of the Project footprint is a valley oak (Quercus lobata) with a diameter breast height (DBH) of 31 inches, and the tree at the center of the Project footprint is a western sycamore (Platanus racemosa) with a DBH of 28.2 inches. A tree removal permit would be required for the removal of these two heritage trees. The tree removal permit application would require an arborist's report, tree preservation plan, and a tree replacement plan. The Project applicant has conducted an arborist survey and developed an arborist report, which will be attached to the application. The tree protection plan will be developed to ensure that all other heritage trees on the Project footprint are adequately protected from potential harm during construction. The tree replacement plan will include a plan for replacement of removed Heritage Trees, including a plan for "1 or more replacement trees be planted of a designated species, size and location," per the requirements of the Heritage Tree Ordinance. The Dublin General Plan also requires that developers "protect riparian vegetation as a protective buffer for stream quality and for its value as a habitat and aesthetic resource."The project would avoid the riparian corridor south of the Project footprint, and there would be no impact to riparian vegetation. With adherence to the tree removal permit conditions, the Project would not conflict with the City's tree ordinance or the Dublin General Plan, and potential impacts would be less than significant. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 373 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 43 (f) Conflict with adopted habitat conservation or natural community conservation plans (No Impact) The Project is not located within a Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Communities Conservation Plan Permit Area. Because there are no Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Communities Conservation Plans that apply to the Project site, the Project would not conflict with any such plans. Therefore, there would be no impact. Source(s) California Department of Fish and Wildlife Service (CDFW). 2023. Rarefind 5, a program created by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife that allows access to the California Natural Diversity Database. Reviewed January 17, 2023. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2023. IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation. Available online at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed on January 17, 2023. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 374 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 44 This page intentionally left blank Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 375 City of Dublin Cultural Resources HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 45 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5? c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? I— Environmental Setting The Project site is located south of Dublin Boulevard with the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery to the east; Interstate (I-)580 to the south; and a business park to the west. Historic -age built environment resources on the Project site consist of the Hexcel Corporation research and development (R&D) facility, landscaping, and parking. The Contemporary/Brutalist style facility has a roughly L-shaped plan and was largely constructed in two phases dating to 1962 and 1967, with small additions and alterations in the mid-1980s. A full archaeological and historical context for the project site is provided in the Focused EIR. Regulatory Framework Cultural resources in California are protected by a number of regulations. The following provides a brief outline of the regulations, policies, and ordinances that are applicable to the proposed project. Federal National Historic Preservation Act The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (16 United States Code 470) and its implementing regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 800) establish a program for the preservation of historic properties throughout the United States and provides a framework for identifying and treating historical and archaeological resources under the CEQA. Section 106 of the NHPA requires that federal projects or projects under federal jurisdiction consider the effect of an undertaking on properties eligible for or included in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Historic properties that are listed in or eligible for the NRHP are considered historical resources for the purposes of CEQA. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 376 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 46 National Register of Historic Places Historic properties are those significant cultural resources that are listed in or are eligible for listing in the NRHP per the criteria listed below (36 CFR 60.4): The quality of significance in American, state, and local history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and meet one or more of the following criteria: a. Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; b. Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; c. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of installation, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; d. Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Ordinarily, cemeteries, birthplaces, or graves of historic figures; properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes; structures that have been moved from their original locations; reconstructed historic buildings; and properties that are primarily commemorative in nature are not considered eligible for the NRHP, unless they satisfy certain conditions. In general, a resource must be 50 years of age to be considered for the NRHP, unless it satisfies a standard of exceptional importance. Listing in the NRHP does not entail specific protection of, or assistance for a property. However, listing does guarantee the property's recognition during planning for federal or federally assisted projects, eligibility for federal tax benefits, and qualification for federal historic preservation assistance. Additionally, project effects on properties listed in the NRHP must be evaluated under CEQA. State California Environmental Quality Act CEQA requires public agencies to consider the effects of their actions on "historical resources," "unique archeological resources," and "tribal cultural resources." Pursuant to PRC Section 21084.1, a "project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment." Section 21083.2 requires agencies to determine whether proposed projects would have effects on unique archeological resources. Historical Resources "Historical resource" is a term with a defined statutory meaning (PRC § 21084.1; determining significant impacts to historical and archeological resources is described in the CEQA Guidelines, § 15064.5[a] and [b]). Per the CEQA Guidelines, section 15064.5(a), historical resources include the following: Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 377 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 47 (1) A resource listed in or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) (PRC § 5024.1). (2) A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in PRC § 5020.1(k) or identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of PRC § 5024.1(g), will be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant. Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be a historical resource, provided the lead agency's determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. (4) The fact that a resource is not listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR, not included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to Cal. Pub. Resources Code § 5020.1(k)), or identified in a historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in Cal. Pub. Resources Code § 5024.1(g)) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be a historical resource as defined in Cal. Pub. Resources Code§§ 5020.1(j) or 5024.1. (3) Non -Unique Archeological Resources Under CEQA, archeological resources are presumed non -unique unless they meet the definition of "unique archeological resources" (Cal. Pub. Resources Code § 21083.2[g]). Under CEQA, an impact on a non -unique archeological resource is not considered a significant environmental impact. Unique Archeological Resources Archeological resources can sometimes qualify as "unique archeological resources" that are not "historical resources." (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(c)(3)). PRC, Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archeological resource as an artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: 1. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; or 2. Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or 3. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. If a project can be demonstrated to cause damage to a unique archeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that resources cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (PRC Section 21083.2[a], [b], and [c]). Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 378 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 48 California Register of Historical Resources The CRHR is a guide to cultural resources that must be considered when a government agency undertakes a discretionary action subject to CEQA. The CRHR helps government agencies identify, evaluate, and protect California's historical resources, and indicates which properties are to be protected from substantial adverse change (Pub. Resources Code, Section 5024.1(a)). The CRHR is administered through the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) which is part of the California State Parks system. A cultural resource is evaluated under four CRHR criteria to determine its historical significance. A resource must be significant at the local, state, or national level in accordance with one or more of the following criteria set forth in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(3) and Public Resources Code section 5024.1: 1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of California's history and cultural heritage; 2. It is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; 3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or 4. It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. In addition to meeting one or more of the above criteria, the CRHR requires that sufficient time must have passed to allow a "scholarly perspective on the events or individuals associated with the resource." The CRHR also requires a resource to possess integrity, which is defined as "the authenticity of a historical resource's physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Codes Governing Human Remains Section 7050.5 of the Health & Safety Code requires that construction or excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the county coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner must then contact the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which has jurisdiction pursuant to Public Res. Code § 5097. The NAHC, pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98, will immediately notify the person it believes to be most likely descendant (MLD), from the deceased Native American person so they can inspect the burial site and make recommendations for appropriate treatment or disposition. Local City of Dublin General Plan The City of Dublin General Plan, Chapter 7 Environmental Resources Management Conservation Element, provides guidance for the protection of archaeological and historic resources in Dublin and guiding policies related to historic and cultural resources are as follows: Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 379 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 49 Guiding Policy 7.7.1A.1: Preserve Dublin's historic structures. Seven sites in the Primary Planning Area are listed in the California Archaeological Inventory, Northwest Information Center, at Sonoma State University including the church and school on the grounds of the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums. As many as a dozen potentially significant historic and prehistoric sites have been identified in the Eastern Extended Planning Area. Guiding Policy 7.7.1A.2: Follow State regulations as set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 regarding discovery of archaeological sites, and Historical Resources, as defined in Section 5020.1 of the Public Resources Code. Guiding Policy 7.7.1A.3: Preserve the Green Store. The Green Store is a recognized historical resource and has been used as a church since 1989. This use can remain as long as the landowner(s) wish to continue its operation. The Parks/ Public Recreation designation on the General Plan Land Use Map illustrates the long- term potential for expansion of the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums to include this historic structure and the property it is on and is not intended to affect or change the current church use or its continued operation as a religious land use under a valid conditional use permit. Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan The Project site is located within the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan boundary. The Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan was adopted in 2006 and updated in 2014. Applicable goals and objectives of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan related to historic and cultural resources are as follows: Goal 1: Preserve and protect the valuable historic resources within the Dublin Village Historic Area. Objective 1.1: Identify Dublin's historic resources and adopt a formal Historic Resources Inventory. Objective 1.2: Identify mechanisms to protect properties on the Historic Resources Inventory from being destroyed or altered to the point of removing their historic value. Objective 1.3: Identify incentives to encourage the preservation and enhancement of privately -owned historic resources. Objective 1.4: Pursue formal designation and recognition of Dublin's historic resources through the California State Office of Historic Preservation and National Registry. Objective 1.5: Work cooperatively with property owners to rehabilitate Alamilla Springs. Objective 1.6: Ensure that improvements and renovations to publicly owned historic resources are done according to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 380 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 50 Goal 2: Guide the design of future development to reinforce the unique historic qualities and design elements that once defined Dublin Village. Objective 2.1: Create design guidelines for residential, commercial, and mixed -use development on private property. Objective 2.2: Create design guidelines that provide direction for future streetscape improvements in the public right of way. Objective 2.3: Create guidelines that provide direction on the preferred preservation and rehabilitation techniques for properties on the Historic Resources Inventory. Dublin Historic Resources Inventory The Dublin Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) was created when the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan was adopted by the Dublin City Council in 2006. The HRI was established to "recognize those few remaining resources that have a place in Dublin's history, including those resources that might be significant to the immediate community but not significant at the state or federal level" (City of Dublin Community Development Department 2014: 27). The HRI consists of resources that were found eligible for listing in the NRHP and the CRHR, or only having local significance, from the survey efforts undertaken in Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project that was finalized in 2004 by Page & Turnbull, Inc. The HRI includes only seven resources, three of which are near the 6600 block of Donlon Way: St. Raymond's Church, Murray Schoolhouse, and the Pioneer Cemetery, which have been combined as the "Dublin Heritage Center." The Pioneer Cemetery is adjacent to the Hexcel property, and historic documents suggest it extends into the Project parcel (VerPlanck 2003). The Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan did not establish goals or policies for maintaining or adding properties to the HRI. No guidelines were provided to reevaluate properties in the Dublin Village Historic Area that were less than 50 years old at the time the survey was conducted in 2004, nor any significance criteria or mechanisms for nominating or adding properties to the HRI. Previous CEQA Documents The City of Dublin hired the archaeological firm William Self Associates, Inc. (WSA) in 2003 to prepare an Archaeological Assessment Report of the Donlon Way Specific Plan (later renamed the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan area). A record search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC), conducted by WSA, did not identify any previously recorded archaeological sites within the Specific Plan area boundaries, but one new archaeological site was recorded during the pedestrian survey and Archeological High Probability areas were also identified within the Specific Plan area boundaries. The Archaeological Assessment Report concluded that there is a moderate -to -high -probability of identifying Native American archeological resources and a high -probability of encountering historic -period archeological resources within the Specific Plan area boundaries. The City of Dublin hired the architectural firm Page & Turnbull, Inc. in 2003 to prepare the Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project that was finalized in 2004. The city contracted Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 381 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 51 with Page & Turnbull to identify and map historic resources in an approximately 38-acrea area for a future Specific Plan for the Donlon Way area (later renamed the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan) and to prepare preservation recommendations. Page & Turnbull prepared a historic context of the Dublin Village area and recorded all of the properties in the survey area on Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 A and B forms. The Hexcel Corporation R&D facility on the Project site was recorded as part of this effort on December 10, 2023. At that time, the facility was not considered old enough (at least 50 years old) to be considered a potential historical resource under CEQA. Additionally, while the historic evaluation recorded on the Department of DPR 523 series forms did contain a thorough historic context statement, it did not address the four eligibility criteria for either the NRHP or the CRHR, but merely concluded that the property lacked architectural or historical significance to be eligible. The Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan was adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006, under Resolution No. 149-06 and relied on the findings of the Archaeological Assessment Report of the Donlon Way Specific Plan and the Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project. The approximately 38-acre Specific Plan area included the two project site parcels. Subsequently, three Specific Plan addendum and amendments have been prepared for the Specific Plan. City Council determined that no new significant impacts were identified by the addendums or amendments, and no further environmental analysis was required. As part of this Initial Study, AECOM prepared a historical resource evaluation of the Hexcel Corporation's 1960s-constructed R&D facility on the Project site for eligibility for listing in the CRHR as a potential historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. AECOM found the facility eligible for listing in the CRHR under Criterion 1, because it is significant at the national level for its associations within the Man in Space historic context published by the National Park Service and is, therefore, considered a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5? (Potentially Significant Impact) The proposed Project would result in the demolition of the existing Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, which is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. As proposed, the Project impact to this historical resource would be potentially significant. This potentially significant impact is further analyzed in the Focused EIR. (b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5? (Potentially Significant Impact) The proposed Project would include excavation of much of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility property, which is adjacent to the Dublin Village Historic Settlement, recorded as a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. As such, there is potential for previously unrecorded archaeological resources associated with the historic settlement to be within the Hexcel Property. Additionally, the Hexcel property is adjacent to the marked boundary of the Pioneer Cemetery. Marked grave sites in the cemetery are within five feet of the Hexcel property fence. Historic documents suggest that the cemetery was larger than the currently marked boundary (VerPlanck 2003). For these reasons, it is likely that the cemetery extends beneath the Hexcel Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 382 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 52 parking lot. If previously unrecorded archaeological resources associated with the historic district are present within the Hexcel property and/or if burials extend beyond the marked boundary of the adjacent Pioneer Cemetery, the Project impact to archaeological resources would be potentially significant. This potentially significant impact is further analyzed in the Focused EIR. (c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? (Potentially Significant Impact) The proposed Project would include excavation of the parking lot to the south of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, which is adjacent to the marked boundary of the Pioneer Cemetery. There is a high probability that the cemetery boundary exceeds the currently marked property line and extends beneath the Hexcel parking lot (VerPlanck 2003). If so, the Project has the potential to disturb human remains. The Project impact could be potentially significant. This potentially significant impact is further analyzed in the Focused EIR. Source(s) City of Dublin Community Development Department. 2014 (updated). Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. Adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006, Resolution No. 149-06. Available online: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7780/DVHASP-FULL-PDF- 10714?bidld=. Accessed April 2023. . 2022 (amended). General Plan. Available online: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30287/General-Plan-Update- 04192022-WEB. Accessed April 2023. Page & Turnbull, Inc. 2004. Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project (Final). Prepared for the City of Dublin. On file at the Northwest Information Center in Rohnert Park, California. VerPlanck, Christopher. 2003. Pioneer Cemetery Site Record (P-01-010637). On file at the Northwest Information Center in Rohnert Park, California. William Self Associates, Inc. 2003. Archaeological Assessment Report, Donlon Way Area Specific Plan, City of Dublin, Alameda County, California. Prepared for the City of Dublin. On file at the Northwest Information Center in Rohnert Park, California. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 383 City of Dublin Energy HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 53 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues 13. ENERGY. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Environmental Setting The proposed Project is located in the City of Dublin within Alameda County. Electric and natural gas services to Alameda County are provided by Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). In 2021, PG&E delivered approximately 78,588 gigawatt-hours of electricity within its service area (California Energy Commission 2023a). PG&E's total natural gas throughput was approximately 4,467 million therms in 2021 (California Energy Commission 2023b). PG&E provides power from a variety of sources: biomass and biowaste, geothermal, small and large hydroelectric, solar, wind, natural gas, and nuclear (PG&E 2021). In 2018, East Bay Community Energy (EBCE) began serving Dublin residential, business, and municipal electricity customers. To help meet the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions goals set in the City of Dublin's Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond (discussed below), the Dublin City Council voted in January 2021 to set the default electricity option for Dublin residences to EBCE's Renewable 100 service, which began in January 2022, and is sourced from California wind and solar facilities, including a new wind farm in Livermore. Customers can change their EBCE service or return to PG&E service at any time. All municipal electric accounts in Dublin have been powered by Renewable 100 since July 2019 (City of Dublin 2023). Transportation, such as gasoline and diesel fuel consumption, is also an energy -consuming sector, and applicable to the proposed Project (diesel and gasoline fuel consumption during construction and operational activities). Transportation is the largest energy -consuming sector in California, accounting for approximately 34 percent of all energy use in the state in 2020 (EIA 2022a). Historically, gasoline and diesel fuel accounted for nearly all transportation -related energy demand; now, however, numerous transportation power options are available, including ethanol, natural gas, electricity, and hydrogen. Nonetheless, despite advancements in alternative fuels and clean -vehicle technologies, gasoline and diesel remain the primary fuels used for transportation in California, with 12.7 billion gasoline gallon equivalents of petroleum (GGEs) consumed in 2021 and 3.7 billion GGEs of diesel consumed in 2020 (DOE 2023). Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 384 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 54 Regulatory Framework Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975. The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 established the first fuel economy standards for on -road motor vehicles sold in the United States. The National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration is responsible for establishing standards for vehicles and revising the existing standards. The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program was created to determine vehicle manufacturers' compliance with the fuel economy standards. The EPA administers the testing program that generates the fuel economy data. Energy Policy Acts of 1992 and 2005. The Energy Policy Act of 1992 was enacted to reduce dependence on imported petroleum and improve air quality by addressing all aspects of energy supply and demand, including alternative fuels, renewable energy, and energy efficiency. This law requires certain federal, state, and local government and private fleets to purchase alternate fuel vehicles. The act also defines "alternative fuels" to include fuels such as ethanol, natural gas, propane, hydrogen, electricity, and biodiesel. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was enacted on August 8, 2005. This law set federal energy management requirements for energy -efficient product procurement, energy savings performance contracts, building performance standards, renewable energy requirements, and use of alternative fuels. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 also amends existing regulations, including fuel economy testing procedures. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Signed into law in December 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act was enacted to increase the production of clean renewable fuels; increase the efficiency of products, buildings, and vehicles; improve the federal government's energy performance; and increase U.S. energy security, develop renewable fuel production, and improve vehicle fuel economy. The Energy Independence and Security Act included the first increase in fuel economy standards for passenger cars since 1975. The act also included a new energy grant program for use by local governments in implementing energy - efficiency initiatives, as well as a variety of green building incentives and programs. Light -Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. On May 7, 2010, the final Light -Duty Vehicle GHG Emissions Standards and CAFE Standards were published in the Federal Register. Phase 1 of the emissions standards required that model year 2012-2016 vehicles meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide (CO2) per mile, which is equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon, if the automobile industry were to meet this CO2 level solely through fuel economy improvements. On March 31, 2022, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration finalized the CAFE Standards for model years 2024-2026. The final rule establishes standards that would require an industry -wide fleet average of approximately 49 miles per gallon for passenger cars and light trucks in model year 2026, by increasing fuel efficiency by 8 percent annually for model years 2024 and 2025, and 10 percent annually for model year 2026. Heavy -Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards. In September 2011, in response to a Presidential Memorandum issued in May 2010, EPA in coordination with National Highway Traffic Safety Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 385 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 55 Administration (NHSTA) issued GHG emissions and fuel economy standards for medium and heavy duty trucks manufactured in model years 2014-2018, known as Phase 1 GHG Rule. In October 2016, EPA and NHTSA jointly finalized Phase 2 standards for medium- and heavy- duty vehicles through model year 2027 that will improve fuel efficiency and cut carbon pollution to reduce the impacts of climate change, while bolstering energy security and spurring manufacturing innovation. On December 20, 2022, EPA adopted a final rule, "Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Heavy -Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards," that sets stronger emissions standards to further reduce air pollution, including pollutants that create ozone and particulate matter, from heavy-duty vehicles and engines starting in model year 2027. The final program includes new, more stringent emissions standards that cover a wider range of heavy-duty engine operating conditions compared to today's standards, and it requires these more stringent emissions standards to be met for a longer period of time of when these engines operate on the road. This final rule is consistent with President Biden's Executive Order, "Strengthening American Leadership in Clean Cars and Trucks" and is the first step in the Clean Trucks Plan. City of Dublin General Plan. The City of Dublin General Plan, adopted in 1985 and amended in 2022, includes an Environmental Resources Management: Energy Conservation Element. The following implementing policies related to energy efficiency and conservation in new development would be applicable to the proposed Project (City of Dublin 2022): • New development proposals shall be reviewed to ensure lighting levels needed for a safe and secure environment are provided —utilizing the most energy -efficient fixtures (in most cases, [light emitting diode] LED lights) —while avoiding over -lighting of sites. Smart lighting technology (e.g. sensors and/or timers) shall also be employed in interior and exterior lighting applications where appropriate. • New development projects shall install LED streetlights in compliance with the City's LED light standard. • In new commercial and residential parking lots, require the installation of conduit to serve EV parking spaces to enable the easier installation of future charging stations. • Encourage the installation of charging stations for commercial projects over a certain size and any new residential project that has open parking (i.e. not individual, enclosed garages). • Encourage buildings (and more substantially, whole neighborhoods) to be designed along an east -west axis to maximize solar exposure. Where feasible, require new development projects to take advantage of shade, prevailing winds, landscaping and sun screens to reduce energy use; and to use regenerative energy heating and cooling source alternatives to fossil fuels. • Continue to implement parking lot tree planting standards that would substantially cool parking areas and help cool the surrounding environment. Encourage landscaping conducive to solar panels in areas where appropriate. • Promote and encourage photovoltaic demonstration projects in association with new development. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 386 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 56 City of Dublin Climate Action Plan 2030. The City of Dublin adopted its Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond (CAP 2030) in September 2020, as a guiding document to identify ways in which the community and City can reduce GHG emissions, meet Dublin's long-term climate action goals, and promote a healthy, prosperous community. The CAP 2030 focuses on the following strategies: 100 percent renewable and carbon -free electricity; building efficiency and electrification; sustainable mobility and land use; materials and waste management; and municipal leadership measures (City of Dublin 2020). Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated) The proposed Project activities would increase energy consumption for the duration of construction in the form of fossil fuels. However, energy consumption associated with construction of the proposed Project would not be inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary with Mitigation Measure AQ-1 incorporated. During project operation, the proposed Project would result in a net reduction in energy consumption, primarily related to improved building energy standards and eliminating natural gas infrastructure. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation. This impact is further analyzed in the Focused EIR. (b) Conflict with local plan for renewable energy (No Impact) The proposed Project would not use land that was otherwise slated for renewable energy production and does not otherwise conflict with any state or local renewable energy plans. In addition, fuel use would be consistent with current construction and manufacturing practices and energy standards that promote strategic planning that reduces consumption of fossil fuels and enhances energy efficiency. Further, the proposed Project electrical and plumbing fixtures would be Title 24 and CALGreen compliant and the proposed Project would also install EV charging stations in compliance with CALGreen Tier 2, which would also be consistent with City of Dublin General Plan Energy Conservation Element strategies. Lastly, the proposed Project would be all -electric (i.e., no natural gas infrastructure), which would be consistent with the City's CAP 2030 strategy Building Efficiency and Electrification (Measure EE-1: Achieve All - Electric New Building Construction). Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct any state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency and there would be no impact. Sou rce(s) California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023a. 2021 Electricity Consumption by Entity: Pacific Gas & Electric Company. Available online: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyutil.aspx. Accessed February 2023. . 2023b. 2021 Gas Consumption by Entity: Pacific Gas & Electric Company. Available online: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbyutil.aspx. Accessed February 2023. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 387 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 57 City of Dublin. 2020. Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond. September. Available online: https://dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/24447/Climate-Action-Plan-2030-And- Beyond. Accessed March 2023. . 2022. General Plan. Available online: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30287/General-Plan-Update- 04192022-WEB. Accessed March 2023. . 2023. Energy. Available online: https://dublin.ca.gov/2032/Energy. Accessed March 2023. Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). 2021. Power Content Label. Available online: https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/4653. Accessed February 2023. South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2008. Draft Guidance Document — Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold. Available online: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)- ceqa-significance-thresholds/ghgboardsynopsis.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed February 2023. The Climate Registry. 2022. Default Emission Factor Document. May. Available online: https://theclimateregistry.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/2022-Default-Emission- Factors-Final.pdf. Accessed February 2023. United States Department of Energy (DOE). 2023. Alternative Fuels Data Center: California Transportation Data for Alternative Fuels and Vehicles. Available online: https://afdc.energy.gov/states/ca. Accessed April 2023. United States Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2022a. State Profile and Energy Estimates: California. Available online: https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2. Accessed February 2023. . 2022b. Carbon Dioxide Emissions Coefficients. October. Available online: https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/co2 vol mass.php. Accessed February 2023. W Traffic Engineering Transportation Planning (W-Trans). 2022. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. December. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 388 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 58 This page intentionally left blank Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 389 City of Dublin Geology and Soils HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 59 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 390 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 60 Environmental Setting Seismic Hazards The Project site is situated in a seismically active area within the Diablo Range, along the margin of the eastern Diablo Hills and the western edge of the Livermore Valley. The fault trace of the active Calaveras Fault is approximately 965 feet east of the Project site, and the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone associated with the Calaveras Fault is approximately 450 feet east of the Project site (DOC 2023). The active Pleasanton Fault is approximately 2.4 miles east of the Project site (Jennings and Bryant 2010). Other active faults in the Project region include a portion of the Las Positas Fault (approximately 11.7 miles to the southeast), the Greenville Fault (approximately 12.5 miles to the northeast), and the Hayward Fault Zone (approximately 7.3 miles to the southwest). The Project site is located within an Earthquake Zone of Required Investigation for liquefaction as delineated by the California Geological Survey (CGS) (DOC 2023). Soils Based on a review of Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey data, native soil at the Project site consists of the Yolo loam (calcareous substratum, 0 to 6 percent slopes) soil type (NRCS 2022). A preliminary geotechnical investigation was prepared for the proposed Project, which included four soil borings in the developed portion of the Project site north of Dublin Creek (Cornerstone Earth Group [Cornerstone] 2022). The results of soil borings indicated that the near -surface soils consist of undocumented artificial fill consisting of clay with variable amounts of sand and gravel, and clayey sand with gravel, to depths ranging from 1.5 to 5 feet below the ground surface (bgs). Below the artificial fill, clay with sand and silt was present to the maximum soil boring depth of 40 feet bgs. Paleontological Resources The near -surface soils at the Project site consist of artificial fill material to depths ranging from 1.5 to 5 feet bgs (Cornerstone 2022). Native sediments at the Project site beneath the artificial fill consist of the late Miocene to early Pliocene -age Contra Costa Group, which includes the Orinda and Moraga Formations. The Contra Costa Group is comprised of nonmarine sedimentary rocks including sandstone, conglomerate, shale, and minor claystone, limestone, and tuff (Wagner et al. 1991). A search of the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP) database indicates there are over 40 recorded vertebrate fossil sites from within the Contra Costa Group (UCMP 2023). Most of these sites are in Contra Costa County; however, five of the sites are within Alameda County. The closest recorded vertebrate fossil site from within the Contra Costa Group is Bolenas Creek, approximately 6.5 miles northwest of the Project site (UCMP 2023). Paleontological Sensitivity Analysis A paleontologically sensitive geologic formation is one that is rated high for potential paleontological productivity (i.e., the recorded abundance and types of fossil specimens, and Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 391 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 61 the number of previously recorded fossil sites) and is known to have produced unique, scientifically important fossils. Exposures of a specific geologic formation at any given Project site are most likely to yield fossil remains representing particular species or quantities similar to those previously recorded from that geologic formation in other locations. Therefore, the paleontological sensitivity determination of a rock formation is based primarily on the types and numbers of fossils that have been previously recorded from that formation. In its standard guidelines for assessment and mitigation of adverse impacts on paleontological resources, the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP 2010) established four categories of sensitivity for paleontological resources: high, low, no, and undetermined. Areas where fossils have been previously found are considered to have a high sensitivity and a high potential to produce fossils. Areas that are not sedimentary in origin and that have not been known to produce fossils in the past typically are considered to have low sensitivity. Areas consisting of high-grade metamorphic rocks (e.g., gneisses and schists) and plutonic igneous rocks (e.g., granites and diorites) are considered to have no sensitivity. Areas that have not had any previous paleontological resource surveys or fossil finds are considered to be of undetermined sensitivity until surveys are performed. After reconnaissance surveys, a qualified paleontologist can determine whether the area of undetermined sensitivity should be categorized as having high, low, or no sensitivity. In keeping with the SVP significance criteria, all vertebrate fossils are generally categorized as being of potentially significant scientific value. The near -surface artificial fill consists of materials that were excavated from another location, transported to the Project site, and then graded and compacted. During the excavation and subsequent construction process, any fossils that may have been present in the original materials would have been destroyed. Therefore, the artificial fill is not paleontologically sensitive. Because of the large number of vertebrate fossils that have been recovered from the Contra Costa Group, it is considered to be of high paleontological sensitivity. Regulatory Framework Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Alquist-Priolo Act) (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Sections 2621-2630) was passed in 1972 to reduce the hazard of surface faulting to structures designed for human occupancy. The Alquist-Priolo Act requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones known as Earthquake Fault Zones around the surface traces of active faults and to issue appropriate maps. Before a project can be permitted in a designated Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, cities and counties must require a geologic investigation to demonstrate that proposed structures would not be constructed across active faults. Seismic Hazards Mapping Act The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 (PRC Sections 2690-2699.6) addresses earthquake hazards from non -surface fault rupture, including liquefaction and seismically induced landslides. The act established a mapping program for areas that have the potential for liquefaction, landslide, strong ground shaking, or other earthquake and geologic hazards. The Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 392 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 62 act also specifies that the lead agency for a project may withhold development permits until geologic or soils investigations are conducted for specific sites and mitigation measures are incorporated into plans to reduce hazards associated with seismicity and unstable soils. California Building Standards Code The California Building Standards Code (CBC) (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) provides minimum standards for building design in California. The CBC applies to building design and construction in the state and is based on the federal Uniform Building Code (UBC) used widely throughout the country (generally adopted on a state -by -state or district -by -district basis). The CBC has been modified for California conditions with numerous more detailed or more stringent regulations. The State earthquake protection law (California Health and Safety Code, Section 19100 et seq.) requires that structures be designed to resist stresses produced by lateral forces caused by earthquakes. The CBC requires that any structure designed for a project site undergo a seismic design evaluation that assigns the structure to one of six categories, A—F; Category F structures require the most earthquake -resistant design. The CBC philosophy focuses on "collapse prevention," meaning that structures are to be designed to prevent collapse during the maximum level of ground shaking that could reasonably be expected to occur at a site. CBC Chapter 16 specifies exactly how each seismic -design category is to be determined on a site -specific basis, based on site -specific soil characteristics and proximity to potential seismic hazards. CBC Chapter 18 regulates the analysis of expansive soils, slope instability, liquefaction, and surface rupture attributable to faulting or lateral spreading, along with an evaluation of lateral pressures on basement and retaining walls, liquefaction and loss of soil strength, and lateral movement or reduction of the foundation's soil -bearing capacity. Dublin Municipal Code Section Chapter 7.16, Grading Regulations The City of Dublin Grading Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 7.16) requires a geologic/soil investigation report, preliminary grading plans, proposed provisions for storm drainage control, and any existing or proposed flood control in the vicinity of the grading. A conceptual plan for erosion and sediment control is also required, including both temporary facilities and long-term site stabilization features such as planting or seeding for the area affected by the proposed grading. Chapter 7.16 prohibits grading operations during the rainy season except upon a clear demonstration, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, that at no stage of the work will there be any substantial risk of increased sediment discharge from the site. Should grading be permitted during the rainy season, the smallest practicable area of erodible land must be exposed at any one time during grading operations and the time of exposure must be minimized. City of Dublin General Plan Chapter 8.0 of the City of Dublin General Plan outlines policies and programs related to seismic safety, safety and emergency preparedness. The following policies related to geology and soils are applicable to the proposed project: • Guiding Policy 8.2.1.A.1. Geologic hazards shall be mitigated or development shall be located away from geologic hazards in order to preserve life, protect property, and Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 393 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 63 reasonably limit the financial risks to the City of Dublin and other public agencies that would result from damage to poorly located public facilities. • Implementing Policy 8.2.1.B.1. Structural and Grading Requirements a. All structures shall be designed to the standards delineated in the Dublin Building Code and Dublin's Grading Ordinance. A "design earthquake" shall be established by an engineering geologist for each structure for which ground shaking is a significant design factor. b. Structures intended for human occupancy shall be at least 50 feet from any active fault trace; freestanding garages and storage structures may be as close as 25 feet. These distances may be reduced based on adequate exploration to accurately locate the fault trace. Generally, facilities should not be built astride potential rupture zones, although certain low risk facilities may be considered. Critical facilities that must cross a fault, such as oil, gas, and water lines, shall be designed to accommodate the maximum expected offset from fault rupture. Site specific evaluations shall determine the maximum credible offset. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Seismic hazards i) Surface Fault Rupture The Project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zone or the fault trace of any other known fault (DOC 2023, Jennings and Bryant 2010). Thus, there would be no impact from surface fault rupture during construction or operation. ii) Strong Seismic Ground Shaking As described above in the Environmental Setting, the Project site is located in a seismically active area. Seismic design calculations performed by Cornerstone (2022) estimated a peak ground acceleration of 0.73 gravity (g) for the Project site, which indicates that strong seismic ground shaking would be anticipated at some point during the next 50 years. The proposed Project would not exacerbate the potential for seismic shaking, as the intensity of the earthquake ground motion at the site would depend on the characteristics of the generating fault, distance to the earthquake epicenter, magnitude, and duration of the earthquake, and specific site geologic conditions. While complete avoidance of any damage may not be feasible, the Project would be designed to withstand seismic shaking. The CBC includes provisions to reduce impacts caused by major structural failures or loss of life resulting from earthquakes or other geologic hazards, and the preliminary geotechnical investigation prepared by Cornerstone includes measures to reduce the hazards from strong seismic ground shaking. Design review performed through the City's permitting process would ensure compliance with the requirements of the CBC and the City's building standards. Therefore, the impact from strong seismic ground shaking during construction and operation would be less than significant. iii) Liquefaction, Lateral Spreading, and Settlement Based on the results of soil borings, the close proximity to the active Calaveras Fault, and the fact that groundwater was encountered at the Project site at depths ranging from 18 to 20 feet bgs, Cornerstone (2022) indicated there is potential for liquefaction in localized sand layers Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 394 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 64 underneath the proposed building, which could induce settlement of 0.25 inch or less. Cornerstone (2022) also indicated that approximately 1.25 inches of settlement could occur from liquefaction -induced settlement in the area proposed for parking and landscaping south of the building. Liquefaction and settlement associated with the proposed building would be addressed through required compliance with the CBC, and the preliminary geotechnical investigation prepared by Cornerstone includes measures to reduce the hazards from liquefaction. Design review performed through the City's permitting process would ensure compliance with the requirements of the CBC and the City's building standards. Therefore, impacts related to liquefaction and associated settlement would be less than significant. The preliminary geotechnical investigation (Cornerstone 2022) indicated that there is a moderate potential for lateral spreading associated with the area proposed for parking and landscaping between the building and Dublin Creek to the south, where horizontal displacement could range from several inches to a few feet. However, the potential for lateral spreading further from the creek (including within the proposed building footprint) is low; therefore, the risk of injury, loss, or death from lateral spreading in areas adjacent to the creek during a seismic event would be minimal. Therefore, the impact from hazards related to lateral spreading during construction and operation would be less than significant. iv) Landslides The Project site north of Dublin Creek has been previously graded to accommodate the existing building and parking lots and is nearly flat. The elevation slopes gently from approximately 388 feet in the west to 384 feet in the southeast and 380 feet in the northeast. The Project site itself is not located in an Earthquake Zone of Required Investigation for landslides (DOC 2023). A small landslide hazard area has been mapped by CGS approximately 350 feet northwest of the Project site, on the north side of Dublin Boulevard (DOC 2023). However, this area has since been graded and developed as a housing development, and the area indicated as a landslide hazard zone is now flat and is approximately 25 feet below the elevation of Dublin Boulevard. Therefore, this area would not represent a hazard for the project site. Another small landslide hazard zone has been identified by CGS along a ridge approximately 800 feet south of the Project site, south of Dublin Canyon Road (DOC 2023). This area is approximately 125 feet higher than the Project site; however, given the intervening distance and small mass of this ridgeline, if a landslide were to occur it would be unlikely to affect the Project site. Therefore, the impact from landslide hazards during construction and operation would be less than significant. (b) Erosion/topsoil loss (Less than Significant) Based on a review of NRCS (2022) soil survey data, the Yolo loam soil in the southern portion of the Project site adjacent to Dublin Creek has a moderate water infiltration rate, is well drained, and has a moderate water erosion and runoff hazard (NRCS 2022). Surficial soils in the remainder of the Project site consist of artificial fill (Cornerstone 2022). No Project -related earthmoving activities would occur on Parcel 2, which is south of the existing parking lot, adjacent to Dublin Creek. However, if not properly controlled, construction -related stormwater runoff could drain south into Dublin Creek resulting in erosion. However, because the proposed Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 395 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 65 Project would disturb more than 1 acre of land, the Project applicant is required by law to prepare a SWPPP and implement site -specific BMPs specifically designed to prevent erosion and downstream sedimentation, and to protect water quality, in compliance with the statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit (Order WQ 2022-0057-DWQ). Furthermore, the Project applicant is required to implement the provisions of City Municipal Code Chapter 7.16, which require grading and drainage plans that identify measures to reduce erosion, and which generally prohibits grading activities during the winter rainy season. Therefore, impacts from construction -related soil erosion would be less than significant. The potential for operational activities to result in soil erosion is evaluated in Section 9, Hydrology and Water Quality. (c-d) Soil stability (Less Than Significant Impact) The potential for unstable soils associated with seismic activity is evaluated in criteria (a), above. No development is proposed in the native soils adjacent to Dublin Creek. Laboratory test results indicated that soils underneath the developed portion of the Project site are moderately expansive (Cornerstone 2022). Soil expansion associated with the proposed building would be addressed through compliance with the CBC, which is mandatory for all projects. The preliminary geotechnical investigation prepared by Cornerstone includes recommended measures to reduce the hazards from soil expansion consistent with the CBC. These measures include adding sufficient reinforcement of slab -on -grade supported on a layer of non -expansive soil; extending footings below the zone of seasonal moisture fluctuation; limiting moisture changes in the surficial soils by using positive drainage away from building as well as limiting landscape watering; implementing a plug of low -permeability clay soil, sand -cement slurry, or lean concrete within trenches just outside where trenches pass into building and pavement areas; and following detailed grading and foundation recommendations specified in the Geotechnical Report (Cornerstone 2022). Design review performed through the City's permitting process would ensure compliance with the requirements of the CBC and the City's building standards. Therefore, because the Project would be required to implement measures to comply with the CBC, the City's building standards, hazards from soil expansion would be reduced, and impacts from construction and operation related to unstable soils and soil expansion would be less than significant. (e) Soil capability to support wastewater disposal, including septic (No Impact) The Project site is located within the area served by a municipal wastewater system. Wastewater treatment would continue to be provided at the regional treatment plant (see Section 18: Utilities and Service Systems for additional details). Because the proposed Project would not require installation of a septic system or alternative wastewater disposal system, there would be no impact from Project construction or operation. (f) Unique geologic feature/paleontological resources (Less Than Significant with Mitigation) A unique geologic feature consists of a major natural element that stands out in the landscape, such as a large and scenic river, gorge, waterfall, volcanic cinder cone, lava field, or glacier. There are no unique geologic features at the Project site or within the Project viewshed. Thus, there would be no impact to unique geologic features from Project construction or operation. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 396 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 66 Paleontological Resources — Construction In areas where the artificial fill only extends to 1.5 feet, excavation and grading during project construction would encounter the native Contra Costa Group materials, which are of high paleontological sensitivity. Furthermore, excavation to a maximum depth of approximately 12 feet would occur at the proposed on -site stormwater drainage pumps, which would also encounter the paleontologically sensitive Contra Costa Group. Therefore, project -related earthmoving activities could result in accidental damage to, or destruction of unique paleontological resources, and this impact would be potentially significant. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Avoid Impacts to Unique Paleontological Resources, potential construction -related impacts to unique paleontological resources would be less than significant with mitigation. This impact is further analyzed in the Focused EIR. Paleontological Resources — Operation Because Project operation would not involve ground -disturbing activities, there would be no impact to unique paleontological resources. Source(s) California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2023. DOC Maps Data Viewer —Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, and Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones. Available: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/DataViewer/. Accessed January 11, 2023. Cornerstone Earth Group. 2022. Geotechnical Investigation, Dublin Boulevard Industrial, 11711 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California. Cornerstone Project No. 681-12-1. Sunnyvale, CA. Jennings, C.W. and W.A. Bryant. 2010. 2010 Fault Activity Map of California. Available: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/App/index.html. Accessed January 11, 2022. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. Web Soil Survey. Available: http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm. Accessed January 11, 2022. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). 2010. Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee. University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP). 2023. Paleontological Collections Database. Available: https://ucmpdb.berkeley.edu/about.shtml. Accessed January 25, 2022. UpCodes. 2016. California 18 Soils and Foundations. California Building Code 2016. Available: https://up.codes/viewer/california/ca-building-code-2016/chapter/18/soils-and- foundations#18. Accessed May 4, 2023. Wagner, D.L., E.J. Bortugno, and R.D. McJunkin. 1991. Geologic Map of the San Francisco -San Jose Quadrangle, California, 1:250,000. Regional Geologic Map Series, Map No. 5A. California Division of Mines and Geology. Sacramento, CA. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 397 City of Dublin Greenhouse Gas Emissions HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 67 Potentially Significant Impact 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: Less Than Significant Impact with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Environmental Setting Certain gases in the Earth's atmosphere, classified as GHGs, play a critical role in determining the Earth's surface temperature. A portion of the solar radiation that enters the Earth's atmosphere is absorbed by the Earth's surface, and a smaller portion of this radiation is reflected back toward space. Infrared radiation is absorbed by GHGs; therefore, infrared radiation released from Earth that otherwise would have escaped back into space is instead "trapped," resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon, known as the "greenhouse effect," is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate on Earth. GHGs are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources and anthropogenic sources, and are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. The following GHGs are widely accepted as the principal contributors to human - induced global climate change that would be relevant to the proposed Project: CO2; methane (CH4); and nitrous oxide (N20). Emissions of CO2 are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion. CH4 is the main component of natural gas and is associated with agricultural practices and landfills. N20 is a colorless GHG that results from industrial processes, vehicle emissions, and agricultural practices. Global warming potential (GWP) is a concept developed to compare the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to CO2. The GWP of a GHG is based on several factors, including the relative effectiveness of a gas to absorb infrared radiation and length of time that the gas remains in the atmosphere (atmospheric lifetime). The reference gas for GWP is CO2; therefore, CO2 has a GWP of 1. The other main GHGs that have been attributed to human activity include CH4, which has a GWP of 28, and N20, which has a GWP of 265 (IPCC 2013). For example, 1 ton of CH4 has the same contribution to the greenhouse effect as approximately 28 tons of CO2. GHGs with lower emissions rates than CO2 still may contribute to climate change because they are more effective at absorbing outgoing infrared radiation than CO2 (i.e., high GWP). The concept of CO2-equivalents (CO2e) is used to account for the different GWP potentials of GHG to absorb infrared radiation. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 398 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 68 Regulatory Framework Executive Order S-3-05. Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, signed in June 2005, proclaimed that California is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. EO S-3-05 declared that increased temperatures could reduce the Sierra Nevada's snowpack, further exacerbate California's air quality problems, and potentially cause a rise in sea levels. To combat those concerns, the EO established total GHG emissions targets. Specifically, emissions are to be reduced to the 2000 level by 2010, the 1990 level by 2020, and to 80 percent below the 1990 level by 2050. Assembly Bill 32. In 2006, California passed the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill [AB] 32; California Health and Safety Code Division 25.5, Sections 38500, et seq.). AB 32 further details and puts into law the mid-term GHG reduction target established in EO S-3-05, which is to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. AB 32 also identifies CARB as the state agency responsible for the design and implementation of emissions limits, regulations, and other measures to meet the target. Executive Order B-30-15. Issued in April 2015, EO B-30-15 establishes a statewide GHG reduction goal of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The emission reduction target acts as an interim goal between the AB 32 goal (i.e., achieve 1990 emission levels by 2020) and EO S- 03-05 goal of reducing statewide emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. In addition, the EO aligns California's 2030 GHG reduction goal with the European Union's reduction target (i.e., 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030) that was adopted in October 2014. Executive Order B-55-18. Issued in September 2018, EO B-55-18 establishes a new statewide goal of achieving and maintaining carbon neutrality as soon as possible and no later than 2045. Senate Bill (SB) 32. SB 32, signed on September 8, 2016, requires California to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. That 2030 target represents reductions needed to ensure California can achieve its longer -term 2050 target of a reduction of GHG emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels per EO B-30-15. Assembly Bill 1279. AB 1279, signed on September 16, 2022, declares the policy of the state both to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative GHG emissions thereafter, and to ensure that by 2045, statewide anthropogenic GHG emissions are reduced to at least 85 percent below the 1990 levels. The bill requires CARB to work with relevant state agencies to ensure that updates to the scoping plan identify and recommend measures to achieve these policy goals and to identify and implement a variety of policies and strategies that enable carbon dioxide removal solutions and carbon capture, utilization, and storage technologies in California, as specified. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). In April 2022, BAAQMD adopted new CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts From Land Use Projects and Plans (BAAQMD 2022). The BAAQMD analyzed what will be required of new land use development projects to achieve California's long-term climate goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 as articulated in Executive Order B-55-18 (and subsequently codified in AB 1279). The BAAQMD found that a new land use development project being built today needs to either incorporate design elements (listed below) to do its "fair share" of implementing the goal of Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 399 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 69 carbon neutrality by 2045 or be consistent with a local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b). Projects must include, at a minimum, the following project design elements: 1. Buildings a. The project will not include natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing (in both residential and nonresidential development). b. The project will not result in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy usage as determined by the analysis required under CEQA Section 21100(b)(3) and Section 15126.2(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines. 2. Transportation a. Achieve a reduction in project -generated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) below the regional average consistent with the current version of the California Climate Change Scoping Plan (currently 15 percent) or meet a locally adopted Senate Bill 743 VMT target, reflecting the recommendations provided in the Governor's Office of Planning and Research's Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA: i. Residential projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per capita ii. Office projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per employee iii. Retail projects: no net increase in existing VMT b. Achieve compliance with off-street EV requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2. As described in more detail below, the City of Dublin has prepared a Climate Action Plan, which serves as the City of Dublin's qualified GHG Reduction Plan and programmatic tiering document that meets the criteria under the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b). Therefore, the proposed Project's impacts related to GHG emissions are analyzed using the City of Dublin's Climate Action Plan 2030. City of Dublin General Plan. The City of Dublin General Plan, adopted in 1985 and amended in 2022, includes an Environmental Resources Management: Community Design & Sustainability Element. In addition to the policies listed in Section 3.7, Energy, from the Energy Conservation Element, the following policies and measures related to GHG emissions and sustainability would be applicable to the proposed Project: • Encourage alternative modes of transportation by providing priority parking for carpool and alternative energy vehicles, bicycle racks/lockers, showers for employees, and easy access to adjacent regional trails and transit stops. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 400 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 70 • Encourage development features that minimize the use of non-renewable energy consumption (i.e. material reuse, natural lighting and ventilation, etc.). • Facilitate environmental and energy -efficient design guidelines that promote good design for new construction. City of Dublin Climate Action Plan 2030. The City of Dublin adopted its Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond (CAP 2030) in September 2020, as a guiding document to identify ways in which the community and City can reduce GHG emissions, meet Dublin's long-term climate action goals, and promote a healthy, prosperous community. The purpose of the CAP 2030 is to meet California's 2030 GHG emissions reductions target of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and set the City on the path to achieve the goal envisioned by EO B-55-18 of carbon neutrality by 2045. The CAP 2030 focuses on the following strategies: 100 percent renewable and carbon -free electricity; building efficiency and electrification; sustainable mobility and land use; materials and waste management; and municipal leadership measures (City of Dublin 2020). The City's CAP 2030 also allows for CEQA streamlining pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b). In order to reach the City of Dublin's GHG emissions reduction goal (65,090 MT of CO2e by 2030) the City has identified four strategies and seven core measures which are expected to reduce communitywide emissions by an estimated 73,452 MT of CO2e in 2030. The City has determined that implementing the measures in the CAP 2030 should reduce the impacts from activities under jurisdictional control or significant influence of the City of Dublin to collectively achieve the specified emissions levels in the CAP. These strategies include: • Strategy 1: Renewable and Carbon -Free Energy (CF) o CF-1: Opt -Up to 100% Renewable and Carbon -Free Electricity o CF-2: Develop a Renewable Resource Buildout Plan • Strategy 2: Building Efficiency and Electrification (EE) o EE-1: Achieve All -Electric New Building Construction o EE-2: Implement the State Building Energy Disclosure Program o EE-3: Streamline Battery Storage Permit Requirements o EE-4: Develop an Existing Building Electrification Plan • Strategy 3: Sustainable Mobility and Land Use (SM) o SM-1: Adopt an Electric Vehicle Charging Station Ordinance o SM-2: Develop an EV Infrastructure Plan o SM-3: Develop a Transportation Demand Management Plan o SM-4: Develop a Citywide Parking Management Plan o SM-5: Update the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan o SM-6: Continue to Prioritize Transit -Oriented Development o SM-7: Develop a Built Environment That Prioritizes Active Mobility Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 401 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 71 • Strategy 4: Materials and Waste Management (MM) o MM-1: Achieve the Organic Waste Diversion Requirements of SB 1383 o MM-2: Reduce Embodied Emissions Associated with Building Materials Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Generate GHG emissions (Less than Significant/Less than Cumulatively Considerable) Heavy-duty off -road equipment, materials transport, and worker commutes during construction of the proposed Project would result in GHG emissions from vehicle exhaust. After construction, day-to-day activities associated with operation of the proposed Project would generate emissions from sources such as area, mobile, electricity, solid waste, water and wastewater sources. As discussed previously, the City's CAP 2030 constitutes a plan for the reduction of GHG emissions in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5 Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15183(b), a project's incremental contribution to a cumulative GHG emissions effect may be determined not to be cumulatively considerable if it complies with the requirements of the CAP 2030. Accordingly, the analysis of the proposed Project's cumulative contribution to climate change and GHG emissions is demonstrated by the analysis of the project's consistency with the applicable CAP 2030 measures, as shown in Table 3: Project Consistency with Applicable CAP 2030 GHG Emissions Reduction Measures below. Table 3: Project Consistency with Applicable CAP 2030 GHG Emissions Reduction Measures GHG Emission Reduction Measure Description Project Consistency Strategy 1: Renewable and Carbon -Free Energy (CF) CF-1: Opt -Up to 100% The City of Dublin will set 100% renewable Renewable and and carbon -free electricity as the default Carbon -Free electricity for all Dublin customers served by Electricity East Bay Community Energy to unlock health and GHG emissions reduction benefits associated with carbon -free electricity. Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure; however, the project would be automatically enrolled in East Bay Community Energy's Renewable 100 electricity service. CF-2. Develop a Renewable Resource Buildout Plan The City will leverage State and local funding and partnerships to develop local community solar projects in Dublin and investigate development of micro -grids to improve the resilience of the local electricity infrastructure. Not applicable. The City is the responsible party for this measure and the Renewable Resource Buildout Plan has not been developed at the time of this analysis; however, the Project would not conflict with development of renewable resources and the Project would be required to comply with any associated standards or requirements. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 402 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 72 GHG Emission Reduction Measure Description Project Consistency Strategy 2: Building - Efficiency and Electrification (EE) EE-1: Achieve All - Electric New Building Construction Adopt an all -electric building reach code for new construction to reduce natural gas use and limit the development of new gas infrastructure in the City of Dublin. Consistent. Consistent with Dublin Municipal Code (DMC) Chapter 7.94.100 (Green Building Code, All electric buildings), the proposed Project would be all -electric and would not have natural gas infrastructure. EE-2: Implement the State Building Energy Disclosure Program The City of Dublin will require all commercial and multifamily buildings covered by AB 802 to report energy use through the Energy Star Portfolio Manager tool. Consistent. The proposed Project would be covered by AB 802 and would be required to report energy use through the Energy Star Portfolio Manager tool. EE-3: Streamline Battery Storage Permit Requirements The City will ensure that permitting for the installation of new battery storage in residential and commercial buildings is streamlined and clear in order to promote the installation of additional energy storage capacity in Dublin. Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. The Project would not conflict with implementation and would comply with the battery storage requirements in the latest building code. EE-4: Develop an Existing Building Electrification Plan Develop a plan to promote the retrofit of 22% existing buildings in Dublin to all electric by 2030 and consider development of existing building electrification ordinances in the future. Not applicable. This measure establishes countywide building retrofit measures for existing buildings. As the Project does not include existing structures, and would instead demolish an existing building, this measure does not apply. Strategy 3: Sustainable Mobility and Land Use (SM) SM-1: Adopt an Electric Vehicle Charging Station Ordinance The City of Dublin will adopt an electric vehicle (EV) charging station ordinance for multifamily and commercial buildings to increase access to charging stations and promote the use of EVs. Consistent. Consistent with DMC Chapter 7.94.090 (Green Building Code, EV charging), the proposed Project would install EV charging at the Tier 2 level (EV-capable and EV Charging Station Equipment). SM-2: Develop an EV Infrastructure Plan Develop an electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure plan to ensure that the City is optimally siting EV chargers and using the most beneficial program for publicly accessible EV chargers. Consistent. The City is responsible for this measure; however, the proposed Project would implement the required number of EV chargers per DMC Chapter 7.94.090. SM-3: Develop a Transportation Demand Management Plan Develop a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan for the City of Dublin. The TDM Plan will identify strategies to help facilitate the move from single -occupancy vehicles to less carbon intensive transportation modes. Consistent. The City is responsible for this measure; however, as described in more detail in Section 16, Transportation, the proposed Project would be located in an area with a projected vehicle miles travelled (VMT) per employee lower than 12.9 miles (which is 15 percent lower than the existing countywide 15.2 VMT per employee for the East Planning Area). In addition, the existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities serving the Project site are adequate (W-Trans 2022). The proposed Project would also provide bicycle storage spaces that exceed the City's bicycle parking requirements. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 403 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 73 GHG Emission Reduction Measure Description Project Consistency SM-4: Develop a Citywide Parking Management Plan Develop a comprehensive Parking Management Plan that will specify parking requirements and costing that supports multi - modal transportation and a reduction in vehicle miles travelled. Consistent. The City is responsible for this measure; however, as described in more detail in Section 16, Transportation, the proposed Project would be located in an area with a projected VMT per employee lower than 12.9 miles. In addition, the proposed parking supply meets City requirements and estimated parking demand (W-Trans 2022). SM-5: Update the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Update the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan to contribute to the overall VMT reduction required to meet the City's climate goals. The plan will maximize the convenience and safety of active transportation within the City of Dublin. Consistent. The City is responsible for this measure; however, as described in more detail in Section 16, Transportation, the proposed Project would be located in an area with a projected VMT per employee lower than 12.9 miles. In addition, the existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities serving the Project site are adequate (W- Trans 2022). Further, the proposed Project would provide bicycle storage spaces that exceed the City's bicycle parking requirements. SM-6: Continue to Prioritize Transit - Oriented Development Dublin has access to two BART stations and several LAVTA bus lines. Focusing higher density development and amenities around these transit stops can decrease VMT and GHG emissions generated within Dublin. Consistent. The City is responsible for this measure; however, as described in more detail in Section 16, Transportation, the proposed Project is adequately served by transit since existing transit stops are less than one-half mile away from the Project site (W-Trans 2022). SM-7: Develop a Built Environment That Prioritizes Active Mobility The City of Dublin will implement building standards that improve the pedestrian experience and create a built environment that prioritizes active mobility. Consistent. The City is responsible for this measure; however, pedestrian and bicycle facilities serving the Project site are adequate since existing pedestrian and bicycle access provide connectivity between the Project site and surrounding multi -modal transportation infrastructure and facilities. In addition, the proposed Project includes long-term and short-term bicycle stalls as well as an interior bike rack. Strategy 4: Materials - and Waste Management (MM) MM-1: Achieve the Organic Waste Diversion Requirements of SB 1383 The City of Dublin will coordinate with community stakeholders to achieve the goal of organics comprising less than 9.35% of Dublin waste by 2025. Additionally, at least 20% of currently disposed edible food will be recovered for human consumption by 2025. Consistent. The City is responsible for this measure; however, the proposed Project would comply with the Organics Reduction and Recycling Ordinance (City of Dublin 2023). MM-2: Reduce Embodied Emissions Associated with Building Materials The City of Dublin will require the use of low carbon concrete in new construction projects to reduce lifecycle GHG emissions and the embodied carbon associated with construction projects. Note: Municipal GHG emissions reduction measures (Strategy 5: Municipal Leadership Measures) are not included here as they would not be applicable to the proposed Project. CF = Renewable and Carbon -Free Energy; EE = Building Efficiency and Electrification; SM = Sustainable Mobility and Land Use; MM = Materials and Waste Management; AB = Assembly Bill; SB = Senate Bill; DMC = Dublin Municipal Code Not applicable. The City has not adopted an ordinance mandating low carbon concrete for all new development projects at the time of this analysis. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 404 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 74 As summarized in above, the proposed Project would be consistent with all applicable GHG emission reduction measures included in CAP 2030. For disclosure purposes, construction and operational GHG emissions of the proposed Project were also estimated using the same methodology discussed earlier under Section 3.2, Air Quality. These emissions are shown in Table 4: GHG Emissions Summar below. As shown in Table 4, the proposed Project would result in a net reduction in GHG emissions, primarily due to the reduction in daily vehicle trips and more energy -efficient, all -electric building, compared to existing conditions. Therefore, because the proposed Project would not conflict with the CAP 2030 measures and implementation of the proposed Project would result in a net reduction in GHG emissions compared to existing conditions, this impact would be less than significant impact and less than cumulatively considerable based on consistency with CAP approach. Table 4: GHG Emissions Summary Source/Description GHG Emissions Construction Total Construction Emissions (MT CO2e) 439 Amortized Construction Emissions (MT CO2e/year) 1 15 Operation Area (MT CO2e/year) <0.1 Energy (MT CO2e/year) 2 113 Mobile (MT CO2e/year) 454 Stationary (MT CO2e/year) 3 Waste (MT CO2e/year) 65 Water (MT CO2e/year) 53 Total Annual Emissions, including amortized construction (MT CO2e/year) 3 703 Existing Emissions (MT CO2e/year) 790 Net Emissions (MT CO2e/year) (87) Notes: GHG = greenhouse gas; MT CO2e/year = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per year Additional modeling assumptions and details are provided in Appendix D. 'Since construction related GHG emissions would cease upon completion of construction, GHG emissions associated with construction of the proposed Project were amortized over the proposed Project lifetime. The assumed amortization period is 30 years, based on the typically assumed project lifetime based on other air districts (e.g., South Coast Air Quality Management District [2008]). 2 Energy -related emissions associated with the proposed Project conservatively assume PG&E is the service provider. However, as of January 2022, the default electricity option is East Bay Community Energy's (EBCE's) Renewable 100 service, which is sourced from California wind and solar facilities, which would further reduce indirect GHG emissions as a result of energy consumption. 3 The operational GHG emission estimates assumed the proposed Project would include 18,000 square feet of office space, 36,500 square feet of light industrial space, and 70,804 square feet of warehousing space. Based on the latest site plan, it is anticipated the proposed Project would include 18,000 square feet of office space, 30,000 square feet of light industrial space, and 77,304 square feet of warehousing space. Since light industrial land uses generate higher daily vehicle trips than warehousing land uses, daily vehicle trips and the associated GHG emissions are anticipated to be lower (i.e., the GHG emission estimates assumed the proposed Project would generate 494 daily trips, based on the 2022 Transportation Impact Study (W-Trans 2022); however, based on the updated site plan the proposed Project is anticipated to generate approximately 468 daily trips). Similarly, based on California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) default data, building energy consumption rates for light industrial land uses are higher than building energy consumption rates for warehousing space. As such, the GHG emissions presented above are conservative since fuel consumption and electricity consumption would be lower. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would result in a higher net reduction in GHG emissions compared to existing conditions. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 405 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 75 (b) Conflict with GHG plans or regulations (Less Than Significant Impact) As discussed previously, the City of Dublin adopted CAP 2030, which establishes a pathway for the City to achieve emissions reductions in alignment with the 2030 GHG reduction goals established by SB 32 and help prepare the City of Dublin to implement further programs and policies to meet carbon neutrality by 2045. As summarized in Impact (a) above, the proposed Project would be consistent with the applicable measures of CAP 2030. In accordance with State law, CARB developed the State's Climate Change Scoping Plan (2008) and Scoping Plan updates (2014, 2017, and 2022) to outline the State's strategy to reduce California's GHG emissions per AB 32, SB 32, and AB 1279. In addition, as required by Dublin Municipal Green Building Code, the proposed Project would also comply with the most current Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen mandatory measures. The Building Standards and CALGreen requirements include mandatory measures for all new building construction, which would result in energy conservation and contribute to meeting the State's goals established by AB 32 and SB 32 for reduction in GHG emissions. Furthermore, the proposed Project would be all -electric (no natural gas infrastructure), consistent with the CARB 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan) goals of building decarbonization and ending fossil fuel infrastructure expansion for newly constructed buildings. Additionally, as described in Impact (a) above, implementation of the proposed Project would result in a net reduction in GHG emissions compared to existing conditions, and as a result, would not conflict with the goals and strategies included in local and statewide plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Furthermore, the proposed Project would also be consistent with the BAAQMD recommended building project design features of not including natural gas infrastructure or resulting in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy usage (as discussed in Section 3.7, Energy), as well as the transportation project design features of achieving a reduction in project -generated VMT below the regional average (as discussed in Section 16, Transportation), and compliance with off-street EV requirement per CALGreen Tier 2 (pursuant to DMC Chapter 7.94.090). The BAAQMD project design features were developed based on an analysis of what would be required of land use development projects to achieve California's long-term climate goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 as articulated in Executive Order B-55-18. Although these project design features are not being used to evaluate the proposed Project's climate impact under CEQA because the City has developed a local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b), these design features can be used as indicators of the proposed Project's consistency with California's long-term climate goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 (as codified in AB 1279) and CARB's 2022 Scoping Plan. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with the applicable plans, policies and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, and this impact would be less than significant. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 406 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 76 Source(s) Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2022. CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts From Land Use Projects and Plans. April. Available online: https://www.baagmd.gov/h'/media/files/planning-and-research/cega/ceqa- thresholds-2022/justification-report-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed February 2023. City of Dublin. 2020. Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond. September. Available online: https://dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/24447/Climate-Action-Plan-2030-And- Beyond. Accessed March 2023. . 2023. Compost, Recycling, Landfill. Available online: https://dublin.ca.gov/2042/Recycling-Programs#new. Accessed March 2023 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2013. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 pp. Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5 all final.pdf. Accessed February 2023. South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2008. Draft Guidance Document — Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold. Available online: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)- ceqa-significance-thresholds/ghgboardsynopsis.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed February 2023. W Traffic Engineering Transportation Planning (W-Trans). 2022. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. December. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 407 City of Dublin Hazards and Hazardous Materials HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 77 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Environmental Setting The Project site has been used since the 1960s as a research and development facility, which tests epoxy resins and composites primarily for aerospace and other applications. The laboratories were used for small-scale testing, while the building located south of the offices/laboratories (referred to by Hexcel as the "Hi Bay") was used to test larger quantities of Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 408 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 78 carbon fiber plates. Part of the research activities include testing prefabricated prototype carbon fiber plates. The research activities include chemical testing and reactions of the carbon fiber plates, as well as climate or extreme condition testing of the plates including extreme heat, cold, pressure, and electrical conditions, and stress testing. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was performed by Ardent Environmental Group (Ardent) in 2022. The main chemicals used at the site include petroleum oils and lubricants, non -chlorinated solvents, metals (such as chromium and aluminum), and acids. According to waste records and a 1994 chemical inventory, historical chemical uses included halogenated solvents, including 1,1,1- trichloroethane (1,1,1-TCA) and trichloroethene (TCE). Small containers of the different testing chemicals were stored in approximately 10 fire cabinets in a designated Hazardous Waste and Storage Area, while larger quantities of virgin chemicals and wastes were stored in 55-gallon drums in the Hazardous Waste and Storage Area. The following areas of concern were noted in the Phase I ESA (Ardent 2022). • Area of Chemical Use, Storage, and/or Handling. Chemicals are used, stored, and/or handled in the laboratories (existing and historical), Hi Bay area, and within the hazardous waste and storage area of the site. • Former 500-Gallon Waste Chromic Acid Underground Storage Tank (UST, Abandoned In - Place in 1988). This Underground Storage Tank (UST) was located immediately east of the Hi Bay portion of the building and was used to containerize waste acid wash reportedly consisting of deionized water, sulfuric acid, and sodium dichromate generated from the etching of aluminum panels. Soil and groundwater in the vicinity of this UST were investigated in the late 1980s under the direction and oversight of the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH). Laboratory results indicated no detectable to low concentrations of hexavalent chromium, trivalent chromium, and aluminum. Based on these results, ACDEH allowed Hexcel to abandon the UST in -place by filling the tank with a cement slurry. • Recently Removed 520-Gallon Waste Chromic Acid UST (2021). This UST was formerly located immediately east of the on -site hazardous waste and storage area and accepted waste from accidental spills from this area. Floor drains in the hazardous waste and storage area directed any accidental spills of chemicals to the tank. The UST was removed in April 2021 under the direction and oversight of the ACDEH. Following removal, two soil samples were collected from within the UST excavation. Laboratory results indicated no detectable concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons, and no detectable to low concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), namely acetone, at levels that were well below federal and state thresholds. Based on these results, the ACDEH issued a No Further Action letter dated July 20, 2021. • The eastern portion of the existing building was constructed in 1962, with subsequent additions over the years. Based on the age of the building, Ardent (2022) concluded that asbestos -containing materials (ACMs) and lead -based paint are likely present. As part of the Phase I ESA, Ardent (2022) retained Environmental Database Report (EDR) to perform a search of federal, State, and tribal hazardous materials databases, and retained Antea Group to perform a review of identified hazardous materials sites near the Project site. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 409 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 79 The database searches included those sites that are identified as part of the Cortese List. The Project is listed in the SWRCB's GeoTracker database as a Cleanup Program Site; however, cleanup program sites are not considered part of the Cortese List. No hazardous materials sites were determined to represent a hazard for the proposed Project (Ardent 2022). Regulatory Framework California Occupational Safety and Health Administration The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) has the primary responsibility for developing and enforcing workplace safety regulations within California. The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration enforces hazard communication program regulations that contain training and information requirements, including procedures for identifying and labeling hazardous substances, communicating hazard information related to hazardous substances and their handling, and preparation of health and safety plans to protect workers and employees at hazardous waste sites. Cal/OSHA regulations also include requirements for protective clothing, training, and limits on exposure to hazardous materials. Cal/OSHA also enforces occupational health and safety regulations specific to lead (CCR Title 8 Section 1532.1) and asbestos (CCR Title 8 Section 1529) investigation and abatement. California Department of Toxic Substances Control The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) implements the State's hazardous waste management program for the California Environmental Protection Agency. DTSC has the primary regulatory responsibility, with delegation of enforcement to local jurisdictions that enter into agreements with DTSC, for the management of hazardous materials (including remediation) and the generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous waste under the authority of California's Hazardous Waste Control Law (California Health and Safety Code Section 25100, et seq.). San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board The San Francisco Bay RWQCB is authorized by the State Water Resources Control Board to enforce provisions of the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969. This act gives the San Francisco Bay RWQCB authority to require groundwater investigations when the quality of groundwater or surface waters of the state is threatened and to require remediation of the site, if necessary. Hazardous Waste Transportation Statutory requirements governing hazardous waste transportation in California are contained in the California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5, Articles 6.5, 6.6, and 13. Hazardous waste transporters must have a valid registration permit issued by DTSC. In addition, hazardous waste transporters must comply with a variety of other State and federal regulations, including the California Vehicle Code (CCR Title 13); California State Fire Marshal Regulations (CCR Title 19); U.S. Department of Transportation regulations (Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations); and USEPA regulations (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations). Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 410 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 80 Bay Area Air Quality Management District BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2, adopted December 15, 1976, regulates hazardous pollutants from asbestos demolition, renovation, and manufacturing activities. The purpose of the rule is to control emissions of asbestos to the atmosphere during demolition, renovation, milling and manufacturing and establish appropriate waste disposal procedures. The rule sets out specific procedures to be followed and methods for reducing hazards from asbestos -containing materials during such activities. Senate Bill 1082 — California Environmental Protection Agency's Unified Program In 1993, Senate Bill 1082 gave the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) the authority and responsibility to establish a unified hazardous waste and hazardous materials management and regulatory program, commonly referred to as the Unified Program. The Unified Program is overseen by CalEPA with support from DTSC, RWQCBs, the Office of Emergency Services (OES), and the State Fire Marshal. The purpose of this program is to consolidate and coordinate hazardous materials and hazardous waste programs, and to ensure that they are consistently implemented throughout the state. The Unified Program includes: Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventories (Business Plans), California Accidental Release Prevention Program, Underground Storage Tank Program, Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act Program, Hazardous Waste Generator and Onsite Hazardous Waste Treatment (tiered permitting) Programs, and California Uniform Fire Code Hazardous Material Management Plans and Hazardous Material Inventory Statements. State law requires county and local agencies to implement the Unified Program. The agency in charge of implementing the program is called the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). The Alameda County Department of Environmental Health is the designated CUPA for the county. In addition to the CUPA, other local agencies, such as the City of Dublin, help to implement the Unified Program. City of Dublin General Plan Section 8.3.4 of the General Plan outlines policies and programs related to hazards and hazardous materials. The following policies related to hazardous materials are applicable to the proposed Project: • Guiding Policy 8.3.4.1.A.1. Maintain and enhance the ability to regulate the use, transport, and storage of hazardous materials and to quickly identify substances and take appropriate action during emergencies. • Guiding Policy 8.3.4.1.A.2. Minimize the risk of exposure to hazardous materials from contaminated sites. • Implementing Policy 8.3.4.1.B.4. Require site -specific hazardous materials studies for new development projects where there is a potential for the presence of hazardous materials from previous uses on the site. If hazardous materials are found, require the clean-up of sites to acceptable regulatory standards prior to development. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 411 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 81 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Exposure to hazardous materials (Less than Significant Impact) Exposure from use or spill of chemicals and other hazardous materials during construction and operation: Construction of the project would involve the transport, use, and disposal of limited quantities of hazardous materials typically used in construction including fuels, paints, solvents, adhesives, asphalt and lubricants that could pose a threat to human health or the environment if not properly managed. The use of these hazardous chemicals and substances would be subject to federal, state, and local health and safety requirements. Transportation of hazardous materials on area roadways is regulated by the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and the Caltrans, and use of these materials is regulated by DTSC, as outlined in CCR Title 22. The Project applicant and its construction contractors would be required to use, store, and transport hazardous materials in compliance with applicable federal and State regulations during Project construction. Furthermore, as discussed in Section 9: Hydrology and Water Quality, a SWPPP would be required for the project. The SWPPP would contain Spill Response Plan to address minor spills of hazardous materials. With adherence to these regulations, impacts would be less than significant during construction. Operation of the protect may involve the transport, use, and disposal of limited quantities of hazardous materials associated with the R&D and life sciences industry. If any hazardous materials are stored or handled at the Project site, either as a result of on -site businesses (similar to Hexcel) or from basic maintenance activities such as herbicides and cleaning products, the building tenants and maintenance staff would be required to follow manufacturer's instructions and (if applicable) would be required to prepare Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventories (Business Plans) and comply with the requirements of Hazardous Waste Generator (tiered permitting) Programs. Therefore, impacts from exposure to hazardous materials during Project operation would be less than significant during Project operation. Exposure from disturbance of hazardous building materials at the site during construction: Due to the age of the on -site structures at the Project site, abatement of hazardous materials including ACMs and lead -based paint may be necessary as part of the demolition activities. Construction worker health and safety regulations and hazardous materials removal and disposal protocols would be implemented in accordance with applicable federal and state standards, including the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health and the BAAQMD Regulation 11 Rule 2: Asbestos Demolition, Renovation and Manufacturing. The Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) program requires "best available" dust mitigation measures to be followed during earth -moving activities to reduce exposure to airborne asbestos. An Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan must be submitted to BAAQMD for review and approval prior to the start of earth -moving activities in areas where NOA may be encountered. The abatement contractor would be appropriately licensed and certified, and is required by law to comply with all local, state, and federal requirements regarding hazardous materials. Hazardous materials would be disposed of in an approved, off -site Class I or Class II landfill. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 412 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 82 A permitted liquid nitrogen above ground storage tank is present in the southern portion of the site and immediately outside the existing building. However, there are no known issues with the tank and Ardent (2022) determined that the liquid nitrogen tank does not represent an environmental hazard. During demolition, the tank would be removed and disposed of in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local ACDEH standards. Since local, state and federal regulations will be complied with during the disturbance of hazardous building materials, these impacts will be less than significant. (b) Upset/Accident (Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated) If soil or groundwater have previously been contaminated at levels that exceed regulatory thresholds, this would represent a significant human health and environmental hazard since excavation work would be required during construction that could release these hazardous materials. Furthermore, during demolition of the existing building, there could be exposure to lead paint and/or asbestos. Therefore, these construction -related impacts are considered potentially significant. With Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-1: Perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment and HAZMAT-2: Perform Sampling of Materials To Be Demolished, potential construction -related impacts from accidental exposure to hazardous materials would be less than significant with mitigation. Operation of the Project would be similar to existing conditions and is not expected to result in an upset or accident release of hazardous materials, as labeling instructions of chemicals would be followed. This impact is further analyzed in the Focused EIR. (c) Hazardous materials near schools (No Impact) There are no K-12 schools within 0.5 mile of the Project site. The nearest school, Valley Christian Elementary, is approximately 0.68 mile to the northwest. Thus, Project construction and operation would result in no impact from handling of hazardous materials near a school. (d) Hazardous materials list (No Impact) The nearest open, active Cortese Listed site is approximately 3 miles northeast of the Project site. The Project site is included in the State Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB 2023) GeoTracker database as a closed Clean -Up Program Site, which is not part of the Cortese List. Because the Project site is not listed on the Cortese list, there would be no impact. (e) Proximity to a public airport (No Impact) The Livermore Municipal Airport is approximately 6 miles east of the Project site and outside of the airport's Airport Influence Area (Alameda County 2012). Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in an airport safety or airport noise impact. Thus, Project construction and operation would result in no impact from airport safety or noise hazards. (f) Impair implementation of an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan (No Impact) The existing ingress and egress from Dublin Boulevard to the Project site would be maintained. All construction materials would be staged on -site, and therefore no temporary lane closures along Dublin Boulevard would be required during Project construction that could impede Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 413 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 83 emergency access or hinder emergency evacuation. For Project operation, planned emergency access throughout the Project site would be reviewed by the City of Dublin Building Department and the Fire Department to ensure that appropriate widths and turning radii area provided for emergency vehicles. Furthermore, it is expected that a similar number of employees would be working at the Project site as compared to existing conditions, and therefore Project operation would not place substantial numbers of additional vehicles on area roadways that could impede emergency access or hinder emergency evacuation. Thus, Project construction and operation would result in no impact from impairment of emergency response or evacuation plans. (g) Expose people or structures to wildland fires (Less Than Significant Impact) As discussed in Section 18, Wildfire, the Project would not substantially alter site slopes or vegetation or introduce new land uses that would exacerbate potential wildfire risks at the site. Strict adherence to applicable California Public Resources Code requirements would ensure that wildfire risks are minimized during construction. The proposed building would be constructed according to CBC, the California Fire Code and City of Dublin codes, and ordinances and regulations to minimize fire hazards, including fire prevention and suppression measures; fire hydrants and sprinkler systems; emergency access; and other similar requirements. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Source(s) Alameda County. 2012. Livermore Executive Airport. Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Ardent Environmental Group, Inc. 2022. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Hexcel Corporation Facility, 11711 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California. Ardent Project No. 101327001. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2023. GeoTracker. Available: https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/. Accessed January 17, 2023. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 414 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 84 This page intentionally left blank Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 415 City of Dublin Hydrology and Water Quality HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 85 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact ess an Significant Impact with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact e e X X X X r X X X if X X 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the projec a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surfa or groundwater quality? b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfe substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: (i). Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off - site; (ii). Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or offsite; (iii). Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwate drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or (iv). Impede or redirect flood flows? d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release pollutants due to project inundation? e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? Environmental Setting Dublin Creek traverses the southern portion of the project site, south of the existing building and the southernmost parking area. Dublin Creek flows eastward from the foothills of the Diablo Range. It is a tributary to Alamo Creek (now known as the Alamo Canal), which flows southward along 1-680. The Alamo Canal discharges at its southern end into Arroyo de la Laguna Creek, which flows southward and discharges into Alameda Creek in the Sunol Valley. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 416 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 86 As required by the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the San Francisco Bay RWQCB has designated beneficial uses for water body segments in its jurisdiction (including Dublin Creek, Alamo Canal, Arroyo de la Laguna Creek, and Alameda Creek) along with water quality criteria necessary to protect these uses, as contained in the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the San Francisco Bay Basin (San Francisco Bay RWQCB 2019). Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to identify waters where the permit standards, any other enforceable limits, or adopted water quality standards are still unattained. NPDES permits for water discharges must take into account the pollutants for which a water body is listed as impaired. Even if a stream is not included in the SWRCB's 303(d) list, any upstream tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream, including Dublin Creek and Alamo Canal, could contribute pollutants to the listed segment. Arroyo del la Laguna Creek and Alameda Creek are both listed as impaired due to the presence of diazinon (SWRCB 2021). The Project site includes an existing underground stormwater drainage system. Stormwater is discharged into Dublin Creek through two existing on -site drainage outfalls (via 10-inch and 12- inch pipelines, respectively), and via discharge into a 24-inch pipeline that also carries upstream stormwater from other off -site properties to the west and discharges into Dublin Creek in the southern portion of the Project site. These are private drainages that were maintained by the property owner. Furthermore, stormwater from the southern part of the project site drains directly into Dublin Creek via overland flow. However, because the project site was developed with the existing building and parking areas in 1962, it does not include any stormwater quality pre-treatment prior to discharge. The Project site does not include any groundwater wells, and the proposed project does not include drilling of any new wells. Therefore, groundwater resources are not addressed further in this IS. The channel of Dublin Creek, which flows through the southern portion of the Project site, is a 100-year floodplain as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA 2009). In addition, the southeastern portion of the Project site between the existing building and Dublin Creek is within a FEMA-designated 500-year floodplain (FEMA 2009). Regulatory Framework Federal Clean Water Act Water Quality Criteria and Standards, Section 303 Section 303 of the CWA requires states to adopt water quality standards for all surface waters of the United States. As defined by the CWA, water quality standards consist of two elements: (1) designated beneficial uses of the water body in question, and (2) criteria that protect the designated uses. Section 303(d) requires states to develop lists of the water bodies and associated pollutants that exceed water quality criteria. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Program, Section 402 The NPDES permit program was established as part of the CWA to regulate municipal and industrial discharges to surface waters of the U.S. NPDES permits generally identify limits on the Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 417 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 87 concentrations and/or mass emissions of pollutants in effluent discharged into receiving waters; prohibitions on discharges not specifically allowed under the permit; and provisions that describe required actions by the discharger, including industrial pretreatment, pollution prevention, self -monitoring, and other activities. NPDES permits are required for both construction and operational stormwater discharges. California's RWQCBs are responsible for implementing the NPDES permit system. Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act The Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter -Cologne Act) of 1969 is California's statutory authority for the protection of water quality. Under the Act, the State must adopt water quality policies, plans, and objectives that protect the State's waters for the use and enjoyment of the people. Regional authority for planning, permitting, and enforcement is delegated to the nine RWQCBs. Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins (Basin Plan) The Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the San Francisco Bay Basin (San Francisco Bay RWQCB 2019) identifies the beneficial uses of water bodies and provides water quality objectives and standards for waters of the San Francisco Bay hydrologic regions. California National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit System Waste Discharge Requirements for Construction The California State Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB) statewide stormwater general permit for construction activity (Order WQ 2022-0057-DWQ) is applicable to all construction activities that would disturb 1 acre of land or more. Construction activities subject to the general construction activity permit include clearing, grading, stockpiling, and excavation. Dischargers are required to eliminate or reduce non-stormwater discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters through preparation of a SWPPP and implementation of BMPs along with inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements to prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction -related pollutants that could contaminate nearby water resources. Municipal Regional Stormwater Discharge (MS4) Permit The City of Dublin, along with 75 other municipalities and agencies, is a co-permittee under the Municipal Regional Stormwater Discharge (MS4) Permit administered by the San Francisco Bay RWQCB (Order No. R2-2022-0018, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008, issued May 11, 2022). The City is also a participant in the Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program, which was created to implement the requirements of the MS4 Permit. New and redevelopment projects are required to use the C.3 Stormwater Technical Guidance (Alameda Clean Water Program 2021) when designing stormwater drainage systems. Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.74, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control The City of Dublin's Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 7.74) was enacted to protect water quality by requiring projects to eliminate non- stormwater discharges to the municipal separate storm sewer; control the discharge to Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 418 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 88 municipal separate storm sewers from spills, dumping or disposal of materials other than stormwater; and reduce pollutants in stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable. Owners of properties that include a watercourse must maintain structures so as not to become a hazard to the use, function or physical integrity of the watercourse; shall not remove healthy bank vegetation beyond that actually necessary for said maintenance; and shall not remove said vegetation in such a manner as to increase the vulnerability of the watercourse to erosion (Section 7.74.110[A]). Development is prohibited within 30 feet of the centerline of any creek or 20 feet of the top of a bank (Section 7.74.110[B]). Dublin Municipal Code Section Chapter 7.16, Grading Regulations The City of Dublin's Grading Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 7.16) requires a geologic/soil investigation report, preliminary grading plans, proposed provisions for storm drainage control and any existing or proposed flood control in the vicinity of the grading. A conceptual plan for erosion and sediment control is also required, including both temporary facilities and long-term site stabilization features such as planting or seeding for the area affected by the proposed grading. Chapter 7.16 prohibits grading operations during the rainy season except upon a clear demonstration, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, that at no stage of the work will there be any substantial risk of increased sediment discharge from the site. Should grading be permitted during the rainy season, the smallest practicable area of erodible land shall be exposed at any one time during grading operations and the time of exposure shall be minimized. City of Dublin General Plan Sections 7.2, 7.3 and 12.3 of the General Plan outlines policies and programs related to stream corridors and riparian areas and erosion and siltation control. The following policies related to hydrology and water quality are applicable to the proposed Project: • Guiding Policy 7.2.1.A.1. Protect riparian vegetation as a protective buffer for stream quality and for its value as a habitat and aesthetic resource. • Guiding Policy 7.2.1.A.2. Promote access to stream corridors for passive recreational use and to allow stream maintenance and improvements as necessary, while respecting the privacy of owners of property abutting stream corridors. • Implementing Policy 7.2.1.B.1. Enforce Watercourse Ordinance 52-87 for developed areas of the city. • Implementing Policy 7.2.1.6.2. Require open stream corridors of adequate width to protect all riparian vegetation, improve access, and prevent flooding caused by blockage of streams. • Implementing Policy 7.2.1.6.3. Require revegetation of creek banks with species characteristic of local riparian vegetation, where construction requires creekbank alteration. • Guiding Policy 7.3.1.A.1. Maintain natural hydrologic systems. • Guiding Policy 7.3.1.A.2. Regulate grading and development on steep slopes. • Implementing Policy 7.3.1.B.1. Enforce the requirements of the Municipal Regional Permit for stormwater issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board or any subsequent permit as well as Chapter 7 (Public Works) and Chapter 9 (Subdivisions) of Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 419 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 89 the Dublin Municipal Code for maintenance of water quality and protection of stream courses. • Implementing Policy 7.3.1.6.2. Review development proposals to insure site design that minimizes soil erosion and volume and velocity of surface runoff. • Implementing Policy 7.3.1.6.3. Restrict development on slopes over 30 percent. • Implementing Policy 7.3.2.63. Development projects shall comply with the requirements of the Municipal Regional Permit for stormwater issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board or any subsequent permit as well as Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7 (Public Works) and Chapter 9 (Subdivisions). • Guiding Policy 12.3.5.A1. Protect the quality and quantity of surface water and groundwater resources that serve the community. • Guiding Policy 12.3.5.A2. Protect water quality by minimizing stormwater runoff and providing adequate stormwater facilities. • Guiding Policy 12.3.5.A3. To minimize flooding in existing and future development, design stormwater facilities to handle design -year flows based on buildout of the General Plan. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Violate water quality or waste discharge requirements or degrade surface or groundwater quality (Less than Significant Impact) The proposed Project would require construction on approximately 7.3 acres of the 8.81-acre Project site, which would be entirely on Parcel 1. No construction would occur on the southern approximately 0.56 acre of the Project site (Parcel 2), which is adjacent to Dublin Creek. Parcel 1, between the existing parking lot and Dublin Creek, and Parcel 2 would not include any project -related staging, construction, or earthmoving activities. Because groundwater is 18-20 feet bgs (Cornerstone Earth Group 2022), the need for construction dewatering is unlikely. Project construction would require demolition of existing buildings and pavement, excavation, grading, material stockpiling, and staging at the Project site, which would temporarily disturb surface soils. These activities would expose soil to the erosive forces of wind and water. During winter rain events, the soil could be transported via overland flow to Dublin Creek and other downstream waterbodies, thereby increasing turbidity and degrading water quality. The Project is required by law to comply with the provisions of the SWRCB's statewide NPDES Construction General Permit (Order WQ 2022-0057-DWQ). The Construction General Permit regulates stormwater discharges for construction activities under the federal Clean Water Act and applies to all land -disturbing construction activities that would disturb 1 acre or more. The Project applicant must submit a notice of intent to discharge to the San Francisco Bay RWQCB, and must prepare and implement a SWPPP that includes BMPs to minimize those discharges. All NPDES permits also have inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements. The San Francisco Bay RWQCB requires dischargers to implement construction and operational design features and BMPs that are specifically intended to reduce the potential for downstream hydromodification, and to control erosion and reduce downstream sediment transport, in order to protect water quality and in -stream beneficial uses as designed under the Basin Plan. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 420 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 90 Under the NPDES MS4 Phase II General Permit for operational stormwater discharge, project applicants must comply with the Alameda Clean Water Program to protect the water quality of existing waterbodies and improve operational stormwater quality discharges. The Alameda Clean Water Program requires that measures for long-term BMPs that protect water quality and control runoff flow be incorporated into new development and substantial redevelopment projects. The proposed Project is required to design and implement operational water quality and runoff controls per the Alameda Clean Water Program's C.3 Stormwater Technical Guidance (Alameda Clean Water Program 2021). The project applicant is required by law to comply with the NPDES construction and operational permit programs. In addition, the project applicant must comply with the provisions of Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.74, "Stormwater Management and Discharge Control," and Chapter 7.16, "Grading Regulations." Municipal Code Chapter 7.16 requires project applicants to submit a preliminary grading plan showing proposed stormwater drainage features along with features designed to control operation -related erosion and protect water quality. Final grading and drainage plans must be prepared by the project applicant and submitted to the City Building Department for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits or approval of improvement plans. Furthermore, grading during the winter rainy season is not allowed unless a waiver is obtained from the building department. Therefore, Project -related construction and operational impacts from violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or other substantial degradation of surface or groundwater quality would be less than significant. (b) Substantially decrease or interfere with groundwater supplies (Less Than Significant Impact) There are no groundwater wells at the Project site, and none are proposed as part of the Project. Water needs for the proposed Project would continue to be met by the Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD), as they are now. As discussed in Section 18, Utilities and Services Systems, the Project is estimated to necessitate double the amount of water currently being used at the Project site. However, this increased water demand from the Project would make up less than 0.0002 percent of the estimated projected supply of DSRSD. Thus, this increase would be nominal. The proposed new building and parking would result in a higher amount of impervious surfaces at the Project site as compared to existing conditions, but bioretention areas have been sized accordingly, and therefore would not result in a substantial decrease in the surface area of permeable soils that would allow rainwater to reach the aquifer. Therefore, Project construction and operation would not substantially decrease or interfere with groundwater supplies, and there would be less than significant impact. (c) Substantially alter existing drainage patterns re: erosion/siltation, re: flooding, or degrade water quality (Less Than Significant Impact) (i). The Project is required by law to comply with the provisions of the SWRCB's statewide NPDES Construction General Permit (Order WQ 2022-0057-DWQ). The Construction General Permit regulates stormwater discharges for construction activities under the federal CWA and applies to all land -disturbing construction activities that would disturb 1 acre or more. The Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 421 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 91 project applicant must submit a notice of intent to discharge to the San Francisco Bay RWQCB, and must prepare and implement a SWPPP that includes BMPs to minimize those discharges. All NPDES permits also have inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements. The San Francisco Bay RWQCB requires dischargers to implement construction and operational design features and BMPs that are specifically intended to reduce the potential for downstream hydromodification, and to control erosion and reduce downstream sediment transport, in order to protect water quality and in -stream beneficial uses as designed under the Basin Plan. Furthermore, per the City of Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.16, grading during the winter rainy season is not allowed unless a waiver is obtained from the building department. Therefore, impacts from construction -related alteration of drainages resulting in increased erosion, degradation of water quality, or downstream flooding would be less than significant. (ii) and (iii). As noted above, the Project site includes an existing stormwater drainage system that discharges to Dublin Creek through three outfalls (10-, 12-, and 24-inch, respectively) along with overland flow. The existing 10-inch outfall would no longer be used, but the existing 12- inch outfall, and the existing 12-inch conveyance line to the 24-inch outfall, would continue to be used for discharge of stormwater as part of the proposed Project. A Preliminary Drainage Plan (Kier+Wright 2022) for the proposed Project has been prepared. To comply with regional and local operational stormwater permitting requirements, the Project applicant would install a new drainage system that includes bioretention planters to provide stormwater pre-treatment prior to discharge (Kier+Wright 2022). Two pumps, with a maximum depth of excavation of between 12 to 20 feet below existing ground level, would be installed to raise stormwater to an appropriate elevation for discharge conveyance. The Preliminary Drainage Plan for the proposed Project (Kier+Wright 2022) shows the locations and components of the proposed new stormwater drainage system including the bioretention/filtration planters, which would be installed within each of five subsheds at the Project site and would generally range in size from approximately 1 to 2.7 acres. The Preliminary Drainage Plan meets the requirements of Dublin Municipal Code Section 7.16, and incorporates the design and engineering requirements of the Alameda Clean Water Program's C.3 Stormwater Technical Guidance (Alameda Clean Water Program 2021). In addition to water quality pre-treatment features, the Preliminary Drainage Plan incorporates the necessary storm drainage detention to attenuate excessive flow rates and volumes based on recurring storm intervals per the C.3 Stormwater Technical Guidance and City requirements. Therefore, the proposed on -site stormwater drainage system would be sufficient to detain and treat operational stormwater runoff generated by the proposed Project, and would not result in upstream or downstream flooding. Furthermore, the proposed Project would also meet the requirements of Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.74 related to stormwater management and discharge because vegetation along Dublin Creek would not be disturbed, and no development would occur within 30 feet of the centerline of Dublin Creek or within 20 feet of the top of the creek bank. Final grading and drainage plans must be prepared by the Project applicant and submitted to the City Building Department for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits or approval of improvement plans. Therefore, operational impacts from substantial alteration of drainages resulting in operational erosion and degradation of water quality, or exceedance of drainage systems and associated downstream flooding would be less than significant. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 422 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 92 (iv). The channel of Dublin Creek, which flows through the southern portion of the Project site, is a FEMA 100-year floodplain. However, Project -related construction would not be performed in, and no new development would be located in, the 100-year floodplain. Project -related development in the 500-year floodplain (which consists primarily of parking, drive isles, and landscaping) does not require permitting from the City's Floodplain Administrator and does not require flood insurance, because of the very low likelihood that flooding would occur or that it would result in damage. Therefore, Project construction and operation would result in a less than significant impact from impedance of flood flows. (d) Flood hazard, seiche, or tsunami (No Impact) There are no large waterbodies in the Project vicinity that would represent a seiche hazard for the Project site. Furthermore, given the distance of the Project site from the Pacific Ocean (approximately 13 miles) and the presence of the intervening mountains of the Diablo Range, tsunamis would not represent a hazard for the proposed Project. Project -related construction materials would be stored in upland areas of the Project site, not within the bed or bank of the Dublin Creek channel (100-year flood zone). Therefore, the proposed Project would result in no impact from inundation of construction materials in a flood hazard, seiche, or tsunami zone. (e) Water Quality (Less Than Significant Impact) For the same reasons described in criteria (a) and (c) above, construction and operation of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact related to potential conflicts with or obstruction of the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the San Francisco Bay Basin (San Francisco Bay RWQCB 2019). For the same reasons described in criterion (b) above, construction and operation of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact from a substantial decrease or interference with groundwater supplies. Source(s) Alameda Clean Water Program. 2021. C.3 Stormwater Technical Guidance. Version 7.1. http://cleanwaterprogram.org/. Accessed January 26, 2023. Cornerstone Earth Group. 2022. Geotechnical Investigation. Location 11711 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2009. FEMA Flood Map Service Center, Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Available: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home. Accessed January 26, 2023. Kier+Wright. 2022. Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan, Preliminary Utility Plan. Kier+Wright Job No. A22024. Livermore, CA. San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2019. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the San Francisco Bay Basin. Available: Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 423 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 93 https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/basinplanning.html. Accessed January 24, 2023. State Water Resources Control Board. 2021. 2018 California Integrated Report. Available online: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/water quality assessment/2 018 integrated report.html. Accessed January 24, 2023. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 424 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 94 This page intentionally left blank Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 425 City of Dublin Land Use and Planning HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 95 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 1 Environmental Setting The Project site is located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California. The site includes two parcels totaling 8.81 acres; APN 941-1560-009-01 [Parcel 1] is the larger parcel at 8.30 acres and is located adjacent to Dublin Boulevard, and [APN] 941-1560- 003-04 [Parcel 2] is the smaller parcel at 0.51 acre and is located toward the back (south) of the Project site adjacent to 1-580 (Figure 1. Project Location). Parcel 1 (the northern and main portion of the site) is developed with a 62,715 square foot building, at -grade parking, underground and aboveground utilities, pavement, and ornamental landscaping. The existing building is being used as a R&D facility. The landscape consists of grass areas and mature trees. Parcel 2 (the southern parcel) is undeveloped and is surrounded by dense riparian vegetation including mature trees. The Dublin Creek runs along the approximate southern boundary. The Project site is immediately surrounded by commercial office uses including a R&D facility, medical and professional offices to the west, US Bank, Dublin Pioneer Cemetery, and the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums to the east; I-580 to the south; and Dublin Boulevard to the north (see Figure 2. Project Site). To the north of Dublin Boulevard and to the east of the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and cemetery are single-family houses. Approximately a mile to the west is Dublin Hills Regional Open Space Preserve. Regulatory Framework City of Dublin General Plan The City of Dublin General Plan was adopted by the City Council on February 11, 1985, and amended February 15, 2022. The City of Dublin General Plan is a policy document guiding future development within the City and is a comprehensive plan intended to guide growth and development. In accordance with Government Code Section 65300, the General Plan includes policies for the entire Planning Area, including the City limits proper, and those areas outside the City limits that bear relation to Dublin's planning. The General Plan contains 12 elements that address many aspects of the community including: land use, housing, parks and open Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 426 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 96 space, community design, infrastructure, safety, sustainability, and conservation of resources. The Land Use Element is considered the framework for the General Plan because it establishes development and land use patterns that enhance the City's character. All relevant General Plan policies are described in each technical section of this Initial Study, as appropriate. There are no additional General Plan policies applicable to land use and planning that are not already addressed in the other resource sections of this Initial Study. General Plan Land Use Designation The Project site is designated as Business Park/Industrial in the City's General Plan. This designation allows non -retail businesses, such as research, limited manufacturing and distribution activities, and administrative offices, that do not involve heavy trucking or generate nuisances due to emissions, noise, or open uses (City of Dublin 2022). Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan The site is also located in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan boundaries. The purpose of the Specific Plan area is to protect and preserve historical resources, and further enhance the area with development that is compatible with the historic buildings and remnants of the area. The District's boundary extends from Cronin Circle to 1-580 and San Ramon Road to Hansen Drive, including portions west of Hansen Drive along Dublin Boulevard. The District encompasses approximately 40 acres (City of Dublin 2014). Consistent with the City of Dublin General Plan, the Project site is designated as Business Park/Industrial in the Dublin Area Village Specific Plan (City of Dublin 2014). The Specific Plan indicates that the Project site could accommodate up to 154,202 square feet of development with a floor -area ratio of 0.30 to 0.40. There are no Specific Plan land use and planning policies applicable to the proposed Project. City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance Title 8 of the City's Municipal Code establishes the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance, which sets cohesive zoning rules for the City and designates land use types. Ch. 8.12 establishes zoning districts, adopts an official Zoning Map, shows equivalent zoning districts between the new Zoning Ordinance and the former Zoning Ordinance, determines permitted land uses and conditionally permitted land uses, and establishes decision maker authority for such conditionally permitted land uses. The City's Zoning Ordinance is the primary implementation tool for the goals and policies contained in the Land Use Element. For this reason, the Zoning Map must be consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map. Parcels 1 and 2 are zoned by the City as Light Industrial (M1) (referenced in Section 8.28 of the Dublin Municipal Code). The M-1 zoning district is intended to provide for the continued use, expansion, and new development of light industrial use types in proximity to major transportation corridors, and to ensure compatibility with adjacent residential and commercial uses. Permitted uses in the M-1 zoning district include ambulance service; laboratory; office; commercial; industrial, such as printing and publishing or research and development Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 427 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 97 laboratory; storage of petroleum products for on -site use; trucking terminal; and warehousing and distribution. Parcel 1 is further zoned as PD under Ordinance No. 80-60. The existing PD Ordinance No. 80-60 for the Project site was approved by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors on July 10, 1980. The ordinance states conditional uses consist of pharmacies, research and development laboratories, light manufacturing, and banks. The intent of the PD designation is to create a more desirable use of the land, a more coherent and coordinated development, and a better physical environment than would otherwise be possible under a single zoning district or combination of zoning districts. A PD Zoning District is established by the adoption of an Ordinance reclassifying the property to such district and adopting a Development Plan, which establishes regulations for the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the property within the PD district (Section 8.32 of the Dublin Municipal Code). Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Physically divide an established community (No Impact) Access to residential neighborhoods in the vicinity of the Project site would be maintained during construction. There would be no closure of any publicly accessible roadway that provides connectivity between the existing neighborhoods north of Dublin Boulevard in the vicinity of the Project site. All construction activities, including staging areas, would be on the Project site. Therefore, construction of the proposed Project would not introduce a physical feature that would create a barrier, divide, or separate adjacent uses during construction. Therefore, physical division of an established community would not occur due to construction of the proposed Project. There would be no impact. There are no residential land uses within the Project site. The nearest established community is located north of Dublin Boulevard, north of the Project site. The proposed Project would demolish the existing 62,715 square foot industrial building and development of a new 125,304 square foot building. Site improvements would include landscaping; parking; a fire access road; circulation improvements for truck access and loading and unloading materials; utilities; pavement and grading to treat site drainage. Overall, the Project would not result in any permanent road closures or introduce any physical feature that would create a barrier, divide, or separate adjacent uses. Therefore, physical division of an established community would not occur due to operation of the proposed Project. There would be no impact. (b) Conflict with land use plan, policy, or regulation (No Impact) According to CEQA, policy conflicts do not, in and of themselves, constitute a significant environmental impact. Policy conflicts are considered to be environmental impacts only when they would result in direct physical impacts or where those conflicts relate to avoiding or mitigating environmental impacts. For an impact to be considered significant under this threshold, any inconsistency would also need to result in a significant adverse change in the environment not already addressed in the other resource sections of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR). These technical sections provide a detailed analysis of other relevant physical Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 428 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 98 environmental effects that could result from implementation of the proposed Project and identify mitigation measures, as necessary, to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. The proposed Project would demolish the existing 62,715 square foot industrial building and develop a new 125,304 square foot building. The new building would cater to future tenants in the R&D and life sciences field (see Figure 3. Site Plan). The proposed Project is consistent with the City General Plan and Dublin Area Village Specific Plan land use designation for the site and no General Plan amendments are required. In addition, the proposed Project would not exceed the Specific Plan's development potential for the Project site (154,202 square feet). The proposed Project is a permitted use within the M-1 zoning district. A Planned Development Rezone would be required for Parcel 1, which provides development standards beyond those of the M-1 zoning, and a new ordinance would be adopted concurrently. With approval of a Planned Development Rezone and adoption of a new PD ordinance, the proposed Project would not conflict with the zoning of the Project site. Implementation of the proposed Project would not conflict with adopted City General Plan policies or other land use plan, policy, or regulation that would generate any adverse physical impacts beyond those addressed in detail in the environmental sections of this Initial Study (air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, etc.). Therefore, there would be no impact. Source(s) City of Dublin. 2014. Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. City of Dublin. 2022. City of Dublin General Plan. Available: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/171/General-Plan#Chapter%207. Accessed March 6, 2023. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 429 City of Dublin Mineral Resources HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 99 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact 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? Environmental Setting Minerals are any naturally occurring chemical element or compound, or groups of elements and compounds, formed from inorganic processes and organic substances including, but not limited to, coal, peat and oil bearing rock, but excluding geothermal resources, natural gas and petroleum. Rock, sand, gravel and earth are also considered minerals by the Department of Conservation when extracted by surface mining operations. Neither the State Geologist nor the California Department of Mines and Geology (CDMG) have classified any areas in the City as containing mineral deposits that are either of Statewide significance or the significance of which requires further evaluation (California Department of Conservation, 2022). Regulatory Framework State Regulations Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1974 The CGS and the California State Mining and Geology Board are required by the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1974 (SMARA) to categorize lands into four Aggregate and Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs), described below. These MRZs classify lands that contain significant regional or Statewide mineral deposits. Lead Agencies are mandated by the State to incorporate MRZs into their General Plans. MRZs are classified on the basis of geologic factors without regard to existing land use and land ownership. The four MRZs are categorized as follows: • MRZ-1: An area where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. • MRZ-2: An area where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 430 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 100 • MRZ-3: An area containing mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated. • MRZ-4: An area where available information is inadequate for assignment to any other MRZ zone. Of the four categories, lands classified as MRZ-2 are of the greatest importance because such areas are underlain by demonstrated mineral resources or are located where geologic data indicate that significant measured or indicated resources are present. MRZ-2 areas are designated by the State Mining and Geology Board as being "regionally significant." Such designations require that a Lead Agency make land use decisions involving designated areas in accordance with its mineral resource management policies and that it consider the importance of the mineral resource to the region or the State as a whole, not just to the Lead Agency's jurisdiction. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a-b) Loss of known or identified mineral resource (No Impact) The Project site is not located in a designated mineral resource area (California Department of Conservation 2022). Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in the loss of available of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the state or the loss of availability of any locally known important mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, there would be no impact regarding mineral resources. Source(s) California Department of Conservation. 2022. Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) Mineral Lands Classification Portal. Accessed: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=mlc. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 431 City of Dublin Noise HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 101 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: 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? b) Generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? 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? Environmental Setting Noise Background Sound is a physical phenomenon generated by vibrations that result in waves that travel through a medium, such as air, and result in auditory perception by the human brain. Noise is usually defined as unwanted or disruptive sound. Whether something is perceived as a noise event is influenced by the type of sound, the decibel level of the sound, the perceived importance of the sound, its appropriateness in the setting, the time of day, the type of activity during which the noise occurs, and the sensitivity of the listener. Local jurisdictions may have legal definitions of what constitutes "noise" and such environmental parameters to consider. The amplitude of noise is measured in decibels (dB) using a logarithmic scale. A sound level of 0 dB is approximately the threshold of human hearing and is barely audible under extremely quiet listening conditions. Normal speech has a sound level of approximately 60 dB. Sound levels above approximately 110 dB begin to be felt inside the human ear as discomfort and eventually as pain at 120 dB and higher levels. The minimum change in the sound level in an outdoor noise environment that an average human ear can perceive is about 3 dB. A change of 5 dB or greater is readily perceived, and a change in sound level of 10 dB usually is perceived as a doubling of the sound's loudness2. 2 Caltrans. 2003. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 432 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 102 Most sounds perceived by the human ear in the environment do not consist of a single frequency but instead are composed of a broad band of frequencies differing in sound level. The method commonly used to quantify environmental sounds consists of evaluating all frequencies of a sound according to a weighting system that reflects the typical frequency - dependent sensitivity of average healthy human hearing. This is called "A -weighting," and the decibel level measured is referred to as dBA. Environmental noise levels vary continuously and may include a mixture of noise from near and distant sources generated by combinations of events of short -period (e.g., vehicle pass -by) and long -period (e.g., power plant) duration. A single descriptor, equivalent sound level (Leq), may be used to describe such sound that is changing in level from one moment to another. Leq is the energy -average sound level during a measured time interval. It is the "equivalent" constant sound level that would have to be produced by a single, steady source to equal the acoustic energy contained in the fluctuating sound level measured. Sound pressure from a stationary source (i.e., a point source, such as a heating, ventilation and air conditioning [HVAC] unit) propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern. The sound pressure level attenuates (or decreases) at a rate of 6 dBA for each doubling of distance from a point source. Highways, trains, and power lines consist of several localized noise sources on a defined path, and therefore can be treated as a line source, which approximates the effect of several point sources. Noise from a line source propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. In general, sound pressure levels from a line source attenuate at a rate of 3 dBA for each doubling of distance from the source. Vibration Background Vibration is an oscillatory motion through a solid medium in which the motion's amplitude can be described in terms of displacement, velocity, or acceleration. Groundborne vibration propagates from the source through the ground to adjacent buildings by surface waves, having a frequency measured in cycles per second (Hertz [Hz]). Most environmental vibrations consist of a composite of many frequencies and generally are classified as broadband or random vibrations. The normal frequency range of most groundborne vibration that can be perceived generally ranges between 1 and 200 Hz. Vibration energy dissipates geometrically as it travels through the ground, causing the vibration amplitude to decrease with distance away from the source. Soil properties also affect the propagation of vibration, with stiffer soils, clays, and rock strata enabling more efficient transmission of vibrational energy. On interaction with a building foundation, usually a ground - to -foundation coupling loss occurs; however, the transmitted vibration also can be amplified by structural conditions of the walls and floors, allowing resonance. Vibration in buildings typically is perceived as the rattling of windows or items on shelves, or the motion of building surfaces. At sufficiently high levels and depending on the loudness of the background airborne noise level, the vibration of interior building surfaces can be heard as a low -frequency rumbling sound, also known as groundborne noise. The peak particle velocity (PPV) and RMS velocity normally are described in inches per second (in/sec). PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 433 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 103 signal. PPV is the metric often used to describe vibration events that may result in structural stress on affected structures. Existing Land Uses Land uses surrounding the Project site include light industrial to the west, retail commercial, and the Dublin Heritage Park & Museums to the east, single and multi -family residential to the north, and commercial directly northeast. The noise -sensitive receptor most vulnerable to both on -site construction and operational noise is a single-family residence (R-5) approximately 165 feet north of the northern Project property line. This property is considered most exposed to Project noise and vibration due to its proximity to project construction work areas, site driveways, and proposed stationary noise sources. Baseline Noise Measurements A baseline noise measurement survey was conducted by AECOM for a 24-hour period on January 11, 2023. The baseline measurements were performed with two (2) Larson Davis Model 820 and one (1) Larson Davis Model 831 sound level meters. The two (2) long-term measurements were conducted near residential receptor locations and the three (3) short-term measurements were conducted at various points along the Project property line. The primary observed noise sources at all the measurement locations were traffic along Highway 1-580, Dublin Blvd, and Hansen Dr, and bird calls. Table 5: Summary of Measured Sound Levels summarizes the results of the baseline noise survey. Figure 8. Proposed Project Area, Noise Monitoring Locations and Worst -Case Noise -Sensitive Receptors provides the proposed Project layout superimposed on aerial imagery of the study area, baseline measurement locations, and nearest residential receptors (worst -case noise -sensitive land uses used for impact assessment). Table 5: Summary of Measured Sound Levels Daytime' Evening2 Nighttime3 Noise Levels Noise Levels Noise Levels Measurement ID (dBA Leq) (dBA Leq) (dBA Leq) Average Daily Noise Levels (dBA CNEL) LT-1 64 62 62 69 LT-2 65 63 60 68 ST-1 68 N/A4 N/A4 N/A4 ST-2 68 N/A4 N/A4 N/A4 ST-3 65 N/A4 N/A4 N/A4 Notes: CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level; dBA = A weighted decibel; ID = identification; Leq = Equivalent Sound Level; LT = long term; N/A = not applicable; ST = short term. Daytime: 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 2 Evening: 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. 3 Nighttime: 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 4 Short-term (ST) Measurements were only conducted during daytime periods because the represented land uses are only occupied during daytime hours. ST measurements were conducted for 30 minutes. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 434 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 104 Regulatory Framework Federal Regulations Federal Transit Administration Vibration The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Manual (FTA Manual) provides guidance for the analysis of vibratory impacts generated by transportation and construction projects by providing thresholds for structural damage and human perception/annoyance. Table 6: Construction Vibration Damage Criteria below shows a curated list of damage thresholds from the FTA Manual, as applicable to various receptors and vibratory source types. Table 6: Construction Vibration Damage Criteria Peak Particle Velocity Building Category (inches/second) Reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster) 0.50 Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.30 Non -engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.20 Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018), Table 12-3. The FTA Manual guidelines show that a PPV vibration level of up to 0.2 in/sec is considered safe for non -engineered timber and masonry buildings and would not result in any construction vibration damage. Therefore, in order to be conservative, the 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold has been used when evaluating vibration impacts at the nearest structures to the Project site. Noise The criteria for environmental impacts resulting from construction noise are based on the FTA "general assessment" guidelines for assessing construction noise effects which are based on the maximum sound levels generated from the two noisiest prices of equipment for each phase of construction. Table 7 summarizes the FTA general assessment construction noise criteria for each land use. Table 7: FTA General Assessment Noise Criteria Land Use Leq.equip (1 hr), dBA Day Night Residential 90 80 Commercial 100 100 Industrial 100 100 Notes: dBA = A -weighted decibel; FTA = Federal Transit Administration; Leq = Equivalent Sound Level Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018), Table 7-2. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 435 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 105 The FTA Manual guidelines show that the applicable construction noise criterion for residential land uses is 90 dBA (1-hour Leq) during the daytime (7 a.m. to 4 p.m.). The proposed construction activities for the Project will be limited to daytime therefore, the 90 dBA construction noise criterion will be applied for noise -sensitive residential properties around the Project site. Local Regulations City of Dublin General Plan The Noise Element of the City of Dublin General Plan establishes residential, commercial, and industrial land use compatibility standards for noise exposure assessed at the property line of the receiving land use (City of Dublin 2016). The land use compatibility noise criteria as shown in Table 8: City of Dublin Land Use/Noise Compatibility Standards (dBA, CNEL), provide the bases for decisions on the siting or proposed land uses in relation to existing or planned noise sources and for determining noise mitigation requirements. Table 8: City of Dublin Land Use/Noise Compatibility Standards (dBA, CNEL) Land Use Category Normally Conditionally Normally Clearly Acceptable Acceptable Unacceptable Unacceptable Residential 60 or less 61-70 71-75 Over 75 Motels, hotels 60 or less 61-70 71-80 Over 80 Schools, churches, nursing homes 60 or less 61-70 71-80 Over 80 Neighborhood parks 60 or less 61-65 66-70 Over 70 Offices: retail commercial 70 or less 71-75 76-80 Over 80 Industrial 70 or less 71-75 Over 75 Source: Dublin General Plan Noise Element, Table 9-1, 2012 Notes: CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level; dBA = A -weighted decibel Normally Acceptable: Specific land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features, included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice. Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. City of Dublin Municipal Code The Dublin Municipal Code includes standards pertaining to noise control within the City. Municipal Code Section 5.28.020 prohibits any person within the City to make any loud, disturbing, unnecessary, unusual, habitual noise; or any noise which annoys, disturbs, injures, or endangers the health, repose, peace, or safety of any reasonable person of normal sensitivity present in the area. Since the City of Dublin Municipal code does not provide explicit limits that would be applicable for the assessment of noise impacts generated by operation of the Project, the Alameda County Code of Ordinances, Title 6 — Health and Safety, Chapter 6.60 — Noise, 6.60.040 — Exterior noise Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 436 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 106 level standards were determined to be the best -available alternative regional threshold and are provided in Table 9: Alameda County Exterior Noise Level Standard below. Table 9: Alameda County Exterior Noise Level Standards Land Use Category Cumulative Number of Daytime Nighttime Minutes in Any (7:00 a.m. (10:00 p.m. One (1) Hour Time Period to 10:00 p.m.) to 7:00 a.m.) Single/Multiple Family Residential 30 50 45 Schools 15 55 50 Hospitals 5 60 55 Churches 1 65 60 Public Libraries 0 70 65 Source: Alameda County 2022 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Generate noise exceeding standards (Less Than Significant Impact) The short-term construction and long-term noise impacts associated with the proposed Project are described below. Construction Noise Prediction and Results Construction would occur Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. for approximately 12 months. General construction efforts would occur, on average, approximately 430 feet from the geometric center of the overall construction work area to the nearest residential structure at R-5. The construction noise assessment was conducted using construction prediction methodologies based on the FTA manual. Utilization factors for construction equipment (or the percentage of time in a given hour that a piece of equipment is operating at maximum power) as recommended for FTA detailed assessments, were also included in the calculations to help accurately predict construction noise levels during the various construction phases. The compliance assessment for this analysis focused on predicted 1-hour Leg levels. Project construction noise was estimated for construction phases by considering the quantities of contributing sound sources and calculating their aggregate sound propagation to the studied nearest receptor location (R5). The key assumptions for this analysis included in this method are as follows: • Free -field conditions and no attenuation factors • For a given construction phase, the two loudest pieces of construction equipment are assumed to operate —on average —from the same source point location at the general geographic centroid of the Project site or stationed range. • Each piece of equipment or vehicle is assigned a reference maximum noise level (Lmax) value at a reference distance (e.g., 50 feet), and an "acoustical usage factor" (AUF) that the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) User's Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 437 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 107 Guide (FHWA 2006) describes as an estimated portion of a construction operation time period when the Lmax value can be expected. Table 10: Proposed Project Construction Equipment Reference Sound Pressure Levels provides a list of equipment types anticipated to operate during the various project construction phases along with their reference maximum sound level, usage factor, and calculated 1-hour Leq at 50 feet. Since reference sound levels for the listed construction equipment are presented as maximum sound levels (i.e., the maximum sound level the equipment would produce at any moment in time, or Lmax), the usage factor is applied to account for the fact that equipment is not continuously operated in a full -throttle condition throughout its use. Thus, typical usage factors for each type of construction equipment were applied to reference maximum sound levels to arrive at average hourly sound levels. Lmax values and usage factors provided herein are generally based on a combination of the RCNM User's Guide and the FTA Manual. Table 10: Proposed Project Construction Equipment Reference Sound Pressure Levels Anticipated Project Lmax, Construction Equipment dBA at 50 Feet' Resulting 1-Hour Leq, Usage Factor dBA at 50 Feet2 Aerial Lift 75 0.2 68 Air Compressors 78 0.4 74 Concrete/Industrial Saws 90 0.2 83 Cranes 81 0.2 73 Excavators 81 0.4 77 Forklifts 75 0.4 71 Generator Sets 81 0.5 78 Graders 85 0.4 81 Pavers 77 0.5 74 Rollers 80 0.2 73 Rubber -Tired Dozers 82 0.4 78 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 84 0.4 80 Welders 74 0.4 70 Source: FHWA RCNM 2006, FTA 2018 Notes: dBA = A -weighted decibel; Leq = Equivalent Sound Level; L„ ax= maximum noise level 1. L.., values are based on representative equipment in RCNM ("Actual Measured" levels) and the FTA Manual. 2. 1-Hour Leq values are calculated by applying the usage factor (reductive adjustment) to the momentary Lmax reference noise level. Individual hourly noise levels generated by proposed Project construction equipment would range from 74 to 90 dBA, Leq at 50 feet from the equipment. Following a combination of procedures suggested in the FTA Manual for the general and detailed assessment of construction noise, Table 11: Combined Construction Noise Levels per Construction Phase calculates the combined construction noise level generated by the two loudest pieces of equipment operating during each construction phase and the resulting 1-hour sound level Leq (dBA) at the nearest receptor. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 438 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 108 Table 11: Combined Construction Noise Levels per Construction Phase Construction Phase/Activity Two Loudest Pieces of Equipment in Combined 1-hour Phase Leq, dBA at 50' Concrete Saw Demolition Combined 1-hour Leq, dBA at Nearest Receptor R5 (430') Applicable Daytime FTA General Assessment Threshold Leq.equip (1hr), (dBA) Tractor 85 661 90 Site Preparation Grader Grader 84 651 90 Grading/Excavation Grader Tractor 84 651 90 Trenching/Foundation Excavator Tractor 82 631 90 Building - Exterior Tractor Generator 82 631 90 Building -Interior/ Air Compressor Architectural Coating Aerial Lift 75 561 90 Paving Tractor Paver Notes: dBA = A -weighted decibel; FTA = Federal Transit Administration; Leq = Equivalent Sound Level 1 Calculated using distance measured from the geometric center of the overall Project area to receptor (approximately 430') and an acoustical attenuation rate of 6 decibels per doubling of distance from the source. 81 621 90 Table 11 shows that project construction activities will not exceed the FTA general assessment construction noise criteria of 90 dBA, Leq at the nearest noise -sensitive receptor. Since construction activities are not expected during nighttime hours, construction activities are not predicted to generate adverse effects at any adjacent noise -sensitive properties. Therefore, there would be a less than significant impact related to noise during construction. Operational Noise Prediction Table 12: Modeled Noise Sources provides the noise sources included in the acoustic model, corresponding quantity, and reference A -weighted sound power levels. Table 12: Modeled Noise Sources Equipment Name Reference A -Weighted Quantity Modelled Sound Power Level (dBA) Rooftop HVAC 9 792 Truck Activities 1 104 Notes: dBA = A -weighted decibel; HVAC = heating, ventilation and air conditioning 1 "Truck Activities" represent one (1) truck that is assumed to operate continuously during facility operating hours. The reference sound power level represents an assortment of truck movements, loading activities, engine idling, and truck trailer coupling noise based on sound pressure level measurements conducted by AECOM in November 2022. 'Sound power levels provided by Carrier for the 50FCQM07 unit. Modeled as a point source at an elevation of 4.5 feet above the project roof height. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 439 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 109 Operational Noise Modeling Results The CadnaA° Noise Prediction Model (Version 2022) was used to estimate the propagation of sound from project operations from stationary (Rooftop HVACs), and non -stationary (Truck Activities) sources, and thereby to predict SPL at various distances from the Project area, including representative noise -sensitive receptors selected for the ambient sound survey. CadnaA is a Windows -based software program that predicts and assesses sound levels near industrial sound sources and is based on International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9613-2 algorithms for the calculation of sound propagation (ISO 1996). The calculations account for classical sound wave divergence plus attenuation factors resulting from air absorption, basic ground effects, and barrier/shielding. Additional CadnaA model configuration settings and operations noise analysis assumptions were as follows: 10 degrees Celsius outdoor temperature, 70 percent relative humidity, calm wind conditions (less than 0.5 meters per second), one order of acoustic reflections, and a ground absorption co -efficient of 0.5 representing a conservative mixture of hard and soft ground surfaces. These assumptions were selected as they represent conservative meteorological conditions for sound propagation that are expected to occur at the Project site. These are the only predicted noise sources associated with project operation. Figure 9. Distribution of Modeled Noise Sources Assumed for Project Operations shows the primary facility noise sources included in the acoustic model. Table 13: Predicted Proposed Facility Operational Sound Levels (dBA) shows predicted project operational sound levels for both daytime facility operations at all studied receptors. Table 13: Predicted Proposed Facility Operational Sound Levels (dBA) Predicted Daytime Noise -Sensitive (7:00 AM — 7:00 PM) Receptor ID Sound Level Applicable Limit' Exceeds Limit? R-1 39 50 No R-2 42 50 No R-3 40 50 No R-4 39 50 No R-5 47 50 No Notes: dBA = A -weighted decibel; ID = identification 1 Alameda County Noise ordinance — Daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10 p.m.) noise level standards for single or multi -family residential land uses. As shown in , the predicted daytime operational noise levels are below the applicable noise limits. Therefore, there would be a less than significant impact regarding noise from stationary sources. Traffic Noise Prediction Daily traffic volumes from existing facility operations amount to approximately 695 trips per day traveling on Dublin Boulevard, primarily occurring during typical daytime business hours (e.g., 7 a.m. to 6 p.m.). Operation of the proposed Project is expected to result in a net reduction of 201 trips per day, for a total of 494 project trips per day upon completion. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 440 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 110 The closest noise -sensitive receptor (R5) to the Project site is a single-family residential building on the north side of Dublin Boulevard. The existing and future with -project worst -hour (i.e., peak traffic volume) sound level (Leq) was calculated at five receptors in the Project area using the Federal Highway Administration Traffic Noise Model Version 2.5. Data used in these calculations included existing (2022) daily peak -hour traffic volumes and truck mixes and future -year (2040) daily peak -hour traffic volumes and truck mixes' to account for any growth in non -project -related traffic volumes. These traffic volumes are included in Table 14: Peak - Hour Traffic Volumes below, and the results of these calculations are shown in Table 15: Predicted Existing and Future -with -Project Worst -Hour Traffic Noise Level' below. Table 14: Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes Roadway Future With Project Peak -Hour Existing Peak -Hour Volumes Volumes Car Truck Car Truck Hansen Dr I North of Dublin Blvd 219 2 270 2 Dublin Blvd I East of Hansen Dr 1375 8 1671 23 Dublin Blvd I West of Hansen Dr 1111 6 1366 6 Hansen Dr I South of Dublin Blvd 69 0 71 15 Table 15: Predicted Existing and Future -with -Project Worst -Hour Traffic Noise Levels Future With -Project Existing Traffic Noise Traffic Noise Level Receiver ID Level (dBA, Leq) (dBA, Leq) Change in Traffic Noise Exposure (dBA, Leq) R-1 47 48 + 1 R-2 56 57 + 1 R-3 60 61 + 1 R-4 58 59 + 1 R-5 61 62 + 1 Notes: dBA -=A-weighted decibels; ID = identification The operational noise modeling assumed the proposed Project would include 18,000 square feet of office space, 36,500 square feet of light industrial space, and 70,804 square feet of warehousing space. Based on the latest site plan, the proposed Project would actually include 18,000 square feet of office space, 30,000 square feet of light industrial space, and 77,304 square feet of warehousing space. As light industrial land uses generate higher daily vehicle trips than warehousing land uses, daily vehicle trips and the associated mobile source emissions are anticipated to be lower (i.e., the noise modeling assumed the proposed Project would generate 494 daily trips, based on the 2022 Transportation Impact Study [W-Trans 2022]); however, under the revised site plan, the proposed Project is anticipated to generate approximately 473 daily trips. As such, the emissions presented above are conservative and actual traffic noise is anticipated to be lower. Implementation of the proposed Project would result in a higher net reduction in traffic noise compared to existing conditions. 3 W-Trans, 2022, Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 441 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 111 As shown in , predicted traffic noise levels are expected to increase at all modeled receivers by a maximum of 1 dBA, Leg. These increases are likely due to increases in non - project -related traffic, due to the expected net decrease in project trips. This maximum increase is below the perceptible threshold. However, since project would generate noise due to traffic, the impact would be less than significant. (b) Generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise (Less Than Significant Impact) Construction activities can generate ground -borne noise and vibration of varying degrees based on the construction activity and equipment, soil conditions, and distance to vibration -sensitive structures or land uses. Vibration associated with project construction activities would occur most notably during major ground -disturbing activities, such as site grading. The piece of construction equipment generating the strongest vibration would be the dozer which, per the FTA Manual, can generate a vibration level of up to 0.089 PPV in/sec at 25 feet. With the closest residential structure as close as 430 feet from the potential operation of dozers used during grading, vibration was assessed at this distance using Equation 7-2 from the FTA Manual. At approximately 430 feet, a dozer will result in a vibration level of 0.001 PPV in/sec at the closest residential unit which is well below the 0.01 PPV in/sec vibration perception threshold and below the construction vibration damage criteria of 0.2 PPV. There are historical gravestones east of the proposed facility, about 100 ft from the nearest construction zones. Vibration levels due to construction may reach up to 0.011 PPV at the gravestones which are well below the construction vibration damage criteria of 0.2 PPV. Therefore, there would be a less than significant impact related to vibration during project construction. Vibration generated on -site during project operation would be negligible and thus, dismissed from this study due to the relative distances to vibration -sensitive receptors. Vibration associated with facility operations would occur most notably during the use of trucks around the facility. A loaded truck can generate a vibration level of up to 0.076 PPV in/sec. With the closest residential structure as close as 135 feet from the potential operation of trucks, this will result in a vibration level of 0.0006 PPV in/sec at the closest residential unit, which is well below the vibration perception threshold of 0.01 PPV in/sec. Therefore, there would be no impact related to vibration during project operation. (c) Excessive noise level near a private airport (No Impact) The Project site is not located within two miles of any public or private airport and the closest airport is approximately 6 miles away. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in the exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Thus, there would be no impact. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 442 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 112 Source(s) Alameda County. 2022. Code of Ordinances, Title 6 — Health and Safety, Chapter 6.60 — Noise. Caltrans. 2003. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. CT-HWANP- RT-13-069.25.2 City of Dublin. 2016. General Plan. Chapter 9, Environmental Resources Management: Noise Element. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2006. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User's Guide. FHWA-HEP-05-054. Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. FTA Report No. 0123. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 1996. Acoustics — Attenuation of Sound During Propagation Outdoors — Part 2: General Method of Calculation. W Traffic Engineering Transportation Planning (W-Trans). 2022. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. December. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 443 City of Dublin Population and Housing HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 113 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact 13. 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)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Environmental Setting According to the City of Dublin General Plan, in 2010, Dublin's total population was estimated at 46,036 and represented 17 percent of the 269,437 residents in the Tri-Valley area (City of Dublin 2022). Between 2010 and 2020, the population increased to 65,161 residents representing an increase of 42 percent (California Department of Finance 2021). The number of housing units increased from 15,782 units to 23,567 units, or an increase of 49 percent, over the 10-year period (California Department of Finance 2021). U.S. Census Bureau 2021 American Community Survey indicates 10,837 residents in the City of Dublin were employed in the professional, scientific, and management industries in 2020 (U.S. Census Bureau 2021). As of January 1, 2022, the California Department of Finance (DOF) estimates the City's total population was 72,932 persons and 24,977 housing units (DOF 2022). The Project site consists of an existing 62,715-square-foot industrial building. No residential units currently exist at the Project site. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Population growth (No Impact) A project's impacts caused by inducing substantial unplanned population growth are analyzed based on the following three inquiries: (1) does the project induce unplanned population growth (direct or indirect), (2) is that growth substantial, and (3) does this substantial unplanned growth result in significant adverse environmental impacts. As discussed below, the proposed Project would not involve construction of new homes, generate substantial new employment opportunities, or extend roadways or other infrastructure that would directly or indirectly induce unplanned population growth. The proposed Project would demolish the existing 62,715-square-foot industrial building and develop a new 125,304-square-foot building. The number of onsite construction workers would vary depending on the construction phase, but it is anticipated for a project of this scope to Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 444 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 114 range from 7 to 64 workers over a 12-month period. The source of the construction labor force is unknown at this time, but workers would be expected to come from the local labor pool and not relocate to the City from other areas for the relatively short construction period. According to the most current labor data available from the U.S. Census Bureau 2021 American Community Survey, 798 residents in the City of Dublin and 43,577 residents in Alameda County as a whole were employed in the construction industry in 2020 (U.S. Census Bureau 2021). Based on the availability of nearby construction workers, Project construction would not cause a substantial influx of construction personnel that would result in unplanned population growth or a substantial increase in housing demand in the region. The existing employees onsite each day is 150 to 200. The proposed building would cater to future tenants in the R&D and life sciences field, and it is estimated that the proposed Project would have 200 employees 4 onsite each day. Therefore, it is expected that similar number of employees would be working at the Project site as compared to existing conditions. Thus, the Project would not result in unplanned population growth. Furthermore, the Historic Area Specific Plan identified the Project site for a similar amount of R&D and industrial floor space. The proposed Project would not induce substantial population growth indirectly (through the extension of roads or other infrastructure into undeveloped areas). The proposed Project would be an infill project with the new building and infrastructure improvements occurring within the Project site. Any new utility infrastructure required to serve the proposed Project would be sized to accommodate Project -related demands and would not be intended to serve any development on lands other than the Project site. For the reasons described above, the proposed Project would not directly or indirectly induce substantial unplanned population growth, and no impact would occur. (b) Housing and resident displacement (No Impact) The Project site does not contain residences. Therefore, the proposed Project would have no impact related to the displacement of substantial numbers of people or existing housing that would necessitate construction of or replacement housing elsewhere. Sou rce(s) ABAG. 2011. ABAG Non Residential Buildings Analysis. Obtained March 8, 2023 from NonResidentialAnalysis 120511.pdf (ca.gov). California Department of Finance. 2021. E-5: Population and Housing for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2011-2020, with 2010 Benchmark. Obtained March 8 from https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/estimates-e5-2010-2020/. California Department of Finance. 2022. E-5: Population and Housing for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2021-2022, with 2020 Benchmark. Obtained March 8, 2023 from 4 Based on ABAG average square feet per employee rates for each "principal building activity" (ABAG 2011). Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 445 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 115 https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing- esti mates -for -cities -counties -a nd-the-state-2020-2022/. City of Dublin. 2022 (February). City of Dublin General Plan. Available: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/171/General-Plan#Chapter%207. Accessed March 6, 2023. U.S. Census Bureau. 2021. American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates. DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics. Accessed March 6, 2023 from https://data.census.gov/table?q=DP03:+SELECTED+ECONOMIC+CHARACTERISTICS&g=0 500000US06001 1600000US0620018&tid=ACSDP1Y2021.DP03. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 446 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 116 This page intentionally left blank Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 447 City of Dublin Public Services HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 117 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or need for new or physical 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? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? Environmental Setting The proposed Project is located within the City of Dublin and is served by the following existing public services (City of Dublin 2022). Fire Protection Fire suppression, emergency medical and rescue services, and other life safety services are provided to the Project area and Project site by the Alameda County Fire Department (ACFD). There are three fire stations in Dublin, with the closest to the Project site being Fire Station No. 16 at 7494 Donohue Drive, approximately 0.7 miles northeast. Police Protection Dublin Police Services, which is contracted with the Alameda County Sherriff's Office, provides contracted police protection to the Project area and Project site. Dublin Police Services has 62 sworn personal along with four County civilian personnel who provide public safety to the City as well as four professional staff members and a three -member Behavioral Health Unit. The Dublin Police Services headquarters are located at 6361 Clark Avenue, approximately 1 mile northeast of the Project site. Schools The Project site is served by the Dublin Unified School District, which operates seven elementary schools, two middle schools, one kindergarten through 8, a comprehensive high school, and a continuation high school within the City of Dublin. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 448 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 118 Parks The City's Public Works Department oversees the maintenance of parks and recreational facilities throughout the City. See Section 15, Recreation for more details. Other Public Services The Dublin Library is operated by Alameda County Library, with additional funding from the City of Dublin. The Dublin Public Library is located at 200 Civic Plaza, approximately 1.5 miles east of the Project site. The nearest United States Postal Service to the Project site is 1 mile to the east. Regulatory Framework Federal and State Regulations California Fire Code The California Fire Code exists within Part 9 of the CBC and includes measures for emergency planning preparation and safety. Examples of fire safety requirements include: installation of sprinklers in all high-rise buildings; the establishment of fire resistance standards for fire doors, building materials, and particular types of construction; and the clearance of debris and vegetation within a prescribed distance from occupied structures in wildlife hazard areas. Local Regulations City of Dublin General Plan Chapter 3 of the Land Use Element outlines policies and programs to provide open space both within and apart from development projects, which relate to the provision of park facilities in the City. Those policies are listed in Section 15, Recreation. Section 8.3.2 of the City of Dublin outlines the following policies and programs related to fire hazards and fire protection (City of Dublin 2022): • Implementing Policy 8.3.2.1.B.1. Continue to enforce the City's wild land urban interface regulations. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a, b) Fire and Police Services (No Impact) The construction of the proposed Project could result in a small, temporary increase in the demand for fire suppression, emergency medical services and sheriff services, due the temporary presence of construction personnel in the area. The number of construction personnel would vary with each construction phase, but it is anticipated for a project of this scope to range from 7 to 64 workers. Local, state and federal worker safety regulations would be adhered to, in order to minimize the likelihood of workplace injuries and accidents requiring emergency medical attention, including the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health. Typical fire and safety precautions would be taken, such as prohibiting onsite fires; keeping fire extinguishers onsite during construction activities; discarding smoking materials in approved containers and maintaining access to fire hydrants and emergency vehicle access. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 449 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 119 Construction activities would not necessitate new or physically altered fire and police facilities or need for new or physical altered these facilities. Therefore, there would be no impact during construction. During project operation, the use of the Project site would be of a similar nature to the existing use and the number of future employees would be similar to existing numbers. Therefore, an increase in demand for fire protection and police services is not anticipated. ACFD and Dublin Police would continue to provide services to the Project site and would not require additional firefighters or police officers to serve the proposed Project. The Project would be required to comply with the CBC, the California Fire Code and City of Dublin codes, and ordinances and regulations to minimize fire hazards, including fire prevention and suppression measures; fire hydrants and sprinkler systems; emergency access; and other similar requirements. The Project would also implement and maintain a fire access road and six fire hydrants onsite. Therefore, the Project would not require the construction of new or alteration of existing fire protection or police facilities to maintain an adequate level of fire protection and police services. Thus, the proposed Project would not result in new or physically altered fire and police facilities or need for new or physical altered these facilities, which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of these public services. Therefore, there would be no impact. (c) Schools (No Impact) The proposed Project would not generate additional students in the Dublin Unified School District as no new residential uses are proposed and there would not be any substantial increase in demand for worker housing in the area as number of new of employees is estimated to be similar to the existing number of employees. Nonetheless, appropriate developer impact fees, as required by State law, would be assessed and paid by the Project applicant to offset any potential impact to school facilities. The proposed Project would not require need for new or physical altered school facilities, which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios and performance objectives. Therefore, there would be no impact. (d) Parks (No Impact) The proposed Project would not contribute to a substantial increase in the population necessitating either construction of new or alteration of existing park facilities to maintain an adequate level of service. No physical impacts associated with the provision of park services would occur. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the need for new or altered parks, which could cause significant environmental impacts. Thus, there would be no impact. (e) Other public facilities (No Impact) Future employees working at the proposed Project site may patronize public facilities such as post offices and local library branches operated by the Alameda County Library. However, as described above, employees are likely to come from within the City and surrounding communities and the numbers of future employees would be similar to that of existing conditions; therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to increase the number of library Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 450 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 120 patrons or patrons utilizing other public facilities. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a need for new or physically -altered public facilities, which could cause significant environmental impacts. Thus, there would be no impact. Source(s) City of Dublin. 2022. City of Dublin General Plan. February 11. (Amended February 15, 2022). Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 451 City of Dublin Recreation HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 121 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues 15. RECREATION. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact 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? Environmental Setting The City of Dublin has a variety of recreational facilities including neighborhood parks, community parks, community facilities, a senior center, open space areas and a series of trail networks. According to the City of Dublin Parks and Recreation Master Plan, the City of Dublin currently owns and maintains 24 parks, including 18 neighborhood parks, five community parks, and one nature park totaling a combined 237.04 acres. In addition, the City maintains over 26.26 miles of greenways and trails (City of Dublin 2022). The nearest recreational areas to the Project site include: Maple Park, approximately 0.4 miles to the north; Martin Canyon Creek Trailhead, approximately 0.45 miles to the northwest; Dolan Park, approximately 1 mile to the northwest; and Shannon park, approximately 1 mile to the north. The City has over 59 acres of undeveloped parkland that has either been offered for dedication by landowners or acquired by the City (City of Dublin 2022). In addition, the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) operates the Dublin Hills Regional Park, a large open space park with regional trail connections. This regional park is approximately 2 miles to the west of the Project site. The Iron Horse Trail, approximately 2 miles northeast of the Project site, runs along the Union Pacific/Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, connecting Dublin, the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station, and the City of Pleasanton. Regulatory Framework Local Regulations City of Dublin General Plan Chapter 3 of the Land Use Element outlines policies and programs to provide open space both within and apart from development projects. The following goals and policies related to parks and recreation that are applicable to the proposed Project: Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 452 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 122 • Guiding Policy 3.4.1.A.1. Expand park area throughout the Primary and Extended Planning Areas to serve new development. • Implementing Policy 3.4.1.B.1. Acquire and improve parklands in conformance with the standards and policies in the City's Parks and Recreation Master Plan. • Implementing Policy 3.4.1B.2. Continue to maintain and periodically update the Citywide Parks and Recreation Master Plan. The Master Plan shall provide specific standards for acquiring parkland to support growth planned in the Land Use Element. • Implementing Policy 3.4.1.B.3. The policies set forth below, as implemented through the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and development approvals, constitute the action program for preserving and providing open space for outdoor recreation. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Increase the use of existing recreation facilities causing deterioration (No Impact) During construction of the proposed Project, there would be temporary increase in the number of construction personnel in the area; however, demand for recreational facilities is not expected to substantially increase as a result, as it is expected that these workers would come from the existing pool of workers in the Bay Area and that no relocation of additional workers to the area would be needed. Therefore, there would be no increased demand for recreational resources during project construction. Similarly, the operation of the Project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or be accelerated, as the Project would not be inducing growth in the project area and the number of future employees is estimated to be similar to existing numbers. Therefore, there would be no impact. (b) Propose, require new facilities that cause physical effect (No Impact) As discussed in Impact a above, increased demand of recreational resources is not expected as a result of construction or operation of the proposed Project. The Project would not include construction of recreational facilities nor is it required to construct or expand recreational facilities. However, the proposed Project would include private green spaces within the project site, such as landscaping and a plaza at the main building entrance, and outdoor areas for use by employees during breaks. The environmental impacts of constructing these features are analyzed as part of the project, within the various sections of this initial study, and are not considered to be public recreational facilities Therefore, there would be no impact. Source(s) City of Dublin. 2022. City of Dublin General Plan. Amended February 15, 2022. City of Dublin. 2022. Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Obtained February 11, 2023 from https://dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/5063/Park-and-Recreation-Master-Plan--- 2022-Update?bidld=. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 453 City of Dublin Transportation HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 123 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access? The information provided in this Transportation section is summarized from the Final Transportation Impact Study for the Project prepared by W-Trans on December 2022 and an addendum that was made to the traffic study on April 6, 2023 to account for a change in the previous project description, which reduced the size of the light industrial space and increased the warehouse space, thereby reducing traffic generation of the Project and the amount of required parking stalls. The traffic study and addendum are provided in Appendix E of this Initial Study/EI R. Environmental Setting Regional access to the Project site is provided by 1-580 and 1-680. Dublin Boulevard provides local access to the Project site. Local roadways, and pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the Project site are described below. Dublin Boulevard Dublin Boulevard is a 7.5-mile-long, two-lane divided, east -west roadway with two 10-foot-wide lanes in each direction that provides local access within the City to both commercial and residential areas. It is located adjacent to the Project site to the north. Dublin Boulevard would provide access to the Project site. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Continuous sidewalks are provided on the northern and southern sides of the roadway east of Hansen Drive. However, to the west, sidewalks are not provided on the south side of the road. There is a network of curb Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 454 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 124 ramps, crosswalks with pedestrian phasing at signalized intersections, as well as overhead lighting. In addition, Class IS bike lanes exist on the road for 0.3 mile between Inspiration Drive and Silvergate Drive; Class II 6 on -street bike lanes exist on the road for about 0.6 mile between Silvergate Drive and San Ramon Road; and Class III' bike route exists on the road for 0.9 mile between San Ramon Road and Clark Avenue. On -street parking is prohibited. San Ramon Road San Ramon Road is a two-lane divided, north -south roadway that provides local access within the City to both commercial and residential areas. It is located approximately 1,200 feet from the Project site to the east. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Sidewalks are provided on the eastern and western sides of the roadway east of Hansen Drive. However, sidewalks are not provided on the south side of Dublin Boulevard. Also, on -street bicycle lanes are provided on either side of the street. A Class II bike lane is present for 1.5 miles between Alcosta Boulevard and Dublin Boulevard. On -street parking is prohibited. Silvergate Drive Silvergate Drive is a two-lane divided, north -south roadway that connects Dublin Boulevard to the south to San Ramon Road to the north. It is located approximately 900 feet from the Project site to the northwest. The posted speed limit is 25 mph. Sidewalks are provided on the eastern and western sides of the roadway. A Class II bike lane is present for 1.1 miles between Dublin Boulevard and San Ramon Road. On -street parking is allowed. Hansen Drive Hansen Drive is a local street serving single-family residential homes, which is located to approximately 150 feet from the Project site to the north. Sidewalks are provided on the eastern and western sides of the roadway. Crosswalks are provided at Silvergate Drive, Amarillo Road, and Dublin Boulevard. Overhead streetlights are also provided. A Class III bike lane exists on each side of the street for 0.4 mile between Silvergate Drive and Dublin Boulevard. On -street parking is allowed. Dublin Boulevard and Hansen Drive Intersection This is a four-way signalized intersection with protected left -turns on both the eastbound and westbound approaches along Dublin Boulevard. The intersection also contains marked crosswalks along the north and east legs of the intersection. The southern leg is a driveway for the Project site. 5 Class I is a completely separated right-of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows of motorized traffic minimized. 6 Class II is a striped and signed lane for one-way bike travel on the street. Class III is a lane signing only for shared use with motor vehicles within the same travel lane on the street. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 455 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 125 Regulatory Framework State Regulations Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) With the passage of SB 743 (September 27, 2013) and the subsequent adoption of the revised CEQA Guidelines (December 28, 2018), level of service (LOS) can no longer be used as a criterion for identifying significant transportation impacts for most projects under CEQA effective July 1, 2020. LOS measures the average amount of delay experienced by vehicle drivers at an intersection during the most congested time of day, while the new metric VMT measures the total number of daily miles traveled by vehicles on the roadway network and thereby the impacts on the environment from those miles traveled. In other words, SB 743 changes the focus of transportation impact analysis in CEQA from measuring impacts on drivers to measuring the impact of driving. Metropolitan Transportation Commission The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) conducts transportation planning, financing, and coordination for the San Francisco Bay Area, including Alameda County. MTC periodically updates the Regional Transportation Plan, which plans for the development of mass transit, highway, airport, seaport, railroad, bike, and pedestrian facilities. The most current Regional Transportation Plan, Transportation 2035, budgets funding for transportation -related projects. In addition, MTC and ABAG adopted Plan Bay Area 2040 in 2017, which is a State -mandated transportation and land use plan. The Sustainable Communities Strategy outlines a sustainable communities strategy for the region, which aims to integrate transportation, land use, and housing to meet GHG reduction targets established by the California Air Resources Board. The Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC) is an independent special district that aims to provide sustainable, accessible, and community -focused transportation opportunities. The Alameda CTC is the county's congestion management agency, providing countywide transportation planning, design and construction of specific highway, pedestrian, and bicycle improvement projects, as well as the promotion of transit -oriented development. In accordance with California Government Code 65088, the Alameda CTC prepares the Alameda County Congestion Management Program (CMP), which measures the performance of the county's multi -modal transportation system, addresses roadway congestion, and connects transportation and land use. Alameda CTC also maintains a countywide travel model in compliance with Plan Bay Area 2040 and CMP legislation. The Alameda County CMP contains the following five mandatory elements: (1) level of service monitoring; (2) performance; (3) travel demand management; (4) land use analysis program; and (5) capital improvements. The Alameda CTC has also developed information related to Senate Bill 743 and tools for measuring and reducing vehicle miles travelled (Alameda CTC 2014). Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 456 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 126 Local Regulations City of Dublin General Plan Chapter 5.0, Land Use and Circulation: Circulation and Scenic Highways Element, identifies the City's transportation and roadway policies (City of Dublin 2022). As described in the City of Dublin General Plan, the City aims to provide a comprehensive circulation network that supports multiple modes of transportation including private vehicles, transit, cycling, and walking. The following policies from the City of Dublin General Plan relate to the proposed Project: • Implementing Policy 5.2.2.B.2. Design and construct all roads in the City's circulation network as defined in Figure 5-1 as well as bicycle and pedestrian networks as defined in the City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. • Guiding Policy 5.2.3.A.1. Provide an integrated multi -modal circulation system that provides efficient vehicular circulation while providing a design that allows safe and convenient travel along and across streets for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, persons with disabilities, seniors, children, youth, and families; and encourages pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and other non -automobile transportation alternatives. • Guiding Policy 5.4.3.A.1. Plan for all users by creating and maintaining Complete Streets that provide safe, comfortable, and convenient travel along and across streets (including streets, roads, highways, bridges, and other portions of the transportation system) through a comprehensive, integrated transportation network that meets the requirements of currently adopted transportation plans and serves all categories of users. • Guiding Policy 5.5.1.A.1. Provide safe, continuous, comfortable and convenient bikeways throughout the City. • Guiding Policy 5.5.1.A.2. Improve and maintain bikeways and pedestrian facilities and support facilities in conformance with the recommendations in the Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. • Guiding Policy 5.5.1.A.4. Provide comfortable, safe, and convenient walking routes throughout the City and, in particular, to key destinations such as Downtown Dublin, the BART Stations, schools, parks, and commercial centers. • Implementing Policy 5.5.1.B.1. Complete the bikeways systems illustrated on Figures 5-3a and 5-3b (in the General Plan). • Implementing Policy 5.5.1.B.2. Improve bikeways, bicycle support facilities, and pedestrian facilities in accordance with the Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan in conjunction with development proposals. • Implementing Policy 5.5.1.B.3. Ensure on -going maintenance of bikeways, bicycle support facilities and pedestrian facilities that are intended for public use and located on private property in conjunction with development proposals. City of Dublin Municipal Codes Municipal Code 8.76.070. Part of the City's Development Standards, which states that bicycle parking requirements shall conform to the California Building Standards Code. The California Building Standards Code states that the number of short-term and long-term bicycle parking Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 457 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 127 stalls provided must be equal to or greater than five percent of the number of motorized vehicle parking spaces provided. Municipal Code 8.76.080. Sets the requirement for the amount of on -site parking stalls, which is based on use types and square footage of those use types (Code Publishing 2022). City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan The City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan provides policies, network plans, prioritized project lists, support programs, and best practice design guidelines for bicycling and walking in Dublin. The Plan indicates that Class II bicycle Lanes are proposed along Dublin Boulevard adjacent to the Project site (City of Dublin 2023). Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Conflict with applicable transportation plans standards, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities (Less Than Significant Impact) Applicant transportation plans and policies are described above in the Regulatory Setting subsection. In accordance with SB 743, policies relating to level of service are no longer to be considered as part of the CEQA analysis for transportation impacts, even though such policies are still contained in applicable plans and used by agencies outside of CEQA. This discussion therefore focuses on compliance with applicable policies relating to transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The traffic impact analysis prepared for this Project (in Appendix E) includes an analysis of LOS impacts for the City's use outside of CEQA; however, that LOS analysis is not used within this CEQA document to determine the level of significance of environmental impacts from the Project. Significant impacts to transit services would occur if the Project would create demand for public transit service that exceeds the provided or planned capacity, disrupts existing transit services or facilities, conflicts with a planned transit facility, or conflicts with policies adopted by the City. Project construction and operation would not substantially increase demand for transit services. During project construction, construction workers are not expected to use public transit systems such as buses, bike facilities and pedestrian facilities, as this is not typical for construction workers. During the project operation, the Project would have a similar amount of employees compared to existing conditions, as described in Section 13, Population and Housing. The Project would not result in the need for new transit facilities nor would it conflict with existing or planned transit facilities. Furthermore, according to the Transportation Impact Study, the operation of the Project is expected to result in an average net reduction of 222 trips per day, and 3 fewer morning peak hour trips and 1 fewer afternoon peak hour trips compared to existing conditions. Therefore, the Project would result in a reduction of traffic on the roadway network in the Project vicinity compared to existing conditions. Significant impacts to bicycle and pedestrian facilities would occur if the Project would generate demand for pedestrian or bicycle facilities that exceeds the provided or planned capacity, Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 458 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 128 disrupts existing bicycle or pedestrian facilities, or conflicts with a planned bicycle or pedestrian facility. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities within the study area are adequate and would be improved upon completion of facilities identified in the City's draft Bike and Pedestrian Plan. The Project would not result in any changes within the Dublin Boulevard right-of-way that would conflict with existing bicycle or pedestrian facilities, or prevent the proposed future installation of Class II bike lanes. Furthermore, the Project would provide 24 bicycle parking stalls on -site, with 12 short short-term and 12 long-term stalls as required by the City's Municipal Code 8.76.070 as described in the Regulatory Framework section. The Project proposes 217 motorized parking spaces; thus, a minimum of 11 short-term and 11 long-term parking stalls for bikes are required. The Project would also provide adequate parking stalls on -site and would not impact street parking along public roadways. Parking requirements are based on the City's Municipal Code 8.76.080, which require a certain amount of on -site parking stalls based on use types and square footage of those use types. Based on the Project's use types, 217 would be consistent with this municipal code. Therefore, for all of the reasons described above, the Project would not conflict with applicable transportation plans standards, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities impacts on pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities within the study area and impacts would be less than significant. (b) Conflict with CEQA Section 15064.3 (b) (Less Than Significant Impact) Based on CalEEMod standard construction assumptions for a project of this size and nature (as detailed in Appendix D) project construction activities may generate between 5 and 128 trips per day, with a total construction period of approximately 12 months. Construction trips would cease once construction of the project is complete. Since project construction would be for a short-term and temporary period of time, no long term VMT impacts would occur. Thus, there would be less than a significant impact during project construction. The proposed Project is not anticipated to increase the travel demand to and from the Project site from existing conditions. According to the Alameda County Travel Model, the existing countywide VMT per employee for the East Planning Area is 15.2 miles. Based on Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Guidance and the City's Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines, a project generating a VMT that is 15 percent or more below this value, or 12.9 miles per employee, would have a less -than -significant VMT impact. The City of Dublin Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines publishes a screening map which shows that this Project located inside an area with a projected VMT per employee lower than 12.9 miles. A copy of the screening map showing VMT estimates in Dublin is provided in Appendix E. Therefore, the proposed Project would be expected to have a less than significant impact related to VMT. (c) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use (Less Than Significant) During project construction, all construction and staging activities would occur on the Project site with no encroachment or alterations of public right-of-way, including pedestrian and Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 459 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 129 bicycle facilities. As discussed above, Project construction would result in up to 128 traffic trips per day to and from the Project site from construction workers and deliveries of equipment and materials. During peak construction periods, approximately 51 of these trips would be from trucks. These deliveries would be temporary and short-term and are not expected to result in hazards on public roadways. These trips would not be an incompatible use. Therefore, there would be no impact. During project operation, the Project driveways and fire access road would be designed according to the City's and local fire department's specifications, including specifications for sight distance and turn radii for heavy vehicles, discussed further below. The Project does not include any changes to the geometric design of the public roadway (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). The Project would introduce similar amounts of heavy truck trips to and from the Project site compared to existing conditions. Truck trips are not considered an incompatible use for Dublin Boulevard. At driveways, a substantially clear line of sight should be maintained between the driver of a vehicle waiting to enter the street and the driver of an approaching vehicle. The sight distances along Dublin Boulevard at the Project driveways were evaluated based on sight distance criteria contained in the Highway Design Manual published by California Department of Transportation (Caltrans 2020). The recommended sight distances for driveway approaches are based on stopping sight distance and use the approach travel speed as the basis for determining the recommended sight distance. Based on the posted speed limit of 35 mph, the minimum stopping sight distance required is 250 feet; a review in the field shows that sight distances at the proposed project driveways on Dublin Boulevard each exceed 250 feet to the west and so are adequate. To maintain this sight distance, it is noted that any vegetation near the project's driveways should be trimmed to an appropriate height of less than three feet and trees trimmed so that nothing hangs below a height of seven feet from the surface of the roadway. For a motorist traveling westbound on Dublin Boulevard intending to turn left into either project driveway, the stopping sight distance looking west along Dublin Boulevard is also greater than 250 feet, providing adequate visibility to allow a following driver to observe and react to a vehicle that may slow before moving into the left -turn pocket before entering the driveway. Therefore, adequate sight distance is available at the proposed project driveway locations to accommodate all turns entering and exiting the Project site. Large wheelbase vehicles would be able to access the Project site via the western driveway as illustrated in the vehicle turning template analysis provided in Appendix E. The design vehicle used for the turn analysis is based on the Review of Truck Characteristics as Factors in Roadway Design, Transportation Research Board, 2004, with the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) Interstate Semi -Trailer (WB-62) vehicle. The WB-62 vehicle has a minimum turning radius of 45 feet, a centerline turning radius of 41 feet, and a minimum inside radius of 7.9 feet. It is noted that the evaluation was limited to only movements between the Project site and the east of the site since this represents the most likely direction of travel based on the City of Dublin Truck Route Map (January 2014). As demonstrated by the analysis, the western driveway can accommodate the WB-62 truck for all movements to and from the east. However, Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 460 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 130 the analysis also shows that the WB-62 vehicle is unable to access the eastern driveway without striking fixed objects (such as utility poles and a fire hydrant) adjacent to the driveway. Therefore, trucks can feasibly access the site via the western driveway. The eastern driveway is not suitable for access by trucks. There is a potential for sight distance to be blocked by vegetation. Furthermore, the eastern driveway cannot accommodate large vehicles. Thus, the City will require a condition of approval that would require vegetation maintenance for sight distance to achieve a minimum sight distance of 250 feet at each driveway access point; and a condition of approval that prohibits trucks from accessing the eastern driveway. Therefore, these impacts would be less than significant. (d) Result in inadequate emergency access (No Impact) Law enforcement, fire, and/or emergency services would be maintained during project construction and operation. All construction and staging activities would occur on the Project site, and construction activities would not fundamentally alter emergency access to the Project site or other properties in the vicinity. Construction for the Project would not require the closure of local roads. If needed, a traffic control plan could be implemented, which would include notification of emergency services. However, due to the small scope of the Project and the fact that no public roads are being affected, a traffic control plan would most likely not be needed. Therefore, project construction would not impede access for emergency vehicles and there would be no impact. During Project operation, the site would be accessible via two driveways along Dublin Boulevard. The western driveway is also the southern leg of the Dublin Boulevard and Hansen Drive intersection. The eastern driveway is located approximately 180 feet east of the Dublin Boulevard and Hansen Drive intersection. The raised median along Dublin Boulevard prohibits left -turn egress from this driveway, though there is a left -turn pocket that accommodates left turns into the site. The primary driveway across from Hansen Drive also provides access to the adjacent land use to the west. Additionally, these driveways would be connected by a 30 to 40- foot-wide fire access route around the perimeter of the proposed building. A 26-foot-wide fire access route along the northern side of the building would allow for aerial apparatus access. The Project's driveways and internal roadway network would be designed to meet current City standards and so can be expected to accommodate the access requirements for both emergency and passenger vehicles. Therefore, there would be no impact on emergency access. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 461 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 131 Source(s) Alameda County Transportation Commission, 2014. Alameda Countywide Travel Demand Model. Caltrans. 2020. Highway Design Manual. Seventh Edition. Available online at https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/design/documents/hdm-complete- 12312020a11y.pdf. City of Dublin. 2022. City of Dublin General Plan. Amended February 15, 2022. City of Dublin, 2023. Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. Obtained February 14, 2023 from https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/32269/24392-Dublin-ATP- Draft-v73-1302023?bidld=. . 2023. Energy. Available online: https://dublin.ca.gov/2032/Energy. Accessed March 2023. Code Publishing, 2022. The Dublin Municipal Code. Obtained February 14 from https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Dublin/html/Dublin08/Dublin0876.html. W-Trans. 2022. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. Prepared for the City of Dublin on December 12, 2022. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 462 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 132 This page intentionally left blank Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 463 City of Dublin Tribal Cultural Resources HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 133 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact 17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision I of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivisil(c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Environmental Setting The Project site is located in the Amador Valley, along the north bank of Dublin Creek. The modern address is 11711 Dublin Boulevard, located in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California. The property is approximately 8.81 acres. The project site is located within the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, with the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery to the east; Interstate (I-)580 to the south; and a business park to the west. The Amador Valley is the homeland of the Chochenyo Ohlone (Levy 1978). No known previously recorded tribal cultural resources are within the project APE. A full tribal cultural context for the project site is provided in the Focused EIR. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 464 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 134 Regulatory Framework State California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") CEQA requires lead agencies to consider whether projects will impact tribal cultural resources as a separate category of environmental analysis. Tribal cultural resources may or may not also be archeological or historic resources. For clarity, archeological and historic resources are addressed in the cultural resources chapter. In some cases, tribal cultural resources are viewsheds, cultural landscapes, plant gathering areas, or other sacred spaces that are not readily identifiable to people outside of the Tribe. In many cases, tribal cultural resources also include an archaeological component, such as artifacts, features, and sites (with or without human remains). PRC Section 21074 states the following: (a) "Tribal cultural resources" are either of the following: (1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following: (A) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources. (B) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1. (2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. (b) A cultural landscape that meets the criteria of subdivision (a) is a tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape. (c) A historical resource described in Section 21084.1, a unique archaeological resource as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 21083.2, or a "nonunique archaeological resource" as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 21083.2 may also be a tribal cultural resource if it conforms with the criteria of subdivision (a). California Health and Safety Code California law protects Native American burials, skeletal remains, and associated grave goods, regardless of their antiquity, and provides for the sensitive treatment and disposition of those remains. Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that if human remains are discovered in any place other than a dedicated cemetery, no further disturbance or excavation of the site or nearby area reasonably suspected to contain human remains can occur until the county coroner has examined the remains (Section 7050.5b). PRC Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 also outline the process to be followed in the event that human remains are discovered. If the Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 465 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 135 coroner determines or has reason to believe the remains are those of a Native American, the coroner must contact the California NAHC within 24 hours (Section 7050.5c). The NAHC will notify the Most Likely Descendant ("MLD"). With the permission of the landowner, the MLD may inspect the site of discovery. The inspection must be completed within 48 hours of notification of the MLD by the NAHC. The MLD may recommend means of treating or disposition of, with appropriate dignity, the Native American human remains, and any cultural or funerary items associated with Native American people. Assembly Bill (AB) 52 AB 52 (effective July 1, 2015) added PRC Sections 21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2, and 21084.3 to CEQA, relating to consultation with California Native American tribes, consideration of tribal cultural resources, and confidentiality. AB 52 provides procedural and substantive requirements for lead agency consultation with California Native American tribes and consideration of impacts on tribal cultural resources, as well as examples of mitigation measures to avoid or minimize impacts to tribal cultural resources. AB 52 establishes that if a project may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, that project may have a significant effect on the environment. Lead agencies must avoid damaging impacts to tribal cultural resources, when feasible, and shall keep information submitted by tribes confidential unless the information is deemed publicly available by the tribe. AB 52 requires a lead agency to consult with California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project, if the tribe requested to the lead agency, in writing, to be informed by the lead agency of proposed projects in that geographic area and the tribe requests consultation. Section 21080.3.1(d) states that within 14 days of determining that an application for a project is complete or a decision by a public agency to undertake a project, the lead agency shall provide formal notification to the designated contact of, or tribal representative of, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice, which shall be accomplished by means of at least one written notification that includes a brief description of the proposed project and its location, the lead agency's contact information, and a notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to request consultation. Previous CEQA Documents The City of Dublin hired the archaeological firm William Self Associates, Inc. (WSA) in 2003 to prepare an Archaeological Assessment Report of the Donlon Way Specific Plan (later renamed the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan area). A record search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC), conducted by WSA, did not identify any previously recorded archaeological sites within the Specific Plan area boundaries, but one new archaeological site was recorded during the pedestrian survey and Archeological High Probability areas were also identified within the Specific Plan area boundaries. The Archaeological Assessment Report concluded that there is a moderate -to -high -probability of identifying Native American archeological resources within the Specific Plan area boundaries. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 466 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 136 The City of Dublin hired the architectural firm Page & Turnbull, Inc. in 2003 to prepare the Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project that was finalized in 2004. The city contracted with Page & Turnbull to identify and map historic resources in an approximately 38-acrea area for a future Specific Plan for the Donlon Way area (later renamed the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan) and to prepare preservation recommendations. Page & Turnbull prepared a historic context of the Dublin Village area and recorded all of the properties in the survey area on Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 A and B forms. The Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan was adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006 under Resolution No. 149-06 and relied on the findings of the Archaeological Assessment Report of the Donlon Way Specific Plan and the Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project. The approximately 38-acre Specific Plan area included the two project site parcels. Subsequently, three Specific Plan addendum and amendments have been prepared for the Specific Plan. City Council determined that no new significant impacts were identified by the addendums or amendments, and no further environmental analysis was required. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (No Impact) No listed Tribal Cultural Resources are within the Project APE, therefore there will be no impact to listed Tribal Cultural Resources. (b) Significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1(Potentially Significant Impact) The proposed Project would include excavation of the parking lot to the south of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, which is adjacent to the marked boundary of the Pioneer Cemetery. Marked grave sites in the cemetery are within five feet of the Hexcel property fence. Historic documents suggest that the cemetery was larger than the currently marked boundary (Freudenhem 1977). Additionally, there is anecdotal evidence that the cemetery location was first used by the Ohlone, and may also include burials of Native American and Mexican farm laborers who worked for Jose Maria Amador, interred prior to formal consecration of the cemetery in 1859 (VerPlanck 2003). It is likely that the cemetery extends beneath the Hexcel parking lot, and possible that the cemetery includes Native American human remains. If so, the Project impact to Tribal Cultural Resources would be potentially significant. This potentially significant impact is further analyzed in the Focused EIR. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 467 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 137 Source(s) City of Dublin Community Development Department. 2014 (updated). Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. Adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006, Resolution No. 149-06. Available online: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7780/DVHASP-FULL-PDF- 10714?bidld=. Accessed April 2023. . 2022 (amended). General Plan. Available online: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30287/General-Plan-Update- 04192022-WEB. Accessed April 2023. Freudenheim, Richard. 1977. National Register of Historic Places Inventory — Nomination Form, Dublin Village Historic Settlement (CA-ALA-521H, P-01-002127). On file at the Northwest Information Center in Rohnert Park, California. Levy, Richard. 1978. Costanoan. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, edited by Robert F. Heizer, 485-495. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institute. VerPlanck, Christopher. 2003. Pioneer Cemetery Site Record (P-01-010637). On file at the Northwest Information Center in Rohnert Park, California. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 468 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 138 This page intentionally left blank Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 469 City of Dublin Utilities and Service Systems HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 139 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact 18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c) 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 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? e) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X regulations related to solid waste? Environmental Setting The Project site is within an urban area that is currently served by water storage, treatment, and distribution facilities, wastewater and stormwater collection, and solid waste collection and disposal service systems. These services are described below. Water The DSRSD provides potable and recycled water services to the City of Dublin, including the Project site. DSRSD serves approximately 100,400 people and 26,237 potable water accounts to residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional customers. DSRSD manages 3,610 potable water hydrants, 24 recycled water hydrants, 17 potable pump stations, 5 recycled water pump stations, 339 miles of potable water pipes, 72 miles of recycled water pipes, and 223 miles of sewer pipes. DSRSD also manages 14 reservoirs storing 24.98 million gallons (mg) of potable water and 4 reservoirs that store 10.95 mg of recycled water. DSRSD's primary water supply source is purchased potable water from Zone 7, augmented by recycled water produced at Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 470 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 140 DSRSD's Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility. Zone 7 is a State Water Project contractor that wholesales treated water to four retail water agencies, including DSRSD, Livermore, Pleasanton, and Cal Water Livermore District (West Yost 2021). About 60 percent of the water comes from the State Water Project via the South Bay Aqueduct; 5 percent from local groundwater; 11 percent from local runoff impounded at Lake Del; and about 24 percent from recycled water recovered from wastewater (DSRSD 2023a). Treated potable water enters DSRSD's distribution system from five metered turnouts from the Zone 7 transmission system (West Yost 2021). To improve the reliability of the Tri-Valley's water supply, particularly in dry years, DSRSD and East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) created the San Ramon Valley Water Program (SRVRWP) in 1995. The partnership built a water recycling plant adjacent to the DSRSD wastewater treatment facility and a backbone transmission system that connects to DSRSD and EBMUD recycled pipelines to reduce the demand for potable water (City of Dublin 2022). Wastewater Wastewater collection and treatment services are also provided by DSRSD for the City of Dublin, including the Project site. DSRSD owns and operates a Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility in Pleasanton that has a capacity of 17 million gallons per day (MGD) average dry weather flow (ADWF). The existing wastewater service area encompasses approximately 13,340 acres, or 20.85 square miles. Within the wastewater service area there are currently 207 miles of gravity mains, one permanent lift station, and one temporary lift station. The permanent lift station has 26 feet of force main (West Yost 2019). DSRSD's provides secondary treatment by activated sludge process (DSRD 2023a). Stormwater The Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (ACFCWCD) provides flood protection to the project area via planning, designing, constructing, and maintaining flood control projects, including natural creeks, channels, levees, pump stations, dams, and reservoirs. The City of Dublin manages and maintains the municipal stormwater system including storm drainpipes and inlets that are on public streets. The City has jurisdiction and maintenance responsibility for local storm drains that discharge to the Zone 7 flood control system. Drainage facilities on private property are maintained by private property owners. Runoff from the Project area drains to underground pipes and open culverts to Dublin Creek, south of the Project site. Dublin Creek ultimately discharges into Las Positas Creek and flows south to San Francisco Bay (Zone 7 2022). Electricity The EBCE is a Community Choice Aggregator that procures electricity for residential, business, and municipal accounts to most of Alameda County, including the City of Dublin, utilizing PG&E's distribution system. PG&E handles billing, power outages and maintenance of powerlines and other PG&E infrastructure (EBCE 2023). Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 471 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 141 Solid Waste The City of Dublin has a service agreement with Amador Valley Industries (AVI), which provides weekly collection service for compost, recycling, and landfill. Solid waste generated within the City is deposited at the Altamont Landfill which has a total estimated permitted capacity of 124,400,000 cubic yards. The Altamont Landfill has a remaining capacity of 65,400,000, which is approximately 50 percent full and is estimated to reach capacity on December 1, 2070. The landfill is a Class II (designated waste), III (nonhazardous solid waste) with permitted waste types including tires, mixed municipal, industrial, green materials, contaminated soil, ash, and construction/demolition waste (CalRecycle 2019). The Alameda County Waste Management Authority, now known as Stopwaste.org, is responsible for developing and implementing a Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan. It manages a long-range program for development of solid waste facilities and offers many programs in the areas of source reduction and recycling, market development, technical assistance, and public education. Funding is provided by per -ton disposal and waste import mitigation fees (Stopwaste 2023). Regulatory Framework State Regulations California Urban Water Management Planning Act Under the California Water Code and Urban Water Management Planning Act of 1983, all California urban water suppliers are required to prepare and adopt an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) every five years, which promotes water conservation and efficiency measures. Urban water suppliers that serve more than 3,000 customers or are supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually are subject to this Act. This Act requires that the total project water use be compared to water supply sources over the next 20 years in five-year increments. Planning must occur for all drought years and must include a water recycling analysis that incorporates a description of the wastewater collection and treatment system, outlining existing and potential recycled water uses. In September 2014, the Act was amended by SB 1420, which now requires urban water suppliers to provide descriptions of their water demand management measures and similar information. Water Conservation Act of 2009 The Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SB X7-7) requires all water suppliers to increase water use efficiency by reducing per capita urban water use by 20 percent by December 31, 2020. This bill also set a goal for the state of reducing per capita water use by at least 10 percent by December 31, 2015. California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939) AB 939 established the California Integrated Waste Management Board under CalRecycle, which required all counties within California to prepare integrated waste management plans. Additionally, it changed the focus of solid waste management from landfill to diversion strategies (e.g., source reduction, recycling, and composting), and required all municipalities to Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 472 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 142 divert 25 percent of their solid waste from landfill disposal by January 1, 1995, and 5 percent by the year 2000. California Mandatory Commercial Recycling Law (AB 341) AB 341 was enacted to help meet California's recycling goal of 75 percent by the year 2020. AB 341 requires all commercial businesses and public entities that generate four cubic yards or more of waste per week to have a recycling program in place. In addition, multi -family apartments with five or more units are also required to form a recycling program. In addition, each local government jurisdiction will implement a commercial solid waste recycling program that consists of education, outreach and monitoring of businesses, designed to divert commercial solid waste from businesses. Each jurisdiction will report the progress achieved in implementing its commercial recycling program, including education, outreach and monitoring, and if applicable, enforcement efforts and exemptions, by providing updates in its electronic annual report. CalRecycle will review each jurisdiction's commercial recycling program that consists of education, outreach and monitoring. Mandatory Organics Recycling AB 1826 In October 2014, Governor Brown signed AB 1826, requiring businesses to recycle their organic waste on and after April 1, 2016, depending on the amount of waste they generate per week. This law also requires that on and after January 1, 2016, local jurisdictions across the state implement an organic waste recycling program to divert organic waste generated by businesses, including multifamily residential dwellings that consist of five or more units. Organic waste means food waste, green waste, landscape and pruning waste, nonhazardous wood waste, and food -soiled paper waste that is mixed in with food waste. This law phases in the mandatory recycling of commercial organics over time, while also offering an exemption process for rural counties. In particular, the minimum threshold of organic waste generation by businesses decreases over time, which means an increasingly greater proportion of the commercial sector will be required to comply. CALGreen Building Code CALGreen requires mandatory green standards that all buildings in California must abide by, including: reducing indoor water use, reducing wastewater, recycling and/or salvaging nonhazardous construction and demolition debris, and providing readily accessible areas for recycling by the occupant. The code includes different categories such as energy, water, material, and resource efficiency. These standards include a mandatory set of minimum guidelines, as well as more stringent voluntary measures for new construction projects that local communities can opt into. Local Regulations 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) The DSRSD adopted a UWMP in 2016 as per SB X7-7 and the Urban Water Management Planning Act (Section 10610 of Division 6 of the California Water Code). These plans are prepared every five years and must address the reliability of water sources within the following 20 years as well as other demand management measures and water shortage contingency Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 473 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 143 plans. Additionally, the UWMP identifies strategies to meet requirements under SB X7-7 by reporting on progress towards meeting a 20 percent reduction for per -capita urban water use by the year 2020. The UWMP also plans for emergencies and times of water shortage. DSRSD is currently in the process of updating the UWMP. Dublin Municipal Code 7.30.060: The City of Dublin requires all construction and demolition (C&D) projects recycle at least 65 percent of the waste for remodels or tenant improvements, and 75 percent of the waste for new construction generated on a job site, excluding asphalt and concrete debris, of which 100 percent must be recycled. City of Dublin General Plan Chapter 4.0, Land Use and Circulation: Schools, Public Lands, and Utilities Element, identifies the City's policies related to the provision of public services and utilities in the City. The following policies from the City of Dublin General Plan relate to the proposed project: • Guiding Policy 4.4.1.A.1. Ensure that adequate solid waste disposal capacity is available, to avoid constraining development, consistent with the Dublin General Plan. • Implementing Policy 4.4.1.6.3. Prior to project approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that capacity will exist in solid waste disposal facilities for their project prior to the issuance of building permits. • Guiding Policy 4.5.1.A.1. Expand sewage treatment and disposal capacity to avoid constraining development consistent with the Dublin General Plan. • Implementing Policy 4.5.1.B.1. Prior to project approval, developers shall demonstrate that adequate capacity will exist in sewage treatment and disposal facilities for their projects prior to the issuance of building permits. • Guiding Policy 4.6.1.A.1. Base General Plan proposals on the assumption that water supplies will be sufficient and that local wells could be used to supplement imported water if necessary. • Implementing Policy 4.6.1.6.1. Consider obtaining water service from the East Bay Municipal Utility District and other sources. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures (a) Require relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities (Less Than Significant Impact) During project construction, potable and non -potable water, energy and possibly stormwater drains would be needed for a short-term and temporary period of time. This use would be minimal and would not require the relocation of existing, construction of new, or expansion of utility facilities. DSRSD prohibits the use of potable water for dust -control and construction grading and requires that recycled water be used (DSRSD 2023b). Therefore, project construction would only utilize a small amount of potable water for drinking, onsite sanitary needs and cement mixing. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 474 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 144 Construction of the Project would not generate wastewater that requires treatment, and therefore would not result in wastewater discharges. Gas, diesel, and battery powered equipment and vehicles would be utilized during construction. The use of these energy sources would be minimal as discussed in Section 13, Energy. Electrical power would not be required. As discussed in Section 9, Hydrology and Water Quality, a SWPPP and BMPs shall be implemented in order to eliminate or reduce non-stormwater discharges to storm sewer systems per SWRCB statewide stormwater general permit for construction activity. Therefore, there would not be a substantial impact to stormwater drainages necessitating the construction of new or expanded stormwater facilities. For these reasons, there would be a less than significant impact during construction activities. The Project site is served by existing utilities infrastructure. The Project would either utilize existing utility infrastructure or make upgrades to infrastructure, as specified in the proceeding paragraphs in this section. Operation of the proposed Project would require water, wastewater treatment, drainage facilities, electricity, and telecommunication. The site is zoned as M-1— (Light Industrial) and Planned Development (PD) by the City and the site would continue to be used for R&D and industrial purposes. Existing sanitary sewer lines would be removed and new sanitary sewer lines from the proposed building would be implemented, which would connect to an existing sanitary sewer manhole in the northeast portion of the site near Dublin Boulevard. The new sanitary sewer lines installed within the Project site would be constructed in conformance with City and DSRSD standards, and their construction would not cause significant environmental effects. Existing water lines would be removed and replaced with new water lines, including irrigation lines, that would connect to existing and proposed water meters in the north portion of the site and existing public water main at the northeast portion of the site near Dublin Boulevard. Fire service lines connecting the fire hydrants to water would be implemented around the proposed building and connect to a water main at the northwest portion of the site near Dublin Boulevard. The proposed fire hydrants onsite would tie into these water lines. The proposed Project would not require the construction of new water treatment facilities, or the expansion of existing facilities, other than those already planned as part of the UWMP. The proposed storm water drainage system on the Project site would be composed of catch basins and storm drains throughout the Project site, which would connect and convey storm water to proposed bioretention areas on the Project site and existing and proposed stormwater pipelines. New storm drains line would connect to a new storm drain manhole at the northeast corner of the Project site. Stormwater would be treated onsite via five bioretention treatment planter areas that would be implemented in the western corner, southeast corner and south and northeast portion of the site. The site would be graded to have water flow into these biorientation basins. Approximately 9,819 square feet of bioretention areas on the Project site would be used for stormwater control. The bioretention areas would provide appropriate vegetation and water quality treatment to prevent discharge of untreated storm water from the Project site. In addition, on -site drainage systems would be designed to be consistent with the Alameda County NPDES C.3 requirements for Low Impact Development (LID). Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 475 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 145 The proposed Project would include connections to the existing electricity and telecommunication lines. These connections would be conducted in accordance with each PG&E specifications, telecommunication companies and accordance with City guidelines. No natural gas lines would be provided or used at the Project site. While the square footage of uses at the site would increase from approximately 62,715 square feet under existing conditions to 125,304 square feet, the proposed Project would result in a net reduction in energy consumption, primarily related to improved building energy standards and eliminating natural gas infrastructure as described in the Focused EIR Energy impact a. Similarly, demand for other utilities such as water are expected to decrease from existing conditions due to increased efficiencies of the building and other site improvements. Therefore, the Project would not require the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities that could cause an environmental effect. Thus, there would be a less than significant impact. (b) Sufficient water supply (Less Than Significant Impact) As discussed in Impact a above, the Project would utilize recycled water for construction activities and a minimal amount of potable water for drinking, onsite sanitary needs, and cement mixing. Water use during construction would be temporary and for a short-term period of time and would be hauled to the site. Therefore, there would be no impact on water supply during project construction. The Project would connect to existing water mains that are serviced by the DSRSD. There are existing water uses at the site. While the proposed building would be doubling in size from the existing building, it is expected that water use would decrease from existing use because of increased water -efficiencies at the site. Some efficiencies include low flow toilets and faucets and water -efficient irrigation systems with rain sensors. Additionally, since the proposed building would be brand new, there are expected to be little to no leaks. The Project would also utilize drought tolerant plants that have low water requirements once established. Therefore, water use at the site is expected to decrease from exiting levels. The 2020 UWMP predicts total water demand of 11,993 acre-feet per year (AFY) for Zone 7 water and 3,044 AFY for recycled water in 2025, and 13,820 AFY for Zone 7 Water and 3,044 AFY for recycled water in 2040. DSRSD projected supply is 15,037 AFY in the year 2025 (West Yost 2021). Since the water demand from the proposed Project is expected to decrease from existing levels, DSRSD would have enough water supply to serve the Project site. Additionally, consistent with the DSRSD District Code, the project applicant would be required obtain a certificate of capacity rights from DSRSD, prior to issuance of a building permit. The certificate of capacity rights, which is part of the entitlement review process, ensures the DSRSD can adequately serve the proposed project. With the projects and programs implemented by DSRSD and Zone 7, water supplies are projected to meet demands. Furthermore, the proposed Project would be consistent with the type and intensity of development assumed for the Project site in in the City's Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and accounted for in the UWMP. As stated in the UWMP, DSRSD can meet its water Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 476 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 146 demand under multiple dry years with diversified supply and conservation measures (West Yost 2021). In addition, sustained water use efficiency following 2012-2016 drought and subsequent legislation related to water conservation have lowered water supply demand (Brown and Caldwell 2021). Therefore, for all of the reasons described above, the proposed Project would have less than significant impact. (c) Sufficient wastewater capacity (Less Than Significant Impact) Wastewater generated by the Project would be treated at DSRSD's Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility. As discussed in the Environmental Setting section, the wastewater treatment facility has a capacity of approximately 17.0 MGD. During project construction, there would be no wastewater generated that would require treatment at wastewater treatment facility. During project operation, similar to water use estimated in Impact (b), it is assumed that the Project would generate less waste water than existing conditions with the upgraded and improved utilities utilized in the facility. Furthermore, the Project would generate a nominal amount of wastewater compared to the capacity at the wastewater treatment facility. The Project, in combination with other development projects in the City, would not contribute to cumulatively considerable impact since it would not increase the amount of existing wastewater that is being generated. Furthermore, the Project would be consistent with the type and intensity of development assumed for the Project site in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and accounted for in DSRSD's Wastewater Collection System Master Plan. Therefore, there would be a less than significant impact. (d-e) Adequate landfill and compliance (Less Than Significant Impact) The Altamont Landfill would serve the Project site. During project construction, the Project would generate solid waste from demolition of the existing building, pavement, and concrete. The Project applicant and its contractor(s) would comply with the City's Municipal Code 7.30.060, which requires that at least 75 percent of all C&D waste for new construction generated on a job site and 100 percent of asphalt and concrete debris to be recycled. Since the majority of waste would be recycled, project construction would result in a less than significant impact related to landfill capacity. Operation of the proposed Project is not anticipated to generate a significant amount of 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. The Project would be consistent with the type and intensity of development assumed for the Project site. The number of future employees that would produce solid waste would be similar to existing conditions as discussed in Section 13, Population and Housing. However, the waste generated may be slightly more than existing waste production associated based on the increased size of the proposed building. Nonetheless, as part of the approval process and issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate that capacity will exist in solid waste disposal facilities for their Project prior to the issuance of building permits per City's General Plan Policy 4.4.1.6.3. Furthermore, the Project would be consistent with the type and intensity of development assumed for the Project site in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and accounted for regarding waste generation to the landfill. Thus, it is expected that the Project Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 477 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 147 would be accommodated by the Altamont Landfill, which is expected to have adequate capacity to accommodate. The Project would not conflict or interfere with the City's ability to implement its adopted solid waste management programs and policies, such as those defined in the General Plan and City's Municipal Code 7.30.060. The Project would not conflict with any of the State regulations regarding solid waste such as AB 1826, AB 341, and AB 939. Waste collection services for the proposed Project would be provided weekly by AVI. The Project would be subject to existing requirements regarding recycling and waste disposal. Since waste disposal in the City complies with State requirements, the proposed Project would not violate any State regulations relate to solid waste. Thus, the Project's impacts would be less than significant. Source(s) Brown and Caldwell. 2021. 2021 Alternative Water Supply Study: A Framework for a Resilient and Sustainable Water Future. Obtained February 2, 2023 from https://www.dsrsd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/7747/637602093234970000. CalRecycle. 2019. Facility/Site Summary Details: Altamont Landfill and Resource Recovery (01AA-0009). Obtained on March 10, 2023 from www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/7?sitel D=7. City of Dublin. 2006. Initial Study/EIR for Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan and Dublin Village Historic Area Rezoning. City of Dublin. 2022. City of Dublin General Plan. Water Resources Element. DSRSD. 2023a. District At A Glance. Obtained February 2, 2023 from https://www.dsrsd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/811/638109442954430000.DS RSD 2, 2023. Drought Water Use Rules. Obtained February 11, 2023 from https://www.dsrsd.com/your-account/water-conservation/water-use-rules. DSRSD. 2023b. Drought Water Use Rules. Obtained February 2, 2023 from https://www.dsrsd.com/your-account/water-conservation/water-use-rules. EBCE. 2023. Frequently Asked Questions webpage. Obtained February 2, 2023 from https://ebce.org/faq/. Stopwaste. 2023. About the Alameda County Waste Management Authority. Obtained on February 11, 2023 from https://www.stopwaste.org/about-stopwaste/boards/acwma- board. Ventura Water. 2022 Comprehensive Water Resources Report. Final Report. Obtained on March 17, 2023 from https://www.cityofventura.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/31810/2022-Comprehensive- Water-Resources-Report. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 478 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study 1 Page 148 West Yost. 2019. 2017 Wastewater Collection System Master Plan. Obtained on February 11, 2023 from https://www.dsrsd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/7233/637620238955100000. West Yost. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Obtained on March 10, 2023 from https://www.dsrsd.com/home/showpu bl isheddocument/7749/637607511715070000. Zone 7. 2022. Annual Report 2022. Obtained on February 11, 2023 from https://zone7water. report/. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 479 City of Dublin Wildfire HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study l Page 149 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact 18. 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? 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? 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 ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including X downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Environmental Setting Fire hazard severity zones are measured qualitatively, based on vegetation, topography, weather, crown fire potential (a fire's tendency to burn upward into trees and tall brush), and ember production and movement within the area in question. The most significant weather factor in Alameda County, including the Project site, is wind. Wind patterns are predominately west to east during fire season due to the cooler marine air flowing from the San Francisco Bay into the Livermore and San Joaquin valleys (CAL FIRE 2022a). Steep, inaccessible slopes and brush create a high fire hazard in the western hills of the City (City of Dublin 2022). Additionally, areas within the Extended Planning Areas that are adjacent to open space are susceptible to fire hazards (City of Dublin 2022). Fire prevention areas considered to be under state jurisdiction are referred to as "state responsibility areas" or SRAs, and CAL FIRE is responsible for vegetation fires within SRA lands.$ In general, SRA lands contain trees producing, or capable of producing, forest products; timber, 8 California Public Resources Code (PRC) Sections 4125-4127 define a State Responsibility Area as lands in which the financial responsibility for preventing and suppressing wildland fire resides with the State of California. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 480 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 150 brush, undergrowth, and grass, whether of commercial value or not, that provide watershed protection for irrigation or for domestic or industrial use; or lands in areas that are principally used, or are useful for, range or forage purposes. PRC Sections 4201-4204 and Government Code Sections 51175-51189 require identification of fire hazard severity zones within the State of California. In SRAs, CAL FIRE is required to delineate three wildfire hazard ranges: moderate, high, and very high.' The Project site is not within a SRA. The nearest SRA extends north and south of Interstate 580 approximately 0.7 mile west of the Project site. This portion of the SRA is identified as a moderate fire hazard severity zone (CAL FIRE 2022b, 2023a). This SRA is served by Battalion 4 of CAL FIRE's Santa Clara Unit (CAL FIRE 2022a). CAL FIRE identifies only very high fire hazard severity zones in "local responsibility areas," (LRAs) which are areas under the jurisdiction of local entities (e.g., cities and counties). The Project site is within a LRA, and the Alameda County Fire Department provides fire protection services to the Project site. There are no very high fire hazard severity zones within or in the vicinity of the Project site (CAL FIRE 2008, 2023b). The nearest very high fire hazard severity zone is located east of the City of Pleasanton, east of Interstate 680, approximately 3.5 miles south of the Project site. Regulatory Framework Federal Regulation National Fire Protection Association Codes, Standards, Practices, and Guides National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) codes, standards, recommended practices, and guides ("National Fire Protection Association Documents") are developed through a consensus standards development process approved by the American National Standards Institute. This process brings together professionals representing varied viewpoints and interests to achieve consensus on fire and other safety issues. National Fire Protection Association standards are recommended guidelines and nationally accepted good practices in fire protection but are not law or "codes" unless adopted as such or referenced as such by the CFC or a local fire agency. State Regulations California Fire Code The CFC is Chapter 9 of Title 24 of the CCR. It was created by the California Building Standards Commission and is based on the International Fire Code created by the International Code Council. It is the primary means for authorizing and enforcing procedures and mechanisms to ensure the safe handling and storage of any substance that may pose a threat to public health 9 CAL FIRE has developed a Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP) that uses a series of computer models to assess fire hazard. FRAP's data collection and models provide detailed analysis and mapping of fuels, fire weather, historical fire occurrences, and ignition location and frequency, all of which they have analyzed and modeled to develop fire hazard severity rankings for lands throughout California. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 481 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 151 and safety. The CFC regulates the use, handling, and storage requirements for hazardous materials at fixed facilities. The CFC and the California Building Code use a hazards classification system to determine what protective measures are required to protect fire and life safety. These measures may include construction standards, separations from property lines, and specialized equipment. To ensure that these safety measures are met, the CFC employs a permit system based on hazard classification. The CFC is updated every 3 years. California Public Resources Code Section 4427 PRC Section 4427 limits the use of any motor, engine, boiler, stationary equipment, welding equipment, cutting torches, tarpots, or grinding devices from which a spark, fire, or flame may originate, when the equipment is located on or near land covered by forest, brush, or grass. Before such equipment may be used, all flammable material, including snags, must be cleared away from the area around such operation for a distance of 10 feet. A serviceable round point shovel with an overall length of not less than 46 inches and a backpack pump water -type fire extinguisher, fully equipped and ready for use, must be maintained in the immediate area during the operation. Section 4431 PRC Section 4431 requires users of gasoline -fueled internal combustion —powered equipment operating within 25 feet of flammable material on or near land covered by forest, brush, or grass to have a tool for firefighting purposes at the immediate location of use. This requirement is limited to periods when burn permits are necessary. Under Section 4431, the Director of Forestry and Fire Protection specifies the type and size of fire extinguisher necessary to provide at least a minimum assurance of controlling fire caused by use of portable power tools during various climatic and fuel conditions. Section 4442 PRC Section 4442 prohibits the use of internal combustion engines running on hydrocarbon fuels on any land covered by forest, brush, or grass unless the engine is equipped with a spark arrestor and is constructed, equipped, and maintained in good working order when traveling on any such land.' Zo A spark arrester is a device constructed of nonflammable materials specifically for the purpose of removing and retaining carbon and other flammable particles larger than 0.0232 inch from the exhaust flow of an internal combustion engine that uses hydrocarbon fuels or which is qualified and rated by the U.S. Forest Service. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 482 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 152 Local Regulations City of Dublin General Plan Section 8.3.2 of the General Plan outlines policies and programs related to wildfire (City of Dublin 2022). The following policies related to hazardous materials are applicable to the proposed Project: • Guiding Policy 8.3.2.1.A.1. Require special precautions against fire as a condition of development approval in the western hills and elsewhere in the Extended planning Areas where proposed development would interface with open space. City of Dublin Wildfire Management Plan The City of Dublin has adopted a Wildfire Management Plan to reduce the risk of open land wildfire to the lowest practical level consistent with reasonable protection of wildlife habitat and other open space values. The Wildfire Management Plan is implemented in conjunction with Chapter 7.32 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code, "Materials and Construction Methods for Exterior Wildfire Exposure," which provides for acceptable methods of compliance inspection and documentation for vegetation management. The Wildfire Management Plan requires compliance with State defensible space guidelines and brush control in designated wildland-urban interface fire areas. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures As stated above, Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines determines wildfire impacts based on whether a proposed project would occur within or near a SRA or on lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The Project site is not within a SRA or very high fire hazard severity zone. However, the area approximately 0.7 mile to the west is within a SRA and designated by CAL FIRE as a moderate fire hazard severity zone (CAL FIRE 2008, 2022b, 2023a, 3b). (a) Impair an emergency response plan (No Impact) As discussed in Section 8, "Hazards and Hazardous Materials" (Impact f), the existing ingress and egress from Dublin Boulevard to the Project site would be maintained. All construction materials would be staged on -site, and therefore no temporary lane closures along Dublin Boulevard would be required during Project construction that could impede emergency access or hinder emergency evacuation. For Project operation, planned emergency access throughout the Project site would be reviewed by the City of Dublin Building Department and the Fire Department to ensure that appropriate widths and turning radii area provided for emergency vehicles. Thus, Project construction and operation would result in no impact from impairment of emergency response or evacuation plans. (b) Exposure to wildfire (Less Than Significant Impact) The Project would not substantially alter site slopes or vegetation or introduce new land uses that would exacerbate potential wildfire risks at the site. The Project would involve demolishing the existing industrial facility and constructing a new building in its place. The Project contractor would be required to comply with applicable provisions of the California Fire Code and Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 483 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 153 regulations related to fire safety and wildfire suppression identified above in the Regulatory Framework section, including the following requirements from the California PRC: • PRC Section 4428, which identifies additional firefighting equipment requirements during the period of highest fire danger (April 1—December 1); • PRC Section 4431, which prohibits the use of portable tools powered by gasoline -fueled internal combustion engines within 25 feet of flammable materials when burning permits are required; and • PRC Section 4442, which requires engines be equipped with a spark arrestor. Strict adherence to applicable PRCs requirements would ensure that wildfire risks are minimized during construction. The proposed building would comply with state and local regulations related to fire safety such as the CFC and the City building code requirements. Internal sprinkler systems, fire access man doors, fire hose, and fire resistant materials will be implemented. No highly flammable and combustible material shall be used or stored in the building. Driveways on the Project site would be connected by a 30 to 35-foot-wide fire access route around the perimeter of the proposed building. A total of six fire hydrants would be installed along this fire access road. The road would be designed to accommodate emergency response vehicles (i.e., fire trucks). A 26- foot-wide fire access route along the northern side of the building would allow for aerial apparatus access. A fire service line would connect to a public water line, which would provide water to the fire hydrants located around the site. These site improvements would reduce the risk of fire spreading offsite. Therefore, the Project would not exacerbate potential wildfire risks at the Project site, and this impact would be less than significant. (c) Require installation or maintenance of infrastructure (No Impact) The Project does not include infrastructure that would exacerbate fire risks, as all proposed utility connections would be developed within previously developed areas of the site away from large areas of vegetation. No new public roadways are proposed and the existing ingress and egress from Dublin Boulevard to the Project site would be maintained. While electric equipment would be removed and replaced with new equipment, it would be done so according to PG&E specifications adhere to local and State regulations, which would be reviewed by the City. Adherence to regulations would minimize any increase fire risks. For these reasons, the installation or maintenance of infrastructure associated with the Project would not exacerbate fire risk, and no impact would occur. (d) Exposure to flooding or landslides (No Impact) As discussed previously, the Project site is not within a State Responsibility Area or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ); however, the area approximately 0.7 mile to the west is within a SRA and designated by CAL FIRE as a moderate fire hazard severity zone (CAL FIRE 2023a, 2023b). There are no areas on or nearby the Project site that have recently had fires that would result in post -fire slope instability. As discussed in Section 8, "Hydrology and Water Quality," the proposed on -site stormwater drainage system would be sufficient to detain and treat operational stormwater runoff Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 484 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 154 generated by the proposed Project, and would not result in upstream or downstream flooding (see Question c for further discussion of drainage impacts). Project -related construction would not be performed in, and no new development would be located in, the 100-year floodplain. In addition, the Project site north of Dublin Creek has been previously graded to accommodate the existing building and parking lots and is nearly flat. The elevation slopes gently from approximately 388 feet in the west to 384 feet in the southeast and 380 feet in the northeast. The Project site itself is not located in an Earthquake Zone of Required Investigation for landslides (see Question a(iv), in Section 6, "Geology and Soils," for further discussion of landslide potential). Therefore, the Project would not result in significant risks related to downslope or downstream flooding or landslides as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes, and no impact would occur. Source(s) CAL FIRE. See California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. City of Dublin. 2022 (February). City of Dublin General Plan. Safety Element Available: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/171/General-Plan#Chapter%207. Accessed March 6, 2023. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2008 (June). Alameda County —Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. Update. Available: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/community-wildfire-prepa redness-and- mitigation/wildland-hazards-building-codes/fire-hazard-severity-zones-maps/. Accessed March 6, 2023. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2022a. Strategic Fire Plan Santa Clara Unit. Available: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/wmnnzObo/2022-fresno-kings-unit-fire- plan.pdf. Accessed March 6, 2023. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2022b (November). Alameda County — Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA. Available: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/community-wildfire-prepa redness-and- mitigation/wildland-hazards-building-codes/fire-hazard-severity-zones-maps/. Accessed March 6, 2023. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2023a. Online Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA. Available: http://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. Accessed February 28, 2023. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2023b. Online Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. Available: http://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. Accessed February 28, 2023. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 485 City of Dublin Mandatory Findings of Significance HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 155 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues Potentially Significant Impact 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Does the project: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a) Have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, 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? b) 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 the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? (a) Significant Impacts to Biological Resources or Important Examples of History or Prehistory The Project could result in potentially significant impacts to biological, geology and soils (paleontological), cultural resources, and tribal cultural resources. Biological resources and paleontological resources would result in a less than significant impact with mitigation and are further described in the Focused EIR. Related to California history or prehistory and cultural resources, this Initial Study has identified that the proposed project would have potentially significant impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources, as discussed above in Sections 5 and 18 respectively, due to the proposed demolition of a potentially historic resource (the existing Hexcel building) and due to the high potential for archaeological resources and possibly human burials to underlie the Project site. Therefore, impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources are analyzed in a Focused EIR. (b) Cumulative Impacts Consideration of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects in the Project area and vicinity indicate that, with the exception of cultural and tribal cultural resources (which are analyzed in an EIR), impacts from implementation of the Project would not combine with Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 486 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Page 156 impacts from other projects to cause a significant cumulative impact and would not make a considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact. The Project would not have impacts to agriculture or forestry resources, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, public services, or recreational resources that would combine with other projects. Cumulative impacts with respect to aesthetics, biological resources, energy, geology, hazardous and hazardous materials, noise, hydrology and water quality, transportation, utilities and service systems, and wildfire would be less than significant. However, such impacts would be limited to the Project area and, where necessary, mitigated such that they would not substantially combine with other off -site impacts. Transportation, air quality and GHG emissions could extend beyond the Project area to potentially combine with impacts from other projects. However, the Project would decrease traffic from existing levels. Cumulative impacts of the Project with other reasonably foreseeable projects and development in relation to transportation have been taken into consideration in Section 16, Transportation (see also Appendix E). For GHG emissions, the BAAQMD considered the emission levels at which a project's individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable in developing its CEQA significance thresholds. The BAAQMD considers projects that result in emissions that exceed its CEQA significance thresholds to result in individual impacts that are cumulatively considerable and significant. As discussed in Sections 3 and 7, the Project's emissions would be below the BAAQMD cumulatively considerable thresholds. Cumulative impacts of the Project for air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, hazardous materials, geology and soils (paleontological resources) and tribal resources are further discussed in the Focused EIR. (c) Substantial Adverse Effects on Human Beings As described within this Initial Study, environmental impacts (including those that may have a direct or indirect adverse effect on humans [i.e., air quality, noise, hazardous materials]) that are associated with the proposed project would be either less than significant or could be reduced to less than significant through implementation of project -specific mitigation measures recommended in this document. Hazardous and hazardous materials and air quality emissions could have an impact on human beings and are described in more detail in the Focused EIR. No other adverse effects on human beings from the Project are anticipated. Source(s) None. Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 487 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures Figures Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 488 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures This page intentionally left blank Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 489 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures BI ackhawk-Camino Tassajara ° Contra Costa County Danville s. �Te eke_ aqe San Ramon �� v Castro Valley Project Location Fairview Alameda County - Project Location ■ o N Milrc Figure 1. Project Location 5 Pleasanton Project Location CPAD2022 Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 490 This page intentionally left blank 491 City of Dublin Cm* Figure 2. Project Site 1,000 HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) 492 This page intentionally left blank 493 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures 4ECQM oafrfand c4 I/1./2023 USER salf.Parfard P4fi jnaaecomnetcol*fsl4MER1...aMusnaiccx,paSOctJeca\GSPvoJeaa\wc57s55[.`rycfDud,Hetv1\o2 neapsl02 kamxMaps Via W pra a05-:a ulusaamxrcixe A U N Feet DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/w P4RIES) (A PIIRIJC ROP➢) / �'44.4 ' ' seiNCIr ■ Inc LI�I LII II II II II II I I I I u_ Source: AECOM, 2022, Ear *Might, 2022 Figure 3. Site Plan Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) This page intentionally left blank 495 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures Dublin Blvd. Elevation - North Elevation Northwest Elevation West Elevation 1 I 1 East Elevation New Public St. Elevation - East Elevation I 0 120 Feet Source: AECOM, 2022:10er *Wriest, 2022 Figure 4. Elevations Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) This page intentionally left blank 497 City of Dublin N 1213 Feet Figure 5. Overall Floor Plan HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures Source: AECOM, 2022; Igor 2022 Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) This page intentionally left blank 499 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures jEl I ONO 150 Source: AECOM, 2022; Ear +Wrig+k 2022 Figure 6A. Landscape Plan Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) This page intentionally left blank 501 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures PLANT LIST 40,. NATIVE SYM NO, BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE WATER REGIME MATURE HABIT HYDRP4GNE H 1( 140.5 N'S furro. • Be�T eat 24. Box. e® L 3. x ao Pleipc l4 c. xEUH o44ET" DENSE PST42A1E J4' m 5! 023 sA' K 4D' L.YERSTRDk IA DT-LiMPE RSV OR4FE MYRTLE x , .L x 15' una 01.5 6 m2aueERer Tie as x r L as x 3o PL4T421L5 4^E9roLI4 LamON FL4T.E TIME 2a mk oR e� II 70' K 503 TGT44 I4 W1Eele w 14:W 15066 rw...e. r 55 EVERGREEN SCREENING SHRUBS Oomp1E4yl5r�4 'T"J"N W BTRALL®£aRr ;Ili O H£T£T015L£640441HXI4 YDTCN Nk 25 OE44051415 RAY 441TM4N' 0 441514Ls GRASSES % 11 12 MJ4.ENS055145K.EIIa III W 5T LWIANDR0 L.'LGf1LA1i' 24L, L to :t m 5 GAL L 1rxs'PLF4I4 1D1cc s UAL L 44004PNTS'GC GAL 441.4.151e541lB 1 04L LRE TIP 1 GAL L DROUGHT TOLERANT SHRUBS 0 10 4O401,4 0EBERT CARPET' MOBTIL4TE 4OAG1A 5 GALL 024 14.e4 'Lm464.10 04501111.6660-14,6 504. 5 a4LW4 40)145 W 35 MOWDsill PRILO =FREDERR! s 45 OWL n 4E5I=EP4. E P41e44L034 ICED r10O4, B G44. 51 ROWT1 o, i 30424 SLUE LFOIOMr 5 mL 054 WILL-WILL'Llt1Le JO444' 446011L£ DR1914 554 • NSA, D- 22.244E0A24: SRA, s G4L N O 0 4o110FHTulO1F-SE2T822442 cu450 TEu45 0.J441L6 5G4L N C$ 20 06410T445 T5INTI 1400; c4, LIL4o 5GAL 21,4 ELAND 31 co 5'k5' PL4NT5'L u 5' 5' 0.ANT5'ae 4' k 4' PR4411. 4' Da 4' g 4' RANI 9' oc. k 3' PERENNIALS .6 55 T4Le4414414 4' .13100Lae' So0IErf G4RL144 I GAL L I' k 15' 4 YosRHBNA LILPCNA 'D£L4 MINA' YEINMIN IGAL L Ex 21 n1 4 .2 A4441LL£A 1,0.16 ME r L ® D1ETE5 v_ 1040504Tp' TORT 1164T LILT 1 a41_ L 3' k 3' O 22 040(14 R LE4O0 4504 TR4ILIl10 GA]A144A 1 24L L T 5?-5' No1£. Door 0AIeZB%54ALL 0E NSTALL52D WN£FE 15E52 ARE 4111422 Itl' cP 0A2/4M5142 NDi 54.4.1 MULCHES BARK MI2.14-ALL PLANTERS NOT DE51GNATED FOR 50D DRANK RECYCLED CHIPPED W000 MULCH- PLACE 9" HDL DEPTH 112'- 3' LENGTH DECO12A11NE COLOR DARK HRO11hl OR E0U4L 110 1/515LE CCNTAMMANTS PLACE 3' MM. DEPTH Cf HARK IN ALL PLANT 5ASIN5 ALL 414L04 AND 4MP05T USED IN THE cs6ITER4L LANDSCAPE AREAS AND ,ANT BID-TREAHENT AREAS SHALL MEET SB 1253 PROCUREMENT REOWREMENTS. UPDATED LANDSCAPE PLAN SHEETS THAT SPECIFY MULCH AND C011POS? THAT MEET 951353 5�A000HE PURCA544510 66 44,2LCH AND co100511 E FROM WILL ME FRONDED FOR RERMIT �A 444 L�R THAT WILL INDICATES 50 1369 COMPLIANCE FOR EACH PRODUCT. 6FIETRE uSLER FOR APPAL FRIOR1SHALL DE 0 DELLITERT ED To THE TO THE 911E CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP AND MAINTAIN A COPT OF Al RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE PROCUREMENT OF 55 1359 COMPLIANT COMPOST AND MULCH. CONTRACTOR SHALL 055410E TO THE ROTS OORK6 DEPARTMENT RECORDS IN0IC.144 THE TOTAL COMPOST AND MULCH PR GURE0 DR USED, THE 0 4NTITr OF .o1-12.229T (22049 aR GLOIC 1-4443,8) AND MULCH (TONS) PROCIIR=D FROM EACH FAGILITT DR EN/ITT, FACILITY OR VENDOR INFORMATION MAME OF FACILITY, ADDRESS, CONTACT INFORMATION), A GENERAL DESCRIPTION GF HOW THE OSPIIAO5T 411D/02 MULCH 211L6116ED, AND WHERE COMPOST 4N0 221ULG4111AD USED, AND INvoloES DEMONSTRATING PR0CU0MENT. BIO-RETENTION PLANTING Blo-RETENTION NATIVE 0RASS TO 5E 'HIo-FILTRATION Sao" AS AYAILASLE FRONT DELTA ELUE00A GO_-oR P4IAL, 400 sNALL ae 6001,14 IN p 5p4117f sASE TOPSDIL. TEMPORARY IRRIGATION TO BE PROVIDED FOR ESTABLISHMENT. 500 SHALL SE LAID MITE A MINIMUM OF IS. OVERLAP EETYMEN ADJACENT ENDS AND SHALL BE LAID HORIZONTAL,PARALLEL TO ANY SLOPE SOD SHALL BE LAID TIGHT TO HEADER AND OR ADJACENT PAXEMENT, THE MIN11-11M DIMENSION OF ANT OLP PIECE SHALL 8E 1O" EXISTING LM1D0GAPE AREA TO REMAIN THE LLND0C4PE ...TRACTOR SHALL FIELD PLACE PLANTS AROUND A®ovE GTCI0UND UTILITIES To BoRLEN UTILITIES FROM PIBLIO STREETS AND PARKING AREAS A4 RINn6 RR FLAN 5 CONSTRUCTION 111 XF PLTi1475 2-i14 E RE-s00111ACTFLANDSCAP11) I71- or E ARCHITECT IF PLANTING REQUIRES CL RIFICATION. LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS; TOTAL P4R1<ING AREA • 54,515 SE RAEKII.t, AREA INCLUDES THE FOLLOWIFk. LPAVEMEIT INCLUDING ISLANDS, STALLS, AISLES AND ACCESS DRVEL 2. ADJACENT BUILDING FRONTAGE LANDSCAPE AREA INC. WALKS P4RKING AREA LANDSCAPE REOWRED • 12511 T>F- r15% OF PA.RKING AREA/ PARKING AREA LANo9C4,E PROVIDED = 14,9522 9E. 212 =) NO. OF STANDARD PARKING SPACES • 211 TREES REQUIRED = 55 (I/4 SPACES) TREES PROVIDED • 55 TOTAL &RE LANDSCAPE: 99,106 5E. LANDSCAPE BY AREA PARKING AREA. 14550 6F f 14%1 511E PERIMETER 1NE:212.15306 SF. (13A) MELDING FACADE NOT INC IN P4RCINDM SOSO SF. f14T•: HID -RETENTION, 13936 5F. (10.1 EXISTING TO REMAIN. 45450 SF_(490) WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER IS/ ET DATA, REPEAT CYCLING IRRIGATON ZONES PER PLANT WATER REOUIRETIENTS RAIN 4EN5OR TO BE SPECIFIED SOIL AMENDMENT6 TO 15E (4004 OR4TED FL4Nr0R 6uRF4cE ARF4& To ER 2121LO454 WATER USAGE. TO MEET STATE WATER EFFIc1ENT L4NO5cAPE STANDARD Source: AECOM, 2D22, Ear a IWigJ94 2022 Figure 6B. Landscape Plan Details Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) This page intentionally left blank 503 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures A 0 N Feet 180 IRE ACCESS ROUTE Source: AECOM, 2022, !Ger t Wrig 12022 Figure 7. Fire Access Route Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) This page intentionally left blank 505 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures Worst -Case Noise Sensitive Receiver Long-term Noise Monitoring Location Short-term Noise Monitoring Location Project Boundary Proposed Faclity Building 77 N Figure 8. Proposed Project Area, Noise Monitoring Locations and Worst -Case Noise -Sensitive Receptors Source Gaggle 2023 Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) This page intentionally left blank 507 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures Figure 9. Distribution of Modeled Noise Sources Assumed for Project Operations Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) This page intentionally left blank 509 City of Dublin Figure 10. Perspective 1 HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures Source AECOM, 2022,, Kler+Wrlgm, 2022 Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) This page intentionally left blank 511 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Initial Study I Figures Source: AECOO; 2022; tier * Wright, 2022 Figure 11. Perspective 2 Hexcel - Initial Study_7_26_23_Clean_Final.docx (7/26/23) This page intentionally left blank 513 Appendix B: Notice of Preparation and Scoping Comments This page intentionally left blank 515 DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report Date To Project Title Project Application Number Project Location Project Applicant Contact — For questions or submitting comments. May 15, 2023 Responsible and Trustee Agencies (see Distribution List, attached) Office of Planning and Research Hexcel Redevelopment Project PLPA-2022-00038 The project site is located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard (APN# 941- 1560-009-01 and 941-1560-003-04) in the City of Dublin, CA. Dublin Boulevard Owner, LP Gaspare Annibale Associate Planner City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Phone: 925/833-6610 Gaspare.Annibale@dublin.ca.gov The City of Dublin will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused environmental impact report (EIR) for the project identified above. We are requesting the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information which is germane to your agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The purpose of an EIR is to inform decision -makers and the general public of the environmental effects of a proposed project that an agency may implement or approve. The EIR process is intended to provide information sufficient to evaluate a project and its potential for significant impacts on the environment, to examine methods of reducing adverse impacts, and to consider alternatives to the project. According to State law, the deadline for your response to this Notice of Preparation is 30 days after receipt of this notice, on or before June 15; however, we would appreciate an earlier response, if possible. Please identify a contact person, and send your response to the contact name above. NOP for Hexcel EIR_Final_5_8_2023.docx (5/15/2023) 516 City of Dublin Project Summary and Probably Environmental Effects Hexcel Redevelopment Project 1 Page 2 Project Description Dublin Boulevard Owner, LP is proposing to construct a new 125,304 square foot building on the 8.81-acre project site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California. The project site is composed of two parcels (Assessor Parcel Numbers [APN] 941-1560-009-01 [Parcel 1] and 941-1560-003-04 [Parcel 2]) with an existing 62,715 square foot building on Parcel 1. The existing Hexcel research and development (R&D) building would be demolished and replaced with the proposed building. The proposed building would cater to future tenants in the R&D and life sciences field. Other site improvements would include landscaping; parking; a fire access road; circulation improvements for truck access and loading and unloading materials; utilities; pavement and grading to treat site drainage. The City would require the applicant to obtain the following approvals and permits: approval of a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan; Site Development Review Permit; Heritage Tree Removal Permit; and demolition, building, grading, and encroachment permits. CEQA Procedural Matters 1. A copy of the Initial Study is ❑ is not 0 attached. 2. The proposed project is ❑ is not Z considered a project of statewide, regional, or area wide significance. 3. The proposed project will ❑ will not 0 affect highways or other facilities under the jurisdiction of the State Department of Transportation. 4. A scoping meeting will 0 will not ❑ be held. The scoping meeting will be held on May 25, 2023 at 7:00 PM via Zoom: https://dublinca.zoom.us/j/82819595305?pwd=en Bvczd4WDE4cFhCQ2hvQndSMWZ3QT0 9. Probable Environmental Effects The Draft EIR for the proposed project will be prepared and processed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended. In accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the EIR will include the following: ■ A summary of the project; ■ A project description; ■ A description of the existing environmental setting, potential environmental impacts, and mitigation measures; ■ Alternatives to the project as proposed; and ■ Environmental consequences, including (a) any significant environmental effects which cannot be avoided if the project is implemented; (b) any significant irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources; (c) the growth inducing impacts of the proposed project; (d) effects found not to be significant; and (e) cumulative impacts. NOP for Hexcel EIR_Final582023.docx (5/15/2023) 517 City of Dublin Project Summary and Probably Environmental Effects Hexcel Redevelopment Project 1 Page 3 The City has prepared a draft Initial Study, and City staff have determined that the project may have potentially significant effects on the environment in several resource areas. Impacts related to the following resource topics were found to be potentially significant but could be reduced to Less than Significant with Mitigation: Air Quality, Biological Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, and Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Due to the age and history of the building to be demolished, and the proximity of the adjacent cemetery, initial research indicates that impacts relating to Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources could be potentially significant and further analysis is required to determine if these impacts could be mitigated to a less than significant level or if they would be significant and unavoidable. In accordance with Section 15063(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City intends to focus the EIR on Cultural Resources, Tribal Cultural Resources, and those resource topics that can be reduced to Less than Significant with Mitigation only and rely on the analysis within the Initial Study for all other environmental topics. CITY OF DUBLIN Gaspare Annibale Associate Planner NOP for Hexcel EIR_Final582023.docx (5/15/2023) 518 THE CITY OF pLEASANTON. June 12, 2023 Gaspare Annibale Associate Planner City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Via Email: Gaspare.Annibale@dublin.ca.gov RE: Hexcel Redevelopment Project/PLPA-2022-00038 Dear Mr. Annibale: Thank you for the Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Case No. PLPA-2022-00038 dated "Received May 24, 2023" by the City of Pleasanton Planning Division (Pleasanton). The project would demolish an existing 62,715 square -foot building and construct a new 125,304 square -foot building with 217 parking stalls and related site improvements on the 8.81-acre site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. Pleasanton staff reviewed the notice and information included in the notice as well as those posted on Dublin's website. The notice stated a draft Initial Study (IS) was prepared and identified a number of items that could have potential significant impacts. However, the IS was not made available for public review. And additionally, transportation was not among the listed items that could have potentially significant impacts. Pleasanton staff would like to review the prepared IS for this project. Additionally, staff requests the review of the draft EIR when it is available. Thank you for the referral and we look forward to working with Dublin in identifying transportation impacts and mitigations. If you have any questions, I can be reached at: jsoo@cityofpleasantonca.gov Sincerely, Jenny Soo Associate Planner Electronic cc: Mike Tassano, Traffic Engineer COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT P. O. BOX 520 • 200 Old Bernal Avenue www.cityofpleasantonca.gov Pleasanton, CA 94566-0802 Planning Building & Safety Code Enforcement Permit Center Traffic Engineering (925) 931-5600 (925) 931-5300 (925) 931-5620 (925) 931-5630 (925) 931-5677 Fax: 931-5483 Fax: 931-5478 Fax: 931-5478 Fax: 931-5478 Fax: 931-5487 519 CHAIRPERSON Lqura Miranda Luise,lo VICE CHAIRPERSON Reginald Pagaling Chumash SECRETARY Sara Dutschke Miwok COMMISSIONER Isaac Bojorquez Chlone-Cosfonoan COMMISSIONER Bully McQuillen Yokayo Pomo, Yuki. Nomtaki COMMISSIONER Wayne Nelson Luiseno COMMISSIONER Stanley Rodrlguex Kurneypgy COMMISSIONER [Vacant] COMMISSIONER [Vacant] EXECUTIVE SECRETARY Raymond C, Hllchcock M iwok, Nisenan NAHC HEADQUARTERS 1550 Harbor Boulevard Suite 100 West Sacramento, Cotifornia 95691 {916) 373-3710 nahc' nahc.cc .aa NAHC.ca.gov SYATE OF CALIFORNIA _GILVICLIIPW;Orrk nnYP/lief NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION May 18.2023 Gaspare Annibale Cify of Dublin Community Development ❑epartment 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Re: 2023050372, Hexcel Redevelopment Project, Alameda County Dear Mr. Annibale: ECEINE MAY 2 2 2023 CiTY OF DUBLIN BUILDING & SAFETY DIVISION The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) has received the Notice of Preparation (NOP), Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) or Early Consultation for the project referenced above. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub, Resources Code §21000 et seq.), specifically Public Resources Code §21084.1, states that a project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, is a project that may hove a significant effect on the environment_ (Pub, Resources Code § 21084.1; Cal. Code Begs., tit. I4, § 15064.5 (le) (CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5 (b)). If there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before a lead agency, that a project may have a significant effect an the environment, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) shall be prepared. (Pub. Resources Code § 21080 (d); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 5064 subd. (a) (1) (CEQA Guidelines § 15064 (o) ( I )). In order to determine whether a project will cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, a lead agency will need to determine whether there are historical resources within the area of potential effect (APE). CEQA was amended significantly in 2014. Assembly Bill 52 (Gallo. Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014) (AB 52) amended CEQA to create a separate category of cultural resources, "tribal cultural resources" (Pub. Resources Code §21074) and provides that a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. (Pub. Resources Code §21084.2). Public agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects to any tribal cultural resource. (Pub. Resources Code §21084.3 (a)). AB 52 applies to any protect for which a notice of preparation, a notice of negative declaration, or a mitigated negative declaration Is filed on or after July 1, 2015. If your project involves the adoption of or amendment to a general plan or a specific plan, or the designation or proposed designation of open space, an or after March 1, 2005, It may also be subject to Senate Bill i8 (Burton, Chapter 905, Statutes of 2004) (SB 18). Both SB 18 and AB 52 have tribal consultation requirements. If your project is also subject to the federal National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq.) (NEPA), the tribal consultation requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (154 U.S.C. 300101, 36 C.F.R. §800 et seq.) may also apply. The NAHC recommends consultation with California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of your proposed project as early as possible in order to avoid inadvertent discoveries of Native American human remains and best protect tribal cultural resources. Below is a brief summary of portions of AB 52 and SB 18 as well as the NAHC's recommendations for conducting cultural resources assessments. Consult your legal counsel about compliance with AB 52 and 58 18 as well as compliance with any other applicable laws. AB 52 Page 1 of 5 520 AB 52 has added to CEQA the additional requirements listed below, along with many other requirements: 1. Fourteen Day Period to Provide Notice of Completion of an Application/Decision to Undertake a Project: Within fourteen (14) days of determining that an application for a project is complete or of a decision by a public agency to undertake a project, a lead agency shall provide formal notification to a designated contact of, or tribal representative of, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice, to be accomplished by at least one written notice that includes: a. A brief description of the project. b. The lead agency contact information. c. Notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to request consultation. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1 (d)). d. A "California Native American tribe" is defined as a Native American tribe located in California that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC for the purposes of Chapter 905 of Statutes of 2004 (SB 18). (Pub. Resources Code §21073). 2. Begin Consultation Within 30 Days of Receiving a Tribe's Request for Consultation and Before Releasing a Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report: A lead agency shall begin the consultation process within 30 days of receiving a request for consultation from a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1, subds. (d) and (e)) and prior to the release of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration or Environmental Impact Report. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1(b)). a. For purposes of AB 52, "consultation shall have the same meaning as provided in Gov. Code §65352.4 (SB 18). (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1 (b)). 3. Mandatory Topics of Consultation If Requested by a Tribe: The following topics of consultation, if a tribe requests to discuss them, are mandatory topics of consultation: a. Alternatives to the project. b. Recommended mitigation measures. c. Significant effects. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.2 (a)). 4. Discretionary Topics of Consultation: The following topics are discretionary topics of consultation: a. Type of environmental review necessary. b. Significance of the tribal cultural resources. c. Significance of the project's impacts on tribal cultural resources. d. If necessary, project alternatives or appropriate measures for preservation or mitigation that the tribe may recommend to the lead agency. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.2 (a)). 5. Confidentiality of Information Submitted by a Tribe During the Environmental Review Process: With some exceptions, any information, including but not limited to, the location, description, and use of tribal cultural resources submitted by a California Native American tribe during the environmental review process shall not be included in the environmental document or otherwise disclosed by the lead agency or any other public agency to the public, consistent with Government Code §6254 (r) and §6254.10. Any information submitted by a California Native American tribe during the consultation or environmental review process shall be published in a confidential appendix to the environmental document unless the tribe that provided the information consents, in writing, to the disclosure of some or all of the information to the public. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (c)(1)). 6. Discussion of Impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources in the Environmental Document: If a project may have a significant impact on a tribal cultural resource, the lead agency's environmental document shall discuss both of the following: a. Whether the proposed project has a significant impact on an identified tribal cultural resource. b. Whether feasible alternatives or mitigation measures, including those measures that may be agreed to pursuant to Public Resources Code §21082.3, subdivision (a), avoid or substantially lessen the impact on the identified tribal cultural resource. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (b)). Page 2 of 5 7. Conclusion of Consultation: Consultation with a tribe shall be considered concluded when either of the following occurs: a. The parties agree to measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect, if a significant effect exists, on a tribal cultural resource; or b. A party, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached. (Pub, Resources Code §21080.3.2 (b)). B. Recommendina Mitiaation Measures Aareed Upon in Consultation in the Environmental Doctor n1 Any mitigation measures agreed upon in the consultation conducted pursuant to Public Resources Code §21080,3.2 shall be recommended for Inclusion In the environmental document and in an adopted mitigation monitoring and reporting program, if determined to avoid or lessen the impact pursuant to Public Resources Code §21082.3, subdivision (b), paragraph 2, and shall be fully enforceable. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (a}}. 9. Required Consideration of Feasible Mitigclfiort: If mitigation measures recommended by the staff of the Ieoid agency as a result of the consultation process are not included in the environmental document ar if there are no agreed upon mitigation measures at the conclusion of consultation, or if consultation does not occur, and if substantial evidence demonstrates that a project will cause a significant effect to a tribal cultural resource, the lead agency shall consider feasible mitigation pursuant is Public Resources Code §21084.3 (b), (Pub, Resources Code §21082.3 (e)), 10. Exorreel s of Mitigation Measures That, If Feasible, Mav Be Considered to Avoid or Minimize Significant Adverse Imttcts to Tribal Cultural Resources: a. Avoidance and preservation of the resources in place, including, but not limited to: i. Planning and construction to avoid the resources and protect the cultural and natural context. ii. Planning greenspace, parks, or other open space, to incorporate the resources with culturally appropriate protection and management criteria. b. Treating the resource with culturally appropriate dignity, taking into account the tribal cultural values and meaning of the resource, including, but not limited to, the following: i. Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource. 11. Protecting the traditional use of the resource. ifi. Protecting the confidentiality of the resource. c. Permanent conservation easements or other interests in real property, with culturally appropriate management criteria for the purposes of preserving or utilizing the resources or places. d. Protecting the resource. (Pub. Resource Code §21084.3 (b)), e. Please note that a federally recognized California Native American tribe or a non -federally recognized California Native American tribe that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC to protect a California prehistoric, archaeological, cultural, spiritual, or ceremonial place moy acquire and hold conservation easements if the conservation easement is voluntarily conveyed. (Clv. Code §815.3 (c)). f. Please note that it is the policy of the state that Native American remains and associated grove artifacts shall be repatriated. (Pub. Resources Code §5097,991). 11. Prerequisites for Certifying an Environmental Impact Report or Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration or Negative Declaration with o Significant Impact on an Identified Tribal Cultural Resource: An Environmental Impact Report may not be certified, nor may a mitigated negative declaration or a negative declaration be adopted unless one of the following occurs: a. The consultation process between the tribes and the lead agency has occurred as provided in Public Resources Code §21080.3.1 and §21080.3.2 and concluded pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21080.3.2. b. The tribe that requested consultation failed to provide comments to the lead agency or otherwise failed to engage in the consultation process. c. The lead agency provided notice of the project to the tribe in compliance with Public Resources Code §21080,3.1 (el} and the tribe failed to request consultation within 30 days, (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (d)), The NAHC's PowerPoint presentation tilled, "Tribal Consultation Under AB 52: Requirements and Best Practices" may be found online at: hl1://nohc.ca.govjwp=conteoJu lads/20I5/101AB52fribalConsultation CaIEPAPDF,pdf Page 3 of 5 522 S8 18 SB 18 applies to local governments and requires local governments to contact, provide notice to, refer plans to, and consult with tribes prior to the adoption or amendment of a general plan or a specific plan, or the designation of open space. (Gov. Code § 65352,3), Local governments should consult the Governor's Office of Planning and Research's "Tribal Consultation Guidelines," which can be found online at: i'itDj.(1www,00r_ca_gov/dccs/09 14 95 Uodated Guidelines 922,0df. Some of SB 18's provisions include: 1. Tribal Consultation; If a local government considers a proposal to adopt ar amend a general plan or a specific plan, ar to designate open space it is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the NAHC by requesting a "Tribal Consultation List," If a tribe, once contacted, requests consultation the local government must consult with the tribe on the plan proposal. A tribe has 90 days from the date of receipt of notification to request consultation unless a shorter timetrcme has been agreed to by the tribe. (Gov. Code §65352.3 (a){2)). 2. No Staf tory Time Limit on B 18 Tribal Conss.rltation. There Is no statutory tirne limit on SB 18 tribal consultation. 3. Ccnficlentictlity: Consistent with the guidelines developed and adopted by the Office of Planning and Research pursuant to Gay. Code §65040.2, the city or county shall protect the confidentiality of the information concerning the specific identity, location, character, and use of places, features and objects described in Public Resources Code §5097.9 and §5097.993 that are within the city's or county's jurisdiction. (Gov. Code §65352.3 (b) ) 4. Conclusion at SB 18 Tribal Consultation: Consultation Should be concluded at the point in which: a, The parties to the consultation come to a mutual agreement concerning the appropriate measures for preservation or mitigation; or b, Either the local government or the tribe, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached concerning the appropriate measures of preservation or mitigation. (Tribal Consultation Guidelines, Governor's Office of Planning and Research (2005) at p. 18). Agencies should be aware that neither A B 52 nor SB 18 precludes agencies from initiating tribal consultation with tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with their jurisdictions before the timeframes provided in AB 52 and SB 18. For that reason, we urge you to continue to request Native American Tribal Contact Lists and "Sacred Lands File" searches from the NAHC. The request forms can be found online at: htto://nahc.ca.govlresourceslforrnsl. NAHC Recommendations for Cultural Resources Assessments To adequately assess the existence and significance of tribal cultural resources and plan for avoidance, preservation in place, or barring both, mitigation of project -related impacts to tribal cultural resources, the NAHC recommends the following actions: 1. Contact the appropriate regional California Historical Research Information System (CHRiS) Center (https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=30331) for an archaeological records search. The records search will determine: a. If part or all of the APE has been previously surveyed for cultural resources. b. If any known cultural resources have already been recorded on ar adjacent to the APE. e. If the probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE, d. If a survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present. 2, If an archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the preparation of a professional report detailing the findings and recommendations of the records search and field survey_ a. The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measures should be submitted immediately to the planning department. All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be In a separate confidential addendum and not be made available for public disclosure. b. The final written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has been completed to the appropriate regional CHRIS center. Pogo 4 of 5 523 3. Contact the NAHC for: a. A Sacred Lands File search. Remember that tribes do not always record their sacred sites in the Sacred Lands File, nor are they required to do so. A Sacred Lands File search is not a substitute for consultation with tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the project's APE. b. A Native American Tribal Consultation List of appropriate tribes for consultation concerning the project site and to assist in planning for avoidance, preservation in place, or, failing both, mitigation measures. 4. Remember that the lack of surface evidence of archaeological resources (including tribal cultural resources) does not preclude their subsurface existence. a. Lead agencies should include in their mitigation and monitoring reporting program plan provisions for the identification and evaluation of inadvertently discovered archaeological resources per Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15064.5(f) (CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(f)). In areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated Native American with knowledge of cultural resources should monitor all ground -disturbing activities. b. Lead agencies should Include in their mitigation and monitoring reporting program plans provisions for the disposition of recovered cultural items that pre not burial associated in consultation with culturally affiliated Native Americans. c. Lead agencies should include in their mitigation and monitoring reporting program plans provisions for the treatment and disposition of inadvertently discovered Native American human remains. Health and Safety Code §7050.5, Public Resources Code §5097.98, and Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §15064.5, subdivisions (d) and (e) (CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5, subds. (d) and (e)) address the processes to be followed in the event of an inadvertent discovery of any Native American human remains and associated grave goods in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address: Codv.Campaane@nahc.ca.aov Sincerely, CeLmearz Cody Campagne Cultural Resources Analyst cc: State Clearinghouse Page 5 of 5 524 WATER AGENCY Delivering Quality, Reliability and Safety June 15, 2023 Gaspare Annibale, Associate Planner City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Sent by email: Gaspare.Annibale@dublin.ca.gov 100 North Canyons Parkway Livermore, CA 94551 (925) 454-5000 Re: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report — Hexcel Redevelopment Project Zone 7 Water Agency (Zone 7, or Zone 7 of the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District) has reviewed the referenced document in the context of Zone 7's mission to "Deliver safe, reliable, efficient, and sustainable water and flood protection services" within the Livermore-Amador Valley. Below are our comments for your consideration. 1. Water Supply — The EIR should clearly describe the source of potable water supply and evaluate the planned water use in the context of existing planning documents. 2. Wells - Our records indicate that there is one lost well (3S1W02K001) and one destroyed well (3S1W02K012) in the project area. Exact locations of wells are unknown. Please immediately notify Zone 7 if 3S1W02K001 is located or any other wells exist in the project area. If located, well 3S1W02K001 must be permitted by Zone 7 for destruction. Also, please be advised that a Zone 7 drilling permit is needed for any water well or soil boring work that may be planned for this project. The drilling permit application and permit fee schedule can be downloaded from our website: https://www.zone7water.com/post/well-drilling-and-soil-boring-permits. For additional information please email wellpermits@zone7water.com. 3. Groundwater Basin - Note that the subject property (or project) is located within the basin area under sustainable groundwater management by Zone 7 as per the Alternative Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the Livermore Valley Groundwater Basin (https: //www. zone7water. co m/sites/main/files/fi le- zone7water.com 525 WATER AGENCY Delivering Quality, Reliability and Safety attachments/alt gw sustainability plan-4.pdf?1656015908 ) and is subject to all relevant sustainable groundwater management actions. 4. Flood Protection / Channel ownership - The proposed project is adjacent to Dublin Creek (Line T), which is not owned or maintained by Zone 7. Zone 7 owns and maintains the section of Line T, east of San Ramon Road, which is downstream of the project. Based on real property information, the parcel owner is responsible for the reach of Dublin Creek. 5. Flood Protection / Impervious areas - Developments creating new impervious areas within the Livermore-Amador Valley are subject to the assessment of the Development Impact Fee for Flood Protection and Storm Water Drainage. These fees are collected for Zone 7 by the local governing agency: 1) upon approval of final map for public improvements creating new impervious areas; and/or 2) upon issuance of a building or use permit required for site improvements creating new impervious areas. Fees are dependent on whether post -project impervious area conditions are greater than pre -project conditions. 6. Water -wise Landscaping - Zone 7 encourages the use of sustainable, climate - appropriate, and drought -tolerant plants, trees and grasses that thrive in the Tri-Valley area. Find more information at: http://www.trivalleywaterwise.com. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any questions on this letter, please feel free to contact me at (925) 454-5005 or via email at erank@zone7water.com. Sincerely, 5-liaa gA/K)/Z Elke Rank cc: Ken Minn, file Page 2 526 This page intentionally left blank 527 Appendix C: Historical Resources Evaluation This page intentionally left blank 529 AECOM To: Gaspare Annibale, Associate Planner, City of Dublin From: Heather Miller, MA, Architectural Historian, AECOM Trina Meiser, MA, Historic Preservation Planner, AECOM Stephanie Osby, Environmental Planner/Project Manager, AECOM Project Name: 11711 Dublin Boulevard Historical Resouce Evaluation Date: May 12, 2023 150 California Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94111 aecom.com FINAL Technical Memorandum -11711 Dublin Boulevard Historical Resource Evaluation Introduction AECOM Technical Services, Inc. (AECOM) holds an on -call master services agreement with the City of Dublin (City) for environmental analysis services, dated July 1, 2021. The City requested AECOM to prepare a historical resource evaluation of the Hexcel Corporation's 1960s-constructed research and development facility at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The facility was previously recorded on Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms and evaluated for eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) in 2003, but at that time the property was less than 50 years old and not considered a potential historical resource under CEQA. Additionally, the 2003 historic evaluation (VerPlanck 2003) did not address the four eligibility criteria for either the NRHP or the CRHR, but merely concluded that the property lacked architectural or historical significance to be eligible. This technical memo describes the current condition of the facility with recent photographs, provides a historical context of the use of the facility and physical development of the facility over time, and evaluates the facility for eligibility for listing in the CRHR as a potential historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. Facility Description The Hexcel Corporation's R&D facility at 11711 Dublin Boulevard is sited at the south side of the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hansen Drive in Dublin. The 62,715-square foot facility is on an 8.81-acre, triangular -shaped parcel, Assessor's Parcel Number (APN): 941-1560-009-01 (see Attachment - Location Map). The Contemporary/Brutalist style facility has a roughly L-shaped plan and was largely constructed in two phases dating to 1962 and 1967, with small additions and alterations in the mid-1980s. The original 1962 portion of the facility is on the east half, has a roughly rectangular plan, and is constructed of tilt -up concrete panels in a north -south orientation (Photograph 1). The north end of the building rests on a concrete foundation and is one story tall. The exterior is clad with scored concrete, and the flat roof parapet is lined with a louvered metal equipment screen. Primary entry into this section is through a single, aluminum -framed glass door with a fixed transom above and full -height fixed windows. The door is accessed by a low concrete ramp and is protected by a wood -frame, flat roof porch shelter enclosed with vertically oriented, narrow wood slats. A privacy screen using the same vertically 1 530 oriented, narrow wood slats lines the west side of the east half of the facility and terminates near the secondary entry, which consists of a pair of glazed, metal double doors (Photograph 1 and Photograph 2). The privacy screen obscures two pairs of glass double doors and a pair of flush metal double doors. Photograph 1: Northeast corner of building complex showing the 1962-constructed portion, facing southwest, December 16, 2022. Note this is the original 1962-constructed section of the complex. Photograph 2: West side of original 1962-construction section of the complex and primary entry on far right, facing southeast, December 16, 2022. 2 531 A two-story building hyphen built in 1984 connects the 1962-constructed east half with the 1967- constructed west half (Photograph 2 and Photograph 3). The hyphen has a flat roof and is clad with scored concrete (Photograph 4). Entry is gained through a pair of glazed metal doors with a transom above. A similar entry onto a second -story balcony is located directly above. Fenestration in the building hyphen consists of full -height, fixed windows with black anodized frames. The 1967-constructed portion of the facility abuts the west side of the two-story building hyphen. This single -story building section has a T-shaped plan and an east -west orientation (Photograph 3). The building is characterized by a flat roof with deep eaves and fascia that is supported by repeating narrow, concrete pylons with wood sheathing on all sides (Photograph 3 and Photograph 5). It includes full - height, tinted fixed windows with black anodized frames. Primary entry into this section and the main entrance to the entire facility is through a pair of glass double doors with black anodized frames on the east end of the north -facing facade (Photograph 4). Photograph 3: North side of building complex, with two-story building hyphen on left, facing southeast, December 16, 2022. Photograph 4: Detail of north side of the building complex with two-story hyphen on left. Note the recessed window near the center of the frame faces an interior courtyard (see Photographs 15 and 16), facing south, December 16, 2022. 3 532 A secondary entry is through a pair of glass double doors with black anodized frames on the east end of the south side (Photograph 6). Photograph 5: Overview of west and south sides of building complex, facing northeast, December 16, 2022. Photograph 6: Detail of entry on south side, facing north, December 16, 2022. Like the north side of the facility, a two-story building hyphen built in 1984 connects the 1982constructed east half of the building and the 1967-constructed west half of the building. It also features - 4 533 similar entry configurations on the first- and second stories (Photograph 7). East of the building hyphen is the south end of the 1962 portion of the facility that is accessed by a roll up door (Photograph 8). Photograph 7: Detail of entrances in two-story building hyphen on south side, facing north. Note the window at the center of the frame faces an interior courtyard (see Photograph 16). Photograph 8: Two-story office section (on left) and overhead entry door into laboratory section (on right) on south side, facing north, December 16, 2022. A single -story chemical storage addition, constructed in 1985, is at the southeast corner of the facility. The addition has a square plan, a flat roof, with scored panel lines in the concrete exterior (Error! Reference source not found.). Primary entry is gained through a pair of flush metal double doors on the 5 534 west side. A small, corrugated metal shed roof addition that was constructed between 1993 and 2002 is on the west side. Projecting boxed eaves are on the south and east sides above chain -link wall sections with integrated entry doors (Photograph 10). A single metal entry door is on the north end of the east side of the addition and protected by a cantilevered metal awning that is affixed to the addition and the 1962 portion of the facility (Photograph 11). Photograph 9: Southeast corner of building complex, facing northeast, December 16, 2022. Note this section was added in 1985. Photograph 10: Overview of south and east sides of building complex, facing northwest, December 16, 2022. 6 535 An overhead roll -up door is centrally located on the east side of the facility, and two glass double doors are in the north end of the south side, all located in the 1962 portion of the facility (Photograph 11 and Photograph 12). Photograph 11: South end of the east side of building complex, facing northwest, December 16, 2022. Note most of this side consists of the original 1962-constructed section. Photograph 12: North end of the east side of building complex, facing south December 16, 2022. Note most of this side consists of the original 1962-constructed section. 7 536 The facility contains three open-air courtyards. The east courtyard is in the 1962 portion of the facility. It is accessed from inside the building on the north and south ends through aluminum -frame glass double doors set into fixed window surrounds (Photograph 13 and Photograph 14). Ribbon windows line the entire length of the west side of the courtyard and three-quarters of the length of the east side. Two wood benches are sited on the north end of the courtyard. A variety of mature trees and shrubs are planted in the ground, including Bird of Paradise, Pygmy Palm, Foxtail Fern, Olive, Ivy, Japanese Aralia, and Oleander. Most of the courtyard is paved with concrete. Photograph 13: Southern entry into the east courtyard, facing north, December 16, 2022. Photograph 14: Northern entry into the east courtyard, facing northeast, December 16, 2022. 8 537 The central courtyard lines the west side of the two-story building hyphen. It was originally larger, but was encroached upon with the two-story building hyphen addition. This courtyard is visible from inside the building along two hallways that connect the 1967 building section to the 1984 building hyphen. Access into the central courtyard is on the south end through an anodized metal -frame glass door set into fixed window surrounds (Photograph 15). Full -height fixed windows line the north side of the central courtyard (Photograph 16). Plantings consist of several varieties of ferns of shrubs. A concrete walkway and repeating narrow, concrete pylons with wood sheathing line the west side of the courtyard. Photograph 15: Southern entry into central courtyard, facing north, December 16, 2022. 9 538 Photograph 16: Northern end of central courtyard, facing south, December 16, 2022. The west courtyard is in the 1967 portion of the facility. It is accessed from inside the building on the north end through flush double doors set into fixed window surrounds (Photograph 17). Offices with full - height, tinted fixed windows with black anodized frames and repeating narrow, concrete pylons with wood sheathing line the west and east sides of the courtyard (Photograph 18). A small water feature is sited near the center of the courtyard with a concrete pagoda. Plantings consist of several matures trees, a few shrubs, and two potted trees. Several rocks of various sizes have been placed adjacent to and north of the water feature. Dry -laid brick largely covers the courtyard floor with concrete around the perimeter. 10 539 Photograph 17: Northern entry into west courtyard, facing south, December 16, 2022. Photograph 18: Overview of west courtyard, facing southwest, December 16, 2022. 11 540 Property Development In October 1961, Royal Research Corporation (Royal Research), a scientific research and development enterprise, purchased 13 acres of undeveloped, agricultural -zoned land between Dublin Boulevard and Highway 50 from William T. and Alice K. Marsh. That same month Alameda County approved Royal Research's request to rezone the property into a special industrial zone to build a new research and development facility. At the time, Dublin was a small agricultural community with one school and one church, but a new 9,500-home development called San Ramon Village was underway on the north side of town. Royal Research surveyed the entire county to select a site to build their facility and chose this property because of the somewhat remote location. The company was already leasing a small office across the street at 11824 Dublin Avenue and were relying on the budding labor pool of new San Ramon Village residents (Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 1994 July 1: Appendix A; Oakland Tribune 1960 September 4; Oakland Tribune 1961 October 27; Oakland Tribune 1960 August 7). In 1962, Royal Research which manufactured enclosures for safe handling of radioactive and hazardous materials, commissioned construction of a 25,000-square-foot research and development facility on the subject property (Plate 1 and Plate 2). The building housed offices and small laboratory spaces with a central courtyard in the north end, and the main laboratory area in the taller south end. Construction of the facility totaled nearly $350,000 with an additional $350,000 for equipment and was completed by the end of the year (Stockton Daily Evening Record 1962 July 31; Daily Review 1962 August 22). Plate 1: 1962 architectural rendering of the Royal Research Corporation building, which is the east half of the extant facility. Note the east courtyard is in the building section in the foreground (Source: Daily Review 1962 August 22). Royal Research continued to occupy the facility until 1966 when it was sold to Hexcel Products, Inc. (Hexcel). Based in Berkeley, Hexcel was the largest developer and manufacturer of honeycomb, a structural material used in a number of applications, primarily associated with the aeronautics and aerospace industries. When looking to relocate from Berkeley, the executives at Hexcel sought a site somewhere between Carquinez Strait and Palo Alto, preferably near a college campus to draw from a technical labor pool for research and development, with the former Royal Research facility fitting its needs. Soon after the purchase, Hexcel announced a million -dollar, 20,000-square foot expansion of the research and development facility with a new administrative headquarters designed by San Francisco architecture firm Lackey, Knorr, Elliott & Associates. Hexcel closed their headquarters in Berkeley and relocated to Dublin and moved their manufacturing plants in Berkeley and Oakland to plants in Arizona, 12 541 Texas, and Maryland (Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 1994 July 1: Appendix A; Oakland Tribune 1966 May 18; Oakland Tribune 1967 November 12; San Francisco Examiner 1966 May 18; Contra Costa Times 1967 February 24). Plate 2: 1965 photograph showing the original 1962-constructed building with the visible courtyard (now the east courtyard) (Source: UCSB 1965). Hexcel's new headquarters addition, completed in early 1967, housed the engineering, marketing, finance and general administrative staff. The original 1962 section was utilized as laboratory space for further research and development (Plate 3). Hexcel president William S. Powell understood that technical employees were in great demand and wanted to entice new hires, so the building design included full - height tinted glass windows, courtyards, enclosed breezeways, and patios to provide outdoor views along with comfortable, carpeted workspaces, air conditioning, and taped music piped through an internal speaker system (Plate 4 and Plate 5) (Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26; Contra Costa Times 1967 February 24; Oakland Tribune 1967 November 12). The Hexcel facility remained the same until the 1980s. In 1984 construction of a two-story hyphen connected the 1962 and 1967 buildings, resulting in a central courtyard. A small lab and chemical storage addition was constructed at the southeast corner of the facility the following year (Oakland Tribune 1984 May 16; Oakland Tribune 1984 July 11; Oakland Tribune 1985 November 13). 13 542 Plate 3: 1967 architectural rendering of the Hexcel addition with the 1962 building section on the far left. The arrow on the left indicates the location of the central courtyard prior to enclosure and the arrow on the right indicates the location of the west courtyard (Source: Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26). Plate 4: 1967 photograph with view of west courtyard from office along the east side. Note the border of the courtyard water feature on the far right and original Irish moss planted as ground cover (Source: Oakland Tribune 1967 November 12). 14 543 Plate 5: 1967 photograph of a patio area with privacy screens added at northwest corner of the 1962 building section during the 1967 facility expansion. Note the privacy screens and signage are no longer extant (Source: Oakland Tribune 1967 November 12). Royal Research Corporation Royal Research Corporation, originally called Dublin Industries, was founded in Berkeley in 1959 by former Lawrence Radiation Laboratory staff (now known as the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory). The company focused on producing custom-made mechanical devices to handle radioactive materials. General Electric served as their primary customer for handling material at the Vallecitos Atomic Laboratory in nearby Sunol. In 1960, the company expanded into research, hiring Dr. William W.T. Crane, who headed heavy elements processing at Lawrence Radiation Laboratory from 1948 to 1958. Crane would later become president of the company. Dublin Industries merged with the Pasadena -based Royal Industries in August 1960, which was an engineering firm. After the merger, Dublin Industries was renamed Royal Research Corporation, operating as a subsidiary to Royal Industries (Daily Review 1962 August 22; Los Angeles Times 1957 October 11). The first major research contract obtained by Royal Research was to develop an isotopic power supply for the Atomic Energy Commission that resulted in the creation of thermo-electric generators for underwater seismic stations that could last several years. Within two years, Royal Research expanded research into vacuum devices to handle reactive materials, energy conversion, and microwave technology; 90 percent of their contracts were with the U.S. government (Daily Review 1962 August 22). In June 1963, Royal Industries, Inc. sold Royal Research to General Technology Corporation which included use of the Dublin plant (subject facility). Royal Industries, Inc. retained ownership of the plant before selling the facility to Hexcel Products, Inc. in 1966 (Pasadena Independent 1963 June 5; Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 1994 July 1: Appendix A). 15 544 Hexcel Corporation Hexcel Corporation can trace its formation to 1946 when two University of California alumni, Roger C. Steele and Roscoe T. "Bud" Hughes decided to experiment with new construction material technologies developed during World War II, including plastics, in Hughes' basement at his house in Berkeley. Steele's experimentation led to the creation of structural honeycomb, which he demonstrated at a government - sponsored plastics conference as the California Reinforced Plastics Company (Plate 6). This demonstration secured a research and development contract of his expandable honeycomb for use in military aircraft radar domes in 1948. That same year, the company hired chemist Ken Holland to oversee resin research and development. The company furthered their ties with the military in 1949 when they won a low -bid contract to develop honeycomb fuel cell support panels for B-36 bombers (Pederson, ed. 1999: 193; Oakland Tribune 1967 May 22; Hexcel.com 2023; Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26). i5 proud to be a new corporate citizen of the Son Ramon Valley. 111010* t 1111? 4 '1.4(4t Stib 1 �' 4/ 14 itVIIP114 " SP t" f? ft/#*4,0 of ; *•* tts--- 40j *It -00 pimp, kt. 40#• ► a 40444 it Plate 6: Photograph of Hexcel's structural honeycomb material (Source: Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26). 16 545 In 1954, the company changed its name to Hexcel Products Inc. and continued creating honeycomb in a variety of materials including plastic, aluminum, fiberglass and paper, resulting in the highest strength - to -weight ratio material on the market with excellent energy absorption properties. Although the technology was initially used in aerospace, implementation of paper materials expanded use into commercial and residential building materials for use in interior partitions and mobile homes, and well as furniture manufacturing. By the end of the decade, Hexcel ran its headquarters out of Berkeley in a shared warehouse building at 2332 Fourth Street and had opened manufacturing plants in Berkeley, Oakland, and Havre de Grace in Maryland (Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26; Pederson, ed. 1999: 193; Oakland Tribune 1959 September 17; San Francisco Examiner 1962 July 2). In the 1960s, Hexcel had several large contracts with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), military, and commercial aviation clients. In 1968 Hexcel acquired Coast Manufacturing and Supply Company in Livermore and diversified the company's product range beyond structural honeycomb to include reinforced plastics, industrial glass fabrics, structural adhesives, industrial resin compounds, and diffusion bonded assemblies. This shift occurred as the Federal government began to divest large-scale pursuits and the public's interest in government programs shifted following the moon landing and withdrawal from Vietnam in 1969. Using the new materials procured from the Coast acquisition, Hexcel designed and produced high-performance snow skis. These were the first commodity made for the direct retail market (Times Record News 1970 April 10; Hexcel.com 2023; Pederson, ed. 1999: 193-194). Hexcel continued to diversify its portfolio in the 1970s with the acquisition of a graphite weaving company and a knee, hip, and shoulder joint replacement manufacturer. By the end of the decade only half of their sales were from honeycomb (Pederson, ed. 1999: 194). An economic downturn and oil crisis at the end of the 1970s led to the sale of the ski and medical products and a returned focus on aviation and aerospace. The company secured a number of high value contracts, for example with NASA for components in the Columbia Space Shuttle, with Boeing, their largest customer accounting for 20 percent of total sales, and with the U. S. Air Force for its new B-2 bomber program that prompted construction of a new 160,000-square-foot manufacturing plant in Arizona. However, deregulation of the airline industry by President Ronald Reagan cut airline profits, leading to reductions of Hexcel's Boeing and Airbus orders (Hexcel.com 2023; Oakland Tribune 1988 June 6). The early 1990s were tumultuous for the company starting with a Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection filing in 1993. After layoffs and plant and asset sales, the company avoided bankruptcy. In 1996 Hexcel merged with two composites companies to improve vertical integration; the new combined firm had a total of 4,700 employees with 19 manufacturing plants in seven countries (Pederson, ed. 1999: 194-195). Since the late 1990s, Hexcel continued to lead research and development in honeycomb, carbon fiber, and resin structural materials. The company has contracts with a number of aerospace companies including Airbus, Boeing, SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Lockheed Martin. In May 2021, a groundbreaking ceremony was held in West Valley City, Utah for the company's new research and technology headquarters with plans to vacate the Dublin facility in 2023 (Hexcel.com 2023). Hexcel and NASA In 1958, NASA utilized Hexcel honeycomb in their first spacecraft, Pioneer 1. The satellite probe included eight square feet of fiberglass reinforced Hexcel honeycomb plastic that only weighed 15 ounces. At a press conference hosted by Hexcel president Roger C. Steele in October 1958, he lauded the company's honeycomb "structural sandwich" construction as the "highest strength to weight ratio of any material known to man" and could be used "to build a space vehicle of extraordinary strength with an absolute minimum of weight" (Oakland Tribune 1958 October 23). The special fiberglass reinforced plastic honeycomb was developed for radio and electrical transmission properties, and the structural sandwich construction created a heat resistant barrier to protect the internal instrumentation. Although Pioneer 1 17 546 was meant to orbit the moon, a programming error resulted in the satellite only traveling 71,300 of the 222,000 miles, but did collect data of the extent of the Earth's radiation belts (Concord Transcript 1958 December 8). Success of the structural integrity of Pioneer 1 led to more contracts between Hexcel and NASA. By the early 1960s, Hexcel developed cutting -edge materials for several space programs and missions including the Mariner Program satellites (1960-1975); Project Mercury spacecraft (1958-1961); Project Gemini spacecraft (1961-1966); and Apollo Program command and lunar module spacecraft (1960- 1972). Hexcel honeycomb protected John Glen as he became the first American to orbit the earth in February 1962 in Friendship 7, part of the Mercury program (Oakland Tribune 1962 September 23; Hexcel.com 2023; Contra Costa Times 1970 June 21). Hexcel continued research and development for NASA through the 1960s and created several types of honeycomb for NASA spacecraft. The Apollo 8 capsule held three astronauts when it left Earth's and orbited the Moon ten times in December 1968 and contained layers of honeycomb to create the ightweight but high -strength structural capsule shell. A cylindrical honeycomb called "tube -core" was installed under the astronauts' seats to help absorb G-force energy loads. A heatshield made of stainless -steel honeycomb and steel alloy sheets and an internal reinforced plastic honeycomb ablative heat shield were placed on the inside and outside of the capsule (Contra Costa Times 1968 December 4). This same structural and heat protection honeycomb was used in subsequent capsules in the Apollo program, including Apollo 9 (Plate 7) and Apollo 11. Hexcel also developed a new honeycomb used on the Apollo 11 lunar module landing struts and footpads for the first moon landing in July 1969. This specific honeycomb design crushed and folded -in on itself to a absorb the impact of the landing and prevent bouncing (Plate 8) (Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26; Contra Costa Times 1969 March 28; Times Record HONEYCOMB COCOON in their ten-day lunar rest flight, the Apollo 9 oslronauts were protected against Severe "G" forces and heat during blast-off and reentry by a virtual cocoon of Hex- cel aluminum honeycomb. Aluminum honeycomb farms the core of many sections of the Apollo spacecraft's inner structural shell, providing the greatest strength and rigidify at the lowest possible weight. Special cylindrical honeycomb devices from Haxcel installed under ilia crew's seats pralec+od ihern from excessive "G" loadings — pressures many times normal grcvily. And a hoot shield made of stainless sleet honeycomb core faced wiih steel alloy sheets helped protect the spacecraft and -crew from vaporijing in the heal of re-entry. Hexcel, which produces honeycomb for indus- trial cis well os aerospace applications, is heedquariered in Dublin, California. Plate 7: Drawing and description of Hexcel honeycomb for Apollo 9 (Source: Contra Costa Times 1969 March 28). 18 547 Dublin -On The -Moon Apc`.'.o astronauts were proPerted during missions la- the moon and back by honeycomb material made by Hekcel in Dublin. The command module, at top, con. Pained 1 — o launch heat ikieldi 2 — a re-entry heat shield; 3 — a 3trwcrurnl "sandwich", 4 — an inner shield artcl.Elrrg the pressurlted cabin; and 5 — "ribs" To ab• sorb impact_ The loner module, below. contained hon• eycomb material in its landing 4t1uta and footpads to absorb the shack of the landing and prevent rebound. Mexcel, headquoriered in DwbIIr, mpnufaciuros horsey, comb materials and a wide range of engineered ma• tarials in plants tkro ghDul the Unireri Stoles and Eurrp .. Plate 8: Diagrams showing where Hexcel honeycomb was utilized on the Apollo 11 lunar landing module (Source: Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26). News 1970 April 10). After the moon landing, a local newspaper interviewed proud Hexcel employees at the headquarters in Dublin. While the newspaper noted that 300,000 people from 20,000 companies were involved in some capacity with the moon landing, Hexcel stood out because they "developed the best material NASA has found for use in spacecraft" (Argus 1969 July 24). Hexcel continued its NASA relationship into the 1970s and development of the Space Shuttle program. Hexcel honeycomb was used in the nose cap, payload doors, and wings in the first space shuttle Columbia that launched in April 1981. Columbia flew 28 missions during its 22 years in service (NASA.gov 2023; Hexcel.com 2023). Hexcel also supplied $1 million worth of materials for the Discovery Space Shuttle launched in August 1984. Honeycomb was used in the cargo bay doors, a new carbon composite heat shield material that could be used on several missions before needing to be replaced and wove high -temperature resistant ceramic fabric to line the flight crew's cabin to protect them from extreme heat upon earth re- entry (Seguin Gazette Enterprise 1988 September 30; Hexcel.com 2023). Lackey, Knorr & Elliott (1967 Hexcel addition) Hexcel commissioned the large headquarters addition to the 1962 former Royal Research facility in 1967 from architects Lackey, Knorr & Elliott, based out of San Francisco. Donald R. Knorr and Edward P. Elliott formed their first partnership Knorr -Elliott & Associates in 1958. The firm received awards of excellence from Architectural Record for residential designs in 1958 and 1963; a citation for the Dux Incorporated furniture company headquarters and warehouse in South San Francisco in 1963; a merit award for a dental plaza in Stanford in 1963; and an environmental award for the Koret of California distribution plant in South San Francisco in 1968 (Plate 9) (PCAD 2023b; AIA 1970: 516). In 1967, the partnership included architect Lawrence Lackey, with the 1967 Hexcel addition appearing to be the only design produced by the collaboration (Oakland Tribune 1967 November 12). Lackey was an urban planner, architect, and landscape architect 19 548 based out of San Francisco, active between the late 1950s and 1970s. He was best known for the Master Plan he designed for the University of Fairbanks in Alaska in 1965 (PCAD 2023a; Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26). Plate 9: Architectural rendering of the Knorr -Elliott & Associates design for Koret of California distribution center (Source: San Francisco Examiner 1966 June 26). Contemporary and Brutalist Architecture The original architect of the 1962-constructed portion of the facility was not discovered in the historic record. This portion of the building was constructed with tilt -up concrete panels, which was a construction technique developed in the 1920s. Its methods were subsequently refined, and by 1962, when this building was constructed, tilt -up construction was common (Collins 1951 October: 1335-135; Jansen 1952 September: 243-245). The 1967-constructed portion of the facility was designed with a blend of Contemporary and Brutalist styles. The Contemporary style, popular between about 1940 and 1980, is characterized by strong roof forms including flat, gabled, shed, or butterfly roofs, typically with deep overhangs; large windows, often aluminum -framed; non-traditional exterior finishes including vertical wood siding, concrete block, stucco, flagstone, and mullion -free glass; angular massing; sun shades, screens, or shadow block accents; horizontally oriented commercial buildings; distinctive triangular, parabolic, or arched forms; "eyebrow" overhangs on commercial buildings, and integrated, stylized signage on commercial buildings (McAlester 2013: 628-632). The building also has elements of Brutalism, which was popular from the late 1950s to mid-1970s and commonly used for educational and civic buildings. Brutalism is characterized by unadorned rough concrete, heavy block shapes, large massing, flat roofs, and window voids in the larger concrete massing. This aesthetic emerged in post-war Europe and was derived from the French phrase "beton brut," which means raw or rough concrete. However, the 1967-constructed portion of the facility does not have the rough concrete finish seen in most Brutalist buildings and instead employs a stucco finish concrete throughout the exterior (PAST Consultants, LLC. 2009 June: 85-86). Historic Significance Criteria and Evaluation Man in Space National Historic Landmark Theme Study Congress passed Public Law 96-344 in 1980 which directed the Secretary of the Interior to produce a study that identified events and locations associated with the "Man in Space" theme to be brought into the National Park system and ways to present these significant locations, structures, and objects to the public. It also required evaluation of the resources identified with the Man in Space theme for recommendation as National Historic Landmarks (NHLs). The resulting study was first published in 1984 as "Man in Space: A National Historic Landmark Theme Study," prepared by Dr. Harry A. Butowsky. In it, Butowsky identified 23 research and development facilities, testing facilities and stands, astronaut training facilities, tracking stations, mission control centers, a launch pad, and the Saturn 5 Space Vehicle 20 549 that he recommended as NHLs and prepared NRHP Nomination Forms for each resource (Butowsky 1984 May: passim). Butowsky acknowledges that undoubtedly contractor -owned facilities and sites played significant roles in the United States's pursuit to the moon and subsequent space programs, however this document in its first phase does not identify or provide guidance about these properties. The original report does however identify four significant themes for the Man in Space context which resources would be considered historically significant. They include: 1. Technical Foundations before 1958; 2. The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon; 3. The Exploration of the Planets and the Solar System; and 4. The Role of Scientific and Communications Satellites. These four subthemes provided a foundation for identification of significant properties. However, this early report lacks the details to clearly spell out what types of properties would or would not be significant under these subthemes for modern NRHP analysis. A second phase of the report was published later in 1984 that identified another launch pad as well as three spacecrafts, which were not previously identified in the first report. The three spacecrafts, Mercury Friendship 7 (1962), Gemini 4 (1964), and the Apollo 11 Command Module (1969) were all located in the National Air and Space Museum at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. Butowsky declared the three spacecrafts as "nationally significant historic objects ... it is important to recognize the national significance of the objects having internal integrity which have contributed critically to the success of the space program and, together, form an integral chapter in that program's history" (Butowsky 1984 August:1-2). These spacecrafts represented a first, or breakthrough, for each program's mission. While the first phase of the report stated that the second phase would examine the importance of contractors, it was not included. Butowsky did not specifically call out any private company, but he described the use of Hexcel fiberglass honeycomb in the description of the Apollo 11 Command Module. All three of these spacecrafts contain honeycomb developed by Hexcel for NASA (Butowsky 1984 August: passim). California Register of Historical Resources Significance The criteria for listing historical resources in the CRHR are consistent with those developed for listing in the NRHP but have been modified for state use in order to include a range of historical resources which better reflect the history of California. An historical resource must be significant at the local, state, or national level under one or more of the following four criteria: 1. is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; 2. is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history; 3. embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or 4. has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation. CRHR 1 Under CRHR Criterion 1, the Hexcel facility at 11711 Dublin Boulevard is significant at the national level for its association with the Man in Space historic context under subtheme 2. The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon. Specifically, the research and development of materials by Hexcel were integral to the success of NASA's Pioneer 1, Project Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo. The honeycomb technology and materials developed by Hexcel allowed NASA to build strong, heat -resistant, yet lightweight spacecrafts that could withstand the stressors of space and protect its human occupants. Use of Hexcel honeycomb in the three NHL significant objects, Mercury Friendship 7Spacecraft (1962), Gemini 4 Spacecraft (1964), and the Apollo 11 Command Module (1969) are of fundamental importance to the United States and its success in the Space Race to the moon. Furthermore, Hexcel's crushable honeycomb used on the landing struts and footpads of the Apollo 11 lunar module were the first objects to touch the moon in July 1969 and were pivotal to the success of the moon landing. 21 550 While the Hexcel honeycomb utilized in Friendship 7 and the Gemini 4 spacecrafts was developed at Hexcel's first research and development lab in Berkeley, the Apollo 11 mission took place two years after Hexcel expanded the facility in Dublin into its research and development and administrative headquarters. This clear association with subtheme 2 demonstrates how Hexcel's Dublin facility played a significant role at the national level for the successful moon landing in 1969. Additional significance evaluation of Hexcel's Dublin facility is required, because it is not the only example of Hexcel's importance in The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon. Hexcel's first research and development facility was located in a shared warehouse at 2332 Fourth Street in Berkeley that they occupied between 1957 and 1967 (Oakland Tribune 1957 June 23; Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26). While this building is where Hexcel employees developed the first honeycomb used for NASA, the purpose-built research and development and administration headquarters built in Dublin is a better representation of the company's significance as a leader in structural honeycomb technology. Moreover, the building at 2332 Fourth Street in Berkeley appears to have undergone extensive remodeling new windows, doors, and scored concrete finish. As such, the building has lost integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling of the timeframe that Hexcel occupied the building. As discussed below, Hexcel's Dublin facility retains sufficient integrity to the established period of significance and is therefore, a better representation of Hexcel's significance under this criterion. CRHR 2 Under CRHR Criterion 2, this facility is not associated with a significant individual. The facility has been utilized by countless research and development staff, and research did not reveal any individuals who made demonstrably important contributions to history at the local, state, or national level. While Roger C. Steele is credited with creating Hexcel's first structural honeycomb, he developed it in the mid- to late 1940s in Roscoe Hughes' basement in Berkeley, and the honeycomb used on Friendship 7 and the Gemini 4 were developed at the company's facility in Berkeley. The house and the Berkeley laboratory have stronger associations with Steele's technological successes rather than the Hexcel facility in Dublin, therefore, this facility is not eligible under this criterion. CRHR 3 Under CRHR Criterion 3, this facility is not significant because it is not an important example of a type, period, or method of construction. The building is a combination of Contemporary and Brutalist styles. The Contemporary style proliferated for commercial and residential buildings in the post -World War II era throughout the Bay Area, California, and the nation. The overall facility is a typical example of this style and is unremarkable. It also lacks the high artistic value or distinctive design or engineering that would merit listing in the CRHR. Additionally, this facility does not represent the work of a master. There is no indication that the 1962- constructed portion of the facility is the work of a maser architect or would be considered a good example of a master architect's portfolio if further research determined that it was designed by a master architect. The 1967-constructed portion of the facility was a singular design through a collaboration of Lawrence Lackey and Knorr -Elliott & Associates. There is no indication that Lawrence Lackey would be considered a master. Likewise, while the Knorr -Elliott & Associates partnership received awards, there is no indication that either Knorr or Elliott rise to the level of a master architect. Therefore, the facility is not eligible under this criterion. CRHR 4 Criterion 4 is typically used to evaluate archaeological sites for their potential to yield data important to understanding the prehistory of the area or region. For built environment resources, under CRHR Criterion 4, this facility does not appear to have any likelihood of yielding important information about historic construction materials or technologies, and therefore, does not appear to be eligible under this criterion. 22 551 Integrity Analysis Historical resources eligible for listing in the CRHR must meet one or more of the criteria of significance and retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. The resource must retain integrity to its period of significance to be considered eligible for listing. The period of significance of the Hexcel facility under subtheme 2: The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon is 1967 when the company expanded and relocated to the Dublin facility and 1969 when Apollo 11 landed on the moon. Integrity is the authenticity of a historical resource's physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance. A resource that has lost its historic character or appearance may still have sufficient integrity for the CRHR if it maintains the potential to yield significant scientific or historical information or specific data. Historic integrity is made up of seven aspects: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The character -defining features of the Hexcel facility are: the interspatial connection between the 1962- constructed research and development laboratory building section on the east half and the 1967- constructed administration area on the west half; the repeating narrow, concrete pylons with wood sheathing and full -height, tinted fixed windows with black anodized frames on the administration building section; the lack of windows in the laboratory building section; and the east courtyard and west courtyards. Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event took place. The location of this facility has remained the same; therefore, the integrity of location remains intact. Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, and style of property. The facility was altered from the original 1967 Hexcel design with the two-story building hyphen added in 1984 and the small chemical storage addition at the rear of the facility in 1985. These changes only slightly modified the form and plan of the original 1967-constructed facility. Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. The immediate setting of the property continues to be a mixture of post-war residential and commercial construction. Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern of configuration to form a historic property. None of the changes made to the facility changed the materials used in the 1962 or 1967 building sections. The materials used in the 1984 and 1985 additions were sympathetic in both material, texture, and color to the extant building sections. Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. The additions made in 1984 and 1985 are complementary to the Hexcel design and do not diminish the integrity of workmanship of the 1962- or 1967-constructed portions of the facility. Feeling is a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. While the two-story building hyphen added in 1984 and the small chemical storage addition at the rear of the facility in 1985 have lightly affected integrity of design, the facility still conveys the feeling as a 1960s- constructed research and development facility. Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. The facility is where research and development occurred to put a man on the moon between 1967 and 1969, and at the time of recordation, was still occupied by Hexcel. The facility retains integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, and feeling as a 23 552 1960s-constructed research and development facility, and therefore, retains a direct association with the Man in Space historic context under subtheme 2. The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon. Historical Significance Conclusion Based on the results of this historical resource evaluation, the Hexcel facility at 11711 Dublin Avenue is eligible for listing in the CRHR under Criterions 1 because it is significant at the national level for its association with the Man in Space historic context under subtheme 2. The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon and retains sufficient integrity to its period of significance (1967 and 1969). The property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code and is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. References AIA Historical Directory of American Architects (AIA). 1970. "Knorr, Don Robert." Available: https://content.aia.org/sites/default/files/2018-09/Bowker_1970_K.pdf. Accessed January 2023. Argus. 1969 July 24. "Honeybee Plays A Part In Apollo Moon Voyage." 5. Butowsky, Dr. Harry A. 1984 May. Man in Space: National Historic Landmark Theme Study. n.p. Available at: https://historicproperties.arc.nasa.gov/downloads/man_in_space_butowsky.pdf. Accessed January 2023. . 1984 August. Man in Space: National Historic Landmark Theme Study, Phase 11. n.p. Available at: http://npshistory.com/publications/nhl/theme-studies/man-in-space-2.pdf. Accessed January 2023. Collins, F. Thomas. 1951 October. "Tilt -up Construction in the Western United States," Journal of the American Concrete Institute. Concord Transcript. 1958 December 8. "Moon Rocket Fails, But Space Science Gains." 1. Contra Costa Times. 1967 February 24. "New Research Facility Set for SR Valley." 1-2. . 1967 March 26. "Hexcel in Dublin - Honeycomb Goes to Work." 30. . 1968 December 4. "Hexcel Honeycomb To Cushion Apollo 8." 4C. . 1969 March 28. "Honeycomb Cocoon" [caption]. 8. . 1970 June 21. "SR Valley Sets Pattern For County's New Space -Age Industry." 7. Daily Review (Hayward, CA). 1962 August 22. "Dublin Research Firm - New Industry Plan $350,000 Plant." 8. Hexcel.com. 2023. "History & Timeline." Available at: https://www.hexcel.com/About/History-and- Timeline. Accessed January 2023. Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 1994 July 1. Results of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of the Hexcel Research and Development Facility, 11711 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California, Prepared for Hexcel Corporation. Jansen, Franklin G. 1952 September. "Tilt -Up Construction," CEC Bulletin, 6:9. Los Angeles Times .1957 October 11. "Century Eng. Wil Change Name to Royal Industries." Part Five, Page 9. McAlester, Virginia Savage. 2013. A Field Guide To American Houses. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf. 24 553 NASA.gov. 2023. "NASA Orbiter Fleet." Available https://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/shuttleoperations/orbiters/columbia_info.html . Accessed January 2023. at: Oakland Tribune. 1957 June 23. "Secretary" [classified advertisement]. 34. . 1958. October 23. "Berkeley Form Has Tole in First Moon Probe Vehicle." 34. . 1959 September 17. "Notes on Bay Commerce." 62. . 1960 August 7. "Two Eastbay Atomic Firms Merge, Plan for Expansion." 26. . 1960 September 4. "San Ramon Village Grand Opening: Celebration Starts Today at Model City. 2-R. . 1961 October 27. "Supervisors OK Expansion in Dublin Area." 11-E. . 1962 September 23. "Button Pusher: Canaveral Just Fires Cal Creations." 43. . 1966 May 18. "$1 Million Headquarters For Hexcel in Dublin." 46. . 1967 May 22. "News of Business, Industry." 13. . 1967 November 12. "Courtyards and Patios Upgrade Environment." 10-CM- 11-CM. . 1984 July 11. "Building Permits - Dublin." 62. . 1984 May 16. "Building Permits - Dublin." 64. . 1985 November 13. "Building Permits - Dublin." 16. . 1988 June 6. "Hexcel." B-3. Pacific Coast Architecture Database (PCAD). 2023a. "Lawrence Lackey." Available at: https://pcad.lib.washington.edu/person/3022/. Accessed January 2023. . 2023b. "Knorr - Elliott and Associates, Architects (Partnership)." Available at: https://pcad.lib.washington.edu/firm/1030/. Accessed January 2023. Pasadena Independent. 1963 June 5. "Royal Industries Sells Subsidiary." 19. PAST Consultants, LLC. 2009 June. San Jose Modernism: Historic Context Statement, prepared for Preservation Action Council of San Jose. Pederson, Jay P., Editor. 1999. International Directory of Company Histories, Volume 28. San Francisco, CA: St. James Press. San Francisco Examiner. 1962 July 2. "Industrial Engineer" [classified advertisement]. 36. . 1966 June 26. "Big Koret Shipping Center." 25. . 1966 May 18. "$1 Million Bay Unit for Hexcel." 71. Seguin Gazette -Enterprise (Seguin, Texas). 1988 September 30. "Discovery Carries Hexcel Products." 1- 2. Stockton Daily Evening Record. 1962 July 31. "Work Starts on Bay Area Plant." 4. Times Record News (Wichita Falls, Texas). 1970 April 10. "Apollo 13 Flight Materials Produced In Graham Plant." 5A. University of Santa Barbara Library (UCSB). 1965 May 15. Flight ID CAS-65-130, Frame 9-190 [aerial photograph]. VerPlanck, Christopher. "Department of Parks and Recreation form: 11711 Dublin Boulevard." P-01- 010656, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. 25 554 Attachment - Location Map Legend 0 Parcels County of Alameda Parcel Map 752.2 0 376.08 752.2 Feet WGS_1984_Web_Mercator Auxiiiary_Sphere County of Alameda 0 2015 This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 26 Appendix D: CaIEEMod Output Sheets This page intentionally left blank 557 Repel Redevelopment Construction Emissions By Pham nd Source Phase Year Category ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PMSO PMSO Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 011 N20 CO2e Demolition 2023 Off -Road O067 O6338 05317 1.06E-03 0 O0296 O0296 0 0.0278 0.0278 0 92.8197 92.8197 O0216 0 93.3606 Demolition 2023 Fug Dust 0 0 0 0 0.0309 0 0.0309 1.67E-03 0 1.67E-03 0 0 0 0 0 0 Demolition 2023 Hauling 1.26E-03 0.08 0.0181 3.60E-04 0.0103 6.80E-04 0.011 2.80E-03 6.50E-04 3.09E-03 0 35.457 35.457 7.50E-04 5.60E-03 37.1452 Demolition 2023 Vendor 7.00E-05 2.80E-03 8.60E-04 1.00E-05 1.30E-04 2.00E-05 1A0E-04 1.20E-04 2.00E-05 1.00E-04 0 13574 1.2574 2.00E-05 1.90E-04 1.3139 Demolition 2023 Worker 137E-03 8.70E-04 0.0108 3.00E-05 3.85E-03 2.00E-05 3.87E-03 1.03E-03 2.00E-05 1.00E-03 0 3.0013 3.0013 9.00E-05 8.00E-05 3.0287 Site Prep -Grading 2023 OH -Road 0.017 0.1973 0.1097 3.20E-04 0 6.83E-03 6.83E-03 0 6.29E-03 6.29E-03 0 27.6882 27.6882 8.95E-03 0 27.9121 Site Prep -Grading 2023 Fug Dust 0 0 0 0 0.01. 0 0.0114 1.26E-03 0 1.26E-03 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site Prep -Grading 2023 Hauling 3.00E-05 1.61E-03 3.70E-04 1.00E-05 2.10E-04 1.00E-05 2.30E-04 6.00E-05 1.00E-05 7.00E-05 0 0.7284 0.7284 2.00E-05 1.20E-04 0.7631 Site Prep -Grading 2023 Vendor 2.00E-05 9.20E-04 2.80E-04 0 1A0E-04 1.00E-05 1A0E-04 0.00E-05 1.00E-05 5.00E-05 0 0.1062 0.1062 1.00E-05 6.00E-05 04245 Site Prep -Gentling 2023 Worker 0.10E-04 2.80E-04 3.50E-03 1.00E-05 1.25E-03 1.00E-05 1.25E-03 3.30E-04 1.00E-05 3A0E-04 0 0.9696 0.9696 3.00E-05 3.00E-05 0.9785 Trenching 2024 OH -Road 3A0E-03 0.0299 0.0578 9.00E-05 0 1.02E-03 1.02E-03 0 1.31E-03 1.31E-03 0 7.6397 7.6397 2.17E-03 0 7.7015 Trenching 2031 Hauling a a D 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trenching 2024 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trenching 2024 Worker 1.50E-04 1.00E-04 1.21E-03 0 1.70E-04 0 1.80E-04 1.30E-04 0 1.30E-04 0 0.3574 0.3574 1.00E-05 1.00E-05 O3606 Bultling Cons009on-E4erior 2024 Off -Road 00822 0.7366 0.8868 1.60E-03 0 0.0325 0.0325 0 0.0313 0.0313 0 137.3069 137.3069 0.02 0 137.8069 Bultling Construction -Exterior 3031 Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bultling Construction -Exterior 2024 Vendor 2.69E-03 0.1198 0.0354 5.10E-01 0.0179 7.30E-04 0.0187 5.19E-03 7.00E-04 5.88E-03 0 51.9666 51.9666 7.20E-04 7.79E-03 54.3048 Bultling Construction -Exterior 2024 Worker 0.0167 0.011 0.142 LAOE-04 0.0542 2.70E-04 0.0511 0.0144 2.50E-04 0.0147 0 40.7957 40.7957 1.11E-03 1.10E-03 41.1533 Paving 2024 Off -Road 0.0104 0.0979 0.1466 2.30E-04 0 1.69E-03 1.69E-03 0 1.33E-03 1.33E-03 0 19.6486 19.6486 6.21E-03 0 19.8037 Paving 2024 Paving 2.51E-03 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 a 0 Paving 3031 Hauling a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 Paving 3021 Vendor 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 Paving 2024 Worker SAOE-04 3.50E-04 1.58E-03 1.00E-05 1.75E-03 1.00E-05 1.76E-03 1.60E-04 1.00E-05 1.70E-04 0 1.3166 1.3166 1.00E-05 1.00E-05 1.3281 Building Interior- Arch Coating 2024 Off -Road 5.31E-03 0.0411 0.0675 1.10E-04 0 1.71E-03 1.71E-03 0 1.73E-03 1.73E-03 0 9.3932 9.3932 1.29E-03 0 9.4254 Building ln[edw-Pxh Coating 2020 Arch Coating O.6917 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Building ln[edw-Pxh Coating 2021 Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Building ln[edw-Pxh Coating 2021 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Building Interior- Arch Coating 2024 Worker 7.00E-04 1.60E-04 5.93E-03 2.00E-05 2.26E-03 1.00E-05 2.27E-03 6.00E-04 1.00E-05 6.10E-04 0 1.7038 1.7038 5.00E-05 5.00E-05 1.7187 Annual Emissions Summary ROG 2023 0.09 NOa 0.92 CO 0.67531 302 00018 Fugitive PM10 0.05848 Exhaust PM10 0.01 PM10 Total O09555 Fugitive PM2.5 0.01035 Exhaust PM2.5 0.03 PM2.S Total 004515 Rio- CO2 NBio-CO2 162.3278 Total CO2 162.3278 OIO 0.03147 N20 O00508 CO2e 164.9266 2024 Total 0.82 0.90 1.04 1.96 1.34785 2.02316 0.00304 0.00080 0.07658 0.13506 0.04 0.08 O11796 0.21362 0.02078 0.03113 0.04 0.07 0.10561 270.1285 032.0563 270.1285 032.0563 0.03193 0.0630 0.00899 0.01507 273.603 038.5296 Average Daily Emissions (I bs Construction Start Date 9/1/2023 Constructor End Date 8/30/2024 Constructor Work Days 261 ROG NOx Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.S 6.92 14.98 060 0.57 Hemel Redevelopment Operational Emissions Summary Proposed Project Emissions Existing Emissions ROG NOx CO 502 Fugitive PM10 ExhaustPM10 PM30 Total Fugitive PM2.5 ExhaustPM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr Mr/yr Area 0.5707 3.00E-05 2.83E-03 0 0 1.00E-05 1.00E-05 0 1.00E-05 1.00E-05 0 5.52E-03 5.52E-03 1.00E-05 0 5.88E-03 Energy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111.9466 111.9466 0.0181 2.20E-03 113.0535 Mobile 0.1066 0.2351 1.3549 4.85E-03 0.5324 3.46E-03 0.5358 0.1422 3.23E-03 0.1455 0 448.1329 448.1329 0.0126 0.0199 454.3616 Stationary 7.18E-03 0.0201 0.0183 3.00E-05 0 1.06E-03 1.06E-03 0 1.06E-03 1.06E-03 0 3.332 3.332 4.70E-04 0 3.3437 Waste 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26.0945 0 26.0945 1.5421 0 64.648 Water 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.887 14.6592 23.5463 0.9152 0.0218 52.9335 Total 0.68448 0.25523 1.37603 0.00488 0.5324 0.00453 0.53687 0.1422 0.0043 0.14657 34.9815 578.07622 613.05782 2.48848 0.0439 688.34618 ROG NOx CO 502 Fugitive PM10 ExhaustPM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 ExhaustPM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio-0O2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr Mr/yr Area 0.2898 2.00E-05 1.87E-03 0 0 1.00E-05 1.00E-05 0 1.00E-05 1.00E-05 0 3.64E-03 3.64E-03 1.00E-05 0 3.87E-03 Energy 9.12E-03 0.0829 0.0696 5.00E-04 0 6.30E-03 6.30E-03 0 6.30E-03 6.30E-03 0 140.4201 140.4201 9.85E-03 2.64E-03 141.4526 Mobile 0.3079 0.3914 2.9138 6.27E-03 0.6425 4.70E-03 0.6472 0.1716 4.38E-03 0.176 0 579.0834 579.0834 0.0368 0.0299 588.9222 Waste 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9683 0 0.9683 0.0572 0 2.3988 Water 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9.7838 15.4395 25.2233 1.0074 0.024 57.569 Total 0.60682 0.47432 2.98527 0.00677 0.6425 0.01101 0.65351 0.1716 0.01069 0.18231 10.7521 734.94664 745.69874 1.11126 0.05654 790.34647 ROG NOx PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Proposed Project Annual Emissions (tons) 0.68 0.26 0.54 0.15 Existing Emissions (tons) 0.61 0.47 0.65 0.18 Net Emissions (tons) 0.08 -0.22 -0.12 -0.04 Average Daily Emissions (lbs) 0.60 -1.69 -0.90 -0.27 Working Days per Year 260 GHG Emissions Summary MT CO2e Total Construction 439 Amortized Construction 15 Area 0 Energy 113 Mobile 454 Stationary 3 Waste 65 Water 53 Total Annual Emissions 703 Existing Emission 790 Net Emissions -87 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Hexcel Redevelopment Project Alameda County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses I Size I Metric 1 Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building • 12.00 + 1000sgft ; 0.28 12,000.00 1 0 + t General Office Building • 6.00 + 1000sgft ; 0.14 6,000.00 i 0 General Light Industry • 36.50 + 1000sgft ; 0.84 36,500.00 1+ 0 1 Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail • 70.80 + 1000sgft ; 3.33 70,804.00 i 0 Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces • 99.11 + 1000sgft ; 2.28 99,106.00 + 0 4 1 F I Parking Lot • 84.52 1000sgft 1.94 84,515.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Climate Zone 5 Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company CO2 Intensity (Ib/MWhr) 203.98 CH4 Intensity (Ib/MWhr) 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data 0.033 Project Characteristics - Land Use - Project specific land uses, square footages on 8.81-acre site. Construction Phase - Project specific construction schedule Off -road Equipment - Project specific construction equipment. Off -road Equipment - Project specific construction equipment. Off -road Equipment - Project specific equipment o, 0 c ad Equipment - Project specific construction equipment. Precipitation Freq (Days) 63 Operational Year 2025 N20 Intensity (Ib/MWhr) 0.004 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Off -road Equipment - Project specific construction equipment. Off -road Equipment - Project specific construction equipment. Trips and VMT - Vendor trips during demolition and grading to account for water truck trips. Demolition -related haul truck trips based on 20CY-trucks and 12,170 CY of demo debris. Grading haul trucks based on 200 CY material import, if needed. Demolition - Square footage of existing building Grading - Material cut/fill anticipated to balance. Vehicle Trips - Trip rate based on Final TIS for the project (W-Trans 2022). Construction Off -road Equipment Mitigation - Implementation of BAAQMD BMPs. Fleet Mix - LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MCY, HHD, LHD1, and LHD2 left as default fleet percentages; added OBUS, UBUS, SBUS, MCY, and MH to MDV category to account for 20% max trucks. Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps - Energy Use - Project would comply with City of Dublin Code: DMC Chapter 7.94.100 for commercial buildings - no natural gas infrastructure. Table Name Column Name Default Value 20.00 230.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 3.36 4.80 1.38 6.90 1.01 0.21 1.08 3.66 0.21 17.67 1. New Value tblConstructionPhase tblConstructionPhase tblConstructionPhase tblConstructionPhase tblConstructionPhase tblEnergyUse tblEnergyUse tblEnergyUse tblEnergyUse tblEnergyUse tblEnergyUse tblEnergyUse tblEnergyUse tblEnergyUse tblEnergyUse NumDays NumDays NumDays NumDays NumDays NT24E NT24E NT24E NT24NG NT24NG NT24NG T24E T24E T24E T24NG 22.00 107.00 65.00 21.00 34.00 5.56 5.12 1.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.70 9.43 0.58 0.00 tblEnergyUse - T24NG 18.14 0.00 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 35 Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM tblEnergyUse tblFleetMix tblFleetMix tblFleetMix tblFleetMix tblFleetMix tblFleetMix tblGrading tblGrading tblGrading tblLandUse tblLandUse tblLandUse tblLandUse tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment •- (J7 tblOffRoadEquipment a) tblOffRoadEquipment • T24NG • 1.17 0.00 • MCY 0.02 0.00 i r 4 • MDV 0.11 0.14 i r 4 • MH 2.4230e-003 0.00 i r 4 • OBUS 7.9000e-004 0.00 i r 4 • SBUS 3.4300e-004 0.00 i r 4 • UBUS 5.6000e-004 0.00 i r 4 • AcresOfGrading 36.75 20.00 r 4 • MaterialExported 0.00 7,000.00 r 4 • Materiallmported 0.00 6,800.00 r 4 • LandUseSquareFeet 70,800.00 70,804.00 r 4 • LandUseSquareFeet 99,110.00 99,106.00 r 4 • LandUseSquareFeet 84,520.00 84,515.00 r 4 • LotAcreage 1.63 3.33 r 4 • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00 r 4 • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00 r 4 • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 r 4 • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 2.00 r 4 • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 3.00 r 4 • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 4.00 r 4 • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 r 4 • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 r 4 • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 r 4 • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 r 4 • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 r 4 • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 r 4 • UsageHours 6.00 7.00 r 4 • UsageHours 8.00 7.00 • UsageHours •8.00 7.00 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 35 Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblTripsAndVMT tblTripsAndVMT tblTripsAndVMT tblTripsAndVMT tblVehicleTrips tblVehicleTrips tblVehicleTrips tblVehicleTrips tblVehicleTrips tblVehicleTrips tblVehicleTrips tblVehicleTrips tblVehicleTrips • UsageHours • 8.00 7.00 • UsageHours 8.00• 7.00 • r 4 • UsageHours 8.00 7.00 r 4 • UsageHours 8.00 7.00 r 4 • UsageHours 8.00 7.00 r 4 • UsageHours 8.00 7.00 r 4 • UsageHours i 8.00 7.00 r 4 • UsageHours 8.00 7.00 r 4 • UsageHours i 8.00 0.00 r 4 • UsageHours 8.00 6.00 r 4 • UsageHours 8.00 7.00 • r 4 • HaulingTripNumber 285.00 1,217.00 r 4 • HaulingTripNumber 1,725.00 25.00 r 4 • VendorTripNumber 0.00 2.00 r 4 • VendorTripNumber 0.00 2.00 r 4 • ST_TR 1.99 13.53 • i r 4 ST_TR• 2.21 0.00 i r 4 • ST_TR 1.74 0.00 • i r 4 SU_TR• 5.00 13.53 i r 4 SU_TR• 0.70 0.00 i r 4 SU_TR• 1.74 0.00 i r 4 WD_TR• 4.96 13.53 i r 4 • WD_TR 9.74 0.00 i • WD TR • 1.74 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NO1 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2023 •i 0.0871 0.9176 : 0.6754 1.8100e- 0.0584 0.0371 0.0956 0.0104 0.0348 0.0451 • 0.0000 i 162.3278 : 162.3278 0.0315 6.0800e- 164.9265 003 ' 003 i r J J J J J J J J 1r J J J T 2024 • 0.8163 1.0374 1.3478 3.0400e- 0.0766 0.0414 0.1179 0.0208 0.0396 0.0604 • 0.0000 i 270.1284 270.1284 0.0319 8.9800e- 273.6029 003 : • 003 i Maximum 0.8163 1.0374 1.3478 3.0400e- 0.0766 0.0414 0.1179 0.0208 0.0396 0.0604 0.0000 270.1284 270.1284 0.0319 8.9800e- 273.6029 11 003 003 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2023 -i 0.0871 0.9176 0.6754 1.8100e- 0.0352 0.0371 0.0723 , 7.0900e- 0.0348 0.0419 • 0.0000 i 162.3277 162.3277 0.0315 6.0800e- 164.9263 003 003 ; 003 i J J J J J J J J w J J J T 2024 • 0.8163 1.0374 1.3478 3.0400e- 0.0766 0.0414 0.1179 0.0208 0.0396 0.0604 • 0.0000 i 270.1282 270.1282 0.0319 8.9800e- 273.6027 003 • 003 i Maximum 0.8163 1.0374 1.3478 3.0400e- 0.0766 0.0414 0.1179 0.0208 0.0396 0.0604 0.0000 270.1282 270.1282 0.0319 8.9800e- 273.6027 11 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 35 Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.22 0.00 10.89 10.47 0.00 3.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 9-1-2023 11-30-2023 0.7872 0.7872 2 12-1-2023 2-29-2024 0.4353 0.4353 3 3-1-2024 5-31-2024 0.5942 0.5942 4 6-1-2024 8-31-2024 1.0085 1.0085 Highest 1.0085 1.0085 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 4 0.5707 3.0000e- : 2.8300e- 0.0000 : 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- • 0.0000 5.5200e- 5.5200e- 1.0000e- 1 0.0000 5.8800e- �i 005 003 1 005 005 005 005 : 003 003 005 I i 003 ;I Energy •i 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 111.9466 111.9466 0.0181 1 2.2000e- 113.0535 •I 1 .� 1 003 i ;I1 i Mobile •i 0.1066 0.2351 1 1.3549 4.8500e- 0.5324 1 3.4600e- 0.5358 0.1422 3.2300e- 0.1455 • 0.0000 448.1329 448.1329 0.0126 1 0.0199 454.3616 •I 1 003 003 003 •I .1 1 i Stationary •i 7.1800e- 0.0201 I 0.0183 3.0000e- : 1.0600e- 1.0600e- 1.0600e- 1.0600e- • 0.0000 3.3320 3.3320 4.7000e- 1 0.0000 3.3437 :: 003 005 : 003 003 003 003 004 ;I Waste •I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 26.0945 0.0000 26.0945 1.5421 0.0000 64.6480 Water • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 8.8870 • 14.6592 23.5463 0.9152 0.0218 52.9335 Total 0.6845 0.2552 1.3760 4.8800e- 0.5324 4.5300e- 0.5369 0.1422 4.3000e- 0.1465 34.9815 578.0762 613.0577 2.4884 0.0439 688.3461 003 003 003 c.n CA tJ1 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 2.2 Overall Operational Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr 1 Area •i 0.5707 3.0000e- 2.8300e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1 1.0000e- 1.0000e- • 0.0000 ' 5.5200e- 5.5200e- 1.0000e- : 0.0000 5.8800e- •I 005 003 005 005 I 005 005 : 003 003 005 I i 003 .1 Energy .1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 111.9466 111.9466 0.0181 : 2.2000e- 113.0535 9i : i 003 i ,I 1.J Mobile •1 0.1066 0.2351 1.3549 4.8500e- 0.5324 3.4600e- 0.5358 1 0.1422 3.2300e- 0.1455 • 0.0000 i 448.1329 448.1329 0.0126 : 0.0199 454.3616 9003 003 003 : .1 i Stationary .1 7.1800e- 0.0201 0.0183 3 0000e- 1.0600e- 1.0600e- ' 1.0600e- 1.0600e- • 0.0000 i 3.3320 3.3320 4.7000e- 1 0.0000 3.3437 :: 003 005 003 003 003 003 : 004 Waste .1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 26.0945 i 0.0000 26.0945 1.5421 0.0000 64.6480 • • Water •I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 8.8870 i 14.6592 23.5463 0.9152 0.0218 52.9335 • • Total 0.6845 0.2552 1.3760 4.8800e- 0.5324 4.5300e- 0.5369 0.1422 4.3000e- 0.1465 34.9815 578.0762 613.0577 2.4884 0.0439 688.3461 003 003 003 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 :Demolition :Demolition 19/1/2023 :11/30/2023 5: 65: • - - r 4 T --- -� --- 2 a) :Site Prep - Grading :Grading :12/1/2023 :12/29/2023 5. 21 : CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 35 Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM 3 •Trenching - Foundation 4 :Building Construction Exterior 5 :Paving 6 :Building Interior - Architectural •Coating •Trenching !Building Construction Paving :Architectural Coating • 1 /1 /2024 •2/1 /2024 5' 24 I2/1/2024 :6/28/2024 i 5: 107: 4 17/1 /2024 :8/15/2024 i 5: 34 • r 4� '--- --- —I---- — •8/1/2024 :8/30/2024 5' 22' Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 20 Acres of Paving: 4.22 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non -Residential Indoor: 187,956; Non -Residential Outdoor: 62,652; Striped Parking Area: 11,017 (Architectural Coating — sqft) OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type 1 Amount Usage Hours I Horse Power I Load Factor Demolition :Concrete/Industrial Saws ; 21 7.00! 81: 0.73 Demolition :Excavators ; 1+ 7.00! 158 0.38 Demolition :Rubber Tired Dozers ; 2+ 7.00! 247 0.40 Demolition +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 1+ 6.00! 97 0.37 Site Prep - Grading :Excavators ; 1+ 7.00! 158 0.38 Site Prep - Grading :Graders ; 4+ 7.00! 187 0.41 Site Prep - Grading :Rubber Tired Dozers ; 0+ 0.00! 247 0.40 Site Prep - Grading +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 1+ 6.00! 97 0.37 +; Building Construction Exterior :Cranes ; 1+ 7.00! 231: 0.29 - --+ t Building Construction Exterior :Forklifts ; 21 7.00! 897 0.20 - --+ t Building Construction Exterior :Generator Sets ; 3 7.00! 847 0.74 Building Construction Exterior +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 1+ 7.00! 97 0.37 --+ t Building Construction Exterior :Welders ; 1 I 7.00! 467 0.45 Paving :Cement and Mortar Mixers ; 1+ 7.00! 9 0.56 + ; Pavinn :Pavers ; 1 ; 7.00! 1307' 0.42 al a Pay :Paving Equipment 1.1: 7.00: 132: 0.36 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 35 Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Paving • Rollers Paving +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Building Interior - Architectural Coating :Aerial Lifts Building Interior - Architectural Coating +Air Compressors Trenching - Foundation :Excavators Trenching - Foundation :Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1• 1 2 2 1 1• 7.00 7.00 i 7.00 i 7.00 i 7.00 i 7.00: 80• 97: 63• 78• 158• 97• 0.38 0.37 0.31 0.48 0.38 0.37 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 6: 15.00• 2.00: 1,217.00: 10.80: Site Prep - Grading 6; 15.00' 2.00 i 25.00 i 10.80 1 Building Construction 8: 128.00 51.00 i 0.00: 10.80 Paving 5; 13.00 0.00i 0.00: 10.80: • -i 1 ' Building Interior 4; 26.00• 0.001 0.00: 10.801 F i- t Trenching - • 2: 5.00: 0.00: 0.00' 10.80: • 7.30; 20.00: LD_Mix HDT_Mix 7.30: 20.00: LD_Mix 7.30: 20.00: LD_Mix 7.30: 20.00: LD_Mix 7.30: 20.00: LD_Mix HDT_Mix HDT_Mix HDT_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT HHDT HHDT HHDT HHDT 7.30• 20.00•LD_Mix :HDT_Mix •HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Water Exposed Area CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.2 Demolition - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •i i 0.0309 0.0000 0.0309 4.6700e- 0.0000 4.6700e- ■ 0.0000 i 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003 003 Off -Road • 0.0670 0.6338 0.5317 1.0600e- 0.0296 0.0296 0.0278 0.0278 • 0.0000 i 92.8197 92.8197 0.0216 0.0000 93.3606 003 • Total 0.0670 0.6338 0.5317 1.0600e- 0.0309 0.0296 0.0604 4.6700e- 0.0278 0.0324 0.0000 92.8197 92.8197 0.0216 0.0000 93.3606 il 003 003 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 1.2600e- ' 0.0800 1 0.0181 3.6000e- 0.0103 6.8000e- ' 0.0110 2.8400e- 6.5000e- 3.4900e- • 0.0000 35.4570 1 35.4570 7.5000e- 5.6000e- 37.1452 003 i 004 004 003 004 003 004 003 i Vendor • 7.0000e- 2.8400e- 8.6000e- 1.0000e- 4.3000e- 2.0000e- 4.4000e- 1.2000e- 2.0000e- 1.4000e- • 0.0000 1.2574 1.2574 2.0000e- 1.9000e- 1.3139 005 003 004 005 004 005 004 004 005 004 005 004 i Worker • 1.2700e- 8.7000e- 0.0108 3.0000e- 3.8500e- 2.0000e- 3.8700e- 1.0300e- 2.0000e- 1.0400e- • 0.0000 3.0013 3.0013 9.0000e- 8.0000e- 3.0287 • 003 004 005 003 005 003 003 005 003 : • 005 005 i Total 2.6000e- 0.0837 0.0298 4.0000e- 0.0146 7.2000e- 0.0153 3.9900e- 6.9000e- 4.6700e- 0.0000 39.7156 39.7156 8.6000e- 5.8700e- 41.4877 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 003 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.2 Demolition - 2023 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •i i 0.0139 0.0000 0.0139 2.1000e- 0.0000 2.1000e- ■ 0.0000 i 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003 003 Off -Road • 0.0670 0.6338 0.5317 1.0600e- 0.0296 0.0296 0.0278 0.0278 ■ 0.0000 i 92.8196 92.8196 0.0216 0.0000 93.3605 003 • Total 0.0670 0.6338 0.5317 1.0600e- 0.0139 0.0296 0.0434 2.1000e- 0.0278 0.0299 0.0000 92.8196 92.8196 0.0216 0.0000 93.3605 il 003 003 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 4 1.2600e- 1 0.0800 : 0.0181 3.6000e- 0.0103 6.8000e- ' 0.0110 2.8400e- 6.5000e- 3.4900e- ■ 0.0000 35.4570 : 35.4570 7.5000e- 5.6000e- 37.1452 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 003 i Vendor • 7.0000e- 2.8400e- 8.6000e- 1.0000e- 4.3000e- 2.0000e- 4.4000e- 1.2000e- 2.0000e- 1.4000e- ■ 0.0000 1.2574 1.2574 2.0000e- 1.9000e- 1.3139 005 003 004 005 004 005 004 004 005 004 005 004 i Worker • 1.2700e- 8.7000e- 0.0108 3.0000e- 3.8500e- 2.0000e- 3.8700e- 1.0300e- 2.0000e- 1.0400e- ■ 0.0000 3.0013 3.0013 9.0000e- 8.0000e- 3.0287 • 003 004 005 003 005 003 003 005 003 : • 005 005 i Total 2.6000e- 0.0837 0.0298 4.0000e- 0.0146 7.2000e- 0.0153 3.9900e- 6.9000e- 4.6700e- 0.0000 39.7156 39.7156 8.6000e- 5.8700e- 41.4877 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 003 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.3 Site Prep - Grading - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •i I 0.0114 0.0000 0.0114 1.2600e- 0.0000 1.2600e- ■ 0.0000 i 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003 003 0ff-Road • 0.0170 0.1973 0.1097 3.2000e- 6.8300e- 6.8300e- 6.2900e- 6.2900e- • 0.0000 i 27.6882 27.6882 8.9500e- 0.0000 27.9121 004 003 003 003 003 : • 003 Total 0.0170 0.1973 0.1097 3.2000e- 0.0114 6.8300e- 0.0182 1.2600e- 6.2900e- 7.5500e- 0.0000 27.6882 27.6882 8.9500e- 0.0000 27.9121 004 003 003 003 003 003 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 3.0000e- 1 1.6400e- : 3.7000e- 1.0000e- 2.1000e- 1.0000e- 1 2.3000e- 6.0000e- 1.0000e- 7.0000e- • 0.0000 0.7284 : 0.7284 2.0000e- 1.2000e- 0.7631 005 003 1 004 005 004 005 004 005 005 005 005 004 i Vendor • 2.0000e- 9.2000e- 2.8000e- 0.0000 1.4000e- 1.0000e- 1.4000e- 4.0000e- 1.0000e- 5.0000e- • 0.0000 0.4062 0.4062 1.0000e- 6.0000e- 0.4245 005 004 004 004 005 004 005 005 005 005 005 i Worker • 4.1000e- 2.8000e- 3.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.2500e- 1.0000e- 1.2500e- 3.3000e- 1.0000e- 3.4000e- • 0.0000 0.9696 0.9696 3.0000e- 3.0000e- 0.9785 • 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 : • 005 005 i Total 4.6000e- 2.8400e- 4.1500e- 2.0000e- 1.6000e- 3.0000e- 1.6200e- 4.3000e- 3.0000e- 4.6000e- 0.0000 2.1042 2.1042 6.0000e- 2.1000e- 2.1660 004 003 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 004 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.3 Site Prep - Grading - 2023 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •i i 5.1200e- 0.0000 5.1200e- 5.7000e- 0.0000 5.7000e- ■ 0.0000 i 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003 003 004 004 Off -Road • 0.0170 0.1973 0.1097 3.2000e- 6.8300e- 6.8300e- 6.2900e- 6.2900e- • 0.0000 i 27.6882 27.6882 8.9500e- 0.0000 27.9121 004 003 003 003 003 : • 003 Total 0.0170 0.1973 0.1097 3.2000e- 5.1200e- 6.8300e- 0.0120 5.7000e- 6.2900e- 6.8600e- 0.0000 27.6882 27.6882 8.9500e- 0.0000 27.9121 il 004 003 003 004 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 3.0000e- ' 1.6400e- : 3.7000e- 1.0000e- 2.1000e- 1.0000e- 12.3000e- 6.0000e- 1.0000e- 7.0000e- • 0.0000 0.7284 : 0.7284 2.0000e- 1.2000e- 0.7631 005 003 I 004 005 004 005 004 005 005 005 005 004 i Vendor • 2.0000e- 9.2000e- 2.8000e- 0.0000 1.4000e- 1.0000e- 1.4000e- 4.0000e- 1.0000e- 5.0000e- • 0.0000 0.4062 0.4062 1.0000e- 6.0000e- 0.4245 005 004 004 004 005 004 005 005 005 005 005 i Worker • 4.1000e- 2.8000e- 3.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.2500e- 1.0000e- 1.2500e- 3.3000e- 1.0000e- 3.4000e- • 0.0000 0.9696 0.9696 3.0000e- 3.0000e- 0.9785 • 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 : • 005 005 i Total 4.6000e- 2.8400e- 4.1500e- 2.0000e- 1.6000e- 3.0000e- 1.6200e- 4.3000e- 3.0000e- 4.6000e- 0.0000 2.1042 2.1042 6.0000e- 2.1000e- 2.1660 004 003 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 004 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.4 Trenching - Foundation - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 3.4000e- 0.0299 0.0578 9.0000e- 1.4200e- 1.4200e- 1.3100e- 1.3100e- ■ 0.0000 i 7.6397 7.6397 2.4700e- 0.0000 7.7015 003 005 003 003 003 003 • 003 Total 3.4000e- 0.0299 0.0578 9.0000e- 1.4200e- 1.4200e- 1.3100e- 1.3100e- 0.0000 7.6397 7.6397 2.4700e- 0.0000 7.7015 il 003 005 003 003 003 003 003 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling • 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 1 • 1 i i i Vendor •• 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker • 1.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.2400e- 0.0000 4.7000e- 0.0000 4.8000e- 1.3000e- 0.0000 1.3000e- • 0.0000 0.3574 0.3574 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 0.3606 004 004 003 004 004 004 004 005 005 i Total 1.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.2400e- 0.0000 4.7000e- 0.0000 4.8000e- 1.3000e- 0.0000 1.3000e- 0.0000 0.3574 0.3574 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 0.3606 004 004 003 004 004 004 004 005 005 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.4 Trenching - Foundation - 2024 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 3.4000e- 0.0299 0.0578 9.0000e- 1.4200e- 1.4200e- 1.3100e- 1.3100e- ■ 0.0000 i 7.6397 7.6397 2.4700e- 0.0000 7.7015 003 005 003 003 003 003 • 003 Total 3.4000e- 0.0299 0.0578 9.0000e- 1.4200e- 1.4200e- 1.3100e- 1.3100e- 0.0000 7.6397 7.6397 2.4700e- 0.0000 7.7015 il 003 005 003 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling • 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 1 • 1 i i i Vendor •• 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 . Worker • 1.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.2400e- 0.0000 4.7000e- 0.0000 4.8000e- 1.3000e- 0.0000 1.3000e- • 0.0000 0.3574 0.3574 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 0.3606 004 004 003 004 004 004 004 005 005 i Total 1.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.2400e- 0.0000 4.7000e- 0.0000 4.8000e- 1.3000e- 0.0000 1.3000e- 0.0000 0.3574 0.3574 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 0.3606 004 004 003 004 004 004 004 005 005 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.5 Building Construction Exterior - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr 0ff-Road •i 0.0822 0.7366 0.8868 1.6000e- 0.0325 0.0325 0.0313 0.0313 ■ 0.0000 i 137.3069 137.3069 0.0200 0.0000 137.8069 003 ■ Total 0.0822 0.7366 0.8868 1.6000e- 0.0325 0.0325 0.0313 0.0313 0.0000 137.3069 137.3069 0.0200 0.0000 137.8069 il 003 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling • 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 ' 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 • 1 i 1 i Vendor • 2.6900e- 0.1198 0.0354 5.4000e- 0.0179 7.3000e- 0.0187 5.1900e- 7.0000e- 5.8800e- • 0.0000 51.9666 51.9666 7.2000e- 7.7900e- 54.3048 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 003 i Worker •• 0.0167 0.0110 0.1420 4.4000e- 0.0542 2.7000e- 0.0544 0.0144 2.5000e- 0.0147 • 0.0000 40.7957 40.7957 1.1400e- 1.1000e- 41.1533 004 004 004 003 003 i Total 0.0194 0.1307 0.1774 9.8000e- 0.0721 1.0000e- 0.0731 0.0196 9.5000e- 0.0205 0.0000 92.7622 92.7622 1.8600e- 8.8900e- 95.4581 004 003 004 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.5 Building Construction Exterior - 2024 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr 0ff-Road •i 0.0822 0.7366 0.8868 1.6000e- 0.0325 0.0325 0.0313 0.0313 ■ 0.0000 i 137.3068 137.3068 0.0200 0.0000 137.8067 003 ■ Total 0.0822 0.7366 0.8868 1.6000e- 0.0325 0.0325 0.0313 0.0313 0.0000 137.3068 137.3068 0.0200 0.0000 137.8067 il 003 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling • 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 ' 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 • 1 i 1 i Vendor • 2.6900e- 0.1198 0.0354 5.4000e- 0.0179 7.3000e- 0.0187 5.1900e- 7.0000e- 5.8800e- • 0.0000 51.9666 51.9666 7.2000e- 7.7900e- 54.3048 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 003 i Worker •• 0.0167 0.0110 0.1420 4.4000e- 0.0542 2.7000e- 0.0544 0.0144 2.5000e- 0.0147 • 0.0000 40.7957 40.7957 1.1400e- 1.1000e- 41.1533 004 004 004 003 003 i Total 0.0194 0.1307 0.1774 9.8000e- 0.0721 1.0000e- 0.0731 0.0196 9.5000e- 0.0205 0.0000 92.7622 92.7622 1.8600e- 8.8900e- 95.4581 004 003 004 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road 4 0.0104 0.0979 : 0.1466 2.3000e- 4.6900e- 4.6900e- 4.3300e- 4.3300e- ■ 0.0000 i 19.6486 : 19.6486 6.2100e- 0.0000 19.8037 004 003 003 003 003 1 003 Paving • 2.5400e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003 • Total 0.0129 0.0979 0.1466 2.3000e- 4.6900e- 4.6900e- 4.3300e- 4.3300e- 0.0000 19.6486 19.6486 6.2100e- 0.0000 19.8037 il 004 003 003 003 003 003 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 4 0.0000 ' 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor •• 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker • 5.4000e- 3.5000e- 4.5800e- 1.0000e- 1.7500e- 1.0000e- 1.7600e- 4.6000e- 1.0000e- 4.7000e- • 0.0000 1.3166 1.3166 4.0000e- 4.0000e- 1.3281 • 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 : • 005 005 i Total 5.4000e- 3.5000e- 4.5800e- 1.0000e- 1.7500e- 1.0000e- 1.7600e- 4.6000e- 1.0000e- 4.7000e- 0.0000 1.3166 1.3166 4.0000e- 4.0000e- 1.3281 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 005 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.6 Paving - 2024 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road 4 0.0104 0.0979 : 0.1466 2.3000e- 4.6900e- 4.6900e- 4.3300e- 4.3300e- ■ 0.0000 i 19.6486 : 19.6486 6.2100e- 0.0000 19.8037 004 003 003 003 003 1 003 Paving • 2.5400e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003 • Total 0.0129 0.0979 0.1466 2.3000e- 4.6900e- 4.6900e- 4.3300e- 4.3300e- 0.0000 19.6486 19.6486 6.2100e- 0.0000 19.8037 il 004 003 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 4 0.0000 ' 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor •• 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker • 5.4000e- 3.5000e- 4.5800e- 1.0000e- 1.7500e- 1.0000e- 1.7600e- 4.6000e- 1.0000e- 4.7000e- • 0.0000 1.3166 1.3166 4.0000e- 4.0000e- 1.3281 • 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 : • 005 005 i Total 5.4000e- 3.5000e- 4.5800e- 1.0000e- 1.7500e- 1.0000e- 1.7600e- 4.6000e- 1.0000e- 4.7000e- 0.0000 1.3166 1.3166 4.0000e- 4.0000e- 1.3281 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 005 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.7 Building Interior - Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating •i 0.6917 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 i 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0ff-Road • 5.3100e- 0.0414 0.0675 1.1000e- 1.7400e- 1.7400e- 1.7300e- 1.7300e- • 0.0000 i 9.3932 9.3932 1.2900e- 0.0000 9.4254 003 004 003 003 003 003 : • 003 Total 0.6970 0.0414 0.0675 1.1000e- 1.7400e- 1.7400e- 1.7300e- 1.7300e- 0.0000 9.3932 9.3932 1.2900e- 0.0000 9.4254 il 004 003 003 003 003 003 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 4 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor •• 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker • 7.0000e- 4.6000e- 5.9300e- 2.0000e- 2.2600e- 1.0000e- 2.2700e- 6.0000e- 1.0000e- 6.1000e- • 0.0000 1.7038 1.7038 5.0000e- 5.0000e- 1.7187 • 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 : • 005 005 i Total 7.0000e- 4.6000e- 5.9300e- 2.0000e- 2.2600e- 1.0000e- 2.2700e- 6.0000e- 1.0000e- 6.1000e- 0.0000 1.7038 1.7038 5.0000e- 5.0000e- 1.7187 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 005 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.7 Building Interior - Architectural Coating - 2024 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating •i 0.6917 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 i 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0ff-Road • 5.3100e- 0.0414 0.0675 1.1000e- 1.7400e- 1.7400e- 1.7300e- 1.7300e- • 0.0000 i 9.3932 9.3932 1.2900e- 0.0000 9.4254 003 004 003 003 003 003 : • 003 Total 0.6970 0.0414 0.0675 1.1000e- 1.7400e- 1.7400e- 1.7300e- 1.7300e- 0.0000 9.3932 9.3932 1.2900e- 0.0000 9.4254 il 004 003 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling -i 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor •• 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker • 7.0000e- 4.6000e- 5.9300e- 2.0000e- 2.2600e- 1.0000e- 2.2700e- 6.0000e- 1.0000e- 6.1000e- • 0.0000 1.7038 1.7038 5.0000e- 5.0000e- 1.7187 • 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 : • 005 005 i Total 7.0000e- 4.6000e- 5.9300e- 2.0000e- 2.2600e- 1.0000e- 2.2700e- 6.0000e- 1.0000e- 6.1000e- 0.0000 1.7038 1.7038 5.0000e- 5.0000e- 1.7187 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 005 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated •i 0.1066 1 0.2351 : 1.3549 i 4.8500e- : 0.5324 i 3.4600e- i 0.5358 : 0.1422 i 3.2300e- 0.1455 . 0.0000 i 448.1329 : 448.1329 i 0.0126 : 0.0199 i 454.3616 •1 I I 1 003 I 1 003 1 1 1 003 1 1 1 q 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • el• + F + F F + F + r •J. F + F Unmitigated • 0.1066 • 0.2351 • 1.3549 4.8500e- • 0.5324 3.4600e- 0.5358 • 0.1422 3.2300e- • 0.1455 • 0.0000 • 448.1329 • 448.1329 0.0126 • 0.0199 454.3616 003 003 003 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT General Light Industry General Office Building General Office Building Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces Parking Lot Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail ; 494.00 ; 0.00 ; 0.00 ; 0.00 - ; 0.00 + 0.00 494.00 494.00 T 0.00 0.00 t 0.00 0.00 t 0.00 0.00 -r -.• 0.00 0.00 t 0.00 0.00• • 1,442,239 • • • • 1,442,239 r Total I 494.00 494.00 494.00 I 1,442,239 I 1,442,239 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip % Trip Purpose LLand Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass -by CO0neral Light Industry 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 28.00 13.00 • 92 5 3 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 35 Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Miles Trip % Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass -by General Office Building General Office Building Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces Parking Lot Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No • 9.50 9.50 9.50 9.50 9.50 7.30 7.30 7.30 -r 7.30 T 7.30 1 0.00 1 0.00 -r 7.30 7.30 0.00 1 0.00 7.30 T 7.30 ▪ 59.00 : 0.00 7.30 - 33.00 48.00 33.00 48.00 19.00 19.00 • • • • 77 19 4 77 19 4 0.00 • 0 0 0.00 • 0 0 41.00 • • 92 • 5 • 0 0 3 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use I LDA I LDT1 I LDT2 I MDV I LHD1 I LHD2 I MHD I HHD I OBUS I UBUS I MCY I SBUS I MH General Light Industry General Office Building Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces Parking Lot Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail 0.570753: a 0.5707531 a 0.5707531 a 0.5707531 0.056481; 0.056481: 0.056481: 0.056481: 0.179220: 0.140534: 0.020784: 0.005211 ; 0.013984: 0.013033: 0.000000: 0.000000 ; 0.000000: 0.000000 0.179220: 0.111941: 0.020784: 0.005211: 0.013984: 0.013033: 0.000790: 0.000560: 0.024477: 0.000343 0.179220: 0.111941: 0.020784: 0.005211: 0.013984: 0.013033: 0.000790: 0.000560: 0.024477: 0.000343 0.179220: 0.111941: 0.020784: 0.005211: 0.013984: 0.013033: 0.000790: 0.000560: 0.024477: 0.000343 0.000000 0.002423 0.002423 0.002423 0.570753: 0.056481 : 0.179220 : 0.111941 : 0.020784 : 0.005211 : 0.013984 : 0.013033 : 0.000790 : 0.000560 : 0.024477 : 0.000343 : 0.002423 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity •i 1 1 1 i 1 : 0.0000 : 0.0000 i : 0.0000 ; 0.0000 . 0.0000 Mitigated 9 I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 91 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 J 1 J J J J J 7 Electricity •▪ i 1 1 1 1 i 0.0000 : 0.0000 i i 0.0000 ; 0.0000 • ▪ 0.0000 Unmitigated 9 I 1 I I 1I 1 1 1 1 9 J J J J J J J J • NaturalGas 9▪ 1 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 0.0000 i i 0.0000 : 0.0000 i 1 0.0000 0.0000 • ▪ 0.0000 Mitigated 9 I 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 • NaturalGas • 0.0000 • 0.0000 • 0.0000 • 0.0000 • 0.0000 • 0.0000 • 0.0000 • 0.0000 • ▪ 0.0000 Unmitigated 111.9466 1 111.9466 i 0.0181 i 2.2000e- i 113.0535 003 i J J 1 1. 111.9466 : 111.9466 1 0.0181 i 2.2000e- : 113.0535 003 i J J J 1. 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 0.0000 I I I I I 1 i } } 4 0.0000 • 0.0000 • 0.0000 • 0.0000 • • 0.0000 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr t General Light I 0 ■1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 : 0.0000 Industry i : i 1- -r J J J J J J J J General Office i 0 •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 : 0.0000 Building : i• I- - J J J J J J J J Other Non- i 0 •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 : 0.0000 Asphalt Surfaces 1 : 1- 4 J J J J J J J J Parking Lot I 0 •1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I : I- • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Unrefrigerated i 0 }i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Warehouse -No i T Rail I , 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1. J J J 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • •• J J J 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 •• J J J 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • * T i i i 0.0000 r 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 rr r Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr t General Light I 0 ■1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 : 0.0000 Industry i : i 1- -r J J J J J J J J General Office i 0 •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 : 0.0000 Building : i• I- - J J J J J J J J Other Non- i 0 •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 : 0.0000 Asphalt Surfaces 1 : 1- 4 J J J J J J J J Parking Lot I 0 ■1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I : I- • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Unrefrigerated i 0 }i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Warehouse -No i T Rail I , 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1. J J J 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • •• J J J 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 •• J J J 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • * T i i i 0.0000 r 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 rr r Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr General Light Industry General Office Building General Office Building Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces Parking Lot Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail I 556625 • 51.5010 8.3300e- 1.0100e- 52.0103 i • 003 003 i i Total 111.9466 0.0181 2.1900e- 003 113.0535 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Mitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr General Light Industry General Office Building General Office Building Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces Parking Lot Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail I 556625 • i • i 51.5010 8.3300e- 1.0100e- 52.0103 003 003 i J J r 10.0647 1.6300e- 2.0000e- 10.1643 003 004 i J J r 20.1295 3.2600e- 3.9000e- 20.3285 003 004 i J J r 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 J J r 2.7369 4.4000e- 5.0000e- 2.7639 004 005 i 27.5144 i 4.4500e- 1 5.4000e- r 27.7865 003 004 , Total 111.9466 0.0181 2.1900e- 003 113.0535 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated •i 0.5707 i 3.0000e- : 2.8300e- : 0.0000 : : 1.0000e- : 1.0000e- : : 1.0000e- 1.0000e- • 0.0000 i 5.5200e- i 5.5200e- i 1.0000e- : 0.0000 i 5.8800e- 9 1 005 1 003 1 I I 005 I 005 I I 005 1 005 : ' 003 1 003 1 005 i 003 91 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 ,1 4 I. } 4 } } I. } T • i• } 4 1 Unmitigated • 0.5707 • 3.0000e- • 2.8300e- • 0.0000 . • 1.0000e- • 1.0000e- • . 1.0000e- • 1.0000e- • 0.0000 • 5.5200e- • 5.5200e- • 1.0000e- • 0.0000 • 5.8800e- 005 003 005 005 005 005 003 003 005 003 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural 9i 0.0692 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 Coating :: 9 J J J J J J J J •• J J J Consumer •i 0.5012 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products Landscaping • 2.6000e- 3.0000e- 2.8300e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- • 0.0000 5.5200e- 5.5200e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 5.8800e- 004 005 003 005 005 005 005 : 003 003 005 I 003 Total 0.5707 3.0000e- 2.8300e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 5.5200e- 5.5200e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 5.8800e- 005 003 005 005 005 005 003 003 005 003 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 6.2 Area by SubCategory Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural •i 0.0692 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 Coating :: Consumer .1 0.5012 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products Landscaping • 2.6000e- 3.0000e- 2.8300e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- • 0.0000 i 5.5200e- 5.5200e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 5.8800e- 004 005 003 005 005 005 005 • 003 003 005 i 003 Total 0.5707 3.0000e- 2.8300e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 5.5200e- 5.5200e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 5.8800e- 005 003 005 005 005 005 003 003 005 003 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category MT/yr • Mitigated •i • ei• Unmitigated •• 23.5463 : 0.9152 : 9 1 I q 1 1 I- I. 23.5463 : 0.9152 • 0.0218 i 52.9335 1 1 r 0.0218 : 52.9335 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use Mgal 1 MT/yr General Light 18.44063 / • 6.9036 1 0.2757 6.5800e- 15.7566 Industry 1 0 : 003 i i * General Office 13.19921 / • 3.2516 i 0.1046 2.5100e- 6.6134 Building i 1.9608 ; 003 i I J r Other Non- I 0 / 0 • 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Asphalt Surfaces i I Parking Lot I 0 / 0 • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 1 Unrefrigerated 116.3725 / }i 13.3911 i 0.5348 1 0.0128 Warehouse -No 1 0 Rail Total 23.5463 0.9152 0.0219 52.9335 co O CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 7.2 Water by Land Use Mitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use Mgal 1 MT/yr General Light Industry .-Ir General Office Building Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces Parking Lot Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail i 8.44063 / • i 0 6.9036 1 0.2757 6.5800e- 15.7566 003 i J * 3.2516 1 0.1046 2.5100e- 6.6134 003 i J * 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 J J 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i I 13.3911 i 0.5348 1 0.0128 * 30.5635 Total 23.5463 0.9152 0.0219 52.9335 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Category/Year Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I MT/yr Mitigated -I -I -I • iI- Unmitigated - 26.0945 : 1.5421 i 0.0000 i 64.6480 I I 1 I I F F r 26.0945 : 1.5421 : 0.0000 : 64.6480 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr General Light I 45.26 99.1874 1 0.5430 0.0000 22.7613 Industry I .1 • Office I' nil .1 . I 16.74 1 3.3981 1 0.2008 I I'General 0.0000 8.4186 Building j •I • Non- I' nil .1 . I 0 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 I'Other 0.0000 0.0000 Asphalt Surfaces 1 I Parking Lot 1 0 •.I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I 1 1- ii * Unrefrigerated I 66.55 'I 13.5091 1 0.7984 0.0000 33.4681 Warehouse -No I Rail I Total 26.0945 1.5421 0.0000 64.6480 co CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 34 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 8.2 Waste by Land Use Mitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr General Light Industry General Office Building Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces Parking Lot Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail f 45.26 •i j •I 9.1874 : 0.5430 0.0000 22.7613 J J t 3.3981 : 0.2008 0.0000 8.4186 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 J J t 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 13.5091 1 0.7984 i 0.0000 * 33.4681 Total 26.0945 1.5421 0.0000 64.6480 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Fire Pump Horse Power I Load Factor Fuel Type • 1 • 1: 50: 175: 0.73 Diesel CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 35 of 35 Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Equipment Type Number I Heat Input/Day I Heat Input/Year I Boiler Rating I Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 10.1 Stationary Sources Unmitigated/Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Equipment Type tons/yr MT/yr Fire Pump - •i 7.1800e- i 0.0201 i 0.0183 i 3.0000e- i i 1.0600e- ' 1.0600e- . ' 1.0600e- 1.0600e- r 0.0000 i 3.3320 i 3.3320 ' 4.7000e- i 0.0000 3.3437 Diesel (175 - 300 ; 003 005 003 003 003 1 003 } 004 HP) } Total 7.1800e- 0.0201 0.0183 3.0000e- 1.0600e- 1.0600e- 1.0600e- 1.0600e- 0.0000 3.3320 3.3320 4.7000e- 0.0000 3.3437 003 005 003 003 003 003 004 11.0 Vegetation CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations Alameda County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses I Size I Metric I Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Research & Development • 62.72 + 1000sgft ; 5.58 r 1- Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces • 140.72 1000sgft 3.23 4. 62,715.00 140,724.00 0 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Climate Zone 5 Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company CO2 Intensity (Ib/MWhr) 203.98 CH4 Intensity (Ib/MWhr) 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data 0.033 Precipitation Freq (Days) 63 Operational Year 2023 N20 Intensity (Ib/MWhr) Project Characteristics - Existing operations run only (2023). Land Use - Based on existing land uses and 8.81-acre site. Construction Phase - Operations only run - construction phases as placeholders. Off -road Equipment - Operations only run. Off -road Equipment - Operations only run. Trips and VMT - Operations only run. Architectural Coating - Operations only run. Vehicle Trips - Trip rate based on Final TIS for project (W-Trans 2022). Energy Use - The building was built in two phases dating 1962 and 1967 - use of historical data. 0.004 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Table Name tblArchitecturalCoating tblArchitecturalCoating tblArchitecturalCoating tblConstructionPhase tblConstructionPhase tblConstructionPhase tblConstructionPhase tblLandUse tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblOffRoadEquipment tblTripsAndVMT tblVehicleTrips tblVehicleTrips tblVehicleTrips I ConstArea_Nonresidential_Exterior r ConstArea Nonresidential Interior r r • ConstArea_Parking r • NumDays r • NumDays r • PhaseEndDate r r • PhaseEndDate r r • LotAcreage r • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount r • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount r • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount r • • OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount r • UsageHours r • UsageHours r • UsageHours r • UsageHours r • WorkerTripNumber r ST_TR r r SUTR r r 1 Column Name • WD_TR Default Value 31, 358.00 94, 073.00 8,443.00 20.00 20.00 4/25/2024 3/28/2024 1.44 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 16.00 1.90 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 New Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 3/29/2024 3/1/2024 5.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.08 11.08 11.26 11.08 2.0 Emissions Summary CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2024 •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 • i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 11 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2024 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 , 0.0000 , 0.0000 , 0.0000 , 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 • i 0.0000 , 0.0000 , 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 11 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ROG NOx CO 502 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LVi uarter IStart Date I End Date I Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) I Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied IHighest I 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area •i 0.2898 2.0000e- i 1.8700e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- i 1.0000e- 1.0000e- • 0.0000 i 3.6400e- 3.6400e- 1.0000e- 1 0.0000 3.8700e- ;� 005 I 003 005 005 I 005 005 • i 003 003 005 I i 003 •I J J J J J J J J • J J J • Energy 9i 9.1200e- 0.0829 i 0.0696 5.0000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- i 6.3000e- 6.3000e- • 0.0000 140.4201 140.4201 9.8500e- 1 2.6400e- 141.4526 •� 003 11 004 003 003 1 003 003 • .� 003 1 003 1 •l J J J J J J J J - J J J • Mobile •i 0.3079 0.3914 I 2.9138 6.2700e- 0.6425 4.7000e- 0.6472 I 0.1716 4.3800e- 0.1760 • 0.0000 i 579.0834 579.0834 0.0368 I 0.0299 588.9222 .1 003 003 003 . J J J J J J J J •1 J J J • Waste • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.9683 0.0000 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988 . J J J J J J J J •• J J J • Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 9.7838 i 15.4395 25.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690 Total 0.6068 0.4743 2.9853 6.7700e- 0.6425 0.0110 0.6535 0.1716 0.0107 0.1823 10.7521 734.9466 745.6987 1.1113 0.0566 790.3465 003 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 2.2 Overall Operational Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area •i •1 ,l Energy .1 •� ': el Mobile .i el Waste •1 Ir Water •I 0.2898 2.0000e- 1 1.8700e- 0.0000 : 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1 1.0000e- 1.0000e- • 0.0000 i 005 005 9i 005 003 I 005 i 005 1 J J J J J J J J I. 9.1200e- 0.0829 1 0.0696 5.0000e- 1 6.3000e- 6.3000e- 1 6.3000e- 6.3000e- • 0.0000 003 i 1 004 1 003 003 i : 003 003 • • J J J J J J J J I. 0.3079 0.3914 ' 2.9138 6.2700e- 0.6425 1 4.7000e- 0.6472 ' 0.1716 4.3800e- 0.1760 • 0.0000 9 003 : 003 003 J J J J J J J J I. 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.9683 1 • • J J J J J J J J I. 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 9.7838 . • • ' 3.6400e- 3.6400e- 1.0000e- : 0.0000 3.8700e- 003 003 005 I i i 003 J J J i 140.4201 140.4201 9.8500e- : 2.6400e- 141.4526 003 i 1 003 i J J J i 579.0834 579.0834 0.0368 1 0.0299 588.9222 J J J i 0.0000 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988 J J J i 15.4395 25.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690 Total 0.6068 0.4743 2.9853 6.7700e- 003 0.6425 0.0110 0.6535 0.1716 0.0107 0.1823 10.7521 734.9466 745.6987 1.1113 0.0566 790.3465 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase I Phase Name Phase Type I Start Date I End Date Number Num Days Week Num Days 1 :Paving :Paving 3/1/2024 :3/1 /2024 5 1: 4 2 :Architectural Coating :Architectural Coating :3/29/2024 :3/29/2024 r 5. 1: Phase Description Cn tD tG CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0 Acres of Paving: 3.23 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non -Residential Indoor: 0; Non -Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating — sqft) OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Architectural Coating Paving Paving Paving Usage Hours I Horse Power I Load Factor :Air Compressors ; 0l 0.00! 1 1 - - - - i 0 0.00! i :Paying Equipment ; 0+ 0.00! + 1- -Rollers 0: 0.00: :Payers 78: 130 132 80: 0.48 0.42 0.36 0.38 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Paving + 0; 0.00:.O.00 Architectural Coating 0 0.00 0.00 • 0.00: 10.80: 7.30; 20.00;LD_Mix HDT_Mix 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 : LD_Mix :HDT_Mix HHDT .HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.2 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr 0ff-Road ■i 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 Paving • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 ■ i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ilTotal 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling -i 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor •■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker -1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.2 Paving - 2024 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road ■i 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 Paving • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 ■ i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ilTotal 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling ■i 0.0000 ' 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor •■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker -1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.3 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0ff-Road • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 • i 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ilTotal 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling -i 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor •r 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker -1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 3.3 Architectural Coating - 2024 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0ff-Road • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 • i 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ilTotal 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling -i 0.0000 1 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor •r 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker -1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ■ 0.0000 • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated •i 0.3079 0.3914 2.9138 i 6.2700e- 0.6425 i 4.7000e- i 0.6472 0.1716 i 4.3800e- 0.1760 � 0.0000 i 579.0834 579.0834 i 0.0368 0.0299 i 588.9222 •1 1 1 1 003 1 1 003 1 1 1 003 1 1 1 i • :l• + F + F F + F F r •I• F + F r Unmitigated • 0.3079 • 0.3914 • 2.9138 6.2700e- • 0.6425 4.7000e- 0.6472 • 0.1716 4.3800e- • 0.1760 • 0.0000 • 579.0834 • 579.0834 0.0368 • 0.0299 588.9222 003 003 003 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces ; 0.00 0.00 Research & Development ; 695.00 695.00 T 0.00 695.00 • • 1,741,842 1,741,842 Total I 695.00 695.00 695.00 I 1,741,842 I 1,741,842 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip % Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass -by Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces ; 9.50 r rt Research & Development 9.50 7.30 7.30 i 0.00 I t r 7.30 7.30 • 33.00 0.00 0.00 • 0 t 48.00 19.00 82 0 0 15 3 4.4 Fleet Mix 0 0 0 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Land Use LDA I LDT1 I LDT2 I MDV I LHD1 I LHD2 I MHD I HHD I OBUS I UBUS I MCY I SBUS I MH Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces 0.569121: 0.056513: 0.180870: 0.112593: 0.021111: 0.005121: 0.013190: 0.012692: 0.000800: 0.000580: 0.024593: 0.0003311 0.002484 a i T Research & Development • 0.569121• 0.056513• 0.180870• 0.112593• 0.021111• 0.005121• 0.013190• 0.012692• 0.000800• 0.000580• 0.024593• 0.000331• 0.002484 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: Y 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity •i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 : 0.0000 : 0.0000 i , 0.0000 0.0000 : 0.0000 50.1927 1 50.1927 : 8.1200e- i 9.8000e- I 50.6891 Mitigated •1 I I I I i I 1 I . i I 003 : 004 1 ,I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 J J J J J J J Electricity •1 i 1 i : 0.0000 : 0.0000 i : 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 50.1927 : 50.1927 : 8.1200e- i 9.8000e- i 50.6891 Unmitigated •1 1 003 004 i J J J J J J J J 7 J J t NaturalGas •i 9.1200e- i 0.0829 i 0.0696 : 5.0000e- i : 6.3000e- : 6.3000e- i 1 6.3000e- 6.3000e- • 0.0000 90.2273 : 90.2273 : 1.7300e- i 1.6500e- i 90.7635 Mitigated :� 003 I I : 004 : I 003 li 003 : I 003 003 I I 003 : 003 i I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 NaturalGas •• 9.1200e- • 0.0829 • 0.0696 • 5.0000e- • • 6.3000e- • 6.3000e- • • 6.3000e- 6.3000e- • 0.0000 90.2273 • 90.2273 • 1.7300e- • 1.6500e- • 90.7635 Unmitigated 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Other Non- 1 0 90.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Asphalt Surfaces 1 1-4 J J J J J J J J ; J J J Research & 1 1.6908e • 9.1200e- 0.0829 0.0696 5.0000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- • 0.0000 i 90.2273 90.2273 1.7300e- 1.6500e- 90.7635 Development 1 +006 003 004 003 003 003 003 : 003 003 i Total 9.1200e- 0.0829 0.0696 5.0000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- 0.0000 90.2273 90.2273 1.7300e- 1.6500e- 90.7635 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Other Non- 1 0 .1 0.0000 i 0.0000 , 0.0000 0.0000 , 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 . 0.0000 0.0000 , 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 Asphalt Surfaces i . . r 4 J J J J J J J J •• J J J 4. Research & 1 1.6908e • 9.1200e- 0.0829 0.0696 5.0000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- • 0.0000 90.2273 90.2273 1.7300e- 1.6500e- 90.7635 Development j +006 : 003 004 003 003 003 003 ; 003 003 1 Total 9.1200e- 0.0829 0.0696 5.0000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- 6.3000e- 0.0000 90.2273 90.2273 1.7300e- 1.6500e- 90.7635 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Other Non- 1 0 •1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Asphalt Surfaces 1 1-4 J J r Research & 1 542485 • 50.1927 8.1200e- 9.8000e- 50.6891 Development i 003 004 i i Total 50.1927 8.1200e- 9.8000e- 50.6891 003 004 Mitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Other Non- 0 •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Asphalt Surfaces i . J J r Research & 542485 • 50.1927 8.1200e- 9.8000e- 50.6891 Development i ; 003 004 i i Total 50.1927 8.1200e- 9.8000e- 50.6891 003 004 6. m-krea Detail 0 — 03 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated •; 0.2898 1 2.0000e- 1.8700e- 1 0.0000 1.0000e- i 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- • 0.0000 i 3.6400e- 3.6400e- i 1.0000e- 1 0.0000 1 3.8700e- •I I 005 I 003 005 0051 005 005 ;1 003 003 005 i 003 1 1 • :I• 1- F F 1- F F F F r I• F F + r Unmitigated • 0.2898 • 2.0000e- • 1.8700e- • 0.0000 • • 1.0000e- • 1.0000e- • • 1.0000e- • 1.0000e- • 0.0000 • 3.6400e- • 3.6400e- • 1.0000e- • 0.0000 • 3.8700e- 005 003 005 005 005 005 003 003 005 003 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural •i 0.0356 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 Coating :: Consumer .1 0.2540 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products Landscaping • 1.7000e- 2.0000e- 1.8700e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- • 0.0000 3.6400e- 3.6400e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 3.8700e- 004 005 003 005 005 005 005 : • 003 003 005 i 003 Total 0.2898 2.0000e- 1.8700e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 3.6400e- 3.6400e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 3.8700e- 005 003 005 005 005 005 003 003 005 003 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 6.2 Area by SubCategory Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural •i 0.0356 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 Coating :: Consumer .1 0.2540 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products Landscaping • 1.7000e- 2.0000e- 1.8700e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- • 0.0000 i 3.6400e- 3.6400e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 3.8700e- 004 005 003 005 005 005 005 • 003 003 005 i 003 Total 0.2898 2.0000e- 1.8700e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 3.6400e- 3.6400e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 3.8700e- 005 003 005 005 005 005 003 003 005 003 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category MT/yr • Mitigated •i • ei• Unmitigated •• 25.2233 i 1.0074 : 0.0240 i 57.5690 9 1 1 1 q 1 1 1 I- F r 25.2233 : 1.0074 • 0.0240 : 57.5690 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use Mgal 1 MT/yr Other Non- I 0 / 0 • Asphalt Surfaces 1 • r 4 Research & 130.839 / 0 • Development i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 J J T 25.2233 1.0074 1 0.0240 57.5690 Total 11 25.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 7.2 Water by Land Use Mitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Other Non- Asphalt Surfaces Research & Development i 0 / 0 •i i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 J J 925.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690 ilTotal 25.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Category/Year Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e MT/yr Mitigated :1 0.9683 i 0.0572 i 0.0000 i 2.3988 • iI- I. F r Unmitigated :: 0.9683 : 0.0572 : 0.0000 : 2.3988 CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Other Non- I 0 •i Asphalt Surfaces i 1-4 Research & I 4.77 • Development t i 0.0000 : 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 J J -I- 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988 Total 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988 Mitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Other Non- I 0 •i Asphalt Surfaces 1 . i r 'I Research & I 4.77 • Development 1 . i 0.0000 1 0.0000 i J J 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 r 2.3988 Total 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988 9.1 j' perational Offroad — CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Boilers Number Hours/Day Hours/Year JHorse Power Load Factor Equipment Type Number I Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating I Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type 11.0 Vegetation Number Fuel Type Energy Consumption Summary Proposed Project Energy Consumption Summary Source Construction' (amortized over project lifetime) Diesel Gasoline Energy Requirement 1,278 201 Gallons/yr Gallons/yr Unit Annual Energy Consumption (MMBtu) 176 25 Subtotal 202 Building Operations' Electrical Natural Gas 1,209,922 - KWh/yr kBTU/yr 4,128 - Subtotal 4,128 Operational Transportation' Electricity Diesel Gasoline 32,528 6,174 49,324 KWh/yr Gallons/yr Gallons/yr 111 852 6,166 Subtotal 7,128 Total 11,458 Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding. Source: Modeled byAECOM in 2023 1. Construction estimates are based on conversion for CO2 emissions estimates from CaIEEMod to fuel consumption for diesel and gasoline -powered vehicles using U.S. Energy Information Administration 2022 factors. 2. Building operation energy consumption is based on estimated electricity demand from CaIEEMod. No natural gas infrastructure in compliance with City code. 3. Operational transportation fuel consumption reflects CaIEEMod VMT estimate, which incorporates trip generation data provided by TIA for the Project. Existing Energy Consumption Summary Building Operations' Electrical Natural Gas Source Energy Requirement 542,485 KWh/yr 1,690,800 kBTU/yr Unit Annual Energy Consumption (MMBtu) 1,851 1,691 Subtotal 3,542 Operational Transportation2 Electricity Diesel Gasoline 35,002 KWh/yr 7,876 Gallons/yr 60,858 Gallons/yr - 1,087 7,607 Subtotal 8,694 Total 12,236 Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding. Source: Modeled byAECOM in 2023 1. Building operation energy consumption is based on estimated electricity and natural gas demand from CaIEEMod. 2. Operational transportation fuel consumption reflects CaIEEMod VMT estimate, which incorporates trip generation data provided by TIA for existing conditions. Net Energy Consumption Summary Annual Energy Consumption (MMBtu) Proposed Project - Existing Conditions (778) Conversion Factors Category IN. Amount Units Diesel (heat content) 0.138 MMBtu/gallon Motor Gasoline 0.125 MMBtu/gallon Natural Gas 0.1 MMBtu/therm Btu per kWh 3,412 Btu/kWh Gallons per Barrel 42 gallons/barrel https://thecl i materegistrv.org/wp-content/u ploads/2022/11/2022-Defa u It-E m ission-Factors-Fi n a I. pdf 615 Construction Energy Summary Emission Factor Source MT CO2 a Fuel Type b Gallons (lb CO2/gallon) Off -Road 294.50 Diesel 22.45 29,384 Hauling 36.19 Diesel 22.45 3,610 Vendor 53.63 Diesel 22.45 5,351 Worker 48.14 Gas 17.86 6,038 Total Demand Diesel 38,346 Gasoline 6,038 Sources: e Modeled by AECOM in 2023. U.S. Energy Information Administration released October 5, 2022 (https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/co2_vol_mass.php) 616 Project Operational Transportation Energy Consumption Source: EMFAC2021 Iv1.0.. Emissions Inventory Region Type: County Region: Alameda Calendar Year: 2025 Season: Annual Vehicle Classification: FMFAC2007 Categories Units: miles/day for CVMT and EVMT, trips/day for Trips,kWh/day for Energy Consumption,tons/tlay for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel Consumption Region Alameda Alametla Alameda Alametla Calendar year 2025 2025 2025 2025 Vehicle category LOA ILA LOA LOA Model Year Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate aggregate Speed Aggregate aggregate Aggregate aggregate Fuel Gasoline Diesel Electricity Plug-in Hybrid Population 546668.9721 2039.963989 47802.8263 16264.37604 Total VAR 19830452.29 55387.872. 723669.533 %VMT 11% 0.2496 9.48% 3.1]% EMIT 2163781.86 372.9.3749 Fuel Consumption .7.7239298 1.2860..7 11.58789112 Fuel Consumption/Mile 0.033 0.023 0.000 0.016 Energy Consumption 835398.3806 112487.7917 Energy Consumption / Mile 0.386 0.302 Alameda Alameda Alameda Alameda 2025 2025 2025 2025 LOT1 LOT1 Aggregate aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate aggregate Aggregate aggregate Gasoline Diesel Electricity Plug-in Hybrid .229.43705 26.2407.92 160.9168358 82.97866268 1681495.67 304.9619282 6350.144103 4267.620687 0.0296 0.2596 6850.144103 2415.775875 65.43336139 0.0126.83 0.061175156 0.039 0.041 0.000 0.014 0 ]19.6363158 0.386 0.302 Alameda Alameda Alameda Alameda 2025 2025 2025 2025 LG. LG. Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate aggregate Aggregate aggregate Gasoline Diesel Electricity Plug-in Hybrid 253399.3877 .1.8112024 1799.655866 21..722049 9825879.725 35889.68271 63781.98114 1.553.5289 0.3696 1.0596 63781.98114 57.3.55065 392.0663593 1.080479483 1.597242423 0.0. 0.000 0.015 0.386 0.302 Alameda Alameda Alameda 2025 2025 2025 LHDTI MDT] LHDTI Aggregate aggregate Aggregate Aggregate aggregate Aggregate Gasoline Diesel Electricity 18847.97703 9347.769632 166.1321894 718081.1534 375050.1539 11462.56249 33.95% 11.2.56249 73.03897794 23.3))28263 0.102 0.062 0.000 7.1609178 0.655 Alameda Alameda Alameda 2025 2025 2025 IHDR IHDR aggregate Aggregate aggregate Aggregate Aggregate aggregate Gasoline ezel Electricity 2.2.532308 ...470296 42.68505741 .603.42272 165207.4735 2798.596435 36.5196 1.0696 2798.596435 22924)) 0.115 0.074 1806...6 0.645 Alameda Alameda Alameda Alameda 2025 2025 2025 2025 MDV MDV MDV MDV Aggregate aggregate Aggregate aggregate Aggregate aggregate Aggregate aggregate Gasoline Diesel Electricity Plug-in Hybrid 136231.70. 1904.613628 19.807931 1284.474. 5084190.809 72630.04717 .041.68751 61042.80887 1.3]% 1.1596 .041.68751 32932.52287 245.2316451 2.880070264 0.943867907 0.048 0.040 0.0610 0.015 26269.70716 9..603454 0.386 0.302 Alameda Alameda Alameda Alameda 2025 2025 2025 2025 MHOT MHOT MHOT MHOT Aggregate aggregate Aggregate aggregate Aggregate aggregate Aggregate aggregate Gasoline Diesel Electricity Natural Gas 1612.599975 1434).8096] 114.3.33. 158.2385165 84199.09574 6011739321 5978.325429 7563.711613 86.0296 1.0896 5978.325429 17.67434141 70.85659815 1.05897.84 0.210 0.118 0.000 0.140 6.7.593438 1.094 Alameda Alameda Alameda Alameda 2025 2025 2025 2025 HHDT HHDT HHDT HHDT Aggregate aggregate Aggregate aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate aggregate Gasoline Diesel Electricity Natural Gas 6.5870361. 1.86.56788 91178791991 1088.373943 866.544.39 1818729.. 102.56318 75208.5745 95.4)% 0.54% 3.9596 Proposed Project Fleet M. General Light Industry Total Annual Vn. LOA 0.570753 LOU LHOI VMT by Fleet Category LDp Total 823162.24 Diesel 1997.66125 Gasoline Plug In Hybrid 26100.41718 Eiettrkity 780..60646 Natural Gas 81059.10 16.67.236 205.3.6905 329.6122136 LDR 258478.07 924.79 36 89.9011 2719.867.8 1.3.51223 AADV 202.3.62 2784.938356 1..9.0403 2340.635404 26.9.001546 111101 29975.50 10177.78069 19...3)) 311.0609232 7515.51 6692.265500 2703.755060 79.686.169 MHD 20168.27 17307.80335 2429.691055 172.513537 218.2622306 HHD 18796.70 17905.09770 35500.520 100.9327167 762.0703786 Percent Fuel Type by Fleet Category LDA Mosel Gasoline Plug In Hybrid Electricity LDT1 0.02% 99.33% 0.25% 0A0% MOM 11101 1.3]% 96.1896 1.1596 1.2996 11102 IYIHD 62.4396 36.5196 0.00% 1.0696 HHO 95.4)% 0.0596 0.0096 05496 Natural Gas T3.9596Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% ConsumptionFuel (gallons for diesel/Gas; kWM1 for 6lectiry) Diesel Gasoline Pugl Elettd Ity Nat ural Gas LOA 46.38404394 23361.30515 417.93))17 30130.11513 0 .1 27.84142501 10102.63157 4115719533 634.5313672 0 36.19182A)0 102 LH01 634.3921025 1982..7442 03.68061 0 MHD 2044.673298 510.03.294 0 188..2.33 30.55830107 HO '(Note that natural gas consumption is negligible an not amounted for summary tab. Plug, Hybrid is summed mmed wall o in Summary Tab. 185.5661152 14o.e1]38]e Total Annual VMT Is based on CaIEEMad VMT estimate. Grey highlighted columns indicated calculations using EMFAC data, not data o taut from EMFAC. MHO 0.013984 HHD 0.013033 10230.56318 0.22.00961 300.0761.5 14.27179323 0.165 0.000 0.190 18807.06117 1.838 ExlsltliM Operational Transportation Energy Consumption 0311v1.0.31Em1sionslnvemary Ion type: County Region: Alameda CalendarYear: 2024 Season: Annual Vehicle EMPAC.2007 EVCategories 0nits: miles/dee for C.. and EVMr, trips/clay for Trips, IMP/day for Energy Cense.. Mel ay to Emissions,1000 gallons/day for Fuel Consumption Region calendarfeer Vehlole category Model year Fuel Population TMal VMr Consumption m Fuelwumptlan/Mlle FVMr Energy Consumption m rgywumptlon/Mile Alameda Aggregate Aggregate aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1.43347 Aggregate aggregate Ple.icity Alameda mM mA Aggregate Aggregate Flog -in Hyena 14910g6076 670426.3099 2.95% 10.98632777 0.016 007007a52 101834a.o3 0.300 Alameda 2024 2024 1671 Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline Diesel 51.7..173 28.935.781 1731568.48 3..10163 68.55514321 0.014338951 0.040 Alameda 2024 2024 1671 Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Fl Mary Plogrin Hybrid 139.3137.3 57.17.9905 5582.724901 2971.762703 0.3296 0.043846781 0.000 0.015 5582.724901 2155.392579 496.3712644III 0.386 0.302 Alameda 2024 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 250140.8178 9685168.656 396.0221228 0041 Alameda Alameda Alameda 2024 2024 2024 Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Diesel krniriry Flog -In Hyena 877.4.3623 1325.769916 1787.793858 35171.51513 47543.5.3 88602.88431 0.386 1.081813418 1.37.64862 0.031 0.000 0.016 475..56893 47120.1193 1.1.gmw3, 0.386 0.302 Alameda Alameda Alameda 2024 2024 2024 Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregare Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline Diesel 18902.95342 91.,826182 59.85101767 716627.0752 3.4.278 4.6.696.8 74.1.7641 22.91149684 0.103 0.063 0.000 2910.818763■ 0.655 Alameda Alameda Alameda 2024 2024 2024 Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate aggregate Aggregate Gasoline Diesel Fl Mary 2669..53287 3917.3.251 15..131497 97703.8855 159736..1 1090..7211 0.4296 11.40931526 11..367227 0.117 0.075 0.000 1090.487211 703.M131437 0.645 'Alameda 2024.14 'Aggregate lAggregate 1Gasoone 01 oL Alameda Alameda 2024 2024 MOV Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline Diesel 134110.7385 1883.691486 498033.957 72884.43028 96..96 1.4196 240.5360188 2.108.3 0.050 0.040 Alameda Alameda 2024 2024 MOV Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Fl Mary Plogrin Hybrid 1410.450867 1037.24.5 50813.79984 49646.00518 0.0696 0.7932.32 0.000 0.016 50813.79984 25999.83624 19618.32063 or 0.386 0.302 Alameda 2024 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1646.77726 85631.5095 18.18377.6 0.212 Alameda Alameda Alameda 2024 2024 2024 MHDT MHDT MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Diesel krniriry Natural Gas 14077.45. 38.51310217 598407.5165 1999.7.399 7246.41.92 86.3196 1.0596 70.87.0725 1.01.01303 0.118 0.000 1999.764399 2206.758e03111 1.104 Alameda Alameda Alameda 2024 2024 2024 2024 HHDT HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate solme Diesel Fl Mary Natural Gas 05.104597 14019.976 1044.383087 898.91.328 180.1.053 4380.548876 7.96.19506 0.0596 0.2396 3.9696 0.238807262 301.5126077 .1638.32 0.266 0.167 0.000 0.190 .80.548876 8047.3921. 1.837 Alameda Alameda Alameda Alameda 2024 2024 2024 2024 OBUS OMB OBUS OMB Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregau Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline Diesel krniriry Natural Gas 610.2133302 362.9257155 0.91893.5 2.06334.52 30..73345 2687032823 84.1685424 133.4816. 52.91. 6.34490564 3.791.5691 0.017.6965 0.208 0.141 0.000 0.133 80.1685424 93.2 saggxs. 1.108 Alameda Alameda 2024 2024 1.115 LIBUS Aggregau Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate solme Diesel 255.0030274 670.8467919 20852.16865 19.5996 69.16 2.387867428 9.2486.839 0.115 0.125 Alameda Alameda 2024 2024 1.115 LIBUS Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Fl Mary Natural Gas 14.13091.3 109.7868.6 12..382.9 10..91285 1.1796 1..13.811 0.000 0.144 1244.382099 2169.zcmc. 1.743 Alameda Alameda Alameda Alameda 2024 2024 2024 2024 SBUS SBUS SBUS SBUS Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline Diesel krniriry Natural Gas 1.243873534 25.33404192 4472.146206 9573.3609. ..54353936 637.2541208 0.440740767 1.180633639 0.11582887 0.123 0.182 n.97e09R1A. 1.053 laL'meda Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate 1Gasoline Aggregate'Diesel Grey 111M1600ed columns %%Rated calculations using FMFAC data, not dab output from FMFAC. 1Lanci Use 3nve 'General tight indict. 0.5707531 0.056481 Total Annual VMF: 21•171syFleet Cate.re LDA Total 1,741,802 994161.55 Diesel 2678.820465 alne 87.02659 PMg-In Hy3nd 2937047796 canary 86085.98272 Lou 98380.98 19.5369.. 97877.89373 167.9805779 3..566702 312172.92 1113.94.6 306746.9705 2806.2.38 1505.791613 194983.50. 2757.499812 188425.2526 1878.300337 1922.482524 36202.44 12180.8177 23873.49058 148.1358151 9076.74 5608.171304 3430.281489 2.57.92 21024.48076 3008.581901 70.2.82625 254.5960436 22701.. 21738.63822 10.848795. 52.86753099 899.0722425 1376.06 642.7552772 728.0947353 2.012915393 3.19.52135 UBUS 680.2901492 191.1.3761 11.40498575 92.62..34 0635.07 42635.0.63 SBUS 388.3421132 181.41.66 1.847.7611 25.85011357 020.48 1234..3518 2985.634.8 desel Gasoline Nyinisi Natural Gas 99.49. 032. 0.3696 98.2696 1.4196 96.6496 0.9696 33.6596 65..96 0.4196 0.0096 0.4296 86.3196 12.3596 0.2996 95.7696 0.0596 0.0096 0.2396 46.7196 52.9196 0.1596 UBUS 69.7496 0.0096 1.1796 100.0016 SBUS 65.0096 0.0096 0.3196 29.2696 70.7496 kWh for Electricity) Dleml Gasoline Plug.... PlectrieRY Natural Gas I eNote that natural eas consumption is neell ible an not accounted for in summary ta6.1112-in Hybrid is um.. with Gasoline in ...are Tab. s based on Cal 618 This page intentionally left blank 619 Appendix E: Final Transportation Impact Study This page intentionally left blank 621 �W-Trans Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project Prepared for the City of Dublin Submitted by W-Trans December 12, 2022 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 1 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING Balancing Functionality and Livability since 1995 w-trans.com 622 i-Tran5 This page intentionally left blank 623 Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 2 Transportation Setting 4 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 8 Capacity Analysis 9 Alternative Modes Analysis 14 Access and Circulation 20 Parking 22 Conclusions and Recommendations 23 Study Participants and References 24 Figures 1. Site Plan 3 2. Study Area and Existing Lane Configurations 5 3. Existing, Existing plus Project, Future, and Future plus Project Traffic Volumes 10 Tables 1. Bicycle Facility Summary 6 2. Transit Routes 7 3. Signalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria 9 4. Existing and Existing with 8-Phase Operation Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service 11 5. Future and Future with 8-Phase Operation Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service 11 6. Trip Generation Summary 12 7. Trip Distribution Assumptions 12 8. Existing and Existing plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service 13 9. Future and Future plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service 13 10. Parking Analysis Summary 22 Plates 1. Existing Cross -Section of Dublin Boulevard between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive 15 2. Option A - Widen Dublin Boulevard to the South 15 3. Option B - Narrow the Median 16 4. Option C - Westbound Only Class I Multi -Use Path 16 5. Option D - Westbound and Eastbound Class I Multi -Use Paths with Widened Eastbound Side 17 6. Option E - Westbound and Eastbound Class I Multi -Use Path with Narrowed Median 17 7. Option F - Class IV Separated Bikeway Option 17 8. Existing Cross -Section of Dublin Boulevard between Donlon Way and Hansen Drive 18 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 624 9. Option G - Westbound Only Class I Multi -Use Path 18 10. Option H - Class I Multi -Use Path 19 11. Option I - Class IV 19 Appendices A. Vehicle Miles Traveled Screening Map B. Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive Peak Hour Volumes C. Intersection Level of Service Calculations D. Truck Turning Templates Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 625 Executive Summary The Hexcel Redevelopment Project is located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin. This project involves replacing the existing 62,715 square -foot research and development building with a new building that will consist of 18,000 square feet of office space, 36,500 square feet of light industrial space, and 70,804 square feet of warehousing space. The project is expected to generate an average net reduction of 201 trips per day and will generate an average increase of 1 a.m. and 2 p.m. peak hour trips. Because the project would effectively result in no change in trips on the network, it would result in no change to traffic operation. This project is presumed to have a less -than -significant transportation impact on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) since the estimated VMT per employee is below the significance threshold of 12.9 miles per employee. The Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection was evaluated to determine if acceptable operation would also be expected upon converting the Hansen Drive and driveway approaches to protected left -turn phasing. It was determined that the intersection would function acceptably under all volume scenarios evaluated. Vehicles would access the project site via existing driveways on Dublin Boulevard. Sight distances at each driveway for both entering and exiting drivers is adequate, though landscaping should be kept trimmed to maintain adequate sight lines. Signage should be placed at the easterly driveway warning drivers of trucks not to use that driveway. Pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities within the study area are adequate and would be improved upon completion of facilities identified in the City's draft Bike and Pedestrian Plan. Various alternatives were developed to accommodate a Class I bike path, Class IV separated bike trail and/or sidewalk on both sides of Dublin Boulevard. The proposed on -site circulation and access design are expected to comply with City design standards. The proposed parking supply of 227 spaces meets the City's parking requirement of 227 spaces and the proposed parking space sizes meet the City's parking size requirements. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 626 Introduction This report presents an analysis of the potential traffic impacts that would be associated with development of a mixed -use office, light industrial, and warehouse building which would replace an existing research and development building located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin. The traffic study was completed in accordance with the criteria established by the City of Dublin and is consistent with standard traffic engineering techniques. Prelude The purpose of a traffic impact study is to provide City of Dublin staff and policy makers with data that they can use to make an informed decision regarding the potential transportation impacts of a proposed project, and any associated improvements that would be required in order to mitigate these impacts to an acceptable level under CEQA, the City's General Plan, or other policies. Impacts relative to access for pedestrians, bicyclists, and to transit are addressed in the context of the CEQA criteria. Consistent with SB 743, the project's transportation impacts were analyzed using VMT. While no longer a part of the CEQA review process, vehicular traffic service levels at key intersections were evaluated for consistency with General Plan policies by determining the number of new trips that the proposed use would be expected to generate, distributing these trips to the surrounding street system based on anticipated travel patterns specific to the proposed project, then analyzing the effect the new traffic would be expected to have on the study intersections. Project Profile The proposed project would replace an existing research and development building with a new building consisting of office, light industrial, and warehouse uses. The proposed project site plan is shown in Figure 1. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 627 TABULATION ----. 'esssssseed'%pm o 1 yy BUILDINGARE11 26,304 S. f . II 1 1_ Source: HPA Architecture 9/7 CODE ANALYSIS ana,r rear., OF WINNERS, earr .1.01 PEE SITE PLAN KEYNOTES 8 MOW WOW er NCEENNE NENNO ENO SON No.. pare Exar SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES Cl..`IC.DdN., 771=1 mI ....® i....., �uwz.m.0 NON-WXSOOE PAIN r ii, to: SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES ME STE Pax WED ON NEE SOILS WORT visa FOR Mall ORPOE NORTON Of ve.nu. TO BR A ODIUM BOO O. PROW KNOT 00. ea Pa OWE WaNCEN PO BE.. WONTING PO. OF WOW SNO BE WPM. OYEEALLSITE PLAN O IYA tlPe. BON gar, 020,91110302 94610 small Apapperchs.00m Devioper DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP TOWaee.9u, 191 NmD 90502 Projec▪ t: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN,. Consulta▪ nts: Green De.ip; • Title. OVERALL SITE PUN Drawn by: Late: INTRO. 'DAB-A1.1 dub900-2.ai 9/22 Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project Figure 1 - Site Plan 00 r \ W-Trans Transportation Setting Study Area and Periods The study area of this project varies by topic. For pedestrian trips, it consists of all streets and pedestrian travel routes within a half -mile of the project site. For bicycle trips, it consists of all streets and bicycle travel routes within one mile of the project site. For the traffic operational analysis, it consists of the Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection. The driveway connections were evaluated for operational issues such as adequacy of sight distance and need for a left -turn lane. Additionally, the segments of Dublin Boulevard between Silvergate Drive and Donlon Way and between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive were assessed to determine the feasibility of installing Class I or IV bike lanes and a sidewalk on the south side of the street. Operating conditions during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods were evaluated to capture the highest potential impacts for the proposed project as well as the highest volumes on the local transportation network. The morning peak hour occurs between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. and reflects conditions during the home to work or school commute, while the p.m. peak hour occurs between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. and typically reflects the highest level of congestion during the homeward bound commute. Study Roadways and Intersection Dublin Boulevard is a 7.5-mile-long east -west road with two 10-foot-wide lanes in each direction. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive is a four-way signalized intersection with protected left -turn phasing on both the eastbound and westbound approaches along Dublin Boulevard and split phased operation along the Hansen Drive. Marked crosswalks with pedestrian phasing exist along the north and east legs of the intersection. The southern leg is a driveway for the proposed project site. Existing lane configurations and controls of this intersection are shown in Figure 2. Alternative Modes Pedestrian Facilities Pedestrian facilities include sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian signal phases, curb ramps, curb extensions, and various streetscape amenities such as lighting, benches, etc. In the vicinity of the project site, sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian signals, and curb ramps provide connected access for pedestrians with the exception of a gap in the sidewalk network to the west of the project site. • Dublin Boulevard - Continuous sidewalks are provided on both sides of Dublin Boulevard east of Hansen Drive. To the west, however, sidewalks are not provided on the south side of Dublin Boulevard. There is a network of curb ramps, crosswalks with pedestrian phasing at signalized intersections, as well as overhead lighting. Dublin Boulevard provides access to both commercial and residential areas. Hansen Drive - Hansen Drive is classified as a local street and it serves a residential neighborhood consisting primarily of single-family homes. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of Hansen Drive. Crosswalks are provided at Silvergate Drive, Amarillo Road, and Dublin Boulevard. Lighting is provided by overhead streetlights. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 629 LEGEND Study Intersection A North A Not to Scale dub900-2.ai 9/22 Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project Figure 2 - Study Area and Existing Lane Configurations w 0 TW-Trans Bicycle Facilities The Highway Design Manual, Caltrans, 2017, classifies bikeways into four categories: • Class I Multi -Use Path - a completely separated right-of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows of motorized traffic minimized. Class II Bike Lane - a striped and signed lane for one-way bike travel on a street or highway. Class III Bike Route - signing only for shared use with motor vehicles within the same travel lane on a street or highway. Class IV Bikeway - also known as a separated bikeway, a Class IV Bikeway is for the exclusive use of bicycles and includes a separation between the bikeway and the motor vehicle traffic lane. The separation may include, but is not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible physical barriers, or on -street parking. In the project area, Class II bike lanes exist on Dublin Boulevard for about 0.55 miles west of San Ramon Road, as well as along the entirety of Silvergate Drive. Class III bike routes exist on Dublin Boulevard between San Ramon Road and Clark Avenue. Bicyclists ride in the roadway and/or on sidewalks along all other streets within the project study area. Table 1 summarizes the existing and planned bicycle facilities in the project vicinity, as contained in the draft Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. This plan has recently been presented to the Dublin City Council but has not yet been approved. Table 1 - Bicycle Facility Summary Status Facility Class Length (miles) Begin Point End Point Existing Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Silvergate Dr San Ramon Rd Dublin Blvd I II II II III 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.5 0.9 Inspiration Dr (1000' east) Silvergate Dr (750' west) Dublin Blvd Alcosta Blvd San Ramon Rd Silvergate Dr (750' west) San Ramon Rd San Ramon Rd Dublin Blvd Clark Ave Planned Dublin Blvd Hansen Dr I/IV III 4.4 0.4 Kelly Canyon Dr Silvergate Dr Scarlett Dr Dublin Blvd Notes: * All or portions of these bikeways are located within the project site Source: Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (draft), 2022 Transit Facilities The Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA) Tri-Valley Wheels Bus provides fixed route bus service in Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore. The closest stop is located approximately 0.3 miles from the project site at the Silvergate Drive/Betlen Drive intersection. This stop serves Wheels Bus Local Route 503 which primarily serves students at Dublin High School and Wells Middle School with seven stops in West Dublin. The Wheels Bus Route 30R stop is located approximately 0.7 miles east of the project site and provides daily service to destinations between West Dublin/Pleasanton Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) and Livermore. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 631 The West Dublin/Pleasanton BART station is located approximately one mile from the project site. The station is along the "blue line" that operates direct train service between the Daly City and Dublin/Pleasanton stations. Connecting service to other BART lines is available via a transfer at the Bay Fair or other stations. Existing transit routes and their operation schedules are summarized in Table 2. Table 2 - Transit Routes Transit Agency Route Distance to Stop (mi)1 Days of Operation Service Time Frequency Connection Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority Tri-Valley Wheels Route #30R 0.7 Mon - Fri Sat Sun 5:52 a.m. - 9:52 p.m. 6:27 a.m. - 9:58 p.m. 6:19 a.m. - 9:50 p.m. 30 minutes 1 hour 1 hour West Dublin BART to Livermore Route #503 EB 0.3 Mon, Tues, Thurs, Fri Wed 7:54 a.m. 7:45 a.m. - 8:29 a.m. 44 minutes Dublin & Brigadoon to Wells Middle School Route #503 WB 0.3 Mon, Tues, Thurs Wed Fri 3:35 p.m. - 4:21 p.m. 2:32 p.m. - 3:22 p.m. 2:46 p.m. - 3:46 p.m. 46 minutes 50 minutes 1 hour Wells Middle School/Dublin High School to Dublin & Marshall Canyon Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) West Dublin/ Mon - Fri 5:09 a.m. - 1:32 a.m. 15 minutes Daly City to Pleasanton 1.0 Sat Sun 5:47 a.m. - 1:32 a.m. 7:12 a.m. - 1:32 a.m. 30 minutes 30 minutes Dublin/Pleasanton Note: 1 Defined as the shortest walking distance between the project site and the nearest bus stop Source: wheelsbus.com; bart.gov Two bicycles can be carried on all LAVTA Tri-Valley Wheels fixed -route buses. Bike rack space is on a first come, first served basis. On BART trains, bicycles are allowed except in the first car or any crowded car. During commute hours, bikes are not allowed in the first three cars of any train. Cyclists must yield to other passengers and yield priority seating to seniors and people with disabilities. Paratransit Services Wheels Dial -A -Ride provides paratransit services to eligible people with disabilities who live in Livermore, Pleasanton, or Dublin. Additionally, BART provides paratransit services through lift vans to people with disabilities who cannot ride BART trains. Paratransit services are provided by both through reservations only. On -Demand Transportation Services On -demand private vehicle services, such as Uber and Lyft, are available in the project area 24 hours a day. These private vehicle services can be used for trips both within the local area and to further destinations, including transit stops/stations and local airports. For a limited amount of time, Tri-Valley Wheels is paying half of Uber and Lyft fares (up to $5) for rideshare trips that either start or end in Dublin, Pleasanton, or Livermore. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 632 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Guidance provided by both the California Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) in the publication Transportation Impacts (SB 743) CEQA Guidelines Update and Technical Advisory, 2018, and the City of Dublin's Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (Dated July 15, 2021), was used to evaluate the proposed project's potential vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Guidance provided in these documents recommends the use of screening thresholds to quickly identify when a project would be expected to result in a less -than -significant impact without conducting a detailed study. (See CEQA Guidelines, 150361(3)(C), 15128, and Appendix G.) The criteria used by the City of Dublin states that projects located in areas where the baseline VMT for employees is 15 or more percent below the existing regional average per employee could be considered to be in a low-VMT area and therefore presumed to have a less -than -significant VMT impact. According to the Alameda County Travel Demand Model, the existing countywide VMT per employee for the East Planning Area is 15.2 miles. Based on OPR guidance and the City's TIA Guidelines, a project generating a VMT that is 15 percent or more below this value, or 12.9 miles per employee, would have a less -than -significant VMT impact. The City of Dublin Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines publishes a screening map which shows that this project is located inside an area with a projected VMT per employee lower than 12.9 miles. Because this per employee VMT rate is below the significance threshold of 12.9 miles, the project would be considered to have a less -than -significant VMT impact. A copy of the screening map showing VMT estimates in Dublin is provided in Appendix A. Finding — The proposed project would be expected to have a less -than -significant VMT transportation impact. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 633 Capacity Analysis Intersection Level of Service Methodologies Level of Service (LOS) is used to rank traffic operation on various types of facilities based on traffic volumes and roadway capacity using a series of letter designations ranging from A to F. Generally, Level of Service A represents free flow conditions and Level of Service F represents forced flow or breakdown conditions. A unit of measure that indicates a level of delay generally accompanies the LOS designation. The study intersection was analyzed using methodologies published in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Transportation Research Board, 6th edition. This source contains methodologies for various types of intersection control, all of which are related to a measurement of delay in average number of seconds per vehicle. The study intersection is currently controlled by a traffic signal and was evaluated using the signalized methodology from the HCM. This methodology is based on factors including traffic volumes, green time for each movement, phasing, whether the signals are coordinated or not, truck traffic, and pedestrian activity. Average stopped delay per vehicle in seconds is used as the basis for evaluation in this LOS methodology. For the purposes of this study, delays were calculated using signal timing obtained from the City of Dublin. The ranges of delay associated with the various levels of service are indicated in Table 3. Table 3 — Signalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E LOS F Delay of 0 to 10 seconds. Most vehicles arrive during the green phase, so do not stop at all. Delay of 10 to 20 seconds. More vehicles stop than with LOS A, but many drivers still do not have to stop. Delay of 20 to 35 seconds. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many still pass through without stopping. Delay of 35 to 55 seconds. The influence of congestion is noticeable, and most vehicles have to stop. Delay of 55 to 80 seconds. Most, if not all, vehicles must stop and drivers consider the delay excessive. Delay of more than 80 seconds. Vehicles may wait through more than one cycle to clear the intersection. Reference: Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2018 Existing Conditions The Existing Conditions scenario provides an evaluation of current operation of the study intersection based on existing traffic volumes during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods. This condition does not include project -generated traffic volumes. Existing traffic volume data was collected on August 25, 2022, when local schools were in session. Copies of the traffic count data sheets are provided in Appendix B. The study area and the existing lane configurations are shown in Figure 2. The existing traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. Upon request from City Staff, the Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection was assessed using existing signal phasing as well as an eight -phase operation with protected left turns on all four approaches to provide a comparison of the potential phasing schemes. Copies of the Level of Service calculations are provided in Appendix C. Under existing conditions, the Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection is operating acceptably during both peaks. Using eight -phase signal operation, delay would increase during both peak hours though remain acceptable at LOS B. Under existing volumes there would be nominal changes to the Level of Service and delay Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 634 L71 (153) <-517(321) 60 (36) (6) 5 _4‘' (448)583-> (1) 2* L87 (194) <-630(407) 74 (46) (8) 7_' (568)710-> (2) 3. LEGEND Study Intersection xx AM Peak Hour Volume (xx) PM Peak Hour Volume 4 71 (153) <-517(321) 61 (36) F+P N o L87 (194) <-630(407) L 75 (46) (8) 7_+ (568)710-> (2) 4. Nolrth Not to Scale:. dub900-2.ai 9/22 Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project Figure 3 - Existing, Existing plus Project, Future, and Future plus Project Traffic Volumes cri Ty -Trans due to changing from the existing operation to an eight -phase scheme with protected left turns on Hansen Drive and the project driveway. These results are summarized in Table 4. Table 4 - Existing and Existing with 8-Phase Operation Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection Existing (Current Phasing) AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Dublin Blvd/Hansen Dr 12.2 B 12.9 B Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service Future Conditions Existing (8-Phase Operation) AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS 13.1 B 13.6 B Roadway segment volumes for the horizon year of 2040 were obtained from the Alameda County Transportation Commission's travel demand model. The average annual growth rates for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours were obtained by comparing the projected 2020 volumes to the projected 2040 volumes along Dublin Boulevard between Silvergate Drive and San Ramon Road. The a.m. peak hour volumes are projected to grow by approximately 1.21 percent per year while the p.m. peak hour volumes are projected to grow by approximately 1.48 percent per year. Future traffic counts were obtained by multiplying the existing traffic counts by the annual growth rate for 18 years until 2040. Under the anticipated Future volumes, the Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection is expected to operate acceptably at LOS B during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours under current signal phasing and with eight phases. These results are summarized in Table 5. The future traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. Table 5 - Future and Future with 8-Phase Operation Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection Current Phasing AM Peak Delay LOS PM Peak Delay LOS 8-Phase Operation AM Peak Delay 1. Dublin Blvd/Hansen Dr 12.5 B 13.7 B LOS 13.3 B PM Peak Delay LOS 14.6 B Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service Project Description The proposed project consists of 18,000 square feet of office space, 36,500 square feet of light industrial space, and 70,804 square feet of warehousing space, along with 227 vehicle parking spaces and 12 long-term and short- term bicycle parking spaces. Trip Generation The anticipated trip generation for the proposed project was estimated using standard rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in Trip Generation Manual,11 th Edition, 2021 for "General Office Building" (ITE LU 710), "General Light Industrial" (ITE LU 110), and "Warehousing" (ITE LU 150). Because the site is currently occupied, "Research and Development Center" rates (ITE LU 760) were applied to estimate trips associated with the existing use. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 636 The expected trip generation potential for the proposed project is indicated in Table 6, with deductions taken for trips made to and from the existing research and development building which will cease with the construction of the project. The proposed project is expected to generate an average of 494 trips per day, including 66 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 63 during the p.m. peak hour. After deductions for the existing land use are taken into account, the proposed project would result in a net reduction of 201 trips on a daily basis, with an increase of 1 net new trip during the morning peak hour and 2 net new trips during the evening peak hour; the net trips represent the increase or decrease in traffic associated with the project compared to existing volumes. Table 6 - Trip Generation Summary Land Use Units Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour (ksf) Rate Trips Rate Trips In Out Rate Trips In Out Existing Research & Dev -62.715 11.08 -695 1.03 -65 -53 -12 0.98 -61 -10 -51 Proposed Offices 18.000 10.84 195 1.52 27 24 3 1.44 26 4 22 Light Industrial 36.500 4.87 178 0.74 27 24 3 0.65 24 3 21 Warehousing 70.804 1.71 121 0.17 12 9 3 0.18 13 4 9 Proposed Subtotal 494 66 57 9 63 11 52 Total (Proposed less Existing) -201 1 4 -3 2 1 1 Note: ksf = 1,000 square feet Trip Distribution The pattern used to allocate new project trips to the street network was based on 2020 projection data for inbound and outbound trips from Dublin Boulevard. This data was obtained from the Alameda County Countywide Travel Demand Model for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The applied distribution assumptions and resulting trips are shown in Table 7. Table 7 - Trip Distribution Assumptions Route Percent Daily AM Peak PM Peak Dublin Boulevard (West) Dublin Boulevard (East) 48% 52% -96 0 -105 1 1 1 TOTAL 100% -201 1 2 Intersection Operation Existing plus Project Conditions Upon the addition of project -related traffic to the existing volumes, the study intersections would continue to operate acceptably using either the existing or eight -phase configuration. These results are summarized in Table 8. The Existing plus Project traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 637 Table 8 - Existing and Existing plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection Phasing Existing Conditions AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS Existing plus Project AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Dublin Blvd/Hansen Dr Existing Signal Phasing Eight -Phase Operation 12.2 B 12.9 B 13.1 B 13.6 B 12.1 B 13.0 B 13.0 B 13.7 B Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service It is noted that with the addition of project -related traffic volumes, average delay at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive slightly decreases during the a.m. peak hour. While this is counter -intuitive, this condition occurs when a project adds trips to movements that are currently underutilized or have delays that are below the intersection average, resulting in a better balance between approaches and lower overall average delay. The conclusion could incorrectly be drawn that the project improves operation based on this data alone; however, it is more appropriate to conclude that the project trips are expected to make use of excess capacity, so drivers will experience little, if any, change in conditions as a result of the project. Finding - Under both the existing phasing and with eight phase operation, the study intersection is expected to continue operating acceptably at the same Levels of Service upon the addition of project -generated traffic as without it. Future plus Project Conditions The study intersection is expected to operate acceptably at LOS B using existing phasing and eight -phase operation with or without the addition of project -generated traffic to the anticipated Future volumes. The Future plus Project operating conditions are summarized in Table 9 and the volumes are shown in Figure 3. Table 9 - Future and Future plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection Phasing Future Conditions AM Peak Delay LOS PM Peak Delay LOS Future plus Project AM Peak Delay LOS PM Peak Delay LOS 1. Dublin Blvd/Hansen Dr Existing Signal Phasing Eight -Phase Operation 12.5 B 13.7 B 13.3 B 14.6 B 12.4 B 13.8 B 13.3 B 14.7 B Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service It should be noted that with the addition of project -related traffic volumes, average delay at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive would decrease during the a.m. peak hour. As noted previously, this condition reflects use of excess capacity and should not be interpreted as meaning that the project improves operation. Finding - The study intersection would continue operating acceptably and at the same acceptable Levels of Service with the addition of project -generated traffic to future conditions under both existing phasing and eight - phase operation. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 638 Alternative Modes Analysis Pedestrian Facilities Given the proximity of nearby shopping centers, schools, residential and other commercial areas to the site, it is reasonable to assume that some project patrons and employees would want to walk, bicycle, and/or use transit to reach the project site. Sidewalks exist along the project frontage, and on both sides of Dublin Boulevard east of the project site. Although sidewalks do not exist on the south side of Dublin Boulevard west of the project site between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive, the site is accessible via the sidewalks to the north side of Dublin Boulevard and via the crosswalks at Hansen Drive/Dublin Boulevard. Finding - Pedestrian facilities serving the project site are adequate since a network of facilities is present nearby and the project site is accessible using existing facilities. Bicycle Facilities Existing bicycle facilities, including Class II bike lanes and Class III bike routes on Dublin Boulevard together with shared use of minor streets, provide adequate access for bicyclists. The planned Class III route along Hansen Drive and Class I Multi -Use Path or Class IV Separated Bikeway along Dublin Boulevard would further improve bicycle facilities in the area. Finding - Bicycle access to the site is adequate since the area is served by a network of bicycle facilities. Bicycle Storage The proposed project would provide 24 bicycle parking stalls on -site, with 12 short-term and 12 long-term stalls. The required number of parking stalls is based on the City of Dublin Municipal Code 8.76.070; Development Standards, which states that bicycle parking requirements shall conform to the California Building Standards Code. The California Green Building Standards Code states that the number of short-term and long-term bicycle parking stalls provided must be equal to or greater than five percent of the number of motorized vehicle parking spaces provided. The site plan shows that 227 motorized parking spaces would be provided. Therefore, a minimum of 11 short-term and long-term parking stalls are required. Finding - The 24 bicycle storage spaces that would be provided are adequate and exceed the City's bicycle parking requirements. Transit Facilities Development sites which are located within one-half mile (2,640 feet) of a transit stop are generally considered to be adequately served by transit. Existing transit routes were reviewed and determined to be adequate to accommodate project -generated transit trips. Existing stops are within an acceptable walking distance of the site and would be accessible via the existing sidewalk network in the study area. If 20 percent of peak hour trips were made by transit, there would be 13 and 12 additional transit riders during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours respectively, spread out over multiple buses and times. As such, the volume of transit riders expected to be generated by the project is not anticipated to exceed the carrying capacity of the existing transit services near the project site. Finding - The project site is adequately served by transit since existing transit stops are less than one-half mile away. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 639 Dublin Boulevard Alternative Mode Analysis Sidewalks and Class I or IV bicycle facilities are proposed along Dublin Boulevard in the vicinity of the project site in the Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (Draft 2022). To further support the development of these proposed improvements, a feasibility study exploring options to expand the existing sidewalk network and construct a Class I multi -use path or Class IV separated bikeway along the section of Dublin Boulevard between Silvergate Drive and Donlon Way was initiated. Sidewalk Feasibility Between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive The feasibility of adding a sidewalk along the south side of Dublin Boulevard between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive was assessed. Through the evaluation two options were identified which would provide a sidewalk within this area. Each option as well as the existing condition are described in detail below. The public right of way along this segment of Dublin Boulevard is approximately 120 feet wide with varying curb - to -curb width throughout the block. Class II bike lanes currently exist on both sides of the street and are separated from automobile travel lanes by 3-foot-wide buffers. A sidewalk also exists along the north side, adjacent to the westbound travel lanes on Dublin Boulevard. The median varies between four feet and 25 feet wide. The existing cross-section of Dublin Boulevard between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive is shown in Plate 1. IIIIEASTBOUND h -RIME WESTBOUND _ . . — . . . . . • 5' 3• Ti• 25- 11' 1V 3' 5' 7 Bike lane Buffer Drive lane Median Drive lane Drive lane Buffer Bike lane Sidewalk Plate 1 Existing Cross -Section of Dublin Boulevard between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive As illustrated in Option A, shown in Plate 2, Dublin Boulevard could be widened along the eastbound side by approximately seven feet to make way for a new sidewalk. This would, however, require the removal (and reconstruction) of the existing guard rail as well as the construction of a retaining wall within the undeveloped sloped area just south of Dublin Boulevard. EASTBOUND WESTBOUND G • ._. ._. ORME • • 7' S' 3• 11' 25" f 1" 11' a' 5' 7' Sidewalk Bike lane Buffer Drive lane Median Drive lane Drive lane Buffer Bike lane Sidewalk Plate 2 Option A - Widen Dublin Boulevard to the South The existing median along Dublin Boulevard could be narrowed by approximately seven feet as shown as Option B in Plate 3. The travel lane and bike lane on the south side could be shifted laterally to the north which would Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 640 •oil - provide space for a new sidewalk along the southern edge of the roadway. The two westbound travel lanes approaching Silvergate Drive would also need to be merged into a single lane to accommodate the new sidewalk. EASTBOUND WESTBOUND . . . 7' 5' 3' 11' 18' 11- 11- 3' 5' 7' Sidewalk Bike lane Buffer Drive lane Median Drive lane Drive lane Buffer Bike lane Sidewalk Plate 3 Option B - Narrow the Median Class I or Class IV Installation Feasibility The section of Dublin Boulevard between Silvergate Drive and Donlon Way was assessed to explore whether installing a Class I multi -use path or Class IV separated bikeway is feasible. The segments between Donlon Way and Hansen Drive and between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Way were examined separately since the curb -to - curb width and configurations vary between the two segments. Between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive The existing sidewalk on the north side of Dublin Boulevard could be reconstructed to merge the existing Class II bike lane and sidewalk to form a 12-foot-wide Class I multi -use path. The center median would be narrowed by two feet and the westbound travel lanes would be shifted to the south by two feet. The eastbound Class II bike lane would be maintained. This option, which is preferred by City Staff, is titled as Option C and is illustrated in Plate 4. EASTBOUND WESTBOUND #OREM' - i t 5' 3' 11 ' 23' 11' 11' S' 12' Bike lane Buffer Drive lane Median Drive lane Drive lane Planting Multi -use Path strip Plate 4 Option C - Westbound Only Class I Multi -Use Path As was suggested for Option C above, the sidewalk along the north side of Dublin Boulevard could be merged with the Class II bike lane to create a 12-foot-wide Class I multi -use path. The eastbound side could be widened by five feet into the undeveloped sloped area to create space for a 12-foot-wide multi -use path. This option requires the construction of retaining walls to support the widening of Dublin Boulevard. The center median would be narrowed by four feet to allow for 12-foot-wide multi -use paths and five -foot -wide landscaped areas serving as buffer space between the pathway and vehicle traveled way. The westbound travel lanes would be shifted southward by two feet and the eastbound travel lane would be shifted northward by four feet. This option is titled Option D and is illustrated in Plate 5. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 641 EASTBOUND WESTBOUND 5' Planting Ship 11' Drive lane 19' Median * 1 ■ f li 1 Dove lane ❑rive lane 5' Planting slritl 12' Multi -use Path Plate 5 Option D - Westbound and Eastbound Class I Multi -Use Paths with Widened Eastbound Side As illustrated in Plate 6, Option E includes narrowing of the existing median along Dublin Boulevard by eleven feet and shifting the travel lane on the eastbound side north toward the center of the roadway. Combined with the removal of the Class II bike lake, this would provide room for a 12-foot-wide Class I multi -use path and a five -foot - wide buffer/landscaped area. On the westbound side, the bike lane and sidewalk would be reconstructed and combined to create a 12-foot-wide Class I multi -use path and a five -foot -wide buffer/landscaped area. To the east of the intersection with Silvergate Drive, the existing four -foot -wide median and left -turn lane would be realigned to the north and one of the westbound travel lanes eliminated. To the west of the intersection with Hansen Drive, the second eastbound travel lane would also be eliminated. • 12' Maki -use Patrl EASTBOUND WESTBOUND 5' Planting Strip 11' Drive lane R • —• R R iw 14' 11' 11 Median Drive lane Drive lane 5' Planting Strip 12' Multiuse Path Plate 6 Option E - Westbound and Eastbound Class I Multi -Use Path with Narrowed Median As shown in Option F, the existing cross-section between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive would remain without reconstruction of its existing lanes. However, a raised element (such as bollards) would be added within the existing buffer spaces between the bike lanes and travel lanes on both directions. This option is illustrated in Plate 7. EASTBOUND WESTBOUND • * 5' 3• 11' 25' 11' 11' 3' S' 7' Bike lane Bollard Drive lane Median Drive lane Drive lane Bollard Bike lane Sidewalk Plate 7 Option F - Class IV Separated Bikeway Option Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 (17 642 Between Donlon Way and Hansen Drive The public right of way on Dublin Boulevard between Donlon Way and Hansen Drive is approximately 97 feet wide with a curb -to -curb width of around 78 feet. Class II bike lanes exist on both sides of the road with on -street parking permitted along the westbound side only and not allowed near Hansen Drive where a right turn lane is provided instead of parking. Along the eastbound side of the road is the Dublin Heritage Park, which includes a 5-foot-wide landscaped section which serves as a buffer between the curb and the sidewalk. The existing cross-section of Dublin Boulevard is shown in Plate 8. EASTBOUND ▪ • WESTBOUND 8' Planting 6 11' 11' 15' 11" 11' 5' 8' 6' Sidewalk s1r1p Bike lane Drive lane Drive lane Median Drive lane Drive lane Bike lane Parking lane Sidewalk �i Plate 8 Existing Cross -Section of Dublin Boulevard between Donlon Way and Hansen Drive As shown in Option G, the existing sidewalk along the north side could be reconstructed and merged with the bike lane to create a 12-foot-wide Class I multi -use path, though this would require eliminating the Class II bike lane. The five-foot planting strip on the south side would be removed and relocated to the north side and the sidewalk on the south side would be shortened by one foot. The center median and all lanes would be shifted six feet to the south. The potential layout for Dublin Boulevard under this option is shown in Plate 9. 1 EASTBOUND 1�r 7 6' 11' Sidewalk Bike lane Drive lane AIM ▪ • 11' Drive lane WESTBOUND - _ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 15' 11' 11' 8' 5 12' Median Drive lane Drive lane Parking lane Planting Multi -use path strip Plate 9 Option G - Westbound Only Class I Multi -Use Path Option H includes the reconstruction of the existing sidewalks on both sides of Dublin Boulevard to create a 12- foot-wide Class I multi -use path in each direction in addition to five -foot -wide buffer/landscaped area on both sides as shown in Plate 10. Under this option, the existing Class II bike lanes would be eliminated in both directions and the center median would be narrowed by four feet. The westbound parking lane and travel lanes would be shifted to the south by two feet while the eastbound travel lanes would be shifted north by two feet. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 643 EASTBOUND 12' S' 11' M ulli-use Path Planting Drive lane strip 11' Drive lane 11 Median WESTBOUND • � * 11' 11' 5' S 12' Drive lane Drive lane Parking lane PI and ing Mvlti•use Path strip Plate 10 Option H - Class I Multi -Use Path Option I would be comprised of removing the on -street parking along the westbound side of Dublin Boulevard, as well as the right -turn lane at the intersection with Hansen Drive to make way for 3.5-foot-wide buffers with a raised element between the existing bike lanes and drive lanes on both sides. The travel lanes and median would also be shifted to the north by 3.5 feet, while the westbound bike lane would be shifted to the north by 7 feet. The potential layout for Dublin Boulevard under this option is shown in Plate 11. EASTBOUND 8' 5' Sidewalk planting Bike lane Ballard stop 3 3q 11' WESTBOUNO •6 III i in f i 15' 11' Rim 3 h' 6' 6' Drive lane Drive lane Median Drive lane Drive lane Bollard Bike lane Sidewalk Plate 11 Option I - Class IV Finding - Several options for the reconstruction of Dublin Boulevard have been identified which would provide either new Class I multi -use pathways or Class IV separated bikeways in the vicinity of the project site. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 644 Access and Circulation Site Access The site is currently accessible via two driveways along Dublin Boulevard. The western driveway is also the southern leg of the Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection. The eastern driveway is located approximately 180 feet east of the Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection. The raised median along Dublin Boulevard prohibits left -turn egress from this driveway, though there is a left -turn pocket that accommodates left turns into the site. The primary driveway across from Hansen Drive also provides access to the adjacent land use to the west. The project's driveways and internal roadway network would be designed to meet current City standards and so can be expected to accommodate the access requirements for both emergency and passenger vehicles. Sight Distance At driveways, a substantially clear line of sight should be maintained between the driver of a vehicle waiting to enter the street and the driver of an approaching vehicle. The sight distances along Dublin Boulevard at the project driveways were evaluated based on sight distance criteria contained in the Highway Design Manual published by Caltrans. The recommended sight distances for driveway approaches are based on stopping sight distance and use the approach travel speed as the basis for determining the recommended sight distance. Based on the posted speed limit of 35 mph, the minimum stopping sight distance required is 250 feet; a review in the field shows that sight distances at the proposed project driveways on Dublin Boulevard each exceed 250 feet to the west and so are adequate. To maintain this sight distance, it is noted that any vegetation near the project's driveways should be trimmed to an appropriate height of less than three feet and trees trimmed so that nothing hangs below a height of seven feet from the surface of the roadway. For a motorist traveling westbound on Dublin Boulevard intending to turn left into either project driveway, the stopping sight distance looking west along Dublin Boulevard is also greater than 250 feet, providing adequate visibility to allow a following driver to observe and react to a vehicle that may slow before moving into the left - turn pocket before entering the driveway. Finding - Adequate sight distance is available at the proposed project driveway locations to accommodate all turns entering and exiting the site. Recommendations - To achieve a minimum sight distance of 250 feet at each driveway access point, it is recommended that vegetation along the project frontage be trimmed and maintained. Oversized Vehicle Circulation Large wheelbase vehicles would be able to access the site via the western driveway as illustrated in the vehicle turning template analysis provided in Appendix D. The design vehicle used for the turn analysis is based on the Review of Truck Characteristics as Factors in Roadway Design, Transportation Research Board, 2004, with the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) Interstate Semi -Trailer (WB-62) vehicle. The WB-62 vehicle has a minimum turning radius of 45 feet, a centerline turning radius of 41 feet, and a minimum inside radius of 7.9 feet. It is noted that the evaluation was limited to only movements between the project site and the east of the site since this represents the most likely direction of travel based on the City of Dublin Truck Route Map (January 2014). As demonstrated by the analysis, the western driveway can accommodate the WB-62 truck for all movements to and from the east. However, the analysis also shows that the WB-62 vehicle is unable to access the eastern driveway without striking fixed objects (such as utility poles and a fire hydrant) adjacent to the driveway. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 645 Finding - Trucks can feasibly access the site via the western driveway. The eastern driveway is not suitable for access by trucks. Recommendation - Signage should be installed instructing drivers that trucks and other large vehicles are prohibited from accessing the eastern driveway. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 646 Parking The project was analyzed to determine whether the proposed parking supply would be sufficient to accommodate the anticipated parking demand. The project site as proposed would provide a total of 227 standard parking spaces, shared by various proposed land uses. The parking supply requirements are based on the City of Dublin Municipal Code, Section 8.76.080; Parking Requirements by Use Type. According to Section 8.76.040 G, if a project contains more than one use type, "the amount of parking to be provided shall be the total of that required by Section 8.76.080." Based on application of the parking requirements for the various uses, the project would be required to provide 227 parking spaces. Parking demand was estimated using standard rates published by ITE in Parking Generation, 5`h Edition, 2019. The parking demand for the proposed project was estimated using the published standard rates for "General Office Building" (ITE LU 710), "General Light Industrial" (ITE LU 110), and "Warehousing" (ITE LU 150). According to the ITE estimates 95 parking spaces would be required to accommodate the expected peak demand. The proposed parking supply of 227 spaces is anticipated to adequately accommodate the estimated peak parking demand of 95 spaces and meets the City Code requirement of 227 spaces. The expected demand and City code requirements are summarized in Table 10. Table 10 - Parking Analysis Summary Land Use Units (ksf) Supply (spaces) Rate City Requirements Spaces Required ITE Parking Generation Rate Est. Parking (Per ksf') Demand Offices 12.000 6.000 Light Industrial 36.500 Warehousing 70.804 227 1 per 0.25 ksf 30 1 per 0.3 ksf 35 1 per 0.4 ksf 91 1 per 1 ksf 71 2.39 43 0.65 0.39 Total 227 227 24 28 95 ' ksf = 1,000 square feet City parking space sizes are based on the Dublin Municipal Code, Section 8.76.080; Development Standards. The City requires that full-size spaces must be at least 9 feet by 20 feet and compact spaces must be 8 feet by 17 feet. The length may be reduced by 2 feet if the vehicles parked in them will overhang landscaping or a sidewalk. A review of the site plan confirms that each of the off-street parking spaces on site would be compliant with these requirements. The Uniform Building Code and the Federal Accessibility Guidelines requires that enough parking spaces for the disabled be provided. The site plan shows that out of 227 spaces available at the proposed project, there are nine stalls designated for disabled persons' use. Based on requirements stipulated by the Federal Accessibility Guidelines, seven accessible stalls are required. Thus, the project complies with the Federal Accessibility Guidelines. Finding - The proposed parking supply would satisfy the City of Dublin's parking requirements and accommodate the anticipated parking demand. The nine accessible stalls proposed for the project is greater than the seven stalls required. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 647 Conclusions and Recommendations Conclusions • The proposed project would be expected to generate 201 fewer trips per day, with one additional trip during the a.m. peak hour and two additional trips in p.m. peak hour. The existing pedestrian facilities serving the project site are adequate but would be improved upon installation of a sidewalk along the south side of Dublin Boulevard per the City's Bike and Pedestrian Plan. • Existing bicycle facilities near the project site are adequate but would be improved upon completion of planned facilities. • Transit facilities serving the project site are adequate. • The proposed project would be expected to have a less -than -significant impact on VMT. • The study intersection at Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive currently operates acceptably and is expected to continue doing so under Future volumes and upon the addition of project -generated traffic. Further, acceptable operation is projected for all volume scenarios with the addition of protected left turns on the northbound and southbound approaches. • Adequate sight distance is available at each of the project driveways. • Large trucks (WB-62) can access the project site at the western driveway but not at the eastern driveway. • Constructing a sidewalk along the south side of Dublin Boulevard between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive is feasible by either widening Dublin Boulevard to the south or by narrowing the existing median. • Installing a Class I Multi -Use path or Class IV Separated Bikeway along Dublin Boulevard between Donlon Way and Silvergate Drive is feasible. The option preferred by City staff would provide a Class I Multi -Use path on the north side of Dublin Boulevard. • The proposed parking supply meets City requirements and the estimated parking demand. • The nine accessible stalls provided by the project would be more than the required minimum of seven stalls. Recommendations • Signage stating that trucks are prohibited from accessing the eastern driveway should be installed. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 T(23 648 Study Participants and References Study Participants Principal in Charge Senior Traffic Engineer Assistant Engineer Graphics Editing/Formatting Quality Control References Mark E. Spencer, PE Kenny Jeong, PE Valerie Haines, EIT Cameron Wong Hannah Yung-Boxdell Dalene J. Whitlock, PE, PTOE Alameda Countywide Travel Demand Model, Alameda County Transportation Commission, 2014, https://www.alamedactc.org/planning/congestion-management/countywide-travel-demand-model/ Bay Area Rapid Transit, https://www.bart.gov/schedules California Green Building Standards Code, California Building Standards Commission, 2010 Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (Draft), City of Dublin, 2022 Dublin Municipal Code, Code Publishing Company, 2022, City of Dublin Truck Route Map, City of Dublin, 2014 Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2018 Highway Design Manual, 6th Edition, California Department of Transportation, 2017 Intersection Channelization Design Guide, National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report No. 279, Transportation Research Board, 1985 Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority, http://www.lavta.org/ Parking Generation, 5th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2019 Review of Truck Characteristics as Factors in Roadway Design, Transportation Research Board, 2004 Streetmix, https://streetmix.net Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, Governor's Office of Planning and Research, 2018 Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, City of Dublin, 2021 Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2021 Wheels Bus, https://wheelsbus.com/routes-and-schedules/ DUB900-2 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022 649 Appendix A Vehicle Miles Traveled Screening Map Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 2022 A 650 i-Tran5 This page intentionally left blank 651 Legend +111 \\ No VMT Generated <12.9 - Below Target VMT (Planning Area 4 Average - 15%) 12.9 - 15.2 - Target VMT (Planning Area 4 - 15% to Planning Area 4 Average) > 15.2 - Above Planning Area 4 Average Priority Development Area (PDA) Dublin City Limits Alameda County Wei DUBLIN 'f KITTELSON CALIFORNIA &ASSOCIATES c/10P Dougherty Hills �� Open Space 2 c �On.. DR 'IT'' O 4air BRIGHTONQh, `g YORKOP DUBLIN BL CLicPara CnR�rno�� Contra Costa County QPJSNpES DR f �yi • 0 RQNGe Ro 11TH ST 0THST aTNST SCI RW Pleasanton BRODER BL OILIER CANYON HD Livermore 1 Mile 0 Employment VMT (VMT per Employee) Dublin, California i-Tran5 This page intentionally left blank 653 Appendix B Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive Peak Hour Volumes Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 2022 B 654 i-Tran5 This page intentionally left blank 655 www.idaxdata.com 01 N Hansen Dr Dublin Blvd Peak Hour i&' ac = 0.c M JIUU 0 = 521 590 583 Dublin B 5 r TEV: 1,387 PHF: 0.75 ?d,n,1r` 0 0 0 Two -Hour Count Summaries Dublin Blvd 71 517 50 10 Date: 08/25/2022 Count Period: 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM Peak Hour: 7:45 AM to 8:45 AM 648 737 EB 0.5% 0.67 WB 0.6% 0.83 NB 0.0% 0.50 SB 0.7% 0.83 TOTAL 0.6% 0.75 /1n o?o� Interval Start Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Driveway Hansen Dr Eastbound UT LT TH RT Westbound UT LT TH RT Northbound UT LT TH RT Southbound UT LT TH RT 15-min Total Rolling One Hour 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 0 0 39 0 0 1 47 0 0 0 75 0 O 7 20 6 2 9 31 5 O 11 76 11 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 25 1 0 0 27 0 0 0 38 0 0 100 122 212 0 0 0 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 164 220 113 86 1 0 1 0 1 5 0 4 30 11 5 4 116 163 140 98 5 16 22 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 37 39 35 27 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 358 461 318 250 792 1,153 1,349 1,387 8:45 AM 0 4 82 0 1 3 64 27 0 0 0 1 0 23 0 0 205 1,234 Count Total 0 10 826 2 13 80 708 120 0 0 0 10 0 251 2 4 2,026 0 Peak Hour All HV HV% O 5 583 2 O 0 3 0 0% 1% 0% 10 50 517 71 O 0 3 1 0% 0% 1% 1% 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0% 0 138 1 4 0 1 0 0 1% 0% 0% 1,387 8 1% 0 0 0 Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count. Interval Start Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total EB WB NB SB Total East West North South Total 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 3 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 5 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 3 1 0 3 0 4 Count Total Peak Hour 5 9 0 2 16 0 0 0 1 1 5 0 13 0 18 3 4 0 1 8 0 0 0 1 1 3 0 5 0 8 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com 656 www.idaxdata.com Two -Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles Interval Start Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Driveway Hansen Dr 15-min Total Rolling One Hour UT Eastbound LT TH RT UT Westbound LT TH RT UT Northbound LT TH RT UT Southbound LT TH RT 7:00 AM 7:15AM 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 - I. O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -,0 0 0 - N 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ,-0 0 a-0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 3 0 0 0 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 7 11 10 8 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 5 8:15AM 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 1 9 Count Total 0 0 5 0 0 1 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 16 0 Peak Hour 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 0 Two -Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Interval Start Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Driveway Hansen Dr 15-min Total Rolling One Hour LT Eastbound TH RT LT Westbound TH RT LT Northbound TH RT LT Southbound TH RT 7:00 AM 7:15AM 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15AM 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left -Turn, if any. Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com 657 www.idaxdata.com 01 N Hansen Dr Dublin Blvd Peak Hour o0 q l1Ya) _�_ ca c M 1 L A t Dublin Blvd 2 ` 153 324 321 4 r TEV: 1,160 45� 448 PHF: 0.92 5 1 a 31 Dublin Blvd n i t r 0 0 — 0 0 Two -Hour Count Summaries 510 672 Date: 08/25/2022 Count Period: 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM Peak Hour: 5:00 PM to 6:00 PM f Ofo HV %: PHF EB 0.4% 0.96 WB 0.2% 0.91 NB 0.0% 0.38 SB 1.5% 0.84 TOTAL 0.4% 0.92 f ofo • L. fl0000C._> 3 0J • L1 1 ~ 0 0 ~ 1 �f � 01 v V i0 <. Ell � tr 0 0 0 o�o Interval Start Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Driveway Hansen Dr Eastbound UT LT TH RT Westbound UT LT TH RT Northbound UT LT TH RT Southbound UT LT TH RT 15-min Total Rolling One Hour 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 1 2 125 0 O 4 115 1 O 2 112 0 0 1 118 0 5 1 80 31 3 2 70 34 1 2 86 42 6 0 67 42 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 13 0 1 0 13 0 14 0 2 0 32 0 2 0 22 0 1 0 34 0 1 267 269 281 283 0 0 0 1,100 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 0 0 2 0 2 1 0 1 116 112 113 107 0 1 0 0 8 7 10 6 2 1 1 1 76 66 80 99 40 40 39 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 9 5 5 0 0 0 0 31 32 40 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 315 271 290 284 1,148 1,150 1,159 1,160 Count Total 3 13 918 2 46 10 624 302 0 1 1 97 0 236 0 7 2,260 0 Peak Hour All HV HV% 2 4 448 1 O 0 2 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 31 5 321 153 0 0 0 1 0% 0% 0% 1% 0 0 1 59 0 0 0 0 0% 0% 0 134 0 1 0 2 0 0 1% 0% 1,160 5 0% 0 0 0 Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count. Interval Start Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total EB WB NB SB Total East West North South Total 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM O 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 4 O 1 0 0 1 O 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 1 ICount Total 5 2 1 2 10 2 3 0 0 5 Peak Hour 2 1 0 2 5 1 2 0 0 3 5 0 5 0 10 I 5 0 3 0 8 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com 658 www.idaxdata.com Two -Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles Interval Start Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Driveway Hansen Dr 15-min Total Rolling One Hour Eastbound UT LT TH RT UT Westbound LT TH RT UT Northbound LT TH RT UT Southbound LT TH RT 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 > > 0 0 N 0 O O 0 0 0 0 -, 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cr 0 Cr 0 0 -, 0 0 Cr -. Cr 0 0 0 0 0 Cr 0 Cr 0 0 0 0 0 Cr 0 Cr 0 0 0 0 0 Cr 0 Cr 0 0 0 0 0 Cr Cr Cr 0 0 0 -, 0 Cr Cr Cr 0 0 0 0 0 Cr -. Cr - 0 0 0 0 Cr Cr Cr 0 0 0 0 0 Cr Cr Cr 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 5 5:00 PM 2 7 4 5 5 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 1 2 0 Count Total 0 0 4 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 10 0 Peak Hour 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 0 Two -Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Interval Start Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Driveway Hansen Dr 15-min Total Rolling One Hour Eastbound LT TH RT LT Westbound TH RT LT Northbound TH RT LT Southbound TH RT 4:00 PM 4:15PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cr r Cr 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cr 0 Cr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 2 3 0 0 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 Count Total 0 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 Peak Hour 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left -Turn, if any. Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com 659 Appendix C Intersection Level of Service Calculations Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 2022 660 i-Tran5 This page intentionally left blank 661 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive Movement Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (veh/h) Initial Q (Qb), veh Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zone On Approach Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In Adj Flow Rate, vehlh Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, vehlh Arrive On Green Sat Flow, veh/h Grp Volume(v), vehlh Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln Q Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh V/C Ratio(X) Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h HCM Platoon Ratio Upstream Filter(I) Uniform Delay (d), s/veh Incr Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),veh/In 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.1 LnGrp LOS C Existing Phasing 12/12/2022 r k 4\ t,* 5 583 2 60 517 71 0 0 ▪ • 6 138 1 ▪ • 4 5 583 2 60 517 71 0 0 6 138 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 No No No No 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900 6 686 2 71 608 84 0 0 7 162 1 5 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 12 1275 4 97 1416 628 0 0 35 226 1 7 0.01 0.35 0.35 0.05 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.13 0.13 0.13 1810 3663 11 1810 3582 1588 0 0 1659 1738 11 54 6 335 353 71 608 84 0 0 7 168 0 0 1810 1791 1883 1810 1791 1588 0 0 1659 1802 0 0 0.1 6.3 6.3 1.6 5.2 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 6.3 6.3 1.6 5.2 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.7 0.0 0.0 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.96 0.03 12 623 656 97 1416 628 0 0 35 234 0 0 0.51 0.54 0.54 0.73 0.43 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.72 0.00 0.00 671 1500 1577 671 2999 1329 0 0 1270 1095 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 20.7 10.9 10.9 19.5 9.2 8.1 0.0 0.0 20.1 17.4 0.0 0.0 12.4 1.0 1.0 3.9 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.1 0.7 1.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.0 0.0 12.0 11.9 23.4 9.5 8.2 0.0 0.0 21.2 19.0 0.0 0.0 BBC A A A A C B A A Approach Vol, veh/h Approach Delay, s/veh Approach LOS Timer - Assi.ned Phs 1 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 694 12.1 B 21.5 5.0 35.0 763 10.6 B 10.0 6.7 4.6 4.5 25.4 15.5 19.6 5.0 35.0 7 21.2 C 5.5 4.6 32.0 168 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 7.2 5.7 3.6 8.3 6.6 0.6 0.0 6.3 2.2 0.0 12.2 B User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. 1 Existing AM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive Existing Phasing 12/12/2022 t 4\ t,* v 1 1 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (veh/h) Initial Q (Qb), veh Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zone On Approach Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In Adj Flow Rate, veh/h Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, vehlh Arrive On Green Sat Flow, veh/h Grp Volume(v), veh/h Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In Q Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h V/C Ratio(X) Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h HCM Platoon Ratio Upstream Filter(I) Uniform Delay (d), s/veh Incr Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),vehM Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh LnGrp LOS 6 6 0 1.00 1.00 1900 7 0.92 0 14 0.01 1810 7 1810 0.1 0.1 1.00 14 0.52 950 1.00 1.00 18.8 10.8 0.0 0.1 T1• 448 448 0 1.00 No 1900 487 0.92 0 1026 0.28 3696 238 1805 4.2 4.2 501 0.47 1895 1.00 1.00 11.4 1.0 0.0 1.4 1 1 0 0.97 1.00 1900 1 0.92 0 2 0.28 8 250 1898 4.2 4.2 0.00 527 0.47 1993 1.00 1.00 11.5 0.9 0.0 1.4 36 36 0 1.00 1.00 1900 39 0.92 0 64 0.04 1810 39 1810 0.8 0.8 1.00 64 0.61 950 1.00 1.00 18.1 3.4 0.0 0.3 1.00 No 1900 349 0.92 0 1103 0.31 3610 349 1805 2.8 2.8 1103 0.32 3790 1.00 1.00 10.2 0.2 0.0 0.9 321 321 153 153 0 0 1.00 1.00 1885 166 0.92 1 486 0.31 1590 166 1590 3.1 3.1 1.00 486 0.34 1669 1.00 1.00 10.3 0.6 0.0 0.9 1.00 1.00 1976 0 0.92 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0 0.00 0 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4+ 1.00 No 1976 1 0.92 0 2 0.07 25 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 59 59 0 0.99 1.00 1976 64 0.92 0 117 0.07 1629 65 1655 1.4 1.4 0.98 119 0.55 1303 1.00 1.00 17.1 1.5 0.0 0.5 4+ 134 134 0 0 0 1.00 1.00 1885 146 0.92 1 223 0.12 1795 147 1808 3.0 3.0 0.99 225 0.65 949 1.00 1.00 15.9 1.2 0.0 1.1 1.00 No 1900 0 0.92 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 1 0 0.98 1.00 1900 1 0.92 0 2 0.12 12 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.01 0 0.00 0 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.7 12.4 12.4 21.5 10.4 10.8 0.0 0.0 18.5 17.1 0.0 0.0 CBBC BB A A B B A A Approach Vol, vehlh Approach Delay, s/veh Approach LOS Timer - Assi.ned Phs Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 16.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 40.0 495 12.7 B 554 11.3 B 9.3 5.9 15.6 4.6 4.5 5.0 20.0 20.0 40.0 65 18.5 B 7.3 4.6 30.0 147 17.1 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 5.1 5.0 2.8 6.2 4.4 0.4 0.0 4.4 3.4 0.2 12.9 B User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. 1 Existing PM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Phasing 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/12/2022 r k- 4\ t,* Movement Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (veh/h) Initial Q (Qb), veh Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zone On Approach Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In Adj Flow Rate, veh/h Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, veh/h Arrive On Green Sat Flow, veh/h Grp Volume(v), veh/h Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In Q Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h V/C Ratio(X) Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h HCM Platoon Ratio Upstream Filter(I) Uniform Delay (d), s/veh Incr Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),vehM 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.1 LnGrp LOS C Approach Vol, veh/h Approach Delay, s/veh Approach LOS Timer - Assi.ned Phs Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5 583 3 61 517 71 0 0 ▪ • 3 138 1 ▪ • 4 5 583 3 61 517 71 0 0 3 138 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 No No No No 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900 6 686 4 72 608 84 0 0 4 162 1 5 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 12 1276 7 98 1423 631 0 0 29 226 1 7 0.01 0.35 0.35 0.05 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.13 0.13 0.13 1810 3651 21 1810 3582 1588 0 0 1659 1738 11 54 6 336 354 72 608 84 0 0 4 168 0 0 1810 1791 1881 1810 1791 1588 0 0 1659 1802 0 0 0.1 6.3 6.3 1.6 5.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 6.3 6.3 1.6 5.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.7 0.0 0.0 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.96 0.03 12 626 658 98 1423 631 0 0 29 234 0 0 0.51 0.54 0.54 0.73 0.43 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.72 0.00 0.00 673 1503 1579 673 3007 1333 0 0 1273 1098 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 20.6 10.9 10.9 19.4 9.1 8.0 0.0 0.0 20.2 17.4 0.0 0.0 12.4 1.0 1.0 3.9 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.8 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.1 0.7 1.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 11.9 11.8 23.3 9.4 8.1 0.0 0.0 20.9 18.9 0.0 0.0 BBC A A A A C B A A 696 764 4 168 12.0 10.6 20.9 18.9 B B C B 8 21.6 10.0 6.8 19.6 5.3 5.0 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.6 35.0 25.4 15.5 35.0 32.0 7.1 5.7 3.6 8.3 2.1 6.6 0.6 0.0 6.3 0.0 Intersection Summa HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.1 1 HCM 6th LOS B User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. Existing + Project AM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive Existing Phasing 12/12/2022 ,c k 4\ t,* '- 1 1 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (veh/h) Initial Q (Qb), veh Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zone On Approach Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In Adj Flow Rate, veh/h Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, veh/h Arrive On Green Sat Flow, veh/h Grp Volume(v), veh/h Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In Q Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h V/C Ratio(X) Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h HCM Platoon Ratio Upstream Filter(I) Uniform Delay (d), s/veh Incr Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),vehM Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh LnGrp LOS Approach Vol, veh/h Approach Delay, s/veh Approach LOS Timer - Assi.ned Phs Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+11), s Green Ext Time (p_c), s 6 6 0 1.00 1.00 1900 7 0.92 0 14 0.01 1810 7 1810 0.1 0.1 1.00 14 0.52 735 1.00 1.00 18.9 10.8 0.0 0.1 T1• 448 448 0 1.00 No 1885 487 0.92 1 1008 0.28 3658 238 1791 4.2 4.2 493 0.48 1642 1.00 1.00 11.6 1.0 0.0 1.4 2 2 0 0.98 1.00 1900 2 0.92 0 4 0.28 15 251 1882 4.2 4.2 0.01 518 0.48 1726 1.00 1.00 11.6 1.0 0.0 1.5 37 37 0 1.00 1.00 1900 40 0.92 0 66 0.04 1810 40 1810 0.8 0.8 1.00 66 0.61 735 1.00 1.00 18.1 3.4 0.0 0.4 321 321 0 1.00 No 1885 349 0.92 1 1090 0.30 3582 349 1791 2.9 2.9 1090 0.32 3285 1.00 1.00 10.2 0.2 0.0 0.9 29.7 12.6 12.6 21.5 10.5 CBBCB 496 555 12.8 11.4 B B 4.8 4.5 15.5 2.1 0.0 16.6 5.0 35.0 5.2 4.3 9.3 4.6 25.4 5.0 0.5 5.9 4.5 15.5 2.8 0.0 153 153 0 0.97 1.00 1885 166 0.92 1 473 0.30 1554 166 1554 3.2 3.2 1.00 473 0.35 1425 1.00 1.00 10.3 0.6 0.0 0.9 1.00 1.00 1976 1 0.92 0 2 0.07 25 67 1658 1.5 1.5 0.01 123 0.54 1390 1.00 1.00 17.0 1.4 0.0 0.5 4+ 0 1.00 No 1976 1 0.92 0 2 0.07 25 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.0 18.4 0.0 B B A 67 18.4 B 15.5 5.0 35.0 6.2 4.3 7.4 4.6 32.0 3.5 0.2 60 60 0 0.99 1.00 1976 65 0.92 0 119 0.07 1608 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.97 0 0.00 0 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 134 134 0 1.00 1.00 1885 146 0.92 1 223 0.12 1796 147 1808 3.0 3.0 0.99 224 0.66 1203 1.00 1.00 15.9 1.2 0.0 1.1 4+ 0 0 1.00 No 1900 0 0.92 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 1 0 0.99 1.00 1900 1 0.92 0 2 0.12 12 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.01 0 0.00 0 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.1 0.0 0.0 A B A A 147 17.1 Intersection Summa HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.0 1 HCM 6th LOS B User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. Existing + Project PM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Phasing 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/12/2022 Movement Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (veh/h) Initial Q (Qb), veh Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zone On Approach Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In Adj Flow Rate, veh/h Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, veh/h Arrive On Green Sat Flow, veh/h Grp Volume(v), veh/h Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In Q Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h V/C Ratio(X) Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h HCM Platoon Ratio Upstream Filter(I) Uniform Delay (d), s/veh Incr Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),vehM 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.2 LnGrp LOS C t 4\ t P V 1 1 7 710 3 74 630 87 0 0 ▪ • 8 169 7 710 3 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 No No No 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 7 710 3 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 14 1293 5 99 1435 636 0 0 36 235 0.01 0.35 0.35 0.05 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.14 1810 3658 15 1810 3582 1588 0 0 1658 1731 7 348 365 74 630 87 0 0 8 176 1810 1791 1882 1810 1791 1588 0 0 1658 1803 0.2 6.7 6.7 1.7 5.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 4.0 0.2 6.7 6.7 1.7 5.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 4.0 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.96 14 633 666 99 1435 636 0 0 36 245 0.52 0.55 0.55 0.75 0.44 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.72 652 1456 1531 652 2912 1291 0 0 1233 1064 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 21.3 11.2 11.2 20.1 9.4 8.2 0.0 0.0 20.7 17.8 11.0 1.1 1.0 4.2 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 2.3 0.7 1.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.6 44 2 2 0 1.00 No 1900 2 1.00 0 3 0.14 20 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 5 0 0.98 1.00 1900 5 1.00 0 7 0.14 51 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.03 0 0.00 0 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.2 12.2 24.3 9.7 8.3 0.0 0.0 21.8 19.3 0.0 0.0 BBC A A A A C B A A Approach Vol, veh/h Approach Delay, s/veh Approach LOS Timer - Assi.ned Phs Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 720 12.4 B 1 2 22.2 5.0 35.0 791 10.9 B 4 10.4 6.8 4.6 4.5 25.4 15.5 8 21.8 C 176 19.3 20.2 5.0 35.0 5.5 4.6 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 7.5 6.0 3.7 8.7 6.8 0.6 0.1 6.5 2.2 0.0 12.5 B User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. Future AM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive Existing Phasing 12/12/2022 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (veh/h) Initial Q (Qb), veh Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zone On Approach Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In Adj Flow Rate, veh/h Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, veh/h Arrive On Green Sat Flow, veh/h Grp Volume(v), veh/h Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In Q Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h V/C Ratio(X) Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h HCM Platoon Ratio Upstream Filter(I) Uniform Delay (d), s/veh Incr Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),vehM Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh LnGrp LOS 8 8 0 1.00 1.00 1900 8 1.00 0 15 0.01 1810 8 1810 0.2 0.2 1.00 15 0.52 675 1.00 1.00 20.5 9.8 0.0 0.1 T1• 568 568 0 1.00 No 1900 568 1.00 0 1098 0.30 3689 278 1805 5.3 5.3 537 0.52 1521 1.00 1.00 12.1 1.1 0.0 1.8 2 2 0 0.98 1.00 1900 2 1.00 0 4 0.30 13 292 1897 5.3 5.3 0.01 565 0.52 1599 1.00 1.00 12.1 1.0 0.0 1.9 ,c k 4\ t,* '- 1 1 46 46 0 1.00 1.00 1900 46 1.00 0 72 0.04 1810 46 1810 1.0 1.0 1.00 72 0.64 675 1.00 1.00 19.6 3.5 0.0 0.4 407 407 0 1.00 No 1900 407 1.00 0 1187 0.33 3610 407 1805 3.5 3.5 1187 0.34 3043 1.00 1.00 10.5 0.2 0.0 1.1 194 194 0 0.97 1.00 1885 194 1.00 1 511 0.33 1555 194 1555 4.0 4.0 1.00 511 0.38 1311 1.00 1.00 10.7 0.7 0.0 1.1 1.00 1.00 1976 0 1.00 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0 0.00 0 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4+ 2 2 0 1.00 No 1976 2 1.00 0 3 0.08 43 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 0 0.98 1.00 1976 75 1.00 0 128 0.08 1613 77 1656 1.9 1.9 0.97 132 0.58 1276 1.00 1.00 18.5 1.5 0.0 0.7 170 170 0 1.00 1.00 1885 170 1.00 1 237 0.13 1786 172 1807 3.8 3.8 0.99 240 0.72 1105 1.00 1.00 17.3 1.5 0.0 1.5 4+ 0 0 1.00 No 1900 0 1.00 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 2 0 0.99 1.00 1900 2 1.00 0 3 0.13 21 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.01 0 0.00 0 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 30.3 13.2 13.2 23.2 10.8 11.3 0.0 0.0 20.0 18.8 0.0 0.0 CBBCBB A A B B A A Approach Vol, veh/h Approach Delay, s/veh Approach LOS Timer - Assi.ned Phs Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 578 13.4 B 18.7 5.0 35.0 647 11.8 B 4 5 10.1 6.1 4.6 4.5 25.4 15.5 77 20.0 B 172 18.8 17.4 5.0 35.0 7.9 4.6 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 6.0 5.8 3.0 7.3 5.1 0.6 0.0 5.1 3.9 0.3 13.7 B i User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. Future PM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Phasing 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/12/2022 Movement Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (veh/h) Initial Q (Qb), veh Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zone On Approach Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In Adj Flow Rate, veh/h Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, veh/h Arrive On Green Sat Flow, veh/h Grp Volume(v), veh/h Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In Q Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h V/C Ratio(X) Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h HCM Platoon Ratio Upstream Filter(I) Uniform Delay (d), s/veh Incr Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),vehM 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.2 LnGrp LOS C 4 4\ t,* '- 1 1 7 710 4 75 630 87 0 0 ▪ • 5 169 7 710 4 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 No No No 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 7 710 4 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 14 1295 7 100 1441 639 0 0 31 235 0.01 0.35 0.35 0.06 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.14 1810 3652 21 1810 3582 1588 0 0 1658 1731 7 348 366 75 630 87 0 0 5 176 1810 1791 1881 1810 1791 1588 0 0 1658 1803 0.2 6.7 6.7 1.8 5.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.0 0.2 6.7 6.7 1.8 5.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.0 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.96 14 635 667 100 1441 639 0 0 31 245 0.52 0.55 0.55 0.75 0.44 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.72 654 1461 1535 654 2922 1295 0 0 1237 1067 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 21.2 11.1 11.1 20.0 9.3 8.1 0.0 0.0 20.7 17.8 11.0 1.1 1.0 4.2 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.9 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 2.3 0.8 1.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.6 2 2 0 1.00 No 1900 2 1.00 0 3 0.14 20 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 5 0 0.98 1.00 1900 5 1.00 0 7 0.14 51 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.03 0 0.00 0 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.1 12.1 24.2 9.6 8.2 0.0 0.0 21.6 19.3 0.0 0.0 BBC A A A A C B A A Approach Vol, veh/h Approach Delay, s/veh Approach LOS Timer -Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 1 4.8 4.5 15.5 721 12.3 B 2 22.3 5.0 35.0 792 10.8 B 10.4 6.9 4.6 4.5 25.4 15.5 20.2 5.0 35.0 5 21.6 C 8 5.4 4.6 32.0 176 19.3 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 7.5 6.0 3.8 8.7 6.8 0.6 0.1 6.5 12.4 B 2.1 0.0 1 User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. Future + Project AM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive Existing Phasing 12/12/2022 t 4\ t,* v 1 1 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (veh/h) Initial Q (Qb), veh Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zone On Approach Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In Adj Flow Rate, veh/h Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, veh/h Arrive On Green Sat Flow, veh/h Grp Volume(v), veh/h Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In Q Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h V/C Ratio(X) Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h HCM Platoon Ratio Upstream Filter(I) Uniform Delay (d), s/veh Incr Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),vehM Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh LnGrp LOS 8 8 0 1.00 1.00 1900 8 1.00 0 15 0.01 1810 8 1810 0.2 0.2 1.00 15 0.52 672 1.00 1.00 20.6 9.8 0.0 0.1 T1+ ii tt- r 44 568 3 47 407 194 1 2 76 170 568 3 47 407 194 1 2 76 170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 No No No 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 568 3 47 407 194 1 2 76 170 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1095 6 73 1189 512 2 3 129 237 0.30 0.30 0.04 0.33 0.33 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.13 3682 19 1810 3610 1555 21 42 1595 1786 278 293 47 407 194 79 0 0 172 1805 1896 1810 1805 1555 1658 0 0 1807 5.3 5.3 1.1 3.6 4.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.8 5.3 5.3 1.1 3.6 4.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.01 0.96 0.99 537 564 73 1189 512 135 0 0 240 0.52 0.52 0.65 0.34 0.38 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.72 1514 1591 672 3029 1305 1272 0 0 1100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 12.2 12.2 19.7 10.6 10.7 18.5 0.0 0.0 17.3 1.1 1.1 3.5 0.2 0.7 1.5 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 1.9 0.5 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.0 0.0 1.5 4+ 0 0 1.00 No 1900 0 1.00 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 2 0 0.99 1.00 1900 2 1.00 0 3 0.13 21 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.01 0 0.00 0 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 30.4 13.3 13.2 23.2 10.8 11.4 20.0 0.0 0.0 18.8 0.0 0.0 CBBC BBC A A B A A Approach Vol, veh/h Approach Delay, s/veh Approach LOS Timer -Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.9 4.5 15.5 579 13.5 B 18.7 5.0 35.0 4 10.1 4.6 25.4 648 11.9 B 5 6.2 4.5 15.5 17.4 5.0 35.0 79 20.0 C 8 8.0 4.6 32.0 172 18.8 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+11), s 2.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 6.0 5.8 3.1 7.3 5.1 0.6 0.0 5.1 3.9 0.3 13.8 B User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. Future + Project PM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/02/2022 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive Movement Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 5 Future Volume (veh/h) 5 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 Work Zone On Approach Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 Cap, veh/h 12 Arrive On Green 0.01 Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 6 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1810 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 12 V/C Ratio(X) 0.51 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 187 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),veh/In 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 31.5 LnGrp LOS C Approach Vol, veh/h Approach Delay, s/veh Approach LOS Timer -Assigned Phs 1 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 ~ t 4\ EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL T1• j 583 2 60 517 71 0 583 2 60 517 71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 No No 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 686 2 71 608 84 0 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 1 0 0 1 1 0 1120 3 100 1270 562 5 0.31 0.31 0.06 0.35 0.35 0.00 3663 11 1810 3582 1586 1882 335 353 71 608 84 0 1791 1883 1810 1791 1586 1882 6.2 6.2 1.5 5.1 1.4 0.0 6.2 6.2 1.5 5.1 1.4 0.0 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 548 576 100 1270 562 5 0.61 0.61 0.71 0.48 0.15 0.00 806 848 258 2688 1190 243 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 11.5 11.5 18.0 9.7 8.5 0.0 1.6 1.5 3.5 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.1 0.6 1.5 0.4 0.0 t 1 -' NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR T4 0 6 138 1 4 0 6 138 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 No No 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900 0 7 162 1 5 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0 0 1 0 0 0 66 212 74 372 0.00 0.04 0.12 0.27 0.27 0 1660 1795 272 1358 0 7 162 0 6 0 1660 1795 0 1629 0.0 0.2 3.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 3.4 0.0 0.1 1.00 1.00 0.83 0 66 212 0 447 0.00 0.11 0.76 0.00 0.01 0 1374 441 0 447 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 11.00 0.0 17.9 16.5 0.0 _ 10.2 0.0 0.3 5.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.0 0.0 13.0 13.0 21.4 10.1 8.7 0.0 0.0 BBC B A A A 694 763 7 13.2 11.0 18.2 B B B 2 18.7 5.0 29.0 7.1 6.0 3 0.0 4.5 5.0 0.0 0.0 4 5 8 15.2 6.6 16.8 9.1 6.1 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 8.5 5.5 17.4 9.5 32.0 2.1 3.5 8.2 5.4 2.2 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.2 0.0 18.2 22.2 0.0 10.2 BC A B 168 21.8 C Intersection Summa HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.1 HCM 6th LOS B 8-Phase Operation 12/02/2022 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (veh/h) Initial Q (Qb), veh Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zone 0n Approach Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In Adj Flow Rate, veh/h Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, veh/h Arrive 0n Green Sat Flow, veh/h Grp Volume(v), veh/h Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In Q Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h V/C Ratio(X) Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h HCM Platoon Ratio Upstream Filter(I) Uniform Delay (d), s/veh Incr Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),vehM Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh LnGrp LOS Approach Vol, veh/h Approach Delay, s/veh Approach LOS Timer -Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+11), s Green Ext Time (p_c), s l l ~ 6 6 0 1.00 1.00 1900 7 0.92 0 14 0.01 1810 7 1810 0.1 0.1 1.00 14 0.52 193 1.00 1.00 18.5 10.8 0.0 0.1 T1• 448 448 0 1.00 No 1900 487 0.92 0 987 0.27 3696 238 1805 4.2 4.2 482 0.49 675 1.00 1.00 11.6 1.1 0.0 1.4 1 1 0 0.98 1.00 1900 1 0.92 0 2 0.27 8 250 1898 4.2 4.2 0.00 507 0.49 710 1.00 1.00 11.6 1.1 0.0 1.4 36 36 0 1.00 1.00 1900 39 0.92 0 64 0.04 1810 39 1810 0.8 0.8 1.00 64 0.61 218 1.00 1.00 17.8 3.4 0.0 0.3 t 4\ WBR NBL t NBT NBR SBL SBT 321 153 321 153 0 0 0.97 1.00 1.00 No 1900 349 0.92 0 1066 0.30 3610 349 1805 2.8 2.8 1066 0.33 2797 1.00 1.00 10.3 0.3 0.0 0.9 1885 166 0.92 1 459 0.30 1554 166 1554 3.2 3.2 1.00 459 0.36 1204 1.00 1.00 10.4 0.7 0.0 1.0 1• 0 1 59 0 1 59 0 0 0 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1976 0 0.92 0 5 0.00 1882 0 1882 0.0 0.0 1.00 5 0.00 251 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.3 12.7 12.6 21.2 10.5 11.1 0.0 CBBC BB 495 554 12.9 11.5 B B 1.00 No 1976 1 0.92 0 2 0.09 25 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 A A 65 16.6 B 1 2 3 4 5 -1!1- 8 4.8 16.1 0.0 16.6 5.8 15.0 8.5 8.1 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.0 29.0 5.0 7.9 4.5 14.0 8.5 32.0 2.1 5.2 0.0 2.0 2.8 6.2 5.0 3.4 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.1 0.2 1976 64 0.92 0 154 0.09 1630 65 1655 1.4 1.4 0.98 156 0.42 1415 1.00 1.00 16.0 0.7 0.0 0.5 134 134 0 1.00 1.00 1885 146 0.92 1 190 0.11 1795 146 1795 3.0 3.0 1.00 190 0.77 408 1.00 1.00 16.3 6.4 0.0 1.4 0 0 1.00 No 1900 0 0.92 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.00 1.00 1900 1 0.92 0 514 0.32 1603 1 1603 0.0 0.0 1.00 514 0.00 514 1.00 1.00 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.6 22.7 0.0 8.6 BC A A 147 22.6 C Intersection Summa HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.6 HCM 6th LOS B User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. Existing AM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Existing PM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 12/02/2022 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive l I~ t 4\ t P V 1 ►r Movement EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 'j t1+ ' t4 jr ii 1+ 'j T4 Lane Configurations 'j t1. ' t4 j' ii 1+ 'j T4 Traffic Volume (veh/h) 5 583 3 61 517 71 0 0 3 138 1 4 Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 448 2 37 321 153 1 1 60 134 0 1 Future Volume (veh/h) 5 583 3 61 517 71 0 0 3 138 1 4 Future Volume (veh/h) 6 448 2 37 321 153 1 1 60 134 0 1 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 686 4 72 608 84 0 0 4 162 1 5 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 487 2 40 349 166 1 1 65 146 0 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Cap,veh/h 12 1120 7 101 1276 565 5 0 61 212 74 369 Cap,veh/h 14 983 4 66 1066 459 5 2 156 190 0 320 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.31 0.31 0.06 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.12 0.27 0.27 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.27 0.27 0.04 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.00 0.20 SatFlow,veh/h 1810 3651 21 1810 3582 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 272 1358 SatFlow,veh/h 1810 3687 15 1810 3610 1554 1882 25 1630 1795 0 1598 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 6 336 354 72 608 84 0 0 4 162 0 6 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 238 251 40 349 166 1 0 66 146 0 1 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1810 1791 1881 1810 1791 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 0 1629 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1810 1805 1897 1810 1805 1554 1882 0 1655 1795 0 1598 Cr Serve(g_s), s 0.1 6.2 6.2 1.5 5.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.4 0.0 0.1 Cr Serve(g_s), s 0.1 4.2 4.2 0.8 2.8 3.2 0.0 0.0 1.4 3.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 6.2 6.2 1.5 5.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.4 0.0 0.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 4.2 4.2 0.8 2.8 3.2 0.0 0.0 1.4 3.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.83 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 12 549 577 101 1276 565 5 0 61 212 0 443 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 14 481 506 66 1066 459 5 0 158 190 0 320 V/C Ratio(X) 0.51 0.61 0.61 0.71 0.48 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.76 0.00 0.01 V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.50 0.50 0.61 0.33 0.36 0.20 0.00 0.42 0.77 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 188 808 849 258 2694 1193 244 0 1378 442 0 443 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 193 674 708 217 2790 1201 251 0 1412 407 0 336 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 11.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.1 11.4 11.4 17.9 9.6 8.4 0.0 0.0 17.9 16.5 0.0 _ 10.3 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.6 11.6 11.6 17.8 10.3 10.4 18.7 0.0 16.0 16.3 0.0 12.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.4 1.6 1.5 3.5 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 5.7 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.8 1.1 1.1 3.3 0.3 0.7 18.4 0.0 0.7 6.4 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ile Back0fQ(50 % ),vehM 0.1 2.0 2.1 0.6 1.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 % ile Back0fQ(50 % ),vehM 0.1 1.4 1.5 0.3 0.9 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.4 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 31.4 13.0 12.9 21.4 10.0 8.6 0.0 0.0 18.1 22.1 0.0 10.3 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 29.3 12.8 12.7 21.2 10.6 11.1 37.1 0.0 16.6 22.7 0.0 12.0 LnGrp LOS CBBCB A A A BC A B LnGrp LOS CBBCB BD A BC A B Approach Vol, veh/h 696 764 4 168 Approach Vol, veh/h 496 555 67 147 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.1 10.9 18.1 21.7 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.0 11.5 16.9 22.6 Approach LOS B B B C Approach LOS B B B C 8-Phase Operation 12/02/2022 k- 4\ t WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Timer -Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 8 r 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.7 18.7 0.0 15.1 6.6 16.8 9.1 6.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 29.0 5.0 8.5 5.5 17.4 9.5 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+11), s 2.1 7.1 0.0 2.1 3.5 8.2 5.4 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.2 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.0 :L7m-nziaz- Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5=6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 16.1 4.6 12.1 5.9 15.0 8.5 8.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 29.0 5.0 7.9 4.5 14.0 8.5 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+11), s 2.1 5.2 2.0 2.0 2.8 6.2 5.0 3.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.1 0.2 Intersection Summa HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.7 HCM 6th LOS B HCM 6th LOS B User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. Existing + Project AM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Existing + Project PM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation 12/02/2022 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive Movement Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (veh/h) Initial Q (Qb), veh Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zone On Approach Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In Adj Flow Rate, veh/h Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, veh/h Arrive On Green Sat Flow, veh/h Grp Volume(v), veh/h Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In Q Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h V/C Ratio(X) Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h HCM Platoon Ratio Upstream Filter(I) Uniform Delay (d), s/veh Incr Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),veh/In 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 30.4 LnGrp LOS C 7 1 ~ t 4 WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ii T1• 'j tt- j ii 1+ ) 7 710 3 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 7 710 3 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 No No No 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 7 710 3 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 14 1131 5 102 1282 568 5 0 69 221 0.01 0.31 0.31 0.06 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.12 1810 3658 15 1810 3582 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 7 348 365 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 1810 1791 1882 1810 1791 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 0.2 6.6 6.6 1.6 5.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.6 0.2 6.6 6.6 1.6 5.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.6 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 554 582 102 1282 568 5 0 69 221 0.52 0.63 0.63 0.73 0.49 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.77 183 787 828 251 2625 1163 238 0 1342 431 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 19.6 11.7 11.7 18.4 9.9 8.6 0.0 0.0 18.3 16.8 10.9 1.7 1.6 3.7 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 2.3 0.7 1.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.6 2 2 0 1.00 No 1900 2 1.00 0 132 0.28 475 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 5 0 0.98 1.00 1900 5 1.00 0 331 0.28 1188 7 1663 0.1 0.1 0.71 463 0.02 463 1.00 11.00 10.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.4 13.3 22.0 10.3 8.8 0.0 0.0 18.5 22.3 0.0 10.4 BBCB A A A BC A B Approach Vol, veh/h Approach Delay, s/veh Approach LOS Timer -Assigned Phs 1 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 720 13.5 B 2 19.2 5.0 29.0 3 0.0 4.5 5.0 791 11.2 B 8 18.5 B 4 5 -15/m- 8 15.6 6.7 17.2 9.4 6.2 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 8.5 5.5 17.4 9.5 32.0 176 21.8 C Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 7.4 0.0 2.1 3.6 8.6 5.6 2.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.2 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 13.3 B User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. Future AM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 12/02/2022 I~ k 4\ t EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 'j tt- i 'i 1+ i 1 Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 568 2 46 407 194 0 2 75 170 0 2 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 568 2 46 407 194 0 2 75 170 0 2 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone 0n Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 8 568 2 46 407 194 0 2 75 170 0 2 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Cap,veh/h 15 950 3 73 1045 450 5 4 161 221 0 543 Arrive 0n Green 0.01 0.26 0.26 0.04 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.00 0.34 SatFlow,veh/h 1810 3689 13 1810 3610 1553 1882 43 1614 1795 0 1603 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 278 292 46 407 194 0 0 77 170 0 2 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1810 1805 1897 1810 1805 1553 1882 0 1657 1795 0 1603 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 5.2 5.2 1.0 3.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 1.7 3.6 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 5.2 5.2 1.0 3.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 1.7 3.6 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 15 465 489 73 1045 450 5 0 166 221 0 543 V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.60 0.60 0.63 0.39 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.77 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 186 651 684 210 2697 1160 242 0 1366 393 0 543 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.2 12.6 12.6 18.3 11.0 11.2 0.0 0.0 16.5 16.5 0.0 8.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.7 1.8 1.7 3.3 0.3 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.8 5.6 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),vehM 0.1 1.8 1.9 0.4 1.1 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.6 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 28.9 14.4 14.3 21.7 11.4 12.1 0.0 0.0 17.2 22.1 0.0 8.5 LnGrp LOS CB BC BB A A BC A A Approach Vol, veh/h Approach Delay, s/veh Approach LOS Timer -Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 1 4.8 4.5 4.0 578 14.6 B 2 16.2 5.0 29.0 3 0.0 4.5 5.0 4 17.8 4.6 7.9 647 12.3 B 5 6.1 4.5 4.5 77 17.2 B 15.0 9.3 8.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 14.0 8.5 32.0 172 21.9 C 1 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+11), s 2.2 5.9 0.0 2.0 3.0 7.2 5.6 3.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.1 0.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 14.6 B User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. Future PM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/02/2022 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/02/2022 l_I"Ni,~ t 4\ t P V 1 ►r l l I~ t 4\ t P V 1 1 M Mille r'NEW WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 'j t1+ ' t4 jr ii 1+ ''j j+ Lane Configurations 'j t1+ ' t4 j' ii 1+ ''j j+ Traffic Volume (veh/h) 7 710 4 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 2 5 Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 568 3 47 407 194 1 2 76 170 0 2 Future Volume (veh/h) 7 710 4 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 2 5 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 568 3 47 407 194 1 2 76 170 0 2 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 710 4 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 2 5 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 8 568 3 47 407 194 1 2 76 170 0 2 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Cap,veh/h 14 1132 6 103 1287 570 5 0 64 221 131 328 Cap,veh/h 15 946 5 74 1045 450 5 4 163 221 0 356 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.31 0.31 0.06 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.12 0.28 0.28 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.26 0.26 0.04 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.00 0.22 SatFlow,veh/h 1810 3652 21 1810 3582 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 475 1188 SatFlow,veh/h 1810 3682 19 1810 3610 1553 1882 42 1615 1795 0 1599 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 348 366 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 0 7 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 278 293 47 407 194 1 0 78 170 0 2 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1810 1791 1881 1810 1791 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 0 1663 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1810 1805 1896 1810 1805 1553 1882 0 1657 1795 0 1599 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 6.6 6.6 1.6 5.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.6 0.0 0.1 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 5.3 5.3 1.0 3.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 1.7 3.6 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 6.6 6.6 1.6 5.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.6 0.0 0.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 5.3 5.3 1.0 3.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 1.7 3.6 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.71 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 14 555 583 103 1287 570 5 0 64 221 0 459 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 15 464 487 74 1045 450 5 0 168 221 0 356 V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.63 0.63 0.73 0.49 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.77 0.00 0.02 V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.60 0.60 0.63 0.39 0.43 0.21 0.00 0.47 0.77 0.00 0.01 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 183 790 830 252 2633 1166 238 0 1346 432 0 459 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 186 649 682 209 2690 1158 242 0 1363 392 0 356 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 11.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.5 11.7 11.7 18.3 9.8 8.6 0.0 0.0 18.3 16.8 0.0 _ 10.4 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.2 12.7 12.7 18.4 11.1 11.2 19.4 0.0 16.5 16.5 0.0 11.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.9 1.7 1.6 3.7 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 5.5 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.7 1.8 1.7 3.3 0.3 0.9 19.9 0.0 0.7 5.6 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),veh/In 0.1 2.2 2.3 0.7 1.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 %ile Back0fQ(50 % ),vehM 0.1 1.9 1.9 0.4 1.1 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.6 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 30.4 13.3 13.2 22.0 10.2 8.7 0.0 0.0 18.5 22.2 0.0 10.4 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 28.9 14.5 14.4 21.7 11.4 12.2 39.3 0.0 17.2 22.1 0.0 11.8 LnGrp LOS CBBCB A A A BC A B LnGrp LOS CB BC B BD A BC A B Approach Vol, veh/h 721 792 5 176 Approach Vol, veh/h 579 648 79 172 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.4 11.2 18.5 21.8 Approach Delay, s/veh 14.6 12.4 17.5 22.0 Approach LOS B B B C Approach LOS B B B C Timer -Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 -15/m- 8 Timer -Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 19.2 0.0 15.5 6.7 17.2 9.3 6.1 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 16.3 4.6 13.3 6.1 15.0 9.3 8.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 29.0 5.0 8.5 5.5 17.4 9.5 32.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 29.0 5.0 7.9 4.5 14.0 8.5 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 7.4 0.0 2.1 3.6 8.6 5.6 2.1 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 5.9 2.0 2.0 3.0 7.3 5.6 3.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.2 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.1 0.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.3 Intersection Summa HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 14.7 HCM 6th LOS B HCM 6th LOS B User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. Future + Project AM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Future + Project PM W-Trans Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Appendix D Truck Turning Templates Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 2022 D 670 i-Tran5 This page intentionally left blank 671 WESTERN DRIVEWAY W-Trans 15.00 48.00 I1�� 2.50 41.00 ' - 0.00 4.00 19.50 WB-62 Tractor Width Trailer Width Tractor Track Trailer Track feet : 8.00 : 8.50 : 8.00 : 8.50 Lock to Lock Time Steering Angle Articulating Angle U U : 6.0 : 28.4 : 70.0 1 OF 2 AutoTURN — ENTERING SITE DRIVEWAYS D N 300-2 — HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT October 2022 DUBLN BL VD EASTERN DRIVEWAY W-Trans 15.00 48.00 2.50 41.00 0.00 4.00 19.50 WB-62 Tractor Width Trailer Width Tractor Track Trailer Track feet : 8.00 : 8.50 : 8.00 : 8.50 Lock to Lock Time Steering Angle Articulating Angle ((oll l ((0) : 6.0 : 28.4 : 70.0 2 OF 2 AutoTURN — EXITING SITE DRIVEWAYS D w 300-2 — HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT October 2022 /-Trans Memorandum Date: April 6, 2023 Project: DUB900-2 To: Mr. Oliver Castillo, EIT Assistant Civil Engineer City of Dublin From: Kenny Jeong, PE kjeong@w-trans.com Subject: Hexcel Redevelopment Project Transportation Impact Study Addendum As requested, W-Trans has prepared a revised trip generation and parking analysis relative to the proposed redevelopment of the Hexcel facility located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin. Revised Project Description The project site plan has recently been updated and now consists of 18,000 square feet of office space, 30,000 square feet of light industrial space and 77,304 square feet of warehouse use with 217 parking spaces. This represents a change from the previous project description as depicted in the Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project, December 12, 2022, W-Trans (TIS), which provided an analysis of a project comprised of 18,000 square feet of office use, 36,500 square feet of light industrial space and 70,804 square feet of warehouse uses with 227 parking spaces. It is noted that the overall size of the proposed project has remained constant at 125,304 square feet in both the project as evaluated in 2022 and the current proposal. A copy of the revised site plan is enclosed. Revised Trip Generation According to the trip generation estimates documented in the TIS, the proposed project would result in a net reduction of 201 trips on a daily basis from the prior Research and Development uses, with an increase of 1 net new trip during the morning peak hour and 2 net new trips during the evening peak hour. The project as currently proposed would be comprised of slightly different square footage estimates of internal uses which would result in a net decrease of 21 daily trips, including 4 fewer a.m. peak hour trips and 3 fewer p.m. peak hour trips compared to the project as evaluated in the 2022 TIS. A summary of these changes is shown in Table 1. 414 13th Street, 5th Floor Oakland, CA 94621 510.444.2600 w-trans.com SANTA ROSA • OAKLAND 674 Mr. Oliver Castillo Page 2 April 6, 2023 Table 1 -Trip Generation Summary (December 2022) Land Use Units (ksf) Existing Research & Dev -62.715 Daily Rate Trips 11.08 -695 AM Peak Hour Rate Trips In Out PM Peak Hour Rate Trips In Out 1.03 -65 -53 -12 0.98 -61 -10 -51 Proposed (December 2022) Offices 18.000 Light Industrial 36.500 Warehousing 70.804 10.84 195 1.52 27 24 3 4.87 178 0.74 27 24 3 1.71 121 0.17 12 9 3 1.44 26 4 22 0.65 24 3 21 0.18 13 4 9 Proposed 2022 Subtotal 125.304 494 66 57 9 63 11 52 Total (Proposed 2022 less Existing) -201 1 4 -3 2 1 1 Proposed (April 2023) Offices 18.000 10.84 195 1.52 27 24 1.44 26 4 22 Light Industrial 30.000 4.87 146 0.74 22 19 3 0.65 20 3 17 Warehousing 77.304 1.71 132 0.17 13 10 3 0.18 14 4 10 Proposed 2023 Subtotal 125.304 473 62 53 9 60 11 49 Total (Proposed 2023 less Existing) -222 Note: ksf = 1,000 square feet -3 0 -3 -1 1 -2 Finding - Since the currently proposed project is expected to generate slightly fewer vehicle trips than were used in the analysis presented in the Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project (2022), the project's effect on intersection Level of Service (LOS) and queuing would be similar to the results presented for the prior analysis. The results as presented in the prior Transportation Impact Study would therefore continue to adequately represent the project as currently proposed, and as no changes to the findings would be expected, a comprehensive update of the prior traffic analysis is unnecessary. Revised Parking Analysis An update to the expected demand and City code requirements using the current (2023) proposed land uses is summarized in Table 2. According to these estimates, the revised proposed parking supply of 217 spaces is anticipated to adequately accommodate the estimated peak parking demand of 93 spaces and would satisfy the City Code requirement of 217 spaces. For informational purposes, a copy of the previous summary is also provided in Table 2. 675 Offices Mr. Oliver Castillo Page 3 April 6, 2023 Table 2 - Revised Parking Analysis Summary Land Use Units (ksf) Proposed (December 2022) 12.000 6.000 Light Industrial 36.500 Warehousing 70.804 Supply (spaces) 227 Total (2022) 125.304 227 Rate City Requirements Spaces Required ITE Parking Generation Rate Est. Parking (per ksf) Demand 1 per 0.25 ksf 30 1 per 0.3 ksf 35 1 per 0.4 ksf 91 1 per ksf 71 227 2.39 43 0.65 24 0.39 28 95 Proposed (April 2023) Offices 12.000 6.000 Light Industrial 30.000 Warehousing 77.304 217 1 per 0.25 ksf 30 1 per 0.3 ksf 35 1 per 0.4 ksf 75 1 per 1 ksf 77 Total (2023) 125.304 217 Note: ksf =1,000 square feet 2.39 43 0.65 0.39 20 30 217 93 The Uniform Building Code and the Federal Accessibility Guidelines include minimum requirements disabled parking. The site plan shows that out of 217 spaces available at the proposed project, there are eight stalls designated for disabled persons' use (including two spaces with the added designation for electric vehicles only). Based on requirements stipulated by the Federal Accessibility Guidelines, seven accessible stalls are required. Thus, the proposed project would comply with the Federal Accessibility Guidelines. Finding - The proposed parking supply would satisfy the City of Dublin's parking requirements and accommodate the anticipated parking demand. The supply of eight accessible stalls proposed for the project is greater than the seven stalls required. Thank you for giving W-Trans the opportunity to provide these services. Please call if you have any questions. M ES/kbj/D UB900-2.M 1 Enclosures: Revised Site Plan 676 LILL I.ay,n MOM 1.1 L▪ a ▪ LI a. mar 1I in �_ _�fl :area.:..,.-.., W• O. wf„a.s.n M.ban.. Y.M. ar INIrot :IeIel:Ielal:C'Ielelaela BLVD �I;;Iaelal.l.CI,I.I,I I I "I"I"I" r "I''. IrIIl„rm rimexr 7 UNIT A 33,528 S.F. A A _ TOTAL ; UIL I ING4RE 125 3d4 IS.F. IIUNIT 29,,899 S.F. 29,906IS.F. 1111111111111111 UNIT D 25,9 1 S.F. IIIIIII� Attachment 3 Exhibit B Hexcel Redevelopment Project Findings Concerning Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15163(e), the City Council hereby makes the following findings with respect to the potential for significant environmental impacts from the Hexcel Redevelopment project (Project) and means for mitigating those impacts. Many of the impacts and mitigation measures in the following findings are summarized rather than set forth in full. The text of the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) should be consulted for a complete description of the impacts and mitigations. Findings pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(c) relating to Project Alternatives are made in Exhibit C. These findings do not attempt to describe the full analysis of each environmental impact contained in the EIR. Instead, the findings provide a summary description of each impact, describe the applicable mitigation measures identified in the EIR and adopted by the City, and state the findings on the significance of each impact after imposition of the adopted mitigation measures. A full explanation of these environmental findings and conclusions can be found in the EIR, and these findings hereby incorporate by reference the discussion and analysis in those documents supporting the EIR's determinations regarding mitigation measures and the Project's impacts and mitigation measures designed to address those impacts. The facts supporting these findings are found in the record as a whole for the Project. In making these findings, the City ratifies, adopts, and incorporates into these findings the analysis and explanation in the EIR, and ratifies, adopts, and incorporates in these findings the determinations and conclusions of the EIR relating to environmental impacts and mitigation measures, except to the extent any such determinations and conclusions are specifically and expressly modified by these findings. SECTION 1: AIR QUALITY Impact AQ-1: Conflict with air quality plans Impact; andAQ-2: Result in cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices The construction contractor shall comply with the following Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Basic Construction Measures, as applicable, for reducing construction emissions of uncontrolled fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5): • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off -site shall be covered. 1 678 Attachment 3 • All visible mud or dirt track -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 (mph). • 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 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. • Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The BAAQMD's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects during demolition and construction activities identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, the Project's cumulative impact would not exceed the air quality thresholds established by BAAQMD for fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) emissions. Additionally, the Project would not conflict with the attainment of the applicable air quality plan. Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the impact would be less than significant. This is because the implementation of mitigation would make the Project consistent with BAAQMD Rules and Regulations for controlling fugitive dust emissions and would reduce fugitive dust emissions during demolition and construction. SECTION 2: BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Impact BIO-1: Have substantial adverse effect on candidate, sensitive, or special status species Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Nesting Bird Avoidance Measures A. To the extent practicable, construction activities and any tree trimming/removal shall be performed from September 16 through February 15 to avoid the general nesting period for 2 679 Attachment 3 birds. If construction or tree trimming/removal cannot be performed during this period, nesting bird surveys and active nest buffers (as necessary) shall be implemented as follows: i. Nesting Bird Surveys: If Project -related work is scheduled during the nesting season (typically February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for active nests of such birds within 7 days prior to the beginning of Project construction. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding the work area shall be determined by the qualified biologist, but should be at least: i) 50 feet for passerines; ii) 300 feet for raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day and during appropriate nesting times, as determined by the qualified biologist. ii. Active Nest Buffers: If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the survey area, an appropriate buffer between the nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of the nest to characterize "normal" bird behavior and establish a buffer distance which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and shall increase the buffer if the birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Construction shall only be allowed to impact a migratory bird or its nest, including its young, if a permit from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is obtained in accordance with the MTBA and all permit conditions are adhered to. Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, the Project would reduce impacts to nesting birds to a less than significant level by avoiding impacts to active nests. Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, the impact would be less than significant. This is because the mitigation would protect nesting birds by first requiring that construction activities during the nesting season be avoided. If construction cannot be avoided, preconstruction surveys would be required to identify all active nests with the potential to be impacted by tree removal, construction noise, or human presence, define appropriate avoidance buffers, and require qualified biologists to monitor active nests and bird behavior during construction. The buffer distance would be adjusted as needed. Impact BIO-2: Interfere or impede the movement of migratory fish or wildlife Mitigation Measure: 3 680 Attachment 3 Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Roosting Bat Surveys and Avoidance A. The Project Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a bat habitat assessment in all project areas that require tree removal. The qualified biologist shall identify and document the location of potentially suitable bat roosting habitat prior to construction activities. If no suitable bat habitat is observed, the biologist shall inform the Project Applicant, and no further considerations are required. If bat roosting habitat is observed, the location of such habitat areas shall be provided to the Project Applicant, and the following requirements shall be implemented throughout the construction period: i. Removal of trees that provide suitable bat roosting habitat shall be conducted outside of the bat maternity season (April 15 to August 31) and overwintering season (October 16 to January 15) to the extent feasible. ii. Presence/absence surveys shall be conducted 2 to 3 days prior to removal of any trees in suitable bat habitat, at any time of year. If presence/absence surveys are negative, work may proceed with no restrictions. If presence/absence surveys detect bats within trees planned for removal, work should proceed in accordance with the following restrictions: • If a maternity colony of bats is observed during maternity season (April 15 to August 31), tree removal shall not occur until August 31 or when maternity season has ended based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist. • If bats are observed during overwintering season (October 16 to January 15), tree removal shall not occur until January 15 or until bats are no longer present based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist. • If bats are present outside of maternity or overwintering seasons, construction shall follow a two-phase tree removal system conducted over 2 consecutive days. On the first day (in the afternoon), limbs and branches will be removed using chainsaws or other hand tools. Limbs with cavities, crevices, or deep bark fissures will be avoided, and only branches or limbs without those features will be removed. On the second day, the entire tree shall be removed. Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, impacts to roosting bats would be reduced to a less than significant level by avoiding impacts to trees that provide suitable bat roosting habitat during bat maternity season and overwintering season. Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, the impact would be less than significant. This is because the mitigation would require a qualified biologist to identify and document the location of potentially suitable bat roosting habitat prior to construction activities. Tree removal during times of the year when bats are most sensitive to disruption (maternity and overwintering seasons) would be avoided to the extent feasible by either confirming that bats are absent prior to tree removal and/or following protocols that provide an opportunity for bats to relocate prior to tree removal. 4 681 Attachment 3 SECTION 3: CULTURAL RESOURCES Impact CR-1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure CUL-1: HABS Recordation In consultation with the City of Dublin Planning Division, the Project applicant shall document the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility prior to demolition. Documentation shall be performed by a Secretary of Interior -qualified professional (in history or architectural history) and be consistent with the standards of the National Parks Service (NPS) Historic American Building Survey (HABS) and shall consist of the following elements: 1. Historical Report: A qualified historian or architectural historian shall assemble historical background information relevant to the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility in short format Historic American Building Survey (HABS), based on HABS guidelines for historical reports. Much of this information may be drawn from the previous Historical Resource Evaluation and would detail critical information such as the property's significance, physical description, history, and a summary of information sources. 2. Photographs: Large -format, black and white photographs of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility shall be taken and processed for archival permanence in accordance with HABS, Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), and HALS (Historic American Landscapes Survey) Photography Guidelines in effect at the time of recording. The standards require large -format black -and -white photography, with the original negatives having a minimum size of 4"x5". Digital photography, roll film, film packs, and electronic manipulation of images are not acceptable. The photographs shall be taken by a professional with HABS photography experience. A minimum of 10 and a maximum of 24 photographs must be taken, detailing the site, building exteriors, and interiors, specifically the R&D portion of the building. Photographs must be identified and labeled using HABS/HALS standards. Following completion of the HABS documentation, including the short form historical report and large -format photographs, and approval by the City of Dublin, the materials shall be placed on file with the City of Dublin Planning Division, and the Dublin Historical Society at the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums. Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Interpretive Displays In concert with HABS documentation (Mitigation Measure CUL-1), the Project applicant shall install permanent interpretive displays or signage for public exhibition detailing the history and significance of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility at the Project site. The interpretive displays or signage could be based on the photographs produced in the HABS documentation and the historic archival research previously prepared as part of the Project. 5 682 Attachment 3 The interpretive displays or signage shall be prepared by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards, in coordination with an exhibit designer. Interpretive displays or signage at the Project site shall be located outside of the new building, near the publicly accessible sidewalk and/or inside the new building in a prominent space, such as the lobby, where they may be viewed by employees and visitors. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Finding: Even with implementation of mitigation measures, the Project would still result in a significant and unavoidable impact to the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, as it would result in its demolition. Therefore, the Project would have a Significant and Unavoidable Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. For the impact determined to be significant and unavoidable, no additional feasible measures are available to further reduce the impact. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon approval of the Project. Rationale for Finding: Despite implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2, the Project would result in a Significant and Unavoidable Impact. This is because the Project would still result in the complete demolition of the existing building, which is a historical resource. Impact CR-2: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure CUL-3: Archaeological and Tribal Monitoring A. A qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology shall be retained by the applicant prior to implementing construction or soil remediation activities that involve earthmoving or soil excavation, and the archaeologist shall be available for consultation or evaluation of any cultural resources uncovered by such activities. Prior to the start of excavation, the archaeologist shall produce an Archaeological Testing Plan and an Archaeological Treatment 6 683 Attachment 3 and Monitoring Plan, in consultation with the City of Dublin, and through them, with any consulting Native American tribes. i. The Archaeological Testing Plan will define the following: • Methods and scope of archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction (e.g., GPR, hand excavated test units, trenching with flat edged bucket). • Treatment of any discoveries during testing. ii. The Treatment and Monitoring Plan will comply with mitigation measures 4, 5, 6, and 7, set forth in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B, and will specify the following: • Archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction. • Archaeological and Tribal monitoring requirements, which will be based on the results of archaeological testing and consultation with Native American tribes. • Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any historic -era or pre -contact era artifacts encountered during project activities. • Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any human remains from the historic era. For human remains of Native Americans from any time period, treatment protocols would be established with the designated MLD. B. If an archaeological resource or human burials are discovered during archaeological testing, consideration will be given to options that avoid or minimize impact. C. If an archaeological resource (or suspected resource) is discovered during monitoring of project activities, construction or excavation activities within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be temporarily halted or directed to other areas, pending the archaeologist's evaluation of its significance. If the resource is significant, data collection, excavation, or other standard archaeological or historical procedures shall be implemented to mitigate impacts, pursuant to the Treatment and Monitoring Plan and the archaeologist's direction. If any human remains are encountered, the archaeologist shall contact the appropriate County Coroner immediately, and security measures shall be implemented to ensure that burials are not vandalized until the decision of burial deposition has been made pursuant to California law. If human remains are determined to be Native American interments, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and follow the procedures stated herein and other applicable laws. A report by the archaeologist evaluating the find and identifying mitigation actions taken shall be submitted to the City and filed with the California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS). Where appropriate to protect the location and sensitivity of the cultural resources, the report may be submitted under Public Utilities Code Section 583 or other appropriate confidentiality provisions. Mitigation Measure CUL-4: Inadvertent Discovery Protocols A. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology to implement archaeological awareness training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities. The training shall include information regarding the possibility of encountering buried cultural resources, the 7 684 Attachment 3 appearance and types of resources likely to be seen during construction, notification procedures, and proper protocols to be followed should suspected or confirmed resources be encountered by the crew. This training shall be provided once to each worker involved in ground -disturbing activities before they begin work, and shall be documented in training records. B. In the event that precontact or historic -age resources (or suspected resources) are inadvertently discovered during Project implementation, all activity within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the City of Dublin's Project Manager shall be notified, and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the City of Dublin to examine the find, pursuant to Mitigation Measure 7 set out in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B. Project personnel shall not collect or move any historic material. The archaeologist shall evaluate the find(s) within 48 hours to determine if it meets the definition of a historical or unique archaeological resource and follow the procedures outlined below: i. If the find(s) does not meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming Project implementation. ii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of a historical resource or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be avoided by Project activities and preserved in place. If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Dublin, the qualified archaeologist shall make appropriate recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of such find(s), and significant impacts to such resources shall be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the archaeologist prior to resuming construction activities within the 50-foot radius. iii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of both a tribal cultural resource and a historical or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be treated in accordance with MM CUL-3. C. Recommendations for treatment and disposition of find(s) could include, but are not limited to, archaeological monitoring, collection, recordation, and analysis of any significant cultural materials. A report of findings documenting any data recovery shall be submitted to NWIC. In the event that archaeological resource(s) are discovered during Project implementation, an archaeological monitor shall be retained to monitor all ground disturbing activities in the vicinity (i.e., within 50 feet) of the find. Archaeological monitors have the authority, upon the finding of a potential resource, to request that work be slowed, diverted, or stopped if archaeological resources are identified within the direct impact area. If the resource is determined by an archaeologist to be a historical or unique archaeological resource, the archaeologist shall amend the Treatment and Monitoring Plan, with measures to avoid or reduce impacts to the resource. The treatment plan measures may include, but not be limited to, avoidance and preservation in place (the preferred method if feasible), capping, incorporation of the site within a park or other open space, or data recovery. If the resource is also a tribal cultural resource, then designated representatives from the consulting tribe(s) shall make appropriate recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of such find(s) in 8 685 Attachment 3 accordance with MM CUL-3 and these recommendations shall be incorporated into the treatment plan. Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, the potential impact on archaeological and buried resources would be reduced to a less than significant level since protocols and procedures would be followed during construction activities. Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-3 and CUL-4, potentially significant impacts on archeological and buried resources would be reduced to a less than significant impact. This is because these mitigations would require training for all construction workers so that they are aware of the potential for encountering buried resources and the procedures that need to be followed if potential precontact or historic period archaeological resources are encountered during on - site activities, as well as the regulations pertaining to discovery of human burials. SECTION 4: ENERGY Impact EN-1: Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices The construction contractor shall comply with the following BAAQMD Basic Construction Measures, as applicable, for reducing construction emissions of uncontrolled fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.$): • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off -site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt track -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 (mph). • 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 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. • Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 9 686 Attachment 3 48 hours. The BAAQMD's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, the Project's impact would not consume energy in a wasteful or inefficient way. Thus, the impact would be less than significant with mitigation. Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the impact of wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy consumption would be less than significant. This is because this mitigation measure would minimize the idling time of construction equipment and trucks by shutting equipment off when it is not in use or reducing the idling time to 5 minutes. Additionally, construction contractors would be required to maintain and properly tune all construction equipment in accordance with the manufacturer's specification. These required practices would limit wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption. SECTION 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS Impact GEO-1: Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure GEO-1. Avoid Impacts to Unique Paleontological Resources To minimize the potential for destruction of or damage to previously unknown unique, scientifically important paleontological resources during earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall do the following: • Prior to the start of earthmoving activities, retain either a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist to inform all construction personnel involved with earthmoving activities regarding the possibility of encountering fossils, the appearance and types of fossils likely to be seen during construction, and proper notification procedures should fossils be encountered. • If paleontological resources are discovered during earthmoving activities, the construction crew shall immediately cease work within 50 feet of the find and notify the Project applicant and the City. The Project applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist to evaluate the resource and prepare a recovery plan, based on SVP Guidelines. The recovery plan may include, but is not limited to, a field survey, construction monitoring, sampling and data recovery procedures, museum curation for any specimen recovered, and a report of findings. Recommendations in the recovery plan that are determined by the City (as the CEQA lead agency) to be necessary and feasible shall be implemented before construction activities can resume within 50 feet of the site where the paleontological resource or resources were discovered. 10 687 Attachment 3 Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, the Project's impact would minimize impacts to paleontological resources. Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, the impact would be less than significant. This is because construction workers would be alerted to the possibility of encountering paleontological resources and, in the event that resources were discovered, construction would be halted, and fossil specimens would be recovered and recorded and would undergo appropriate curation. SECTION 6: HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Impact HAZMAT-1: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-1: Perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment • Prior to the start of earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall retain the services of a qualified remediation firm to perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA). The Phase II ESA shall be limited to only those areas where chemical use, storage, and handling have previously occurred. Soil borings shall be obtained as part of the Phase II ESA, along with groundwater samples if necessary. The samples shall be submitted to a laboratory for environmental testing and the results shall be reported in the Phase II ESA, copies of which shall be provided to the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH) and the City of Dublin Building Department. If there are no detections of constituents of concern, or the amounts are below regulatory agency threshold levels, no further actions shall be required. • If the results of laboratory analyses from the Phase II ESA demonstrate that constituents of concern are present at levels that exceed regulatory agency threshold levels, the Project applicant shall consult with ACDEH (and other regulatory agencies such as the SWRCB if necessary) regarding the necessary actions for remediation. All necessary remedial activities shall be completed by the Project applicant, with a certification by the lead agency with remedial oversight (e.g., ACDEH or SWRCB) that no further action is required, prior to the start of construction activities at the Project site. Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-2: Perform Sampling of Materials To Be Demolished. Prior to demolition of any building in the project area, the building shall be sampled to determine if the building contains lead paint and/or asbestos. If either of the materials are determined to be present, 11 688 Attachment 3 they shall be handled and disposed of as a hazardous material and in compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations. Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, potential construction -related impacts from accidental exposure to hazardous materials would be less than significant. Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZMAT-1 and HAZMAT-2, the impact would be less than significant. This is because Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-1 would reduce potential impacts from exposure to on -site hazardous materials because soil (and groundwater, if necessary) testing would be performed, and if contamination is found to be present, necessary remediation would be completed prior to the start of Project -related earthmoving activities. Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-2 would sample materials before demolition would occur, and if hazardous materials such as lead paint and asbestos are found, they would be handled and disposed in compliance to applicable regulations. SECTION 7: TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Impact TR-1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure TR-1: Inadvertent/Unanticipated Tribal Cultural Resources Discovery Protocols The City of Dublin shall require the following steps to be taken, including as a part of all contracts related to construction of the Project, as applicable: A. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain representatives from consulting tribe(s), if available, to implement Tribal Cultural Resources Sensitivity Training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities. The training shall include information regarding the possibility of encountering buried tribal cultural resources, the appearance and types of tribal cultural resources that could potentially be seen during construction, notification procedures, and proper protocols to be followed should suspected or confirmed tribal cultural resources be encountered. This training shall be provided once to each worker involved in ground disturbing activities before they begin work and shall be documented in training records. B. If tribal cultural resources or potential tribal cultural resources are discovered during Project implementation, all activity within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the City of Dublin's Project Manager shall be notified, and Tribal Representatives from the consulting tribe(s) shall be immediately notified. The Tribal Representative(s) shall evaluate the find(s) 12 689 Attachment 3 within 48 hours to determine if it meets the definition of a tribal cultural resource (PRC §21074) and follow the procedures outlined below: i. If the find(s) does not meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming Project implementation (but see Mitigation Measures CUL-3 and CUL-4) ii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, then it shall be avoided by Project activities and preserved in place. The contractor shall implement any measures deemed by the City of Dublin to be necessary and feasible to preserve in place, avoid, or minimize impacts to the tribal cultural resource. If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Dublin, Tribal Representatives from the consulting tribe(s) if available, shall make recommendations regarding the culturally appropriate treatment and disposition of such find(s) and significant impacts to such tribal cultural resources shall be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the consulting tribe(s), if they are available, prior to resuming construction activities within the 50-foot radius. iii. If the find meets the definition of both a tribal cultural resource and a historical or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be treated in accordance with the measures described in Section C. below and Mitigation Measure CUL-4. C. Culturally appropriate treatment may include, but is not limited to, minimal processing of materials for reburial, minimizing handling of tribal cultural resources objects, leaving objects in place within the landscape, or returning tribal cultural resources objects to a location within the Project area where they would not be subject to future disturbance. No cultural soil may be removed from the Project site. Permanent curation, testing, or data collection of tribal cultural resources will not take place unless requested in writing by the consulting tribe(s). D. All fill soils imported and used for this Project must be clean, engineered fill. E. The applicant shall enter into a tribal monitoring agreement with the consulting tribe(s) prior to the start of ground disturbing activities. The tribal monitoring agreement shall form the terms and compensation for the tribal monitoring with the consulting tribe(s) and be utilized in combination with the tribal cultural resource treatment. Tribal Monitors have the authority to identify sites or objects of cultural significance and to request, upon the finding of a potential tribal cultural resource, that work be slowed, diverted, or stopped if such sites or objects are identified within the direct impact area. Only the consulting tribe(s) can recommend culturally appropriate treatment of such sites or objects, via their Tribal Monitor. Work within 50 feet of the discovery location cannot resume until all necessary investigation and evaluation of the discovery under the requirements of the tribal monitoring agreement have been implemented. Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation 13 690 Attachment 3 Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, tribal cultural resources encountered during construction would be treated in a culturally appropriate manner in consultation with Tribal Representatives and protocols to protect these resources under the mitigation measure would be required. Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measures TR-1, the impact would be less than significant. This is because with incorporation of Mitigation Measure TR-1, potential impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant since protocols would be required during construction activities, including retaining a qualified archaeologist during ground disturbing activities; implementing archaeological awareness training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities; stopping activity within a 50-foot radius of the precontact or historic -age resources find(s) to have it evaluated by an a qualified archaeologist; and avoiding or mitigating impacts to the find(s). 14 691 Attachment 4 Exhibit C Hexcel Redevelopment Project Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Potential Additional Mitigation Measures The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides that decision makers should not approve a project as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures that would substantially lessen the significant impacts of the project (CEQA Section 21002). The Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Hexcel Redevelopment project (Project) identified feasible mitigation measures that would reduce most of the potentially significant impacts to less than significant, as set forth in Exhibit B (Findings Concerning Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures). However, the following impacts in the EIR either remained significant after mitigation or no feasible mitigation was identified: • Cultural Resources. The Project is proposing to completely demolish the existing Hexcel Corporation Research & Development facility (R&D), which is a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. The demolition of this facility would result in a significant direct impact even with the implementation of the Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2. Thus, the Project would have a Significant and Unavoidable Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. For the impact determined to be significant and unavoidable, no additional feasible mitigation measures are available to further reduce the impact. As required by CEQA, the following findings address whether there are any feasible alternatives or any additional feasible mitigation measures available that would reduce any of these impacts to less than significant. FINDINGS CONCERNING ALTERNATIVES CEQA requires that an EIR "describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project..." (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a)). If a project alternative will substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of a proposed project, the decision maker should not approve the proposed project unless it determines that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations... make the project alternative infeasible" (CEQA Sections 21002 and 21081(a)(3), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)). The alternatives that were identified and analyzed to lessen significant impacts to historical resources are discussed in the Alternatives Chapter of the Draft EIR and include the No Project Alternative, Reduced Grading Alternative, Partial Preservation Alternative, and Alternative Location. As further set forth below, the City Council considered the alternatives identified and analyzed in the Draft EIR and finds them to be infeasible for specific economic, social, or other considerations pursuant to CEQA 1 692 Attachment 4 Sections 21002 and 21081(a)(3), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3). For CEQA purposes, "feasible" means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, technological, and legal factors. (CEQA Section 21061.1, CEQA Guidelines Section 15364.) No Project Alternative — Draft EIR Section Description and Analysis of Alternatives Retained CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3) requires that a No -Project Alternative be evaluated as part of an EIR, proceeding under one of two scenarios: 1) when the project is a revision to an existing land use or regulatory plan, the "no project" alternative will be the continuation of the existing plan into the future; or 2) if the project is other than a land use or regulatory plan, the "no project" alternative is the circumstances under which the project does not proceed. The No Project Alternative assumes no demolition or development would occur on the Project site. The Hexcel Corporation R&D facility would not be demolished, the site would not be redeveloped with a new facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field, and Parcels 1 and 2 would not be rezoned. Accordingly, this alternative would avoid all of the Project's significant impacts (including significant and unavoidable impacts to a historical resource), as well as the need to implement mitigation measures for Air Quality; Biological Resources; Cultural Resources (Historical and Archeological Resources); Energy; Geology and Soils (Paleontological Resources); Hazards and Hazardous Materials; and Tribal Cultural Resources. Finding: The City finds this alternative infeasible because it would not be consistent with any of the Project's objectives. The No Project Alternative would not achieve any of the following Project objectives, as described in the Project Description of the Draft EIR: • To redevelop the Hexcel site with a new and upgraded facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field. • To rezone Parcels 1 and 2 as a Planned Development, which provide development standards beyond those of the M-1 zoning, and adopt a new ordinance. The property would be rezoned under a new PD Zone with a new ordinance number associated with it. Therefore, the City Council considered the No Project Alternative and declines to adopt it because it would not achieve any of the Project's objectives, as supported by the administrative record for the Project. Reduced Grading Alternative - Draft EIR Section Description and Analysis of Alternatives Retained Under the Reduced Grading Alternative, soil would be imported to build up the southern periphery of the property and treat stormwater onsite with a valley gutter catch basin and a Silva cell rather than grading to enable stormwater to be gravity fed into bioretention planters. The Silva cell is a modular suspended pavement system that uses soil volumes to support large tree growth and provide onsite stormwater management. The Silva cell would replace 3,280 square feet of the two bioretention planters proposed in the southeast corner of the site adjacent to the south parking areas. 2 693 Attachment 4 This alternative would reduce the amount of grading in the High Archaeological Probability Area by approximately 23 percent, compared to the proposed Project at approximately 53 percent, thereby reducing the risk of impacts to buried cultural resources. Excavation depths for the Reduced Grading Alternative would generally be limited to less than one foot below current grade, except for three locations where depths would range from two feet deep to seven feet deep. While this design does not completely eliminate the risk of impact to archaeological resources or human remains, the area and degree of potential impact are substantially reduced with the Reduced Grading Alternative. Nevertheless, the Project would still have the potential to impact archaeological resources and disturb human remains, both of which could be potentially significant. The Reduced Grading Alternative would also reduce the potential to impact paleontological resources, because it would reduce the depths of excavation where these resources could occur. Furthermore, by reducing the amount of grading, there would be less total construction equipment use during the grading phase, which would reduce NOx, ROG, PM10 exhaust and PM2.5 exhaust emissions. The Reduced Grading Alternative would still involve demolition of the existing Hexcel building in its entirety and, therefore, would have a significant and unavoidable impact to historical resources. Finding: The City finds that although the Reduced Grading Alternative would meet the proposed Project's objectives, it would not avoid significant and unavoidable impacts related to historical resources and, from an operational standpoint, the City has concerns with the use of a Silva cell for this Project. The City is aware of other projects implementing Silva cells for stormwater treatment that have malfunctioned. Operational failure of these Silva cells can result in sewage getting mixed with stormwater. Therefore, the City Council considered the Reduced Grading Alternative and declines to adopt it because there is a risk implementing a Silva cell for stormwater treatment for this Project. Partial Preservation Alternative — Draft EIR Section Alternatives Considered but Rejected Under the Partial Preservation Alternative, the 25,000-square-foot laboratory building, the portion of the existing Hexcel Corporation R&D facility that qualifies the building as a historical resource, would be adaptively reused as a commercial self -storage facility. The rest of the existing building would be demolished and a new 114,141-square-foot building would be constructed in its place. The new building would be used by future tenants in the life sciences and manufacturing field. This would result in a mixed -used site, rather than a site used for solely life sciences and manufacturing. This alternative would reduce impacts to a historical resource as that portion of the building would be retained and would somewhat meet the Project's objectives. However, it is unlikely that the Partial Preservation Alternative would avoid the significant and unavoidable impact on the historical resource. Although this alternative would retain the most important portion of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility contributing to its eligibility as a historical resource and would, therefore, have a reduced level of impact compared to the proposed Project, the alternative would still demolish more than half of the original structure and would also involve substantial changes to the setting of the historical resource. 3 694 Attachment 4 Therefore, the structure would not continue to retain its integrity to convey the historical significance. It is considered unlikely that feasible mitigation measures could be implemented to fully mitigate the potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level. Furthermore, the applicant prepared a Pro Forma for financial feasibility of Partial Preservation Alternative and found that this alternative would result in a loss of approximately $10.8 million over the life of the Project, while the total upfront costs (capitalization) would be approximately $55.7 million, which is approximately 40 percent higher than the proposed Project. Therefore, the Partial Preservation Alternative would be financially infeasible. Other significant impacts related to Air Quality; Biological Resources; Cultural Resources (Historical and Archeological Resources); Energy; Geology and Soils (Paleontological Resources); Hazards and Hazardous Materials; and Tribal Cultural Resources would still remain under this alternative and mitigation would be required. Finding: The City finds that the Partial Preservation Alternative would not meet the Project objective to redevelop the site with a new and upgraded facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field because it would be developed as a mixed -used site with the introduction of the commercial self - storage facility, which would not be as appealing to future life sciences/manufacturing tenants. It also would not be economically feasible for the Project applicant due to the reduction in the number of tenants, and the reduction in value of a commercial self -storage and warehousing floorspace compared to life sciences/manufacturing. Also, as noted in the section above, it is unlikely that the Partial Preservation Alternative would avoid the significant and unavoidable impact on the historical resource. Therefore, the City Council considered the Partial Preservation Alternative and declines to adopt it because it would not achieve the Project's objectives and is infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations described above, as supported by the administrative record for the Project. Alternative Location - Draft EIR Section Alternatives Considered but Rejected The use of another site for this Project would not meet the project's objectives to redevelop the Hexcel site with a new and upgraded facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field and to rezone Parcels 1 and 2 of this site as a Planned Development. Furthermore, the Project applicant already owns this site, which is suitable for the scale and type of project that the applicant has proposed. Development of the Project on the proposed site would help ensure the construction of the Project is affordable and accomplished in a timely manner. A new site option would require the applicant to sell this site and find a new site within the City limits of a similar size, designated for this type of use, and proximate to regional freeway access. There are limited sites in the City designated for industrial uses of similar size and proximity to a freeway interchange to implement the proposed Project. Therefore, an alternative location was rejected from further consideration. Finding: 4 695 Attachment 4 The City Council considered an alternative location and declines to adopt it because it would not achieve any of the Project's objectives and is infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations described above, as supported by the administrative record for the Project. FINDINGS REGARDING INFEASIBILITY OF ADDITIONAL MITIGATION MEASURES Not Applicable: The EIR did not identify any additional mitigation measures and/or modifications to the measures beyond those identified in the EIR as set forth in Exhibit A. 5 696 Attachment 5 Exhibit D Hexcel Redevelopment Project Statement of Overriding Considerations General. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council of the City of Dublin makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations. The City Council has balanced the benefits of the Hexcel Redevelopment project (Project) to the City of Dublin against the significant adverse impacts identified in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that cannot be reduced to less than significant through feasible mitigations or alternatives and would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council hereby determines that the benefits of the Project outweigh the adverse impacts and the Project should be approved. The City Council has carefully considered each impact in reaching its decision to approve the Project. Even with mitigation, the City Council recognizes that implementation of the Project carries with it unavoidable significant adverse environmental impacts as identified in the EIR. The City Council specifically finds that to the extent the identified significant adverse impacts for the Project have not been reduced to acceptable levels through feasible mitigation or alternatives, there are specific economic, social, land use and other benefits that support approval of the Project. Significant and Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. The following significant and unavoidable environmental impact is associated with the Project as identified in the EIR: • Historical Resources. Since the proposed Project would result in the demolition of the existing Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, which is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable impact on a historical resource. Even with implementation of the mitigation measures, the Project would still result in a significant and unavoidable impact to a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, as the Project would result in the demolition of the historical resource. Overriding Considerations. The City Council has carefully considered the significant and unavoidable impact in reaching its decision to approve the Project. In reaching its decision, the City Council has balanced the significant and unavoidable impact against the Project's benefits, and hereby determines that the significant and unavoidable impact is outweighed by the benefits of the Project as further set forth below. Any one of i 697 Attachment 5 these benefits is sufficient to justify approval of the Project. The substantial evidence supporting the various benefits can be found in the record as a whole. • The redevelopment of the Project site creates an opportunity to bring economic and job -rich uses to the City related to advanced manufacturing and life sciences. Presently, the site is occupied by the Hexcel research and development facility, which is an outdated and smaller facility that does not offer the most recent amenities and other design features that would appeal to future tenants in this field. Due to the smaller size of the existing facility, it limits the ability to offer tenant space that is flexible for various business needs. The redevelopment of the Project site with a new and updated light industrial building will attract advanced manufacturing and life science uses contributing to approximately 200 net new jobs onsite and other employment opportunities in the City that would function around the operations at the site. Additionally, the Project will be an incubator for innovation and business attraction within the City. • Since the Project would be attracting new jobs to the City, it would also support local retail and restaurants, as it is expected that future employees would be patrons to these surrounding businesses. • The General Plan provides a long-range vision for economic growth and development of the City. The Project will further the General Plan objective of providing a broad range of non -retail businesses and high -growth employment opportunities in research, limited manufacturing and distribution activities, and administrative offices. The Project supports the following General Plan Policies and Goals: o Policy 11.5.3-A. Retaining high -growth companies is a priority for the City of Dublin. Targeting high -growth companies, the City should maintain a Business Visitation Program that seeks to identify and solve local economic development constraints; and o Goal III. Development of Strategic Employment Supporting Sites seeks to maximize the potential for development of workplace uses in the City of Dublin. • The Project site is approximately 0.25-mile from the Interstate 580 (I-580)/San Ramon Road interchange. The proximity of the Project site to the I-580/San Ramon Road interchange is consistent with General Plan goals and policies and facilitates efficient transportation. The benefit of the Project site being close to a major highway is that delivery vehicles and trucks coming to and from the site would be able to take shorter routes on the City's roadways and, therefore, impacts related to noise and transportation and circulation would be minimized. This would be consistent with General Plan Policy 5.6.1-A.1. Designate and accommodate truck routes to minimize noise nuisance on residential arterial streets. • The Project would result in a net reduction in energy consumption, primarily related to improved building energy standards and eliminating natural gas infrastructure. Therefore, the Project would support the following City's General Plan's Energy Conservation Element Policies: o Policy 13.3.2-A: 2 698 Attachment 5 ■ Encourage the installation of alternative energy technology in new residential and commercial development. ■ Encourage designing for solar access. ■ Encourage energy efficient improvements be made on residential and commercial properties. o Policy 13.3.2-B: ■ New development proposals shall be reviewed to ensure lighting levels needed for a safe and secure environment are provided —utilizing the most energy - efficient fixtures. ■ In new commercial and residential parking lots, require the installation of conduit to serve electric vehicle parking spaces to enable the easier installation of future charging stations. ■ Encourage the installation of charging stations for commercial projects over a certain size and any new residential project that has open parking. ■ Encourage buildings (and more substantially, whole neighborhoods) to be designed along an east -west axis to maximize solar exposure. Where feasible, require new development projects to take advantage of shade, prevailing winds, landscaping and sun screens to reduce energy use; and to use regenerative energy heating and cooling source alternatives to fossil fuels. ■ Continue to implement parking lot tree planting standards that would substantially cool parking areas and help cool the surrounding environment. For all of the above reasons, the benefits of the Hexcel Redevelopment Project outweigh its significant and unavoidable environmental impact. 3 699 Attachment 6 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT pRniFCT Final EIR I Page 19 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is a CEQA-required component of an EIR. CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 and Public Resources Code §21081.6 requires a public agency to adopt a monitoring and reporting program to ensure efficacy and enforceability of any mitigation measures applied to a proposed project. The Lead Agency must adopt an MMRP for mitigation measures incorporated into the project or proposed as conditions of approval. As stated in Public Resources Code §21081.6 (a)(1): "The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation." Table 4-1 represents the MMRP for the Project. This table lists each of the mitigation measures proposed in the EIR, including mitigation refined or updated in the Final EIR in Chapter 3, Changes to the Draft EIR, and specifies the timing and responsible party for each mitigation measure. 700 City of Dublin Table 4-1. Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program Table HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 20 Air Quality Responsible for Approval / Monitoring roject Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Implementation Completion Date Initials During MM AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices. • Responsible for construction The construction contractor shall comply with the following BAAQMD approval: City of Basic Construction Measures, as applicable, for reducing construction Dublin emissions of uncontrolled fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5): ■ Implementation: • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. Project applicant • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off -site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt track -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 (mph). • 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 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall 701 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 21 Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for ompletion Initials Approval / Monitoring / Implementation be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. • Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The BAAQMD's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Biological Resources During construction MM BIO-1: Nesting Bird Avoidance Measures A. To the extent practicable, construction activities and any tree trimming/removal shall be performed from September 16 through February 15 to avoid the general nesting period for birds. If construction or tree trimming/removal cannot be performed during this period, nesting bird surveys and active nest buffers (as necessary) shall be implemented as follows: i. Nesting Bird Surveys: If Project -related work is scheduled during the nesting season (typically February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for active nests of such birds within 7 days prior to the beginning of Project construction. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding the work area shall be determined by the qualified biologist, but should be at least: i) 50 feet for passerines; ii) 300 feet for raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day and during appropriate nesting times, as determined by the qualified biologist. ii. Active Nest Buffers: If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the survey area, an appropriate buffer between the nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall Responsible for approval: City of Dublin Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified biologist 702 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 22 Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible forompletion Approval / Monitoring / Implementation Initials be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of the nest to characterize "normal" bird behavior and establish a buffer distance which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and shall increase the buffer if the birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Construction shall only be allowed to impact a migratory bird or its nest, including its young, if a permit from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is obtained in accordance with the MBTA and all permit conditions are adhered to. Prior to construction MM BIO-2: Roosting Bat Surveys and Avoidance A. The Project Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a bat habitat assessment in all project areas that require tree removal. The qualified biologist shall identify and document the location of potentially suitable bat roosting habitat prior to construction activities. If no suitable bat habitat is observed, the biologist shall inform the Project Applicant, and no further considerations are required. If bat roosting habitat is observed, the location of such habitat areas shall be provided to the Project Applicant, and the following requirements shall be implemented throughout the construction period: ■ Responsible for approval: City of Dublin • Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified biologist 703 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR 1 Page 23 Responsible forompletion Approval / Monitoring / Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Implementation Initials i. Removal of trees that provide suitable bat roosting habitat shall be conducted outside of the bat maternity season (April 15 to August 31) and overwintering season (October 16 to January 15) to the extent feasible. ii. Presence/absence surveys shall be conducted 2 to 3 days prior to removal of any trees in suitable bat habitat, at any time of year. If presence/absence surveys are negative, work may proceed with no restrictions. If presence/absence surveys detect bats within trees planned for removal, work should proceed in accordance with the following restrictions: • If a maternity colony of bats is observed during maternity season (April 15 to August 31), tree removal shall not occur until August 31 or when maternity season has ended based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist. • If bats are observed during overwintering season (October 16 to January 15), tree removal shall not occur until January 15 or until bats are no longer present based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist. • If bats are present outside of maternity or overwintering seasons, construction shall follow a two-phase tree removal system conducted over 2 consecutive days. On the first day (in the afternoon), limbs and branches will be removed using chainsaws or other hand tools. Limbs with cavities, crevices, or deep bark fissures will be avoided, and only branches or limbs without those features will be removed. On the second day, the entire tree shall be removed. Cultural Resources Prior to building demolition MM CUL-1: HABS Recordation In consultation with the City of Dublin Planning Division, the Project applicant shall document the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility prior to ■ Responsible for approval: City of Dublin 704 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 24 Timing Project Design Feature / Condition Responsibl completion Approval / Monitorin of Approval / Miti ate Initials demolition. Documentation shall be performed by a Secretary of Interior -qualified professionals (in history or architectural history) and be consistent with the standards of the National Parks Service (NPS) Historic American Building Survey (HABS) and shall consist of the following elements: 1. Historical Report: A qualified historian or architectural historian shall assemble historical background information relevant to the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility in short format Historic American Building Survey (HABS), based on HABS guidelines for historical reports. Much of this information may be drawn from the previous Historical Resource Evaluation and would detail critical information such as the property's significance, physical description, history, and a summary of information sources. 2. Photographs: Large -format, black and white photographs of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility shall be taken and processed for archival permanence in accordance with HABS, Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), and HALS (Historic American Landscapes Survey) Photography Guidelines in effect at the time of recording. The standards require large -format black -and -white photography, with the original negatives having a minimum size of 4"x5". Digital photography, roll film, film packs, and electronic manipulation of images are not acceptable. The photographs shall be taken by a professional with HABS photography experience. A minimum of 10 and a maximum of 24 photographs must be taken, detailing the site, building exteriors, and interiors, specifically the R&D portion of the building. Photographs must be identified and labeled using HABS/HALS standards. Following completion of the HABS documentation, including the short form historical report and large -format photographs, and approval by the City of Dublin, the materials shall be placed on file with the City of Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified historian or architectural historian 705 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 25 Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsibl Approval / Monitorin ompletion a e Initials Dublin Planning Division, and the Dublin Historical Society at the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums. Prior to building demolition MM CUL-2: Interpretive Displays In concert with HABS documentation (MM CUL-1), the Project applicant shall install permanent interpretive displays or signage for public exhibition detailing the history and significance of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility at the Project site. The interpretive displays or signage could be based on the photographs produced in the HABS documentation and the historic archival research previously prepared as part of the Project. The interpretive displays or signage shall be prepared by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards, in coordination with an exhibit designer. Interpretive displays or signage at the Project site shall be located outside of the new building, near the publicly accessible sidewalk and/or inside the new building in a prominent space, such as the lobby, where they may be viewed by employees and visitors. • Responsible for approval: City of Dublin • Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified historian or architectural historian Prior to construction MM CUL-3: Archaeological and Tribal Monitoring A. A qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology shall be retained by the applicant prior to implementing construction or soil remediation activities that involve earthmoving or soil excavation, and the archaeologist shall be available for consultation or evaluation of any cultural resources uncovered by such activities. Prior to the start of excavation, the archaeologist shall produce an Archaeological Testing Plan and an Archaeological Treatment and Monitoring Plan, in consultation with the City of Dublin, and through them, with any consulting Native American tribes. • Responsible for approval: City of Dublin • Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified archaeologist 706 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 26 Responsibl completion Approval / Monitorin Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure ate Initials i. The Archaeological Testing Plan will define the following: • Methods and scope of archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction (e.g., GPR, hand excavated test units, trenching with flat edged bucket). • Treatment of any discoveries during testing. ii. The Treatment and Monitoring Plan will comply with mitigation measures 4, 5, 6, and 7, set forth in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B, and will specify the following: • Archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction. • Archaeological and Tribal monitoring requirements, which will be based on the results of archaeological testing and consultation with Native American tribes. • Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any historic -era or pre -contact era artifacts encountered during project activities. • Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any human remains from the historic era. For human remains of Native Americans from any time period, treatment protocols would be established with the designated MLD. B. If an archaeological resource or human burials are discovered during archaeological testing, consideration will be given to options that avoid or minimize impact. C. If an archaeological resource (or suspected resource) is discovered during monitoring of project activities, construction or excavation activities within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be temporarily halted or directed to other areas, pending the 707 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 27 Timing Responsibl completion Approval / Monitorin Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure ate Initials archaeologist's evaluation of its significance. If the resource is significant, data collection, excavation, or other standard archaeological or historical procedures shall be implemented to mitigate impacts, pursuant to the Treatment and Monitoring Plan and the archaeologist's direction. If any human remains are encountered, the archaeologist shall contact the appropriate County Coroner immediately, and security measures shall be implemented to ensure that burials are not vandalized until the decision of burial deposition has been made pursuant to California law. If human remains are determined to be Native American interments, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and follow the procedures stated herein and other applicable laws. A report by the archaeologist evaluating the find and identifying mitigation actions taken shall be submitted to the CPUC. Where appropriate to protect the location and sensitivity of the cultural resources, the report may be submitted under Public Utilities Code Section 583 or other appropriate confidentiality provisions. Prior and during construction MM CUL-4: Inadvertent Discovery Protocols A. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology to implement archaeological awareness training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities. The training shall include information regarding the possibility of encountering buried cultural resources, the appearance and types of resources likely to be seen during construction, notification procedures, and proper protocols to be followed should suspected or confirmed resources be encountered by the crew. This training ■ Responsible for approval: City of Dublin • Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified archaeologist 708 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 28 Responsibl completion Approval / Monitorin Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure ate Initials shall be provided once to each worker involved in ground -disturbing activities before they begin work, and shall be documented in training records. B. In the event that precontact or historic -age resources (or suspected resources) are inadvertently discovered during Project implementation, all activity within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the City of Dublin's Project Manager shall be notified, and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the City of Dublin to examine the find, pursuant to Mitigation Measure 7 set out in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B. Project personnel shall not collect or move any historic material. The archaeologist shall evaluate the find(s) within 48 hours to determine if it meets the definition of a historical or unique archaeological resource and follow the procedures outlined below: i. If the find(s) does not meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming Project implementation. ii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of a historical resource or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be avoided by Project activities and preserved in place. If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Dublin, the qualified archaeologist shall make appropriate recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of such find(s), and significant impacts to such resources shall be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the archaeologist prior to resuming construction activities within the 50-foot radius. iii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of both a tribal cultural resource and a historical or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be treated in accordance with MM CUL-3. 709 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 29 Responsible forompletion Approval / Monitoring / I= Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Implementation Initials C. Recommendations for treatment and disposition of find(s) could include, but are not limited to, archaeological monitoring, collection, recordation, and analysis of any significant cultural materials. A report of findings documenting any data recovery shall be submitted to NWIC. i. In the event that archaeological resource(s) are discovered during Project implementation, an archaeological monitor shall be retained to monitor all ground- disturbing activities in the vicinity (i.e., within 50 feet) of the find. Archaeological monitors have the authority, upon the finding of a potential resource, to request that work be slowed, diverted, or stopped if archaeological resources are identified within the direct impact area. If the resource is determined by an archaeologist to be a historical or unique archaeological resource, the archaeologist shall amend the Treatment and Monitoring Plan, with measures to avoid or reduce impacts to the resource. The treatment plan measures may include, but not be limited to, avoidance and preservation in place (the preferred method if feasible), capping, incorporation of the site within a park or other open space, or data recovery. If the resource is also a tribal cultural resource, then designated representatives from the consulting tribe(s) shall make appropriate recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of such find(s) in accordance with MM CUL-3 and these recommendations shall be incorporated into the treatment plan. Geology and Soils During construction MM GEO-1: Avoid Impacts to Unique Paleontological Resources To minimize the potential for destruction of or damage to previously unknown unique, scientifically important paleontological resources ■ Responsible for approval: City of Dublin 710 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 30 Responsible forompletion Approval / Monitoring / Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Implementation Initials during earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall do the following: • Prior to the start of earthmoving activities, retain either a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist to inform all construction personnel involved with earthmoving activities regarding the possibility of encountering fossils, the appearance and types of fossils likely to be seen during construction, and proper notification procedures should fossils be encountered. • If paleontological resources are discovered during earthmoving activities, the construction crew shall immediately cease work within 50 feet of the find and notify the Project applicant and the City. The Project applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist to evaluate the resource and prepare a recovery plan, based on SVP Guidelines. The recovery plan may include, but is not limited to, a field survey, construction monitoring, sampling and data recovery procedures, museum curation for any specimen recovered, and a report of findings. Recommendations in the recovery plan that are determined by the City (as the CEQA lead agency) to be necessary and feasible shall be implemented before construction activities can resume within 50 feet of the site where the paleontological resource or resources were discovered. ■ Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified archaeologist or paleontologist Hazards and Hazardous Materials Prior to construction MM HAZMAT-1: Perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment • Prior to the start of earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall retain the services of a qualified remediation firm to perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA). The Phase II ESA shall be limited to only those areas where chemical use, storage, and handling have previously occurred. Soil borings shall be obtained as part of the Phase II ESA, along with groundwater samples if necessary. The samples shall be submitted to a laboratory ■ Responsible for approval: City of Dublin ■ Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified remediation firm 711 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 31 Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible forompletion Approval / Monitoring / Implementation Initials for environmental testing and the results shall be reported in the Phase II ESA, copies of which shall be provided to the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH) and the City of Dublin Building Department. If there are no detections of constituents of concern, or the amounts are below regulatory agency threshold levels, no further actions shall be required. • If the results of laboratory analyses from the Phase II ESA demonstrate that constituents of concern are present at levels that exceed regulatory agency threshold levels, the Project applicant shall consult with ACDEH (and other regulatory agencies such as the SWRCB if necessary) regarding the necessary actions for remediation. All necessary remedial activities shall be completed by the Project applicant, with a certification by the lead agency with remedial oversight (e.g., ACDEH or SWRCB) that no further action is required, prior to the start of construction activities at the Project site. Prior to building demolition HAZMAT-2: Perform Sampling of Materials To Be Demolished. Prior to demolition of any building in the project area, the building shall be sampled to determine if the building contains lead paint and/or asbestos. If either of the materials are determined to be present, they shall be handled and disposed of as a hazardous material and in compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations. ■ Responsible: City of Dublin ■ Implementation: Project applicant with assistance from qualified remediation firm Transportation and Traffic Project design Condition of Approval: • Requires vegetation maintenance for sight distance to achieve a minimum sight distance of 250 feet at each driveway access point • Prohibits trucks from accessing the eastern driveway ■ Responsible: City of Dublin ■ Implementation: Project applicant 712 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 32 Responsibl Approval / Monitorin Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure I Tribal Cultural Resources ompletion ate Initials Prior to and MM TR-1: Inadvertent/Unanticipated Tribal Cultural Resources • Responsible for during Discovery Protocols approval: City of construction The City of Dublin shall require the following steps to be taken, including as a part of all contracts related to construction of the Project, Dublin • Implementation: as applicable: Project applicant A. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall with assistance from retain representatives from consulting tribe(s), if available, to representatives from implement Tribal Cultural Resources Sensitivity Training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities. The training shall include information regarding the possibility of encountering buried tribal cultural resources, the appearance and types of tribal cultural resources that could potentially be seen during construction, notification procedures, and proper protocols to be followed should suspected or confirmed tribal cultural resources be encountered. This training shall be provided once to each worker involved in ground -disturbing activities before they begin work and shall be documented in training records. consulting tribe(s) B. If tribal cultural resources or potential tribal cultural resources are discovered during Project implementation, all activity within a 50- foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the City of Dublin's Project Manager shall be notified, and Tribal Representatives from the consulting tribe(s) shall be immediately notified. The Tribal Representative(s) shall evaluate the find(s) within 48 hours to determine if it meets the definition of a tribal cultural resource (PRC §21074) and follow the procedures outlined below: i. If the find(s) does not meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming Project implementation (but see MM CUL-3 and CUL-4) 713 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 33 Timing Responsibl completion Approval / Monitorin Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure ate Initials ii.lf the find(s) does meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, then it shall be avoided by Project activities and preserved in place. The contractor shall implement any measures deemed by the City of Dublin to be necessary and feasible to preserve in place, avoid, or minimize impacts to the tribal cultural resource. If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Dublin, Tribal Representatives from the consulting tribe(s) if available, shall make recommendations regarding the culturally appropriate treatment and disposition of such find(s) and significant impacts to such tribal cultural resources shall be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the consulting tribe(s), if they are available, prior to resuming construction activities within the 50-foot radius. iii. If the find meets the definition of both a tribal cultural resource and a historical or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be treated in accordance with the measures described in Section C. below and MM CUL-4. C. Culturally appropriate treatment may include, but is not limited to, minimal processing of materials for reburial, minimizing handling of tribal cultural resources objects, leaving objects in place within the landscape, or returning tribal cultural resources objects to a location within the Project area where they would not be subject to future disturbance. No cultural soil maybe removed from the Project site. Permanent curation, testing, or data collection of tribal cultural resources will not take place unless requested in writing by the consulting tribe(s). D. All fill soils imported and used for this Project must be clean, engineered fill. E. The applicant shall enter into a tribal monitoring agreement with the consulting tribe(s) prior to the start of ground disturbing activities. 714 City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Final EIR I Page 34 Responsible forompletion Approval / Monitoring / Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Implementation Initials The tribal monitoring agreement shall form the terms and compensation for the tribal monitoring with the consulting tribe(s) and be utilized in combination with the tribal cultural resource treatment. Tribal Monitors have the authority to identify sites or objects of cultural significance and to request, upon the finding of a potential tribal cultural resource, that work be slowed, diverted, or stopped if such sites or objects are identified within the direct impact area. Only the consulting tribe(s) can recommend culturally appropriate treatment of such sites or objects, via their Tribal Monitor. Work within 50 feet of the discovery location cannot resume until all necessary investigation and evaluation of the discovery under the requirements of the tribal monitoring agreement have been implemented. Energy Conservation During construction See Air quality mitigation measure MM AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices. ■ Responsible for approval: City of Dublin • Implementation: Project applicant 715 Attachment 7 ORDINANCE NO. XX — 24 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND APPROVING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT WITH RELATED STAGE 1 AND STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLPA 2022-00038 (APNS 941-1560-009-01 AND 941-1560-003-04) The Dublin City Council does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. RECITALS A. The property owner, Overton Moore Properties, proposes to redevelop an 8.81-acre site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The project would demolish the existing 62,175-square- foot Hexcel research and development building and construct a new 125,532-square-foot light industrial building to appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses with 217 parking stalls and related site improvements. Requested approvals include a Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the "Hexcel Redevelopment Project" or the "Project." B. The Project site includes two parcels totaling approximately 8.81 acres located north of the I- 580, south of Dublin Boulevard and residential and commercial uses, east of existing office buildings, and west of the U.S. Bank Branch, Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery. C. The Project site has a General Plan and Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial. D. The Project site is subject to zoning, where one half of the site is zoned Planned Development (Alameda County Ordinance No. 80-60) and the other half is zoned M-1 (Light Industrial). E. The proposed Project is consistent with the Business Park/Industrial land use designation but requires a Planned Development Rezone to accommodate the Project. F. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the CEQA Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared. G. Pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures, the City prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated August 2023, and a Final EIR dated November 2023, for the proposed Project, which reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project. Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 1 of 8 716 H. The Draft EIR identified potentially significant impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal resources, energy, geology and soils, and hazards and hazardous materials, most of which can be substantially reduced through mitigation measures. I. The Draft EIR was circulated for 45 days for public comment from August 21, 2023, to October 5, 2023. Comments received on the Draft EIR were responded to in the Final EIR dated November 2023. The Draft EIR, comments and associated responses, and changes and clarifications to the Draft EIR constitute the Final EIR. J. Following a properly noticed public hearing on December 12, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 23-11, recommending that the City Council certify the Final EIR and adopt required CEQA Findings, and approve a Planned Development Zoning District with a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit, which Resolution is incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours. K. On March 19, 2024, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard, and continued the proposed project to a date uncertain. L. A Staff Report dated September 17, 2024, and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the proposed Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, Heritage Tree Removal Permit and Final EIR, for the City Council. M. On September 17, 2024, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard. N. The City Council considered the Final EIR prepared for the Project, and all above referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony prior to taking action on the Project. O. On , the City Council adopted Resolution No. xx-24 certifying the Final EIR and adopting CEQA Findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project. P. The City Council did hear and use independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendations, and testimony herein above set forth. SECTION 2: FINDINGS A. Pursuant to Section 8.32.070 of the Dublin Municipal Code (DMC), the City Council finds as follows. 1. The Hexcel Redevelopment Project ("the Project") PD-Planned Development Zoning meets the purpose and intent of DMC Chapter 8.32, in that it provides a comprehensive development plan that will be consistent with the General Plan and Dublin Village Historic Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 2 of 8 717 Area Specific Plan, and protects the integrity and character of the area by creating a desirable use of land that is sensitive to surrounding land uses by virtue of the layout and design of the site plan. The Project is planned comprehensively and will follow development standards tailored to the specific needs of the site. These standards will address issues such as building setbacks, architecture, landscaping and grading. The proposed building will blend with the natural features unique to the site through design and planning. The Applicant proposes an outdoor seating area and sufficient landscaping within new bi- retention areas and the new parking lot, along the site perimeter and the frontage of the building facade, which are consistent with the provisions and regulations for development set forth therein. 2. Development of the Project under the PD-Planned Development Zoning will be harmonious and compatible with existing and future development in the surrounding area, in that the proposed Project would redevelop an existing developed site with a light industrial building catering to advanced manufacturing and life science uses, which is consistent with the General Plan and Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. B. Pursuant to DMC Sections 8.120.050 A and B, the City Council finds as follows. 1. The PD-Planned Development Zoning for the Project will be harmonious and compatible with existing and potential development in the surrounding area, in that the proposed Project would redevelop an existing developed site with a light industrial building catering to advanced manufacturing and life science uses and has taken into account adjacent land uses. 2. The Project site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the zoning district being proposed, in that the site is flat with existing access provided from Dublin Boulevard and is served by existing public utilities. The Project site conditions were documented in the EIR prepared for the Project, and the environmental impacts that have been identified will be mitigated to the greatest degree possible. There are no major physical or topographic constraints and, thus, the site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of uses proposed through the PD-Planned Development Zoning. 3. The PD-Planned Development Zoning will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, in that the Project will comply with all applicable development regulations and standards and will implement all adopted mitigation measures. In order to ensure adequate emergency vehicle access to all portions of the site, access is provided to the site from Dublin Boulevard. 4. The PD-Planned Development Zoning is consistent with and in conformance with the Dublin General Plan and the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, in that the proposed light industrial building is consistent with the existing Business Park/Industrial land use designation for the site, which allows non -retail businesses such as research, limited manufacturing and distribution activities, and administrative offices. The Project complies with this designation as it will provide for an attractive facility that appeals to advanced manufacturing and life science uses that will not generate nuisances related to emissions, noise, odors, or glare. C. Pursuant to CEQA, the City Council certified a Final EIR via Resolution No. xx-24 on September 17, 2024, prior to approving the Project. Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 3 of 8 718 SECTION 3: ZONING MAP AMENDMENT Pursuant to DMC Chapter 8.32, Title 8 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code, the City of Dublin Zoning Map is amended to rezone the property described below to a Planned Development Zoning District and supersedes the previously adopted Planned Development Zoning (Alameda County Ordinance No. 80-60) and M-1 Zoning (Light Industrial): 8.81 acres located north of the 1-580, south of Dublin Boulevard, east of existing office buildings, and west of the U.S. Bank Branch, Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery, which includes the following Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 941- 1560-009-01 AND 941-1560-003-04 ("the Property"). A map of the rezoning area is shown below: SECTION 4. APPROVAL OF STAGE 1 AND 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN The regulations for the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the Property are set forth in the following Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for the entire 8.81-acre Project area, which is hereby approved. Any amendments to the Stage 1/Stage 2 Development Plan shall be in accordance with DMC Section 8.32.080 or its successors. Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan This is a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan pursuant to DMC Chapter 8.32. This Development Plan meets all the requirements for both a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan and is adopted as part of the PD-Planned Development rezoning for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project (PLPA-2022-00005). The Planned Development zoning district and this Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan provides flexibility to encourage innovative development while ensuring that the goals, policies, and action programs of the General Plan and provisions of DMC Chapter 8.32 are satisfied. 1. Statement of Uses Parcel 1 Permitted Uses (as defined by the Zoning Ordinance): Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 4 of 8 719 Industrial — Light (Warehouse and Distribution uses involving heavy truck traffic are not permitted) Office — Professional/Administrative Similar and related uses as determined by the Director of Community Development Conditional Uses: None Accessory Uses: Uses which are necessarily and customarily associated with, and are appropriate, incidental, and subordinate to the principal uses as determined by the Director of Community Development Parcel 2 No development or uses are permitted on Parcel 2. 2. Stage 1 and Stage 2 Site Plan The Stage 1 and Stage 2 Site Plan is shown below. TABULATION 33,866 F. 1� amyucl Kra 1- Effirt9r 1— I T9TAL 9UILL IN9 AREA 125,53 SF. LNT 9 T TI UNR C 2 ,947 B.F. 29,966 S u KIM MEM SITE PLAN GENERAL NOT. SITE PLAN GENERAL NO DUBLIN BOULEVARD LP • Protect 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. Con• sultants: Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 5 of 8 720 3. Development Regulations The following Development Standards apply to Parcel 1 only. No development is permitted on Parcel 2. Floor Area Ratio 0.33 Maximum Building Height: 40 feet Maximum lot coverage 31 Parking Spaces Office: Up to 7,500 square feet - 1 per 250 square feet 7,501 to 40,000 square feet - 1 per 300 square feet 40,001+ square feet - 1 per 350 square feet Industrial — Light: 1 per 400 square feet of general purpose area, plus 1 per 1,000 square feet of warehouse or distribution area Parking Stall Dimensions Standards Per Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.76 (Off - Street Parking and Loading Regulations) Minimum Setbacks 10' front (along Dublin Boulevard) 10' side (along west and east property lines) 20' rear (along south property line) Signage Per Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.84 (Sign Regulations) 4. Phasing Plan. The Project will be built in one phase, first beginning with demolition, and followed by site preparation/grading, trench and foundation, exterior building construction, interior building construction and paving/landscaping. 5. General Plan and Specific Plan Consistency. The Project is consistent with the General Plan and Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial, which allows non -retail businesses such as research, limited manufacturing and distribution activities, and administrative offices. In addition, the proposed Project design will provide for an attractive building that appeals to advanced manufacturing and life science uses that will not generate heavy truck traffic and nuisances related to emissions, noise, odors, or glare and is consistent with the floor area ratio of 0.30 to 0.40 allowed in the Business Park/Industrial land use designation. 6. Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. The proposed Project is an industrial use type and is not subject to the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations (DMC Chapter 8.68) for the provision of affordable housing because the regulations apply only to residential development projects of 20 units or more. 7. Architectural Standards. The Project's architectural style utilizes a historic industrial adaptive reuse design approach that is industrial in nature and is unique to light industrial, advanced manufacturing and life science uses. Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 6 of 8 721 The architectural design of the Project shall reflect the following standards: • Incorporate features such as channel canopies and different wall planes and horizontal and vertical reveals to break down the building form into more human scale volumes. • Use varying colors, brick veneer, heights, low slope/flat roof construction, light fixtures, and landscaping to enhance the building detail at the pedestrian level. • Colors shall be neutral in nature, while bright/harsh primary colors shall be avoided. • Lighter building color applications for portions of the facade shall be used to provide interest. • Provide outdoor space for tenants, which allows for gathering and socializing, with landscaping, outdoor seating, enhanced paving treatment, and other features to provide an appropriate urban scale for the development. 8. Preliminary Landscaping Plan. The conceptual landscape design of the Project shall reflect the following standards: • Provide plentiful green space and natural habitat that utilizes a native and climate - adaptive planting palette to Dublin's Historic Area and is considered moderate or low water use. • Provide a generous landscape buffer along the perimeter of the project site to soften the main street frontage, rear and sides of the building, and reduce the mass of the building onto adjacent properties. • As shown on the Preliminary Landscape Plan, preserve existing trees where possible along the site perimeter to further enhance the landscape buffer and better integrate the new development into the surrounding community. • Utilize plants that provide a year-round vegetated landscape with seasonality, color, and interest for an attractive visual environment. 9. Aerial Photo. 10. Applicable Requirements of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Except as specifically provided in this Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the property shall be subject to the regulations of the closest comparable Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 7 of 8 722 zoning district as determined by the Community Development Director and the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. No development shall occur on this property until a Site Development Review Permit has been approved. SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY The provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if any provision, clause, sentence, word or part thereof is held illegal, invalid, unconstitutional, or inapplicable to any person or circumstances, such illegality, invalidity, unconstitutionality, or inapplicability shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions, clauses, sentences, sections, words or parts thereof of the ordinance or their applicability to other persons or circumstances. SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days following its adoption. SECTION 7. POSTING OF ORDINANCE The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public spaces in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this th day of 2024, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 8 of 8 723 Attachment 8 RESOLUTION NO. XX — 24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT AND HERITAGE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR THE HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLPA 2022-00038 (APNS 941-1560-009-01 AND 941-1560-003-04) WHEREAS, the property owner, Overton Moore Properties, proposes to redevelop an 8.81-acre site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The project would demolish the existing 62,175- square-foot Hexcel research and development building and construct a new 125,532-square-foot light industrial building to appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses with 217 parking stalls and related site improvements. Requested approvals include a Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the "Hexcel Redevelopment Project" or the "Project;" and WHEREAS, the Project site includes two parcels totaling approximately 8.81 acres located north of the 1-580, south of Dublin Boulevard and residential and commercial uses, east of existing office buildings, and west of the U.S. Bank Branch, Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery; and WHEREAS, the Project site has a General Plan and Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial; and WHEREAS, the Project site is subject to zoning, where one half of the site is zoned Planned Development (Alameda County Ordinance No. 80-60) and the other half is zoned M-1 (Light Industrial); and WHEREAS, the proposed Project is consistent with the Business Park/Industrial land use designation but requires a Planned Development Rezone to accommodate the Project; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the CEQA Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures, the City prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated August 2023, and a Final EIR dated November 2023, for the proposed Project, which reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR identified potentially significant impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal resources, energy, geology and soils, and hazards and hazardous materials, most of which can be substantially reduced through mitigation measures; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated for 45 days for public comment from August 21, 2023, to October 5, 2023. Comments received on the Draft EIR were responded to in the Final Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 1 of 35 724 EIR dated November 2023. The Draft EIR, comments and associated responses, and changes and clarifications to the Draft EIR constitute the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, following a properly noticed public hearing on December 12, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 23-11, recommending that the City Council certify the Final EIR and adopt required CEQA Findings, and approve a Planned Development Zoning District with a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit, which Resolution is incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours; and WHEREAS, On March 19, 2024, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard, and continued the proposed project to a date uncertain; and WHEREAS, A Staff Report dated September 17, 2024, and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the proposed Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, Heritage Tree Removal Permit and Final EIR, for the City Council; and WHEREAS, on September 17, 2024, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Final EIR prepared for the Project, and all above referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony prior to taking action on the Project; and WHEREAS, on September 17, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. xx-24 certifying the Final EIR and adopting CEQA Findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendations, and testimony herein above set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding the Site Development Review Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project: A. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of this Chapter, with the General Plan and with any applicable Specific Plans and design guidelines because: 1) the proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial as it will provide space for light industrial uses that would cater to advanced manufacturing and life science tenants that will not generate nuisances related to emissions, noise, odors, or glare; 2) the proposed Project gives thoughtful consideration to the surrounding area through setbacks, height, architectural elements and landscape design; and 3) the proposed Project will conform to the allowable uses and development standards as stated in the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan. Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 2 of 35 725 B. The proposal is consistent with the provisions of Title 8, Zoning Ordinance because: 1) the Planned Development Zoning provides a comprehensive development plan that creates a desirable use of land that is sensitive to surrounding land uses by virtue of the layout and design of the site plan; and 2) development of the Project under the Planned Development Zoning will be harmonious and compatible with existing and future development in the surrounding area, in that the site will provide new light industrial facility. C. The design of the Project is appropriate to the City, the vicinity, surrounding properties, and the lot(s) in which the Project is proposed because: 1) the Project site is adjacent to Office uses and is appropriately setback and screened from adjacent properties; 2) the proposed development will consist of a light industrial facility that would appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses that would provide for additional employment opportunities and innovation in the Dublin community and surrounding areas; and 3) the design of the Project has taken into account sensitive adjacencies and will provide for a light industrial facility for advanced manufacturing and life science companies. D. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the approved development because: 1) the Project site is flat with access provided from Dublin Boulevard and is served by existing public utilities; 2) development intensity is consistent with the floor area ratio and employee density for the Business Park/Industrial land use designation; and 3) the Project site conditions were documented in the EIR that has been prepared, and the environmental impacts that have been identified will be mitigated to the greatest degree possible. E. Impacts to existing slopes and topographic features are addressed because: 1) the Project site is flat; 2) the roadway and utility infrastructure to serve the site already exist; and 3) future approval of grading and improvement plans will enable the site to be modified to suit the Project, which will be developed for the site in accordance with City policies and regulations. F. Architectural considerations including the character, scale and quality of the design, site layout, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, screening of unsightly uses, lighting, building materials and colors and similar elements result in a project that is harmonious with its surroundings and compatible with other development in the vicinity because: 1) use of varying building planes, colors and materials, and the contrast between horizontal and vertical reveals would break up the scale of the concrete tilt -up panels and overall building mass; 2) lighter building color applications and materials are used to provide interest; 3) articulation in plan and elevation and black channel window trim further break up the scale of the building and distinguish each office entrance; 4) the loading docks would be screened from public view on Dublin Boulevard by the building and from adjacent properties and the 1-580 by new and existing landscaping treatment on the east and south sides of the project site; and 5) the existing sidewalk that runs along the site frontage leading into the property will be further extended into the project site with direct access to the outdoor seating area at the main building entrance, thereby providing a strong relationship between the street and building and enhance the project's connectivity to the surrounding area. G. Landscape considerations, including the location, type, size, color, texture and coverage of plant materials, and similar elements have been incorporated into the project to ensure Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 3 of 35 726 visual relief, adequate screening and an attractive environment for the public because: 1) landscape plan features a low water usage plant palette, including a variety of drought tolerant trees, shrubs and ground cover to provide visual interest in texture and color while conserving natural resources. Native plants are utilized to encourage biodiversity in conjunction with the existing riparian vegetation and Dublin Creek on Parcel 2; 2) sufficient plant screening is provided in the setback between the site and adjacent community area north of Dublin Boulevard to minimize any undesirable visual impacts; 3) sufficient plant screening is provided between the site and adjacent properties to the east to minimize any undesirable visual impact; 4) the loading docks will be screened by new and existing landscaping treatment on the south and east sides of the project site; 5) large shade trees are provided within the parking lot to minimize radiation, provide a cooler environment, and reduce urban heat island effect; 6) a variety of drought tolerant trees, plants, and shrubs are included to provide visual interest in texture and color palette; and 7) the landscape design was conducted in a manner that preserves the existing heritage trees on -site by incorporating them into the site design. H. The site has been adequately designed to ensure proper circulation for bicyclists, pedestrians and automobiles because: 1) the project site is accessed from two existing driveways on Dublin Boulevard with the main driveway located at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hansen Drive and the secondary driveway located at the northeastern corner of the project site (east of Hansen Drive adjacent to the U.S. Bank Branch entrance); 2) the existing sidewalk that runs along the site frontage leading into the property will be further extended into the project site and provide direct access to the main building entrance and outdoor seating area; 3) safe and convenient pedestrian paths are proposed between the building entrances, public sidewalks, and on -site parking lot; 4) all infrastructure including, pathways, sidewalks, and lighting have been reviewed for conformance with City policies, regulations, and best practices and have been designed with multi -modal travel in mind; and 5) the Project has been reviewed by the Public Works Department and Fire Department and adequate access and circulation has been provided on -site. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding the Historic Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project: A. Approval of the application is consistent with the purpose and intent of this Chapter because: 1) the project has implemented various elements of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Commercial Design Guidelines, where appropriate, to be in compliance with the Specific Plan; 2) the project would enhance and reinforce the unique historic qualities and design elements found in Dublin Village in that the project includes muted earth tone building colors, vertically oriented windows with simple framing, stone monumentation, and similar lighting design and plant pallet standards found in the Historic Area; 3) the project would improve the public realm to create a positive pedestrian experience because the building is oriented toward the street and provides direct pedestrian connectivity with the walkway from the street to the main building entrance; and 4) the project would enhance the areas image as a historic district and create a unique sense of place because the project would install permanent interpretive display/signage for public exhibition detailing the history and significance of the former Hexcel Corporation research and development facility. Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 4 of 35 727 B. Any approval complies with the policies of the General Plan, with any applicable Specific Plans, with the development regulations or performance standards established for the standard Zoning District (C-O, C-1, PD, R-M, etc.) in which it is located, and with all other requirements of the Zoning Ordinance because: 1) the proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial as it will provide space for light industrial uses that would cater to advanced manufacturing and life science tenants that will not generate nuisances related to emissions, noise, odors, or glare; 2) the proposed Project gives thoughtful consideration to the surrounding area through setbacks, height, architectural elements and landscape design; and 3) the proposed Project will conform to the allowable uses and development standards as stated in the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan. C. The approval will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare because: 1) the Project will comply with all applicable development regulations and standards and will implement all adopted mitigation measures; and 2) adequate emergency vehicle access to all portions of the site is provided from Dublin Boulevard. D. The design of the project will provide a desirable environment for the development and an attractive environment for the public because: 1) the project has implemented various design elements that would enhance and reinforce the unique historic qualities and design elements found in Dublin Village Historic Area while ensuring it would appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses in that the project includes muted earth tone building colors, vertically oriented windows with simple framing, stone monumentation, and similar lighting design and plant pallet standards found in the Historic Area; and 2) the project creates an attractive environment for the public because the building is oriented toward the street, proposes landscaping consistent with the Historic Area, and provides direct pedestrian connectivity with the walkway from the street to the main building entrance and the project would install permanent interpretive display/signage for public exhibition detailing the history and significance of the former Hexcel Corporation research and development facility. E. The project is in substantial compliance with the applicable chapters of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan because: 1) the project has implemented various elements, where appropriate, under the Commercial Design Guidelines to be in compliance with the architectural, site planning and lighting standards of the Specific Plan. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby approve Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council does hereby approve the Site Development Review Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project subject to the conditions included below, and other plans, and text relating to this Site Development Review Permit. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance of building permits and shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval. The following codes represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitoring compliance of the conditions of approval: [PL] Planning; [B] Building; [PO] Police; [PW] Public Works; [ADM] Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 5 of 35 728 Administration/City Attorney; [FIN] Finance; [PCS] Parks and Community Services; [F] Dublin Fire Prevention; [DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District; [LDD] Livermore Dublin Disposal; [CO] Alameda County Department of Environmental Health; [Zone 7] Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Zone 7; [LAVTA] Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority; and [CHS] California Department of Health Services. CONDITION TEXT RESPONA GENCY WHEN REQUIRED Prior to: PLANNING — GENERAL 1. Approval. This approval is for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project generally depicted and indicated on the Project Plans prepared by HPA Architecture, dated August 21, 2024, attached as Exhibit A and other plans, text, and diagrams relating to PL On -going this project, and as specified as the following Conditions of Approval for this project. 2. Effective Date. This Site Development Review Permit approval becomes effective once the Planned Development Rezoning has been approved by City Council and is effective. PL On -going 3. Permit Expiration. Construction or use shall commence within one (1) year of Permit approval or the Site Development Review Permit shall lapse and become null and void. If there is a dispute as to whether the Site Development Review Permit has expired, the City may hold a noticed public hearing to determine the matter. Such a determination may be processed concurrently with revocation proceedings in appropriate circumstances. If the Site Development Review Permit expires, a new application must be made and processed according to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. PL One Year After Effective Date 4. Time Extension. The Director of Community Development may, upon the Applicant's written request for an extension of approval prior to expiration, and upon the determination that any Conditions of Approval remain adequate to assure that applicable findings of approval will continue to be met, grant a time extension of approval for a period not to exceed twelve (12) months. The Director of Community Development may grant a maximum of two (2) extensions of approval, and additional extensions may be granted by the original decision maker. PL Prior to Expiration Date 5. Compliance. The Applicant/Property Owner shall operate this use in compliance with the Conditions of Approval of this Site Development Review Permit, the approved plans and the regulations established in the Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions specified may be subject to enforcement PL On -going Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 6 of 35 729 action. 6. Modifications. Modifications or changes to this Site Development Review Permit approval may be considered by the Community Development Director if the modifications or changes proposed comply with Dublin Municipal Code (DMC) Section 8.104.100. PL On -going 7. Revocation of Permit. The Site Development Review Permit approval shall be revocable for cause in accordance with DMC Section 8.96.020.1. Any violation of the terms or conditions of this permit shall be subject to citation. PL On -going 8. Requirements and Standard Conditions. The Applicant/Developer shall comply with applicable City of Dublin Fire Prevention Bureau, Dublin Public Works Department, Dublin Building Department, Dublin Police Services, Alameda County Flood Control District Zone 7, Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority, Alameda County Public and Environmental Health, Dublin San Ramon Services District and the California Department of Health Services requirements and standard conditions. Prior to issuance of building permits or the installation of any improvements related to this project, the Applicant/Developer shall supply written statements from each such agency or department to the Planning Department, indicating that all applicable conditions required have been or will be met. Various Building Permit Issuance 9. Required Permits. The Applicant/Developer shall obtain all permits required by other agencies including, but not limited to Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Zone 7, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Caltrans and provide copies of the permits to the Public Works Department. PW Building Permit Issuance and Grading Permit Issuance 10. Fees. The Applicant/Developer shall pay all applicable fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance, including, but not limited to, Planning fees, Building fees, Traffic Impact Fees, TVTC fees, Dublin San Ramon Services District fees, Public Facilities fees, Dublin Unified School District School Impact fees, Fire Facilities Impact fees, Alameda County Flood and Water Conservation District (Zone 7) Drainage and Water Connection fees; or any other fee that may be adopted and applicable. Various Building Permit Issuance 11. Indemnification. Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Dublin and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Dublin or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Dublin or its advisory agency, ADM On -going Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 7 of 35 730 appeal board, Planning Commission, City Council, Community Development Director, Zoning Administrator, or any other department, committee, or agency of the City provided, however, that the Applicant's duty to so defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be subject to the City's promptly notifying the Applicant of any said claim, action, or proceeding and the City's full cooperation in the defense of such actions or proceedings. 12. Clarification of Conditions. In the event that there needs to be clarification to the Conditions of Approval, the Director of Community Development and the City Engineer have the authority to clarify the intent of these Conditions of Approval to the Applicant/Developer without going to a public hearing. The Director of Community Development and the City Engineer also have the authority to make minor modifications to these conditions without going to a public hearing in order for the Applicant/Developer to fulfill needed improvements or mitigations resulting from impacts to this project. PL, PW On -going 13. Clean-up. The Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for clean-up and disposal of project related trash to maintain a safe, clean and litter -free site. PL On -going 14. Construction Trailer. The Applicant/Developer shall obtain a Temporary Use Permit prior to the establishment of any construction trailer, storage shed, or container units on the Project site. PL Establishment of the Temporary Use 15. Equipment Screening. All electrical equipment, fire risers, and/or mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view by landscaping and/or architectural features and that electrical transformers are either underground or architecturally screened. Any roof -mounted equipment shall be completely screened from adjacent street view by materials architecturally compatible with the building and to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. The Building Permit plans shall show the location of all equipment and screening for review and approval by the Community Development Director. PL Building Permit Issuance PLANNING — PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS 16. Public Art. The project is required to comply with DMC Sections 8.58.05A and 8.58.05D of Chapter 8.58 (Public Art Program). The project will make a monetary contribution in -lieu of acquiring and installing a public art project on the property, as provided by the DMC Section 8.58.050D. The in -lieu contribution shall be as provided in the DMC Chapter 8.58. PL Building Permit Issuance 17. Mitigation Monitoring Program. Applicant/Developer shall comply with the applicable mitigation measures of PL Ongoing Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 8 of 35 731 the 2023 Hexcel Redevelopment Environmental Impact Report certified by Resolution No. XX-24, including any applicable action programs and implementation measures contained in Resolution No. XX-24. The EIR is on file with the Community Development Department. 18. Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan. Plans shall comply with DMC Chapter 8.72 and be generally consistent with the project plans attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A prepared and stamped by a PL Building Permit Issuance State licensed landscape architect or registered engineer shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Director. 19. Water Efficient Landscaping Regulations. The Applicant/Developer shall meet all requirements of the City of Dublin's Water -Efficient Landscaping Regulations contained in DMC Chapter 8.88 and submit written documentation to the Public Works Department (in the form of a Landscape Documentation Package and other required documents) that the development conforms to the City's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. PL Building Permit Issuance 20. Landscape Edges. Concrete curbs or bands shall be used at the edges of all planters and paving surfaces, unless otherwise defined differently. The design width and depth of the concrete edge shall be to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and City Engineer. PL Building Permit Issuance 21. Backflow Prevention Devices. The Landscape Plan shall show the location of all backflow prevention devises. The location and screening of the backflow prevention devices shall be reviewed and approved by City staff. PL Building Permit Issuance 22. Maintenance of Landscape. All landscape areas on the site shall be enhanced and properly maintained at all times. Any proposed or modified landscaping to the site, including the removal or replacement of trees, shall require prior review and written approval from the Community Development Director. PL On -going 23. Distance Between Light Poles and Tree Trunks. A minimum distance of 15 feet shall be provided between light poles and tree trunks. PL Building Permit Issuance 24. Protection of Existing Landscaping on Adjacent Property. To the maximum extent feasible, existing landscaping on the adjacent property to the east, including but not limited to trees, shrubbery, and vines on the existing fence, shall be protected during grading/construction activities. Protection measures shall include fencing trees at the drip line perimeter and, where construction is proposed within existing driplines, excavating by hand. In addition, roots over one (1) inch PL On -going Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 9 of 35 732 in diameter that must be cut shall be observed and approved by the City Arborist. 25. Protection of Heritage Trees. Prior to obtaining a demolition permit, a tree protection plan shall be prepared for the heritage trees to remain on Parcel 1. PL Demolition Permit Issuance BUILDING AND SAFETY 26. Building Codes and Ordinances. All project construction shall conform to all building codes and ordinances in effect at the time of building permit. B Through Completion 27. Construction Drawings. Construction plans shall be fully dimensioned (including building elevations) accurately drawn (depicting all existing and proposed conditions on site), and prepared and signed by a California licensed Architect or Engineer. All structural calculations shall be prepared and signed by a California licensed Architect or Engineer. The site plan, landscape plan and details shall be consistent with each other. B Issuance of Building Permits 28. Building Permits. To apply for building permits, Applicant/Developer shall submit electronic drawings for plan check. An annotated copy of the Conditions of Approval shall be included with the submittal. The B Issuance of Building Permits notations shall clearly indicate how all Conditions of Approval will or have been complied with. Construction plans will not be accepted without the annotated resolutions attached to each set of plans. Applicant/Developer will be responsible for obtaining the approvals of all participation non -City agencies prior to the issuance of building permits. 29. As -Built Drawings. All revisions made to the building plans during the project shall be incorporated into an "As Built" electronic file and submitted prior to the issuance of the final occupancy. B Occupancy 30. Addressing a) Provide a site plan with the City of Dublin's address grid overlaid on the plans (1 to 30 scale). Highlight all exterior door openings on plans (front, rear, garage, etc.). The site plan shall include a single large format page showing the entire project and individual sheets for each neighborhood. Application and required plans shall be submitted electronically. b) Address signage shall be provided as per the Dublin Commercial Security Code. c) Address signage will be required on all doors leading to the exterior of the building. Addresses shall be illuminated and be able to be seen from the street, four (4) inches in height minimum. B a) Prior to Release of Addresses b) Prior to Permitting c) Prior to Occupancy 31. Engineer Observation. The Engineer of record shall be retained to provide observation services for all B Prior to Scheduling Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 10 of 35 733 components of the lateral and vertical design of the building, including nailing, hold-downs, straps, shear, roof diaphragm and structural frame of building. A written report shall be submitted to the City Inspector the Final Frame Inspection prior to scheduling the final frame inspection. 32. 60-Foot No Build Covenant. Pursuant to Dublin Municipal Code Section 7.32.130, the owner shall file with the Building Official a Covenant and Agreement Regarding Maintenance of Yards for an Oversized Building binding such owner, his heirs, and assignees, to set aside a 60-foot required yard as unobstructed space having no improvements. After execution by the owner and Building Official, such covenant shall be recorded in the Alameda County Recorder's Office, and shall continue in effect so long as an oversized building remains or unless otherwise released by authority of the Chief Building Official. B Prior to Permitting 33. Foundation. Geotechnical Engineer for the soils report shall review and approve the foundation design. A letter shall be submitted to the Building Division on the approval. B Prior to Permit Issuance 34. Air Conditioning Units. Air conditioning units and ventilation ducts shall be screened from public view with materials compatible to the main building. Units shall be permanently installed on concrete pads or other non - movable materials approved by the Chief Building Official and Director of Community Development. B Occupancy of Building 35. Plumbing Fixture Count. The plumbing fixture count (e.g., water closets, lavatories, urinals, drinking fountains) shall meet the minimum requirements for the use as regulated by the CA Plumbing Code. B Prior to Permitting 36. Solar Zone — CA Energy Code. Show the location of the Solar Zone on the site plan. Detail the orientation of the Solar Zone. This condition of approval will be waived if the project meets the exceptions provided in the CA Energy Code. B Through Completion 37. Accessible Parking. The required number of parking stalls, the design and location of the accessible parking stalls shall be as required by the CA Building Code, Chapter 11-B. B Through Completion 38. Green Parking. The design and number of clean air/ EV ready stalls shall be as required by the CA Green Building Standards Code. B Through Completion 39. Retaining Walls. All retaining walls over 30 inches in height and adjacent to a walkway shall be provided with guardrails. Retaining walls with a surcharge and retaining walls over 36 inches in height shall obtain permits and inspections from the Building and Safety Division. B Through Completion Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 11 of 35 734 40. Accessory Structures. Building permits are required for all trash enclosures and associated amenities / structures and are required to meet the accessibility and building codes. B Through Completion 41. FEMA — Floodplain. The property is currently shown to be in a floodplain. If the building is located within the floodplain, the applicant shall submit either a letter of map amendment, letter of map change or letter of map revision prior to permitting. If the location of the building has not been removed from the floodplain by a letter, then elevation certificates will be required at the correct stages. B Prior to Permitting 42. Temporary Fencing. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed along perimeter of all work under construction B Through Completion 43. Copies of Approved Plans. Applicant shall provide City with one reduced (1/2 size) copy of the City of Dublin stamped approved plan. B 30 Days After Permit and Each Revision Issuance FIRE PREVENTION 44. Fire Apparatus Access Road Fire department access requirements are to be met. All fire apparatus access road shall be with an approved all -weathered surface and capable of supporting imposed load of 75,000 lbs. F Approval of Improvement Plans 45. Fire Hydrants All existing and proposed fire hydrants shall comply with the requirements in CFC Section 507.5, Appendix B, and Appendix C. F Approval of Improvement Plans 46. No fire service lines shall pass beneath buildings. F Approval of Improvement Plans 47. New Fire Sprinkler System & Monitoring Requirements a) In accordance with The Dublin Fire Code, fire sprinklers shall be installed in the building. The system shall be in accordance with the NFPA 13, the CA Fire Code and CA Building Code. Plans and specifications showing detailed mechanical design, cut sheets, listing sheets and hydraulic calculations shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval and permit prior to installation. This may be a deferred submittal. b) Sprinkler Plans. (Deferred Submittal Item). Submit detailed mechanical drawings of all sprinkler modifications, including cut sheets, listing sheets and calculations to the Fire Department for approval and permit prior to installation. F Building Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 12 of 35 735 c) All sprinkler system components shall remain in compliance with the applicable N.F.P.A. 13 Standard, the CA Fire Code and the CA Building Code. d) Underground Plans. (Deferred Submittal Item). Submit detailed shop drawings for the fire water supply system, including cut sheets, listing sheets and calculations to the Fire Department for approval and permit prior to installation. All underground and fire water supply system components shall be in compliance with the applicable N.F.P.A. 13, 24, 20, 22 Standards, the CA Fire Code and the CA Building Code. The system shall be hydrostatically tested and inspected prior to being covered. Prior to the system being connected to any fire protection system, a system flush shall be witnessed by the Fire Department. e) Central Station Monitoring. Automatic fire extinguishing systems installed within buildings shall have all control valves and flow devices electrically supervised and maintained by an approved central alarm station. Zoning and annunciation of central station alarm signals shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. f) Fire Protection Equipment shall be identified with approved signs constructed of durable materials, permanently installed and readily visible. 48. Fire Alarm System Required A Fire Alarm -Detection System shall be installed throughout the building so as to provide full property protection, including combustible concealed spaces, as required by NFPA 72. The system shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 72, CA Fire, Building, Electrical, and Mechanical Codes. If the system is intended to serve as an evacuation system, compliance with the horn/strobe requirements for the entire building must also be met. All automatic fire extinguishing systems shall be interconnected to the fire alarm system so as to activate an alarm if activated and to monitor control valves. Delayed egress locks shall meet requirements of C.F.C. Fire Alarm Plans. (Deferred Submittal Item). Submit detailed drawings of the fire alarm system, including floor plan showing all rooms, device locations, ceiling height and construction, cut sheets, listing sheets and battery and voltage drop calculations to the Fire Department for review and permit prior to the installation. Where employee work areas have audible alarm coverage, circuits shall be initially designed with a minimum 20 F Occupancy Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 13 of 35 736 percent spare capacity for adding appliances to accommodate hearing impaired employee's. a) Central Station Monitored Account. Automatic fire alarm systems shall be monitored by an approved central alarm station. Zoning and annunciation of central station alarm signals shall be approved by the Fire Department. b) Qualified Personnel. The system shall be installed, inspected, tested, and maintained in accordance with the provisions of NFPA 72. Only qualified and experienced persons shall perform this work. Examples of qualified individuals are those who have been factory trained and certified or are NICET Fire Alarm Certified. c) Inspection & Testing Documentation. Performance testing of all initiating & notification devices in the presence of the Fire Inspector shall occur prior to final of the system. Upon this inspection, proof that the specific account is UL Certificated must be provided to the Fire Inspector. 49. Fire Access During Construction. a) Fire Access. Access roads, turnaround, pullouts, and fire operation areas are fire lanes and shall be maintained clear and free of obstructions, including the parking of vehicles. b) Entrances. Entrances to job sites shall not be blocked, including after hours, other than by approved gates/barriers that provide for emergency access. c) Site Utilities. Site utilities that would require the access road to be dug up or made impassible shall be installed prior to construction commencing. d) Entrance flare, angle of departure, width, turning radii, grades, turnaround, vertical clearances, road surface, bridges/crossings, gates/key-switch, within a 150-foot distance to Fire Lane shall be maintained. e) Personnel Access. Route width, slope, surface and obstructions must be considered for the approved route to furthermost portion of the exterior wall. f) All -Weather Access. Fire access is required to be all-weather access. Show on the plans the location of the all-weather access and a description of the construction. Access roads must be designed to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus. F During Construction 50. Fire Extinguishers. Extinguishers shall be visible and unobstructed. Signage shall be provided to indicate fire extinguisher locations. The number and location of extinguishers shall be shown on the plans. Additional fire extinguishers maybe required by the fire inspector. F Occupancy Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 14 of 35 737 Fire extinguisher shall meet a minimum classification of 2A 10BC. Extinguishers weighing 40 pounds or less shall be mounted no higher than five (5) feet above the floor measured to the top of the extinguisher. Extinguishers shall be inspected monthly and serviced by a licensed concern annually. 51. FD Building Key Box. Building Access. A Fire Department Key Box shall be installed at the main entrance to the Building. Note these locations on the plans. The key box should be installed approximately 5 1/2 feet above grade. The box shall be sized to hold the master key to the facility as well as keys for rooms not accessible by the master key. Specialty keys, such as the fire alarm control box key and elevator control keys shall also be installed in the box. The key box door and necessary keys are to be provided to the fire inspector upon the final inspection. The inspector will then lock the keys into the box. F Occupancy 52. Means of Egress. Exit signs shall be visible and illuminated with emergency lighting when building is occupied. F Occupancy 53. Maximum Occupant Load. Posting of room capacity is required for any occupant load of 50 or more persons. Submittal of a seating plan on 8.5-inch x 11-inch paper is required prior to final occupancy. F Occupancy 54. Interior Finish. Wall and ceiling interior finish material shall meet the requirements of Chapter 8 of the California Fire Code. Interior finishes will be field verified upon final inspection. If the product is not field marked and the marking visible for inspection, maintain the products cut -sheets and packaging that show proof of the products flammability and flame -spread ratings. Decorative materials shall be fire retardant. F Occupancy 55. General Inspection. Upon inspection of the work for which this submittal was provided, a general inspection of the business and site will be conducted. F Occupancy 56. Addressing. Addressing shall be illuminated or in an illuminated area. The address characters shall be contrasting to their background. If address is placed on glass, the numbers shall be on the exterior of the glass and a contrasting background placed behind the numbers. Building Address. The building shall be provided with all addresses or the assigned address range so as to be clearly visible from either direction of travel on the street the address references. The address characters shall not be less than 5 inches in height by 1-inch F Occupancy of any building Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 15 of 35 738 stroke. Larger sizes may be necessary depending on the setbacks and visibility. Multi -Tenants. Where a building has multiple tenants, address shall also be provided near the main entrance door of each tenant space. The address shall be high enough on the building to be clearly visible from the driveway, street or parking area it faces even when vehicles are parked in front of the tenant space. The address shall not be less than 5-inches in height with a 1/2-inch stroke. Rear Doors. The address shall also be provided on any rear doors to the tenant space with minimum 5- inch-high characters. Entrance Posting. Where the addressing on the building will not be clearly visible from either direction of travel along the access road the address references. Address posting shall also be provided at the entrance to the property. The address size shall be 5-inches high and should be on a reflective background. 57. Fire Safety During Construction and Demolition A. Clearance to combustibles from temporary heating devices shall be maintained. Devices shall be fixed in place and protected from damage, dislodgement or overturning in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. B. Smoking shall be prohibited except in approved areas. Signs shall be posted "NO SMOKING" in a conspicuous location in each structure or location in which smoking is prohibited. C. Combustible debris, rubbish and waste material shall be removed from buildings at the end of each shift of work. D. Flammable and combustible liquid storage areas shall be maintained clear of combustible vegetation and waste materials. F Ongoing during construction and demolition PUBLIC WORKS — GENERAL CONDITIONS 58. Conditions of Approval. Applicant/Developer shall comply with the City of Dublin Public Works Standard Conditions of Approval contained below ("Standard Condition") unless specifically modified by Project Specific Conditions of Approval below. PW On -going 59. Compliance. Applicant/Developer shall comply with the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinances, City of Dublin Title 7 Public Works Ordinance, which includes the Grading Ordinance, the City of Dublin Public Works Standards and Policies, the most current requirements of the State Code Title 24 and the Americans with Disabilities Act PW On -going Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 16 of 35 739 with regard to accessibility, and all building and fire codes and ordinances in effect at the time of building permit. All public improvements constructed by Applicant/Developer and to be dedicated to the City are hereby identified as "public works" under Labor Code Section 1771. Accordingly, Applicant/Developer, in constructing such improvements, shall comply with the Prevailing Wage Law (Labor Code § 1720 et seq.). 60. Hold Harmless/Indemnification. Applicant/Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Dublin and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Dublin or its advisory agency, appeal board, Planning Commission, City Council, Community Development Director, Zoning Administrator, or any other department, committee, or agency of the City to the extent such actions are brought within the time period required by Government Code Section 66499.37 or other applicable law: provided, however, that the Applicant/Developer's duty to so defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be submitted to the City promptly notifying or proceeding and the City's full cooperation in the defense of such actions or proceedings. PW On -going 61. Fees. Applicant/Developer shall pay all applicable fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance, including, but not limited to: Planning fees; Building fees; Dublin San Ramon Services District fees; Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District fees. Various Depts Grading Permit or Building Permit Issuance 62. Zone 7 Impervious Surface Fees. Applicant/Developer shall complete a "Zone 7 Impervious Surface Fee Application" and submit an accompanying exhibit for review by the Public Works Department. Fees generated by this application will be due at issuance of Building Permit. PW Grading Permit or Building Permit Issuance PUBLIC WORKS — AGREEMENTS 63. Stormwater Management Maintenance Agreement. Developer or Property Owner shall enter into an Agreement with the City of Dublin that guarantees the property owner's perpetual maintenance obligation for all stormwater management measures installed as part of the project, including those on -site and within the public Rights of Way. In addition to stormwater management measures, drainage v-ditches, mitigation areas, and existing wetlands shall be included for reference, as applicable. Said Agreement is required pursuant to Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, Order No. R2-2022-0018. Said permit requires the City to provide verification and assurance that all treatment devices will be properly PW Grading Permit or Building Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 17 of 35 740 operated and maintained. The Agreement shall be recorded against the property and shall run with the land. 64. Improvement Agreement. Applicant/Developer shall enter into an Improvement Agreement with the City for all public improvements including any required offsite storm drainage or roadway improvements that are needed to serve the development, as determined by the City Engineer. PW Grading Permit or Building Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance PUBLIC WORKS — PERMITS AND BONDS 65. Encroachment Permit. Applicant/Developer shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Public Works Department for all construction activity within the public right-of-way. At the discretion of the City Engineer an encroachment permit for work specifically included in an Improvement Agreement may not be required. PW Permit Issuance 66. Grading Permit. Applicant/Developer shall obtain a Grading Permit from the Public Works Department for all grading. PW Permit Issuance 67. Security. Applicant/Developer shall provide faithful performance security to guarantee the improvements, as well as payment security, as determined by the City Engineer (Note: The performance security shall remain in effect until one year after final inspection). PW Permit Issuance 68. Permits from Other Agencies. Applicant/Developer shall obtain all permits and/or approvals required by other agencies including, but not limited to: Regional Water Quality Control Board Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) PW Permit Issuance PUBLIC WORKS — SUBMITTALS 69. Improvement Plan Submittal Requirements. All submittals of plans shall comply with the requirements of the "City of Dublin Public Works Department Improvement Plan Submittal Requirements", the "City of Dublin Improvement Plan Review Check List," and current Public Works and industry standards. A complete submittal of improvement plans shall include all civil improvements, joint trench, street lighting and on - site safety lighting, landscape plans, and all associated documents as required. Applicant/Developer shall not piecemeal the submittal by submitting various components separately. PW Grading Permit Issuance 70. Improvement Plan Requirements from Other Agencies. Applicant/Developer will be responsible for submittals and reviews to obtain the approvals of all participating non -City agencies, including but not limited to: the Alameda County Fire Department and the Dublin San Ramon Services District. PW Grading Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 18 of 35 741 71. Composite Exhibit. Construction plan set shall include a Composite Exhibit showing all site improvements, utilities, landscaping improvements and trees, etc. to be constructed to ensure that there are no conflicts among the proposed and existing improvements. PW Grading Permit Issuance 72. Geotechnical Report. Applicant/Developer shall submit a Design Level Geotechnical Report, which includes street pavement sections, grading and additional information and/or clarifications as determined by the City Engineer. PW Grading Permit Issuance 73. Ownership and Maintenance of Improvements. Applicant/Developer shall submit an Ownership and Maintenance Exhibit for review and approval by Planning Division and Public Works Department. Terms of maintenance are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. PL, PW Grading Permit Issuance 74. Building Pads, Slopes and Walls. Applicant/Developer shall provide the Public Works Department with a letter from a registered civil engineer or surveyor stating that the building pads have been graded to within 0.1 feet of the grades shown on the approved Grading Plans, and that the top & toe of banks and retaining walls are at the locations shown on the approved Grading Plans. PW Acceptance of Improvements 75. Approved Plan Files. Applicant/Developer shall provide the Public Works Department a PDF format file of approved site plans, including grading, improvement, landscaping & irrigation, joint trench and lighting. PW Grading Permit Issuance 76. Master Files. Applicant/Developer shall provide the Public Works Department a digital vectorized file of the "master" files for the project, in a format acceptable to the City Engineer. Digital raster copies are not acceptable. The digital vectorized files shall be in AutoCAD 14 or higher drawing format. All objects and entities in layers shall be colored by layer and named in English. All submitted drawings shall use the Global Coordinate System of USA, California, NAD 83 California State Plane, Zone III, and U.S. foot. PW Acceptance of Improvements 77. Environmental Services Files. Applicant/Developer shall provide to the Public Works Department GIS shape files, provided in a format acceptable to the City, all MRP Provision C.3 stormwater features, trash capture devices, mitigation measures, wetlands, v-ditches and public waste containers. PW/ESD Acceptance of Improvements 78. SB 1383 Compliance Reporting. To comply with SB 1383, applicant shall provide to the Public Works Department records indicating where SB 1383 compliant mulch or compost was applied in the project, the source and type of product, quantity of each product, and invoices demonstrating procurement. PW/ESD Acceptance of Improvements / building occupancy Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 19 of 35 742 PUBLIC WORKS — EASEMENTS AND ACCESS RIGHTS 79. Dedications. Applicant shall dedicate all rights -of -way and easement dedications required by these conditions or determined necessary by the City Engineer. PW Improvement Plan Approval 80. Public Service Easements. A Public Service Easement (PSE) shall be dedicated along the project's frontage to allow for the proper placement of public utility vaults, boxes, appurtenances or similar items behind the back- of -sidewalk. Private improvements such as fences, gates or trellises shall not be located within the PSE. PW Improvement Plan Approval 81. Emergency Vehicle Access Easements. Applicant/Developer shall dedicate Emergency Vehicle Access Easements (EVAE) over the clear pavement width of all drive aisles as required by the Alameda County Fire Department and City Engineer. PW Improvement Plan Approval 82. Abandonment of Easements. Applicant/Developer shall obtain abandonment from all applicable public agencies of existing easements and rights -of -way within the project site that will no longer be used. Prior to completion of abandonment, the improvement plans may be approved if the Applicant/Developer can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the abandonment process has been initiated. PW Improvement Plan Approval 83. Acquisition of Easements. Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for obtaining all onsite and offsite easements, and/or obtain rights -of -entry from the adjacent property owners for any improvements not located on their property. The Applicant/Developer shall prepare all required documentation for dedication of all easements on -site and off -site. The easements and/or rights -of -entry shall be in writing and copies furnished to the Public Works Department. PW Improvement Plan Approval 84. Approval by Others. Applicant/Developer will be responsible for submittals and reviews to obtain the approvals of all applicable non -City agencies. PW Improvement Plan Approval PUBLIC WORKS — GRADING 85. Grading Plan. The Grading Plan shall be in conformance with the recommendation of the Geotechnical Report, the approved Site Development Review, and the City design standards & ordinances. In case of conflict between the soil engineer's recommendation and the City ordinances, the City Engineer shall determine which shall apply. PW Grading Permit Issuance 86. Geotechnical Engineer Review and Approval. The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall be retained to review all final grading plans and specifications. The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall approve all grading plans prior to City approval. PW Grading Permit Issuance/ Sitework Permit Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 20 of 35 743 87. Grading Off -Haul. The disposal site and haul truck route for any off -haul dirt materials shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. If the Applicant/Developer does not own the parcel on which the proposed disposal site is located, the Applicant/Developer shall provide the City with a Letter of Consent signed by the current owner, approving the placement of off -haul material on their parcel. A Grading Plan may be required for the placement of the off -haul material. A Transportation Permit or Encroachment Permit may be required for the haul route, as determined by the City Engineer, which shall include a pre- and post -hauling survey of the pavement condition. Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for repairing damaged pavement due to hauling operations, as determined by the City Engineer. PW Grading Permit Issuance/ Sitework Permit 88. Erosion Control Plan. A detailed Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall be included with the Grading Plan submittal. The plan shall include detailed design, location, and maintenance criteria of all erosion and sedimentation control measures. The plan shall also address site housekeeping best management practices. PW Grading Permit Issuance 89. Demolition Plan. Applicant/Developer's Civil Engineer shall prepare a demolition plan for the project, which shall be submitted concurrent with the improvement plan package. The demolition plan shall address the following: • Pavement demolition, including streetlights and landscaped median islands • Landscaping and irrigation • Fencing to be removed and fencing to remain Any items to be saved in place and or protected, such as trees, water meters, sewer cleanouts, drainage inlets or backflow prevention devices. PW Grading Permit Issuance PUBLIC WORKS - STORM DRAINAGE & OTHER UTILITIES 90. On -Site Storm Drain System. Storm drainage for the 10-year storm event shall be collected on -site and conveyed through storm drains to the public storm drain system. Show the size and location of existing and proposed storm drains and catch basins on the site plan. Show the size and location of public storm drain lines and the points of connection for the on -site storm drain system. PW Grading Permit Issuance 91. Overland Release. Grading and drainage shall be designed so that surplus drainage (above and beyond that of the 10-year storm event) not collected in site PW Grading Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 21 of 35 744 catch basins, is directed overland so as not to cause flooding of existing or proposed buildings. 92. Storm Drain Easements. Private storm drain easements and maintenance roads shall be provided for all private storm drains or ditches that are located on private property. The Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for the acquisition of all storm drain easements from offsite property owners which are required for the connection and maintenance of all offsite storm drainage improvements. PW Grading Permit Issuance 93. Storm Drain Inlet Markers. All public and private storm drain inlets must be marked with storm drain markers that read: "No dumping, drains to creek," and a note shall be shown on the improvement plans. The markers may be purchased from the Public Works Department. PW Acceptance of Improvements 94. Fire Hydrants. Fire hydrant locations shall be approved by the Alameda County Fire Department. A raised reflector blue traffic marker shall be installed in the street opposite each hydrant, and shown on the signing & striping plan. PW Acceptance of Improvements 95. Dry Utilities. Applicant/Developer shall construct gas, electric, telephone, cable TV, and communication improvements within the fronting streets and as necessary to serve the project and the future adjacent parcels as approved by the City Engineer and the various Public Utility agencies. PW Certificate of Occupancy or Acceptance of Improvements 96. Dry Utility Locations. All electric, telephone, cable TV, and communications utilities, shall be placed underground in accordance with the City policies and ordinances. All utilities shall be located and provided within public utility easements or public services easements and sized to meet utility company standards. PW Certificate of Occupancy or Acceptance of Improvements 97. Utility Vaults and Boxes. All utility vaults, boxes, and structures, unless specifically approved otherwise by the City Engineer, shall be underground and placed in landscaped areas and screened from public view. Landscape drawings shall be submitted to the City showing the location of all utility vaults, boxes, and structures and adjacent landscape features and plantings. The Joint Trench Plans shall be submitted along with the grading and/or improvement plans. PW Certificate of Occupancy or Acceptance of Improvements PUBLIC WORKS- STREET IMPROVEMENTS 98. Public Improvements. The public improvements shall be constructed generally as shown on the Site Development Review. However, the approval of the Site Development Review is not an approval of the specific design of the drainage, traffic circulation, parking, stormwater treatment, sidewalks and street improvements. PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 22 of 35 745 99. Public Improvement Conformance. All public improvements shall conform to the City of Dublin Standard Plans, current practices, and design requirements and as approved by the City Engineer. PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance 100. Pavement Structural Sections. Asphalt concrete pavement sections within the public right-of-way shall be designed using the Caltrans method for flexible pavement design (including the asphalt factor of safety), an assumed R-Value of 5. Final pavement sections shall be based on the actual R-Value obtained from pavement subgrade. PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance 101. Decorative Pavement. Any decorative pavers/paving installed within City right-of-way shall be done to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Where decorative paving is installed at signalized intersections, pre- formed traffic signal loops shall be put under the decorative pavement. Decorative pavements shall not interfere with the placement of traffic control devices, including pavement markings. All turn lane stripes, stop bars and crosswalks shall be delineated with concrete bands or colored pavers to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Maintenance costs of decorative paving installed within the public right-of-way along the project frontage shall be the responsibility of the Applicant/Developer or future property owner. PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance 102. Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk. Applicant/Developer shall remove and replace damaged, hazardous, or nonstandard curb, gutter and sidewalk along the project frontage. Contact the Public Works Department to mark the existing curb, gutter and sidewalk that will need to be removed and replaced. PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance 103. Curb Ramps. City standard curb ramps are required at all intersections. All curb ramps shall include truncated domes and meet the most current City and ADA design standards. Curb ramp locations shall be shown on the plans. PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance 104. Visibility Triangle. All improvements within the sight visibility triangle at all intersections, including but not limited to walls and landscaping, shall be a maximum height of 30" from the roadway surface elevation at the nearest lane. PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance 105. Traffic Signing and Striping. Applicant/Developer shall install all traffic signage, striping, and pavement markings as required by the City Engineer. Signing plans shall show street name and stop signs and any other regulatory signage appropriate for the project. Striping plans shall show stop bars, lane lines and channelization as necessary. Striping plans shall distinguish between existing striping to be removed and PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 23 of 35 746 new striping to be installed. All striping shall be thermoplastic. 106. Street Lighting. Street light standards and luminaries shall be designed and installed or relocated as determined by the City Engineer. PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance PUBLIC WORKS - CONSTRUCTION 107. Erosion Control Implementation. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall be implemented between October 1st and April 30th unless otherwise allowed in writing by the City Engineer. The Applicant/Developer will be responsible for maintaining erosion and sediment control measures for one year following the City's acceptance of the improvements. PW Start of Construction and On -going 108. Archaeological Finds. If archaeological materials are encountered during construction, construction within 100 ft of these materials shall be halted until a professional Archaeologist certified by the Society of California Archaeology (SCA) or the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitigation measures. PW Start of Construction and On -going 109. Construction Activities. Construction activities, including the idling, maintenance, and warming up of equipment, shall be limited to Monday through Friday, and non -City holidays, between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. except as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Extended hours or Saturday work will be considered by the City Engineer on a case -by -case basis. Note that the construction hours of operation within the public right-of-way are more restrictive. PW Start of Construction and On -going 110. Temporary Fencing. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed along the construction work perimeter to separate the construction area from the public. All construction activities shall be confined within the fenced area. Construction materials and/or equipment shall not be operated/stored outside of the fenced area or within the public right-of-way unless approved in advance by the City Engineer. PW Start of Construction and On -going 111. Construction Noise Management Plan. Applicant/Developer shall prepare a construction noise management plan that identifies measures to minimize construction noise on surrounding developed properties. The plan shall include hours of construction operation, use of mufflers on construction equipment, speed limit for construction traffic, haul routes and identify a noise monitor. Specific noise management measures shall be provided prior to project construction. PW Start of Construction Implementatio n, and On - going as needed Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 24 of 35 747 112. Traffic Control Plan. Closing of any existing pedestrian pathway and/or sidewalk during construction shall be implemented through a City -approved Traffic Control Plan and shall be done with the goal of minimizing the impact on pedestrian circulation. PW Start of Construction and On -going as needed 113. Construction Traffic Interface Plan. Applicant/Developer shall prepare a plan for construction traffic interface with public traffic on any existing public street. Construction traffic and parking may be subject to specific requirements by the City Engineer. Lane Closures on Dublin Boulevard are only permitted between 9:00 a.m. — 3:30 p.m. PW Start of Construction; Implementatio n, and On - going as needed 114. Pest Control. Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for controlling any rodent, mosquito, or other pest problem due to construction activities. PW On -going 115. Dust Control Measures. Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for watering or other dust -palliative measures to control dust as conditions warrant or as directed by the City Engineer. PW Start of Construction; Implementatio n On -going as needed 116. Dust Control/Street Sweeping. Applicant/Developer shall provide adequate dust control measures at all times during the grading and hauling operations. All trucks hauling export and import materials shall be provided with tarp cover at all times. Spillage of haul materials and mud -tracking on the haul routes shall be prevented at all times. The Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for sweeping of streets within, surrounding and adjacent to the project, as well as along the haul route, if it is determined that the tracking or accumulation of material on the streets is due to its construction activities. PW During Grading and Site Work 117. Construction Traffic and Parking. All construction - related parking shall be off-street in an area provided by the Applicant/Developer. Construction traffic and parking shall be provided in a manner approved by the City Engineer. PW Start of Construction and On -going PUBLIC WORKS — EROSION CONTROL & STORMWATER QUALITY 118. Stormwater Treatment. Consistent with Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP) Order No. R2-2022-0018, the Applicant/Developer shall submit documentation including construction drawings demonstrating all stormwater treatment measures and hydromodification requirements as applicable are met. PW/ESD Grading Permit Issuance 119. Stormwater Source Control. All applicable structural and operational stormwater source controls shall be implemented. PW/ESD Grading/Sitew ork Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 25 of 35 748 120. Maintenance Access. Applicant shall design and construct maintenance access to all stormwater management measures and mitigation swales, as appropriate. Maintenance access for equipment and personnel to overflow risers, cleanouts and other structures is required. The final number, location, width, and surfacing of maintenance access points from public or private streets is subject to the approval of the City Engineer. PW/ESD Grading Permit Issuance 121. Green Stormwater Infrastructure. The Applicant/Developer shall incorporate Green Infrastructure facilities within the public rights -of -way of newly constructed or widened streets, subject to the review of the Public Works Department. Green Stormwater Infrastructure facilities include, but are not limited to: infiltration basins, bioretention facilities, pervious pavements, etc. PW/ESD Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance 122. NOI and SWPPP. Prior to any clearing or grading, Applicant/Developer shall provide the City evidence that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been sent to the California State Water Resources Control Board per the requirements of the NPDES. A copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be provided to the Public Works Department and be kept at the construction site. PW Start of Any Construction Activities 123. SWPPP. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall identify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriate to the project construction activities. The SWPPP shall include the erosion and sediment control measures in accordance with the regulations outlined in the most current version of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook or State Construction Best Management Practices Handbook. The Applicant/Developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors implement all storm water pollution prevention measures in the SWPPP. PW SWPPP to be Prepared Prior to Grading Permit Issuance; Implementatio n Prior to Start of Construction and On -going as needed 124. Stormwater Management Plan. A final Stormwater Management Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer. Approval is subject to the Applicant/Developer providing the necessary plans, details, and calculations that demonstrate the plan complies with the standards issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board and Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program. Landscape Based Stormwater Management Measures shall be irrigated, be on a separate irrigation controller from traditional landscape, and meet WELO requirements. PW/ESD Building Permit Issuance and Grading Permit Issuance 125. SB 1383 Compliance. To comply with SB 1383 procurement requirements, all mulch and compost used PW/ESD Building Permit Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 26 of 35 749 in stormwater management measures and general landscape areas shall meet SB 1383 procurement requirements. Specifically, compost must be produced at a permitted composting facility; digestate, biosolids, manure and mulch do not qualify as compost. Eligible mulch must be derived from organic materials and be produced at a permitted transfer station, landfill, or composting facility. Examples of allowed compost include arbor mulch and composted mulch. Issuance and Grading Permit Issuance. 126. Trash Capture. The project must include appropriate full trash capture devices for both private and public improvements. Specific details on the trash capture devices selected are required on the construction plan set demonstrating how MRP Provision C.10 (trash capture) requirements are met. A list of approved full trash capture devices may be found at the California Stormwater Quality Association website at the following link: https://www.casqa.org/resources/trash/certified- full -capture -system -trash -treatment -control -devices. Please note that lead time for trash capture device delivery can be substantial. The applicant/contractor shall plan accordingly. PW Building Permit Issuance and Grading Permit Issuance 127. Phased Construction and Stormwater Management Measures. Required stormwater treatment, hydromodification management, and trash capture devices shall be installed concurrent with construction of the first phase of improvements. Temporary facilities are not permitted. PW/ESD Building Permit Issuance and Grading Permit Issuance PUBLIC WORKS — ON -SITE IMPROVEMENTS 128. Drive Aisle Width. The parking lot aisles shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide to allow for adequate onsite vehicle circulation for cars, trucks, and emergency vehicles. PW Grading Permit Issuance 129. Vehicle Parking. All on -site vehicle parking spaces shall conform to the following: a. All parking spaces shall be double striped using four - inch white lines set two feet apart in accordance with City Standards and DMC 8.76.070.A.17. b. Twelve -inch -wide concrete step -out curbs shall be constructed at each parking space where one or both sides abut a landscaped area or planter. c. Where wheel stops are shown, individual six-foot long wheel stops shall be provided within each parking space in accordance with City Standards. d. A minimum two -foot radius shall be provided at curb returns and curb intersections where applicable. e. Parking stalls next to walls, fences and obstructions to vehicle door opening shall be an additional 4' in width per DMC Section 8.76.070.A.16. PW Grading Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 27 of 35 750 f. Landscaped strips adjacent to parking stalls shall be unobstructed in order to allow for a minimum two -foot vehicular overhang at front of vehicles. 130. Traffic Management Plan. The applicant shall make necessary modification to the parking area or develop and implement an on -site traffic management plan to address any potential concerns that may be identified by site circulation review of the site for delivery vans and trucks. If an on -site traffic management plan is developed, it should be pre- approved by Public Works department. PW Building Permit Issuance and Grading Permit Issuance 131. Onsite Signing and Striping Plan. A Traffic Signing and Striping Plan showing all proposed signing and striping within on -site parking lots and drive aisles, shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer. PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance 132. Photometrics. The Applicant/Developer shall provide a complete photometrics plan for both onsite and frontage roadways. Include the complete data on photometrics, including the High, Average and Minimum values for illuminance and uniformity ratio. PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance 133. Project signs. All proposed project monument signs shall be placed on private property. Signs should be located outside of any easement areas unless specifically approved by the City Engineer. Any signage allowed to be located in an easement is subject to removal and replacement at the expense of the Developer/property owner if required by the easement holder. PW Grading Permit Issuance 134. Solid Waste Requirements. The Project must comply with all requirements in Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.98, including the following requirements: Install trash, recycling and organics collection containers at the entrance and exit of the property. PW/ESD Building Permit or Site Work Permit Issuance 135. Cigarette Butt Collection. Install and appropriately site cigarette butt collection containers for employee and public use. PW/ESD Building Permit or Site Work Permit Issuance 136. Garbage Truck Access. The applicant shall provide plans and details on anticipated garbage truck access and routes, in addition to example set -out diagrams for waste carts/bins placement on garbage day demonstrating adequate space available for carts/bins. Carts and bins shall not block street or driveway access. PW/ESD Building Permit or Site Work Permit Issuance PUBLIC WORKS - SPECIAL CONDITIONS 137. Corrective Grading Plan. The Geotechnical Report identifies areas of undocumented fill which shall be removed and replaced with engineered fill. The Applicant shall provide corrective grading plans for removal and replacement of soil. The Public Works PW Grading Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 28 of 35 751 Department may issue a separate grading permit for this work. 138. Access Easement. The Applicant shall dedicate an access easement from the public right-of-way at Dublin Boulevard to the existing City maintained storm drain line located near the south side of the property, to allow the City maintenance access through the project site to the storm drain line. PW Improvement Plan Approval 139. Public Sidewalk Easement. The Applicant shall dedicate a public sidewalk easement behind the public right-of-way at Dublin Boulevard where the proposed public sidewalk extends outside the right-of-way and onto private property. PW Improvement Plan Approval 140. Easement Vacation. An existing easement is located within the parcel that will be in conflict with the location of the proposed building. The project shall provide documentation to the City as needed for the existing easement to be vacated. Vacation of the easement will be required through the City Council process. PW Building Permit Issuance 141. Parking Lot Slopes. Slopes shall not exceed five percent in parking lot areas. PW Improvement Plan Approval 142. Adjacent Properties. The Applicant is responsible to obtain written authorization from adjacent property owners for any access needed through adjacent properties, and any grading and improvements on adjacent properties. A copy of written authorizations shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to start of any work. PW Grading Permit or Building Permit Issuance 143. Traffic Study. The Applicant shall comply with the findings and recommendations of the traffic study, including but not limited to maintaining the landscaping to provide the minimum sight distance for vehicles exiting the project site and providing signage instructing drivers of trucks and other large vehicles that access into the project site is prohibited from the eastern driveway. PW Improvement Plan Approval 144. Public Sidewalk. The project shall provide a 10-foot- wide sidewalk separated from the curb by a five-foot landscape/amenities strip per Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan along the project frontage at Dublin Boulevard, between the two driveways serving the site. PW Improvement Plan Approval 145. Bicycle Lane at Dublin Boulevard. The Applicant shall provide a six -foot -wide bicycle lane with a two -foot -wide buffer at Dublin Boulevard along the project frontage. PW Improvement Plan Approval 146. Bicycle Parking. The Applicant shall provide 12 short- term bicycle parking spaces and 12 long-term bicycle parking spaces onsite. PW Building Permit Issuance and Grading Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 29 of 35 752 147. Landscape Features within Public Right -of -Way. The Property Owner shall enter into an "Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features" with the City to require the Property Owner to maintain the sidewalk, landscape, irrigation and any decorative features within public right-of-way along the project frontage, including but not limited to any decorative pavements, stormwater treatments and trash capture devices. The Agreement shall identify the ownership of the special features and maintenance responsibilities. The Property Owner will be responsible for maintaining the surface of all decorative pavements including restoration required as the result of utility repairs. PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance 148. Stormwater Management Report. Provide a Stormwater Management Report including narrative of existing and proposed conditions, explaining how stormwater treatment, hydromodification and trash capture requirements are being met. The report shall also include exhibits, plans and sizing calculations. PW/ESD Building Permit Issuance and Grading Permit Issuance 149. Bubble -Up Structures. Bubble -ups are discouraged. If bubble -ups are needed, they shall be placed outside of the bioretention area (e.g. adjacent to the stormwater treatment facility, not in the treatment soil). PW/ESD Approval of Improvement Plans 150. Irrigation at Stormwater Treatment Areas. Stormwater treatment areas are required to be irrigated, be on a separate irrigation controller from the traditional landscape and meet WELO requirements. PW/ESD Approval of Improvement and Landscape Plans 151. ReScape California Landscape Design. All publicly owned landscape (e.g. parks, right of way, etc.) shall be designed and rated to meet ReScape standards. The applicant is encouraged to design all other landscape areas according to ReScape Landscape standards. PW/ESD Building Permit Issuance and Grading Permit Issuance 152. Street Restoration. A pavement treatment, such as slurry seal or grind and overlay, will be required within the public streets fronting the site as determined by the Public Works Department. The type and limits of the pavement treatment shall be determined by the City Engineer based upon the number and proximity of trench cuts, extent of frontage and median improvements, extent of pavement striping and restriping, excessive wear and tear/damage due to construction traffic, etc. PW Certificate of Occupancy or Acceptance of Improvements 153. Overhead Utilities. Existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground as generally shown on the approved Site Development Plans. All new utilities shall be placed underground. PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 30 of 35 753 154. Hydromodification Management Standards. This project is subject to hydromodification management measures. The Applicant/Developer shall review the Bay Area Hydrology Model (BAHM) Review Worksheet for all projects that must meet Hydromodification Management Standards. The worksheet is available on the City's website at the following webpage: http://dublin.ca.gov/1656/ PW Grading Permit or Encroachment Permit Issuance 155. Waste Enclosure. The waste enclosure shall meet all of the requirements set forth within the Dublin Municipal Code Section 7.98, including but not limited to providing sewer and water hook-ups. The improvement plans and/or building permit plans shall show additional information demonstrating these requirements are met. A standard plan for the waste enclosure can be downloaded at https://dublin.ca.gov/341/Standard- PW/ESD Building Permit Issuance and Grading Permit Issuance Plans in the "Stormwater Measures" section. A pedestrian accessible path of travel shall be provided for employees from the building to the waste enclosure in conformance with current accessibility requirements. 156. PCBs Demolition Ordinance. The applicant shall provide all screening and testing forms required to comply with Chapter 7.29 of the Dublin Municipal Code, Management of Polychlorinated Biphenyls during the Building Demolition Process. Forms and additional resources may be found at https://dublin.ca.gov/2113/PCBs-Building-Demolition- PW/ESD Prior to issuance of Demolition Permit Ordinance. 157. Mitigation Measures. The applicant shall provide to the Planning Division and the Public Works Department a copy of the mitigation measures maintenance manual and schedule for reference, including maintenance procedures and protocols to follow after mitigation reporting is complete. PW/ESD Acceptance of Improvements 158. Fair Share Contribution. The Applicant shall pay a fair share contribution in the amount of $210,000 towards the construction of a 12-foot-wide Class I trail and a five- foot -wide buffer from the roadway on the north side of Dublin Boulevard between Silvergate Drive and Hansen Drive along the project frontage. PW Building Permit Issuance 159. Traffic Signal Modification. The Applicant shall coordinate with the City for traffic signal modifications including signal pole upgrades at the northeast and southwest corners, ADA compliant pedestrian push buttons, pedestrian countdown signal heads, appropriate vehicle signal heads to provide north -south split phasing, two Iteris vehicle detection cameras for Dublin Boulevard approaches, and project entry driveway conductor loops at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hansen Drive, as generally shown on the PW Improvement Plan Approval Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 31 of 35 754 approved SDR plans, to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer. DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT 160. Regulations that apply to development projects. The regulations that apply to development projects are codified in: the Dublin San Ramon Services District Code; the DSRSD "Standard Procedures, Specifications and Drawings for Design and Installation of Water and Wastewater Facilities" as amended from time to time; all applicable DSRSD Master Plans and all DSRSD policies. Prior to issuance of any building permit, complete improvement plans shall be submitted to DSRSD that conform to the pertinent documents. DSRSD Building Permit Issuance 161. Fees. Planning and review fees, inspection fees, and fees associated with a wastewater discharge permit shall be paid to DSRSD in accordance with the rates and schedules and at time of payment as established in the DSRSD Code. Planning and review fees are due after the 1st submittal of plans. Construction Permit and Inspection Fees are due prior to the issuance of a Construction Permit. Capacity Reserve Fees are due before the water meter can be set or the connection to the sewer system. DSRSD Permit Submittal and Construction Permit Issuance 162. District Review and Acceptance. Prior to issuance of any building permit by the City; or any Building Permit or Construction Permit by the Dublin San Ramon Services District, all improvement plans for DSRSD facilities shall be signed by the District Engineer. Each drawing of improvement plans for DSRSD facilities shall contain a signature block for the District Engineer indicating approval of the sanitary sewer and/or water facilities shown. Prior to approval by the District Engineer, the applicant shall pay all required DSRSD fees, and provide an engineer's estimate of construction costs for the sewer and water systems, a faithful performance bond, and a comprehensive general liability insurance policy in the amounts and forms that are acceptable to DSRSD. The applicant shall allow at least 15 working days for final improvement drawing review by DSRSD before signature by the District Engineer. DSRSD Building Permit Issuance or Construction Permit Issuance 163. Easements. All easement dedications for DSRSD facilities shall be by separate instrument irrevocably offered to DSRSD or by offer of dedication on the Final Map. Prior to approval by the City for Recordation, the Final Map shall be submitted to and approved by DSRSD for easement locations, widths, and restrictions. DSRSD Building Permit Issuance or Construction Permit Issuance 164. Installation in Main Thoroughfares. Where the narrow width of a proposed alley or cul-de-sac is so restrictive that the standard separation requirements for water mains and sewer mains cannot be maintained, the water DSRSD Building Permit Issuance or Construction Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 32 of 35 755 and sewer mains shall be installed within main thoroughfares, outside of alleyways or cul-de-sacs. Water and sewer mains may not be installed within courtyards. Water meters shall be installed around the outer perimeter of buildings. Installation of water lines from the meter to each unit shall be documented and submitted to the District. Permit Issuance 165. Provide Sufficient Capacity. All mains shall be sized to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate future flow demands in addition to each development project's demand. Layout and sizing of mains shall be in conformance with DSRSD utility master planning. DSRSD Approval of Improvement Plans 166. Submission of Proposed Easements. Prior to approval by the City of a grading permit or a site development permit, the locations and widths of all proposed easement dedications for water and sewer lines shall be submitted to and approved by DSRSD. DSRSD Grading Permit Issuance 167. Locate facilities in public streets. Water and sewer mains shall be located in public streets rather than in off- street locations to the fullest extent possible. If unavoidable, then sewer or water easements must be established over the alignment of each sewer or water main in an off-street or private street location to provide access for future maintenance and/or replacement. DSRSD Approval of Improvement Plans 168. Looped or Interconnect Pipelines. Domestic and fire protection waterline systems for Tracts or Commercial Developments shall be designed to be looped or interconnected to avoid dead end sections in accordance with requirements of the DSRSD Standard Specifications and sound engineering practice. DSRSD Approval of Improvement Plans 169. Sewers to operate by gravity flow. Sewers shall be designed to operate by gravity flow to DSRSD's existing sanitary sewer system. Pumping of sewage is discouraged and may only be allowed under extreme circumstances following a case by case review with DSRSD staff. Any pumping station will require specific review and approval by DSRSD of preliminary design reports, design criteria, and final plans and specifications. The DSRSD reserves the right to require payment of present worth 30-year operations and maintenance costs as well as other conditions within a separate agreement with the applicant for any project that requires a pumping station. DSRSD Approval of Improvement Plans 170. Water and/or Sewer Capacity Demands. This project will be analyzed by DSRSD to determine if it represents additional water and/or sewer capacity demands on the District. Applicant will be required to pay all incremental capacity reserve fees for water and sewer services as required by the project demands. All capacity reserve fees must be paid prior to installation of a water meter DSRSD Building Permit Issuance or Construction Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 33 of 35 756 for water. If a water meter is not required, the capacity reserve fee shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. The District may not approve the building permit until capacity reserve fees are paid. 171. Obtain Permit to Construct. No sewer line or waterline construction shall be permitted unless the proper utility construction permit has been issued by DSRSD. A construction permit will only be issued after all of the items in Condition No. 2 have been satisfied. DSRSD Building Permit Issuance or Construction Permit Issuance 172. Backflow Prevention Devices/Double Detector Check Valves. Above ground backflow prevention devices/double detector check valves shall be installed on fire protection systems connected to the DSRSD water main. The applicant shall collaborate with the Fire Department and with DSRSD to size and configure its fire system. DSRSD Approval of Improvement Plans 173. Recycled Water Improvements. Improvement plans shall include recycled water improvements as required by DSRSD. Services for landscape irrigation shall connect to recycled water mains. Applicant must obtain a copy of the DSRSD Recycled Water Use Guidelines and conform to the requirements therein. Availability of Recycled Water to be determined by District. DSRSD Approval of Improvement Plans 174. General Condition. Fire hydrants shall not be located behind a backflow prevention device and shall be connected directly to a DSRSD water main. DSRSD Approval of Improvement Plans 175. Trash Enclosures. If trash enclosures are required to drain to the sanitary sewer system, grease interceptors shall be connected downstream of the drain and installed near the trash enclosure area. The trash enclosure shall be roofed and graded to minimize rainwater or stormwater from entering the drain within the trash enclosure. DSRSD Building Permit Issuance or Construction Permit Issuance Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 34 of 35 757 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September 2024, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 35 of 35 758 TABULATION SITE AREA 383,598 s.f. 8.81 ac 12,000 s.f. 6,000 s.f. 29,500 s.f. 78,032 s.f. In s.f. In acres BUILDING AREA Office - 1st floor Office - 2nd floor Light Industrial Warehouse (Accessory to Light Industrial Use) TOTAL FAR 125,532 s.f. Maximum allowed Actual AUTO PARKING REQUIRED 0.33 0.33 30 stalls Office: 0-7.5k s.f. (1/ 250 s.f.) 7.5k s.f. - 40k s.f. (1/ 300 s.f.) Light Industrial : 1/400 s.f. VVhse (Accessory to Lght Industrial Use) : 1/1000 s.f. 35 stalls 74 stalls 78 stalls TOTAL EV AUTO REQUIRED 217 stalls 98 stalls [66] stalls [32] stalls {1} stalls {1} stalls {1} stalls 217 stalls 32 stalls 185 stalls 3 stalls 3 stalls 54 stalls 59 stalls 3 stalls 3 stalls 98 stalls [66] stalls {45} stalls {21} stalls [32] stalls {1} stalls {1} stalls {1} stalls EV Capable (45% of total parking) EV capable w ithout EVSE (67%) EV capable w ith EVSE (33%) ADA EV Parking (9' x 20' + 5' Aisle) ADA EV Van Parking (12' x 20' + 5' Aisle) Ambulatory (10' x 20' + 2' O.H.) ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED Total Auto Provided EV Auto w ith EVSE Auto to use for ADA Calculation (Total Auto - EV Auto w / EVSE) ADA Parkng (9' x 20' + 5' Aisle) ADA Van Parking (12' x 20' + 5' Aisle) AUTO PARKING PROVIDED Standard (9' x 18' + 2' O.H.) Compact ( 8' x 15' + 2' O.H.) (Max. 35% of required auto parking) ADA Parkng (9' x 20' + 5' Aisle) ADA Van Parking (12' x 20' + 5' Aisle) EV Capable (45% of total parking) — EV capable w ithout EVSE (67%) - Standard EV without EVSE ( 9' x 18' + 2' O.H.) - Compact EV w ithout EVSE (8' x 10' + 2' O.H.) (Max. 35% of required EV; EV capable w ith EVSE(33%) - ADA EV Parking (9' x 20' + 5' Aisle) -ADA EV Van Parking (12'x 20'+5'Aisle) - Ambulatory (10' x 20' + 2' O.H.) Total BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED 217 stalls 11 stalls 11 stalls Long Term (mn. 5% of Auto Parking) Short Term (min. 5% of Auto Parking) Total BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED 22 stalls 12 stalls 12 stalls Long Term (mn. 5% of Auto Parking) Short Term (min. 5% of Auto Parking) Total ZONING ORDINANCE FOR CITY 24 stalls Zoning Designation - Light Industrial Zoning (M-1) MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT ALLOWED Height - 45' SETBACKS Bu id ing Front/ Street Side - 10' Side - 10' Rear - 20' AERIAL MAP TYP. K14) A 242'-9" TYP. TYP. // TYP. L 01) TY / TYP. G C19/ .. PO ENTIAL OFFICE UNIT A 33,605 - .F 167 'ON a No/ 4 DOCK DOORS A o, 1 DUBLIN Er) r7 A A A \h\ v,C R PROP LIB TYP. (14) / A A A A A A /\/\/\/\/\/\/ c c,vC C c c c 13@8'=104 TYP. TYP. TYP. TYP. TYP. (16)(1 A) (18) (27) C 3 ) IN( TO �� eN1 - is � Iearxana� aoinnerve ORS I � I w POTENTIAL OFFI E BLVD 51'-6" DRIVEWAY C�i C C CC C C 10@8 =80' UNIT C 29,955 S 4@9'=36'` / \ / K DOORS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17@8'=136' pR ▪ 2@9'=18 4@9'=36' bo V. V 12@8'=96' ,1L 15@9'=135' 6@9'=54' 35' DRIVEWA TYP. TYP. TYP. TYP. TYP. N TYP. C18)(17) 16 C 8) 3 K10> 5 DOCK D OVERALL SITE PLAN A scale: 1" = 30'-0" 8@9'=72' SCALE: 1" = 30 -0" w z J w 0_ 0 Ct CL TRUE 90' NORTH Attachment 9 CODE ANALYSIS : BUILDING OCCUPANCY: CONSTRUCTION TYPE: FIRE SPRINKLERS: ACTUAL ROOF HEIGHT: ALLOWABLE PARAPET HEIGHT: ACTUAL STORIES: ALLOWABLE STORIES: ACTUAL BUILDING AREA: ALLOWABLE AREA (BASIC): ACTUAL AREA INCREASED ALLOWABLE <60' AND B= S1= F1= B, F-1 & S-1 III - B YES (ESFR) < 40' 75'-0" 2 STORIES 2 STORIES 125,532 S.F. 76,000 S.F. 70,000 S.F. 48,000 S.F. UNLIMITED PER CBC 507.1 >40' 3 HOUR WALL WILL BE PROVIDED SMOKE AND HEAT VENTS ARE NOT REQUIRED FOR HIGH PILE COMBUSTIBLE STORAGE PER CFC TABLE 3206.2 FOOTNOTE H. SITE PLAN KEYNOTES HEAVY BROOM FINISH CONCRETE PAVEMENT. ASPHALT CONCRETE (AC) PAVING ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL DRIVEWAY APRONS 5'-6"X5'-6"X4" THICK CONCRETE EXTERIOR LANDING PAD TYP. AT ALL EXTERIOR MAN DOORS TO LANDSCAPED AREAS. FINISH TO BE MEDIUM BROOM FINISH SLOPE TO BE 1 /4" : 12" MAX. C6) (8) ) (1 °) 1A> (1B> 12 13 (14> 15 (16) 17 (18) (19) (20) 21 22 23 04) 25 (26) 27 TRASH, RECYCLING AND COMPOST CONTAINER. C28> C29> (30> 31 32 33 (34) APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TRANSFORMER. 3 HOUR RATED WALLS. CONCRETE WALKWAY, MEDIUM BROOM FINISH. SEE "L" DRAWINGS. CONCRETE RAMP WITH CONCRETE GUARD WALL. SEE "C" BIKE RACK. ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGER. FUTURE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGER. EXTERIOR METAL STEEL STAIR. 12' x 14' DRIVE-IN DOOR LANDSCAPE. CONC. FILLED GUARD POST 6" DIA. U.N.O. 48" PRE -CAST CONC. WHEEL STOP. TRUNCATED DOMES. ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL SIGN. HARDSCAPE AT ENTRANCE. SEE "L" DRAWINGS. ACCESSIBLE ENTRY SIGN. PUMP ROOM. TRASH ENCLOSURE. ELECTRICAL ROOM. AMENTITY SEATING STORM TREATMENT SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS OFF-STREET LOADING SPACES 15' x 35' x 14' CLEARANCE. NOT USED 5' CLEAR BACKUP AREA SMOKING AREA, PROVIDE SIGN AND CIGARETTE RECEPTACLE. SEE SHEET DAB-A4.1 RETAINING WALL, EITHER TAN CMU BLOCK OR CONCRETE WALL PAINTED TAUPE, SEE COLOR 3 ON DAB-A3.1 MONUMENT SIGNAGE FENCE ARBOR H. SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES DRAWINGS. CONCRETE PAVING. SEE "C" I DRWGS. FOR THICKNESS I STANDARD PARKING STALL 9' X 18' (WITH 2' OVERHANG) STANDARD PARKING STALL WITH EVCS (EV CHARGER INSTALLED) STANDARD PARKING STALL, EV CAPABLE !LANDSCAPED AREA NON -ACCESSIBLE PATH COMPACT PARKING STALL 8' X 17' (15' WITH 2' OVERHANG) ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL (9' X 18') + 8' W/ ® ACCESSIBLE AISLE BICYCLE PARKING LONG-TERM / SHORT-TERM Ei ACCESSIBLE PARKING (VAN) STALL (12' X 18') + 8' W/ ACCESSIBLE AISLE PATH OF TRAVEL. MINIMUM WIDTH TO BE 4'. SLOPE NOT TO EXCEED 5% IN THE DIRECTION OF TRAVEL AND CROSS SLOPE NOT TO EXCEED 2%, SEE CIVIL FOR GRADING PLAN SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES 1. THE SITE PLAN BASED ON THE SOILS REPORT PREPARED BY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER, DATE, PROJECT NUMBER # 2. IF SOILS ARE EXPANSIVE IN NATURE, USE STEEL REINFORCING FOR ALL SITE CONCRETE 3. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE FACE OF CONCRETE WALL, FACE OF CONCRETE CURB OR GRID LINE U.N.O. 4. SEE "C" PLANS FOR ALL CONCRETE CURBS, GUTTERS AND SWALES 5. PROVIDE STRUCTURAL CALCULATION AND CONSTRUCTION ANCHORAGE DETAIL FOR TRANSFORMER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 6. SEE "C" DRAWINGS FOR POINT OF CONNECTIONS TO OFF -SITE UTILITIES. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ACTUAL UTILITY LOCATIONS. 7. PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM BLDG. SEE "C" DRAWINGS. 8. CONTRACTOR TO REFER CONTROL DIMENSIONS. STARTING LAYOUT POINT 9. SEE "C"DRAWINGS FOR TO "C" DRAWINGS FOR ALL HORIZONTAL SITE PLANS ARE FOR GUIDANCE AND S. FINISH GRADE ELEVATIONS. 10. CONCRETE SIDEWALKS TO BE A MINIMUM OF 4" THICK W/ TOOLED JOINTS AT 6' 0.C. EXPANSION/CONSTRUCTION JOINTS SHALL BE A MAXIMUM 12' EA. WAY W/ 1:20 MAX. SLOPE. EXPANSION JOINTS TO HAVE COMPRESSIVE EXPANSION FILLER MATERIAL OF 1/4". FINISH TO BE A MEDIUM BROOM FINISH 11. U.N.O. PROVIDE KNOX BOXES AT ALL OFFICE ENTRANCES. 12. PAINT CURBS AND PROVIDE SIGNS TO INFORM OF FIRE LANES AS REQUIRED BY FIRE DEPARTMENT. 13. ON -SITE FIRE MAIN, FIRE SPRINKLER, AND SPRINKLER MONITORING SYSTEM SHALL BE SUBMITTED SEPARATELY TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR REVIEW AND PERMITTING. 14. ALL VERTICAL MOUNTING POLES OF FENCING SHALL BE CAPPED. 15. LANDSCAPED AREAS SHALL BE DELINEATED WITH A MINIMUM SIX INCHES (6') HIGH CURB 16. ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR WALK SURFACES TO BE NON -SLIP TYPE 17. PROVIDE DOUBLE STRIPES AT AUTO PARKING STALLS PER CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARDS. SEE DETAIL ON A1.2 hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 ■ Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: K&W Green Design ■ Title: OVERALL SITE PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 JV 08/21/2024 Sheet: DAB.A1.1 0 30' 60' i / • / A / / 9 9/ AE� /N H. B • R / / / o, 1 DUBLIN / \ / \ / / / / / \ C ,C C„C CCCuCC„CC I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 R BLVD 51'-6" 35' DRIVEWA w z J w 0 Ct CL SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES CONCRETE PAVING. SEE "C" DRWGS. FOR THICKNESS I STANDARD PARKING STALL 9' X 18' (WITH 2' OVERHANG) STANDARD PARKING STALL WITH EVCS (EV CHARGER INSTALLED) STANDARD PARKING STALL, EV CAPABLE !LANDSCAPED AREA NON —ACCESSIBLE PATH COMPACT PARKING STALL 8' X 17' (15' WITH 2' OVERHANG) ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL (9' X 18') + 8' W/ ® ACCESSIBLE AISLE • ACCESSIBLE PARKING (VAN) STALL (12' X 18') + 8' W/ ACCESSIBLE AISLE hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 ■ Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: K&W Green Design • Title: FIRE ACCESS ROUTE Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 JV 08/21/2024 OVERALL SITE PLAN scale: 1" = 30'-0 SCALE: 1" = 30 —0" '0000�0000/ 30' 60' TRUE 90' NORTH Sheet: DAB•A1. 1F Jk1NO ONTO VH0 A3 moivinEnv 13@8'=104' <8> � 1 A> <16><18> 27 &1NO ONIOHVHO A3 000000( 0000000 000000[ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J`1NO DNIO IVHO A3 0000000 00000 0[ 00 .. 0 0 0 o. {!. 000 C nn 2 � TYP. TYP. <10> <24> AP, 7'-7" 13'-9" IIII IIIIII�I IIIIII�I IIIII�I .000000 oo.oggt:g1 gg*Ng00000.NOgg000.000: 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ENLARGED SITE PLAN ENLARGED SITE PLAN scale: 1" = 10'-0" 4@9'=36' SCALE: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10' SCALE: 1" = 1 0'-0" 20' 1 0' 20' TRUE 30' NORTH TRUE 30' NORTH SITE PLAN KEYNOTES HEAVY BROOM FINISH CONCRETE PAVEMENT. ASPHALT CONCRETE (AC) PAVING ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL DRIVEWAY APRONS 5'-6"X5'-6"X4" THICK CONCRETE EXTERIOR LANDING PAD TYP. AT ALL EXTERIOR MAN DOORS TO LANDSCAPED AREAS. FINISH TO BE MEDIUM BROOM FINISH SLOPE TO BE 1/4" : 12" MAX. (6) ci) C8) �9) K10) 1 A) �1B> 12 13 (14> 15 (16) 17 (18> (19) (20) 21 22 23 (24) 25 (26) 27 TRASH, RECYCLING AND COMPOST CONTAINER. (28> K29) (30> KT1) 32 33 (34> APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TRANSFORMER. 3 HOUR RATED WALLS. CONCRETE WALKWAY, MEDIUM BROOM FINISH. SEE "L" DRAWINGS. CONCRETE RAMP WITH CONCRETE GUARD WALL. SEE BIKE RACK. ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGER. FUTURE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGER. EXTERIOR METAL STEEL STAIR. 12' x 14' DRIVE-IN DOOR LANDSCAPE. CONC. FILLED GUARD POST 6" DIA. U.N.O. 48" H. PRE -CAST CONC. WHEEL STOP. TRUNCATED DOMES. ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL SIGN. HARDSCAPE AT ENTRANCE. SEE "L" DRAWINGS. ACCESSIBLE ENTRY SIGN. PUMP ROOM. TRASH ENCLOSURE. ELECTRICAL ROOM. AMENTITY SEATING STORM TREATMENT SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS OFF-STREET LOADING SPACES 15' x 35' x 14' CLEARANCE. NOT USED 5' CLEAR BACKUP AREA SMOKING AREA, PROVIDE SIGN AND CIGARETTE RECEPTACLE. SEE SHEET DAB-A4.1 RETAINING WALL, EITHER TAN CMU BLOCK OR CONCRETE WALL PAINTED TAUPE, SEE COLOR 3 ON DAB-A3.1 MONUMENT SIGNAGE FENCE ARBOR SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES DRAWINGS. CONCRETE PAVING. SEE "C" I DRWGS. FOR THICKNESS I STANDARD PARKING STALL 9' X 18' (WITH 2' OVERHANG) STANDARD PARKING STALL WITH EVCS (EV CHARGER INSTALLED) STANDARD PARKING STALL, EV CAPABLE LANDSCAPED AREA NON -ACCESSIBLE PATH COMPACT PARKING STALL 8' X 17' (15' WITH 2' OVERHANG) ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL (9' X 18') + 8' W/ ® ACCESSIBLE AISLE BICYCLE PARKING LONG-TERM / SHORT-TERM • ACCESSIBLE PARKING (VAN) STALL (12' X 18') + 8' W/ ACCESSIBLE AISLE } PATH OF TRAVEL. MINIMUM WIDTH TO BE 4'. SLOPE NOT TO EXCEED 5% IN THE DIRECTION OF TRAVEL AND CROSS SLOPE NOT TO EXCEED 2%, SEE CIVIL FOR GRADING PLAN SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES 1. THE SITE PLAN BASED ON THE SOILS REPORT PREPARED BY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER, DATE, PROJECT NUMBER # 2. IF SOILS ARE EXPANSIVE IN NATURE, USE STEEL REINFORCING FOR ALL SITE CONCRETE 3. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE FACE OF CONCRETE WALL, FACE OF CONCRETE CURB OR GRID LINE U.N.O. 4. SEE "C" PLANS FOR ALL CONCRETE CURBS, GUTTERS AND SWALES 5. PROVIDE STRUCTURAL CALCULATION AND CONSTRUCTION ANCHORAGE DETAIL FOR TRANSFORMER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 6. SEE "C" DRAWINGS FOR POINT OF CONNECTIONS TO OFF -SITE UTILITIES. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ACTUAL UTILITY LOCATIONS. 7. PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM BLDG. SEE "C" DRAWINGS. 8. CONTRACTOR TO REFER TO "C" DRAWINGS FOR ALL HORIZONTAL CONTROL DIMENSIONS. SITE PLANS ARE FOR GUIDANCE AND STARTING LAYOUT POINTS. 9. SEE "C" DRAWINGS FOR FINISH GRADE ELEVATIONS. 10. CONCRETE SIDEWALKS TO BE A MINIMUM OF 4" THICK W/ TOOLED JOINTS AT 6' 0.C. EXPANSION/CONSTRUCTION JOINTS SHALL BE A MAXIMUM 12' EA. WAY W/ 1:20 MAX. SLOPE. EXPANSION JOINTS TO HAVE COMPRESSIVE EXPANSION FILLER MATERIAL OF 1/4". FINISH TO BE A MEDIUM BROOM FINISH 11. U.N.O. PROVIDE KNOX BOXES AT ALL OFFICE ENTRANCES. 12. PAINT CURBS AND PROVIDE SIGNS TO INFORM OF FIRE LANES AS REQUIRED BY FIRE DEPARTMENT. 13. ON -SITE FIRE MAIN, FIRE SPRINKLER, AND SPRINKLER MONITORING SYSTEM SHALL BE SUBMITTED SEPARATELY TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR REVIEW AND PERMITTING. 14. ALL VERTICAL MOUNTING POLES OF FENCING SHALL BE CAPPED. 15. LANDSCAPED AREAS SHALL BE DELINEATED WITH A MINIMUM SIX INCHES (6") HIGH CURB 16. ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR WALK SURFACES TO BE NON -SLIP TYPE 17. PROVIDE DOUBLE STRIPES AT AUTO PARKING STALLS PER CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARDS. SEE DETAIL ON A1.2 hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 ■ Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: K&W Green Design ■ Title: ENLARGED SITE PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 JV 08/21/2024 Sheet: DABA1.2 761 542' 63' 43'-9 1/8" 8'-2 7 8" 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 63' '-2' 6' i y 3' 21'-3" y 9'-9" i 6' i 6' 9'-9" i 25'-2" 3' 24' 6' TYP. TYP • 0) i TYP. K11) TYP. l 1) TYP. (3) TYP. K19) i i TYP. (3) TYP. (1) TYP. K11) TYP. C3> TYP. (19) TYI •3P1:—I_ _ _ J 1 = / I TYP. I/ � / TYP. 1 I I TYP. I i/ ////////////// POTENTIAL I POTENTIAL POTENTIAL POTENTIAL/// 1 \3) OFFICE BOFFICE p OFFICE OFFICE j I 1 TYP. Y� / //// / / / 1 I r , V 1 / ///J 1 // // / -6 1/8" 2P �\ TAP. 'ID / — — — — 1 — TYP. / 1 : TYP. (6) 60' 1 POTENTIAL TENANT POTENTIAL TENANT k TYP > 18'-5 7/8" TYP. DEMISING LOCATIONS DEMISING LOCATIONS 1 (1 1) (1) } 1 I 232' . 1 0 -0- 1 1 1 0 0 I 0 232' ro\ 60' TYP. N 1 1 1 1 ( 1) } TYP. 167' (2) 130' 130' TYP. U 115' TYP. TYP. 6 0 N 11 Zip 542' TYP. C11> 60' TYP. TYP. TYP. K18) 1 (1) 1) } 4 DOCK DOORS r l r l r l f l 11 111-1 1• 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 1 1 5 l r l 11 11 1 1 1 DOCK r l 1 1 1— DOORS r l r l 1-1 1 1 1 5 DOCK r l r l 1 1 1 1 1 1 DOORS r l r l r l ii 1 1 1 1 1 Imo, r l r l 1 �. 5 DOCK DOORS r l r 1 1 1 1 1� l "1 1 1� o o �1� a � , 11--11 _r — • w - —I w _ u o 0 \ (10) TYP. (11) TYP / C7) TYP. C TYP. ) (5) TYP. K9) TYP. (8)K6)0 / * TYP. TYP. K16) TYP. (5) TYP. (10) TYP. 0 (10) P. TYP. (5) TYP. 0) TYP. (13) TYP. (6/0 TYP. TYP. (16) TYP. (1) TYP. (5) TYP. K10) TYP. TYP. 28'-10" 3' 2'-6"3' O 63' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 63' 542' OVERALL FLOOR PLAN 4' 8' 8' ' 4' 4' TYP. 4' 5' -6'' 52' 20'-6" i 4'-3" 3'-3" 6' 3'-3" 4'-3" TYP. TYP. POTENTIAL OFFICE TYP. i 11' TYP. I • • • • ■ ■ 20'-6" 4'-3" 3'-3" 6' i 6" 5'-6'' 4' 3'-3" 4'-3" TYP. POTENTIA TYP. (19) OFFICE ENLARGED FLOOR PLAN 4' 8' SCALE: 1/8" = 1 '-0" 8' 4' KEYNOTES - FLOOR PLAN 10 11 12 13 14 1s 1s 17 18 19 CONCRETE TILT -UP PANEL. STRUCTURAL STEEL COLUMN. TYPICAL STOREFRONT SYSTEM WITH GLAZING. SEE ENLARGED PLANS AND ELEVATIONS FOR SIZE, COLOR AND LOCATIONS. CONCRETE RAMP W/ 42" HIGH CONC TILT -UP GUARD WALL OR BUILDING WALL ON BOTH SIDES OF RAMP. 9' X 10' DOCK DOOR, SECTIONAL 0.H., STANDARD GRADE. DESIGNED TO RESIST CITY REQUIRED WIND SPEED. EXTERIOR METAL STEEL STAIR. 5'-6'X5'-6"X4" THICK CONCRETE EXTERIOR LANDING PAD TYPICAL AT ALL EXTERIOR MAN DOORS TO LANDSCAPED AREA. FINISH TO BE MEDIUM BLOOM FINISH. SLOPE TO BE 1/4" : 12" MAX. 4'X8' METAL LOUVER. DOCK DOOR BUMPER. 12' X 14' DRIVE THRU. SECTIONAL 0.H., STANDARD GRADE. DESIGNED TO RESIST CITY REQUIRED WIND SPEED. 3' X 7' HOLLOW METAL EXTERIOR MAN DOOR. DESIGNED TO RESIST CITY REQUIRED WIND SPEED. CONC. FILLED GUARD POST. 6" DIA. U.N.0.. 48"H. EXTERIOR DOWNSPOUT INTERIOR ROOF DRAIN INTERIOR ROOF DRAIN Z GUARD. INTERIOR BIKE RACK. ELECTRICAL ROOM. METAL CANOPY ABOVE. WITH OVERFLOW SCUPPER. & OVERFLOW SCUPPERS. WITH PIPED OVERFLOW. scale: 1" = 20'-0" EA) SCALE: 1" = 20 -0" aaaiiaiaaaaaaiaaaaaiiiii 0 D; 20' 40' GENERAL NOTES - FLOOR PLAN 60, TRUE NORTH 1. THIS BUILDING IS DESIGNED FOR HIGH PILE STORAGE WITH FIRE ACCESS MAN DOORS AT 125' +/-. A SEPARATE PERMIT WILL BE REQUIRED FOR ANY RACKING/CONVEYER SYSTEMS. INSURE HEAT AND SMOKE VENTS AS REQ'D COMPLY WITH TABLE 910.3 CBC 2. FIRE HOSE LOCATIONS SHALL BE APPROVED PER FIRE DEPARTMENT. 3. SEE "C" DRAWINGS FOR FINISH SURFACE ELEVATIONS. 4. WAREHOUSE INTERIOR CONCRETE WALLS ARE PAINTED WHITE. COLUMNS ARE TO RECEIVE PRIMER ONLY. ALL GYP. BD. WALLS IN WAREHOUSE TO RECEIVE 1 COAT OF WHITE TO COVER. 5. THE BUILDING FLOOR SLAB IS FLAT/SLOPED, SEE CIVIL. 6. SLOPE POUR STRIP 1 /2" TO EXTERIOR AT ALL MANDOOR EXITS. SEE "S" DRAWINGS FOR POUR STRIP LOCATION. 7. PROVIDE 6" DIA. CONCRETE BOLLARD AT ALL FIRE RISER AND UNPROTECTED INTERIOR ROOF DRAIN. 8. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE FACE OF CONCRETE PANEL WALL, GRIDLINE, OR FACE OF STUD U.N.O. 9. SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR POINT OF CONNECTIONS TO OFF -SITE UTILITIES. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ACTUAL UTILITY LOCATIONS. PLUMBING/ELECTRICAL COORDINATION. 10. FOR DOOR TYPES AND SIZES, SEE DETAIL SHEET A5.1. NOTE: ALL DOORS PER DOOR SCHEDULE ARE FINISH OPENINGS. 11. CONTRACTOR TO PROTECT AND KEEP THE FLOOR SLAB CLEAN. ALL EQUIPMENT TO BE DIAPERED INCLUDING CARS AND TRUCKS. 12. ALL EXIT MAN DOORS IN WAREHOUSE TO HAVE ILLUMINATED EXIT SIGN HARDWARE. 13. HIGHLY FLAMMABLE AND COMBUSTIBLE MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE USED OR STORED IN THIS BUILDING. 14. PROVIDE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS AT LOCATIONS DETERMINED BY FIRE DEPARTMENT. 15. EACH EXTERIOR EXIT DOOR SHALL BE IDENTIFIED BY A TACTILE EXIT SIGN WITH THE WORDS "EXIT". THE MOUNTING HEIGHT FOR SUCH SIGNAGE SHALL BE 60" FROM FINISH FLOOR LEVEL TO THE CENTER OF THE SIGN. 16. AFFIX AN INTERNATIONAL ACCESSIBILITY SYMBOL ON ALL ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCES PER CBC 11B-216.6 17. ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR WALKING SURFACES TO BE NON -SLIP TYPE hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 ■ Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: K&W Green Design ■ Title: OVERALL FLOOR PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 JV 08/21/2024 Sheet: DABA2. 1 scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" 0 8' 1 6' TRUE 24' NORTH N N N Ln ♦ ♦ ♦ 63' 43' — 9" 52' 52' 542' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 43' 20' 35' x 32' x 32' TYP. x x /\ x 32' x x 32' >< x x m 32' x x >< 32' x x /\ x O N) 32 O N -JI x >< 32' 32' x 32' 32' x FT.MIN. TO DRAIN w CL CL J N 0 0 1- z w a v a 0 J N x 32' TYP. 32' RI GE LINE 32' x TYP x x 32' i 27' . kg ROOF PLAN KEYNOTES CONCRETE PARAPET, SEE "S" DRAWINGS FOR THICKNESS. NOT USED. TPO 60 MIL SINGLE PLY ROOFING (MECHANICALLY FASTENED) OVER 1/4" SECUROCK (MECHANICALLY FASTENED) OVER ROOF SHEATHING OVER ROOF FRAMING. INTERMEDIATE MECHANICAL FASTENERS ARE REQUIRED CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY WITH OWNER ON WARRANTY REQUIREMENTS. 4' X 8' SKYLIGHT, STRUCTURAL JOIST. ROOF LEGEND x 4' X 8' DOUBLE DOME CURB MOUNTED FIXED SKYLIGHTS SUNOPTICS SIG 4080 W52.250 L100.250 DGZ CC1 LENSCLWH 800MD MI FMRTG ICC—ESR-2415 BUILDING PARAPET LINE EXTERIOR METAL DOWNSPOUT W/ OVERFLOW SCUPPER ROOF PLAN scale: 1" = 20'-0" SCALE: 1" = 20'-0" 20' SKYLIGHT CALCULATION 40' PLAN 60' NORTH GENERAL: BURGLAR BARS: SKYLIGHTS: SKYLIGHT REQUIRED SKYLIGHT PROVIDED BUILDING AREA (FOOT PRINT) = YES 2.5 % = 2,989 S.F. (94 EA.) 105 119,532 S.F. hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 ■ Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: K&W Green Design ■ Title: ROOF PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 JV 08/21/2024 Sheet: DAB.A21 10 435'-2 7/8" 63' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' TYP. TYP. C1 XD 11 00 TYP. C12 10 27' TYP. TYP. TYP. C1 0 C12 10 (1)0 TYP. (1)0 TYP. C2> WEST ELEVATION �C scale: 1" = 20'-0" 6' 00 A IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV vIV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV Iv IV Iv IV Iv IV TYP. C1 n C8 XD TYP. O ( I40I ( r A v A v i 52' 8' —2 7/ 8" TIP. TYP. TIP. TIP. (1)0 \10 \1Pn (10 0( ) TYP. )6c C8 XD TYP. A NORTH ELEVATION " = 20'-0" scale: 542' OBLIQUE VIEW TYP. C2> > A 00 N) NORTHWEST ELEVATION(B) scale: 1" 63' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 52' 63' TYP. 52' TYP. (8* C4> TYP. TYP. TYP C1/ 6 8 11 TYP. 26' 26' TYP. 11 00 TYP. (2) C, 1 x x y IV IV A IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV ■ II iv ' iv iv iv iv IV IV iv iv IV IV , IV IV ,' Iv Iv Iv IV Iv Iv v ., 1- I I I I I I I I L I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TYP. (14)7 TYP. (12)10 TYP. C1n 6' 27' TYP. (1XD 5) TYP. K7)(6) TYP. TYP. TYP. TYP. C1� C11 IIII I I I I I I IV Iv IV IV Iv IV IV Iv IV I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L I A y xx IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV IV x 0 IV IV IV IV IV IV IV E IV iv iv iv iv I I I I I I I I I � L A 00 Iv IV v IV IV IV IV V IV IV IV IV IV IV TYP. TYP. C1XD (1 XD IV Iv IV Iv IV Iv N./ Iv IV Iv IV Iv IV ENLARGED FLOOR PLAN scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" 10 TYP. TYPK) O TYP. TYP. C1n A A /W/////////////////////////// C8 11 (4) TYP. TYP. KEYNOTES - ELEVATIONS 00 M (4) lE)'' TYP. TYP. TIP. C1XD 60' TYP. TYP. (10) TYP. TYP. TYP. (1)0 TIP. TYP. I \1)0 C5> TYP. 60' K7) (6) TYP. TYP. 232' TYP. 1 0 C10> TYP. 60' TYP. TYP. TYPKIK) on on (5) (4> (8* TYP. TYP. TYP. 8 11 TYP. SOUTH ELEVATION 52' scale: 1" = 20'-0" TYP. TIP. (14)0 C11 A— Y ►A HHHHHHHHHHH 00 • EAST ELEVATION 10 11 12 13 (14) CONCRETE FINISH GRADIET—UP VARIESANSEE "C"EDRAWINGS. WATERPROOF ALL WALLS WHERE EXTERIOR GRADE IS HIGHER THAN FINISH FLOOR AND EXPOSED TO THE WEATHER. WATERPROOFING TO BE PROTECTED WITH PROTECTION BOARD AND A MIN. OF 6" OF GRAVEL. PROVIDE TRENCH DRAIN AT BOTTOM AND DAYLIGHT TO CURB OR TAKE TO STORM DRAIN. PANEL JOINT. PANEL REVEAL. ALL REVEALS TO HAVE A MAX. OF 3/8" CHAMFER. REVEAL COLOR TO MATCH ADJACENT BUILDING FIELD COLOR. U.N.O. OVERHEAD DOOR © DRIVE THRU. PROVIDE COMPLETE WEATHER—STRIPPING PROTECTION ALL AROUND. OVERHEAD DOOR © DOCK HIGH. PROVIDE COMPLETE WEATHER—STRIPPING PROTECTION ALL AROUND. EXTERIOR METAL STEEL STAIR. METAL LOUVER. PAINT TO MATCH BUILDING COLOR. HOLLOW METAL DOORS. PROVIDE COMPLETE WEATHER STRIPING ALL AROUND DOOR. PROVIDE FOR RAIN DIVERTER ABOVE DOOR. EXTERIOR DOWNSPOUT WITH OVERFLOW SCUPPERS. DOCK BUMPER ALUMINUM STOREFRONT FRAMING WITH TEMPERED GLAZING. METAL CHANNEL CANOPY 24" ILLUMINATED ADDRESS LETTERING METAL CHANNEL GENERAL NOTES - ELEVATIONS A. B. D. E ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. T.O.P. EL.= TOP OF PARAPET ELEVATION. F.F. = FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. STOREFRONT CONSTRUCTION: GLASS, METAL ATTACHMENTS AND LINTELS I -ALL BE DESIGNED TO RESIST CITY REQUIRED WIND SPEED. EXPOSURE C WINDS. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. F. CONTRACTOR SHALL FULLY PAINT SEVERAL CONCRETE PANEL W/ SELECTED COLORS. LOCATION TO BE SELECTED BY ARCHITECT. ARCHITECT AND OWNER SHALL APPROVE PRIOR TO PAINTING REMAINDER OF BUILDING. G. BACK SIDE OF PARAPETS TO HAVE SMOOTH FINISH AND BE PAINTED WITH ELASTOMERIC PAINT. H. FOR SPANDREL GLAZING, ALLOW SPACE BEHIND SPANDREL TO BREATH. J. USE ADHESIVE BACK WOOD STRIPS FOR ALL REVEAL FORMS. K. THE FIRST COAT OF PAINT TO BE ROLLED —ON AND THE SECOND COAT TO BE SPRAYED —ON L. EXTERIOR STAIRS AND RAMPS TO MATCH BUILDING COLOR. RAILINGS TO MATCH BUILDING COLOR. M. ALL DOORS TO BE PAINTED THE SAME COLOR AS THE ADJACENT WALL. scale: 1" = 20'-0" ELEVATION COLOR LEGEND/SCHED. L CONCRETE TILT —UP PANEL. ; THIN BRICK VENEER COLOR : SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 7043 COLOR : SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 9183 PANEL. COLOR : SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 7633 PANEL. COLOR : SHERWIN—WILLIAMS SW 6622 CONCRETE TILT —UP PANEL. WORLDLY GRAY 245—C1 CONCRETE TILT —UP PANEL. DARK CLOVE O CONCRETE TILT —UP TAUPE TONE O CONCRETE TILT —UP _.. HEARTY ORANGE CONCRETE TILT —UP PANEL. COLOR : SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 7509 TIKI HUT CONCRETE TILT —UP PANEL. COLOR : SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 9183 DARK CLOVE METAL PAINT GLAZING COLOR : GRAY GLAZING MULLIONS COLOR : DARK BRONZE CANOPY MATERIAL : PPG PITT—TECH PLUS EP DTM © BLACK METAL CANOPY . DOOR COLOR : MATCH BUILDING COLOR OVERHEAD/DOCK DOORS : FACTORY FINISHED WHITE GLAZING LEGEND NOTE: ALL EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR GLAZING SHALL BE TEMPERED. IV V , INSULATED VISION GLASS SINGLE LITE VISION GLASS SPANDREL GLASS WITH CONCRETE BEHIND IV : INSULATED VISION GLASS 1/4" VISTACOOL PACIFICA + 1/4" SOLARBAN 60 CLEAR 1" INSULATED GLASS UNIT WITH 1/2" AIRSPACE AND 1/4" LITES U: 0.27 SHGC: 0.21 VLT: 26% MINIMUM VT TO BE 0.42 PER 2016 CEC TABLE 140.3-B • 1 11 1 ] a r c h i t e c t u r Years hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 ■ Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: K&W Green Design • Title: ELEVATION Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 JV 08/21/2024 Sheet: SC : SPANDREL WITH CONCRETE BEHIND 1 /4" VISTACOOL PACIFICA WITH OPACI-COAT-300 WARM GRAY INSTALLED ON CONCRETE. V : VISION GLASS 1 /4" VISTACOOL PACIFICA MULLIONS : DARK BRONZE. DAB-A3,1 MI 6" THICK C W/ MEDIUM PROVIDE CO WALL PERIM PROVIDE 1/ JOINT MATE CONCRETE PAN INSIDE, OUTSID OF WALL TO M AS REQUIRED. CONCRE — are — err LOPE RIAL / v - V V v / / / / / / L 1 beA ..----- /e oe ♦ ..) ♦ \ / / SLAB TO • \ F \ p DDLE SLAB BROOM FINISH, NTROL JOINTS ETER. . • c •ONC. . . °O 6 CY DUMPSTER \ 6 W x 8 H CONCRETE 2CY FOR GREEN WASTE 1 \ / \ / 1 \ / CURB.0.e / 1 / 6 CY DUMPSTER 60 • c . . rn 2" EXPANSION _1 \ / / (0 AT INT. °.e v \ / / cL / / \ \ \ 0 0) 1 EL, PAINT _AND TOP aTCH BUILDING. .••d ° : 6"W x 8"H CONCRETE CURB z / o / , / ,1, / o \ \ 6"W x 8"H CONCRETE CURB ° C� v •/ / n .0.e . / / N / O // PROVIDE / DEEP 3/4" DIA.x 2" DRILLED HOLES IN . . .0.e ♦ TE TILT -UP / / \ FOR E \\ 0) o li ONESLAFOR EACH GATE. v °C N qiiii II .V ♦ 2(0 Q Q 2' ♦>- PR o CLR. LO( OF 36'1 o "�' 0 v 0 SEE DOOR CLEARANCE COI TO o • OF SIN gh 6" 4'-9" i 13' W 2' 3' 2'-6" i / / / i i 25'-9" / i DVIDE A 40" KICK PLATE GATED ON THE PUSH SIDE THE GATE. WIDE PEDESTRIAN GATE. A5.1 FOR DOOR SCHEDULE CRETE APRON DESIGNED WITHSTAND 20,000 POUNDS DIRECT FORCE FROM A GLE TRUCK AXLE. TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN CONCRETE TILT -UP PANELS, SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS. PAINT INSIDE, OUTSIDE AND TOP OF WALL TO MATCH BUILDING. ♦ 0 25'-9" i 5'-3,, 13' 2' 3' i 2'-6" i ♦ A CENTER LINE OF HINGE, TYP. P ♦� ♦ P 7 NOTES: 1. PAINT METAL PER SPECIFICATIONS. 2. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE DETAIL "ao scale: 1:20 DIRECT ROOF DRAINAGE TO STORM WATER CONTROL OR LANDSCAPE AREA SCREEN TO BE PROVIDED TO PREVENT ILLEGAL DUMPING 6X6 TUBE STEEL COL. CONCRETE TILT -UP PANEL, PAINT TO MATCH BUILDING. METAL ACCESSIBLE GATE WITH 1 1/2" X 1 1/2" X 1/4" STEEL ANGLE HORIZ. BRACE FOR SUPPORT, PAINT TO MATCH BUILDING. PROVIDE 32" MIN. CLEARANCE FINISH SURFACE SEE PLANS 5/8" (16 mm) DIA. HOLES PROVIDED FOR ANCHORS BY OTHERS (TYPICAL-4) ♦ 0) 1'-7 $' 3'-0" TOP VIEW 2'-8 r, 0'-0" FINISHED GRADE FRONT VIEW NOTE: CONCRETE SLAB AND ANCHORING DEVICES (BY OTHERS) PER LOCAL CONDITIONS. CONSULT PROJECT ENGINEER FOR EXACT REQUIREMENTS. TIMBERFORM CYCLOOPS MANUFACTURED BY COLOMBIA CASCADE CO., PORTLAND, OREGAN. (800) 547-1940, (503) 223-1157 MODEL NUMBER: 2170 COLOR 8017 BIKE RACK DETAIL NOTE: PROVIDE MINIMUM ONE CIGARETTE POLE @ OUTDOOR SMOKING PATIO. MINIMUM 25' FROM OPERABLE WINDOW OR DOOR SEE SITE PLAN FOR LOCATION FINISH: BRONZE SIZE: 41" HIGH scale: N.T.S. 1 0" 0 NOTE: SIGN TO BE POSTED @ OUTDOOR SMOKING AREA. MINIMUM 25' FROM OPERABLE WINDOW OR DOOR SEE SITE PLAN FOR LOCATION ADHERE SIGN TO BUILDING WALL PER SIGN MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS. OR PROVIDE POLE MOUNTED SIGN WHERE REQUIRED C hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 n Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA n Consultants: K&W Green Design n Title: DETAILS Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 JV 08/21/2024 TRASH ENCLOSURE GATE ELEVATION B scale: 1:20 CIGARETTE PO scale: N.T.S. SMOKING AREA SIGN scale: N.T.S. Sheet: DAB.A41 1 6-18-24 05:30:48 PM PRELIMINARY SITE IMPROVEMENT PLANS GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL WORK SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CITY OF DUBLIN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS' STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS. ALL WORK SHALL BE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF AND INSPECTION BY THE CITY ENGINEER. 2. AT LEAST ONE SET OF APPROVED PLANS SHALL BE ON THE SITE AT ALL TIMES FOR INSPECTION. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE APPROVED PLANS DURING CONSTRUCTION WILL REQUIRE 48 HOURS PRIOR NOTICE AND APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER. 3. THE PERMITTEE/CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE CITY OF DUBLIN ENGINEERING DIVISION TWO (2) BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY WORK. 4. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO ASCERTAIN THE EXISTENCE OF ANY AND ALL UNDERGROUND FACILITIES, WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO DAMAGE BY REASON OF HIS OPERATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT (USA) AT (800) 642-2444, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION. WORK SHALL START WITHIN 5 DAYS AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF A USA INQUIRY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER. COMPLETE REMOVAL OF THE USA MARKINGS SHALL BE WI THIN 2 WORKING DAYS AFTER COMPLETION OF THE EXCAVATION, BACKFILL AND SURFACE REPLACEMENT OR FOURTEEN (14) CALENDAR DAYS FOLLOWING THE ISSUANCE OF THE INQUIRY IDENT/FICA TION NUMBER WHICHEVER IS EARLIER. 5. CONTACTING USA DOES NOT RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR FROM HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE LOCATION AND DEPTH OF BURIED UTILITIES OR REPAIR OF BURIED UT/L/TIES DAMAGED BY HIS OPERATION. 6. ALL GRADING, SITE PREPARATION, PLACING AND COMPACTION OF FILL SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE II TH THE CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARDS, SPECIFICATIONS, SPECIFIC NOTES, DETAIL DRAWINGS AND PER THE RECOMMENDATIONS SPECIFIED IN THE "GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION" BY CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP, DATED APRIL 6, 2022, FILE NO. 681-12-1. 7 A GRADING PERMIT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF GRADING. A COPY OF THE GRADING PERMIT IS REQUIRED TO BE ON SITE AT ALL TIMES. 8. GRADING OPERATIONS SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE SOILS INVESTIGATION REPORT. THE SOILS ENGINEER WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ON SITE INSPECTION AND QUALITY CONTROL FOR THE GRADING OPERATION. PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND CONSTRUCTION CONTROL WITH RESPECT TO EARTHWORK, SLOPE STABILITY, SETTLEMENT COMPACTION, ETC., AS SHOWN HEREIN ARE PROVIDED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL READ AND BE FULLY AWARE OF THE SOILS REPORT BEFORE STARTING WORK. ALL WORK SHALL MEET THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN. 9. SUBSEQUENT TO THE COMPLETION OF THE WORK, THE SOILS/GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER SHALL SUBMIT A REPORT TO THE CITY ENGINEER STATING THAT ALL WORK HAS BEEN DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION" BY CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP, DATED APRIL 6, 2022, FILE NO. 681-12-1. 10. NOISE -PRODUCING CONSTRUCTION AND GRADING OPERATIONS SHALL BE LIMITED TO WEEKDAYS (MONDA Y THROUGH FRIDAY) EXCEPT CITY HOLIDAYS AND FROM THE HOURS OF 7:30 A.M. TO 6:00 P.M. ALL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE ADEQUATELY MUFFLED AND MAINTAINED. NO CHANGES SHALL BE ALLOWED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE CITY. ALL REQUESTS FOR CHANGE MUST BE MADE A MINIMUM OF 72 HOURS PRIOR TO THE REQUEST FOR CHANGE. 11. IT SHALL BE UNDERSTOOD THAT THE TERM "CITY ENGINEER" AS USED HEREIN IS THE CITY ENGINEER OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN OR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE. NO WORK SHALL BE DONE ON THIS PROJECT PRIOR TO A PRE -CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE TO BE HELD IN THE ENGINEERING DIVISION. CONTACT XXXXX, TO ARRANGE FOR THE CONFERENCE AT (XXX) XXX-XXXX. 12. A PRE -CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE SHALL BE SCHEDULED AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS IN ADVANCE OF COMMENCEMENT OF ANY CONSTRUCTION WORK FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS DELINEATED WITHIN THIS SET OF PLANS. THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS SHALL BE IN ATTENDANCE: OWNER/DEVELOPER, CONTRACTOR (S), CITY ENGINEER, ENGINEER, SOILS ENGINEER, CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR, OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES 13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A SCHEDULE OF ALL GRADING OPERATIONS AND RECEIVE APPROVAL OF SAID SCHEDULE FROM THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO OR THE DAY OF THE PRE -CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE. 14. THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR AGREES, THAT IN ACCORDANCE W/TH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, TO ASSUME SOLE AND COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE JOB SITE CONDITIONS DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY,. THAT THIS REQUIREMENT SHALL BE MADE TO APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS. 15. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBERS FOR PUBLIC WORKS, AMBULANCE, POLICE, AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS AT THE JOB SITE. 16. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT DISTURB OR DESTROY ANY PERMANENT SURVEY POINTS WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE CITY ENGINEER. IN THE EVENT IT BECOMES NECESSARY TO REMOVE OR DISTURB A MONUMENT, THE PERSON SO DOING SHALL FIRST OBTAIN PERMISSION, IN WRITING, FROM THE CITY ENGINEER AND SHALL DEPOSIT WITH THE CITY ENGINEER A SUFFICIENT AMOUNT BASED UPON THE CITY ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE, TO COVER THE COST OF PRELIMINARY REFERENCING AND FINAL RELOCATION OF THE MONUMENTS. 17. ALL CONSTRUCTION STAKING SHALL BE DONE BY A REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER OR LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR. UPON COMPLETION OF GRADING, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REQUEST THE LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR TO CHECK THE GRADES AND CERTIFY THAT THE PADS ARE GRADED TO WITHIN f 0.10 FOOT OF FINISH PAD GRADE. 18. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE WORK AREA THROUGHOUT THE PERIOD OF CONSTRUCTION. 19. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MATCHING EXISTING STREETS, SURROUNDING LANDSCAPE AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS, WITH A SMOOTH TRANSITION IN GRADE AVOIDING ANY ABRUPT OR APPARENT CHANGES IN GRADE OR CROSS SLOPE, LOW SPOTS OR HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS 20. EXISTING CURB AND SIDEWALK WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS THAT ARE DAMAGED OR DISPLACED, EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE NOT TO BE REMOVED, SHALL BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED, EVEN IF THE DAMAGE OR DISPLACEMENT OCCURRED PRIOR TO ANY WORK PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR SHALL DOCUMENT CONDITION V/A PHOTOGRAPHS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION. 21. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTROL DUST BY WATERING EXPOSED SURFACES AS NEEDED. INCREASED WATERING SHALL BE REQUIRED WHEN WIND SPEEDS EXCEED 10 MPH OR WHEN DIRECTED BY THE CITY. 22. NO PERSON SHALL, WHEN HAULING ANY EARTH, SAND, GRAVEL, STONE, DEBRIS, PAPER, OR ANY OTHER SUBSTANCE OVER ANY PUBLIC STREETS OR OTHER PUBLIC PLACE, ALLOW MATERIAL TO BLOW OR SPILL OVER AND UPON SAID PUBLIC OR ADJACENT PRIVATE PROPERTY ALL LOADS LEAVING THE SITE SHALL BE COVERED. 23. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE TO PREVENT THETRACK/NG OF SOIL, DUST MUD, OR CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS ON PUBLIC STREETS. 24. MUD TRACKED ONTO STREETS OR ADJACENT PROPERTIES SHALL BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY, STREET SHALL BE SWEPT WITH A POWER SWEEPER (NOT PRESSURE WASHED) AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY. 25. A DISPOSAL SITE FOR ANY OFF -SITE HAUL OF DIRT MATERIALS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE GRADING PERMIT. THE OFF -SITE HAUL ROUTE FOR EXCESS DIRT OR CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS IS SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER. 26. EXCAVATIONS SHALL BE ADEQUATELY SHORED, BRACED AND SHEETED SO THAT THE EARTH WILL NOT SLIDE OR SETTLE AND SO THAT ALL EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS OF ANY KIND WILL BE FULLY PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE. ANY DAMAGE RESULTING FROM A LACK OF ADEQUATE SHORING, BRACING AND SHEETING, SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EFFECT NECESSARY REPAIRS OR RECONSTRUCTION AT HIS OWN EXPENSE. WHERE THE EXCAVATION FOR A TRENCH, STRUCTURE AND/OR BORING OR JACKING PIT /S FIVE FEET OR MORE IN DEPTH THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFORM TO THE APPLICABLE CONSTRUCTION SAFETY ORDERS OF THE DIVISION OF INDUSTRIAL SAFETY OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. 27. ALL TRENCHES IN EXISTING CITY STREETS SHALL BE BACKFILLED AND PAVED WITHIN 24 HOURS OF EXCAVATION. STEEL PLATES MAY BE PLACED OVER UNBACKFILLED TRENCHES BEYOND THE 24 HOUR PERIOD WITH THE SPECIFIC APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER. 28. ALL REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE SHALL BE CLASS 111 OR BETTER, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 29. OPERATION OF VALVES ON THE DSRSD WATER SYSTEM SHALL BE PERFORMED BY WATER BUREAU PERSONNEL ONLY. OF 1 1 711 DUBLIN BLVD FOR DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA DUBLIN BOULEVAR (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) DEVELOPER -N21°34'00"W 749.99' BASIS OF BEARINGS SITE MAP DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 S. VERMONT AVENUE #101 TORRANCE, CA 90502 310-323-9100 CIVIL ENGINEER KIER & WRIGHT CIVIL ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS, INC. ATTN: ZICO SARYEDDEAN, P.E. 2850 COLLIER CANYON ROAD LIVERMORE, CA 94551 925-245-8788 1"= 80' LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT GREEN DESIGN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, INC. ATTN: BARBARA M. HATCH, RLA ASLA 1464 POPINJAY DRIVE RENO, NV 89509 775-829-1364 ARCHITECT HPA, INC. ATTN: TERESA GOODWIN, AIA 600 GRAND AVENUE, SUITE 302 OAKLAND, CA 94610 925-413-6896 VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE SHEET INDEX NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 SHEET CIVIL C1.0 C2.0 C3.0 C4.0 C5.0 C5.1 C6.0 C7.0 C8.0 C9.0 C10.0 C10.1 C11.0 C11.1 C11.2 C12.0 DESCRIPTION COVER SHEET TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY DEMOLITION PLAN PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN PRELIMINARY GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN TYPICAL SECTIONS PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN PRELIMINARY SWQCP FIRE ACCESS PLAN GARBAGE TRUCK TURNING TRUCK TURNING TRUCK TURNING EXISTING EASEMENTS TO REMAIN EXISTING EASEMENTS TO BE VACATED PROPOSED EASEMENTS CLEAN BAY BLUE PRINT Know what's below. Call before you dig. >- m REVISION a<a<a >- oo REVISION S5 a<a<a ti W cy QROFESS/0Hq R P SARYFz� Nqy No. 65838 CIVII. qTf F �Q yG� Z rn rn 71 OF CAL‘FO�� R+WI COVER SHEI OF 11711 DUBLIN C(1D DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEET C 1 1 OF 16 ■ 0 SHEETS 2-8",4-10 394 > 0 6-18-24 05:30:57 PM d cL N w a 0 c cn 2E w w CN N O N N N N O 111. 393. • • 10" k-/391.9 393.1 6"TR• ` Q� 389.48 P-FC 390.38 P FC 389 65 P-FC 394 0-, ccp � O 388.35 P-FC 88.48 P-FC N89; 389.03 EP ,o) .4 388.95 P-FC 388.77 4 IGiik1/4 580 Grass Asphalt 8"RW(P) S68°34'30"W 856.48' > �2\ N65°06'55E 16.69' a CD 8"RW(P) \° C®' o -44.69'7.25' �2s,„1, �F SOT) se •24"'TR CB 389.20 RE •8"TR •14"TR 6"TR• 386.42 P-‹ / 386.64 386.82 EP 385.74 P- PD DISTRICT Grass Bike ks CB 386.89 RE IE 380 80 6" N) IE 380 68 6" W IE 380 40 8" E IE 380 37 10 (S) CB 387.02 RE IE DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) Grass // / 88.12 EP 387.10 P-FC 388.50.. EP 387.76 P FC x oncrete 388.52 P-PC 388.41 P-FC E(P) N55°2205"W (R) i 1- •32"TR 387.55 P 386 3 P-FC CB 387.89 RE IE 380.30 6" (E) IE 379.74 10 (N) Fc' IE 379.66 12"(SW) .R/ cb W o, ") -1 co 380.96 8 380.86 Concrete ^. C 'c 3% .11 RE 393.49 S39°2 '4"W 55.10 (S39°05'W) 382. i o° ^) �5 co � ^p ��c?fie OQ ''P ���� �Oo��,h AD -ss --SMH "�4' 482.16 RE IE 472.69 6"(THRU) OH 156.04' EB 10"w(P) FC-' • FO 383.60 RE IE 382.12 8"(SE) 8"SD T(PJ OFD MON (1 \ OFD MON 0H - TELE -N21 °34'00"W 749.99 W( S21 °33'40"E 256.13'- w OC CTV V') SSMH 384.66 RE IE 372.36 12"(W) IE 372.06 8"(N) IE 372.03 12 (E) 8"W(P) - S68°34'30"W 332.25' 382.96 P-FC <2/ TMH BELL • �� ��w� 383.76 RE. �j� TRAFFIC . f L EASEMENT. 99377923 0' Grass FEMA FLOOD ZONE X NO SCREE) . • b •�� •`L°` M-1 DISTRICT 383.82 • 1 1 j <cc' I p 1 e'ko I o ��• 1Q'kc \.RE Q' 1 I °`O I <0"9 iO 'O% /0 I C' - O Q'<cCj Q 0% �„3 D. �b/ �C /�.�C ).��O<C' N`Q gQ 'b/e'^D% ADC) (6%. Q /F ��. A 1 •,4� // l/ •`P �c\' 0 /�// �� 15� /cue. / / Q Q Fc ji FI •�ti o� / \ '- J / / ail / / Asphalt P►, DISTRICT FEMA FLOOD ZONE BOUNDARY CTVFO(P) BASIS OF BEARINGS -32.72 BW MON SIGN - 383.95 BW dSSCO , II 383.78 RE L j Concrete 383.99 P-FC 11711 Dublin Boulevard Mu ti-Story Ccnc. Building FP= 366.64 OH Grass TELE SSMH 381.83 RE IE 371.73 6" (NW) IE 371.67 12 (W) IE 371.476"(S),12"(E) Transformer 38 5- ZONE X-SCREEN 7 7 CTV 8"RW(P) 12"SS N69°52'30"E 56.91' (58.76) 20"TR • I III S,N) N29 42'09"W (R)__TB Asp)yalt 386.17 0 ABBREVIATIONS 383.54-383.4 C 383�,' 7 i io 2d�3838Cc��a$�6 DDCV �� 3 83.64 C E 83. �O�O /'o�c 9g13 \ 1 EEC ��°83.9883�383.40 CxEP Pep 8 N �/ 5$2� Io, F�Cr D82 co �{ -0 iNip \ ,8 C FDC �� -1384.2 �' FE�uIA � �$2 ;.P 384.769 13'6 x -5$1\\6 38563845\\ C 138.21' L_ T G(D) D EXCEPTION PARCEL 2 2921-401 OR 8"W(P) 380.48 BW T(P) 0 15 30 11 NOTES 60 90 Scale in = 30' 1. THIS PLOT WAS PREPARED FROM INFORMATION FURNISHED IN A PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT, PREPARED BY NORTH AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, DATED JULY 29, 2021, NUMBER 54606-21-00926. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR MATTERS OF RECORD NOT STATED IN SAID PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT THAT co`), MAY AFFECT THE TITLE LINES, OR EXCEPTIONS, OR EASEMENTS OF THE PROPERTY. 0 1) 0� C-1 DISTRICT 2. ALL DISTANCES AND ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE IN FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF. 3. THE TYPES, LOCATIONS, SIZES AND/OR DEPTHS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WERE OBTAINED FROM SOURCES OF VARYING RELIABILITY. THE CONTRACTOR IS CAUTIONED THAT ONLY ACTUAL EXCAVATION WILL REVEAL THE TYPES, EXTENT, SIZES, LOCATIONS AND DEPTHS OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. (A REASONABLE EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO LOCATE AND DELINEATE ALL KNOWN UNDERGROUND UTILITIES). HOWEVER, THE ENGINEER CAN ASSUME NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY OF ITS DELINEATION OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WHICH MAY BE ENCOUNTERED, BUT WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS 4. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SHOWN ON THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM) FOR ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, MAP NUMBER 06001C0304G FOR COMMUNITY NUMBER 060705 (CITY OF DUBLIN), WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF AUGUST 3, 2009, AS BEING LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONE "X", FLOOD ZONE "X-SCREEN" AND FLOOD ZONE "AE". ACCORDING TO FEMA THE DEFINITION OF ZONE "X" IS: AREA OF MINIMAL FLOOD HAZARD ACCORDING TO FEMA THE DEFINITION OF ZONE "X-SCREEN" IS: 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD HAZARD, AREAS OF 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD WITH AVERAGE DEPTHS OF LESS THAN ONE FOOT OR WITH DRAINAGE AREAS OF LESS THAN ONE SQUARE MILE. ACCORDING TO FEMA THE DEFINITION OF ZONE "AE" IS: WITH BFE OR DEPTH DETERMINED (382'± - 385'±) INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED FROM THE FEMA WEBSITE ON FEBRUARY 4, 2022. 5. BENCHMARK: A-1964; COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY DISK STAMPED "A-1964" IN CONCRETE POST UNDER A MANHOLE LID, 9' SOUTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF DUBLIN BLVD ON THE EXTENSION OF WESTERLY LANES OF SILVER GATE DRIVE. ELEVATION: 434.843 (NGVD29) 6. BASIS OF BEARINGS: THE BEARING OF NORTH 21° 34' 00" WEST TAKEN ON THE MONUMENT LINE OF HANSEN DRIVE AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN RECORD OF SURVEY NUMBER 395, FILED FOR RECORD ON OCTOBER 3,1969 IN BOOK 7 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY AT PAGES 70-71, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ALAMEDA COUNTY WAS TAKEN AS THE BASIS FOR ALL BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON. 382.8- -- 382.80 C 3)S2.7 ACC 3 2.7 383.0 / 383.0/94FF 38/ 08 C 7-3$ .Q HABCKK 383.3- - 383.'6 C BL 1 383i38 C 383gLRDS/BOL / co B.S.L. BW C./CONC CAB CAN CB 3 \ " 5g5. I.E.E. C68553 C8563 C \\ 38 67 C JP/RSRJ 382.96 RE384. \\ IE 381. 3\&5\ \ Say \ IE381.11 �C \ C \384.j "55.1 \384,`�i 1 C 385 78 c 385 �4 C 38-. 6 j hA 385 6 C � ,�Sg ' , 385.E �38594 38E93 �3�5 3 85 9 60) AIR CONDITIONER ABOVE FINISH FLOOR ANGLE POINT AUTO SPRINKLER RISER BACK OF CURB BUILDING LINE BOLLARD BUILDING SETBACK LINE BACK OF WALK CONCRETE CABINET CABLE TELEVISION CATCH BASIN DOUBLE DETECTOR CHECK VALVE EAST ELECTRIC BOX ELECTRICAL LINE EDGE OF PAVEMENT ELECTRICAL VAULT FACE OF CURB FOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY F `-38 3824 FINISH FLOOR 50�FH \ ?5� C\\ DIRE HYDRANT FNC \\ \\ CE FP \ LG POLE GA� Gam\ GUY ANCHOR ,6\ 6-'\ GRADE BREAK GRGN ,5a1�1 G GROUNDRKER/METER HP HIGH POINT IE INVERT ELEVATION INGRESS EGRESS EASEMENT JOINT POWER POLE JOINT POWER POLE RISER LEGEND LIP LT MH MON NW OR PED P-FC PIV PL POC RE S.D.E. SDMH SE SL SLB SSCO SSMH SW TB TC TD TMH TSB TSP UKD WB WM WV W/ LIP OF GUTTER LIGHT MANHOLE MONUMENT NORTH NORTH WEST OFFICIAL RECORD PAVEMENT PEDESTRIAN PAVEMENT AT FACE OF CURB POST INDICATOR VALVE PROPERTY LINE POINT OF CONNECTION RIM ELEVATION SOUTH STORM DRAIN EASEMENT STORM DRAIN MANHOLE SOUTH EAST STREET LIGHT STREET LIGHT BOX SANITARY SEWER CLEAN OUT SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE SOUTH WEST TELEPHONE BOX TOP OF CURB TRENCH DRAIN TELEPHONE MANHOLE TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE UNKNOWN DESTINATION WEST WATER BOX WATER METER WATER VALVE WITH 38140 C 101� E C FO FS -G 0 AGM •\ 3�6 ��385 �3�38Sg9 -HPG d'6'��96C, 851 C JT 386' 386 O 385 cb /941 oo OH RW SD 0 IE SL TS CTV aRlt BUILDING LINE CONCRETE/BLOCK WALL CONCRETE CURB CONCRETE CURB Sc GUTTER MAJOR CONTOUR LINE MINOR CONTOUR LINE DRIVEWAY EASEMENT LINE EDGE OF PAVEMENT ELECTRIC LINE FENCE LINE FIBER OPTICS LINE FIRE SERVICE LINE & VALVE GAS LINE -VALVE 8,c METER HIGH PRESSURE GAS LINE JOINT TRENCH LINE LOT LINE MONUMENT/MONUMENT LINE ABBUTER'S RIGHTS RELINQUISHED OVERHEAD POWER LINE PROPERTY LINE RECLAIMED WATER LINE & VALVE SANITARY SEWER LINE -MANHOLE & CLEANOUT SIDEWALK SPOT ELEVATION STORM DRAIN LINE -MANHOLE Sc CATCH BASIN STORM DRAIN LINE OVER 24"DIAMETER STREET LIGHT CONDUIT LINE TELEPHONE LINE TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONDUIT LINE CABLE TELEVISION LINE UNKNOWN UTILITY LINE WATER LINE Sc VALVE CI 2022 DATE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SYMBOL AREA DRAIN AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER RISER BACKFLOW PREVENTION DEVICE DOUBLE DETECTOR CHECK VALVE ELECTROLIER FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION FIRE HYDRANT FLAG POLE GAS METER GUY ANCHOR HOSEBIBB POST INDICATOR VALVE TRANSFORMER TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE TRAFFIC SIGN TREE UTILITY BOX WATER VALVE WELL >- co REVISION >- co REVISION R+WI ad Phc TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY 11711 DUBOFLIN BLVD FOR BLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP CALIFORNIA DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEET C2 0 2 OF 16 SHEETS T 0 a r Lri N CO CO 2-8",4-10 394. i , /822 c> moo, o o JA-) Q C// /7. • e r DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) E(P) -X CTV OH S68°34'30"W 856.48' CB 389.20 RE JT SSMH 384.66 RE IE 372.36 12"(W) IE 372.03 112%(E) I0H TELL N 21 °34'00"W 749.99 W( CTVFO(P) OH TELE CTV „�2N N65°06'55E 16.69' OAP' HIGlikk4Y S80 w 127.25" .i.-4767 .. li7.-„vt,,,---N,,-- 4*-4,07: -,,,,,- ,.. i • - limic A''''. 6 SS 4 482.16 RE IE 472.696"(THRU)i i3iiiREii�. !l•-•,i2i.,,,Si TM 383.76 - TRAi Y S1GN-A-L EASEMENT�� J9377923 OR SSMH 381.83 RE IE 371.73 6"(NW) G(D) IE 371.67 12 (W) IE 371.476"(S),12"(E) G(D) - �17r�' Sao 6 -4!G�irO�����������c���•i���t��,����������i�� ���� @VY �iyi >Mvr�►�� 20 + 138.21 \\\\ \\\\ \\\\ \\\\ \\\\ \\\\ \\\\ \\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\ \\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\©\\\\\\\ \\\ \\\\\\ \ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ co / Qo (S64°09'W 70.25') \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ gL\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\ \\\ \\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\-\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\-\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\�\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ vvv\vvv>,vvvvvv\vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvyv \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ '\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Nv\\\\\\\ \.\\\\\\\\ \.v\\\\\\\ \.\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\ vvvvvvvvvyyyy �.Crr;v�. vvy y�vvv \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ •\\\>; \\\\\\\\ vvvvvvvvvvvvvvyvN Y1�vvvvvvvv \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\'\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\'\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\'\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ vvv/y vvvvvv \\\\ \\\a \\\\\ ®\\\\ ®\\ \\\\o\\\\\\ \\\\ \• \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\ v\ \_ \�\\\ ,\\\ .\\\\ \\\\\\\ .\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ •\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ •\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\-N. \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ \`\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\'\\\\ \ \ \ \ \ • \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\.\\\\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Q \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\;\\\\\\\\\\\\\)\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\>\\\\\\ \\L\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\ \N'\\\\\A \\"\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\'.\\\\\\\\ \'\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \ \ ,\\ vv�v��v\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\ \\ \\\\ Q \\\\\ \\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\ \\ \\\\ Ate\ \\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\ \\\\ \\\ \\\\\ \ vvvvvv�A\ \\\ \ \\\\,\\ EXCEPTION PARCEL 2 2921-401 OR 8"W(P) 4. 9O 4) , 7 380.48 EW C-1 DISTRICT T(P) 382.8 , 382.80 C i 2/2.798/ 382.2 383.0 / 383.0/9' C 7:383' 08 C/ 383.0 // // X 383.3 3833/6 c 1 383/8 C 383.3 383.5 / 383.6/6 C 3p� 3838 /67 C / 383.E ��. 383/8� C�g36 / C g83.6 4 C P 383.1 �• �°\9g�\��c -583.15 C n /3846 02 C 5 C859 755 384�.�- �g x � �gA�3 3855: 8�3345 C 3 3849 385 28 385. 24 cC 38 6,6 ' P. 38 0) �83 r 1\51--; �86 � 335 3 3� d6 22 dd 98 851 2� C� AQ C 386 386,36 38 385 93 85 S6 C 3 GBW'� \382.5/92c 4C 15 30 60 90 Scale 1" = 30' LEGEND \\\\\\\\\\ �3r X X X 10 11 12 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 24 26 29 30 31 32 34 38 39 40 41 42 4 44 4 4 4 • 49 50 EXISTING BUILDING TO BE DEMOLISHED EXISTING AC PAVEMENT TO BE REMOVED EX/S17NG CONCRETE TO BE REMOVED EX/S17NG LANDSCAPING TO BE REMOVED SAWCUT LINE EX/S17NG TREE TO BE REMOVED UNDERGROUND UTILITIES TO BE REMOVED UNDERGROUND UTILITIES TO BE ABANDONED PLUG AND CAP END EXIS17NG TREE OR BUSHES TO BE REMOVED REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE CURB REMOVE EXISTING LANDSCAPE & IRRIGATION REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALK REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE V-GUTTER REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER REMOVE EXISTING ELECTRICAL BOX REMOVE EX/STING SITE LIGHT AND CONCRETE BASE REMOVE EXISTING AC PAVEMENT & AGGREGATE BASE REMOVE EXISTING FENCE REMOVE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT REMOVE EXISTING STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN REMOVE EXISTING DRIVEWAY APRON REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE CURB RAMP REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE RAMP AND HANDRAIL/NGS REMOVE EXISTING GAS METER REMOVE EXISTING GAS PIPE AND CAP AT R/W REMOVE EXISTING GATE AND APPURTENANCES REMOVE EXISTING STORM DRAIN PIPE REMOVE EXISTING SEWER PIPE AND CAP AT MANHOLE REMOVE EXISTING ELECTRICAL CAB/NET REMOVE EXISTING GATE KEYPAD REMOVE EXISTING ELECTRICAL CONDUIT REMOVE EXISTING AC UNIT REMOVE EXISTING ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER REMOVE EXISTING SHED REMOVE EXISTING MONUMENT SIGN REMOVE EXISTING WATER METER REMOVE EXISTING AUTOMA TIC SPRINKLER RISER REMOVE EXISTING STRUCTURE REMOVE EXISTING EQUIPMENT REMOVE EXISTING WALL REMOVE EXISTING TANK REMOVE EX. OVERHEAD POWER LINE PER PG&E REQUIREMENTS REMOVE EXISTING JUNCTION POLE REMOVE EXISTING CTV CONDUIT REMOVE EXISTING FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION REMOVE EXISTING POST INDICATOR VALVE PROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING DOUBLE DETECTOR CHECK ASSEMBLY PROTECT IN PLACE EX/STING FIRE HYDRANT PROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING POWER POLE PROTECT IN PLACE EX/STING SEWER MANHOLE PROTECT IN PLACE EX/STING FENCE PROTECT /N PLACE EX/STING TREE PROTECT IN PLACE EX/STING WATER METER PROTECT /N PLACE EX/STING TELEPHONE BOX REMOVE EXISTING FLAG POLE PROTECT EXISTING TRAFFIC BOX /N PLACE PROTECT EXISTING TRAFFIC POLE IN PLACE PROTECT EXISTING TRAFFIC TELECOM BOX IN PLACE >- m REVISION a<a<a >- REVISION S5 a<a<a /SARY\ W g Q�OFESS/0Hq P No. 65838 CIVIC \Q qTf rn 71 OF CAL‘FO�� R+WI ad Phc ION PLAN OF JBLIN BLVD FOR VARD OWNER, LP CALIFORNIA DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEET C 3 ■ 0 3 OF 16 SHEETS T a) cn N) CD 00 CO 4. r GJ P4 TY LINE \;:y . ��h , / /„ / // // \\/ / 2-8, 4-10 A,TR • x \ / \ y / \\ \ 6 TR•\ Gras �85�1'�,b � •1 TR2��� \\ N \ / \\ \ • / * W 0 4' sp, . HIGH14/4 OH 156.04' N65°06'55E 16,69 Aar A�Ar� Prir �i��iimszar 44.69' 7.25, ��J`'� v� - rer ;;74,,*." /. • i S39°29'4/"W 55.10' (S39°05'W),, 1 0 5' 12' 0 ui ii/Ibl (S8124'W) - —S8 7 '39-77 1 "1/17-9-6-08 '-: ---__T-1- ------ NF XN -_- PO:ED 08) DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) • tk NIX 0 ,o Grass '68°34'30"W 856,48' /_:72// �� / X Trrer 0,1101. 01 FEMA FLOOD ZONE X NO SCREEN Grass OH TELE N21434'00"W 749.99 BASIS OF BEARINGS v— O OH ` N68°34'301 314.42'- 176.21' • TELE to MONUMENT SIGN , Are, AA IP LIZ ......AZZA.C........L.LArwAlwAspANZZALEN.......- z�ris�t-�/�� �.!- - —ir,_.raw r "� - N6•52 3 E56. t° � fir. i 2�TR� -- 'JNIJN1-10 6510'34" W 320.4 / 1 p _ / I 'P?s. ``' Q , SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR ARBOR AND FENCE DETAILS, TYP `fiTRAii-R, Jlhl'HL CHJCI ICI' I II ri D oCD CO - 0 CO / 6A TtoOD SON M-1 DISTRICT \1 �i E j �\ (S64°001 70.25')- _� - \V i—S64°18'01"W 69.63 Aspnal` `SCR4-\ \ gQ� N N N INSTALL N 15 DSRSD • PROPOSED EVAE eft CD C-1 DISTRICT 0 CD CD 0 0 PROPERTY LINE RI CT OR 0 30 60 90 >- oo REVISION >- co REVISION R+WI ad Phc PRELIMINARY SI. 11711 DUBOFLIf FOR DUBLIN BOULEVARI DUBLIN, DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEET C4 4 OF 16 0 SHEETS >. 0 0_ o N) Cri 00 CO 2-8",4-10",3-12"TR • 394 92.: 6"TR .9 SDMH RE 393.69 \ , 2 IE 378.48 18"SD IE 378.48 EX 24"SD Grass 3:' W 389 65+P-FE 0 0) cie- 0 GRADING LIMIT UNE 388 HIGH/4/4 GRADING LIMIT LINE 4 DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) Concrete IC) ,\ E(P) 8"RW(P) A8°34'30'W 856.48' `'� N65°06'55E 16.69' �` X to . ��,tfr solPY-o'ss �e,c54 127. 25' / 8"RW(P) ma`s 'yc.J N55°22'05"W (R)'``j) i 8"TR • CB 389.20 RE / /' / / // / / / / Grasse RETAINING WALL BY OTHERS CB 8577 RE ,o E 382.2 36" V E 382.14 3"� Asphal 386.5 386 8) 38, TRICT RE 393.87 IE 378.64 3"SD IE 376.89 12"SD lE 376.89 EX. 24"SD 8) Concrete '3 LCD •24"TR -''tip-j`7 8�16 RaE1a^! -1 DISTRICT 49 Q I 1 ,o I 1 C:) mac' .76 31.117E pL I : 380.96 8" E Fo �� I 380.86�: W)/ 4 8"SD / /9� '7 6.• 0 85.6 x�, I. 38 r---r fir- r-- 'r- r---� 1 / 1 I I cS 1 1 1 a c5 OH 12 SS SSMH 384.66 RE IE 372.36 12"(W) IE 372.06 8"(N) IE 372.03 12 (E) 156.04' LINE <9 I - ARBOR AND FENCE DETAILS, TYP 387.5 11611 SNOW •WPW7VAPr r TELE N21°34'00"W 749.99 BASIS of BEARINGS 0�1 8"W(P)- -8 W(p) CURB-O-LET DRAIN UNIT B • ▪ F RETAINING WALL BY OTHERS 393.49 SD PUMP ;' RE 384.25 12"SD TRENCH DRAIN -1 I RE 384.45 Q�'���SPILL CONTAINMENT VAULT 1� a a o F9 `1bQ FEMA FLOOD RETAINING WALL BY OTHERS =I® CREEN �- VERFLOW TOW 389.6 ' FORCE MAIN BOW 384.4 - BOW 384.3 ___WArz- 21 4/W55.10' (s39°o5'W) 382.16 HDW( ,oe t�� �T 4) 0 0 �� O Q c�\. ,•. i' Ado 93 <� �� A 11 , 0P .VC. cO O OQ �'Or4) OQ o 439/9 CTVFO N68°34'30E - 8"W(P) 314.42' 10"W TELE SSMH 381.83 RE G(D) IE 371.73 6" (NW) IE 371.67 12 (W) „ IE 371.476"(S),12"(E) *�� )19„r: F� 1�■ill .b.iNI1■I N1111Il�l.p14iM III►s RETA/NING WALL- BY OTHERS T MITERED END IE 381.00 12" OW 386.5 BOW 381.5 11711 Dublin Multi -Story C FF 3 Equip. DRA/N��a-RE 384.50 vSPILL CONTAINMENT VAULT ,,�Ill'IRENCH V a � o �aa ► << ) ff Pik RETAINING WALL ��BUBBLER `RE 382.50 FL 381.80- Boul vard nc. uilding 6.64 AC Unit r 1385 7 ��/)e a D\0. �W 388.3 BOW 383.0 t---.RETAINING WALL. BY OTHERS BOW 382.3 O ��CO �C �8) b M M%^ V (a% FEMA FLOOD ZONE_BOUNDARY oe 93`o 4 Transformer UNIT D ----RETAINING WALL BY OTHERS SDJB RE 383.78 TOW 384.0 BOW 382.3 I en 57 /9 4 �� co,SDMH-- CTV 8"RW(P)- 12"SS 138.21 EXCEPTION PARCEL 2 2921-401 OR 8"W(P) T(P) GRADING LIMIT LINE C-1 DISTRICT 383:// 383.089' C :3/827 /C/ 382.7 C-1 3:08 C i/ 383.0 <C, 383:4- :83./3/6 C /1/ 3/8 /3//:cs,8 C / 383. 3 N. -7,,,,,b_ii,1--:._,, t\,,,,,,,:::5,3,,,,:,11::::\698;4co:.0N2.4..1\60 385 CB c 382.96 RE IE 381. IE 381 385 ,33 6,,GRADING LIMIT 379.82 12"N 0,0 5 1010 ecce 47 15 30 60 90 Scale 1" = 30' LEGEND • • EVAE FL FF HP LP PSE PV RE 23.8 X"SD • TC WLE STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN STORM DRAIN JUNCTION BOX STORM DRAIN MANHOLE EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT FLOW LINE FINISH FLOOR HIGH POINT LOW POINT PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT PAVEMENT RIM ELEVATION SPOT ELEVATION STORM DRAIN LINE TOP OF CURB WATER LINE EASEMENT OVERLAND RELEASE ARROW NOTE 1. CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL FULL TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE IN ALL STORM DRAIN CATCH BASINS PER CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVED DEVICES LIST 2. CURB RAMPS AND ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL SHALL BE DESIGNED TO ENSURE THAT ADA SLOPE REQUIREMENTS ARE MET 3 ROOF DRAINS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO BE PLUMBED TO CURB-O-LETS TO SHEET FLOW TO TREATMENT AREAS. 4. CURB CUTS WILL BE PROVIDED NEAR BIORETENTION AREAS TO ALLOW WATER TO ENTER THE TREATMENT AREAS >- oo REVISION >- oo REVISION i. R+WI ad Phc PRELIMINARY GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN 11711 DUBLIN BLVD FOR DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB SHEET C c n 5 OF 16 SHEETS CL 00 r7 0 CV N 00 CO DOUBLIN BOULEVARD EX CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER PROPOSED BUILDING 10' EXISTING GRADE 40' 15.5' TO 24.5' EXISTING LANDSCAPE 60' EXISTING GRADE 15.5' TO 24.5' LANDSCAPE 3:1 MAX SLOPE Pr1 1 I J 11.37' TO 15.45' LANDSCAPE CONCRETE CURB CONCRETE CURB 18' PARKING 2% t 65.37' TO 69.45' CONCRETE V-GUTTER 30' DRIVEWAY 2% t CONCRETE CURB \y. ��r�c�c; L; s s:yLiyiyiyti�tiT::'�i'i'rjS'j"j�"j�"j ,� t �•-. T, '.%�%eJF'i`i`o.-� <_5a�•",p`'-'-.�-.".,sk:w,',r'N„',yy':''.'yRG��G��GR.".Is!:!rs'''_."��.'''."�i'':ril.;iisieielee�:`.\\//' SECTION NOT TO SCALE 35' DRIVE AISLE 12' LANDSCAPE 15' COMPACT PARKING fCONC RVETE STEP -OFF ACURV.AB SECTION . _ v///////v// //i/i///////V/V vVAA,i//A//A/ / .AVAVV/A/ '. • _�yr A///,//VAwVwV�/vA�/v�/ 6' SIDEWALK PROPOSED BUILDING 26' DRIVE AISLE 18' TO 20' AUTO PARKING 75' CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER NOT TO SCALE a 5' z� TRUCK DOCK DOORS TRENCH DRAIN TRUCK DOCK 2% ± TRUCK YARD KEYED CONCRETE 2.5' VARIES BIORETENTION BASIN 3.• 1 MAX. N. •.� �.N. ate. M..• ••ems• ••. - -� - - - - - - - - - �..�. �..... � �. � ' -� -� SLOPE ,•.,... ..-r.. .,,�.•.-t...,,�,..,,.,......;�•.t..:�-.w„v.•-.:-sr..°...,x..-tom•-,�.•.c-...z+r.. ...-,x•,..t...,,�,•..v._....r. .-�'_t•-t--•.v.. .r. .-..%-.•-t•.t-. .r. r-•.%t - - -- �c.• Y• v �. �• �• �• v Y• �. -�• "�• `%�`Ii �: %: �. `�I• �• Y• �• v Y• v �• �• �• �• v Y• W �. �• �• h�I•.Y•�.b M.H.H.h.H.I•�iNN �H.H.hw•.•�i••u ..•.• r�i• 'I•�I '� . ��• ' • Y. 'v. Y• H '�-• +�• ' . Y• 'v. '• � '"-• -%• ' -a.�i., _c, _..,a.., _.:, _•.•._�,�i.• _�•"_ia• . • i • �• _�•"_%•a•.•._�, i,aa_ -�-- -...a�i...-.......... ���:�..iivi'�i'�i � �'��� �� _ . _ r�er �� .� _.. . _.. .. ...... ... .. \/\\/\\ </\/\/\/\/\\,\,\,\\/\\ ‹. /, e/, /\\ /\\( /\\,\\ < /\\ /\\,\\ A ,\ /\\,\/\\ \\77<'.3 i\\/ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ =%' - y �.a � iY � •_ , r i* � yr . .�, \/\/\/i�/�/��i�i i /%/A \//\\//\\//\//\/\\\\ <\\ �\\ �\\, \� \/\\,\\ /\/\ ,�\//' D r DUBLIN BOULEVARD 1' MIN UI 12" DEEP LIFT AC PAVEMENT 0 \j/`r�/j�/ \/7\/< 42.09' TO 40.62' R/W 3.98' TO 10' 10' 11.44' TO 16.64' 6.46' 1.5' LANDSCAPE 0.5' TEMPORARY DRAINAGE EASEMENT 1.5' SWALE 8' HIGH MAX RETAINING WALL CONCRETE CURB 5' CITY OF DUBLIN VARIES 9.15' TO 15.04' VARIES 5' 13' *//�� \//\/j \\/ CITY OF DUBLIN SIDEWALK DRAINAGE EASEMENT EXISTING GRADE SECTION EXISTING 24" SD 3:1 MAX SLOPE VARIES 15'-19' BIORETENTION BASIN NOT TO SCALE rr• v "• i• .N�r s•-i•� ••mow• .• i•'y4-1 ••�•'i• "G'i is CURB AND GUTTER /VA/VA/V / /&& 18" BIO-TREATMENT SOIL MIX 12" MIN CLASS 11 PERMEABLE MATERIAL R/W EXISTING TELECOM CONDUIT PROTECT IN PLACE 3% ± VARIES 34'-41' BIORETENT/ON BASIN SECTION CURB AND GUTTER h 0.67' 1.5' SWALE 3% ± 4' HIGH MAX RETAINING WALL 3:1 MAX. SLOPE 7' EXISTING FENCE x \/\\/� /��//�/jam/j�/j/ x/VV / // /A/A/A/A/A/AAA/A/A/A/A/A/A/A/A/A/A/A/A/� 18" BIO-TREATMENT 1O i / ///////\//\//\//\////\//\//\/\/\/\/\/\//\//\//\//\/\//\//\ \, \///\/ /M\/ltRbi//i\//i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\i\A / 12" MIN CLASS 11 PER E A R%AZ NOT TO SCALE in 3:1 MAX. SLOPE a 67' 2' VAVA �VA,v\VAz&S&&&SS< </ 18" Bl0-TREATMENT SOIL MIX /\ 12" MIN CLASS 11 PERMEABLE MATERIAL \//'\//'\ DUBLIN BOULEVARD VARIES 100. 00'-105.36'± 4) PROPOSED BUILDING 40' VARIES 1.5' / 6.17' LANDSCAPE / x//: \<///t///\//X VA/AAj�A/�A ING WALL CONCRETE CURB 26' DRIVEWAY 4% ± SECTION CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER KEYED CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER 18' PARKING f1.2% /\/\\,\\ ,\\ ,\\ A .\\ SECTION NOT TO SCALE \ \ NOT TO SCALE \.\\/\/\/.\ 26' 783' LANDSCAPE R/W 50' MON LINE VARIES 50.00' 55.36'± L — — 11' RIGHT TURN LANE 7' BIKE LANE 11' THRU LANE 11' THRU LANE EXISTING GRADE 12' LEFT TURN LANE L SECTION 4' MEDIAN 11' THRU LANE 11' THRU LANE 6' BIKE LANE 1' MIN I NOT TO SCALE 12" DEEP LIFT AC PAVEMENT FEMA FLOOD ZONE AE EXISTING GRADE fv—FEEXIScT1ENG N VARIES VARIES II 2.85' 6.35' 13.65' 7.15' II 10' SIDEWALK 1 L_____,. I CITY OF DUBLIN CURB AND GUTTER CITY OF DUBLIN SIDEWALK EXISTING GRADE N N N 18' N PARKING ±1.5% N N N CONCRETE CURB N N PROPOSED BUILDING N N CONCRETE CURB 7' TO 9' SIDEWALK 9' j SIDEWALK ±1 % PROPOSED BUILDING 0 >- m REVISION a<a<a >- REVISION S5 a<a<a /SARY\ ce Q�OFESS/OHq P ti ti No. 65838 CIVII. �Q qTf 71 OF CAL‘FO�� R+WI ad Phc YPICAL SEC 11711 DUBOFL FOR [N BOULEVAI DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEET C 5 ■ 1 6 OF 16 SHEETS 771 0_ N O N 00 &D 0 eS vJ Ie 393.2 / k-39.1.9 / / / / '399.9x •10"T 393.1 CB 3492. -k, /RE 38560 TR• /90.FL 38510, 394 393 392 /\b/ / Gras SDMH RE 393.69 •12"TR IE 378.48 18"SD 2 2 IE 378.48 EX. 24 "SD \)( 391. /\\ 391.0 \ / <2.8- a0 6 TR•\ 9 391.1 389.26 390 Crass/ 380.8 -391.4/ / / //-�� / w w 389.48 P-6C 360.36 P FCC * � * 389.65*P-PC F0 , 388.35 P-F 388 48 P-FC DUBLIN BOULEVARD (K/ ri v, rciiS) (A PUbLIC ROAD) X 8"TR• / / / / // / / // 38716 P-F, � e / Q \ • -,�•/� ° 388.4-1.,P-FC 38��9 RE IE 380730,6" (E` IE 379.74 108; .5` IE 379.66 12' ‘S S80 wiP X E(P) 032"y Asphal 6"SD ...--Chainlink Fence Gras/ q ti X S68.34'30"W 856.48' CB 389.20 RE •8"TR 38 .7 /P-FC PD DI TRICT Grass UNT Racks CB ^'c5 386.89 RE IE 380 80 6" N IE 380.68 6r- I 380'40 81(� 8"RW(P) N65°06'55"E 16.69' Concrete/ // /`�'I / / I u1'g9 ��• L C v,„ �� F 3 .11 RE `" IE 380.96 8"(E) 8"SD IE 380.86 <8"(W co 'r'8 e ASR a D I I SD PUMP RE 384.25 39 RD 45nh • P/V� 8'RW(P) 63( 12 -44.69' SDCP, - B TSB 0 •24 °TR 02).'1 -1 DISTRICT UPGRADE EXISTING PEDESTR/AN CROSSING BUTTON TO CURRENT ADA STANDARDS 0 8"FS W LO TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE TO REMAIN. UH A 156.04' 10' W(P) - !�• E(P) TRAFFIC SIGNAL •K POLE TO REMAIN. TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE TO REMAIN. 12 SS SSMH 384.66 RE IE 372.36 12"(W) IE 372.06 8"(N) IE 372.03 12 (E) �m TSB a TRAFFIC SIGNAL TO BE UPGRADED FOR _ A PROTECTED LEFT TURN SIGNAL Grass Mir tom UNIT B CB < 385.69 RE I. 382.69 8"(W) ) �n a TRENCH DRAIN RE 384.45 - D�A CURB-O-LET Alw ouewnn Grass < NO SC,KL±N 12"SD OVERFLOW� 3" SD FORe CE MAIN x rya NE o0p OZOY ° N. onuret L' 1RENCH DRAIN c •r`RE 384.50 SPILL CONTAINMENT VAULT RE 384.59 •3 1 - a""---- TRAFFIC SIGNAL TO BE UPGRADED FOR A PROTECTED LEFT TURN SIGNAL TELE -1121 °34'00"W 749.99 U8 P"w G( RP A) /D-Ek:1577NG PEDESTRIAN CROSSING BUTTON TO CURRENT ADA STANDARDS RE 384.53 PD DISTRICT I yiR co halr RE 38250- UNIT C UPGRADE EXISTING PEDESTRIAN CROSSING <BUTTON TO CURRENT ADA STANDARDS BASIS OF F.' SSCG SDJB RE 386.41 IE 381.05 FO(P) 7RAFFIC SIGNAL POLE TO REMAIN. (P) TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE TO REMAIN. 11711 Dublin Multi -Story C Equip. SPILL CONTAINMENT VAULT FL 381.80x co o • Boul 6,64 AC linit uilding SDJB RE 383.78'8, CB 382.30 co CO SSMH 381.83 RE IE 371.67 12 (W) IE 371.476"(S),12"(E) o 12"SD ZONE X SO N CTV 8"RW(P) DRAIN MITERED END7 sphalt 'SDMH RE 383.68 RE 382.50 FL 382.00 SDMH '0 IZI cOY EXCEPTION PARCEL 2921-401 OR 8"W(P) OVERHEAD ELECTRIC POLE TO REMAIN. OVERHEAD ELECTRIC POLE TO REMAIN. CD z CD • CD IPCD:rj, • 2036,8.4;0: \ \ 4. 6: bi co CB C 382.96 RE 328 0 wyE 3/82.79 • co co RE 385.77 IE 379.92 EX. 12"SD IE 379.92 EX. 12"SD IE 380.28 12"SD EX OUTFALL IE 379.82 12"N -80 Top -383.15 15 30 60 90 Scale 1" = 30' LEGEND A SR RE TC WS X X FS SS CO TG • • SSMH • AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER RISER RIM ELEVATION TOP OF CURB WATER SER VICE EXISTING UTILI TY TO BE ABANDONDED BY REMOVAL FIRE SERVICE SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT TO GRADE STORM DRAIN LINE AREA DRAIN STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN STORM DRAIN JUNCTION BOX STORM DRAIN MANHOLE BACK FLOW PREVENTION DEVICE FIRE DEPARTMEN T CONNECTION FIRE HYDRANT & VALVE POST INDICATOR VALVE SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE SINGLE CHECK VALVE STORM DRAIN MANHOLE WATER METER BOLLARDS >- oo REVISION >- oo REVISION R+WI ad Phc PRELIMINARY U 11711 DUI FO DUBLIN BOULEV, DUBLIN, SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB SHEET C a n 7 OF 16 SHEETS > N cn 0 Cri CN N co CD 6 CL CV O N CL cn w 0 w 2E w J w c.7 0 O N N O N <s 2-8,4-10—1''TR. N89; s8o DUBLIN BOULEVARD K/ uv VNI"CIL3) `h1 ruDLIC ROAD) 1Q. 8"TR• E(P) QA2°34'3N"W 856.48' CB 389.20 RE 8"RW(P) > N65°06'55E 16.69' ,OQ O.s 'O. BIORETENTION SIZING CALCULATIONS Area No. Area (SF) Area (AC) Landscape (SF) Landscape (AC) Imperv. (SF) Imper. (AC) Treatment Area* (SF) Treatment Required (SF) Treatment Provided (SF) Sizing Ratio (%) Type of Planter 1 72,340 1.661 9,970 0.229 62,370 1.432 63,367 2,535 2,387 3.77% Bio-Retention Planter 2 9,403 0.216 2,152 0.049 7,251 0.166 7,466 299 325 4.35% Bio-Retention Planter 3 45,287 1.040 10,410 0.239 34,877 0.801 35,918 1,437 1,193 3.32% Bio-Retention Planter 4 70,476 1.618 5,589 0.128 64,887 1.490 65,446 2,618 2,087 3.19% Bio-Retention Planter 5 119,910 2.753 10,318 0.237 109,592 2.516 110,624 4,425 3,827 3.46% Bio-Retention Planter *: Total Treatment Area is equal to Impverious Area + 0.10 * Landscape Area. 8"RW(P) > 0 0 0 a c3 OH B 156.04' C C C �► CII C C C1111 C C C 27SS SSMH 384.66 RE IE 372.36 12"(W) IE 372.06 8"(N) IE 372.03 12 (E) 8"W(P) N21°34'00"W 749.99' BASIS OF BEARINGS J 1 - 8„W(P) �1�� �OQ10\ ^)�°' FEMA FLOODZO BOUNDARY CQ 'off (oe CTVFO(P) N68°34'30"E 314.42' 176.21' 8"W(P) (7 H \ X� 9;1- TELE SSMH 381.83 RE — IE 371.73 6" (NW) IE 371.67 12 (W) IE 371.476"(S),12"(E) WC) ti Dcb CTV 8"RW(P) - 12"SS SEE NOTE 138.21 0 C7 co ^4) (7 T(P 380.48 BW EXCEPTION PARCEL 2 2921-401 OR 8"W(P) T(P) FO(P 0 15 30 60 90 Scale 1" = 30' LEGEND ■■■■■■■ IF NATIVE MATERIAL IS USED FOR SIDE SLOPE, RELATIVE COMPACTION OF SUBGRADE TO BE SIMILAR TO ADJOINING NATIVE SOILS SIDE SLOPE 1� 3 C-1 DISTRICT 171 LLB SLOPE VAR/ES lli� i l� i l�li�li -111 111-111 1 I I T I I H I I-1 11- NA Tl VE SOIL 2% MINIMUM II-1 I- IIIIIIIII SLOPE TO UNDERDRA/N 111 =1=1=1=1=1 I I I I I I 1 11 1 11 I I_ i i ii i iITI1 1 11 I I _III BIO-TREATMENT SOIL MIX (BSM) PER SPECS. DO NOT MECHANICALLY COMPACT TRIBUTARY AREA LIMITS BIO-RETENTION TREATMENT AREA CLEANOUT W/TH CAP AT FIN. GRADE (SEE MUNICIPAL STD. DRAWING) BEGINNING OF LINE VAR/ES (AS NEEDED) 2" FREEBOARD I4" MIN./ 1—Ilh�ho 1 112VARIES.- III pl'ODIA. PERFORATED OR SLOTTED SLOPED UNDERDRA/N (SLOPE CAT 0.50% MIN.) W/TH PERFORATIONS DOWN. SEE PLAN FOR L>, CONNECTION TO C.B. AND FOR INVERT ELEVA770N 0 MIN 12" OF CLASS II PERMEABLE ROCK PER CAL TRANS SPECIFICA 770NS o 0 CB 382.96 RE IE 381. IE 381 <0 V Q) 2 85 2-8"(W) 61 12"(S) RICT co 2h2 22 CB 384.58 RE IF 381.49 6"( �s \ T' A T0F co 5 TOP PLACE 4" MIN. D/A. APPROVED COBBLE 0.2 FEET BELOW CURB OPENINGS FOR DISTANCE OF 2' EITHER SIDE OF CURB OPENING OPENING IN CURB SEE PLAN FOR LOCA T1ON I11 14 MIN. — SET BOTTOM OF CURB PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT TO AVOID WATER /NFIL TRA 770N UNDER PAVEMENT PLACE GEOTEXTILE BETWEEN COBBLES AND NA77VE SOIL FOR EROSION CONTROL UNDERDRA/N CLEAN OUT WITH RIM TO FINISH GRADE. SEE U77L/TY PLAN FOR LOCATION AND INVERT NOTE: SURFACE AREA OF THE BIO TREATMENT SOIL SHALL EQUAL 4% OF THE AREA OF THE SITE THAT DRAINS TO TREATMENT MEASURE, UNLESS SIZING CALCULATIONS ARE SUBMITTED DEMONSTRATING THAT PROVISION C.3 REQUIREMENTS ARE MET USING A SMALLER SURFACE AREA. BIO-RETENTION DETAILS NOT TO SCALE NOTES 0 1. ALL CATCH BASINS IN BIORETENTIONS SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH AN OLDCASTLE INFRASTRUCTURE FLOGARD CA TCHBASIN TRASH SCREEN INSERT, FLAT GRATED INLET STYLE DROP IN BASKET, OR OTHER APPROVED CASQA APPROVED TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE >- m REVISION a<a<a >- oo REVISION S5«a<a ti ce Q�OFESS/0Hq P SARYFz� ,�-'� R Fqy No. 65838 CIVIk. �Q qTf yG 71 OF CAL‘FO�� R+WI ad Phc PRELIMINARY SWQCP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD FOR DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEET C 7 0 ■ 8 OF 16 SHEETS T cn 6-18-24 05:32:15 PM 2-8", 4-10 i e<<s' j\t op 0 eAv / • 10"TR TR• \ \ 8,, 6'TR \ \ ` Gras \ \ � ,4 \ •1 \• v v y\ FIRE HYDRANT Grass sR) —_- OSED EVA \ ti • 1 8 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ s8o />"33 GB \ Arrow Xc mint 1 ..aoinn M xvn F:! A FLO D 7ONE \ZONE PE OH 24"TR• OD OD ainli�k�e� M-1 DISTRICT DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) 14"TR• 8"TR oe \ FIRE HYDRANT D DISTRICT OH OH TELE N2L34'00"W 749.99 BASIS OF BEARINGS O X NO SC EEN v 11711 Dublin Multi —Story C FF= 3 \ \ \ �\ \ \NN FEMA FLOOCZOPI BOUNDARY / \ \ N \N N TELE o OOD uivt duuNu/Y Qs N \\\ N 0 W \ J W � W W J I x CD LJD 0 0 hainlink Fenc Custom FIRE HYDRANT C-1 DISTRICT z X 4 FIRE HYDRANT RICT 7 7 7 4 4 4 4 4 7 7 7 0 15 30 60 90 Scale 1" = 30' 41 . 1 5 8.03 18.38 Arrow XT Quint 105 feet Width :8.00 Track :9.07 Lock to Lock Time4.0 Steering Angle :33.3 >- m REVISION a<a<a oo REVISION S5 a<a<a ce Q�OFESS/0Hq P SARYFz� tiNsR FgyyG No. 65838 CIVII. �Q qTf rn 71 OF CAL‘FO�� R+WI ad Phc FIRE ACCESS PLAN 11711 DUBLIN BLVD FOR DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEET C8.O 9 OF 16 SHEETS >, N 0 0 6-18-24 05:32:20 PM e<<s' op 0 / W Grass /* W W W W W W W W W W W 1 W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W/ W \ \ \\ \\ \ \ \ s8o / OH o-NL� N1 )NI'JtlbHJ A3' �JNI�JNVH.l AOMIIMV F: A FLO D ZONE FEMA FLOOD ZONE X NO SCREEN 7/ \ZONE GB \ \ yC \ \ \ / 1 AlIVEM AE c 24"TR• a i link sec\ x— _x M-1 DISTRICT DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) 14"TR• v 11711 Dublin Boul yard Multi —Story C.nc. uilding FF= 356.64 OH TELE N21'34'00"W 749.99 BASIS OF BEARINGS 0 NO FEMA FLOOD O BOUNDARY N OH TELE DU==CRA H TRUCK FLOOD ZONE —SCR .N MA t\ODD • N \\ \ �� N N N N \� ��F\ \\ \ \\\ N — \\\ N\ \\\ • �• I k CD CDCD 0 0 0 0 0 C-1 DISTRICT CD 0 0 J7 �1 / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / // / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / N / \ \ i1 4 4 x 4 L 4 4 4 �A D1lsTRICT 4' 4' 4' 4' 4' 4' 4' 4 4' 4' 4 4' 0 15 30 60 90 Scale 1" = 30' 32.50 DU3L \ THASH TUC Width Track Lock to Lock Time Steering Angle feet : 8.08 : 7.50 : 6.0 :27.7 >- m REVISION a<a<a oo REVISION S5 a<a<a ti ce Q�OFESS/0Hq P SARYFz� R Fq Ny No. 65838 CIVII. �Q qTf yG� rn 71 OF CAOO�� R+WI ad Phc RUCK OF IUBLIf FOR EVARI DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEET C9.O 10 OF 16 SHEETS >, N 0 0 6-18-24 05:32:26 PM sop 0\ ()<-3 • 10"TR / Grass / 4' 1' W W -_— S80 x OH a inli�k�e�\ / BONE PE '�\ �1'A -(L\� M-1 DISTRICT �� �\\1 �\ E�\ :_ (S64°09'W 70.25')' L33 G\ �� \ — \ / DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) (S8124'w), X NO OH TELE N21'34'00"W 749.99 BASIS OF BEARINGS v— O SCRe\ X_ \ 11711 Dublin Multi —Story C FF= 3 FEMA FLOOD--O BOUNDARY OH TELE � O \ ' \ N \\ \ �p�� �� \ \ N � /^ /,,° �«- \ \ W rW jam/ .� w \ >,417. \ • \ \ \ ,saa;;o,6a k 4<1 1 0 0 b_ 0 0 C-1 DISTRICT / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / // / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / \ / \ \ II 4 4 x / 4 L 4 4 RICT 7 7 \ 4' 4 4 4 4' 0 15 30 60 90 15.00 Ii --I. Scale 1" = 30' 53.00 3 00 45.50 4.00 19.50 WB-67 Tractor Width Trailer Width Tractor Track Trailer Track 0.00 feet :8.00 :8.50 :8.00 :8.50 U V Lock to Lock Time Steering Angle Articulating Angle :6.0 :28.4 :75.0 >- m REVISION a\a\a >- REVISION S5 a\a\a ti ce Q�OFESS/0Hq P SARYF�� s., ,�R Fqy No. 65838 CIVIC. �Q qTf yG� m 7, OF cm.. Fi R+WI ad Phc TI OF )UB EV FOEF DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEETC. 11 OF 16 0 ■ 0 SHEETS T cn Grass /4' J/ W \e �V 6"TR \ \ Gras \ �� -_- s8o Vx / � E AE --- \\ 7\ C><) j �\ (S64°09'W 70.25') 33 GB :______E-tC116\ ,-\ \ \ \ // \ \ \ \ OH \ ainlink_Eenie� M-1 DISTRICT DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) 7 A 0 OH TELE N21'34'00"W 749.99 BASIS OF BEARINGS O _ (S8124'14/), X NO Sc EEN 11711 Dublin Multi —Story Cc FF= 3E 0. N\ FEMA FL005-70 BOUNDARY v OH � O TELE NN co N \\\ MEI IMP o k 4<1 x x \ \� 23' eft 0 CD CD 0 0 0 0 0 C-1 DISTRICT x i 1 LLB 0 f 0 L RICT '\J \ \ \ 0 15 30 60 90 15.00 /I •" Scale 1" = 30' 53.00 3 00 45.50 4.00 19.50 WB-67 Tractor Width Trailer Width Tractor Track Trailer Track 0.00 feet :8.00 :8.50 :8.00 :8.50 U V Lock to Lock Time Steering Angle Articulating Angle :6.0 :28.4 :75.0 >- m REVISION a<a<a >- REVISION S5 a<a<a ti ce Q�OFESS/0Hq P SARYFz� R Fq Ny No. 65838 CIVII. �Q qTf yG� rn 1 OF cm.. Fi R+WI ad Phc URNING )F BLIN BLVD OR /ARD OWNER, LP CALIFORNIA DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEETC 12 OF 16 O ■ SHEETS 1 05: 32: 45 PM N00 NUMBER COLOR CHART EASEMENT USE IN FAVOR OF GRANTED BY DISPOSITION 1 ++++++++++ ++++,+++,+++,+++,+++ + + + + + + + + + + TRAFFIC SIGNAL EASEMENT CITY OF DUBLIN HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN 2 ACCESS EASEMENT DUBLIN HILL INC. HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN 3 COMMUNICATION EASEMENT GTE SPRINT/PG&E HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN 4 PG&E AERIAL & UNDERGROUND EASEMENT PG&E HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN 5 0 0 ° °0 000 ° °0 (- ° O 10' WIDE DRAINAGE EASEMENT DUBLIN HILL INC. HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN 6 III 10' WIDE TEMPORARY DRAINAGE EASEMENT DUBLIN HILL INC. HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 7 / / A 10' STORM DRAIN EASEMENT CITY OF DUBLIN HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN 8 STORM DRAIN EASEMENT STATE OF CA MR. & MRS. KOLB TO REMAIN 9 TEMPORARY DRAINAGE EASEMENT STATE OF CA/PG&E HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN 10 TEMPORARY DRAINAGE EASEMENT STATE OF CA/PG&E HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN 11 ABUTTER'S RIGHTS RELINQUISHED STATE OF CA HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN TI I ' IT PROPERTY LINE i ice/ //// Grass \ \ (3S1 208) seo DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) tx ��Chai�linl< Fence 0 OH r, r r , OH TELE N2V34'00"W 749.99 BASIS OF BEARINGS v- 0 FEMA FLOOD ZONE X NO SCREEN ONE AE M-1 DISTRICT (S64°00 70.25 ). — �(S812� _ 7 Asphalt \VEX�OSC�\ 69Q\ eN � \ \ \� \ \ FEMA FLOO6-70 BOUNDARY 4 4.22' 0) U 5 N 138.21 EXCEPTION PARCEL 2 22------2921401 OP C-1 DISTRICT Ox .'5 0 —1 En 0 PROPERTY LINE OH V NF874'30"F 314.42' � Nam. o06 TELE \\\ \ \\\ p�� �r 0 \ \ x \ Aso 0� �\\\ ,, N \ \ \ 0 15 30 60 90 Scale 1 " = 30' >- m REVISION s' a<a<a >- REVISION S5 a<a<a ., Lo Q�OFESS/0Hq PR SARYFz,4F ,�qy No. 65838 CIVII. �Q qTf yG OF CAL‘FO�� R+WI ad Phc ING EASEMEN 11711 DUB FOR 1BLIN BOULEW DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEET C 1 13 OF 16 1 SHEETS ■ 0 05: 32: 47 PM NCO NUMBER COLOR CHART EASEMENT USE IN FAVOR OF GRANTED BY DISPOSITION 1 INGRESS/EGRESS & UTILITY EASEMENT DUBLIN HILL INC. HEXCELCORP. TO BE VACATED 2 %�%�%�%�% PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT STATE OF CA/COUNTY HEXCEL CORP. TO BE VACATED PROPERTY LINE / F,,? \\//\/% \ \ \ \ t \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) // \ (3,51 2. 08) Y seo ancrete Asphal ,- Chainlink Fence \ 0 PD DI TRICT Grass OP - Racks \ / Concret MIMII =►MP 112MO11 IP.MN II/II�-111 I' I/ I®Ir —1 DISTRICT o a asphalt OH Grass UNIT B FEMA FLOOD ZONE X NO SCREEN 7/ Grass i WINO ONO.. A3 IffDI�Ir -A OH TELE N2V34'00"W 749.99 BASIS OF BEARINGS v- 0 r t x aixlink�en \ZONE ft_001-1 /\ _ E qrP\ _ - \„ \/ 1 \ PD DISTRICT M-1 DISTRICT Equip. AC Unit 7 Asphalt 11711 Dublin Boul Multi —Story Conc. FF= 3:6.64 Asphalt _ (58124,0 \ 4/0 S ti FEMA FLOOD ZON. BOUNDARY 4 4.22' OH NF874'30"F 314.42' vard Lidding FL 00 N 000 N \ \ \ Aso TELE Transformer OD Uivt dUUI JDH \ Asphalt 0) 138.21 EXCEPTION PARCEL 2 �2921 401 0P C-1 DISTRICT En 0 LL, z V 00 0 J7 \1 ox CD .'5 0 PROPERTY LINE 0 15 30 60 90 Scale 1 " = 30' >- m REVISION s' a<a<a >- REVISION S5 a<a<a tiP ce Q�OFESS/0Hq SARYFz� ,�N R FgyyG No. 65838 CIVII. �Q qTf rn 71 OF CAL‘FO�� R+WI ad Phc ITS TO F UOBLIN BL FOR EVARD 0 DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEET C 1 14 OF 16 1 SHEETS ■ 1 N 00 CD w CD 0 CV O N uJ W 0_ CD cn W Ld Ld W CD CD N N N O N NUMBER COLOR CHART EASEMENT USE IN FAVOR OF GRANTED BY DISPOSITION 1 \\\\\\ PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN BOULEPVARD OWNER,LPROPOSED 2 DUBLIN SAN RAMON SEWER DISTRICT EASEMENT DUBLIN SAN RAMON SEWER DISTRICT DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP PROPOSED 3 EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN BOULLVARD OWNER, PROPOSED 4 y` s" `.:,- , yy :;e �4 y `: -: PUBLIC SIDEWALK EASEMENT CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP PROPOSED 5 Z<<- z-<<<<<<<<<< C<<• (.4 �I < �<<i<< STORM DRAIN ACCESS EASEMENT CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER , LP PROPOSED 6 ��\ SEWER EASEMENT (EITHER PRIVATE OR DSRSD) ENTERPRISE LLC OR DUBLIN SAN RAMON SEWER DISTRICT DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP PROPOSED 7 ,i1 i1 i i I.,i '�'111'�'111'�'111'1'1111111 " " i I,' AT&T EASEMENT AT&T DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP PROPOSED 8 PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN BOULLVARD OWNER, PROPOSED EXISTING ELECTR/CAL TO CB REMAIN IN PLACE 389.20 RED -JT FO EXISTING WATER TO REMAIN IN PLACE 0 EX/STING JOINT TRENCH TO REMAIN IN PLACE EXISTING JOINT TRENCH TO REMAIN IN PLACE IEXISTING SANITARY :\ / SEWER TO REMAIN % 'INPLACE EXISTING FIBER OPTIC TO REMAIN IN PLACE 10"w(P) EXISTING SANITARY SEWER TO REMAIN�.- Tiil;;;l;li IN PLACE MH 11,› 30"W PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT DETAIL SCALE: 1"=20' e<<s' \S JCJ &:) \ q v\i\\ e < �\C�J� PROPERTY LINE 4.fp f / EXISTING FIBER OPTIC TO REMAIN IN PLACE ,e;'r'‘I I11 I I I�I�I'I'I II II';II 1 I II r 1' I;I I�lill ll'. ' I'Ill lj �'I III I I 1111 I ii l� / / / // / �/ / W W W � V W W W W W W s, , >< `</< <<< << << DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) /2/ H.Tr`iI7 wA s8o 10"w 1 FO -x o6 z • —X SEE PUBLIC SERk7CE EASEMENT DETAIL, THIS SHEET • � -'''''''.-..,,,,,,,,,Gra..„,,,..:., x 0 OH 10"W(P) _ 111 WI, 40101,421010.1010 WO* AoTairairAttiATAIMAIIKOSVittie -71/4571/477--v141•Vrk �� a • � y <<<( < <( << < & <<<< FLO D ZO0 V /�� \ZONE A \L'�\ \A �LO6M-1 DISTRICT z __ ,3.3 G_i \,\_ `'‘'______,---;__\ \ (S64°001 70.25)- \ \ \/ \ \ / i wOH TELE N21'3400"W 749.99' BASIS OF BEARINGS v— r. > 12"SS2"SS"SS 12"SS SSMH 384.66 RE flyrjr IE 372.36 12"(W) IE 372.06 8" �N) IE 372.03 12 (E 0�1 8"W(P)-8"w(P) (S8124'w) 1-4000 SCREEN \\s�,� \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ �� \ \ \ NN 'MA FLOO-6 BOUNDARY 454.22, TELE SSMH 381.83 RE IE 371.476"(S),12"(E) 15 30 60 90 C-1 DISTRICT 0 / / / / / / / / / PROPERTY LINE RICT >- oo REVISION oo REVISION R+WI ad Phc PROPOSED EASEMEN 11711 DUBLIN BLVC FOR DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWI DUBLIN, SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB SHEET C 1 15 OF 16 1 SHEETS 2 05: 33: 05 PM N c CO � .....,:,_,J:.-,7:-.0_..,,,,, qo kid r'<.7,5 ,v a .=-- ---;:;----- ;1:3-,-----.,..,-_-_-_,----, Fc-=\--k .--,,,<„,.: . ."--:,et.......,--7-k -2, „.1,4„....r.--- c Materials storage & spill cleanup Non -hazardous us materials management Sand, dirt, and similar materials must be stored at least 10 feet (3 meters) from catch basins. All construction material must be covered with a tarp and contained with a perimeter control during wet weather or when rain is forecasted or when not actively being used within 14 days. tor Use (but don't overuse) reclaimed water for dust control as needed. par Sweep or vacuum streets and other paved areas daily. Do not wash down streets or work areas with water! I Recycle all asphalt, concrete, and aggregate base material from demolition activities. Comply with City of Dublin Ordinances for recycling construction materials, wood, gyp board, pipe, etc. Check dumpsters regularly for leaks and to make sure they are not overfilled. Repair or replace leaking dumpsters promptly. J Cover all dumpsters with a tarp at the end of every work day or during wet weather. Ha srdous materials management ment r. Label all hazardous materials and hazardous wastes (such as pesticides, paints, thinners, solvents, fuel, oil, and antifreeze) in accordance with city, county, state, and federal regulations. Jor Store hazardous materials and wastes in water tight containers, store in appropriate secondary containment, and cover them at the end of every work day or during wet weather or when rain is forecasted. or Follow manufacturer's application instructions for hazardous materials and be careful not to use more than necessary. Do not apply chemicals outdoors when rain is forecasted within 24 hours. / Be sure to arrange for appropriate disposal of all hazardous wastes. Spill prevention and control Keep a stockpile of spill cleanup materials (rags, absorbents, etc. ) available at the construction site at all times. When spills or leaks occur, contain them immediately and be particularly careful to prevent leaks and spills from reaching the gutter, street, or storm drain. Never wash spilled material into a gutter, street, storm, drain, or creek! Dispose of all containment and cleanup materials properly. kidr Report any hazardous materials spills immediately! Dial 911 Construction Entrances aInd Periiiieter Establish and maintain effective perimeter controls and stabilize all construction entrances and exits to sufficiently control erosion and sediment discharges from site and tracking off site. Sweep or vacuum any street tracking immediately and secure sediment source to prevent further tracking. Clean Bay Blue Print Make sure your crews and subs do the job right! Runoff from streets and other paved areas is a major source of pollution and damage to creeks and the San Francisco Bay. Construction activities can directly affect the health of creeks and the Bay unless contractors and crews plan ahead to keep dirt, debris, and other construction waste away from storm drains and local creeks. Following these guidelines and the project specifications will ensure your compliance with City of Lublin requirements. Veh i le and equipment maintenance SL cleaning ).s Inspect vehicles and equipment for leaks frequently. Use drip parrs to catch leaks until repairs are made; repair leaks promptly. toir Fuel and maintain vehicles on site only in a berthed area or over a drip pan that is big enough to prevent runoff. 1.0 If you must clean vehicles or equipment on site, clean with water only in a berried area that will not allow rinse water to run into gutters, streets, storm drains, or creeks. ,. Do not clean vehicles or equipment on -site using soaps, solvents, degreasers, steam cleaning equipment, etc, Earthwork & contaminated soils tor Keep excavated soil on the site where it will not collect in the street. Po Transfer to dump trucks should take place on the site, not in the street. Use fiber rolls, silt fences, or other control measures to minimize the flow of silt off the site. ' Earth moving activities are only allowed during dry weather by permit and as approved by the City of Dublin inspector in the Field, i Mature vegetation is the best form of erosion control. Minimize disturbance to existing vegetation whenever possible. If you disturb a slope during construction, prevent erosion by securing the soil with erosion control fabric, or seed with fast- growing grasses as soon as possible. Place fiber rolls down -slope until soil is secure_ lor If you suspect contamination (from site history, discoloration, odor, texture, abandoned underground tanks or pipes, or buried debris), call the Engineer for help in determining what should be done, and manage disposal of cntarninated soil according to their instructions. Dewatering operations iotr Effectively manage all run-on, all runoff within the site, and all runoff that discharges from the site. Run-on from off site shall be directed away from all disturbed areas or shall collectively be in compliance. Pow Reuse water for dust control, irrigation, or another on -site purpose to the greatest extent possible. Be sure to notify and obtain approval from the Engineer before discharging water to a street, gutter, or storm drain. Filtration or diversion through a basin, tank, or sediment trap may be required. tor In areas of known contamination, testing is required prior to reuse or discharge of groundwater. Consult with the Engineer to determine what testing is required and how to interpret results. Contaminated groundwater must be treated or hauled off -site for proper disposal. Saw cutting tor Always completely cover and barricade storm drain inlets when saw cutting. Use plastic sheeting (Visqueen) to keep slurry out of the storm drain system. tor Shovel, absorb, or vacuum saw -cut slurry and pick up all waste as soon as you are finished in one location or at the end of each work day (whichever is sooner!). tof If saw cut slurry enters a catch basin, clean it up immediately. Paving/asphalt work lot Always cover stone drain inlets and !manholes when paving or applying seal coat, tack coat, slurry seal, or fog seal. Protect gutters, ditches, and drainage courses with sand/gravel bags, or earthen berms. Do not sweep or wash down excess sand from sand sealing into gutters, storm drains, or creeks. Collect sand and return it to the stockpile, or dispose of it as trash. Piiir Do not use water to wash down fresh asphalt concrete pavement. Concrete, grout, and mortar storage & waste disposal a/ Store concrete, grout, and mortar under cover, on pallets, and ai.ray from drainage areas. These materials must never reach a storm drain. a- Wash out concrete equipment/trucks off -site or into contained washout areas that will not allow discharge of wash water onto the underlying soil or onto the surrounding areas. Collect the wash water from washing exposed aggregate concrete and remove it for appropriate disposal off site. Painting Never rinse paint brushes or materials in a gutter or street! ior Paint out excess water -based paint before rinsing brushes, rollers, or containers in a sink. tow Paint out excess oil -based paint before cleaning brushes in thinner. I Filter paint thinners and solvents for reuse whenever possible. Dispose of oil -based paint sludge and unusable thinner as hazardous waste. Landscape Materials I.0 Contain, cover, and store on pallets all stockpiled landscape materials (mulch, compost, fertilizers, etc.) during wet weather or when rain is forecasted or when not actively being used within 14 days. fro Discontinue the application of any erodible landscape material within 2 days of forecasted rain and during wet weather. Storm drain polluters may be liable for fines of S 14,Oa0 or more per day! For references and more detailed information: www.cleanwaterprogram_org www. calm phandbooks.corm >- m REVISION s' a<a<a >- REVISION S5«a<a .. W ce QROFESS/0Hq PR SARYFz,4Fq ,�y No. 65838 CIVII. �Q qTf yG� Z rn 71 OF cm.. Fi R+WI ad Phc CLEAN BAY BLUE PRIN 11711 DUBLIN BLVD FOR DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNI DUBLIN, DATE JUNE, 2024 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 sHEEC1 16 OF 2.0 16 SHEETS 781 T ■ PLANT LIST CA. NATIVE SYM. NO. BOTANICAL NAME 30 LAURUS N. 'SARATOGA' 28 PISTACIA C. 'KEITI-I DAVEY' 1 LAGERSTROEMIA 'DYNAMITE RED' 16 ARBUTUS MARINA 4 PLATANUS ACERFOLIA COMMON NAME SWEET BAY CHINESE PISTACI-IE CRAPE MYRTLE STRAWBERRY TREE LONDON PLANE TREE TOTAL NUMBER OF NEW TREES PROPOSED = 85 EVERGREEN SCREENING SHRUBS 0 40 ARBUTUS U. 'CO1" IPACTA' HETEROMELES ARBUTIFOLIA 34 CEANOTHUS 'RAY HARTMAN' 19 PRUNUS CAROL INIANA 'COMPACTA' GRASSES N 12 CO 3 m 55 • 88 NOT SHOWN NIUHLENBERGIA RIGENS FESTUCA MAIREI LOMANDR4 L. 'LOMLON' FESTUCA GLAUCA 'ELIJAH BLUE' DROUGHT TOLERANT SHRUBS O 15 ACACIA R. 'DESERT CARPET' 0 41 OLEA 'LITTLE OLLIE' ii 0 0 N ® 0 N N o 4, 41 12 12 28 46 SALVIA AROMAS 23 RHAMNUS C. 'MOUND SAN BRUNO' 24 HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA 63 RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA 'PINK LADY' 61 CALL ISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN' 20 AGAVE D. 'VARIEGATA' 31 LEUCOPHYLLUM F. 'BERTSTAR DWARF' 13 CEANOTHUS 'POINT REYES' PERENNIALS TULBAGHIA V. 'TRICOLOR' VERBENA LILACINA 'DE LA MINA' ACHILLEA 'MOONSHINE DIETES V. 'VARIEGATA' W. STRAWBERRY TOYON CEANOTI-IUS COMPACT CI -TERRY LAUREL DEER GRASS ATLAS FESCUE LIME TUFF ELIJAH BLUE FESCUE PROSTRATE ACACIA DW. FRUITLESS OLIVE CLEVELAND SAGE COFFEEBERRY RED YUCCA INDIAN HAWTHORNE DW. BOTTLE BRUSH AGAVE TEXAS RANGER CA. LILAC SOCIETY GARLIC VERBENA YARROW FORT NIGHT LILY SIZE WATER REGIME MATURE HABIT HYDROZONE H ❑ W 24' BOXor B<B 24' BOXor B<B 24' BOX OR B 45 24' BOX OR B 45 24' BOX OR E'4 5 5 5 5 GAL, GAL GAL GAL 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. PINK 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. NOTE: ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED WHERE TREES ARE WITHIN 10' OF PAVEMENT. MULCHES L L L L L L BARK MULCH -ALL PLANTERS NOT DESIGNATED FOR SOD ORANIC RECYCLED CHIPPED WOOD MULCH- PLACE 3" MIN. DEPTH 1/2'- 3' LENGTH DECORATIVE COLOR DARK BROWN OR EQUAL NO VISIBLE CONTAMINANTS PLACE 3' MIN. DEPTH OF BARK IN ALL PLANT BASINS ALL MULCH AND COMPOST USED IN THE GENERAL LANDSCAPE AREAS AND ANY BIO-TREAMENT AREAS SHALL MEET SIB 1383 PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS. UPDATED LANDSCAPE PLAN SHEETS THAT SPECIFY MULCH AND COMPOST THAT MEET SB1383 PROCUREMENT STANDARDS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR PERMIT. RECOMMENDATION WILL SPECIFY THE PURCHASE OF MULCH AND COMPOST BE FROM A SUPPLIER THAT INDICATES SIB 1383 COMPLIANCE FOR EACH PRODUCT. SAMPLES OF MULCH SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO DELIVERY TO THE SITE. CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP AND MAINTAIN A COPY OF ALL RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE PROCUREMENT OF SIB 1383 COMPLIANT COMPOST AND MULCH. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECORDS INDICATING THE TOTAL COMPOST AND MULCH PROCURED OR USED, THE QUANTITY OF COMPOST (TONS OR CUBIC YARDS) AND MULCH (TONS) PROCURED FROM EACH FACILITY OR ENTITY, FACILITY OR VENDOR INFORMATION (NAME OF FACILITY, ADDRESS, CONTACT INFORMATION), A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE COMPOST AND/OR MULCH WAS USED, AND WHERE COMPOST AND MULCH WAS USED, AND INVOICES DEMONSTRATING PROCUREMENT. 30' X 20' 50' X 40' 15' X 15' 40' X 30' 10' X 50' 8' X 8' PLANT 6' OC 12' X 15' PLANT 10' OC 8' X 8' PLANT 8' OC 12' X 8' 2' X 3' PLANT 3' OC 3' X 3' 3' X 3' PLANT 3' OC 2' X 2' 2'X6' 6'X6' 5' X 5' 4' X 5' 4' X 4' 5' X 5' 3' X 3' 2' X 3' 3' X 4' 2' X 6' 1' X 1.5' 2' X 3' 2X2 3' X 3' PLANT 6' OC PLANT 5' OC PLANT 4' OC PLANT 3' OC 000 W , /4, W W /W W W W / W 4, /W W W W W W W W W / •, W * W W W W W W / 4, 4,W * W W 4. 4,W (\ W W W W •Y W W W W 4, W W W W W O 4, W W W •Y W \ W W W •, W W W W W W W W W •Y \ \ W W W �W W O 0 BIO-RETENTION PLANTING B10-RETENTION NATIVE GRASS TO BE "510-FILTRATION SOD" AS AVAILABLE FROM DELTA BLUEGRASS GO. OR EQUAL. SOD SHALL BE GROWN IN A SANDY BASE TOPSOIL. TEMPORARY IRRIGATION TO BE PROVIDED FOR ESTABLISHMENT. SOD SHALL BE LAID WITH A MINIMUM OF IS" OVERLAP BETWEEN ADJACENT ENDS AND SHALL BE LAID HORIZONTAL/PARALLEL TO ANY SLOPE. SOD SHALL BE LAID TIGHT TO HEADER AND OR ADJACENT PAVEMENT. THE MINIMUM DIMENSION OF ANY GUT PIECE SHALL BE 12". EXISTING LANDSCAPE AREA TO REMAIN THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD PLACE PLANTS AROUND ABOVE GROUND UTILITIES TO SCREEN UTILITIES FROM PUBLIC STREETS AND PARKING AREAS AFTER PLACEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF UTILITY. PLANTINGS PER PLAN SHALL BE UTILIZED. PLANTS MAY BE RE -SPACED IN VICINITY OF UTILIY TO ACCOMODATE SCREENING. CONTACT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IF PLANTING REQUIRES CLARIFICATION. LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS: TOTAL PARKING AREA = 84,515 S.F. PARKING AREA INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING: 1. PAVEMENT INCLUDING ISLANDS, STALLS, AISLES AND ACCESS DRIVES 2. ADJACENT BUILDING FRONTAGE LANDSCAPE AREA INC. WALKS PARKING AREA LANDSCAPE REQUIRED = 12,611 S.F. (15% OF PARKING AREA) PARKING AREA LANDSCAPE PROVIDED = 14,350 S.F. (11%) NO. OF STANDARD PARKING SPACES = 211 TREES REQUIRED = 55 (1/4 SPACES) TREES PROVIDED = 55 TOTAL SITE LANDSCAPE: 99,106 S.F. LANDSCAPE BY AREA: PARKING AREA: 14,350 S.F (14%) SITE PERIMETER (NEW) :15,390 S.F. (15%) BUILDING FACADE (NOT INC IN PARKING): 6,680 S.F. (14%) BIO-RETENTION: 13,936 S.F. (1%) EXISTING TO REMAIN: 48,150 S.F. (49%) WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER W/ ET DATA, REPEAT CYCLING IRRIGATION ZONES PER PLANT WATER REQUIREMENTS RAIN SENSOR TO BE SPECIFIED SOIL AMENDMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED PLANTER SURFACE AREAS TO BE MULCHED WATER USAGE TO MEET STATE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE STANDARD 1' = 30' } } } } } 0 15 30 60 150 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN SCALE: 1" = 30' DOCUMENTATION CONTACT THE CITY FOR FINAL INSPECTION OF LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. THE OWNER SHALL SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING TO THE CITY PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: CERTIFICATION OF INSTALLATION ACCORDING TO THE APPROVED PLAN. LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE WITH THE FOLLOWING SUBMITTALS TO BE PREPARED BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE CITY: THE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING 1. PROJECT INFORMATION: a. DATE OF LANDSCAPE PLAN SUBMITTAL± b. PROJECT APPLICANT± c. PROJECT ADDRESS (IF AVAILABLE, PARCEL AND/OR LOT NUMBER(S))± d. TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA (SQUARE FEET)± e. PROJECT TYPE (E.G., NEW, REHABILITATED, PUBLIC, PRIVATE, CEMETERY, HOMEOWNER- INSTALLED)± W W f. WATER SUPPLY TYPE (E.G., POTABLE, RECYCLED, WELL) AND IDENTIFY THE LOCAL RETAIL WATER PURVEYOR IF THE APPLICANT IS NOT SERVED BY A PRIVATE WELL± g. CHECKLIST OF ALL DOCUMENTS IN LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE± h. PROJECT CONTACTS TO INCLUDE CONTACT INFORMATION FOR THE PROJECT APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER± APPLICANT SIGNATURE AND DATE WITH STATEMENT, I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE AND SUBMIT A COMPLETE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE ± 2. WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET ON THE FORM OR FORMAT PROVIDED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT± 3. SOIL MANAGEMENT REPORT± 4. LANDSCAPE DESIGN PLAN± 5. IRRIGATION DESIGN PLAN± AND 6. GRADING DESIGN PLAN. ORD. 6-18 (SEPTEMBER 2018) -Fe' SUCTON DISCHARGE UNIT A EXISTING VEGETATION TO REMAIN TYP. OVERHEA1RIGATION SHALL BE SCHEDULED BETWEEN S:mmPM AND 10:00AM UNLFS WEATHER CONDITIONS PREVENT IT. IF ALLOWABLE 14OUR5F IRRIGATION DIFFER FROM THE WATER DISTRICT, THE STRICTER OF THE TWO SHALL APPLY. OPERATIONS OF THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM OirrSIDE THE NORMAL WATERING WINDOW 15 ALLOWED FOR AUDITING NP SYSTEM MAINTAINENCE THE IRRIGATION AUDIT SHALL INCLUDE, BUT IS-NGr LIMITED TO: INSPECTION, SYSTEM TUNE-UP, SYSTEM TEST WITH DISTR4BUTION UNIFORMITY, REPORTING OVERSPRAY OR RUNOFF THAT C ES OVERLAND FLOW, AND PREPARATION OF AN IRRIGATION SCHEDULE, INCLUDING CONFIGURING IRRIGATION CONTROLLERS WITH APPLICATION RATE, SOIL TYPES, PLANT FACTORS, SLOPE, EXPOSURE AND ANY OTHER FACTORS NECESSARY FOR ACCURATE PROGRAMMING. ORD. 6-18 (SEPTEMBER 2018) WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER W/ ET DATA, REPEAT CYCLING IRRIGATION ZONES PER PLANT WATER REQUIREMENTS RAIN SENSORTO BE SPECIFIED SOIL AMENDMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED PLANTER SURFACE AREAS TO BE MULCHED WATER USAGE TO MEET STATE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE STANDARD I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE AND SUBMIT A COMPLETE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN PLAN COMPLIES WITH DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 8.88 FOR THE EFFICIENT USE OF WATER E.?aA 4-12-23 8 FS DUBLIN BLVD. EXIST. STREET TREES 0 373.5GB A XIST. STREETSCAPE I-IRUB AND GRASSES 1 , 1 / 4- c \---T MAIN PLAZA -PUBLIC 4 EMPLOYEE AMENITY AREA 6' BENCH - TYP UNIT B ASRi- L EXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN NEW LANDSCAPE .I/ ,--.% - \fr / \fr \fr ill ME= LAI 6 FS 873 1- 1 1 1 1 CONCRETE ACCENT TYP. HPA architecture hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com GreenDesion Landscape Architects, Inc. 1464 Popinjay Drive Reno, NV. p: 775 8291364 email: bhatch00@charter.net Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 O Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA O Consultants: CIVIL RJA STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL PLUMBING ELECTRICAL LANDSCAPE Green Design FIRE PROTECTION SOILS ENGINEER O Title: PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 BH 08/18/2022 COMMENTS COMMENTS 1-26-23 4-12-23 COMMENTS 11-3-23 REVISED 1-31-24 REVISED 6-10-24 Sheet: CA.LIC * 4511 L1.1 �,�tN11'S4UU W /49.99 tiA515 Ur titAKINC7 E-- c(o) — — ■ 1' = 30' III 0 15 30 PLANT LIST CA. NATIVE SYM. NO. BOTANICAL NAME 60 30 LAURUS N. 'SARATOGA' 28 PISTACIA C. 'KEITI-I DAVEY' 1 LAGERSTROEMIA 'DYNAMITE RED' 16 ARBUTUS MARINA 4 PLATANUS ACERFOLIA COMMON NAME SWEET BAY CHINESE PISTACI-IE CRAPE MYRTLE STRAWBERRY TREE LONDON PLANE TREE TOTAL NUMBER OF NEW TREES PROPOSED • 85 EVERGREEN SCREENING SHRUBS 0 40 ARBUTUS U. 'COMPACTA' 1 HETEROMELES ARBUTIFOLIA 34 CEANOTHUS 'RAY HARTMAN' O 19 PRUNUS CAROLINIANA 'COMPACTA' GRASSES N c 12 MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS CO 3 FESTUCA MAIREI m 55 LOMANDRA L. 'LOMLON' • 88 FESTUCA GLAUCA 'ELIJAH BLUE' DROUGHT TOLERANT SHRUBS O 15 ACACIA R. 'DESERT CARPET' O 41 N pi 23 0 24 ® 63 a 61 N m 20 N 3I N 0 13 OLEA 'LITTLE OLLIE' 46 SALVIA AROMAS RHAMNUS C. 'MOUND SAN BRUNO' HESPER4LOE PARVIFLOR4 RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA 'PINK LADY' CALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN' AGAVE D. 'VARIEGATA' LEUCOPHYLLUr 1 F. 'BERTSTAR DWARF' CEANOTHUS 'POINT REYES' PERENNIALS ® 41 TULBAGHIA V. 'TRICOLOR' N ® 12 VERBENA LILACINA 'DE LA MINA' N A 12 ACHILLEA 'MOONSHINE © 28 DIETES V. 'VARIEGATA' W. STRAWBERRY TOYON CEANOTHUS COMPACT CHERRY SIZE 24' BOXor B<B 24' BOXor B<B 24' BOX OR B EB 24' BOX OR B EB 24' BOX OR B<B 5 GAL, 5 GAL 5 GAL LAUREL 5 GAL DEER GRASS ATLAS FESCUE LIME TUFF ELIJAH BLUE FESCUE PROSTRATE ACACIA W. FRUITLESS OLIVE CLEVELAND SAGE COFFEEBERRY RED YUCCA INDIAN HAWTHORNE DW. BOTTLE BRUSH AGAVE TEXAS RANGER CA. LILAC SOCIETY GARLIC VERBENA YARROW FORT NIGHT LILY I GAL. I GAL. I GAL. I GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. PINK 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. NOTE: ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED WHERE TREES ARE WITHIN 10' OF PAVEMENT. LANDSCAPE NOTES: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL GUARANTEE ALL PLANT MATERIALS FOR ONE FULL YEAR UPON FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN THE SITE ,INCLUDING WATER SCHEDULING AND MOWING, FOR THE ONE YEAR GUARANTEE PERIOD. ANY PLANTS REPLACED UNDER THIS GUARANTEE SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR ONE FULL YEAR FROM THE DATE OF REPLACEMENT. TAG ALL REPLACED PLANT MATERIAL WITH REPLACEMENT DATE. SOIL IN THE PLANTER AREAS SHALL BE AMENDED PER A SOIL ANALYSIS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS PREPARED BY AN AGRICULTURAL SUITABILITY SOIL TESTING SERVICE AFTER PLANTERS ARE BROUGHT TO GRADE PER CIVIL GRADING PLAN. ALL SOIL ANALYSIS AND REPORTS SHALL SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF 412.5 IN THE CALIFORNIA WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE FOR A SOIL MANAGEMENT REPORT. THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PREPARATION TH I S REPORT SHALL BE THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT THE REPORT TO THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE CITY. SHRUB PLANTERS: COLLECT A MINIMUM OF 16 SOIL SAMPLES FROM ONSITE PLANTER AREAS AFTER PLANTERS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO GRADE. THOROUGHLY MIX THE COLLECTED SAMPLES AND SUBMIT ONE MIXED SAMPLE FOR ANALYSIS WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ORGANIC SOIL AMENDMENT. PLANTER AREA SOILS SHALL BE AMENDED PER THE SO I L ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS TO A MIN. DEPTH OF 6" PRIOR TO PLANTING. AT MINIMUM FOR SOILS LESS THAN 6% ORGANIC MATTER IN THE TOP 6 INCHES OF SOIL, COMPOST AT A RATE OF FOUR CUBIC YARDS PER 1,000 S.F. OF PERMEABLE AREA SHALL BE INCORPORATED TO A DEPTH OF SIX INCHES INTO EXISTING SOIL. PLANTER AREAS: LOOSEN SOIL TO A DEPTH OF 12" PRIOR TO AMENDING. SPREAD AMENDMENT AND INCORPORATE PER SOIL ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS OR MIN. STATED WHICH EVER 15 GREATER. RAKE OUT ALL ROCK AND DEBRIS GREATER THAN 1 1/2" DIA. RAKE TO AN EVEN GRADE. SOIL REPORT SHALL INCLUDE SOIL INFILTRATION RATE FOR IRRIGATION SCHEDULING. PLANT BAGKF I LL SHALL BE AMENDED AT THE TIME OF PLANTING PER THE SOIL RECOMMENDATIONS. IN ROCK MULCH AREAS WHERE SHRUBS AND OR TREES ARE AT A MINIMUM OF 10' OC, SOIL AMENDING MAY BE PROVIDED PER INDIVIDUAL PLANT PIT BAGKF I LL ONLY. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE SPRAYED WITH VERMA-PLEX OR EQUAL ORGANIC FOL I AR FERTILIZER AFTER INSTALLATION. SOIL SHALL NOT BE TILLED OR AMENDED WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF EXISTING TREES IF PRESENT ONSITE. A COPY OF THE SOIL ANALYSIS AND SOIL AMENDMENTS INCORPORATED SHALL BE SUBMITTED THE OWNER AND THE CITY AS PART OF THE PROJECT . LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING PLANT MATERAIL PER SYMBOLS AND SPACING INDICATED ON THE PLAN. SYMBOLS PREVAIL OVER QUANTITIES LISTED IN THE PLANT LEGEND. 24 HR. MIN. NOTICE TO THE OWNER REPRESENTATIVE REQUIRED FOR PLANT MATERIAL REVIEW PRIOR TO PLANTING. ALL PLANT SUBSTITUTIONS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN SCALE: 1" = 30' WATER REGIME MATURE HABIT HYDROZONE H L W L L L L M L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L 30' X 20' 50' X 40' 15' X 15' 40' X 30' 10' X 50' 8' X 8' PLANT 6' OC 12' X 15' PLANT 10' OC 8' X 8' PLANT 8' OC 12'X8' 2' X 3' PLANT 3' OC 3' X 3' 3' X 3' PLANT 3' OC 2' X 2' 2' X 6' 6' X 6' PLANT 6' OC 5' X 5' 4' X 5' PLANT 5' OC 4' X 4' PLANT 4' OC 5' X 5' PLANT 3' OC 3' X 3' 2' X 3' 3' X 4' 2' X 6' 1' X 1.5' 2' X 3' 2X2 3' X 3' ALL PLANTS NOT MEETING OR EXCEEDING REQUIREMENTS AND RECOMMENDA- TIONS OF ANSI 260.1 'AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK' SHALL BE REJECTED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RECEIVE ON -SITE APPROVAL OF PLANT MATERIAL BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO PLANTING. FAILURE TO RECEIVE APPROVAL PRIOR TO PLANTING MAY RESULT IN REJECTION AND THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE ALL REJECTED PLANT MATERIAL AT HIS EXPENSE. THE OWNER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO INSPECT AND EVALUATE PLANT MATERIAL THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE PERIOD. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR NOTIFYING THE OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE A MIN. OF 4S HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE FOLLOWING SITE OBSERVATIONS AND/OR MEETINGS. A. PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH ALL PARTIES. B. PLANT MATERIAL ON SITE, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. C. PLANT LOCATIONS STAKED, PRIOR TO PLANTING. D. FINAL PROJECT WALK-THROUGH E. ADDITIONAL SITE OBSERVATIONS DETERMINED BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE OR CONTRACTOR IT 15 THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO LOCATE AND PRO- VIDE PLANT MATERIAL A5 SPECIFIED ON THIS PLAN. THE CONTRACTOR MAY SUBMIT A REQUEST TO PROVIDE SUBSTITUTIONS FOR THE SPECIFIED PLANT MATERIAL UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. ANY SUBSTITUTIONS PROPOSED SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE WITHIN TWO WEEKS OF THE AWARD OF CONTRACT. SUBSTITUTIONS MUST MEET EQUIVALENT DESIGN AND FUNCTIONAL GOALS OF THE ORIGINAL PLANT MATERIAL A5 DETERMINED BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. ANY CHANGES MUST NAVE THE APPROVAL OF THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. B. THE REQUEST MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY AT LEAST THREE NOTICES FROM PLANT SUPPLIERS THAT THE PLANT MATERIAL SPECIFIED 15 NOT AVAILABLE PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION SUBMIT I DIGITAL COPY OF ALL LANDSCAPE MATERIALS FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. SUBMIT DIGITAL PHOTOS OF ALL PLANT MATERIAL WITH A STANDARD MEASURING DEVICE CLEARLY VISIBLE FOR APPROVAL AND RECORD PRIOR TO DELIVERY TO THE SITE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE OWNER'S SITE SUPERINTENDENT IN VARIFIYING ELEVATION OF FINISHED GRADE PER CIVIL IS COMPLETE AND IN PLACE PRIOR TO START OF WORK. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSURE POSITIVE DRAINAGE IN ALL PLANTER AREAS PER CIVIL ENGINEERS GRADING PLAN AFTER MOUNDING/LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS ARE COMPLETE. MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1) 3 00 8"6- STREETSCAPE PLANTING IN B°G DUBLIN BLVD. 8"W(P) EXIST. 10' WATER LINE 4011 ��.���► i 400, I fair , i;� ��i-=is=''�'411*W (r1"471111P Y W W Y •Y "Y W `S'_ �GJ ill W W W irA.111,1,7111PP- liolirebtanefef AA INN afr w 611111117111% HERRY UREL HEDGE W MAINTAINED 1' X 5' c c c c�c c c cic LA I TO ---I- At ° ° Qa UNIT C D ° ° a a ° D Q o D 11 11 11 11 !TT D aD ° D ° D � Q D D D Q ° D °. . ° p a a D a a D D a D Q a D Q D a Q v D a a D D a p a a a D 4, W W W W W W W W W W W a a a SS STUB UNIT D a a a a I. • 1 FDLki-HT PIN _is EX. DDCV 1I TRENCH DRAIN W W W W W W W W W W �W, 4' W W \W 4, HPA architecture hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com GreenDeswin, Landscape Architects, Inc. 1464 Popinjay Drive Reno, NV. p: 775 8291364 email: bhatch00@charter.net Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 ■ Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: CIVIL STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL PLUMBING ELECTRICAL LANDSCAPE FIRE PROTECTION SOILS ENGINEER RJA Green Design ■ Title: PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 BH 08/18/2022 COMMENTS COMMENTS 1-26-23 4-12-23 COMMENTS 11-3-23 REVISED 1-31-24 REVISED 6-10-24 Sheet: 1_1 2 TREE DATA - SEE MAP TO THE UPPER LEFT Legend O Heritage Tree • Tree Not Protected Tree Canopy C) Study Area - 8.74 Acres EXISTING TREES ONSITE 0 Stringer Biological Consulting Aerial Base: Google Earth (03/11/2022) 25 Feet 50 Figure 2 Tree Map 11711 Dublin Boulevard - Parcel 3 Alameda County, CA 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Sniirra• Aarial fr]iaitafr4Inha 11ff1d17f31Q1 Tree Number Species DBH (inches) Dripline (ft) Height (ft) Health2 Structure2 Condition Notes 3 ornamental prunus Prunus sp. 6.3, 8 10.00 15.00 GF F 3 included bark, co -dominant leaders, pruning cuts 4 ornamental prunus Prunus sp. 15.5 7.00 18.00 GF GF 4 co -dominant leaders 5 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 18.2 18.00 35.00 G G 5 6 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 13.2 13.00 30.00 G G 5 7 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 15.6 15.00 35.00 G G 5 8 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 10.7 12.00 30.00 G GF 4 lean 9 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 20 18.00 40.00 G G 5 10 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 20.5 20.00 40.00 G G 5 11 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 21.3 20.00 40.00 G G 5 12 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 10.6 13.00 13.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 13 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 22 16.00 20.00 G GF 4 included bark, pruning cuts 14 crepe myrtle Lagerstroemia indica 7 9.00 15.00 G GF 4 lean 127 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 14.4 16.00 40.00 GF G 4 minor crown dieback 15 eastern red cedar Juniperus virginiana 8.1 7.00 13.00 GF F 3 pruning cuts, co -dominant leaders 128 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 9.3 12.00 35.00 G G 5 129 valley oak Quercus lobata 31 30.00 50.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 16 Italian stone pine Pinus piney 7.3 4.00 40.00 GF GF 4 pruning cuts 17 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 30.4 23.00 50.00 GF GF 4 exposed roots, included bark 18 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 23.5 17.00 30.00 GF GF 4 included bark, minor crown dieback 130 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 30.5 30.00 60.00 GF G 4 exposed roots, included bark 19 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 27.1 25.00 50.00 G GF 4 exposed roots 20 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 19.6 17.00 50.00 GF G 4 21 narrow -leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 9.5 14.00 25.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts, included bark 22 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 15.8 14.00 32.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 23 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 15.9 19.00 35.00 G GF 4 included bark 24 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 15, 9.9, 14 25.00 40.00 G GF 4 included bark, co -dominant leaders 25 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 16.7 25.00 45.00 GF GF 4 included bark, pruning cuts 26 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 15.7 20.00 45.00 GF GF 4 included bark, pruning cuts 27 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 16.9 20.00 50.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 28 California black walnut Juglans californica g 1 8, 6.6, 6.4 16.00 20.00 FP FP 2 co -dominant leaders, included bark, broken branches 29 California black walnut Juglans californica 12, 9.4, 8.7, 11.7, 11, 6.4, 12.1, 9 25.00 37.00 FP FP 2 included bark, co -dominant leaders, broken branches, lean 30 California black walnut Juglans californica 10.5 18.00 30.00 F F 3 Mistletoe, lean, broken branches 31 California black walnut Juglans californica 9.7 20.00 20.00 F F 3 lean, mistletoe 32 California black walnut Juglans californica 5.5 4.00 10.00 FP FP 2 epicormics, broken branches 33 California black walnut Juglans californica 11.5 18.00 25.00 G GF 4 0 California black walnut Juglans californica 9.1, 6.9 12.00 22.00 F F 3 co -dominant leaders, included bark, mistletoe 38 California black walnut Juglans californica 13.4 11.00 23.00 GF GF 4 animal burrow at base 36 California black walnut Juglans californica 11.3 18.00 25.00 G G 5 old nest 37 blue oak Quercus douglasii 15.5 20.00 33.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts, old nest 38 California black walnut Juglans californica 17.4, 12.6 20.00 30.00 GF FP 3 co -dominant leaders, included bark, broken branches 39 blue oak Quercus douglasii 12.8 15.00 29.00 G G 5 40 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 17.6 18.00 32.00 G GF 4 41 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 38 25.00 65.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 42 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 22.3 25.00 55.00 GF F 3 large pruning cuts, epicormics 43 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 20.4 15.00 50.00 GF GF 4 lean 44 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 20.5 20.00 50.00 G G 5 45 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 12.3 20.00 45.00 G G 5 46 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 23.1 25.00 50.00 G GF 4 co -dominant leaders, old nests 47 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 13.7 17.00 40.00 GF GF 4 pruning cuts 48 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 11.5 18.00 30.00 F FP 3 broken branches, partially topped, pruning cuts 49 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 20 25.00 45.00 GF GF 4 pruning cuts 50 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 18.7 30.00 50.00 G GF 4 51 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 16.8 20.00 45.00 G G 5 52 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 21.4 25.00 55.00 G G 5 53 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 21.2 25.00 55.00 G G 5 54 Japanese maple Acer palmatum 9.7, 5.6, 5, 6.3, 8, 5.2 7.00 12.00 F FP 2 trunk wound, trunk rot, co- dominant leaders, included bark 55 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 23 30.00 55.00 F F 3 lean, epicormics, pruning cuts 56 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 11.5 20.00 45.00 G GF 4 57 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 9.2 12.00 20.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 58 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 17.5 20.00 35.00 GF GF 4 pruning cuts 59 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 15.1 15.00 25.00 G G 5 60 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 18 16.00 32.00 F F 3 included bark, co -dominant leaders 61 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 6.5 10.00 20.00 F FP 3 significant lean pruning cuts 62 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 7.5, 10.5 15.00 20.00 GF F 3 lean, included bark 63 California black walnut Juglans californica 6.7, 6.2, 3 16.00 16.00 GF FP 2 included bark, co -dominant leaders 64 blue oak Quercus douglasii 10 7.00 22.00 G GF 4 included bark 65 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 8.1 15.00 17.00 GF FP 3 lean, included bark 66 blue oak Quercus douglasii 10.6 8.00 23.00 G G 5 TREE DATA CONTINUED ON SHEET L1.4 ■ HPA architecture hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com GreenDesign Landscape Architects, Inc. 1464 Popinjay Drive Reno, NV. p: 775 8291364 email: bhatch00@charter.net Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 ■ Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: CIVIL STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL PLUMBING ELECTRICAL LANDSCAPE FIRE PROTECTION SOILS ENGINEER RJA Green Design ■ Title: PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 BH 08/18/2022 COMMENTS 1-26-23 COMMENTS 4-12-23 COMMENTS 11-3-23 EXISTING TREES IN FENCED CREEK AREA (NOT TO BE DISTURBED) Sheet: L 1 ■ 3 784 J Tree Number Species DBH (inches) Dripline (ft) Height (ft) Health2 Structure2 Condition Notes 67 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 41.5 35.00 60.00 F F 3 trunk wound, trunk rot, included bark 68 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 11.2 17.00 25.00 G G 5 69 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 23 18.00 45.00 G G 5 70 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 19 20.00 45.00 G GF 4 included bark 71 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 15.4 16.00 40.00 G GF 4 included bark 72 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 18.2 17.00 50.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 73 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 17.8 20.00 40.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 74 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 5.4 3.00 17.00 GF GF 4 75 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 16.8 18.00 45.00 G G 5 76 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 15.3 19.00 50.00 G G 5 77 narrow -leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 16.9 18.00 50.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 78 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 19.5 23.00 65.00 GF GF 4 old nest, pruning cuts 79 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 17.9 19.00 45.00 GF F 3 pruning cuts, broken branches 80 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 18.4 25.00 50.00 GF G 4 pruning cuts 81 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 15.5 20.00 50.00 GF GF 4 included bark, pruning cuts 82 Chinese elm U/mus parvifolia 17, 11.2 22.00 55.00 GF F 3 co -dominant leaders, epicormics, pruning cuts 83 narrow -leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 14.1 16.00 40.00 GF GF 4 pruning cuts 84 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 14.3 19.00 40.00 GF GF 4 minor trunk wound 85 Chinese elm U/mus parvifolia 20.9 30.00 55.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 86 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 28.2 35.00 65.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 87 Japanese maple Acer palmatum 7.6, 3, 8.2, 6.5, 4, 6.2 12.00 21.00 FP FP 2 co -dominant leaders, trunk wound, included bark, pruning cuts TREE DATA -DUBLIN CREEK AREA SEE MAP LOWER LEFT SWEET L13 Tree Number Species DBH (inches) Height (ft) Dripline (ft) Health/Vigor Z Notes 1 Robinia pseudoacacia 36 65 30 P Falling into creek 2 Umbellularia californica 44 50 30 F-G Pruned at fence line, undercut by creek 3 Platanus racemosa 40 70 40 F undercut by creek 4 Robinia pseudoacacia 14 35 10 P Dead or nearly dead 5 Robinia pseudoacacia 16 20 15 P Topped, nearly dead 6 Umbellularia californica 40 50 25 F-G Many stump sprouts 7 Umbellularia californica 26 50 30 F-G Undercut by creek 8 Umbellularia californica 30,24,12 70 30 G Undercut by creek 9 Umbellularia californica 8 25 10 F Pruned at fence, leans 10 Umbellularia californica 12,10,10 60 30 F Moderate dieback, decay 11 Umbellularia californica 24 70 30 F Moderate dieback 12 Umbellularia californica 6 20 20 F Leans toward 1-580, pruned at fence 13 Umbellularia californica 11 50 15 F Spindly, shaded 14 Umbellularia californica 14,10 45 15 F Spindly, shaded 15 Umbellularia californica 9,8,8 40 20 F-P Spindly, epicormics, dieback 16 Umbellularia californica 10 40 15 P Severe dieback 17 Umbellularia californica 6 30 10 P Severe dieback 18 Umbellularia californica 7 30 10 P Severe dieback, epicormics 19 Umbellularia californica 6 35 10 F-P Dieback, epicormics 20 Umbellularia californica 10 40 15 F-P Dieback, epicormics 21 Umbellularia californica 26,12 50 30 F F-P Dieback, decay, leans 22 Umbellularia californica 9 40 15 F-P Dieback, decay, leans 23 Umbellularia californica 13,12,9 50 20 F-P Dieback, epicormics 24 Umbellularia californica 5 30 10 P Severe dieback 25 Umbellularia californica 9 45 10 F-P Dieback, epicormics 26 Quercus agrifolia 22 60 30 F Moderate dieback 27 Umbellularia californica 18,15,12 50 20 F Moderate dieback, undercut by creek 28 Umbellularia californica 5 40 10 F-P Spindly, sparse foliage 29 Umbellularia californica 5,3 40 15 P Severe dieback 30 Quercus agrifolia 29 60 40 F-P Significant dieback, sparse foliage 31 Umbellularia californica 8 20 20 P Sparse foliage, epicormics 32 Umbellularia californica 5 25 20 P Sparse foliage, epicormics 33 Quercus agrifolia 29 60 30 F Moderate dieback 34 Quercus agrifolia 32,28,10 45 30 F-P Significant dieback, sparse foliage, leans 35 Quercus agrifolia 19 60 _ 40 F Moderate dieback 36 Umbellularia californica 5 30 10 F Spindly 37 Umbellularia californica 26 = 60 30 Moderate decay on trunk and branches 38 Umbellularia californica 30,18 60 30 F Undercut by creek, epicormics 39 Umbellularia californica 5 30 15 F Shaded 40 Umbellularia californica 26 50 30 F Sparse foliage 41 Umbellularia californica 5 30 5 P Severe dieback 42 Umbellularia californica 4.5 30 10 P Severe dieback 43 Umbellularia californica 9 40 20 P Dead or nearly dead 44 Quercus agrifolia 24 50 30 F Some dieback 45 Umbellularia californica 5 25 5 F Sparse foliage 46 Quercus agrifolia 18 40 30 F-P Leans, significant dieback 47 Quercus agrifolia 8,5 40 30 F-P Severe dieback 48 Umbellularia californica 8,7,5,2 40 5 F-P d Spindly,epicormics, significant ieback 49 Quercus agrifolia 34 70 35 F Moderate decay, dieback 1.- 50 Umbellularia californica 10,8 40 20 F-P Spindly, significant dieback 51 Umbellularia californica 5,6,6,5,4 30 10 P Severe dieback 52 Quercus agrifolia 22 60 30 F Moderate dieback, dead branches 53 Quercus agrifolia 29 40 40 P _ Leans/resting on ground, severe dieback and decay 54 Quercus agrifolia 7 30 30 P Leans heavily, severe dieback, sparse foliage 55 Umbellularia californica 7,3,1 30 10 P Nearly dead 56 Umbellularia californica 6,6,4,3 30 15 P Nearly dead 57 Juglans hindsii 16 55 20 F Some dieback 58 Quercus agrifolia 15,6,6 50 25 F-P Sparse foliage, dieback 59 Umbellularia californica 8 30 10 P Sparse foliage, dieback 60 Umbellularia californica 7 30 10 P Sparse foliage, dieback 61 Quercus agrifolia 11 40 20 F-P Sparse foliage, dieback 62 Quercus agrifolia 7 35 10 F-P Sparse foliage, dieback 63 Quercus agrifolia 16 40 20 F Leans toward 1-580, fence in trunk 64 Umbellularia californica 4,4,3 20 10 F-P Spindly, sparse foliage 65 Umbellularia californica 7,7,6 35 10 F Spindly 66 Umbellularia californica 6,6,5,5,4 25 10 P Nearly dead 67 Umbellularia californica 6 30 10 P Nearly dead 68 Quercus agrifolia 15 45 20 F Some dieback 69 Umbellularia californica 5 30 10 P Nearly dead 70 Quercus garryana 11 40 20 F Some dieback 71 Quercus agrifolia 20,14 60 30 G 72 Umbellularia californica 6 30 10 P Nearly dead 73 Umbellularia californica 6,4 30 10 F Some dieback 74 Umbellularia californica 7,4 30 10 F Some dieback 75 Umbellularia californica 10,10 50 20 F Some dieback 76 Umbellularia californica 6 20 10 G 77 Aesculus californica 6 20 10 F Dead branches 78 Umbellularia californica 21 60 35 G 79 Umbellularia californica 60,48,44,24 65 40 • p Major decay at base of two trunks, on edge of creek bank 80 Platanus racemosa 16,8,3 35 20 F Fence in trunk 81 Quercus agrifolia 6,5 15 10 G 82 Sambucus sp. 7,6,4 10 10 G 83 Umbellularia californica 28,20,16,12 50 40 G 84 Umbellularia californica 5 15 10 G 85 Umbellularia californica 7 20 10 G 86 Quercus agrifolia 13 25 15 F-G Growing through fence /WWW WW * WWW /WWW• /W / W W W W o `W W• WWW W W * J W '�' W W W W W W W Y. W W• W W W W WWW W e •* �W W W LEGEND EXISTING HERITAGE TREE TO REMAIN EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN EXISTING HERITAGE TREE TO BE REMOVED EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED 9 I 9 r ig ig Tree Number Species 1 DBH (inches) Height (ft) Dripline (ft) Health/Vigor2 Notes 87 Quercus agrifolia 11,9,8 30 15 F-G Growing through fence 88 Umbellularia californica 16 30 15 F-G Pruned at fence 89 Aesculus californica 4,4,3 20 10 G 90 Platanus racemosa 18 40 25 G Undercut by creek 91 Platanus racemosa 7,6,4,3,2 20 10 G 92 Umbellularia californica 13,12,10,9 45 30 F-G Some decay 93 Umbellularia californica 12,7,7,7,6,6,6,E 40 20 F Growing through fence, undercut, exposed roots 94 Aesculus californica 7,6,4 20 15 G 95 Aesculus californica 8 20 15 G 96 Juglans hindsii 17 35 15 F English ivy on trunk 97 Quercus agrifolia 8 15 15 F Growing through fence 98 Aesculus californica 14,10 40 20 F Some dead stems 99 Aesculus californica 10,10,9 25 30 P Leans heavily, dead stems *101 Alnus sp. 16,16,12,12,8 50 30 F Sparse canopy *102 Quercus agrifolia 16,10,8 60 20 G *103 Umbellularia californica 18,6,6 55 20 P Sparse foliage, major decay at base *104 Umbellularia californica 20 65 30 F Some dieback *105 Umbellularia californica 14 30 10 P Major trunk decay *106 Salix sp. 20,16 30 30 G *107 Juglans hindsii 16,14 60 30 F-G Undercut, exposed roots *108 Aesculus californica 10 30 30 F Undercut, exposed roots *109 Aesculus californica 10,10 35 30 F Undercut, exposed roots L 12 / / / / / / PARCEL 2 / / / / / / / / 0 TREE REMOVAL PLAN PARCEL 1 IMPROVMENT AREA EXISTING HERITAGE TREES ON PARCEL 1 • 4 EXISTING HERITAGE TREES TO REMAIN = 3 (041, 061, *129) EXISTING HERITAGE TREES TO BE REMOVED • I (+'86) TOTAL TREES TO REMAIN (INCLUDING HERITAGE) = 24 TOTAL TREES TO BE REMOVED (INCLUDING HERITAGE) = 65 TOTAL: SCALE: 1" = 40' TREE REMOVAL PLAN PARCEL 2 EXISTING AREA TO REMAIN UNDISTURBED EXISTING HERITAGE TREES ON PARCEL 2 = 19 EXISTING HERITAGE TREES TO REMAIN = 19 (02, *3, 06,r, * , *11, *11, 030, 033, 034, 031, 038, *40, *44, *49, 053, 069, 019, 1,83) EXISTING HERITAGE TREES TO BE REMOVED • 0 TOTAL TREES TO REMAIN (INCLUDING HERITAGE) = 108 TOTAL TREES TO BE REMOVED (INCLUDING HERITAGE) = 0 TOTAL EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN = 132 TOTAL EXISTING TREES TO BE REMOVED = 65 TOTAL TREES PROPOSED INCLUDING EXISTING TO REMAIN AND NEW TREES = 211 W W •W W •W W * W1 EX. DXXV TRENCH DRAIN WeelffigIMMA IOW 67s •W W W• WW PRELIMINARY TREE PRESERVATION PLANfi ■ HPA architecture hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com GreenDesion Landscape Architects, Inc. 1464 Popinjay Drive Reno, NV. p: 775 8291364 email: bhatch00@charter.net Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 ■ Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: CIVIL RJA STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL PLUMBING ELECTRICAL LANDSCAPE Green Design FIRE PROTECTION SOILS ENGINEER ■ Title: PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 BH 08/18/2022 COMMENTS COMMENTS 1-26-23 4-12-23 COMMENTS 11-3-23 Sheet: L1.4 DUBLIN BLVD. 1 1 ■ LATERAL PIPE SIZING: THE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL BUBBLER AND OR SPRAY LATERAL SIZED AS FOLLOWS: System Design BUBBLERS ARE GPM EACH: ROTOR HEADS GPM PER LEGEND SHEET 2.1. The system shall not exceed the following flow rates for noted pipe sizes: 3/4', 4.0 GPM: 1', 12.0 GPM: 1 1/4', 22.0 GPM: 1 1/2', 30.0 GPM: 2', 50.0 GPM: 2 1/2', 15.0 GPM. ♦ ♦♦ • 2ok• � /7` RUB DOCUMENTATION MAINLINE SHOWN IN PAVEMENT FOR CLARIFICATION ONLY. PLACE BEHIND BACK OF CURB I N ADJACENT PLANTER. ♦, I, / • -1. •Y W W • • ;\ W W •Y W ait LOWS ♦ \ ♦� TREE • • • • • ♦ ♦I I CONTACT THE G I TY FOR FINAL INSPECTION OF LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. THE OWNER SHALL SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING TO THE CITY PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY - CERTIFICATION OF INSTALLATION ACCORDING TO THE'4FPROVED PLAN. LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE WITH THE FOLLOWING SUBMITTALS TO BE PREPARED BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR FOR SUBMIT 4L TO THE CITY AT COMPLETION OF INSTALLATION: THE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLO 1. PROJECT INFORMATION: a. DATE OF LANDSCAPE PLAN SUBMITTAL± b. PROJECT APPLICANT± c. PROJECT ADDRESS (IF AVAILABLE, PARCEL AND/OR LOT NUMBER(S))± d. TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA (SQUARE FEET)± e. PROJECT TYPE (E.G., NEW, REHABILITATED, PUBLIC, PRIVATE, CEMETERY, HOMEOWNER- INSTALLED)± r. WATER SUPPLY TYPE (E.G., POTABLE, RECYCLED, WELL) AND IDENTIFY THE LOCAL RETAIL WATER PURVEYOR IF THE APPLICANT IS NOT SERVED BY A PRIVATE WELL± MAINLINE SHOW PAVEMENT F CLARIFICATION ONLY PLACE '!HIND BACK CURB ADJACENT PL TER. 9• CHECKLIST OF ALL DOCUMENTS IN LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE± h. PROJECT CONTACTS TO INCLUDE CONTACT INFORMATION FOR THE PROJECT APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER± APPLICANT SIGNATURE AND DATE WITH STATEMENT, I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE AND SUBMIT A COMPLETE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE ± 2. WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET ON THE FORM OR FORMAT PROVIDED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT± 3. SOIL MANAGEMENT REPORT± 4. LANDSCAPE DESIGN PLAN± 5. IRRIGATION DESIGN PLAN± AND 6. GRADING DESIGN PLAN. ORD. 6-1S (SEPTEMBER 201S) I' = 30' 0 15 30 60 150 PRELIMINARY IRRIGATION PLAN SCALE: 1" = 30' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ♦ • OF ♦ ♦ I♦ I♦ LLER SLEEVE TYP. APPROX. LOGA1IION OF CONTROLLER ,OORD. w/ GENERAL CONTRACTOR PA ROO-T.S UNIT A r_- 1-1 r IIII IIII ; 1111 I , IIII • �♦ DRIP ZONE 15 1-7 L ----------� °pWcrl----- UNIT B i P1 I LOW SHRUB 171 ----- ENEnumsemeowon — owe; MED TREE -----DRIP -ON--F LOW in in NE so' 1 im _I EN sue• titx alio♦ r� ♦ J J IRRIGATION LEGEND: SYMBOL MFG. RAINBIRD • RAINBIRD RAINBIRD H NIBCO NIBCC, HUNTER C NOT SHOWN HUNTER NOT SHOWN HUNTER LATERAL SERIES/MODEL RWS(2) WITH (1)1401 BUBBLER EA. FEB SERIES XCZ-100-PRB-COM W/ T-FP600 T-113 -K ACC2 W/ SOLAR SYNC CREATIVE SENSOR FS1-T100-001 TECHNOLOGIES RAINBIRD PESB ICD 100/200 ICD SEN SCH 40 (SIZE PER NOTES) — — — DRIP LATERAL 1" SCH. 40 PVC MI MI IRRIG. MAIN ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ DRIP ZONE P.o.G. LOW HYDROZONE NOTE: HYDROZONES ARE PER VALVE AREA OF INFLUENCE. A DESIGNATION OF HIGH, MEDIUM OR LOW IS SHOWN ADJACENT TO THE VALVE CALLOUT SYMBOL TO DESIGNATE THE WATER USE OF THE HYDROZONE. PEPCO TORO SLEEVE 211 SCH 40 PVC unless noted otherwise 3/4' FLEXIBLE TUBING TURBO -SC EMITTERS SCH. 40 PVC POINT OF CONNECTION VALVE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER GALLONS PER MINUTE OR "D" FOR DRIP IRRIG. VALVE PSI GPM PRESS. COMP. BUBBLERS 20-90 25 ea. REMOTE CONTROL VALVE (SIZE AS NOTED) 1' DRIP CONTROL VALVE ASSEMBLY 40 psi (W/200 MESH SCREEN) FULL PORT BRASS BALL VALVE SIZE PER MAINLINE BRONZE GATE SHUT OFF VALVE W/ CROSS TOP SIZE PER PIPE DECODER SERIES WALL MOUNT CONTROLLER W/ 24 STA. WITH WEATHER SENSOR 1" FLOW SENSOR INSTALL PER MFG. SPECIFICATIONS 1 1/2' MASTER CONTROL VALVE DECODER: 100 PER SINGLE ADDRESS VALVE, 200 FOR DOUBLE ADDRESS (2 VALVES) SENSOR DECODER: 1 PER FLOW SENSOR INSTALL 6 12" MIN. BELOW FINISH GRADE RUN A 111 LATERAL TO ALL INDIVIDUAL TREE BUBBLERS PER VALVE. INSTALL 6 12" MIN. BELOW FINISH GRADE (NOT SHOWN) RUN A 111 LATERAL TO ALL INDIVIDUAL PLANTER AREAS PER VALVE. INSTALL 6 24" MIN. BELOW FINISH GRADE ADD WARNING TAPE 6 6" DEPTH ABOVE PIPE. VALVE SIZE RAINBIRD 44LC INSTALL 51 6' MIN. BELOW FINISH GRADE (NOT SHOWN) SINGLE OUTLET (SELF FLUSHING) PRESSURE COMPENSATING -INSTALL DRIP TO ALL PLANTS 6 (2) 1/2 GPI-I/1 GAL, (2) 1 GPH/5 GAL, (3) 2 GPH/15 GAL, (4) 2 GPH/24' OR 3611 BOX (NOT SHOWN) 2" (MIN.) LARGER THAN IRRIG. PIPE (MIN. 4" DIA.) INSTALL 6 SPECIFIED DEPTH PER MAIN LINE OR LATERAL PIPE. EXTEND SLV. 12' BEYOND PAVEMENT, STAKE TO MARK. 1' QUICK COUPLER VALVE, 2 PIECE BODY W/ LOCKING COVER WIRE SPLICE - NOT SHOWN -TO BE FIELD NOTED FOR ASBUILT DRAWINGS MAINLINE DRAIN -NOT SHOWN -TO BE FIELD NOTED FOR ASBUILT DRAWINGS SURGE AND LIGHTNING ARRESTORS FOR 2 WIRE SYSTEM TO BE FIELD NOTED FOR ASBUILT DRAWINGS BRASS BALL VALVE PER LEGEND BHT. L2.1 SIZE TO MAINLINE LOCATE ONE AT EACH VALVE OR GROUP OF VALVES. MAINLINE PER PLAN AUTOMATIC VALVE AUTOMATIC CONTROL VALVE CONNECTION DETAIL NOTE: OVERHEAD IRRIGATION SHALL BE SCHEDULED BETWEEN 8:00FM AND 10:00AM UNLESS WEATHER CONDITIONS PREVENT IT. IF ALLOWABLE HOURS OF IRRIGATION DIFFER FROM THE WATER DISTRICT, THE STRICTER OF THE TWO SHALL APPLY. OPERATIONS OF THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE NORMAL WATERING WINDOW 15 ALLOWED FOR AUDITING AND SYSTEM MAINTAINENCE THE IRRIGATION AUDIT SHALL INCLUDE, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO: INSPECTION, SYSTEM TUNE - UP, SYSTEM TEST WITH DISTRIBUTION UNIFORMITY, REPORTING OVERSPRAY OR RUNOFF THAT CAUSES OVERLAND FLOW, AND PREPARATION OF AN IRRIGATION SCHEDULE, INCLUDING CONFIGURING IRRIGATION CONTROLLERS WITH APPLICATION RATE, SOIL TYPES, PLANT FACTORS, SLOPE, EXPOSURE AND ANY OTHER FACTORS NECESSARY FOR ACCURATE PROGRAMMING. ORD. 6 -18 (SEPTEMBER 2018) WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER W/ ET DATA, REPEAT CYCLING IRRIGATION ZONES PER PLANT WATER REQUIREMENTS RAIN SENSORTO BE SPECIFIED SOIL AMENDMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED PLANTER SURFACE AREAS TO BE MULCHED WATER USAGE TO MEET STATE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE STANDARD I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE AND SUBMIT A COMPLETE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN PLAN COMPLIES WITH DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 8.88 FOR THE EFFICIENT USE OF WATER BIA 4-12-23 CA. L IC * 4511 HPA architecture hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com GreenDesion Landscape Architects, Inc. 1464 Popinjay Drive Reno, NV. p: 775 8291364 email: bhatch00@charter.net Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA Consultants: CIVIL RJA STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL PLUMBING ELECTRICAL LANDSCAPE Green Design FIRE PROTECTION SOILS ENGINEER • Title: PRELIMINARY IRRIGTATION PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 BH 08/18/2022 COMMENTS COMMENTS 1-26-23 4-12-23 COMMENTS 11-3-23 REVISED 1-31-24 REVISED 6-10-24 Sheet: L2 1 786 IRRIGATION NOTES 1. ALL MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE PLANS, THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY, THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION, LOCAL BUILDING CODES, ORDINANCES, AND OTHER CODES OR REGULATIONS THAT APPLY. 15. AN OPEN TRENCH INSPECTION OF THE REDUCED PRESSURE PRINCIPLE BACKFLOW DEVICE SHALL BE PERFORMED BY THE WATER PURVEYOR PRIOR TO OPERATING THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM. IRRIGATION REQUIREMENTS NOTE: RUN A 1" SCH 40 PVC LATERAL TO ALL REMOTE AREAS WITHIN EACH DRIP ZONE. RUN 3/4" FLEXIBLE TUBING TO THE EXTENTS OF ALL PLANTER AREAS. REFER TO DETAIL SHEET FOR EMITTER LAYOUT. c(D) c(D) ■ 2. SLEEVES ARE NOT SHOWN AT PAVEMENT CROSSINGS. ALL PIPING AND WIRING UNDER PAVING SHALL BE INSTALLED IN SLEEVES. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO COORDINATE ALL SLEEVING WITH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR. FAILURE OF INSTALLING SLEEVES PRIOR TO PAVING SHALL BE THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY AND SHALL BE INSTALLED AS HIS EXPENSE. PIPING AND CONTROL WIRES UNDER PAVEMENT SHALL BE INSTALLED IN SEPARATE SLEEVES. LATERAL SLEEVES SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 18" DEPTH, MAINLINE SLEEVES SHALL BE A MINIMUM 24" DEPTH. SLEEVE SIZE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF TWICE (2X) O.D. DIAMETER OF THE PIPE TO BE SLEEVED. CONTROLLER WIRE SLEEVES SHALL BE 2X THE SIZE FOR THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF WIRES. BACKFILL MIN. 4" SAND. 3. MAINLINE SLEEVES UNDER PAVEMENT SHALL BE INSTALLED 24" BELOW THE SUBGRADE THE TRENCH SHALL BE CLEANED FREE OF ALL ROCK 4 DEBRIS, AND BACKFILLED WITH SAND TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 4" OVER THE SLEEVE OVER AND UNDER THE SLEEVE. BACKFILL TRENCH WITH 1/8' MINUS. 4. ALL MAIN LINES SHALL BE PRESSURE TESTED AT 120 PSI FOR A MINIMUM 2.5 HOUR PERIOD PRIOR TO BACKFILLING OF TRENCHES. IF ANY LEAKS ARE PRESENT THEY SHALL BE CORRECTED AND LINES SHALL BE RE -TESTED PRIOR TO BACKFILLING TRENCHES. 5. PIPE SIZES SHALL CONFORM TO THOSE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. NO SUBSTITUTIONS OF SMALLER PIPE SIZES SHALL BE PERMITTED, BUT SUBSTITUTIONS OF LARGER SIZES MAY BE APPROVED. ALL DAMAGED AND REJECTED PIPE SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE AT THE TIME OF SAID REJECTION. 6. THE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR SHALL FLUSH ALL LATERALS PRIOR TO INSTALLING EMITTER HEADS. THIS DESIGN IS DIAGRAMMATIC. ALL PIPING, VALVES, ETC., SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE PLANTER AREAS IS FOR DESIGN CLARIFICATION ONLY AND SHALL BE INSTALLED IN THE PLANTER AREAS. 8. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR TO FAMILIARIZE HIMSELF WITH ALL GRADE DIFFERENCES, LOCATION OF WALLS, RETAINING WALLS, STRUCTURES AND UTILITIES. THE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ALL ITEMS DAMAGED BY HIS WORK. HE SHALL COORDINATE HIS WORK WITH OTHER CONTRACTORS, FOR THE LOCATION AND INSTALLATION OF PIPE SLEEVES AND LATERALS UNDER ROADWAYS AND PAVING. 9. SHOULD DISCREPANCIES IN THE PLANS OR FIELD MODIFICATIONS BE REQUIRED, CONTACT THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION FOR RESOLUTION OR CLARIFICATION. 10. DO NOT WILLFULLY INSTALL THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS WHEN IT IS OBVIOUS IN THE FIELD THAT UNKNOWN OBSTRUCTIONS, GRADE DIFFERENCES OR DIFFERENCES IN THE AREA DIMENSIONS EXIST THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE ENGINEERING. SUCH OBSTRUCTIONS OR DIFFERENCES SHOULD BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. IN THE EVENT THIS NOTIFICATION IS NOT PERFORMED, THE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSUME FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY REVISIONS NECESSARY. 11 ALL IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT NOT OTHERWISE DETAILED OR SPECIFIED SHALL BE INSTALLED AS PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS. 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL AT HIS OUJN EXPENSE, LOCATE ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WHICH MAY AFFECT HIS OPERATION DURING CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL TAKE ALL NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS TO AVOID DAMAGE TO THE SAME. 13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL USE EXTREME CAUTION WHEN WORKING NEAR OVERHEAD OR UNDERGROUND POWER AND/OR TELEPHONE, WATER, GAS AND SEWER FACILITIES SO AS TO SAFELY PROTECT ALL UTILITIES, PERSONNEL, AND EQUIPMENT, AND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL COSTS AND LIABILITY IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. 14. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES NECESSARY TO PROTECT EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS WHICH ARE TO REMAIN IN PLACE, FROM DAMAGE, AND ALL SUCH IMPROVEMENTS DAMAGED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE REPAIRED OR RECONSTRUCTED SATISFACTORY TO THE OWNER AT THE EXPENSE OF THE CONTRACTOR MA INTENANCE THE IRRIGATION SHALL BE MAINTAINED TO ENSURE SUFFICIENT AND TIMELY WATERING NECESSARY FOR THE SURVIVAL OF ALL PLANT MATERIAL. A COPY OF THE APPROVED IRRIGATION FLAN WITH ANY ASBUILT CONDITIONS, SHALL BE KEPT ON THE PROJECT SITE FOR REFERENCE. THE SYSTEM SHALL BE CHECKED YEARLY FOR CONTINUED OPERATION WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN AND COMPONENTS ADJUSTED AND OR REPLACED AS REQUIRED FOR EFFICIENT OPERATION OF THE SYSTEM TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT WATER TO ENSURE THE HEALTH OF THE PLANT MATERIAL. 1' = 30' 16. THE IRRIGATION CONTROLLER SHALL BE WIRED DIRECTLY TO THE POWER SOURCE. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO BRING CONTROLLER WIRING TO THE CONTROLLER LOCATION. CONNECTING THE CONTROLLER TO THE POWER SOURCE SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF A LICENSED ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR THE INSTALLATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE AND ANY LOCAL CODES OR ORDINANCES THAT APPLY. IT SHALL BE THE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO COORDINATE THE POWER SOURCE AND EXACT LOCATION OF THE CONTROLLER WITH OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. FINAL CONNECTION OF THE VALVE WIRES TO THE CONTROLLER SHALL BE THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY. 11. INSTALL REMOTE CONTROL VALVES, PRESSURE REGULATOR AND QUICK COUPLER VALVES AS DETAILED. INSTALL R.C.V. ID TAGS MANUFACTURED BY T. CHRISTY, ENT. STANDARD SIZE, 1 1/8' HOT STAMPED BLACK LETTERS ON YELLOW BACKGROUND ON SOLENOID WIRES. LETTERS TO CONFORM TO CONTROLLER/STATION NUMBER. 18. ALL VALVE WIRING SHALL BE HUNTER TWISTED ID WIRE APPROVED FOR DIRECT BURIAL IN GROUND. CONNECT WIRES AS DETAILED PER MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS UTILIZING RAINBIRD DB GREASE FILLED CONNECTORS. ALL WIRE STRIPPING TO BE DONE WITH KING OF WIRE STRIPPER AVAILABLE ON AMAZON.COM. EACH WIRE AT VALVES SHALL NAVE 24" EXCESS COILED LOOP IN VALVE BOX. TAPE WIRE CABLE TO MAINLINE EVERY FIFTEEN FEET (15'). FLOW SENSOR WIRE SHALL BE PAIGE PE89 FROM THE FLOW SENSOR TO THE 2 WIRE CABLE. PROVIDE 2 WIRE CABLE GROUND ROD IN BOX WITH HUNTER SURGE ARRESTOR EVERY 1000' LF OR FOR EVERY TWELVE DECODERS WHICH EVER COMES FIRST. 2 WIRE CABLE IS TO BE LOOPED AROUND THE BUILDING FROM THE CONTROLLER TO THE CONTROLLER. TAPE WIRE CABLE MAINLINE PER DETAILS. 19. ALL BACKFILL MATERIAL, OTHER THAN SAND AROUND THE MAINLINE, SHALL BE FREE OF ROCKS, CLODS AND OTHER EXTRANEOUS MATERIALS, COMPACT BACKFILL TO ORIGINAL DENSITY. 20. AT JOB COMPLETION, SUPPLY OWNER WITH ONE (2) SETS OF MATCHING QUICK COUPLER VALVE KEY AND HOSE SWIVEL, AND TWO (2) KEYS FOR EACH CONTROLLER, ALL MANUFACTURERS INFORMATION. 21. ACCURATELY AND NEATLY MARK ALL FIELD CHANGES MADE DURING CONSTRUCTION ON A DAILY BASIS ON ONE PLAN SET. ALL DRAFTING TO BE DONE BY A COMPETENT DRAFTSMAN. SUBMIT TO OWNER FOR RECORD. DIMENSION MAINLINE OFF BACK OF CURB OR SIDE WALK FOR REFERENCE ON CONSTRUCTION PLAN SET. LOCATE ALL RAIN SENSORS, DRAINS ON THE PLAN. A DIAGRAM OF THE IRRIGATION PLAN SHOWING HYDROZONES SHALL BE KEPT WITH THE IRRIGATION CONTROLLER FOR SUBSEQUENT MANAGEMENT PURPOSES. 22. ALL IRRIGATION INSTALLATION AND EQUIPMENT SHALL GUARANTEED FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR. 23.REUSE OR RECYCLE EXCESS CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL. 24.PROVIDE (1) DIGITAL COPY OF SUBMITTAL PACKAGE OF ALL IRRIGATION COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS FOR APPROVAL BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK. 25.THE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY PRESSURE AT THE POINT OF CONNECTION. THE SYSTEM IS DESIGNED WITH A MINIMUM OF 60 PSI AT THE METER POINT OF CONNECTION. PRESSURE REGULATING DEVICES SHALL ARE REQUIRED IF THE WATER PRESSURE IS BELOW OR EXCEEDS THE RECOMMENDED PRESSURE OF THE SPECIFIED IRRIGATION DEVICES. 26. CHECK VALVES OR ANTI -DRAIN VALVES ARE REQUIRED ON ALL SPRINKLER HEADS WHERE LOW POINT DRAINAGE WOULD OCCUR 0 15 30 60 PRELIMINARY IRRIGATION PLAN SCALE: 1" = 30' 150 NOTE: THE SOLAR SYNC SHALL BE SET UP PER HUNTER'S ET REGION REFERENCE MAP TO MANAGE WATERING. OBTAIN A COPY OF THE OWNER'S MANUAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. THE MANUAL SHALL BE PROVIDE TO THE OWNER UPON COMPLETION OF INSTALLATION. THE IRRIGATION SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS LISTED IN STATE OF CALIFORNIA MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE PRACTICES AND SHALL BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S LANDSCAPING POLICIES. THE IRRIGATION SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR PER THE MAINTENANCE SPECIFICATIONS AVAILABLE AT WWW.STOPWASTE.ORG AND SHALL BE PART OF THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE OWNER AND IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR. THE IRRIGATION SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR A MINIMUM OF ONE YEAR BY THE INSTALLATION CONTRACTOR THE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR SHALL NAVE ON IT'S STAFF A CERTIFIED IRRIGATION PROFESSIONAL TO PROVIDE WRITTEN PROCEDURES AND PERFORM TESTING AND ADJUSTMENT PROCEDURES, PROVIDE A WRITTEN WATERING SCHEDULE AND PERFORM AN IRRIGATION AUDIT. THE PROVISION OF THE TESTING PROCEDURES, WATERING SCHEDULE AND SHALL BE PART OF THE INSTALLATION/MAINTENANCE CONTRACT. THE TESTING PROCEDURES AND WATERING SCHEDULE SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY ENGINEER UPON COMPLETION OF INSTALLATION AND AUDIT. A DETAILED OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE REPORT INCLUDING INSTRUCTIONS AND COPIES OF WARRANTIES/QUARANTEES SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER AND THE CITY UPON COMPLETION OF INSTALLATION AND AUDITING. THE OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE REPORT SHALL BE UPDATED AT AT THE END ON THE ONE YEAR MAINTENANCE PERIOD IF REQUIRED. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE SET TO OPERATE BETWEEN 10 FM AND AM. THE APPLICATION RATE FOR ROTOR HEADS SHALL NOT EXCEED .25" PER CYCLE AND SHALL NOT EXCEED .W5" PER HOUR. THE CONTROLLER SHALL BE SET TO CYCLE AT MULTIPLE START TIMES PER WATERING DAY TO PER SOIL INFILTRATION CAPACITY TO AVOID RUNOFF. DUBLIN BLVD. DRIP ZON • 1 1 C C C C MAINLINE SHOWN IN ~ PAVEMENT FOR ---- -- — CLARIFICATION ONLY. PLACE- BEHINDBACK OF CURB IN ADJACENT PLANTER. N N' J W' W, (%) ' W, LL -t -t Wes• z_ JI 0 I-� Q, 1 1 1 r f UNIT c l + W W INN I1NIT D (FOC EX. 2" DOMESTIC IRRIG. METER AND BAGKFLOW RESET BEHIND NEW WALK PER CIVIL DINGS. ATIG PRESSURE or 50 PSI. FLOW TO BE PROGRAMMED IS 25 MAINLINE SSHOWN IN PAVEMENT FOR CLARIFIC TION ONLY. PLACE B YOND BACK OF CURB IN 4DJACENT PLANTER. Ti'.P DR • * + W W \\ \ , 4, W W Ss -" \\ s W W W W �W \ \ \ 4, 4, \ \ \W W Nt a • J m Iv no LLB O hr-) N— O� O 0 nN J DRIP ZONE 1 W W CONTROLLER WIRE SLEEVE TYP. CONTROLLER WIRE SLEEVE TYP. HPA architecture hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com GreenDesion Landscape Architects, Inc. 1464 Popinjay Drive Reno, NV. p: 775 8291364 email: bhatch00@charter.net Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 ■ Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: CIVIL STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL PLUMBING ELECTRICAL LANDSCAPE FIRE PROTECTION SOILS ENGINEER RJA Green Design ■ Title: PRELIMINARY IRRIGTATION PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 BH 08/18/2022 COMMENTS COMMENTS 1-26-23 4-12-23 COMMENTS 11-3-23 REVISED 1-31-24 REVISED 6-10-24 Sheet: L_2 ■ 2 ■ HPA DUBLIN HYDROZONE INFORMATION TABLE Please complete the hydrozone table(s) for each hydrozone. Use as many tables as necessary to provide the square footage of landscape area per hydrozone. Table reflects temporary irrigated areas where spray irrigation is provided. Hydrozone* Zone or Valve Irrigation Method** Area (Sq. Ft.) % of Landsca pe Area LW Shrubs & Trees Low Density 1,4,12,13,14,15,16,17 Drip/Bubbler 10,861 45% LW Shrubs & Trees Med. Density 2,3,11 Drip/Bubbler 2,293 9% LW Shrubs & Trees High Density 5,8,9,10 Drip/Bubbler 8,384 36% LW Bio- Retention 7 Spray 2,712 10% MW Trees 6 Bubbler 640 Total 24,890 sq.ft. 100% * Hydrozone HW = High Water Use Plants MW = Moderate Water Use Plants LW = Low Water Use Plants VLW= Very Low Water Us -Non Irrigated Trees are assumed a 40 s.f area for watering each. Maximum Applied Water Allowance Calculations for New and Rehabilitated Non -Residential Landscapes Messages and Warnings -741141-. T9lFGF cAUF�P�� Click on the blue cell on right to Pick City Name ET,:, of City from Appendix A Total Landscape Area Results: (ET,,) x (0.62) x [(0.45 x LA) + (1.0 - 0.45) X SLA)] Pleasanton (Name of City 46.20 ETo (inches/year) 2712 22,178 0 24,890 MAWA calculation incorporating Effective Precipitation (Optional) Precipitation (Optional) ET„ of City from Appendix A Total Landscape Area Special Landscape Area Enter Effective Precipitation Results: MAWA = [(ETe- Eppt) x (0.62)] x [(0.45 x LA) + ((1.0 - 0.45) x SLA)] Overhead Landscape Area (ft2) Drip Landscape Area (ft2) SLA (ft2) J Gallons Cubic Feet HCF Acre-feet Millions of Gallons 46I ETe (inches/year) 24,890ILA (ft2) OISLA (ft2) 19 Total annual precipitiation (inches/year) 4.75I Eppt (in/yr)(25% of total annual precipitation) 287,842 Gallons 38,478.96 Cubic Feet 384.79 HCF 0.88 Acre-feet 0.29 Millions of Gallons Estimated Total Water Use Equation: ETWU = ETo x 0.62 x [((PF x HA)/IE) + SLA]; Considering precipitation ETWA = (ETo-Eppt) x 0.62 x [((PF x HA)/IE) +SLA] Enter values in Pale Blue Cells Tan Cells Show Results Messages and Warnings Irrigation Efficiency Default Value for overhead 0.75 and drip 0.81. Plant Water Use Type Very Low Low Medium High SLA Plant Factor 0 - 0.1 0.2 - 0.3 0.4 - 0.6 0.7 - 1.0 1.0 Hydrozone Select System From the Dropdown List click on cell below Plant Water Use Type (s) (low, medium, high) Plant Factor (PF) Hydrozone Area (HA) (ft) Without SLA Enter Irrigation Efficiency (IE) (PF x HA (ft2))/IE Zone 1 Drip Very Low 0.10 10,861 0.81 1,341 Zone 2 Drip Low 0.20 2,293 0.81 566 Zone 3 Drip Low 0.30 8,384 0.81 3,105 Zone 4 i Drip Very Low 0.10 2,712 0.81 335 Zone 5 - Drip 0.40 640 0.81 316 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Zone 11 Zone 12 Zone 13 Zone 14 Zone 15 Zone 16 Zone 17 Zone 18 Zone 19 `ram Zone 20 11.01..._ Zone 21 Zone 22 Zone 23 Zone 24 Zone 25 Zone 26 Ems..._ Zone 27 Zone 28 Zone 29 Zone 30 Zone 70 Zone 71 Zone 72 i Zone 73 Zone 74 Zone 75 t Zone 76 - Zone 77 Zone 78 Zone 79 Zone 80 Zone 81 Zone 82 Zone 83 Zone 84 Zone 85 Zone 86 Zone 87 Zone 88 Zone 89 Zone 90 Zone 91 Zone 92 Zone 93 Zone 94 Zone 95 Zone 96 Zone 97 Zone 98 Zone 99 Zone 100 5,663 SLA 0 0 Sum 24,890 Results MAWA = 287,842 ETWU = 145,536 Gallons ETWU complies with MAWA 19,455 Cubic Feel 194.55 HCF 0.45 Acre-feet 0.15 Millions of Gallons architecture hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com GreenDesion Landscape Architects, Inc. 1464 Popinjay Drive Reno, NV. p: 775 8291364 email: bhatch00@charter.net Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 ■ Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: CIVIL STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL PLUMBING ELECTRICAL LANDSCAPE FIRE PROTECTION SOILS ENGINEER RJA Green Design ■ Title: PRELIMINARY IRRIGTATION PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 BH 08/18/2022 COMMENTS COMMENTS 1-26-23 4-12-23 PRELIMINARY IRRIGATION PLAN SCALE: 1" = 30' Sheet: L_2 ■ 3 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.0L0.1++010.1 +0. +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 + 0.0 + +0.0 4.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.0 +0.0 0.0 '0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.4 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 + + + + + + + + + + 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 + 0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 0.0 +0.0 0 0 0.0 +0.0 +0.0 0.0 0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0. +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0 +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0. +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0. +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 .. 0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 +I +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 + +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 +0. +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.44 +i +0.1 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 +0.5 +0.2 +0.3 +0.3 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 +0.5 +0 +0.2 +0.3 +0.3 +0.5 +0.6 +0.7 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 +0.5 +0.7 +i +0.1 +0.2 +0.4 +0.6 +0.8 +0.1 +0.2 +0.3 +0.5 +0.8 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.4 +0.7 +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.3 +0.6 +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.3 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 0)/ +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 + .1 +0.y/ +0.3 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0. +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 O. ... +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 " I +„ , i +�0,.22 +0.3JI + +0.1 +/ �.3❑O <11§0t. +2. -" +3.3 +4.2 +4.9 +5 °.$ +2.4 +3.1 +3.8 +41.: +1.9 +2.3 +2.8 +3.4 4.1 +4 +1.5 403 +2.0 +2.2 +2.7 +3.. +3.5 +3 C 8 +1.6 +2.1 +2.3 +2.6 +3.0 1+3.4 +4 +0.1 + 1 +0.2q.4 I +2 0 .P4 +2.3 +2.3 +2.4 +2.8 g +14 +4 I L"� + + +2.3 +2.4 +2. r..+=8.1 61 70.1 W +0.4 W+B.1W ++0.3W +q.iA +0.1 +0.2W +¢7 **o .1* +0:3 A ba.. sa W w0.0 +0.4 W 40.1 +0.10 +0..2 +0.4I +o.o. 'o o W 'o.i W 404 W+q.i 0+6.2 '449 +0.1' +0.2 +0. "2.0 T1.6 ) ) +1.4 +1 7 +1.9 +2.2 +2.4 ) +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 + 0 w 0.0. W 0:0 W 40.1 . +0.z2 W +0.3 .4 .6 i +1 '1 3'7 � f + Ma \w + w + 0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 ..:.,�,.., +Q.2 W+C !i +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 r: .4' * +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +� +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 � 0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.3 +2.5 +2.4 +2.3 +2 4. ^+2 + 2.5 +2.4 +2.3 +2.3 ?'2 +2.5 +2.3 +2.4 +2. +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 + .0 +0.0 w+0.o"" +0'.0 W 40.1 +o.1' +0.2 W+0.3' W+1.SJ 4.8 +3.2 +. Q83@+93.4 +. OV1 @ 3b' + + + + + + " W 3d IVi. 3 + + + + 1 kr . OV1 0 ,. ,, •. ,. .. •. �i .Q 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.3 7 - 2 4 6.1 C�.'7 4.4 3.7 3.2 3.1 °� a @�' a ° ° ° + +� ,+ +° + a + °+� I+ 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.6 4.1 4. .2 .6 , 4.: 4.9 +5.2 +5.] 5.4 5.3 4.8 4.3 3.5 3.2 3.1 3.4° 4.1 4.9 5.B .8 4.9 �1 3.6 3.4 3.6p 4.1 4.7 4.9 54 5.2 4.9 5.0 5.4 5.9 a o .6 4.6 5.2 6.6 5.3 4.5 4.0 �.7 3.8 4.3 4f 5.1 5.2 3.9 a 4 p ao p a +4.0 +3.5 + 0 a +2.9 +3.1 +3.8 +4.3 +4.5, +4.4 a +3.9 +3.3 +3.0' +3.2 +3.7 +4.1 +4.3 +4.2, +3.5 +3.4 +3.6 +4.1 +4.4 +4.4 +4a.2 +3.7 a o3.1 +2.9 +3.1 +3.7 0 4.2 +4.4 a 4.4 +4.'P °+3.4 +30 +3.3 +3.8 ° 4.3 +8.! +4.4 +4.0 1 I+3.1 ° Qa a 7 Q a �+ +2.7 + + a + + + +° + + + +3.2 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + p + + + " + + + + + v+ + + + + + + + + r 3.1 2. a 2.6 *2.B 12 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.2 a 2.8 p 2.6 a 2� 3.2 3.8' 3.7 3.5 3Q 2.8 2.6 2.8 3.2 3.5 3.6 p 3.5 3.1 2.7 �.6 2.7a 3.2 3.5 3.7 3.6 p3.3 2.9 a 2.8 3.fp 3.4 3.8 3.'. 3.7 3.3 , G 7 6 12.7 2.9 2.7 2.4 ° Q a p ° a 4 ° a ° ° a + + + + + + + + + + + + +° + 4+a + + + + + + p + ' + + + + + + + + 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.9 3.0 3. 3 2 2.6 2.3 4 2.2 2.� 2.Ob 2.8 ++ + + + +.9 2°8 2.6 2.3 2.2 2.3 a.6 2.8 a 2.8 2.7 2f5 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.5 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.2 ° 2.1 2.2 2.5 �.8 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.4 2.4 p2.5 2.8 a+ + + + + + + 2.0 3.0 3. 3.0 2.8 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.2 ° + + + + + + + + + + p a p a a p a a a p a ° + + + + + + + + + + + a + + + + + + + ' + + + +4 +° + + + + + + + + + ° + + + + + + + + '4° + a+ + + + + + + + + + + 5 3.0-1 3.7/3.7 3.5 3.1 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.5 2. 2.2 �2.0 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2� 2.1a 2.0 1.9 168 a1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 201 19 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.0 a2.0 1.$' 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 p 2.1a 2.1a 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.4 p2.! 2.4 2.2 2.1 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.� A2 C,j' 5' p a 4 o a ° ° 4 ° 0 � ((.// +� + I: //I/ + +2.4 +2.4 +2.4 +2.4 +2.4 +2.3 +2.1 +1.9 +1.7 +1.6 +1.6 +1.6 +1.7 +1.7 +1.7 +1.6 +1.6 +1.6 +1.6 +1.6 +1.7 +1.7 +1.6 +1.5 +1.4 +1.4 +1.4 +1.4 +1.5 +1.5 +1.5 +1.4 +1.3 +1.3 +1.4 +1.4 +1.5 +1.6 +1.6 +1.6 +1.6 +1.7 +1.8 +1.9 +2.0 +2.0 +2.0 +1.9 +1.8 +1.7 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +�+0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 01 +0.1 +0.2 +0.3 +0.3 +0.5 +0.6 \ 2.3 +2.4 +2.4 +2.4 +2.2 +2.0 +1.8 +1.7 +1.6 +1.5 +1.5 +1.4 +1.5 +1.5 +1.5 +1.5 +1.5 +1.5 +1.5 +1.5 +1.4 +1.4 +1.3 +1.3 +1.3 +1.2 +1.2 +1.2 +1.2 +1.2 +1.1 +1.1 +1.1 +1.1 +1.2 +1.2 +1.3 +1.3 +1.4 +1.5 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 2.6 2.5 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.5 'I 1.3 \� + + + + + + + + + + \\ 1.7 .4 .8 2.7 +2.4 +2.2 +1.9 +1.7 +1.5 +1.5 +1.5 +1.5 +1.6 +1.8 +2.0 +2.0 +2.0 +1.9 +1.7 +1.5 +1.4 +1.3 +1.3 +1.2 +1.2 +1.1 +1.1 +1.1 +1.1 +1.2 +1.2 +1.2 +1.2 +1.2 +1.2 +1.2 +1.2 +1.3 +1.4 +1.6 +1.6 +1.7 +1.8 +1.9 +1.9 +2.0 +1.9 +1.9 +1.8 +1.7 + U + +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 �. 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 � �,+ �� U + + + + + + + + ui+2/ +24 +2.0 +1.7 +1.6 +1.5 +1.6 +1.7 +1.8 +2.1 +2.4 +2.5 +2.4 +2.3 +1.9 +1.6 +1.5 +1.3 +1.3 +1.2 +1.2 +1.1 +1.1 +1.2 +1.3 +1.5 +1.5 +1.5 +1.5 +1.4 +1.3 +1.3 +1.3 +1.4 +1.5 +1.7 +1.8 +1.8 +2.0 +2.1 +2.3 +2.4 +2.4 +2.3 +2.1 +1.9 +f+0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 �.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 �\.@ a5' U + + + ` + + + + + + +0.3 \ / +2 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +1 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 �Q.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 2 2 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.8 2.1 2.5 2.0 2.3 2.3 1.9 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.6 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.5 2.8 3.0 3.0 2.9 2.5 2.2 1� 1 ` IASA2 @ 27.5' C +1..8 +2.5 +3.1 +3.7 +4.2 +4.6 +4.8 +4.7 +3.7 +3.7 +3.6 +3 .0, 1.6 2.4 + 3� +3� +4.2 +4.5 +4.5 +4.3 +3.7 + + +, +, 1 +4.1 +3.8 +3.3 +0.0 *0.1 *0.1 *0.2 *0.3 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0 +2. 7 +0.4 +0.6 0.9 +0.8 ;`• ' " 2.5 +2.0 +1.8 +1.6 +1. 1.5 1.6J1 *A IAi A J,iA jl M.� JIY'f12 A A .�J1 �r(� / `�G 2.9 +2.7 +2.3 +2.0 +1.9 +1.9 +2.0 C2 C CWC � -.'Y C2 C 6 �G '. C\i + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 2.6 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.6 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 3.1 2.9 2.4 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.3 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.0 +0.1 +0.1 0.1 0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0. +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.3 +0.4 +04( +0.Z -0.3 +0.4 +0.5/ 0.5 .5 +0.5 +0. +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0. .. 0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.4 +0.4 +0.4 +0.5 +0.5 +0.5 +0.5 +0.5 +0.4 +0.4 +0.4 +0.4 +0.4 +0.5 +0.5 +0.6 +0.6 +0.6 +0.6 + + + + + + + �.fi._�.ri-G.�-%�rr�5-9-5---- +0.2 +0.3 +0.3 +0.4 +0.' +0 ' +0. +� +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +1 �.1r407 I.T T.T 3-+0'3 -b( .1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 +0.4 +0.6 +0.4 +0.6 +0.6 +0.6 +0.5 +0.4 +0.3 +0.3 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 +0.5 +0.6 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + .3 1.1 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7 0 +1.7 .2 +1.9 +1.6 +1.4 +1.3 +1.2 1.2 +1.1 +1.1 +1.0 o +3.2 +3.1 +2.7 +2.3 +2.6 +2.9 +3.3 +3.4 +3 5 2.8 +2.9 +3.0 +3.2 +3.2 +3.4 +3.3 +3.2 +3.4 +3.9 +4.0 +3. +2.7 +3.3 +3.9 +4.4 +4.3 +3.3 +3.6 +4.5 +4 +3.6 +3.7 +3.9 +4.1 +! 4.3 +4.6 +4.6 +4.5 +4.2 +5.0 +5.3 +5.4 1l r--� r--� r--, r--� I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I +2+2.P 4. V ° I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I +3 I 1 1 I I 1 1 I +2 A C +2.4 +2.1 +2.0 +2.0 +2.0 0.7 '0. *.1 W77,1 +1.7 F0.++1:11.3W +1"1 4'1.3' +1'6 * wl i .1 W+1.3+' +1t5 +1.8 + w +2.2 .2 +1.3 .... ..... llll lll l +1 +1 +1 + • .2 +1.1 +1.0 +1.4 +1.3 +1.8 +1.8 +1.8 +1.8 +1.8 +1.8 +1.9 +2.0 +2.0 +2.0 +1.8 +1.6 +2.3 +2.3 +2.2 +2.0 +2.0 +2.0 +2.2 +2.4 +2.6 +2.5 +2.3 +1.9 ° +40 '61..2 +3.5_62.9 +2.6n +2.4 +2$ +2.5 2+ .� +3.3 +1 [1.0 2. C2l1 C . C I 1 1 I n /n\fin\ %�� / 2iN 4 .4 �3.3 +3.0 �+2.E� 2.� A A. A., / / \ 39 .� +2 +V +11 +2.7 +2.8 +2.8 +2.6 +2.5 +2.5 r-, I 1 I I I e +2.7 +2.6 +2.5 +2.3 +2.1 +1.9 +1.9 +1.8 n +, \ + .2 +2.8 +2.1 Al @ 27.5' o .0 +3.1 +2.3 .3 +2.9 +2.2 .7 +2.5 +2.1 .1 +2.1 +1.8 +1.7 +1.7 +1.6 + + + + + + + + + + + + 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.4 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I +1.2 +1.3 +1.3 +1.3 1.2 +1.3 +1.3 1.4 +1.5 +1.4 1.7 +1.6 +1.5 2.1 +2.0 +1.7 2.5 +2.2 +1.8 2.8 +2.5 +1.9 3.3 +2.9 +2.0 .9 +3.0 +2.0 1$3 @ A.'2 +1.9 4.0 +2.8 +1.8 2.4 +2.3 +1.6 1.7 +1.9 +1.5 1.3 +1.6 +1.5 1.3 +1.5 +1.5 1.7 +1.8 +1.6 2.4 +2.3 +1.8 3.4 +2.9 +1.9 I 1 4.3 +3.0 +, 2.6 +2.3 +, 1.7 +2.2 +. q +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 T +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0. + +3.3 +3.1 +3. +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.3 +0.3 VV3@9' +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 ' l +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.5 .0.7 .0.6 .0.6 .0.5 +0.5 +0.4 +0.3 +0.4 +0.3 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 +0.5 H +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0. Schedule Symbol Label QTY Catalog Number Description Lamp Number Lamps Lumens per Lamp LLF Wattage ,����� i....1 di►�i ''���i/ W4 4 LC6SLEM 6LCSL 14 L EM 6 INCH LBR DOWNLIGHT 1400LM 4000K 1 1641 0.9 18 W3 14 RZR-WM1-PLED-III-W- 20LED-350mA-40K EM1 WALL MT AT 9 FT AFG MM511 BUG RATING B1 UO G1 CAST BLACK PAINTED FINNED METAL HOUSING. 20 WHITE LIGHT EMITTING DIODES (LEDS), BASE UP. 20 151 0.9 21.4 o SA2 7 VLL-PLED-III-W-80LED- 525mA-NW-HS -MM511 POLE MT AT 27.5 FT AFG 25 FT POLE 30 IN BASE BUG RATING B1 UO G3 CAST BLACK PAINTED FINNED METAL HOUSING. 80 WHITE LIGHT EMITTING DIODES (LEDS), BASE UP. 80 167 0.9 129.4 o W2 2 VLL-PLED-III-W-80LED-- MM511 525mA-NW WALL MT AT 30 FT AFG BUG B3 UO G3 CAST BLACK PAINTED FINNED METAL HOUSING. 80 WHITE LIGHT EMITTING DIODES (LEDS), BASE UP. 80 218 0.9 129.4 ° W 1 15 VLL-PLED-IV-80LED- 700mA-NW-MM511 BUG B3 UO G3 WALL MT AT 30 FT AFG CAST BLACK PAINTED FINNED METAL HOUSING. 80 WHITE LIGHT EMITTING DIODES (LEDS), BASE UP. 80 295 0.9 173.6 0 ° ® ® SA1 4 VLL-PLED-VSQ-W-80LED- -525mA-40K POLE MT AT 27.5 FT AFG 25 FT POLE 30 IN BASE BUG RATING B5 UO G3 CAST BLACK PAINTED FINNED METAL HOUSING. 80 WHITE LIGHT EMITTING DIODES (LEDS), BASE UP. 80 232 0.9 258.8 w "C" 411.0 r1C.2 15 f. +1t1 a1°@30' a 7 +4.a 8 +4.0 +3.4, 0 3.1 +3.3 713.8 4 a a \AO @ 9' • DW 1 i�C+�Cwr2c 025C+>4Cq*C+�.0^1C7^c16C+15C+.5wr1C6' r +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 +0.4 +0.3 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.3 +0.0 +0.0 +0�0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 Statistics Description Symbol Avg Max Min Max/Min Avg/Min 14/ 3 + + + + + + + + + + + + 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.5 .4 1.3 +3 SITE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN 3.2 +2.8 +" 3.5 +3.1 . 3.6 +3.2 +. 3.4 +3.1 0 0 +0.3 'NOM Engineers, Inc. 102 DISCOVERY Irvine, Ca. 92618 Tel. 949-880-2524 Fax. 949-450-1454 Contact: Eric Tra e-mail: erict@rpmpe.com IF THIS SHEET IS NOT A 30" X 42" IT IS A REDUCED PRINT • HPA architecture hpa, inc. 18831 bardeen avenue - ste. 92612 fax: 949-863-0851 email: hpa@hparchs.com Owner: 2518 N. SANTIAGO BLVD. ORANGE, CA 92867 TEL : 714-998-3400 111 Project: DUBLIN 11711 DUBLIN BLVD DUBLIN CA Consultants: Civil: Structural: Mechanical: Plumbing: Electrical: Landscape: Fire Protection: Soils Engineer: LDDC DFA RPM ENGINEERS RPM ENGINEERS RPM ENGINEERS Title: SITE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: Sheet: 20499 RPM 04/10/23 E-1.0 RPM#22-614 04/10/23 ■ HPA BICYCLE CIRCULATION LAYOUT 11711 DUBLIN BOULEVARD 8 R 0, LEGEND - - •>- - • BICYCLE CIRCULATION Dublin, California 21657 06.21.2024 790 0 0 0n 0 X W N O U W 0 CC r w CC c_D CD 0 O N N Cr) m 0 X W cn W W W 0 cN N O N O N LEGEND 0 ■ • EVAE FL FF HP LP PSE PV RE 23.8 X'SD • TC - WLE STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN STORM DRAIN JUNCTION BOX STORM DRAIN MANHOLE EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT FLOW LINE FINISH FLOOR HIGH POINT LOW POINT PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT PAVEMENT R/M ELEVATION SPOT ELEVATION STORM DRAIN LINE TOP OF CURB WATER LINE EASEMENT )1111110.- OVERLAND RELEASE ARROW 428.5 TOP PROPOSED BUILDING 405.12 EX. ROOF TOP EXISTING BUILDING 388.5 FF J86.64 f F 6.17' 26' 394 q&j_\,4 \N\ 392. Gras • 9 Z83' TR 33 TOW 3936 BOW 38Z9 \PROPOSED STAIRS PROPOSED CURB 385.44 FS PROPOSED AC PAVEMENT ,385.15 384.44 PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER .911 GRADING LIMIT LINE 391.1389.26 380 8/ / / / SECTION SCALE: 1" = 8' EX ,:-.-----ouGRNAE-DING LIMIT 02.85) EX DUBLIN BOULEVARD (R/W VARIES) (A PUBLIC ROAD) CB RE Concrete BY OTHERS -x Asphal EX GRADE E(P) CB 389.20 RE Grass LIENci Racks CB 386.89 RE BOW 384.6- SDMH RE 393.87 TRICT 428.5 TOP /\211 Concrete, IE 380.86 8"(W) \RETAINING WALL BY OTHERS 393.49 421.65 EX. ROOF TOP PROPOSED BUILDING 401.10 EX ROOF TOP 388.5 FF SECTION SCALE: 1" = 8' Cb SD PUMP RE 384.25 12''SD OVERFLOW 8.26' SD E(P) ZOM UNIT B SPILL CONTAINMENT VAULT TOW 389.6 TOW 389.6 34.83' RD SDJB RE 386.10, TOW 38Z0 BOW 381.5 7RENCH DRAIN RE 384.50 ',01iL CONTAINMENT VAULT RETAINING WALL •si BY 01HERS BOW 383.0 388.3 mis cc PROPOSED CURB 385.25 PROPOSED FS AC PAVEMENT PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER 384.15 Fs 385.11 EG EX GRADE RETAINING WALLx -56 *383,78 RETAINING WALL, BY OTHERS * 11711 Dublin Multi -Story Cc RE 382.50 TOW 380.5 BOW 381.5 6.641 AC Unit ,,,,5,9,GRADING LIMIT FLOOD ZON BOUNDARY EX FENCE Fs GRAVE 3856,5 GRADE 8"W(P) CB FL 379.50 Ts, Transformer UNIT D ZONE -SCR' J?ETAINING WALL BY OTHERS RE 383.78 8"W(P) T(P) 60 90 Scale 1" = 30' rGRADING LIMIT I LINE II C-1 DISTRICT 0 <,,,, 383.3 4/_3833'.83/0,8; c / 383.0 // // 783.15 3/ 83/i8,38;6 c/ 383.3 / / IN 44 cNc)LoLur,,,, t\ \c ji;\:::5,,,, 1:: \ \ \,c,,_,30_3,5)8;4:.0: .,,, co SDMH RE 383.68 382.96 RE 385 :13 c3f._ ;r1 RE 382.30 A4A FLOOD TOW 384.0 BOW 3823 cc -593 00 TOE CB RE 382.50 382.00 co '5(bN4044 -----\10/:),/_8100,,_*27,.......</....:,:8,;4:8,N4,9,..:.......9'd,IEE,X,:,.3,_....e:6:77°,091/7.872:.......LL12"N ......... GRADING LIMIT LINE 49 6"( 5 4.7 8.5 >- co REVISION >- co REVISION R+WI id Ph IONS — BUILDINGS AND EXI' ov 11 711 DUBLIN BLVD FOR DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNEI DATE MAY, 2023 SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER CR DRAWN BY VB JOB NO. A22024 SHEET 1 OF EX 1 1 SHEETS 791 �• MN MI MMI • .. ..'.. ■_■ ■ n Elmo ■mi •� •m Elm Elms ■•o ■_I ...! ms ■•■ �I_■mI ■•1 MA —----- - ... . ■■ -_--- n= -n - - ; as=. •u ■■ ■■ .. ..'.. =� TM ■ Dublin Blvd. Elevation - North Elevation Northwest Elevation Arthur H. Breed, Jr. Frwy Elevation - South Elevation West Elevation East Elevation Conceptual Elevations - 32ft clear 11711 DUBLIN BOULEVARD Dublin, California #21657 07.22.2024 792 Dublin Blvd. Elevation - North Elevation Arthur H. Breed, Jr. Frwy Elevation - South Elevation SHERWIN-WILLIAMS SW 9109 NATURAL LINEN SHERWIN-WILLIAMS SW 7509 TIKI HUT SHERWIN-WILLIAMS SW 7633 TAUPE TONE Enlarged View of Dublin Blvd. Elevation - North Elevation SHERWIN-WILLIAMS SW 9183 DARK CLOVE 0 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS SW 6622 HEARTY ORANGE 0 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS SW 9183 DARK CLOVE METAL PAINT ■ Yeas 0 THIN BRICK VENEER 0 GREY GLAZING Conceptual Elevations & Material Board - 32ft clear 0 BLACK MULLIONS 11711 DUBLIN BOULEVARD Dublin, California #21657 07.22.2024 BLACK METAL CANOPY 0 WALL SCONCE BY NATE 793 Attachment 10 HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 11 Natoma Street, Suite 155 Folsom, CA 95630 916.365.8700 tel 619.462.0552 fax www.helixepi.com HELIX Environmental Planning March 4, 2022 Project 03697.00017.001 Will McPhee, Associate Overton Moore Properties 19700 S. Vermont Avenue, Suite 101 Torrance, CA 90502 Subject: Arborist Survey for the 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project, City of Dublin, Alameda County, California Dear Mr. McPhee: This letter documents the results of an arborist survey conducted for the proposed project located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard, City of Dublin, Alameda County, California. HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. (HELIX) was tasked with conducting a survey of trees on the site, as well as providing general preservation and avoidance guidance for trees that may be preserved onsite during and subsequent to construction. This letter report describes the methods and results of our arborist inventory. All referenced figures are included in Attachment A. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The Study Area is located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County on the north side of Interstate-580, between Donlon Way and Silvergate Drive and consists of Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APNs) 941-1560-9-1 and 941-1560-3-4 (Figure 1). The project study area is approximately 8.74 acres and is located within the U.S. Geological Survey "Dublin, CA" 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle, Santa Rita Land Grant. The approximate center of the property is at latitude 37.699520 and longitude -121.940571, NAD 83. The proposed project includes the demolition of the existing 62,715 square foot commercial structure in order to construct a 126,445 square foot building with associated parking and landscaping. The proposed project will avoid any impacts to Dublin Creek and the surrounding riparian corridor in the southeastern corner of the Study Area. METHODS The City of Dublin regulates the preservation of trees through Chapter 5.60 of the City Municipal Code. The City regulates the removal of heritage trees, defined as 1) any oak (Quercus sp.), bay (Umbellularia sp.), cypress (Cupressus sp.), maple (Acer sp.), redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), buckeye (Aesculus sp.), 798 Letter to Will McPhee Page 2 of 3 March 4, 2022 or sycamore (Platanus sp.) tree having a trunk or main stem of twenty-four (24) inches or more in diameter measured at four (4) feet six (6) inches above natural grade; 2) any tree required to be preserved as part of an approved Development Plan, Zoning Permit, Use Permit, Site Development Review or Subdivision Map; or 3) any tree required to be planted as a replacement for an unlawfully removed tree. Removal of a heritage tree may require a tree removal permit from the City of Dublin Community Development Department. In cases where removal of a Heritage Tree is specifically approved as part of a City -approved Planned Development, Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review, or Subdivision Map or in the case of hazard trees, a permit may not be required. International Society of Arboriculture certified arborist Stephanie McLaughlin (WE-12922A) surveyed the Study Area on February 1, 2022. The following data were collected for all trees on the project site with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of four inches or greater: species, trunk diameter at 4-feet 6-inches above the ground, dripline radius, estimated height, and overall health and structure of the tree. Overall condition was rated on a five -point scale of 0 (dead), 1 (severe decline), 2 (declining), 3 (fair), 4 (good), or 5 (excellent). Comments such as number of trunks, irregularities, scars or other growth characteristics or vigor indicators were recorded for each tree. Recommendations for preservation or removal were made based on each tree's condition. The location of each tree was recorded using an EOS Systems Arrow 100 Global Navigation Satellite System receiver with sub -meter accuracy. Trees on the site were identified in the field with pre-printed numbered tags. As the proposed project will avoid any impacts to Dublin Creek and the surrounding riparian corridor in the southeastern corner of the Study Area, this area was not included in the arborist survey. RESULTS The Study Area is located within a residential and commercial area in the City of Dublin. The Study Area is the site of a 62,715 square foot chemical manufacturing facility surrounded by associated parking lots, ornamental landscaping, and a chain -link security fence. Dublin Creek runs along the southeastern corner of the site. The habitat at the Study Area is primarily developed with a vegetation assemblage dominated by non-native ornamentals, as well as grasses and forbs. There are a variety of tree species on site planted as landscaping around the manufacturing facility and in planting wells in the parking lot. There are a total of 89 trees on or overhanging the Study Area. The species assemblage is composed of 22 Chinese elm (Ulmus parvifolia), 20 narrow -leaved ash (Fraxinus angustifolia), 18 western sycamore (Platanus racemosa), 11 California black walnut (Juglans californica), six coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), four blue oak (Quercus douglasii), two Japanese maple (Acer palmatum), two ornamental prunus trees (Prunus sp.), one valley oak (Quercus lobata), one eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), one crepe myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica), and one Italian stone pine (Pinus pinea). Of the 89 trees on or overhanging the project site, four qualify as Heritage Trees protected by the City of Dublin Tree Preservation Ordinance. The protected trees consist of one valley oak, one coast live oak, and two western sycamores (trees #41, #67, #86, and #129). Approximate tree locations are shown on Figure 2 in Attachment A. Representative photographs of the site are provided in Attachment B. Tree data is provided in Attachment C. HELItal Plannin • 799 Letter to Will McPhee Page 3 of 3 March 4, 2022 TREE PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS Tree protection recommendations are included as Attachment D to minimize the potential for injury or damage to occur to avoided trees adjacent to the project footprint. These recommendations should be integrated into the construction documents, as applicable to the project. CONCLUSION There are a total of 89 trees on the site, four of which are Heritage Trees protected by the City of Dublin tree preservation ordinance and 85 of which are not regulated. Removal of a Heritage Tree requires approval from the City of Dublin Community Development Department either through a tree removal permit or other project approvals. The appropriate tree preservation and protection measures should be implemented for onsite trees to be avoided during construction. I appreciate the opportunity to assist you on this project. Feel free to contact me with any questions at (916) 365-8712. Sincerely, Stephen Stringer, M.S. Principal Biologist/Biology Group Manager (ISA Certified Arborist WE-7129A) Attachments: Attachment A— Figures Attachment B — Representative Site Photos Attachment C — Tree Data Attachment D — General Recommendations for Tree Protection HELIX $oo Environmental Plannin Attachment A Figures 801 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project V_20220218.mxd 2/18/2022 NAPA SONOMA MARIN Study Area SAN MATEO SOLANO CONTRA COSTA ALAMEDA SANTA CRUZ YoLo SACRAMENTO SANTA CLARA SAN JOAQUIN STANISLAUS 1r! \• oN: 441/ 0 .:04111lith USGS 7.5 Min. Dublin Santa Rita Land Grant Approximate Location: -121.940571 37.699520 NAD 1983 State Plane CA Zone III (US IFFeet)t Approximate Acreage: ±8.74 Acres' ti HELIX 1 Miles 41, Environmental Planning San Ramon • cos ( f . et CONTRA COSTA COUNTY T nSunol Dublin • p�{ i(iaag6noa • ALAMEDA COUNTY os��as� � P Pleasanton Source: Base Map Layers (Esri, USGS, NGA, NASA) Vicinity Map Figure ?802 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project T:\PROJECTS\O\OvertonMooreProperties 03697\00017 DublinBoulevardBRAARborist\Mao\Fie1 TreeMaD 20220222.mxd 2/22/2022 0 100 Feet 4, HELIX Environmental Planning Source: Aerial (DigitalGlobe, 11/04/2019). Arborist Inventory Map Figure 2803 Attachment B Representative Site Photos 804 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Photo 1: View of the paved parking area and mature western sycamore trees surrounding the front of the existing building. Photo taken February 1, 2022. Photo 2: View of the paved parking area and mature western sycamore trees surrounding the rear of the existing building. Photo taken February 1, 2022. HELIX Envimnmerrial Planning Representative Site Photos Attachment B 805 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Photo 3: View of Dublin Creek running across the southeastern corner of the Study Area. Photo taken February 1, 2022. Photo 4: View of chain link fence surrounding Dublin Creek. Photo taken February 1, 2022. HELIX Envimnmerrial Planning Representative Site Photos Attachment B 806 Attachment C Tree Data 807 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment C Tree Data' Tree Number Species DBH (inches) Dripline (ft) Height (ft) Health 2 Structure z Condition Notes 3 ornamental prunus Prunus sp. 6.3, 8 10.00 15.00 GF F 3 included bark, co -dominant leaders, pruning cuts 4 ornamental prunus Prunus sp. 15.5 7.00 18.00 GF GF 4 co -dominant leaders 5 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 18.2 18.00 35.00 G G 5 6 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 13.2 13.00 30.00 G G 5 7 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 15.6 15.00 35.00 G G 5 8 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 10.7 12.00 30.00 G GF 4 lean 9 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 20 18.00 40.00 G G 5 10 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 20.5 20.00 40.00 G G 5 11 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 21.3 20.00 40.00 G G 5 12 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 10.6 13.00 13.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 13 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 22 16.00 20.00 G GF 4 included bark, pruning cuts 14 crepe myrtle Lagerstroemia indica 7 9.00 15.00 G GF 4 lean 127 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 14.4 16.00 40.00 GF G 4 minor crown dieback 15 eastern red cedar Juniperus virginiana 8.1 7.00 13.00 GF F 3 pruning cuts, co -dominant leaders 128 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 9.3 12.00 35.00 G G 5 129 valley oak Quercus lobata 31 30.00 50.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 16 Italian stone pine Pinus pinea 7.3 4.00 40.00 GF GF 4 pruning cuts C-1 808 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment C Tree Data' Tree Number Species DBH (inches) Dripline (ft) Height (ft) Health2 Structure2 Condition Notes 17 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 30.4 23.00 50.00 GF GF 4 exposed roots, included bark 18 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 23.5 17.00 30.00 GF GF 4 included bark, minor crown dieback 130 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 30.5 30.00 60.00 GF G 4 exposed roots, included bark 19 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 27.1 25.00 50.00 G GF 4 exposed roots 20 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 19.6 17.00 50.00 GF G 4 21 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 9.5 14.00 25.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts, included bark 22 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 15.8 14.00 32.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 23 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 15.9 19.00 35.00 G GF 4 included bark 24 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 15, 9.9, 14 25.00 40.00 G GF 4 included bark, co -dominant leaders 25 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 16.7 25.00 45.00 GF GF 4 included bark, pruning cuts 26 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 15.7 20.00 45.00 GF GF 4 included bark, pruning cuts 27 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 16.9 20.00 50.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 28 California black walnut Juglans californica 8.1, 8, 6.6, 6.4 16.00 20.00 FP FP 2 co -dominant leaders, included bark, broken branches 29 California black walnut Juglans californica 12, 9.4, 8.7, 11.7, 11, 6.4, 12.1, 9 25.00 37.00 FP FP 2 included bark, co -dominant leaders, broken branches, lean 30 California black walnut Juglans californica 10.5 18.00 30.00 F F 3 Mistletoe, lean, broken branches 31 California black walnut Juglans californica 9.7 20.00 20.00 F F 3 lean, mistletoe 32 California black walnut Juglans californica 5.5 4.00 10.00 FP FP 2 epicormics, broken branches C-2 809 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment C Tree Data' Tree Number Species DBH (inches) Dripline (ft) Height (ft) Health 2 Structure 2 Condition Notes 33 California black walnut Juglans californica 11.5 18.00 25.00 G GF 4 0 California black walnut Juglans californica 9.1, 6.9 12.00 22.00 F F 3 co -dominant leaders, included bark, mistletoe 38 California black walnut Juglans californica 13.4 11.00 23.00 GF GF 4 animal burrow at base 36 California black walnut Juglans californica 11.3 18.00 25.00 G G 5 old nest 37 blue oak Quercus douglasii 15.5 20.00 33.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts, old nest 38 California black walnut Juglans californica 17.4, 12.6 20.00 30.00 GF FP 3 co -dominant leaders, included bark, broken branches 39 blue oak Quercus douglasii 12.8 15.00 29.00 G G 5 40 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 17.6 18.00 32.00 G GF 4 41 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 38 1 25.00 65.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 42 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 22.3 25.00 55.00 GF F 3 large pruning cuts, epicormics 43 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 20.4 15.00 50.00 GF GF 4 lean 44 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 20.5 20.00 50.00 G G 5 45 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 12.3 20.00 45.00 G G 5 46 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 23.1 25.00 50.00 G GF 4 co -dominant leaders, old nests 47 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 13.7 17.00 40.00 GF GF 4 pruning cuts 48 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 11.5 18.00 30.00 F FP 3 broken branches, partially topped, pruning cuts 49 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 20 25.00 45.00 GF GF 4 pruning cuts C-3 810 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment C Tree Data' Tree Number Species DBH (inches) Dripline (ft) Height (ft) Health2 Structure2 Condition Notes 50 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 18.7 30.00 50.00 G GF 4 51 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 16.8 20.00 45.00 G G 5 52 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 21.4 25.00 55.00 G G 5 53 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 21.2 25.00 55.00 G G 5 54 Japanese maple Acer palmatum 9.7, 5.6, 5, 6.3, 8, 5.2 7.00 12.00 F FP 2 trunk wound, trunk rot, co- dominant leaders, included bark 55 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 23 30.00 55.00 F F 3 lean, epicormics, pruning cuts 56 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 11.5 20.00 45.00 G GF 4 57 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 9.2 12.00 20.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 58 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 17.5 20.00 35.00 GF GF 4 pruning cuts 59 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 15.1 15.00 25.00 G G 5 60 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 18 16.00 32.00 F F 3 included bark, co -dominant leaders 61 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 6.5 10.00 20.00 F FP 3 significant lean pruning cuts 62 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 7.5, 10.5 15.00 20.00 GF F 3 lean, included bark 63 California black walnut Juglans californica 6.7, 6.2, 3 16.00 16.00 GF FP 2 included bark, co -dominant leaders 64 blue oak Quercus douglasii 10 7.00 22.00 G GF 4 included bark 65 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 8.1 15.00 17.00 GF FP 3 lean, included bark 66 blue oak Quercus douglasii 10.6 8.00 23.00 G G 5 C-4 811 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment C Tree Data' Tree Number Species DBH (inches) Dripline (ft) Height (ft) Health 2 2 Structure Condition Notes 67 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 41.5 35.00 60.00 F F 3 trunk wound, trunk rot, included bark 68 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 11.2 17.00 25.00 G G 5 69 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 23 18.00 45.00 G G 5 70 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 19 20.00 45.00 G GF 4 included bark 71 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 15.4 16.00 40.00 G GF 4 included bark 72 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 18.2 17.00 50.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 73 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 17.8 20.00 40.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 74 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 5.4 3.00 17.00 GF GF 4 75 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 16.8 18.00 45.00 G G 5 76 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 15.3 19.00 50.00 G G 5 77 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 16.9 18.00 50.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 78 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 19.5 23.00 65.00 GF GF 4 old nest, pruning cuts 79 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 17.9 19.00 45.00 GF F 3 pruning cuts, broken branches 80 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 18.4 25.00 50.00 GF G 4 pruning cuts 81 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 15.5 20.00 50.00 GF GF 4 included bark, pruning cuts 82 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 17, 11.2 22.00 55.00 GF F 3 co -dominant leaders, epicormics, pruning cuts 83 narrow leaved ash Fraxinus angustifolia 14.1 16.00 40.00 GF GF 4 pruning cuts C-5 812 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment C Tree Data' Tree Number Species DBH (inches) Dripline (ft) Height (ft) Health z Structure z Condition Notes 84 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 14.3 19.00 40.00 GF GF 4 minor trunk wound 85 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 20.9 30.00 55.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 86 western sycamore Platanus racemosa 28.2 35.00 65.00 G GF 4 pruning cuts 87 Japanese maple Acer palmatum 7.6, 3, 8.2, 6.5, 4, 6.2 12.00 21.00 FP FP 2 co -dominant leaders, trunk wound, included bark, pruning cuts 1 Green shading indicates heritage tree. 2 P-Poor, FP -Fair Poor, F-Fair, GF-Good Fair, G-Good C-6 813 Attachment D General Recommendations for Tree Protection 814 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment D General Recommendations for Tree Protection General Protection Guidelines for Trees Planned for Preservation To prevent soil compaction: • 6-8 inches of wood chips should be spread inside the dripline of trees where temporary construction traffic or staging would occur. Chips should be removed after project completion, or the depth reduced to no more than 4 inches. Alternatively, bridging root areas with steel plates would reduce damage to roots within construction traffic areas. o A circle with a radius measurement from the trunk of the tree to the tip of its longest limb, plus one foot, constitutes the critical root zone protection area of each protected tree. Limbs must not be cut back in order to change the dripline. The area beneath the dripline is a critical portion of the root zone and defines the minimum protected area of each protected tree. Removing limbs that make up the dripline does not change the protected area. To reduce damage due to raising the existing grade: • Grading within the protected zone of a protected tree should be minimized. Cuts within the protected zone should be maintained at less than 20% of the critical root zone area. Grade cuts should be monitored by the project Arborist. Any damaged roots encountered should be root pruned and properly treated as deemed necessary by the Project Arborist. • Construct an open -joint wall of shell, brick, rock, or masonry in a circle around the tree trunk, with at least 1 to 2 feet between the wall and trunk. This wall should be as high as the top of the new grade. This opening is commonly referred to as a tree well. • If fills exceed 1 foot in depth up to 20% of the critical root zone area, aeration systems may serve to mitigate the presence of the fill materials as determined by the Project Arborist. • Construct an aeration system using 4-inch agricultural clay tile or 4-inch perforated plastic pipe arranged in five to six horizontal lines radiating from the tree well like spokes in a wheel to a point beyond the branch spread. Allow excess moisture to drain away by installing the radial lines so they slope away from the trunk. Connect the outer ends of the radiating system with a circle of tile or perforated plastic pipe. • To provide vents, place 4- or 6-inch plastic pipe or bell tile upright over the junction of the radial lines with the circle. They should extend to the surface of the planned grade level. Extend the lower end of the aeration system to a curb or storm drain to carry excess moisture away from the root system. • Cover the exposed soil and tile system with rock or coarse gravel to a depth of 6 to 18 inches, depending on the amount of fill. Follow this with a covering layer of gravel. Place a thin layer of straw, woven plastic, or other porous material over the gravel to prevent soil from filtering into the gravel and stone. Fill with good topsoil to the desired grade. D-1 815 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment D (cont.) General Recommendations for Tree Protection • When fill materials are deemed necessary on two or three sides of a tree it is critical to provide for drainage away from the critical root zone area of the tree (particularly when considering heavy winter rainfalls). Overland releases and subterranean drains dug outside the critical root zone area and tied directly to the main storm drain system are two options. • The construction of impervious surfaces within the dripline of a protected tree should be minimized. When necessary, a piped aeration system should be installed under the direct supervision of the Project Arborist. • Preservation devices such as aeration systems, tree wells, drains, special paving, and cabling systems must be installed in conformance with approved plans and certified by the Project Arborist. • To discourage rodents, fill the tree well with enough coarse gravel to cover the ends of the lines opening into the well. Also fill the upright bell tile and cover with a screen or grill. • Minor roots less than one inch in diameter encountered during approved excavation and/or grading activities may be cut, but damaged roots should be traced back and cleanly cut behind any split, cracked or damaged area as deemed necessary by the Project Arborist. • Major roots greater than one inch in diameter encountered during approved excavation and/or grading activities may not be cut without approval of the Project Arborist. Depending upon the type of improvement being proposed, bridging techniques or a new site design may need to be employed to protect the roots and the tree. • Cut faces, which will be exposed for more than 2-3 days, should be covered with dense burlap fabric, and watered to maintain soil moisture at least on a daily basis (or possibly more frequently during summer months). If any native ground surface fabric within the protected zone must be removed for any reason, it should be replaced within 48 hours. • In cases where a permit has been approved for construction of a retaining wall(s) within the protected zone of a protected tree the applicant will be required to provide for immediate protection of exposed roots from moisture loss during the time prior to completion of the wall. The retaining wall within the protected zone of the protected tree should be constructed within 72 hours after completion of grading within the root protection zone. General Construction Site Recommendations: • A minimum 4-foot tall, brightly colored, synthetic fence should be installed around the limits of the work area or around outermost edge of the protected zone of trees that are designated for retention on -site. Encroachment into the fenced areas should be restricted to the minimum amount feasible and fencing should remain in place until all construction activities have ceased. The protected zone is defined as the "dripline" (which is an imaginary line that is drawn on the ground around the tree at the outermost limit of the canopy) or in cases where construction is encroaching on the dripline of a retained tree, the protected zone is the portion of the tree's dripline that is being protected. Fencing should be installed in accordance with an approved D-2 816 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment D (cont.) General Recommendations for Tree Protection fencing plan prior to the commencement of any grading operations or such other time as determined by the review body. • Signs should be installed on the protective fence in four equidistant locations around each individual tree. The size of the sign should be a minimum of two by two feet and contain the following language "Warning: This Fence Shall Not Be Removed or Relocated Without Written Authorization From *insert governing body*". Protective fencing should remain in place throughout the entire construction period and should not be removed, relocated, taken down or otherwise modified without prior written authorization. • All portions of permanent fencing that will encroach into the protected zone of a protected tree should be constructed using posts set no closer than ten feet on center. Posts should be spaced in such a manner as to maximize the separation between the tree trunks and the posts in order to reduce impacts to the trees(s). • The fenced area should be kept clear of building materials, waste, and excess soil. • No digging, trenching, compaction, or other soil disturbance should be allowed in the fenced area. • The storage of construction equipment or hazardous materials such as gasoline, oil, or other toxic chemicals should not be allowed in or adjacent to the fenced area. • Storage areas for equipment, soil, and construction materials as well as burn sites (if permitted), cement washout pits, and construction work zones should be kept away from protected trees and outside the fenced in area. • Cable, chain, rope, or signage should not be attached to retained trees. • Designated roads and parking areas should be established. All construction personnel should be restricted to driving and parking in designated areas. Discharge of exhaust from construction vehicles and equipment should not be allowed near the protected zone of trees. • Grade changes should be avoided near fenced areas to the maximum extent possible. • No sprinkler or irrigation system should be installed in such a manner that sprays water or required trenching within the dripline of a protected tree. An above ground drip irrigation system is recommended. An independent low -flow drip irrigation system may be used for establishing drought tolerant plants within the protected zone of a protected tree. Irrigation should be gradually reduced and discontinued after a 2-year period. • Landscaping beneath native oak trees may include non -plant materials such as bark mulch, wood chips, boulders, etc. Planting live material under protected native oak trees is generally discouraged and is not recommended within 6 feet of the trunk of a native oak tree with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of 18 inches or less, or within 10 feet of the trunk of a native oak tree with DBH of more than 18 inches. The only plant species which should be planted with the dripline of native oak trees are those which are tolerant of the natural, semi -arid environs of the tree(s). D-3 817 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment D (cont.) General Recommendations for Tree Protection Recommendations for Construction Activities in the Vicinity of Retained Trees: • Any protected trees on site which require pruning should be pruned by an ISA Certified Arborist prior to the start of construction work. All pruning should be in accordance with the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 pruning standards, ANSI Standard 2133.1-2000 regarding safety practices, and the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) "Tree Pruning Guidelines" and Best Management Practices. • Trenching within the dripline of retained trees should be avoided to the maximum extent practicable and kept a minimum distance of 10 times the diameter of the tree away from its trunk. If necessary, this trenching should be conducted using hand excavation or compressed air to reduce impacts to tree roots. Machine trenching should not be allowed within the dripline of retained trees. Trenching inside the dripline should be monitored by a certified arborist who may direct the construction crew to use hand tools rather than heavy equipment. Hand saws, pass -through pruners, shovels and trowels, burlap cloth, and water should be available at all times during trenching inside the dripline. If pipes must be installed closer to the tree than a distance of 10 times the diameter of the tree away from its trunk, they should be bored beneath the tree a minimum of 3 feet below the ground surface to reduce impacts to roots. • Excavation should also be minimized within the dripline of retained trees. Construction within the dripline of retained trees should be conducted in a manner that minimizes excavation and provides for the best preservation of roots as determined by the Project Arborist. • If tree roots are severed outside of the fenced area, they should be severed cleanly and kept moist. All exposed roots outside of fenced areas should be covered with protective material during construction such as mulch or plywood sheets to reduce soil compaction. Protective material should be removed upon completion of construction activities. • Construction activities involving soil disturbance should be avoided during hot, dry, weather and trees should be watered before, during, and after trenching and excavation within the dripline of retained trees to offset water loss due to cut roots. • Grading within the driplines of retained trees should be avoided wherever feasible. • Any removal of paving or structures (i.e., demolition) that occurs within the dripline of a protected tree should be done under the direct supervision of the Project Arborist. • No sign, ropes, cables (except those which may be installed by an ISA Certified Arborist to provide limb support) or any other items should be attached to the protected trees. Small metallic numbering tags for the purpose of identification in preparing tree reports and inventories should be allowed. • No vehicles, construction equipment, mobile homes/office, supplies, materials, or facilities should be driven, parked, stockpiled, or located within driplines of protected trees. • Drainage patterns on the site should not be modified so that water collects, stands, or is diverted across the dripline of any protected tree. D-4 818 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment D (cont.) General Recommendations for Tree Protection • No trenching should be allowed within the driplines of protected trees, except as specifically approved by the Planning Department as set forth in the project's Conditions of Approval and/or approved tree permit. If it is absolutely necessary to install underground utilities within the dripline of a protected tree the utilizing hand tools to avoid root injury under the direct supervision of the Project Arborist. Recommendations for Protection of Trees Post -Construction: • Post -construction inspections of the trees should be conducted by a Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker to determine if retained trees are stressed (e.g., water stress, nutrient stress) or damaged (e.g., broken branches, trunk damage). Appropriate corrective actions should be implemented, as necessary. Such corrective actions may include remediation of severe soil compaction through vertical mulching or a similar technique, remedial pruning to repair damaged or broken limbs, application of mulch, application of root stimulant to encourage new root growth in trees that have a significant portion of their roots lost due to cutting or soil compaction, etc. • Aeration of soil by vertical mulching or similar technique should be implemented around retained trees to offset the impacts of soil compaction that has already occurred due to construction activities and other site uses. • All trees that will be preserved following project construction should be periodically monitored by a qualified tree care professional for the life of the project. The project (i.e., homeowners association/property owner) should be responsible for providing for monitoring and ongoing care and maintenance of all preserved trees on the site. D-5 819 Stringer Biological Consulting, Inc. January 20, 2023 Ms. Jennifer Freedman Overton Moore Properties 19700 S. Vermont Avenue, Suite 101 Torrance, CA 90502 Subject: Arborist Report for 11711 Dublin Blvd., City of Dublin, Alameda County, CA. Ms. Freedman: Per your request, Stringer Biological Consulting, Inc. (SBC) prepared this Arborist Report for the project located at 11711 Dublin Blvd. in the City of Dublin, Ca. This arborist report was prepared as an addendum to the arborist report prepared on March 4, 2022, which covered the portion of the project site outside of the Dublin Creek corridor. The purpose of the arborist survey for this addendum was to survey the trees around Dublin Creek in the southeast corner of the property, which were not included in the original arborist survey. Existing Conditions Project Location and Site Description The project site is located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard on the north side of Interstate 580, between Donlon Way and Silvergate Drive and consists of Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APNs) 941-1560-9-1 and 941-1560-3-4. It is located within the U.S. Geological Survey "Dublin, CA" 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle, Santa Rita Land Grant. The approximate center of the property is at latitude 37.699520 and longitude -121.940571, NAD 83. The site is currently developed with a commercial building, parking lot, and landscaping. The proposed project includes the demolition of the existing 62,715 square foot commercial structure in order to construct a new building with associated parking and landscaping. Regulatory Background The City of Dublin regulates the preservation of trees through Chapter 5.60 of the City Municipal Code. The City regulates the removal of heritage trees, defined as 1) any oak (Quercus sp.), bay (Umbellularia sp.), cypress (Cupressus sp.), maple (Acer sp.), redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), buckeye (Aesculus sp.), or sycamore (Platanus sp.) tree having a trunk or main stem of twenty-four (24) inches or more in diameter measured at four (4) feet six (6) inches above natural grade; 2) any tree required to be preserved as part of an approved Development Plan, Zoning Permit, Use Permit, Site Development Review or Subdivision Map; or 3) any tree required to be planted as a replacement for an unlawfully removed tree. Removal of a heritage tree may require a tree removal permit from the City of Dublin Community Development Department. In cases where removal of a Heritage Tree is specifically approved as part of a City -approved Planned Development, Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review, or Subdivision Map or in the case of hazard trees, a permit may not be required. 820 11711 Dublin Blvd. Arborist Page 2 of 3 Methods The arborist survey was conducted on December 7, 2022 by SBC Principal Biologist/Arborist Stephen Stringer, M.S. Mr. Stringer is an International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist (WE- 7129A) and holds a B.S. and M.S. Degree in Biology from California State University, Sacramento. Mr. Stringer has been a Certified Arborist since 2004 and has worked as a consulting arborist on hundreds of projects throughout California. He conducts arborist inventories, tree impact assessments, develops tree preservation and avoidance measures, and monitors work around trees during construction in compliance with project permits. All trees located in the southeastern portion of the project site along Dublin Creek (that were not included in the original arborist survey) with a diameter -at -breast -height (dbh) of 4 inches or greater. were inventoried. The following data were collected for all trees with a dbh of 4 inches or greater: species, dbh (4.5 feet above grade), estimated dripline radius, estimated height, and overall health and structure of the tree. Overall condition was rated on a five -point scale of 0 (dead), 1 (poor), 2 (fair to poor), 3 (fair), 4 (good), or 5 (excellent). Comments such as number of trunks, irregularities, scars or other growth characteristics or vigor indicators were recorded for each tree. The arborist inventory consisted of a general assessment of the current health and condition of the trees on the site based on a brief visual inspection from the base of the tree. The assessment did not include a detailed analysis of each tree and is not intended to constitute a thorough analysis of the health/condition of the trees. The trunk location of each tree was recorded using an iPhone paired to an Arrow 100® Submeter GNSS receiver running ArcGIS Collector. Trees on the site were tagged in the field with pre-printed numbered tags. Trees with trunks located offsite that were overhanging the site were not tagged. Results: A total of 107 trees with a dbh of 4 inches or greater were inventoried within the survey area. Of those, a total of 19 trees qualified as Heritage Trees (See Attachments A, B) based on size and species, including 12 California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica), 1 western sycamore (Platanus racemosa), and 6 coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia). Two of the Heritage Trees, tree 53 (coast live oak) and tree 79 (California bay laurel) were given a rating of poor and are potential hazards due to their condition (See Attachment B). Other trees within the survey area included Northern California black walnut (Juglans hindsii), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), Oregon oak (Quercus garryana), elderberry (Sambucus sp.), white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), willow (Salix sp.), and black locust (Robinia psuedoacacia). A site plan depicting the locations of all of the inventoried trees is included in Attachment A (Figures 1 and 2). Tree data are included as Attachment B. Representative site photos are provided as Attachment C. Summary and Recommendations: A total of 19 Heritage Trees protected by the City of Dublin were inventoried within the survey area. None of the Heritage Trees would be removed as part of the project as they are all south of the fence that separates the project development area from the Dublin Creek corridor. Removal of a Heritage Tree would require approval from the City of Dublin Community Development Department either through a tree removal permit or other project approvals unless it is deemed an immediate hazard to life or property and removal is approved by the City. None of the Heritage Trees are considered an immediate 821 11711 Dublin Blvd. Arborist Page 3 of 3 hazard to life or property, however, trees 53 and 79 could represent a hazard if the area around the trees was subjected to human activity or development. Thank you for the opportunity to work on this project. If you need further information, please contact me at (916) 996-9374 or StringerBiological@outlook.com to discuss the results of this report. Sincerely, 5t>-,,,_)__ Stephen Stringer, M.S. Principal Biologist/ISA Certified Arborist WE-7129A Attachments: Attachment A— Site Plan with Tree Locations Attachment B —Tree Data Attachment C — Site Photos 822 Stringer Biological Consulting 4 0 75 150 Feet Figure 1 Site Plan/Trees 11711 Dublin Boulevard - Parcel 3 Alameda County, CA Aerial Base: Maxar (5/26/2021) 823 Figure 2 0 25 50 Tree Map Stringer Biological N Feet 11711 Dublin Boulevard - Parcel 3 Consulting Alameda County, CA Aerial Base: Google Earth (03/11/2022) 824 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment B Tree Data' Tree Number Species DBH (inches) Height (ft) Dripline (ft) Health/Vigor 2 Notes 1 Robinia pseudoacacia 36 65 30 P Falling into creek 2 Umbellularia californica 44 50 30 F-G Pund at fence line, undercut by creek 3 Platanus racemosa 40 70 40 F undercut by creek 4 Robinia pseudoacacia 14 35 10 P Dead or nearly dead 5 Robinia pseudoacacia 16 20 15 P Topped, nearly dead 6 Umbellularia californica 40 50 25 F-G Many stump sprouts 7 Umbellularia californica 26 50 30 F-G Undercut by creek 8 Umbellularia californica 30,24,12 70 30 G Undercut by creek 9 Umbellularia californica 8 25 10 F Pruned at fence, leans 10 Umbellularia californica 12,10,10 60 30 F Moderate dieback, decay 11 Umbellularia californica 24 70 30 F Moderate dieback 12 Umbellularia californica 6 20 20 F Leans toward 1-580, pruned at fence 13 Umbellularia californica 11 50 15 F Spindly, shaded 14 Umbellularia californica 14,10 45 15 F Spindly, shaded 15 Umbellularia californica 9,8,8 40 20 F-P Spindly, epicormics, dieback 16 Umbellularia californica 10 40 15 P Severe dieback 17 Umbellularia californica 6 30 10 P Severe dieback 18 Umbellularia californica 7 30 10 P Severe dieback, epicormics 19 Umbellularia californica 6 35 10 F-P Dieback, epicormics 20 Umbellularia californica 10 40 15 F-P Dieback, epicormics 21 Umbellularia californica 26,12 50 30 F-P Dieback, decay, leans 22 Umbellularia californica 9 40 15 F-P Dieback, decay, leans 23 Umbellularia californica 13,12,9 50 20 F-P Dieback, epicormics 24 Umbellularia californica 5 30 10 P Severe dieback 25 Umbellularia californica 9 45 10 F-P Dieback, epicormics 26 Quercus agrifolia 22 60 30 F Moderate dieback 27 Umbellularia californica 18,15,12 50 20 F Moderate dieback, undercut by creek 28 Umbellularia californica 5 40 10 F-P Spindly, sparse foliage 29 Umbellularia californica 5,3 40 15 P Severe dieback B-1 825 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment B Tree Data, Tree Number Species DBH (inches) Height (ft) Dripline (ft) Health/Vigor 2 Notes 30 Quercus agrifolia 29 60 40 F-P Significant dieback, sparse foliage 31 Umbellularia californica 8 20 20 P Sparse foliage, epicormics 32 Umbellularia californica 5 25 20 P Sparse foliage, epicormics 33 Quercus agrifolia 29 60 30 F Moderate dieback 34 Quercus agrifolia 32,28,10 45 30 F P Significant dieback, sparse foliage, leans 35 Quercus agrifolia 19 60 40 F Moderate dieback 36 Umbellularia californica 5 30 10 F Spindly 37 Umbellularia californica 26 60 30 F Moderate decay on trunk and branches 38 Umbellularia californica 30,18 60 30 F Undercut by creek, epicormics 39 Umbellularia californica 5 30 15 F Shaded 40 Umbellularia californica 26 50 30 F Sparse foliage 41 Umbellularia californica 5 30 5 P Severe dieback 42 Umbellularia californica 4.5 30 10 P Severe dieback 43 Umbellularia californica 9 40 20 P Dead or nearly dead 44 Quercus agrifolia 24 50 30 F Some dieback 45 Umbellularia californica 5 25 5 F Sparse foliage 46 Quercus agrifolia 18 40 30 F-P Leans, significant dieback 47 Quercus agrifolia 8,5 40 30 F-P Severe dieback 48 Umbellularia californica 8 7 5,2 40 5 F-P Spindly, epicormics, significant dieback 49 Quercus agrifolia 34 70 35 F Moderate decay, dieback 50 Umbellularia californica 10,8 40 20 F-P Spindly, significant dieback 51 Umbellularia californica 5,6,6,5,4 30 10 P Severe dieback 52 Quercus agrifolia 22 60 30 F Moderate dieback, dead branches 53 Quercus agrifolia 29 40 40 p Leans/resting on ground, severe dieback and decay 54 Quercus agrifolia 7 30 30 p Leans heavily, severe dieback, sparse foliage 55 Umbellularia californica 7,3,1 30 10 P Nearly dead 56 Umbellularia californica 6,6,4,3 30 15 P Nearly dead B-2 826 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment B Tree Data' Tree Number Species DBH (inches) Height (ft) Dripline (ft) 2 Health/Vigor Notes 57 Juglans hindsii 16 55 20 F Some dieback 58 Quercus agrifolia 15,6,6 50 25 F-P Sparse foliage, dieback 59 Umbellularia californica 8 30 10 P Sparse foliage, dieback 60 Umbellularia californica 7 30 10 P Sparse foliage, dieback 61 Quercus agrifolia 11 40 20 F-P Sparse foliage, dieback 62 Quercus agrifolia 7 35 10 F-P Sparse foliage, dieback 63 Quercus agrifolia 16 40 20 F Leans toward 1-580, fence in trunk 64 Umbellularia californica 4,4,3 20 10 F-P Spindly, sparse foliage 65 Umbellularia californica 7,7,6 35 10 F Spindly 66 Umbellularia californica 6,6,5,5,4 25 10 P Nearly dead 67 Umbellularia californica 6 30 10 P Nearly dead 68 Quercus agrifolia 15 45 20 F Some dieback 69 Umbellularia californica 5 30 10 P Nearly dead ■ 70 Quercus garryana 11 40 20 F Some dieback 71 Quercus agrifolia 20,14 60 30 G 72 Umbellularia californica 6 30 10 P Nearly dead 73 Umbellularia californica 6,4 30 10 F Some dieback 74 Umbellularia californica 7,4 30 10 F Some dieback 75 Umbellularia californica 10,10 50 20 F Some dieback 76 Umbellularia californica 6 20 10 G 77 Aesculus californica 6 20 10 F Dead branches 78 Umbellularia californica 21 60 35 G 79 Umbellularia californica 60,48,44,24 65 40 P Major decay at base of two trunks, on edge of creek bank 80 Platanus racemosa 16,8,3 35 20 F Fence in trunk 81 Quercus agrifolia 6,5 15 10 G 82 Sambucus sp. 7,6,4 10 10 G 83 Umbellularia californica 28,20,16,12 50 40 G 84 Umbellularia californica 5 15 10 G 85 Umbellularia californica 7 20 10 G 86 Quercus agrifolia 13 25 15 F-G Growing through fence B-3 827 11711 Dublin Boulevard Project Attachment B Tree Data' Tree Number Species DBH (inches) H (f) t Dr(pline Health/Vigor2 Notes 87 Quercus agrifolia 11,9,8 30 15 F-G Growing through fence 88 Umbellularia californica 16 30 15 F-G Pruned at fence 89 Aesculus californica 4,4,3 20 10 G 90 Platanus racemosa 18 40 25 G Undercut by creek 91 Platanus racemosa 7,6,4,3,2 20 10 G 92 Umbellularia californica 13,12,10,9 45 30 F-G Some decay 93 Umbellularia californica 12,7,7,7,6,6,6,E 40 20 F Growing through fence, undercut, exposed roots 94 Aesculus californica 7,6,4 20 15 G 95 Aesculus californica 8 20 15 G 96 Juglans hindsii 17 35 15 F English ivy on trunk 97 Quercus agrifolia 8 15 15 F Growing through fence 98 Aesculus californica 14,10 40 20 F Some dead stems 99 Aesculus californica 10,10,9 25 30 P Leans heavily, dead stems *101 Alnus sp. 16,16,12,12,8 50 30 F Sparse canopy *102 Quercus agrifolia 16,10,8 60 20 G *103 Umbellularia californica 18,6,6 55 20 P Sparse foliage, major decay at base *104 Umbellularia californica 20 65 30 F Some dieback *105 Umbellularia californica 14 30 10 P Major trunk decay *106 Salix sp. 20,16 30 30 G *107 Juglans hindsii 16,14 60 30 F-G Undercut, exposed roots *108 Aesculus californica 10 30 30 F Undercut, exposed roots *109 Aesculus californica 10,10 35 30 F Undercut, exposed roots 'Green shading indicates heritage tree. 2 P-Poor, F-P-Fair to Poor, F-Fair, F-G-Fair to Good, G-Good * Untagged, inaccessible in creek, location and dbh approximate B-4 828 Attachment C. Site Photos Photo 1. View of the survey area showing trees along Dublin Creek. Photo 2. View of the southwest portion of the survey area. Arborist Report 11711 Dublin Blvd. C-1 January 20, 2023 829 Attachment C. Site Photos Photo 3. Representative view of the survey area. Photo 4. Close up view of the base of tree 79, a large California bay laurel with significant decay at the base of two stems. Arborist Report 11711 Dublin Blvd. C-2 January 20, 2023 830 Attachment I I RESOLUTION NO. 23 — 11 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP, A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT WITH A STAGE 1 AND 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT AND HERITAGE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR THE HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLPA 2022-00038 (APNS 941-1560-009-01 AND 941-1560-003-04) WHEREAS, the property owner, Overton Moore Properties, proposes to redevelop an 8.81-acre site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The project would demolish the existing 62,175-square-foot Hexcel research and development building and construct a new 125,304-square-foot light industrial building to appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses with 217 parking stalls and related site improvements. Requested approvals include a Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the "Hexcel Redevelopment Project" or the "Project;" and WHEREAS, the Project site includes two parcels totaling approximately 8.81 acres located north of the 1-580, south of Dublin Boulevard and residential and commercial uses, east of existing office buildings, and west of the U.S. Bank Branch, Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery; and WHEREAS, the Project site has a General Plan and Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial; and WHEREAS, one half of the Project site is subject Planned Development (Alameda County Ordinance No. 80-60) and the other half is zoned M-1 (Light Industrial); and WHEREAS, the proposed Project is consistent with the Business Park/Industrial land use designation but requires a Planned Development Rezone to accommodate the Project; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the CEQA Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and Reso. No. 23-11, Item 6.1, Adopted 12/12/2023 Page 1 of 3 831 WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures, the City prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated August 2023, and a Final EIR dated November 2023, for the proposed Project, which reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR identified potentially significant impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal resources, energy, geology and soils, and hazards and hazardous materials, most of which can be substantially reduced through mitigation measures; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated for 45 days for public comment from August 21, 2023, to October 5, 2023. Comments received on the Draft EIR were responded to in the Final EIR dated November 2023. The Draft EIR, comments and associated responses, and changes and clarifications to the Draft EIR constitute the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated December 12, 2023, and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, Heritage Tree Removal Permit and Final EIR; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, on December 12, 2023, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this Resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Dublin Planning Commission recommends that the City Council certify the Final EIR and adopt required CEQA Findings for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt an Ordinance attached as Exhibit A approving a Planned Development Zoning District with a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan based on findings, as set forth in Exhibit A. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve a Resolution attached as Exhibit B approving the Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit, based on findings and conditions of approval, as set forth in Exhibit B. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 12th day of December 2023 by the following vote: Reso. No. 23-11, Item 6.1, Adopted 12/12/2023 Page 2 of 3 832 AYES: Aini,Thalblum,Tyler NOES: Grier, Wright ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: DocuSigned by: Planning Nurliission Chair DocuSigned by: 1� � ��QR 9EBB9DD07254493... Assistant Community Development Director Reso. No. 23-11, Item 6.1, Adopted 12/12/2023 Page 3 of 3 833 Attachment 12 IF STAFF REPORT DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL CALIFORNIA Agenda Item 6.1 DATE: TO: FROM: SU B,JECT: March 19, 2024 Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Linda Smith, City Manager Hexcel Redevelopment (PLPA-2022-00038) Prepared by: Gaspare Annibale, Associate Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will consider the Hexcel Redevelopment project, which includes the redevelopment of an 8.81-acre site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The project would demolish the existing 62,175-square-foot Hexcel research and development building and construct a new 125,304-square-foot light industrial building to appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses with 217 parking stalls and related site improvements. Requested approvals include a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. The City Council will also consider certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing, deliberate, and take the following actions: 1) adopt the Resolution Certifying an Environmental Impact Report and Adopting Environmental Impact Findings, Findings Regarding Alternatives, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project; 2) waive the reading and INTRODUCE the Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map and Approving a Planned Development Zoning District with Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project; and 3) adopt the Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost associated with processing the project application is borne by the Applicant. Page 1 of 16 834 DESCRIPTION: Background Overton Moore Properties is proposing to demolish the existing 62,175-square-foot Hexcel research and development building located 11711 Dublin Boulevard and construct a new 125,304-square-foot light industrial building to appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses. The project site includes two parcels totaling 8.81 acres and is located in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan (Figure 1). Please refer to Table 1 below for surrounding uses. The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial and one half of the site is zoned Planned Development (Alameda County Ordinance No. 80-60) and the other half is zoned M-1 (Light Industrial). Figure 1. Project Location Table 1. Surrounding Land Uses Location Zoning General Plan Land Use Current Use of the Property North Single Family Residential (R-1) & Commercial Office (C- 0) Single Family Residential & Retail/Office Single Family/Briarhill Cabana Club & Dublin Office Building South I-580 I-580 I-580 East Retail Commercial (C- 1) & Agriculture (A) Parks/Public Recreation U.S. Bank Branch, Dublin Heritage Park and Museums, and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery West Planned Development (PD) Retail/Office DeSilva Gates Office Buildings On July 10, 1980, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No. 80-60, which rezoned the western half of the project site and the two commercial properties west of the project site Light Industrial to Planned Development (PD). The PD zoning allows for Commercial Office Page 2 of 16 835 (C-0) with some uses requiring a conditional use permit, such as a research and development laboratory. But the PD zoning does not permit the light industrial/warehousing uses being proposed. On August 1, 2006, the City Council adopted the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan (Resolution No. 149-06). The Specific Plan provides guidelines for future development within the area to be sensitive to its historic past and to preserve and enhance the area's historical, cultural, and archaeological resources. Proposed Project The proposed project would redevelop Parcel 1 of the project site by demolishing the existing 62,175-square-foot Hexcel research and development building and constructing a new 125,304- square-foot, light industrial, concrete tilt -up building designed to appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses. Parcel 2, which is undeveloped and contains dense riparian vegetation, mature trees, and a portion of Dublin Creek, is not proposed for development. The proposed building would include 18,000 square feet of office, 30,000 square feet of light industrial, and 77,304 square feet of warehouse (accessory to the light industrial). There would be 119,304 square feet on the ground floor and 6,000 square feet of mezzanine office space on the second floor. The proposed building could accommodate up to four tenants, with each unit providing office space and loading docks. The project would construct new site improvements including a new trash enclosure, 217 on -site parking spaces, and associated site, frontage, and landscape improvements. There are 89 existing trees on Parcel 1, of which 65 trees would be removed, including one of four Heritage trees. Refer to Figure 2 for the proposed site plan and Attachment 9 for the Project Plans. Requested approvals include a PD Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. Page 3 of 16 836 Figure 2. Proposed Site Plan TABULATOR 4 AERIAL MAP R N 4 DUBLIN B L V u.e.udu.e.0..0 _a_ lila TOTALI BULDNO AR?B 1R5.304 S. . II 1 UNITT 1 LNrr B T 33.528 .F.$2�.699 S.F. Alt 1 1 T 1 T t R D J A 4' •L II II • t-innnriniirinn 11 HI II IIII II 111110 I H 1 ,I. 29.906 S{F. I u thrill lino H i u li 25.971 S.F. al =ME iliiuiii11111i MALL SRL FLAB A Analysis Planned Development Rezone To accommodate the proposed project, the applicant has requested a PD Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan. Dublin Municipal Code (DMC) Chapter 8.32 establishes the intent, purpose and requirements of PD zoning districts. The proposed PD would establish a detailed Development Plan for the site, including permitted and conditionally permitted uses, the overall development density and intensity (e.g., floor area ratio, building height, setbacks, etc.), parking requirements, and design guidelines. "Industrial -Light" and "Office - Professional/Administrative" uses as defined by the Dublin Zoning Ordinance would be the only uses allowed by the PD on Parcel 1. Warehouse and Distribution uses involving heavy truck traffic are not permitted. No development would be allowed on Parcel 2. Table 2 provides an overview of the proposed development standards for the project. The Ordinance providing the details of the proposed PD zoning district is included as Attachment 7. Page 4of16 837 Table 2. Development Standards Floor Area Ratio 0.33 Maximum Building Height 40 feet Maximum Lot Coverage 31% Parking Spaces Office: Up to 7,500 square feet, 1 per 250 square feet; 7,501 to 40,000 square feet, 1 per 300 square feet Industrial - Light: 1 per 400 square feet of general purpose area, plus 1 per 1,000 square feet of warehouse or distribution area Parking Stall Dimension Standards Per Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.76 (Off - Street Parking and Loading Regulations) Minimum Setbacks 10' front (along Dublin Boulevard) 10' side (along west and east property lines) 20' rear (along south property line) Signs Per to Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.84 (Sign Regulations) Site Development Review Permit The following is a summary of key components of the project associated with the Site Development Review Permit. Site Design and Access: The project site would be accessed from two existing driveways on Dublin Boulevard. The main driveway is located at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hansen Drive and the secondary driveway is located at the northeastern corner of the project site (east of Hansen Drive adjacent to the U.S. Bank Branch entrance). Both driveways would provide access to all parking areas on -site and to the loading docks at the rear of the building. The loading docks would be screened from public view on Dublin Boulevard by the building and from the I-580 by new and existing landscaping on the south side of the project site. The project site also provides access to the adjacent office buildings to the west. The existing sidewalk along the property frontage would be extended into the project site and provide direct access to an outdoor seating area at the main building entrance. This would create a strong relationship between the street and the building and enhance the project's connectivity to the surrounding area. Architecture: The project's architectural style utilizes a contemporary design approach with muted taupe and earth tones to soften the building and allow it to blend more naturally with the landscape and color schemes commonly used in the vernacular of the late 19th century buildings in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. The exterior employs simple details with clean lines in keeping with the simple shapes used on the historic buildings and mimicking the historic wood siding used on adjacent projects. The massing of the building is broken up using reveals, paint color changes and articulation, allowing the scale to visually appear pedestrian -oriented. This is further enhanced with pronounced trellis awnings along the windows and contrast color Page 5 of 16 838 blocking at the roofline. At the tenant locations and in the mezzanine areas, windows and glazing reflect a stronger vertical orientation with simple frames. The building would have two-story glazing at the proposed office spaces on the north, east and northwestern elevations, primarily along Dublin Boulevard, maximizing natural light into the office and mezzanine spaces and providing distinct office entrances for multiple tenants. Additionally, the stone monument and lighting standards reflect a similar design employed in other areas of the Historic Area. Refer to Figure 3 for the proposed building perspective. Figure 3. Proposed Building Perspective Landscaping: The project site would provide approximately 99,106 square feet of new landscape area, including a new parking lot, site perimeter, building facade, and bio-retention landscaping. Approximately 14,350 square feet of landscaping would be provided within the parking lot, 15,390 square feet would be provided along the perimeter of the project site, 6,680 square feet would be incorporated into the walkways and outdoor seating area, and 13,936 square feet provided within the bio-retention areas at the north, southeastern and western portions of the project site. The remaining landscape square footage includes existing landscaping that is to remain. Existing landscaping west of the main driveway and new landscaping east of the main driveway would provide a landscape buffer along Dublin Boulevard to help soften the project frontage. Furthermore, along the southern boundary of the project site, all existing landscaping would remain within Parcel 2, which provides a buffer from the I-580 and helps soften the project design at the rear of the building. The landscape plan features a low water usage plant palette, including a variety of drought tolerant trees, shrubs and ground cover to provide visual interest in texture and color while conserving natural resources. Native plants are utilized to encourage biodiversity in conjunction with the existing riparian vegetation and Dublin Creek on Parcel 2. New plant screening that matches the plant pallet found in the Historic Area is provided in the setback along Dublin Page 6of16 839 Boulevard to minimize any undesirable visual impacts. Refer to Figure 4 for the proposed plant pallet. Figure 4. Proposed Plant Pallet The landscape edge along the eastern property line provides for new shrubbery and trees to screen the project from the adjacent properties. The existing landscaping on the adjacent property to the east would provide a visual separation between the project site and the U.S. Bank Branch, Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Pioneer Cemetery. Refer to Figure 5 for the proposed building perspective view from the Dublin Pioneer Cemetery. A condition of approval has been provided to ensure this landscaping is protected during grading/ construction activities. Large shade trees would be provided within the parking lot to provide a cooler environment, and reduce urban heat island effect. The landscape design preserves the existing Heritage trees on -site and incorporates them into the site design. Page 7 of 16 840 Figure 5. Proposed Building Perspective View from Dublin Pioneer Cemetery There are 89 existing trees on Parcel 1, of which 65 trees are proposed to be removed, including one of the four Heritage Trees as further discussed below. A total of 85 trees would be planted on Parcel 1. On Parcel 2, there are 108 trees, including 19 Heritage Trees, all of which would be preserved. Heritage Tree Removal Permit A Heritage Tree Removal Permit is required for any oak, bay, cypress, maple, redwood, buckeye and sycamore tree with a trunk or main stem 24 inches or greater in diameter measured four feet six inches above natural grade. There are four Heritage Trees on Parcel 1 and 19 on parcel 2 for a total of 23 heritage trees. One of the four Heritage Trees on Parcel 1 is proposed to be removed. That tree is a sycamore tree measuring 28.2 inches in diameter, which conflicts with the location of the proposed building. The Arborist Report is included as Attachment 10. CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN, SPECIFIC PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE: The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. The proposed project would provide space for light industrial uses that would cater to advanced manufacturing and life science tenants consistent with the Business/Industrial land use designation. Warehouse and distribution uses that would involve heavy truck traffic are not permitted. The proposed floor -area ratio (FAR) of 0.33 is within the FAR of 0.30 to 0.40 allowed in the Business Park/Industrial land use designation. Page 8 of 16 841 The Dublin Village Specific Plan provides discretion in applying various provisions in the design guidelines to specific projects. It is not anticipated that each guideline will apply equally to every project. In some cases, one or more of the guidelines may be relaxed to facilitate compliance with a more important or appropriate guideline for that project. In reviewing the proposed project, staff believes the intent and spirit of the design guidelines have been followed and the project respects its surroundings and honors the heritage and desired character of the area while balancing the economic development benefits this project would bring to Dublin. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed project. On May 15, 2023, the City issued a Notice of Preparation for an EIR and held a public scoping meeting on May 25, 2023. The City received three letters regarding the scope of the EIR. Subsequently, a Draft EIR was prepared for the proposed project and circulated for a 45-day public review period from August 21, 2023, to October 5, 2023. The City received three comment letters during the public review period. In addition, a fourth letter was received after the public review period. Responses have been prepared for each of the comments received by the City. The Draft EIR, comments and associated responses, and changes and clarifications to the Draft EIR constitute the Final EIR (Attachment 2). The environmental document prepared for the project is a Focused EIR that evaluates potential impacts of a limited number of environmental issue areas that the City determined to be significant (CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(c)(3)). After preparation of an Initial Study (Appendix A of Draft EIR, Attachment 6), the City determined that the proposed project would have significant or potentially significant impacts in the following topic areas that require further analysis and are, therefore, discussed in the Draft EIR: • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources* • Energy • Geology and Soils • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Tribal Cultural Resources The Draft EIR concludes that the proposed project would have a significant and unavoidable impact on Cultural Resources (noted above with *). The remaining topic areas have mitigation measures that have been prepared to reduce impacts in these areas to a level that is less than significant. The information and analysis presented in the Initial Study provides substantial evidence for the conclusion, for all the topic areas listed below, that: 1) CEQA standards triggering preparation of further environmental review do not exist for those topics; and 2) impacts under these topics would result in no impact or be less than significant. Page 9of16 842 • Aesthetics • Agricultural and Forestry Resources • Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Hydrology and Water Quality • Land Use and Planning • Mineral Resources • Noise • Population and Housing • Public Services • Recreation • Transportation • Utilities and Service Systems • Wildfire There were no impacts identified for the topic area listed above and, therefore, no mitigation is required. An overview of all topic areas is provided below. Aesthetics There were no potentially significant impacts identified for aesthetics and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Agricultural and Forestry Resources There were no potentially significant impacts identified for agricultural and forestry resources and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Air Quality Demolition activities and construction of the proposed project would involve the use of offroad equipment, haul trucks, and worker commute trips that would generate short-term criteria air pollutant emissions. Operation of the proposed project would generate long-term emissions associated with daily employee vehicle trips, building energy consumption, reapplication of architectural coatings, use of consumer products, and maintenance/testing of the fire pump. However, construction -related emissions of the proposed project would not exceed the thresholds of significance recommended by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The proposed project would implement BAAQMD's Basic Construction Mitigation Measures as noted in Mitigation Measure AQ-1 and be subject to BAAQMD Rules and Regulations for controlling fugitive dust emissions, which would reduce fugitive dust emissions during demolition and construction. Further, the proposed project would result in a net reduction of emissions compared to existing conditions and would not exceed BAAQMD thresholds of significance. The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, and construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with mitigation. Page 10 of 16 843 Biological Resources The project would involve the removal of approximately 65 trees which could be used by birds during the nesting season. If a tree containing an active nest were to be removed during construction, such removal would result in nest destruction and failure. Due to this potential for loss of nests and due to potential disturbance of nesting birds from noise and vibration during project construction, the impact to nesting birds would be potentially significant. However, nesting bird avoidance measures would be implemented as a mitigation measure to protect nesting birds; therefore, impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special status species would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation. Further, the riparian corridor associated with Dublin Creek on Parcel 2 could be used as foraging habitat for common bats. As such, trees that would be removed as part of the project outside of riparian areas may provide suitable day or night roosting habitat for bat species. Given the availability of alternative natural habitat for hibernaculum in the vicinity of the project and based on planned tree replacement, impacts on the habitat for bats are not expected to be significant. However, if construction were to remove trees containing bats during the maternity or winter season, bat mortality could occur, and the impact on common bat species would be potentially significant. Implementation of roosting bat surveys and avoidance as a mitigation measure would ensure that impacts to wildlife movement, migration, or nursery sites would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation. Cultural Resources A historical resource evaluation was prepared for the existing Hexcel research and development building to assess its eligibility for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). The building was determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR under Criterion 1 because it is significant at the national level for its associations within the Man in Space historic context published by the National Park Service and is, therefore, considered a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. The significance of a historical resource is considered to be "materially impaired" when a project demolishes or materially alters the physical characteristics that justify the determination of a historical resources' significance. Because the proposed project would result in the demolition of the existing Hexcel building, the impact would be significant and unavoidable. CEQA requires that all feasible mitigation must be completed even if it does not mitigate project impacts below a level of significance. Therefore, the following mitigation measures would still be implemented as part of the project, even though they would not fully offset the loss of the resource, and the impact would remain significant and unavoidable: • Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) Recordation: applicant shall document the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility prior to demolition consisting of a historical report and photographs. • Interpretive Displays: applicant shall install permanent interpretive displays or signage as prepared by an architectural historian for public exhibition detailing the history and Page 11 of 16 844 significance of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility. Further, based on the existence of archeological resources within and adjacent to the project area, there is a high probability of encountering historic -period archeological resources during ground disturbance at the project site, particularly within those portions of the property closest to St. Raymond's Church and Pioneer Cemetery, and a high probability of identifying Native American archeological resources, particularly within a 150-meter (493 foot) corridor centered on Dublin Creek. The possibility of encountering buried archaeological resources in the project area outside of the High Archeological Probability Area remains a concern as well, and per the mitigation measures in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and associated Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, requires mitigation to avoid adverse impact. Therefore, the project would be required to implement archaeological and tribal monitoring and produce an archaeological testing plan and treatment and monitoring plan prior to the start of construction. Inadvertent discovery protocols would also be implemented should precontact or historic -age resources be discovered. Together these mitigation measures would reduce the potential impact on archeological and buried resources to less than significant with mitigation. Energy The proposed construction activities would increase energy consumption for the duration of project construction in the form of fossil fuels (e.g., gasoline, diesel fuel). However, the operation of the proposed project would result in a net reduction in energy consumption, primarily related to improved building energy standards and eliminating natural gas infrastructure. Energy consumption associated with the construction and operation of the proposed project would not be inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary with the implementation of basic construction emission control practices per the air quality mitigation measures. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with mitigation. Geology and Soils The project site is composed of artificial fill to depths ranging from 1.5 - 5 feet, with native Contra Costa Group sediments below the fill. Most grading and earthmoving activities at the project site would extend to a maximum depth of two to three feet below the ground surface and, therefore, would generally be confined to the artificial fill material, which is not paleontologically sensitive. However, in areas where the artificial fill only extends to 1.5 feet, excavation and grading would encounter the native Contra Costa Group materials, which are of high paleontological sensitivity. Furthermore, excavation to a maximum depth of approximately twelve feet would occur at the proposed on -site stormwater drainage pumps, which would also encounter the paleontologically sensitive Contra Costa Group materials. Therefore, project -related earthmoving activities could result in accidental damage to or destruction of unique paleontological resources, and this impact would be potentially significant. To minimize the potential for destruction of or damage to previously unknown unique, scientifically important paleontological resources during earthmoving activities at the project site, the applicant would be required to retain a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist to provide the necessary information to all construction personnel regarding the procedure for encountering fossil fuels. Construction work would immediately cease within 150 feet of the find and a recovery plan would be developed to record and undergo appropriate curation. Therefore, with the implementation of these mitigation measures construction -related impacts to unique paleontological resources would be less than significant Page 12 of 16 845 with mitigation. Greenhouse Gas Emissions There were no potentially significant impacts identified for greenhouse gas emissions and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Hazards and Hazardous Materials It has been recommended that a subsurface investigation be completed in the vicinity of the on - site areas for chemical use, storage, and handling to assess whether a release occurred in the past. If soil or groundwater has been previously contaminated at levels that exceed regulatory thresholds, this would represent a significant human health and environmental hazard because excavation work would be required during construction that could release these hazardous materials. Furthermore, demolition of the existing building could expose workers and the environment to hazardous materials such as lead paint and/or asbestos. Therefore, these construction -related impacts are considered potentially significant and require mitigation. Prior to earthmoving activities, a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment must be completed and the building must be sampled for lead paint and/or asbestos. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, potential construction -related impacts from accidental exposure to hazardous materials would be less than significant with mitigation. Hydrology and Water Quality There were no potentially significant impacts identified for hydrology and water quality and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Land Use Planning There were no potentially significant impacts identified for land use planning and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Mineral Resources There were no potentially significant impacts identified for mineral resources and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Noise There were no potentially significant impacts identified for noise and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Population and Housing There were no potentially significant impacts identified for population and housing and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Public Services There were no potentially significant impacts identified for public services and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Recreation There were no potentially significant impacts identified for recreation and, therefore, no Page 13 of 16 846 mitigation is required. Transportation There were no potentially significant impacts identified for transportation and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Tribal Cultural Resources The proposed project would include excavation of the parking lot to the south of the existing Hexcel building, which is adjacent to the marked boundary of the Pioneer Cemetery. Marked grave sites in the cemetery are within five feet of the property line shared with the project site. Historic documents suggest that the cemetery was larger than the currently marked boundary. Additionally, there is anecdotal evidence that the cemetery location was first used by the Ohlone and may also include burials of Native American and Mexican farm laborers who worked for Jose Maria Amador, interred prior to formal consecration of the cemetery in 1859. It is likely that the cemetery extends beneath the Hexcel parking lot, and possible that the cemetery includes Native American human remains. If so, the impact on tribal cultural resources would be potentially significant during earthmoving and excavation activities. Inadvertent/unanticipated discovery protocols would be implemented, ensuring tribal cultural resources encountered during construction would be treated in a culturally appropriate manner in consultation with Tribal Representatives and, therefore, the impact on tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with mitigation. Utilities and Service Systems There were no potentially significant impacts identified for utilities and service systems and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Wildfire There were no potentially significant impacts identified for wildfire and, therefore, no mitigation is required. The City Council resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report is included as Attachment 1. To approve the project, the City Council must make findings regarding significant impacts and mitigation measures (Attachment 3), findings concerning infeasibility of alternatives and potential additional mitigation measures (Attachment 4), and will need to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) (Attachment 5) that identifies all environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated and explains why the benefits of the project outweigh its unavoidable environmental impacts. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is included as Attachment 6. The SOC is required in order to approve the project, if desired by a majority of the City Council. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: On December 12, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the proposed project. Two members of the public addressed the Commission regarding the project. After closing the public hearing and deliberating, the Planning Commission voted 3-2 to recommend approval of the Hexcel Redevelopment Project and adopted Resolution No. 23-11 (Attachment 11). In their Page 14 of 16 847 motion, the Planning Commission recommended that the Applicant consider incorporating more design elements found in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan area. Since the Planning Commission meeting, the Applicant has made the following changes to the project plans to address the Commission's comments: • Revised building colors to include muted earth tones to soften the building allowing it to blend more naturally with the landscape and the color schemes used on buildings in the Historic Area. • Modified the windows and glazing to reflect a stronger vertical orientation with simple frames in keeping with the Historic Area. • Provided more pronounced trellis awnings along windows. • Added a contrast color at the top of the building to reduce the massing. • Integrated stone monumentation within the landscape area near the front of the building, which is similar to what can be found in the Historic Area. • Incorporated light standards that reflect a similar design employed in other areas of the Historic Area. • Matched the plant pallet found in the Historic Area along the project frontage. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: Two City -led Community Meetings were held on October 25 and 26, 2023, to provide Dublin residents with information about the proposed Hexcel Redevelopment project. Staff provided a presentation that included an overview of the City's development review process and the proposed project. Questions were asked about the project's impact on infrastructure capacity and the general contractor that would be used for the project. Comments were also provided regarding the EIR and project design. In accordance with State law, a public notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the proposed project to advertise the project and upcoming public hearing. A public notice was also published in the East Bay Times and posted at several locations throughout the City. A Planning Application sign was posted on the project site and the project was also included on the City's Development Projects webpage. A copy of this Staff Report has been provided to the applicant. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Attachment 1- Resolution Certifying an Environmental Impact Report and Adopting Environmental Impact Findings, Findings Regarding Alternatives, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project Page 15 of 16 848 2) Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to the Resolution - Final Environmental Impact Report 3) Attachment 3 - Exhibit B to the Resolution - Findings Concerning Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 4) Attachment 4 - Exhibit C to the Resolution - Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Potential Additional Mitigation Measures 5) Attachment 5 - Exhibit D to the Resolution - Statement of Overriding Considerations 6) Attachment 6 - Exhibit E to the Resolution - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7) Attachment 7 - Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map and Approving a Planned Development Zoning District with Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project 8) Attachment 8 - Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project 9) Attachment 9 - Exhibit A to the Resolution - Hexcel Redevelopment Project Plans 10) Attachment 10 - Arborist Report 11) Attachment 11 - Planning Commission Resolution No. 23-11 Page 16 of 16 849 Hexcel Redevelopment City Council Meeting September I 7, 2024 DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Background • Hexcel Redevelopment project proposes redevelopment of an 8.8 I - acre site located at 1171 I Dublin Boulevard • Project would demolish the existing 62, 175-square-foot Hexcel research and development building and construct a new 125,532- square-foot light industrial building • On March 19, 2024, City Council held a Public Hearing to consider project • City Council continued project to a date uncertain and directed the applicant to modify the project design Response to Comments • The applicant has made the following changes to the project to address City Council's comments and concerns: — Revised paint color, materials and articulation — Added channel canopies and black trim around windows — Incorporated wood fencing element at entrance to tie with Heritage Park — Refined landscape plan to match existing landscape around Heritage Park — Added more trees and shrubbery along northern and eastern site boundaries — Relocated stone monument commemorative plaque to northeast corner of site for better visibility Revised Project Design — Building Perspective VM DUBLIN CALIFORNIA 853 Revised Project Design — Dublin Boulevard Frontage Landscaping VM DUBLIN 854 CALIFORNIA Revised Project Design Parking Lot Landscaping V VM DUBLIN 855 CALIFORNIA Revised Landscape Plan PLANT UST wrAgolar MULCHES BIG -RETENTION PLANTING LA WATER EFFICIENT LANDASCA7 REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENTATION neat, tr2 tam newevrAteo. rum. me. cottemr. WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS nen TA M.P.} CYCLX0 1.110. DUN. IN 91 Vfr Ii 1 I 1001IIO 31 DUBLIN CALIFORNIA 856 Revised Project Design LandscapeView from Cemetery VM DUBLIN CALIFORNIA ir 857 Revised Project Design —View from 1-580 VM DUBLIN 858 CALIFORNIA Environmental Review • Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for project • Draft EIR circulated from August 21, 2023 — October 5, 2023 — Draft EIR, comments and associated responses, and changes and clarifications to Draft EIR constitute the Final EIR • Potential environmental impacts: o Air Quality o Biological Resources o Tribal Cultural Resources o Energy o Geology and Soils o Hazards and Hazardous Materials o Cultural Resources* Recommendation Conduct a public hearing, deliberate, and take the following actions: • Adopt the Resolution Certifying an Environmental Impact Report and Adopting Environmental Impact Findings, Findings Regarding Alternatives, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program • Waive the reading and INTRODUCE the Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map and Approving a Planned Development Zoning District with Stage I and Stage 2 Development Plan • Adopt the Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit Hexcel Redevelopment City Council Meeting September I 7, 2024 DUBLIN CALIFORNIA September 17, 2024 SB 343 Senate Bill 343 mandates supplemental materials that have been received by the City Clerk's office that relate to an agenda item after the agenda packets have been distributed to the City Council be available to the public. The attached documents were received in the City Clerk's office after distribution of the September 17, 2024, Regular City Council meeting agenda packet. Item 6.1 862 DUBLIN CALIFORNIA THE NEW AMERICAN BACKYARD CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: September 17, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SUBJECT: Item 6.1: Hexcel Redevelopment (PLPA-2022-00038) The September 17, 2024, City Council Meeting includes the Hexcel Redevelopment project which includes a proposed Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, Heritage Tree Removal Permit, and certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. After the agenda was posted, it was discovered that two pages in the Hexcel Redevelopment Project landscape plans are incorrect (Sheet L1.1 on page 24 and L1.2 on page 25). The correct landscape plan pages have been incorporated into Attachment 9 — Exhibit A to the Resolution — Hexcel Redevelopment Project Plans. The two correct pages are attached here. 863 T ■ PLANT LIST CA. NATIVE SYM. NO. BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE WATER REGIME MATURE HABIT HYDROZONE H X W 30 LAURUS N. 'SAR4TOGA' 28 PISTACIA C. 'KEITH DAVEY' 1 LAGERSTROEMIA 'DYNAMITE RED' 19 ARBUTUS MARINA 4 PLATANUS ACERFOLIA SWEET BAY CHINESE PISTACHE CRAPE MYRTLE STRAWBERRY TREE LONDON PLANE TREE TOTAL NUMBER OF NEW TREES PROPOSED = 88 EVERGREEN SCREENING SHRUBS 29 ARBUTUS U. 'CO1" IPACTA' HETEROMELES ARBUTIFOLIA 24 CEANOTHUS 'RAY HARTMAN' 19 PRUNUS CAROLINIANA 'COMPACTA' 23 XYLOSMA CONGESTA GRASSES N a 12 MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS m 3 FESTUCA MAIREI NOT SHOWN m 55 LOMANDR4 L. 'LOMLON' • 88 FESTUCA GLAUCA 'ELIJAH BLUE' DROUGHT TOLERANT SHRUBS ACACIA R. 'DESERT CARPET' OLEA 'LITTLE OLLIE' N 46 SALVIA AROMAS 23 RHAMNUS C. 'MOUND SAN BRUNO' 24 HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA ® 63 RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA 'PINK LADY' t 61 CALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN' N ® 20 AGAVE D. 'VARIEGATA' N ® 31 LEUCOPHYLLUM F. 'BERTSTAR DWARF' N 0 13 CEANOTHUS 'POINT REYES' O 15 O 47 ii PERENNIALS g 41 TULBAGHIA V. 'TRICOLOR' N ® 12 VERBENA LILACINA 'DE LA MINA' N A 12 ACHILLEA 'MOONSHINE © 28 DIETES V. 'VARIEGATA' 4, OW. STRAWBERRY TOYON CEANOTHUS COMPACT CHERRY LAUREL SHINY XYLOSMA DEER GRASS ATLAS FESCUE LIME TUFF ELIJAH BLUE FESCUE PROSTRATE ACACIA W. FRUITLESS OLIVE CLEVELAND SAGE COFFEEBERRY RED YUCCA INDIAN HAWTHORNE PINK W. BOTTLE BRUSH AGAVE TEXAS RANGER CA. LILAC SOCIETY GARLIC VERBENA YARROW FORT NIGHT LILY 24' BOX or 1545 24' BOX or 1545 24' BOXCAR B<B 24' BOXCAR B<B 24' BOX OR 545 5 5 5 5 5 GAL, GAL GAL GAL GAL 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 GAL. GAL. GAL. GAL. GAL. GAL. GAL. GAL. GAL. GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. NOTE: ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED WHERE TREES ARE WITHIN 10' OF PAVEMENT. MULCHES M L L L L L L L L L BARK MULCH -ALL PLANTERS NOT DESIGNATED FOR SOD ORANIC RECYCLED CHIPPED WOOD MULCH- PLACE 3" MIN. DEPTH 1/2'- 3' LENGTH DECORATIVE COLOR DARK BROWN OR EQUAL NO VISIBLE CONTAMINANTS PLACE 3" MIN. DEPTH OF BARK IN ALL PLANT BASINS ALL MULCH AND COMPOST USED IN THE GENERAL LANDSCAPE AREAS AND ANY BIO-TREAMENT AREAS SHALL MEET SIB 1383 PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS. UPDATED LANDSCAPE PLAN SHEETS THAT SPECIFY MULCH AND COMPOST THAT MEET SB1383 PROCUREMENT STANDARDS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR PERMIT. RECOMMENDATION WILL SPECIFY THE PURCHASE OF MULCH AND COMPOST BE FROM A SUPPLIER THAT INDICATES SIB 1383 COMPLIANCE FOR EACH PRODUCT. SAMPLES OF MULCH SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO DELIVERY TO THE SITE. CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP AND MAINTAIN A COPY OF ALL RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE PROCUREMENT OF SIB 1383 COMPLIANT COMPOST AND MULCH. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECORDS INDICATING THE TOTAL COMPOST AND MULCH PROCURED OR USED, THE QUANTITY OF COMPOST (TONS OR CUBIC YARDS) AND MULCH (TONS) PROCURED FROM EACH FACILITY OR ENTITY, FACILITY OR VENDOR INFORMATION (NAME OF FACILITY, ADDRESS, CONTACT INFORMATION), A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE COMPOST AND/OR MULCH WAS USED, AND WHERE COMPOST AND MULCH WAS USED, AND INVOICES DEMONSTRATING PROCUREMENT. 30' X 20' 50' X 40' 15' X 15' 40' X 30' 10' X 50' 8' X S' PLANT 6' OC 12' X 15' PLANT 10' OC 8' X 8' PLANT 8' OC 12' X 8' 10' X 10' 2' X 3' PLANT 3' OC 3' X 3' 3' X 3' PLANT 3' OC 2' X 2' 2'X6' 6' X 6' 5' X 5' 4' X 5' 4' X 4' 5' X 5' 3' X 3' 2' X 3' 3' X 4' 2' X 6' 1' X 1.5' 2' X 3' 2X2 3' X 3' PLANT 6' OC PLANT 5' OC PLANT 4' OC PLANT 3' OC 000 / O r W /4./ W W W W W W r. 4/' W 4, 4, 4,W W W 4, •Y W W •Y W W W W W W W `, W W W W W W W /`Y W W W ., W W /W W W W 4, W W W /W W •Y W W W W W W / •, W W W W W W W W / 4, 4, 4, 4, 4., 4, 4, 4, 4,(\ \ 4, 4, 4' 4, 4, 4, 4,W W W W W W W W O W� 4, 4,4, 4, 4,\ W 4, 4, W •, W `` •Y W W W •Y W W W W •Y \ \ W W W € �W W � W O 0 BIO-RETENTION PLANTING B10-RETENTION NATIVE GRASS TO BE "510-FILTRATION SOD" AS AVAILABLE FROM DELTA BLUEGRASS GO. OR EQUAL. SOD SHALL BE GROWN IN A SANDY BASE TOPSOIL. TEMPORARY IRRIGATION TO BE PROVIDED FOR ESTABLISHMENT. SOD SHALL BE LAID WITH A MINIMUM OF IS" OVERLAP BETWEEN ADJACENT ENDS AND SHALL BE LAID HORIZONTAL/PARALLEL TO ANY SLOPE. SOD SHALL BE LAID TIGHT TO HEADER AND OR ADJACENT PAVEMENT. THE MINIMUM DIMENSION OF ANY GUT PIECE SHALL BE 12". EXISTING LANDSCAPE AREA TO REMAIN THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD PLACE PLANTS AROUND ABOVE GROUND UTILITIES TO SCREEN UTILITIES FROM PUBLIC STREETS AND PARKING AREAS AFTER PLACEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF UTILITY. PLANTINGS PER PLAN SHALL BE UTILIZED. PLANTS MAY BE RE -SPACED IN VICINITY OF UTILIY TO ACCOMODATE SCREENING. CONTACT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IF PLANTING REQUIRES CLARIFICATION. LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS: TOTAL PARKING AREA = 84,515 S.F. PARKING AREA INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING: 1. PAVEMENT INCLUDING ISLANDS, STALLS, AISLES AND ACCESS DRIVES 2. ADJACENT BUILDING FRONTAGE LANDSCAPE AREA INC. WALKS PARKING AREA LANDSCAPE REQUIRED = 12,611 S.F. (15% OF PARKING AREA) PARKING AREA LANDSCAPE PROVIDED = 14,350 S.F. (11%) NO. OF STANDARD PARKING SPACES = 211 TREES REQUIRED = 55 (1/4 SPACES) TREES PROVIDED = 55 TOTAL SITE LANDSCAPE: 99,106 S.F. LANDSCAPE BY AREA: PARKING AREA: 14,350 S.F (14%) SITE PERIMETER (NEW) :15,390 S.F. (15%) BUILDING FACADE (NOT INC IN PARKING): 6,680 S.F. (14%) BIO-RETENTION: 13,936 S.F. (1%) EXISTING TO REMAIN: 48,150 S.F. (49%) WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER W/ ET DATA, REPEAT CYCLING IRRIGATION ZONES PER PLANT WATER REQUIREMENTS RAIN SENSOR TO BE SPECIFIED SOIL AMENDMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED PLANTER SURFACE AREAS TO BE MULCHED WATER USAGE TO MEET STATE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE STANDARD 1' =30' } } } } } 0 15 30 60 150 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN SCALE: 1" = 30' DOCUMENTATION CONTACT THE CITY FOR FINAL INSPECTION OF LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. THE OWNER SHALL SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING TO THE CITY PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: CERTIFICATION OF INSTALLATION ACCORDING TO THE APPROVED PLAN. LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE WITH THE FOLLOWING SUBMITTALS TO BE PREPARED BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE CITY: THE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING 1. PROJECT INFORMATION: a. DATE OF LANDSCAPE PLAN SUBMITTAL± b. PROJECT APPLICANT± c. PROJECT ADDRESS (IF AVAILABLE, PARCEL AND/OR LOT NUMBER(S))± d. TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA (SQUARE FEET)± e. PROJECT TYPE (E.G., NEW, REHABILITATED, PUBLIC, PRIVATE, CEMETERY, HOMEOWNER- INSTALLED)± W f. WATER SUPPLY TYPE (E.G., POTABLE, RECYCLED, WELL) AND IDENTIFY THE LOCAL RETAIL WATER PURVEYOR IF THE APPLICANT 15 NOT SERVED BY A PRIVATE WELL± g. CHECKLIST OF ALL DOCUMENTS IN LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE± h. PROJECT CONTACTS TO INCLUDE CONTACT INFORMATION FOR THE PROJECT APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER± APPLICANT SIGNATURE AND DATE WITH STATEMENT, "I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE AND SUBMIT A COMPLETE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE"± 2. WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET ON THE FORM OR FORMAT PROVIDED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT± 3. SOIL MANAGEMENT REPORT± 4. LANDSCAPE DESIGN PLAN± 5. IRRIGATION DESIGN PLAN± AND 6. GRADING DESIGN PLAN. ORD. 6-18 (SEPTEMBER 2018) -1e- SUCTON DISCHARGE UNIT A EXISTING VEGETATION TO REMAIN TYP. OVERHEAI5J.�RIGATION SHALL BE SCHEDULED BETWEEN S:00PM AND 10:00AM UNLFS WEATHER CONDITIONS PREVENT IT. IF ALLOWABLE 1-1OURSF IRRIGATION DIFFER FROM THE WATER DISTRICT, THE STRICTER OF THE TWO SHALL APPLY. OPERATIONS OF THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM 01IrSIDE THE NORMAL WATERING WINDOW IS ALLOWED FOR AUDITING NP SYSTEM MAINTAINENCE THE IRRIGATION AUDIT SHALL INCLUDE, BUT IS-NCr LIMITED TO: INSPECTION, SYSTEM TUNE-UP, SYSTEM TEST WITH DISTR4BUTION UNIFORMITY, REPORTING OVERSPRAY OR RUNOFF THAT C ES OVERLAND FLOW, AND PREPARATION OF AN IRRIGATION SCHEDULE, INCLUDING CONFIGURING IRRIGATION CONTROLLERS WITH APPLICATION RATE, SOIL TYPES, PLANT FACTORS, SLOPE, EXPOSURE AND ANY OTHER FACTORS NECESSARY FOR ACCURATE PROGRAMMING. ORD. 6-1S (SEPTEMBER 201S) WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER W/ ET DATA, REPEAT CYCLING IRRIGATION ZONES PER PLANT WATER REQUIREMENTS RAIN SENSORTO BE SPECIFIED SOIL AMENDMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED PLANTER SURFACE AREAS TO BE MULCHED WATER USAGE TO MEET STATE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE STANDARD I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE AND SUBMIT A COMPLETE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN PLAN COMPLIES WITH DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 8.88 FOR THE EFFICIENT USE OF WATER BIA 4-12-23 DUBLIN BLVD. EXIST. STREET TREES / / PLAZA AREA WITH 6' BENCH - TYP 8 FS 0 373.5GB A XIST. STREETSCAPE I-IRUB AND GRASSES 1 , 1 , 4- \---T MAIN PLAZA -PUBLIC 4 EMPLOYEE AMENITY AREA 6' BENCH - TYP UNIT B ASR [ - 1-1 i i- L EXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN NEW LANDSCAPE •I/ 1/ ill � 4,- 1 -------I - -Ikka 6 FS 873 1- 1 1 1 1 CONCRETE ACCENT TYP. HPA architecture hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com GreenDesicn Landscape Architects, Inc. 1464 Popinjay Drive Reno, NV. p: 775 8291364 email: bhatch00@charter.net Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 ■ Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: CIVIL RJA STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL PLUMBING ELECTRICAL LANDSCAPE Green Design FIRE PROTECTION SOILS ENGINEER ■ Title: PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 BH 08/18/2022 COMMENTS COMMENTS 1-26-23 4-12-23 COMMENTS 11-3-23 REVISED 1-31-24 REVISED 6-10-24 Sheet: CA.LIC * 4511 L1.1 �,�tN11'S4UU W /49.99 tiA515 Ur titANINUS c(D) — — ■ 1' = 30' 0 15 30 PLANT LIST CA. NATIVE SYM. NO. BOTANICAL NAME ip 30 LAURUS N. 'SARATOGA' 28 PISTACIA C. 'KEITI-I DAVEY' 1 LAGERSTROEMIA 'DYNAMITE RED' 19 ARBUTUS MARINA 4 PLATANUS ACERFOLIA COMMON NAME SWEET BAY CHINESE PISTACI-IE CRAPE MYRTLE STRAWBERRY TREE LONDON PLANE TREE TOTAL NUMBER OF NEW TREES PROPOSED = 88 EVERGREEN SCREENING SHRUBS 29 ARBUTUS U. 'COMPACTA' 1 HETEROMELES ARBUTIFOLIA 24 CEANOTHUS 'RAY HARTMAN' O4 19 PRUNUS CAROLINIANA 'COMPACTA' 0 23 XYLOSMA CONGESTA GRASSES N c 12 MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS m 3 FESTUCA MAIREI m 55 LOMANDRA L. 'LOMLON' • 88 FESTUCA GLAUCA 'ELIJAH BLUE' DROUGHT TOLERANT SHRUBS O 15 ACACIA R. 'DESERT CARPET' O 41 OLEA 'LITTLE OLLIE' N 46 SALVIA AROMAS 23 RHAMNUS C. 'MOUND SAN BRUNO' 24 HESPER4LOE PARVIFLOR4 ® 63 RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA 'PINK LADY' t 61 CALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN' N ® 20 AGAVE D. 'vARIEGATA' N 1 31 LEUCOPHYLLUM F. 'BERTSTAR DWARF CEANOTHUS 'POINT REYES' ►wi N 0 13 PERENNIALS 41 TULBAGHIA V. 'TRICOLOR' N @ 12 VERBENA LILACINA 'DE LA MINA' N 0 12 ACHILLEA 'MOONSHINE © 28 DIETES V. 'VARIEGATA' W. STRAWBERRY TOYON CEANOTHUS SIZE 24' BOXor B<B 24' BOXor B<B 24' BOX OR BOB 24' BOX OR BOB 24' BOX OR B<B 5 GAL, 5 GAL 5 GAL COMPACT CHERRY LAUREL 5 GAL SHINY XYLOSMA DEER GRASS ATLAS FESCUE LIME TUFF ELIJAH BLUE FESCUE PROSTRATE ACACIA W. FRUITLESS OLIVE CLEVELAND SAGE COFFEEBERRY RED YUCCA INDICN HAWTHORNE PINK W. BOTTLE BRUSH AGAVE TEXAS RANGER CA. LILAC SOCIETY GARLIC VERBENA YARROW FORT NIGHT LILY 5 GAL 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 5 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. NOTE: ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED WHERE TREES ARE WITHIN 10' OF PAVEMENT. LANDSCAPE NOTES: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL GUARANTEE ALL PLANT MATERIALS FOR ONE FULL YEAR UPON FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN THE SITE ,INCLUDING WATER SCHEDULING AND MOWING, FOR THE ONE YEAR GUARANTEE PERIOD. ANY PLANTS REPLACED UNDER THIS GUARANTEE SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR ONE FULL YEAR FROM THE DATE OF REPLACEMENT. TAG ALL REPLACED PLANT MATERIAL WITH REPLACEMENT DATE. SOIL IN THE PLANTER AREAS SHALL BE AMENDED PER A SOIL ANALYSIS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS PREPARED BY AN AGRICULTURAL SUITABILITY SOIL TESTING SERVICE AFTER PLANTERS ARE BROUGHT TO GRADE PER CIVIL GRADING PLAN. ALL SOIL ANALYSIS AND REPORTS SHALL SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF 412.5 IN THE CALIFORNIA WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE FOR A SOIL MANAGEMENT REPORT. THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PREPARATION TH I S REPORT SHALL BE THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT THE REPORT TO THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE CITY. SHRUB PLANTERS: COLLECT A MINIMUM OF 16 SOIL SAMPLES FROM ONSITE PLANTER AREAS AFTER PLANTERS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO GRADE. THOROUGHLY MIX THE COLLECTED SAMPLES AND SUBMIT ONE MIXED SAMPLE FOR ANALYSIS WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ORGANIC SOIL AMENDMENT. PLANTER AREA SOILS SHALL BE AMENDED PER THE SO I L ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS TO A MIN. DEPTH OF 6" PRIOR TO PLANTING. AT MINIMUM FOR SOILS LESS THAN 6% ORGANIC MATTER IN THE TOP 6 INCHES OF SOIL, COMPOST AT A RATE OF FOUR CUBIC YARDS PER 1,000 S.F. OF PERMEABLE AREA SHALL BE INCORPORATED TO A DEPTH OF SIX INCHES INTO EXISTING SOIL. PLANTER AREAS: LOOSEN SOIL TO A DEPTH OF 12" PRIOR TO AMENDING. SPREAD AMENDMENT AND INCORPORATE PER SOIL ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS OR MIN. STATED WHICH EVER 15 GREATER. RAKE OUT ALL ROCK AND DEBRIS GREATER THAN 1 1/2" DIA. RAKE TO AN EVEN GRADE. SOIL REPORT SHALL INCLUDE SOIL INFILTRATION RATE FOR IRRIGATION SCHEDULING. PLANT BAGKF I LL SHALL BE AMENDED AT THE TIME OF PLANTING PER THE SOIL RECOMMENDATIONS. IN ROCK MULCH AREAS WHERE SHRUBS AND OR TREES ARE AT A MINIMUM OF 10' OC, SOIL AMENDING MAY BE PROVIDED PER INDIVIDUAL PLANT PIT BAGKF I LL ONLY. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE SPRAYED WITH VERMA-PLEX OR EQUAL ORGANIC FOL I AR FERTILIZER AFTER INSTALLATION. SOIL SHALL NOT BE TILLED OR AMENDED WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF EXISTING TREES IF PRESENT ONSITE. A COPY OF THE SOIL ANALYSIS AND SOIL AMENDMENTS INCORPORATED SHALL BE SUBMITTED THE OWNER AND THE CITY AS PART OF THE PROJECT . LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING PLANT MATERAIL PER SYMBOLS AND SPACING INDICATED ON THE PLAN. SYMBOLS PREVAIL OVER QUANTITIES LISTED IN THE PLANT LEGEND. 24 HR. MIN. NOTICE TO THE OWNER REPRESENTATIVE REQUIRED FOR PLANT MATERIAL REVIEW PRIOR TO PLANTING. ALL PLANT SUBSTITUTIONS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 60 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN SCALE: 1" = 30' 150 WATER REGIME MATURE HABIT HYDROZONE H X W L L L L M L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L 30' X 20' 50' X 40' 15' X 15' 40' X 30' 10' X 50' 8'X8'PLANT 6'OC 12' X 15' PLANT 10' OC 8'X8'PLANT 8'OC 12' X 8' 10' X 10' 2' X 3' PLANT 3' OC 3' X 3' 3' X 3' PLANT 3' OC 2' X 2' 2' X 6' 6' X 6' PLANT 6' OC 5' X 5' 4' X 5' PLANT 5' OC 4' X 4' PLANT 4' OC 5' X 5' PLANT 3' OC 3' X 3' 2' X 3' 3' X 4' 2' X 6' 1'X15' 2' X 3' 2 X 2 3' X 3' ALL PLANTS NOT MEETING OR EXCEEDING REQUIREMENTS AND RECOMMENDA- TIONS OF ANSI 260.1 'AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK' SHALL BE REJECTED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RECEIVE ON -SITE APPROVAL OF PLANT MATERIAL BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO PLANTING. FAILURE TO RECEIVE APPROVAL PRIOR TO PLANTING MAY RESULT IN REJECTION AND THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE ALL REJECTED PLANT MATERIAL AT H15 EXPENSE. THE OWNER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO INSPECT AND EVALUATE PLANT MATERIAL THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE PERIOD. THE CONTRACTOR 15 RESPONSIBLE FOR NOTIFYING THE OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE A MIN. OF 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE FOLLOWING SITE OBSERVATIONS AND/OR MEETINGS. A. PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH ALL PARTIES. B. PLANT MATERIAL ON SITE, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. C. PLANT LOCATIONS STAKED, PRIOR TO PLANTING. D. FINAL PROJECT WALK-THROUGH E. ADDITIONAL SITE OBSERVATIONS DETERMINED BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE OR CONTRACTOR IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO LOCATE AND PRO- VIDE PLANT MATERIAL AS SPECIFIED ON THIS FLAN. THE CONTRACTOR MAY SUBMIT A REQUEST TO PROVIDE SUBSTITUTIONS FOR THE SPECIFIED PLANT MATERIAL UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. ANY SUBSTITUTIONS PROPOSED SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE WITHIN TWO WEEKS OF THE AWARD OF CONTRACT. SUBSTITUTIONS MUST MEET EQUIVALENT DESIGN AND FUNCTIONAL GOALS OF THE ORIGINAL PLANT MATERIAL AS DETERMINED BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. ANY CHANGES MUST NAVE THE APPROVAL OF THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. B. THE REQUEST MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY AT LEAST THREE NOTICES FROM PLANT SUPPLIERS THAT THE PLANT MATERIAL SPECIFIED IS NOT AVAILABLE PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION SUBMIT I DIGITAL COPY OF ALL LANDSCAPE MATERIALS FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. SUBMIT DIGITAL PHOTOS OF ALL PLANT MATERIAL WITH A STANDARD MEASURING DEVICE CLEARLY VISIBLE FOR APPROVAL AND RECORD PRIOR TO DELIVERY TO THE SITE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE OWNER'S SITE SUPERINTENDENT IN VARIFIYING ELEVATION OF FINISHED GRADE PER CIVIL 15 COMPLETE AND IN PLACE PRIOR TO START OF WORK. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSURE POSITIVE DRAINAGE IN ALL PLANTER AREAS PER CIVIL ENGINEERS GRADING PLAN AFTER MOUNDING/LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS ARE COMPLETE. MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.1 0 1 1 1 1 1 -- 1) - i i CHERRY LAUREL HEDGE I TO MAINTAINED -�- AT 1' X 5' 3 00 UNIT C 0"6' STREETSCAPE PLANTING IN 8°G DUBLIN BLVD. 8"W(P) vilsonEr 4L. II17,7'Ii 7,:f ITT I 14171177117411477 71' T.11 2" T 7r/ 4.\Z\I'„:\r L\I 47t ����MPIP111 AP 1/ EXIST. 10' WATER LINE EX. DDCV 11 11 11 11 !TT D ° aD ° D ° D D a D D Q ° D °. . ° p a a D a a D Q D a Q a D a d D D a a D a a a — I. • I� D Q FD INIqa D PIN _I S ° D a EXISTING FENCE TO LIMIT OF NEW LANDSCAPE CCCCCC \ 4' W W N N W W W i \ \ 4' \ \ is 4, 4, 4, a a Dv a ° SS STUB UNIT D a a I • � �� TRENCH DRAIN W W W W W 4. W W W W �W\ 4. W W \W W 0 0 0 HPA architecture hpa, inc. 600 grand ave, suite 302 oakland, ca 94610 tel: 949.862.2113 email: hpa@hparchs.com GreenDeswin, Landscape Architects, Inc. 1464 Popinjay Drive Reno, NV. p: 775 8291364 email: bhatch00@charter.net Developer DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101 Torance, CA 90502 Project: 11711 DUBLIN BLVD. DUBLIN, CA ■ Consultants: CIVIL STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL PLUMBING ELECTRICAL LANDSCAPE FIRE PROTECTION SOILS ENGINEER RJA Green Design ■ Title: PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN Project Number: Drawn by: Date: Revision: 21657 BH 08/18/2022 COMMENTS COMMENTS 1-26-23 4-12-23 COMMENTS 11-3-23 REVISED 1-31-24 REVISED 6-10-24 Sheet: 1_1 2 r DUBLIN CALIFORNIA STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 7.1 DATE: September 17, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.ECT: Draft Economic Development Strategy Prepared by: Rhonda Franklin, Management Analyst 11 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will review the draft Economic Development Strategy. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Review and provide direction on the draft Economic Development Strategy. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. DESCRIPTION: On September 5, 2023, the City Council approved an agreement with Strategic Economics, Inc. (the Consultant), to update the Economic Development Strategy and General Plan Economic Development Element (Project) which was originally developed and approved by the City Council in 2012. Since then, Staff and the Consultant have made significant progress on the Project including the following key activities: • Organizing and conducting focus group meetings with members of the City Council, Staff, property owners/managers and brokers, regional agencies, business owners/managers, developers, and other stakeholders; • Developing and conducting online surveys with the business community and the community at large; • Gathering data relative to the Project; and • Analyzing information from the focus group meetings, surveys, and other sources to Page 1 of 4 866 determine Dublin's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. On May 21, 2024, the City Council received a presentation from the Consultant on the Economic Development Strategy Framework, which served to provide an initial review and discussion on the overarching recommendations, goals, objectives, strategies, and priorities for the Project. The City Council provided feedback on the Framework which has been incorporated into the draft Strategy, including: • Advocating for a full -service hotel; • Enhancing small business support and communication; • Incorporating life sciences as a focus for new industry in addition to biomedical; and • Enhancing business engagement and outreach. The Consultant received the feedback provided by the City Council and developed the draft Strategy (Attachment 1) and associated Implementation Matrix (Attachment 2). The Consultant will provide a presentation on these, which includes the proposal of seven goals. • Goal 1- Innovation Growth Grow businesses and employment in innovation -oriented and professional services industries matching Dublin's strengths and opportunities —especially computer technology, professional services, biomedical devices, and other R&D/advanced manufacturing —through business attraction and marketing programs. • Goal 2 - Promote Infill Investment Promote infill development and reinvestment in older retail, office, and industrial areas — including establishing Downtown Dublin as a vibrant community gathering space with a mix of modern employment, housing, retail, dining, and entertainment uses serving residents and workers. • Goal 3 - Greenfield Development Ensure development of major greenfield opportunity sites with modern commercial and light industrial employment uses by supporting infrastructure needs and reducing cost barriers. • Goal 4 - Retail Vitality Sustain and strengthen the health of Dublin's shopping, dining, and entertainment businesses through strategic planning and promotional efforts. • Goal 5 - Hospitality Expansion Work with regional agencies to expand and highlight Dublin's potential as a regional hotel and hospitality destination through hotel attraction efforts and advocacy for attracting a multiuse venue to Dublin. • Goal 6 - Small Business Support Strengthen startup and growth opportunities for small businesses by pursuing improvements to City processes and maintaining and marketing supportive services and programs. Page 2 of 4 867 • Goal 7 - Workforce Opportunities Enhance Dublin's workforce support and development systems to create opportunities for all members of the workforce through collaboration with regional organizations. Commercial Vacancy Tax Program Summary During the discussion of the Project at the May 21, 2024 City Council meeting, the City Council requested a summary of commercial vacancy tax programs, covering potential benefits and drawbacks, along with examples of cities where these programs have succeeded or failed. Research finds that a commercial vacancy tax (or fee) could be applied as a flat amount, percentage, or on an assessed value basis. Implementing the program as a tax would require placing a measure on the ballot for voter approval. It could also be implemented as a fee, essentially a method of recovering costs associated with administering the program. The benefits of a commercial vacancy tax or fee could include the creation of a financial incentive for property owners to actively lease their spaces, thereby enhancing local economic activity and revitalizing commercial areas. The drawbacks would include increasing costs for property owners, which could be passed on to tenants or could deter investment in applicable areas, and City resources (i.e. additional staff and financial expenses). Table 1 below lists the two Bay Area cities that currently have a commercial vacancy tax and a brief overview of their respective programs. Table 1. Summary of Bav Area Cities with a Vacancy Tax Program City Tax or Fee Commercial Property Type Vacancy Definition Program Implemented Oakland Tax • Nonresidential (Tax Rate: $6,000 per parcel) • Parcel with ground floor commercial activity allowed but vacant (Tax Rate: $3,000 per parcel) • Undeveloped (Tax Rate: $6,000 per parcel) In use less than 50 days in a calendar year 2019 San Francisco Tax Ground floor of any portion of a building or structure where the ground floor is: • Adjacent or tangent to a public right of way • Located in a specific commercial district • Is not residential real estate (Tax rate: $250-$500 per linear foot of Unoccupied, uninhabited, or unused for more than 182 days whether consecutive or nonconsecutive in a tax year 2024 Page 3 of 4 868 frontage for taxable commercial space) An Oakland City Council Staff Report dated June 26, 2024 shows that the overall number of parcels assessed, since the vacancy tax was implemented, declined during the first three tax years (2019- 2021), but increased by approximately 20 percent from tax year 2021 to 2022. The commercial vacancy tax for San Francisco went into effect January 1, 2024, and therefore not enough data yet exists to determine whether the program has successfully met the intended outcomes. Other California cities in which a commercial vacancy tax or fee was considered, but did not receive enough support to move forward, were: • Richmond - the City Council decided to look at alternative methods. • West Hollywood - the City Council was not in favor of a ballot measure. • San Marino - the ballot measure for specified vacant commercial and residential properties did not receive the two-thirds vote required for the approval. In the cases of Oakland and San Francisco, it is important to note that both municipalities are charter cities, are highly urbanized, and have population densities greater than Dublin. Ultimately, Staff would not recommend a commercial vacancy tax (or fee) for Dublin given the administrative burden, unintended consequences, and financial strain on landowners. Staff regularly receives inquiries requesting information on lease availabilities, and property managers/landowners are eager to lease spaces quickly. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: The City Council Agenda was posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Draft Economic Development Strategy 2) Draft Economic Development Strategy Implementation Matrix Page 4 of 4 869 Attachment I It'i A STRATEGIC ECONOMICS REAL ESTATE STRATEGY CITY OF DUBLIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS PUBLIC DRAFT Prepared for: City of Dublin September 17, 2024 irm DUBLIN CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 0 Table of Figures 1 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 2 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 II. INTRODUCTION 7 III. SUMMARY OF "SWOT" CONCLUSIONS 9 IV. COMMUNITY AND BUSINESS SURVEY FINDINGS 16 V. CHANGES AND PROGRESS SINCE THE 2012 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY 17 VI. GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS 19 Goal 1: Innovation Growth 20 Goal 2: Promote Infill Investment 23 Goal 3: Greenfield Development 26 Goal 4: Retail Vitality 29 Goal 5: Hospitality Expansion 30 Goal 6: Small Business Support 32 Goal 7: Workforce Opportunities 35 VII. ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 37 VIII. APPENDICES 38 871 Table of Figures Figure 1: Jobs By Industry Sector in Dublin, 2023 9 Figure 2: Total Population of Tri-Valley Cities, 2000 to 2022 10 Figure 3: Job Growth by Industry Sector in Dublin and the Tri-Valley, 2016 to 2023 11 Figure 4: Office and Industrial Inventory in Dublin and Other Tri-Valley Communities, Square Feet, 2023 12 Figure 5: Dublin Educational Attainment for the Population 25 Years and Over, 2010 and 202113 Figure 6: Dublin Shopping Centers 14 Figure 7: Race in Dublin, 2000 - 2021 15 Figure 8: Online Survey Major Findings 16 Figure 9: Review of the 2012 City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy: Priorities, Goals, and Implementation Status 17 Figure 10: GOAL 1- Innovation Growth Implementation Matrix 22 Figure 11: GOAL 2 - Infill Investment Implementation Matrix 25 Figure 12: GOAL 3 - Greenfield Development Implementation Matrix 28 Figure 13: GOAL 4 - Retail Vitality Implementation Matrix 30 Figure 14: GOAL 5 - Hospitality Expansion Implementation Matrix 31 Figure 15: GOAL 6 - Small Business Support Implementation Matrix 33 Figure 16: GOAL 7 - Workforce Opportunities Implementation Matrix 36 City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 1 872 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS City Council Michael McCorriston Sherry Hu Jean Josey Kashef Qaadri Janine Thalblum Melissa Hernandez Focus Group Participants Councilmember, Mayor Councilmember, Vice Mayor Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember Former Mayor Lesleigh Alderman Stephen Baiter, EBEDA Cindy Bannister, Orchard Commercial Jeff Birnbaum, CBRE Kelly Bowers, Three Valley's Community Foundation Michael Carrigg, Colliers Joe Castorena, Dogtopia Julia Duncan, Tri-Valley ROP Cindy Eszlinger, James Allyn Printing Co. Tracy Farhad, Visit Tri-Valley Matt Garrett, Lawrence Livermore National Lab Diane Halden, Colliers Frank Hanna, Twisted Pair Inc. Shawn Hardy, Hines Taz Harvey, Dublin Honda and Mazda Rick Hearn, Vestar Yu Ji, Avant Anti -Aging Steve Kau, CPA Veena Kaul, Kensington Laboratories Online Survey Participants Jeanette Lema, Hively Nancy Mangold, East Bay SBDC Katie Marcel, Innovation Tri-Valley Charles Martinez, Vestar Lydia Moore, Fresh Millions Karen Nguyen, Karen Nguyen - Skincare and Lashes Jaimie Orfanos, Alameda County Larry Plisskin, Pharmor Realty Wil Ridder, Valley Link Tim Sbranti, Innovation Tri-Valley Angela Season, KeyPoint Credit Union John Sechser, TRI Commercial Kelly Shiffer, DWS Group Mike Smith, Lee and Associates Stephanie and Wendy, Three Sheets Craft Beer Bar Carol Therien, Retail Pacific Sandra Weck, Colliers Sawsan Wolski, Dublin Arts Collective Many thanks to the numerous Dublin community members and businesses who shared their experiences and perspectives on this project through the online survey. City Staff Linda Smith, City Manager Colleen Tribby, Assistant City Manager Hazel Wetherford, Deputy City Manager William McDonald, Fire Chief Nate Schmidt, Police Chief Andrew Russell, Public Works Director Jeff Baker, Community Development Director Neda Zayer, Assistant Community Development Director Felicia Escover, Economic Development Manager Crystal De Castro, Senior Planner Rhonda Franklin, Management Analyst 11 City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 2 873 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Dublin Economic Development Strategy is an implementation -focused plan that prioritizes and guides the City of Dublin's economic development activities for the next five to seven years. The Strategy primarily focuses on goals and strategies that the Office of Economic Development will implement with assistance from other City departments and outside partners or organizations. The Economic Development Strategy incorporates technical analysis findings, results of stakeholder engagement, and input from City decisionmakers and staff. The conclusions of these efforts identify Dublin's competitive advantages and opportunities and led to the creation of strategies and actions that best support Dublin's long term economic development. The Economic Development strategies and implementation actions are grouped into seven goals that support Dublin's overall economic vitality. The seven goals are identified below, along with the strategies that the City of Dublin will implement to achieve the goals. Goal 1: Innovation Growth. Grow businesses and employment in innovation -oriented and professional services industries matching Dublin's strengths and opportunities —especially computer technology, professional services, biomedical devices, and other R&D/advanced manufacturing — through business attraction and marketing programs. Historically, Dublin's economy focused more heavily on household -serving uses, government jobs, and a few larger headquarters, regional offices, and manufacturing/R&D facilities. The City is now poised to pivot toward more aggressive business and job growth in innovation -oriented industries. Attraction of these industries is made possible by Dublin's larger and highly educated population, mix of infill development opportunities at land with existing uses or buildings, greenfield development opportunities on vacant land, and longstanding assets such as accessibility via BART and 1-680/1-580 and location within the dynamic Tri-Valley market area. The proposed strategies include: • Adjusting outreach and engagement to focus on high -priority industry opportunities, and • Establishing a business -friendly brand unique to Dublin's economic development efforts targeted to the noted industries and activities. Goal 2: Promote Infill Investment. Promote infill development and reinvestment in older retail, office, and industrial areas —including establishing Downtown Dublin as a vibrant community gathering space with a mix of modern employment, housing, retail, dining, and entertainment uses serving residents and workers. Dublin includes commercial and industrial developments that are now several decades old and positioned to benefit from reinvestment, modernization, or transformational change. These changes will enable Dublin to better compete for innovation -oriented businesses in the industries specified in Goal 1, create a community gathering space in Downtown Dublin, and attract modern retail, dining, recreation, and entertainment amenities. The strategies focus on supporting four locations with significant potential: City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 3 874 • Investing in Downtown Dublin as an innovation district and a vibrant mixed -use community, • Exploring opportunities with the Hacienda Crossings shopping center ownership to support reinvestment, tenant attraction, reducing barriers to diversifying uses, and re - visioning of the center, and • Determining the functionality and relevance of existing industrial buildings for manufacturing, R&D, and construction businesses —especially at Sierra Court Industrial area. Goal 3: Greenfield Development. Ensure development of major greenfield opportunity sites with modern commercial and light industrial employment uses by supporting infrastructure needs and reducing cost barriers. Dublin's undeveloped "greenfield" sites represent major opportunities for attracting commercial and light industrial development. The Fallon East Economic Development Zone —located east of Fallon Road and north of I-580—is an opportunity to attract development of modern facilities that meet the needs of tenants in innovation -oriented industries. The Dublin Centre project could potentially provide a second downtown -like community gathering space southeast of Tassajara Road and Dublin Boulevard. Undeveloped properties owned by Alameda County east of the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station could accommodate transit -oriented development, including "Campus Office" employment uses specified for these properties in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. An adjacent property east of Arnold Road, currently owned by IKEA, could potentially accommodate a variety of commercial uses. The following strategies focus on prioritizing greenfield sites to ensure future growth supports the economic development needs of Dublin: • Prioritizing the Fallon East Economic Development Zone as a key district for attracting R&D, biomedical, office, manufacturing and other light industrial uses, • Supporting the Dublin Centre Project's commercial component as a modern mixed -use space, and • Collaborating with Alameda County and the adjacent property owner to attract desired development to parcels near the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. Goal 4: Retail Vitality. Sustain and strengthen the health of Dublin's shopping, dining, and entertainment businesses through strategic planning and promotional efforts. Dublin's retail, dining, and entertainment opportunities continue to evolve in response to growing e-commerce sales and a growing preference for vibrant public places, including retail destinations. As more sales shift online —particularly for undifferentiated "commodity" goods —the tenant mix within physical storefront spaces will continue to shift toward a greater emphasis on dining, entertainment, personal and medical services, food/grocery, and unique "boutique" retail. Retail formats will also increasingly favor mixed -use, pedestrian -friendly environments providing a vibrant "third space" separate from places of home and work for the community to gather. The following strategies seek to support Dublin's retail opportunities in light of these trends: City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 4 875 • Investigating other incentives, and changes to zoning and land use regulation to reduce barriers for retail conversion, • Continuing and expanding the monitoring of performance of existing shopping centers and commercial areas in Dublin —especially those consisting of businesses threatened by e-commerce trends —by comparing sales tax performance of tenants to "comparable" retailers to provide notice of tenants at risk of closure, and • Supporting the health of Dublin's automobile dealerships and other large sales tax revenue generators through continuation of one-on-one engagement. Goal 5: Hospitality Expansion. Work with regional agencies to expand and highlight Dublin's potential as a regional hotel and hospitality destination through hotel attraction efforts and advocacy for attracting a multiuse venue to Dublin. Dublin's opportunities to attract additional hotels are linked to employment and business growth within the city and Tri-Valley, as well as growth of new visitor attractions. The strategies focus on positioning Dublin to benefit from ongoing efforts to attract additional hotel stays and visitation: • Positioning Dublin to attract or leverage opportunities related to the potential multiuse sports, entertainment, and conference venue that Visit Tri-Valley is seeking to bring to the region, and • Working with relevant regional stakeholders to market Dublin as an ideal location for visitors seeking access to employment destinations and events in the Tri-Valley and beyond. Goal 6: Small Business Support. Strengthen startup and growth opportunities for small businesses by pursuing improvements to City processes and maintaining and marketing supportive services and programs. Dublin offers a variety of services to support small businesses. Opportunities exist to ensure that these services are widely known, proven to be effective, and successfully targeted to Dublin's increasingly diverse community of business owners. The following strategies target improvements in the support offered by the City of Dublin for local small businesses: • Enhancing efficiency and transparency with business applicants during City processes, • Enhancing marketing of City -offered incentives, services, and programs to existing small businesses, • Enhancing engagement between the City of Dublin and the full diversity of local small businesses —especially those related to the city's large and rapidly growing Asian populations, and • Expanding small business technical training resources as necessary. Goal 7: Workforce Opportunities. Enhance Dublin's workforce support and development systems to create opportunities for all members of the workforce through collaboration with regional organizations. Dublin's population is relatively well educated overall, but 15 percent of residents hold a high school diploma or did not finish high school. Dublin also includes a concentration of jobs in industry sectors that typically offer relatively low pay and limited benefits —such as retail, food City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 5 876 services, and personal services. Although the City does not directly provide education, training, and workforce development services, the City of Dublin has an opportunity to ensure these services are readily accessible for Dublin residents and workers. Dublin can also potentially enhance regional commute access for Dublin workers and residents. Workforce strategies include: • Leveraging regional workforce and economic development organizations and initiatives to ensure education and training services are accessible and appropriate for Dublin residents and workers, and • Leveraging initiatives to expand and invest in transportation infrastructure that supports worker access to jobs, including the Valley Link Project. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 6 877 II. INTRODUCTION The Dublin Economic Development Strategy is an implementation -focused action plan that serves to prioritize and guide the City of Dublin's economic development activities for the next five to seven years. The Strategy primarily focuses on strategies and actions that the Office of Economic Development will implement with assistance from other City departments and outside partners or organizations. After adoption of the Strategy, the City of Dublin also intends to adopt an updated Economic Development Element of the City's General Plan. The Element serves as a citywide vision and policy plan, while the Strategy functions as a shorter -term and implementation tool. This new Economic Development Strategy identifies and leverages the mix of longstanding and new opportunities for the City of Dublin to expand business and workforce opportunities in the community. Dublin's previous Economic Development Strategy dates to 2012. In the 12 years since then, Dublin's population rapidly grew, the COVID-19 pandemic transformed where and how people work, retail opportunities have continued to evolve as e-commerce has grown, and regional and local economic conditions have continued to change. Process for Developing the Strategy The Economic Development Strategy incorporates technical analysis findings, results of stakeholder engagement, and input from City decisionmakers and staff. The conclusions of these efforts identified Dublin's competitive advantages and opportunities, and led to the creation of strategies and actions that best support Dublin's long term economic development. Steps taken to develop the Economic Development Strategy are detailed below: • Technical Analyses: The consultant team —consisting of Strategic Economics, Greensfelder Real Estate Strategy, and Tawni Sullivan (a life science real estate industry expert) —completed detailed economic, market, workforce, and retail and trend analysis to identify Dublin's assets and opportunities. The analyses assessed demographic, employment, real estate, retail, and hotel/tourism conditions and trends. The conclusions of the technical analyses are incorporated in the Strategy, and the full technical analysis report is included as an appendix. • Business and Community Surveys: Strategic Economics conducted two online community surveys targeted to Dublin residents and businesses, respectively. The surveys gauged respondents' opinions regarding the business environment in Dublin, priorities for economic development efforts, and the City's performance in creating a positive business environment. The results of the surveys were summarized in a Community Engagement Report that is included in the community engagement appendix of the Economic Development Strategy. • Stakeholder Interviews: The consultant team and City staff completed seven focus group meetings with local and Tri-Valley stakeholders to gain insights into concerns and priorities relating to economic development for the City of Dublin. The focus groups consisted of commercial brokers and developers, local businesses, local and regional community and non- profit organizations, interested property managers and property owners, regional agencies, and City staff. Strategic Economics also conducted separate interviews with members of the Dublin City Council. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 7 878 Report Contents The remainder of the Economic Development Strategy consists of the following content: 1. Summary of "SWOT" Conclusions: Describes Dublin's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats that informed the Strategy. 2. Summary of Community and Business Survey Findings: Describes key takeaways from the community and business surveys conducted for the Strategy. 3. Changes and Progress Since the 2012 Strategy: Provides an overview of the City's progress in implementing the 2012 Economic Development Strategy, including ongoing City efforts and notes on how Dublin's economic opportunities have evolved over time. 4. Goals, Strategies, and Implementation Actions: Describes strategies and implementation actions to achieve seven goals that will guide the City of Dublin's economic development efforts over the next five to seven years. For each goal, an implementation action summary table notes the time frame, responsible party, potential partners, and metrics for measuring implementation progress. 5. Economic Performance Indicators: This section lists specific performance indicators that Dublin can use to measure the impact and progress of the Economic Development Strategy. 6. Technical Appendices: The appendices include a technical report describing the findings and conclusions of the analyses and stakeholder input, a study of retail conditions and opportunities, and a summary of the business and community survey results. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 8 879 III. SUMMARY OF "SWOT" CONCLUSIONS The in-depth analyses and community engagement efforts completed for the Economic Development Strategy identified several significant strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) applicable to Dublin's economic development efforts. The conclusions of this analysis are summarized below, with detailed analysis provided in an appendix to the Economic Development Strategy. Key Industries Dublin's economy has historically focused heavily on household -serving uses and government jobs. Illustrated in Figure 1, more than 22 percent of Dublin's total jobs in 2023 were in the "Government" sector (government programs/facilities of all types) and another 30 percent of total jobs were in household -serving industries such as retail, services, and health care. These household -serving jobs corresponded to the city's rapid growth as a residential community. Dublin also includes a longstanding presence of several corporate headquarters or major offices for companies representing a variety of industries. Multiple retail, medical device, financial services, and business services companies have headquarters or major regional offices in Dublin. Examples of companies located in Dublin include Ross Stores Inc., Patelco Credit Union, TriNet, and Zeiss Meditec. FIGURE 1: JOBS BY INDUSTRY SECTOR IN DUBLIN, 2023 MAJOR INDUSTRY SECTORS GREEN = HIGHLY CONCENTRATED IN DUBLIN RELATIVE TO TRI-VALLEY Government I Health Care and Social Assistance Accommodation and Food Retail Trade Other Services (Excluding Public Administration) Construction Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 1 Management of Companies and Enterprises Administrative & Support, Waste Management and.. Manufacturing Information Finance and Insurance Educational Services I= Real Estate and Rental and Leasing I= Wholesale Trade NI Transportation and Warehousing r Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation I• Other Industries II 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 TOTAL JOBS Source: Lightcast Employment Q3 2023 Data; Strategic Economics, 2023. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 9 880 Dublin is positioned to build on its larger and highly educated residential base to pivot toward more aggressive business and job growth in professional services and innovation -oriented industries. As shown in Figure 2, Dublin's population grew more than 136 percent from 2000 to 2022—the fastest rate among Tri-Valley cities and now approaching the size of Pleasanton, San Ramon, and Danville. Dublin's residents are also highly educated, with nearly 70 percent of Dublin's population age 25 or older holding a bachelor's degree or higher. Dublin's larger and highly educated population base will allow the city to better compete for jobs in professional services and innovation -oriented industries. As illustrated in Figure 3, Dublin's job growth in the Information industry sector (which includes software and media) and Finance and Insurance sector exceeded the Tri-Valley as a whole from 2016 to 2023. Dublin also attracted more than $300 million in venture capital investments in software and electronic hardware technology related businesses from 2018 to 2023. Given these strengths and broader regional economic trends, Dublin is positioned to attract long term growth in computer technology, professional services, biomedical industries, and other R&D and advanced manufacturing businesses. FIGURE 2: TOTAL POPULATION OF TRI-VALLEY CITIES, 2000 TO 2022 100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 2000 2010 2022 .,Dublin Livermore .,Pleasanton ,San Ramon .Danville Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000,2010, ACS 2018-2022; Strategic Economics, 2024 City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 10 881 FIGURE 3: JOB GROWTH BY INDUSTRY SECTOR IN DUBLIN AND THE TRI-VALLEY, 2016 TO 2023 Information Health Care and Social Assistance Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Administrative & Support, Waste Management... Management of Companies and Enterprises -� Transportation and Warehousing Educational Services Finance and Insurance —� Manufacturing L All Jobs 1 Accommodation and Food ■ Construction Other Services (Excluding Public Administration) ■ Government '� Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Retail Trade 7 Wholesale Trade Other Industries -100% -50% 0% 50% 100% 150% Job Growth, 2016-2023 Source: Lightcast Employment Q3 2023 Data; Strategic Economics, 2023 • Dublin • Tri-Valley The Tri-Valley's robust regional institutional assets and industry organizations create opportunities to enhance Dublin's economic development efforts. Nearby institutions and organizations such as Sandia National Laboratory, Las Positas College, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and i-Gate attract talent to the Tri-Valley, drive innovation, and create ongoing potential for Dublin to capture spinoff business growth. Infrastructure, Built Environment, and Real Estate Dublin's office and light industrial building inventory is relatively small and becoming dated as little new development activity occurs —creating a need to support further build -to -suit and speculative development through business attraction and development support efforts. Demand for Dublin's inventory of office and light industrial spaces is reasonably strong, although the city has a much smaller share of new space suitable for office, R&D, and manufacturing uses than other Tri-Valley cities, as illustrated in Figure 4. Recent new office, light industrial, and R&D development activity has been limited, resulting in an aging building stock. Stakeholders interviewed for the Economic Development Strategy noted the need for modernized office, light industrial/flex, and R&D space that offers the chance for businesses to locate and expand in Dublin. This space is more likely to be built when demand rises to a level such that a large business seeks a new build -to -suit space, or when achievable rents and other development conditions improve in Dublin and across the Bay Area. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 11 882 Speculative office and life science development is currently constrained throughout the Bay Area due to recent increases in labor and materials costs, increased financing costs, and limited access to capital. Fortunately, Dublin's economic development efforts have contributed to the construction of the Zeiss Innovation Center, the proposed Dublin Commons project, and redevelopment of the former Hexcel property. FIGURE 4: OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL INVENTORY IN DUBLIN AND OTHER TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITIES, SQUARE FEET, 2023 20,000,000 18,000,000 16,000,000 14,000,000 32) 12,000,000 10,000,000 - 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 I Dublin • Pleasanton Source: CoStar, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023 Livermore San Ramon Danville Building Type ■ Industrial ■ Office Flex Dublin's remaining greenfield development sites are major opportunities to attract large-scale, modern office, R&D, and manufacturing uses, but each site requires unique infrastructure or other development support. Dublin's "greenfield" commercial and light industrial opportunity sites consist of previously undeveloped properties at the Fallon East Economic Development Zone, Dublin Centre Project, and near the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. This collection of greenfield sites is an asset that Dublin can use to attract new innovation -oriented businesses and, in the case of Dublin Centre, create a modern mixed -use community gathering space. The City is already working to address the major infrastructure needs at the Fallon East Economic Development Zone, and proactively engaging developers at the other major greenfield sites. Several of Dublin's older existing commercial areas, like Downtown Dublin and Hacienda Crossings, require reinvestment and modernization —creating a need for the City to balance efforts to develop greenfield sites while also supporting the health of older commercial properties. Various older commercial areas in Dublin have outdated space that does not meet the needs of modern tenants. In addition, many of these areas suffer from a lack of amenities and welcoming public gathering spaces. These environments are made even less welcoming by limited pedestrian access to and within the shopping centers. The Downtown Dublin Specific Plan intends to resolve these issues by creating a modern mixed -use environment with bike and pedestrian connections, but similar efforts should be targeted for other commercial areas like Hacienda Crossings. Overall attempts to modernize and reinvest in Dublin's existing buildings, spaces, and districts will help balance citywide economic development by promoting infill development in conjunction with ongoing greenfield development. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 12 883 Dublin has strong demand for its limited existing industrial space, but competition from recreation and other household -serving uses creates a need to consider potential preservation of these spaces for industrial uses. According to CoStar real estate data, the vacancy rate in Dublin's small inventory of industrial spaces has been below one percent for much of the past five years. Although Dublin includes a few larger industrial buildings, the variety of smaller buildings and spaces within the Sierra Court Industrial area represents more than 78 percent and 60 percent of Dublin's industrial and flex space, respectively. This important reservoir of industrial space for construction, manufacturing, repair and maintenance uses in Dublin is also experiencing strong demand from recreation and fitness tenants — creating a need to examine the appropriate balance of uses to ensure production, distribution, and repair services and businesses are still accommodated in Dublin. However, if these spaces are preserved for innovation -oriented industrial uses, then it will also be important to ensure recreational and fitness businesses are accommodated elsewhere in Dublin. Workforce and Job Access Growth of local jobs aligned with Dublin's highly educated population will create an opportunity for more residents to work locally and help reduce current long commutes. Dublin's residents enjoy excellent access to jobs throughout the region via I-580, 1-680, and two BART stations. However, local growth of jobs aligned with Dublin's highly skilled and educated workforce, as shown in Figure 5, will create an opportunity for more residents to work locally and potentially reduce the 35 percent share of Dublin workers commuting more than 40 minutes to work (according to U.S. Census ACS 2017- 2021 estimates). FIGURE 5: DUBLIN EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT FOR THE POPULATION 25 YEARS AND OVER, 2010 AND 2021 60,000 • Doctorate Degree 50,000 • Professional School Degree 40,000 Master's Degree 0 30,000 • Bachelor's Degree a °- 20,000 ■Some College 10,000 2010 2021 High School Graduate (Includes Equivalency) • Less than High School Source: U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2010-2014, 2017-2021 5 Year Estimates; Strategic Economics, 2023. Collaborations with Tri-Valley workforce development organizations can enhance the trained and skilled workforce available for Dublin employers and support career opportunities for workers in Dublin. Collaborations with education and workforce development partners can support the availability of trained workers for Dublin employers across all categories of skills and occupations. Workforce and education service providers can also create new career opportunities for workers in Dublin's large share of jobs in industries that typically pay relatively lower wages and have less job stability, such as retail, food service, and personal services. Examples of regional workforce development organizations City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 13 884 include Tri-Valley Career Center, Las Positas College, and the Tri-Valley Regional Occupational Program. Retail and Hotels Dublin's retail inventory is large and desirable for a wide range of tenants. Dublin has approximately four million square feet of retail space, including a variety of regional and local shopping centers —as shown in Figure 6—and large automobile dealerships. Automobile dealerships and automobile -related businesses generated over 40 percent of Dublin's sales tax revenue in 2022—the City's largest category of sales tax revenue —followed by general consumer goods, business to business sales, and restaurants and hotels. Dublin's overall retail sales have recovered overall since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, although performance varied by category of retail. FIGURE 6: DUBLIN SHOPPING CENTERS •f San Ramon Golf Club San Ramon Village F ,, N& r m m o `°• Dougherty -o •i.: a Dr % n111yd4 -o NI ci. O� O O D ton? :'74, 0O DO~ Shopping Centers in the Dublin Area Center Square Feet Center Type Camp Parks Military Reservation Komandorski Village Livermore Pleasanton • Community Center • Lifestyle Center O Neighborhood Center O Outlet Center O Power Center • Strip Center • Super Regional Mall -n III "e O Fa oen es. • o F � — V 10 3 0 m J = 0 167,000 - 260,000 260,001 - 580,000 580,001 - 875,000 °Greater than 875,000 Dublin - • ow 0 0 " ii you ik O 0 a' Pleasanton Sports Park h Or o 0 O 0 1.5 Milos Black Ave ✓ a Sources: oStar, 2023; Esri, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. co nth Park 0 Source: CoStar, 2023; Esri, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dublin's retail, dining, and entertainment opportunities will need to continually evolve in response to growing e-commerce sales and the evolution of bricks -and -mortar retail. As more sales shift online — particularly for undifferentiated "commodity" goods —Dublin should anticipate that the tenant mix within physical storefront spaces will continue to shift toward a greater emphasis on dining, entertainment, personal and medical services, food/grocery, and unique "boutique" retail. These trends are apparent in Dublin's sales tax data for 2022 to 2023, which indicates increasing sales in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan area but declines among "big box" power centers that typically sell many goods readily available online. These trends especially create challenges for large-scale City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 14 885 shopping centers like Hacienda Crossings. Demand for different types of spaces continues to evolve, and there is currently relatively lower demand for big -box retail spaces than in the past. Broader retail trends make it increasingly difficult to fill large vacant retail space, and it is often expensive or impractical to split these spaces for use by more than one retailer. Dublin's retail spaces primarily consist of traditional automobile -oriented shopping centers and commercial corridors; the city lacks amenity -rich community gathering destinations, although opportunities exist in Downtown Dublin and Dublin Centre. Despite Dublin's strong quality of life and desirable climate, safety, and location, residents and businesses continue to note its lack of a vibrant community gathering space with pedestrian accessibility. Current public -private efforts are underway to develop such a place in Downtown Dublin with the Dublin Commons project, and the Dublin Centre project is also planning to create a similar activity node. Dublin's rapidly diversifying population opens new opportunities to attract businesses reflectinga wide variety of cultural influences. Since 2000, U.S. Census data shows that Dublin's population growth overwhelmingly consisted of residents identifying as Asian, as shown in Figure 7. The U.S. Census American Community Survey estimates that, as of 2021, 48 percent of Dublin's Asian residents were of Indian origin, 26 percent of Chinese origin, and nine percent of Filipino origin. Half of Dublin's residents report speaking a language other than English at home. The rich diversity of Dublin's population creates opportunities to further support the diverse mix of retail, grocery, dining, and personal services businesses in the city. FIGURE 7: RACE IN DUBLIN, 2000 - 2021 Total Population 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 2000 2010 2020 • White • Hispanic or Latino • African American or Black Asian • Other Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000, 2010, ACS 2017-2021; Strategic Economics, 2023. Regional initiatives to attract hotel stays and a multiuse venue can support local hotels in Dublin. Dublin's hotels primarily attract business travelers based on the city's convenient access to major employers throughout the Tri-Valley and beyond. As hotel occupancy and revenues continue to recover over time since the COVID-19 pandemic, Dublin can position itself to leverage Visit Tri-Valley's efforts to expand visitation. Visit Tri-Valley is pursuing development of a multiuse sports, entertainment, and conference venue, which Dublin could either seek to attract to the city itself or seek to leverage for further hotel stays. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 15 886 IV. COMMUNITY AND BUSINESS SURVEY FINDINGS As part of the Economic Development Strategy process, Strategic Economics administered two online surveys to Dublin residents and businesses, respectively. Both surveys were used to inform the selection of both strategies and implementation actions for the City of Dublin. The surveys' major findings are summarized below and grouped by general positive opinions and concerns about Dublin. The detailed survey findings are shown in an appendix to the Economic Development Strategy. FIGURE 8: ONLINE SURVEY MAJOR FINDINGS Community Survey Positive Opinions about Dublin A wide variety of dining, beverage, and entertainment destinations Large amount of welcoming public parks Large quantity of different shopping and retail stores Concerns about Dublin Lack of high -quality job opportunities compatible with residents Housing affordability Limited downtown or large community gathering space Over -emphasis on residential development by the City Positive Opinions about Dublin Proximity to potential customers Safe and welcoming community Desirable demographic composition and trends City Staff responsiveness and communication Concerns about Dublin Lack of affordable office, retail, or industrial space High water and utility costs and fees Limited awareness of City funding and incentives among existing local businesses City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 16 887 V. CHANGES AND PROGRESS SINCE THE 2012 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY The City of Dublin's previous Economic Development Strategy established four priorities based on conditions and opportunities identified in 2012. The City of Dublin has made —and continues to make — substantial progress on implementing that strategy's implementation actions. Although the new Economic Development Strategy re -prioritizes and adjusts the City's efforts, the Strategy also seeks to build upon and enhance past successes and ongoing actions by the City of Dublin's economic development team. The previous priorities and related ongoing current City actions are described in Figure 9 below. FIGURE 9: REVIEW OF THE 2012 CITY OF DUBLIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY: PRIORITIES, GOALS, AND IMPLEMENTATION STATUS 2012 Priority 2012 Strategy Actions Ongoing City Efforts Economic Vibrancy Continued development and job growth Maintain and enhance ED activities, Business visits and roundtables including marketing and branding Business incentive and recognition programs Engaging with regional economic development efforts and organizations Maintaining responsive communications, including ongoing interactions with brokers and property owners Small Business Facilitate business expansion projects Enhance development services, with streamlined permitting for routine growth -supporting real estate improvement projects Management of small business navigator and business concierge programs Promotional campaigns, including a holiday gift guide, small business spotlight series, and bi- monthly newsletters Small business support via grants, a mobile text program, business visitation program, and special events like a small business night at the farmers' market Eastern Transit Center Encourage new development, particularly commercial office and retail spaces Increase partnerships with real estate developers and landowners to entitle and market sites As -needed development support Coordination with Alameda County Surplus Property Authority Downtown Dublin Expedite progress toward the Downtown Vision Explore options to facilitate development, including financing mechanisms, funding sources, and revitalization tools Significant ongoing Downtown Dublin development support The City of Dublin has made especially significant progress in implementing the Downtown Dublin and Eastern Transit Center goals. Efforts at Downtown Dublin include completion of an Urban Land Institute Technical Assistance Panel, approval of the Downtown Preferred Vision, adoption of specific plan amendments, adoption of public -private agreements, and a variety of other ongoing development City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 17 888 support efforts. Progress at the Eastern Transit Center includes construction of a parking garage, construction of additional housing, tenanting of storefront spaces, and ongoing support for potential development projects. In addition, Dublin has continued to balance competing priorities as R&D and entertainment uses compete for limited affordable space. The City of Dublin also proactively continued to identify and pursue new opportunities since the 2012 Economic Development Strategy was adopted, as demonstrated by ongoing progress in pursuing development and business attraction to the Fallon East Economic Development Zone. This area consists of approximately 285 acres of largely undeveloped land northeast of Fallon Road and 1-580. In the years since 2012, the City of Dublin recognized this area as a major commercial and industrial development opportunity and has thus far approved General Plan land use amendments in 2022, established an incentives package for targeted types of businesses, and is working with property owners, and the City of Livermore to fund and construct the Dublin Boulevard extension to support future development. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 18 889 VI. GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS The following strategies and implementation actions are organized within seven goals that reflect challenges and opportunities identified through the technical analyses and community outreach activities completed for the Economic Development Strategy. An "implementation matrix" follows each set of strategies and actions. The matrices provide detailed strategy implementation guidance by specifying the following information: • Time frame: Details the timing of action implementation. Actions that must be continuously implemented over time are marked as "ongoing." • Subarea: Indicates whether the action item primarily applies citywide or to specific locations. • Supporting organization/department: Lists City departments or outside partners necessary for successful action implementation (in partnership with Dublin's Economic Development staff). • Metrics for Measuring Progress: Identifies potential metrics for tracking progress in implementing a given strategy or action. Goals The strategies and actions focus on achieving the following seven primary goals to support Dublin's economic vibrancy, workforce opportunities, and overall quality of life. These goals are rooted in the opportunities and challenges noted in this report's "Summary of SWOT Conclusions." Goal 1: Innovation Growth Grow businesses and employment in innovation -oriented and professional services industries matching Dublin's strengths and opportunities —especially computer technology, professional services, biomedical devices, and other R&D/advanced manufacturing —through business attraction and marketing programs. Goal 2: Promote I nfi l I Investment Promote infill development and reinvestment in older retail, office, and industrial areas — including establishing Downtown Dublin as a vibrant community gathering space with a mix of modern employment, retail, dining, and entertainment uses serving residents and workers. Goal 3: Greenfield Development Ensure development of major greenfield opportunity sites with modern commercial and light industrial employment uses by supporting infrastructure needs and reducing cost barriers. Goal 4: Retail Vitality Sustain and strengthen the health of Dublin's shopping, dining, and entertainment businesses through strategic planning and promotional efforts. Goal 5: Hospitality Expansion Work with regional agencies to expand and highlight Dublin's potential as a regional hotel and hospitality destination through hotel attraction efforts and advocacy for attracting a multiuse venue to Dublin. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 19 890 Goal 6: Small Business Support Strengthen startup and growth opportunities for small businesses by pursuing improvements to City processes and maintaining and marketing supportive services and programs. Goal 7: Workforce Opportunities Enhance Dublin's workforce support and development systems to create opportunities for all members of the workforce through collaboration with regional organizations. Goal 1: Innovation Growth Historically, Dublin's economy focused more heavily on household -serving uses, government jobs, and a few larger headquarters, regional offices, and manufacturing/R&D facilities. The City is now poised to pivot toward more aggressive business and job growth in innovation -oriented industries, as indicated by recent venture capital investments and attraction of facilities such as the Zeiss Innovation Center. Attraction of these industries is made possible by Dublin's larger and highly educated population, mix of infill development and greenfield development opportunities, and longstanding assets such as accessibility via BART and 1-680/1-580 and location within the dynamic Tri-Valley market area. Based on this mix of assets and current economic trends, high -priority industry opportunities include: • Information Technology, Software, and Artificial Intelligence • Professional Services • Biomedical - Including medical equipment/device R&D and manufacturing The following strategies seek to support Dublin in attracting and retaining businesses in these growing industry opportunities. Strategy 1.1 Adjust, enhance, formalize, and implement outreach and engagement with businesses, brokers, industry associations, and Tri-Valley institutions to focus on high -priority industry opportunities, including information technology, professional services, and biomedical uses such as medical equipment/device R&D and manufacturing. Action 1.1.1 Establish standing industry stakeholder groups for information technology, professional and financial services, and biomedical businesses. Convene meetings with each stakeholder group twice per year to communicate City news and learn about these employers' needs and concerns. Action 1.1.2 Convene meetings with brokers, developers, and major property owners twice per year to provide updates regarding City efforts, resources, and major development projects, and to receive input regarding conditions and needs. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 20 891 Strategy 1.2 Action 1.1.3 Focus existing business visitation program towards high -priority industries to identify specific business needs while connecting them with available resources and services. Action 1.1.4 Continue City practices of offering business seminars and hosting roundtable programs in collaboration with relevant regional stakeholders such as the Dublin Chamber of Commerce and the East Bay Economic Development Alliance. Within these events, target high -priority industries to maintain relationships with these businesses and better understand challenges and opportunities for City staff to provide support. Action 1.1.5 Continue partnership with local and regional entities such as the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, Innovation Tri-Valley, i-Gate, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratory, East Bay Small Business Development Center, and East Bay Economic Development Alliance to participate in business events and other relevant trade shows or industry groups. Establish a business -friendly brand unique to Dublin's economic development efforts targeted to the noted industries and activities, with a focus on Dublin's competitive assets such as its geographic location near 1-580 and 1-680, BART access, high educational attainment, and major infill and greenfield development opportunity sites. Action 1.2.1 Conduct annual City staff trainings to establish a shared understanding of Dublin's assets and messaging for economic development and emphasize the benefits of ensuring the City maintains a business -friendly environment. Action 1.2.2 Undertake and implement an economic development -tailored marketing and branding strategy that focuses on Dublin's competitive assets and transformational development projects/areas identified through the Economic Development Strategy effort, as well as existing business and development incentives. As part of this new branding identity, create a cohesive marketing plan that includes an updated webpage unique to the economic development branding strategy creation of new materials for handout at industry meetings, and refreshed press and media engagement. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 21 892 FIGURE 10: GOAL 1- INNOVATION GROWTH IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX Action Item Time Frame Subarea Supporting Organization / Department Metrics for Measuring Progress 1.1.1. Establish standing industry stakeholder groups for information technology, professional and financial services, and biomedical businesses. Convene meetings with each stakeholder group twice per year to communicate City news and learn about these employers' needs and concerns. Ongoing Citywide Dublin Chamber of Commerce, Biomedical Manufacturing Network, Daybreak Labs, i-Gate Completion of semi-annual meetings 1.1.2. Convene meetings with brokers, developers, and major property owners twice per year to provide updates regarding City efforts, resources, and major development projects, and to receive input regarding conditions and needs. Ongoing Citywide Completion of semi-annual meetings 1.1.3. Focus existing business visitation program towards high -priority industries to identify specific business needs while connecting them with available resources and services. Ongoing Citywide Number of businesses contacted and visited 1.1.4. Continue City practices of offering business seminars and hosting roundtable programs in collaboration with relevant regional stakeholders such as the Dublin Chamber of Commerce and the East Bay Economic Development Alliance. Within these events, target high -priority industries to maintain relationships with these businesses and better understand challenges and opportunities for City staff to provide support. Ongoing Citywide Dublin Chamber of Commerce, East Bay Economic Development Alliance, technical service providers, topic area experts Number of seminars and roundtable programs held 1.1.5. Continue partnership with local and regional entities such as the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, Innovation Tri- Valley, i-Gate, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratory, East Bay Small Business Development Center, and East Bay Economic Development Alliance to participate in business events and other relevant trade shows or industry groups. Ongoing Citywide Dublin Chamber of Commerce, Innovation Tri- Valley, i-GATE, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratory, East Bay Small Business Development Center, and East Bay Economic Development Alliance Number of events attended by City staff City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 22 893 Action Item Time Frame Subarea 1.2.1. Conduct annual City staff trainings to establish a shared understanding of Dublin's assets and messaging for economic development and emphasize the benefits of ensuring the City maintains a business -friendly environment. 1-2 years and then Citywide Ongoing Supporting Organization / Department Community Development Department, Public Works Department, Fire, City Manager's Office Metrics for Measuring Progress Completion of annual staff trainings 1.2.2. Undertake and implement an economic development -tailored marketing and branding strategy that focuses on Dublin's competitive assets and transformational development projects/areas identified through the Economic Development Strategy effort, as well as existing business and development incentives. As part of this new branding identity, create a cohesive marketing plan that includes an updated webpage unique to the economic development branding strategy, creation of new materials for handout at industry meetings, and refreshed press and media engagement. 1-2 years Citywide Goal 2: Promote !nth! Investment City Manager's Office, Community Development Department, Communications Division, Information Systems Division Completion of updated marketing and branding strategy Dublin includes commercial and industrial developments that are now several decades old and positioned to benefit from reinvestment, modernization, or transformational change. These changes will enable Dublin to better compete for innovation -oriented businesses in the industries specified in Goal 1, create a community gathering space in Downtown Dublin, and attract modern retail, housing, dining, recreation, and entertainment amenities. The strategies focus on supporting three locations with significant potential. First, substantial public and private efforts are already underway to construct the "Dublin Commons" project within the Downtown Dublin Preferred Plan area. The new project envisions the creation of a new community gathering hub with a mix of retail, life science, and residential uses. Second, the large Hacienda Crossings shopping center represents a variety of potential future opportunities to attract new entertainment and dining tenants, and potentially re -envision the center's design and uses. Finally, the future of Dublin's older industrial building stock —especially within the Sierra Court Industrial area — must be carefully considered to examine the proper balance between retaining industrial uses versus allowing other uses to repurpose these spaces. Strategy 2.1 Identify and implement investments, partnerships, and regulatory changes that accelerate the emergence of Downtown Dublin as an innovation district and a vibrant mixed -use community and regional gathering destination —including improved integration of the Downtown Core area with other subareas. Action 2.1.1 Continue providing supportive services, regulatory amendments, and participating in development negotiations as part of the public -private City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 23 894 Strategy 2.2 Strategy 2.3 partnership to accelerate buildout and tenanting of the Dublin Commons project. Action 2.1.2 Explore adoption of funding and financing tools —including enhanced infrastructure financing districts and community facilities districts —to accelerate construction of public infrastructure that supports buildout of the Dublin Commons project and improves multimodal transportation connections within and between subareas of Downtown Dublin. Action 2.1.3 Continue to build partnerships with interested property owners and developers to identify and implement opportunities to accelerate the development of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan area. Action 2.1.4 Explore the potential creation of a business and innovation incubator space in the Downtown Dublin area. Explore opportunities with the Hacienda Crossings shopping center owner to support tenant attraction (including non-traditional anchors that attract foot traffic, such as medical office uses), expansion of entertainment and dining, reducing barriers to diversifying uses, and incentivizing reinvestment and new development. Action 2.2.1 Maintain proactive regular contact with Hacienda Crossings management and ownership to identify and address barriers and opportunities for attracting tenants and reinvestment at the shopping center —especially for the specified tenant types and potential addition of different commercial and residential uses. Promote existing tenant attraction incentives such as the sales tax reimbursement program. Action 2.2.2 If the Hacienda Crossings ownership chooses to pursue a significant master planning or re -visioning process for the center, collaboratively identify ways to support and accelerate this process. Undertake a process to determine the functionality and relevance of existing industrial buildings for manufacturing, R&D, and construction businesses; implement land use restrictions as needed to preserve the diversity of spaces available for businesses. Action 2.3.1 Conduct ongoing actions to study the functionality, relevance, challenges, and opportunities of industrial spaces, especially within the Sierra Court Industrial area. This study includes establishing areas of focus, conducting outreach to businesses with new or existing business licenses in those areas, and seeking targeted feedback from real estate brokers and property owners. Action 2.3.2 Based on the findings of the preceding action, investigate the need for land use restrictions that limit or expand the types of uses permitted in City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 24 895 specific industrial areas in Dublin, particularly in the Sierra Court Industrial area. FIGURE 11: GOAL 2 - INFILL INVESTMENT IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX Action Item Time Frame Subarea Supporting Organization / Department Metrics for Measuring Progress 2.1.1. Continue providing supportive services, regulatory amendments, and participating in development negotiations as part of the public private partnership to accelerate buildout and tenanting of the Dublin Commons project. Ongoing Downtown Dublin Retail District City Manager's Office; Dublin Commons development partner Progress in Dublin Commons buildout and tenanting 2.1.2. Explore adoption of funding and financing tools —including enhanced infrastructure financing districts and community facilities districts —to accelerate construction of public infrastructure that supports buildout of the Dublin Commons project and improves multimodal transportation connections within and between subareas of Downtown Dublin. 1-2 years Downtown Dublin Retail District Dublin Commons development partner Decisions and potential implementa- tion of funding tools 2.1.3. Continue to build partnerships with interested property owners and developers to identify and implement opportunities to accelerate the development of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan area. Ongoing Downtown Dublin Retail District, Downtown Dublin Village Parkway, Downtown Dublin TOD Interested property owners and developers in Downtown Dublin Contacts with property owners and developers 2.1.4. Explore the potential creation of a business and innovation incubator space in the Downtown Dublin area. 1-2 years Downtown Dublin Retail District, Downtown Dublin Village Parkway, Downtown Dublin TOD East Bay Economic Development Alliance, Innovation Tri-Valley, i-Gate, Daybreak Labs, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratory, Las Positas College Creation of an innovation incubator space in Downtown Dublin 2.2.1. Maintain proactive regular contact with Hacienda Crossings management and ownership to identify and address barriers and opportunities for attracting tenants and reinvestment at the shopping center— especially for the specified tenant types and potential addition of different commercial and residential uses. Promote existing tenant attraction incentives such as the sales tax reimbursement program. Ongoing Hacienda Crossings Hacienda Crossings management, ownership, and businesses Contacts and implementing any resulting action steps City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 25 896 Action Item Time Frame Subarea Supporting Organization / Department Metrics for Measuring Progress 2.2.2. If the Hacienda Crossings ownership chooses to pursue a significant master planning or re -visioning process for the center, collaboratively identify ways to support and accelerate this process. 3-5 years Hacienda Crossings Hacienda Crossings Ownership Collaboration with potential Hacienda Crossings re visioning process 2.3.1. Conduct ongoing actions to study the functionality, relevance, challenges, and opportunities of industrial spaces, especially within the Sierra Court Industrial area. This study includes establishing areas of focus, conducting outreach to businesses with new or existing business licenses in those areas, and seeking targeted feedback from real estate brokers and property owners. 2-3 years Citywide, Sierra Court Industrial area Community Development Department Number of businesses, brokers, and property owners contacted; completion of study 2.3.2. Based on the findings of the preceding action, investigate the need for land use restrictions that limit or expand the types of uses permitted in specific industrial areas in Dublin, particularly in the Sierra Court Industrial area. 3-5 years Citywide, Sierra Court Industrial area Community Development Department If needed, land use code amendments Goal 3: Greenfield Development Dublin's undeveloped "greenfield" sites represent major opportunities for attracting commercial and light industrial development. The Fallon East Economic Development Zone —located east of Fallon Road and north of I-580—is a longstanding City focus area, with the opportunity to attract development of modern facilities that meet the needs of tenants in innovation -oriented industries. The Dublin Centre project could potentially provide a second downtown -like community gathering space southeast of Tassajara Road and Dublin Boulevard, while also effectively providing daily needs retail for the large number of new housing units to be built in the area. Undeveloped properties owned by Alameda County east of the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station could accommodate transit -oriented development, including "Campus Office" employment uses specified for these properties in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. An adjacent property east of Arnold Road, currently owned by IKEA, could potentially accommodate a variety of commercial uses. The following strategies focus on meeting the unique needs of each major greenfield development site by undertaking actions to accelerate development and ensure future growth supports the economic development needs of the Dublin community. Strategy 3.1 Continue prioritizing the Fallon East Economic Development Zone as a key district for attracting R&D, biomedical, office, manufacturing and other light industrial uses, with efforts including infrastructure funding and financing, and proactive City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 26 897 Strategy 3.2 consideration of incentives adjustments in response to business/developer feedback. Action 3.1.1 Continue working with property owners, developers, and the City of Livermore to coordinate, fund, and build out the Dublin Boulevard extension and other required infrastructure. Action 3.1.2 As part of ongoing outreach and engagement with relevant businesses, developers, and property owners, solicit feedback on the effectiveness of existing development incentives in the Fallon East EDZ; adjust incentives as needed. Action 3.1.3 Promote greenfield development opportunities at the Fallon East EDZ as part of Dublin's broader marketing and branding efforts, especially when undertaking business attraction efforts focused on R&D, biomedical, office, manufacturing and other light industrial uses. Work with the developer of the Dublin Centre project to ensure the creation of a second modern mixed -use community gathering, shopping, dining, and entertainment destination at the project. Action 3.2.1 Continue ongoing engagement with the Dublin Centre project development team to identify and resolve any potential regulatory barriers to build out the commercial area, support business attraction efforts, and emphasize the importance of fulfilling the community's desire for creation of a vibrant community gathering space that also offers daily needs retail. Strategy 3.3 Continue proactive engagement with Alameda County to determine a shared vision and work plan for activating and developing County -owned parcels near the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station with a potential mix of employment and housing uses. Action 3.3.1 Continue ongoing communication with the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority to maintain a shared understanding of the potential preferred uses of the remaining development opportunity sites, explore ways in which the City can support development and business attraction, and coordinate regarding County -led efforts to develop the sites. Strategy 3.4 Continue to monitor opportunities to support desired commercial development at the vacant property currently owned by IKEA (bounded by Arnold Road, Martinelli Way, Hacienda Drive, and 1-580). Action 3.4.1 Continue regular engagement with property owners of the site to encourage consideration of development desired by the City and to identify ways to support efforts to pursue new projects at the site via existing City services. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 27 898 FIGURE 12: GOAL 3 - GREENFIELD DEVELOPMENT IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX Action Item Time Frame Subarea Supporting Organization / Department Metrics for Measuring Progress 3.1.1. Continue working with property owners, developers, and the City of Livermore to coordinate, fund, and build out the Dublin Boulevard extension and other required infrastructure. Ongoing Fallon East Economic Development Zone City of Livermore, Public Works Department, Relevant property owners and developers along Dublin Blvd. and in the Fallon East EDZ Progress on Dublin Boulevard extension and other required infrastructure 3.1.2. As part of ongoing outreach and engagement with relevant businesses, developers, and property owners, solicit feedback on the effectiveness of existing development incentives in the Fallon East EDZ; adjust incentives as needed. Ongoing Fallon East Economic Development Zone Relevant property owners, businesses, and developers in or near the Fallon East EDZ Relevant contacts; incentives adjustment 3.1.3. Promote greenfield development opportunities at the Fallon East EDZ as part of Dublin's broader marketing and branding efforts, especially when undertaking business attraction efforts focused on R&D, biomedical, office, manufacturing, and other light industrial uses. 2-3 years Fallon East Economic Development Zone City Manager's Office, Community Development Department, Public Works Department, Communications Division Inclusion of greenfield development opportunities in updated marketing and branding efforts 3.2.1. Continue ongoing engagement with the Dublin Centre project development team to identify and resolve any potential regulatory barriers to build out the commercial area, support business attraction efforts, and emphasize the importance of fulfilling the community's desire for creation of a vibrant community gathering space that also offers daily needs retail. Ongoing 580 Corridor Dublin Centre project development team Completion of ongoing engagement with the Dublin Centre team 3.3.1. Continue ongoing communication with the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority to maintain a shared understanding of the potential preferred uses of the remaining development opportunity sites, explore ways in which the City can support development and business attraction, and coordinate regarding County -led efforts to develop the sites. Ongoing Tassajara Road Alameda County Surplus Property Authority Contacts with Alameda County; specific actions supporting development 3.4.1 Continue regular engagement with property owners of the site to encourage ed y consithe e anlon of d to identifyI wa snt to support City Y efforts to pursue new projects at the site via existing City services. Ongoing Road Tassajara Relevant property () Contacts with property owner; progress in progress permitting/ construction City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 28 899 Goal 4: Retail Vitality Dublin's retail, dining, and entertainment opportunities continue to evolve in response to growing e- commerce sales, a growing preference for vibrant public places, and the continuing evolution of brick - and -mortar requirements. As more sales shift online —particularly for undifferentiated "commodity" goods —the tenant mix within physical storefront spaces will continue to shift toward a greater emphasis on dining, entertainment, personal and medical services, food/grocery, and unique "boutique" retail. The following strategies seek to support Dublin's retail opportunities in light of these trends, by reducing cost barriers for new tenants, crafting a comprehensive citywide retail vision to identify retail priority areas and types, and support the health of existing retail tenants. Strategy 4.1 Study other potential incentives and changes to zoning and land use regulation that will reduce barriers to splitting large vacant retail spaces, and to converting retail uses to in -demand uses such as entertainment, dining, personal service, and flexible retail uses. Strategy 4.2 Action 4.1.1 Collect information regarding specific regulatory barriers to changes of use in retail spaces through ongoing contacts with brokers and retail, dining, and entertainment businesses. Work with the Community Development Department to support review and modification of any barriers as needed. Continue and expand monitoring of the performance of existing shopping centers and commercial areas, especially those consisting of businesses threatened by e-commerce trends, and continue to provide proactive targeted support to underperforming locations. Action 4.2.1 Continue working with the City of Dublin's sales tax data provider to establish data reporting geographies for each shopping center and retail district in Dublin. Action 4.2.2 Continue monitoring sales tax performance on a quarterly basis for all reporting geographies and for any businesses showing a declining sales trend in year -over -year sales compared to a "comparable store," even if the retailer is not showing a major decline in sales. Conduct outreach and market existing City -offered services to owners of shopping centers and businesses experiencing significant declines in sales. Consider retaining a retailer "coach" to work with these businesses. Action 4.2.3 Continue ongoing engagement with brokers and property owners to identify opportunities, challenges, tenant changes, and trends. Strategy 4.3 Continue to communicate with and support the health of Dublin's automobile dealerships and other large sales tax revenue generators. Action 4.3.1 Continue annual outreach to automobile dealership owners and the other top 10 sales tax revenue generators in Dublin to offer City services and identify and resolve any relevant issues and concerns. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 29 900 FIGURE 13: GOAL 4 - RETAIL VITALITY IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX Action Item Time Frame Subarea Supporting Organization / Department Metrics for Measuring Progress 4.1.1. Collect information regarding specific regulatory barriers to changes of use in retail spaces through ongoing contacts with brokers and retail, dining, and entertainment businesses. Work with the Community Development Department to support review and modification of any barriers as needed. 1-2 years Citywide Community Development Department, Local businesses and stakeholders Identification and resolution of specific barriers to changes of use in Dublin retail spaces 4.2.1. Continue working with the City of Dublin's sales tax data provider to establish data reporting geographies for each shopping center and retail district in Dublin. 9 Ongoing Citywide HdL Revision to reporting geographies 4.2.2. Continue monitoring sales tax performance on a quarterly basis for all reporting geographies and for any businesses showing major declines in sales. Conduct outreach and offer services to owners of shopping centers and businesses experiencing significant declines in sales. Ongoing Citywide HdL, Shopping Center property owners and management staff Completion of quarterly sales tax performance analysis; as outreach to appropriate 4.2.3. Continue ongoing engagement with brokers and property owners to identify opportunities, challenges, and tenant changes. Ongoing Citywide Local brokers and property owners Number of brokers and stakeholders contacted 4.3.1. Continue annual outreach to automobile dealership owners and the other top 10 sales tax revenue generators in Dublin to offer City services and identify and resolve any relevant issues and concerns. Ongoing Citywide HdL, automobile dealership owners, top sales tax revenue generators Completion of bi-annual outreach Goal 5: Hospitality Expansion Dublin's opportunities to attract additional hotels are linked to employment and business growth within the city and Tri-Valley, as well as growth of new visitor attractions. The strategies focus on positioning Dublin to benefit from ongoing efforts to attract a new multiuse sports, entertainment, and meeting venue to the Tri-Valley, and continuing to promote the accessibility of Dublin's hotels to businesses and Tri-Valley destinations. Strategy 5.1 Position Dublin to attract a potential multiuse venue that would capture visitation and commercial activity associated with events at the facility. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 30 901 Strategy 5.2 Action 5.1.1 Through ongoing collaboration with Visit Tri-Valley, determine potential opportunities for Dublin to better position local opportunity sites for attraction of a multiuse venue. Action 5.1.2 If a site outside Dublin is prioritized for attraction of a multiuse venue, determine potential ways the City can support the venue's construction and attract hotel stays based on the venue's operations. Work with Visit Tri-Valley and local hotel operators to market Dublin as an ideal location for visitors seeking access to employment destinations and events throughout the Tri-Valley. Action 5.2.1 Work with Visit Tri-Valley to convene a twice annual meeting of hotel owners and managers in Dublin to offer services, identify and address concerns, and learn about opportunities to promote the City's hotels. Action 5.2.2 Continue collaboration with Visit Tri-Valley and advocate for promotion of Dublin's hotels. FIGURE 14: GOAL 5 - HOSPITALITY EXPANSION IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX Action Item Time Frame Subarea Supporting Organization / Department Metrics for Measuring Progress 5.1.1. Through ongoing collaboration with Visit Tri-Valley, determine potential opportunities for Dublin to better position local opportunity sites for attraction of a multiuse venue. Ongoing Citywide Visit Tri-Valley Progress on determining potential venue opportunities 5.1.2. If a site outside Dublin is prioritized for attracon of a multiuse venue, determine potential ways the City can support the venue's construction and attract hotel stays based on the venue's operations. 3-5 years Citywide Visit Tri-Valley, City that is prioritized for multiuse venue Development of a plan / policies to attract hotel stays based on the venue's operations 5.2.1. Work with Visit Tri-Valley to convene a twice annual meeting of hotel owners and managers in Dublin to offer services, identify and address concerns, and learn about opportunities to promote the City's hotels. 1-2 years, then Ongoing Citywide Dublin hotel owners and managers Completion of bi-annual meetings 5.2.2. Continue collaboration with Visit Tri- Valley and advocate for promotion of Dublin's hotels. Ongoing Citywide Visit Tri-Valley Number of new promotional collaborations for Dublin hotels City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 31 902 Goal 6: Small Business Support Dublin offers a variety of services to support small businesses. Opportunities exist to ensure that these services are widely known, proven to be effective, and successfully targeted to Dublin's increasingly diverse community of business owners. The following strategies target improvements in the efficiency, marketing, and accessibility of support offered by the City of Dublin for local small businesses. Strategy 6.1 Improve efficiency and transparency with small business applicants during the City's permitting process. Strategy 6.2 Strategy 6.3 Action 6.1.1 Continue maintaining a "concierge" function to support businesses in navigating processes to obtain business licenses and to serve as an advocate and navigator for obtaining building and planning approvals. Action 6.1.2 Prepare and conduct ongoing follow-up surveys with businesses that interact with the City of Dublin to obtain licenses, permits, and entitlements. Complete an annual review to identify recurring issues that can enhance clarity and efficiency of these processes. Improve marketing of City -offered incentives, services, and programs to existing small businesses in addition to maintaining current success in engaging new businesses. Action 6.2.1 In addition to continuing to promote available City services to new businesses obtaining business licenses, establish and maintain a process and regular timeline for preparing and sending email blasts, social media promotions, and mailing of printed materials to all local business license holders. Through these contacts, promote City business support services, incentives, and relevant news. Action 6.2.2 Continue conducting reviews of small business promotional events and campaigns to assess their impact and relevance to the businesses; consider modifying, ending, or beginning new initiatives based on the findings. Enhance ongoing engagement between the City of Dublin and the full diversity of local small businesses —including businesses specifically targeted to Dublin's fast-growing communities of Indian and Chinese descent —to understand opportunities to support businesses and to share available programs and marketing opportunities. Action 6.3.1 Conduct targeted outreach to businesses and business organizations focused on serving Dublin's Indian American and Chinese American communities to gather information about specific needs, concerns, and potential modifications to City services and explanatory materials. Implement updates to programs, processes, and written and online materials as needed. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 32 903 Strategy 6.4 As opportunities and funding arise, expand small business technical training resources. Action 6.4.1 Continue to provide and, if possible, expand the Small Business Navigator program, and other technical support programs. Action 6.4.2 Continue using the City's website to help connect local small businesses to Federal, State, and nonprofit programs and organizations that provide technical assistance. Action 6.4.3 Continue providing responsive small business assistance through activities such as direction to resources, local grant funding and low-cost loan opportunities, landlord outreach, and connections with real estate brokers and other regional partners. FIGURE 15: GOAL 6 - SMALL BUSINESS SUPPORT IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX Action Item Time Frame Subarea Supporting Organization / Department Metrics for Measuring Progress 6.1.1. Continue maintaining a "concierge" function to support businesses in navigating processes to obtain business licenses and to serve as an advocate and navigator for obtaining building and planning approvals. Ongoing Citywide Community Development Department, Public Works Department Number of businesses supported 6.1.2. Prepare and conduct ongoing follow- up surveys with businesses that interact with the City of Dublin to obtain licenses, permits, and entitlements. Complete an annual review to identify recurring issues that can enhance clarity and efficiency of these processes. 1-2 years, then Ongoing Citywide Community Development Department, Public Works Department Number of surveys administered and collected; completion of annual review 6.2.1. In addition to continuing to promote available City services to new businesses obtaining business licenses, establish and maintain a process and regular timeline for preparing and sending email blasts, social media promotions, and mailing of printed materials to all local business license holders. Through these contacts, promote City business support services, incentives, and relevant news. Ongoing Citywide Community Development Department, Communications Division Establish timeline to regularly prepare and send media and marketing materials to local businesses; Number of businesses contacted City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 33 904 Action Item Time Frame Subarea Supporting Organization / Department Metrics for Measuring Progress 6.2.2. Continue conducting reviews of small business promotional events and campaigns to assess their impact and relevance to the businesses; consider modifying, ending, or beginning new initiatives based on the findings. Ongoing Citywide Public Information Department Development of review criteria; completion of annual review of small business promotional events 6.3.1. Conduct targeted outreach to businesses and business organizations focused on serving Dublin's Indian American and Chinese American communities to gather information about specific needs, concerns, and potential modifications to City services and explanatory materials. Implement updates to programs, processes, and written and online materials as needed. 2-3 years, then Ongoing Citywide Public Information Department Number of businesses contacted as part of this targeted outreach; updated programs, processes, materials 6.4.1. Continue to provide and, if possible, expand the Small Business Navigator program, and other technical support programs. Ongoing Citywide Communications Division, Information Systems Division Number of events and contacts 6.4.2. Continue using the City's website to help connect local small businesses to Federal, State, and nonprofit programs and organizations that provide technical assistance. Ongoing Citywide Communications Division Traffic on the business resources webpage 6.4.3. Continue providing responsive small business assistance through activities such as direction to resources, local grant funding and low-cost loan opportunities, landlord outreach, and connections with real estate brokers and other regional partners. Ongoing Citywide Local property owners and real estate brokers Number of small businesses provided direct assistance or direction City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 34 905 Goal 7: Workforce Opportunities Dublin's population is well educated overall, but 15 percent of residents hold a high school diploma or did not finish high school. Dublin also includes a concentration of jobs in industry sectors that typically offer relatively low pay and limited benefits —such as retail, food services, and personal services. Although the City does not directly provide education, training, and workforce development services, the City of Dublin has an opportunity to ensure these services are readily accessible for Dublin residents and workers. Dublin can also potentially enhance regional commute access for Dublin workers and residents by planning for ways to leverage improved accessibility created by the planned Valley Link Project rail service to the San Joquin Valley. Strategy 7.1 Influence and leverage regional workforce and economic development organizations and initiatives to ensure workforce development, education, and vocational training services are available to Dublin residents and workers. Action 7.1.1 Maintain regular contact with and seek opportunities to connect and encourage collaboration between major employers, the Dublin Unified School District, Las Positas College, and Tri-Valley workforce development organizations. Use this process to enhance awareness of available training services and their graduates, encourage creation of internship and on-the- job training opportunities, and clarify the workforce training needs of Dublin's employers. Strategy 7.2 Leverage initiatives to expand and invest in transportation infrastructure that supports Dublin worker access. Action 7.2.1 Consider and incorporate new worker commute access opportunities in City planning and business attraction efforts, based on the Valley Link Project. Ensure new public projects and, when possible, private development projects support robust "last -mile" job access connections from the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 35 906 FIGURE 16: GOAL 7 - WORKFORCE OPPORTUNITIES IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX Action Item 7.1.1. Maintain regular contact with and seek opportunities to connect and encourage collaboration between major employers, the Dublin Unified School District, Las Positas College, and Tri-Valley workforce development organizations. Use this process to enhance awareness of available training services and their graduates, encourage creation of internship and on-the-job training opportunities, and clarify the workforce training needs of Dublin's employers. Time Frame Subarea Ongoing Supporting Organization / Department Dublin Unified School District, Las Positas College, Citywide Tri-Valley workforce development organizations Metrics for Measuring Progress Number of contacts / meetings with relevant workforce development organizations 7.2.1. Consider and incorporate new worker commute access opportunities in City planning and business attraction efforts, based on the Valley Link Project. Ensure new public projects and, when 3-5 years Citywide possible, private development projects support robust "last -mile" job access connections from the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. Valley Link, Contra Costa Transportation Authority, Tri-Valley Transit, Tri-Valley Transportation Council, Transportation, Community Development Department, Public Works Department Progress towards development of new worker access projects and opportunities City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 36 907 VII. ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS The following economic performance indicators are recommended for use by the Office of Economic Development to track and market economic conditions in the City of Dublin. These indicators gauge the health of the Dublin economy, but may be influenced by regional, national, or international conditions and therefore outside of the control of the City of Dublin. In contrast, the "Metrics for Measuring Progress," listed in the implementation matrices for each implementation action, track implementation of the City's direct actions. 1. New and Discontinued Business Licenses: Number of business licenses issued and discontinued annually for businesses located in Dublin, by location within the city. 2. Transient Occupancy Tax Revenue: Amount of annual transient occupancy tax revenue collected annually. 3. Building Permits: Number and value of commercial and industrial building permits issued by the City annually. 4. Sales Tax Revenue: Amount of citywide sales tax revenue collected annually. If this data can be reviewed on a business -by -business basis for retailers, sales trends can point to businesses that may be having a hard time, but that are not yet at risk of closure. Early intervention with coaching or other expertise may help the City retain these businesses. 5. Resident Employment and Unemployment Rate: Labor force, employment, and unemployment rate for Dublin's residents, updated monthly and annually based on California Employment Development Department data. 6. Jobs Count: Annual number of jobs located in Dublin and the Tri-Valley based on a consistent set of data sources such as Lightcast via the East Bay Economic Development Alliance, U.S. Census Longitudinal Employer -Household Dynamics data, and, as available through custom request, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages data via the California Employment Development Department. 7. Overall Real Estate Market Data: Summary of asking rents, vacancy rates, and absorption rates collected quarterly for Dublin's industrial and commercial buildings. City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 37 908 VIII. APPENDICES Appendix A. Technical Analysis Report Appendix B. Community Engagement Summary City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions 38 909 APPENDIX A: TECHNICAL ANALYSIS REPORT This appendix to the City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Actions report ("Economic Development Strategy") summarizes the existing conditions and dynamics of Dublin's economy to identify the City's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for sustaining future economic growth and prosperity. Strategic Economics completed technical analyses and community outreach to develop the findings of this appendix. The "Summary of SWOT Conclusions" section of the Economic Development Strategy summarized the key conclusions of these analyses. Those conclusions and the detailed findings described in this appendix informed development of the economic development strategies and implementation actions. Approach and Contents Strategic Economics completed a variety of data analyses to identify Dublin's competitive positioning, opportunities, and challenges. Strategic Economics and the City of Dublin also conducted outreach to local stakeholders to inform and complement the findings of the data analyses. Stakeholder engagement activities included online business and community surveys, seven focus groups, and interviews with members of the Dublin City Council. These engagement activities were described in detail in the Economic Development Strategy. This report is organized into the following sections: 1. Population and Workforce (page 3) 2. Key Industry Sectors and Jobs (page 11) 3. Office, Flex, and Light Industrial Real Estate Market Conditions (page 20) 4. Retail Performance (page 25) 5. Hotels and Tourism (page 30) The Technical Analysis Report references smaller geographies, or "subareas," within Dublin as shown in Figure 1. These subareas were created in consultation with City of Dublin staff to capture concentrations of business and jobs within Dublin and to better analyze and recommend actions for specific areas of the city. The analyses also often compared Dublin with other major Tri-Valley communities (Danville, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon), the Tri-Valley as a whole, and the East Bay (Contra Costa and Alameda Counties). Regional comparisons provide context for understanding Dublin's competitive positioning and assets, and to identify broader regional trends in the types of jobs and businesses that are growing or declining. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 1 910 FIGURE 1: REFERENCE MAP OF DUBLIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY SUBAREAS trif Q ®'t Subarea 3 Subarea 4 Subarea 5 Subarea 2 Subarea 1 Subareas in Dublin 1. Dublin Village Historic Area 8. Central Parkway (Office) (industrial and Once) 7. Dublin Corporate Center (Office and 2. Downtown Transit-Odented District Healthcare) 3. Downtown Retail District 8. 580 Corridor (Retail) 4. Downtown Village Parkway District 9. Fallon East Economic Development Zone 5. Sierra Trinity Business Park/ 10. Camp Parks and Governmental Facilities Dougherty Road Dublin Livermore Pleasanton � County Boundary Subarea Boundary Subarea 10 Subarea 6 4ubarea 7 F 1 f ,d1( , Subarea 8 2 4 Miles Subarea 9 Sources: City of Dublin, 2023: Esri, 2023: U.S. Census LEND, 2021: Strategic Economics_ 2024. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 2 911 1. Population and Workforce Dublin's population and workforce characteristics impact the community's economic opportunities in a variety of ways. The size and composition of the residential customer base impacts Dublin's ability to support different kinds of retail. The resident workforce affects Dublin's ability to grow jobs and economic activity through entrepreneurship and employer growth, retention, and attraction. Commute patterns clarify existing workforce transportation assets and potential gaps in matches between local jobs and resident skills. The Population and Workforce findings open with a discussion of key demographic and household trends that impact Dublin's competitive positioning for jobs and retail. These findings are followed by a comparison of Dublin's resident workforce versus local jobs and an assessment of resident and worker commute patterns. DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS The following findings describe the existing demographics of Dublin's population and households in terms of population, income, race and ethnicity. The findings are based on analysis of 2000, 2010, and 2020 data obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau Decennial Census, and 2021 data obtained from the Census's American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates. Dublin is the fastest growing city in the Tri-Valley region and is now comparable in size to other major Tri-Valley communities. As shown in Figure 2, Dublin's population grew 136 percent from 2000 to 2021, with growth accelerating since 2010 and greatly exceeding all other Tri-Valley communities. Dublin's population of nearly 70,000 residents is now approaching the size of Livermore, San Ramon, and Pleasanton's populations —which ranged from 79,558 to 88,403 as of 2021. FIGURE 2: TOTAL POPULATION, 2000 TO 2021 Total Population 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 Dublin 69,818 30,066 2000 2010 2021 Livermore Pleasanton San Ramon tDanville Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000, 2010, ACS 2017-2021; Strategic Economics, 2023. Dublin has a diverse population compared to other major Tri-Valley communities, with a rapidly growing Asian population. Figure 3 illustrates Dublin's growing Asian population, which grew by over 1,000 percent from 2000 to 2021 according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau's Decennial Census and American Community Survey. As seen in Figure 4, Dublin's racial composition includes a higher share of People of Color than other major Tri-Valley communities, with Asian residents constituting 52 percent of the population, Hispanic or Latino residents constituting 10 percent, and Black residents constituting four percent (the highest share of Black residents of any Tri-Valley community). The retail Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 3 912 section of this report discusses potential opportunities associated with this expanding racial and ethnic diversity in Dublin. FIGURE 3: RACE IN DUBLIN, 2000, 2010, AND 2021 Total Population 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 s 2000 2010 2021 White Hispanic or Latino African American or Black Asian ■ Other Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000, 2010, ACS 2017-2021; Strategic Economics, 2023. FIGURE 4: RACIAL COMPOSITION OF TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITIES, 2021 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 52% 1 4% 15% 23% 1 2% 39% 2% 11% 48% 8% 15% 7% 1% ■ Other Asian 3% African American or Black 73% • Dublin Livermore Pleasanton San Ramon Danville Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2017-2021; Strategic Economics, 2023. ✓ Hispanic or Latino ■ White Dublin's Asian population is itself diverse, consisting primarily of people of Indian, Chinese, and Filipino origin. The U.S. Census American Community Survey estimates that, as of 2021, 48 percent of Dublin's Asian residents were of Indian origin, 26 percent of Chinese origin, and nine percent of Filipino origin. In addition, as of 2021, nearly half of Dublin's residents report speaking a language other than English at home. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 4 913 FIGURE 5: ASIAN POPULATION BY ORIGIN IN DUBLIN, 2021 Two or More Other Origin Japanese, Origins, 2% Specified 1% Vietnamese, 3% Korean, 5% Filipino, 9% Chinese, Except Taiwanese, 26% Pakistani, 0. Taiwanese, 1% Asian Indian, 48% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2017-2021; Strategic Economics, 2023. Dublin has a relatively high -income population, and Dublin's household income levels grew rapidly since 2010. Dublin's median household income of just over $185,000 as of 2021 was more than $65,000 higher than the East Bay as a whole. Dublin's median income is comparable to other Tri- Valley communities such as Pleasanton and San Ramon. In addition, Dublin's median income growth has outpaced all other major Tri-Valley communities. As seen in Figure 6, Dublin's inflation -adjusted median household income rose by 30 percent between 2010 and 2021, highest among all Tri-Valley communities during that time. FIGURE 6: MEDIAN INCOME OF TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITIES (CONSTANT 2022 DOLLARS), 2010 TO 2021 $200,000 $150,000 0 $100,000 $50,000 $0 $185,110 $142,098 1 i I $181,611 $151,300 $153,135 $123,495 Dublin Livermore $187,653 $196,151 $159,892 $160,469 Pleasanton San Ramon Danville ■ 2010 2021 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010, ACS 2017-2021; Strategic Economics, 2023. Dublin's population is highly skilled and educated, comparable to Pleasanton and San Ramon. As shown in Figure 7, 68 percent of Dublin's population age 25 years or older has a bachelor's degree or higher level of education, up from 52 percent in 2010. The share of Dublin's population with a bachelor's degree or higher is comparable to Pleasanton and San Ramon, at 66 percent and 70 percent, respectively. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 5 914 FIGURE 7: DUBLIN EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT FOR POPULATION 25 YEARS AND OVER, 2010 TO 2021 60,000 • Doctorate Degree 50,000 c 40,000 0 30,000 a 0 a 20,000 10,000 2010 2021 Source: U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2006-2010, 2017-2021; Strategic Economics, 2023. WORKFORCE • Professional School Degree Master's Degree ■ Bachelor's Degree ■ Some College High School Graduate (Includes Equivalency) The following findings describe characteristics of Dublin's workforce in terms of occupation and commuting patterns. In addition, Dublin's residents were compared to workers at jobs in Dublin to examine the match between the resident workforce versus the number and types of jobs located in the city. Occupational characteristics used for these analyses were based on 2021 data obtained through U.S. Census Bureau Longitudinal Employer -Households Dynamics (LEHD) data. Educational attainment findings and commute patterns were based on 2000, 2010, and 2020 data obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau, 2021 data obtained from the American Community Survey (ACS), and 2021 LEHD data. It is important to note that the U.S. Census LEHD data differs from the Lightcast data used in the detailed economic analysis in the next section of this report. LEHD data provides a consistent data set for comparing the characteristics of workers at jobs versus residents who hold jobs, and for examining commute patterns. However, LEND data only describes relatively broad industry sectors and is not available for recent years; the data therefore cannot be used for detailed and timely economic analysis. The highest shares of workers at jobs in Dublin are employed in household -serving industries such as the Retail, Accommodation and Food Service, and Healthcare and Social Assistance industry sectors. As of 2021, 42 percent of Dublin's total workers at jobs in the city worked within these three industry sectors, as shown in Figure 8. The mix of jobs by industry in Dublin is significantly different from the types of jobs held by Dublin's residents, with a higher share of workers at jobs in Dublin concentrated in industries that tend to pay lower wages. Compared to the industries in which Dublin's residents work, the city includes a high share of retail and service jobs focused on serving the consumer needs of Dublin's large and fast- growing residential population. In 2021, LEHD data indicated that only seven percent of Dublin's employed residents worked in the Retail Trade industry, yet 18 percent of workers at jobs in the city were employed in Retail Trade. In addition, nearly 10 percent of workers at jobs in Dublin worked in the Accommodation and Food Services industry, compared to less than five percent of Dublin's employed residents. Jobs in the Retail Trade and Accommodation and Social Assistance industries Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 6 915 tend to include a relatively high share of lower wage jobs, increasing the likelihood that these workers will commute from relatively lower cost communities outside Dublin. A much higher share of Dublin's residents work in the Information and Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services (PSTS) industry sectors compared to workers at jobs in the city. As of 2021, nearly 29 percent of Dublin's employed residents worked in the PSTS and Information industry sectors, yet only eight percent of workers at jobs in Dublin were employed in those industry sectors. The PSTS and Information industry sectors include professional services, research and development, and technology businesses that tend to pay high salaries and have high educational attainment requirements — corresponding to Dublin's population and household characteristics. The limited share of such jobs in Dublin relative to the resident workforce suggests that a significant share of Dublin's residents commute to concentrations of these jobs outside Dublin itself —and that an opportunity may exist to grow industries that benefit from proximity to this highly skilled workforce. FIGURE 8: SHARE OF DUBLIN'S WORKERS AT JOBS IN THE CITY VERSUS WORKING RESIDENTS, BY INDUSTRY SECTOR, 2021 Retail Trade Health Care and Social Assistance Accommodation and Food Services Construction Educational Services Management of Companies and Enterprises Manufacturing Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Administration & Support, Waste... Other Services (excluding Public Administration) Wholesale Trade Information Finance and Insurance Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Transportation and Warehousing Public Administration Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Utilities Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% Workers Residents Note: LEHD data assigns government jobs to various industry sectors, whereas the Lightcast data described in the next section of this report groups "Government" jobs into a single category. Therefore, the "Public Administration" item in the chart above does not correspond to the Government jobs shown in the Lightcast data analyses. Source: U.S. Census Longitudinal Employer -Household Dynamics, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2024. Employed residents of Dublin have higher educational attainment than workers at jobs in Dublin. As seen in Figure 9, the percent of employed residents in Dublin that hold a bachelor's degree or higher is 42 percent, compared to 28 percent of workers at jobs in Dublin. Note that the data does not track the share of workers with more advanced degrees, such as a master's or doctorate degree, as a separate category. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 7 916 FIGURE 9: EDUCATION ATTAINMENT OF DUBLIN'S WORKFORCE AND RESIDENTS, 2021 100% — 90% 28.20% • Bachelor's degree or advanced 80% degree 70% Some college or Associate degree 60% 23.10% 50% 21.20% High school or equivalent, no college 40% 30% 10.90% 13.40% Less than high school 0 ° 9.10% Not Available 10% 13.80% 15.10% 0% 22.70% Workers Employed in Dublin Working Residents of Dublin Source: U.S. Census Longitudinal Employer —Household Dynamics, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2024. Dublin's mismatch between local jobs versus the types of jobs held by residents represents an ongoing evolution of Dublin from a relatively small and primarily residential Tri-Valley community to a now larger community with a substantial base of skilled resident workers. Dublin's concentration of household - serving jobs corresponds to the community's recent history as a fast-growing residential city with convenient access to other Tri-Valley and Bay Area employment destinations. As Dublin's population has grown, including a large share of highly educated professional workers, a new opportunity is emerging to enhance growth of businesses and jobs in the city that benefit from proximity to this residential workforce. Collaborations with Tri-Valley workforce development organizations can enhance the trained and skilled workforce available for Dublin employers and support career opportunities for workers in Dublin. Collaborations with education and workforce development partners can support the availability of trained workers for Dublin employers across all categories of skills and occupations. Workforce and education service providers can also create new career opportunities for workers in Dublin's large share of jobs in industries that typically pay relatively lower wages and have less job stability, such as retail, food service, and personal services. Examples of regional workforce development organizations include Tri-Valley Career Center, Las Positas College, and the Tri-Valley Regional Occupational Program. COMMUTE PATTERNS Dublin residents have long average commute times compared to the East Bay region overall. As seen in Figure 10, 25 percent of Dublin's resident workers aged 16 and older commute more than 60 minutes for work; 15 percent of workers in the East Bay commute for 60 minutes or longer. Figure 11 illustrates that nearly a quarter of Dublin residents commute to the region's largest concentrations of jobs in places like San Francisco, San Jose, and Oakland —roughly the same share as workers who commute to Tri-Valley locations. Although the rate at which workers work from home is still evolving, data shows that a relatively high share of Dublin's residents were working from home in 2021 compared to the East Bay overall. In 2021, 22 percent of Dublin's employed residents worked from home versus 16 percent for workers in the East Bay overall. From 2014 to 2021, the share of Dublin's workers aged 16 and over who worked Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 8 917 from home nearly quadrupled due to the COVID-19 pandemic, while the share for workers in the East Bay overall grew by 2.5 times. The higher rate of working from home in Dublin is partly explained by the City's high share of residents in professional industries with occupations allowing work to be performed remotely. FIGURE 10: AVERAGE COMMUTE TIME FOR DUBLIN RESIDENTS 16 YEARS AND OLDER, 2014 TO 2021 Travel Time Worked At Home 90 or More Minutes 60 to 89 Minutes 40 to 59 Minutes 30 to 39 Minutes 20 to 29 Minutes 10 to 19 Minutes Less than 10 Minutes 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 Number of Workers Source: U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2010-2014, 2017-20215 Year Estimates; Strategic Economics, 2023. FIGURE 11: TOP 15 EMPLOYMENT DESTINATIONS OF EMPLOYED RESIDENTS OF DUBLIN, 2021 Employment Destination (City) Employed Residents of Dublin Share of Total San Francisco 2,977 9.8% Pleasanton 2,623 8.7% San Jose 2,289 7.6% Dublin 1,751 5.8% Oakland 1,360 4.5% Fremont 1,326 4.4% Livermore 1,236 4.1% San Ramon 1,203 4.0% Sunnyvale 851 2.8% Santa Clara 822 2.7% Hayward 726 2.4% Mountain View 712 2.3% Palo Alto 669 2.2% San Leandro 585 1.9% Walnut Creek 573 1.9% Source: U.S. Census Longitudinal Employer —Household Dynamics, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2023. 2021 2014 About 5.8 percent of Dublin's working residents both live and work in Dublin, which is lower than other major Tri-Valley communities. According to U.S. Census Bureau LEHD data, in 2021, a relatively lower share of people both lived and worked at their primary job in Dublin than in all other major Tri-Valley Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 9 918 communities. Dublin's share of the employed population who worked in the same community was much lower than communities like Livermore and Pleasanton, in which shares of 21.2 and 14.2 percent of employed residents also work at their primary jobs in those cities, respectively. With a net "export" of workers commuting in and out of Dublin, Dublin is a resident -rich city with more employed residents than jobs. As shown in Figure 12, Dublin's 0.79 ratio ofjobs to employed residents is lower than all major Tri-Valley communities except Danville. This means that more Dublin residents are commuting elsewhere to work than there are outside workers commuting to Dublin. The ratio reflects Dublin's history as a fast-growing residential community that is now positioned to accelerate growth of businesses and jobs. FIGURE 12: RATIO OF JOBS TO EMPLOYED RESIDENTS BY TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITY, 2021 0.79 1.69 1 1.22 • 1.02 Dublin Pleasanton Livermore San Ramon 0.61 J Danville Note: Data reflects all jobs located in each community versus a count of the "primary job" associated with each employed resident—i.e., the latter is a count of employed residents rather than a count of all the jobs those residents may hold. The data comes from U.S. Census LEHD and is therefore internally consistent, but the actual job counts will differ from data based on any other source —such as the Lightcast data used in the detailed industry sector analysis of this report. Source: U.S. Census Longitudinal Employer -Household Dynamics, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2023. Dublin's ratio of jobs to households is slightly lower than the Tri-Valley area overall, but significantly higher than the East Bay. As shown in Figure 13, Dublin's ratio of jobs to households of 1.7 is slightly lower than the Tri-Valley's 1.8 ratio but significantly higher than the East Bay as a whole. Like the ratio of jobs to employed residents, the ratio of jobs to households provides context for understanding Dublin's relative balance of jobs and population. Both metrics can be used to broadly track progress over time in expanding jobs relative to Dublin's households and working residents. However, the ratio alone does not capture nuances of commute patterns or alignment of jobs with resident skills. For example, a commonly used criterion is that a healthy ratio of jobs to households is approximately 1.5, but this ratio does not capture comparative local context and nuance on its own. FIGURE 13: RATIO OF JOBS TO HOUSEHOLDS BY DUBLIN, TRI-VALLEY, AND EAST BAY, 2021 Total Jobs Total Households Ratio of Jobs to Households Dublin 38,960 22,946 1.70 Tri-Valley 228,144 127,097 1.80 East Bay 1,260,812 986,789 1.28 Note: Tri-Valley total household data reflects the sum of total households in the U.S. Census Bureau's 2021 ACS data for Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore, San Ramon, and Danville. The Lightcast employment count for Dublin covers ZIP code 94568. The job counts shown in this figure are based on Lightcast data, which differs from the LEHD data used to calculate the ratio ofjobs to employed residents. Source: Lightcast Q3 2023 Data Set; U.S. Census Bureau 2017-2021; Strategic Economics, 2024. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 10 919 2. Key Industry Sectors and Jobs The "Key Industry Sectors and Jobs" findings describe the composition and performance of Dublin's economy —along with other relevant challenges and assets for growing jobs and businesses —to identify competitive strengths and opportunities. The findings are based on analyses of jobs by industry sector, venture capital investment patterns, and qualitative input from local Dublin business and industry stakeholders. The industry and sub -industry sectors described throughout this chapter conform to the North American Industry Classification System, commonly referred to as "NAICS." NAICS is a standardized set of industry and sub -industry classifications, each of which is assigned a NAICS code ranging from high-level 2-digit industry codes to more detailed 6-digit industry codes. The analysis of jobs by industry sector was based on 2023 data obtained from Lightcast for the 2-digit and 6-digit NAICS code levels. Venture capital investment data for 2023 was obtained through Pitchbook via the City of Dublin. As part of the process to identify industries that are concentrated in Dublin, Strategic Economics employed a metric known as the "location quotient." This metric calculated the relative concentration of jobs in a given industry in Dublin compared to the Tri-Valley region. Strategic Economics also performed a detailed evaluation of opportunities for expanding life science and innovation -oriented industries in Dublin, as requested by the City of Dublin. WHAT IS A LOCATION QUOTIENT? A location quotient (LQ) is a metric used to understand the relative concentration of an industry in a study area (in this case, Dublin), compared to a reference geography (in this case, the Tri-Valley). LQs are used to assess an area's specialization, weaknesses, and opportunities for growth within a broader region. The LQ of a given industry A in Dublin, compared to the Tri-Valley, is calculated using the following formula: LQ for Industry A = (Jobs in Industry A in the TriValley/(Total Jobs in TriValley) (Jobs in Industry A in Dublin)/(Total Jobs in Dublin) LQs were interpreted using the rules of thumb below. Note that these vary based on the aggregation level of the industry and the size of the study area and reference geography. • LQ > 1.15 indicates a generally high concentration relative to the reference geography; • LQ between 0.85 and 1.15 indicates a normal or average distribution of that industry compared to the reference geography; • LQ < 0.85 indicates a relatively low concentration relative to the reference geography. INDUSTRY COMPOSITION AND TRENDS, BY NUMBER OF JOBS The following findings provide a foundation for understanding which industry sectors support large shares of Dublin's jobs and create opportunities to sustain their presence, and which industry sectors are positioned for growth regardless of their current size. The findings describe the composition and evolution of Dublin's economy based on analyses of jobs by industry sector and job growth by sector Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 11 920 between 2016 and 2023. A more detailed analysis of industry opportunities follows in the next section of this report, based on consideration of broader economic trends and Dublin's competitive assets for businesses. As of the third quarter of 2023, Dublin had an estimated 40,820 jobs, with job growth similar to that of the Tri-Valley in the period since 2016. Jobs grew by 6.4 percent in Dublin since 2016, from 38,377 in 2016 to 40,821 jobs in 2023, as shown in Figure 14. This slightly outpaces the 5.8 percent job growth in the Tri-Valley overall during that period. These similar growth rates indicate that Dublin is keeping pace with job growth in the Tri-Valley area over the long term. FIGURE 14: DUBLIN AND TRI -VALLEY TOTAL JOBS, 2016 TO 2023 Number of Jobs 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Dublin Tri-Valley 38,377 41,259 40,821 2016 2019 2023 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 229,563 241,183 242,919 2016 2019 2023 Source: Lightcast Employment Q3 2016, 2019, and 2023 Data Set; Strategic Economics, 2023. Dublin's largest industry sectors primarily consist of Government jobs and household -serving industries, though the city's economy does include a variety of professional services, research and development, manufacturing, and technology industries and businesses. Figure 15 shows Dublin's industries by number of jobs, while Figure 16 compares industry composition to the Tri-Valley and East Bay. Growth trends from 2016 to 2023 are summarized in Figure 17. Major industry sectors or groupings of industry sectors are profiled below. Government. Government jobs constitute Dublin's largest share of employment, accounting for over 22 percent of total jobs as of 2023. This large share of jobs in the city is attributable to local government jobs (including the local school district) and the presence of facilities in Dublin such as Santa Rita Jail, Alameda County Superior Court, Parks Reserve Forces Training Area ("Camp Parks"), and other county and federal facilities. The number and share of Government jobs slightly decreased in Dublin between 2016 and 2023. During the same period, the share of Government jobs grew at a rate of over 20 percent in the Tri-Valley region. These Government jobs provide employment opportunities for residents and attract workers and visitors to Dublin that support consumer spending. Healthcare and Social Assistance. This primarily household -serving industry sector is Dublin's second largest, accounting for 12 percent of total jobs as of 2023. Since 2016, the total share of Healthcare and Social Assistance jobs grew by 103 percent, greatly exceeding the Tri-Valley's 27 percent increase in these jobs during the same period. Examples of these jobs include hospitals, medical offices, home health aides, medical diagnostic labs, assisted living facilities, and individual and family service and relief organizations. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 12 921 Accommodation and Food Services, Retail Trade. These two primarily household -serving industry sectors —which include restaurants, retail stores, and hotels —combined to constitute 20 percent of Dublin's total jobs in 2023. Jobs in these sectors declined or grew slowly between 2016 and 2023—particularly for retail jobs. Dublin's jobs in Retail Trade declined by 21 percent, compared to a 14 percent decline in the Tri-Valley. Dublin's Accommodation and Food Services jobs grew by five percent, although this growth outpaced flat growth in the Tri-Valley overall. Food Services employment is likely to continue outpacing growth in Retail Trade, since restaurants are an "experiential" activity that cannot be replicated through online sales. Other Services. The Other Services industry sector is another primarily household -serving industry sector that includes many types of businesses that are also located in commercial and light industrial areas, including a variety of personal services such as salons, dry cleaners, and automobile repair. The industry sector also includes some categories of nonprofit organizations and domestic workers. Other Services was Dublin's fifth largest industry sector in 2023, constituting eight percent of jobs. The sector grew slowly between 2016 and 2023, with one percent growth in Dublin and five percent growth in the Tri-Valley. However, this growth may have been constrained by the COVID-19 pandemic. As with Food Services, jobs at personal services businesses are generally positioned for ongoing growth relative to Retail Trade. Besides Government jobs and jobs in primarily household -serving industries, Dublin's economy includes a mix of jobs in a variety of individually smaller industry sectors representing professional services, corporate headquarters, technology, and innovation -oriented industry sectors. The PSTS, Information, Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate industry sectors collectively constituted 11 percent ofjobs in Dublin in 2023, versus 25 percent ofjobs in the Tri-Valley. These industry sectors include businesses such as professional services (attorneys, real estate brokers), software companies, and scientific research and development. Jobs in the Management of Companies and Enterprises sector constituted another five percent of employment in Dublin, with the Ross Stores corporate headquarters likely accounting for most of these jobs. Dublin's Information and Management of Companies and Enterprises jobs grew at a much faster pace than the Tri-Valley from 2016 to 2023, and Finance and Insurance jobs also grew in Dublin while declining in the Tri-Valley (see Figure 17). However, PSTS jobs and Real Estate jobs declined in Dublin despite growth in the Tri-Valley. Manufacturing, Transportation and Warehousing, and Wholesale Trade jobs —which are largely associated with industrial land uses —constitute a relatively small share of Dublin's jobs. Jobs in these industry sectors constituted six percent of Dublin's jobs in 2023, versus 11 percent in the Tri-Valley.1 Transportation and Warehousing and Manufacturing jobs grew in Dublin from 2016 to 2023, though growth rates slightly lagged these industries in the Tri-Valley overall. Dublin has long included a presence of advanced manufacturing jobs, such as at the former Hexcel facility, the current Zeiss Innovation Center, and smaller employers such as Kensington Laboratories (a wafer robotics manufacturer). These jobs serve to diversify the Dublin economy, despite their small overall share of Dublin's economy. Construction industry sector jobs are also associated with industrial uses. Lightcast data shows that these jobs constituted Dublin's sixth largest industry sector in 2023. However, such jobs are often not actually located in the area indicated by data either because workers are at job site elsewhere or located temporarily in a given community for specific projects. This mismatch and ambiguity also occur with many jobs in the Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation industry sector, which includes many temp agency jobs. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 13 922 FIGURE 15: DUBLIN TOTAL JOBS BY SECTOR, 2023 Government Health Care and Social Assistance Accommodation and Food Retail Trade Other Services (Excluding Public Administration) Construction Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Management of Companies and Enterprises Administrative & Support, Waste Management and... Manufacturing Information Finance and Insurance I• Educational Services Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Wholesale Trade I= Transportation and Warehousing Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Other Industries ■ 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,00010,000 TOTAL JOBS Source: Lightcast Employment Q3 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. FIGURE 16: SHARE OF JOBS BY INDUSTRY SECTOR AND LOCATION, 2023 Government Health Care and Social Assistance Accommodation and Food Retail Trade Other Services (Excluding Public Administration) Construction Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Management of Companies and Enterprises Administrative & Support, Waste Management and... Manufacturing Information Finance and Insurance Educational Services Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Wholesale Trade Transportation and Warehousing Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Other Industries ME- 1 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Share of Jobs by Location Source: Lightcast Employment Q3 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. • Dublin ■ Tri-Valley • East Bay Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 14 923 FIGURE 17: INDUSTRY GROWTH IN DUBLIN AND THE TRI-VALLEY, 2016 TO 2023 Information Health Care and Social Assistance Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Administrative & Support, Waste Management... Management of Companies and Enterprises Transportation and Warehousing Educational Services Finance and Insurance Manufacturing All Jobs Accommodation and Food Construction Other Services (Excluding Public Administration) Government Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Retail Trade Wholesale Trade Other Industries ■ m- ■ Z 7 -100% -50% 0% 50% 100% 150% Job Growth, 2016-2023 Source: Lightcast Employment Q3 2016 and 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. ECONOMIC ASSETS AND INDUSTRY OPPORTUNITIES • Dublin • Tri-Valley The following findings identify Dublin's major opportunities for future industry growth. These opportunities informed the preparation of economic development strategies that support these industries while also ensuring a generally attractive business environment for all potential businesses. The findings describe factors used to identify different industry opportunities. Examples include industry size, concentration, trends favoring future growth of the industry, venture capital investment patterns, compatibility with Dublin and the Tri-Valley's workforces, links to existing large employers in Dublin or the Tri-Valley, and potential opportunities associated with Tri-Valley institutions. Dublin is likely to maintain its large and concentrated presence of household -serving industry sectors, given the larger local population, ongoing local population growth, and the city's accessible location along 1-580 for regional consumer access. Household -serving industry sectors are heavily concentrated in Dublin. As shown in Figure 18, Other Services, Accommodation and Food Services, Retail Trade, and Health Care and Social Assistance are all more heavily concentrated in Dublin than the Tri-Valley or East Bay. Potential job growth in these sectors will be linked to household consumption, population growth, and trends favoring services and dining as retail sales increasingly shift to online shopping. The California Employment Development Department (EDD) also projects that Accommodation and Food Service jobs will grow by 47 percent in the East Bay from 2020 to 2030, as shown in Figure 19. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 15 924 Dublin's concentration of professional services, technology, advanced manufacturing, and research and development jobs is relatively limited today, but the city does include a significant existing base of these jobs. As shown in Figure 18, Dublin includes a relatively low concentration of jobs in the Manufacturing, Finance and Insurance, Real Estate, Information, and PSTS industry sectors compared to the Tri-Valley and, for most sectors, the East Bay. However, the city already includes a base of jobs in these sectors (as described earlier) and several major employers representing these sectors or activities such as Patelco Credit Union, TriNet, and Zeiss Meditec. PSTS jobs are projected to grow significantly by 2030 in the East Bay, along with lower but significant growth for Manufacturing and Information jobs. As shown in Figure 19, as of May 2023 the California EDD projected that PSTS jobs will constitute the fourth fastest growing industry sector in the East Bay between 2020 and 2030. Projected growth rates are lower for Manufacturing and Information jobs, but positive growth is anticipated for both industry sectors. Dublin is well positioned to expand its base of professional services (such as attorneys, accountants, and finance), technology, advanced manufacturing, life sciences, and other innovation -oriented businesses given the City's existing business, population, location, and infrastructure assets within the Tri-Valley. Based on the economic assessment and input from local and regional business stakeholders, these assets include: • The highly educated workforce in Dublin and the Tri-Valley (as described earlier), along with local workforce training and education assets such as Las Positas College. • Regional access to a diverse workforce, including diverse occupations and skills from within the Tri-Valley and surrounding areas. • Transportation infrastructure assets, including BART for commuters, I-580 for commuters and goods movement needs, and future connections via the Valley Link Project that will create a passenger rail connection to Northern San Joaquin Valley. • Regional research and development institutional anchors such as the Lawrence Livermore and Sandia National Laboratories. • Regional startup and business support initiatives such as i-Gate's support for startups. • A large and competitive existing base of these jobs in the Tri-Valley: Figure 16 indicates that the Tri-Valley's economy includes a relatively high share of jobs in the PSTS, Information, Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate industry sectors compared to the East Bay as a whole. These industry sectors also grew recently in the Tri-Valley, as shown in Figure 17. Venture capital investments in Dublin -based companies indicate the city's potential to grow businesses and jobs related to Al and software. Dublin is especially well positioned to expand jobs in the computer technology and software industry, leveraging growth of artificial intelligence (Al). In addition to Dublin's rapid growth of Information jobs from 2016 to 2023, these jobs are also highly concentrated in the city compared to the East Bay (Figure 18). Dublin has seen considerable venture capital investment in computer -related technology startups based in Dublin since 2018. Figure 20 and Figure 21 illustrate venture capital deals by industry sector and deal size for startups based in Dublin. Over 72 percent of venture capital deals in Dublin were for startups based in the information technology industry. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 16 925 FIGURE 18: RELATIVE CONCENTRATION OF INDUSTRY SECTORS FOR DUBLIN VERSUS THE TRI-VALLEY AND EAST BAY, 2023 (EXPRESSED AS A LOCATION QUOTIENT) Government Management of Companies and Enterprises Other Services (Excluding Public Administration) Accommodation and Food Services Retail Trade Health Care and Social Assistance Construction Educational Services Other Industries Administrative & Support, Waste Management and... Manufacturing Finance and Insurance Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Transportation and Warehousing Information Wholesale Trade Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 0.00 1.00 2.00 Location Quotient (Equal Concentration of Industry Sector at 1.0) 3.00 • Dublin vs. Tri-Valley • Dublin vs. East Bay Note: As described earlier in this report, a location quotient of 1.0 indicates equal concentration of an industry sector in Dublin versus the comparison geography. Location quotients above 1.0 indicate the extent to which an industry sector is more heavily concentrated in Dublin versus the comparison geography. Source: Lightcast Employment Q3 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. FIGURE 19: PROJECTED JOB GROWTH BY MAJOR INDUSTRY SECTOR, EAST BAY, 2020 TO 2030 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Accommodation and Food Services Transportation and Warehousing Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Educational Services (Private) Health Care and Social Assistance Administrative and Support and Waste Management... Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Construction Wholesale Trade Manufacturing Retail Trade Information Management of Companies and Enterprises Finance and Insurance Government Other Services All Jobs 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Percent Change in East Bay Jobs, 2020 to 2030 Source: California Employment Development Department, 2020-2030 Industry Employment Projections, Oakland -Hayward -Berkeley MD, May 2023; Strategic Economics, 2024. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 17 926 FIGURE 20: DUBLIN VENTURE CAPITAL DEALS BY CATEGORY, 2018 TO 2023 Industry Sector Venture Capital Deals Information Technology Consumer Products and Services (B2C) Financial Services Healthcare Energy 33 5 2 4 Total 45 Source: Pitchbook, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. FIGURE 21: DUBLIN VENTURE CAPITAL DEAL SIZE, 2018 TO 2023 Category Venture Capital Invested (Millions of Dollars) Commercial Services 0 Communications and Networking 3 Computer Hardware 306.2 Consumer Durables 0 Consumer Non -Durables 0.25 Energy Equipment 0.08 Healthcare Technology Systems 45 IT Services 2.41 Other Financial Services 51.2 Retail 38.36 Semiconductors 20.09 Services (Non -Financial) 0.01 Software 27 Total 493.6 Source: Pitchbook, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. The biomedical industry's presence is relatively limited in Dublin today, but a cluster of these businesses exist within the Tri-Valley area. The City of Dublin requested targeted analysis of life science industry opportunities. As defined by the East Bay Economic Development Alliance (EDA), the broader biomedical industry includes biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, medical equipment, genomics, and digital healthcare.2 Zeiss Meditec, a maker of optical medical equipment, is Dublin's largest biomedical industry employer. A few smaller biomedical businesses also exist in the City, such as the medical equipment company Azure Biosystems. However, recent mapping by the East Bay EDA shows that Dublin can build upon its location within an already thriving biomedical business cluster, with Pleasanton already home to a large number of biomedical businesses.3 2 https://www.resilienteastbay.org/industry-biomedical/ 3 https://www.resilienteastbay.org/map/ Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 18 927 Dublin is positioned to expand its presence of businesses in the biomedical industry —and especially medical devices and equipment —based on the industry's long term regional growth potential and Dublin's competitive assets. Dublin is positioned to grow biomedical businesses and jobs based on the skilled and diverse workforce of the Tri-Valley, existing base of biomedical industry businesses in the Tri-Valley, and opportunities for development of new facilities in Dublin such as the Downtown Commons project and at the Fallon East Economic Development Zone. However, the Tri-Valley is relatively distant from the Bay Area's largest concentrations of pharmaceutical and biotechnology research in South San Francisco and Emeryville. As a result, Dublin is likely best positioned to compete for other aspects of the biomedical industry such as medical equipment/devices, genomics, and digital healthcare. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 19 928 3. Office, Flex, and Light Industrial Real Estate Market Conditions The performance of commercial real estate in the City of Dublin reflects the community's ability to retain and expand different kinds of businesses. Rental rates, vacancy rates, and development activity are indicators of market demand and growth in the city. This report section provides a market assessment of office, flex/R&D, and light industrial land uses in the City of Dublin. The findings are based on real estate market data obtained from real estate data service CoStar Group (CoStar), interviews with local brokers and developers, and focus group meetings and interviews with industry stakeholders. OFFICE, FLEX, AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL Dublin includes a relatively small share of the Tri-Valley's non-residential building inventory. As shown, in Figure 22, Dublin has fewer square feet of non-residential building inventory compared to other Tri- Valley cities. Dublin constitutes 13 percent of the total square feet of industrial, office, and flex space within Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore, and San Ramon combined. FIGURE 22: TRI-VALLEY CURRENT INVENTORY BY SQUARE FEET, 2023 20,000,000 15,000,000 m 2-2 10,000,000 ') 5,000,000 0 Dublin Source: Costar, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. Pleasanton Livermore San Ramon Danville Industrial Office Flex Dublin's nonresidential building inventory primarily consists of retail and office uses. As shown in Figure 23, retail uses constitute 44 percent of Dublin's nonresidential building inventory, in square feet. Office uses constitute 29 percent of space, while flex and industrial uses constitute 15 and 12 percent of space, respectively. FIGURE 23: DUBLIN EXISTING INVENTORY BY BUILDING TYPE, 2023 (SQUARE FEET) Flex 15% Retail 44% Office 29% Industrial 12% Sources: CoStar, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2024. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 20 929 The "Sierra Trinity Business Park/Dougherty Road" subarea includes most of Dublin's light industrial and flex spaces. Figure 24 shows that the Dougherty Road subarea accounts for 59 percent of Dublin's flex space inventory and 78 percent of Dublin's light industrial inventory. FIGURE 24: DUBLIN INVENTORY SHARE BY SUBAREA, 2023 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 26% Flex Industrial Source: CoStar, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. 21% 35% 8% Office 30% Retail ■ Dublin Corporate Center ■ Dublin Village Historic Area ■ Downtown Village Parkway District ■ Downtown Transit -Oriented District ■ Downtown Retail District ■ Sierra Trinity Business Park/Dougherty Road ■ Central Parkway ■ Camp Parks and Governmental Facilities ■ 580 Corridor Dublin's office rents lag those of many other Tri-Valley communities, while industrial rents are comparable to other communities. As shown in Figure 24, Dublin's office rents slightly lag those of San Ramon, Pleasanton, and Danville. As shown in Figure 25, however, Dublin's industrial rents match those of Pleasanton and San Ramon. Historically, Dublin was a relatively low-cost office location within the Tri-Valley, but rents are now approaching those of other Tri-Valley communities. As shown in Figure 25, Dublin commanded lower average office rents since 2019 compared to San Ramon, Pleasanton, and Danville. Dublin's rents have recovered in recent years, however. FIGURE 25: DUBLIN AVERAGE OFFICE RENT PER SQUARE FOOT, 2012 TO 2023 $45.00 $40.00 $35.00 $30.00 Annual Rent Per Sq. Ft. $25.00 $20.00 $15.00 $10.00 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Note: Rents shown on a full service gross basis. Source: CoStar, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. San Ramon - Pleasanton Danville - Dublin Livermore Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 21 930 FIGURE 26: DUBLIN AVERAGE INDUSTRIAL RENT PER SQUARE FOOT, 2012 TO 2023 Annual Rent Per Sq. Ft. $50.00 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 $10.00 $0.00 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Note: Rents include all service types. Note: CoStar provides no industrial building data for Danville. Source: CoStar, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. Dublin Pleasanton Livermore San Ramon Dublin's office vacancy rates have remained competitive with San Ramon and Pleasanton during and since the COVID-19 pandemic, with Dublin benefitting from a stable mix of business headquarters, major regional offices, and health care services. As shown in Figure 27, Dublin's 14.6 percent vacancy rate in late 2023 slightly exceeded Pleasanton and was lower than San Ramon. Although Dublin's office vacancy rate was historically higher than San Ramon and Pleasanton, the COVID-19 pandemic and adoption of widespread work from home policies has not created an outsized impact on vacancies within Dublin's small inventory of office space. Strong demand exists for Dublin's existing industrial spaces. Despite limited overall inventory, Dublin's industrial space is in high demand for service, distribution, and recreation tenants. Based on CoStar real estate data, the city's industrial vacancy rate was below one percent between 2018 and 2022. Dublin's industrial vacancy rate has remained lower than other Tri-Valley communities for much of the last decade. Dublin's vacancy rate did significantly increase in 2023 due to the closure of the Hexcel facility, which the new property owner plans to redevelop. FIGURE 27: OFFICE VACANCY RATES FOR TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITIES, 2012 TO 2023 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Source: Costar, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. San Ramon Dublin Livermore Pleasanton Danville Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 22 931 FIGURE 28: INDUSTRIAL VACANCY RATES FOR TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITIES, 2012 TO 2023 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Note: Increased vacancy in 2023 was driven by closure of the Hexcel facility. Note: CoStar provides no industrial building data for Danville. Source: CoStar, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. Dublin San Ramon Livermore Pleasanton Little new office, flex, and industrial development occurred in Dublin during the past decade. As shown in Figure 29, Dublin's inventory of office, industrial, and flex spaces was nearly flat in the past decade and beyond, while retail inventory grew over time to serve the city's growing population. The only significant additions to Dublin's office and industrial inventory included a Kaiser medical office building in 2019 and the Zeiss Innovation Center (classified as a flex/R&D building) in 2021. FIGURE 29: DUBLIN BUILDING INVENTORY IN SQUARE FEET, 2006 TO 2023 4,500,000 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 a) 2,500,000 cn 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 0 A 4, 0 o <o A icb 0 o 1' o0o0odOr" or" oyoyo�ol.yoti (1�( Source: CoStar, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. Retail Office Industrial Flex Dublin's office, flex, and light industrial building inventory is relatively small and becoming dated as little new development activity occurs. Limited development activity in Dublin has resulted in an aging building stock. Local stakeholders interviewed for the Economic Development Strategy noted the need for modernized office, light industrial/flex, and R&D space that offers the chance for businesses to locate and expand in Dublin. The relatively slow pace of office development activity is partly due to the relatively low achievable rents in Dublin and other Tri-Valley communities compared to some other Bay Area locations. Tri- Valley communities command relatively lower rents for office space compared to other regional locations; for example, as of September 2024, CoStar reported that Dublin's asking rent per square foot for office space was 29 percent lower than Downtown Oakland. Commercial, flex, and light industrial development is currently constrained throughout much of the Bay Area due to broader construction cost challenges and lower achievable rents within the Tri-Valley area. New office, flex, and light industrial space is more likely to be built in Dublin when demand rises Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 23 932 to a level such that a large business seeks a new build -to -suit space, or when achievable rents and other development conditions improve in Dublin and across the Bay Area. Speculative office and life science development is currently constrained throughout the Bay Area due to recent increases in labor and materials costs, increased financing costs, and limited access to capital. These broader development challenges create a need and opportunity to support further build -to -suit and speculative development in Dublin through City efforts to expand and enhance business growth. Dublin's economic development efforts have contributed in recent years to the construction of the Zeiss Innovation Center and proposed development of the Dublin Commons project. Despite strong demand for Dublin's limited existing flex and light industrial space, competition from recreation and other household -serving uses creates a need to consider potential preservation of these spaces for industrial uses and to pursue new development. The important reservoir of flex and light industrial space for construction, manufacturing, repair and maintenance uses in the Sierra Trinity Business Park / Dougherty Road area of Dublin is also experiencing strong demand from recreation and fitness tenants. This competition for space creates a need to examine the appropriate balance of uses to ensure production, distribution, and repair services and businesses are still accommodated in Dublin. This may occur through protecting existing flex and light industrial space and/or supporting development of new space. If existing spaces are preserved for traditional industrial uses, then it will also be important to ensure recreational and fitness businesses are accommodated elsewhere in Dublin. Dublin's remaining greenfield development sites are major opportunities to attract large-scale, modern office, R&D, and manufacturing uses, but each site requires unique infrastructure or other development support. Dublin's "greenfield" commercial and light industrial opportunity sites consist of previously undeveloped properties at the Fallon East Economic Development Zone, Dublin Centre Project, and near the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. This collection of greenfield sites is an asset that Dublin can use to attract new innovation -oriented businesses and, in the case of Dublin Centre, create a modern mixed -use community gathering space. The City is already working to address the major infrastructure needs at the Fallon East Economic Development Zone, and proactively engaging developers at the other major greenfield sites. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 24 933 4. Retail Performance The following findings describe Dublin's retail real estate inventory, retail sales performance, and interviews with local retail brokers, businesses, and property owners. Sales tax revenue data was obtained from HdL and the City of Dublin for 2017 to 2022. Sales tax revenue was analyzed at both the city and subarea level. Taxable sales data —which allowed for comparison between cities —was obtained from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDFTA) for 2018 to 2022 for the Tri-Valley region. Worker flow data was obtained from U.S. Census Bureau's Longitudinal Employer -Household Dynamics (LEND) tool for 2021. RETAIL REAL ESTATE CONDITIONS AND TRENDS Dublin's retail inventory is large, diverse, and desirable for a wide range of tenants. Dublin has approximately four million square feet of retail space, including a variety of regional and local shopping centers —as shown in Figure 30—and large automobile dealerships along 1-580. The inventory includes large regional destinations like Hacienda Crossings, and other centers and "big box" power centers that draw customers from larger trade areas such as the collection of Downtown Dublin's retail or Fallon Gateway. Dublin also includes a variety of smaller grocery -anchored centers that serve local residential trade areas such as Shops at Waterford and Persimmon Place. FIGURE 30: DUBLIN SHOPPING CENTERS canvo„ ��a San Ramon Golf Club 0 San Ramon Village . C• 0 6 o� � ° ° °no O• rat Camp Parks Military Reservation Komandorski Village Dougherty 260,001 - 580,000 580,001 - 875,000 °Greater than 875,000 Dublin Livermore Pleasanton a S• Oo ° °~ n • • _0 0 O 0 ... a• 11y1 • v O Fairlands Park o r s O 0 2O v. Shopping Centers in the Dublin Area Center Square Feet Center Type 0 167,000 - 260,000 0 • Community Center • Lifestyle Center O Neighborhood Center O Outlet Center O Power Center O Strip Center • Super Regional Mall 0 • n p Pleasanton Sports Park a ° 0 0.38 0.75 1.5 Mil®s Black Ave a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sources:b oStar, 2023; Esri, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. co 0 O° ° ° L Source: CoStar, 2023; Esri, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2023. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 25 934 Dublin's shopping centers benefit from access and visibility via 1-580 and 1-680 and, for centers serving a local trade area, via Dublin Boulevard. Figure 30 shows that Dublin's shopping centers are arranged along these major transportation corridors. Retail development and growth has occurred in conjunction with Dublin's population growth. As noted earlier and shown in Figure 29, retail development has continuously occurred as Dublin's population grew. This includes more recent development activity in the eastern portion of Dublin as housing was added to those areas of the city. Dublin's low retail vacancy rates and competitive rents indicate continued strong demand for retail space. As shown in Figure 31, in 2023 Dublin's approximately four percent vacancy rate was lower than any time since 2018. In recent years, Dublin's retail vacancy rate has fallen below other Tri-Valley communities, emphasizing the high demand for retail space in Dublin. As seen in Figure 32, Dublin's retail areas achieve relatively high rents compared to other Tri-Valley communities. FIGURE 31: TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITIES RETAIL VACANCY RATE, 2012 TO 2023 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Source: Costar, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2024. FIGURE 32: TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITIES RETAIL RENT PER SQUARE FOOT (NNN), 2012 TO 2023 Average Annual Rent Per Sq. Ft. $ 50.00 $45.00 $40.00 $35.00 $30.00 $25.00 $ 20.00 $15.00 $10.00 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Source: Costar, 2023; Strategic Economics, 2024. Pleasanton Danville San Ramon Dublin Livermore Danville Dublin Pleasanton Livermore San Ramon Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 26 935 RETAIL PERFORMANCE AND OPPORTUNITIES Dublin is a major regional and local retail destination —especially for automobile dealerships, and restaurants. Comparison of taxable sales per capita (i.e., sales relative to the local resident population) between Tri-Valley communities demonstrates the extent to which a given community may be attracting customers and sales beyond spending by local residents. As shown in Figure 33, Dublin's 2022 taxable sales per capita exceeded all other Tri-Valley communities for Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers and only slightly lagged Pleasanton for Food Services and Drinking Places. FIGURE 33: TAXABLE SALES PER CAPITA BY BUSINESS TYPE, 2022 $9,000 $8,000 $7,000 $ 6, 000 $ 5, 000 $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 Pleasanton San Ramon c n0 o E J Pleasanton San Ramon Pleasanton San Ramon P & Pleasanton Clothing and Clothing Food Services and Gasoline Stations General Merchandise Motor Vehicle and Accessories Stores Drinking Places Stores Parts Dealers Source: California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, 2018-2022; Strategic Economics, 2023. San Ramon Automobile dealerships and automobile -related businesses generated over 40 percent of Dublin's sales tax revenue in 2022 the City's largest category of sales tax revenue. As shown in Figure 34, Dublin's next largest categories of sales tax revenue are general consumer goods, business to business sales, and restaurants and hotels. Dublin's sales tax revenues recovered from the COVID-19 pandemic, with growth driven by automobile - related sales and, to a lesser extent, a variety of other industry categories. As shown in Figure 34, sales tax revenues across most "Major Industry Groups" have recovered since 2020. Sales growth was primarily driven by the "Autos and Transportation" category. Retail sales tax revenue in Dublin is driven by large shopping centers along the 1-580 corridor and in Downtown Dublin, as well as automobile dealerships. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 27 936 FIGURE 34: DUBLIN SALES TAX REVENUE BY MAJOR INDUSTRY GROUPS, 2017 TO 2022 (NOMINAL DOLLARS) $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Autos & Transportation Restaurants & Hotels Food & Drugs General Consumer Goods Building & Construction Business & Industry Fuel & Service Stations Note: Sales tax revenue from the "county pool" is not shown. That revenue category reflects e-commerce related sales tax collections. Note: The "Business and Industry" category primarily consists of business to business sales, and is therefore not attributable to retail businesses. Source: HdL, 2022; City of Dublin, 2022; Strategic Economics, 2024. Dublin's retail, dining, and entertainment opportunities will continually evolve in response to growing e-commerce sales and the evolution of bricks -and -mortar retail. As more sales shift online —particularly for undifferentiated "commodity" goods —Dublin should anticipate that the tenant mix within physical storefront spaces will continue to shift toward a greater emphasis on dining, entertainment, personal and medical services, food/grocery, and unique "boutique" retail. Based on subarea sales tax data provided by the City of Dublin, these trends are apparent in Dublin's sales tax data for 2022 to 2023. This data indicates increasing sales in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan area but declines among "big box" power centers that typically sell many goods readily available online. The shift away from commodity goods retail toward boutique retail and services creates challenges for Dublin's larger "big box" shopping centers and spaces. These trends especially create challenges for large-scale shopping centers like Hacienda Crossings. Demand for different types of spaces continues to evolve, and there is currently relatively lower demand for big -box retail spaces than in the past. Broader retail trends make it increasingly difficult to fill large vacant retail space, and it is often expensive or impractical to split these spaces for use by more than one retailer. Dublin's retail spaces primarily consist of traditional automobile -oriented shopping centers and commercial corridors; the city lacks amenity -rich community gathering destinations, although opportunities exist in Downtown Dublin and Dublin Centre. Despite Dublin's strong quality of life and desirable climate, safety, and location, residents and businesses continue to note the city's lack of a vibrant community gathering space with pedestrian accessibility. Current public -private efforts are underway to develop such a place in Downtown Dublin with the Dublin Commons project, and the Dublin Centre project is also planning to create a similar yet smaller activity node. Dublin's rapidly diversifying population opens new opportunities to attract businesses reflectinga wide variety of cultural influences. Since 2000, U.S. Census data shows that Dublin's population growth overwhelmingly consisted of residents identifying as Asian, as described earlier in this report and shown in Figure 4. The rich diversity of Dublin's population creates opportunities to further support the diverse mix of retail, grocery, dining, and personal services businesses in the city. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 28 937 Through an online business survey and stakeholder interviews, retail business and property owners noted several advantages and challenges for their operations in Dublin: Positive feedback included: • A main positive for Dublin businesses is the City's central location and its proximity to potential customers. • Dublin was described as a safe and welcoming community. • Dublin has a desirable demographic composition and trends that support strong business performance. • The City of Dublin's staff are responsive and clear in their communication with businesses. Several challenges were also raised: • Challenges finding relatively affordable office, retail, or industrial space in Dublin. • Local businesses would benefit from enhancing the marketing of City -offered incentives, services, and programs to existing small businesses, in addition to current promotion of services to new businesses. • Numerous businesses raised concerns about high sewer and water capacity fees charged by the Dublin San Ramon Services District (which is separate from the City of Dublin). Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 29 938 5. Hotels and Tourism The following findings describe recent conditions and trends in both Dublin's and the Tri-Valley's hotel markets, including analysis of hotel occupancy, revenue, and transient occupancy tax revenue. The findings also summarize issues and opportunities identified through interviews with Visit Tri-Valley representatives and review of the organization's 2023 Strategic Plan. Hotel occupancy, revenue, and inventory data was obtained from CoStar for Dublin and the Tri-Valley region for 2012 to 2024. Dublin hotel performance data was obtained from the City of Dublin for 2019 to 2024. Dublin's inventory of 689 hotel rooms constitutes 12 percent of the Tri-Valley's total inventory. As of 2024, CoStar notes five hotels in Dublin that include a mix of economy, midscale, and upper midscale hotels. As shown in Figure 35, Dublin has a relatively small share of the hotel inventory in the Tri-Valley, with just 12 percent of the hotel rooms in Tri-Valley communities being located in Dublin. Dublin's hotel inventory has grown slowly over time. The most recent addition to Dublin's hotel inventory is an "Aloft" branded property that opened in 2018. According to available data, that was the first new hotel to open in Dublin since the early 2000s. FIGURE 35: TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITIES HOTEL INVENTORY, 2024 City Number of Hotel Properties Percentage of Total Hotel Properties in the Tri-Valley Region Number of Hotel Rooms Percentage of Total Hotel Properties in the Tri-Valley Region Danville 1 2% 62 1% Dublin 5 10% 689 12% Livermore 21 43% 1,612 29% Pleasanton 15 31% 2,050 37% San Ramon 7 14% 1,147 21% Tri-Valley Region Total 49 100% 5,560 100% Sources: Costar, 2024; Strategic Economics, 2024. The Dublin and Tri-Valley hotel markets are recovering slowly from the COVID-19 pandemic, which will likely constrain hotel development opportunities in the near term. As shown in Figure 36 and Figure 37, Dublin's average revenue per room recovery rate and occupancy rate, along with other Tri-Valley Cities, are slowly recovering since 2020. Transient occupancy tax receipts also reflect these conditions, with nearly all hotel properties in Dublin generating lower revenue in 2023 than in 2019. Hotel demand in Dublin is primarily driven by business travelers. Based on input from Visit Tri-Valley and review of Dublin's mix of hotel properties, Dublin's hotels primarily serve business travelers seeking convenient access to major employers throughout the Tri-Valley and beyond. Dublin's hotels also provide relatively low cost accommodation compared to many other parts of the Bay Area while also providing convenient access to destinations via BART and freeways. Demand for hotel stays in Dublin could potentially be expanded through local employment growth and diversification of visitors to the city and Tri-Valley. Given that business travelers constitute much of the demand for hotel stays in Dublin, business and job growth in Dublin and the Tri-Valley can provide additional demand for hotel stays over time. Visit Tri-Valley is also exploring opportunities to diversify hotel demand through attraction or development of other destination and meeting amenities. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 30 939 FIGURE 36: AVERAGE REVENUE PER AVAILABLE ROOM BY YEAR IN THE TRI-VALLEY REGION, 2012 TO 2024 $150.00 $100.00 $50.00 $- 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 YTD Year Danville Dublin Livermore Pleasanton San Ramon Tri-Valley Region Note: 2024 data reflects data through July. Source: CoStar, 2024; Strategic Economics, 2024. FIGURE 37: TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITIES AVERAGE HOTEL OCCUPANCY RATE, 2012 TO 2024 100% O 80% • 60% c O 40% 0 20% 0 % 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 >> YTD - Danville Year Dublin Livermore Pleasanton San Ramon Note: 2024 data reflects data through July. Source: CoStar, 2024; Strategic Economics, 2024. Local stakeholders noted a lack of hotels with larger conference centers or meeting spaces in the Tri- Valley. Stakeholders interviewed for this study noted that no hotels exist in Dublin, Pleasanton, or Livermore that can host large conferences or meetings, due to a limited number of large hotels and a lack of hotels with adequate meeting spaces. The San Ramon Valley Conference Center was noted as the closest facility that can host larger events, though the property only includes 119 on -site guest rooms. Regional initiatives to attract hotel stays and a multiuse venue can support local hotels in Dublin. As hotel occupancy and revenues continue to recover over time since the COVID-19 pandemic, Dublin can position itself to leverage Visit Tri-Valley's efforts to expand visitation. Visit Tri-Valley is pursuing development of a multiuse sports, entertainment, and conference venue to diversify hotel demand and expand visitor spending. Dublin could either seek to attract this facility to the city itself or seek to leverage the future facility to attract additional hotel stays. Dublin Economic Development Strategy Technical Report 31 940 /` STRATEGICECONOMICS Appendix B: Community Engagement Summary City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy and Economic Development Element Update April 24, 2024 .1t4 DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Table of Contents 1. Survey Introduction and Purpose 2. Local Business Survey Results Summary • Who responded (background questions) • Survey Results 3. General Community Survey Results Summary • Who responded (background questions) • Survey Results STRATEGIC ECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Introduction and Purpose ad. Survey Introduction and Purpose • The City of Dublin is in the process of updating its Economic Development Strategy and Economic Development Element. Both documents will guide the City's economic development policies and actions in both the short and long term. • To assist in this project, both a General Community Survey and Local Business Survey were prepared and distributed to Dublin's residents and businesses, respectively. These surveys were marketed by the City of Dublin and left open for responses during December 2023 and January 2024. • The purpose of the surveys was to provide an opportunity for Dublin's residents and businesses to comment on their current economic development priorities and concerns. • The survey results, alongside analyses and other stakeholder engagement activities, will be used to inform prioritization of the economic development strategies included in the Economic Development Strategy and Economic Development Element. S STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Local Business Survey Local Business Survey Results Summary Individual Responses: 70 gill STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Local Business Survey Who Responded (Background Questions) Local Business Survey Results Summary gill STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN 945 CALIFORNIA iFw Local Business Survey Question 14 - Which of the following best describes your business? Other (please specify) Restaurant/cafe/bar Professional services (attorneys, accountants, therapists, etc.) Health and wellness Real Estate Arts, entertainment, and recreation Equipment or vehicle service and repair Warehouse and distribution Scientific research and development Retail (non-food/grocery) Personal services (nail salons, hair salons, pet grooming, etc.) Manufacturing Education Child care and after school programs Information technology Construction Hotel and hospitality Grocery/convenience/food store 0% • "Other" responses include: • Banking/Financial Institution • Consulting • Other Personal Services 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA 6 946 IIF Local Business Survey Question 15 - Where is your businesses based out of? 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% ql A commercial or industrial building/space (office, storefront, industrial building, etc.) A residential home Virtual office address ■ DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Other Summary of Survey Respondents • Nearly 70 percent of respondents were based out of commercial or industrial space in Dublin • Around 25 percent of respondents represented businesses based out of a residential home STRATEGICECONOMICS 947 OPF Local Business Survey i 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Question 16 - How many employees does your business employ, including yourself? 1 (self-employed 2-9 employees 10-19 employees 20-50 employees More than 50 with no other employees employees) STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" ■ DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Summary of Survey Respondents • Most survey respondents employ between 2 and 9 people • Just over 25 percent of respondents were self-employed • Less than 10 percent of respondents represented companies that employ more than 50 people 8 948 Local Business Survey Question 17 - Where do you live? 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dublin Other San Ramon Danville Pleasanton Livermore ------/ 41 STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Summary of Survey Respondents • Over 40 percent of survey respondents live in Dublin • 10 percent of survey respondents live in San Ramon and Danville, respectively • Remaining respondents are spread across the Bay Area, but primarily in the East Bay • "Other" responses include: • Oakland • San Francisco • Hayward • Fairfield rillr- Local Business Survey 4 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Question 18 - What is your age? 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75 years Prefer not years years years years years years and older to say STRATEGICECONOMICS ite DUBLIN Summary_of Survey Respondents • Most survey respondents were between the ages of 45 and 64 • Dublin's actual age distribution illustrated below for reference 75 and over 55-74 co a) c 35-54 a) Q 18-34 Under 18 Condensed Age Distribution in Dublin, 2021 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% % of Population ■ 2021 950 CALIFORNIA FP— Local Business Survey Question 19-Whatisthe combined annual income of everyone in your household? 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 1 1 F Less than $25,000 - $50,000 - $75,000 - $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 Prefer not $25,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 - STRATEGICECONOMICS .N DUBLIN $150,000 $200,000 or More to say Summary of Survey Respondents • Nearly a quarter of survey respondents reported a combined annual household income of greater than $200,000 • Around 15 percent of survey respondents reported an income of less than $100,000 • Dublin's actual income distribution shown below as reference Household Income Distribution in Dublin, 2021 (Constant 2022 Dollars) T.) $200,000 or More a) J N E o $125,000 to $199,999 0 a- ) o $75,000 to $124,999 0 c C < $25,000 to $74,999 a) u) c a) c c � Less than $24,999 iii M...1 0% 10% 20% 30% Households 40% 50% ■ 2021 11 951 CALIFORNIA Question 20 - Which catego, best describes you? 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 35% 21% 10% 1 8% 8% 1 1 6% 3% 3% CP. �`O S°: �C.rd \G\ • G�� G\ O`? c ciezy cc\O DUBLIN Summary of Survey Respondents • 35 percent of survey respondents identified as White/Caucasian • Around 25 percent of survey respondents identified as Asian • Dublin's actual demographics shown below for reference 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Dublin Total Population Racial Composition, 2021 6% Dublin • White • Hispanic or Latino • African American or Black Asian • Other Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2017-2021; Strategic Economics, 2023. 12 STRATEGICECONOMICS CALIFORNIA 952 Local Business Survey Survey Results Local Business Survey Results Summary "----_____./ °AI STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA rr Local Business Survey 1 Question 1 - What factors drew your business to its location and to Dublin generally? Weighted Average Score (1 to 5, with 5 Indicating "Very Important") Safe community Proximity to customers Access to freeways Proximity to home Affordable office, retail, or industrial space Office, retail, or industrial space that met the business's physical requirements (size, ceiling... Dublin's reputation/brand as a place to do business City of Dublin's permitting and approval processes Access to employees City of Dublin's business incentive programs Dublin's public transportation options (BART, bus) Proximity to suppliers STRATEGICECONOMICS 0 1 2 3 4 5 .1" DUBLIN Responses by Level of Importance of Each Item Safe community Proximity to customers Access to freeways Proximity to home Affordable office, retail, or industrial space Office, retail, or industrial space that met the business's physical requirements (size, ceiling... Dublin's reputation/brand as a place to do business City of Dublin's permitting and approval processes Access to employees City of Dublin's business incentive programs Dublin's public transportation options (BART, bus) Proximity to suppliers 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 5=Very Important, 1=Not Important • Very Important • Important Moderately Important • Slightly Important • Not Important N/A 14 954 CALIFORNIA i-P— Local Business Survey Question 1 Gathered Opinions on Important Factors That Drew Businesses to Dublin: Summary of Important Factors for Businesses Some of the most important factors that drew businesses to Dublin: • Safe community • Proximity to customers • Office, retail, or industrial space that met the business's physical requirements (size, ceiling heights, power, loading, etc.) M STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Some of the least important factors that drew businesses to Dublin: • Proximity to suppliers • Dublin's public transportation options (BART, bus) • Factors with a relatively split opinion on importance: • City of Dublin's business incentive programs i-P— Local Business Survey 4 Question 2 - Where else did you consider opening, expanding, or relocating your business? Pleasanton San Ramon I never considered a location outside Dublin Livermore Walnut Creek Other Alameda County Bay Area locations not listed above Outside California Other Contra Costa County Other California locations not listed above San Joaquin County STRATEGICECONOMICS 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% .11 DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Summary of Places Businesses Considered for Expansion, Relocation, or Opening • Pleasanton and San Ramon represent the most cited alternative location options for responding business representatives • Nearly a third of respondents noted that they never considered a location outside of Dublin • Areas outside of the East Bay were not typically considered for locating or expanding businesses that are currently located in Dublin 956 Local Business Survey Question 3 - What kind of concerns does your business face in Dublin? Weighted Average Score (1 to 3, with 1 indicating "Not at All Concerned") High or increasing local taxes and fees Crime High or increasing housing costs for myself or employees Increasing cost of commercial or industrial building rents or land in Dublin Automobile traffic congestion along major Dublin corridors Ability to meet electricity needs in Dublin Local government regulation and restrictions related to development Long employee commute times Challenges recruiting employees to work on -site Inadequate internet service speeds in commercial or industrial districts Lack of available space in Dublin for business relocation or expansion Inadequate internet service speeds in residential areas 1 0 1 2 3-Very Concerned, 1=Not at All Concerned 3 Responses by Option High or increasing local taxes and fees Crime High or increasing housing costs for myself or employees Increasing cost of commercial or industrial building rents or land in Dublin Automobile traffic congestion along major Dublin corridors Ability to meet electricity needs in Dublin Local government regulation and restrictions related to development Long employee commute times MLMI. Challenges recruiting employees to work on -site Inadequate internet service speeds in commercial or industrial districts Lack of available space in Dublin for business relocation or expansion Inadequate internet service speeds in residential areas 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% ■ Very Concerned Somewhat Concerned ■ Not at All Concerned ■ Don't Know STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA 17 957 FP— Local Business Survey Question 3 Gathered Opinions on What Kinds of Concerns Local Businesses Face in Dublin: Summary of Local Business Concerns The following are higher concerns for businesses in Dublin: • Crime • High or increasing local taxes and fees • High or increasing housing costs for myself or employees M STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" DUBLIN CALIFORNIA The following are lesser concerns for businesses in Dublin: • Lack of available space in Dublin for business relocation or expansion • Challenges recruiting employees to work on -site • Inadequate Internet service speeds in commercial or industrial districts Other concerns noted by businesses: • High cost of utilities which is restrictive for local small businesses • An overall lack of industrial space for sale in Dublin r—ir Local Business Survey 4 Question 4 - Please note other concerns for your business in Dublin Key Takeaways/Themes from free responses • Rising and prohibitive cost of rent and land • High water and other utility costs • Perceived lack of City efforts to support and communicate with local small businesses • The citywide emphasis on housing production limits industrial and retail space • Rising crimes that effect both businesses and employees, and the desire for increased police response STRATEGICECONOMICS .11' DUBLIN CALIFORNIA a • • c Li • It ree Response Answer Examples It's expensive to start a business an rent is very expensive..." Permitting processes through the city re long and tedious. It feels like we ave to jump through a lot of hoops nd as a small business it sometimes reates a barrier to start up." sewer, water and utility add on fees nd tiered pricing for businesses..." IIF Local Business Survey I2 Question 5 - What is the outlook for your business in Dublin? Very Positive Somewhat Positive Unclear Somewhat Negative Very Negative 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% Summary of Local Business Outlook: • Over 75 of respondents were positive about the outlook of their business in Dublin • Less than five percent of survey respondents were negative about the outlook of their business in Dublin STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA 960 Local Business Survey 1 Question 6 - What factors influenced your response to the previous question? (On Local Business Outlook) Key Takeaways/Themes from Free Responses Factors that are creating a positive outlook for local businesses: • Strong and consistent local customer base • Sustained access to employees • Continued demographic trends make Dublin a desirable place to locate a business Factors that are creating a negative outlook for local businesses: • Current broader economic trends are negatively affecting local business sales • Rising rents can push out local small businesses STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" DUBLIN CALIFORNIA ree Response Answer Examples "Been in business for over 30 years in Dublin. We have a very strong base of regular customers" Location, growing population, development of downtown coming, etc." bility to expand and convert usable ace" As rent keeps going up small businesses can not afford to stay" Continued growth in Dublin" 21 Ir- Local Business Survey Question 7 - How would you define your interactions with the City of Dublin in relation to your business? Very Positive Somewhat Positive Unclear Very Negative Somewhat Negative 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" ■ DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Summary of Interactions with the City_of Dublin • Over 80 percent of respondents noted positive interactions with the City of Dublin 962 Local Business Survey 1 Question 8 - What factors influenced your response to the previous question? (On Interactions with the City of Dublin) Key Takeaways/Themes from Free Responses Positive interactions: • Quick turnaround and assistance for permitting and other small business needs • Knowledgeable, responsive, and friendly City staff • City marketing and newsletters keep businesses informed Less positive interactions: • Lack of connection to local businesses outside of those pursuing specific City resources STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" DUBLIN ree Response Answer Examples "City news email keep me informed and espond accordingly." "The staff at the City of Dublin has always en courteous, nice, and helpful. It's just of hoops and barriers to get business unning and costly for small businesses..." "Long timeframes, permitting costs...often nhibit or negatively impact our business" veryone at the city office is friendly and it easy to do the license renewals." `Quick feedback on permit issues" 23 CALIFORNIA i-P— Local Business Survey i Question 9 - Do you utilize any programs or incentives offered to businesses by the City of Dublin? Yes, 24% M STRATEGICECONOMICS , .1" DUBLIN CALIFORNIA No, 76% Summary of Incentive or Program Utilization • Less than 25 percent of respondents report utilizing any programs or incentives offered by the City of Dublin • Those that responded yes primarily noted relief granted by the City of Dublin during the Covid pandemic ir Local Business Survey ou Question 10 - If you answered no to the previous question, what factors influenced this response? (On Program or Incentive Utilization) City programs or incentives would not help my business, 9% City programs or incentives do not apply to my business, 17%, Applying for City programs or incentives is too difficult, 6% Other, 21% STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" DUBLIN CALIFORNIA I am not aware of City programs or incentives, 47% Summary of Responses • Of respondents that said they do not utilize city -offered incentives, nearly 50 percent noted that they are not aware of City programs or incentives • Nearly 40 percent of respondents said that City programs or incentives would not help, or do not apply, to their business • "Other" responses mostly consisted of respondents who answered "yes" to the previous question (question #9) 25 965 Ir- Local Business Survey Question 11- Do you receive business -related email communications from the City of Dublin? M STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Summary of Responses • Over 80 percent of respondents receive business - related email communications from the City of Dublin 26 OF Local Business Survey 4 Question 12 - What changes in Dublin would help your business and industry prosper? Weighted Average Score (1 to 5, with 5 indicating "Very Important") Reducing crime Affordable office, retail, or industrial space New events and promotions to draw customers to local businesses Simplifying and streamlining City of Dublin permitting and approval processes Expanding City of Dublin business incentive, grant, and programs Increased opportunities for business owners to meet and interact Growth of housing opportunities affordable to me and my employees Marketing Dublin as a location for businesses to locate Reducing automobile traffic congestion Expanding workforce development resources and programs Diversifying the sizes, types, and locations of office, retail, and industrial buildings/spaces Expanding education and training resources for business owners Growing the number of residents/customers in Dublin Diversifying the types of businesses in Dublin Growing the number of businesses in Dublin Growing the inventory of office, retail, or industrial buildings/spaces Improving public transportation service (BART, bus service) STRATEGICECONOMICS 0 1 2 3 4 5 5=Very Important, 1=Not Important .1" DUBLIN Affordable office, retail, or industrial space New events and promotions to draw customers to local businesses Simplifying and streamlining City of Dublin permitting and approval processes Expanding City of Dublin business incentive, grant, and programs Increased opportunities for business owners to meet and interact Growth of housing opportunities affordable to me and my employees Marketing Dublin as a location for businesses to locate Reducing automobile traffic congestion Expanding workforce development resources and programs Diversifying the sizes, types, and locations of office, retail, and industrial buildings/spaces Expanding education and training resources for business owners Growing the number of residents/customers in Dublin Diversifying the types of businesses in Dublin Growing the number of businesses in Dublin Growing the inventory of office, retail, or industrial buildings/spaces Improving public transportation service (BART, bus service) Responses by Option Reducing crime MI M i 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% ■Very Important Important • Moderately Important ■Slightly Important • Not Important 27 967 CALIFORNIA Irw Local Business Survey Question 12 Gathered Opinions on What Changes Are Needed for Local Businesses to Prosper Summary of Responses on Changes that Would Help Businesses Prosper Changes that were noted as most important to helping local businesses prosper: • Reducing crime • Affordable office, retail, or industrial space • New events and promotions to draw customers to local businesses M STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Changes that were noted as less important to helping local businesses prosper: • Improving public transportation service (BART, bus service) • Growing the inventory of office, retail, or industrial buildings/spaces • Growing the number of businesses in Dublin Changes that had divergent responses as to their ability to help businesses prosper: • Marketing Dublin as a location for businesses to locate • Diversifying the types of businesses in Dublin 28 OF - Local Business Survey Question 13 - What other issues, opportunities, and priorities should be addressed in the Dublin Economic Development Strategy? Key Takeaways/Themes from Free Responses • Continue to provide a business - friendly environment in Dublin • Support the marketing and visibility of local small businesses • Look for ways to streamline the permitting process • Partnership with regional groups to support public transportation and reduce local traffic congestion STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" DUBLIN CALIFORNIA ree ResDonse Answer Examples ontinue to provide businesses with the type of business -friendly nvironment that attracts more businesses to Dublin." ontinued partnership with Tri-Valley cities to address public transportation nd area traffic issues." ;Opportunities for business to meet sidents as a meet and greet." "Making it easier for ads to be displayed." 29 Mr General Community Survey General Community Survey Results Summary Individual Responses: 406 gill = S STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Mr General Community Survey Who Responded (Background Questions) General Community Survey Results Summary ........„, A 31 STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA gr General Community Survey i. Question 1-First, please tell us which of the following describes you: (check all that apply) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% live in Dublin I shop in I work in I go to school Dublin Dublin in Dublin STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" ■ DUBLIN CALIFORNIA I am a business owner in Dublin Other Summary of Survey Respondents • Nearly all respondents live in Dublin • Only 21% of respondents work in Dublin • Those who responded "other" primarily had children who go to school in Dublin 32 NVGeneral Community Survey Question 7 - Where do you live? 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 99% Dublin 1% 0% 0% 0% Livermore Pleasanton San Ramon Other (please specify) ______, A STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN Summary of Survey Respondents • Nearly all respondents report living in Dublin 33 973 CALIFORNIA ITGeneral Community Survey go Question 8 - What is your age? 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% o ■ 0% 0-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75 years Prefer not years years years years years years years and older to say u IIII �i STRATEGICECONOMICS .11 DUBLIN Summary of Survey Respondents • The largest share of respondents were between the ages of 35 and 44 • Over 75 percent of total respondents were between the ages of 25 and 54 • Only about 10 percent of total respondents were less than 25 or more than 65 years of age • Dublin's actual age distribution shown below for reference 75 and over 55-74 V2 co a) c 35-54 a) tto 18-34 Under 18 Condensed Age Distribution in Dublin, 2021 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% % of Population • 2021 34 974 CALIFORNIA General Community Survey 0 Question 9-Whatisthe combined annual income of everyone in your household? 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% • I Less than $25,000 - $50,000 - $75,000 - $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 Prefer not $25,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 - STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" DUBLIN $150,000 $200,000 or More to say Summary of Survey Respondents • Nearly 50 percent of all respondents noted their annual household income as greater than $200,000 • Only seven percent of respondents noted their annual household income as less than $100,000 • Dublin's actual income distribution shown below as reference Household Income Distribution in Dublin, 2021 (Constant 2022 Dollars) T.) $200,000 or More a) J N E o $125,000 to $199,999 0 a- ) o $75,000 to $124,999 0 c C < $25,000 to $74,999 a) u) c a) c c � Less than $24,999 iii IM.4 0% 10% 20% 30% Households 40% 50% ■ 2021 35 975 CALIFORNIA Mlir General Community Survey Question 10 - Which category best describes you? 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 5`a� �ra� J o Ar Q.k STRATEGICECONOMICS o� co coo .1" DUBLIN 1 1 Summary of Survey Respondents • Over 40 percent of respondents identified themselves as falling within one or more of the Asian ethnic categories • 30 percent of respondents identified themselves as White/Caucasian • Dublin's actual demographics shown below for reference 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Dublin Total Population Racial Composition, 2021 • Dublin • White • Hispanic or Latino • African American or Black Asian Other 36 976 CALIFORNIA ipix General Community Survey Question 11 - What is your current employment status? 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% I...__ �,c6c\ e ,:k \oho �o�� gy . ez , ��� �o'� �� ,,c ��� Qk a Summary of Survey Respondents • Over 70 percent of respondents were currently employed • Around 10 percent of respondents were currently retired or semi -retired STRATEGICECONOMICS ■ DUBLIN CALIFORNIA ipix General Community Survey Question 12 - What is your current occupation category? Computer or Mathematical Business or Financial Operations Other (please specify) Not employed Architecture or Engineering Management Healthcare Educational Instruction or Library Office and Administrative Support Legal Student Sales Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, or Media Life, Physical, or Social Sciences Real Estate (realtors, brokers, property managers,...M Construction M Community or Social Service Protective Service (police, security, etc.) • Production / Manufacturing • Food Preparation or Serving (restaurants, catering, etc.) • Military • Transportation or Material Moving/ Warehouse 1 Farming, Fishing, or Forestry 1 Personal Care or Service (hair salons, nail salons,... Installation, Maintenance, or Repair (service technicians,... Building and Grounds Cleaning or Maintenance STRATEGICECONOMICS 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% .1" DUBLIN Summary of Survey Respondents • Occupations with the highest share of respondents: • Computer or Mathematical • Business or Financial Operations • Architecture or Engineering • Not Employed • "Other" responses include: • Technology • Marketing • Management • "Not Employed" responses likely include many retirees 978 CALIFORNIA Mr General Community Survey Survey Results General Community Survey Results Summary ........„, A STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA InGeneral Community Survey I Question 2 - Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement below: Weighted Average Score (1 to 5, with 5 Indicating Strong Agreement) Responses by Level of Agreement with Statement 1 Dublin has stores that meet my needs. Dublin has many great eating, drinking, and entertainment places. I regularly use, and benefit from, the BART service at either of Dublin's stations. Existing transportation options in Dublin make it easy for me to get to work. Dublin has a community gathering place where I can easily walk to restaurants, stores, and... Dublin is a great environment for small independent businesses. I have access to great education and job training opportunities in or near Dublin. Dublin offers high quality job opportunities in my occupation/profession. Housing in Dublin is affordable for people and families with a range of different incomes. Childcare is accessible. Dublin offers adequate support and services for entrepreneurs to start businesses. STRATEGICECONOMICS 1 1 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 5=Strongly Agree, 1=Strongly Disagree .1" DUBLIN Dublin has stores that meet my needs. ii Dublin has many great eating, drinking, and entertainment places. I regularly use, and benefit from, the BART service at either of Dublin's stations. Existing transportation options in Dublin make it easy for me to get to work. Dublin has a community gathering place where I can easily walk to restaurants, stores, and entertainment. Dublin is a great environment for small independent businesses. I have access to great education and job training opportunities in or near Dublin. Dublin offers high quality job opportunities in my occupation/profession. Housing in Dublin is affordable for people and families with a range of different incomes. Childcare is accessible. Dublin offers adequate support and services for entrepreneurs to start businesses. I Mr--• Mawr 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% • Strongly Agree • Agree Neutral — Disagree • Strongly Disagree Don't Know 980 CALIFORNIA General Community Survey a Question 2 Gathered Opinions on How Dublin Meets the Community's Needs: Summary of Feedback on Dublin's Performance The statements with the highest weighted average positive response —meaning the most strongly agree/agree responses were the following: • Dublin has stores that meet my needs regularly use, and benefit from, the BART service at either of Dublin's stations • Dublin has many great eating, drinking, and entertainment places STRATEGICECONOMICS .11' DUBLIN CALIFORNIA The statements with the lowest weighted average negative response —meaning the most disagree or strongly disagree responses were the following: • Dublin offers high quality job opportunities in my occupation/profession • Housing in Dublin is affordable for people and families with a range of different incomes • Dublin has a community gathering place where I can easily walk to restaurants, stores, and entertainment Statements with a large range of responses, indicating diverging opinions: • I regularly use, and benefit from, the BART service at either of Dublin's stations • Dublin has many great eating, drinking, and entertainment places 981 General Community Survey ..11 Question 3 - What are Dublin's other important strengths and weaknesses related to the economy and workforce? Key Takeaways/Themes from Free Responses • Dublin has a large amount of green space and public areas that are welcoming and accessible • Dublin has a large variety of retail businesses and fantastic schools • Dublin does not have a downtown or "unique" regional entertainment destination that can attract residents and visitors • Dublin has a lack of local jobs, requiring residents to endure lengthy commutes • There is concern regarding new higher - density residential development ee Response Answer Examples Dublin is a comfortable place to Iive...Iiving Dublin allows me to live close to work." Dublin lacks a true downtown that is alkable and attracts residents to help form community." issing some place families can go for ntertainment" trengths - good schools, safe community, ntral location near major cities/attractio► riety of dining/grocery options." 42 STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA UPI General Community Survey Question 4 - Please select how important each action is for you: Weighted Average Score (1 to 5, with 5 Indicating "Very Important") Responses by Level of Importance of Each Item Increase the number of great eating, drinking, and entertainment places in Dublin. Increase the number of community gathering places where I can easily walk to restaurants, stores, and entertainment. Improve opportunities for small independent businesses to succeed in Dublin. Increase the number and types of stores in Dublin. Offer more services for entrepreneurs seeking to start businesses. Increase education and job training opportunities in Dublin. Make it easier to find high quality job opportunities in my occupation/profession in Dublin. STRATEGICECONOMICS Increase the number of great eating, drinking, and entertainment places in Dublin. Increase the number of community gathering places where I can easily walk to restaurants, stores, and entertainment. Improve opportunities for small independent businesses to succeed in Dublin. Increase the number and types of stores in Dublin. Offer more services for entrepreneurs seeking to start businesses. Increase education and job training opportunities in Dublin. Make it easier to find high quality job opportunities in my occupation/profession in Dublin. ■ Mi Ilm Elms' Km" 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 ■Very Important Important Moderately Important ■Slightly Important ■ Not Important 5=Very Important, 1=Not Important .11' DUBLIN 43 983 CALIFORNIA 1111. General Community Survey 1 Question 4 Gathered Opinions on Which Priorities are Important to Dublin Residents: Summary of Resident Priorities Actions very important to Dublin residents: • Increase the number of great eating, drinking, and entertainment places in Dublin • Increase the number of community gathering places where one can easily walk to restaurants, stores, and entertainment • Improve opportunities for small independent businesses to succeed in Dublin STRATEGICECONOMICS .1" DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Actions somewhat less important to Dublin residents: • Make it easier to find high quality job o pportunities in my occupation/profession in Dublin • Offer more services for e ntrepreneurs seeking to start businesses • Increase education and job training o pportunities in Dublin 44 Question 5 - What are other priorities that should be addressed in the Economic Development Strategy? Key Takeaways/Themes from Free Responses • Focus on existing residents' quality of life instead of continued housing development • This includes combating the housing costs and traffic congestion that may come with development • Increase job opportunities for residents to reduce their required commute • Emphasize affordable housing production • Increase commercial establishment diversity • This includes a desire for "upscale" shopping and dining destinations ii • • ii Li ii ee Response Answer Examples Vould like to see...stronger walkable, ikeable, and alternative transportation pportunities" ore affordable housing for young ouples and families." u lease make sure our new downtown 1 n with entertainment and good staurants" e should also address the Infrastructur plift needed to support the economic owth and all the new housing." STRATEGICECONOMICS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA General Community Survey Question 6 - What other issues, opportunities, and priorities should be addressed in the Dublin Economic Development Strategy? Key Takeaways/Themes from Free Responses • The need for more affordable housing in Dublin • Concern about increasing Dublin's residential density (relating to crime, congestion, infrastructure) • The importance of redeveloping Downtown Dublin into a place that attracts visitors from across the region • Overall lack of regional appeal or "brand" for Dublin • Traffic and congestion concerns • The need to improve bike and pedestrian connections and safety citywide STRATEGICECONOMICS VN DUBLIN ee Response Answer Examples `Create a core Downtown." "Making sure Dublin stays safe." "Something about Dublin should be drawin eople from other areas to want to come ere." ore bike/walking paths and the ability to onnect existing trails." "Places for people to gather from both in own and out of town and resources to courage people to start, or engage with, usinesses..." 46 CALIFORNIA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX - PUBLIC DRAFT Attachment 2 4iriM Ongoing Goal 1 Innovation Growth Strategy 1.1 Adjust, enhance, formalize, and implement outreach and engagement with businesses, brokers, industry associations, and Tri-Valley institutions to focus on high -priority industry opportunities, including information technology, professional services, and biomedical uses such as medical equipment/device R&D and manufacturing. Action 1.1.1 Establish standing industry stakeholder groups for information technology, professional and financial services, and biomedical businesses. Convene meetings with each stakeholder group twice per year to communicate City news and learn about these employers' needs and concerns. Action 1.1.2 Convene meetings with brokers, developers, and major property owners twice per year to provide updates regarding City efforts, resources, and major development projects, and to receive input regarding conditions and needs. Ongoing Action 1.1.3 Focus existing business visitation program towards high -priority industries to identify specific business needs while connecting them with available resources and services. Ongoing Action 1.1.4 Continue City practices of offering business seminars and hosting roundtable programs in collaboration with relevant regional stakeholders such as the Dublin Chamber of Commerce and the East Bay Economic Development Alliance. Within these events, target high -priority industries to maintain relationships with these businesses and better understand challenges and opportunities for City staff to provide support. Ongoing Strategy 1.2 Establish a business -friendly brand unique to Dublin's economic development efforts targeted to the noted industries and activities, with a focus on Dublin's competitive assets such as its geographic location near 1-580 and 1-680, BART access, high educational attainment, and major infill and greenfield development opportunity sites. Action 1.1.5 Continue partnership with local and regional entities such as the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, Innovation Tri-Valley, i-Gate, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratory, East Bay Small Business Development Center, and East Bay Economic Development Alliance to participate in business events and other relevant trade shows or industry groups. Ongoing Action 1.2.1 Conduct annual City staff trainings to establish a shared understanding of Dublin's assets and messaging for economic development and emphasize the benefits of ensuring the City maintains a business -friendly environment. 1-2 years and Ongoing Action 1.2.2 Undertake and implement an economic development -tailored marketing and branding strategy that focuses on Dublin's competitive assets and transformational development projects/areas identified through the Economic Development Strategy effort, as well as existing business and development incentives. As part of this new branding identity, create a cohesive marketing plan that includes an updated webpage unique to the economic development branding strategy creation of new materials for handout at industry meetings, and refreshed press and media engagement. 1-2 years Goal 2 Promote Infill Investment Strategy 2.1 Identify and implement investments, partnerships, and regulatory changes that accelerate the emergence of Downtown Dublin as an innovation district and a vibrant mixed -use community and regional gathering destination —including improved integration of the Downtown Core area with other subareas. Action 2.1.1 Continue providing supportive services, regulatory amendments, and participating in development negotiations as part of the public -private partnership to accelerate buildout and tenanting of the Dublin Commons project. Ongoing Action 2.1.2 Explore adoption of funding and financing tools —including enhanced infrastructure financing districts and community facilities districts —to accelerate construction of public infrastructure that supports buildout of the Dublin Commons project and improves multimodal transportation connections within and between subareas of Downtown Dublin. 1-2 years Action 2.1.3 Continue to build partnerships with interested property owners and developers to identify and implement opportunities to accelerate the development of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan area. Ongoing Action 2.1.4 Explore the potential creation of a business and innovation incubator space in the Downtown Dublin area. 1-2 years Strategy 2.2 Explore opportunities with the Hacienda Crossings shopping center owner to support tenant attraction (including non-traditional anchors that attract foot traffic, such as medical office uses), expansion of entertainment and dining, reducing barriers to diversifying uses, and incentivizing reinvestment and new development. Action 2.2.1 Maintain proactive regular contact with Hacienda Crossings management and ownership to identify and address barriers and opportunities for attracting tenants and reinvestment at the shopping center —especially for the specified tenant types and potential addition of different commercial and residential uses. Promote existing tenant attraction incentives such as the sales tax reimbursement program. Ongoing Action 2.2.2 If the Hacienda Crossings ownership chooses to pursue a significant master planning or re -visioning process for the center, collaboratively identify ways to support and accelerate this process. 3-5 years 7 Strategy 2.3 Undertake a process to determine the functionality and relevance of existing industrial buildings for manufacturing, R&D, and construction businesses; implement land use restrictions as needed to preserve the diversity of spaces available for businesses. Action 2.3.1 Conduct ongoing actions to study the functionality, relevance, challenges, and opportunities of industrial spaces, especially within the Sierra Court Industrial area. 2-3 years Action 2.3.2 Based on the findings of the preceding action, investigate the need for land use restrictions that limit or expand the types of uses permitted in specific industrial areas in Dublin, particularly in the Sierra Court Industrial area. 3-5 years Goal 3 Greenfield Development Strategy 3.1 Continue prioritizing the Fallon East Economic Development Zone as a key district for attracting R&D, biomedical, office, manufacturing and other light industrial uses, with efforts including infrastructure funding and financing, and proactive consideration of incentives adjustments in response to business/developer feedback. Action 3.1.1 Continue working with property owners, developers, and the City of Livermore to coordinate, fund, and build out the Dublin Boulevard extension and other required infrastructure. Ongoing Action 3.1.2 Aspart of ongoing outreach and engagement with relevant businesses, developers, and property owners, solicit feedback on the effectiveness of g gp p p Y existing development incentives in the Fallon East Economic Development Zone; adjust incentives as needed. Ongoing Action 3.1.3 Promote greenfield development opportunities at the Fallon East Economic Development Zone as part of Dublin's broader marketing and branding efforts, especially when undertaking business attraction efforts focused on R&D, biomedical, office, manufacturing and other light industrial uses. 2-3 years Strategy 3.2 Work with the developer of the Dublin Centre project to ensure the creation of a second modern mixed -use community gathering, shopping, dining, and entertainment destination at the project. Action 3.2.1 Continue ongoing engagement with the Dublin Centre project development team to identify and resolve any potential regulatory barriers to build out the commercial area, support business attraction efforts, and emphasize the importance of fulfilling the community's desire for creation of a vibrant community gathering space that also offers daily needs retail. Ongoing Strategy 3.3 Continue proactive engagement with Alameda County to determine a shared vision and work plan for activating and developing County -owned parcels near the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station with a potential mix of employment and housing uses. Action 3.3.1 Continue ongoing communication with the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority to maintain a shared understanding of the potential preferred uses of the remaining development opportunity sites, explore ways in which the City can support development and business attraction, and coordinate regarding County -led efforts to develop the sites. Ongoing Strategy 3.4 Continue to monitor opportunities to support desired commercial development at the vacant property currently owned by IKEA (bounded by Arnold Road, Martinelli Way, Hacienda Drive, and 1-580). Action 3.4.1 Continue regular engagement with property owners of the site to encourage consideration of development desired by the City and to identify ways to support efforts to pursue new projects at the site via existing City services. Ongoing Goal 4 Retail Vitality Strategy 4.1 Study other potential incentives and changes to zoning and land use regulation that will reduce barriers to splitting large vacant retail spaces, and to converting retail uses to in -demand uses such as entertainment, dining, personal service, and flexible retail uses. Action 4.1.1 Collect information regarding specific regulatory barriers to changes of use in retail spaces through ongoing contacts with brokers and retail, dining, and entertainment businesses. Work with the Community Development Department to support review and modification of any barriers as needed. 1-2 years Strategy 4.2 Continue and expand monitoring of the performance of existing shopping centers and commercial areas, especially those consisting of businesses threatened by e-commerce trends, and continue to provide proactive targeted support to underperforming locations. Action 4.2.1 Continue working with the City of Dublin's sales tax data provider to establish data reporting geographies for each shopping center and retail district in Dublin. Ongoing Action 4.2.2 Continue monitoring sales tax performance on a quarterly basis for all reporting geographies and for any businesses showing a declining sales trend in year -over -year sales compared to a "comparable store, even if the retailer is not showing a major decline in sales. Conduct outreach and market existing City -offered services to owners of shopping centers and businesses experiencing significant declines in sales. Consider retaining a retailer "coach to work with these businesses. Ongoing Action 4.2.3 Continue ongoing engagement with brokers and property owners to identify opportunities, challenges, tenant changes, and trends. Ongoing Strategy 4.3 Continue to communicate with and support the health of Dublin's automobile dealerships and other large sales tax revenue generators. Action 4.3.1 Continue annual outreach to automobile dealership owners and the other top 10 sales tax revenue generators in Dublin to offer City services and identify and resolve any relevant issues and concerns. Ongoing Goal 5 Hospitality Expansion Strategy 5.1 Position Dublin to attract a potential multiuse venue that would capture visitation and commercial activity associated with events at the facility. Action 5.1.1 Through ongoing collaboration with Visit Tri-Valley, determine potential opportunities for Dublin to better position local opportunity sites for attraction of a multiuse venue. Ongoing 988 Action 5.1.2 If a site outside Dublin is prioritized for attraction of a multiuse venue, determine potential ways the City can support the venue's construction and attract hotel stays based on the venue's operations. 3-5 years Strategy 5.2 Work with Visit Tri-Valley and local hotel operators to market Dublin as an ideal location for visitors seeking access to employment destinations and events throughout the Tri-Valley. Action 5.2.1 Work with Visit Tri-Valley to convene a twice annual meeting of hotel owners and managers in Dublin to offer services, identify and address concerns, and learn about opportunities to promote the City's hotels. 1-2 years and Ongoing Action 5.2.2 Continue collaboration with Visit Tri-Valley and advocate for promotion of Dublin's hotels. Ongoing Goal 6 Small Business Support Strategy 6.1 Improve efficiency and transparency with small business applicants during the City's permitting process. Action 6.1.1 Continue maintaining a "concierge function to support businesses in navigating processes to obtain business licenses and to serve as an advocate and navigator for obtaining building and planning approvals. Ongoing Action 6.1.2 Prepare and conduct ongoing follow-up surveys with businesses that interact with the City of Dublin to obtain licenses, permits, and entitlements. Complete an annual review to identify recurring issues that can enhance clarity and efficiency of these processes. 1-2 years and Ongoing Strategy 6.2 Improve marketing of City -offered incentives, services, and programs to existing small businesses in addition to maintaining current success in engaging new businesses. Action 6.2.1 In addition to continuing to promote available City services to new businesses obtaining business licenses, establish and maintain a process and regular timeline for preparing and sending email blasts, social media promotions, and mailing of printed materials to all local business license holders. Through these contacts, promote City business support services, incentives, and relevant news. Ongoing Strategy 6.3 Enhance ongoing engagement between the City of Dublin and the full diversity of local small businesses —including businesses specifically targeted to Dublin's fast-growing communities of Indian and Chinese descent —to understand opportunities to support businesses and to share available programs and marketing opportunities. Action 6.2.2 Continue conducting reviews of small business promotional events and campaigns to assess their impact and relevance to the businesses; consider modifying, ending, or beginning new initiatives based on the findings. Ongoing Action 6.3.1 Conduct targeted outreach to businesses and business organizations focused on serving Dublin's Indian American and Chinese American communities to gather information about specific needs, concerns, and potential modifications to City services and explanatory materials. Implement updates to programs, processes, and written and online materials as needed. 2-3 years and Ongoing Strategy 6.4 As opportunities and funding arise, expand small business technical training resources. Action 6.4.1 Continue to provide and, if possible, expand the Small Business Navigator program, and other technical support programs. Ongoing Action 6.4.2 Continue using the City's website to help connect local small businesses to Federal, State, and nonprofit programs and organizations that provide technical assistance. Ongoing Action 6.4.3 Continue providing responsive small business assistance through activities such as direction to resources, local grant funding and low-cost loan opportunities, landlord outreach, and connections with real estate brokers and other regional partners. Ongoing Goal 7 Workforce Opportunities Strategy 7.1 Influence and leverage regional workforce and economic development organizations and initiatives to ensure workforce development, education, and vocational training services are available to Dublin residents and workers. Action 7.1.1 Maintain regular contact with and seek opportunities to connect and encourage collaboration between major employers, the Dublin Unified School District, Las Positas College, and Tri-Valley workforce development organizations. Use this process to enhance awareness of available training services and their graduates, encourage creation of internship and on-the-job training opportunities, and clarify the workforce training needs of Dublin's employers. Ongoing Strategy 7.2 Leverage initiatives to expand and invest in transportation infrastructure that supports Dublin worker access. Action 7.2.1 Consider and incorporate new worker commute access opportunities in City planning and business attraction efforts, based on the Valley Link project. Ensure new public projects and, when possible, private development projects support robust "last -mile job access connections from the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. 3-5 years 989 Draft Economic Development Strategy September I 7, 2024 DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Background • 11-6-2012 —Adoption of Economic Development (ED) Strategy • 9-5-2023 —Approval of Consultant for ED Strategy Update • 5-21-2024 — City Council Feedback on ED Strategy Framework Project Activities • Focus group meetings • Online surveys • Data gathering • Data analysis • Goal I • GoaI2 • GoaI3 • GoaI4 • GoaI5 • GoaI6 • GoaI7 Seven Proposed Goals Innovation Growth Promote Infill Investment Greenfield Development Retail Vitality Hospitality Expansion Small Business Support Workforce Opportunities Commercial Vacancy Tax Summary • Flat amount, percentage, or assessed value basis • Tax or fee • Primarily used as financial incentive to — Enhance local economic activity Revitalize commercial areas Commercial Vacancy Tax Summary, 2 • Potential Drawbacks — Increasing costs for property owners — Increased costs for tenants — Deter investment in applicable areas — Additional strain on City resources (staff and financial expenses) Commercial Vacancy Tax Summary, 3 City Tax or Fee Commercial Property Type Vacancy Definition Program Implemented Oakland Tax • Nonresidential (Tax Rate: $6,000 per parcel) • Parcel with ground floor commercial activity allowed but vacant (Tax Rate: $3,000 per parcel) • Undeveloped (Tax Rate: $6,000 per parcel) In use less than 50 days in a calendar year 2019 San Francisco Tax Ground floor of any portion of a building or structure where the ground floor is: • Adjacent or tangent to a public right of way • Located in a specific commercial district • Is not residential real estate (Tax rate: $250-$500 per linear foot of frontage for taxable commercial space) Unoccupied, uninhabited, or unused for more than 182 days whether consecutive or nonconsecutive in a tax year 2024 IN N IA Commercial Vacancy Tax Summary, 4 • Outcomes for Oakland and San Francisco — Oakland • Saw a decline in vacant parcels assessed in 2019-2021,and • 20% increase in vacant parcels assessed in tax year 2021 to 2022 — San Francisco • Program was implemented in 2024 • Sufficient data not available • Attempts by Other Cities — Richmond — City Council considered alternative methods — West Hollywood — City Council not in favor of ballot measure — San Marino —Ballot measure did not receive 2/3 vote requirement Commercial Vacancy Tax Summary, 5 Ultimately, Staff would not recommend a commercial vacancy tax for the following reasons: — Administrative burden — Unintended consequences — Potential financial strain on landowners • Staff consistently receives inquiries about lease availabilities • Property owners and managers are eager to lease spaces quickly Recommendation • Review and provide direction on the draft Economic Development Strategy • Questions • Welcome Derek Braun with Strategic Economics r DUBLIN CALIFORNIA STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 8.1 DATE: September 17, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.ECT : Annual Review of the City's Statement of Investment Policy Prepared by: JayBaksa, Finance Director EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will consider a resolution completing the annual review of the Statement of Investment Policy. The Policy has been updated to clarify the Delegation of Authority and Authorized and Suitable Investments and remove language to the Prohibited Investment Practices to provide more flexibility in the City's investment strategy. While not required by statute, annual review of a local agency's investment policy is recommended by the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission and is included as a requirement in the City Policy. Additionally, the City Council will consider and provide feedback on the establishment of a Finance and Investment Subcommittee, which would be responsible for reviewing and making recommendations to the City Council on financial matters including the City's investment strategy. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution Approving the Annual Review of the Statement of Investment Policy and Delegation of Authority to Complete Investment Transactions and provide feedback and direction on the establishment of a Finance and Investment Subcommittee. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. DESCRIPTION: The current Statement of Investment Policy, adopted on August 21, 2007, states that it is subject to annual review by the City Council and that the review shall be conducted by the second meeting in September (Section XVIII). The Policy was last revised on August 15, 2023 to reflect the current organizational structure of the Finance Department. Page 1 of 3 1000 After Staff review and consultation with the City's investment advisor, Chandler Asset Management, the annual review of the Policy includes the following changes. Proposed Changes Section IV. Delegation of Authority Staff has removed the designation of Assistant Finance Director as Deputy City Treasurer, as that position is vacant (replaced by an Accounting Manager) as of last fiscal year. The Finance Director will retain the designation of City Treasurer, and the City Manager will be the sole designated Deputy City Treasurer. Section IX.9: Authorized and Suitable Investments The proposed change adds language to Section IX.9 to allow for investments in Joint Powers Authority (JPA) pools that meet the requirements of the California Governmental Code. Currently, the Policy allows for investments in JPA pools, but specifically lists one JPA, California Asset Management Program (CAMP) as the only authorized JPA investment vehicle. The change will allow the City to invest in any JPA that meets the criteria of the California Government Code Section 6509.7, including but not limited to CAMP. Section XI: Prohibited Investment Practices and Instruments The proposed change removes the phrase "Securities are purchased with the intent to hold to maturity" from this section to provide more flexibility in the City's investment strategy. Other: Staff has made corrections in the document for spelling or grammatical errors. All such corrections are reflected in the redlines of Attachment 3. The attached Resolution documents the annual review and confirms the delegation of authority to Staff to complete investment transactions. The Policy is provided as Exhibit A to the Resolution. Finance and Investment Subcommittee Staff is recommending the City Council consider the establishment of a Finance and Investment Subcommittee comprising two members of the City Council. The Subcommittee would be responsible for reviewing and making recommendations to the City Council on matters related to the City's investments and on other major financial matters. Topics to consider for the Subcommittee could include: • Review of the City's Investment Policy, including determining if and how the City should incorporate Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) practices and Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) standards. This topic was most recently raised at the meeting of May 21, 2024, with two Councilmembers expressing the desire to address this issue at a later date. • Review of and recommendations on the City's investment strategy, portfolio composition, and quarterly returns. • Review of items related to existing and potential debt issuance. • Review of quarterly financial reviews. Page 2 of 3 1001 If the City Council provides direction to create the Finance and Investment Subcommittee, Staff would bring that item to the City Council in October for formal approval. Appointments to the Subcommittee would then be made by the Mayor as part of the annual item brought to the City Council. The next such item is planned for a December 2024 meeting, with the newly seated City Council. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: The City Council Agenda was posted. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Resolution Approving the Annual Review of the Statement of Investment Policy and Delegation of Authority to Complete Investment Transactions 2) Exhibit A to the Resolution - Statement of Investment Policy for the City of Dublin 3) Statement of Investment Policy for the City of Dublin (Redline) Page 3 of 3 1002 Attachment I RESOLUTION NO. XX — 24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING THE ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY AND DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO COMPLETE INVESTMENT TRANSACTIONS WHEREAS, on August 21, 2007 the City Council adopted Resolution 152-07 approving a Statement of Investment Policy ("Investment Policy"); and WHEREAS, Section XVIII of the Investment Policy requires an annual review by the City Council no later than the second meeting in September; and WHEREAS, the last modification to the Investment Policy was approved by the City Council at the meeting of August 15, 2023; and WHEREAS, the focus of the annual review is to allow for any adjustments as a result of changes in State laws or other recommended modifications; and WHEREAS, consistent with the provisions of Government Code Section 53607, the Investment Policy provides for the City Council to delegate for a one-year period the authority to invest City funds to the City Treasurer and any duly appointed Deputy City Treasurer; and WHEREAS, Staff recommends changes to the Investment Policy aligning with current best practices and clarifying language; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Investment Policy at the September 17, 2024 meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby in accordance with California Government Code 53646(a)(2) complete the annual review of the Statement of Investment Policy, as attached hereto as Exhibit A. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council action explicitly renews the delegation of authority to complete investment transactions by City Staff (Finance Director designated as the City Treasurer and the City Manager designated as the Deputy City Treasurer), as described in Section IV of the Statement of Investment Policy. {Signatures on the following page} Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 1 of 2 1003 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September 2024, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 2 of 2 1004 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY FOR THE CITY OF DUBLIN I. INTRODUCTION This Statement of Investment Policy is intended to identify various policies and procedures that will foster a prudent and systematic investment program designed to seek the City's objectives of safety, liquidity and return through a diversified investment portfolio. This policy also serves to organize and formalize the City's investment - related activities, while complying with all applicable status governing the investment of public funds. II. SCOPE This policy covers all funds and investment activities under the direct authority of the City of Dublin, as set forth in the State Government Code, sections 53600 et seq., excluding any bond- related proceeds or reserves, which are governed by their bond indentures. Cash held by the City shall be pooled in order to more effectively manage City cash resources. All pooled funds are accounted for in the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and include: Funds General Fund Special Revenue Funds Capital Project Funds Internal Service Funds Enterprise Funds Agency Funds This original investment policy was adopted by the City of Dublin (the "City"), on August 21, 2007. This update to the Policy is effective on September 17, 2024 and replaces any previous versions. III. OBJECTIVES The overall program shall be designed and managed with a degree of professionalism worthy of the public trust. The primary objectives, in order of priority, of the City's investment activities shall be: 1 1005 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution 1) Safety: Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. The City's investments shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to safeguard the principal of the funds under its control by maintaining an appropriate risk level. 2) Liquidity: The City's investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet its reasonably anticipated cash flow requirements. 3) Return: Return should become a consideration only after the basic requirements of safety and liquidity have been met. The City seeks to attain market average rate of return on its investments throughout economic cycles, consistent with constraints imposed by its safety objectives and cash flow considerations. 4) Diversification: The investment portfolio will be diversified to avoid incurring unreasonable and avoidable risks regarding specific security types or individual financial institutions. This shall also conform with applicable sections of the Government Code. IV. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY As authorized in Government Code Section 53607, the City Council delegates the authority to invest funds of the City to the City Treasurer and/or any duly appointed Deputy City Treasurer. The City Treasurer and any duly appointed Deputy City Treasurer shall make all investment decisions and transactions in strict accordance with State law and this investment policy. The Finance Director shall be designated as the City Treasurer and the City Manager shall be designated as the Deputy City Treasurer. This delegation shall be for a one-year period until the delegation of authority is revoked or expires. The City Council may renew the authority each year as part of an annual review of this policy. The City Treasurer shall establish procedures for the operation of the investment program. The City Treasurer shall be also responsible for all transactions undertaken and establishing a system of controls to regulate the activities of subordinates. The City recognizes that in a diversified portfolio, occasional measured losses may be inevitable and must be considered within the context of the overall portfolio's return and the cash flow requirements of the City. Authorized individuals acting in accordance with written procedures and the investment policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments. 2 1006 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution The City may engage the services of one or more external investment managers to assist in the management of the City's investment portfolio in a manner consistent with the City's objectives. Such external managers may be granted discretion to purchase and sell investment securities in accordance with this investment policy. Such managers must be registered under the Investment Advisors Act of 1940. V. PRUDENCE Pursuant to California Government Code Section 53600.3, all persons authorized to make investment decisions on behalf of the City are trustees and therefore fiduciaries subject to the prudent investor standard: "When investing, reinvesting, purchasing, acquiring, exchanging, selling, or managing public funds, a trustee shall act with care, skill, prudence, and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing, including, but not limited to, the general economic conditions and the anticipated needs of the agency, that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the agency." VI. ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST All participants in the investment process shall act as custodians of the public trust. Investment officials shall recognize that the investment portfolio is subject to public review and evaluation. The overall program shall be designed and managed with a degree of professionalism that is worthy of the public trust. Thus, employees and officials involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that conflicts with proper execution of the investment program or impairs their ability to make impartial investment decisions. Additionally, the City Treasurer and the Deputy Treasurer shall file applicable financial disclosures as required by the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). VII. INTERNAL CONTROLS The Treasurer is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure designed to ensure that the assets of the entity are protected from loss, theft or misuse. The internal control structure shall be designed to provide reasonable assurance that these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that (1) the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived; and (2) the valuation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by City management. Periodically, as deemed appropriate by City management 3 1007 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution and/or the City Council, an independent analysis by an external auditor shall be conducted to review internal controls, account activity and compliance with policies and procedures. VIII. AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL DEALERS AND INSTITUTIONS To the extent practical the Treasurer shall endeavor to complete investment transactions using a competitive bid process whenever possible. It shall be the City's policy to purchase securities only from authorized institutions and firms. No deposit of public funds shall be made except in a qualified public depository as established by state laws. Institutions eligible to transact investment business with the City include: 1) Primary government dealers as designated by the Federal Reserve Bank and non - primary government dealers 2) Nationally or state -chartered banks 3) The Federal Reserve Bank 4) Direct issuers of securities eligible for purchase The Treasurer shall maintain procedures for the establishing a list of authorized broker/dealers and financial institutions which are approved for investment purposes. These may include primary or regional dealers that qualify under Securities & Exchange Commission Rule 15C3-I (uniform net capital rule). The City requires each firm that will be used for the purchase or sale of securities to be evaluated by the Treasurer prior to any investments. The firms shall submit current financial statements, and annual audited financial statements each year thereafter, which are to be evaluated by the Treasurer. At a minimum, the firm must be financially sound and have been in business a minimum of three years. In addition, the firms must provide: proof of National Association of Security Dealers membership, proof of state registration or exemption, and certificate of having read the City's investment policy. If an investment adviser is retained by the City, then that adviser will be permitted to use their own list of approved broker/dealers and financial institutions for investment purposes. IX. AUTHORIZED AND SUITABLE INVESTMENTS The City's investments are governed by Government Code, Sections 53600 et seq. Within the investments permitted by the Government Code, the City seeks to further 4 1008 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution restrict eligible investments to the guidelines listed below. In the event an apparent discrepancy is found between this Policy and the Government Code, the more restrictive parameters will take precedence. Percentage holding limits listed in this section apply at the time the security is purchased. Any investment currently held at the time the Policy is adopted which does not meet the new Policy guidelines can be held until maturity, and shall be exempt from the current Policy. At the time of the investment's maturity or liquidation such funds shall be reinvested only as provided in the most current Policy. An appropriate risk level shall be maintained by primarily purchasing securities that are of high quality, liquid, and marketable. The portfolio shall be diversified by security type and institution to avoid incurring unreasonable and avoidable risks regarding specific security types or individual financial institutions. 1) United States Treasury Issues. United States Treasury notes, bonds, bills, or certificates of indebtedness, or those for which the faith and credit of the United States are pledged for the payment of principal and interest. There is no limitation as to the percentage of the portfolio that may be invested in this category. The maximum maturity of these securities is ten years. The City Council authorized investments in United States Treasury Issues beyond five years on September 6, 2022. 2) Federal Agency Obligations. Federal agency or United States government - sponsored enterprise obligations, participations, or other instruments, including those issued by or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by federal agencies or United States government- sponsored enterprises. There is no limitation as to the percentage of the portfolio that may be invested in this category. However, the portfolio's exposure to any one federal agency issuer is limited to 35 percent of the overall portfolio. The limit of the overall portfolio's exposure to callable federal agency securities is 25 percent. The maximum maturity for agency securities is ten years. The City Council authorized investments in Federal Agency Obligations beyond five years on September 6, 2022. 3) Bankers' Acceptances. Bankers' acceptances, otherwise known as bills of exchange or time drafts, that are drawn on and accepted by a commercial bank. Bankers' acceptances must be secured by the irrevocable primary obligation of the accepting domestic bank. Purchasers are limited to issuers whose short-term debt is rated "A- 1" or higher, or the equivalent, by a Nationally Recognized Statistical - Rating Organization (NRSRO). Bankers' acceptances cannot exceed a maturity of 5 1009 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution 180 days. A maximum of 40 percent of the portfolio may be invested in this category. The amount invested in bankers' acceptances with any one financial institution in combination with any other debt from that financial institution shall not exceed 20 percent of the portfolio. 4) Commercial Paper. Commercial paper of "prime" quality rated "A-1" or higher, or the equivalent, by a NRSRO. The entity that issues the commercial paper shall meet all of the following conditions in either paragraph (a) or paragraph (b): a. The entity meets the following criteria: (i) Is organized and operating in the United States as a general corporation. (ii) Has total assets in excess of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000). (iii) Has debt other than commercial paper, if any, that is rated "A" or higher by a nationally recognized statistical - rating organization. b. The entity meets the following criteria: (i) Is organized within the United States as a special purpose corporation, trust, or limited liability company. (ii) Has program wide credit enhancements including, but not limited to, overcollateralization, letters of credit, or surety bond. (iii) Has commercial paper that is rated "A-1" or higher, or the equivalent, by a nationally recognized statistical -rating organization. Eligible commercial paper shall have a maximum maturity of 270 days or less and not represent more than 10 percent of the outstanding paper of an issuing corporation. A maximum of 25 percent of the portfolio may be invested in this category. Under a provision of the California Government Code sunsetting on January 1, 2026, no more than 40 percent of the portfolio may be invested in Commercial Paper if the Agency's investment assets under management are greater than $100,000,000. The amount invested in commercial paper of any one issuer in combination with any other debt from that issuer shall not exceed 20 percent of the portfolio. 5) Negotiable Certificates of Deposit. Negotiable certificates of deposit (NCDs) issued by a nationally or state -chartered bank, a savings association or a federal association, a state or federal credit union, or by a state -licensed branch of a foreign bank. Purchases are limited to institutions which have Tong -term debt rated "A" or better and/or have short-term debt rated at least "A-1" or higher, or the equivalent by a NRSRO. A maximum of 30 percent of the portfolio may be invested in this category. The amount invested in NCDs with any one financial institution in 6 1010 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution combination with any other debt from that financial institution shall not exceed 20 percent of the portfolio. The maximum maturity of these securities is five years. 6) Time Certificates of Deposit. Time Certificates of Deposit (TCDs) placed with commercial banks and savings and loans. The purchase of TCDs from out-of-state banks or savings and loans is prohibited. The amount on deposit shall not exceed the shareholder's equity in the financial institution. To be eligible for purchase, the financial institution must have received a minimum overall satisfactory rating for meeting the credit needs of California Communities in its most recent evaluation, as provided Government Code Section 53635.2. TCDs are required to be collateralized as specified under Government Code Section 53630 et. seq. The Treasurer, at his discretion, may waive the collateralization requirements for any portion that is covered by federal (FDIC) insurance. The City shall have a signed agreement with the depository per Government Code Section 53649. The maximum maturity of these securities may not exceed one (1) year in maturity. A maximum of 10 percent of the portfolio may be invested in this category. 7) Mutual Funds and Money Market Mutual Funds that are registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Company Act of 1940, provided that, a. MUTUAL FUNDS that invest in the securities and obligations as authorized under California Government Code, Section 53601 (a) to (k) and (m) to (q) inclusive and that meet either of the following criteria: i. Attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two (2) NRSROs; or ii. Have retained an investment adviser registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years' experience investing in the securities and obligations authorized by California Government Code, Section 53601 and with assets under management in excess of $500 million. iii. No more than 10% of the total portfolio may be invested in shares of any one mutual fund. b. MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUNDS registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Company Act of 1940 and issued by diversified management companies and meet either of the following criteria: 7 1011 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution i. Have attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two (2) NRSROs; or ii. Have retained an investment adviser registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years' experience managing money market mutual funds with assets under management in excess of $500 million. iii. No more than 20% of the total portfolio may be invested in Money Market Mutual Funds. c. No more than 20(Y0 of the total portfolio may be invested in these securities. 8) State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). The City may invest up to the maximum as permitted by LAIF. For due diligence, the Treasurer shall maintain on file a copy of LAIF's current Answer Book. 9) Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Pools, provided that: The JPA is organized pursuant to California Government Code Section 6509.7 and invests in the securities and obligations authorized in subdivisions (a) to (r), inclusive. Each share shall represent an equal proportional interest in the underlying pool of securities owned by the JPA. The JPA has retained an investment advisor who is registered with the SEC (or exempt from registration), has assets under management in excess of $500 million, and has at least five years' experience investing in instruments authorized by Section 53601, subdivisions (a) to (q). 10)Medium Term Notes. Medium -term notes, defined as all corporate and depository institution debt securities with a maximum remaining maturity of five years or less, issued by corporations organized and operating within the United States or by depository institutions licensed by the United States or any state and operating within the United States. Purchases are limited to securities rated "A" or higher, or the equivalent, by a NRSRO. A maximum of 30 percent of the City's portfolio may be invested in this category and a maximum of 5 percent with any one issuer. The maximum maturity of these securities is five years. 11)Asset-Backed, Mortgage -Backed, Mortgage Pass -Through Securities, and Collateralized Mortgage Obligations, from issuers not defined in the Federal Agency Obligations Subdivision. The City may purchase such securities provided that they are rated "AA" or higher, or the equivalent, by a NRSRO. Purchase of securities authorized by this subdivision may not exceed 20 percent of the portfolio, 8 1012 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution and a maximum of 5 percent per issue. The maximum maturity of these securities is five years. 12)Municipal Securities. Obligations of the State of California, any of the other 49 states, or any local agency within the State of California, may be purchased by the City provided that long-term obligations are rated "A" or higher, or the equivalent, by at least one NRSRO. There are no limits on the dollar amount or percentage that the city may invest in municipal securities; however, investments in these securities are limited to a maximum of 5 percent with any single issuer. The maximum maturity of these securities is ten years. The City Council authorized investments in Municipal Securities beyond five years on September 6, 2022. 13)Supranationals provided that issues are US dollar denominated senior unsecured unsubordinated obligations issued or unconditionally guaranteed by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, International Finance Corporation, or Inter -American Development Bank. The securities must be rated in a rating category of "AA" or its equivalent by a NRSRO. No more than 30% of the portfolio may be invested in these securities, and no more than 10% of the portfolio may be invested in any single issuer. The maximum maturity does not exceed five (5) years. X. AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS FOR BOND PROCEEDS Bond proceeds shall be invested in securities permitted by the applicable bond documents. If the bond documents are silent as to the permitted investments, bond proceeds will be invested in securities permitted by this Policy. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Policy, the percentage or dollar portfolio limitations listed elsewhere in this Policy do not apply to bond proceeds. In addition to the securities listed in Section IX above, bond proceeds may be invested in structured investment products if approved by the Treasurer. XI. PROHIBITED INVESTMENT PRACTICES AND INSTRUMENTS The City shall not make investments for the purpose of trading or speculation as the dominate criterion such as anticipation of appreciation of capital value through changes in market rates. Any investment in a security not specifically listed as an Authorized and Suitable Investment above, but otherwise permitted by the Government Code, is prohibited 9 1013 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution without the prior approval of the City Council. Section 53601.6 of the Government Code specifically disallows investments in invoice floaters, range notes, or interest - only strips that are derived from a pool of mortgages. Under a provision of the California Government Code sunsetting on January 1, 2026, securities backed by the United States Government that could result in a zero or negative interest accrual if held to maturity are permitted. XII. REVIEW OF INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO The City Treasurer shall periodically, but no less than quarterly, review the portfolio to identify investments that do not comply with this investment policy and establish protocols for reporting major and critical incidences of noncompliance to the City Council. XIII. TERM OF INVESTMENTS Funds of the City will be invested in accordance with sound treasury management principles. It is the objective of this Policy to provide a system which will accurately monitor and forecast revenues and expenditures so that the City can invest funds to the fullest extent possible. The maximum maturity of individual investments shall not exceed the limits set forth in under Authorized and Suitable Investments. No investment shall exceed a maturity of five years from the date of purchase unless the City Council has granted express authority to make that investment either specifically or as a part of an investment program approved by the City Council no less than three months prior to the investment. XIV. INVESTMENT RISK a. MARKET RISK Market risk is the risk that the portfolio will decline in value (or will not optimize its value) due to changes in the general level of interest rates. The City recognizes that, over time, longer -term portfolios achieve higher returns. On the other hand, longer -term portfolios have higher volatility of return. The City shall mitigate market risk by providing adequate liquidity for short-term cash 10 1014 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution needs, and by making some longer -term investments only with funds that are not needed for current cash flow purposes. The City also prohibits investments in any fossil fuel companies, tobacco or tobacco -related companies, and companies in support of the production of firearms. The City further recognizes that certain types of securities, including variable rate securities, securities with principal pay -downs prior to maturity, and securities with embedded options, will affect the market risk profile of the portfolio differently in different interest rate environments. The City, therefore, adopts the following strategies to control and mitigate its exposure to market risk: i. The maximum stated final maturity of individual securities in the portfolio shall be five years, unless otherwise stated in this policy; ii. The City shall maintain a minimum of three months of budgeted operating expenditures in cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments; and iii. The duration of the portfolio will typically be approximately equal to the duration of a market index, selected by the City as its performance benchmark, which meets the City's needs for cash flow and level of risk tolerance plus or minus 20%. b. CREDIT RISK In general, the City's portfolio will be diversified to avoid incurring unreasonable and avoidable risks regarding specific security types or individual financial institutions, such as credit risk. Credit risk is the risk that a security or a portfolio will lose some or all of its value due to a real or perceived change in the ability of the issuer to repay its debt. The City shall mitigate credit risk by adopting the following strategies: i. The diversification requirements included in Section IX are designed to mitigate credit risk in the portfolio; ii. No more than 5% of the total portfolio may be deposited with or invested in securities issued by any single issuer unless otherwise specified in this policy. iii. The City may elect to sell a security prior to its maturity and record a capital gain or loss in order to improve the quality, liquidity or return of the portfolio in response to market conditions or the City's risk preferences; and 11 1015 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution iv. If a security owned by the City is downgraded to a level below the requirements of this policy, making the security ineligible for additional purchases, the following steps will be taken: 1. Any actions taken related to the downgrade by the investment manager will be communicated to the City in a timely manner. 2. If a decision is made to retain the security, the credit situation will be monitored and reported back to the City. XV. SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY Investment securities are to be purchased when possible in book -entry form in the City's name. All security transactions entered into by the City shall be conducted on a delivery -versus -payment (DVP) basis. All cash and securities in the City's portfolio shall be held in safekeeping in the City's name by a third -party bank trust department, acting as agent for the City under the terms of a custody agreement executed by the bank and the City. All investment transactions will require a safekeeping receipt or acknowledgment generated from the trade. A monthly report will be received by the City from the safekeeping institution listing all securities held in safekeeping with current market data and other information. The only exception to the foregoing shall be depository accounts and securities purchases made with: (i) local government investment pools; (ii) time certificates of deposit, and, (iii) money mutual funds, since the purchased securities are not deliverable. Term and non-negotiable instruments, such as certificates of deposit, can be held by the Treasurer, or in safekeeping as the Treasurer deems appropriate. XVI. PERFORMANCE BENCHMARK The investment portfolio shall be designed to attain a market -average rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the City's risk constraints, the cash flow characteristics of the portfolio, and state and local laws, ordinances or resolutions that restrict investments. The Treasurer shall monitor and evaluate the portfolio's performance relative to the market benchmark, which will be included in the Treasurer's quarterly report. The Treasurer shall select an appropriate, readily available index to use as a benchmark. XVII. REPORT INFORMATION The Treasurer shall prepare a report to the City Council not less than semi-annually which is available each year within 60 days following December 31 st and June 30th. 12 1016 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution The semi-annual report shall be presented at a subsequent regularly scheduled City Council Meeting. The report shall be inclusive of a monthly listing of investment transactions. At a minimum the report shall include the following (Revised 9-18-2012): a. Type of Investment b. Issuer c. Date of Maturity d. Par and dollar amount invested e. Current Market Value as of the date of the report f. Source of the market value information g. A list of investment transactions. h. A statement of compliance with the investment policy i. A statement as to the ability of the City to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months In addition, the City Treasurer will submit a monthly transaction report to the City Council. XVIII. REVIEW OF INVESTMENT POLICY This policy shall be subject to review by the City Council on an annual basis, by the second Council meeting in September. Any recommended modifications or amendments shall be presented by Staff to the City Council for their consideration and adoption. GLOSSARY OF TERMS ACCRUED INTEREST: Interest earned but not yet received. AGENCIES: Federal agency securities and/or Government -sponsored enterprises. Examples of well-known agencies that issue bonds are Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC or "Freddie Mac"), Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA or "Fannie Mae"), and the Federal Home Loan Bank. AMORTIZATION: An accounting practice of gradually decreasing (increasing) an asset's book value by spreading its depreciation (accretion) over a period of time. ASKED: The price at which securities are offered. ASSET BACKED SECURITIES: Securities supported by pools of installment loans or leases or by pools of revolving lines of credit. 13 1017 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution BANKERS' ACCEPTANCE (BA): A draft or bill or exchange accepted by a bank or trust company. The accepting institution guarantees payment of the bill, as well as the issuer. BASIS POINT: One basis point is one hundredth of one percent (.0 I ). BENCHMARK: A comparative base for measuring the performance or risk tolerance of the investment portfolio. A benchmark should represent a close correlation to the level of risk and the average duration of the portfolio's investments. BID PRICE: The price offered by a buyer of securities. (When you are selling securities, you ask for a bid.) See Offer. BOND: A financial obligation for which the issuer promises to pay the bondholder a specified stream of future cash flows, including periodic interest payments and a principal repayment. BOOK ENTRY: The system maintained by the Federal Reserve, by which most money market securities are delivered to an investor's custodial bank. The Federal Reserve maintains a computerized record of the ownership of these securities and records any changes in ownership corresponding to payments made over the Federal Reserve wire (delivery versus payment.) BOOK VALUE: The value at which a debt security is shown on the holder's balance sheet. Book value is acquisition cost less amortization of premium or accretion of discount. BROKER: A broker brings buyers and sellers together for a commission. CALLABLE BOND: A bond issue in which all or part of its outstanding principal amount may be redeemed before maturity by the issuer under specified conditions. CALL PRICE: The price at which an issuer may redeem a bond prior to maturity. The price is usually at a slight premium to the bond's original issue price to compensate the holder for loss of income and ownership. CALL RISK: The risk to a bondholder that a bond may be redeemed prior to maturity. CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT (CD): A deposit insured up to $100,000 by the FDIC at a set rate for a specified period of time. COLLATERAL: Securities, evidence of deposit or other property which a borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also refers to securities pledged by a bank to secure deposits of public monies. 14 1018 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution COLLATERALIZED MORTGAGE OBLIGATION (CMO): Classes of bonds that redistribute the cash flows of mortgage securities (and whole loans) to create securities that have different levels of prepayment risk, as compared to the underlying mortgage securities. COMMERCIAL PAPER: An unsecured promissory note of industrial corporations, utilities and bank holding companies having assets in excess of $500 million and an "A" or higher rating for the issuer's debentures. Interest is discounted from par and calculated using the actual number of days on a 360-day year. The notes are in bearer form, mature from one to 270 days and generally start at $100,000. There is a secondary market for commercial paper and an investor may sell them prior to maturity. Unused lines of credit back commercial paper from major banks. COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR): The official annual financial report for the City. It includes combined statements and basic financial statements for each individual fund and account group prepared in conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Supplemental information is also included including a detailed multi -year comparative statistics. COST YIELD: The annual income from an investment divided by the purchase cost. Because it does not give effect to premiums and discounts which may have been included in the purchase cost, it is an incomplete measure of return. COUPON: (a) The annual rate of interest that a bond's issuer promises to pay the bondholder on the bond's face value. (b) A certificate attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a payment date. CREDIT RISK: The risk that principal and/or interest on an investment will not be paid in a timely manner due to changes in the condition of the issuer. CURRENT YIELD: The interest paid on an investment expressed as a percentage of the current price of the security. CUSTODY: A banking service that provides safekeeping for the individual securities in a customer's investment portfolio under a written agreement which also calls for the bank to collect and pay out income, and to buy, sell, receive and deliver securities when ordered to do so by the account holder. DEALER: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all transactions, buying and selling for his own account. DEBENTURE: A bond secured only by the general credit of the issuer. 15 1019 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution DELIVERY VERSUS PAYMENT (DVP): Delivery versus payment is delivery of securities with an exchange of money for the securities. DERIVATIVES: (1) Financial instruments whose return profile is linked to, or derived from, the movement of one or more underlying index or security, and may include a leveraging factor, or (2) financial contracts based upon notional amounts whose value is derived from an underlying index or security (interest rates, foreign exchange rates, equities or commodities). DISCOUNT: The difference between the cost price of a security and its value at maturity when quoted at lower than face value. DISCOUNT SECURITIES: Non -interest -bearing money market instruments that are issued a discount and redeemed at maturity for full face value, e.g., U.S. Treasury Bills. DIVERSIFICATION: Dividing investment funds among a variety of securities offering independent returns. DURATION: A measure of the timing of the cash flows, such as the interest payments and the principal repayment, to be received from a given fixed -income security. This calculation is based on three variables: term to maturity, coupon rate, and yield to maturity. The duration of a security is a useful indicator of its price volatility for given changes in interest rates. FEDERAL CREDIT AGENCIES: Agencies of the Federal government set up to supply credit to various classes of institutions and individuals, e.g., S&L's, small business firms, students, farmers, farm cooperatives, and exporters. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION (FDIC): A federal agency that insures bank deposits, currently up to $100,000 per deposit. FEDERAL FUNDS RATE: The rate of interest at which Fed funds are traded. This rate is currently pegged by the Federal Reserve through open -market operations. FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS (FHLB): Government sponsored wholesale banks (currently 12 regional banks) which lend funds and provide correspondent banking services to member commercial banks, thrift institutions, credit unions and insurance companies. FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FNMA or Fannie Mae): FNMA, like GNMA was chartered under the Federal National Mortgage Association Act in 1938. FNMA is a federal corporation working under the auspices of the Department of Housing 16 1020 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution and Urban Development (HUD). The corporation is called, is a private stockholder -owned corporation. The corporation's purchases include a variety of adjustable mortgages and second loans, in addition to fixed-rate mortgages. FEDERAL OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE (FOMC): Consists of seven members of the Federal Reserve Board and five of the twelve Federal Reserve Bank Presidents. The President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank is a permanent member, while the other Presidents serve on a rotating basis. The Committee periodically meets to set Federal Reserve guidelines regarding purchases and sales of Government Securities in the open market as a means of influencing the volume of bank credit and money. FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM: The central bank of the United States created by Congress and consisting of a seven -member Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., 12 regional banks and about 5,700 commercial banks that are members of the system. FED WIRE: A wire transmission service established by the Federal Reserve Bank to facilitate the transfer of funds through debits and credits of funds between participants within the Fed system. FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION (FHLMC or Freddie Mac): A United States government sponsored corporation. GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (GNMA or Ginnie Mae): Securities influencing the volume of bank credit guaranteed by GNMA and issued by mortgage bankers, commercial banks, savings and loan associations, and other institutions. Security holder is protected by full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. Ginnie Mae securities are backed by the FHA, VA or FmHA mortgages. The term "pass- throughs" is often used to describe Ginnie Maes. HAIRCUT: The margin or difference between the actual market value of a security and the value assessed by the lending side of a transaction (i.e. a repo). INTEREST RATE: The annual yield earned on an investment, expressed as a percentage. LEVERAGE: Borrowing funds in order to invest in securities that have the potential to pay earnings at a rate higher than the cost of borrowing. LIQUIDITY: Refers to the ability to easily and rapidly convert a security into cash. LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF): The local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) is a special fund in the California State Treasury created and governed pursuant 17 1021 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution to Government Code Sections 16429.1 et seq. There are limits on the maximum dollars deposited by a city as well as the number of transactions allowed each month. LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT POOL (LGIP): The aggregate of all funds from political subdivisions that are placed in custody of the State Treasurer for investment and reinvestment. MAKE WHOLE CALL: A type of call provision on a bond that allows the issuer to pay off the remaining debt early. Unlike a call option, with a make whole call provision, the issuer makes a lump sum payment that equals the net present value (NPV) of future coupon payments that will not be paid because of the call. With this type of call, an investor is compensated, or "made whole." MARGIN: The difference between the market value of a security and the loan a broker makes using that security as collateral. MARKET RISK: The risk that the value of securities will fluctuate with changes in overall market conditions or interest rates. MARKET VALUE: The price at which a security is trading and could presumably be purchased or sold on a specific date. MARKING TO MARKET: The process of posting current market values for securities in a portfolio. MATURITY: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable. MEDIUM TERM NOTES (MTNs): Unsecured, investment -grade senior debt securities of major corporations which are sold in relatively small amounts on either a continuous or an intermittent basis. MTNs are highly flexible debt instruments that can be structured to respond to market opportunities or to investor preferences. MODIFIED DURATION: The percent change in price for a 100 basis point change in yields. Modified duration is the best single measure of a portfolio's or security's exposure to market risk. MONEY MARKET: The market in which short-term debt instruments (T-bills, discount notes, commercial paper, and banker's acceptances) are issued and traded. 18 1022 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUND: Mutual funds that invest solely in money market instruments (short- term debt instruments, such as Treasury bills, commercial paper, bankers' acceptances, and federal funds). MORTGAGE PASS THROUGH SECURITIES: A securitized participation in the interest and principal cash flows from a specified pool of mortgages. Principal and interest payments made on the mortgages are passed through to the holder of the security. MUNICIPAL SECURITIES: Securities issued by state and local agencies to finance capital and operating expenses. MUTUAL FUND: An entity which pools the funds of investors and invests those funds in a set of securities which is specifically defined in the fund's prospectus. Mutual funds can be invested in various types of domestic and/or international stocks, bonds, and money market instruments, as set forth in the individual fund's prospectus. For most large, institutional investors, the costs associated with investing in mutual funds are higher than the investor can obtain through an individually managed portfolio. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS (NASD): A self -regulatory organization (SRO) of brokers and dealers in the over-the-counter securities business. Its regulatory mandate includes authority over firms that distribute mutual fund shares as well as other securities. NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED STATISTICAL RATING ORGANIZATIONS (NSROs); Credit rating agencies whose ratings are permitted to be used for regulatory purposes such as those imposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission. NEGOTIABLE CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT: A large denomination certificate of deposit which can be sold in the open market prior to maturity. NEW ISSUE: Term used when a security is originally "brought" to market. OFFER: The price asked by a seller of securities. (When you are buying securities, you ask for an offer.) See Asked and Bid. OPEN MARKET OPERATIONS: Purchases and sales of government and certain other securities in the open market by the New York Federal Reserve Bank as directed by the FOMC in order to influence the volume of money and credit in the economy. Purchases inject reserves into the bank system and stimulate growth of money and credit; sales have the opposite effect. Open market operations are the Federal Reserve' s most important and most flexible monetary policy tool. 19 1023 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution PORTFOLIO: Collection of securities held by an investor. PREMIUM: The amount by which the price paid for a security exceeds the security's par value. PREPAYMENT SPEED: A measure of how quickly principal is repaid to investors in mortgage securities. PREPAYMENT WINDOW: The time period over which principal repayments will be received on mortgage securities at a specified prepayment speed. PRIMARY DEALER: A group of government securities dealers who submit daily reports of market activity and positions and monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) -registered securities broker -dealers, banks, and a few unregulated firms. PRINCIPAL: The face value or par value of a debt instrument, or the amount of capital invested in a given security. PRUDENT PERSON (PRUDENT INVESTOR) RULE: A standard of responsibility which applies to fiduciaries. In California, the rule is stated as "Investments shall be managed with the care, skill, prudence and diligence, under the circumstances then prevailing, that a prudent person, acting in a like capacity and familiar with such matters, would use in the conduct of an enterprise of like character and with like aims to accomplish similar purposes." PURCHASE DATE: The date on which a security is purchased for settlement on that or a later date. RATE OF RETURN: The yield obtainable on a security based on its purchase price or its current market price. This may be the amortized yield to maturity on a bond or the current income return. REALIZED YIELD: The change in value of the portfolio due to interest received and interest earned and realized gains and losses. It does not give effect to changes in market value on securities, which have not been sold from the portfolio. REGIONAL DEALER: A financial intermediary that buys and sells securities for the benefit of its customers without maintaining substantial inventories of securities and that is not a primary dealer. 20 1024 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution REPURCHASE AGREEMENT (RP OR REPO): A holder of securities sells these securities to an investor with an agreement to repurchase them at a fixed price on a fixed date. The security "buyer" in effect lends the "seller" money for the period of the agreement, and the terms of the agreement are structured to compensate him for this. RULE 2a-7 OF THE INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT: Applies to all money market mutual funds and mandates such funds to maintain certain standards, including a 13- month maturity limit and a 90-day average maturity on investments, to help maintain a constant net asset value of one dollar ($1.00). SAFEKEEPING: See CUSTODY. SECONDARY MARKET: A market made for the purchase and sale of outstanding issues following the initial distribution. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION: Agency created by Congress to protect investors m securities transactions by administering securities legislation. SETTLEMENT DATE: The date on which a trade is cleared by delivery of securities against funds. STRUCTURED NOTE: A complex, fixed income instrument, which pays interest, based on a formula tied to other interest rates, commodities or indices. Examples include inverse floating rate notes which have coupons that increase when other interest rates are falling, and which fall when other interest rates are rising, and "dual index floaters," which pay interest based on the relationship between two other interest rates - for example, the yield on the ten-year Treasury note minus the Libor rate. Issuers of such notes lock in a reduced cost of borrowing by purchasing interest rate swap agreements. TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY (TVA): The Tennessee Valley Authority provides flood control and power and promotes development in portions of the Tennessee, Ohio, and Mississippi River valleys. TVA currently issues discount notes and bonds. TIME CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT: A non-negotiable certificate of deposit which cannot be sold prior to maturity. TOTAL RATE OF RETURN: A measure of a portfolio's performance over time. It is the internal rate of return, which equates the beginning value of the portfolio with the ending value; it includes interest earnings, realized and unrealized gains, and losses in the portfolio. 21 1025 Attachment 2 — Exhibit A to the Resolution TREASURY BILLS: A non -interest -bearing discount security issued by the U.S. Treasury to finance the national debt. Most bills are issued to mature in three months, six months, or one year and are sold on a discount basis. TREASURY BONDS: Long-term coupon -bearing U.S. Treasury securities issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial maturities of more than 10 years. TREASURY NOTES: Medium -term coupon -bearing U.S. Treasury securities issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial maturities of I to 10 years. U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES: Instruments issued by various US Government Agencies most of which are secured only by the credit worthiness of the particular agency. VOLATILITY: The rate at which security prices change with changes in general economic conditions or the general level of interest rates. WEIGHTED AVERAGE MATURITY (WAM): The average maturity of all the securities that comprise a portfolio that is typically expressed in days or years. YIELD: The rate of annual income return on an investment, expressed as a percentage. It is obtained by dividing the current dollar income by the current market price of the security. YIELD TO MATURITY: The rate of income return on an investment, minus any premium or plus any discount, with the adjustment spread over the period from the date of purchase to the date of maturity of the bond, expressed as a percentage. YIELD CURVE: The yield on bonds, notes or bills of the same type and credit risk at a specific date for maturities up to thirty years. ZERO -COUPON SECURITY: Security that is issued at a discount and makes no periodic interest payments. The rate of return consists of a gradual accretion of the principal of the security and is payable at par upon maturity. 22 1026 Attachment 3 STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY FOR THE CITY OF DUBLIN I. INTRODUCTION This Statement of Investment Policy is intended to identify various policies and procedures that will foster a prudent and systematic investment program designed to seek the City's objectives of safety, liquidity and return through a diversified investment portfolio. This policy also serves to organize and formalize the City's investment - related activities, while complying with all applicable status governing the investment of public funds. II. SCOPE This policy covers all funds and investment activities under the direct authority of the City of Dublin, as set forth in the State Government Code, sections 53600 et seq., excluding any bond- related proceeds or reserves, which are governed by their bond indentures. Cash held by the City shall be pooled in order to more effectively manage City cash resources. All pooled funds are accounted for in the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and include: Funds General Fund Special Revenue Funds Capital Project Funds Internal Service Funds Enterprise Funds Agency Funds This original investment policy was adopted by the City of Dublin (the "City"), on August 21, 2007. This update to the Policy is effective on August 15, 2023, September 17, 2024 and replaces any previous versions. III. OBJECTIVES The overall program shall be designed and managed with a degree of professionalism worthy of the public trust. The primary objectives, in order of priority, of the City's investment activities shall be: 1 1027 Attachment 3 1) Safety: Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. The City's investments shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to safeguard the principal of the funds under its control by maintaining an appropriate risk level. 2) Liquidity: The City's investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet its reasonably anticipated cash flow requirements. 3) Return: Return should become a consideration only after the basic requirements of safety and liquidity have been met. The City seeks to attain market average rate of return on its investments throughout economic cycles, consistent with constraints imposed by its safety objectives and cash flow considerations. 4) Diversification: The investment portfolio will be diversified to avoid incurring unreasonable and avoidable risks regarding specific security types or individual financial institutions. This shall also conform with applicable sections of the Government Code. IV. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY As authorized in Government Code Section 53607, the City Council delegates the authority to invest funds of the City to the City Treasurer and/or any duly appointed Deputy City Treasurer. The City Treasurer and any duly appointed Deputy City Treasurer shall make all investment decisions and transactions in strict accordance with State law and this investment policy. The Finance Director shall be designated as the City Treasurer and the City Manager and/or Assistant Finance Director shall be designated as the Deputy City Treasurer. This delegation shall be for a one-year period until the delegation of authority is revoked or expires. The City Council may renew the authority each year as part of an annual review of this policy. The City Treasurer shall establish procedures for the operation of the investment program. The City Treasurer shall be also responsible for all transactions undertaken and establishing a system of controls to regulate the activities of subordinates. The City recognizes that in a diversified portfolio, occasional measured losses may be inevitable and must be considered within the context of the overall portfolio's return and the cash flow requirements of the City. Authorized individuals acting in accordance with written procedures and the investment policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments. 2 1028 Attachment 3 The City may engage the services of one or more external investment managers to assist in the management of the City's investment portfolio in a manner consistent with the City's objectives. Such external managers may be granted discretion to purchase and sell investment securities in accordance with this investment policy. Such managers must be registered under the Investment Advisors Act of 1940. V. PRUDENCE Pursuant to California Government Code Section 53600.3, all persons authorized to make investment decisions on behalf of the City are trustees and therefore fiduciaries subject to the prudent investor standard: "When investing, reinvesting, purchasing, acquiring, exchanging, selling, or managing public funds, a trustee shall act with care, skill, prudence, and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing, including, but not limited to, the general economic conditions and the anticipated needs of the agency, that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the agency." VI. ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST All participants in the investment process shall acts as custodians of the public trust. Investment officials shall recognize that the investment portfolio is subject to public review and evaluation. The overall program shall be designed and managed with a degree of professionalism that is worthy of the public trust. Thus, employees and officials involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that conflicts with proper execution of the investment program; or impairs their ability to make impartial investment decisions. Additionally, the City Treasurer and the Deputy Treasurer shall file applicable financial disclosures as required by the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). VII. INTERNAL CONTROLS The Treasurer is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure designed to ensure that the assets of the entity are protected from loss, theft or misuse. The internal control structure shall be designed to provide reasonable assurance that these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance 3 1029 Attachment 3 recognizes that (1) the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived; and (2) the valuation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by City management. Periodically, as deemed appropriate by City Mmanagement and/or the City Council, an independent analysis by an external auditor shall be conducted to review internal controls, account activity and compliance with policies and procedures. VIII. AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL DEALERS AND INSTITUTIONS To the extent practical the Treasurer shall endeavor to complete investment transactions using a competitive bid process whenever possible. It shall be the City's policy to purchase securities only from authorized institutions and firms. No deposit of public funds shall be made except in a qualified public depository as established by state laws. Institutions eligible to transact investment business with the City include: 1) Primary government dealers as designated by the Federal Reserve Bank and non - primary government dealers 2) Nationally or state -chartered banks 3) The Federal Reserve Bank 4) Direct issuers of securities eligible for purchase The Treasurer shall maintain procedures for the establishing a list of authorized broker/dealers and financial institutions which are approved for investment purposes. These may include primary or regional dealers that qualify under Securities & Exchange Commission Rule 15C3-I (uniform net capital rule). The City requires each firm that will be used for the purchase or sale of securities to be evaluated by the Treasurer prior to any investments. The firms shall submit current financial statements, and annual audited financial statements each year thereafter, which are to be evaluated by the Treasurer. At a minimum, the firm must be financially sound and have been in business a minimum of three years. In addition, the firms must provide: proof of National Association of Security Dealers membership, proof of state registration or exemption, and certificate of having read the City's investment policy. If an investment adviser is retained by the City, then that adviser will be permitted to use their own list of approved broker/dealers and financial institutions for investment purposes. 4 1030 Attachment 3 IX. AUTHORIZED AND SUITABLE INVESTMENTS The City's investments are governed by Government Code, Sections 53600 et seq. Within the investments permitted by the Government Code, the City seeks to further restrict eligible investments to the guidelines listed below. In the event an apparent discrepancy is found between this Policy and the Government Code, the more restrictive parameters will take precedence. Percentage holding limits listed in this section apply at the time the security is purchased. Any investment currently held at the time the Policy is adopted which does not meet the new Policy guidelines can be held until maturity, and shall be exempt from the current Policy. At the time of the investment's maturity or liquidation such funds shall be reinvested only as provided in the most current Policy. An appropriate risk level shall be maintained by primarily purchasing securities that are of high quality, liquid, and marketable. The portfolio shall be diversified by security type and institution to avoid incurring unreasonable and avoidable risks regarding specific security types or individual financial institutions. 1. United States Treasury Issues. United States Treasury notes, bonds, bills, or certificates of indebtedness, or those for which the faith and credit of the United States are pledged for the payment of principal and interest. There is no limitation as to the percentage of the portfolio that may be invested in this category. The maximum maturity of these securities is ten years. The City Council authorized investments in United States Treasury Issues beyond five years on September 6, 2022. 2. Federal Agency Obligations. Federal agency or United States government - sponsored enterprise obligations, participations, or other instruments, including those issued by or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by federal agencies or United States government- sponsored enterprises. There is no limitation as to the percentage of the portfolio that may be invested in this category. However, the portfolio's exposure to any one federal agency issuer is limited to 35 percent of the overall portfolio. The limit of the overall portfolio's exposure to callable federal agency securities is 25 percent. The maximum maturity for agency securities is ten years. The City Council authorized investments in Federal Agency Obligations beyond five years on September 6, 2022. 5 1031 Attachment 3 3. Bankers' Acceptances. Bankers' acceptances, otherwise known as bills of exchange or time drafts, that are drawn on and accepted by a commercial bank. Bankers' acceptances must be secured by the irrevocable primary obligation of the accepting domestic bank. Purchasers are limited to issuers whose short-term debt is rated "A- 1" or higher, or the equivalent, by a Nationally Recognized Statistical - Rating Organization (NRSRO). Bankers' acceptances cannot exceed a maturity of 180 days. A maximum of 40 percent of the portfolio may be invested in this category. The amount invested in bankers' acceptances with any one financial institution in combination with any other debt from that financial institution shall not exceed 20 percent of the portfolio. 4. Commercial Paper. Commercial paper of "prime" quality rated "A-1" or higher, or the equivalent, by a NRSRO. The entity that issues the commercial paper shall meet all of the following conditions in either paragraph (Aa) or paragraph (Bb): a. The entity meets the following criteria: (i) Is organized and operating in the United States as a general corporation. (ii) Has total assets in excess of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000). (iii) Has debt other than commercial paper, if any, that is rated "A" or higher by a nationally recognized statistical - rating organization. b. The entity meets the following criteria: (i) Is organized within the United States as a special purpose corporation, trust, or limited liability company. (ii) Has program wide credit enhancements including, but not limited to, overcollateralization, letters of credit, or surety bond. (iii) Has commercial paper that is rated "A-1" or higher, or the equivalent, by a nationally recognized statistical -rating organization. Eligible commercial paper shall have a maximum maturity of 270 days or less and not represent more than 10 percent of the outstanding paper of an issuing corporation. A maximum of 25 percent of the portfolio may be invested in this category. Under a provision of the California Government Code sunsetting on January 1, 2026, no more than 40 percent of the portfolio may be invested in Commercial Paper if the Agency's investment assets under management are greater than $100,000,000. The amount invested in commercial paper of any one 6 1032 Attachment 3 issuer in combination with any other debt from that issuer shall not exceed 20 percent of the portfolio. 5. Negotiable Certificates of Deposit. Negotiable certificates of deposit (NCDs) issued by a nationally or state -chartered bank, a savings association or a federal association, a state or federal credit union, or by a state -licensed branch of a foreign bank. Purchases are limited to institutions which have long-term debt rated "A" or better and/or have short-term debt rated at least "A-1" or higher, or the equivalent by a NRSRO. A maximum of 30 percent of the portfolio may be invested in this category. The amount invested in NCDs with any one financial institution in combination with any other debt from that financial institution shall not exceed 20 percent of the portfolio. The maximum maturity of these securities is five years. 6. Time Certificates of Deposit. Time Certificates of Deposit (TCDs) placed with commercial banks and savings and loans. The purchase of TCDs from out-of-state banks or savings and loans is prohibited. The amount on deposit shall not exceed the shareholder's equity in the financial institution. To be eligible for purchase, the financial institution must have received a minimum overall satisfactory rating for meeting the credit needs of California Communities in its most recent evaluation, as provided Government Code Section 53635.2. TCDs are required to be collateralized as specified under Government Code Section 53630 et. seq. The Treasurer, at his discretion, may waive the collateralization requirements for any portion that is covered by federal (FDIC) insurance. The City shall have a signed agreement with the depository per Government Code Section 53649. The maximum maturity of these securities may not exceed one (1) year in maturity. A maximum of 10 percent of the portfolio may be invested in this category. 7. Mutual Funds and Money Market Mutual Funds that are registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Company Act of 1940, provided that, a. MUTUAL FUNDS that invest in the securities and obligations as authorized under California Government Code, Section 53601 (a) to (k) and (m) to (q) inclusive and that meet either of the following criteria: i. Attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two (2) NRSROs; or ii. Have retained an investment adviser registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years' experience investing in the securities and 7 1033 Attachment 3 obligations authorized by California Government Code, Section 53601 and with assets under management in excess of $500 million. iii. No more than 10% of the total portfolio may be invested in shares of any one mutual fund. b. MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUNDS registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Company Act of 1940 and issued by diversified management companies and meet either of the following criteria: i. Have attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two (2) NRSROs; or ii. Have retained an investment adviser registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years' experience managing money market mutual funds with assets under management in excess of $500 million. iii. No more than 20% of the total portfolio may be invested in Money Market Mutual Funds. c. No more than 20% of the total portfolio may be invested in these securities. 8. State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). The City may invest up to the maximum as permitted by LAIF. For due diligence, the Treasurer shall maintain on file a copy of LAIF's current Answer Book. 9. that invests in the securities and obligations authorized in subdivisions (a) to (n), maintain on file a copy of CAMP's current Information Statement. 9. Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Pools, provided that: The JPA is organized pursuant to California Government Code Section 6509.7 and invests in the securities and obligations authorized in subdivisions (a) to (r), inclusive. Each share shall represent an equal proportional interest in the underlying pool of securities owned by the JPA. The JPA has retained an investment advisor who is registered with the SEC (or exempt from registration), has assets under management in excess of $500 million, and has at least five years' experience investing in instruments authorized by Section 53601, subdivisions (a) to (q). 8 1034 Attachment 3 10. Medium Term Notes. Medium -term notes, defined as all corporate and depository institution debt securities with a maximum remaining maturity of five years or less, issued by corporations organized and operating within the United States or by depository institutions licensed by the United States or any state and operating within the United States. Purchases are limited to securities rated "A" or higher, or the equivalent, by a NRSRO. A maximum of 30 percent of the City's portfolio may be invested in this category and a maximum of 5 percent with any one issuer. The maximum maturity of these securities is five years. 11.Asset-Backed, Mortgage -Backed, Mortgage Pass -Through Securities, and Collateralized Mortgage Obligations, from issuers not defined in the Federal Agency Obligations Subdivision. The City may purchase such securities provided that they are rated "AA" or higher, or the equivalent, by a NRSRO. Purchase of securities authorized by this subdivision may not exceed 20 percent of the portfolio, and a maximum of 5 percent per issue. The maximum maturity of these securities is five years. 12. Municipal Securities. Obligations of the State of California, any of the other 49 states, or any local agency within the &State of California, may be purchased by the City provided that long-term obligations are rated "A" or higher, or the equivalent, by at least one NRSRO. There are no limits on the dollar amount or percentage that the city may invest in municipal securities; however, investments in these securities are limited to a maximum of 5 percent with any single issuer. The maximum maturity of these securities is ten years. The City Council authorized investments in Municipal Securities beyond five years on September 6, 2022. 13. Supranationals provided that issues are US dollar denominated senior unsecured unsubordinated obligations issued or unconditionally guaranteed by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, International Finance Corporation, or Inter -American Development Bank. The securities must be rated in a rating category of "AA" or its equivalent by a NRSRO. No more than 30% of the portfolio may be invested in these securities, and no more than 10% of the portfolio may be invested in any single issuer. The maximum maturity does not exceed five (5) years. X. AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS FOR BOND PROCEEDS 9 1035 Attachment 3 Bond proceeds shall be invested in securities permitted by the applicable bond documents. If the bond documents are silent as to the permitted investments, bond proceeds will be invested in securities permitted by this Policy. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Policy, the percentage or dollar portfolio limitations listed in elsewhere in this Policy do not apply to bond proceeds. In addition to the securities listed in Section IX above, bond proceeds may be invested in structured investment products if approved by the Treasurer. XI. PROHIBITED INVESTMENT PRACTICES AND INSTRUMENTS The City shall not make investments for the purpose of trading or speculation as the dominate criterion such as anticipation of appreciation of capital value through changes in market rates. Securities are purchased with the intent to hold to maturity. Any investment in a security not specifically listed as an Authorized and Suitable Investment above, but otherwise permitted by the Government Code, is prohibited without the prior approval of the City Council. Section 53601.6 of the Government Code specifically disallows investments in invoice floaters, range notes, or interest - only strips that are derived from a pool of mortgages. Under a provision of the California Government Code sunsetting on January 1, 2026, securities backed by the United States Government that could result in a zero or negative interest accrual if held to maturity are permitted. XII. REVIEW OF INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO The City Treasurer shall periodically, but no less than quarterly, review the portfolio to identify investments that do not comply with this investment policy and establish protocols for reporting major and critical incidences of noncompliance to the City Council. XIII. TERM OF INVESTMENTS Funds of the City will be invested in accordance with sound treasury management principles. It is the objective of this Policy to provide a system which will accurately monitor and forecast revenues and expenditures so that the City can invest funds to the fullest extent possible. 10 1036 Attachment 3 The maximum maturity of individual investments shall not exceed the limits set forth in under Authorized and Suitable Investments. No investment shall exceed a maturity of five years from the date of purchase unless the City Council has granted express authority to make that investment either specifically or as a part of an investment program approved by the City Council no less than three months prior to the investment. XIV. INVESTMENT RISK a. MARKET RISK Market risk is the risk that the portfolio will decline in value (or will not optimize its value) due to changes in the general level of interest rates. The City recognizes that, over time, longer -term portfolios achieve higher returns. On the other hand, longer -term portfolios have higher volatility of return. The City shall mitigate market risk by providing adequate liquidity for short-term cash needs, and by making some longer -term investments only with funds that are not needed for current cash flow purposes. The City also prohibits investments in any fossil fuel companies, tobacco or tobacco -related companies, and companies in support of the production of firearms. The City further recognizes that certain types of securities, including variable rate securities, securities with principal pay -downs prior to maturity, and securities with embedded options, will affect the market risk profile of the portfolio differently in different interest rate environments. The City, therefore, adopts the following strategies to control and mitigate its exposure to market risk: i. The maximum stated final maturity of individual securities in the portfolio shall be five years, unless otherwise stated in this policy; ii. The City shall maintain a minimum of three months of budgeted operating expenditures in cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments; and iii. The duration of the portfolio will typically be approximately equal to the duration of a market index, selected by the City as its performance benchmark, which meets the City's needs for cash flow and level of risk tolerance plus or minus 20%. 11 1037 Attachment 3 b. CREDIT RISK In general, the City's portfolio will be diversified to avoid incurring unreasonable and avoidable risks regarding specific security types or individual financial institutions, such as credit risk. Credit risk is the risk that a security or a portfolio will lose some or all of its value due to a real or perceived change in the ability of the issuer to repay its debt. The City shall mitigate credit risk by adopting the following strategies: i. The diversification requirements included in Section IX are designed to mitigate credit risk in the portfolio; ii. No more than 5% of the total portfolio may be deposited with or invested in securities issued by any single issuer unless otherwise specified in this policy. iii. The City may elect to sell a security prior to its maturity and record a capital gain or loss in order to improve the quality, liquidity or return of the portfolio in response to market conditions or the City's risk preferences; and iv. If a security owned by the City is downgraded to a level below the requirements of this policy, making the security ineligible for additional purchases, the following steps will be taken: 1. Any actions taken related to the downgrade by the investment manager will be communicated to the City in a timely manner. 2. If a decision is made to retain the security, the credit situation will be monitored and reported back to the City. XV. SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY Investment securities are to be purchased when possible in book -entry form in the City's name. All security transactions entered into by the City shall be conducted on a delivery -versus -payment (DVP) basis. All cash and securities in the City's portfolio shall be held in safekeeping in the City's name by a third -party bank trust department, acting as agent for the City under the terms of a custody agreement executed by the bank and the City. All investment transactions will require a safekeeping receipt or acknowledgment generated from the trade. A monthly report will be received by the City from the safekeeping institution listing all securities held in safekeeping with current market data and other information. The only exception to the foregoing shall be depository accounts and securities purchases made with: (i) local government investment pools; (ii) time certificates of deposit, and, (iii) money mutual funds, since 12 1038 Attachment 3 the purchased securities are not deliverable. Term and non-negotiable instruments, such as certificates of deposit, can be held by the Treasurer, or in safekeeping as the Treasurer deems appropriate. XVI. PERFORMANCE BENCHMARK The investment portfolio shall be designed to attain a market -average rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the City's risk constraints, the cash flow characteristics of the portfolio, and state and local laws, ordinances or resolutions that restrict investments. The Treasurer shall monitor and evaluate the portfolio's performance relative to the market benchmark, which will be included in the Treasurer's quarterly report. The Treasurer shall select an appropriate, readily available index to use as a benchmark. XVII. REPORT INFORMATION The Treasurer shall prepare a report to the City Council not less than semi-annually which is available each year within 60 days following December 31 st and June 30th. The semi-annual report shall be presented at a subsequent regularly scheduled City Council Meeting. The report shall be inclusive of a monthly listing of investment transactions. At a minimum the report shall include the following (Revised 9-18-2012): a. Type of Investment b. Issuer c. Date of Maturity d. Par and dollar amount invested e. Current Market Value as of the date of the report f. Source of the market value information g. A list of investment transactions. h. A statement of compliance with the investment policy i. A statement as to the ability of the City to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months In addition, the City Treasurer will submit a monthly transaction report to the City Council. XVIII. REVIEW OF INVESTMENT POLICY This policy shall be subject to review by the City Council on an annual basis, by the second Council meeting in September. Any recommended modifications or amendments shall be presented by Staff to the City Council for their consideration and adoption. 13 1039 Attachment 3 GLOSSARY OF TERMS ACCRUED INTEREST: Interest earned but not yet received. AGENCIES: Federal agency securities and/or Government -sponsored enterprises. Examples of well-known agencies that issue bonds are Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC or "Freddie Mac"), Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA or "Fannie Mae"), and the Federal Home Loan Bank. AMORTIZATION: An accounting practice of gradually decreasing (increasing) an asset's book value by spreading its depreciation (accretion) over a period of time. ASKED: The price at which securities are offered. ASSET BACKED SECURITIES: Securities supported by pools of installment loans or leases or by pools of revolving lines of credit. BANKERS' ACCEPTANCE (BA): A draft or bill or exchange accepted by a bank or trust company. The accepting institution guarantees payment of the bill, as well as the issuer. BASIS POINT: One basis point is one hundredth of one percent (.0 I ). BENCHMARK: A comparative base for measuring the performance or risk tolerance of the investment portfolio. A benchmark should represent a close correlation to the level of risk and the average duration of the portfolio's investments. BID PRICE: The price offered by a buyer of securities. (When you are selling securities, you ask for a bid.) See Offer. BOND: A financial obligation for which the issuer promises to pay the bondholder a specified stream of future cash flows, including periodic interest payments and a principal repayment. BOOK ENTRY: The system maintained by the Federal Reserve, by which most money market securities are delivered to an investor's custodial bank. The Federal Reserve maintains a computerized record of the ownership of these securities and records any changes in ownership corresponding to payments made over the Federal Reserve wire (delivery versus payment.) BOOK VALUE: The value at which a debt security is shown on the holder's balance sheet. Book value is acquisition cost less amortization of premium or accretion of discount. BROKER: A broker brings buyers and sellers together for a commission. 14 1040 Attachment 3 CALLABLE BOND: A bond issue in which all or part of its outstanding principal amount may be redeemed before maturity by the issuer under specified conditions. CALL PRICE: The price at which an issuer may redeem a bond prior to maturity. The price is usually at a slight premium to the bond's original issue price to compensate the holder for loss of income and ownership. CALL RISK: The risk to a bondholder that a bond may be redeemed prior to maturity. CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT (CD): A deposit insured up to $100,000 by the FDIC at a set rate for a specified period of time. COLLATERAL: Securities, evidence of deposit or other property which a borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also refers to securities pledged by a bank to secure deposits of public monies. COLLATERALIZED MORTGAGE OBLIGATION (CMO): Classes of bonds that redistribute the cash flows of mortgage securities (and whole loans) to create securities that have different levels of prepayment risk, as compared to the underlying mortgage securities. COMMERCIAL PAPER: An unsecured promissory note of industrial corporations, utilities and bank holding companies having assets in excess of $500 million and an "A" or higher rating for the issuer's debentures. Interest is discounted from par and calculated using the actual number of days on a 360-day year. The notes are in bearer form, mature from one to 270 days and generally start at $100,000. There is a secondary market for commercial paper and an investor may sell them prior to maturity. Unused lines of credit back commercial paper from major banks. COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR): The official annual financial report for the City. It includes combined statements and basic financial statements for each individual fund and account group prepared in conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Supplemental information is also included including a detailed multi -year comparative statistics. COST YIELD: The annual income from an investment divided by the purchase cost. Because it does not give effect to premiums and discounts which may have been included in the purchase cost, it is an incomplete measure of return. COUPON: (a) The annual rate of interest that a bond's issuer promises to pay the bondholder on the bond's face value. (b) A certificate attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a payment date. CREDIT RISK: The risk that principal and/or interest on an investment will not be paid in a timely manner due to changes in the condition of the issuer. 15 1041 Attachment 3 CURRENT YIELD: The interest paid on an investment expressed as a percentage of the current price of the security. CUSTODY: A banking service that provides safekeeping for the individual securities in a customer's investment portfolio under a written agreement which also calls for the bank to collect and pay out income, and to buy, sell, receive and deliver securities when ordered to do so by the account holder. DEALER: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all transactions, buying and selling for his own account. DEBENTURE: A bond secured only by the general credit of the issuer. DELIVERY VERSUS PAYMENT (DVP): Delivery versus payment is delivery of securities with an exchange of money for the securities. DERIVATIVES: (1) Financial instruments whose return profile is linked to, or derived from, the movement of one or more underlying index or security, and may include a leveraging factor, or (2) financial contracts based upon notional amounts whose value is derived from an underlying index or security (interest rates, foreign exchange rates, equities or commodities). DISCOUNT: The difference between the cost price of a security and its value at maturity when quoted at lower than face value. DISCOUNT SECURITIES: Non -interest -bearing money market instruments that are issued a discount and redeemed at maturity for full face value, e.g., U.S. Treasury Bills. DIVERSIFICATION: Dividing investment funds among a variety of securities offering independent returns. DURATION: A measure of the timing of the cash flows, such as the interest payments and the principal repayment, to be received from a given fixed -income security. This calculation is based on three variables: term to maturity, coupon rate, and yield to maturity. The duration of a security is a useful indicator of its price volatility for given changes in interest rates. FEDERAL CREDIT AGENCIES: Agencies of the Federal government set up to supply credit to various classes of institutions and individuals, e.g., S&L's, small business firms, students, farmers, farm cooperatives, and exporters. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION (FDIC): A federal agency that insures bank deposits, currently up to $100,000 per deposit. 16 1042 Attachment 3 FEDERAL FUNDS RATE: The rate of interest at which Fed funds are traded. This rate is currently pegged by the Federal Reserve through open -market operations. FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS (FHLB): Government sponsored wholesale banks (currently 12 regional banks) which lend funds and provide correspondent banking services to member commercial banks, thrift institutions, credit unions and insurance companies. FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FNMA or Fannie Mae): FNMA, like GNMA was chartered under the Federal National Mortgage Association Act in 1938. FNMA is a federal corporation working under the auspices of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The corporation is called, is a private stockholder -owned corporation. The corporation's purchases include a variety of adjustable mortgages and second loans, in addition to fixed-rate mortgages. FEDERAL OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE (FOMC): Consists of seven members of the Federal Reserve Board and five of the twelve Federal Reserve Bank Presidents. The President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank is a permanent member, while the other Presidents serve on a rotating basis. The Committee periodically meets to set Federal Reserve guidelines regarding purchases and sales of Government Securities in the open market as a means of influencing the volume of bank credit and money. FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM: The central bank of the United States created by Congress and consisting of a seven member Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., 12 regional banks and about 5,700 commercial banks that are members of the system. FED WIRE: A wire transmission service established by the Federal Reserve Bank to facilitate the transfer of funds through debits and credits of funds between participants within the Fed system. FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION (FHLMC or Freddie Mac): A United States government sponsored corporation. GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (GNMA or Ginnie Mae): Securities influencing the volume of bank credit guaranteed by GNMA and issued by mortgage bankers, commercial banks, savings and loan associations, and other institutions. Security holder is protected by full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. Ginnie Mae securities are backed by the FHA, VA or FmHA mortgages. The term "pass- throughs" is often used to describe Ginnie Maes. HAIRCUT: The margin or difference between the actual market value of a security and the value assessed by the lending side of a transaction (i.e. a repo). INTEREST RATE: The annual yield earned on an investment, expressed as a percentage. 17 1043 Attachment 3 LEVERAGE: Borrowing funds in order to invest in securities that have the potential to pay earnings at a rate higher than the cost of borrowing. LIQUIDITY: Refers to the ability to easily and rapidly convert a security into cash. LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF): The local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) is a special fund in the California State Treasury created and governed pursuant to Government Code Sections 16429.1 et seq. There are limits on the maximum dollars deposited by a city as well as the number of transactions allowed each month. LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT POOL (LGIP): The aggregate of all funds from political subdivisions that are placed in custody of the State Treasurer for investment and reinvestment. MAKE WHOLE CALL: A type of call provision on a bond that allows the issuer to pay off the remaining debt early. Unlike a call option, with a make whole call provision, the issuer makes a lump sum payment that equals the net present value (NPV) of future coupon payments that will not be paid because of the call. With this type of call, an investor is compensated, or "made whole." MARGIN: The difference between the market value of a security and the loan a broker makes using that security as collateral. MARKET RISK: The risk that the value of securities will fluctuate with changes in overall market conditions or interest rates. MARKET VALUE: The price at which a security is trading and could presumably be purchased or sold on a specific date. MARKING TO MARKET: The process of posting current market values for securities in a portfolio. MATURITY: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable. MEDIUM TERM NOTES (MTNs): Unsecured, investment -grade senior debt securities of major corporations which are sold in relatively small amounts on either a continuous or an intermittent basis. MTNs are highly flexible debt instruments that can be structured to respond to market opportunities or to investor preferences. MODIFIED DURATION: The percent change in price for a 100 basis point change in yields. Modified duration is the best single measure of a portfolio's or security's exposure to market risk. 18 1044 Attachment 3 MONEY MARKET: The market in which short-term debt instruments (T-bills, discount notes, commercial paper, and banker's acceptances) are issued and traded. MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUND: Mutual funds that invest solely in money market instruments (short- term debt instruments, such as Treasury bills, commercial paper, bankers' acceptances, and federal funds). MORTGAGE PASS THROUGH SECURITIES: A securitized participation in the interest and principal cash flows from a specified pool of mortgages. Principal and interest payments made on the mortgages are passed through to the holder of the security. MUNICIPAL SECURITIES: Securities issued by state and local agencies to finance capital and operating expenses. MUTUAL FUND: An entity which pools the funds of investors and invests those funds in a set of securities which is specifically defined in the fund's prospectus. Mutual funds can be invested in various types of domestic and/or international stocks, bonds, and money market instruments, as set forth in the individual fund's prospectus. For most large, institutional investors, the costs associated with investing in mutual funds are higher than the investor can obtain through an individually managed portfolio. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS (NASD): A self -regulatory organization (SRO) of brokers and dealers in the over-the-counter securities business. Its regulatory mandate includes authority over firms that distribute mutual fund shares as well as other securities. NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED STATISTICAL RATING ORGANIZATIONS (NSROs); Credit rating agencies whose ratings are permitted to be used for regulatory purposes such as those imposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission. NEGOTIABLE CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT: A large denomination certificate of deposit which can be sold in the open market prior to maturity. NEW ISSUE: Term used when a security is originally "brought" to market. OFFER: The price asked by a seller of securities. (When you are buying securities, you ask for an offer.) See Asked and Bid. OPEN MARKET OPERATIONS: Purchases and sales of government and certain other securities in the open market by the New York Federal Reserve Bank as directed by the FOMC in order to influence the volume of money and credit in the economy. Purchases inject reserves into the bank system and stimulate growth of money and credit; sales have the opposite effect. Open market operations are the Federal Reserve' s most important and most flexible monetary policy tool. 19 1045 Attachment 3 PORTFOLIO: Collection of securities held by an investor. PREMIUM: The amount by which the price paid for a security exceeds the security's par value. PREPAYMENT SPEED: A measure of how quickly principal is repaid to investors in mortgage securities. PREPAYMENT WINDOW: The time period over which principal repayments will be received on mortgage securities at a specified prepayment speed. PRIMARY DEALER: A group of government securities dealers who submit daily reports of market activity and positions and monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) -registered securities broker -dealers, banks, and a few unregulated firms. PRINCIPAL: The face value or par value of a debt instrument, or the amount of capital invested in a given security. PRUDENT PERSON (PRUDENT INVESTOR) RULE: A standard of responsibility which applies to fiduciaries. In California, the rule is stated as "Investments shall be managed with the care, skill, prudence and diligence, under the circumstances then prevailing, that a prudent person, acting in a like capacity and familiar with such matters, would use in the conduct of an enterprise of like character and with like aims to accomplish similar purposes." PURCHASE DATE: The date in on which a security is purchased for settlement on that or a later date. RATE OF RETURN: The yield obtainable on a security based on its purchase price or its current market price. This may be the amortized yield to maturity on a bond or the current income return. REALIZED YIELD: The change in value of the portfolio due to interest received and interest earned and realized gains and losses. It does not give effect to changes in market value on securities, which have not been sold from the portfolio. REGIONAL DEALER: A financial intermediary that buys and sells securities for the benefit of its customers without maintaining substantial inventories of securities and that is not a primary dealer. REPURCHASE AGREEMENT (RP OR REPO): A holder of securities sells these securities to an investor with an agreement to repurchase them at a fixed price on a fixed 20 1046 Attachment 3 date. The security "buyer" in effect lends the "seller" money for the period of the agreement, and the terms of the agreement are structured to compensate him for this. RULE 2a-7 OF THE INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT: Applies to all money market mutual funds and mandates such funds to maintain certain standards, including a 13- month maturity limit and a 90-day average maturity on investments, to help maintain a constant net asset value of one dollar ($1.00). SAFEKEEPING: See CUSTODY. SECONDARY MARKET: A market made for the purchase and sale of outstanding issues following the initial distribution. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION: Agency created by Congress to protect investors m securities transactions by administering securities legislation. SETTLEMENT DATE: The date on which a trade is cleared by delivery of securities against funds. STRUCTURED NOTE: A complex, fixed income instrument, which pays interest, based on a formula tied to other interest rates, commodities or indices. Examples include inverse floating rate notes which have coupons that increase when other interest rates are falling, and which fall when other interest rates are rising, and "dual index floaters," which pay interest based on the relationship between two other interest rates - for example, the yield on the ten-year Treasury note minus the Libor rate. Issuers of such notes lock in a reduced cost of borrowing by purchasing interest rate swap agreements. TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY (TVA): The Tennessee Valley Authority provides flood control and power and promotes development in portions of the Tennessee, Ohio, and Mississippi River valleys. TVA currently issues discount notes and bonds. TIME CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT: A non-negotiable certificate of deposit which cannot be sold prior to maturity. TOTAL RATE OF RETURN: A measure of a portfolio's performance over time. It is the internal rate of return, which equates the beginning value of the portfolio with the ending value; it includes interest earnings, realized and unrealized gains, and losses in the portfolio. TREASURY BILLS: A non -interest bearing discount security issued by the U.S. Treasury to finance the national debt. Most bills are issued to mature in three months, six months, or one year and are sold on a discount basis. 21 1047 Attachment 3 TREASURY BONDS: Long-term coupon -bearing U.S. Treasury securities issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial maturities of more than 10 years. TREASURY NOTES: Medium -term coupon -bearing U.S. Treasury securities issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial maturities of I to 10 years. U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES: Instruments issued by various US Government Agencies most of which are secured only by the credit worthiness of the particular agency. VOLATILITY: The rate at which security prices change with changes in general economic conditions or the general level of interest rates. WEIGHTED AVERAGE MATURITY (WAM): The average maturity of all the securities that comprise a portfolio that is typically expressed in days or years. YIELD: The rate of annual income return on an investment, expressed as a percentage. It is obtained by dividing the current dollar income by the current market price of the security. YIELD TO MATURITY: The rate of income return on an investment, minus any premium or plus any discount, with the adjustment spread over the period from the date of purchase to the date of maturity of the bond, expressed as a percentage. YIELD CURVE: The yield on bonds, notes or bills of the same type and credit risk at a specific date for maturities up to thirty years. ZERO -COUPON SECURITY: Security that is issued at a discount and makes no periodic interest payments. The rate of return consists of a gradual accretion of the principal of the security and is payable at par upon maturity. 22 1048 Annual Review of City's Investment Policy September I 7, 2024 DUBLIN CALIFORNIA Tonight • Review of Investment Policy. • Delegation of Authority to complete investment transactions. • Consider establishment of a Finance & Investment Subcommittee. Review of Investment Policy • Policy originally adopted in 2007. • Reviewed annually _ 2nd meeting in September. • Policy is derived from California Governmental Code, Sections 53600 et seq. • Policy can be more restrictive not less. Review of Investment Policy Proposed Changes • Section IV - Delegation of Authority — Remove Assistant Finance Director as Deputy City Treasurer. • Section IX -Authorized and Suitable Investments — Add Joint Powers Authority pools. Review of Investment Policy Proposed Changes • Section XI - Prohibited Investment Practices and Instruments — Remove language "intent to hold". Provide more flexibility. • Other — Spelling and grammatical errors. Delegation of Authority • Section IV — Delegation ofAuthority —City Council delegates the authority to invest funds for one year to the Treasurer (Finance Director)/DeputyTreasurer (City Manager). — Authority is renewed each year as part of the annual review. Finance & Investment Subcommittee • Consider establishment of a Finance and Investment Subcommittee — Two Councilmembers. — Review City's Investment Policy • Socially Responsible Investing (SRI). • Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) standards. Finance & Investment Subcommittee Review City's investment strategy, portfolio composition and returns. Review of items related to existing and potential debt issuance. Review of quarterly financial reports. Finance & Investment Subcommittee Next Steps • October — formal approval. • December —appointments. Questions? VM DUBLIN CALIFORNIA 1058 r DUBLIN CALIFORNIA STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 8.2 DATE: September 17, 2024 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SU B.JECT: Overview of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Transit Oriented Communities Policy Prepared by: Crystal De Castro, Senior Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will receive an initial overview of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy. The TOC Policy is designed to support the region's transit investment by encouraging jurisdictions to adopt transit -supportive land use policies for areas within a half -mile radius of existing or planned transit stops or stations, and to adopt additional policies they intend to further equitable transit -oriented communities. The TOC Policy lays out a menu of policy options for local jurisdictions to choose from. Compliance with the TOC Policy is required to qualify for future One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) transportation funding. Additionally, funding for Valley Link is tied to compliance by the local jurisdictions served by them. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive the Staff presentation. FISCAL IMPACT: Implementation of the TOC Policy will require the allocation of resources including staff time and consultant services. Staff will return to the City Council in the future to further discuss the additional policy considerations outlined in the TOC Policy, which may include a budget adjustment as needed for technical analysis and consultant services. Page 1 of 14 1059 DESCRIPTION: Background The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is the agency responsible for planning, financing, and coordinating transportation for the nine -county San Francisco Bay Area. MTC and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) adopted Plan Bay Area 2050 (PBA 2050) in 2021, as a 30-year regional plan to improve housing, the economy, transportation, and the environment. In 2022, MTC adopted the Transit -Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy. The TOC Policy is an implementation policy of PBA 2050. The TOC policy replaces the TOD Policy to emphasize the importance of broader transit -oriented communities vs. individual development projects at transit stations and along transit corridors. The TOC policy seeks to leverage the regional investments in transit by encouraging the adoption of transit friendly land use policies that facilitate intensification of uses around transit and to adopt additional policies MTC believes will further equitable transit -oriented communities. The TOC Policy was further revised in 2023 to clarify the application of the TOC Policy to transit extension projects, such as Valley Link. The stated goals of the TOC Policy are to: 1. Increase the overall housing supply in part by increasing the density for new residential projects. Prioritize affordable housing in transit -rich areas; 2. In areas near regional transit hubs, increase density for businesses and commercial development; 3. Prioritize bus transit, active transportation, and shared mobility (such as bike share and car share) within and to/from transit -rich areas, particularly to Equity Priority Communities located more than one half mile from transit stops or stations; and 4. Support and build partnerships to create equitable transit -oriented communities within the San Francisco Bay Area. Grant Funding The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides MTC with funding for investments in roads, highways, public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian projects. MTC distributes the region's share of FHWA funding through the One Bay Area Grant (OBAG). While compliance with the TOC Policy is voluntary, it is necessary to qualify for future OBAG transportation funding. There is also the possibility that other regional sources of transportation funding, such as the Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC), may include a TOC compliance requirement in the future. The City has received approximately $1.13 million from the last three rounds of OBAG funding, which have been used for pavement repairs and maintenance on Positano Parkway, corridor improvements on Doughtery Road, and bicycle and pedestrian improvements on Dublin Boulevard. To qualify for the upcoming OBAG 4 funding in 2026, the City must demonstrate compliance with the TOC Policy by January 2026. Potential future OBAG-funded projects may include pavement repairs and maintenance, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, streetscape enhancements, and Safe Routes to School improvements. Page 2 of 14 1060 Alameda CTC is responsible for the planning, programming, and allocating local, regional, State, and federal funds for transportation improvements throughout Alameda County. Alameda CTC administers these funds through the Alameda CTC Comprehensive Investment Plan (CIP). From 2015-2024, Dublin has been allocated a total of approximately $56 million in Alameda CTC CIP transportation funds. Per recent discussions with Alameda CTC staff, future CIP call for projects could emphasize elements of the TOC Policy to qualify for funding. For context, Attachment 1 provides a list of Alameda CTC Transportation CIP funds Dublin has received over the last five years including funds to be allocated within two years. Valley Link Funding Valley Link is currently in the process of applying for two rounds of funding from MTC. This includes an application in September - October 2024 for approximately $3M in supplemental grant funds to complete their environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Valley Link anticipates submitting another application to MTC for a $135M grant in the December 2024 - February 2025 timeframe. The TOC Policy ties MTC funding for Valley Link to compliance by the jurisdictions they serve, including Dublin, Pleasanton and Livermore. While local jurisdictions have until 2026 to achieve TOC Policy compliance, MTC is seeking input from these local jurisdictions with each grant application. MTC is requesting a letter from the three cities acknowledging the TOC Policy for the initial grant application. For the subsequent grant application, MTC is seeking a letter in support of the TOC Policy along with a commitment that the City is taking meaningful steps toward TOC compliance. TOC Policy Overview The TOC Policy identifies Station Areas, which are areas within a half -mile radius of a fixed or planned transit station. Station Areas subject to the TOC Policy are categorized by tiers according to the level of transit service. As shown in Figure 1, the City of Dublin is served by two Station Areas along a single Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) line. The West Dublin BART station is within the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan (DDSP) area and the Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station is within the Transit Center which is in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area. These Station Areas are categorized under the Tier 3 TOC Policy requirements. Page 3 of 14 1061 Figure 1. TOC Sites within the City of Dublin Ila.� w it, . r a 1*1 IRIt•. a 11 f Pl city easitn �,1 "a -.� . ��� I Er 7a.._.- 1 !t..$ The TOC Policy is divided into four elements: 1) Density and Intensity Standards, 2) Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization, 3) Parking Management, and 4) Access and Circulation. Some elements have required policies while others offer a menu of policy options (both Station - based and citywide) for local jurisdictions to choose from. More information about the TOC Policy is available at the MTC website: https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/land-use/transit-oriented- communities-toc-policy. To implement these policies, Staff would need to further analyze the impact of required and optional policies and present the information to the City Council. There is a cost associated with this analysis, including staff time, consultant services and related budget adjustments, as well as to prepare any related General Plan/Specific Plan amendments, zoning amendments, policy language, and environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The TOC Policy, as currently written, requires each local jurisdiction to achieve 85 percent compliance with adopted policies to qualify for OBAG funding; however, MTC has not yet defined how compliance will be measured. Compliance determinations will be addressed as part of the OBAG 4 program development starting in 2025. Staff will continue to engage with MTC on compliance determinations, and MTC plans to provide technical assistance to jurisdictions later this year, including funding, to help develop policies that align with the TOC Policy. The following is a summary of the four elements of the TOC Policy. Attachment 2 provides the MTC final draft guidance for TOC compliance. Page 4of14 1062 MTC TOC Policy Elements in Detail 1) Density and Intensity Standards (Station Areas Only) The TOC Policy requires minimum development standards near Station Areas to promote high intensity uses. It outlines the process for a city to calculate the required minimum densities and Floor Area Ratio (FAR). These minimum standards can be averaged across the relevant land around the station for areas where residential or office uses are permitted by right. Existing residential neighborhoods can be excluded from this density calculation. The TOC Policy includes minimum and maximum development standards to ensure high intensity uses as shown in Table 1. Table 1- TOC Density and Intensity Standards TOC Standards Tier 3 TOC Standard West Dublin BART Station Area (DDSP) Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station Area (Transit Station) Minimum Residential Density (units/acre) 50 TOD 30 25.1 Retail 22 Village None Maximum Residential Density (units/acre) 75 TOD 85 None Retail None Village 15 Minimum Office Intensity (FAR) 2 TOD None .25 Retail None Village None Maximum Office Intensity (FAR) 4 TOD 2.5 .80 Retail 2 (Retail District) 2.5 (Retail Core) Village 0.35 The proposed Standards may be extremely impactful to certain areas within defined Station Areas. For example, a 2 FAR minimum would mean a two-story building covering an entire lot, a four- story building covering half of a lot, or an eight -story building covering a quarter of a lot. The first two examples would require some level of structured parking to meet market demands and that could impact the feasibility of development or redevelopment of the area. On the matter of minimum/maximum residential density, issues could arise around the periphery of the DDSP area where that type of density could not be supported economically or financially. Staff time and consultant services would be required for the associated changes, such as but not limited to, preparing an evaluation of impacts such as traffic and to prepare General Plan/Specific Plan amendments, zoning amendments, and environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff will return to the City Council in the future to provide a scope and budget and to request a budget adjustment as necessary to complete this effort. Page 5 of 14 1063 2) Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization Policies (Citywide Policies) The MTC TOC Policy identifies numerous elective policies in four categories related to affordable housing and commercial stabilization. A City must adopt at least seven policies across the following four categories to demonstrate TOC Policy compliance: • Production (minimum of two out of seven policy options) • Preservation (minimum of two out of eight policy options) • Protection (minimum of two out of eleven policy options) • Commercial Stabilization (minimum of one out of four policy options) In recognition of the variation in the Bay Area jurisdictions' housing needs and funding capacity, the TOC Policy also determines the minimum amount of funding a jurisdiction must provide for specific policy options requiring a minimum funding commitment. This amount is based on the 2023-2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for very low- and low-income units, placing Dublin under Tier E (See Attachment 2, Appendix B: Table 1- Jurisdictions by Funding Tier). The Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization policies are summarized below and shown in Table 2, 3, 4, and 5. Certain policies appear in multiple categories but can only be applied once. Policies not applicable to Dublin are shown in strikethroughs. Additionally, the City already has some required policies in place or has committed to adopting them as part of Housing Element implementation programs. Policies that align with existing City policies or are Housing Element (HE) programs are shown in bold. A summary of each policy is summarized after each table. Production Policies Table 2- Production Policies Policy TOC Policy Notes 1 Inclusionary Housing Existing Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance qualifies. (HE Program B.4: Inclusionary Zoning Regulations) 2 Affordable Housing Fund Funding commitment of $4 million 3 Affordable Housing Overlay Requires incentives beyond State law 4 Public Land for Affordable Housing City is working with Alameda County Surplus Authority to provide affordable housing at the Transit Center Site. (HE Program B.16: Publicly Owned Land) 5 Ministerial Approval Maximum of 0.5 parking spaces per unit 6 Public/Community Land Trusts Funding commitment of $4 million 7 Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process Requires staff, consultant time, and resources to determine effects of vested development rights. Production Policy 1 Inclusionary Housing: Requires that 15% of units in new residential development projects above a certain number of units be deed -restricted affordable to low-income households. A lower percentage may be adopted if it can be demonstrated by a satisfactory financial feasibility analysis that a 15% requirement is not feasible. Page 6of14 1064 Note: The City adopted an updated Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance in 2024 and complies with this policy. Production Policy 2 Affordable Housing Fund: Dedicated local funding for production of deed -restricted affordable housing. Production Policy 3 Affordable Housing Overlay: Area -specific incentives, such as density bonuses and streamlined environmental review, for development projects that include at least 15% of units as deed -restricted affordable housing; exceeds any jurisdiction -wide inclusionary requirements or benefits from state density bonus. Production Policy 4 Public Land for Affordable Housing: Policies to prioritize the reuse of publicly owned land for affordable and mixed -income housing that go beyond existing state law, typically accompanied by prioritization of available funding for projects on these sites. Note: The City is currently working with The Alameda Surplus Authority to provide affordable housing in the Transit Center Site and would comply with this policy. Production Policy 5 Ministerial Approval: Grant ministerial approval of residential developments that include, at a minimum, 15% affordable units if projects have 11 or more units, or that exceed inclusionary or density bonus affordability requirements and do not exceed 0.5 parking spaces per unit. Production Policy 6 Public / Community Land Trusts: Investments or policies to expand the amount of land held by public- and non-profit entities such as co-operatives, community land trusts, and land banks with permanent affordability protections. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing production or preservation requirement, but not both. Production Policy 7 Development Uncertainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process: Include the vested rights and five hearing limit provisions currently outlined in SB330 (2019, Skinner) without a sunset date. Page 7 of 14 1065 Preservation Policies Table 3- Preservation Policies Policy TOC Policy Notes 1 Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing Funding Commitment of $1M 2 Tenant/ Community Opportunity to Purchase Requires further studies to determine staff, consultant time, and resources 3 Single Room Occupancy No SROs in Dublin (SRO) 4 Condominium Conversion Restrictions Existing Condominium Ordinance (DMC 8.54) to be updated to include 1:1 replacement of converted units, no funding requirement and requires staff time. 5 Public/ Community Land Trusts Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. Cannot be applied simultaneously with Production Policy 4. 6 Funding to Support Preservation Capacity Funding commitment for a dedicated staff for four years 7 Mobile Home Preservation No Mobile Home Parks in Dublin 8 Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Enforcement Activities Minimum funding commitment. Amnesty program to waive fines/fees or a low- or no interest loan grant program ($10K minimum per loan/ grant). City currently provides a grant up to $5K a year in coordination with the County Preservation Policy 1 Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing: Public investments to preserve unsubsidized housing affordable to lower- or moderate -income residents (sometimes referred to as "naturally occurring affordable housing") as permanently affordable. Preservation Policy 2 Tenant/ Community Opportunity to Purchase: Policies or programs that provide tenants or mission -driven nonprofits the right of first refusal to purchase a property at the market price when it is offered for sale, retaining existing residents and ensuring long-term affordability of the units by requiring resale restrictions to maintain affordability. Preservation Policy 3 Single Room Occupancy: Limits the conversion of occupied SRO rental units to condominiums or other uses that could result in displacement of existing residents. Page 8of14 1066 Preservation Policy 4 Condominium Conversion Restrictions: Require that units converted to condominiums be replaced 1:1 with comparable rental units, unless purchased by current long-term tenants or converted to permanently affordable housing with protections for existing tenants. Note: The City currently has a Condominium Conversion Ordinance (Dublin Municipal Code (DMC) 8.54) that permits the subdivision of existing apartment buildings into condominiums before they are sold. To align with MTC TOC Preservation Policy 4, the Ordinance would need to be revised to mandate a 1:1 replacement of comparable units unless the units are purchased by existing long-term tenants or converted into permanent affordable housing. This policy would not apply to new condominium developments. Preservation Policy 5 Public / Community Land Trusts: Investments or policies to expand the amount of land held by public- and non-profit entities such as co-operatives, community land trusts, and land banks with permanent affordability protections. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing production or preservation requirement, but not both. Preservation Policy 6 Funding to Support Preservation Capacity: Dedicated local funding for capacity building or other material support for community land trusts (CLTs) or other community -based organizations (CBOs) engaged in affordable housing preservation. Preservation Policy 7 Mobile Home Preservation: Policy or program to preserve mobile homes from conversion to other uses that may result in displacement of existing residents. Preservation Policy 8 Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Enforcement Activities: Policies, programs, or procedures designed to minimize the risk of displacement caused by substandard conditions including through local code enforcement activities. This may include proactive rental inspection programs and assistance to landlords for property improvements in exchange for anti -displacement commitments. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both. Note: Currently, the City funds a Minor Home Improvement Grant Program through Alameda County, providing up to $5,000 a year per eligible household. To align with Preservation Policy 8, the City would need to increase this funding to $10,000 per household each year. Page 9of14 1067 Protection Policies Table 4- Protection Policies Policy TOC Policy Notes 1 Just Cause Eviction Protection Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 2 No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 3 Legal Assistance for Tenants Funding Commitment of $300,000 4 Foreclosure Assistance Funding Commitment of $300,000 5 Rental Assistance Program Funding Commitment of $300,000 6 Rent Stabilization Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 7 Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. Cannot be used if using Preservation Policy 8. 8 Tenant Relocation Assistance Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 9 Mobile Homc Rent Stabilization No Mobile Homes in Dublin 10 Fair Housing Enforcement Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 11 Tenant Anti -Harassment Protections Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. Protection Policy 1 Just Cause Eviction Protection: Defines the circumstances for evictions, such as nonpayment of rent, violation of lease terms, or permanent removal of a dwelling from the rental market, with provisions that are more protective of tenants than those established by AB 1482 (2019, Chiu). Protection Policy 2 No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes: Include the no net loss provisions currently outlined in SB 330 (2019, Skinner) without a sunset date. Require one-to-one replacement of units that apply the same or a deeper level of affordability, the same number of bedrooms and bathrooms, and comparable square footage to the units demolished. Provide displaced tenants with the right of first refusal to rent new comparable units at the same rent as demolished units. Protection Policy 3 Legal Assistance for Tenants: Investments or programs that expand access to legal assistance for tenants threatened with displacement. This could range from a "right to counsel" to dedicated public funding for tenant legal assistance. Note: Currently, the City provides financial assistance with the allocation of annual grants funded by the CDBGprogram and the General Fund to non profits that provide legal assistance. However, the City would be required to provide secured funding in the amount of $300,000 to be TOC compliant. Page 10 of 14 1068 Protection Policy 4 Foreclosure Assistance: Provide a dedicated funding source to support owner - occupied homeowners (up to 120% of Area Median Income (AMI)) at -risk of foreclosure, including direct financial assistance (e.g., mortgage assistance, property tax delinquency, HOA dues, etc.), foreclosure prevention counseling, legal assistance, and/or outreach. Protection Policy 5 Rental Assistance Program: Provide a dedicated funding source and program for rental assistance to low-income households. Protection Policy 6 Rent Stabilization: Restricts annual rent increases based upon a measure of inflation or other metric, with provisions exceeding those established by AB 1482 (2019, Chiu). Protection Policy 7 Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement: Policies, programs, or procedures designed to minimize the risk of displacement caused by substandard conditions including through local code enforcement activities. This may include proactive rental inspection programs and assistance to landlords for property improvements in exchange for anti -displacement commitments. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both. Protection Policy 8 Tenant Relocation Assistance: Policy or program that provides relocation assistance (financial and/or other services) to tenants displaced through no fault of their own, with assistance exceeding that required under state law. Protection Policy 9 Mobile Home Rent Stabilization: Restricts annual rent increases on mobile home residents based upon a measure of inflation or another metric. Protection Policy 10 Fair Housing Enforcement: Policy, program, or investments that support fair housing testing, compliance monitoring, and enforcement. Protection Policy 11 Tenant Anti -Harassment Protections: Policy or program that grants tenants legal protection from unreasonable, abusive, or coercive landlord behavior. Commercial Stabilization Policies Table 5- Commercial Stabilization Policies Policy TOC Policy Notes 1 Small Business and Non -Profit Overlay Requires one of the following: operating subsidy, eviction protections, or relocation requirements 2 Small Business and Non -Profit Preference Policy Requires new commercial space preferences 3 Small Business and Non -Profit Financial Assistance Program Funding commitment 4 Small Business Advocate Office City currently provides this service Commercial Stabilization Policy 1 Small Business and Non -Profit Overlay: Page 11 of 14 1069 Establish boundaries designated for an overlay, triggering a set of protections and benefits should development impact small businesses (including public markets) or community -serving non- profits. Commercial Stabilization Policy 2 Small Business and Non -Profit Preference Policy: Give priority and a right of first offer to local small businesses and/or community -serving non- profits when selecting a tenant for new market -rate commercial space. Commercial Stabilization Policy 3 Small Business and Non -Profit Financial Assistance Program: Dedicated funding program for any impacted small business and community -serving non -profits. Commercial Stabilization Policy 4 Small Business Advocate Office: Provide a single point of contact for small business owners and/or a small business alliance. Note: Commercial Stabilization Policy 4 aligns with and builds upon the work the City has already undertaken and remains committed to doing through the City's Economic Development Department. 3) Parking Management (Station Areas) State law (AB 2097) prohibits the City from imposing parking minimums near the Station Areas. Consequently, parking provided by an owner or developer in new projects near transit is optional. The TOC Policy further requires the City to establish parking maximums, which would prevent developers from exceeding the specified limit, even if they wanted to provide more parking. Table 6 provides a comparison of the Station areas and TOC standards: Table 6 - Parkin Management TOC Policy - Tier 3 Policy Parking Requirement Existing Parking Requirement - West Dublin BART Station Area (i.e., DDSP) Existing Parking Requirement - Dublin/Pleasanton Bart Station Area (i.e., Transit Center) Minimum Residential and Commercial Parking No Minimum No Minimum No Minimum (Per requirements of AB 2097) Maximum Residential Parking 1 Space per unit No Maximum No Maximum Maximum Commercial Office Parking 2.5 Spaces per 1,000 SF None None The City must also allow shared parking for different land uses and set minimum bicycle parking standards in the Station Areas. Page 12 of 14 1070 4) Station Access and Circulation (Citywide Policies) The final policy category for compliance with the TOC Policy pertains to transportation access and circulation. The City is required to meet all the requirements, and the City has existing policies in place that would need to be reviewed by Staff to ensure compliance as provided in Table 7. Table 7 - Station Access and Circulation TOC Requirement Notes Adopt a Complete Streets Policy Adopted Complete Streets Policy in 2012 (Resolution 199-12) Prioritize Implementation of Active Transportation Projects in station Areas DDSP, PDA: Transit Center Dublin Crossing, PDA: Town Center CIP- Downtown: Grid Street network and Golden Gate Drive Gap Analysis and Improvement Program for Station Areas LAVTA Long Range Transit Plan (March 2024) City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (2023) Identify Mobility Hub Opportunities in Station Areas LAVTA Tri-Valley Hub Network Integration Study (2021) City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (2023) Climate Action Plan Local Roadway Safety Plan Conclusion Staff anticipates proceeding with the preparation of policies that have already been committed to through the Housing Element. Staff will return to the City Council in the future to further discuss the additional policy considerations outlined in the TOC Policy and to request budget adjustments as needed for technical analysis and consultant services. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This informational report is not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and no environmental review is necessary. Environmental review will be performed, as required by CEQA, for any future City adoption of the policies necessary to comply with the MTC TOC Policy. Page 13 of 14 1071 NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: Public noticing is not required to seek policy direction. A copy of the Staff Report was also made available on the City's website. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Alameda CTC CIP Five Year Programming with Two-year Allocation for the City of Dublin 2) MTC's Transit Oriented Development Draft Administrative Guidance Page 14 of 14 1072 Attachment Programming and Allocations Prior Allocations Two -Year Allocation Plan Future Programming Project Title Fund Source Programmed Amount Prior Thru FY2022-23 FY2023-24 FY2024- 25 FY2025-26 FY2026- 27 FY2027-28 Total Allocated (Thru FY2024-25) City of Dublin Street Rehab OBAG $661,000 $661,000 $661,000 Dublin Boulevard Preservation OBAG $470,000 $470,000 $470,000 Dougherty Rd Widening (from 4 to 6 Lns) (Dublin - CCC line) 2014 MBB $11,200,000 $11,200,000 $11,200,000 Downtown Dublin Streetscape Plan Implementation 2000 MB $41,000 $41,000 $41,000 Downtown Dublin Streetscape Plan Implementation 2010VRF $226,000 $226,000 $226,000 Dublin Blvd. Widening, WB from 2 to 3 Lns (Sierra Ct-Dougherty Rd) 2014 MBB $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 Dublin Boulevard - North Canyons Parkway Extension 2014 MBB $2,374,000 $2,374,000 $2,374,000 Dublin Boulevard - North Canyons Parkway Extension 2014 MBB $5,374,000 $5,374,000 $5,374,000 Iron Horse Trail Crossing at Dublin Boulevard 2014 MBB $166,000 $166,000 $166,000 Iron Horse Trail Crossing at Dublin Boulevard 2014 MBB $1,128,000 $1,128,000 $1,128,000 Iron Horse Trail Crossing at Dublin Boulevard 2014 MBB $4,751,000 $4,751,000 $4,751,000 Iron Horse Trail Crossing at Dublin Boulevard TFCA $856,000 $856,000 $856,000 Iron Horse Transit Route - Dougherty Road 2000 MB $6,267,000 $6,267,000 $6,267,000 Regional Street Improvement Project 2000 MB $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 Safe Routes to School - Crosswalk Improvements 2000 MB $94,000 $94,000 $94,000 Safe Routes to School Improvements Dublin 2010 VRF $110,000 $110,000 $110,000 Safe Routes to School Improvements Dublin 2010 VRF $390,000 $390,000 $390,000 San Ramon Road Arterial Mgmt TFCA $146,000 $146,000 $146,000 Tassajara Rd Improvements from N. Dublin Ranch Drive to Quarry Lane School 2014 MBB $872,000 $ 872,000 $872,000 Tassajara Rd Improvements from N. Dublin Ranch Drive to Quarry Lane School TFCA $128,000 $ 128,000 $128,000 Tassajara Road Arterial Management Project TFCA $146,000 $146,000 $146,000 Village Parkway Complete Streets Improvements STIP $9,150,000 $9,150,000 $9,150,000 Sub -Total *City applied on behalf of BART, BART is the implementing authority Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station Active Access Improvements* 2014 MBB $ 37,475,000 $7,910,000 r Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station Active Access Improvements* TFCA $495,000 $ 47,625,000 $ 7,910,000 $7,910,000 $ 495,000 $495,000 Sub -Total $ 8,405,000 TOTAL $ 56,030,000 Attachment 2 CT METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit -Oriented Communities Policy Guidance for Public Agency Staff Implementing Metropolitan Transportation Commission Resolution 4530 Draft — September 2023 I. Background and Purpose This document provides guidance to local jurisdictions on how to demonstrate compliance with MTC's Transit -Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy (MTC Resolution 4530), adopted in September 2022. The TOC Policy seeks to support the region's transit investments by ensuring communities around transit stations and along transit corridors are places that not only support transit ridership, but that are places where Bay Area residents of all abilities, income levels, and racial and ethnic backgrounds can live, work, and access services, such as education, childcare, and healthcare. The TOC Policy is rooted in Plan Bay Area 2050 (PBA 2050), the region's Long Range Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, and addresses all four elements of the Plan — transportation, housing, the economy, and the environment. Compliance with the TOC Policy is voluntary for jurisdictions that want to advance the goals of PBA 2050 or to be eligible and/or competitive for some MTC discretionary funding. Four goals guide the TOC Policy and advance PBA 2050 implementation: • Increase the overall housing supply in part by increasing the density for new residential projects. Prioritize affordable housing in transit -rich areas. • In areas near regional transit hubs, increase density for new commercial office development. • Prioritize bus transit, active transportation, and shared mobility within and to/from transit -rich areas, particularly to Equity Priority Communities located more than one half -mile from transit stops or stations. • Support and build partnerships to create equitable transit -oriented communities within the San Francisco Bay Area. Future One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) funding cycles (i.e., OBAG 4 and subsequent funding cycles) will consider funding revisions that prioritize investments in transit station areas that are subject to and compliant with the TOC Policy. With MTC Page 1 of 32 1074 Commission approval, MTC may consider compliance with the TOC Policy to evaluate applications for additional discretionary funding sources. II. Definitions Bus Rapid Transit: "Bus Rapid Transit" (BRT) means a rubber -tired form of rapid transit in an integrated system of facilities, equipment, services, and amenities that exceed the speed and reliability of regular bus service. BRT projects must meet all of the following criteria: 1. Operates along a dedicated right of way for at least two (2.0) Lane Miles along its route. Dedicated Right of Way (ROW) means that private motor vehicles are prohibited from use of the lane except for turns, parking, and/or the use of variable pricing High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes. 2. All vehicles serving the route are equipped with Transit Signal Priority (TSP) 3. Has peak period minimum frequencies of 12 minutes or less. Endorsement: When the MTC Commission acts to endorse projects seeking funding from other sources or when a project is added to the list of projects and programs included in MTC's Major Project Advancement Policy (MAP) or a change is made to a project's MAP Level. Planned Station: A new station/stop will be added to the map and list of transit stations/stops subject to the TOC Policy when the project has a sufficiently defined station location as determined by MTC staff. However, a jurisdiction should consider the steps necessary to comply with the TOC Policy as early as possible in the planning process for the station/stop. Regional discretionary funding: For the purposes of the TOC Policy, "regional discretionary funding" for transit projects includes the following fund sources: regional bridge tolls and associated programs (e.g., RM2 & RM3), Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG), Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ), Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), and Regional Exchange Program (MTC Exchange). This list is non -exhaustive and could be amended in the future if MTC exercises discretionary control over additional funding sources. Transit extension: Creation of a new fixed guideway transit system (rail, ferry, or bus rapid transit), or extension of an existing fixed guideway transit system to a new station, stations, or terminals. Transit extensions include new infill stations on a fixed guideway transit system, and major expansions of existing stations to accommodate new or upgraded fixed guideway service. Page 2of32 1075 III. TOC Policy Requirements The TOC policy requirements consist of the following four elements: 1. Minimum residential and commercial office densities for new development. 2. Affordable housing production, preservation and protection, and stabilizing businesses to prevent displacement. 3. Parking management. 4. Transit station access. The specific requirements for each topic area are described in more detail below. Jurisdictions will be evaluated for compliance with all requirements in each of the four topic areas for each station area within the jurisdiction that is subject to the TOC Policy. A jurisdiction may use an existing adopted policy or plan to meet the requirements or, as needed, may adopt new policies/standards by the deadline for compliance with the TOC Policy (see section V. Documentation Submittal and Review, below, for more details). Where applicable, a jurisdiction may rely on jurisdiction -wide policies to demonstrate compliance. IV. Policy Applicability Types of Transit The TOC Policy applies to areas within one half -mile of the following types of existing and planned fixed -guideway transit1 stops and stations: • Regional rail (e.g., Bay Area Rapid Transit, Caltrain) • Commuter rail (e.g., Capitol Corridor, Altamont Corridor Express, Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit, Valley Link) • Light -rail transit (LRT) • Bus rapid transit (BRT) • Ferries The half -mile radius around a transit station/stop applies even if the jurisdiction has adopted a Priority Development Area (PDA) whose boundaries are different. 1 "Fixed guideway means a public transportation facility that uses and occupies a separate right-of-way or rail line for the exclusive use of public transportation and other high occupancy vehicles, or uses a fixed catenary system and a right of way usable by other forms of transportation. This includes, but is not limited to, rapid rail, light rail, commuter rail, automated guideway transit, people movers, ferry boat service, and fixed -guideway facilities for buses (such as bus rapid transit) and other high occupancy vehicles." (49 CFR § 611.105) Page 3 of 32 1076 Existing Transit and Transit Enhancements or Improvements The TOC Policy applies to jurisdictions with existing fixed -guideway transit service stops and stations, as defined above, including as those stations may evolve with future enhancements or improvements. For jurisdictions with an existing stop/station, OBAG (i.e., OBAG 4 and subsequent funding cycles) is currently the only funding source for which MTC will consider TOC compliance in its investment decisions. With Commission approval, MTC may consider compliance with the TOC Policy to evaluate applications for additional discretionary funding sources for enhancements or improvements to existing stops/stations. Interregional Projects Interregional projects that trigger MTC's Interregional Project Funding and Coordination Policy (Resolution No. 4399) shall be subject to the TOC Policy as set forth in this paragraph. For any portion of the project within MTC's jurisdiction, the project sponsor must satisfy the requirements as noted above for Existing Transit and Transit Extensions, as applicable. For portions of the project within the jurisdiction of another Metropolitan Planning Agency (MPO)/Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), the Interagency Agreement referenced in Resolution 4399 must include a provision acknowledging the applicability of the TOC Policy, confirming compliance with the TOC Policy for the Bay Area portion of the project, and a commitment from the other MPO/RTPA to strive towards achievement of TOC Policy requirements for the portions of the project outside of the Bay Area. The other MPO/RTPA's commitment for non -Bay Area portions of the project should include, as practicable, an agreement to regularly report on the status of progress to meeting TOC Policy requirements, to explain any challenges with achieving TOC Policy requirements, and any steps that will be taken to overcome those challenges. Transit Tiers Geographic areas subject to the TOC Policy are categorized by tier according to the level of transit service at fixed guideway station(s) within ' mile: • Tier 1: Rail stations serving regional centers (i.e., Downtown San Francisco, Downtown Oakland, and Downtown San Jose) • Tier 2: Stop/station served by two or more BART lines or BART and Caltrain • Tier 3: Stop/station served by one BART line, Caltrain, light rail transit, or bus rapid transit • Tier 4: Commuter rail (SMART, ACE, Capitol Corridor, Valley Link) stations, Caltrain stations south of Tamien, or ferry terminals Some TOC Policy requirements are defined by transit tier, with some requirements consistent across all tiers. Page 4 of 32 1077 Opt -In for Jurisdictions Not Served by Fixed -Guideway Transit Service Jurisdictions with transit stops and stations that are not served by fixed -guideway service (e.g., areas that are only served by regular fixed -route bus transit) may choose to "opt in" and voluntarily meet TOC Policy requirements.2 Station areas/stops where a jurisdiction has voluntarily complied with the TOC Policy may be eligible for any future funding sources where the MTC Commission chooses to adopt TOC Policy compliance as a prerequisite for funding or a factor in prioritizing funding. Station Area Geography The'/2-mile area is measured from a single point at the center of the stop or station. Where a station/stop includes infrastructure such as platforms, bus transfer facilities, and parking areas, a single centroid is identified rather than computing distance from multiple station entrances or property boundaries. The following standards are used when determining if an area is inside or outside the 1/2-mile stop/station area boundary: • Open water, rivers, canals, and other water bodies are excluded. • Parcels bisected by the'/2-mile boundary are included if 75 percent or more of the parcel falls within the boundary. In such instances, the entire parcel is included, including the portion outside the'/2-mile radius. • Parcels bisected by the'/2-mile boundary are excluded if less than 75 percent of the parcel falls within the boundary. In such instances, the entire parcel is excluded, including the portion inside the'/2-mile radius. Following these measurement guidelines results in the TOC stop/station area being an irregular shape rather than a perfect circle. Overlapping Station Areas In some cases, the'/2-mile area around one stop/station may overlap with the'/2-mile area around another stop/station. As a jurisdiction must demonstrate compliance for each station area separately, a parcel within an overlapping area will be considered independently in the calculation of the average zoning density and the evaluation of parking standards for each of the overlapping station areas. However, if the overlapping station areas represent different transit tiers, then the parking standards for parcels in the overlapping areas default to the higher tier. MTC will work with local staff to streamline the submission process for jurisdictions with multiple stop/station areas, particularly overlapping stop/station areas and stations 2 For locations with no fixed -guideway transit service, the Tier 4 density and parking management requirements will apply in addition to all other TOC Policy requirements. Page 5 of 32 1078 along LRT or BRT corridors. This may include allowing a jurisdiction to submit aggregated analyses that cover overlapping stop/station areas for some of the required documentation. Multi -Jurisdiction Station Areas The'/2-mile area around some stops/stations may encompass multiple jurisdictions. A jurisdiction is exempt from complying with the TOC Policy if it contains 20 percent or less of the '/2-mile stop/station area. A jurisdiction that comprises more than 20 percent of the stop/station area must comply with all TOC Policy requirements for its portion of the stop/station area. For the TOC Policy's density standards, a jurisdiction is not responsible for the zoning densities and intensities outside of its boundaries, but it must meet the TOC Policy standards for the portion of the stop/station area within its jurisdiction.3 However, joint applications are encouraged for a stop/station area that crosses jurisdictional boundaries; in such instances, compliance with the average density standards should be based on the combined area of the stop/station area in both jurisdictions (or in all jurisdictions, if more than two are involved). V. Documentation Submittal and Review Documentation Submittal MTC will accept submissions from jurisdictions to demonstrate compliance with the TOC Policy for each stop/station area subject to the policy within the jurisdiction. Jurisdictions must use the submission form developed by MTC to submit the documentation required to demonstrate compliance. MTC will make the final submission checklist available on its website prior to formal acceptance of submissions. All submissions must be submitted electronically to TOCPolicy@bayareametro.gov. Questions about the submission form and process should also be directed to TOCPolicy(a�bayareametro.gov. Local Jurisdiction Resolution The jurisdiction's submission must be accompanied by a resolution adopted by the city council or board of supervisors confirming compliance with the TOC Policy. For jurisdictions with multiple station areas subject to the TOC Policy, the jurisdiction may submit a single resolution that includes reference to all stop/station areas for which the jurisdiction is confirming compliance. 3 Average zoning density calculation requirements are covered in Section V of this Guidance document. Page 6of32 1079 Submission Deadline To ensure eligibility for OBAG 4 funding and any other discretionary funding that may be linked to TOC Policy compliance, jurisdictions should anticipate demonstrating compliance prior to adoption of OBAG 4, expected in 2026. MTC will provide more information about submission deadlines as part of developing the OBAG 4 program. MTC Review Process MTC will provide written acknowledgement of a jurisdiction's submission within ten (10) calendar days of receipt. To complete its review of the submission, MTC may request additional clarifying documentation and information from the jurisdiction. Additionally, to assist with its review of the submission, MTC may consult with and gather relevant information from any individual, entity, or public agency. Jurisdictions will receive an official letter upon confirmation of compliance with TOC Policy requirements. VI. Guidance for TOC Policy Submission This section provides the guidance necessary to demonstrate compliance with MTC's TOC Policy requirements. It is divided into four sections: 1 Zoning density and intensity requirements for residential and commercial office development. 2 Affordable housing production, preservation, and protection policies and commercial stabilization policies 3. Parking management policies 4. Station access and circulation requirements Section 1: Density for New Residential and Commercial Office Development Summary of TOC Policy Requirements The TOC Policy seeks to ensure that local planning policies and zoning regulations enable new development around transit stops and stations to be built at sufficiently high densities to support transit ridership and increase the proportion of trips taken by transit. The Policy does not require a jurisdiction to plan or zone specific parcels for a particular land use or density. Rather, a jurisdiction is required to meet zoning density and intensity standards that are averaged across the station area. The density requirements are based on the stop/station area's Transit Tier (see Tables 1 and 3). The TOC Policy allows certain areas to be excluded from the density/intensity calculations. Areas where residential uses are not allowed are excluded from the residential calculations. For the commercial office calculations, only those zoning districts that allow commercial office land uses as a primary use are included. The Page 7 of 32 1080 Policy also allows existing dwelling units to be excluded from the residential and commercial office calculations in order to minimize the risk of potential displacement. A total of four calculations are required to demonstrate conformance to the Policy: • Minimum zoning density required on parcels allowing residential uses. • Maximum zoning density allowed on parcels allowing residential uses. • Minimum commercial office intensity (FAR) required on parcels allowing office uses. • Maximum commercial office intensity (FAR) allowed on parcels allowing office uses. The guidance provided below explains how these calculations should be completed, what may be excluded, and how to determine density and FAR equivalencies if a zoning district does not use these metrics to regulate development. The calculations do not require a determination of "buildout" in the stop/station area. Rather, they only require calculation of the average minimum and maximum density/intensity allowed by zoning on the eligible parcels. All zoning districts within the stop/station area where housing and commercial office uses are considered primary uses (e.g., permitted by right) should have minimum and maximum density or intensity standards. The minimums in a given district may be below the TOC Policy thresholds (Tables 1 and 3), provided the average across the station area meets the requirement. This is further explained in the methodology below. Submitting Required Documentation A jurisdiction has two options for completing the density/intensity calculations: • Option A is simpler and involves determining the area of all zoned parcels within the mile radius where residential uses are allowed (Step 1A) and commercial office uses are allowed (Step 1 B). • Option B is more fine-grained and allows exclusion of certain parcels in each of these zones due to existing uses.4 A jurisdiction may use either option. Both options require a "weighted average" calculation that accounts for the proportional land area in each zone. A five -step process is outlined below. Step 1 is determining the baseline set of zones or parcels to be used in the average density/intensity calculations for each stop/station area. Steps 2 to 5 (which are the same for Option A and Option B) correspond to the calculations of minimum residential density, maximum allowable residential density, 4 Calculation of the average density includes parcels where it may not be physically possible to construct new residential, commercial office, or mixed -use buildings within the specified density ranges due to small parcel sizes, environmental factors, or conflicts with Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans, etc. Page 8 of 32 1081 minimum commercial office intensity, and maximum allowable commercial office intensity for those zones or parcels. Step 1: Determine the Baseline Areas to be Included in the Calculations Option A: a) Identify all zoning districts in the stop/station area where residential uses are permitted by right. This includes single-family zones, multi -family zones, mixed - use zones where housing is a permitted use, and non-residential districts that specifically identify housing as a permitted use. Public/quasi-public zones are excluded. (Step 1A). b) Identify all zoning districts in the stop/station area where commercial offices are permitted by right. This includes office zones, commercial and mixed -use zones where office is permitted by right, and any residential zones that allow 100% office uses (zones that only allow office as an ancillary use are excluded). It also includes light industrial and similar non-residential zones where commercial office is permitted by right and as the primary land use. Public/quasi-public zones are excluded. (Step 1 B) c) Calculate the net area in each zoning district within the stop/station area. "Net" area means that any streets or un-zoned features within the zoning boundary are not counted. d) Report the acreage in each eligible residential zone and each eligible commercial office zone, the sums of these acreages, and the percentage of the total eligible zones that each individual zone represents. Zoning districts included in the residential calculation may also be included in the office calculation. e) Proceed to steps 2 through 5. Option B: a) Conduct steps (a) and (b) as described above for Option A. b) For each zoning district, prepare a list of parcels to be excluded (subtracted) from the eligible acreage in that zoning district. For any excluded parcel, the jurisdiction must document the reason for the exclusion. This requires the use of a parcel -level Excel database that lists each assessor parcel number, address, acreage, existing zoning, existing land use, and the nature of the constraint underlying the exclusion. Exclusions may be based on any one of the following factors: • The parcel is currently occupied by single- or multi -family dwelling units. However, if the parcel was counted as a Housing Opportunity Site in the 6th Cycle Housing Element, it may not be excluded. • The parcel is a park, institution, or public facility and is not suitable for residential use. Page 9 of 32 1082 c) Report the remaining acreage in each eligible residential zone and each eligible commercial office zone, the sums of these acreages, and the percentage of the total eligible zones that each individual zone represents. Zoning districts included in the residential calculation may also be included in the office calculation. d) Proceed to Steps 2 through 5. Step 2: Calculate the Average Minimum Residential Density Required by Zoning in the Stop/Station Area A jurisdiction must demonstrate that the average minimum zoning density in the'/2-mile stop/station area meets the adopted TOC Policy standard for its transit tier shown in Table 1. Table 1: Minimum Zoning Densities Required for Residential Development Level of Transit Service Minimum Zoning Density Tier 1: Rail stations serving regional centers (i.e., Downtown San Francisco, Downtown Oakland, and Downtown San Jose) 100 units/net acre or higher Tier 2: Stop/station served by two or more BART lines or BART and Caltrain 75 units/net acre or higher Tier 3: Stop/station served by one BART line, Caltrain, light rail transit, or bus rapid transit 50 units/net acre or higher Tier 4: Commuter rail (SMART, ACE, Capitol Corridor, Valley Link) stations, Caltrain stations south of Tamien, or ferry terminals 25 units/net acre or higher Notes: 1. Tier 3 jurisdictions with 30,000 residents or fewer may use Tier 4 standards. An equivalency table has been developed for zoning districts where housing is permitted but minimum density is expressed using floor area ratio (FAR), height, or another variable. The intent of the table is to allow jurisdictions using zones that are not measured in dwelling units per acre to convert to density equivalents so that averages may be more accurately estimated. Table 2 shows the equivalent densities for FARs ranging from 0.5 to 5.0 and for height limits ranging from zero to 75 feet. The standards in Table 2 are "default" standards based on sample projects. Jurisdictions are encouraged to develop their own equivalency tables based on actual projects within their stop/station area or nearby, subject to approval by MTC. MTC staff will automatically approve jurisdiction -developed equivalency tables that were accepted by the California Department of Housing and Community Development in a certified Housing Element from the 6th Cycle or later. Page 10 of 32 1083 Table 2: Equivalency Table for Minimum Density Calculation (only for use in zones with no density standard) If there is no minimum density, but the minimum FAR required is... ... then use this equivalent for minimum density If there is no minimum density or FAR, but the minimum height is... ...then use this for equivalent minimum density None Zero None Zero Less than 0.5 8 DUA Less than 25' 20 DUA Between 0.5 and 0.74 16 DUA 25' to 34.9' 35 DUA Between 0.75 and .99 25 DUA 35 to 44.9' 55 DUA Between 1.0 and 1.49 50 DUA 45 to 54.9' 75 DUA Between 1.5 and 1.99 75 DUA 55 to 64.9' 100 DUA Between 2.0 and 2.99 100 DUA 65' to 74.9' or higher 125 DUA Between 3.0 and 3.99 125 DUA 75' or higher 150 DUA 4.0 or higher 150 DUA Although a minimum residential density standard is not mandatory for every zone in the stop/station area in which housing is permitted, it is strongly recommended. A jurisdiction without minimum residential density zoning standards may use the minimums identified in its General Plan, to the extent that the jurisdiction has a General Plan policy that new development must occur at or above a minimum threshold. In the absence of such a policy or zoning standard, a zone without a minimum density will be assigned a "zero" for the purposes of calculating the average for the stop/station area. This will make it more difficult to achieve the required areawide averages. Minimums should be adopted even where density is not used as a metric. In other words, cities that have adopted Form Based Codes without density standards are strongly encouraged to adopt minimum densities, minimum FARs, or minimum heights for future residential and mixed -use projects. Commercial zones where housing is permitted by right should likewise either include minimum densities, minimum FARs, or minimum heights for residential and mixed uses. Once a density or density equivalent has been assigned to each zone, the weighted average should be determined. Figure 1 illustrates the formula to be used for this calculation. A jurisdiction may use an alternative methodology to determine average minimum density, subject to approval by MTC. Page 11 of 32 1084 Figure 1: Calculation of Average Required Minimum Residential Zoning Density Zone 1 min. density } Zone 2 min. density ` Zone 3 min. Total acres in TOC where density residential is permitted*" Acres in Zone 1 Total acres in TOC,,vhere residential is permitted Acres in Zone 2 Total acres in TOC. }where residential is permitted"* Acres in Zone 3 Repeat for all additional zones in 4vhich housing is a permitted use, using acreages developed in Step 1- Weighted Average Minimum Residential Density Notes: Use Tab e 2 to determi ie density equivalen= if zone has no density. "* Use the sums developed in Step 1 for the numerator and the denominator. If using Step 1/Option B, exempted parcels are excluded. As shown in Figure 1, to calculate the average minimum residential zoning density for the stop/station area, the total number of acres in each zone to be included (shown as Zone 1, Zone 2, etc.) is divided by the total number of acres in the stop/station area where residential uses are permitted. Use the sums developed in Step 1 for the numerator and the denominator. If using Option B for Step 1, exempted parcels are excluded. This result is then multiplied by the minimum density for that zone. If the zone has no density standard, use Table 2 to determine the equivalent density. This process is repeated for each zoning designation in the stop/station area where residential uses are permitted, and the results for each zone are summed to result in the weighted average minimum residential density. Step 3: Calculate the Average Maximum Residential Density Allowed by Zoning in the Station Area A jurisdiction must demonstrate that the average maximum allowable residential zoning density in the 1/2-mile stop/station area meets the adopted TOC Policy standard for its transit tier shown in Table 3. Page 12 of 32 1085 Table 3: Maximum Zoning Densities Allowed for Residential Development Level of Transit Service Maximum Allowable Zoning Density Tier 1: Rail stations serving regional centers (i.e., Downtown San Francisco, Downtown Oakland, and Downtown San Jose) 150 units/net acre or higher Tier 2: Stop/station served by two or more BART lines or BART and Caltrain 100 units/net acre or higher Tier 3: Stop/station served by one BART line, Caltrain, light rail transit, or bus rapid transit 75 units/net acre or higher Tier 4: Commuter rail (SMART, ACE, Capitol Corridor, Valley Link) stations, Caltrain stations south of Tamien, or ferry terminals 35 units/net acre or higher Notes: 1. Tier 3 jurisdictions 30,000 or fewer residents may use Tier 4 standards. 2. The allowable densities are consistent with PBA 2050 modeling for Strategy H3 (see Forecasting and Modeling Report, pp. 44-45). An equivalency table has been developed for zoning districts where housing is permitted but maximum allowable density is expressed using floor area ratio (FAR), height, or another variable. The intent of the table is to allow jurisdictions using zones that are not measured in dwelling units per acre to convert to density equivalents so averages may be more accurately estimated. Table 4 shows the equivalent densities for FARs ranging from 0 to 5.0 and for height limits ranging from 0 to 75 feet. The standards in Table 4 are "default" standards based on sample projects. Jurisdictions are encouraged to develop their own equivalency tables based on actual projects within their stop/station area or nearby, subject to approval by MTC. MTC staff will automatically approve jurisdiction -developed equivalency tables that were accepted by the California Department of Housing and Community Development in a certified Housing Element from the 6th Cycle or later. Table 4: Equivalency Table for Maximum Density Calculation (only for use in zones with no density standard) If there is no maximum density, but the maximum FAR allowed is... ...then use this equivalent for maximum density If there is no maximum density or FAR, but the maximum allowable height is... ... then use this for equivalent maximum density Less than 0.74 12 DUA Less than 25 12 DUA Between 0.75 and .99 25 DUA 25 to 34.9' 35 DUA Between 1.0 and 1.49 50 DUA 35' to 44.9' 55 DUA Between 1.5 and 1.99 75 DUA 45' to 54.9' 75 DUA Between 2.0 and 2.99 100 DUA 55' to 64.9' 100 DUA Between 3.0 and 3.99 125 DUA 65' to 74.9' or higher 125 DUA Between 4.0 and 4.99 150 DUA 75' or higher 150 DUA Add 40 DUA for each 1.0 FAR above 5.0 Add 25 DUA for each 10 above 75 Page 13 of 32 1086 Once a density or density equivalent has been assigned to each zone, the weighted average should be determined. Figure 2 illustrates the formula to be used for this calculation. Jurisdictions may use an alternative methodology to determine average maximum density, subject to approval by MTC. Figure 2: Calculation of Average Maximum Allowable Residential Zoning Density Zone 1 max. density ` Zone 2 max. density Zone 3 max. density Acres in Zone 1 Total acres in TOC}.vhere residential is permitted"* Acres in Zone 2 Total acres in TOC where residential is permitted"* Acres in Zone 3 Total acres in TOC where residential is permitted*" Repeat for all additional zones in 4vl�iclr housing is a permitted use: using acreages developed in Step 1- Weighted Average Maximum Residential Density Notes: *Use Table 4 to determine density equivalent if zone has no density. "* Use the sums developed in Step 1 for the numerator and the denominator. If using Step 1/Option B, exempted parcels are excluded. As shown in Figure 2, to calculate the average maximum allowable residential zoning density for the stop/station area, the total number of acres in each zone to be included (shown as Zone 1, Zone 2, etc.) is divided by the total number of acres in the stop/station area where residential uses are permitted. Use the sums developed in Step 1 for the numerator and the denominator. If using Option B for Step 1, exempted parcels are excluded. This result is then multiplied by the allowable maximum density for that zone. If the zone has no density standard, use Table 4 to determine the equivalent density. This process is repeated for each zoning designation in the stop/station area where residential uses are permitted, and the results for each zone are summed to result in the weighted average maximum residential density. Step 4: Calculate the Average Minimum Commercial Office Space Intensity Required by Zoning in the Station Area A jurisdiction must demonstrate that the average minimum required zoning intensity for commercial office space in the 1/2-mile stop/station area meets the adopted TOC Policy standard for its transit tier shown in Table 5. Again, it is recognized that a jurisdiction Page 14 of 32 1087 may not have adopted minimum FAR standards (or minimum heights) for commercial office space in its stop/station area. A jurisdiction without such standards may refer to its General Plan ranges, to the extent the General Plan includes a range and has a policy that development must occur at or above the minimum. Cities without minimum standards for FAR (either in zoning or the General Plan) must assign a "zero" to the applicable zones when calculating the stop/station area average. Table 5: Minimum Zoning Intensities Required for Commercial Office Development Level of Transit Service Minimum Zoning Intensity Required for Commercial Office Space (FAR) Tier 1: Rail stations serving regional centers (i.e., Downtown San Francisco, Downtown Oakland, and Downtown San Jose) 4 or higher Tier 2: Stop/station served by two or more BART lines or BART and Caltrain 3 or higher Tier 3: Stop/station served by one BART line, Caltrain, Tight rail transit, or bus rapid transit 2 or higher Tier 4: Commuter rail (SMART, ACE, Capitol Corridor, Valley Link) stations, Caltrain stations south of Tamien, or ferry terminals 1 or higher Notes: 1. For mixed -use projects that include a commercial office component, this figure shall not be less than the equivalent of the applicable allowed or permitted FAR standard. 2. The allowable densities are consistent with PBA 2050 modeling for Strategy EC4 (see Forecasting and Modeling Report, pp. 57-58). An equivalency table has been developed for zoning districts where minimum required intensity is expressed using height rather than FAR. Table 6 shows the equivalent FARs for height limits ranging from zero to 100 feet. The equivalencies in Table 6 are "default" values based on sample projects. Jurisdictions are encouraged to develop their own equivalency tables based on actual projects within the stop/station area or nearby, subject to approval by MTC. Table 6: Equivalency Table for Minimum Zoning Intensity for Commercial Office (only for use in zones with no Floor Area Ratio (FAR] standard) If there is no FAR standard, but the minimum height required is... ...then use this as the equivalent FAR Zero or less than 25 feet None 25' to 34.9 0.75 35' to 44.9 1.5 45' to 54.9' 2.0 55' to 64.9' 3.0 65' to 74.9' or higher 4.0 75' or higher 5.0 Page 15 of 32 1088 Once an FAR or FAR equivalent has been assigned to each zone, the weighted average should be determined. Figure 3 illustrates the formula to be used for this calculation. Jurisdictions may use an alternative methodology to determine average minimum zoning intensity, subject to approval by MTC. Figure 3: Calculation of Average Zone 1 min_ FAIT Zone 2 min. FARE Zone 3 ruin. FAR x x Minimum Required Commercial Office Zoning Intensity Acres in Zone 1 Total acres in TOC where commercial office is permitted" AC-GS Ill Zone 2 Total acres in TOC }where commercial office is permitted" Acres in Zone 3 Total acres in TOC where commercial office is permitted"h Repeat for all add/Zonal zones in which commercial office is a permitted use, using acreages developed in Step 1. Weighted Average Required Minimum Commercial Office Intensity Notes: * Use Table 6 to determine FAR equivalent if zone has no density. "* Use the sums developed in Step 1 for the numerator and the denominator. If using Step 1/Option B, exempted parcels are excluded. As shown in Figure 3, to calculate the average minimum commercial office zoning intensity for the stop/station area, the total number of acres in each zone to be included (shown as Zone 1, Zone 2, etc.) is divided by the total number of acres in the stop/station area where office uses are permitted. Use the sums developed in Step 1 for the numerator and the denominator. If using Option B for Step 1, exempted parcels are excluded. This result is then multiplied by the minimum intensity for that zone. If the zone has no density standard, use Table 6 to determine the FAR equivalent. This process is repeated for each zoning designation in the stop/station area where office uses are permitted, and the results for each zone are summed to result in the weighted average required minimum commercial office intensity. Step 5: Calculate the Average Maximum Commercial Office Space Intensity Allowed by Zoning in the Station Area A jurisdiction must demonstrate that the average maximum allowable zoning intensity for commercial office space in the 1/2-mile stop/station area meets the adopted TOC Policy standard for its transit tier shown in Table 7. Page 16 of 32 1089 Table 7: Maximum Zoning Intensities Allowed for Commercial Office Development Level of Transit Service Maximum Allowable Zoning Intensity for Commercial Office Space (FAR) Tier 1: Rail stations serving regional centers (i.e., Downtown San Francisco, Downtown Oakland, and Downtown San Jose) 8 or higher Tier 2: Stop/station served by two or more BART lines or BART and Caltrain 6 or higher Tier 3: Stop/station served by one BART line, Caltrain, Tight rail transit, or bus rapid transit 4 or higher Tier 4: Commuter rail (SMART, ACE, Capitol Corridor, Valley Link) stations, Caltrain stations south of Tamien, or ferry terminals 3 or higher Notes: 1. For mixed -use projects that include a commercial office component, this figure shall not be less than the equivalent of the applicable allowed or permitted FAR standard. 2. The allowable densities are consistent with PBA 20505 modeling for Strategy EC4 (see Forecasting and Modeling Report, pp. 57-58). An equivalency table has been developed for zoning districts where maximum allowable intensity is expressed using height rather than FAR. Table 8 shows the equivalent FARs for height limits ranging from 25 to 100 feet. The equivalencies in Table 8 are "default" values based on sample projects. Jurisdictions are encouraged to develop their own equivalency tables based on actual projects within the stop/station area or nearby, subject to approval by MTC. Table 8: Equivalency Table for Maximum Zoning Intensity for Office (only for use in zones with no Floor Area Ratio !FAR] standard) If there is no FAR standard, but the maximum height allowed is... ... then use this as the equivalent FAR Less than 25 0.5 25 to 34.9' 1.0 35' to 44.9' 1.5 45' to 54.9' 2.0 55' to 64.9' 3.0 65' to 79.9' or higher 4.0 80' to 99.9' 5.0 For each 15 feet above 100 feet, add 1.0 Once an FAR or an FAR equivalent has been assigned to each zone, the weighted average FAR for the TOC area should be determined. Figure 4 illustrates the formula to Page 17 of 32 1090 be used for this calculation. Jurisdictions may use an alternative methodology to determine average maximum density, subject to approval by MTC. Figure 4: Calculation of Average Maximum Allowable Commercial Office Zoning Intensity Zone 1 max. FAIT Zone 2 max. FAR* Zone 3 max - FA R* x Acres in Zone 1 Total acres in TOC where residential is permitted"* Acres in Zone 2 Total acres in TOC where residential is permitted"* Acres in Zone 3 Total acres in TOC where residential is permitted*" Repeat for ail additional zones in 4vhiclr commercial office is a permitted use, using acreages developed in Step 1. Weighted Average Maximum Allowable Commercial Office Intensity Notes: *Use Table 8 to determine density equivalent if zone has no density. *k Use the sums developed iri Step 1 for the numerator and the denominator. If using Step 1/Option B, exempted parcels are excluded. As shown in Figure 4, to calculate the average maximum allowable commercial office zoning intensity for the stop/station area, the total number of acres in each zone to be included (shown as Zone 1, Zone 2, etc.) is divided by the total number of acres in the stop/station area where office uses are permitted. Use the sums developed in Step 1 for the numerator and the denominator. If using Option B for Step 1, exempted parcels are excluded. This result is then multiplied by the maximum intensity for that zone. If the zone has no density standard, use Table 8 to determine the FAR equivalent. This process is repeated for each zoning designation in the stop/station area where office uses are permitted, and the results for each zone are summed to result in the weighted average required minimum commercial office intensity. General Guidance and Special Circumstances for Average Density and Intensity Calculations Mixed -Use Districts: Parcels to Include Parcels in mixed -use zoning districts that allow both residential and commercial office as primary uses should be counted in calculations of average residential density and then again in calculations of average commercial office density for each stop/station area. No Page 18 of 32 1091 assumptions about the mix of uses are necessary on mixed -use parcels —simply report the minimum and maximum density or FAR permitted by zoning in each case. SB 6 (2022, Caballero)/AB 2011 (2022, Wicks) SB 6 and AB 2011 allow residential uses by right in most commercial zoning districts. For the purposes of the minimum and maximum average density calculations, residential uses should only be counted in a commercial zone if they are expressly listed as a permitted use in the zoning regulations. Jurisdictions are encouraged to amend their zoning codes to list residential as permitted in those zones affected by SB 6 and AB 2011. Planned Unit Development or Planned Development (PD) Districts For parcels in zoning districts where densities are determined through a subsequent project -level planning process (e.g., Planned Unit Developments), or were previously determined through such a process, the jurisdiction may use the densities and intensities in its General Plan. The jurisdiction also has the option of using any minimum and maximum densities/intensities that were established when the PD was created. Overlay Zones For parcels to which a base zone and overlay zone apply, a jurisdiction should use the standards included in the base zone if it permits residential and/or commercial office uses. Otherwise, a jurisdiction should use the standards included in the overlay zone. Density Bonuses For parcels subject to a density bonus, the density requirements apply to the base zoning (i.e., density bonuses cannot be considered for meeting the TOC Policy's thresholds for minimum density or allowable maximum density). Planned Rezonings Jurisdictions that are in the process of rezoning property per the jurisdiction's certified Housing Element may report the new zoning designation (or the amended zoning district standards) if the zoning will be in place at the time a determination will be made on the application. In such cases, the jurisdiction must note the current zoning, the proposed zoning, and the status of the rezone. Verification of Data A jurisdiction may review and verify data from MTC's Bay Area Spatial Information System (BASIS) or provide a GIS shapefile with the required data. Page 19 of 32 1092 Section 2: Affordable Housing Production, Preservation, and Protection Policies and Commercial Stabilization Policies Summary of TOC Policy Requirements A jurisdiction will fulfill the Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization requirements by selecting from the menu of options in Table 9 the policies that best meet local needs. To comply, a jurisdiction must adopt at least: • Two policies for each of the "3Ps"—affordable housing production, preservation, and protection. • One policy related to commercial stabilization, unless the jurisdiction can document there are no potential impacts to small businesses and/or community non -profits. A jurisdiction may meet the requirements with existing adopted policies or, as needed, adopt new policies by the TOC Policy compliance deadline. Appendix A describes each of the policy options in more detail and outlines the specific minimum standards a jurisdiction's policy must meet to comply with TOC Policy requirements. Compliance with TOC housing policy requirements should be completed in conformance with relevant federal and state laws, including a jurisdiction's duty to affirmatively further fair housing. For each of the "3Ps" policies selected to comply with TOC Policy requirements, the jurisdiction must also include a brief explanation for how the policy addresses the jurisdiction's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and/or other housing needs as identified in the jurisdiction's Housing Element. Table 9: Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization Policy Options Affordable Housing Production Policy Affordable Housing Preservation Policy Affordable Housing Protection and Anti- Displacement Policy Commercial Stabilization Policy Select at least 2 policies Select at least 2 policies Select at least 2 policies Select at least 1 policy 1. Inclusionary Zoning Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing "Just Cause" Eviction Small Business and Non -Profit Overlay Zone 2. Affordable Housing Funding Tenant/Community Opportunity to Purchase No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes Small Business and Non -Profit Preference Policy 3. Affordable Housing Overlay Zones Single -Room Occupancy (SRO) Preservation Legal Assistance for Tenants Small Business and Non -Profit Financial Assistance Program Page 20 of 32 1093 Affordable Housing Production Policy Affordable Housing Preservation Policy Affordable Housing Protection and Anti- Displacement Policy Commercial Stabilization Policy 4. Public Land for Affordable Housing Condominium Conversion Restrictions Foreclosure Assistance Small Business Advocate Office 5. Ministerial Approval Public/Community Land Trusts' Rental Assistance Program 6. Public/Community Land Trusts' Funding to Support Preservation Capacity Rent Stabilization 7. Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process Mobile Home Preservation Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities2 8. Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities2 Tenant Relocation Assistance 9. Mobile Home Rent Stabilization 10. Fair Housing Enforcement 11. Tenant Anti -Harassment Protections Notes: 1. This policy may fulfill either the housing production or preservation requirement, but not both. 2. This policy may fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both. Geography for Policy Applicability At minimum, policies must apply in transit station areas that are subject to the TOC Policy. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC station area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdiction -wide policy). Some policies detailed in Appendix A have additional, policy -specific geographic applicability considerations. Limits on Housing Policies Eligibility to Meet TOC Policy Requirements As noted in Table 9 and Appendix A, there are two cross -cutting policies that appear in multiple places in the menu of options: • Public/Community Land Trusts can be used to meet the requirement for Production or Preservation policies, but not both. • Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities can be used to meet the requirement for Preservation or Protection policies, but not both. Page 21 of 32 1094 Additionally, in some cases, a minimum requirement for one housing policy option may overlap with a minimum requirement for a different housing policy option. In these situations, a jurisdiction will only receive credit toward the TOC Policy requirements for one of the overlapping policies and the jurisdiction may elect which policy. As noted in Appendix A, the policies for which this restriction applies are: • Production Policy 3: Affordable Housing Overlay Zones • Production Policy 5: Ministerial Approval • Production Policy 7: Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process References to State Laws In some cases, the descriptions of housing policy options included in the TOC Policy refer to existing state laws. The laws listed may not represent all laws that are relevant to the policy topic. MTC may adjust the requirements for complying with the TOC Policy over time in response to any changes to state law. Jurisdiction Tiers for Funding Amounts Several of the affordable housing policy options require a specified financial commitment from a local jurisdiction. The minimum financial commitments reflect the fact that an effective housing program will have minimum staffing and related costs, below which meaningful impact is unlikely. A jurisdiction must demonstrate that it meets a minimum funding threshold for its policy to comply with the TOC Policy. The policy options that require a funding commitment are: • Production Policy 2: Affordable Housing Funding • Production Policy 6: Public/Community Land Trusts • Preservation Policy 1: Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing • Preservation Policy 5: Public/Community Land Trusts • Protection Policy 3: Legal Assistance for Tenants • Protection Policy 4: Foreclosure Assistance • Protection Policy 5: Rental Assistance Program • Protection Policy 10: Fair Housing Enforcement In recognition of the variation in Bay Area jurisdictions' housing needs and funding capacity, there are eight different tiers to determine the minimum amount of funding a jurisdiction must provide over a four-year period for each policy listed above, if that policy is selected by the jurisdiction to meet TOC Policy requirements. The tiers are based on the jurisdiction's combined 2023-2031 RHNA for very low- and low-income units. The tiers, and the associated minimum funding commitment, are shown in Table 10 below. See Appendix A.1. for a list of the jurisdictions in each Funding Tier. Page 22 of 32 1095 Table 10: Minimum 4-Year Funding per Policy by Tier Production Preservation Protection Tier Production 2. Affordable Housing Funding Preservation 1. Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing Protection 3. Legal Assistance for Tenants Protection 4. Foreclosure Assistance Production 6. Public/Community Land Trusts Preservation 5. Public/Community Land Trusts Protection 5. Rental Assistance Program Protection 10. Fair Housing Enforcement A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 C $2,000,000 $700,000 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 G $20,000,000 $6,000,000 $500,000 $750,000 Option for Local Jurisdiction Collaboratives to Meet TOC Policy Requirements MTC will allow implementation of affordable housing and commercial stabilization policies through collaboratives that involve more than one jurisdiction partnering to manage policy implementation. Implementation through a collaborative is intended to reduce administrative costs for local jurisdictions and increase efficiency of program delivery. This option may be particularly beneficial for smaller jurisdictions (those in Tiers A to D above) or medium-sized jurisdictions (those in Tiers E and F above). Implementing a policy through a collaborative does not change the minimum requirements for each participating jurisdiction. For example, a city that transfers funds to its county to administer a tenant rental assistance program must meet the funding threshold in Table 10 and require that the county operate the program in accordance with the standards in Appendix A. Target Policies MTC specifically anticipates that the policies below will benefit from collaborative implementation. However, jurisdictions may use a collaborative to implement any of the affordable housing and commercial stabilization policies, subject to MTC approval. Production: 2. Affordable Housing Funding and 6. Public/Community Land Trusts. Preservation: 1. Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing, 5. Public/Community Land Trusts, 6. Funding to Support Preservation Capacity, and 8. Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities Page 23 of 32 1096 Protection: 3. Legal Assistance for Tenants, 4. Foreclosure Assistance, 5. Rental Assistance Program, 7. Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities, and 10. Fair Housing Enforcement Commercial Stabilization: 3. Small Business and Nonprofit Financial Assistance Program Any jurisdiction intending to implement a TOC housing policy through a collaborative shall provide MTC with documentation on the roles and responsibilities for the collaborative and jurisdiction, as well as a schedule of expected funding to the collaborative. MTC may request additional information on collaboratives. Relationship to HCD's Prohousing Program The California Department of Housing and Community Development has a Prohousing Designation Program that provides incentives to jurisdictions that have policies to support increased housing production. While there are similarities between the requirements for a Prohousing Designation and the TOC Policy, there is not sufficient consistency between the policy options and other requirements for a jurisdiction that has received the Prohousing Designation from HCD to automatically meet TOC Policy requirements for affordable housing production policies. Table 11 provides information on which Prohousing Designation policies correspond to the affordable housing production policy options for the TOC Policy. If jurisdictions are currently applying for or planning to apply for HCD's Prohousing Designation, they should consider committing to policies in their Prohousing Designation application that would also achieve TOC Policy compliance. Importantly, policies adopted for the Prohousing Designation would also need to meet the minimum requirements detailed in Appendix A of the TOC Policy implementation guidance. Page 24 of 32 1097 Table 11: Overlap Between HCD Prohousing and TOC Policy Affordable Housing Production Policy Options Affordable Housing Production Policy Options for TOC Policy Policy Options for HCD Prohousing Designation Production Policy 2: Affordable Housing Funding Category 4A: Establishment of local housing trust funds Category 4E: Directed residual redevelopment funds to affordable housing. Category 4F: Development and regular (at least biennial) use of a housing subsidy pool, local or regional trust fund, or other similar funding source. Category 4G: Prioritization of local general funds for affordable housing. Production Policy 3: Affordable Housing Overlay Zones Category 1 D: Density bonus programs which exceed statutory requirements by 10 percent or more. Production Policy 4: Public Land for Affordable Housing Category 4C: A comprehensive program that complies with the Surplus Land Act (Gov. Code, § 54220 et seq.) and that makes publicly owned land available for affordable housing, or for multifamily housing projects with the highest feasible percentage of units affordable to lower income households. A qualifying program may utilize mechanisms such as land donations, land sales with significant write -downs, or below - market land leases. Production Policy 5: Ministerial Approval Category 2A: Establishment of ministerial approval processes for a variety of housing types, including single- family and multifamily housing. Production Policy 7: Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process Category 2D: Establishment of permit processes that take less than four months. Category 2E: Absence or elimination of public hearings for projects consistent with zoning and the general plan. Category 2F: Establishment of consolidated or streamlined permit processes that minimize the levels of review and approval required for projects, and that are consistent with zoning regulations and the general plan. Category 2L: Limitation on the total number of hearings for any project to three or fewer. Submitting Required Documentation For each policy a jurisdiction selects to meet the minimum number required for TOC Policy compliance, the jurisdiction must provide: • A website link to the adopted policy or relevant municipal code section. • Citations (e.g., page number or code section) for descriptions of policy details that meet the minimum standards. • The name of the agency or organization responsible for implementing the policy. Page 25 of 32 1098 • Local jurisdictions should submit all documents electronically, which can be done by providing a website URL linking to the document or uploading a copy of the document using the submission form created by MTC (currently under development). There are additional documentation requirements for some policies. These are described in more detail in Appendix A. Section 3: Parking Management Summary of TOC Policy Requirements The purpose of the TOC Policy parking management requirements is to further support reducing automobile trips and prioritizing the limited land area near transit for other shared transportation modes and active transportation. Parking management is a key complement to residential and commercial density increases that support higher transit ridership on the region's existing and planned fixed -guideway transit investments. To determine compliance with the TOC Policy, MTC will focus on a local jurisdiction's compliance with the parking standards (listed in Table 12). To support limits on off- street parking for new development, one or more additional policies or programs that address parking management must also be in place. These may be one of the policies or programs included in MTC/ABAG's Parking Policy Playbook, or another policy or program that aligns with the intent of the parking management requirement. For parking management policies or programs that are not one of those listed below, a jurisdiction should explain how the policy or program addresses parking demand management in the transit stop/station area. Parking Standards for New Residential or Commercial Development Off-street vehicle parking standards for new residential or general and neighborhood - serving commercial development (e.g., office, retail, and service businesses) must meet the applicable standards for its Transit Tier listed in Table 12, including: • No minimum automobile parking requirement in most Transit Tiers for new residential or commercial developments • For parcels on which residential development is allowed: o The applicable maximum automobile parking per dwelling unit ratio o At least one secure bicycle parking space per dwelling unit. • For parcels on which commercial development is allowed: 5 The TOC Policy does not have a requirement related to minimum parking for Tier 4 station areas. However, jurisdictions must comply with applicable state law, such as AB 2097. Page 26 of 32 1099 o The applicable maximum automobile parking per 1,000 square foot ratio o At least one secure bicycle parking space per 5,000 occupied square feet for commercial office. • Allow unbundled parking.6 • Allow shared parking between different land uses. Table 12: TOC Policy Parking Management Requirements Level of Transit Service New Residential Development New Commercial Development Tier 1: Rail stations serving regional centers (i.e., Downtown San Francisco, Downtown Oakland, and Downtown San Jose) No minimum parking requirement allowed. Parking maximum of 0.375 spaces per unit or lower. No minimum parking requirement allowed. Parking maximum of 0.25 spaces per 1,000 square feet or lower. Tier 2: Stop/station served by two or more BART lines or BART and Caltrain No minimum parking requirement allowed. Parking maximum of 0.5 spaces per unit or lower. No minimum parking requirement allowed. Parking maximum of 1.6 spaces per 1,000 square feet or lower. Tier 3: Stop/station served by one BART line, Caltrain, light rail transit, or bus rapid transit No minimum parking requirement allowed. Parking maximum of 1.0 spaces per unit or lower. No minimum parking requirement allowed. Parking maximum of 2.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet or lower. Tier 4: Commuter rail (SMART, ACE, Capitol Corridor, Valley Link) stations, Caltrain stations south of Tamien, or ferry terminals Parking maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit or lower. Parking maximum of 4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet or lower. All Tiers Minimum of 1 secure bicycle parking space per dwelling unit. Minimum of 1 secure bicycle parking space per 5,000 square feet for commercial office. The TOC Policy's off-street parking standards do not supersede other applicable requirements for parking for people with disabilities that are required by the California Building Code, or other state or federal laws, or off-street parking for deliveries. While not specified in the TOC Policy, in addition to accommodating conventional bicycles in the bicycle parking requirement, bicycle parking spaces should consider specifications that will also accommodate electric bicycles (e-bikes). 6 Unbundling parking means separating the cost of leasing a parking space from the sale or rental price of residential and commercial uses. Page 27 of 32 1100 Meeting Parking Standards Through a Parking District Standards may apply to individual projects or may be met through creation of a parking district that provides shared vehicle parking for multiple land uses within an area. For example, a specific or area plan may determine an overall total amount of new, off- street parking that may be constructed in the area. Some development projects may provide more off-street parking, while others may provide less off-street parking, or parking may be shared between multiple new uses. In such cases, the total amount of new off-street parking to be built should be equivalent to the TOC Policy's parking standards. Complementary Policies for Parking Management In addition to complying with the off-street parking standards, a jurisdiction must adopt at least one policy or program included in MTC/ABAG's Parking Policy Playbooi to address transportation demand management (TDM) and curb management in station/stop areas that complement the Policy's required parking standards: • TDM Policy for New Development: require provision and enforcement of transportation demand management (TDM). • Curb Strategy/Management: Priority curb access based on variable need. • Parking Benefit District (PBD): Invest parking revenues into a PBD to fund streetscape, safety, and TDM programs. • Demand -Responsive Pricing: Price parking according to level of convenience and demand. • Priced Parking: Adding priced parking where it used to be free. TDM and curb -management policies or programs may apply to either the stop/station area or jurisdiction -wide. Submitting Required Documentation A jurisdiction must document its current off-street parking requirements and secure bicycle parking requirements for new multifamily residential and new commercial office development in locations subject to the TOC Policy, including the citation for the municipal code or ordinance codifying such requirements. For parking districts or other types of area -wide approaches to parking requirements and management, a jurisdiction must provide the adopted plan and relevant policies and describe how it will result in creation of the same or less new off-street parking than the TOC Policy's parking management requirements, on average. For unbundled and shared parking, a local jurisdiction must document and provide citations for the adopted plans, policies, and/or municipal code or ordinance allowing Page 28 of 32 1101 unbundled and shared parking. Further detail on unbundled and shared parking is provided in the MTC/ABAG Parking Policy Playbook. A local jurisdiction must also document and provide citations for the adopted plans, policies, and/or municipal code or ordinance for one or more of the listed policies or programs from the MTC/ABAG Parking Policy Playbook that apply either to the geographic area where the TOC Policy applies or jurisdiction -wide. Available Resources for Parking Management The MTC/ABAG Parking Policy Playbook provides detailed guidance and practical tools, such as sample policy language, about how to implement policy changes related to parking, transportation demand management (TDM), and curb management. Section 4: Station Access and Circulation Summary of TOC Policy Requirements In coordination with transit agencies and other mobility service providers, community members, and other stakeholders, a jurisdiction must complete the following in all transit station areas subject to the TOC Policy: • Adopt policies and design guidelines that comply with MTC's Complete Streets Policy.' • Prioritize implementation of active transportation projects on the regional Active Transportation Network and/or any relevant Community Based Transportation Plans within the TOC station area in its capital improvement program (CIP) or other adopted plan or program that lists the jurisdiction's funding and implementation priorities. • Complete an access gap analysis and accompanying capital and/or service improvement program for station access from destinations within a 10-minute travel time (accounting for differences in travel speed and time for people who use wheelchairs or other mobility aids), and 15-minute bicycle or bus/shuttle trip either as a separate study or analysis or as part of a specific or area plan, active transportation plan, or other transportation plan or study that, at a minimum, includes the following: o The geographic area that can currently be accessed via a 10- or 15- minute trip by these modes, with particular focus on access to Equity Priority Communities and other significant origins and/or destinations. See MTC Resolution No. 4493. Page 29 of 32 1102 o Infrastructure and/or service improvements that would expand the geographic area that can be accessed via a 10- or 15-minute trip by these modes. o Incorporation of recommended improvements into a capital improvement or service plan for the local jurisdiction and/or transit agency (if applicable). • As all TOC Policy station areas are also MTC Mobility Hub locations, identify opportunities for Mobility Hub planning and implementation as described in the Mobility Hub Implementation Playbook. For transit lines where stops or stations are more closely spaced (e.g., less than one half -mile apart) such as light rail or bus rapid transit facilities, planning and implementation for Mobility Hubs may be done on a corridor -wide basis rather than for each individual stop or station. Additionally, recognizing that not all light rail or bus rapid transit stops/stations will receive enhancement treatments, locations that are transfer points for at least two different transit systems or major activity centers should be the focus. Submitting Required Documentation Complete Streets: A jurisdiction with an adopted Complete Streets (CS) Policy is considered compliant for the complete streets policy requirement. MTC has documented jurisdiction CS Policies through its One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) Program, most recently compiled in 2017. If a jurisdiction has updated its CS Policy since 2017, it should submit or include a link to the updated CS Policy. A jurisdiction submitting CS projects for regional funding must be compliant with MTC's updated Complete Streets Policy, Resolution 4493. Project Prioritization/Implementation: To demonstrate that it has prioritized implementation within the station area of active transportation projects and/or projects from MTC's Community -Based Transportation Planning Proqram, a jurisdiction must submit at least one of the following: • Capital Improvement Program with relevant projects identified. • Projects funded or submitted for funding (e.g., OBAG, ATP, etc.) within the past five years. • Other funding or implementation plans that include relevant projects. Access Gap Analysis: To demonstrate that it has completed analysis or planning with a focus on improving 10- to 15-minute access to/from the TOC station area (and connecting to Equity Priority Page 30 of 32 1103 Communities, if applicable), emphasizing capital or service improvements, a jurisdiction must submit at least one of the following: • Adopted PDA, Specific, Precise or Area plan(s) that include a station access or circulation element (submit access/circulation element only, or include link to adopted plan with specific page numbers that reference access/circulation element). • Transit agency station access plans. However, if these plans have not been completed for the TOC station area, a jurisdiction may submit: • Adopted active transportation, bicycle or pedestrian plan(s) that include recommended access improvements to/from the station area. • Applicable sections of General Plan Circulation Element that highlight specific elements that guide or inform station access improvements. Jurisdiction -wide or county -wide documents such as active transportation, bicycle, pedestrian plans or General Plan Circulation Elements may only be submitted as evidence of compliance if they include details for specific improvements within the TOC area and should be noted upon submittal. MTC staff will work with local jurisdictions to streamline the process for verifying compliance in locations with overlapping stop/station areas. Mobility Hubs: To comply with the Mobility Hub planning and implementation requirement, jurisdictions must submit any current plans or projects that enhance the TOC station area as a community anchor enabling travelers of all backgrounds and abilities to access transit and other forms of shared transportation. Enhancements may include (but are not limited to) safety improvements, bike parking, electric charging infrastructure (bikes, scooters, carshare), public realm improvements (e.g., lighting, green infrastructure), information improvements (e.g., wayfinding, real-time information) or any other active transportation access improvements within the station area. If the documents submitted to comply with the access requirements listed above contain plans for or implement these enhancements, they must be specifically noted to comply with this Mobility Hubs requirement; or List any current or prior funding application for MTC's Mobility Hub Program for the transit stop/station area. Include the date of application submission. MTC staff will work with local jurisdictions to streamline the process for verifying compliance in locations with overlapping stop/station areas. Page 31 of 32 1104 Available Resources for Station Access and Circulation Complete Streets and Active Transportation • MTC's Complete Streets webpage • MTC's Regional Active Transportation Plan webpage • MTC's Community -Based Transportation Plans webpage • Map of TOC Policy Areas and Active Transportation Network Access Gap Analyses • San Mateo Transit -Oriented Development Pedestrian Access Plan • Irvington Station Area Plan, Access & Mobility Chapter • Berkeley El Cerrito Corridor Access Plan Mobility Hubs • MTC's Mobility Hubs webpage. • MTC's Mobility Hubs Technical Assistance webpage. • Map of TOC Policy Areas and potential Mobility Hub locations Page 32 of 32 1105 Appendix A: TOC Policy Housing and Commercial Stabilization Policy Requirements I. Affordable Housing Production Policy Options To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt at least two of the affordable housing production policies listed below. A jurisdiction may meet the requirements with existing adopted policies or as needed, adopt new policies by the TOC Policy compliance deadline. At minimum, policies must apply in transit station areas that are subject to the TOC Policy. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC station area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdiction -wide policy). See Section 2 of the guidance document for more information about these requirements. Production Policy 1: Inclusionary Zoning Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Requires that 15% of units in new residential development projects above a certain number of units be deed -restricted affordable to low-income households. A lower percentage may be adopted if it can be demonstrated by a satisfactory financial feasibility analysis that a 15% requirement is not feasible. Purpose Inclusionary zoning requires new residential construction projects to contribute to a jurisdiction's affordable housing stock. Inclusionary zoning can enable jurisdictions to leverage private dollars for affordable housing, bringing affordable units online faster and in greater numbers than relying exclusively on public funding streams. Inclusionary zoning also helps ensure new affordable housing units are developed in the same neighborhoods as new market -rate development, furthering the goal of economic integration. Typically, a city or county will adopt an inclusionary zoning policy to both add more affordable homes to its inventory and ensure lower -income$ households can live in high - opportunity neighborhoods where they would otherwise be priced out. Inclusionary 8 Lower -Income: State law (Health and Safety Code, section 50079.5) defines "lower -income" as households earning less than 80% of Area Median Income (AMI). In some contexts, state and federal agencies use the term "low-income" to refer to the more specific category of households earning between 50% of AMI and 80% of AMI. The use of the term "low-income households" in MTC Resolution No. 4530 is assumed to be synonymous with the broad category of "lower -income," or all households below 80% of AMI. Where the TOC Policy or this document discuss policies serving lower -income households, jurisdictions are free to design policies that serve any income group earning less than 80% of AMI, including very low-income (30% to 50% of AMI) and extremely low-income (0% to 30% of AMI) households. MTC recognizes that different income and rent limits are imposed by different programs and it is not the intent of the TOC Policy to create new requirements. Page 1 of 51 1106 zoning can be a method to address historic patterns of exclusion and segregation by ensuring housing is available for lower -wage workers, guarding against concentrations of poverty and affluence, and making it possible for lower -income households to live in higher -resource neighborhoods. An effective inclusionary zoning policy will establish affordability requirements and standards for affordable units, as well as provide incentives and compliance alternatives for developers. Relevant State Law AB 1505 (2017) AB 1505 (2017) outlines state requirements for a jurisdiction's inclusionary zoning ordinance. The law requires jurisdictions to allow alternative means to comply with requirements, such as in -lieu fees, building affordable units off -site, or dedicating land for the construction of affordable housing. Under certain circumstances, the law also allows HCD to review a local ordinance that requires more than 15% affordable units.9 Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's inclusionary zoning policy must meet the following minimum requirements: • The policy must apply to newly constructed residential or mixed -use residential projects. The policy must apply to ownership and rental units. • The policy may exempt properties with fewer than 11 units, student housing, 100% affordable housing, senior housing, or other special housing types. • The policy must require at least 15% of units be deed -restricted affordable housing units. • The policy's affordability requirements must define affordable units as rental housing available to lower -income households earning 80% of Area Median Income (AMI) or less, and ownership housing to lower- and moderate-income10 households earning 120% of AMI or less. Jurisdictions should require deeper levels of affordability where feasible or through offering additional incentives. • The policy may require less than 15% affordable units if: o The jurisdiction provides an analysis showing that an alternative requirement is economically equivalent to the 15% standard (for example, a policy that required fewer units at a deeper affordability level, such as 10% of units affordable to households earning less than 50% of AMI). OR 9 For more information about Assembly Bill (AB) 1505 (2017) and the state legal framework governing inclusionary zoning policies, see this memorandum prepared by the Public Interest Law Project. 1°Moderate-Income: State law (Health and Safety Code, section 50093) defines "moderate -income" as households earning between 80% and 120% of AMI. Page 2of51 1107 o A financial feasibility analysis (completed within 24 months of the date that inclusionary zoning was adopted) found that a 15% requirement was not feasible. • The policy may require more than 15% affordable units." • Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing or at least 45 years for ownership housing. • Per state law, inclusionary zoning must allow for alternative means of compliance (e.g., paying in -lieu fees to support affordable housing development, building affordable units off -site, or dedicating land for the construction of affordable housing). For compliance with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction with an in -lieu fee that typically results in a payment of less than $100,000 per affordable unit, must provide a justification for why the fee will result in at least as many restricted affordable housing units as would be required of a project providing onsite units. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit: • If the inclusionary zoning policy requires less than 15% affordable units, an analysis showing economic equivalency of the alternative standard (e.g., fewer units at deeper levels of affordability) or a financial feasibility analysis showing a 15% requirement is not feasible for the jurisdiction's local market conditions. MTC will provide a spreadsheet illustrating the analysis of economic equivalency. Jurisdictions may fill in the template spreadsheet or create/commission a comparable analysis to show that the jurisdiction's requirements are comparable to the cost of providing 15% of rental units affordable to 80% of AMI and/or 15% or ownership units to 120% of AMI. • If the policy allows payment of an in -lieu fee, documentation (e.g., municipal ordinance citation or program guidelines) demonstrating that the fee will typically exceed $100,000 per required onsite affordable unit. If the in -lieu fee paid per affordable unit is typically less than $100,000, the jurisdiction must provide an analysis showing the in -lieu fee will be sufficient to produce at least as many restricted affordable housing units as the number that would have been required for onsite compliance. • A management plan for monitoring and implementation that outlines procedures for annual monitoring to ensure that residents are income -eligible, and rents are consistent with program guidelines. 11 State Law (AB 1550) allows HCD to request a feasibility study for requirements greater than 15%, but does not require that such a feasibility study be completed prior to adoption of the ordinance. Page 3 of 51 1108 Production Policy 2: Affordable Housing Funding Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Dedicated local funding for production of deed - restricted affordable housing. Purpose Dedicated, ongoing funding provided by local jurisdictions for the creation of deed - restricted affordable housing is a central piece of a comprehensive and inclusive affordable housing strategy. In addition to helping to make projects financially feasible, local financial support is a critical factor in securing outside subsidy. Without local funding, it can be difficult for projects to compete for the necessary state and federal funding. These funds are often collected into a housing trust fund or other dedicated account to be dispersed as subsidies and/or low-cost loans to developers. Effective affordable housing funding programs will pool and disperse funds, which are made available to developers through a single application process. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's affordable housing funding program must meet the following minimum requirements: • The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding12 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. • The program must establish a standard set of financing terms, including affordability requirements. The program's affordability requirements must define affordable units as rental housing available to lower -income households earning 80% of AMI or less, and ownership housing to lower- and moderate -income households earning 120% of AMI or less. Jurisdictions should incentivize deeper levels of affordability where feasible or through offering additional incentives. • Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing. 12 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years' funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. Page 4 of 51 1109 • Funding must be locally generated. Potential local sources include: o Commercial linkage fees and housing impact fees, taxes (such as an employee head tax or real estate transfer tax), local bond measures, successor agency funds, business/gross receipts tax on rental property, and general fund allocations. Jurisdictions may also include county or regional bond funds expended with the jurisdiction's participation on affordable housing projects within its boundaries. o In -kind contributions to developments in the form of fee waivers for building permit fees, impact fees, and other fees can also be counted toward the required amount of local affordable housing funding. Staff hours are not eligible for consideration. o Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a housing funding program when submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count existing funds toward the required total so long as funds are available for expenditure during the four-year planning period (anticipated to align with the OBAG cycle). o Jurisdictions that have committed affordable housing funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as the funds are used during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to a project that will be constructed during the OBAG cycle). o If a jurisdiction is also using inclusionary zoning (Production Policy 1) for the TOC Policy's production requirement, funding generated by collecting in -lieu fees from inclusionary zoning cannot be counted toward the funding minimums required for this affordable housing funding policy (Production Policy 2). If the jurisdiction has inclusionary zoning but does not use it to satisfy the TOC Policy's affordable housing production requirement, the funding generated by collecting in -lieu fees may be counted towards satisfying Production Policy 2. o Federal and state funding (such as HOME/CDBG or PLHA) that is passed through a jurisdiction is not counted as local funding. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit: • A copy of the program's financing terms. Financing terms must indicate the income limits/affordability levels and required affordability period, and the terms must identify a legal mechanism for enforcement of affordable housing requirements (e.g., deed restriction, regulatory agreement, etc.). • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements for being considered "secured." Page 5 of 51 1110 • A schedule of expected funding allocated to the program over the four-year period. MTC understands that projections of future funding may be imprecise, and the expectation is that a jurisdiction will provide a reasonable projection of future funding based on the best information available at the time of submitting compliance documentation to MTC. At the end of the four-year planning period (expected to align with the OBAG cycle), MTC will expect documentation of actual funding received by the program and invested in projects, which may differ from initial projections. Production Policy 3: Affordable Housing Overlay Zones Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Area -specific incentives, such as density bonuses and streamlined environmental review, for development projects that include at least 15% of units as deed -restricted affordable housing; exceeds any jurisdiction -wide inclusionary requirements or benefits from state density bonus. Purpose Changes to local land use law and other regulatory reforms can both enable and incentivize the construction of affordable housing. Zoning incentives can increase the cost-effectiveness of building affordable homes. An Affordable Housing Overlay Zone (AHOZ) is a general term reflecting a variety of potential approaches that provide a package of incentives to developers who include units in their projects that are affordable to lower -income households. They are called "overlay" zones because they layer on top of established base zoning regulations, offering additional benefits to projects that increase the supply of affordable homes. AHOZ incentives may include increased density, relaxed height limits, reduced parking requirements, fast -tracked permitting, and exemptions from mixed -use requirements. AHOZs are a mechanism through which cities can incentivize affordable housing development to specific zones. In addition, jurisdictions can expedite the approval and permit processes for affordable housing projects. Unlike inclusionary zoning policies that require either the building of affordable housing or the payment of an in -lieu fee, AHOZs are optional and incentive -based, offering developers key concessions in exchange for producing affordable housing. An effective AHOZ policy will provide meaningful incentives to projects that provide affordable housing and establish minimum affordability requirements at levels that reflect the jurisdiction's need. Relevant State Laws State Density Bonus Law State law (California Government Code Chapter 4.3 Density Bonuses and Other Incentives) dictates that a developer who meets certain requirements is entitled to a density bonus, including up to a 50% increase in density depending on the amount of affordable housing provided, and an 80% increase for completely affordable projects. Page 6 of 51 This law includes incentives such as reduced parking requirements and concessions for reduced setbacks and minimum square footage requirements.13 SB 35 (2017) SB 35 (2017) dictates that a developer can request a streamlined, ministerial approval process for multifamily developments which include specified levels of affordable housing in jurisdictions that have not met their prorated Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Projects that comply with the jurisdiction's objective design standards and existing zoning are exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review and public hearings. Depending on the number of units, the timeline for determining eligibility is either 60 or 90 days and the final decision must be issued between 90 and 180 days from application submittal.14 Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance Note: Production Policy 3 (Affordable Housing Overlay Zones), Production Policy 5 (Ministerial Approval), and Production Policy 7 (Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process) are related and contain overlapping requirements. As a result, jurisdictions may only count one of these policies for the purpose of TOC compliance for production policies. To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's AHOZ policy must meet the following minimum requirements: • The policy must offer incentives for projects with at least 15% affordable housing. The policy's minimum affordability requirement must exceed any jurisdiction -wide inclusionary zoning requirements. The policy could incentivize any higher proportion of affordable housing up to and including 100% (e.g., only provide incentives to 100% affordable projects). In all cases, the share of affordable units incentivized must exceed what is otherwise incentivized by state law for any given income category. • To incentivize greater shares of affordability than otherwise incentivized by State Law, the AHOZ policy must provide qualifying projects with greater development potential in the form of: o Density bonus: the policy must offset greater affordability with residential density greater than what is available under the state Density Bonus Law. o Additional "concessions" or "incentives": the policy must provide qualifying projects with at least one additional "concession" or "incentive" than what is already available under the state Density Bonus Law. Incentives or concessions could include ministerial approval, some other form of 13 For more information, including the full density bonus chart that outlines the percentage density bonus given for each level of affordability, see this guide on state Density Bonus Law prepared by Meyers Nave Legal Services. 14 For more information, see this fact sheet on Senate Bill 35 prepared by the City of San Leandro. Page 7 of 51 1112 streamlining, or modifications to other planning code requirements. Incentives and concessions must result in an actual and identifiable cost reduction for the project. • The policy's affordability requirements must define affordable units as rental housing available to lower -income households earning 80% of AMI or less, and ownership housing to lower- and moderate -income households earning 120% of AMI or less. Jurisdictions should require deeper levels of affordability where feasible or through offering additional incentives. • Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent and price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing. Production Policy 4: Public Land for Affordable Housing Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policies to prioritize the reuse of publicly owned land for affordable and mixed -income housing that go beyond existing state law, typically accompanied by prioritization of available funding for projects on these sites. Purpose High land costs can make it difficult to create new affordable housing for low- or moderate -income households, particularly in high -value, amenity -rich locations. Local jurisdictions can help overcome this obstacle by identifying public property (including surplus government agency property and tax delinquent/seized property) that can be repurposed for residential use and making it available to developers who commit to creating and maintaining ongoing affordability.15 Utilizing public land can increase feasibility for developing affordable housing. Jurisdictions may donate land; sell land at a deep discount; or transfer land using a below -market, long-term ground lease to affordable housing developers or community land trusts. Jurisdictions can also incentivize the use of public land for affordable housing through zoning, fee waivers, and/or permit streamlining. This policy tool can be used effectively in all communities and is particularly important in communities where vacant land appropriate for residential use is scarce. Effective actions to prioritize the reuse of publicly owned land for affordable housing will include creating an inventory of publicly owned sites, noticing practices aimed towards maximizing affordable housing development, and collaboration with other public agencies. 15 For more information, see the brief "Use of publicly owned property for affordable housing" prepared by Local Housing Solutions. Page 8 of 51 1113 Relevant State Law Surplus Lands Act The Surplus Lands Act (Government Code Sections 54220 — 54234) requires local agencies to make findings that property is either surplus or exempt surplus land before disposing of it. If the property is not exempt, the local agency must provide written notice to housing developers to give them the first chance to purchase and develop surplus agency -owned land for affordable housing. If one of these interested parties purchases the land, then at least 25% of units developed must be affordable. However, if 90 days pass without reaching an agreement with one of these interested parties, then the affordability requirement for whatever development occurs on the land is 15% if 10 or more residential units are developed. The Surplus Land Act also includes penalties for local agencies that violate the Act when disposing of surplus lands. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must meet the following minimum requirements for prioritizing the reuse of publicly owned land for affordable housing: • If the jurisdiction does not have an ongoing or planned public lands project, staff must demonstrate that at least one publicly owned parcel in the jurisdiction has been deemed suitable for affordable housing development. • The jurisdiction must have a program or policy in the Housing Element that describes the redevelopment of publicly owned land for affordable housing and aligns with the other requirements described below. Additionally, the jurisdiction must provide evidence of a recent, ongoing, or planned housing development project on a public land site that meets the requirements of this policy. o In the absence of a Housing Element policy/program and recent or planned public lands project, the jurisdiction must adopt a public lands policy that includes a set of principles and standards for planning, leasing, and disposing of publicly owned land, as well as a program of implementation actions. The policy must include the other requirements described below. • Eligible developments on publicly owned land must exceed the 25% affordable housing minimum required by the Surplus Lands Act, with a target of 33% affordable units. Affordability requirements must define affordable units as housing available to lower -income households earning 80% of AMI or less. Jurisdictions should require higher percentages of affordable units and/or deeper levels of affordability where feasible or through offering additional incentives. • Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing. Page 9 of 51 1114 • Building on its Housing Element sites inventory and supplementary data provided by MTC/ABAG (if needed), the jurisdiction must create a comprehensive inventory of publicly owned sites to identify opportunities to produce affordable or mixed - income housing. The site inventory must include both land that qualifies as "surplus" under the Surplus Lands Act and other currently underutilized sites owned by the jurisdiction and other public agencies (e.g., state, county, and local agencies, as well as other public entities such as school districts). • The jurisdiction must demonstrate that they have dedicated staff or consultant time for monitoring and advancing the public lands program, including periodic review and evaluation of the inventory of publicly owned sites suitable for affordable housing development, outreach to affordable housing developers, and updates to City Council. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit: • A site inventory that meets the requirements described above. • At least one of the following: o Documentation of a Housing Element policy/program for public land redevelopment that meets the standards described above, along with evidence (such as a RFQ/RFP) of a recent, ongoing, or planned housing development project on public lands that meets the standards outlined above. OR o An adopted public lands policy that meets the requirements described above. • In the absence of an ongoing or planned public lands project, evidence that the jurisdiction has at least one publicly owned land site suitable for affordable housing development. • Documentation of dedicated staff or consultant for program for monitoring and advancing program, including anticipated FTE. Production Policy 5: Ministerial Approval Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Grant ministerial approval of residential developments that include, at a minimum, 15% affordable units if projects have 11 or more units, or that exceed inclusionary or density bonus affordability requirements and do not exceed 0.5 parking spaces per unit. Purpose "Ministerial approval" means a process for development approval involving little or no subjective judgment by a public official or commission. A public agency or commission merely ensures the proposed development meets all the objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards in effect at the Page 10 of 51 1115 time the application is submitted to the local government. Developments under ministerial approval are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which eliminates the costs and time for environmental review.16 An effective ministerial approval policy will significantly reduce the turnaround time of housing projects by expediting the approval process, reduce development risk by providing more certainty in the approval process, and thereby lead to faster construction of housing with decreased carrying costs. Relevant State Laws SB 35 (2017) Jurisdictions that have not met their pro -rated Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets must offer a streamlined (ministerial) approval process for multi -family developments per SB 35. The ministerial approval process applies to infill developments that comply with existing residential and mixed -use zoning and objective design standards. Affordability requirements vary depending on the jurisdiction's progress in meeting its RHNA targets or the submittal status of its Annual Progress Report. Developments of 10 units or fewer are not subject to the affordability requirements. Furthermore, jurisdictions cannot impose parking standards on developments within 0.5 miles of transit and other circumstances. While SB 35 only applies to jurisdictions that have not met their RHNA targets and for infill projects, language from SB 35 may be helpful for jurisdictions to include in their adopted ministerial approval policy. State Density Bonus Law Government Code Chapter 4.3 Density Bonuses and Other Incentives states that eligible developments are entitled to a density bonus, including up to a 50% increase in density depending on the amount of affordable housing provided, and an 80% increase for completely affordable projects. This law includes incentives such as reduced parking requirements and concessions for reduced setbacks and minimum square footage requirements.17 Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance Note: Production Policy 3 (Affordable Housing Overlay Zones), Production Policy 5 (Ministerial Approval), and Production Policy 7 (Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process) are related and contain overlapping requirements. As a result, jurisdictions may only count one of these policies for the purpose of TOC compliance for production policies. 16 For more information, see Caltrans' overview of Chapter 34 - Exemptions to CEQA. 17 For more information, see this guide on the state Density Bonus Law prepared by Meyers Nave Legal Services, which includes the full density bonus chart that outlines the percentage density bonus given for each level of affordability. Page 11 of 51 1116 To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's ministerial approval policy must meet the following minimum requirements: • For projects with 11 or more units, the policy must do one of the following: o Grant ministerial approval where at least 15% of units are deed -restricted affordable housing units. o Grant ministerial approval for projects whose affordability share exceeds any existing local inclusionary zoning requirements and provides more affordable housing units or deeper affordability than would be required under state density bonus rules (given the bonus density obtained by the project). • The policy's affordability requirements must define affordable units as rental housing available to lower -income households earning 80% of AMI or less, and ownership housing to lower- and moderate -income households earning 120% of AMI or less. Jurisdictions should require deeper levels of affordability where feasible or through offering additional incentives. • Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing. • At minimum, jurisdictions must provide ministerial approval to projects with 11 or more units meeting the affordability standards described above. This does not preclude jurisdictions from applying ministerial approval to a broader range of projects, such as all multifamily housing regardless of affordability. • Projects eligible for ministerial review cannot include more parking than is allowed by the parking space requirements outlined in Table 12 of MTC's TOC Policy Administrative Guidance. Production Policy 6: Public/Community Land Trusts Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Investments or policies to expand the amount of land held by public- and non-profit entities such as co-operatives, community land trusts, and land banks with permanent affordability protections. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing production or preservation requirement, but not both. Purpose Community Land Trusts (CLTs) are typically nonprofit organizations that acquire and steward land on behalf of community members. They contribute to the affordable housing stock by maintaining land ownership to ensure the housing built on land they own remains affordable to future renters or buyers. Community control of land through Page 12 of 51 1117 CLTs has high potential to prevent displacement in a variety of housing markets and around transit.18, 19 Land banks are public authorities or non-profit organizations occasionally created through local ordinances to acquire, hold, manage, and sometimes redevelop property to return these properties to productive use to meet community goals, such as increasing affordable housing.20, 21 Housing cooperatives are democratically controlled corporations established to provide housing for members. Limited Equity Housing Cooperatives offer long-term affordable homeownership opportunities for low- and moderate -income households. The development of these types of cooperatives is often funded with a combination of private and public funds.22 The acquisition and rehabilitation of housing by CLTs, land banks, and cooperatives can help preserve a range of housing types, stabilize housing costs, and expand housing choice for low- and moderate -income households.23 Support for CLTs, land banks, and cooperatives not only serves as an anti -displacement measure, but also represents a place -based community development strategy for disinvested neighborhoods and communities with concentrated poverty, as jurisdictions can provide funding for these entities to acquire and rehabilitate vacant and distressed properties or maintain existing affordable housing options. This policy intends to set aside funding for CLTs, land banks, and cooperatives to remove land from the speculative market and ensure long- term affordability. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's affordable housing production funding program focused on public/community land trusts must meet the following minimum requirements: • The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding24 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The 18 See Table 1. Literature Review Summary Table in White Paper on Anti -Displacement Strategy Effectiveness (Chapple and Loukaitou-Sideris, 2021). 19 Chapple et al. 2022. Examining the Unintended Effects of Climate Change Mitigation. Institute of Governmental Studies, UC Berkeley. 20 Local Housing Solutions. Land Banks. 21 Center for Community Progress. Land Bank FAQ's. 22 California Center for Cooperative Development. Housing Co-ops. 23 Yelen, J. 2020. Preserving Affordability, Preventing Displacement. Enterprise Community Partners. 24 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years' funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding Page 13 of 51 1118 amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. • Funding must be locally generated. Some of the potential local sources include: o Commercial linkage fees and housing impact fees, taxes (such as an employee head tax or real estate transfer tax), local bond measures, successor agency funds, business/gross receipts tax on rental property, and general fund allocations. Jurisdictions may also include county or regional bond funds expended with the jurisdiction's participation on affordable housing projects within its boundaries. o In -kind contributions to developments in the form of fee waivers for building permit fees, impact fees, and other fees can also be counted toward the required amount of local affordable housing funding. Staff hours are not eligible for consideration. o Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a housing funding program when submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count existing funds toward the required total so long as funds are available for expenditure during the four-year planning period (anticipated to align with the OBAG cycle). o Jurisdictions that have committed affordable housing funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as the funds are used during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to a project that will be constructed during the OBAG cycle). o If a jurisdiction is also using inclusionary zoning (Production Policy 1) for the TOC Policy's production requirement, funding generated by collecting in -lieu fees from inclusionary zoning cannot be counted toward the funding minimums required for this affordable housing funding policy (Production Policy 2). If the jurisdiction has inclusionary zoning but does not use it to satisfy the TOC Policy's affordable housing production requirement, the funding generated by collecting in -lieu fees may be counted towards satisfying Production Policy 2. o Federal and state funding (such as HOME/CDBG or PLHA) that is passed through a jurisdiction is not counted as local funding. • The funding program must establish a standard set of financing terms, including affordability requirements. • The program's affordability requirements must define affordable units as rental housing available to lower income households earning 80% of AMI or less, and ownership housing to lower- and moderate -income households earning 120% of AMI or less. Jurisdictions should require deeper levels of affordability where can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. Page 14 of 51 1119 feasible or through offering additional incentives. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. • Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing. • The program's funds must be reserved for CLTs and/or cooperatives to use for affordable housing production, or the jurisdiction or other public entities can use the funding to acquire and hold property that will be used for production of affordable housing. • A jurisdiction whose policy meets the minimum requirements above cannot also count this policy for credit for Production Policy 2 (Affordable Housing Funding). However, if a jurisdiction establishes a funding program that meets requirements for Production Policy 2, and if this program additionally has set asides for public/community land trusts that meet the funding listed in Appendix B, then the program can also receive credit toward Production Policy 6 (Public/Community Land Trusts). For example, a Tier A jurisdiction that has a production program with $2,000,000 in secured funding during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle would receive credit for both Production Policy 1 and Production Policy 6 if the program has a set aside for CLTs of $1,000,000, as these amounts meet the $1,000,000 four-year minimum for both policies. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit: • A copy of the program's financing terms if they are not included in an ordinance or other documents establishing the program. Financing terms must indicate the income limits/affordability levels and required affordability period, and the terms must identify a legal mechanism for enforcement of affordable housing requirements (e.g., deed restriction, regulatory agreement, etc.) • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements for being considered "secured." • A schedule of expected funding allocated to the program over the four-year period. MTC understands that projections of future funding may be imprecise, and the expectation is that a jurisdiction will provide a reasonable projection of future funding based on the best information available at the time of submitting compliance documentation to MTC. At the end of the 4-year planning period (expected to align with the OBAG cycle), MTC will expect documentation of actual funding received by the program and invested in projects, which may differ from initial projections. Page 15 of 51 1120 Production Policy 7: Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Include the vested rights and five hearing limit provisions currently outlined in SB330 (2019, Skinner) without a sunset date. Purpose In some cities, towns, and counties, the process associated with obtaining approval for new construction is so time-consuming or costly that it dampens the amount of new development and adds significantly to its costs. Permit streamlining and other improvements in the regulatory environment can make cities more attractive to developers of both market -rate and affordable housing, helping to increase the housing supply over the long term and moderate price increases.25 Relevant State Law Housing Crisis Act of 2019 The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 was established by SB 330 (2019) and amended by SB 8 (2021). State law establishes vested rights through a preliminary application —a project is only subject to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when this application is submitted. State law requires timely processing of housing permits that follow existing local zoning rules (must issue written determination of consistency with objective standards within 30 days for 150 or fewer units or 60 days for more than 150 units). SB 330 requires that no more than five total hearings be allowed for residential development projects and the final decision on a residential project must be made within 90 days after certification of an EIR for a development project, or 60 days for a development project where at least 49% of the units in the development are affordable to very low or low-income households. The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 has a sunset date of January 1, 2030. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance Note: Production Policy 3 (Affordable Housing Overlay Zones), Production Policy 5 (Ministerial Approval), and Production Policy 7 (Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process) are related and contain overlapping requirements. As a result, jurisdictions may only count one of these policies for the purpose of TOC compliance for production policies. However, if a jurisdiction implements all provisions from SB 330/SB 8 without a sunset date, then the jurisdiction meets the standards required by and can claim credit for both Production Policy 7 (Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process) and Protection Policy 2 (No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes). 25 For more information, see the brief "Streamlined permitting processes" prepared by Local Housing Solutions. Page 16 of 51 1121 To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's development certainty and streamlined entitlement policy must meet the following minimum requirements: • Adopt a local ordinance with no sunset date that provides the vested rights and five hearing limit provisions from SB 330. • Adopt Protection Policy 2: No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes. If a jurisdiction does not adopt Protection Policy 2, staff must provide a detailed analysis of how the jurisdiction otherwise prevents displacement and protects tenants in areas where development certainty and streamlined approvals are available. II. Affordable Housing Preservation Policy Options To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt at least two of the affordable housing preservation policies listed below. A jurisdiction may meet the requirements with existing adopted policies or as needed, adopt new policies by the TOC Policy compliance deadline. At minimum, policies must apply in transit station areas that are subject to the TOC Policy. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC station area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdiction -wide policy). See Section 2 of the guidance document for more information about these requirements. Preservation Policy 1: Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Public investments to preserve unsubsidized housing affordable to lower- or moderate -income residents (sometimes referred to as "naturally occurring affordable housing') as permanently affordable. Purpose Most lower -income households in the Bay Area rent in the private market without any form of housing assistance. The private market properties offering rents that lower - income people can afford without subsidy are known as unsubsidized or "naturally occurring" affordable housing. Without subsidy, lower -income tenants are particularly vulnerable to rent increases as well as poorly maintained housing, and in the Bay Area's competitive housing market these properties may be targeted by investors seeking to update units and raise rents. Lower -income homeowners are also vulnerable to market pressures that can result in displacement and loss of affordable homes. Preservation programs for unsubsidized affordable housing typically engage community organizations to help identify and monitor at -risk properties while also providing funding to support rehabilitation needs as well as acquisition and conversion to long-term affordable housing. Effective public investments to preserve unsubsidized housing will have funds available to secure unsubsidized affordable housing (rental or ownership), Page 17 of 51 1122 eligibility criteria for receiving funds, regulatory restrictions to maintain affordability of preserved units, and an anti -displacement strategy for existing tenants. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's funding program to preserve unsubsidized affordable housing must meet the following minimum requirements: • The jurisdiction has at least one funding program dedicated to the preservation of existing affordable housing, where preservation of unsubsidized affordable housing is explicitly identified as an eligible use. • The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding26 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. o Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a housing preservation funding program when submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count existing funds toward the required total so long as funds are available for expenditure during the four-year planning period (anticipated to align with the OBAG cycle). o Jurisdictions that have committed affordable housing preservation funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as the funds are used during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to a project that will be acquired or rehabilitated during the OBAG cycle). • The jurisdiction has established criteria for borrower eligibility that require funding recipients to have experience with affordable housing preservation. • The program must establish a standard set of financing terms, including affordability requirements. o The average rent for all units at each property at the time of acquisition must be affordable to households earning no more than 80% of AMI. After acquisition, new residents must be income qualified and earn less than 120% of AMI, and the building must maintain an average income of no more than 80% of AMI. Existing residents of acquired buildings shall not be displaced, even if the household's income exceeds the AMI thresholds noted above. o Units acquired through the program must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent restrictions to ensure affordability. These 26 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years' funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. Page 18 of 51 1123 requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing. • Funding must be locally generated. Some of the potential local sources for funding affordable housing production include housing impact and commercial linkage fees, in -lieu fees, taxes (such as an employee head tax or real estate transfer tax), local bond measures, successor agency funds, business/gross receipts tax on rental property, and general fund allocations. Jurisdictions may also include county or regional bond funds expended with the jurisdiction's participation on preservation projects within its boundaries. Federal and state funding (such as HOME/CDBG or PLHA) that is passed through a jurisdiction is not counted as local funding. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit: • A copy of the program's financing terms. Financing terms must indicate the income limits/affordability levels and required affordability period, and the terms must identify a legal mechanism for enforcement of affordable housing requirements (e.g., deed restriction, regulatory agreement, etc.). • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements for being considered "secured." • A schedule of expected funding to be received by the fund over the 4-year period. MTC understands that projections of future funding may be imprecise, and the expectation is that a jurisdiction will provide a reasonable projection of future funding based on the best information available at the time of submitting compliance documentation to MTC. At the end of the four-year planning period (expected to align with the OBAG cycle), MTC will expect documentation of actual funding received by the program and invested in projects, which may differ from initial projections. Preservation Policy 2: Tenant/Community Opportunity to Purchase Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policies or programs that provide tenants or mission -driven nonprofits the right of first refusal to purchase a property at the market price when it is offered for sale, retaining existing residents and ensuring long-term affordability of the units by requiring resale restrictions to maintain affordability. Purpose A Tenant (or Community) Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA/COPA) policy can give tenants and nonprofits sufficient time to compete to purchase a property. TOPA/COPA policies aim to prevent displacement of lower -income communities, long-term renters, and other marginalized residents by preserving currently affordable housing and Page 19 of 51 1124 creating pathways for long-term affordability. A TOPA/COPA policy can also facilitate homeownership for tenants by creating limited equity housing cooperatives or other ownership models, enabling increased wealth building opportunities for communities who may have historically been denied access to homeownership. For these reasons, jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area have identified TOPA/COPA as key preservation tools to combat displacement.27 Effective TOPA/COPA policies will identify what housing types are subject to the policy, what organizations are qualified to purchase a property, noticing procedures for the sale of property, a consistent local funding source, a reasonable timeline to respond to the intent to sell, and an anti -displacement strategy for existing residents. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's TOPA and/or COPA policy must meet the following minimum requirements:28 • The jurisdiction can meet TOC Policy requirements with either a TOPA or COPA ordinance, or both. • The TOPA/COPA ordinance defines eligible and exempt properties. • The ordinance establishes the legal right of first refusal that gives tenants and/or nonprofits the first right to purchase a covered property. • The ordinance establishes timelines for notice of sale, offer period, time to close, and time to counter-offer under TOPA/COPA.29 Preservation Policy 3: Single -Room Occupancy (SRO) Preservation Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Limits the conversion of occupied SRO rental units to condominiums or other uses that could result in displacement of existing residents. Purpose Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units are a unique form of affordable rental housing that does not exist in all communities. SROs are generally comprised of small, furnished single rooms within multi -tenant buildings with shared kitchens and/or bathrooms. SROs do not typically require a security deposit, credit references, proof of income, or a long- term lease agreement. For these reasons, SROs have provided low-cost housing for vulnerable populations with unstable finances, very low incomes, or limited access to 27 Bay Area Housing Element Advocacy Working Group. "Leveraging the Housing Element to Advance Tenant & Community Opportunity to Purchase Policies." 28 The requirements are derived from key components of: (1) OPA Policy described by Partnership for the Bay's Future. 2022. Opportunity to Purchase Act Campaign Playbook (p.22) and (2) Public Advocates, "Key Considerations for Designing Tenant and Community Opportunity to Purchase Policies." 29 San Jose Community Opportunity to Purchase (COPA) Proposed Program Summary — January 2023 Update. Page 20 of 51 1125 credit. In some cases, SROs are used as transitional housing for people who are in between more permanent housing arrangements. In the absence of preservation policies, housing market pressures leave SRO units vulnerable to demolition or conversion to tourist hotels, condominiums, or market -rate apartments, resulting in displacement and potential homelessness for low-income SRO residents. The purpose of SRO unit conversion regulations is to ensure the retention of existing SRO units and to assist SRO tenants that will be displaced by demolition, conversion, or rehabilitation of these units. An effective SRO preservation policy will limit the number of units that can be converted, ensure housing stability for SRO tenants, and monitor at -risk properties. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To receive compliance credit for this policy, a jurisdiction must have an existing supply of SRO buildings owned by private entities other than mission -driven nonprofit organizations. Due to the heightened vulnerability of both SRO housing stock and the residents who occupy it, a jurisdiction with an adopted SRO preservation policy that applies to all at -risk SROs may receive credit for this policy even if none of the SRO building are located within TOC station areas. To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's SRO preservation policy must meet the following minimum requirements: • The policy must limit the number of SRO units approved to be converted in a given calendar year to no more than the number of equivalent rental units completed the previous calendar year. "Equivalent rental units" shall be defined as low-cost SRO units or any income -restricted housing affordable to households with incomes at 30% of AMI or less. • At the time of application for conversion of units, require applicants to produce a Tenant Relocation Assistance PIan30 spelling out tenant protections, benefits and required relocation payments for any temporarily or permanently displaced residents. • Exemptions to the conversion restrictions can be made for conversion of SRO buildings to 100% affordable units for tenants at 50% of AMI or less. However, affordable housing developers need to provide existing tenants with a first right of refusal for new units. Rents for these tenants must be based on their incomes, though rents for their units could reset at 50% of AMI upon turnover. Developers 30 Relocation Assistance Plan: A plan outlining the benefits and protections afforded to tenants to minimize displacement and support relocation, including at a minimum: no penalty for the tenant to terminate a lease, payment of tenant reasonable moving expenses, relocation assistance payments in an amount that is at least three times the monthly fair market rent of the unit that the resident is being relocated out of, and tenants that experience temporary displacement must be guaranteed protection against unreasonable rent increases upon returning to their unit. Page 21 of 51 1126 also need to produce the Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan referenced above for any temporarily or permanently displaced tenants. • If none of the at -risk SROs in a jurisdiction are located within a TOC station area, then the jurisdiction must apply this policy jurisdiction -wide. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit documentation of the presence of SRO units owned by private entities other than mission -driven nonprofit organizations that would be protected by the policy. Preservation Policy 4: Condominium Conversion Restrictions Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Require that units converted to condominiums be replaced 1:1 with comparable rental units, unless purchased by current long-term tenants or converted to permanently affordable housing with protections for existing tenants. Purpose The conversion of rental housing to condominiums presents a risk to maintaining a supply of rental housing, which typically serves a wider range of households than ownership units in condominiums. Establishing criteria for the conversion of rental housing to condominiums can help preserve much -needed rental housing stock, reduce the risk of displacement of existing tenants in rental units, and ensure continued housing stability for tenants who are displaced in the event of conversions. Effective condominium conversion policies will include restrictions on conversion, right to purchase protections and relocation assistance, and the promotion of affordable housing through comparable replacement units. Relevant State Law Subdivision Map Act The Subdivision Map Act (Gov Code 66410-66424.6) requires developers to provide notices of condominium conversion to tenants at every stage of the process. Requirements for TOC Compliance To receive compliance credit for this policy, a jurisdiction must demonstrate that condominium conversion is a salient housing issue in the jurisdiction by documenting a trend of recent conversions or by providing a detailed discussion of condominium conversions in the 6th Cycle Housing Element. To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's condominium conversion policy must meet the following minimum requirements: • Require 1-for-1 replacement of existing units with comparable rental units, when permitted by law. A program may allow or require replacement units be provided Page 22 of 51 1127 through payment of a fee in an amount approximately sufficient to provide the local share of subsidy for one income -restricted rental unit serving lower -income households (earning 80% of AMI or less) and, in no case less than $100,000 per rental unit being converted. Jurisdictions may allow the following exemptions: o Conversions where at least 90% of condominium units are purchased by current tenants. o Conversions to 100% housing units with long-term affordability restrictions for households earning 120% of AMI or less. • Provide existing tenants the first right to purchase a unit at the same price offered to the general public consistent with the Subdivision Map Act.31 • Condo conversion applications shall include a Tenant Relocation Assistance PIan32 spelling out tenant protections, benefits and required relocation payments for any temporarily or permanently displaced residents. Preservation Policy 5: Public/Community Land Trusts Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Investments or policies to expand the amount of land held by public- and non-profit entities such as co-operatives, community land trusts, and land banks with permanent affordability protections. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing production or preservation requirement, but not both. Purpose Community Land Trusts (CLTs) are typically nonprofit organizations that acquire and steward land on behalf of community members. They contribute to the affordable housing stock by maintaining land ownership to ensure the housing built on land they own remains affordable to future renters or buyers. Community control of land through CLTs has high potential to prevent displacement in a variety of housing markets and around transit.33, 34 Land banks are public authorities or non-profit organizations occasionally created through local ordinances to acquire, hold, manage, and sometimes redevelop property 31 This is a right under the Subdivision Map Act (Gov Code 66410-66424.6). 32 Relocation Assistance Plan: A plan outlining the benefits and protections afforded to tenants to minimize displacement and support relocation, including at a minimum: no penalty for the tenant to terminate a lease, payment of tenant reasonable moving expenses, relocation assistance payments in an amount that is at least three times the monthly fair market rent of the unit that the resident is being relocated out of, and tenants that experience temporary displacement must be guaranteed protection against unreasonable rent increases upon returning to their unit. 33 See Table 1. Literature Review Summary Table in White Paper on Anti -Displacement Strategy Effectiveness (Chapple and Loukaitou-Sideris, 2021). 34 Chapple et al. 2022. Examining the Unintended Effects of Climate Change Mitigation. Institute of Governmental Studies, UC Berkeley. Page 23 of 51 1128 to return these properties to productive use to meet community goals, such as increasing affordable housing.35, 36 Housing cooperatives are democratically controlled corporations established to provide housing for members. Limited Equity Housing Cooperatives offer long-term affordable homeownership opportunities for low- and moderate -income households. The development of these types of cooperatives is often funded with a combination of private and public funds.37 The acquisition and rehabilitation of housing by CLTs, land banks, and cooperatives can help preserve a range of housing types, stabilize housing costs, and expand housing choice for lower -income households.38 Support for CLTs, land banks, and cooperatives not only serves as an anti -displacement measure but also represents a place -based community development strategy for disinvested neighborhoods and communities with concentrated poverty, as jurisdictions can provide funding for these entities to acquire and rehabilitate vacant and distressed properties or maintain existing affordable housing options. This policy intends to set aside funding for CLTs, land banks, and cooperatives to remove land from the speculative market and ensure long-term affordability. Relevant State Law SB 1079 (2020): Residential Property: Foreclosure SB 1097 (2020) grants "eligible bidders" including CLTs certain rights and priorities to make bids on a foreclosed property after the initial trustee sale and potentially to purchase it as the last and highest bidder. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's affordable housing preservation funding program focused on public/community land trusts must meet the following minimum requirements: • The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding39 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. 35 Local Housing Solutions. Land Banks. 36 Center for Community Progress. Land Bank FAQ's. 37 California Center for Cooperative Development. Housing Co-ops. 38 Yelen, J. 2020. Preserving Affordability, Preventing Displacement. Enterprise Community Partners. 39 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years' funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. Page 24 of 51 1129 o Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a housing preservation funding program for CLTs when submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count existing funds toward the required total so long as funds are available for expenditure during the four-year planning period (anticipated to align with the OBAG cycle). o Jurisdictions that have committed affordable housing preservation funds for CLTs prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as the funds are used during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to a project that will be acquired or rehabilitated during the OBAG cycle). • The funding program must establish a standard set of financing terms, including affordability requirements. • The average rent for all units at each preserved property at the time of acquisition must be affordable to households earning no more than 80% of AMI. After acquisition, new residents must be income qualified and earn less than 120% of AMI, and the building must maintain an average income of no more than 80% of AMI. Existing residents of acquired buildings shall not be displaced, even if the household's income exceeds the AMI thresholds noted above. • Units acquired through the program must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing. • The program's funds must be reserved for CLTs and/or cooperatives to use for affordable housing preservation. • A jurisdiction whose policy meets the minimum requirements above cannot also count this policy for credit for Preservation Policy 1 (Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing). However, if a jurisdiction establishes a funding program that meets requirements for Preservation Policy 1, and if this program additionally has set asides for CLTs that meet the funding amounts listed in Appendix B, then the program can also receive credit Preservation Policy 5 (Public/Community Land Trusts). For example, a Tier A jurisdiction that has a preservation program with $800,000 in secured funding during the relevant four- year OBAG cycle would receive credit for both Preservation Policy 1 and Preservation Policy 5 if the program has a set aside for CLTs of $400,000, as these amounts meet the $400,000 four-year minimum for both policies. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit: Page 25 of 51 1130 • A copy of the program's financing terms if they are not included in an ordinance or other documents establishing the program. Financing terms must indicate the income limits/affordability levels and required affordability period, and the terms must identify a legal mechanism for enforcement of affordable housing requirements (e.g., deed restriction, regulatory agreement, etc.) • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements for being considered "secured." • A schedule of expected funding allocated to the program over the four-year period. MTC understands that projections of future funding may be imprecise, and the expectation is that a jurisdiction will provide a reasonable projection of future funding based on the best information available at the time of submitting compliance documentation to MTC. At the end of the 4-year planning period (expected to align with the OBAG cycle), MTC will expect documentation of actual funding received by the program and invested in projects, which may differ from initial projections. Preservation Policy 6: Funding to Support Preservation Capacity Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Dedicated local funding for capacity building or other material support for community land trusts (CLTs) or other community -based organizations (CBOs) engaged in affordable housing preservation. Purpose Capacity refers to an organization's ability to deliver a service or product. For organizations such as CBOs and CLTs which are engaged in affordable housing preservation, capacity may refer to having adequate staffing, organizational knowledge, and material or financial resources to effectively preserve affordable housing. By providing capacity funding to smaller organizations such as CBOs and CLTs, these entities are better equipped to secure properties and financing necessary to preserve affordable housing in a competitive housing market. Key features of an effective funding source to support preservation capacity include pairing capital funds for preservation with grants for capacity building, established guidelines for eligible funding recipients, and supporting developer experience through joint -venture partnerships. Effective policies to support preservation capacity will commit to multi -year funding dedicated for CBOs and CLTs. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's funding to support preservation capacity must meet the following minimum requirements: Page 26 of 51 1131 • The jurisdiction must have a dedicated funding program (with secured funding4o) that supports capacity building for CLTs and CBOs for housing preservation work. Funding must maintain project management staffing for a minimum of four years at approximately .5 FTE. • The jurisdiction must define eligibility for financial awards to CLTs and CBOs. If a jurisdiction establishes a preservation funding program that meets requirements for Preservation Policy 1 (Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing) and/or Preservation Policy 5 (Public/Community Land Trusts), the jurisdiction can use this program to also receive credit for Preservation Policy 6 (Funding to Support Preservation Capacity) if the program additionally has a set aside for capacity building that meets the requirements listed above. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit: • An explanation for how the jurisdiction determined the amount of funding necessary to maintain project management staffing for the four-year period. • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has committed funding that meets the minimum requirements described above. • A copy of the program's eligibility criteria, if they are not included in an ordinance or other documents establishing the program. Preservation Policy 7: Mobile Home Preservation Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policy or program to preserve mobile homes from conversion to other uses that may result in displacement of existing residents. Purpose Mobile home parks provide a distinct type of naturally occurring affordable housing, due to the size of mobile homes, the type of construction, and a unique dynamic where residents typically own their mobile homes but rent the lots under them from mobile home park owners. While state law extends certain protections to mobile home units, mobile home parks are increasingly being acquired by speculative investors for potential future redevelopment. Such market pressures pose displacement risks to mobile home residents, many of whom live on fixed incomes and have limited alternative affordable housing options. Accordingly, a strategy to prevent displacement and promote 4o Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years' funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. Page 27 of 51 1132 community stability for mobile home residents is to regulate and limit the conversion of mobile home parks, and support residents and community organizations in purchasing the park to preserve affordability. An effective Mobile Home Preservation policy or program will either limit conversions through zoning rules or provide significant relocation assistance for park residents in the event of a closure. Relevant State Law Mobile Home Residency Law The California Mobile Home Residency Law (California Civil Code Section 798 — 799.11) sets rules and regulations for mobile homes, specifically regulating the relationship between landlords and residents. The law states that in the case of a change of use of the park, the management must follow specific noticing requirements and appear before a local governmental board, commission, or body to request permits for a change of use. Requirements for TOC Compliance To receive compliance credit for this policy, a jurisdiction must demonstrate there is at least one mobile home park (as defined by California's Mobile Home Park Act) within the jurisdiction. Due to the heightened vulnerability of mobile home parks and the residents who occupy them, a jurisdiction with an adopted mobile home preservation policy that applies to all mobile home parks may receive credit for this policy even if none of the parks are located within TOC station areas. To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt a mobile home preservation policy that meets the minimum standards for one of the following options: 1. Establish a Mobile Home Zoning District or Overlay Zone over existing mobile home parks which limits or prohibits the redevelopment of existing parks. o A jurisdiction may allow 100% affordable housing projects to be considered in this zone, conditionally permitted and after public hearings. If a jurisdiction chooses to do this: ■ The policy's affordability requirements must define affordable units as rental housing available to lower -income households earning 80% of Area Median Income (AMI) or less, and ownership housing to lower - and moderate -income households earning 120% of AMI or less. Jurisdictions should require deeper levels of affordability where feasible or through offering additional incentives. ■ Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at Page 28 of 51 1133 least 55 years for rental housing or at least 45 years for ownership housing. • The ordinance must provide existing mobile home residents with the right to return to a unit in the new development. • At the time of application for conversion of units, applicants must be required to produce a Tenant Relocation Assistance PIan41 spelling out tenant protections, benefits and required relocation payments for any temporarily or permanently displaced residents. 2. Adopt a Mobile Home Closure Ordinance that requires relocation assistance and conditional approval after public hearings. o The ordinance must require owners to produce a Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan spelling out tenant protections, benefits and required relocation payments for any temporarily or permanently displaced residents. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit documentation of the presence of at least one mobile home park within the jurisdiction. Preservation Policy 8: Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policies, programs, or procedures designed to minimize the risk of displacement caused by substandard conditions including through local code enforcement activities. This may include proactive rental inspection programs and assistance to landlords for property improvements in exchange for anti - displacement commitments. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both. Purpose Substandard conditions and physical deterioration represent a key threat to the region's rental housing stock and unsubsidized affordable housing units. These conditions create health and safety risks for tenants and can lead to condemnation, abandonment, and/or demolition of housing units. The remediation of substandard conditions in unsubsidized affordable housing is not only necessary to preserve this housing but also represents an important anti -displacement strategy. Code enforcement programs need to ensure habitability issues and needs for substantial property repairs do not lead to the permanent displacement of tenants, which also requires maintaining housing 41 Relocation Assistance Plan: A plan outlining the benefits and protections afforded to tenants to minimize displacement and support relocation, including at a minimum: no penalty for the tenant to terminate a lease, payment of tenant reasonable moving expenses, relocation assistance payments in an amount that is at least three times the monthly fair market rent of the unit that the resident is being relocated out of, and tenants that experience temporary displacement must be guaranteed protection against unreasonable rent increases upon returning to their unit. Page 29 of 51 1134 stability for tenants during any temporary displacement necessary for repairs. Code enforcement and other programs to address substandard conditions need to be centered in an anti -displacement framework, otherwise these activities can lead to the immediate displacement of vulnerable tenants if properties are deemed uninhabitable. An effective program which prevents the loss of housing stock due to code issues provides public support to landlords and low-income homeowners to maintain their properties. Relevant State Law California Health and Safety Code (HSC) HSC Section 17920.3 provides a definition of a substandard building, which includes inadequate sanitation such as a lack of plumbing, ventilation, or heating; structural hazards such as deteriorated floors, walls, or ceilings; faulty weather protection such as defective waterproofing and windows; and so on. Section 17970 — 17972 requires that when a jurisdiction receives a complaint from a tenant, they must inspect the building, document any findings, prescribe a remedy to the property owner, and schedule a reinspection to verify the correction. Section 17980 — 17992 states that once a building is determined to be substandard, the enforcement agency of the jurisdiction cannot require the vacating of residents unless it concurrently requires expeditious demolition or repair to comply with state law. If the tenant cannot safely reside in their unit due to repair, state law requires a property owner to provide affected tenants with compensation for moving expenses; the value of property lost, stolen or damaged in the process of moving; and costs associated with connection charges imposed by utility companies for starting service. The relocation benefit also includes two months of the established fair market rent for the area as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the property owner must return the full security deposit to the tenant. Requirements for TOC Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt a policy to prevent displacement from substandard conditions that meets the minimum standards for at least one of the following options: 1. Establish an amnesty program to waive fines and fees for property owners with occupied units constructed without the proper permits in exchange for bringing the unit into compliance with health and safety codes. o Prior to making repairs, the property owner must complete a tenant habitability plan describing how they will maintain habitability for the tenant and any adjacent units while repairs are being performed. If the tenant needs to be relocated for repairs, the plan discusses how the landlord will assist with temporary relocation, which must include offering a nearby available unit at same rent (if landlord owns other properties), paying for moving expenses, and providing relocation assistance to pay for the cost of temporary housing. Page 30 of 51 1135 o As a condition of receiving amnesty for fines and fees, the property owner must agree to continue renting to the existing tenant after repairs are complete with reasonable limits on rent increases for that tenant. 2. Create a low -or no -interest loan or grant program to support low-income homeowners (including seniors and people with disabilities) with making repairs or modifications to their homes. o The program must define eligibility for receiving a loan or grant, eligible uses for funds, and minimum/maximum loan or grant amounts. o Funding recipients must be below 80% of AMI. o The minimum loan/grant amount must be at least $10,000. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit: • A template of the tenant habitability plan or some other documented requirements about the details of what must be included in such a plan, if a jurisdiction is selecting the amnesty program for unpermitted units. • The home rehabilitation program's financing terms, if a jurisdiction is selecting this option. III. Affordable Housing Protection Policy Options To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt at least two of the tenant protection/anti-displacement policies listed below. A jurisdiction may meet the requirements with existing adopted policies or as needed, adopt new policies by the TOC Policy compliance deadline. At minimum, policies must apply in transit station areas that are subject to the TOC Policy. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC station area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdiction -wide policy). See Section 2 of the guidance document for more information about these requirements. Protection Policy 1: "Just Cause" Eviction Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Defines the circumstances for evictions, such as nonpayment of rent, violation of lease terms, or permanent removal of a dwelling from the rental market, with provisions that are more protective of tenants than those established by AB 1482 (2019, Chiu). Purpose Just cause ordinances prohibit landlords from ending a tenancy or evicting a tenant without a specific reason. Just cause protections are generally intended to shield tenants from arbitrary evictions that may occur due to economic incentives in a competitive rental market, retaliation against specific tenants, or other instances in Page 31 of 51 1136 which tenants are not at fault. Accordingly, research identifies just cause eviction as a policy with high potential to prevent residential displacement.42 Though state law currently provides just cause protections for some tenants, these protections expire in 2030 and do not cover a wide range of tenancies and housing situations. Moreover, in the absence of local just cause policies and local government infrastructure to implement these protections, tenants may be unaware of their rights under AB 1482 and how to utilize them. As a result, multiple jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area and across California have adopted local just cause eviction ordinances that go beyond state law to better ensure stability for tenants. An effective just cause eviction ordinance will clearly define a limited set of recognized causes for eviction, provide protections for a wide range of tenants and most housing situations, and create processes for local implementation. Relevant State Law AB 1482 (Tenant Protection Act of 2019) While some tenants now have just cause eviction protections due to AB 1482 (the Tenant Protection Act of 2019), this law currently has a sunset of January 1, 2030. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's just cause ordinance must meet the following minimum requirements: • The ordinance must not have a sunset date. • The ordinance must require landlords to file notices of termination of tenancy with a designated local government agency, such as a rent program/board or other city department. • The ordinance must make the failure to file these notices with a designated agency an affirmative defense for a tenant in an eviction case. Additionally, the ordinance must also expand on other aspects of AB 1482 in at least one of the following ways: 1. Limit the legally recognized causes for eviction: The "at -fault" and "no-fault" just causes for eviction allowed by AB 1482 can be found in California Civil Code Section 1946.2(b)(1). If choosing this option, a jurisdiction's just cause policy must include fewer just causes for eviction or define them with greater restrictions to increase protections for tenants. 2. Expand the types of housing and tenancies covered by just cause protections: The protections from AB 1482 only apply after all tenants have lived in the unit for 12 months, or where at least one tenant has occupied the unit for 24 months. Additionally, California Civil Code Section 1946.2(e) exempts several unit 42 Chapple, K. et. al. (2022). Housing Market Interventions and Residential Mobility in the San Francisco Bay Area. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Page 32 of 51 1137 types from AB 1482 protections. If choosing this option, a jurisdiction's just cause policy must provide protections to a wider range of tenants and housing types, with the possibility of applying these protections to all renters in the jurisdiction and/or with no minimum period of tenancy to qualify. Protection Policy 2: No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Include the no net loss provisions currently outlined in SB 330 (2019, Skinner) without a sunset date. Require one-to-one replacement of units that applies the same or a deeper level of affordability, the same number of bedrooms and bathrooms, and comparable square footage to the units demolished. Provide displaced tenants with right of first refusal to rent new comparable units at the same rent as demolished units. Purpose The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 was established by SB 330 (2019) and amended by SB 8 (2021). The no net loss provisions in the Housing Crisis Act prevent development projects that require demolition of existing residential structures from reducing the overall housing stock and supply of affordable housing. These provisions create safeguards to ensure that new development increases the housing supply and maintains or improves existing levels of affordability. The Housing Crisis Act's right to return protections and relocation benefits aim to prevent permanent displacement of existing lower -income tenants by development projects that require demolition. These protections can enable lower -income tenants to maintain housing in their communities at affordable rents, which deters new development from contributing to displacement, housing instability, and homelessness for vulnerable renters. Relevant State Law Housing Crisis Act of 2019 The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 prohibits a jurisdiction from approving a housing development that requires demolition unless the project creates at least as many units as will be demolished. The project must also replace all demolished occupied or vacant "protected units," which include units deed -restricted for lower -income households within the past five years, units subject to rent control within the past five years, units occupied by lower -income households within the past five years, or units withdrawn from the rental market via Ellis Act within the past 10 years.43 The law also includes protections for existing tenants of units that will be demolished. All existing tenants must be allowed to remain until six months prior to the start of construction. Lower -income occupants are entitled to relocation benefits and a right of first refusal to rent or purchase a comparable unit in the new development at an affordable price. The amount 43 For more information on "protected units" defined by state law, see California Government Code Section 66300(d)(2)(F)(vi). Page 33 of 51 1138 of relocation assistance is defined by California Government Code Sections 7260 — 7277. The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 has a sunset date of January 1, 2030. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance Note: If a jurisdiction implements all provisions from SB 330/SB 8 without a sunset date, then the jurisdiction meets the standards required by and can claim credit for both Protection Policy 2 (No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes) and Production Policy 7 (Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process). To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's policy for no net loss and right to return must meet the following minimum requirements: • Include all the no net loss provisions in the Housing Crisis Act with no sunset date, which requires replacing all demolished units with units of equivalent size44 and replacing demolished protected units with units affordable to low-income households.45 • Include all right of return provisions in the Housing Crisis Act with no sunset date, which requires providing displaced lower -income tenants with relocation assistance and right of first refusal to a comparable unit at an affordable rent.46 Protection Policy 3: Legal Assistance for Tenants Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Investments or programs that expand access to legal assistance for tenants threatened with displacement. This could range from a "right to counsel"47 to dedicated public funding for tenant legal assistance. Purpose Many tenant protections granted by state law can only be enforced by tenants using the court system to assert their rights, as is the case for the just cause and rent stabilization protections provided by AB 1482 as well as state anti -harassment laws. However, research and advocates have documented tenants' lack of legal representation in eviction cases and disputes with landlords, while landlords are more commonly represented by attorneys. Legal representation for tenants can ensure greater fairness and due process and increase the likelihood of tenants keeping their housing. Providing legal assistance to tenants helps ensure that tenants have access to legal counsel and are better equipped to defend their rights in court. In recent years, there have been increasing efforts by cities to expand access to legal assistance for tenants facing 44 State law defines equivalent size as containing at least the same number of bedrooms as the units being replaced. 45 For more information on the affordability requirements for replacing protected units, see subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of California Government Code Section 65915. 46 For more information on relocation assistance and right of refusal provided to lower -income households, see California Government Code Section 66300(d)(2)(D). 47 "Right to counsel" extends the right to an attorney, required in criminal procedures, to tenants in eviction trials, which are civil procedures. Page 34 of 51 1139 eviction, which can promote housing stability and prevent homelessness. An effective tenant legal assistance program will include eligibility criteria, a definition of the legal services provided, dedicated funding, and outreach. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's tenant legal assistance program must meet the following minimum requirements: • The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding48 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. • The program's funding terms must define the situations in which a tenant receives legal assistance and set the eligible criteria for who receives assistance. At minimum, eligibility must include eviction and pre -eviction legal services for lower - income tenants. • A jurisdiction must contract with one or more legal services organizations to provide legal assistance and representation for cases involving eviction and other eligible tenant issues. • The jurisdiction must make information available for the public on its website regarding the legal service providers who are funded to assist residents. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit: • A copy of the program's eligibility criteria, if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program. • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has committed funding that meets the minimum requirements described above. Protection Policy 4: Foreclosure Assistance Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Provide a dedicated funding source to support owner -occupied homeowners (up to 120% of Area Median Income (AMI)) at -risk of foreclosure, including direct financial assistance (e.g., mortgage assistance, property tax delinquency, HOA dues, etc.), foreclosure prevention counseling, legal assistance, and/or outreach. 48 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years' funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. Page 35 of 51 1140 Purpose Foreclosures occur when homeowners are unable to make mortgage or other debt payments on a property and therefore must forfeit the rights to their home. Homeowners at risk of foreclosure, especially lower -income households, are also vulnerable to community displacement, homelessness, and may struggle to secure housing in the future due to foreclosure related credit issues. Accordingly, local policies providing foreclosure assistance actively seek to keep homeowners in their residence, which prevents displacement and promotes community and household stability. Foreclosure assistance activities may be administered directly by a jurisdiction, but often are administered in partnership with nonprofit organizations. An effective foreclosure assistance program will provide stable annual operating support to qualified partners to support homeowners facing foreclosure. Relevant State Laws/Programs California Homeowner Bill of Rights The California Homeowner Bill of Rights provides some protections to homeowners facing foreclosure, which focus largely on requirements for how loan servicers must act during the foreclosure process. California Mortgage Relief Program The California Mortgage Relief Program provides financial assistance for homeowners who have fallen behind on housing payments or property taxes during the COVID-19 pandemic because of COVID-related hardships. Funds will be deployed from the program until they are all allocated, with an end date projected by 2025. Foreclosure Intervention Housing Preservation Program The Foreclosure Intervention Housing Preservation Program (Health and Safety Code Sections 50720 - 50720.12) provides funds as loans or grants to eligible borrowers to acquire and rehabilitate properties at risk of foreclosure or in the foreclosure process. The program's purpose is to preserve affordable housing and promote resident or nonprofit organization ownership of residential real property. The Budget Act of 2021 appropriated $500 million through June 30, 2027, for the program. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's foreclosure assistance program must meet the following minimum requirements: • The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding49 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The 49 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years' funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as Page 36 of 51 1141 amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. • A jurisdiction must contract with one or more organizations to provide foreclosure assistance to homeowners earning up to 120% of AMI. • Foreclosure assistance activities may include tax delinquency forgiveness, emergency direct financial assistance (loans, grants, or other investment), loan modification services, legal services, foreclosure counseling, and proactive, targeted outreach to eligible households. • The jurisdiction must make information available for the public on its website regarding the foreclosure assistance providers who are funded to assist residents. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit: • A copy of the program's eligibility criteria, if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program. • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has committed funding that meets the minimum requirements described above. Protection Policy 5: Rental Assistance Program Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Provide a dedicated funding source and program for rental assistance to low-income households. Purpose Health emergencies, job loss, or other unexpected expenses disproportionately impact lower -income households, and force renters to choose between paying rent and covering other necessary life expenses. Most eviction filings result from unpaid rent totaling less than the cost of one month, according to research from Princeton University's Eviction Lab.50 For these reasons, rental assistance programs providing low-income tenants with emergency funds for rent are effective at preventing eviction and stopping displacement.51 In addition to one-time assistance to prevent eviction, some rental assistance programs provide short-term assistance (e.g., six months to one year) to help residents experiencing homelessness become rehoused and achieve stability. Effective rental assistance programs provide one-time or short-term financial support to lower -income tenants at greatest risk of experiencing eviction and homelessness. there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 5o Badger, Emily. (2019). Many Renters Who Fact Eviction Owe Less than $600. The New York Times. 51 Chapple, K. et. al. (2022). Housing Market Interventions and Residential Mobility in the San Francisco Bay Area. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Page 37 of 51 1142 Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's tenant rental assistance program must meet the following minimum requirements: • The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding52 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. • The program must define the situations in which a tenant receives rental assistance and set the eligibility criteria for who receives assistance. Assistance must serve lower -income tenants (with incomes at 80% AMI or less), and jurisdictions may decide to target specific income groups or populations deemed most at risk of displacement and/or homelessness. The jurisdiction may choose to include additional eligibility requirements, such as the type(s) of documentation required for a tenant to establish eligibility (e.g., signed self -attestation form, etc.). • Rental assistance can be distributed directly by the jurisdiction, or the jurisdiction can contract with nonprofits and/or community -based organizations to administer the funds. • The jurisdiction must make information available for the public on its website regarding the rental assistance providers who are funded to assist residents. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit: • A copy of the program's eligibility criteria, if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program. • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has committed funding that meets the minimum requirements described above. Protection Policy 6: Rent Stabilization Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Restricts annual rent increases based upon a measure of inflation or other metric, with provisions exceeding those established by AB 1482 (2019, Chiu). Purpose Rent stabilization ordinances limit annual rent increases to protect tenants from displacement. Importantly, research finds that rent stabilization policies are effective in 52 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years' funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. Page 38 of 51 1143 preventing displacement and promoting neighborhood stability, particularly when paired with condominium conversion restrictions and just cause eviction regulations.53 By decreasing renter housing cost burden over time, rent stabilization leaves tenants with more money to spend on essential needs and in the local economy. The increased stability and affordability created by rent stabilization also has positive consequences for mental and physical health as well as children's educational outcomes.54 Though state law currently caps rent increases for some tenants, these protections expire in 2030 and allow rent increases beyond what many tenants can afford.55 Moreover, in the absence of local rent stabilization ordinances and local government infrastructure to enforce them, tenants may be unaware of their rights and how to utilize them. As a result, multiple jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area and across California have adopted local rent stabilization ordinances that go beyond state law to better ensure stability for tenants. An effective rent stabilization ordinance will define a maximum annual rent increase and create mechanisms for local enforcement. Relevant State Laws Tenant Protection Act of 2019 AB 1482 (the Tenant Protection Act of 2019) limits annual rent increases to no more than 5% plus the local Consumer Price Index (a measure of the inflation rate) or 10%, whichever is lower. This law currently has a sunset of January 1, 2030. Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act Local rent stabilization ordinances must adhere to the framework established in state law by the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act. This law establishes certain parameters for the policy features of local ordinances, such as prohibiting rent stabilization on single-family homes or buildings constructed after 1995, and allowing landlords to reset rents to market rate after a tenant leaves their unit (known as "vacancy decontrol"). Local ordinances retain significant room for policy flexibility to respond to local circumstances but must meet Costa-Hawkins's standards. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's rent stabilization ordinance must meet the following minimum requirements: • The ordinance must not have a sunset date. 53 Chapple, K. et. al. (2022). Housing Market Interventions and Residential Mobility in the San Francisco Bay Area. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. 54 PolicyLink. "Rent Stabilization." Available at: httr s://www.policylink.orq/resources-tools/tools/all-in- cities/housing-anti-displacement/rent-control 55 Research shows that the 8% rent cap in place in San Jose from 1979 to 2016 had little impact on displacement, leading the city to lower its rent cap to 5% in 2016. Accordingly, the 10% cap allowed in state law may be similarly ineffective at preventing displacement. For more information see the findings in "Exploring The Effectiveness Of Tenant Protections In Silicon Valley" by the Urban Displacement Project at UC Berkeley. Page 39 of 51 1144 • The ordinance must apply to multifamily rental housing with three or more units, while adhering to the parameters of the Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act. If the jurisdiction chooses, the ordinance may apply to additional housing types, such as duplexes. o The ordinance may allow for exemptions for special housing types (e.g., deed -restricted affordable housing, student housing, assisted living facilities). • A jurisdiction must define a local enforcement mechanism (such as a rent board or administrative hearing) whereby tenants can dispute rent increases that exceed legally allowed maximums.56 • A rent stabilization ordinance must define maximum annual rent increases as one of the following: o A flat rate increase of up to 5%.57 A jurisdiction may choose to set the maximum allowable rent increase below 5% (for example, several Bay Area jurisdictions set the maximum allowable rent increase at 3%). o A rate increase linked to the local Consumer Price Index (CPI), which is a measure of inflation. A jurisdiction must set the maximum allowable rent increase no higher than 100% of CPI, or the jurisdiction could choose to set the maximum allowable rent increase at a smaller percentage of CPI. o Some combination of the two standards described above (e.g., a maximum annual rent increase limited to 60% of CPI or 5%, whichever is lower). Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit documents or regulations describing the processes for enforcing maximum allowable rent increases and deciding disputes regarding rent increases, if these processes are not described in the jurisdiction's rent stabilization ordinance. Protection Policy 7: Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policies, programs, or procedures designed to minimize the risk of displacement caused by substandard conditions including through local code enforcement activities. This may include proactive rental inspection programs and assistance to landlords for property improvements in exchange for anti - displacement commitments. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both. 56 While AB 1482 can only be enforced by state courts, local rent stabilization ordinances can provide more easily accessible processes for tenants to dispute rent increases that exceed legally allowed maximums. 57 Maximum caps higher than 5% have been found to lack effectiveness at preventing displacement in some circumstances. For more information, see UC Berkeley Urban Displacement Project. "Exploring The Effectiveness of Tenant Protections In Silicon Valley." Page 40 of 51 1145 Purpose Substandard conditions and physical deterioration represent a key threat to the region's rental housing stock and unsubsidized affordable housing units. These conditions create health and safety risks for tenants and can lead to condemnation, abandonment, and/or demolition of housing units. The remediation of substandard conditions in unsubsidized affordable housing is not only necessary to preserve this housing but also represents an important anti -displacement strategy. Code enforcement programs need to ensure habitability issues and needs for substantial property repairs do not lead to the permanent displacement of tenants, which also requires maintaining housing stability for tenants during any temporary displacement necessary for repairs. Code enforcement and other programs to address substandard conditions need to be centered in an anti -displacement framework, otherwise these activities can lead to the immediate displacement of vulnerable tenants if properties are deemed uninhabitable. An effective program which prevents displacement due to code enforcement protects tenants from displacement when renovations are mandated by code enforcement actions by requiring plans for maintaining habitability and providing public support to landlords on the condition that they provide additional tenant protections. Relevant State Law California Health and Safety Code (HSC) HSC Section 17920.3 provides a definition of a substandard building, which includes inadequate sanitation such as a lack of plumbing, ventilation, or heating; structural hazards such as deteriorated floors, walls, or ceilings; faulty weather protection such as defective waterproofing and windows; and so on. Section 17970 — 17972 requires that when a jurisdiction receives a complaint from a tenant, they must inspect the building, document any findings, prescribe a remedy to the property owner, and schedule a reinspection to verify the correction. Section 17980 — 17992 states that once a building is determined to be substandard, the enforcement agency of the jurisdiction cannot require the vacating of residents unless it concurrently requires expeditious demolition or repair to comply with state law. If the tenant cannot safely reside in their unit due to repair, state law requires a property owner to provide affected tenants with compensation for moving expenses; the value of property lost, stolen or damaged in the process of moving; and costs associated with connection charges imposed by utility companies for starting service. The relocation benefit also includes two months of the established fair market rent for the area as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the property owner must return the full security deposit to the tenant. Requirements for TOC Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt a policy to prevent displacement from substandard conditions that meets the minimum standards for at least one of the following options: Page 41 of 51 1146 1. Offer grants or interest -free loans to landlords to repair substandard or other dangerous/inadequate conditions in exchange for keeping rents affordable for 10 years or for the duration of the loan, whichever is longer. o If a tenant needs to be relocated while repairs are completed, the landlord must pay for moving expenses and temporary housing. o The landlord must also agree to continue renting to the existing tenant once repairs are complete. o Jurisdictions may set income qualifications for landlords to receive this funding. 2. Implement a rental escrow program where tenants experiencing persistent habitability issues receive rent reductions and rental payments are deposited into an escrow account until code violations are addressed. o If a tenant needs to be relocated while repairs are completed, the landlord must pay for moving expenses and temporary housing. o While rental funds are in escrow, the landlord can request access to them only for repairs, tenant relocation assistance, and other qualifying expenses. o The rental escrow program must clearly define the circumstances in which a tenant can safely withhold or reduce rent without fear of eviction. o The landlord is required to continue renting to the existing tenant after compares are complete. 3. Require landlords to complete a tenant habitability plan as part of the permitting process for repairs to address code issues. o The plan must describe how the landlord will maintain habitability for the tenant and any adjacent units while repairs are being performed. o If the tenant needs to be relocated for repairs, the plan discusses how the landlord will assist with temporary relocation, which must include offering a nearby available unit at same rent (if landlord owns other properties), paying for moving expenses, and providing relocation assistance to pay for the cost of temporary housing. Protection Policy 8: Tenant Relocation Assistance Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policy or program that provides relocation assistance (financial and/or other services) to tenants displaced through no fault of their own, with assistance exceeding that required under state law. Purpose Relocation assistance can prevent undue burden and hardship for renters in the Bay Area's high -cost housing market. The majority of Bay Area tenants are lower -income, making less than 80% of Area Median Income (AMI), while nearly one -quarter of the Page 42 of 51 1147 region's renters are extremely low-income and make less than 30% of AMI.58 Consequently, most tenants are likely to require financial assistance to regain stability if they are displaced from their current housing due to demolition, code enforcement violations, no-fault or no -cause evictions, or other circumstances outside of their control. An effective relocation assistance policy includes clear definitions of tenant eligibility and required minimum compensation from landlord. Relevant State Laws Multiple state laws govern situations that require property owners to provide tenants with relocation assistance, including the following: • Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (AB 1482) • California Government Code Sections 7260-7277 • Housing Crisis Act of 2019, established by SB 330 (2019) and amended by SB 8 (2021) • California Health and Safety Code Sections 17975-17975.10 Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's relocation assistance policy must meet the following minimum requirements: • Landlords must make relocation payments for all no -cause or no-fault evictions.59 • Jurisdictions can choose to limit assistance to lower -income tenants (those at 80% of AMI or less) or lower- and moderate -income tenants (those at 120% of AMI or less). • The amount of relocation assistance must be equal to at least three months' fair market rent, unless another law (e.g., local, state, federal) requires a higher minimum amount. Protection Policy 9: Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Restricts annual rent increases on mobile home residents based upon a measure of inflation or another metric. Purpose A mobile home rent stabilization policy can help protect the affordability and stability of mobile home communities. Mobile home parks are often a unique hybrid of rental 58 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release. 59 No-fault evictions can occur for tenants covered by just cause eviction protections under state law (i.e., AB 1482) or local ordinances, and these no-fault circumstances are defined by the terms of these laws. For tenants who are not covered by just cause eviction protections under state law or local ordinances, no -cause evictions occur when a landlord chooses not to renew an annual lease or provides a notice to terminate the tenancy that is not required to state a reason. Page 43 of 51 1148 housing and ownership housing: residents typically own their homes and rent the lots where the homes are located, which generally enables mobile homes to be purchased at much lower prices than other forms of homeownership. In some cases, a mobile home resident rents the actual mobile home, either from the mobile home owner or the mobile home park. Despite their name, mobile homes are rarely able to be moved off their lots, and so an unaffordable increase in lot rent could force the sale of the mobile home and displacement of the residents. In some communities, mobile home parks comprise a significant portion of unsubsidized affordable housing, and these neighborhoods are increasingly being acquired by speculative investors.60 Given these conditions, mobile home rent stabilization can promote longer -term community stability for mobile home residents and prevent displacement of lower -income residents who lack other housing options. An effective mobile home rent stabilization ordinance will include a limit on annual rent increases and processes for ensuring compliance with the policy. Relevant State Law SB 940 (2022) While the Mobile Home Residency Law previously exempted "new construction" from local mobile home rent stabilization laws, SB 940 (2022) limits this exemption to 15 years. Additionally, SB 940 creates a distinction between mobile home parks and mobile home spaces. For individual mobile home spaces within an existing mobile home park, "new construction" is newly constructed spaces "initially rented" after January 1, 1990. For mobile home parks, "new construction" is defined as all spaces in a newly constructed mobile home park for which the permit to operate is first issued on or after January 1, 2023. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To receive compliance credit for this policy, a jurisdiction must demonstrate there is at least one mobile home park (as defined by California's Mobile Home Park Act) within the jurisdiction. Due to the heightened vulnerability of mobile home parks and the residents who occupy them, a jurisdiction with an adopted mobile home rent stabilization policy that applies to all mobile home parks may receive credit for this policy even if none of the parks are located within TOC station areas. To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's mobile home rent stabilization ordinance must meet the following minimum requirements: • A mobile home rent stabilization ordinance must define maximum annual rent increases for both mobile home spaces (i.e., lot rent) and mobile homes as one of the following: 60 Arnold, C., Benincasa, R., and Childs, M. 2021. How the government helps investors buy mobile home parks, raise rent and evict people. National Public Radio. Page 44 of 51 1149 o A flat rate increase of up to 5%. A jurisdiction may choose to set the maximum allowable rent increase below 5%. o A rate increase linked to the local CPI, which is a measure of inflation. A jurisdiction must set the maximum allowable rent increase no higher than 100% of CPI, or the jurisdiction could choose to set the maximum allowable rent increase at a smaller percentage of CPI. o Some combination of the two standards described above (e.g., a maximum annual rent increase limited to 60% of CPI or 5%, whichever is lower). • Some form of vacancy control within constitutional limits. • A jurisdiction must define a local enforcement mechanism (such as a rent board or administrative hearing) whereby mobile home residents can dispute rent increases that exceed legally allowed maximums. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit: • Documentation of the presence of at least one mobile home park within the jurisdiction. • Documents or regulations describing the processes for enforcing maximum allowable rent increases and deciding disputes regarding rent increases, if these processes are not described in the jurisdiction's rent stabilization ordinance. Protection Policy 10: Fair Housing Enforcement Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policy, program, or investments that support fair housing testing, compliance monitoring, and enforcement. Purpose Fair housing laws aim to ensure that people have equal access to housing regardless of their race, national origin, family status, religion, sex, disability, or other characteristics that are known as "protected classes."61 Across the region, people of color, people with disabilities, and other protected classes are disproportionately represented in a number of indicators of housing need that put them at greater risk of displacement.62 Consistent enforcement of existing fair housing law is a critical strategy to overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities. Local jurisdictions can further fair housing by supporting fair housing organizations who conduct fair housing testing, investigate 61 The Fair Housing Act is a federal law passed in 1968 and amended several times thereafter that protects individuals from experiencing housing discrimination based on the following characteristics: race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, and disability. California's Fair Employment and Housing Act expands on the protected classes defined by federal law by also prohibiting housing discrimination based on the following characteristics: sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, genetic information, marital status, source of income, citizenship, primary language, and immigration status. 62 For more information on disparities in housing needs, see ABAG's Housing Needs Data Packets. Page 45 of 51 1150 complaints, and assist with filing complaints with the state and/or federal agencies who can take administrative action. In response to fair housing complaints, fair housing organizations can also provide mediation between housing providers and complainants, or file lawsuits against those found to be in violation of the law. Relevant State Laws Fair Employment and Housing Act California's Fair Employment and Housing Act prohibits those engaged in the housing business from discriminating against protected classes. The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing is responsible for enforcing state fair housing laws, which includes investigating and settling fair housing complaints. AB 686 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, established by AB 686 (2018), requires that local jurisdictions take meaningful actions that address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's fair housing enforcement policy must meet at least one of the following minimum requirements: 1. A jurisdiction contracts with one or more fair housing service providers to serve its constituents and provide fair housing enforcement, and the jurisdiction effectively advertises those services to residents.63 o The program must have secured funding that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. 2. A jurisdiction establishes a fair housing testing and enforcement program. Program staff conduct fair housing testing on a regular basis,64 investigate complaints of discrimination, provide information to tenants and landlords, and refer cases to the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing.65 63 Jurisdictions may choose to contract an organization from this list of entities that receive funding through HUD's Fair Housing Initiatives Program. For example, jurisdictions in Marin County contract with Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California. 64 In 2017, the City of Seattle conducted their own in-house civil rights testing program where housing tests were conducted by email, phone and in -person. 65 The City of Santa Barbara has a Fair Housing Enforcement Officer on staff who completes these actions. Page 46 of 51 1151 o The program must have secured funding that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. Submitting Additional Required Documentation In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements described above.66 Protection Policy 11: Tenant Anti -Harassment Protections Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policy or program that grants tenants legal protection from unreasonable, abusive, or coercive landlord behavior. Purpose Despite existing state law prohibiting landlords from using threats or intimidation for the purpose of influencing tenants to vacate a unit, landlord harassment continues to be an issue of concern and driver of informal evictions in many communities across the Bay Area. State law lacks specific language defining harassing behavior, which can make violations difficult to prove in court. As a result, multiple jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area and across California have adopted anti -harassment ordinances that go beyond state law to better ensure stability for vulnerable tenants.67 Informal evictions through tenant harassment are a persistent problem for low-income, undocumented, and/or limited English-speaking residents because these populations are especially vulnerable to landlord actions.68 Anti -harassment ordinances can reduce such displacement pressures by clarifying what constitutes harassment and enabling affected tenants as well as jurisdictions to stop harassment. Anti -harassment policies can also support habitability improvements by reducing the risk of retaliation against tenants who report habitability issues to landlords, thereby improving the quality of 66 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years' funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 67 Mercury News article from June 15, 2022, reporting on tenant harassment in Concord and the ordinance passed in response by the City Council. East Bay Times article from July 13, 2021, reporting on tenant harassment in Richmond and the ordinance passed in response by the City Council. 68 Desmond, M. (2012) Eviction and the Reproduction of Urban Poverty. AJS: 118(1) 88-133; Desmond, M. C. Gershenson, and B. Kiviat (2016) Forced Relocation and Residential Instability among Urban Renters. Social Service Review 89 (2). Greenberg, D. C. Gershenson and M. Desmond (2016) Discrimination in Evictions: Empirical Evidence and Legal Challenges. Harvard Civil Rights -Civil Liberties Law Review 51: 115-158. Page 47 of 51 1152 housing. An effective tenant anti -harassment ordinance defines prohibited harassing behaviors and mechanisms for enforcement. Relevant State Laws California Civil Code Section 1940.2 State law prohibits a landlord from using "force, willful threats, or menacing conduct" to influence a tenant to vacate a dwelling. The law also prohibits a landlord from threatening to disclose information regarding the immigration or citizenship status of a tenant. Tenants are entitled to up to $2,000 per violation if they prevail in a civil action. California Civil Code Section 1942.5 State law prohibits a landlord from retaliating against a tenant for exercising their legal rights. Landlords who violate this prohibition are liable for actual damages, attorney's fees, and punitive damages of up to $2,000 per retaliatory act. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's tenant anti -harassment ordinance must meet the following minimum requirements: • The ordinance must define harassing behaviors, which at minimum shall include behaviors prohibited by state law as well as the following: o Any behavior to prevent tenant organizing. Landlords may not impinge tenants' ability to engage in organizing activities regarding issues of common interest or concern to other tenants, including unreasonable restrictions on distributing literature to and/or meeting with other residents at properties owned by the same landlord. o Refusal to accept or acknowledge receipt of a tenant's lawful rent payment. o Requesting information or documentation relating to immigration or citizenship status, unless otherwise required by federal law. o Failing to perform repairs or maintenance or threatening to fail to perform repairs or maintenance required by contract or by state, county, or local housing, health, or safety laws. • The ordinance must state that the city attorney as well as the impacted tenant may bring a civil action or request an injunction in response to harassment. • The ordinance must establish penalties for landlords found to be in violation, including fines, attorneys' fees, and punitive damages. The ordinance shall also define a violation of the ordinance as an affirmative defense for a tenant in an eviction proceeding. • The ordinance must establish noticing requirements for landlords to provide each tenant with an information sheet outlining anti -harassment protections and any other tenant protections in the jurisdiction (e.g., rent stabilization, just cause, Page 48 of 51 1153 relocation assistance). The sheet must include links to the city website and at least one local tenant legal services organization. IV. Commercial Stabilization Policy Options Commercial Stabilization Policy 1: Small Business and Non -Profit Overlay Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Establish boundaries designated for an overlay, triggering a set of protections and benefits should development impact small businesses (including public markets) or community -serving non -profits. Purpose To prevent displacement caused by transit -oriented development, jurisdictions can protect existing small businesses and community -serving non -profits by affording protections and benefits beyond what is available jurisdiction -wide. A jurisdiction may select this policy to preserve the rich community of small businesses and non -profits located in areas that are subject to new development. An "overlay zone" is a district that superimposes additional regulations over existing zoning districts.69 A successful overlay zone offers benefits such as an operating subsidy, eviction protections, and relocation requirements. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's small business and non-profit overlay policy must meet the following minimum requirements: • Jurisdictions must define "small business" and "community -serving non-profit" to establish the minimum requirements to qualify for protections. • Offer at least one protection or benefit specific to the community and expected to prevent displacement. Commercial Stabilization Policy 2: Small Business and Non -Profit Preference Policy Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Give priority and a right of first offer to local small businesses and/or community -serving non -profits when selecting a tenant for new market -rate commercial space. Purpose Transit -oriented development has the potential to displace existing small businesses and non -profits as new development may increase commercial rent costs. This policy would require that owners or managers of applicable commercial spaces provide a preference to small businesses and/or community -serving non -profits when selecting 69 Planetizen Planopedia. "What is an Overlay District?" Page 49 of 51 1154 tenants by offering them the right of first offer. A jurisdiction would select this policy to protect their existing community of non -profits and small businesses from displacement. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's small business and non-profit preference policy must meet the following minimum requirements: • Jurisdictions must define "small business" and "community -serving non-profit" to establish the minimum requirements to qualify for preference. • Establish a preference policy that prioritizes small businesses and non -profits when selecting new tenants by offering them the right of first offer. Jurisdictions may apply such a policy on publicly -owned properties, as part of the entitlement process for a new development, as a condition of a small business support program, or in other applicable circumstances. Commercial Stabilization Policy 3: Small Business and Non -Profit Financial Assistance Program Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Dedicated funding program for any impacted small business and community -serving non -profits. Purpose As jurisdictions promote transit -oriented development in their communities, they must also take steps to prevent displacement and gentrification in these areas. By providing direct financial assistance, jurisdictions can support small businesses and non -profits through any community -wide transition that comes with new transit -oriented development. Jurisdictions may choose this policy to protect their small businesses and community -serving non -profits that enrich the fabric of their community. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's small business and non-profit financial assistance program must meet the following minimum requirements: • Fund a program that provides financial assistance to stabilize small businesses and non -profits located in the TOC station areas. The jurisdiction could choose to offer this assistance to businesses and non -profits in additional areas as well. • Provide technical assistance and up-to-date information online regarding funding opportunities and deadlines. • Define the size of a small business eligible for financial assistance. • Define a "community -serving" non-profit eligible for financial assistance. Commercial Stabilization Policy 4: Small Business Advocate Office Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Provide a single point of contact for small business owners and/or a small business alliance. Page 50 of 51 1155 Purpose A jurisdiction's small business economy is bolstered by technical assistance, educational workshops, advertising and exposure, and the development of a network of neighboring businesses. These types of support could be offered by a jurisdiction or an outside contractor and are best utilized when there is a single point of contact. A jurisdiction may choose this policy to commit to the resilience of their small business community. Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction's small business advocate office policy must meet the following minimum requirements: • Provide a single point of contact for small business owners to connect with a technical support resource. The single point of contact could be a jurisdictional staff member or an outside contractor. Outside contractors could be a staff member of the nearest Small Business Center (SBC) or Small Business Development Center (SBDC)70 In the case of an outside contractor, the jurisdiction must have dedicated staff oversight. 70 SBCs are part of the California Network of Small Business and Technical Assistance Centers, funded by CaIOSBA, while SBDCs are part of a nationwide network funded by the U.S. Small Business Administration. Page 51 of 51 1156 Appendix B: Jurisdictions by Funding Tier Table 1 lists the jurisdictions in each funding tier and the jurisdiction's required minimum four-year funding commitment for each policy selected that requires a funding commitment. Note: all Bay Area jurisdictions are listed, although not all jurisdictions have stops/station areas that are subject to the TOC Policy. Table 1: Jurisdictions by Funding Tier Jurisdiction Very Low - and Low- Income RHNA Tier Production 2 and Production 6 Preservation 1 and Preservation 5 Protection 3 and Protection 5 Protection 4 and Protection 10 Yountville 30 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Calistoga 50 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Ross 54 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Unincorporated Napa 61 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Colma 69 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Belvedere 77 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Monte Sereno 83 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Sebastopol 86 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Cotati 94 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Portola Valley 115 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Unincorporated Solano 130 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Cloverdale 141 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Woodside 142 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Atherton 148 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 St. Helena 163 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Dixon 175 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Pinole 190 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Los Altos Hills 197 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Fairfax 235 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Hillsborough 244 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Suisun City 255 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Piedmont 257 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 East Palo Alto 260 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Clayton 267 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 San Pablo 273 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 American Canyon 278 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Half Moon Bay 285 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Page 1 of 4 1157 Jurisdiction Very Low - and Low- Income RHNA Tier Production 2 and Production 6 $1,000,000 Preservation 1 and Preservation 5 $500,000 Protection 3 and Protection 5 $100,000 Protection 4 and Protection 10 $150,000 Healdsburg 299 A Tiburon 303 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Sausalito 315 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Corte Madera 336 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Benicia 339 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 San Anselmo 398 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Mill Valley 413 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Morgan Hill 413 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Oakley 440 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Larkspur 459 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Albany 486 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Brisbane 500 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Moraga 501 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 El Cerrito 526 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Hercules 542 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Martinez 551 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Orinda 587 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Windsor 607 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Rohnert Park 629 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Brentwood 634 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Emeryville 710 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Saratoga 715 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Newark 732 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Belmont 769 C $3,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Petaluma 787 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Los Altos 789 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Pittsburg 812 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Foster City 819 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Los Gatos 847 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Pacifica 848 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Pleasant Hill 892 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Novato 898 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Millbrae 906 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Lafayette 943 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Danville 1,028 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Gilroy 1,054 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Vallejo 1,059 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Page 2of4 1158 Jurisdiction Very Low - and Low- Income RHNA Tier Production 2 and Production 6 $2,000,000 Preservation 1 and Preservation 5 $700,000 Protection 3 and Protection 5 $200,000 Protection 4 and Protection 10 $300,000 Vacaville 1,081 C San Bruno 1,109 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 San Carlos 1,164 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Menlo Park 1,166 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Campbell 1,186 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Napa 1,214 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Antioch 1,248 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Fairfield 1,256 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Unincorporated San Mateo 1279 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Unincorporated Santa Clara 1305 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Richmond 1,325 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 San Rafael 1,349 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 San Leandro 1,357 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Union City 1,358 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Burlingame 1,360 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 South San Francisco 1,373 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Unincorporated Sonoma 1,608 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Hayward 1,692 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Dublin 1,710 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Unincorporated Marin 1734 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Redwood City 1,758 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Cupertino 1,880 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Santa Rosa 1,919 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Unincorporated Alameda 1,972 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Concord 2,036 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Livermore 2,075 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Daly City 2,105 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Alameda 2,239 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 San Ramon 1,359 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Palo Alto 2,452 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Walnut Creek 2,611 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Milpitas 2,655 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Page 3 of 4 1159 Jurisdiction Very Low - and Low- Income RHNA Tier Production 2 and Production 6 $4,000,000 Preservation 1 and Preservation 5 $1,200,000 Protection 3 and Protection 5 $300,000 Protection 4 and Protection 10 $450,000 Pleasanton 2,758 E San Mateo 2,800 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Unincorporated Contra Costa 3,266 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 Berkeley 3,854 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 Mountain View 4,370 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 Santa Clara 4,525 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 Sunnyvale 4,677 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 Fremont 5,736 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 Oakland 10,261 G $20,000,000 $6,000,000 $500,000 $750,000 San Jose 23,775 G $20,000,000 $6,000,000 $500,000 $750,000 San Francisco 32,881 G $20,000,000 $6,000,000 $500,000 $750,000 Page 4of4 1160 Overview of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy City Council Meeting September 17, 2024 IIt DUBLIN CALIFORNIA 1161 Background Metropolitan Transportation Commission o Planning, financing, coordinating transportation for Bay Area o 2021: MTC and ABAG Adopted Plan Bay Area 2050 • 30-yr Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy o 2022: MTC Adopted the TOC Policy • Helps Implement Plan Bay Area 2050 • "Voluntary" CMM T TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION San Francisco Bay Area art Association of top Bay Area Governments Sonoma �on" San Francisco Alame dr7 11 ateo %Santa Clara 1016 MIN PLAN BAY AREA 2050 1162 TOC Policy Goals Ell �A 1. Increase the overall housing supply by increasing the density for new residential projects. Prioritize affordable housing in transit -rich areas. 2. In areas near regional transit hubs, increase density for businesses and commercial development. 3. Prioritize bus transit, active transportation, and shared mobility (bike and OHO ped) within and to/from transit -rich areas, located more than 1/2 mile from transit stops or stations; and F.66.1 4. Support and build partnerships to create equitable transit -oriented communities within the San Francisco Bay Area. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Flexible funds to MTC for investments in roads, highways, transit, and bike and pedestrian projects. MTC distributes funds to local agencies through different Programs 1 I. Funding MTC One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) MTC Program to guide distribution of FHWA funds II City of Dublin has received I— $1.13 million in last 3 OBAG cycles OBAG 4- Requires TOC Compliance by 2026 r 1 1 Other Funding .- Alameda County Transportation Commission Comprehensive Investment Plan (CIP) may include TOC compliance requirements in the future 1 1164 Valley Link Rail Extension o Funding forValley Link tied to TOC Policy compliance o MTC commitment letter Pittsburg! Baypoint 1 • 0 ACE Existing DM Uf EMi7 Pnkenkkal Phase 1 DMU?EMU Potantkal Phaso 2 DMU EMU Station -MD Phase 1 DMUIEMU Statism TB Phase 2 I ART ExkstIng �athrnn rtna ntari 1165 CALIFORNIA TOC Policy Overview - Station Areas F4r s'•r- 410.6 West Dublin BART Station A J'. �t is* f - J f f r'-' - i)011 Bsilifle•. 1_c pH111;nity ' :S • _A ' [11111re School Dublin / Pleasanton BART Station i 44,•_;l • • rJrrewi r. DUBLIN CALIFORNIA TOC Policy Overview —TransitTier P Richmond P El Cerrito del Norte P El Cerrito Plaza =North Berkeley Downtown Berkeley P Ashby SAN FRANCISCO MEmbaC d MMontgom ®Powell ®Civic Center/UN Plaza 16th St Mission 24th St Mission Glen Park SBalboa Park e Daly City I � Colma n Francisco [Phan Bruno ©South Sa San Francisco International Airport (SFO)® P Millbrae PENINSULA TO West II IP_Oakland I `J North Concord/ Pittsburg/ Pittsburg Martinez P Bay Point© CenterLEi Concord© Pleasant Hill/Contra Costa Centre Walnut Creek P Lafayettel. Orinda P Rockridger EAST BAY MacArthu r©„ P.E.,,r„„R,ea�,,,P, 19th 12th St/Oakland City Center OAKLAND Lake Merritt `Fruity Coliseum Coliseum[x::P. \'Bay an Leandro) Fair[P Castro West Dublin/ �` Valley© Pleasanton - Hayward) (OAK) ` South Hayward© Union City© Fremont il I national Antioch Daytime Service (Every day until 9pm) 0 Red Line Oj Orange Line Y Yellow Line 0 Green Line fl Blue Line ■ OAK Airport Richmond - Millbrae Richmond - Benyessa/North San lose Antioch - SFO Intl Airport Daly City - BerryessatNorth San Jose Daly City - Dublin/Pleasanton Coliseum - Oakland Intl Airport Oakland Inter Airport SAN JOSE Dublin/ Pleasanton Warm Springs/South Fremont Milpitask P Berryessa/North San Jose • Dublin served by one BART line (Blue line) • TOC Policy Tier 3 • Tier defines required TOC policy standards DUBLIN CALIFORNIA ■ 1167 TOC Policy Overview — 4 Elements i. Density and Intensity Standards (Station Areas) 2. Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization Policies (Citywide) 3. Parking Management (Station Areas) 4. Access and Circulation (Citywide) TOC Policy Overview • Requires further analysis of impacts by staff • What constitutes compliance for MTC? — 85% compliance — MTC TOC Policy does not define compliance — MTC plans to provide technical assistance to help jurisdictions develop policies (end of 2024) — Maintain Standards with flexibility to be determined (2025) Density and Intensity Standards TOC Standards Tier 3 TOC Standard West Dublin BART Station Area (DDSP) Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station Area (Transit Station) Minimum Residential Density (units/acre) Maximum Residential Density (units/acre) Minimum Office Intensity (FAR) Maximum Office Intensity (FAR) 50 TOD 30 Retail 22 Village None 25.1 75 TOD 85 Retail None Village 15 None 2.0 TOD None .25 Retail None Village None 4.0 TOD 2.5 .80 Retail 2.0 (Retail District) 2.5 (Retail Core) Village 0.35 Affordable Housing & Commercial Stabilization City must adopt Citywide policies across the following four categories to demonstrateTOC Policy compliance: o Production (minimum of 2 out of 7 polices) o Preservation (minimum of 2 policies out of 8 polices) o Protection (minimum of 2 polices out of I I polices) o Commercial Stabilization (minimum of I policy out of 4 policies) • CALIFORNIA Production (Minimum of 2 Policies out of 7 Policies) Inclusionary Housing Public Land for Affordable Housing 15% of units for new residential developments be deed restricted for low-income households Reuse of Publicly owned land for affordable and mixed - income housing Notes / Consideration Existing Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance qualifies. (HE Program B.4: Inclusionary Zoning Regulations) City is working with Alameda County Surplus Authority to provide affordable housing at the Transit Center Site. (HE Program B.16: Publicly Owned Land) 1172 Preservation (Minimum of 2 Policies out of 8 Policies) I Condominium Conversion Restrictions Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Enforcement Activities Units converted to condominiums be replaced I:1 with comparable rental units unless purchased by current long-term tenants or converted permanently to affordable housing with tenant protections Minimize risk of displacement caused by substandard conditions, through local code enforcement activities. otes /Consideration Condominium Ordinance (DMC 8.54) to be updated to include 1:1 replacement of converted units, no funding requirement / requires staff time. Minimum funding commitment. Minor Home Improvement Grant with Alameda County provides up to $5,000/yr per household. City would need to increase funding to $ 1 0,000/yr 1 173 CALIFORNIA Protection (Minimum of 2 Policies out of 8 Policies) Policy No. Notes 1 II- 3 Just Cause Eviction Protection Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. Legal Assistance for Tenants Funding Commitment of $300,000 Foreclosure Assistance Funding Commitment of $300,000 MI 6 • 8 Rental Assistance Program Funding Commitment of $300,000 Rent Stabilization Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. Cannot be used if using Preservation Policy 8. Tenant Relocation Assistance Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 9 Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Fair Housing Enforcement No Mobile Homes in Dublin Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. Ot DUBLIN IN CALIFORNIA Tenant Anti -Harassment Protections Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 1174 Commercial Stabilization (Minimum of I Policy out of 4 Policies) Policy No. CALIFORNIA Policy Requirement Notes / Consideration Small Business Advocate Office Provide a single point of City currently provides this service contact for small business through the Economic owners/ alliance Development Department 1175 Parking Management TOC Policy —Ti Policy Parking Requirement Existing Parking Requirement - West Dublin BART Station Area (i.e., DDSP) Existing Parking Requirement - Dublin/Pleasanton Bart Station Area (i.e.,Transit Center) Min. Residential and Commercial Parking Max. Residential Parking Max. Commercial Office Parkin No Minimum Space per unit No Minimum No Maximum 2.5 Spaces per 1,000 None SF No Minimum (Per requirements of AB 2097) No Maximum None DUBLIN CALIFORNIA 1176 Access and Circulation TOC Requirement Adopt a Complete Streets Policy Prioritize Implementation of Active Transportation Projects in Station Areas Gap Analysis and Improvement Program for Station Areas Identify Mobility Hub Opportunities in Station Areas Notes / onsideration Adopted Complete Streets Policy in 2012 (Reso No. 199-12) DDSP, PDA:Transit Center Dublin Crossing, PDA:Town Ctr. CIP- Downtown: Grid Street Network and Golden Gate Dr. LAVTA Long Range Transit Plan (March 2024) City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (2023) LAVTATri-Valley Hub Network Integration Study (2021) City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (2023) Climate Action Plan Local Roadway Safety Plan VM DUBLIN 1177 CALIFORNIA Next Steps • Implement policies committed to through the Housing Element • Staff to return to City Council — Discuss policy considerations — Request budget adjustments for technical analysis and consultant services Questions VM DUBLIN CALIFORNIA 1179