Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1 Dublin Crossing GPOF Ill 4 �Ir 111 1'3 � =�, 82 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL DATE: November 5, 2013 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Cou�/n))cilmembers FROM: Joni Pattillo, City Manager �_-- ` L CITY CLERK File #400 - 20/420 -30/ 450 - 30/600 -60 SUBJECT: Dublin Crossing General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan, Zoning Ordinance Amendments, Development Agreement, and Environmental Impact Report. (PA 08 -049) Prepared by Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will consider the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (DCSP) and associated implementation actions. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is a plan for the orderly development of approximately 189 acres in the City of Dublin. The project area includes 8.7 acres owned by Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, an 8.9 acre parcel owned by NASA, and an approximately 172 acre portion of the 2,485 acre Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Camp Parks) in the center of Dublin, north of Interstate 580 and Dublin Boulevard. The Specific Plan addresses the future development of the project area, which includes demolition of the existing buildings and other improvements on the site and construction of a residential mixed -use project with up to 1,995 single- and multi - family residential units; up to 200,000 square feet of retail, office and /or commercial uses; a 30 acre Community Park; a 5 acre Neighborhood Park, and a 12 acre elementary school site to serve approximately 900 students. In addition to adopting the DCSP, amendments are proposed to the General Plan, the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, and Zoning Map to implement the Specific Plan. Certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and approval of a Development Agreement is also being considered. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time. The costs associated with processing the Dublin Crossing project are borne by the Applicant. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Conduct public hearing, deliberate, adopt Resolution Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report, adopting environmental findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program under CEQA for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan; adopt Resolution amending the General Plan and adopting the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan; waive the first reading and Introduce an Ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Amendments to create a new Chapter: 8.31 (Dublin Crossing Zoning District), rezone all properties within the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan project Page 1 of 12 ITEM NO. 6.1 area to the Dublin Crossing Zoning District, amend the Zoning Map to identify the location of the new Zoning District, amend Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses), and amend Chapter 8.104 (Site Development Review); and waive the first reading and Introduce an Ordinance approving a Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and Dublin Crossing Venture LLC relating to the Dublin Crossing Project. Submitted By Reviewed By Director of Community Development Assistant City Manager DESCRIPTION Background One of the City Council's key initiatives is to process a General Plan Amendment for private development on a portion of the Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Camp Parks). On April 15, 2003, the U.S. Army requested, and the City Council authorized, the commencement of a General Plan Amendment Study for the 189 acre project area. The project area is generally bounded by Scarlett Drive to the west, Dublin Boulevard to the south, Arnold Road to the east, and 5th Street to the north (on the Camp Parks base). The Dublin Crossing project site includes approximately 172 acres owned by the U.S. Army, an 8.7 acre site at the corner of Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road owned by the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, and an 8.9 acre site owned by NASA. The project area is shown below. Figure 1- Vicinity Map Page 2 of 12 In 2004, the City of Dublin, in partnership with the U.S. Army Reserve, engaged community members in a "Strategic Visioning Process" that examined the opportunities and constraints of future non - military development of the site, solicited ideas, and created a vision for what could be constructed. The results of this effort, and the follow -up direction from the City Council, were shared with the U.S. Army Reserve with the hope that any future development plans would incorporate the desired vision. In December 2007, the U.S. Army Reserve prepared a Notice of Availability to solicit a master developer for the Camp Parks Real Property Exchange / "Dublin Crossing" project area. On January 10, 2008, the U.S. Army Reserve and the City (and other local public agencies) participated in an "Industry Day ", where all interested developers received information about the project site, the development process, and received information on the expectations of the City as it related to development potential as well as public amenities and facilities. The City established a webpage for the Dublin Crossing project and posted documents and information for all interested parties to access. Following Industry Day, interested developers submitted proposals to the U.S. Army Reserve for consideration, and in October 2008, the U.S. Army Reserve announced the selection of SunCal Companies as the master developer. In April 2011, SunCal finalized a Real Property Exchange Agreement with the U.S. Army Reserve for the property that binds both parties to a timeline and certain requirements to allow development on the project site to proceed. Once the Exchange Agreement was signed, City Staff began pre - development meetings with SunCal. SunCal shared their draft development proposal for the property with Staff and engaged the City in a discussion of the opportunities and constraints of the site and SunCal's obligations to the U.S. Army. The Dublin Crossing land exchange and phasing of the project is unique because the land plan for this project has been dictated to a great degree by the way in which SunCal is expected to receive land from the U.S. Army. SunCal must construct certain facilities for the Army before receiving certain predetermined parcels of land for private development. Once SunCal began sharing their vision for the development of the Project Area, the City Council held several meetings where they provided feedback to Staff and the Applicant on what was being proposed. On August 16, 2011, the City Council reviewed the original 2004 vision for the Dublin Crossing project site and provided updated direction and feedback to be incorporated into future land plans. After the August 16, 2011 City Council meeting, Staff and SunCal met on a regular basis to discuss the proposed land use and circulation network as well as SunCal's plan to provide parks, open space, and amenities on the project site to address the City Council's direction. Staff and SunCal also negotiated a package of community benefits that SunCal proposed to provide in exchange for acceptance of their land plan and development proposal. These community benefits, and the associated trade -offs, were crafted into a list of Draft Development Agreement Points. On May 29, 2012, the City Council held a special meeting to review SunCal's Draft Land Plan and the Draft Development Agreement Points, which together formed SunCal's development proposal for the property. At the meeting, Staff sought input from the City Council on the Draft Land Plan and the Draft Development Agreement Points and affirmation from the City Council that the concepts illustrated and described in the two documents were acceptable. Following the May 29, 2012 meeting, Staff and SunCal continued to meet every other week to discuss Page 3 of 12 refinements to the Draft Land Plan, potential changes to the project to respond to direction provided by the City Council, to learn more about SunCal's plans for a Community Facilities District (CFD) for the project, and to review design concepts for the Community Park. On May 7, 2013, Staff presented the refined project proposal to the City Council and requested feedback on outstanding items, which at that point included the creation of a Community Facilities District to fund the project infrastructure, the size and location of the project parks, construction of the parks, and feedback on the Draft Development Agreement Points. The City Council reviewed several questions posed by Staff and provided direction to Staff and SunCal on these key issues. The City Council accepted the Development Agreement Points at a subsequent meeting on June 18, 2013. With these "big picture" items resolved, the Draft Specific Plan and accompanying Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) were completed based on the City Council direction. Planning Commission Recommendations On July 9, 2013, a Study Session was held with the Planning Commission to review the Draft Specific Plan and to receive comments on the Draft EIR, which had been circulated for public review from June 24, 2013 to August 8, 2013 (45 days). At this meeting, the Planning Commission provided input on a variety of topic areas including safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular circulation through and around the project area, ensuring adequate parking to serve the new neighborhoods, creating a memorable streetscape and project gateways — especially along Dublin Boulevard, providing diverse development opportunities, and creating a strong project focal point at Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road. The meeting minutes are included as Attachment 1 to this Staff Report. After the Planning Commission Study Session and the close of the Draft EIR comment period, Staff made modifications to the Draft Specific Plan, including adding Circulation Policy 4.25, which addresses the need to minimize the impacts of overflow parking from BART into the project area so that it does not become a burden to residents and a problem that the City will need to manage. Other minor modifications were made to the Draft Specific Plan including streamlining and consolidating sections. The Draft Specific Plan was also edited to further clarify the development standards for the various use types and to ensure that the process for considering Subdivision Maps and Site Development Review applications in the project area is consistent with the City's existing practices. On October 22, 2013, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Dublin Crossing project. After a discussion of the project's merits and comments from the Commissioners, the Planning Commission adopted four Resolutions recommending approval of the project to the City Council. The October 22, 2013 draft meeting minutes are included as Attachment 2 to the Staff Report and Planning Commission Resolutions 13 -32, 13 -33, 13 -34, and 13 -35 (without attachments) are included as Attachment 3. ANALYSIS Specific Plan Overview The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is intended to provide a comprehensive vision for the development of the project area in five development phases over the next 10 to 15 years. The Specific Plan has been crafted to respond to the feedback and direction provided by the City Council over the past two years. Page 4 of 12 It is a plan for the orderly development of approximately 189 acres, which includes 8.7 acres owned by Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, an 8.9 acre parcel owned by NASA, and a 172 -acre portion of the 2,485 -acre Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Camp Parks). The Specific Plan addresses the future development of the project area, which includes demolition of the existing buildings and other improvements on the site and construction of a residential mixed -use project with up to 1,995 single- and multi - family residential units; up to 200,000 square feet of retail, office and /or commercial uses; a 30 acre Community Park; a 5 acre Neighborhood Park, and a 12 acre elementary school site to serve up to 900 students. The Specific Plan document is divided into the following sections: 1. Introduction 2. Land Use and Development Standards 3. Design Guidelines 4. Circulation and Streetscape Design 5. Infrastructure and Public Services 6. Public Realm (Parks, Open Space, Public Facilities) 7. Administration, Implementation and Financing The main sections of the document are described in more detail below, and the Final Specific Plan is included as Exhibit A to Attachment 4 of this Staff Report. Chapter 1: Introduction This chapter establishes the principles and objectives of the Specific Plan, the planning process, the area's setting and constraints, and its relationship to existing plans and policies. Chapter 2: Land Use and Development Standards This chapter explains the conceptual land use plan for the Specific Plan area; identifies land use policies, and defines the land use designations. This chapter also describes the roadway network and the proposed development phasing (based on the SunCal's agreement with the U.S. Army), which greatly influences the land plan. Table 1 in this Staff Report describes the Specific Plan Land Use Districts, the total net acreage for each district, the development density permitted, and the total development potential allowed. The Conceptual Land Use Plan illustrates the location of each land use category in the project area (Attachment 5) Development standards for each land use designation and residential product type are also described. For instance, the DC — Medium Density Residential land use district allows for a variety of residential product types, including single - family detached homes and townhomes. Therefore, the Specific Plan includes development standards for detached single - family homes and attached townhomes, both of which are permitted in that land use district. Table 1: Land Use Summary Specific Plan Total Permitted Density Total Residential Total Commercial Land Use District Net Acreage Development Development Potential Potential Dublin Crossing Medium 41.9 6.0 -14.0 units /net acre Density Residential (DC MDR) Up to 1,995 dwelling units n/a Dublin Crossing Medium- 46.5 14.1 -25 units /net acre High Density Residential Page 5 of 12 Specific Plan Total Permitted Density Total Residential Total Commercial Land Use District Net Acreage Development Development Potential Potential (DC M -HDR) Mixed Use (MU) — 13.2 20.1 -60 units /net acre includes 5 acres of 0.25 to 1.0 FAR Neighborhood Park General Commercial /DC 9.1 Medium -High Density 14.1 -25 units /net acre 75,000 to 200,000 Residential (GC /DC M- 0.25 to 1.0 FAR gross square feet HDR) General Commercial /DC 9.9 20.1 -60 units /net acre High Density Residential 0.25 to 1.0 FAR (GC /DC HDR) School (S) 12 6.0 -14.0 units /net acre n/a Park (P) 30 n/a n/a n/a Open Space (OS) 2.6 n/a n/a n/a Roadways, Utilities, and 23.8 n/a n/a n/a other Infrastructure Total Project Area 189 acres Chapter 3: Design Guidelines This chapter explains design concepts and establishes design policies and design guidelines for development in the Specific Plan area. While development standards are requirements that must be met, design guidelines have more flexibility and are encouraged /discouraged rather than required /prohibited. The design guidelines are intended to be used in conjunction with the more quantitative development standards noted in the previous section. Section 3.1 (General Design Guidelines) apply to all building types (residential, commercial, or public facilities) and provides direction on a variety of design issues ranging from building articulation and massing to site lighting. Section 3.2 (Residential Design Guidelines) contains additional guidelines that are specific to both single- and multi - family residential structures. Section 3.4 (Commercial and Mixed Use Design Guidelines) contains additional guidelines that apply to commercial and mixed -use projects. Chapter 4: Circulation and Streetscape Design This chapter explains the circulation and streetscape design in the Specific Plan area, describes the roadway hierarchy and proposed public right -of -way mobility plans for all modes of transportation including transit, pedestrians and bicycles, and contains design policies for the circulation network. The chapter also contains design concepts for the Specific Plan area's main project entries and details on future street landscaping and streetscape amenities. Chapter 5: Infrastructure and Public Services This chapter describes the plan for infrastructure and utility needs, including potable water, recycled water, sewer, and storm water drainage and detention. Chapter 6: Public Realm (Parks, Open Space, Public Facilities) This chapter identifies the goals and design concepts for the community and neighborhood park, trails and bikeways within the parks; and describes public facilities anticipated within the Specific Plan area. Page 6 of 12 Chapter 7: Administration, Implementation, and Financing This chapter discusses the development review procedures by the City of Dublin and other relevant permitting agencies applicable to the Specific Plan. Implementation of the proposed land uses shall be through a tiered process as outlined in this chapter. A process for amendments to the Specific Plan is also discussed. Additionally, financing sources, maintenance responsibilities, and costs are identified for major infrastructure improvements. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS Several amendments to the General Plan are required in order for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, as drafted, to be consistent with all the elements of the General Plan. One of the main amendments to the General Plan is to change the land use designation for the project area from "Public Lands" to a new "Dublin Crossing" land use designation. The boundaries of the new land use designation shall be contiguous with the project area boundary shown in the Specific Plan, and the maximum development potential shall be as described in the Specific Plan. Figure 1 -1 (General Plan Land Use Map) shall be amended accordingly. Another key amendment is to add the Dublin Crossing Planning Area as a new planning area in the General Plan. Currently there are three planning areas in the City: the Primary Planning Area, Eastern Extended Planning Area, and Western Extended Planning Area. The General Plan needs to be amended throughout to reference the new Dublin Crossing Planning Area, where appropriate. Sections were also added to the various elements of the General Plan to refer to the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. A summary of the exact text amendments proposed to the General Plan, shown in strikethrough (deletions) and underline (additions) is included as Attachment 6 to this Staff Report. The Resolution adopting the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan and related General Plan Amendments is included as Attachment 4 to this Staff Report. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS In addition to providing a guiding vision and policies for development in the project area, the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan will also serve as the Zoning District for the project area. New Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.31 (Dublin Crossing Zoning District) identifies the permitted uses and development standards for properties in the zoning district by referring back to Sections 2.6 and 2.7 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan itself. If these sections of the Specific Plan are amended in the future, they will need to be accompanied by a Zoning Ordinance Amendment, since these sections serve as the zoning standards for the Zoning District. For any use and /or development standard that is not directly addressed in the Specific Plan, the regulations of the closest zoning district in the Zoning Ordinance shall apply. One of the implementation actions of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is to rezone the property in the Specific Plan area with this single zoning district to streamline review and approval of new development in the project area. By creating a new zoning designation that refers to the permitted land uses and development standards contained in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, future development applications need to be in compliance with the Specific Plan. If a development proposal is in conformance with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, the only planning approval needed is for Site Development Review, and a Subdivision Map, where appropriate. The proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments are as follows: Page 7 of 12 1. Create a new zoning district and a new Chapter in the Zoning Ordinance: Chapter 8.31 Dublin Crossing Zoning District 2. Rezone property in the project area to the Dublin Crossing Zoning District (this includes properties identified by Assessor Parcel Numbers 986- 0001 - 001 -15 (partial), 986 -0034- 002-00, and Assessor Parcel Number 986- 0034 - 006 -00 3. Amend the Zoning Map to show the location of the Dublin Crossing Zoning District; and 4. Make minor amendments to Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) and Chapter 8.104 (Site Development Review) to reflect the existence of the new Chapter 8.31 (Dublin Crossing Zoning District). The Draft Ordinance is included as Attachment 7 to this staff report. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT The Applicant requested a Development Agreement for the proposed project. The basic terms of the Development Agreement have been reviewed by the City Council at several different meetings over the course of the past two years. The Draft Development Agreement Points were supported by the City Council at the meeting on June 18, 2013 (Attachment 8), and those Draft Points were used as the basis to craft the proposed Development Agreement. The Development Agreement describes the timing of various financial contributions, responsibilities for infrastructure improvements, timing for the delivery of parkland, the parameters of the potential formation of a Community Facilities District (CFD) and possible future bond sale for the project area, and triggers for circulation network improvements. The terms of the Development Agreement closely follow the Draft Points that the City Council reviewed. However, there are a few key topic areas where, as negotiations on the precise Development Agreement language took place between the Applicant and City Staff, the resulting Development Agreement terms vary from the Draft Points. Table 2 provides a comparison of the key deal points that are different between what the City Council reviewed on June 18, 2013 and the key terms of the Development Agreement as written. Table 2: Development Aareement terms Item June 18, 2013 Deal Points Proposed Development Agreement Timing of $18.7M Community Benefit Payment to $18.7M Community Benefit Payment to Community be received over time: be received over time: Benefit Payment $5M at 12 months after project approval $10M at 24 months after project approval $5M at 30 months after project approval $5M at 48 months after project approval $5M at 48 months after project approval $2.5M at Phase 4 of project $2.5M at Phase 4 of project $1.2M at Phase 5 of project $1.21M at Phase 5 of project Use of Use of funds restricted to municipally Unrestricted Community owned capital projects so that the funds Benefit Payment are CFD reimbursable /fundable Park Construction Not included in the CFD as a Included in the CFD Fee reimbursable item Iron Horse Bridge Not included in the CFD as a Included in the CFD reimbursable item The Development Agreement also establishes that, if a CFD is formed, the Special Taxes collected on each residential unit will increase 2% per year for the life of the CFD. While an annual escalator to CFD Special Taxes is not uncommon, it is important to understand the Page 8 of 12 impact of the increase, given the possibility of a fluctuating real estate market. In an environment in which property values increase each year, total ad valorem taxes (1% of assessed value) will increase along with CFD Special Taxes. However, should property values decline during the life of the CFD, ad valorem taxes would decrease, while CFD Special Taxes would continue to increase by 2% per year. For the City Council's reference, Table 3 shows the City of Dublin's assessed valuation of residential property for the last fifteen fiscal years: Table 3: Averaae Assessed Value. Detached Sinale - Familv Residence: Fiscal Year Parcel Count Average Assessed Value Change From Prior Year 1997 -98 5,000 $172,034 1998 -99 5,194 $185,275 8% 1999 -00 5,237 $199,513 8% 2000 -01 5,500 $222,992 12% 2001 -02 6,235 $273,213 23% 2002 -03 6,622 $307,355 12% 2003 -04 6,918 $340,680 11% 2004 -05 7,048 $368,668 8% 2005 -06 7,524 $429,553 17% 2006 -07 7,746 $484,732 13% 2007 -08 7,870 $513,331 6% 2008 -09 8,021 $508,106 _1% 2009 -10 8,153 $481,635 -5% 2010 -11 8,289 $479,796 0% 2011 -13 8,428 $490,084 2% 2012 -13 8,635 $496,519 1% 2013 -14 9,169 $535,035 8% The Draft Ordinance approving the Development Agreement, with the Development Agreement as Exhibit A, is included as Attachment 9 to this Staff Report. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared to address potential environmental impacts of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan EIR (SCH# 2012062009) was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Draft EIR was released for public review for a 45 -day period, from June 24, 2013 to August 8, 2013. Comments were received from 14 public agencies and interested parties. The comment letters, along with the City's response to those comments, are contained in the Final EIR. The Final EIR is included as Exhibit A to Attachment 10 of this Staff Report. As required by CEQA, the Final EIR (that includes the Response to Comments) was sent directly to those agencies that provided comments on the Draft EIR. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan EIR (comprised of the Draft EIR and Final EIR) is available for review at City Hall Page 9 of 12 during normal business hours. The documents are also posted on the City's website on a page devoted to the Dublin Crossing /Camp Parks Exchange project. After the EIR comment period closed, the City received additional comment letters related to the environmental impacts of the proposed project and a request to extend the comment period for the Draft EIR. The additional comment letters came from Angela Rex, a wildlife biologist, Jeff Miller with the Alameda Creek Alliance, raising concerns about the impacts of the proposed project on burrowing owls, which are a wildlife species known to be present in the Project Area. Erik Alm with CalTrans submitted questions about turning diagrams, and Scott Littlehale with the Carpenters Local Union 713 submitted a letter of interest regarding the Development Agreement. All of the comment letters received after the Final EIR had been published are included in Attachment 11. California burrowing owls are identified as a California Species of Special Concern by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. This means that they are not endangered or threatened, but the agency is monitoring their populations in an attempt to keep them from becoming threatened or endangered. The Biological Report for the Dublin Crossing EIR, prepared by consultants Cardno Entrix (and peer reviewed by the City's environmental consultants RBF) included site surveys that were completed in March 2012. During the site surveys, several pairs and individual burrowing owls were observed within the project area. Therefore, the Draft Dublin Crossing EIR identified the following environmental impact related to burrowing owls: Impact 3.3 -3: Several California burrowing owl pairs have been documented within the project area, including during the winter and breeding season. Due to the security fencing that surrounds Camp Parks, low human use, and maintenance activities, the project area provides suitable breeding, foraging and wintering habitat for the California burrowing owl. Implementation of the proposed project could result in the displacement of burrowing owls during construction activities, and once completed, the proposed project could result in the removal of suitable burrowing owl (breeding and wintering) habitat. Permanent loss of occupied burrow(s) and habitat would be considered a potentially significant impact. The California State Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) is the agency that is responsible for stewardship of California Species of Special Concern is the permitting agency for development that will have impacts to wildlife identified as of special concern. As a result of the environmental impact identified above, the Final EIR contains the following Mitigation Measure, which will be implemented in concert with development in the project area: Mitigation Measure 3.3 -3a: Conduct a Burrowing Owl Survey and Impact Assessment. The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a California burrowing owl take avoidance surveys 14 days prior to ground disturbing activities and impact following the 2012 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012) or as updated at the time of the implementation of the proposed project. If no owls are found during this first survey, a final survey shall be conducted within 48 -hours prior to ground disturbance to confirm that burrowing owls are still absent. If ground disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 14 days after the initial take avoidance survey, the project area shall be resurveyed including the final survey within 48 -hours of disturbance. The report(s) shall be submitted to California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) as indicated in the CDFW 2012 Staff Report. If it is determined that project activities may result in impacts to nesting, occupied, and satellite burrows and /or burrowing owl habitat, the project applicant shall consult with the CDFW. More specifically, if the surveys identify breeding or wintering burrowing Page 10 of 12 owls on or adjacent to the project area, occupied burrows cannot be disturbed and shall be provided with protective buffers. Where avoidance is not feasible during the non - breeding season, a site specific exclusion plan (i.e. a plan that considers the type and extent of the proposed activity, the duration and timing of the activity, the sensitivity and habituation of the owls, and the dissimilarity of the proposed activity with background activities) shall be implemented to encourage the owls to move away from the work area prior to construction and to minimize the potential to affect the reproductive success of the owls. The exclusion plan shall be subject to the CDFW approval and monitoring requirements. Compensatory mitigation could also be required by the CDFW as part of the approval of an exclusion plan. Mitigation may include the permanent protection of habitat at a nearby off -site location acceptable to the CDFW. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce impacts to the California burrowing owl to a less than significant level in accordance with the CEQA standards of significance and the requirements of the California State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Therefore, no changes are proposed to the Final EIR. Mr. Miller also submitted a letter requesting that the comment period for the Draft EIR be re- opened. The City's response to this request is also included in Attachment 11. The comment letter from CalTrans requested additional technical details regarding turning diagrams for all street intersections that were studied in the Draft EIR. The City's Traffic Engineer responded directly to CalTrans and explained where the information Caltrans was looking for could be found in the Final EIR. The comment letter from Mr. Littlehale noted his interested in reviewing the Development Agreement to see how the project would be addressing the provision of affordable housing. A notice of the City Council meeting was sent to Mr. Littlehale along with information on where he could obtain a copy of the City Council Staff Report with attachments (including the proposed Development Agreement). None of the additional comment letters received resulted in changes being proposed to the Final EIR. The Resolution certifying the Final EIR is included as Attachment 10 to this Staff Report. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS /PUBLIC OUTREACH A notice of this public hearing was published in the Valley Times, mailed to all property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the Specific Plan project area boundaries, and all persons who have expressed an interest in being notified of actions related to this project were notified via email. All parties that provided comments on the Draft EIR were also notified of the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings. The Staff Report for this public hearing was also available on the City's website on a specific "Dublin Crossing" webpage. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated July 9, 2013 2. Planning Commission Draft Meeting Minutes dated October 22, 2013 3. Planning Commission Resolutions 13 -32, 13 -33, 13 -34, and 13 -35 4. Resolution amending the General Plan and adopting the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan included as Exhibit A Page 11 of 12 5. Conceptual Land Use Plan 6. Summary of General Plan Amendments 7. Ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Amendments to create a new Chapter: 8.31 (Dublin Crossing Zoning District), rezone all properties within the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan project area to the Dublin Crossing Zoning District, amend the Zoning Map to identify the location of the new Zoning District, amend Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses), and amend Chapter 8.104 (Site Development Review). 8. Dublin Crossing Community Benefit and Potential Land Use Package Development Agreement Points, dated June 12, 2013 9. Ordinance approving a Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and Dublin Crossing Venture LLC relating to the Dublin Crossing Project, with the Development Agreement included as Exhibit A 10. Resolution Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report, adopting environmental findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program under CEQA for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, with the Final EIR included as Exhibit A, the Findings Concerning Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures included as Exhibit B, the Findings Regarding Alternatives included as Exhibit C, the Statement of Overriding Considerations included as Exhibit D, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as included as Exhibit E 11. Comment Letters received after the publication of the Final EIR Page 12 of 12 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, July 9, 2013 CALL TO ORDER /ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 9, 2013, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair O'Keefe called the meeting to order at 7:00:58 PM Present: Chair O'Keefe; Vice Chair Bhuthimethee; Commissioners Do (arrived at 7:26 PM), Goel and Kohli; Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director; Kit Faubion, City Attorney; Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner; Seth Adams, Assistant Planner; and Debra LeClair, Recording Secretary. Absent: None ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA — NONE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS — On a motion by Cm. Goel and seconded by Cm. O'Keefe, on a vote of 4 -0, with Cm. Do being absent, the Planning Commission approved the minutes of the May 28, 2013 meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS — NONE CONSENT CALENDAR.— NONE WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS — NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS — 8.1 PLPA- 2013 -00019 Sprouts Farmers Market Retail — Outdoor Storage Conditional Use Permit to allow the permanent outdoor display of four (4) merchandise display bins outside the customer entrance of Sprouts Farmers Market at 7153 Amador Plaza Road. Seth Adams, Assistant Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Cm. Bhuthimethee thought that Sprouts had outdoor displays currently. Mr. Adams responded that they did but they were not approved through a CUP. Cm. Goel was concerned about accessibility ramps. Mr. Adams pointed out the accessibility ramps on the site map and noted that the path of travel from the disabled parking is a clear path to the store entrance, around the bins and would not impede the flow. CM. Goel asked if Sprouts will be required to put the bins away at night. Mr. Adams answered yes and referred the Planning Commission to Condition of Approval #13 which states that all merchandise and products are to be brought into the store at night. 41tanning Commission 1116� 9, 20 /3 (kgjukaw `JOAleeliwaif air as g e I 85 Cm. Kohli asked how often inspections are being made to ensure they are complying with their Conditions of Approval. Mr. Adams answered that there are annual reviews of conditions of approval and the Code Enforcement Officers regularly patrol the City to catch these kinds of infractions. Cm. Goel asked how Sprouts was allowed to have the outdoor display without a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Mr. Baker answered that the Planning Division has two Code Enforcement Officers that actively patrol the City on a regular basis to ensure that businesses with Conditions of Approval remain compliant and there are some formal reviews of Conditions of Approval. Cm. Goel asked if the store was unaware that they were not allowed to have outdoor display without a CUP. Mr. Baker answered that they were not aware. Cm. O'Keefe opened the public hearing. Terri Dickerhoff, representative of Sprouts Farmers Market, spoke in favor of the project. She stated that, during the process of opening the store, they were not aware of the need for a CUP for the outdoor display, but upon learning they needed one, immediately applied for the permit. Chair O'Keefe closed the public hearing. Cm. Bhuthimethee felt that the bins at Sprouts were clean and well kept. Cm. Goel felt that Sprouts is a welcome addition to Dublin, and stated he could make the findings. Cm. Bhuthimethee agreed and stated she could make the findings. Cm. Kohli agreed and stated he could make the findings. Chair O'Keefe agreed and stated he could make the findings. On a motion by Cm. Goel and seconded by Cm. Bhuthimethee, on a vote of 4 -0, with Cm. Do being absent, the Planning Commission adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 13 -19 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR "RETAIL — OUTDOOR STORAGE" AT AN EXISTING RETAIL STORE AT 7153 AMADOR PLAZA ROAD (SPROUTS FARMERS MARKET) 41tanning Commission 1116� 9, 20 /3 NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS Cm. Do joined the meeting at 7:26:38 PM 9.1 PA 08 -049 Dublin Crossing. Review of the Draft Dublin Crossing Specific Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) for approximately 189 acres located at the northwest corner of Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked for an explanation of the mixed -use and commercial uses that are slated for the parcel at the corner of Dublin Blvd. and Arnold Road. Ms. Bascom explained that the Mixed Use parcel will have, at a minimum, commercial uses and a 5 -acre Neighborhood Park. The parcel could also have residential uses in combination with the commercial, but not residential only. Cm. Kohli asked how the school's location could limit the type of commercial businesses that can be built on the parcel located next to it. Ms. Bascom answered that the Mixed Use parcel will be master - planned with the commercial, park, and (potential) residential uses and the location of the school will be kept in mind. It is expected that a bulk of the commercial uses would be closer to Dublin Blvd. and not at Central Parkway. Cm. Kohli was concerned about having a liquor store or some type of commercial business that would not be appropriate close to a school. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if the old "Camp Parks" sign was studied as a cultural resource in the EIR. Ms. Bascom answered that the sign is outside of the Specific Plan project area and will remain on the active base. The existence of the sign was noted in the EIR, but since no changes are proposed to the sign or its setting, there were no impacts identified in the EIR. Chair O'Keefe was concerned with circulation and connectivity throughout the City. He asked if there had been any discussions during the last 10 years to have Central Parkway connect through the project to Scarlett Drive. Ms. Bascom answered that a number of different options for an east -west roadway have been considered during the time that the project has been reviewed by Staff and the Developer. However, the configuration of the street network and the location of the various land uses depend on the phasing plan and how the developer receives the land from the Army. Chair O'Keefe asked if this project were an empty parcel, would it be ideal to have a connectivity point from Arnold Road to Scarlett Drive. Ms. Bascom answered that yes, that would be ideal, and G Street is serving as that connection. 41 tanning inn Coaaaaaaissio n 1116r 9, 20 / 3 Chair O'Keefe asked about any discussion regarding what roadway alignment is preferable to the City of Dublin. Ms. Bascom responded that the land plan and the circulation would look different if the project were an empty parcel. But since this is not the case, there are limitations to what can be done. The east -west roadway was envisioned as a reliever to Dublin Blvd. but there was a desire to not bifurcate the project area with an expressway going through it. She stated that a connection was desired, but one that served to connect Arnold and Scarlett, not necessarily provide a higher -speed expressway. Chair O'Keefe asked if G Street could be a faster paced arterial located at the northern border of the project area. Ms. Bascom stated that was examined many years ago when the Strategic Visioning Process was completed. There was a desire to have that connectivity, but an exact alignment was not selected. Once there was a developer on board, it became clear that there were challenges connecting the east -west road with Scarlett Drive and Dougherty Road. A five - legged intersection at Scarlett Drive and Dougherty Road was not a good connection. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if the EIR addressed pedestrian traffic crossing Dublin Blvd. and the BART traffic. Ms. Bascom answered that there are policies in the Specific Plan related to improvements to the crosswalks at the main intersections heading to BART (DeMarcus and Iron Horse Parkway) and making it more pedestrian friendly. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if there was a discussion regarding installing a pedestrian bridge. Ms. Bascom answered that there is a mitigation measure in the EIR regarding installing a pedestrian bridge over Dublin Blvd. at the Iron Horse Regional Trail to enhance pedestrian and bicycle travel across Dublin Blvd. Cm. Kohli was concerned about the project's impact on the flow of traffic on Dublin Blvd. Ms. Bascom responded that the Specific Plan assumed ultimate build -out of 1,995 residential units, 200,000 square feet of commercial uses, and a 12 acre school site with the capacity for 900 students. The traffic analysis took into account the worst case scenario (ultimate build -out) and reviewed 32 key intersections where the modeling was done for existing conditions, etc. With the mitigation measures identified, all of the impacts to Dublin Blvd were able to be reduced to acceptable levels. They included enhancements to Dublin Blvd., extension of Scarlett Drive, project periphery improvements, improvements identified in the City's traffic impact fee program and ultimate build -out with the proposed mitigations. Cm. Goel was concerned with the section regarding parking and alternative transportation. He stated that the Specific Plan reduced the parking requirements in the area and he was concerned that minimizing the need for parking might create parking impacts similar to the other areas in the eastern part of Dublin. Ms. Bascom answered that, in the areas that are designated Mixed Use or General Commercial /High Density Residential which are closer to the Transit Center and BART, the Specific Plan allows for the same parking requirements as those residential developments 41tanning Commission 1116� 9, 20 /3 across the street, which is 1.5 spaces per unit plus 15% of the total required spaces for guest parking. In all the other locations and land use districts, the City's standard parking requirements, per the Zoning Ordinance, apply. Cm. Goel asked if the Specific Plan and EIR had been provided to LAVTA and asked if they have provided any initial comments. Ms. Bascom answered that LAVTA has not responded, but the comment period has just started. Cm. Goel asked what traffic model was used. Ms. Bascom answered that, in the citywide traffic model, short term is Year 2020 and long term is build -out of the General Plan, which is Year 2035. Cm. Goel asked if any of the Dublin Blvd. intersections are at a level C or below. Ms. Bascom answered that there are a few existing intersections and then a few are new intersections at Dublin Blvd. Cm. Goel asked if there is a plan for any mitigation measures to control and funnel traffic onto one street within the project. Ms. Bascom responded that B Street lines up with DeMarcus Blvd. and D Street lines up with Iron Horse Pkwy. The others will not go through to Dublin Blvd., so by default, the pedestrian traffic will be focused on DeMarcus Blvd., Iron Horse Pkwy., and at the potential future elevated pedestrian bridge at the Iron Horse Regional Trail. Cm. Goel asked if the traffic model took into consideration the pedestrian traffic across Dublin Blvd. He felt that the City is encouraging residents to walk and take BART, but that during peak travel times the impact to Dublin Blvd. could double. Ms. Bascom stated that traffic was analyzed in great detail, and the need for the pedestrian bridge was identified because of the greater use of the Iron Horse Trail, both on a regional level and from pedestrians and cyclists travelling from within the Specific Plan area to BART. She stated that the impact of more pedestrians using the trail and pushing the "walk" button was studied. She stated that Staff and the consultant could review the traffic model to ensure that the traffic flow and the traffic modeling took into account the pedestrian traffic across Dublin Blvd. Cm. Goel asked if the Iron Horse Trail and Dublin Blvd. is the most convenient place for pedestrians to cross Dublin Blvd. He felt that people will find the most convenient point for them to cross Dublin Blvd. and asked if more opportunities for a pedestrian bridge would make sense. Bill Wiseman, RBF Consulting, explained what was analyzed in the traffic model. Cm. Goel asked if the project improves traffic impacts. Mr. Wiseman responded that the project has negative impacts on traffic, but the mitigation measures improve them to acceptable levels. 41tanning Commission 1116� 9, 20 /3 Mr. Wiseman stated that the impact analysis includes projections of BART traffic and users that includes BART numbers in the peak a.m. and peak p.m. hours with additional foot traffic. He felt that the appropriate location for the pedestrian bridge is the Iron Horse Trail, which would accommodate both regional users of the trail headed to BART as well as users from the Specific Plan area. He stated that the pedestrian crossing /intersection improvements at DeMarcus Blvd. /B Street and Iron Horse Pkwy. /D Street would ensure a safe crossing for pedestrians. Cm. Goel asked if the school will be Kindergarten through 5t" grade. Ms. Bascom answered that the school district has expressed a need for a 12 acre elementary school site within the Specific Plan area that can accommodate up to 900 students. Cm. Goel asked how the clean -up of the Army land could impact the developer's ability to develop the phased release part of the project. Ms. Bascom answered that the 189 -acre site has been completely cleaned with the exception of two spots, which the Developer could provide more detail regarding. Cm. Goel asked if the water channels on site will be underground. Ms. Bascom answered that the only channel on the project site will be a man -made habitat corridor /water conveyance channel for stormwater and drainage that will connect to the Chabot Canal. Cm. Goel asked if there is potential of influencing the design of the channel so that it does not look like a ditch or controlling the flow of the channel. Ms. Bascom answered that the channel is intended to be created as a natural habitat, so it will be aesthetically pleasing. Cm. Goel asked what the level of flow will be. Ms. Bascom answered that the flow will be metered out from a retention basin on Camp Parks and then on to the Zone 7 Alamo Canal drainage channel. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if the retention basin is part of the project. Ms. Bascom answered that the retention basin will be located on Camp Parks, north of the project site. Chair O'Keefe opened the public hearing. Gus Nystrum, Dublin Resident, asked how the military will access Camp Parks. Ms. Bascom answered that a new gate will be built at Dougherty Road with a new traffic signal lined up with Mariposa Circle, which will be the new Access Control Point to Camp Parks. Mr. Nystrum asked what was meant by "cleaning up the site." Ms. Bascom answered that any toxic contaminants have been removed and remediated to acceptable levels. 41 tanning inn Coaaaaaaissio n 1116r 9, 2013 Gregory Kelley, Scarlett Drive Homeowners Association, was concerned about parking along Scarlett Drive and how the project will affect his neighborhood. He asked about parking for the Community Park. Ms. Bascom answered that the parking field for the Community Park shown in the Illustrative Site Plan is conceptual only. The parking for the park will be on -site, not on Scarlett Drive. Mr. Kelley was concerned with children's safety with the extension of Scarlett Drive and traffic /speeding. Ms. Bascom referred to Figure 4.17 which illustrates the Scarlet Drive precise plan, on page 4- 42, which illustrates the Scarlett Drive extension. The Scarlett Drive extension has been planned for several years, but is not currently in the City's 5 -year CIP. The Dublin Crossing development will necessitate the extension of the street. It will be extended to Dublin Blvd. with bike lanes but there will be no on- street parking along Scarlett Drive. Mr. Kelley felt that no on- street parking along Scarlett Drive would be an issue for the residents on Scarlett Drive. Mr. Kelley was also concerned with the issue of clean up and asked if the NASA building has any airborne contaminates that the residents could be exposed to. Joe Guerra, SunCal, spoke in favor of the project. He responded to questions previously posed, including those related to the future school site and the commercial uses and Central Parkway, project phasing, hazardous materials clean up on site, and the street connection from Arnold Road through to Scarlett Drive. Chair O'Keefe asked about facilities on the remaining Camp Parks base and what would be on the north side of the project boundary. Mr. Guerra answered that everything north of phase #5 on the phasing plan is base housing; the remainder is currently grass. Chair O'Keefe was concerned with the use types that would be located at the boundary of the project. Mr. Guerra responded that a chain link fence is located on all boundaries of the base and on Arnold Road. The only height restrictions from the Army is the project cannot have a window above 35 feet high. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if residential backing up to the base is acceptable and asked if there are any special security requirements along the border of Camp Parks. Mr. Guerra responded that the requirement is that the project must replicate the current security requirements, which are to have a 6ft chain link fence with barbed wire along the new property line. Mr. Guerra further clarified that there will be a masonry wall constructed along the project border as well that will serve as backyard fences for the residences. 41tanning Commission 1116� 9, 20 /3 Mr. Guerra continued his responses to questions regarding the pedestrian bridge; the flow of Chabot Creek; cleaning up the project site and the NASA site; and the phasing of Central Park. Cm. Do was concerned that G Street is split between phase 2 and phase 5 and asked how G Street will be connected when it is built in two phases. Mr. Guerra stated that they anticipate G Street will not be connected until phase 4. There was a discussion regarding the phasing of the project and how the land will be received by the Applicant from the Army. Cm. Bhuthimethee was concerned that the first phase of development will be high density housing. Mr. Guerra felt that it is unlikely there will be any commercial uses in the phase 1A area. Mr. Kelley, Resident, returned to the podium and commented that, as a frequent user of the Iron Horse Trail and BART, he knows that the "walk" button at the pedestrian crossing on Dublin Blvd. doesn't make the light turn faster, and felt that the pedestrian bridge will be essential to the project. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if the EIR includes traffic and parking mitigations. Ms. Bascom responded that the EIR has traffic and circulation mitigations but parking was not addressed in the EIR, but will be addressed later on a project -by- project basis. Chair O'Keefe closed the public hearing. Cm. Kohli felt this study session was a good start for the discussion regarding pedestrian issues, traffic, and parking issues on Scarlett Drive. He stated that he is glad that the project will be reviewed to ensure good adjacencies between the school property and the potential commercial uses that could potentially be close by. He stated he looks forward to working with the developer to create a green community with good schools that will bring something to Dublin that will be considered the heart of the City with commerce, transportation and residential. Cm. Bhuthimethee was concerned with creating a sense of place for the project and felt that is important. She asked if there is a way to adopt those elements of the branding and marketing plan that is recommended in the Economic Development Element of the General Plan. Her other concerns included: • Ensuring that the gateway signage is relevant and withstands the test of time. • Noting that the project is a connection between west and east Dublin and felt there should be some type of gesture to recognize that. • Creating a marketing /branding element to make it more distinctly Dublin. • Supportive of the Community Park elements including the outdoor amphitheater. Also thought that instead of a vineyard, it may be more appropriate to have a demonstration garden for a more historically relevant crop in the area, which is hops. • Supportive of traffic calming elements in the plan, but is concerned about speed humps. • Supportive of providing more single -story units in order to integrate people of different ages, mobility restrictions, and abilities. 41tanning Commission 1116� 9, 20 /3 Cm. Goel concerns and supporting comments were: • Parking will be a concern including overflow parking from BART patrons. • Supports the Alameda County Safe Routes to School Program that was mentioned in the Specific Plan. • Supports the unique concepts of the project, i.e.; the neighborhood garden concept in the Community Park and habitat corridor for educational purposes. • Intersection at Arnold and Dublin Blvd. is a gateway and would be one of the 4 corners of Dublin. This project may trigger the Transit Center area to have the commercial on the first floor. • Phasing is not the phasing that will ultimately play out. • This project is an opportunity to create a connection between east and west. Cm. Do agreed with the other commissioners and looks forward to working with the Applicant on the next phase. She agreed that BART overflow parking on Arnold and Scarlett will continue to be a problem and that this reality should be addressed in this plan. Chair O'Keefe agreed with Cm. Bhuthimethee regarding creating a sense of place, creating a civic identity, and felt that there could be some additions to the specific plan around that. He stated he is looking forward to the project incorporating some type of historical element. He was concerned that Dublin has no connection between east and west. While he understands the reasons for not having a bypass arterial, he felt that the people who live on east and west would like to see another main artery within Dublin. He asked that the Applicant try to work it into the project. He asked the Commission for their thoughts on a bypass arterial. Cm. Kohli agreed but felt that with the school, residential and the park they must be careful about how they create an artery where the speed would be above 25 mph. He supported looking at options but felt that they must consider the surroundings. Cm. Bhuthimethee was concerned with whether it was worth including an arterial in the project. Chair O'Keefe felt it was worth it because of all the comments he has heard from residents about the lack of another way to get from one end of the City to the other besides Dublin Blvd. Cm. Goel stated he would not encourage any of the streets within the project to become a bypass arterial. He endorses the statement on engaging safe routes to school and encouraging bike safety. He was sure that the Public Works Department will review the signal prioritization and maintain the flow of traffic and not encourage bypass traffic to go into the residential areas. Cm. Do was concerned about the possible speed of traffic on an arterial bypass when there is a school nearby. Chair O'Keefe wanted his thoughts to be heard and the feedback from residents to be acknowledged. He also wants to ensure that the project is not totally developer- driven but includes what the City wants as well. Cm. Kohli agreed and felt it is important to ensure the Planning Commission represents the residents of the City. Chair O'Keefe acknowledged Mr. Kelley for representing his neighborhood and promised to visit the area and observe the parking issue. He stated that he is happy that the developer has 41tanning Commission 1116� 9, 20 /3 (kgjukaw `JOAleeliwaif �" as g e 19 :4 agreed to provide funding toward the construction of the pedestrian bridge. He also suggested considering a 2nd or 3r pedestrian bridge along Dublin Blvd. at DeMarcus or Iron Horse Parkway. Chair O'Keefe asked the Commission for their thoughts on multiple bridge locations. Cm. Goel felt that commuters will find the location that is easiest for them and felt that the Iron Horse Trail point is a good connection and perfect for the commuter's time constraints. He also felt a different location could work better. Chair O'Keefe asked if the Commission wanted to add a 2nd or 3rd pedestrian bridges. Cm. Goel felt multiple bridges are not the answer, but that an alternate location should be considered. He was unsure if that is the visual that the City would want for Dublin Blvd. Chair O'Keefe felt additional pedestrian bridges should be considered. He also wanted to ensure that the most visible part of the project on Dublin Blvd. would include enhanced building materials enhanced, i.e.; brick, stone, etc. He suggested having that written into the guidelines that anything on Dublin Blvd will have enhanced building materials. Cm. Bhuthimethee agreed. Cm. Bhuthimethee thanked the Planning Commissioners and Staff for their work and felt that their concerns have been heard. Chair O'Keefe agreed. Mr. Baker thanked the Planning Commission and the public for their constructive feedback and discussed the next steps for the project. He advised the Commission that the Public Comment period for the EIR closes on August 8. Staff will then prepare responses to comments and incorporate changes in the Draft Specific Plan as necessary. The Planning Commission will have the opportunity to review the Draft Specific Plan and EIR at a public hearing in the fall and make a recommendation to the City Council. OTHER BUSINESS - NONE 10.1 Mr. Baker spoke regarding the Amador Crossing Commercial Pad project and shared the revised drawings that reflect the Planning Commission's comments. Mr. Baker also answered questions about the signage. Chair O'Keefe asked about the completion date for the project. Mr. Baker did not have a project opening date but the Applicant was working quickly and felt a spring opening was likely. 10.2 There was a discussion regarding the facade upgrade at the Village Parkway site and the grant program for construction and design of facade modifications. A question was asked regarding future grants for similar projects. Mr. Baker responded that there are funds allocated to do facade modifications to another building on Village Parkway. 10.3 Mr. Baker informed the Planning Commission that there will be no meeting on July 23rd ADJOURNMENT — The meeting was adjourned at 9:34:52 PM 41tanning Commission 1116� 9, 2013 Respectfully submitted, Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: Jeff Baker Assistant Community Development Director G:IMINUTESI20131PLANNING COMMISSIONI07.09.13 FINAL PC MINUTES (CF).doc 41 tanning inn Coaaaaaaissio n 11'16r 9, 20 / 3 DRAFT DRAFT Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, October 22, 2013 CALL TO ORDER /ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, October 22, 2013, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair O'Keefe called the meeting to order at 7:04:43 PM Present: Chair O'Keefe; Vice Chair Bhuthimethee; Commissioners Do, Goel and Kohli; Luke Sims, Community Development Director; Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director; Tim Cremin, City Attorney, Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner; and Debra LeClair, Recording Secretary. Absent: None ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA — NONE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS — On a motion by Chair O'Keefe and seconded by Cm. Bhuthimethee, on a vote of 4 -0, with Cm. Do being absent at the time of the vote, the Planning Commission approved the minutes of the September 24, 2013 meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS — NONE CONSENT CALENDAR.— NONE WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS — NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS — 8.1 PA 08 -049 Dublin Crossing - General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan, Zoning Ordinance Amendments, Development Agreement, and Environmental Impact Report. The Planning Commission will consider and make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (DCSP) and associated implementation actions. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Chair O'Keefe asked the City's Traffic Engineer to respond to the Planning Commission's concerns regarding adequate parking on Scarlett Drive that was brought up in the Study Session. Obaid Khan, Traffic Engineer, stated that the Scarlett Drive extension was planned with the Precise Alignment that was approved by City Council. He stated that in order to provide parking they would have to expand the road by 8ft and felt that there is not enough room to accommodate parking. Chair O'Keefe asked if there will be sufficient parking within the development when the Dublin Crossing Park is complete. 41tanning Commission Oc lor)e-r 22, 20 /3 DRAFT DRAFT Mr. Khan answered that there is on- street parking inside the development and near the community park to ensure there is adequate parking. The community park plan has not been completed as yet but they will create a parking area for the community park that will have access from Scarlett Drive. Cm. Bhuthimethee felt that, since the community park area is not planned yet, if a parking lot was installed on Scarlett Dr. it could alleviate the concerns of the neighbors. Cm. Kohli asked what portion of the 30 acre park will be dedicated to parking. Ms. Bascom answered that the exact park design has not yet been determined. Cm. Bhuthimethee stated that she is not advocating a parking lot along Scarlett Drive but was concerned that the parking lot would be used by the residents on the other side of the Dublin Blvd. Ms. Bascom answered that the park design is yet to be determined but usually community parks are sunrise to sunset facilities so afterhours parking would be prohibited and discouraged. Chair O'Keefe opened the public hearing. Joe Guerra, SunCal, Dublin Ventures, spoke in favor of the project. He stated that he supports Staff's recommendation and asked for the Planning Commission's support. In regards to the questions regarding the impact to resident parking; there will be on- street parking along G and A Streets adjacent to the park. He stated that there will be no parking reductions in the neighborhoods adjacent to the park. Gregory Kelley, Resident on Kerry Ct., was concerned with a reduction in parking on Scarlett Drive. Kimberly Brown, resident on Sussex Ct, was concerned with a reduction in parking on Scarlett Drive. Mr. Khan responded to the residents that the existing parking on the west side of Scarlett Drive will be maintained with the new Scarlett Drive extension. He stated that currently there are 18- 20 spaces on the west side of Scarlett Drive that will be maintained. Cm. Goel asked how many parking spaces are on the east side of Scarlett Drive. Mr. Khan answered that there will be no parking on the east side of Scarlett Drive and the precise alignment does not plan for any additional parking. Chair O'Keefe directed the Commission to Figure 4 -16 in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan which shows no parking on either side of Scarlett Drive. Mr. Khan responded that the cross section he is referring to does not show parking. He apologized for the confusion with the cross section which shows the southern portion of Scarlett Drive and suggested that the specific Plan be revised to include the precise plan that was approved by the City Council in 2007; which shows the existing parking that will be maintained. 41tanning Commission Oc h)r)e-r 22, 20 /3 DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Goel asked Mr. Khan to clarify that there will be no impacts to the neighbors and no removal of existing parking spots that the existing development has for its use. Mr. Khan answered, that is correct. Francisca Anaya, resident on Moore Place, was concerned with increased noise levels with the development of the project and asked what types of measures will be taken to mitigate the noise. Chair O'Keefe closed public hearing. Chair O'Keefe asked Staff to respond to Ms. Anaya's concern regarding noise levels and comment on the findings from any studies that were conducted. Ms. Bascom responded that there was no specific noise analysis done for the project as it relates to traffic on Scarlett Drive; however, the precise plan for the 4 lane road was adopted by the City Council in 2007. The Scarlett Drive extension and widening will happen with this project because it is being brought forward at the same time, but it is a Capital Improvement Project that was approved by the City and is not a result of the Dublin Crossing project. Cm. Kohli asked if there was a noise analysis done for the entire Dublin Crossing project and what analysis was done that would impact the residents on Scarlett Drive. Bill Wiseman, RBF Consulting, responded that the noise modeling that was done found that the increase was not significant and would be no different than would be experienced in any urban environment. Cm. Goel asked where the noise study was performed and where the noise meter was placed. Mr. Wiseman responded that a noise analysis looks at existing conditions then it is modeled based on projected traffic volumes; the information is then loaded into noise modeling software to determine the delta. Cm. Goel asked if the noise study for the project resulted in no significant impact. Mr. Wiseman answered yes. Chair O'Keefe addressed an email that was received, after the packet was delivered, regarding reopening the EIR comment period and agreed with the Community Development Department's decision not to reopen the comment period. Cm. Kohli felt that they had a good discussion during the study session regarding streetscape, traffic flow, etc. He mentioned that the project has the potential for 200,OOOsf of commercial, with a minimum of 75,OOOsf and felt that there could be only 75,OOOsf of commercial. He hoped that, in order to increase the retail /restaurant diversity, there would be an opportunity over the life of the project for the City to use more of the 200,OOOsf for commercial and not settle for the bare minimum. 7:56:15 PM Cm. Do arrived at the meeting. 41tanning Commission Oc h)r)e-r 22, 20 /3 ., DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Kohli was still concerned about the school site and possible businesses close by. He wanted the City Council and Staff to be cognizant of what commercial businesses are allowed close to the school but felt that there are guidelines to prevent problems. Cm. Kohli asked for a better understanding of the burrowing owl issue. Mr. Wiseman, responded that surveys were done in 2003 when the Camp Parks Master Plan was created which included environmental surveys. The Dublin Crossing project identified impacts to the burrowing owl in the environmental document. The California Fish and Wildlife agency protocols allow "passive relocation" or displacement, which would include removing their habitat area and the owls would then relocate on their own. He stated that the mitigation measures follow the protocols of the state agency. He stated that the email received regarding a concern for the burrowing owl was referring to Camp Parks as a whole and not just the Dublin Crossing project area. Cm. Bhuthimethee agreed with Cm. Kohli regarding the commercial uses close to the school site. She was concerned that in Phase 1 there could be all high density residential. She stated that she has spoken with residents about their concern that they could end up with more residential when they thought there would be shops /retail /cafe's in one area. She felt that there is a large demand for new housing and asked if there is the possibility that the area could be all residential. Ms. Bascom answered yes; and stated that two of the land use districts are set up as a commercial /residential combination, therefore it could be commercial or residential or a combination of the two. The only mixed -use area is the parcel on the corner of Dublin Blvd. and Arnold Road where at least 75,00sf of commercial space is mandated to anchor that corner. She mentioned that the 75,000sf minimum of commercial in the Specific Plan would be market driven and also depend on timing. Cm. Bhuthimethee felt that there should be a larger civic space at the pedestrian connection of DeMarcus Blvd. and B Street which is a major connection between BART and Dublin Crossing. She wanted to advocate for more civic and public spaces and felt this area is a prime location for that. Cm. Bhuthimethee felt that Staff has been great in acting on some of the concerns of the Planning Commission by creating identity and something unique for the project. She referred to Page 3 -29 of the Specific Plan that shows an image that she felt was distinctive. Cm. Goel stated that he works for the Alameda County Transportation Commission and wanted to ensure that he did not have to recuse himself from the discussion. Tim Cremin, Assistant City Attorney, stated that, based on the fact that he is not an Applicant, there is no conflict. Cm. Goel asked about the section of the EIR that stated there will be a reduction of delay as a result of retail development. He asked what considerations were done to mitigate the circulation impacts of 2,000 residential units. He felt it was helpful to understand what 5,400 residents feel like and asked how many residential units are in the adjacent developments for comparison. 41tanning Commission Oc Io6ar 22, 20 /3 qj,f �` DRAFT DRAFT Ms. Bascom answered that there are approximately 1,300 residential units at the Transit Center. Mr. Baker mentioned that the Sorrento development has a similar sized project area with approximately 1,000 units. Ms. Bascom also mentioned Dublin Ranch Villages which is surrounded by Central Parkway, Dublin Blvd., Brannigan and Keegan with approximately 1,600 units over a smaller area. Cm. Goel felt that Ms. Bascom's answer gave him a better understanding of the community situation concerning parking, circulation and the resident comments heard to date. Cm. Goel wanted to discuss the reduction in delay, level of service at the intersections and the calculations of "no project" versus "with project" and why there is no sizeable impact. He asked if that was because the facility can't take anymore impacts or will the intersection is cap out. Brett Walinski, Hexagon Transportation Consultants, stated that he prepared the transportation portion of the Environmental Impact Report. He stated that they put the project into the Dublin forecast model and discovered some effects that shift traffic around, which are: 1) When traffic is added to the freeway there will be a delay, as a result, other users will alter their route choice until the impact is spread through the transportation system; 2) When the project information is entered into the forecast model, trips are subtracted from one area and added to another area; 3) When the freeway is congested there is a peak hour spread; not all trips are made during the commute period if the commute period is shifted. He stated that there were impacts to 6 intersections and 3 freeway onramps. He stated that this is a large project that will generate traffic and there will be impacts associated with it. Cm. Goel stated that the report talks about a 13 second reduction and that he was delayed today at the current traffic level without the project. He felt that he needed to understand the perspective along with the interchanges being at Level of Service F. He stated that Dougherty Road enters into the project before the 1 -580 interchange and felt that is a highly problematic zone for Dublin residents. He asked if the assumption of the retail redistribution is based on a certain amount of retail establishments in Dublin. Mr. Walinski responded that the model was based on 200,000sf of retail but the redistribution does not occur from only the retail that was only an example of the type of trip that would be displaced. He stated that another example would be if someone commuted from Stockton and then they moved to Dublin, the origin of the trip changes; therefore, some traffic would be added and some traffic would be removed. Cm. Goel asked, with 2,000 units, what is the anticipated density increase in vehicles. Mr. Walinski answered that it would be approximately 2,000 peak hour trips. Cm. Goel asked if they found no significant impacts. Mr. Walinski answered there will be significant impacts at 6 intersections and 2 freeway interchanges. Mitigation measures will reduce some of the impacts to less than significant levels. 41tanning Commission Oc lor)e-r 22, 20 /3 DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Goel stated that, during the study session, there was a discussion regarding a pedestrian overcrossing. He asked what has been developed regarding that suggestion and how it will fit the overall community and if they had considered any undercrossing. Mr. Khan stated that Staff is still developing a plan for the pedestrian crossing at the Iron Horse Trail at Scarlett Drive, but there needs to be a feasibility analysis to determine what type of crossing would be accommodated at the location. He stated that the City has been applying for grants for the feasibility analysis but there are no further details at this point until the analysis has been completed. Cm. Goel felt strongly that the Iron Horse Trail at Scarlett Drive is not the ideal location for the pedestrian crossing because it is close to the park and has the least amount of density. He suggested that the feasibility analysis consider locating the crossing closer to the maximum amount of density. Cm. Goel was concerned with the area zoned for a school and the fact that, if the school district does not build a school, the area can be rezoned for medium density housing. He asked if the school is not built or some type of community resource that the area be rezoned to another public /semi - public use instead of housing. He felt that it would provide a sense of place for the community more so than housing. Ms. Bascom responded that the land use package is what the Planning Commission is reviewing tonight. The school district will pay for the 12 acre school site, and there was no analysis done that would contribute to the parcel being set aside for anything other than school uses. If the school district decided not to build a school, the residentially designated land use is already in place. She stated that there is no representative of the school district at the meeting but, in discussions with them, they are adamant that they will acquire the site for an elementary school and there is no reason to believe they won't, but the land use designation was put in place in the event the district does not build a school. Cm. Goel asked if there is an option to have the secondary zoning removed so that the area is either a school or some type of community resource land use designation instead of residential. He felt that the zoning should not automatically change to residential but should require Planning Commission review in order to make that change. Ms. Bascom answered that was not evaluated or considered. She stated that the City Council and Staff have been working with the developer in putting together the Development Agreement and there was a lot of discussion about the dedication of park land and how much was enough, how the City would acquire the park land, the 30 acre community park is well in excess of the dedication requirements for a project of this size. She stated that the City is receiving park land above and beyond what a 2,000 unit project would require. She stated that the City had not considered purchasing any more property. Cm. Goel asked why the City would consider a contingent plan that pre -zones the area as residential. Ms. Bascom responded that the land use designation allows for either an elementary school or should the school district determine that they are not interested in acquiring the property; the land use designation is in place as residential. 41tanning Commission Oc lor)e-r 22, 20 /3 DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Goel clarified that the recommendation to the Planning Commission sets forth either school or residential but not the potential for other public uses. Ms. Bascom answered yes. Mr. Baker explained that when the overall development was presented to the City Council the concept was that if the school district decided they did not need the school site the residential land use would already be in place. Cm. Goel stated that his point was that there was no consideration of any other public use rather than residential. He asked if that option was ever discussed at any point during the negotiations with the Applicant. Mr. Baker answered that a development package was presented to the City Council and it did not include that component. The Applicant is providing other amenities such as more park land above and beyond what is required. The proposal included a 12 -acre school site to meet the schools requirements with a back -up option as residential. Cm. Goel asked if the calculation of 1,995 units included the scenario that the school would not be built. Ms. Bascom answered that the analysis assumes 1,995 units throughout the project site whether the school is built or not. Cm. Goel asked if the project is capped at 1,995 units. Ms. Bascom answered yes. She continued that there is up to 200,000sf of commercial uses, which is a cap, and a 900 student elementary school. She stated that they reviewed a worst case scenario from an impact perspective as the entire project is built out at the top end and the 1995 cap is whether there are residential units on that 12 -acre site or it is a school everything has been captured within the analysis. Cm. Goel stated that he was comfortable with the cap and asked Ms. Bascom to show the slide with the scenario table. He pointed out the school line and asked if that is part of the total number. Ms. Bascom answered yes. She stated that whether the site is developed as a school or not, the 1995 cap will not be exceeded. Cm. Goel asked if that is stipulated specifically. Ms. Bascom answered yes. Cm. Goel felt that a lot of thought went into the bike /pedestrian circulation and he appreciated that as he is associated with the "Safe Routes to School" program. He felt that Dublin has been consistent with circulation and the ideal drop off zones around school sites and felt that the environmental document indicates a school drop -off zone and appreciated that. He asked about the 40 year asphalt shingle roofs stated in the project documents and asked if there was another nearby development that also has that type of roofing. 41tanning Commission Oc Io6ar 22, 20 /3 DRAFT DRAFT Ms. Bascom stated that there are 40 year asphalt shingle roofs at the Emerald Vista project. Cm. Goel asked if the City can encourage the developer to consider colored bike lanes for safety. Cm. Do agreed with the other Commissioners' concerns about the potential for all residential. She also agreed regarding peak traffic hours and the potential for more traffic in Dublin. She likes the bike facility plans. She asked for clarification regarding the public gathering place on the corner of Arnold and Dublin Blvd. Ms. Bascom responded that in the land use plan there are public gathering sites in the main community park, within the 13 acre mixed use site there is a 5 acre park that will be planned within the commercial /residential area. She stated that those will be the two public gathering places beside the school site which is also a public facility. Cm. Do felt that the main gathering location would be the park. She asked for clarification regarding private streets and assumed that they would be narrower and would have no bike lanes. Ms. Bascom answered that the land plan shows the backbone infrastructure, i.e. public streets. As the individual neighborhoods are developed there are street sections in the specific plan for private streets should those be developed. They can be smaller but they are usually serving a smaller townhome development. She stated that, at this point, the location of any private streets are unknown and will depend on each builder who designs the streets whether they will be public or private streets. Cm. Do asked about the future bus stops and where they will be located and how that will be determined. Mr. Khan answered that the City is working with LAFTA on identifying future bus stop locations. Chair O'Keefe asked if the Commissioners can make the findings for this project and whether there should be any conditions discussed. Cm. Goel stated that his only concern is regarding the zoning of the school site. He stated that he is uncomfortable with a contingent plan for residential for the site. He stated that he understood the project has a cap but didn't think it should be an entitlement without a decision making process. He felt that when it was presented to the other bodies in the decision making process it was never viewed as being a choice for any other zoning and felt that there should be an option to consider other zoning for the school site. Cm. Do stated that she would like the school site to be surrounded by residential instead of commercial or mixed use. Cm. Bhuthimethee was concerned about the elevations on Dublin Blvd and the need for them to be further enhanced because of its visibility and asked if Chair O'Keefe was satisfied. Chair O'Keefe answered that he is satisfied and felt that there is language in the specific plan for the residential pieces, not a specific point about the enhancement of the gateway but he is not concerned with the look of the gateway at this point in the process. 41tanning Commission Oc Io6ar 22, 20 /3 DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Bhuthimethee agreed with Cm. Goel regarding the school site and asked if he would make some sort of suggestion. Cm. Goel responded that there should be either guidance or a recommendation to the Zoning Ordinance or the Specific Plan and a statement in the adoption of the resolution for the City Council. Mr. Baker stated that if the Planning Commission can make a suggestion or recommendation to the City Council. He pointed out that the development plan was a negotiation, and has been in front of the City Council many times to talk about the gives and takes of the relationship. He stated that included in the negotiation is a large package of different items, some of which are addressed in the Development Agreement, such as the large amount of land dedicated to the Central park which exceeds the minimum requirement. He added that one of the more significant items that the developer is providing to the City is a Community Benefit Payment of $18,700,000 above and beyond any other minimum requirements. He stated that while the school site is important, there are other things the developer is providing to the community. This includes funds that would otherwise not be available if the City were to do something else with that site. He wanted to ensure that the Commission was aware of the Community Benefit Payment as well as larger parks, etc. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked what the Community Benefit funds be used for. Mr. Baker answered that the funds are being deposited to the General Fund and are not tied directly to the site. Cm. Bhuthimethee was also concerned about parking on the project area. Cm. Kohli agreed with Cm. Bhuthimethee regarding the parking issue and recommended that the developer install proper signage and parking restrictions within the project to prevent a problem. He stated that he understands the negotiation with the developer and the extra amenities but agreed with the other Commissioners regarding the school site. He felt that if the school site will not have a school on it there should be a requirement that the developer must return to the City to determine what would be the best use of the land besides residential. He felt it should not automatically revert to residential without a review by the City. He stated that recently there have been items before the Planning Commission and the City Council in regards to current plots of land that were designated for one type of land use but now the developer has come back to change it to something else. He felt that it could be the same in this situation if we have to forego a school it would be in the public's best interest for the developer to come back through the process to ensure the best use of the land. He agreed with the other Commissioners that the City Council should consider keeping that land use flexible. Chair O'Keefe thanked everyone for their work on the project, and the Applicant for working with the City and the Army and all the parties involved. He thanked Mr. Baker for providing the bigger picture regarding the negotiations, the relationship between the parties and how this has been a work in progress. He felt that the right thing to do, regarding the land use issue on the school site, would be to recommend to the City Council that they look at the secondary use to be a public space or parkland. 41tanning Commission Oc Io6ar 22, 20 /3 DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Kohli responded that he was not suggesting that the land use be restricted, but that any land use designation change would be required to come back to the Planning Commission to determine what the best land use designation would be, not to confine it to a certain land use. He felt that the land use should be flexible so that if the school is not built, the developer would be required to bring it back to the City with whatever they would like to build on the site. Cm. Goel felt that it should not be an automatic entitlement. He was concerned with public perception. He stated that there is a project anticipated with a certain look and feel and then it's different. He stated that nothing is precluding the developer from returning but they should not have a back -up plan already in the zoning. Chair O'Keefe felt that if the zoning designation is already in the plan from the start then a potential home buyer who wanted to do their homework would know that the school site could be changed to residential. Cm. Kohli stated that the Commission has discussed traffic flow and the impact of traffic with the potential of 1,995 units being built. He stated that, if the project is built out, and there are negative traffic impacts, then the residents will be concerned about the impact of converting the school site to housing. He stated that even though there is a cap of 1,995 units he would not want to see the school site used to fill out the residential component of the project. He wanted the City Council to keep it flexible and open. Cm. Kohli felt that the Applicant has the City's best interest in mind with the extra parkland and the community benefit payment. He felt that the Planning Commission's recommendation is not a detriment to the Applicant. The Commission wants to keep the best interest of the City in mind by being flexible and leaving the land use open. Cm. Goel asked if the Commission has a choice to make a recommendation. Mr. Baker stated that the way the specific plan is written, the school site would become a residential site, staying within the cap of 1,995 units. This proposal was part of the negotiations by the City Council and incorporated into the Development Agreement. He added that the developer will have to come back for a tentative map and site development review. He stated that the Planning Commission make an alternative recommendation included in the motion and that would be forwarded to City Council and they can weigh that as they deliberate on the project. Cm. Goel asked if the context would be a recommendation not a change. Mr. Baker answered yes; the Planning Commission is making a recommendation to the City Council on the Resolutions and Ordinance. So they can make a recommendation for the City Council to consider using flexibility regarding the future school site land use designation. Cm. Goel stated that the Planning Commission is an advisory commission that provides a recommendation but does not take action or alter an action. Mr. Baker answered yes; in this situation. Luke Sims, Community Development Director, stated that as Mr. Baker outlined, it is the Planning Commission's purview to make a recommendation. He wanted to make the point that 41tanning Commission Oc h)r)e-r 22, 20 /3 '132 . DRAFT DRAFT what the Planning Commission has before them is a comprehensive master plan that has been thoroughly veted and discussed, and tirelessly worked on by Staff, the developer and the community to arrive at the project package. He felt that it is important that the package be reviewed as a comprehensive master plan, and they tried to identify, in the recommendation by Staff, to acknowledge that and to point out that this is a good roadmap for the future. He stated that there is some certainty for the developer, but there is certainty for the community in acknowledging that, more than likely, there will be a school with the caveat that it could be residential. However, it is important to remember that there is a cap, and restricting the residential use of the school site does not lower the Applicant's right to build 1,995 units. The developer will have the opportunity to build all 1,995 units whether the school is built or not. They will not be able to build any more. He felt that was important to keep in mind in a master planned perspective. Cm. Goel asked if the entire project was built out, all 1995 built and that parcel was not built yet and it was vacant land school site, essentially the developer could come back and ask to exceed that cap as a zoning change or is that completely excluded. Ms. Bascom stated that the development potential for the site has a residential cap, a commercial cap, and the school site. She continued that the reality is that the school site is in phase 3. The Development Agreement gives the school district until the first parcel map in phase 5 to execute or not on the site. At that point the developer will know how to proceed with the rest of the development. Chair O'Keefe thanked the members of the audience for expressing their concerns regarding parking on Scarlett Drive and noise. On a motion by Cm. Goel and seconded by Cm. Do, on a vote of 5 -0, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 13- 32 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ADOPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS UNDER CEQA FOR THE DUBLIN CROSSING SPECIFIC PLAN RESOLUTION NO. 13 — 33 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN AND ADOPTING THE DUBLIN CROSSING SPECIFIC PLAN 41tanning Commission Oc lor)e-r 22, 20 /3 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 13 — 34 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DRAFT RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE APPROVING ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO CREATE A NEW CHAPTER: 8.31 (DUBLIN CROSSING ZONING DISTRICT), REZONE ALL PROPERTIES WITHIN THE DUBLIN CROSSING SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT AREA TO THE DUBLIN CROSSING ZONING DISTRICT, AMEND THE ZONING MAP TO IDENTIFY THE LOCATION OF THE NEW ZONING DISTRICT, AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 8.12 (ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED USES), AND AMEND CHAPTER 8.104 (SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW) �� RESOLUTION NO. 13 - 35 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND DUBLIN CROSSING VENTURE LLC RELATING TO THE DUBLIN CROSSING PROJECT NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS — NONE OTHER BUSINESS - NONE 10.1 Brief INFORMATION ONLY reports from the Planning Commission and /or Staff, including Committee Reports and Reports by the Planning Commission related to meetings attended at City Expense (AB 1234). 10.2 Chair O'Keefe had a discussion with the Commissioners about the timing of their questions during the public hearing process. ADJOURNMENT — The meeting was adjourned at 9:15:44 PM Respectfully submitted, Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: Jeff Baker Assistant Community Development Director 41tanning Commission Oc lor)e-r 22, 20 /3 DRAFT G:IMINUTESI20131PLANNING COMMISSIOM 10.22.13 DRAFT PC MINUTES. docx DRAFT 41tanning Commission Oc lor)e-r 22, 20 /3 (kqp,da,r .Alleelilllif -135 - Planning Commission Resolutions approved October 22, 2013 (All without attachments) Resolution 13 -32 (Recommending approval of the Final Environmental Impact Report) Resolution 13 -33 (Recommending approval of the General Plan Amendments and Specific Plan) Resolution 13 -34 (Recommending approval of the Zoning Ordinance Amendments) Resolution 13 -35 (Recommending approval of the Development Agreement) RESOLUTION NO. 13- 32 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ADOPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS UNDER CEQA FOR THE DUBLIN CROSSING SPECIFIC PLAN PA 08 -049 WHEREAS, the Applicant, Dublin Crossing LLC (SunCal Companies) has submitted a Planning Application to enable private development on approximately 189 acres of property that is currently part of the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area. The proposal includes the approval of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, General Plan Amendments, Zoning Ordinance Amendments, Rezoning properties to a new Dublin Crossing Zoning District, and consideration of a Development Agreement and certification of an Environmental Impact Report, among other related actions. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the "Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Project" or the "Project "; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (DCSP) project area is approximately 189 acres in size and is generally bound by 5t" Street to the north, Scarlett Drive to the west, Dublin Boulevard to the south, and Arnold Road to the east. The Project Area includes properties identified by Assessor Parcel Numbers 986- 0001 - 001 -15 (partial), 986- 0034- 002 -00, and 986- 0034 - 006 -00; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared. It was determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be prepared to analyze the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Project; and WHEREAS, the City circulated a Notice of Preparation, dated June 4, 2012, to public agencies and interested parties for consultation on the scope of the EIR. The City also conducted a public scoping meeting on June 20, 2012; and WHEREAS, the City prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated June 2013 for the proposed Project that reflected the City's independent judgment and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project. The Draft EIR is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated for public review from June 24, 2013 to August 8, 2013 (45 days); and WHEREAS, the City received comment letters from State, regional, and local agencies as well as interested individuals and organizations during the public review period. In accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the City prepared written responses to all the comments received during the public comment period. The City prepared a Final EIR (that includes the Responses to Comments), dated October 2013, for the proposed Project, which 2 included 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 (Exhibit A also contains the complete EIR — Draft EIR, Appendices, and Final EIR combined — on a CD within the document). The complete Dublin Crossing Specific Plan EIR incorporates the Draft EIR and the Final EIR together. The responses to comments provide the City's good faith, reasoned analysis of the environmental issues raised by the comments; and WHEREAS, the City carefully reviewed the comments and written responses and determined that the Final EIR, including the clarifications and minor corrections to the Draft EIR, do not constitute significant new information requiring recirculation of the Draft EIR under the standards in CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated October 22, 2013 and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Project for the Planning Commission and contained information on the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Staff Report, the Final EIR, including comments and responses, at a noticed public hearing on October 22, 2013 at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR, including comments and responses, reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis on the potential for environmental impacts from the Project; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR identified several potentially significant impacts that will be reduced to a less than significant level with specified mitigation measures. Approval of the project by the City Council will therefore require adoption of findings on impacts and mitigations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR /EIS identified significant and unavoidable environmental impacts of the project and approval of the project by the City Council will therefore require adoption of Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations: and WHEREAS, the Final EIR and all of the documents relating to the Project are available for review in the City Planning Division at the Dublin City Hall, file PA 08 -049, during normal business hours. The location and custodian of the Final EIR and other documents that constitute the record of proceedings for the Project is the City of Dublin Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568, file PA 08 -049. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Dublin Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings and recommendations to the City Council on the Final EIR and the environmental review of the Project under CEQA: A. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. B. The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines. 3 C. The Planning Commission has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR, including the written comments received during the Draft EIR review period and the oral and written comments received at the public hearing, prior to making its recommendation on the proposed Project. D. The Final EIR reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis on the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Project. The Final EIR provides information to the decision - makers and the public on the environmental consequences of the proposed Project. E. The Final EIR adequately describes the proposed Project, its significant environmental impacts, mitigation measures and a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed Project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the Dublin Planning Commission hereby recommends that, prior to the approval of the Project, the City Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report as complete, adequate and in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines. The Planning Commission further recommends that the City Council make all required, mitigation and alternatives findings, adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, all in compliance with the requirements of CEQA. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of October, 2013 by the following vote: AYES: O'Keefe, Bhuthimethee, Do, Goel, Kohli NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Planning Commission Chair Assistant Community Development Director G:IPA #120081PA 08 -049 Camp Parks—Dublin Crossing12011 RestartlPC Mtg 10.22.20131PC Att 8 - Reso FEIR.docx 2185663.1 11 RESOLUTION NO. 13 — 33 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN AND ADOPTING THE DUBLIN CROSSING SPECIFIC PLAN PA 08 -049 WHEREAS, the Applicant, Dublin Crossing LLC (SunCal Companies) submitted a Planning Application to enable private development on approximately 189 acres of property that is currently part of the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area. The proposal includes the approval of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, General Plan Amendments, Zoning Ordinance Amendments, Rezoning properties to a new Dublin Crossing Zoning District, and consideration of a Development Agreement and certification of an Environmental Impact Report, among other related actions. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the "Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Project" or the "Project "; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan requires that certain amendments be made to the General Plan so that the two documents are consistent; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (DCSP) project area is approximately 189 acres in size and is generally bound by 5t" Street to the north, Scarlett Drive to the west, Dublin Boulevard to the south, and Arnold Road to the east. The Project Area includes properties identified by Assessor Parcel Numbers 986- 0001 - 001 -15 (partial), 986- 0034- 002 -00, and 986- 0034 - 006 -00; and WHEREAS, the Project would adopt the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan with permitted land uses, development standards, and design guidelines. The land uses and development standards provide for future development in the planning area. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is a separately bound document attached as Exhibit A -1 and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the General Plan land use designation in the project area is amended to a new designation: "Dublin Crossing," so it is consistent with the land uses permitted by the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. In addition, other provisions of the General Plan are amended to allow the urban development of the Project area which was previously designated "Public Lands" in the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, the City prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated June 2013 for the proposed Project which reflected the City's independent judgment and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project; and 5 WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated from June 24, 2013 to August 8, 2013 (45 days) for public comment; and WHEREAS, comments received on the Draft EIR were reviewed and responded to, and the Final EIR (that contains the Response to Comments) dated October 2013 was prepared; and WHEREAS, consistent with section 65352.3 of the California Government Code, the City obtained a contact list of local Native American tribes from the Native American Heritage Commission and notified the tribes on the contact list of the opportunity to consult with the City on the proposed General Plan Amendment. None of the contacted tribes requested a consultation within the 90 -day statutory consultation period and no further action is required under section 65352.3; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated October 22, 2013 and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Project, including the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, General Plan Amendments, Zoning Ordinance Amendments, Rezoning property to a new Dublin Crossing Zoning District, and Environmental Impact Report, for the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the proposed Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments, on October 22, 2013 at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Final EIR, all above - referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony to evaluate the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Resolution attached as Exhibit A approving amendments to the General Plan and approving the Specific Plan based on findings, as set forth in Exhibit A, that the amendments are in the public interest, promotes general health, safety and welfare, and that the General Plan as so amended will remain internally consistent. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan based on findings, as set forth in Exhibit B, that the Specific Plan is consistent with the Dublin General Plan, as amended, and other required findings. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of October 2013 by the following vote: AYES: O'Keefe, Bhuthimethee, Do, Goel, Kohli NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 31 Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: Assistant Community Development Director G:IPA #120081PA 08 -049 Camp Parks—Dublin Crossing12011 RestartlPC Mtg 10.22.20131PC Att 3 - Reso SP and GPA.docx RESOLUTION NO. 13 — 34 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE APPROVING ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO CREATE A NEW CHAPTER: 8.31 (DUBLIN CROSSING ZONING DISTRICT), REZONE ALL PROPERTIES WITHIN THE DUBLIN CROSSING SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT AREA TO THE DUBLIN CROSSING ZONING DISTRICT, AMEND THE ZONING MAP TO IDENTIFY THE LOCATION OF THE NEW ZONING DISTRICT, AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 8.12 (ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED USES), AND AMEND CHAPTER 8.104 (SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW) PA 08 -049 WHEREAS, the Applicant, Dublin Crossing LLC (SunCal Companies) has submitted a Planning Application to enable private development on approximately 189 acres of property that is currently part of the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area. The proposal includes the approval of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, General Plan Amendments, Zoning Ordinance Amendments, Rezoning properties to a new Dublin Crossing Zoning District, and consideration of a Development Agreement and certification of an Environmental Impact Report, among other related actions. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the "Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Project" or the "Project "; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan requires that certain amendments be made to the Zoning Ordinance to assist in the implementation of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, an implementing action of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is to create a new Dublin Crossing Zoning District (Chapter 8.30) that will apply to all of the properties identified in Figure 1 -1 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. The new zoning district identifies permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited uses as well as development standards for properties within the project area; and WHEREAS, an implementing action of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is to create a new Dublin Crossing Zoning District (Chapter 8.31) that will apply to all of the property identified in Figure 1 -2 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. The new zoning district identifies permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited uses as well as development standards for properties within the project area; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Zoning Map is amended to include the location of the new Dublin Crossing Zoning District that will include all property identified in Figure 1 -2 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan ( "Zoning Map Amendment "); and WHEREAS, all property identified in Figure 1 -2 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan shall be rezoned from their existing zoning district to Dublin Crossing Zoning District; and n. WHEREAS, Staff has identified additional amendments to the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Chapters 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) and 8.104 (Site Development Review) that will further implement the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the text amendments to Chapters 8.12 and 8.104 and the text of the new zoning district (Chapter 8.31) are shown in Sections 3 through Section 5 of the Ordinance, which is attached as Exhibit A. All these text amendments are collectively referred to herein as "Zoning Ordinance Amendments "; and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 8.120.050.13 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council find that the Zoning Ordinance Amendments and Zoning Map Amendment are consistent with the Dublin General Plan and the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan for the reasons set forth in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 8.120.050A of the Dublin Municipal Code, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council make the following findings for the Zoning Ordinance Amendments and Zoning Map Amendment based on the facts set forth in Exhibit A- (1) the proposed Amendments would be harmonious and compatible with existing and potential development in surrounding areas; (2) the Project site is physically suitable for the type, intensity of the zoning district being proposed; and (3) the proposed Amendments 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; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission approve the Zoning Ordinance Amendments and Zoning Map Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission modifications on October 22, 2013, for which California State Law; and did hold a public hearing on the proposed proper notice was given in accordance with WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at its October 22, 2013, meeting did hear and use its independent judgment and considered the Final EIR, all said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council adopt the Ordinance attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference, approving the Zoning Ordinance Amendments and Zoning Map Amendment for the Dublin Crossing Project. votes: PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of October 2013 by the following AYES: O'Keefe, Bhuthimethee, Do, Goel, Kohli NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: I Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Assistant Community Development Director G:1PAM20MPA 08 -049 Camp Parks—Dublin Crossingt2011 RestarttPC Mtg 10.22.2013tPC Att 6 - Reso ZOAs.docx 10 RESOLUTION NO. 13 - 35 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND DUBLIN CROSSING VENTURE LLC RELATING TO THE DUBLIN CROSSING PROJECT PA 08 -049 WHEREAS, a request has been made by the Dublin Crossing Venture LLC (SunCal Companies) ( "Applicant ") to enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Dublin for the property known as the Dublin Crossing Project site, which includes properties identified by Assessor Parcel Numbers 986- 0001 - 001 -15 (partial), 986- 0034 - 002 -00, and 986- 0034 - 006 -00, an approximately 189 acre site; and; and WHEREAS, The Applicant is proposing to obtain approvals for a development project that includes demolition of the existing buildings and other improvements on the site and construction of a residential mixed -use project with up to 1,995 single- and multi - family residential units; up to 200,000 square feet of retail, office and /or commercial uses; a 30 acre Community Park; a 5 acre Neighborhood Park, and a 12 acre elementary school site to serve approximately 900 students; and WHEREAS, The project is located within the proposed Dublin Crossing Specific Plan area, which is the subject of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse number 2012062009. On , 2013, the Planning Commission approved Resolution No. xx -xx, recommending that the City Council certify the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR and adopt CEQA findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project. The Development Agreement was part of the Project analyzed in the EIR and the impacts of the activities under the Development Agreement were analyzed in the EIR; and WHEREAS, the proposed Development Agreement is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A -1; and WHEREAS, on October 22, 2013, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, proper notice of the public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt an Ordinance approving the Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and considered all reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth. 11 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of Dublin Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council make the following findings and determinations regarding the proposed Development Agreement- 1 . The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified and contained in the City's General Plan, and in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan in that: (a) the Development Agreement incorporates the objectives policies, general land uses and programs in the General Plan and Specific Plan and does not amend or modify them; and (b) the project is consistent with the fiscal policies of the General Plan and Specific Plan with respect to the provision of infrastructure and public services. 2. The Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use districts in which the real property is located because the Development Agreement does not amend the uses or regulations in the applicable land use district. 3. The Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare, and good land use policies in that the Developer's project will implement land use guidelines set forth in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan and the General Plan as articulated in Resolution No. xx -xx, amending the General Plan and adopting the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, adopted by the City Council on , 2013. 4. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare in that the Developer's proposed project will proceed in accordance with all the programs and policies of the General Plan, Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, and future Project Approvals and any Conditions of Approval. 5. The Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values in that the project will be consistent with the General Plan, the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, and future Project Approvals. 6. The Development Agreement specifies the duration of the agreement, the permitted uses of the property, the density or intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes. The Development Agreement contains an indemnity and insurance clause requiring the developer to indemnify and hold the City harmless against claims arising out of the development process, including all legal fees and costs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City of Dublin Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council adopt the Ordinance, attached as Exhibit A, approving the Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and Dublin Crossing Venture LLC related to the Dublin Crossing Project. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of October 2013. AYES: O'Keefe, Bhuthimethee, Do, Goel, Kohli NOES: ABSENT: 12 ABSTAIN: Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Assistant Community Development Director G:IPA #120081PA 08 -049 Camp Parks—Dublin Crossing12011 RestartlPC Mtg 10.22.20131PC Att 7 - Reso DA.docx 13 RESOLUTION NO. XX -13 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN AND ADOPTING THE DUBLIN CROSSING SPECIFIC PLAN PA 08 -049 WHEREAS, the Applicant, Dublin Crossing LLC (SunCal Companies) has submitted a Planning Application to enable private development on approximately 189 acres of property that is currently part of the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area. The proposal includes the approval of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, General Plan Amendments, Zoning Ordinance Amendments, Rezoning properties to a new Dublin Crossing Zoning District, and consideration of a Development Agreement and certification of an Environmental Impact Report, among other related actions. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the "Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Project" or the "Project "; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan requires that certain amendments be made to the General Plan so that the two documents are consistent; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (DCSP) project area is approximately 189 acres in size and is generally bound by 5t" Street to the north, Scarlett Drive to the west, Dublin Boulevard to the south, and Arnold Road to the east. The Project Area includes properties identified by Assessor Parcel Numbers 986- 0001 - 001 -15 (partial), 986- 0034- 002 -00, and 986- 0034 - 006 -00; and WHEREAS, the Project would adopt the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan with permitted land uses, development standards, and design guidelines. The land uses and development standards provide for future development in the planning area. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is a separately bound document attached as Exhibit A -1 and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the General Plan land use designation in the project area is amended to a new designation: "Dublin Crossing," so it is consistent with the land uses permitted by the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. In addition, other provisions of the General Plan are amended to allow the urban development of the Project area which was previously designated "Public Lands" in the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City environmental regulations, require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, the City prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated June 2013 for the proposed Project which reflected the City's independent judgment and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated from June 24, 2013 to August 8, 2013 (45 days) for public comment; and 1 WHEREAS, comments received on the Draft EIR were reviewed and responded to, and the Final EIR (that contains the Response to Comments) dated October 2013 was prepared; and WHEREAS, consistent with section 65352.3 of the California Government Code, the City obtained a contact list of local Native American tribes from the Native American Heritage Commission and notified the tribes on the contact list of the opportunity to consult with the City on the proposed General Plan amendment. None of the contacted tribes requested a consultation within the 90 -day statutory consultation period and no further action is required under section 65352.3; and WHEREAS, on October 22, 2013, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution xx -xx recommending that the City Council certify the Final EIR for the project, which Resolution is incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours; and WHEREAS, on October 22, 2013, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution xx -xx recommending that the City Council approve the proposed General Plan amendments and adopt the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, which resolution is incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Project, including the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, General Plan Amendments, Zoning Ordinance Amendments, Rezoning property to a new Dublin Crossing Zoning District, and Environmental Impact Report, for the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the proposed General Plan amendments and proposed Specific Plan, on 2013, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, on , 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution XX -13 certifying the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR and adopting CEQA findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Final EIR and all above - referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony to evaluate the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council finds that the General Plan amendments, as set forth below, are in the public interest, will promote general health, safety and welfare, and that the General Plan as amended will remain internally consistent. The development envisioned by the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is consistent with the guiding and implementing policies of the General Plan in each of the Elements and will allow for development of mixed -use, commercial, residential, and public facility (parks, school) uses in a key infill development area that is within the service boundaries for utilities, the circulation network, and will provide new connections through the community in an area where they are 2 currently limited. The development of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan will aid in the implementing the goals and policies of the General Plan Land Use Element, Housing Element, Public Lands and Utilities Element, Circulation and Scenic Highways Element, Community Design and Sustainability Element, and the Economic Development Element. The General Plan amendments noted below will ensure that the implementation of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is in compliance with the General Plan and that each Element within the General Plan is internally consistent. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts the following amendments to the General Plan: The Table of Contents will be amended to reflect the changes noted below Chapter 1: Background Figure 1 -1 (Land Use exhibit) shall be amended to include one new General Plan land use designation: "Dublin Crossing" All property in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan project area boundary shall have the Dublin Crossing land use designation. Figure 1 -1 shall also be revised to include the Dublin Crossing Planning Area boundary. Figure 1 -2 (Planning Areas exhibit) shall be amended to include the Dublin Crossing Planning Area Boundary Section 1.4 Primary and Extended Planning Areas shall be amended to read The General Plan includes policies for all four of the City's Planning Areas: the Primary Planning Area, Eastern Extended Planning Area, Western Extended Planning Area, and the Dublin Crossing Planning Area. The Primary Planning Area consists of the original 1982 City boundaries and those annexations occurring to the west between 1985 and 1991 and is roughly 3,100 acres. The Eastern Extended Planning Area is located east of the Primary Planning Area while the Western Extended Planning Area is located west of the Primary Planning Area. The Eastern and Western Extended Planning Areas are coterminous with the City's Sphere of Influence and are described in further detail below. The Dublin Crossing Planning Area consists of approximately 189 acres north of Dublin Boulevard between Scarlett Drive and Arnold Road. New Section 1.4.3 shall be added: 1.4.3 Dublin Crossing Planning Area The Dublin Crossing Planning Area boundaries are coterminous with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan boundary. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is a plan for the orderly development of approximately 189 acres that includes 8.7 acres owned by Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, an 8.9 acre parcel owned by NASA, and an approximately 172 acre portion of the 2,485 -acre Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Camp Parks) in the center of Dublin, north of Interstate 580 and Dublin Boulevard. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan addresses the future development of the project area, which includes demolition of the existing buildings and other improvements on the site and construction of a residential mixed -use project as described in the Specific Plan. 3 Section 1.8.1.3 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and Employee Density Measurements for Non - Residential Classifications shall be amended to read: Unless otherwise identified in a Specific Plan or other policy document, Floor Area Ratio (FAR) measurements for General Plan purposes are based on gross acreage. Gross acreage shall be determined by calculating the area of the site and by adding one -half of the area of abutting streets, provided that the street width used for calculation shall not be less than 25 feet or more than 50 feet. Public or private streets within the boundaries of the site, as well as streets abutting the site, shall be calculated within the gross acreage total. Employee density measurements for General Plan purposes are based on gross building square footage and are used to estimate the number of jobs within each classification. The minimum and maximum permitted FAR's, where applicable, and employee density measurements are shown in parentheses next to each land use classification. New Section 1.8.1.8 shall be amended to read: 1.8.1.8 Dublin Crossing Planning Area Dublin Crossing. This designation allows for a range of residential and commercial uses at a variety of densities and FARS consistent with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Employee densities for commercial uses in this Planning Area are consistent with other commercial land use designations at 200 — 450 square feet per employee. Existing Section 1.8.1.8 shall be renumbered to 1.8.1.9 Chapter 2: Land Use Element New Section 2.5 shall be amended to read: The Dublin Crossing Planning Area is approximately 189 acres that includes 8.7 acres owned by Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, an 8.9 acre parcel owned by NASA, and an approximately 172 acre portion of the 2,485 -acre Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Camp Parks) in the center of Dublin, north of Interstate 580 and Dublin Boulevard. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan addresses the future development of the project area, which includes demolition of the existing buildings and other improvements on the site and construction of a residential mixed -use project. The development potential of the Dublin Crossing Planning Area is noted in Table 2.4. Table 2.4: Land Use Development Potential — Dublin Crossing Planning Area Specific Plan Total Permitted Density Total Residential Total Commercial Land Use District Net Acreage(') Development Potential Development Potential Dublin Crossing Medium 41.9 6.0 -14.0 units /net acre Density Residential (DC MDR) n/a Dublin Crossing Medium- 46.5 14.1 -25 units /net acre High Density Residential (DC M -HDR) Up to 1,995 dwelling units Mixed Use (MU) (2) 13.2 20.1 -60 units /net acre 0.25 to 1.0 FAR 75,000 to 200,000 gross square feet General Commercial /DC 9.1 Medium -High Density 14.1 -25 units /net acre 12 Specific Plan Total Permitted Density Total Residential Total Commercial Land Use District Net Acreage(') Development Potential Development Potential Residential (GC /DC M- 0.25 to 1.0 FAR HDR) (" General Commercial /DC 9.9 20.1 -60 units /net acre High Density Residential (3) 0.25 to 1.0 FAR (GC /DC HDR) School (S)(51 12 6.0 -14.0 units /net acre n/a Park (P) (4) 30 n/a n/a n/a Open Space (OS) 2.6 n/a n/a n/a Roadways, Utilities, and 23.8 n/a n/a n/a other Infrastructure Total Project Area 189 acres Total Population 5,387 persons (1,995 units at 2.7 persons per dwelling unit) Total Employment 444 to 1,000 jobs N otes: (1) Net acreage is defined as the gross acreage less backbone street, public street, and right -of -way area. (2) The Mixed Use land use district shall contain a minimum of 75,000 gross square feet of commercial uses (with a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.0 for the area designated for commercial development) and a 5 acre neighborhood park. In conjunction with an application that meets these commercial and park requirements, residential uses are permitted with a density of 20.1 to 60 units /net acre. FAR applies only to commercial uses. (3) Can have commercial only, mixed -use, or residential -only uses. FAR applies only to commercial uses. (4) Park acreage is net usable acres. In the case of the 30 net -acre Community Park, the park is exclusive of Chabot Creek. (5) The school site may be developed at the Dublin Crossing Medium Density Residential (DC MDR) use and density if the site is not utilized by the Dublin Unified School District and if the Specific Plan maximum of 1,995 residential units is not exceeded. Existing Section 2.5 shall be renumbered to 2.6 Section 2.6.6 shall be amended to read: 2.6.6 Dublin Crossing Planning Area A. Guiding Policy 1. Any commercial development in the Dublin Crossing Planning Area shall be in compliance with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. B. Implementing Policies 1. Concentrate commercial uses near the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road. Commercial development should be focused in the Mixed Use (MU) land use district and a minimum of 75,000 square feet of commercial uses will be located in this land district prior to allowing commercial in the General Commercial /Dublin Crossing Medium -High Density Residential (GC /DC M -HDR) and General Commercial /Dublin Crossing High Density Residential (GC /DC HDR) land use districts. 2. Commercial development shall be designed to be consistent with the development standards and design guidelines of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Existing Section 2.6 shall be renumbered to 2.7 New Section 2.7.7 shall be added: 2.7.7 Dublin Crossing Planning Area A. Guiding Policy 1. Any residential development in the Dublin Crossing Planning Area shall be in compliance with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. 5 B. Implementing Policies 1. Locate higher density residential uses along Dublin Boulevard and within one -half mile walking or biking distance to transit facilities. 2. Promote development of a wide variety of housing types and housing alternatives for Dublin residents. 3. Allow the development of residential units consistent with the Dublin Crossing Medium Density Residential (DC MDR) land use district, development standards, and design guidelines should DUSD choose to not construct a school facility on the site designated for school uses. 4. Residential development shall be designed to be consistent with the development standards and design guidelines of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Chapter 3: Parks and Open Space Element Figure 3 -1 (Parks and Open Space exhibit) shall be amended to include the Dublin Crossing Planning Area Boundary, the location of future parks in the Planning Area, and the location of future bike lanes in the Planning Area as identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. New Section 3.2.3 shall be added: 3.2.3 Dublin Crossing Planning Area A. Guiding Policy 1. The creation of any new parks or open space areas for the preservation of natural resources or for public health and safety in the Dublin Crossing Planning Area shall be in compliance with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. B. Implementing Policies 1. Provide pedestrian and bicycle facilities to meet the goals and objectives of the Specific Plan and to promote alternatives to automobile use and reduce parking demand. Pedestrian sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and multi -use trails shall safely connect residential, commercial, and recreational uses to each other and to transit facilities. 2. Community and Neighborhood Park land shall be owned by the City of Dublin and shall be used in accordance with the Specific Plan. Land designated as open space, creeks and waterways, and water treatment /detention /bioretention facilities required to serve the Specific Plan area will not be owned or maintained by the City of Dublin. 3. Underground water detention facilities shall be allowed within the envelope of Central Park and shall be designed to enable the development of or programming of above- ground facilities. 4. The re- aligned drainage channel (now referred to as Chabot Creek) shall be allowed within the Central Park land envelope, but shall not be included within the 30 net -acre calculation of usable park land. Chabot Creek shall not be a part of the public -owned park land, but shall be owned and maintained by a separate entity that is acceptable to the City. New Section 3.4.4 shall be added: 3.4.4 Dublin Crossing Planning Area A. Guiding Policy 1. The creation of any new parks or open space areas for outdoor recreation in the Dublin Crossing Planning Area shall be in compliance with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. 0 B. Implementing Policies 1. Locate the Community Park near the intersection of Dublin Boulevard, Scarlett Drive and the Iron Horse Regional Trail to provide physical and visual access to the Dublin Community and to enable a strong connection between the parks in the Specific Plan area and the Iron Horse Regional Trail. 2. The park and open space system shall be designed to reinforce a sense of community identity and character for the Specific Plan area and the City of Dublin. 3. Create a park system in which each park satisfies the recreation needs of a variety of user groups and a range of active and passive activities. 4. Create public open spaces that are active, safe, and inviting, and allow for playful elements, such as interactive sculptures and furniture. Chapter 4: Schools, Public Lands, and Utilities Elements Figure 4 -1 (Schools and Public Lands exhibit) shall be amended to include the Dublin Crossing Planning Area Boundary and the location of the future school site in the Planning Area as identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Section 4.2.1 shall be amended to read: 4.2.1 All Planning Areas Section 4.3.1 shall be amended to read: 4.3.1 All Planning Areas Section 4.4.1 shall be amended to read: 4.4.1 All Planning Areas Section 4.5.1 shall be amended to read: 4.5.1 All Planning Areas Section 4.6.1 shall be amended to read: 4.6.1 All Planning Areas Section 4.7.1 shall be amended to read: 4.6.1 All Planning Areas Chapter 5: Circulation and Scenic Highways Element Figure 5 -1 (Roadway Classifications) shall be amended to include the new roadways identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Figures 5 -2a and 5 -2b (Transit Map) shall be amended to include the new roadways, school site, parks, and open space areas identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Figures 5 -3a and 5 -3b (Bicycle Circulation) shall be amended to include the new bicycle facilities and roadways identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Figures 5 -4a and b (Multi -Modal Map) shall be amended to include all new public facilities identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Section 5.2.2 shall be amended to read: 5.2.2 All Planning Areas Section 5.2.6 shall be amended to read: 5.2.6 Dublin Crossing Planning Area — Additional Policies 7 The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan contains policies and guidelines which aim to create a multi - modal circulation system to serve the project area as well as provide safe and convenient connections to the rest of the City. The policies contained in Chapter 4 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan shall be implemented as development in the Planning Area is carried out. Existing Section 5.2.6 shall be renumbered to Section 5.2.7 Section 5.3.1 shall be amended to read: 5.3.1 All Planning Areas Section 5.4.3 shall be amended to read: 5.4.3 All Planning Areas Section 5.5.1 shall be amended to read: 5.5.1 All Planning Areas Section 5.6.1 shall be amended to read: 5.6.1 All Planning Areas Section 5.7.1 shall be amended to read: 5.7.1 All Planning Areas Section 5.9.1 shall be amended to read: 5.9.1 All Planning Areas Chapter 7: Conservation Element The headings of Sections 7.2.1, 7.3.1, 7.5.1, 7.6.1, 7.7.1, and 7.8.1 shall be amended to read: All Planning Areas Chapter 8: Seismic Safety and Safety Element Figure 8 -1 (Geologic Hazards and Constraints) shall be amended to be in conformance with updated information on the location of fault traces through the Dublin Crossing Planning Area. The headings of Sections 8.2.1, 8.3.1.1, 8.3.2.1, 8.3.3.1, and 8.3.4.1 shall be amended to read: All Planning Areas Chapter 9: Noise Element Section 9.2.1 shall be amended to read: All Planning Areas Chapter 10: Community Design and Sustainability Element Figure 10 -5 (Villages) shall be amended to change the "Camp Parks Exchange Areas" designation to "Dublin Crossing Specific Plan" New Section 10.2.E shall be amended to read. E. Dublin Crossing Specific Plan The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (DCSP) provides policies and regulations for development in this 189 acre area north of Dublin Boulevard between Scarlett Drive and Arnold Road. The Specific Plan includes regulations on permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited land uses, development standards, and design guidelines, and provides the framework for the development of future public facilities. All other section shall be renumbered appropriately. 8 Section 10.7.4.K shall be amended to read: Implement the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, which has been created to incorporate many policies and guidelines from the Community Design and Sustainability Element. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council finds that the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is consistent with the Dublin General Plan as amended, based on the following- 1 . Create a strong connection between the eastern and western parts of the City and enhance the City's circulation network; 2. Establish residential land use categories, development standards, and design guidelines that encourage diverse housing options to meet the needs of the current and future population; 3. Develop a combination of residential uses and commercial uses to provide jobs, goods, and services to people within the project area as well as throughout the community; 4. Accommodate community needs by providing public spaces such as public parks, open space, and school facilities in close proximity to commercial and residential uses; 5. Create opportunities for living and working in close proximity to transit (BART) thereby minimizing vehicular use; 6. Maximize the use of non - vehicular connections through the strategic placement and variation of land uses and densities, and the creation of safe multi -modal transportation networks both through the site and into the larger community; and 7. Establish new communities that will not have a negative impact the City infrastructure, facilities, or services. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council finds that the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan complies with the requirements of State law (Government Code section 65450 et. seq.) based on the following. 1. The distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan are described in Chapter 1 (Introduction /Background) and Chapter 2 (Land Use and Development Standards) of the Specific Plan; 2. The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses are described in Chapter 4 (Circulation and Streetscape Design), Chapter 5 (Infrastructure and Public Services), and Chapter 6 (Public Realm); 3. The standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable, are described in Chapter 2 (Land Use and Development Standards), Chapter 3 (Design Guidelines), and Chapter 6 (Public Realm). 4. A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) is described in Chapter 7 (Administration, Implementation, and Financing). 5. The specific plan includes a statement of the relationship of the specific plan to the General Plan in Chapter 1 (Introduction). 0 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A -1. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2013 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk G:IPA #120081PA 08 -049 Camp Parks—Dublin Crossing12011 RestartlPC Mtg 10.22.20131PC Att 3 - Exhibit A -CC Reso SP and GPA.docx 2185641.1 10 MIT (3) O 0 U Q) C O -C Q s � m L O 0 Z o0 � -V) 0 } 0') O C O C3 Q O C3 N s \ . s � j 6 O s v0 V N O p u } 3 ca > CD u N Ln O — c Q C M I- r r i C i s s I- r r 0 O LL, V LU Z" Ix LU 0 r -1 1.01 ■ ZO Ll E 0 V) z Q U U IL N 0 z N O U z 07 � c c } clf m 7C) ° O L ° ~ O = _O c O U } >��,� 7r; s -3,> J - V Z _ u u 00 O W - N = 3 s a 3 _ 0 0 E 0 V) z Q U U IL N 0 z N O U z 07 Z Z O U O w o] Q LO M V M r— N mot' M -O V V r— N M V LI-) 00 00 ,Z LO �j \O a) V � � C _Y) N � C) J 6 (j) w 'O LV m V � O Q _0 o a) N LL- - C: a El- V a) LO O O Z Oc: H U 0 O C) N O c O Cl- +_ V a) C2 N a) c O CL +_ V a) C2 Uj CL V O C O N c O U °' - n •X C)) C: N L J 0 sZ •- S N o N N a) CT N K O F— V) U Cl- CL N w Cf V) z •N N W Z J W _ ^ V (D �_ N a) N N C v 0 0 a > U �_Z s Q O N x c o V 1 C S LLJ O O c a) W 0 ° T v Ln o � UJ ID i s i U U ° CY) ' a) - C3 L Cl- H Z V C3 o C) u i u U m ° o ZS o 3 a) Z a) _� N LU _ 0 > C) O • CA o Q a W N o V LO 10 U M M M M M M U Q) r— N N V O O N V r— N M V LI-) 00 00 LO �j \O a) \O � C _Y) N � C) J 6 (j) 16 'O LV m V � O Q _0 o a) - C: a El- V a) LO O O Z Oc: H U 0 O C) N O c O Cl- +_ V a) C2 N a) c O CL +_ V a) C2 V p, V 0 w O 2 c: 6 4z L c _O d _ V a) 0- N c O U °' - n •X C)) C: N L J 0 sZ •- S N o N N a) CT N K O F— V) V) CO CL N w Cf V) z N W Z J W _ ^ V (D �_ N a) N N C v 0 0 a > U �_Z s Q O N x c o V 1 C S LLJ O O c a) o o p Z N ri v Ln o � Do r— N M 'O '0 CT O U r— N M V LI-) 00 00 LO �j \O \O \O � C _Y) N � J 6 (j) 16 1 1 m V � C3� C N O W N W Z J W _ ^ V (D �_ N a) N N C v 0 0 a > U �_Z s Q O N x c o V 1 C S LLJ O O c a) o o p Z a) a) a� E E a a) E } — N U U :�i LU W N o V LO 10 U M M M M M M U Q) N LU N Z cm O U w a CL a) m O a) i O C a V) D 06 U LU Q rn a) U i •V .N O L. L = 2 e 3 ° ° V Q E o a) W .--. (n _ 0) a°)i L s M a) t3 'E U to °-0 u U E ° E O O a) o O 0 a 0 U U U Z u LL a aL n Z N M� Ln� N M-i- L o Lrn �o CV 0, M M M I, N N 7 7 7 C? N N N N N N O DC Q 0 Z N Z LU O N J a) V N W LU L ,C6 V N V O L N "V O N C p N C ,Oii L U U Q C) 6- a) D V) N CA a) v E -o :D °) o a) O 0 a) S Z g N CO T U N N N N N N N CV Z Q V E U w N 0 U z ro 0 M r O LO N 10 M ri ri M M V) � C _Y) N � (j) V � C3� C N O W N W Z J W _ ^ V (D �_ N a) N N C v 0 0 a > U �_Z s Q O N x c o V 1 C S LLJ O O c a) o o p Z a) a) a� E E a a) E } — N U U :�i W N M V LO 10 M M M M M M M Z Q V E U w N 0 U z ro 0 / LLJ \ u \ \ e \ \ \ \ _ j u _ / 0 & t 4 o c m» 10 O� a »< o o m t a m t ^ 9 9 9 9 m m g g m m m m t t t J 3 2 / 0/ m in a& && m m Cl) A A A A CO CO t t t : ƒ : ƒ \ : ) > 7 � t 3 \ \ ) / ƒ )/ g j J '/ t E ( § E ( \ \ : e : b / 0 \ : o > 9 : k } / / \ : 7 ƒ ƒ U 7 : o : $ c % : ° } g : 7 o / .g -.2 / ) / : J : ƒ } E ' ƒ / ƒ_ ' o / J / ' : \ / e * » ' / 7 / ® f _ G _ / \ : - 7 c 2 g = / § ± % / > — c W \ \ [ ƒ 7 / 2 2 ƒ \ e 2 ƒ J ƒƒ ) o 3/ \/ 0 2 3 o- ƒ 2$ c 2 7% / o $ ± I / c e -0 .z f E E S } / / J ^ [ ƒ / T \ ƒ \ \ 2 / / [ ƒ \ % \ § ) 0 S c ® 3 > ® / \ \ a 3 < c „ \ Q 2 > > L 7 2 / \ / / I / / / / \ \ / / / / / \ \ / / m m m a m a& m m m m m m m m m m t t t J 7 7 9 7 7 7 J J J J* J 7« 7« J J a a-0 a s a-0 a a a» a» a -0 -0-0 a -0-0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c o 0 0 ++ e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 41 W -gat w ae z a J U U N O V Z m 0 a� s O �+ O Q _ ZL 0 N O V) E Q E L O O Z O �� -C) Q V N Q X V 0 cn C :'= V i— N C O f— U 41 W -gat w ae z a J U U N O V Z m 0 Z O U D D O H Z M z Q U V w CD Z O U Z D C) N L } ° _ _ O O c v C a) V C N a) S N N u V C a) a) O U N a) > C C E c �T > o Q) Q 3 L q) s a E 0) Q ° o v' 3 c :D 0 ° - p V o c O o N > O-C O c 0 Q a > j w n a u a) ° " V O > Q) > u v > Q • E 0 u N '� u t N � a •0 > a a 3 O E O O O> c S u > > o -0 O Q Q a) O I� a a Q> oo i > c a -6 O M > > N T._ c > > 3 s N> 3 c a p> O a no o �_ u N c Z) c vv i V) O Q O> a a Q T — t a) N Q w T C O t > - i > T-0 U C cn Z) C v o- u N ° > t' C p 4 O C E U U .� C C W °u tLl > in > N c N �_ > > N > Ou ) C c �` -4 > 7 Q) N� > c c° o o> a> p> U > a° a N 3 �O N N V E�> -6 a N O a -c«' a N Q) O s •c c Id w a _ o N p u E c o� c Q E aa)) u 3 E g s .0 > S L °> > U u t 'N ° 3 N a -C Q) ° a c 3 .� s p _ > U ° o ° ° u 0 -0 ° O O O° r 3 v a c a N s `n a V V ° > v b C3 > a— > a O a o L u N> Q) u) 'p -0 •> > w O > a) O c U ULr-- U o �aO p= N Q U sv s 4 o b u L � N 7 c c b b ba u c tL b - L V Q) a > _ ° 0 N Q) a a> ) -a U u Q) o > -a � c ° E a E c a > m > 3 au a a� > -a > a > a V T E > a '> a_ a U O i o T> E— c > E as > a L E a) � o us c� -c CL > > a V t > > a > a E ° qL o O Z) a O c E a O a) _0 a o Q O O a 0) a ) a) a) T E c: a) u > > � c ) D _ o v O s u O v a .0 ? a c c n > o a a o Q > i a^ a -a ° _ C, V u o N a 3> a a 3 a rn a u E > _> a > a t t = u N > a° `o V) N L n O _� a > u N > >> E Q) > E a Q)) -a > Q O o > a •� T Q C - > N N V L a -= C V) -C •� N C p ui C 'o 0 0 °) a) N o-0 > N >> V a C N a N w -a Q) C Q -a = C O a a) E a>i c Q a) o a D u E > a a ° ° 3 a -> > a c s 0 = c a E C) s i p N 3 N a E N E -F a ° ac o 3 3, a o c c> > � 1 E o a > E N� a E� rn O a c= ? S c N° N O Q) Li u Q 0 O o a c � E N Q a V a- . � •a s u a p -0 c o Q) o u 7 _0 c> > >. V Q V u 3 > N c p) O u .0 O N> > 3 a a o 0 a a c o a' a a -0� .� c u -° > o o - o O a s c ° Q) 0 ;} - N a > -a N Q) I Q p O E Q ��- c —a aai a a�ci • o aai c `� 0 p ° c a c o u s a ° 3 a N a cn ° o? o 0) O w U c/) cs w N c U Q w-C (n u Q E o E r 0 0 ■ . ° a ■ o c- o u o 3 N N . > > > .> s s > Q- M z Q U V w CD Z O U Z D C) z O H U O F- z T a } _T C c a) O U a) s a } c a) o 0� c— -o 0 o U E p (� _ -aa � y a Q y a) E N y u a) 2u } O a) o C V d cn > O O+ ` U N O _O t >°° a) y QUc-O a T a) E u N E C U V C -a •0 V Q a a) a O N O aa) ) a) C aj c ap 0 0 ai aN C i W a O c O C o 0 c ` EN a -o a O c a fl- Q) o 0 a) C_0 a a L- a) E C -a `. D C a) �r p a p a �O Q. 'N — O a O a }O C N o Q C c t p i 7- V a a) u Q E a) 0 Q N N o N E O C(D U' O C t _ a `o-0 c0 c a) u a.c L y •� N a � 0) c N E 0 N u j a u Q C� :D s a Q cQE V v p 0 a aL o � 0 a o - o.) C Q- > Q n n aa ) L -o u O Z a) •c o 0) CV u a) N a E 2 nN > y O y O O a c 0 M ypo o ° 0 °-a _° oLn C > L J r O_ U c�-i a a.c QoOV) a) c =) O c E a E a) E o a) u N a) ,� 3 O T o N a) N U C C s Ei a � Q...O L -t a) a) a ,C H o c Q a) E E = O a) -0 ` •E ) O i .O C Q .� Q O u a a a) y 3 O a 4) Q N a) s a) N i a U' a) > c N c N Q) O a) -a O a N O N a � a o N O c c O -0 p N �' -a O h a) s a) E o_ C O O . ,� ° p _ 3 a) .2 O c a) = a ? c o o i C p u V N N 0 c '� � 6 O aL L a1 —a) C O o y c E O v o a) N 0 ) E a) =) N a) O O a ) o L p- a s S E E U o p u - C o o a) - V o Q O a) c c o n o n 6 L O u Q a) c a a o a s 3 V a o V m L O c CL c 0 0 - L C a -p U a aC oa r's -0 a c ° e - ° o a a C3 Q) L c c O a a) a s a , N a C N a E V D o) 7 � N C a) L d O 0) O '� t -" a) -a E L E -,a6 0 o m c '- a U u k C o L O 0 o 0) a Q a U a 3 N �c E ' N c Q° a a a) _ O_ - a N a) ) 0) NC ° o -Q 4? c o o •O a° � ° 3 a C -a c -a °0 ) y .'} N c D a " O a N 0) N c c o T C a i .N V p- _ _ _ a) C c a a) a s L N E C N Q._ a > 0 3 o u a) L a a a °) o o o u O O y ) �V a E m a) c a) a c 0 o c 0) a u C3 Co _a V V C C o— C a , a1 a a = X D u a a N C 0 C 0 c a E a c o a u a) N -0 > O c a) 0 3 c > O -o O S Ca � c a ' E d L 'a 0 a c c a)c O a ) a) O — `� a a a 0 a -J-- y O a N N a) a 0 C N i 'p V a v O C 0 -C a N C > O c . E a u a a) O V O C ° a O o a a> 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 U U a a) a () Cl- u a) w a u a o_ a a s z m LL O r z / e u / 2 e z & ƒa 3: >. § k o / q 2 -0 E e 2 / \ $ < 2 \ 3 \ _§ \ \ f ƒ ± ƒ 0 - E t $ \ � E � u Q) 0) u � ƒ § 0 *(§ 0ƒ ƒ\ i o c 0 - Q ƒ 0 o Q) 0) §& 7 Z a- P x@ o o E a Q »E° 0§ -® 2c ®\ 0 0 0 0 - Q§/ 7 Eƒ 2 3 /fie k/ § -0§� /(/ 0- a) a) /- < Euo %f e E ._ . t e ? & « £ -0 u� \\ Z k /° a) c e±a - Eo 'x@) ƒ£ƒo : o e -cƒ 0 7 7± u x u e �In Ua) �k ƒ \m§ //§ o f 0» a)\ ƒ E© o u%§ c@ ƒ/ 7 ®•/ o o§ o 0 8'@ \ . 3 ƒ 7 « ° _ & t .- Q) w2/ )v) E o 7'; ®» 2 ° ƒ n �'> 4 o - G / \ % ± 0 % \ § / e J b ) 2 t o u °t &.± / ° °��cƒ S§ a§ 7 e x aƒ a 5 E 2% of °§°G0 \ƒ o -2<. \: o E ? - > 0 g 2 \ § 0)-o \ ƒ ¥ e / ± T E % / % o a 07 § x ƒ ƒ ¥ / u.§ 3ƒ 7 mƒ 7\ x» 7§ a E \ ®! / E7 �a ƒ C3 o & u a •2 C m U> Q o 7 m 0-0 -a o± »§ aSbb / 0 / }k *E c4 \< x±00 \•ue <U Lux ƒ ƒ '/ 0 0 � 7 $ ?22� 0 -N a22} / & c of - o 127E %��u All j CLu \ \ Z } u Z \ c z O V 0 O ce z z 0 O r H v i c a) o O T _ c a p } s a) p N p N u p p C a D s C o 3 a N ° a a ° C U C Q) p> .o a a o)-a t O O .E o a) N C _ a) C o _ •- u lD u C c C u a 0 -:F N C a 0 -0 p c� O a v) Lo o O Q a) o a) 0 N t a a ° E U C � -a a) = E , - °� X — � D O a o c o Q c t° c a s a) a) O m N ai a s a -o 0 T o 3 � c N 0 N E a E a w N u a pap N a a) a) a 0 s o 7 O C C o 0 c -o a c s °" O ,p 0 0 c C ° 0 p o o o� u ° a) o _ a N cm o ° -C ' a) E ° a >° p a 0 E 0 O E Q u � �E E -0 c- ua° ) •- `c aN a Q G a 0 .a -�2 E -a Q O O ' O � c 2 o o C } V) a) a— a 67 a _ a C: C p0 � — a _ O C ai iE cj a) a� c a N a -a a T N } *% 2� a ta O d a N. X o c d o ~ ° n L C o 0 ° O ° E c V E c o c v W > a) ° a) c a U a) a o a s c a .} N 5 O _ CU a U 3E 3: 0 O O Q- T c/) o- a) `� o a) s� '> r -, � C s C N E V J E} a— u a-'6 O Q a) O ) L E 0 O o O4 u) u C o a U o c Q Q N `- x 0 a) N D a) E o U a D N > s ■ a a) 0 N p a(D S U 0- CN 00 > C a C6 O o � � N Lf� N i° � a `) V) _0 -C u Co -2 U CV U C: o p o m 3 N o N N u c s a CL a) E - _ a u Q 3 N C a Q a o 0- o Q0N . . � ._ o w > u an U N ao'- aN ) :D -0 a) _0 a) a tV C2 N C •� a o f2 } a \ -a N a °) �_ a) E a t •o ° cl- j D a) C O .V V V ¢ o i W N a- v o '3 c •� a 0= 6 Q a •3 O Q E � c a) cn D > v o Gi a) V O `~ D a) -a C) a — E C a) a) a s c a a a Q c p C c o a E o N W C, '� -0 .0 N C E < C a N > O N N i T E o D C) } N O a) Q) C O a) E Q v Q o a u C C — — a _ O �� a a C: Q C 0 E 3 0 ' a N a) ._ N L E a w C a 0- c 3 � U N > }aci i!f O E c: E p N -a o Q) > ° n a>) V 0 V o a C O a) w a) f O� 0 a) U o E o a o> °`� ° E °) Q a Q a o �aci Q G. Q) a a) ° w a) o _o o X ° a iA -a _ _ ~_ a) E N a c o .� E '3 O 0 j ° N > a) C`c c a a o u 4._ °) a>> 0 o> a) a a o p _ 0 a) Q T a) V 4) -Q N O L' v a) a) C V C a1 0 aui -a _ C a) > p u C a) _T o o O a'a Q) a a E 3 0 a Q U v-) N U a� v) a CD a G. -0 0 3 Q - o a o c c/, r c a a u N p •- Q) c Q) C L 0 V a o � s fE 2 't —0 c O r F- z 0 O r H v i ' Ilk t � t �_c4; z O F- U O 2 F- z 0) a) o 0) N Q 0 _ s Q) -0 U >` Q) N -0 C3 V O — 3 EF s N _0 O- o O 0 0 �0 U 0 N CJ V X Q O V; QL au) U� c C3 ? 0 N EL O V N _ CJ U O CJ -a o U a N Q) � C N 0 O 0 m � oo Q) C Ln O O N O -0 E O a N C) Q N y O -CJ C S -O o E C- N o' O ° C s o t C O O c O t Q c O O } C N Cl) a) C O- N a N O Q U C C X N 'C: cr- O O �C C C 0 Q cn O N Q) u 3 t c V) o _0U O N O C •u O -O O CJ L > p a -0 C Z3 7 0 ~ i N S -° 'N > C~ ° 6 O OC p m +. C �e N p ag U C N L N a c iJ Q) a) N 0-0 OS j N -0 t U C — s .�. C N C3 6 j O O E N 7 'N C a Q>j N i3 O O � > p -0 Q. Q N 0 2 Q 5 c c -0 a- m t � 6 o O -0 c -p C u, E (1) i c O c > j o LL. c L a) L U o -a E O � L p C `� m O C > ° E C c L m s 3 C CJ Q u Ln i L ca L p N CJ O s •� � ac 3 E i = a>> N Q) N O in -6 C 7 N V p >a) - JG > CJ O Q j L CJ > -0 J - m 0) a) o 0) N Q 0 _ s Q) -0 U >` Q) N -0 C3 V O — 3 EF s N _0 O- o O 0 0 �0 U 0 N CJ V X Q O V; QL au) U� c C3 ? 0 N EL O V N _ CJ U O CJ -a o U a N Q) � C N 0 O 0 m � oo Q) C Ln O O N O -0 E O a N C) Q N y O -CJ C S -O o E C- N o' O ° C s o t C O O c O t Q c O O } a) O N C O C V O a O i3 N E o C 0-0 N S -° 'N > C~ ° 6 O OC N C V N C C O i pp � a) O Q) O C) C O ) E: Y aO � '° O � -0 a) ° C C V _ -O Q X = U C O a a) o z C 0 -0 > o o O o � Q C j O O Q -Q > j Ln C i N O s N Q) 3_ � N O u> Q 'a s O /) O - O u Q) -o O CO 0 E "O N E 0 o c O O u a D O U CJ •- p 6 X C p N 3 O s iC n c 0) N N a) Q 0 E O a � O s -O Q A o 3 o c 0 0 0 O t C s o X > Q Q- 0 O u Ln (D Y) u O -O C 0) O 0 ° O E ° > Q 3 c c O V — CJ s N O O V O -O L O — °N a 0-0 O C N i O Q O s O 0 s U 0 - C O O Q � C3 C) O CO p y CU O 10 0 Q) p c C c U 0 C3 LL CO C] Zr o° c i •C D O - c O N T 0� -a a> a L O C a E a -,a o O c c O C ° N Q -O a c _ 0 c • . I 00 p O u Q) O -0 CJ E ; V 0 -0 — Q) O a)) Q> O y 'o ; L 0-0 QX V c V) o >, 0 0 0 Q � N E CJ � O O < Q 0 Q) Q C Q O E Q C u V O N _3 Q Q m _ 0 V) O a> ° ° —o v> m vs O z Ns ° °' �_ a ° °' > 3 o CJ) Q N V O C _a o o > O N C2 Q) 57< W Qui s C C O C 'p N 7 O C O d CO) p •- 0 cn >, N p s p Q) U- u ] ° °° c of a> N -a o .E N u �[ O i3 Q) CJ) L u s -° E t t C i C N _ -o u 3 O o a) L a co rn �' a°i _ d Q '3 0 0� [L `� S O a) 0 N } O u > s •T C N u t .N p> a) c c c c CJ N iJ Q iZ L '� O u Q) 3 = C ~ C3 C3 u V) N s v } s s p p O L .� cn S CA Q O -p n O s c O 0 Q X s� � -o � O Q>) s O O O c V 5 p�� � N � O ��� 00 � H � C 0 cn W O 3 o V CJ V 3 N U C O o .E O N O LL. D C3 10 r Z O H V O z m Q c 6 a v 'v a� a N N N L 7 2) IL \ \ j 2 z 0c e 2 0 > } \ t m 3 ƒQ) £ \ � u� \0-± C3 C3 $.- \ f o 2 c o 2c: u2 o 'E u 2a u u 't-- 3 — 9 § _ § /S \/ Om ƒ ƒ3� o ƒ C: 0 % 7 - J o / .! o k - 2 I_ f t a i®c-cjT § 7 ) c 2 ƒ 2 0 ƒ ƒ tee[ /2ƒ ! § f ± o } 0 0 o e E G� S — E: & \.9�f•� i \ § ƒƒ 7 a / c /0 %ƒ ƒ / c .0 \ 2 0 a / -/ •- ? k § 0 F- .� ƒ / a .g o r \ 0 § 2 § \2 3 \-0 & %c j j \ \ \ ƒ —.CC) e o3 -0 . g =2 2 c i \ S e — .- '»+CI- � §T m5 __�E o -0 c o . . -C =) % - _ ' ° e c § ? ƒe7$ 9 J \ / \ 0- / � 0 m= § f c / 2 ƒ E •- t o C: — 2 2 ce < o � 0 m » -T 0 f ~ § C: �c < 3 \ ƒ � 7 2 ƒ <0)2ƒ — § F- o .- / c .E \ e7 )g \ ) `(u E ) u 4) J.Q 5 / § CO 2 / : R f 2 .� < b - < 0'b \ { /ƒ \ /may A� 0c e 2 0 > } \ t m 3 ƒQ) £ \ � u� \0-± C3 C3 $.- \ f o 2 c o 2c: u2 o 'E u 2a u u 't-- 3 — 9 § _ § /S \/ Om ƒ ƒ3� o ƒ C: 0 % 7 - J o / .! o k - 2 I_ f t a i®c-cjT § 7 ) c 2 ƒ 2 0 ƒ ƒ tee[ /2ƒ ! § f ± o } 0 0 o e E G� S — E: & \.9�f•� i \ § ƒƒ 7 a / c /0 %ƒ ƒ / c .0 \ 2 0 a / -/ •- ? k § 0 F- .� ƒ / a .g o r \ 0 § 2 § \2 3 \-0 & %c j j \ \ \ Z O U O H Z C O a N H Q a0 O X O L M L D LL Z g U U w d N Z N N O U Z J m 0 z O F- u D 0 O z -o c L o) c C c O O o 0 `0 c c S O O i L L O O O O a) ` `) 0 0 0 0 c c V 0 •- C C o o S C o C o) � a a) O O N N V V -O a] t t U V i O Q '� a 0 N N L L o o p - i 3 t a a) - -a 0 0 c c s V V s s� o o a) -_ C3 - o � � C C c c N N N a O a a a s o) -2 a) -o O Q - -o s s o o - -o a)t c c o 0 E _ .� o _ O O v) C C- ate r 0 0 3 3 s s c can o o 0 - o o o o� � � Q U y_ o O Q O O Q 3 3 s s a a N N � m c U� y o a o a 10 Q a) — 3 °� o � m 0 Q Z Z o a a ac) c c 0 E oa Lo ° U o o a) c c o j a 0 Qo' a a ° ° o o Q Q) ° T T C- c g gym° u u° D D os o O 0-0 N N a a 0 0 0 0 cn s L L = C a L Q 0 H E °U 0 o rn�-o ,C: a O o o N •- E o 4) o C o a� c 0 a) + v7 >' a p - O C Q V o L — h N F- E c °D C E X S_ L O a 0 3 C N j U o O ' 0 a -0 O a) C U Q= o ti a) °o- N =) a — o E i Q _ 3 a o E ai C: C: a) E o 0 0 c Os O Q t u N 0 Q c Q V - O N a) D EE a c o O V m N a) c S C 0 N ~ Q t c 0 .- V Q- N N t a) _ C o o o _ O - O O u j c m =° E o f a) V a c a) E L O yr > O O `� 7 H » U u Q H C 'a N O V W r a) c a) Q O a) > a) 0 c C O u a U .T L Q 0) c N 0 o 6 � C C o 0 a u O () au) s Q H cn 0 V C C- C: O a) O 0 a� t a) C a) C c O v X W ' C a) 0 D N C 0 LL u V o (D 3 y N > 0 o s-O- N a) a- Q- N o c O a) Q C . E N E ; E u 0� N N O d Q :F o) -a Q a) -o Q a E o) C a) � U C o o) V C s >� N > C' i V E i.0 >. Q X Lu 0 0 E vi s Q- Q -0 E C Do- —c E a) o O O Q a) O Q c 3 o -o s E o� 3 o pC to V a� E o•o U Q o m S o) a) a) N a) H o 0 0 z m D 0 LL O V C4 H C 'a N O V W r a) c a) Q O a) > a) 0 c C O u a U .T L Q 0) c N 0 o 6 � C C o 0 a u O () au) s Q H cn 0 V C C- C: O a) O 0 a� t a) C a) C c O v X W ' C a) 0 D N C 0 LL u V o (D 3 y N > 0 o s-O- N a) a- Q- N o c O a) Q C . E N E ; E u 0� N N O d Q :F o) -a Q a) -o Q a E o) C a) � U C o o) V C s >� N > C' i V E i.0 >. Q X Lu 0 0 E vi s Q- Q -0 E C Do- —c E a) o O O Q a) O Q c 3 o -o s E o� 3 o pC to V a� E o•o U Q o m S o) a) a) N a) H o 0 0 z m D 0 LL O V C4 Z H U H Z N t C L N Q V c N X W L LL N U- U w d N U Z N O U C L N N O a� u N C a C CL M r z O U D 0 O z N C N p E -a a) ° cm y 3 o N a- a a. a o a " a) N > a) •C a) �L N Q a) .0 a) ~ N Q LO o -'a a N N c �o U a) aa N � - -a t/> Q s Q a t a O p N a t C U 3 aO N a Q Q-a O > U0 c T; a) o Q C E j C a O a) C • a) U a: ti O O a a) > a _ p a s Q_ V o y t Q4 a o ° a .-0 a �- ) 0 o Q.E C3 'a _a S c co ) r. a c O a) N C3 N ° - -0 - c Q O -a c _a -a s o O o 0) a E c o U O N C c a) N c p c O a � a O u° O Q- a) t u N C -a C) N D N o . o E a E ) o c o p a ca u D CL a) c a) 0 a (D O Q N 0 C3 Q -a N 'C a 0 -a a) a -0 o C Q_ O ° a) a _ a) 3 Co - 0' E a 0) Q) a c a ° a 'o C , C: Q) N c O E - C o 0- > o ° a) ° o o 3 O C a aoa) ) ) � t u C 0) '- c o c p a- 0 o a) D 3 N u o �� � � Q o' � -a N U -o c o c 0 �c E o api o c a�ai 0 t u o a C) s- s N ', `+- m O O Q a u `~ u E N > a a ai c N s o O a) Q .� N c O cr) a N O V cn : a) C C O~ U .0 > C N a L } •C a) Q z- a) •� V a c c a o N a) N N a a a) o N o () a a� css °' U c �U 0 U a Q�t-a a) a a u C) O a) 0 0 Q -a a C p E p � 3 0 N a > a) () a Q) 0 a E °U _p a O 0- o O U) O O u� 0 � o _O U o a) p c U U v N s E a t a o0 3 - '> i cs u O s � c _ o a :E u Q o u _ Q N - N� QwN F--- Q_ C C: C a) -a 3 o c U -6 C a) a) a Q N c C p a a) C •� a) o� a� r a t � a a E c 3 a) a) a N N O CL a 'o s • • C p L - Q O d - ° u O 0 U -a o LE �Q cm a�. Qai o0° )- 00 o- -o u Q a U N a a) a) - •> Ol o i s Q > o a O p H o 3 a N u o Q 0 o N Q En C = c a c . c '`a a) - a a a n N a U .± 3 Ua ) o V a) a NQ E 0 c- O O� c �'0 u' N C d o 'E a) u -a • � 0= Q. ± . C N N aca i `� Q - a ' v 3 _ Q s ' a U a) a ai N `N c = _ u c} Cl _ n a c 0) N O a a c a C C D O U a 7 O a c a o a) E a -0 c a —o N 0 a �_V) a � ' u %-L- 0 ! - C C N o au Q) - a) o C O C o Q o s a c c Q cE 0 a u a) W N a N c a o v ° . C-) i O ° -0 U O 0 c 0 C - i a ac � a -0 O Q a 3� Cl- s N s a v) a� Q) V a c c a) _0 ) C3 C N 3 - ot � o C 0 c o ° N u ' 0 N O p v O u N . o O c Q a) (n p C N a) o U >. c C N a -Q -a a) 0 a a) -0 u s Q a) } Q 3 E a c N ° N O Q p'3s �� C C`n•- 3 C� U a a) a-O Cl. ° --�:N N 0 c- T a c 0 a) c Q E p a) u� a p> c v. a Q C N a) CL .y_ a V 4-- V 5 N O2 O d L a) O :.�- V C -a N p > Q_ N c u c a) o Q C ° o-0 Q a au) u t 0>> U� o a) 'o rn o a a c a N -ate �_ a 0- c 0 N u U' L a) a) U' E v) 2 Q N Q- Q 0 0 c O a r s .T vOi N s 0 a -0 -a V) - a D 0 a) s N H u 0 Q_ F- L M m 0 O r V a rn Q N _a a� -6 — 3 O C C — a a C �O O S V O C ^' Z a) O a) a p 0 N co S a p a 0 N a Q Z '' V H O a) C N CL -0 a h O C a4) a a O N a u u C C a a) ° S _a — _ o a a pC u > c a) O (D V) c a N U C N H S ) a) c a V LL 0 � — _ o 3 i >c 3 ° a) o a ° U o a 0) a) c u o N .- ? - o oa Q o .N u — T -a U a) •= Q a a s 2 O a N O a QN > +' LO o C c D a U C Q Q o O c o ° a N N z N U m o) Q -a N— Q a) O Q - a) C N Q N E Q N ° ) - a >> a C > N N -a p a a) a c � a c N -p ° 0 -a � � aa _Q o a 0 Q Q a T Q L ° a O a c a > a) S ° O Q) c Q 0 a) C: t -C a a a N aU ,> N :) a V (D U o ro a 3 C 3 E ° a- ) a 0)2 w - s °m w z aa Q a u a v a o a O N -a d C s m Z) � C 0) N E n) •x Q a . � u p Q a) Q) p .0 a Q a w N -a 0 0 0) Oa a) c c r a Q U p E 4 a o O Q-o _a `"T Q= -a a �-a Q u s - a � E c a N -a U _ a) ° E a o C: o o -a a -0 o a D c u N Q 0_ 0 C ° c O a � ° - N N U a� _C E a 0- •_� a 0- 0 C a •V sa N U O 3 a U Q �a) U Q a i ) O aN _o N o U O � v 0 a ° ;Q a0 a) 5- _0 N> p p D a) '6 o N a�- - C3 o p D °° d U u a N a T - . C a _a S t i Q p a a) U c c Q _V S O E N N 3 •- H O H u 0- V) U Q-j Q o a H �Q a u H O .c oo N O_. -'6 -a a ° 0 0- ° ° ` ° o o n • 3 a a) a U o — O _ Q o O C U CD> i -c p O -O > a p t o c O 0 2 C W a) a) a a) Q s d c Q c j X s Q o a t s E O o s - a ` a N N O -a o p N s c `s O T N O O - p a \o U u N o > a N C O V a a u N rn a N ' V -a a Q N Q o a S w E o o Zo Q O oa . -� 'N N Q N _a N C _a -a sN ° D > ° C a E 0 N co S a) 3 a 0 0 Q) C3 < Q c Q o Q - Q a _C i� ± Q) : C a4) a . a u E s 0-f 0 c aa ) p a) a O Ea� N 0) o > N ° s 0 o CO c a 1 O a a a_ < C�� N a a 0 Q E a o Q N U C N H O o _ N C, .E o 0) ° o >c 3 ° a) o a ° U o a u o N .- ? - o oa Q o .N u aQ ° ( ° Q N a) 4) a) u E a � O OQ +' LO c D a U C Q 0 O U .•Q a ° ° -° ' ° N U m o) a) E •� ° . Q m a) S O V - C n C F a s a o E o N = a Q U O p CO a c � a c N p N a o a 0 Q Q o U O u O a c a C) -O U> U u 0) }t � Q a) Q �•i c - ° a _ a C •U O o () -p i Q c E a} P >. a) — Fn E Q% a- ) a 0)2 — °° a a a c ° ° o a a u o a O u ° a c a c _a 0 o a a) d s o-0 a) a) t p � C 0) E n) •x Q a . � E pE ° a v3 ' a N E o E-0 U -a u p O E s U 0 E Q p E 4 a o p a >Q } - ' o o , m o ° C: o o -a a -0 o a D c c 0) c- ° X ai a c a s ° a C O� 4) + =) h ° - N a U a� _C E a 0- ) m a a U a a s E�� s N U O 3 a N c i .c o a m ,E -a _6 N _o N o U u° E E- > c a) a a° .0 L a N Q) a� :> .0 a p u a N Q a a Q Q N ° u p a) (D a a) o) N a L .N N E N p u •E 0 0 0 C °� ) Lo > a) _O a) a) N Z a N a T r _a S t i Q p a a) U a) >- S N i- S _V S O E N N r •- H O H u 0- V) U Q-j Q o a H �Q a u H O r N O_. -'6 -a Q— u / \ / 2 \ _ ~ t » o ± o k ƒ § •� @ \ : a c ®' 2 @ t •- ® ®@±[) ¥ ® a \ \2\ $: ƒ \\ / t� J\�k §± §� 7 a a c 2 ® E 2 m ; - � / / .% \ .@ ± t o 2 c § G 7± 2/ a c3 0 » a a o = z %� / ƒ W \ k f> \ _k�) e a a u c \ •\ 7 •\ ƒ ƒ + 2 § ¥ 3 z c 2 ° ' 7 \ § S ` � o \ )•/ /° ƒ / : ` G o % 2 / § ./ ƒ / \ $ 0 4 D @» \3-C C3 § % ± e t- .[ af e\ m a: o - - c o c \ 0 U 0 \ -o f 2 _ \ 2 _§ »\ o t o@ 2 ƒ C U E § 2 E§\ƒ o\ % k \ § \ 2 2 \ ' 2 ƒ7EcV)7@ } of ad U) 0 W vii N p cn — +- L cn U LL N U C a Q V) E O z Q' z 0 Z W V1 aaIm c W .j 04 U .j WZ 0 N C N 0 C C Q W x U � `} Ln U) 0 z vii N p cn — +- L cn U LL N U C a Q V) E O z Q' Q � N 0 p N U c W p o O U C o N C N 0 C C U V x U � `} Ln V Q C Q) C) C) Q Q Q — (� N } t S N Q) U V) • U 0 s O 'c F-- o Q o § k / / \ 0 j j } uj / \ All � @ � 0 V $ (A � c 0 � N § \ 0 \ \ \ 0 ° § ƒ \ $ ƒ / ƒ 2 \ 7 7� 0 / u — f % 0 \ e � C3 0 c r / ƒt[3 )um/ 2 U-0 — 7 g -a @ o° # k ° U« 3` £ \ a e — a— o E 2 } c c o; t- c+ E 3 [ _ u » : ¥ 2 0 2 -0 7 ®2 z a / i § \ ƒ -D0 0 k °7iQ- ƒ \ ƒ: ƒ o Q) 0)2 c: � S a e c r.g J e o > c/£ a 2 u 3 o o� c o o 0 c = o o a 0 T 0§ — e•) o f o a u tƒ \ \ » 2@ 2° 20 / %> e %0- 777 / 7/ \� o \ ƒ k c -- a f : o o e a u c G e•c m a m g 2 a E u 0 0 3° f 2 9 7 ( / ± \ t 0 0 / / E 7 ƒ — 0 £ 7—»{ a U¥ o e 0 .� « 7 o a u ƒ `-0 o c` o o m e c\® ) 0 k \ 2 3 J 3/ u±-- S 7 U? 3/ 0) m� •- ® a 8 ® 0 2 c c ± c o& g _o c » 3 J 3 \ 0 o` » ®R R ` \ � 0 ƒ » _— ° ® ƒ / \ '� _ > - E o � -0 » f u: G -0 2 \ \ c 0 / _0 2 ƒ \ t 2 @ -0 /� \ 9 . c •- t f 2 G =: a 2 7\ ƒ\ 7 2 I f Eƒ \ j ) � ƒ o $ - / % ( � E % - _0 * % ¥ 2 u c ± — o o— 3 — / o@[ a 7 a + o ƒ Q± 7-0 o e± .. / o o— \ 0 7§ o •- & y c o— a o u o a .- o o a _¢ .. E k } : % G G —ƒ / / 7 [ % — � 2 a_ g \ \ @ & o ± § e o7� -o ƒ�\ » /§ ƒ» 2/ E7 ƒ /e �\ e\ 2 ƒ ` } 0 \ ) ƒ \ e'/ 7 a k �'/ 7 2 G ƒ 7 § \ ƒ ƒ e._ Q o c.» o 2— m o e 0 a u c u 3 U § \ 0 \ \ m N a z a F N H z W d O J W W 0 z a w N D z a J c 0 CL 0) -a3 c C3 J 0 Q u c O U Cl N D t) ii 'Pa PIO-V d ro � C N u u S. •J,w.�d asroH „a� Z '1S 8 pAQ sn:uewaU b v c 0 o m v, M •ulIH9d —J D a c ° r Ln c a� 'an uaupx. m Tv � c c �C +`• GJ 'in te. v c _ Ae�.fO R L] S E E U U° of c c U V v w C O � C7 l7 'Ib /,I.Iaygnoa Gi J M N z CL CL U U w CL N z N N O u z J m 0 `il Q, Ca CC C 7 N N N D C a J N N a H O c i" m c 3 v LO 0� o, O a 0 C] C O CN N 6 O D O y O H O O Ln rn n O 6 a 6 c � c c c c -!Z -�z � c c c O` � V M � O M Go O� 0 CO C.4 N m r m N y N U _ V L O - 441, C _Q H 6 a) 0 C V O O Op[ O K 0 n a C O L Q Q 0 E C C C C C C N 7 C O c 'E C C C C C 7 J 7 O 7 O ] O 7 C c N E O a) N C N - - d m C a C O T N Q N N N `Q N V V E -a — E E •- O O � O p y E O L d X j O d p a) Q L 7 u�j o E p O .O N a) 7 3 .� E a Q 7 N .p O` � V M � O M Go O� 0 CO C.4 N m r m N y N U _ V L O - 441, C _Q H 6 a) 0 C E N O a c a) ne O O °- y N O U H a) a O L Q Q 0 E C E u Q O O O Q Q O LL N a) O S N 7 C O _ O L c 0 u a) iO C :a,, � a E L 7 ) o E O o EO o� a N E O a) N C N - - d m C a C O U OU LO O p a) C C V a) a) N a) a` V E -a — E E a 7 Q O a C a 0 p y E O L d X j a a E a) U 6 C; O E a) Q L 7 u�j o E s E o S2. =p O p U ?' a .X a) O aa)i 2' a O E C a S a) C a) 7 3 .� E a Q 7 7 L U -6 a C a C V C a) E a O 2 ° > d N a c V C E 'a - j$ L i E N a) V m N— a) E> - a 6 `p '3 E O N 'Q) _ N V O 3 N N O 0`2 N 7 N 'd X O .L N N N_ E V> p U y a) a O L p <<X O 0< E C 7 �O L a) N U E a L a) V - E >' C E i i a) U -a y Z �H O'a OU O U d OU Cl- QF- - a O v N Z d U U w d N Z V) N 0 U Z J m le N n at Q Z Q F- N H Z CW L d 0 J W W Z Q W N Z Q J C d t N N i t N N N W i LL. N Z CL CL U S_ U w d N Z N N 0 U Z J m ❑ ce a ❑ z a N V) z LLJ i O LU ❑ ❑ z LU tn a z a J Y O O s O s m (D z V) a) U 0 U- u D D_ 0 ai u 0 Q V7 C a) Q O vi 0 CL r N U V s 3 D N _0 7 C V 0 J � Q N 0 O •-o L � V C N o) �' -0 c a) � E c a) 0 � N C C 0 .� C U O o V 0 Q N C 6 c Q C3 N V U Q N C T N- 3 0 - c s O N a) -� C •U a) N o C p -C C s 3 0 .� c o) o 'N 7 x fl D 0 -o o r-„ E o _❑ N 7 ❑ O > -o a) a) S x _O CZ .y a) -0 N o N ,� V -o V C 0 0 •C ❑ C •N D :=. O o p C 0 0 C O p C o 0 S c -0 N a) 0> .c N C C a) C2 U) N _°, O E N o O •E V 0 0 o U 7 C p '- E m 0 a) a) 0 3 0 3 o)-0 N i N i 7 7 p N c- _rn N c 0 0 -0 N i •� O O V ❑ N C2 U 0 N a) u E y C in o a) O C 0 o Cho V a V 7 0 o L C o u a) U 0 '- 0) p 0 0 o U 7❑ a) Q °) _p N -o 0 0) U c c E o U N O •3 axi Q- C: C N -o U 0 7 CV •� 0 N y> 0 v J 0 a) ( N E O 7 o o 70 a) Q) S.� p C u a) O) 0 N o 6 -0 7 Cl 0 0) m V V L 'i- � C 7 a) 7 C N a) 0-0 L.L S 0 -0- 0 p a •� -0 CL C c c .3 o a) Ti 7 � 'N N o .. O — C 7 N 3 C C o c .? c a� L N o s s m c� C N o 2 �� N � a }_ N} C U 0_ o -o O u S 0 U •C a o C E 0 S ) a) O _0 O . Z 'n u o O \— E Q V p ON No p_0 CL =_ E 3 N� In T 0 7 CO N p N 0 d❑ o E 0 0 0 7 m 0 0� p 0 -o N� c U V — c S o) V 0 � •N ac) U❑ o c c E E 7 O ❑ N O rn c 0 N C Z E '� O Q 0) N 'x cn O 0 S c o 0 N a� `r a) .i o N rn v) .� N N Q N° y N s a� a a in s o u ❑ Q u V) s s 0- 5 o F- ❑ .N H 0 C2 Cl s° o if- U -O 3 O) U V s 3 D N _0 7 C V 0 J � Q N 0 O •-o L � V C N o) �' -0 c a) � E c a) 0 � N C C 0 .� C U O o V 0 Q N C 6 c Q C3 N V U Q N C T N- 3 0 - c s O L_ N a) -� 0 r- 0 C o c VI N - c O � N o r-„ E o C ❑ •N V 7 > -o > C _O CZ + C c u a) p) 0 L ❑ C •N C T E N a) c C a O C- S 7 o E o C N 7 a U) N Q[ ci. C O •E V a� E� o •r- a Q o U 7 a`) o0 > co E -o i N i 0 0 h 7 c N0 ~ O O V C O m N a7 C 0 o Cho t c U) -o C Q) Q) ` N L U o u a) U 0 ❑ s o a 0 y } 0) = O N � T N -o U 0 a) 7 C 0 O O ~ L c U = _ N 0 in 0 c O 7 C c C3 0 0) � � C 7 N a) > ❑ 0 °� U .0 0 CL i > N o O c O C C C p N CO � C -0 a) U � s— U C N o 2 L_ 0) c 0 ` -� O a) i > D N p 0 0 0 t U 0 c 7 VI N - E o> V o r-„ E o 0 c Q _o 0 — 0 N > -o 0 c C O 0 � ti L a) 7 7 L u U O N C C U c 0 p 0 a) - T E S N O _o O V ) O O 0 u 0-� O C o 0 'U h vi N 0 N c c 0 V c o O N N C o) 0 a� E� o •r- a Q ' E c u 7 p 0 N L 0:,— 7 N E o 7 i o' 6 U E E N E i N i 0 O a E h 7 c 3 O 0 -0 0) 0)'0 a 0 S N C p _ 0 C U S C V a ° 0 a C Q) Q) ` N L U o u a) U 0 •N� os a� L o C 2) �- a E o 0 0 a o a N C N O 3 p a) N O O 0 c N 0 0 0 0 > —LLf a) Q t U 0 c 7 N S S V U) O N 3 c 7'� 7O L L t v'EU -o a) V N 0 0 ") 4 S _o O V ) O O C o O .0 c c 0 V c N -E -0 U N U •c E _ C3 O O o O - 0 N i E L x-00 C N 7 c o oU O -0 U o a) C O a E 0 V "- O -0 0 O t 0 � c 0— C c o m-o Q o c m 0 p 0 a 0 o u 0) a) -0 CO o u a) U 0 C t L'o -o p X O a L C c N 0 a) Q c a H i 7 0 V C U � 7 � N 0 } O D C O s_ 0 O _ C 4) 0 u U O 3 c � C 0 — C V 0 T U o _ C C o) U a 'N O C D O N 7 o) E U 0 a) C o N E -0 V p a) ;_> S N N 0 V i >— o a) a) 0 N s 7 7 2 O 0 N m > �-o C 0) 0 0 c 3 O a) a) o 0 0 2 a) 3 0 c C O O O 0 t N 0 a) 3 o E N C N U) c L C N 7 `mssC 0 0) rn c 3 a) a — X 0 a) � � t 0 � 6 C 0 � o C O!f a� N cn -0 O -0 7 = 0 O C a) T 0 3 S 0 0 0 z LL- m ❑ O H U �o (V m N 0 Q 0 z a r N F- cz LLJ CL L O LU 0 O z LU Q N Z) 0 Z Q J N a� x c v Q) C O U Co CN (n O O S O Z a N Q) w CN CN D i u . t c a) a c C NN N O O a) o o ' � j Q- Z r oX ' c � D g 3� s o 'N o o o t Q N 'E c >p _ } CL � o p a) >: c u a � a s o a � a o 0 o v ) , o 0 C3 ` ; .o ° W c o v - . mai O 0 s a O a) O O a) O a) O c S c c O> u O u0 t s N O 0 a a C) c O c O o s s O ° 0 p ° -° a O vN O Z Ni C 0 0 o a a O o o 0 t � y O (n X -6 u cal 0 a) -a U �� U E C _C C) Z O N 0 0 0 c O -O o c -o O N O O ou c D N - x E c �' c° a a)s a -a E o x --c o= �s o-o-2 E - = c c> V '� >' 'c c° E 0 _ .3 a) Q c o 0 Lo 0 os i O O p a Q'O N N } O c N O o -6 N N U N in N o E 0--o N u a) (n - p Q Q a) c QQ.. t o 7 O> U 7 V 0- Z) C CI- 0 LO o 0 o r -a o _� � 'u - _o a _D �' y .3 _ o -0 ou ( o a) •" -a) a m— :•' s o O X O .O X a) D Q o N N 3 .N .N x O C x o - E�.E > E o �� N -off ° 3� o E �, a) a�Qis 0 Q) (D EsQ o s c V O C _N t C3 a 0 Q m E .N -a O O CA '� � N C) a) o f a) t .� E o o N p c a c o a x >.F o-0 -0 a o E o m E o a� > � a) o o �s o o _0 O O _o j �- E 'U �' a) o E o s .N a c N" -> 0-.- Z > vl a) S Q N V O O U 6 a) E s N H�� o E a) N 3 0 o o o 'o o ai a) m N 0 .Q) a�i C3 3 C 6 0 g� CG X S E a) cn cn C � o 0 D 3 0 o U a) a � —a) s u} cs U 0-0 a) a o s t C N s E O > o V � o O a -6 Q O U) C: �' .N V o s o o a E Q Q 0 N — Q 3 3 o s � c 0 , O E s a oD!f o 3 a) U 2 CO c 0 o m s p p ° o °'o t O a N O H N o .0 -p C s o -D U O O C i O O . t a) a) Q _ C C 0 o S 0 . o o L o C p s N -0 a V } o) -0 O o a) o C ACT i .0 Q p ,C .� OQ o C o L.O 'O O j C y c L N p O C s c a) y C C O p o c a) p = r ° c0- E - c a) E Q- Ev N i 7 U� c o O 0 0 '� -O -6 0� �-a m� v C E C: Q p a) O Q � C N O � o o � V C °o > O a) o = Q C a) s a) .E = N3— U 3 V) U N -0 � _ o- 'X o > rn� rn a E Q O 'O p o - u a) ., C 0 .E N 0 U U o •a E - ) � > 6 o O a c s C3 N _O m s O . � U s s o p 0) c 0 o an s L a } (n -0 o 0 0 o) -O V 0— 6 (� o E a) ■ ■ _ 3 3 C1 E � N .? a) -o aci .c o o o s u ac) C s V 'c O a u (D 0 s° P o -O .S Z) -:F N O Q' o U a 0 z viQ H H z LU O LU LU LUZ Q 0 z Q J m ° U � V y O c -0 Q U a 0" LL- o � ao Cl- Q ° _0 0 o 3 0 L) o > D- a) Q-o O N O O •- N N c a) c� U. O O C c O 0 D O � N 10 C � O -O 0 U } > ° O _ -O O _ O a) o O s O .O ` -0 O p s E o o E c N O a c o n O 0 E 0 E - V 'O 0 •y _0 0 c O U O �X 0 Q Q o N Q -0 a) N a s N 0 y E u ° cn a) C .X 0 >> T p o E = E c V a) C p E y •O a) o L a L U E rn O 'y X QU Q) Q 0 H 'C r -O \ a) E o N -C O -O = a) '�, U E 0 O' o -a c N 0) — CD E s N E 0 a) v' a-0 c a) — 0 F- r y E c 3s �n-a N 0 O a) 3 O O O 0) a C C L s V u _ U O C a) C '� a) 0 E o .� 3 V a V) � a) E c O 0 O a f -C Q 3 u u . o �' E ) s p C u� a c 0 0 'c a 'c .� CV � E -0 -a Q N N U N L •— y C E U V a E o \ L y -a L -O a) o c a) T o t s t •L 0 0 O O s 'a N E° o N Q O Q > N p 0 'X N O D 0 •� O N O E N a T U O E �G m D C14 —c3 > E a -o .� -O O a) lo O a) C a>) o O ,_ 0 0] 0 0 O O L -p a) y s Q O U C u Q 0 N a) 0 —Q U 0 C '0 c 0 0 0 E .d 0 ,y ca -2 N c p -o E O cn a) -o U .in Q L o a) ° 0 0 .!n t x aci C7 ' _o F-t O aci D °� a) .X c a°i UZUD t� �°u 6 O a a u- Q E ° V o a) N o O 4) a O U a) Q-o O N O o a a) m a) -0 a°i p c � a) N -°- a) c o U E °) } > ° -o c ° a a a) o c o — o ° a o N U o L o O p 0 0 o a) O O a) O O O Q x -o -C O -O Q U a) a) s O `) t c N t 3 3 ) o a en C U N N a_ 3 a •E Q a 0 a ° ° ai � C � _ ra r o o ) s N o y O o M E o E 0 o 0 N c 0 O E rn • y a) ao O �, � ) E U O •y Q O � Z E a) O E N 0) 0-0 N a a O W () -0 � 0 s N -O , E U 5 E 0 0 2 c x O O c o aO ) o - E° c o o m ° a 'a oD � a° ° o a (D � ° 3 o y ° ° o o � o U� C O _ U � O 6 N -O O c 0 ° p _0 0 C N X cn Q O a) C p p 00 O LL 0 O y U ,N a) E h O -O = O y C N n Q -O X 5 C ,O � 'U N 0 0 t ' 0 O O O 6 •C •x > E c L ) Q O 0 E Q O c 0 -o 0 t t U s L 0 L c L U > o Oe o .Y = C) -° a) a) O 3 N\ - a u C V a) c c 4) E E U O 0 O N 3 s o t a) 6 E ° a) Q L O U o c a) L o° L u O -° E= 3^ 0 o •E O ° C3 _ ° °_ c o.4 S a) V a _ 0 N c 00 Q _ _ c a U 0) N O°_ O `~ o N N O> ai "- '� 3 E c L > c N -0 E oD ° ° c ° _� � ° ° �-o 6 Q c 0 E L as Q a) L O o a) rnQ O c aU ° L Q O s a E} V 'O L t N V a) p N Q) d -D C In L O) Q N C D a) \ C E C O C V N 'X 'C a o .y Q) a) "' O E s O a) Q) a) O O 0--20 a) (� 4) O N p 'c 0 N O Q O X V Q u N L U -0 C'1 oC CD o E V E= 7 E o U Q E z (b 0 U- 0 r U co N V) { \ / j » / \ 0 / \ / z ± o ƒ \ ¥ § i > m o 0- g - j E (\ /ƒ (D _0 <k ${ �2 ƒ 7 7 0 2 e;_ \: F E } o > § a f o -0§ c t 0 O { ±/ t c a t§ 3 -':T- > LU CL \ ) § / ° E \0- e 2[ ƒ %�2 c ) -0 ± m- o? § » E » 0-0 � z ` 7 G u22r 5 t 2 ° f -0c 0 \$) \ ®0 7a= 0f` 4 E J I C: b r - ._ a 3 t b = 7 \ ±> 0 5 7 ° 2' 0 j o n E a 7 -% » o ' �a /n± & o> 0 Qƒ 2 /\ 0/ o u u § o a) ` G 2-0 o; 0: 2 0 \ u T z S 2 e � - o / ® a e C3 § ^ \\ ■ }7 F a §V) C: 6 g ■ o \ \ 2 f o o o K L. C3 t =a {J �)7 >2E'ƒ Q ) \ � � ± � - ®et- /§ ƒ.)ice. Im < k t i§/ ., -0 E. >/\ c E �' ©- § f 2± b /�°� - 7\ q 3 0 u D o/ U o t E[ 6& _0 \> f$ U ƒ a 7§ G m® c 0 k � S o® e[ k .§ E � \ J ƒ $ / * o A7\2 -Joy mcE7 «- a f cn _0/ 2 t { c am _0 e E § S 2§ 2 § o $ 2 2 7 / § E o © 7 3° 7 .2 CL CL 0 2_ a 7 2 N' a 2 c 2 o i a s�2 /ƒ (D _0 ${ �2 e;_ %E�,� 7 E 0 o$ k k �_ -0§ c o:) > m 0 > »� 0 o o �i® ,= c / c 0)-2 § / / ° ®� �- m c- f c ) -0 ± o? § » E ` 7 G 0ƒ � \ +\ % 2 E `� 2 o ƒ� elf\ u © ` o % = b r - ._ - 0 & 7 }era §o 4 w a 7 -% -C G t c ' �a /n± & o> f�- E\ 4) o u u a U u � f o u u § o a) ` s o a 2-0 o; 0: 2 0 \ u T z S 2 ® a e C3 § § \ o 0 % 0 a § s 2 / \ % ` / G E C3 t =a {J �)7 >2E'ƒ Q a ± � - ®et- §3/20 i§/ ., 0 0.7 E o e 2 u 2% ©- § o e 5 /�°� E 3» S 7 - f o 0 u D o/ _0 \> f$ U ƒ a 7§ G 2^ 7 .0 4 a q .§ E ƒ/ _ m $ c o o» ƒ{ o o§ a 7 ƒ \ o a «- 0* { c am _0 o S 2§ 2 7 o © 7 3° 7 § 2 \%/ 2 E S g/§ 2 t\ b 7 \ k ƒƒ ƒ 2 .� - \ƒ u o 0 ƒ` 2 m§ ° 2 2 = E o oƒ y _o E^ o)- E «\ 2 ® -0 " 0- d�§ k 2&° 2 5® 0 3 n 0 0 u E 0 - o._ U - ° U/ 7 § t_, o -� - m �� E 7 @'; &-0 e � /0 > u o \ o 4 - - e c - ƒ 0 ) & ƒ 7 a : e ƒ ¥ u % - � e % \ $ ¥ ) ± 2 $ 0 6 § C 0 @ g u $ c + '; u $ a ! § I 2�\ _e / c i) fƒ® U g c a c 5% 9 2 7 2(• C) - ƒ > a 3' ® 3 t E r -« * o o o m § o e c_ o c a ' 0) ƒ � a \ / ƒ ± \ \ 4 r mƒ �ƒ 7 0/ a U o� o . mƒ I u: D C zr - »- •§ G ) 2 _0 ® ° 0 c � e & ' u 5 = 2 ± c•- - ƒ E e e \ 2 \ C: E » U .'» �.9.§ % ±\ �E g o/ 7§,§ - 4) 0 i 3 2 ■ • o o « u t 2 G± e oc+ E c Q f> m 2 7 � 7 c + moo c o a > [ > E %§§co��§f g f - f -0 o AaR \moo # + ®° � ` o ° 7§ §7�/ + © 0 f \ � u e -« # o o a E o ; o� 9 0= c Ln &\tmo& o S� 0 o- —C - o C o a= . %£cam o e» o 0=22 _ 2 - ■u�ro�o o ■c��§ 0 n ) z 0 0 7 _ % 2 ¥ _» % s 0 ± - ? 7 o� : ) / E 2 2 ■ - : u / 7 9 0 < U S 7 E@ < a 9 o c± -0 o U c\ 0 a§ a 2ƒ c 0¥ c i r m Dougherty Rd. �, "" 0 C) 0 0 n n & 3 0 3 0 M M C& R R R r) r) Ra- C 3 O n I�W T X. 0 rb 00 Car,pbell Ln > Sw n 0 C C 3 Demarcus Blvd. B St Icor, Horse Pkwy. Ln Ln Amo'd Rd M co c CD K) D CD ^ ° o t ° \ § ± : c o V) \ z \/ / ) 8 G 8 / * \ » / ? c ± c m ƒ / / / ' 2 c o \±$ a}- 9- x< w f f > ± * ® (n � ƒ � \ ® - - ° e � 2 [.2 = _ 3 .g c c.o o « 0 0 = E } G - / 2k�o '/E a- g 0 E o) \ g 5 -\ t t \ m \ / \ / ( / / 7 0 ƒ E g.\'; ` % 7 - / 3foG2 &B� /o 2 s E e t U o 7 / \ \ \ / / / \ 0 \ \ \ \ / / } { E -2 Q) a e ± ( i 4 / E.q \ : > c � % ± . J:ƒ § d V) V) / G § y 2 0 7 z a: G F /_- 2 c z ± J ® ° / � C) o G / b ƒ \ m 0§ & o G E F y§ G o g o=» E > E c e p & o@$~ o o e Z N z r »$ 10 = o _ ; ƒ e' -� `G CO < CN a / \ � -t @ - ® 9 2 C » Ol G a - i 7 � \ / \ ) a E} E g \ y E g¥ - a _. a o\ t a§ � � o a)) m n± e y e a m . q ) ±f /ƒ *[ ®/ ' \ ® C4 O a o o§ a@ (c / 7 E- D-6 3 w § \ \ \ \ \ ± \ \ \ \ \ � LO ± \ s e\ s s g g m j> ± 6 6 G = 2 :� / / j :� / / / j / / / � 2 E 2 . t ' 7 \ \ / $ S R 2 ° \ \ o 3 \ % \ ' ƒ C j 7 - \ } a � O K _ / CJ ® \ 2 \ \ % < Cl) \ ± ® x Co \ _ » \ % Cl) r Et \ 2/ a a m a CN a ' .� a c . 0 � & C� ƒ e . . ? � j } \ e / j z j _T N CC) — C � r O D N Z � p C N O rn N D -0 Z C p Q p rn T < Q rn O m Q rn Z N L O -0 N N N L V) U d _0 d N N C3 Z) -C U) -C Q. c •c p— O Q) •� •�? d-a a) Z Q h Q p C1 — :; O �.- N d- -Q d i) C a) CL c d 'O d 3 t p Q d d U Q O v d 0 N-0 - N O O a o E N L N 3= N -d 3 r- a) d- U c ti a) vi c p C U N a) '� _ N . V d C1� w N y d) F. C N h p L N Q) 7 t .> 3 d) -° a) .c a) d 3 N C i C > Q) O `n N d O d) V N C C CL N Z ' U c i� c p a L a) L d v� ..�- d d 'p Z LU 4) _� Q c D' a>i —d- N� N j N Q) -Q -d v0 C N 0 p 0 0 U U N Q L N O 0— C U a) C H N y w d O N� LC V • -d n ) H d w O _ N -C 3 d C L N 0 3 � N 0 a a d = .• d Z m O UU -C o_-S- d -.r- ff - ` 0 c S N a) d {ii 0 -0 c m d c a) -d V ' Q d O d a) y 0 �+ N -d i C � N L m •t to t _d p Q) o- d V -d a d a) > d 0 O d L C d Q Q C d _ c vi O Q -d a) D 0- O O t _ L D a) U V O CA C2 in = Q V d) c p a) p V) N N N U c Z o_ O a d c d 0 w 0— d p U N t > a •U ` d N= 3 N U c c O N N c 0 -0 a c 'x d o a) U N y '� Q O y N N d 3 L o a°) C °. °�' d C "d r C to -a D d c d N > N d � E c N J L d p V p a) O a) N QrL-• _0 D O > U O N V d c± O U •d N h ? 3 0- U� a°' a� a) >� o - 7 as Q`m 3 �, �� rn� -o ° o ° N -c 'y E p w ti -d a S 3 N o a) ° 0" 0 - ° a N -0-0 -d a a Q) } � U N > o o U () O CO C CT O c Q -d C > C -E N a) N > c p CV _ a) — d p CV a O N O d Q U O d d .V) •) i p V L O E N Od > d) 'd C a) ) aO i L Q N d d 0 y U N 0 d) C ti p � a) L J - d u n aO r 3 a d D V) C d a� U — — 0 d0 4) C C a) a) N c O O D O Z5 U O rn ,- d t - c s E-o (� t a� D >> d 3 a o �, o c p o° g �_ a o o o C a) c N N c a) 6 O N 0 >, p d D a) E s p cai — o O C p a) N -0 ; d d C d 0 L 0 � � ) C 4) a C) a) -0 U N a) U N -_d 'V dU O N " •V N c d d ° E O tL, ' `-- Q ai d d s U _a E � 0 E o Q V d E n 2 U -6-0 C •E N Q d c p O U O O a) m N d -6 -d p— N L N v •� .C: O N d c } 3 c c d 0 H N N d) • c� -Q o � O t N d d d) N 0O d s 5 } o a, E E o N C a •— p -0 a� Y E o c . a) d O c c p c Q Q -d u •c V V O a) C Q' -d :_ 0 —c3 Q) Q) E o N v) O c ii -D -d o +- _ a i d V a � V °o= Os Q) -0 0 E E o o 0 c �, . O p d aV E Cl. d O ) -d O c -d U J O 0 d O O E d N > a) d d O U o } N d 7 E w N C D y � v �O O O O V Q) -- Q) c d ) N ' C C �� D d 6 U C CV t d N c N c C14 C N -O d O N N p C O t2 0 00 vi = �a)E o °N a ' o V V � o o f i s u a °O E E o O c . d — � a) p d C _d E E 7 p U p O 4) U O L N I— 0- .- J 0 L r� Cz U U= J c0 —0 J d d-0 U J U Q c0 J M Q O J d £ ƒ n \ Q) § (1) 7 . ° b U 2 ¥�2! \ / = 2!, �oS & T U 0 \ 777 �@ '® 7 t a 9 t m g / § $ 0- §7�e > 2 2 a Q) ±G§ § ' e » o S7ƒƒ k y - # z ƒ ƒ < c o\ '2 o s c § -7t E / ƒ y < 2 ƒ ° k \ 0 \ °± \ u G§ a O U Q E\-o e ± - ® , § \ a) § z o u Q) 2 9 2 2 2 o >_ '2 \ 3 2ƒ E( / I / b -0-0 ƒ ®�� ƒ© _0 ƒ �� �� _0 LU �u .2/ ƒ� \� �¥ ƒ / \ ƒ2 -0 _ -0 •; C3 � / / [U E C [v E 2 c » % §'� ƒ ) _ / o — o E / /§ 02 c Ua U7 Q_ (D g ~ •F- U U ' 3 LU 0- � � � � � / � ° � 7 @ c b 0 17 § (D § (D <Q) \ §\ o > % u E \ / � ƒ &_ �\ 0 2 . . . . . e° 0 < 0 o 7 mu 0 = ± o•- > o = > - a c @ — ± - m 2U -0-0 /� o < \ V) \ / / } § j / LU f / § \ 0 2 2 ƒ 7 7 m o -0 ƒ G '» o^ & o` R 7 2 G° 0 z s m 2 0± 7 \ J j 3 C .g . q 0 — N u c u 0 0 2) y ± ± u § e a — .c E \ G» e e) o 2 G \ g ƒ 7+ D% ' & ƒ/\ y/. 7 a z 2 z @ 0 G > c E o } C;) ' /a@ ƒE e 0 u ±�• ° °5 0 E2 I 7 . o >± >»/ Eo u o o: Co ƒ §�( \\ /± ƒ ° u k /'\7/ u �) 0 000e� EK /o a§ ƒ C ƒ�® �0 �� » ƒ//0 0 -0 §/ 0S ,t 3 O m &° 0 0 ) 7 E� 2 0 ° 7 f F E C G'E U ƒ§ ea 7 3§/ 22 E / E') o / ƒ @ 2 O 0 2 2 \ k�0 kƒ D 0 &f / 2 # e c $ E & ƒ� E c o� $\ of � @u \7 � ® 0S ,t ƒ$ °k ±7 E ±Cn o u / o am§ ƒ E & E u U� E 0 v � y y a §® / o// 0 ) ƒ J0ƒ 0/ 0 ƒE 2 o c [ $ 2 f — 0 \ ,• / & o / 0 ƒ °« u� \ [ c 0 c V- c S U E E \ / 7 ) / ƒ E ƒ 2 ® / � ƒ -a � ƒ' ` / ° �t% \m �� ƒ%ƒ ° u ƒa �ƒ ± `\ / \ / ±0 m U Q) Q) ƒ ° %� �-0 �0 \) �� —0 --"e u & t = o E ƒ 2 0 ° ° 7 —e— g� S 8 ® $ u E» / o f \±0 ± ƒ / o \\ ƒ / \/ y ƒ - /�/ ? \ ° /_\ \/ -ow \[ �ƒ [ > E 7 \ u / ƒ 0 \ § / % / ƒ § § a) u ƒ k 0 o E a e � �._ 7 o o c ± u a c c 0 E � -0 D 7 @ c&% e \/ a 6 f ._ 0 a o % ƒ22 D- Q) ƒk / ƒG �/\ ��k \$/ /§ « ' -0 \ ± � o & o > m 0 E & u 2) o t = . . . . . . . » ) ƒ E _ \ -0 o . 0 7 J 3 ƒ .g ƒ .g § ± .s 3 7 .g CN ± •x E= 2 0 \ 0 Q e 0 : e e — � 7 V) __j m 0 N c 0 V) 0 Q Z a Z LU O Jul LU 0 0 LUZ Q Z Q J Q) Q) a Q) E a -0 t} N L ( _0 a) 0) 0 s 0) O s Q) c a) t o c a V p c N u N N Q a a) C o� �- m p L p U N 'a -Q O C N L p N O u O p a) O 0 t N s N = �O Q V m N s L c •O a) N C V V 0 i N C p Z) a) ins •� O O C •� c O a) i o a D S 0 E V O- - N O N E 2 s u a c ti o O 'IT p p a N a o aa) \L O -p c E a Q) N Q) Lu E a ° C o0 a _o a a) 4) N V a _0 Q) _0 Q N 0 0- O c a) c a Q N N O s N n Q) ' 6 O O a 0) D V a o c C O U c N -O a Q a) N a a) V N a) c O N Q a) Q V a w 0 a E o O LL O p -0 X 0 C c a c O a1 a a 7t: Z s 0 C 0 Q) O � C C — a s a) c a) N 5 -a � a N a N E a) O s N a � c:O Q) L a) U � t a) C p O u O �a N C 'N C ) C ac O Q a o c �� ] •N a -C a C c O -o a> O 4) O N E D s c O u 0 ai E a') u o-a a ■ ■ ■ ■ a) C o a) E i O s u O c = N i X E o a -a a p N C C a o ._ ll L a — o O V LO .N 0 -6 C 6 in -0 a) W E C �+- L N a) N C a < 1 3 o o s a) s p V a) in a L C -.0 ° N a c] S C .. U a —' V E a 3 u a a N E a -a O -a O a 0 O v �o Q s Q 00 = 0 O v o C Q— CC CL N E E E U U a > O -a -a L o r- C) N O _ a Us D U Lo CN a t t > p -a N N a a c a -a O c C3 O u ->a � V 'v C a N N -a c a ) -E a O N j C) O a) a o E u s E a) a a- Q) D aC� 0 E a E oe 0) U S S o Q Q a Q N .'�- N N N a) _ -a Q Q S Q T '� 0 O C Q a) E -a a) t 6 C E C O "- u a�i -a E E a� a� E O E L a a Q N .o a N p a a a �; o U o E a a, N o N a� a C N s a a -a S O s C i O S C LL t � a) C) 0 0 a) T a) .0 -0 E 0 0- Q) 0 p 0 O � s N- a -O a , c 'O O N u O N C rn ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ s s aQ � O a 0 a \p a) u C--0 N 0 � -E S u E N 0 C: J N 0 0 V o o o Z Ca D 0 LL O r F- u ,p w N d' Q Z Q F N H Z LU O J LLJ LU 0 cl Z LU Q D 0 Z Q J a) -a a a) u a rn a a) 3 N C y s a) U Z y E S N V a\ t a a Q a) a u C V a O 0 a Q CL C U ' E -0O '3 ip _p -a ip — C > p -a y a Q a LL O Q � ' ° ° � �-a 0) � y = —C3 m O a � 0 -0 s -a u X D u a) O aa (a O � a) 0 )y x E= a) ,� -0� y -a 06 -a U a) C -a N-C C N C O U C rn 'rn a a) E a c E U O c C> �c x N 0 o Q " ,E L 0) ° a U o ° a n c v D L - S -a ^ y -a 0-0 a) C � a) y E C Z U — a o a s a s s fn E E Q° a) af E V a) c O_ a) m -a t y 0- S a p N cn� a) a 7 _O Q a) S -0 D �, � +- C � a) o 0) y `+- y c U Q a) O C -a a) y a) `n Q C ° -6 a p n t p O u a _D a) a .c Q -a �o y 0 ° y °— . a-c L y g E a N - -0 U a) -0 U N a O—' 4) N -a �— c c ') - fn C a, Q) a a) a o o a � E a L p O E c c a a) a E a a O E .c a O c (n c y -o S Q y o c a) -a •C a) E O� 7 N N N O '� a) Q •7 N .Q a y O 7 V L _a .D C3 a a (n a 0O O a Q) o� o o �, n s C} C c _a '� N m a) a) N a) O d L L a 00 _0 S N 3 l a c a) S a .c c to y a D L ❑ ❑ ❑ C) Q' t -a o f a) o Z o E N y o a) D s c a o_ -a a 7 Q v p N N .• C a °) _ V c E y Q"' N N a E H m a 0 g s -a c 0 O a a Q a � O O v a ■ ■ ■ a) C -C o E O u a a V C •a o a E O O V ° a D E -o a -a aa) c a a a -a a) C — = 00 o -0 c: a = O Q 0 O a) -a a a) u a y E a) S c a 0 y a C -a V E S O V i � p 0 O: — Q D O a c -0 x _ O ' -C) -0 )y x E= a) ,� -0� y -a L a y a E a C N 'u C a) C N S a) Ln a —cl U y a O C V i L E N> -0 -0 — 0u - > O t v a U C. a a -a O c O a O D N a) a) Q > E -0 E _p a E o � c a o 0 Q O O u E a) a) a) O _N a) a) a) Q N c U •0 a O .c E V y _a c a s s Q) L Q> a a) .� Ea) -a -a y a _� S V -a -O O o j-0 a) N -a a 7 Q N ) L V o C a °) _ N N a E H m a 0 g s -a c 0 a) E a) E a) C -C o (D a a V C •a o a E O O E a a D E -o a -a aa) c a a a -a a) C — = a = O Q 0 O y O D O a) N - a) = a) j O E ° U O a) '72 y ti -a a > o � a O — O s � a) � Q) a 0 a s a) O a U E 0 X U E a N _ D 0 N 0 0 o N y O_ 0 y i-a _O i V C ON E y i C a) E T N ° a14 N O L — L a D E my c c �� ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ C -o 2 a) a)� "'a E c vi U .2-0 a N y O O s 'X -o a) = a C S V E y -a p = U a 7 a) .� a) a In J V) j / z } / j j f LU / \ MR 0 ± 2 ± '- '/� ±0 2».® eu \« LO \ :N r® 0 ƒ 0 — / E .g / ± CO u f E u o § ® 7 , ' E — - * G - _ / '; » e u 2 -0 ƒ E 7 T E §& cn 0 0 0 % u u Q) ƒ C [% �/[ a o n u .g � •3 -0 ƒ r\ o a o 0-,o ) r w 2 o u ; ¥ 2 • > MOO \ 0 a 3 C e o ƒ} _� � % 0 C: o ± ) 7 } -22U \y�ƒ ƒfa Cc:) O / \ k ) § ) / W s® 0 U) °C: f 0) °� 2 ¥ G -E ƒ \ / / © ± k\ E N / ±/ 2 O) O U — \ \ 0 $ 0 \ ` _0 " � 0 o ' \ • �/ • 2 E 2\ 2 )2ƒ To (1) e/ * ukƒ C3 -C ( C \ \ � U 2) ± ƒ ƒ � o Q § \7 ¥ )/\ U+ 110 _\ < E = @ \ / \ � i ©© ƒ _0 D a m > o b 2 U O © c ± ± ƒi> o0 0 x 0\ \ C t% // ° U � ƒ § 7 —u t % m / ; -0 2 (D E §ƒ \ j [ ƒ [ / j ƒt /O 2 -15- k E \ : \ \ k / / \ ± ƒ /: • 2 t @ E k 0\ k \ƒ E 0\/ E E 2 ƒƒ \/\ \E ®/ƒ \� / k % 2 ƒ� G +% ± u ± 0 U 0 E \ � 2 \ � + 6_ £ - � ± 2 ƒ / a 7 c ƒ 2 / / \ / / $ { r � [ 7 c ° u u o b 7 < 7 7 2 . . . . . . . . ƒ §� \ % NO . e 0- - Z g - e 00 E o u E CN , e / ƒa ƒ± o f ±7\ u u 180 \/ ƒ/� �/) -0 a o Q) E S $�0 2 � 2u ƒo� o o \ —00 a .@ \ ) 0 C3 « 2 3 ƒ k ƒ/� j gf§ j \t2 \ E 2 ƒ & CL O 20�_ lff � m f 7 2 ) \ V) � \ \ z } \ j Q z \ 0 \ C4 u U ° -C ¥ ƒ 7 G � j f 7 2 O o o 0 9 8 0- E- U, �k ±� &§ ƒ7 22 CL V) �° > •- \ § �ƒ n L ;O :0 z ».e ƒ o . ƒ e e -0 4.2 z E ° q 0 °»° 0 c o C 0 7 p> \ u 0_0 \ g °± ��% � ° ®•R% j E � J ƒ 0 ƒ ƒ f 07 _$ m o 0 \ ao ± u c �© 00$ G 4) Lo 0 \� ; u o 7 .s 0 -0 $ \ I K 2 § ) ®a m V) ;22 222 W{ 0 Eo) ƒE /ƒ uE 7 \) 0� � \/� �Q)a . % 2/ 6\ 7 2 ƒ e/ 0 / e a R � •- •a 2 0 o e o / ƒ@ƒ 2 g ° O $ g 0 0t _0 \� CD§ \ \ \ ƒ c ( E k . C3 0a) 2 ƒ ƒƒ 7ƒ �'nu Q) 0 e u 2 u co 0 7ƒ .. )a— k 2 {/\ 0. //® U � +�2 tea- �- %�$ / C)k a\@ o{D 2// ƒ 2/2 Oo r7 ® \tea ° /ƒ ��_0 ° ») > 0 o g g c Gƒ �� U 3 ��� ƒ§ 0 -C �uƒ �(2 u ° E \ -0ƒƒ 7 f f\ I u o .g 2 t ƒ§S U ooJ ®%° e c ® c_ % -0>, _0% 7- E o# m & E 2 2© u s E o ƒ/ 2 t »§ f O 2 5� ? \ u o ƒ / - E ) C / / / ƒ / o - ° / o E 0 Q) U k\ 2 m� \� ±©� ems} P - c$ --9 o E D 0 0> � a e E o o\ E E t) 0 0 0 3 ` > E U t u t - t 2 0 o g U o eƒ @ r ƒ t e 'S 0 0 o ;° 2 0 I o c e o J » 2 o o_ O U � �� .g g k® m r a* a a y 6 2 7° #- -C C) a ƒ %.@ a§ y / ƒ 2 7 / 7 / -.@ &/r zoEN ƒ@ƒ \ ±- $O / ao \2/ / o ƒ I . a ®E 2 a f e E 0 u , o / ƒa ƒ-C o 37\ e u I\O u V) 0 0 � � 0 0 \ 0 _0 \ 0 co 0 / E / S, 16 16 q 3 7 e } \ I �\ 2 2 o ƒ_ F / ƒ ƒ ƒ: C: 2 - e 2/ \_$ - 0 0 7 E 0--o- § f 0- c, � f § ƒ 0 E C3 Q) Gƒ ?' 0.5 \ ¥ 0 § //k ƒo K 0 §± -0\ Z) :ƒ 0 ƒ . ) \ - 0 ƒ u 2 u ƒ Date o� >\ )u § / tQ ° ± o / f f ¥ \ a % -a 0 . 7 \ ƒ y o% @ 2 f@ D Eƒ /- oƒ G t m° 2± �§ u S u u ��» 7 c E uƒ e° E o± u 0 c- o« t.g 7 0 0 o u o E o m f .0 a ƒ \ _0 ¢ g e m / 2 \ƒ E m 3 \/ E \ ƒ ƒƒ t ƒ t» t o\ Q o e g [ _ E E % 2 -0 _0 % y ± § k 7 2 a- 5 - o @ o 0 • c � % » ! » c » % _ S(D u a t a d ƒ< /ƒ o \/ƒ ° 2 t 0 ƒ § - E 2 E & ƒ § 7 \ f . . . . . . . . c / \ 0 O u 0 n \ � ) C CN > �7 2 ƒa -6- > § <3U - ' CN j / a z � z \ / > / e z uj < / 2 z < -C 2 13 E 0 _ 0 4) 0 U : 2 � J -E \ \7 / \ u u -0 / § \ § 2< ƒa /C3 \ k \U /�\ )2& kOJ § C� j u / CL \ z } u Z f e 0 2 C ; -0 7== ° ƒ U © J- § / / §.7 CD § E c / \ t / @ o-5 m o ±ƒ ƒ_ ** &° 0) o u » / J u \ T' §% c 7 5-C o E o # g a a o 0 ƒ / / ± { E % / ƒ # k C30 c0-0 ƒ.2 ƒ/\ \iƒ / k / 0 ° \ u \/2 ������ /� 7 7/� / o / -0�0j / \ 0/ 2 %0 0 ® 7 0 2 ; \ t \ / \\�f7 \� k a ¥7 ƒ §§�% $ 2±/ \ 3 g 2 ƒ» k u k)\ J a #�tg¥� /� / c %&_& 8 ƒu\Q• 37� ƒ� ±§ 0 9 g2e °2 ±�§ 27 [ (/0 - \ I � ±§ F \o0T# o o 0 E & ƒ ) § \ f � � \ ƒ ) § \ \ C e b m•- & ƒ $ '� / § / o e & % ® ƒ ƒ ± ! o § f % / / 7 \ o u • o —® o e § 2§ Q J% ' \<% O»< .t c u o a/ , o G q g— u e# w/ G m/ _c u E c a 7 a Q 2¥ ƒ 2 �, § 7 y ƒ . ... . 0 . \ ® u / 2 a o§ a)§ 0 c 0)— < w » -E \ \7 / \ u u -0 / § \ § 2< ƒa /C3 \ k \U /�\ )2& kOJ § C� j u / CL \ z } u Z f e 0 Q cl Z Q H F- <Z CL O LU ui 0 uiZ Q D cl Z Q J AIR 0 0 0° °^ Q w � O � N � _ m O � N Y 6 U 6 O N 7 W E O C D ° ° ° u c -0 L ° o c 3 a -° c N ° O C O a) E Q O 7 E ° C O � u O O t al ] Q L }7 '8 C O N j5 U O u �] m rh = a 3 p 3 a ° a0° Nao o� n lk- S U C3 0 N E O C N O � C � C C UN_ a a U- O > C N F- 130.4s tL'ijuapisa-d a� G� CSS b W T a T O 0 �° O u w C c ° C N V O O � ° . Q C �O C w O Q t ON H Q V O C L_ S E > V OTC U O Q C N L N L p c, p O rn >� o N 3 u ._ Q N ° a C N w O N N -6 y O '° a� O O p rn 'C i6 N C U 2 p 6 C Q C N N (P S c a) 7 _ O > ° Q a) -O c O U O °1 O m 6 0 0 6 v °� .2 N w- > N'D > c_ C > T C C O C T U N C .> 7 V N ° 6 D 6 u 0 0 0, c -a y° L Q N .0 co C °— .t O1 E O N C TC O O Q 6 Ol 6 O a) C O -� O s E N N O C Q 6 d L `p j L O N O d-a p O— p` `0 3 aui c p Q O a _ O u Q Q N' LL O L O -O O N • E O � 7 -S, Q al O L N `y N E N O N Q al N s Y a U V a 3 co o m `p E ai p a L N U > a) a a c 3 rn o a -° °o °� N 3> rL O C N C C •(D C O a T O vOi O U ° O O W O _ O a ° p p p c u N o) L o E u > p� rn uo a o u o �� .o -°'° aui 3 E 6 6 3 N al O N E o o p Qdc a - -_ Q�� O C o N Q °° -° J° co Q s Q 3 Q aI O^ Z N (h c Z m D O H U N N N V) a c z / z � / > / e z LU < \ 0 z < .7 \ N / ) u / // / ± \ § 2< ƒa # / « u 2U o 0 5 §p\ k %J Cl) j u \ CL \ z j U z f c n g 0-0 §� \ o / 2 ƒ ƒ 2 a ) ƒ ƒ 3 ¥ t 2 u° -0 f -0 c% »& ±ƒ/ ƒ _0 c�a� /� c /) } o/= § e 2 2# ƒ & e E m o6 a 2 -Eƒ -0 8a b�2 F �6k o •- o ƒ - ƒ / § ) % ƒ \ / ) § ƒ ƒ #— a q �= e $_ -0 o 2 mu U o 2% .§ o ƒ e a u o $ 0 / \ 0� o U ƒ / @ 7 / § ƒ Q) ( C) a 2 •! \ � d ± / c § ƒ ƒ� f $ § % u / / \ %% 7 § k &$ ƒ/7 ƒ §\�\ .7[ . » /.g ° u E * $ k '2 ƒ m g { 2 ° o T c m ° 0 S u -0 ƒ 2�$\ I o o G0 o o =uN»• / — ® f ± % % ƒ 2 3 ° f 7 5 @ © / ƒ ® c 2 ƒ J e D % % K ƒ § / D 0/ o 0 7 2-0 u o & o o E`- © 2 u E c 9$ c P S G\ f o% a c 7 0 © o E u o E 2 k±\ u o o r > -0 0 0 G , W )@ C E � ` ` ° / � % / $ e» u Q) k k o @ O±± 2 Q k C)± /\ � Cl o// 2 u� u ƒ 0ƒ ƒ/ . . . . . ƒ 2 •- C o � \o » u k 7 a.e o o 3 00 .7 \ N / ) u / // / ± \ § 2< ƒa # / « u 2U o 0 5 §p\ k %J Cl) j u \ CL \ z j U z f c V) \ \ } \ \ j j LU f / \ _ PJASI!� m;)P M®/ / $ \ \ E � \ ± \ 0 / ƒ � \ t k & � � b � 2 � k .$ $ _ ® @ f72 -f $ ID �� \k a) \ % ƒ \f §/K/ *C, ����� \ - aa� §E e c: r- (D u E. / j±3\ \ / -E . 2-c ,2 ?' 7 / \ /) /)\C - 2\- 1) — :2c 0C-- aGƒ 2 f| ±G2e &3 -� \T) -u 0. \ƒ \ g ƒ8$0U \ 2 °, "D $ @\ j §f } \ §7 | ƒ�a` \ƒ/0 ", > ,\ E 0 :: aL § ®7 % ®£\ a � o �vc 7 m 2 : aol C E ��NQ) /E0 0�)/ 7\w&s77:J!c ;27 ƒ$ /47@ =m «E } y 7 R y y / \ \ § § 04 j � _ z / z \ / \ / _ z ui < / c z < ƒ 2 � K 0 _ � 0 m & j g \ CL \ z zo ) u Z \ § ƒ o / § -u \ 0 § % o G ƒ u g 7 '§ E 6» a§! ` 2 ƒ f 2= e7 ±ƒ/ ' u/ƒ E c u 0 Eƒ e \ _0 & ®* 7 -C3 CY) e ± 7 �n 3 � -C LU e ; 5 ( % f o 2 C: C .- 7 1- 2 E%/ - 5 0 — / » c E/ /¥%ƒ m 0 2 a N k \ 2ƒ g 2 e o e( e § S b ƒ 5 7 E ƒ $ ƒ 2 t± G k 7 ) } $ ƒ $ c / c ) } / § 2 7 %. 7 2 0� \ ® o A o u 2 �0 0 2{f ) 0 o /a§ c \ 0 $ 6»§§ ƒ fit— \ � ƒ ƒ % k ƒ / >. �— 2+ � o e 2 a± 0 # a) u u 7 a o a _; 2 § 0 5\$/ o « o -0 u 7 0& o % ƒ ƒ U ® U o _ c ® o c 2 ƒ \ � c •- a a/ 2 2 e@ 7 0 0 — © c e u °: k 0$ 0 o o/ & 7 o c o 2 E £ E\� f 7 a= -0 > n e 0 e E G \o C3 C: » o t o= m ƒƒ 7! ° 0 s = c o f $ E E Z a{ %» /\ o 0§ \\ . m E o $ I E S & ± f ® ® $ m � $ e 0 Q) C: E-0 ± a)> 7 ± % ®© R § = 3 7® / o §/ 0 C: 3 .° = o c± 7 o G u t § f z 0ƒ / $\ a± 2 g / O 2% / w ƒ% q E 0C) 0 ® \ E / f / - - /� 0} Q) _r_ u O§ 2— 7 m & j g \ CL \ z zo ) u Z \ V) j \ z } \ j j f / \ AIR / ƒ ƒ \ E $ cl ƒ k � E ƒ \ O R, C'4 � � % 2 z g % D / ( $ 'C u LU {u -0 Jak2 c± �� !/ - �° �!&j2 % ; _ : \ /C,7` §E ƒ} T2 /me° [ /e ƒ13S � /�� G _ \ \} E ° *§f �� \ \22 *C /7 ƒ § ®E-E CL a $ } \ \rE \ > - ( f % ƒ \} \ \ ® ®k \/ (\ \ ®�» -u -C (/ E .2 ° . - ! / 0 Ln l2 -0 tn�l� \J z \ § /Rƒc2� ®C )® /rJ %\� }Q) -2E - a - loau �§ ;ƒ:) a = «0 0 QE ES -27 })w&z22E a G ;co< 2< 722& §k} / y y R « J y j D \ \ $ & V) � c z / z LU � / \ 0 Q LUz < / e z < -0 0 ƒ k \ ƒ % D ! Q- 7 C: 2 ¥ 7±7o\f� / 7 0 t 2= 2 o 7 u m 0 0 � 5 - o a n o \ . o .- ) _& ƒ / \ a \ u2of§� c— ƒ E / $ % 2 c � 7 G.g c R i ± E / / e C3 e — a o-0 o c-0 * E o & r 5 a k E ( t \± f§ \ (ƒ / I p \ \ u ° 0 \ ƒ e 2 & 7 3 ƒ § $ ƒ / \ G Z o 6•- o` o a * f % 2._ ° t ƒ * = o 7 a ± e. o.§ } o o \ E § a e u. / \ \ ° / 0 0 / 7 - % y t ± E ƒ _ e - - % ± \ �U CL0 -0 §k §f± $ \� /e S f 6f -0 2 3 7 5 5 o o « o \ o E 2 ©§ o/ u o ` a s E / / k \ l \ \ o ƒ & ± z � \ — \ / ° § ( o �ofE� 20 ±f 9 �ƒ \ \ ƒ2 F -b ° a E 7® o o 0 0 e = a % = /— 2 e ; °� 2 7 ƒ§ ' u ƒ 7 b & ¥ \ o ) 2 G $ 2 \ ƒ ƒ ƒ E \ % �® / +�0E $�e e72 c �o�� �a 2 -0 e * f E'- ; o —® — -E ®� o G ! o & 7 o v u o f •� o± » o c E o Z o P Z E 2 ° u / 4 .L ± e % G, a ± c O® o 7 m £ • # o ƒ $ § 2 & © P4 u u . . . . . . . . \ ƒ ƒ § / \ �[ § ■ \ ƒ a c u » a)E 7 » ) r k N / j g j CL \ Ln z § u z j } \ / z } § \ _ \ / \ Residential Suva .� q / / 2 � f E 0 / 2 ± f � ( 0 q ƒ \ / � PlagSt 9'd 22 �t - & \ .\ D t30 0 \ ` \ 2 $ % +0/ \ ®2 }§ �c ga7c \ / . G \7) \7L 9 �_ c $ ± [ 7 \,u -r- 3 u zzzz`� §± E\ f |\ -ac2a |�ƒ \/ } \ \ ƒ \00 c 0, (D §\\ \ \ -L, \ \E co '0 eee)3Gn2& me 22|)$ } §\7 \2 C3 )60 cc ±22 -2E"JU t; C) u EC' j \) \ -EIo \7 } ± / i9a # § $ }yy R yJ j j \ \ q G V) { c z / z \ / \ j 2 z < / _ z < ƒ k 0 K 0 I t 0 U k 0 / C 0 oƒ ± 0- + 2 0 . t 7= 70 ® »— i 3 c t u ƒ ? % 0 o@ 7 : b G o ` ° ® 0 r) — 0 2 2 2 2 ©+ ± @ ƒ-qiL) E $ _ ® u 2 ƒ k ƒG u \ 0 %ƒ T D/§ Gƒ c 2 u C\ a 2 0 E $ ƒ a O± e &c0 ±/@ L 3 c o / m/ 2 ƒ \ 0 7¥ G T © @§ _0 E \ 3 °+ 2 2 E E ou G 2 ƒ 'Je ` o CD ,5�0 0 0 % e t e E g © 2 / ƒ u \ \� § 2 0§ ƒƒ 2 f ,& a ƒ/ c o > $ 22 m \� 7 m± g c 62(\ E 2 ƒ & » ƒ ) ± § / § ° § J 2 ] » 2 a c § s E 0 2 E a o CD 0 > E. 0 ± 0 0 o o _0 , E a u 7 ƒ 3 G 7 k o 2 2 _± o u£ 8 0 ± / ® \ 2 § % � 0 & \ S ƒ & % \ § o / GoGE /o§ \§J e E� a \r \% @/ ��y) %® ` c 2 u a \ o o, ®e � ƒ @@ o < 2 § 2 0.§ 0 0 2 / I o _ •� ;m o £ § \ ! 7 \ \_/± 2 \ 2 S n o$ 2 / % F 0 f g f =% o a e m o —° 5 0@ ± 0 o o © o•E 0 G 0) 0 2ƒ -0_0 § 'E CO ƒ 7> u \ 2 / E a § CO -C E 7 u[ a_ r o E. _« t u o o > ® g� o= J E o o E o= m o e° c f — a -_0 E § c 2 \ S c 7 k / / / \ 0 k \ / o ; S k m / 2 \ / $ ( § ƒ 2 <aae2 2 O %U 0 \± § {S ƒ) e t ` ƒ ƒ»J \E 2 2 ; 7 7 > e c o& g b 2�! c # u.� u ® /... _ e u o— G 0 r a±§ S / u Uƒ e Gƒ « & G CL g § CL \ z } 0 Z \ V) \ < \ z } § j \ f LU / 2 f AR / ƒ / / / 0 ( O ƒ k Q / $ t / k 0 C6 / � .% g \ \ E ± { ƒf .3 0 fa \»/ 3 /yy) )c§ ©T. ƒ \c)( §u /\ j±J ®�§ *a§ 2f LU — - \§\ / \ \ \2\ &( /> 0 c 2\ f|JG$\®- 2 - ®e. �e ƒ&7$ fe 0 Q_0 C3 \f ) \-- \/72 \ C ±mo\ ®� » ƒ\ / -0T |ƒ .2 . E)a oCl) \ §ƒ72o —cam ,o%! 0) 0 \� /�\ /2\ * 3 e /\Q \ ƒ \ \g +/ aM< -C *f« §w \ y y R y j D \ / ƒ C14 V) j z / z LU � / > 0 c z LU < / e z < � @ ƒ/ / \ 0 G0 / \ ƒ/ k0 u /V) 0 . Lo u .7 ƒ Nc / ( ; 0 \ 0 \ / // 0 %/ \ L U) o §/% k2J § C'4 j U § CL \ z LO / f Z f c E f 0 m / S ƒ / ƒ ƒ -c / \�/ . a) t § 0 $ ° c a) Z / ' o ± \ ' z § 0 �) 2 / [ 0 / £ =�± a 0 of °� {ƒ o \/ \� t E o §E Eoo2%oo o u G 2± 0 } § / 0 / 2 [ G » @ 2 / / 7 \ \a7 ƒa@/ .f�/ 7f M -c )ƒ �\D -C / 0 f 0+ 0� 0/ g 2 ®° <2�2§ -0 �A%/ \± o c 2 u o S c 0 f e m /•� u o o 0 k • u- \ _o a » ƒ 4) 0 0 � / § 7 a.- Z f% _Q : 7¥ 2 0 f\ \ ) ± ƒ /� S ƒ E ƒ ± / ƒ e :t= ©0\ n ƒ0)ƒ 07tu ° / 0 0/ 0 2® ƒ k f I I§± 0£ 2 0 f 0 :0E\ o m a f O t t o t u a a a o y c - R A 7 \ / / � � \ _ E \ - S e± e./ c.§.§ 0 0 0 u E a o . t 0 0» o$ _.§ o a-0 5 r e OD' o f E•- ° � 2 ? E 'u ƒ ƒ ƒ f Q k % u u u � @ ƒ/ / \ 0 G0 / \ ƒ/ k0 u /V) 0 . Lo u .7 ƒ Nc / ( ; 0 \ 0 \ / // 0 %/ \ L U) o §/% k2J § C'4 j U § CL \ z LO / f Z f c E ® ' 0 : 2 ƒ / o 0 0 \ / 0 ƒ 'u } § / } ( ƒ 7 0 k ( M E / _& s \ ƒE / . . 0 % f § ƒ D -0 / :t= k -2 o ± $ :0E\ 3 f ƒ °5 ƒ» § 3 0 2 a t 2 o$ 0 u 0 u \a CO u& 7 2 0 \ C k -0 L C a / •R / / \ §� ±- -0 nƒ /•7., [k ± / \ � / { ƒ \ f 2 m® G o\± > •� 7 u \ /Lu< -(D( �.� � @ ƒ/ / \ 0 G0 / \ ƒ/ k0 u /V) 0 . Lo u .7 ƒ Nc / ( ; 0 \ 0 \ / // 0 %/ \ L U) o §/% k2J § C'4 j U § CL \ z LO / f Z f c 0 Q Z Q F-- CZ LU G O LU W Z LU Q D 0 Z Q J —.4 O c C N O d O O p w Q N N c — C p V — p Q V E Q) 7 E C 0 E p C N 7 O > Q 6 V_ E Q Q N N -° O O C Q' O � O � �C o O 3 V O c p O C pl — N N O � O 0 ow ,_ D N p R�- a c a) C a- 0 s V Q O O S V cD C O L a O O O c p N O� N 0) L7 t- 1 r1 � i r • r 1004S FORU SO'd p o c 6 Q O V O O Q C S O rn rn > -° 6 Q .� p 3 Q) 0­0 a O O O C U OO O C O C p v -p y p d m O IV N C -p C C V p N .0 6 O Lo O s — IT 07 C p C p p `O .m p).N N W w C p O n o p c 3 o Q): h ° 0 .c O d c >, c ° N C O p s E C -O N _° O H tT N O> U O Y E ° c a N Q 0 0 ° E V Q Q U C- 0 6 N N O O U � C 7 N p u Q d 0 N N H Q V + S V E s c ° p C 6'p N O ol- � c C C O Y u V ° o ° o 0 p o � oQ � � `p N ° ° E u rn p E ply o 0 o d H N O Qs-0 x O O Z Z, N ch v Z m D D O F- U N M N 1 1 I I 1 i 1004S FORU SO'd p o c 6 Q O V O O Q C S O rn rn > -° 6 Q .� p 3 Q) 0­0 a O O O C U OO O C O C p v -p y p d m O IV N C -p C C V p N .0 6 O Lo O s — IT 07 C p C p p `O .m p).N N W w C p O n o p c 3 o Q): h ° 0 .c O d c >, c ° N C O p s E C -O N _° O H tT N O> U O Y E ° c a N Q 0 0 ° E V Q Q U C- 0 6 N N O O U � C 7 N p u Q d 0 N N H Q V + S V E s c ° p C 6'p N O ol- � c C C O Y u V ° o ° o 0 p o � oQ � � `p N ° ° E u rn p E ply o 0 o d H N O Qs-0 x O O Z Z, N ch v Z m D D O F- U N M N 1 II I 1 I I i rw h p 1 � S 1 � EG C h 1 j � t • t -� 11 j 1 + I 1 111 111 I � Iif II I 1 1 h i it i l I i i Iv I 1 i` 1 1 • I � � ,)) 11 `r'1 "- I- FTI�-I- rT_i_r7 T_rYY` 77. 1004S FORU SO'd p o c 6 Q O V O O Q C S O rn rn > -° 6 Q .� p 3 Q) 0­0 a O O O C U OO O C O C p v -p y p d m O IV N C -p C C V p N .0 6 O Lo O s — IT 07 C p C p p `O .m p).N N W w C p O n o p c 3 o Q): h ° 0 .c O d c >, c ° N C O p s E C -O N _° O H tT N O> U O Y E ° c a N Q 0 0 ° E V Q Q U C- 0 6 N N O O U � C 7 N p u Q d 0 N N H Q V + S V E s c ° p C 6'p N O ol- � c C C O Y u V ° o ° o 0 p o � oQ � � `p N ° ° E u rn p E ply o 0 o d H N O Qs-0 x O O Z Z, N ch v Z m D D O F- U N M N All / ƒ _ z / e z \ \ \ / e z LU < / c z < u f Q E 0 c 0 I-- ./ ƒ Nc � ( � _0/ 0 > G § 2� 0 a/ \ k \/. \�\ §k& \OJ § � j g j CL \ z j u Z f _ G E \ m ± ƒ / C3 = o r & o k c E ƒ ) \ \ ) t ƒ i oof 7 ƒ3 /\ §��/ \ ƒ ƒ ±/± T) 2 o I § o o m) / § ƒ j k » = E F $ ƒ / \ R - ¥ ¥ -0 /- q 0- E .5 c ; § e o 0 �& m i§ o. _0 u § E a±_ 5 0 E ƒ� \ff0J§ [ / §» 0 � % \ } + § J 2 / ƒ f C '° E u %�-0 E 5 § ƒ G@ 2 e o/0/ \ ƒ §2\ 77 \_ n \ @o / ® I§ o G o S 0§ @\ G° b o 2 8 E ± / ƒ — ƒ\ \ c J 6 § A e o g 7§ t o o e o g e c a 7 e 2 u+ g® 2 e —> o a Ar ±.- • ©— a ' o Ek S u ®§ ° =omo�_° � e o / > c o 0 o f u 0 ƒ o o o 0— .\ \ . E& -0 0 0ƒ . c k[ /)�@� \u %�k }o ° \ } S ( E \ ° \ D \ 0 2 k§ $ E o° k° n 7 r ƒ_[ �� \ 2 O f f \\ » e7E2E e�� /�V) oU 0- c.so »�o $ �� of �@ m§ a` J Q) `. q 0 _ $ �§ o\ o§ 0 0 / r® T m) E c °$; k° # e c a ± o < o < .@ 0 3 G G m / § § - e / / / \ / ƒ ƒ 0 0 \ / 0 / . . . . . . . c o o f— m o t §' \' 3:0 2 e o u o—j « e ./ ƒ Nc � ( � _0/ 0 > G § 2� 0 a/ \ k \/. \�\ §k& \OJ § � j g j CL \ z j u Z f _ V) \ \ / } \ j \ f LLJ / f \ / � G E E k 0 ƒ k � E k » / / a) � / 0 & § \. f©-0 0 W k7) ( } 2$ 0 -U 00C 0c 2 o '`® v \ } } \ . _ t I / 2 / R « o C: 3 0 & § \. f©-0 0 W k7) ( } 2$ 0 -U 00C 0c 2 o '`® v p7 () /2 § a) .a) ®a § 2 . _ t ƒ(\#oa)a =2©£ -m ® « o C: -0 ƒ± s) } ±7 }E §tC CL } } } } \c \ \ % % R R } § \ Cl) 0 2 \. f©-0 0 W k7) ( } 0 -U 00C 0c 2 o '`® p7 () /2 § a) .a) ®a §c =f *) - ` ®` ®� _ t ƒ(\#oa)a =2©£ -m ® « o C: s) } ±7 }E � �2E}� }0 - oo/ ƒ 0 -C CL ) § ƒ /jw /gip' \.- 0 cc _0 E IJ §2700 / / j \a § ƒ / /j/ . .-0 0 3: \, \ 2\� \ ƒ} §I\ \ ;77 ƒ ƒ ƒ'!E - z 6 �� § V) { e z / z \ \ \ / c z LU < \ c z < ƒ f Q : 2 7 I &> & _ g ) / [ G o y ƒ ± 7 ° » c = ƒ \ 9 e._ .� e o 4 �•%� o ® es % \ / .. & 2 & 9 } % / § § ® ± *; © § § [./ $ q / E ( 0 e u 7 I m@ 6 _ 2 7 a o. ch %E r- % 0) 7E /\ ƒ E / t$± &* o 9 ± -o %, \ � E /� * S E S f E ƒ§ o= E&� o m= o /ƒ ° 0 / \ .� cn aoE ±o °� j/ � $�7\ \: « e E f © g G 5 o a .g c» e u e E§/ %$ y/ $tea 00 $ c 0 Ao CL $ ƒ 7 / u ƒ § _0 § ƒ ) 7 E \ e 2 2ƒ 2 @ r §ƒ 9 r 'Q § 'O a c» 5 u c CD .-0 ao u�E 7 c u� ` R /ƒ 0 2/ $ I o\ 7> 9 m/ )' ®e § e�� ,- So \E/ �J� ao7 \ » \ _ 7 ± \ b § G � § ± 2 J 7 \ § ƒ / ƒ %§7 �� §$ \\i §/ 09& 0%/ ° , 9 ƒƒ S 29 ' ~ ( ® 0 0 ƒ 2 b a e o E E ® -0 ® e o E J a 2& e o a c/ e F g u 3 o .c f E` E a S 2 e \ ƒ/ \�\� �k ƒ�D00 0 V) %ƒq\ƒ2� �� /moo\§ 7 <� �� U >e * <�� �7e ƒ a n 2 f 2 ƒ §t ƒ ƒq u Q) e U \� \ . \a a2 § C� j u u \ _ ) u Z / 0 ��- - --- -- -- - - - -- -� ( E � ( \ ( r E : . ■ �! E [ .._.._.._.._.._.._.... _.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._..� � � J \ E / � c ƒ k � : � � & 4) � 0 z% \ / ! . CT \ \� §77 \ \ \&$�} � )\ .cm - ®bk / / \\ � \k \ƒ�\{ ( ƒ/ 2 c. E amm -�25a 22+j /$c( »ek± &[oe E�|°+a2- )* = -2.aU �`k ®2gƒ$ $. 76 f Z w)> {\\ 4 o-kFoc �o �2 {$, &. -A \ ® X59 \3 29 /E&= \ .o %/$ » *i$\ ƒ ƒ$� e O V) 7+24iz - \y y J § N Q -a Q N h N h Q �- s 0 S> -6 M a) �L c a) o O T a O _ N Q Q -C o C3 N> Q Q O a) a C- a C} o s a) v O rn Z � l6 .E T .� L S N Q rn T FT C -r-- -a L 7 O V) � O c L� c E c Q Q s (n o f t o a ' 0 a) h L CU C Z E " — E E 'N O u a u ° s o S S 0 O -O — U- < U Q — Q 7 Q a) N C Q 'O -a U U V) N -N O O � u O y Q U U > N O O C O a - -° �Z — a .E o UO 0 N D a a >, a) -c 0 j cn O V cn Q C y 0 a La V a) = V Z W a) o� � > N 0 C Q 0 E O o Q N a Q O N O ° '° Q >- L 3 Q O_ a Q' asi T Q} L L E -a a > O aa cn Q) O — O U m C s u N ' O ' V) Q a) � Q -o a U a W 3 Q •� Q 3 n C Q C a a a _ = N Z, Q) } Z W -O N E c a ) N c c Q - C) -C — Q — y s � O 0 S (n _O Z a o a O o O N -p D ::D O V C U O -a s Q _ � ° a Q a) a a a) c o O O Q C a _ L _ .c o a Q -c 0- E .4-a E E U � Q E u w Q Q a p V) -0 C Q a o o N O 0) o Q s cn 6 E aci -O D W p t � u N g o o _C L O n 0) Q U ti C a a a > -- N Q D N cn ° ) `c o O C Q D V C y a -a C a) j > a n E •E Nc S c C N T o O C Q u u H Q Q 0T aL Z ) o °' a° �' E a Q E N a 1; C3 0 C H-o J sc N C -O y N a ti a) U O to C 7 O V D °) n Q ` s o c k —ID cO a) o N y m Q U a o a) n ° w E-0 E O E� a} a V, O a C a) s C a Q) - -0 N O O O N s O Enc N O a V) D � a c � a cn E Q a L O a) E C N C Q N C E > o T a) U > u V > Q C h o Q cn N E CV C a uu Q C V Q O V) N t D C a) C :� D O D .0 Q -a Q N _ u a U U -6 Q �- 0 S> -6 Q Ca'1 j 'C U Q •U a) �L a) a a) o O T a O Q Q -C o C3 N> Q Q U O a a) j N N UO N C o y a) a C- a C} o s a) rn a1 L 0 a s O l6 .E T .� L S N Q rn L 0 FT C y a) -a a) i c C C c O-_ s a 3 c L� c E c a N Q Q a a a o f D Q _Q a a) o o' ' 4) E 0, Q -o— E a Q E E 'N O u a u ° s o c Q a •y -a N o Q E E Q .c U Q — Q 7 N C Q o y a y =) N C V s O y Q U s s Q C Q � u a N c Q .E o UO 0 N O -c 0 -o C -a � E E c 0 a a = a Q o� � > N 0 C Q 0 E O o Q N a Q o ) 3 Q Q Q a C C: o ° '° Q >- L 3 E c a =- V 'E C Q' asi T Q} L L E -a 0 N m C N ' ° sG s a E _ a) o � Q ° c g a) E E a) E � a a V Q% N' v) E c O -a. O -a C c a ) N c c - C) -C a U Q a s ( °)C o S L O _O Z a o a O o N 0 a a U O -a � ` a L E Q _ � ° a Q O - C Q c o o a) E d cE a � o m a o a Q -c 0- E .4-a E 3 u o � c -a C Q E O E O y N O o Q a u Q -a t u i y_ c EQ g o o a) -0 L s a - N o a a c Q c > -- a)-0 cn ° ) `c r a a N y a -a V a) j c � o 'a � .i aY ) i a V a N Vl Q V -a -C o . -0 .� Z V) -0=0 V) $ Q 0 E .§ D E $ > D � 0 0) 0 � $ ./ w � C-� 0 � G � \ � m � c \ _ - _ 7 i c c\ cc$\§ E ® ± f a 0 ^ ƒ U $ ®• 0= m § $ ƒ ± e© u e e2 u c / 77 7c cp 265 G» Q) _ 0 \ u '- ± m o a ' 0 O \ / .g n E J-c ƒ 0 — 2 \E »�0E N - o8§f @ a e - m b 3LO \ƒ . \E -0 a E ƒ0 o E e ® m / @ ƒ7w 0\ u /a 2 0 § % % e ° C3 §7 S— o f 2 o 7 o .2 ) -0 m 0% 0 a o E 2 of X\ - t / §c e/ o 7 ƒ '@ / § ± 9 ° \ ®ƒ © _ � ƒ2Gt 0 Z)/ & ƒ § I / ƒ } t ƒ ®E o 0 2 0 . % / »— o o -0 e / \ M / ƒ D C) ƒ \ �� F- E — J \ = 7 a E 6 E ƒ\ � caoE D- o — C / q/ _0 o f/ o � G e \ % c& •\ t G \ e o ._ ._ C E U .g \ ƒ 4 k 0 u � \ /2ƒ % % < 7 / \/ \ o / x \ -0 _ / o 7 i c c\ cc$\§ E 3 j[/ ° ®• 0= m ± e© s .© Q) o z u �o 265 G» 0 E ot\\ ° 0 � & \ $ { § ƒ \ > J-c 0)0 a \ƒ »�0E \ - o8§f ƒ± §�a3 {-0 3LO . . \E -0 .g ® o E e ® m / @ 0\ 0 3 ¥ o v a /% o ® 4� m § 5 , a E 7 $o c f 2 o 7 o m 0% 0 e.- k\ 0) f e / 0 ƒ - t / e/ o 7 ƒ _/ ƒ © _ � 0 o ƒ \ . & ƒ § I / ƒ } t ƒ ®E o 0 2 0 . % »— o o -0 e o o e u .g --0 m cqn) C) Z) — J \ § :0 � caoE — C / q/ _0 m m ° £ m o c 0 c— c& •\ t e o ._ ._ C U .g \ o— 5 ®> . e - o / 0 u 0 0 0& o < / _ % % ± \ 7 7 / ¥ \ \ o c o u •- ® o c u / � S o » 0 \ / � / � ƒ f � / $ / 0 ƒ ƒ z u 0 9 \±_ f u T % r• t, 2 \ 0 5 0 0 0 § }' E_0 2— co f m � o§ b a 4 E 0 E G 6 ° 0 E E m G 7 E U ._ a § § $ J k 2 o % ƒ _ 0 7 ƒ z » } ® ƒ � \ \ [ G f \ / \ / k & D t $ 0 0 \ u E _0 7 0 co uƒ ) ƒ \ ƒ ƒ 2 2 < o 7 k g ƒ ± 7 < o \ 7 C� Y m d U Q d d d d d m - � a OD OD O d O a O a a O Q a O a O a a L a L a a u~ :-D L C U y (D C 6 O C O a O E _ U N _ Q) O O a O d O O- _O :z O O .t 2 :c 2 O Q Q Q Q u Q Q Q d. a U S C6 a) C 2 L a) U a� Q V � C 6 � C N M d m d m U U U M O Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q U U U -o I0 U E a c c a a O w � � C � E '0 O 3 d m m d d U O a U o S S L L L S L O L O O O O O O Q O Q O O F- c `c a n. d a a d d a Cl- U a CL o o a� T E C o � C c C O E (V a o L -a -O U n j u Q- d D a) O O O O O O O O Q O O h p ti n Cl- Cl- d d d d d a d 2 U L a) o a) o E t :5 c 2 T a 6 C O a_ li C Q 0 O H O N + C: Q Q Q c N • • pMC U O QU ►� • • Z Z- a M N Z g CL U LL- U w CL N iD Z N N O U Z 00 D 0 M N LU Z uj J D C� Z^ V V) Lu 0 20 N W WZ 0 � W tD V O N Q� C D C:) U) Q) N U U C � C O --C) O U C : O V Q N O c!) c Q _C) s Q .� } c L � � (D a� Q C) Q C- - _O U N > t o Q) -0 Z d U V Ln a Z N O U Z m D 0 Ln uj Z W r) Z LU C7 0 M > a) — O— S m E c N c O � s g) -2 0) •Q C a N a O T) a) ai c a) o U c> N a O N .`F C N N C V c _O c 3 c t .� O a 0 N N E aVi 3 -o -a E° v o a) _c -0 O N D E } S N S U a C 3 c U c a c p O o n >s ,T pS� O -a ON E : n •«Qi- t N a 7 L N i a 0 a -_ N O N s C a a a 0) _0 s H N N Q c O -p c E E N E _0 Q a a) V : - t a) N — N N N Q X�1=111 S V N Q� s H N E -a c U N O N �, E N rn .N V O N ■ E •C a •L N H (D OV N a) N c _T c a) _N -a a N /n (� C _N C S a C C a) a) C � w cn () c U) 0 N X c a a a) E E O U c a) N N r) C3 c a) E c 0 c w S a) 7 0 S I- c O c N a� i7 Q) E U a) C d a) c a v _T a) S a C U O C cl- 0) ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ N t c a �} -a c O _ C L O a c -0 0)E N O a-0 C 0 -o o c c u o E a _rnc Q) a) a_ a� a a) N C V) C a) a) a O � (D � •� a) � � '� > a) a) N O c U a) S O N� a N s a) O o N u _ s a a 0) o 'U O N u E a p c -a Q H C i a) C () V 7 .� c U O a) O C _a V) N N -a C V - a a) () a) N .� a) a) C D 0 O Q N L C Ems_ �S N o._ . C Q. S} = C S 0- p u O o O c ._ 3 a) N 0 a) V o �o a Q Q N� a) a• N a) C � S N N N a) O o ? L '? s •� Q a o a— a > a 4) .- -C N m -a 0 (n N C3 3 O c Q) U aa) s3h a Q N a a o o Na s QU . C cn ° O N a) a0 C U cn O_ Q c c Dn •- N a> ,,>nn y o •C Q Q C V C O N V c a m U a -a OV J 1 S C -a_ O C C a m a s c 0) a� Q --a a) N .L N .� j •� C CD V j C, v) N y E -a_ a) a O N N a a S O N a) s S S S N s p N 0 s 1— U U F- U v U CD Q •> N F- Z m O O r U N co _0 s L D C a a O T N a a 4) N `' a) o0 C 2) N a) a) O C V c N a) V) > C (n D a Q a) h 72 S S V -O a) •3 a O> a N 0) C. u-C E a = ' a U E 0) a a a) C O a) C C S N _0 > >. �, o a o O O C a -° p a .� a L a) O T — C ? o a N .c Q) a s N Q E C o N C a) a •� ._ t U C a) c C .0 S C a_) o V O a C ° '- a -a -a_ � a) a) C In -a N p a) S C N V Q 0)- O O c > a) ° S o 3 — C a o 0 c a V 'N a a •N a C 3 L 0).C: Q a) N C C V) a) N t 7 L O a > S O S a) U O O N 0 _ O O U- 0- -0 L a -CO3 u Q T S h 7 D O a a) O o O c �— -O Q Q 0) 0 s U .- a) E - vi o > a E E O 0 E � o N 0--o p a O N E c o u F- ° m V -a U Q w °u o_ N o Z m O O r U N co z / 3 e z 0 \ 2 : ■ � .§ � c � in O � � c $ u M ƒ u / � / k \2 \\ 0 ƒ9 / § ± u o\ )ƒ � ( ƒ c o % u ƒ / e 0 k'® C C, C3 ° - £ D 0 \ . \ \ T - \ o '- C c - 6 § 2 � § 0 0- —E = e o % �'> o§ w ._ o c. 7 t u e _ 0 2 �_ - _C3 0) b Q) ��� C) °J o -a .g _0 a ?� §%u / D ƒ � : 4) 0 C3 / a a \ ƒ j m 0\ o 9 0r ° ®ƒ 26 § \ ƒ0 ƒ k' / \ F 2 o Q) `±2 + ©3 7/.\• -2 :0 o*u u u � o ƒm2 - F�.q k§ 2 ± \ b o � c o o & D n � u� m a t &ƒ a E/ $ 2 C, c o o m o «oƒ d$� � #E &�7 co ¥ § 7 c .9 ƒ o S.§ 2 � ƒ7/ ƒE ƒ2 ƒ \• o ƒ2?® ) E34) 2 C $ §0/ ƒ�� ƒ / ƒ \ \ ƒƒ _ 0- _> < f 2 c> (n -0 c c-0 cy') I? % { \ j CL / z j / f c / / 7 2 \ & n 0 / ƒ o \ o - f 0 § 0 ° ' ƒ % 7§ƒ _ _ o ) ƒ \ # 2 » . & Q C '` - 0 � E \ ƒ & C 0 \ g o \ § \ G _� 7 2 o . S t m ƒ a ƒ k 7 } § m } G £ _0 C e ,0- o e E c . Q) c 0 7 f 0 k» %§ - 3 / ƒ ' {: 2 ƒ@ U) o E c 2 k t) » @ E 0 T 2% ) % 0/ 0 a § 0 y %} o a 7 © ƒ m® & k 0 0 0 0\ & 0 3 $ .. / / e / f g ` k k- _ \ ; B§ f &ƒ E e G@ $ f J LU « Q) 3 u \ / ` \ \ § ƒ \ / \ 3 G » a 2 _0 E k& 5 y/ r 7 •> 2 0 c( 0 #ƒ o- a o.g 2 e 0 o§ f 2 .! \ 0 o / 0) $ § D- > t 0 7 2 0- 3 0 o ƒ\ .E 7 z _ Q) n c U Q a a 2 2 0 £< a \ Q) g o = \ \$) ƒ 0 0 0 0 0 0 o n 0 0 o o / U- =0CL o \ m . / • » E u \ J / \ / \ LO / CL E ƒ 1:1 0 \ ƒ ƒ���± c e a c a a n o� #\ƒƒ ƒ LE 2 B ± 2�2 ƒ \7\ƒ ±-0 —0 E� k ƒ»§ ƒ/3± // -0 \a ^ ƒoE C3 E C: ° -0 u,i7.__o J 7 C: u •` ± ©\ / k= ƒ -C u ® ƒ ! 2 J § \ k % V) -:F § S & G o ( E E ± § E \ /i2± ƒ)± � V? z ) } \ G / j \ j & o f § CY): 0 ± § \ / 7 2 •§ o > a- E E® .-0 c 2 ou opt ƒ § 2 \ % ) d. / \ \ / F G / \ 0 � 2 _ ® —6 § 7 -0 � m u o f ± S.E ƒ $ e 2 ?'n o m� 'a ƒ bƒ 2\ u o a /ƒ o ± / # / ® » � o % o G o — \ f § 2 m \ } § [ ± ® _ * _ ƒ Jo & o= o S ; Ec 0 ! G,Dƒ ._ ƒa a232f 7 Ef�:0 ƒ/ / § ƒ_ / " \ b n - 0 —ƒ 0/ ° o o — c§ / 0 0 § E ° ƒ 7 o t a E o c » J = ¥ / o ƒ [ 2 ° _ ± o @ \ \ / / k / ' E 0 0 ƒ ® 2 \ \ 5 � ® t 4 # o ? (D 3 / n ƒ ƒ o// 0 0 @& o c t° o e{ > o u m> 2> e m o o u 4 c cyj . . . . cyi CL E ƒ 1:1 0 \ ƒ ƒ���± c e a c a a n o� #\ƒƒ ƒ LE 2 B ± 2�2 ƒ \7\ƒ ±-0 —0 E� k ƒ»§ ƒ/3± // -0 \a ^ ƒoE C3 E C: ° -0 u,i7.__o J 7 C: u •` ± ©\ / k= ƒ -C u ® ƒ ! 2 J § \ k % V) -:F § S & G o ( E E ± § E \ /i2± ƒ)± � V? z ) } \ G / j \ j / / / 7 j ( 5 } ƒ \ 7 \ 0 � ƒ 0 0 � ° / e / § - k ^ ƒ C § � » u e a: 2 ƒ f 2 \ u \0 ).§ o •2 E \ t f ;.g R ° ° t f ƒ u —®± @§ 0 7 17 § r S a a\\ 2 o o 2 — 7 t c& o e: § ) � T / i � ƒ c 7 �.s f @ 2 ƒ '> § & ƒ a o a > § n n ' G � R) \ ) § - > 7 -0 . / 2 \ \ 7 7 0 / 2 / 7 Q) � 2 u T Q- 6- -� f u b•2 a§ ƒ@ t — 2 2ƒ o 1 0) LE 2 b 7±§ -0 ' 2 a` 7 G -0-a @ o 0. t e o / a§ c E o ƒ o % E— o o 0 0 c.N \ a � o e` 0 m 0— 2 0 9 '> a o o» o% % o- % g 7 /5 — ` % ± f ƒ G C 2 c o ° ° -C ` o ® ° R t -0 ?�k� @mob °a2 &emu o— o� © * o r C e m 7 m± X a— °° 3: -0 \ x§± o= 2 7 r o& > 0 fie 9 o t u t) \ ƒ G % * m o } ( u E ° ) \ \ & 2 7 \ ƒ± § 2 S ._ u � / $ ƒ $ 7 $ o o I e w o c ƒ� e$$ c u e/ c® 2 / 6& k# 7 2 0% ._ c = m` � ± 2 m c 0 § ® r o — .e e S ® E e 5° t 7 >' @ § 4) Q § $ [ 3 0 . ƒ / ƒ ƒ G & 2 n § G \ c \ \ ƒ - [ § / \ » \ \ ƒ 0 a % % 7 \ f ƒ� i 0ƒ c E$ C e e u f§ u�_ >=c" <2 e\§ / c ` <'kuo }k ƒaeS ±r � § /$p R ƒ j .[ ƒ§ i- 0 o e n o o < u o u oƒ o \ . O 19 A / / 3 3 z 0 \ � $ � .E LE � \ / 0 U � Q) 0 ::E G � .S 3 � CY) Cl) \ g LL CL \ z j / f c f 0» d ±7 2 § ƒ 0- f f c oU0 e = ± G ± $ ±2 2$ > � / 7 ( � \ C § E CN r /\ 2ƒ \ E 0 E ± 9 E¥ m Q O o 'E % ) % § 7 O o u y g + § _0 ° f 2 ? -c o 0 0 G r© ® F u/ u S 2 o§ o 7 7 0-- E% ±a 0 ° fb ° 2 a 0 7 2 u— c 0- k 3$ a) ° -0 t ƒ(n E @7± ƒ / T 0 ° I E u .2 > c ° �.[ ) « u f@ 7 0/ �) k / -0 ' % e -/\ 2 » ©� 7 ° a ® / o ƒ u -0 \ -0 g = o 5 z= — p., 7 ± » ® o c 7 e ±, , o.g ° 2 7 u c o \ ƒ c S u ƒ Q ƒ \ ƒ ± / 2 Q \ a ƒ / ® ° 0 o ® # 00.5 :§ oƒ )e § =§ -0k �}K $ Eco- °e 2� E ƒ0) % / § / ƒ 2 § z ; £ —C � c t u \§ /e22 \ƒ »f ƒ0 ESA < u E 2 0 u 2 Lu 2 ±/ 4 3» 2 0§ Cl) \ g LL CL \ z j / f c [ ' y / ƒ ƒ § ƒ § 2 \ r 0 % ° � 0 U) / c o _ ! � 7 f o— \ N �\ % y % 7/ ° o� ± —ƒ C m 22%$52 ) @ �� Q) \2fk ƒ� — \ o § . % \ £ ao >� Q) ° § > # 2 �3 ƒ D 7 % —s7° U) ± u °� ƒ © 7 u� a% ƒ e -0 ; ° D o g% ° ° 7 ± 7 o a T u e -o � & @ ° i J fi ƒ c ƒ 0 ® \ % / & - 7 } o � o o � ® + \ a ƒ e c— m u u t ƒ -0 o� o o � 2 > 0 � 0 c z g e a E ƒ 2 ƒ§/ m w-0 & § §.E -0 - ±$ƒ c_ 0 ° 0 2 J 2 � 7 c •© 0 & � 8 o. _ — a - P � 7\ � — 0 0 f 0 0 } a 7 u« 0 C e\/ o i E 2 5 w- a & o ± E{ u u . o u. E _ c 2 . t o C I o E e o _ 0 »& Q a e o 0 ° + o m t` m§® 0= �_ c 0 / t E t / 0 u c 2 ƒ ® c ) f 0 _0ƒ 0 ._ o> m D 0 ƒ 7»; ® o a 0 g E o / C/ o 0\ u c¥ E o C o S— 2 X ± f§ o t ® t —` � n k F §.s o a u o(n 2 o f u 2 7 a. u c _o ` G o y/ o �� § ± & 7 m c i \ ƒ a { ¥ ) g \ $ ƒ § e \ 0 0 E m ®ƒ ' 2 c e = ;_ ƒ_ E a 0 a a o= ±` u $ T T a ��\� ƒ o -- °� \� t u o � cnk u t . 0 §�� ƒ \/ �4 ƒ/� —/ / ��0 }z 0 0 S te 0> 7ƒ 2 c3 \$�/ ƒ 2 Eƒ 2\« 7 7 7 0 — E2&® o �� — o » o u. o� (D —=o� e - o� u� o e ee0 e— p a E j •ggƒ c c o 4) 0 »5� u= u 7TJoo§ o }.g ƒ 0; . ±2 c-0 a �_� � ��� m. o G�3D0 5 k a) ®-0 u_. 2° 7.7 o f± a= 6 7 0 E 2 f 7 f a& \ f± r ƒ= t; ' z 2 2 k i@ a 0 7\ ° 0 m o u o B c E@ _— u 7 2 o _ o 0 o f C- 3 0 p > o o o a u o E u u —— a 0 f y \ o& f a o% E e 2 f A7 7» \wok ƒ$\2 CO ± ƒ� �k�� / /k / §ƒ ƒ ƒ$ƒ U- 9 O . . . . . . . . / j u z \ / / 3 G z e / / / 0 � � 0 � � 0 0 § m 16 � E & % \ L) j CL \ Z Ln Ln 0 / f _ 0 ƒ - 0 }ƒ { @& ƒ +ƒ § R } / [ 5 k R 2% b u_ »[ ± u_0 �� § §� '/ 0\ � \ t G ® u o * } 2 E G , ƒ E E a ƒ & b 5 ƒ a o G § ° \ f k� �k }ƒ ¥ k � a g 2 � e e ƒƒ / ƒ \ ) ƒƒ § E o G� 2 o f 7 c 07 k / E/ (D -0 ° } -a m k + n _0 S + ± � \ ± .2 G r � 6 J z e 2 D . o a #$ m 2 ƒ- o o 3 a o m_ 7 s o 0 \ S/ ® » E u E \ 2 $ u u r+& E u & C3 o { 2 ƒ & 7 •§ (D $ 7 t ¥ ± { / 7 ƒ 2 ± / ¥ £ \ ° 0 0 § * G § I 0 2 0 ƒ \ ƒ ` 2 n w e u n E a E3 6 \ / 0 2 n U� a e O e's.c 7% 0 0 0 0 0 Jag &+2 E & % \ L) j CL \ Z Ln Ln 0 / f _ § G ¥ m o a & M E \ � ƒ / \� / ƒF f § \ t ± � ± } T &.% \ 7 f± 0- o o 2 G 2 0\ G T 3 ƒ 2 \ ; .g C3 \ / 2 @ \ \ a \ 2 2 ƒ \ 2 ) 9 e� // # #'eee� / \ 0: 0 CL 0 � C: 0 A E _ ƒ �C: %�� ��TC 2 \» � F o ® J o@ 2� p G 0$ u e P`» `? o ? u eC: �/ c D ±= G& .) e• ) ƒ ƒJ % \oG { y / o o 0 ± o .g .§ . o \ ƒ @ ` § ) \ ƒ § � \ o} c 2 § u o . \ D § -C R / -C3 -a f 7 ± o± w •� C3 o ) g \�/ /�G} o r /7o 2 / 2 \( (�§ S LL 2a \ \o \f ƒ ƒ/ / /�/ 2 m » J < �o o.§ c E / m 0 o \ _ § . . . . . g � � o cli \ z LLJ z 0 5 0 z 0 \ od . . . . . . . . . . CY) � j 2 § \ I Ln 0 f z j ƒ 2 � 0 o 7 a @ 2 — T 0 %± / 0 o S\ t g — 2 ! . 7 k7 g e E — / � ƒ�/ /\ \ k�( » ± * ƒ § E E 2 3 _0 � § ± \ \ §' c .0 0 / / 3 ° ( ƒ 0 0 _\ ® / ° - \° a ± *© U0 / /7 ƒ ƒQ ` *o ) 7 ƒ� 2 ®/2 2- 0 0 � E & 3 E 3 J \.$ & J/ k a/ 2 i 2 / e 2 (D ƒ \ oƒ C3 3° 2 e 7 / §§ » 7 2 0 e% `/ 0 t 0 0 cn 0 9 c o 7 E & ® p \/ �E a 2 ƒ7 ƒ§ \ = �2 K7$� / § ^ k 0 0 \ $ G . $ ƒ c 0 0 7 7 ƒ * —u § \ / 0 o 0 § 2° \ m%ƒ J d 7 —0$ 0 o » / (n 0 [ ƒ § % ƒ / ƒ 0 \ / t ' j [ / » t °\ k' t 0 0 c u o o 0 o 0 7 E E _ Qo \ o ) u/2 u ° § k ƒ iCa0 o \\ \ o a 0 3 \ a a 0) 3/<§ 2$} a od . . . . . . . . . . CY) � j 2 § \ I Ln 0 f z j N LU LU Z D C7 Z Ln Lu 0 M 1 1 1 1 M- 1 r i i r 1 t t t \ 1 1 l t I r r i� i� 1� i \ \ t t , , , r r t t \ t \ t 1 1 i / 1 /r w tt i 1 1 1 1 1 t t t t , I', Z m D 0 r U N M F O a N N t'o a) c s a 0 a a) S rn i N a c u p s a) L s a p p N > c 2) -a vi C a O -p c p Q) 0 a) O u J5 u a) a) c c a a O a) O a a p p E a a) p a a) S a c aO 2 -0 a u 0 C: -0 p .a O-o c 0 a s p a a a3 ) 0 ' a a c 3 S o N O Q) a) N > O u a a a E a a) N a a) D Q) O a y N •N O a) a a N VI a a) S N T C- a) u -a a) p O u O H E a) c N S u O Q O O -a S v T Q -p p` _ a) O� T O ` N> -a N •� U a) -.f� a° E E E ' > C a aO c c Q E p N r o a > O u a) Q — E c a a) E .c O a) a -a N a) a p E c o� �o b � a _a o , 0 s u U o E c � 0-0 N a)-a > m-0 E E- a N a) a a E E -Q o a s — N a - O p N -Q - a a O a a _ a c � c N o 2 a' o c )°; Na 6va o o_ � os a aj a 00 O o U O 0 O —�0 N E O 6 N Q 0-0 Q a N-0 62 E a (D o V ca � E y .E C5 U. a cli 1 1 1 1 M- 1 r i i r 1 t t t \ 1 1 l t I r r i� i� 1� i \ \ t t , , , r r t t \ t \ t 1 1 i / 1 /r w tt i 1 1 1 1 1 t t t t , I', Z m D 0 r U N M \ / 3 0 7 0 / r A j U / CL \ _ In j u Z f c 1 ° 0 E # 2 e / b w �0) C 7ƒu" 0 -0 0 7ƒ 4 e 0( \ ƒ/ 0} z 2 / ƒ c• so=( c -� a� 03 o -QG72 %& @c6a ±7 ® \P> r u c N— = — e -0 2�— e c k / � / \ / \ 2 ƒ § / Eƒ § � i \ 2/ o § [; 0 J ?_ f 0 » E o o f ± _0 \ c —± E @ * ° @ 0 2 E ± » : e `&& ; T m / E o 0 t c = \-0 f o I D E§ c a° o 0 a . a 2\ 6' o C n E E = f o E¥ƒ ƒ / \2� /� /���� /\ _0 _@ ou0o0D ƒ ƒ\ Q o m o§ 0-0 Q° 2 c- o -0 .0 \ u u -u ƒ e ms ƒ \ ƒ u e� q § u aL � % ± 2 : J ƒ ƒ ƒ / 0 E ° E o / / / \) \ 2 3 0 0 � ®[® ® \ }} -0 a 5 z\ 3 m B.B -0 m c° 7 E E 2§ f -0* °'ƒ 'E ±�bmf \. 7 c fo�o g —° & U c D Do e—u m c= -c o± O t ~ u§ u0 § e . _@ u °> 7 J£` �0 0 0 m/ 7§ E o ° R[ i$ 2 * o / 0 2 ° ° `9e +G» Ea ƒ`¥ ƒ \E \kt§ Q) ƒ) [� /® k k d{ k &; e \ 2 7 ƒ[ 2 2 2 7 e o o 0 -0 -D 0 0 0> 2 . . . . � r A j U / CL \ _ In j u Z f c 7 7 C3 T 0 T \a ,g \ /7 §.2 9 ®t a �2 2 0 % U $ G /® o 0 D o a° o u q \ c J C ƒ/ / E 7 0 $\( T U � / ®_ t E b@ 2 _0 o o T 0 o C: =-0 t 0- \ ° ° a) -.0 @ 2 a[ § kƒ 'S 2 i* 0) = o e « 2._ » .707 / \z \/\ 7 ƒ- �� § 0 ± ) \ § ( 0 0 _0 \ 0 ƒ 2 2/@ � 3� u c 0 o= 0 E l 5 1» / f \ ` \ -0 k \ ' k [ ; 0 & C r '©/ . ƒ E 2& /\ 2 2 E T` o\ f E 2$� c ; o-0 t E o ; c E o a c 0) u, D• - • - c f e w o c 0 —� $ U / 0 7/ 7± u 's x=_— e m m c c u._ o 7 7[ aa\%ƒa /�) .m e0- 07�JE ƒ _o ®� C3 o J c c o o a_ m g %= ° -0 o _# G% — E 0 o[ E J 2 0) \- 2 c E 7 o \ 7 ƒ ƒ22 f ƒ0\ \C3 ƒ20- \ @±±ƒ u ± % ) = f \ - / 0 } § -0 ƒ 2 7 o 2 7 E t u » -0 ¥ / S// -0 2 0 S 2 § -0± o o-0 m_ o 0) = o = 2g2§3e T §} \o�&) \G\2 \k \\ $ 7 \ ƒ 7 \ $ % § § 7 § m ƒ ƒ a s ± \ 2 § 7 t 5 e * 2 a G 2 •� @ Lu f E< /� Q o 2 $ E g ./ (U . . . . / A j \ & A \ \ j 5 0 2 2 \ q @ 4 2 � 0 0 � / & G 9 0 m 3 �\ 0 m CY) o \ \ _ ) & 0/ 0/ 2 u /) 2\ k e/o ( ': 0 E ©%fs 0 _7 5 0ƒ 0 0 2 @! \ E § C 2 0 ƒ ƒ• E ° E /§ (DT /2 e#�7 ƒ�:± > c 2 G w° a? o o 2 C, 2 ow .g e 7 _ c m— o® e f2£7 -0/ )/ %u% /ƒ \ \ ƒ{ § , t �c as 0 �/•- •�N�00 0 c o %._ o o ' u G ± } \C cRƒ ) ƒ /±c (� 0/ 0 -0 T } % -0 \ \ ) / / ƒ / o B ± u U) § Q) Ln \ 2 _2 .[./ _0 Q) Q) \ _0 ¥ 2 § 2 2 \ ) �� ®ef eE 0/° t; � a ` 00/ 0/0 \ Tk T0- ƒj / \ R$ 2 0 .7 £ m ` y o 0 o E o— o e � c 7 5 o. - ±- c@ o 3 ƒ \ ] R ' / ° \ / \ f f » / ƒ In ƒems c -0e �a c- �'�+ )C3 ` 0 °§ ®� %» E/ 0 0 /0[/ ` -0, u ' 0) o z 2 u ut» 57 � 2D �/¢ 2\ 0 §ƒmƒ� o , o ` ($ /7 ƒ ƒ% ƒ0D �0 2 °% )00 m' u o e u) n e> O e 2 ± g w 0 0 � j U j CL \ Z Ln j e Z % c \ / 0 tn / M 4) D7 ƒ 7 ƒ —/ 0 2 & }� ) = 990% e k )0 7 2 9, §oe§ eƒ -0 / 2§ 3# T) \» a 2 2 7 0' C ± U c �_ 0 r 2 a o -. 2 G o o o � t c @ o a r — • E•E § § c 0 u �_ % i f § ƒ E o u 0 ± e a \% o— E°-0 ƒ\ c ƒf ® E » -a o ± G £ ± t $ / § a { 0 2 cn 0 o u c o C c� — e} 2 0 0 7ƒ 2 ® g 2/ a 2 o u ¥ c § 0 0 o f o 0 G 0= o o E c= o ±_0 k /ƒ E\ n u e ƒ » o c o ° a E 2 m e ./ m =% »% a ;§ a 2 0 2 ±ƒ f kƒ T o aƒ 2 % o o f t 0 3 u o o D °— ®— � a/ c $ o m a 7 c= u= 0 § &$ c t u 0 c@ _ - a) o o — o « e U c = 0 E o 5 0 o m o — o u — — ± c c 0 g/ƒ t o o e# 0- -a °§ 7 a c.- 7 7 2 2 % % T / §� b \ K 7 E / � $ k 0 / ._ z # % 2 �� ƒ _ 0 ; E c= o a a k o E ® E o — : o 0 e i a -0 0 � o % — 0 7 E ° § / — -0 ƒ — ƒ & —0 } e = % o � ± E o e E \ & 7 - e * 2 ° > E o.9 &cu )u 2 ` - 0f» o r0 —- 2/ § 7 a / ƒ / § y 2 E 0 ) ± -0 � 0 © . > § c i £ ° o k — 7 y o ) J o , 3 0 _ ƒ E 0 W > e \ » . E/ m g 2 §§ t o��SE> a; P EST 2 °f� 0 0 0) °� ƒ o® °�77 E ee a�f= C 0 o o — o=% x o E ` o ƒ ƒ ±_ c o m» S e` e o¥ . a— u u.- e c- o u r o a» 5 G U& ƒ M.- g o m•- o u % -0\5t -02% a) t7=e., ± aD }•ƒGaƒ•i &t2 ƒ± z ±§ § ®� t m ° E @ a z 3 t 2/ q %± a o E e 2 >» . § ƒ k ? & o o ; = $ m > E t - . o �. p._ e o — Q o o k e u = / > 7 j CL o e e a u o . m m 7 § o� _ E 0 2= $` _0$ o 7 c a o E § E 7» 7+ m e & 7 m e o r g § c r— 3$» m t \ < o 0 o u\ o£_ 9% _ƒ O a e 7 C { . . . . . . . u A \ 0 \ z 0 / w< Z}: t 4 � CL (D .§ Al CY) � 0 © a * -0 G a Y g e ._ ƒ \ / 0 D ƒ z: a e / 0- a- 2@ m C« q a c w o 0 E � o' 0u+ c 9 c u & ƒ / [ U \ / •§ ƒ @ 5 c % � k } * ' g ° 0 m -C ± 0 0 � f u G a ƒ 0c o 0 ƒ 2 \ ƒ » 0 0 / ƒ \ E— f •� ƒ r- E u 2.g t 0 o® 2 ®\ 2 T 2\ * b 2-0 �.eoƒa T ƒ °@» 7 &o D ` o D c ƒ c \ /� ƒ� SE -.g $ rn e. % o o > g f - 7 b = 0 G\ 3 c \ =° 2 ƒ / / ƒ � c 0 (D a ƒ ; u o G £ o - o > 2 •- � 2o$O'3 � Z g j \ z ) u z D 0 \ \ / 7 0 j j \ § 0 2 G & k -0 ƒ \ 2 y f ƒ§ \ƒ _\ ± ƒ 22 \& \%ƒ ƒ _0» X27 %ƒ =2225 2 ±2 / / 7 \ _0 } u / - \ ƒ 7 C3 / & /�� /d / e2 �z���k0� 0 0/ o c ° N e§ \ 2 E` c § o E 0) [ ±% G r ƒ 2 7 5 :// E S o e / 7 '- / 0 § T E ƒ e k / ± - / ® 3 +> 7 7 \ \-0 0 o c 3 � -0 _ - m o § 7 ' » _0 - -0 E§ Gƒ +a �° )s=il=k )� a s 0` 0 u #^ u 5 ± ± ®§ 0 2@ m f § \ ƒ § § E 6 § -0 E / 0 0 m \ a o e- ° § * \ ° ®7 § & ° ± e e r 70-0 §o ƒ©0) f ±2 ci /\ o 5 o 2 % £ •- 7 ) ® a •- ƒ -0 o 2 '� » & ` •- 2 / 7 2 g± o� g- 2 0- co -0 -� 0 7 ._ »� !a o ƒ.2� ±.R %.�`7 o e�2mo7o ± -Q) 2* ±oE'&ra- o -f 2£ a 0 0 0 § 7; 2 yƒ G \/\ e 3 e g a g Jƒ - % D/� 2 0 t F \\ 0) uƒ § ƒ % 2 2 e 7 a.0).S E r¥£ k 4 7 2\ Steƒ Q± Eƒ&/ °�§ &k7.2 / o ° °e /}» - oJ5 u -a LU Eaf�± _° o o ¥ E o o-a 0) D� G 5 0- a: \ o[ f e <uE7o� §'�§ /± EE t3 3$6ƒ2±2 ƒ2 ± . . . . . cl� j j \ § 0 2 G Ln \ j 5 e z g \ I It B j L) j \ z j u Z % 0 / \ % -(D a ± » Q » > 2 3 / 2 ± 7 0 C § I 0 2: 22.¢± m \� \77 0 0 ±� E _ 6 3 2 c ƒ � § ± + u o o uƒ •- 7 0 0 \ Q) \ 0 o 0 ƒ / ƒ § / o ) / J E —(n a0 7 ƒf ƒ e » § C, 6 U E » R a c \ R � § E o &t ° ƒ cn � 6 ® ( / . � \ 3 /�_ ) (D _Q§ ƒf� F® 02 - \ /) ƒ� \/ § ƒ% E/ /. /> /aƒ k \ \ 2 u - k ' / ƒ B j L) j \ z j u Z % 0 V) LU z_ LU J z V) Lu 0 M N O N N c O C D N p > a C cif E a) D p E O s o L O . 0 O E L L E 72 L> C> -0 1P a L -- a) a) a p U Q'— c a) O L Z) C) N -O S C N N O C La S3 L � N o N .a' O 0 a) — U a) • p O o O 3 N C i _0 C N U O C -a C c 3 iu -C N O N Q C U a o o Q j >' } O > u a o� Q r-- o o - 3 N 2 t c C p 0)> V) a ° -O O C N N cn c rn•C) m 0 a�i a a) L a -O C a a) C 7 U L L S L a) -O a) O E c p p O a 'E -O N p c x O s O O o 0 u u o O ff° c N o E a) L tJ s -CO: s E `� 0 4 rn N} a, E N �� N p c u L o a)� a a) C N a E � a c o w E C3 u .° o Q) r- O ° � -0 .L a� a o� N C O L 'rn C � ■ C a V ■ V 3 ■ o O■ 0 m j N N o a, . L in 0 s o u N y N m Q C o -0 C C N S s -0 -0 N 0) o S .o O) > O E s 'E .O E a s p 9 s E 0 o - -a o o> p p a ° -5 o E 0) O -O c a aa c T O O V C C E E o a) D ° C ° a a a N O U s >a p p a) E m o -0 a, o O ? 6 C - N O LJ O s -O U � N L E a > O E p a) o ° ai o � aU C_ n cn V > -0 c O u a ° N N E -a 0 -0 —u a o 3 u E c O p Q N i •� C a C a ) C3 d O o ua) H a) L E ac a Y a) a) s E o 2 0 p o o 7 OC Q O a o a f °C ) 0 2 Q s= E W c O t O O c s ac ) > + O E p o p, - o O V a O O v 0 a) N Q O E ' � u 0 u 'O � s0 Lcn ms-a s ° -p c -a O } N O p Q a) C Q) a) aO u c c p 0 V > 'a a) O O s a ° a o E o o °) as E a c a a _ cn a a - 4) E a > °' LO a o V o a i p E L E L -O S N C N '- S °) = s o-- O C O rn 4 a c C > S ° °� •Q C N O N a)-o C O a C N u} t L a) 7 a) S C N a) V N S N _O — N Q C O) o n i N Q E n O s E a p T N S p O �� O 3 3 Q) 0 a N •� J N� '� Q O -O C N j a c O ° O °) -p a) a °� C E U O o E C a) _a a a) s N 3 D s m u p E V o� i -0 C3 -0 a? o Q m >. � C .3 ' 3 o L� E Q Q- N N c •y 3 a) -O O c Q) 0) a •� O a) o a) a o C S N C N O a) N E .c O C N `� o o H N a C O _U a o t 3 C •� ° E a) �) N .N >- =- -a 0- ai a� a) -0 S O o_ c a N p c N _� a O E E 0 0� -p -° .E a o C 3 .> U H E .a a-0 > o N °u rn C 3 o a a c a) u N N± a U' c .x c C O` N vi a O ?• U s a c a) m a) C u a) N a) o ] u N a) •> c> N C O a N E O) D 2 a) Q N V vi C E N N 3 N u .? cn —O a) >. a a p> N p C .Q — O °u a 0 -a a) N E.2 d U C o c a) E O � `� O a) C a) x L 0 a p Q p c� S C O E C' U . O C N p �` >, W /11J� a) Q— V ] N -o O 0 O U) fl L a a a L a) C In U a a) d s O a s N •� p N p Q- 3 c� c° 7v c E `~ 'c -6 ° a - p N s C °) c E N •` U N Q .0 C EF- a) o Lri N � O c Oj c p .� s a s j a >> v v O ''' N> r cn O N C Q p O- �O Q1 S N -a � S U N L o 'S Q L �' cn o 0 Ln Q -O a) -O � S -6 a) - m L r . C C a) 0). z O N N v N a O C c a O C -O p c `� ) N a E M .- a 0) O s U U W C a .E -0 a o °u ::E Q- w ac) o 0 o LU .E O) c a E D Q a) 0 3 O S C O a 3 L 0 X W L O C O .o .E E E N o_ O) c S 2) C O N V C 0 _Q Q a O N a) c W ■ ■ z m 0 H V O C4 A \ / 3 e I e \ � : � � .� � c � � D 0 � ■ � � � � � § C; j g \ \ _ Ln j u Z f _ ] .® § + ° o \ /: ƒ§ \ G 7 \ 7 E R 2 0— 2 c e e c m e 2 2 [ \ _0 � 0 / � 9 ± § 3-0 / (� # 7 -C § ƒ / ƒ ƒ a V) � ± ƒ % $ . § a ± \ $ § 5 & ® 'a E [ o G G @ a> _ ± G o 0 2 E E)§ 5 e ƒ E� / ± a 7 e ƒ' / %)ƒ § \ / \/ ± / u ƒ / o 7± 's 2 2 e � 5a ` t? , m ƒC 2 o �t .: ± » ° D oc . /G -0 km \ / 7 � » / \ ƒ' 0u c 2§ �._ oƒ e E: — E u a G u c - 7 -o { o § G 2 S ƒ ` § \ 2 ± / o a 2 ƒ L3 ¥ 2 7 y / % k _£ a f\ E f j 0 ƒ j G ƒ a 2£ E E % c 2 c o g -0 ƒ ® e §& y E 7 fƒ 7 \ ' L;7- § 2 ƒ �'- § / 2 •� . a § & 'n E \ u u m e /— ƒ e G — 0 S) / . o._ c± » 2 T 9 ƒ / _ ƒ 0— 7 ƒ m -F- ? / 7 § ' \ § G / \ 2 \ 4 % � \ F $ u { 3)§± p o a— '2 E a f e e f f o [ f E ° a ®/ a a fƒ g§\ G f( U 7 _o 2/ 4 §§/ B E §ƒ / r E ®% 0 $ ƒ U o U / 7 7 5 o 8+ u � u! %ƒ 'etk/ . 2 E 2 ƒ Q) In 2 � J S 7� /§ q / 7 k % f \ ƒ a & % § C; j g \ \ _ Ln j u Z f _ e � z 2 � - g . . . . / n= n§ Q- c 70 o Q- :3 ; n e z \ \$ 2/ C,» o n 2 , m a n n o f , o S y f 2 / c R] R c i; 70 a o$ A ƒ- Cƒ e Q c �]� _, o f c � n (D CD ;ƒ® 2 5 �' a n= G e = y U ® e� � « ®< ®mom a�2 __.2 -gym \o G3 E { 7 2 0 2 J ¥ 2 ƒ \ / ƒ 2 E 2 ƒ \ / ƒ ) 2 ƒ ƒ ƒ o / \ J%$ O§ E ®z \ a° o c o q+ o /_ 3 m m $ m D n - c= _.0 7® o f n - a y R � $§ L _ \- ( O F U k� J s^ n� c] y«+ i s aƒ a» n + n f a'c » §_ z § a = c Q y y $ $ \ / f / o / 0 ° 9 / » \ ƒ ¢ f } ®§ J% 0 !n B \ z c o / � § \ / m » \ s a y J 2 ± ƒ ƒ J /ƒ J y ƒ ° § D §�\ƒ 2 / *F ±° %\ ƒ~° e a yam% \ \ § R -0 CL \ ƒ c ƒ § § \ < S k / ! ƒ C � ƒ ƒ 2 n $ - § q 2 § # \ c $ , x �_ * y ƒ ƒ :3 3 \ U- CD u- 3 y +cn. U ± � / / \ ) % \ � § 9 C « o s ƒ O m y = - n ° n 2 ® \ ƒ ƒ C) ƒ ƒ -< :3 0- % § (n - <. \ _« 9 R e « 2= a]_` s /& m J n a g y m o c];® ._`- m^ 3` B g 3 e o o_ f$ E] #\ 5' y o 7 e' 2±a E�'q $;& /m; +o %\� -0 z ' % §@ � a e]: n 3 J - o / 0 CD ^ G Q y ] �e CD z / 3 e z e j R Cl) { \ j CL \ Z j u Z f c ƒ �� t? c )± 0 2 U S % 0 k\£ c# `/ [o -0 /k 2 c f .a >00/ƒ 2 _.- a— - c E 07-C o/ o § Im 7 I o-C 2 S e — 0 §.g ° S » c u � E ƒ � c 7 # E u c o f 7 -C u -0 co 04._ 2 0\ -0ƒ e \o u »- ° 9m —S a m 0 E .g §ƒ S 3 0) 2 T 6§ m - / \ CL ƒ _ �ƒ r 0� ƒ _( E a 2 " 1 ' 0)F# cƒ _2� \/� o fo %± \ %\\ 2 C: -0- 7 20 0 0 `7 f§ §33® c 2 7 G » r - o o D ® - ° .g \ ƒ j \ o E / / t 2 \ f ƒ a % \ a b\ /§ = 7 \ c 7ƒ f o o= •- a .o ._ ._ oƒ 2 c 0o =� & { / \ a \ § 0 t eo § •% ƒ - % ' E G ;2 >� u _/ e±/ 7 ¥a \ 2�k� k) -0[T%/ ±E i\ \ \a [ %tea 7a 7 c-±§ ` 2$\ � 'S ƒ r— 2ƒ /ƒ ® e± S± a a 3 m e t o 0 2 -0 0 2«oz e — 3 2 7 0 ?u '— 0 0_ § 2 o— o m7 ƒ o a c . a 20 \ 7§7 _� g 0 3 — (> m �0 ® \ § \ [ ƒ T 0 ® o ` ƒ c 7 > § 0 ƒ 2 2 u E t ® C o 0 0 0© u© °° °» 0 2 0 2 7- 7 2 _0 2 0[/ nƒ a u CO �2 0 g 2/ 0 r o& c> c 0 o i/ Cl- J > t § /. § E 7 } \ ± 7 V \ / C _0 / ± } o E \ ` E 0 G f 2 ,¥ o 2 o 2 -c 7. 0§ 2 c o § mo o— o E; E u E u 7 ƒ$ _>. e 2 e E - 2 t o e Q@& t a t o 0 0 0 / ` o G ƒ ƒ E E % ( % + E ® / < ± & 2 ± ± ± Z 7 2 ± § z/ 7 0® D E ƒ§ ®2 k B 0\ 0 F° 0 7 o n o 0 o = o-0 u m » c,_§ 2 a E u- ± o a o b � � . . . . . CN CY) R Cl) { \ j CL \ Z j u Z f c / / / $ \ �\ 7 (D Q) c u ƒ \ E ƒ E ƒ E ƒ 2 Q 'E m ± \ &o \a »7 57 00277 7 ƒ§ ± a& ƒ I G® ƒ a §\ e § & g 3 E ) \ ƒ e 2 * 7 • ƒ e o E e m \ f o E� c E\ / @ G , = « �7 �o� _ §§ \ƒ�.E /b o °0 5 \ ) ƒ�C)0— /k( ƒ \k ƒ \§ _0 C3 m /§ 0. 2 G` @ 2 §\ 2 `° �/ G ® e n§ a_0 ce oT0D -" c a\ f ®� s ® E o e A o a b u u E % a G n� \ e c 0 2 ` o G E &) c$ g r± f f S m 2 ƒ%$ ƒ E m 2 .g % a 2 ®s ) 2 2 @ ƒ \ £ @ d n ƒ q ƒ ƒ G � \ § \ ± ƒ 2 ƒ \ ± \ a @ o— ° E J . 0° % k e 'n e« e o a t o J e— u _% 2 2) o ƒ 2 \ « ƒ u ƒ \ C3 0) > ® E o S 2 / ƒ ° § » f t � - / § 2 ®2 £ ƒ c:V)c _b� ƒ)ƒ�� ƒn e§ 7�a k �� �) / ( a- Q) &± m 0 2 6-2-0 2-0 ca c§ <& %[ 2/ ƒ t o 0 o n o o c o § D \ § u m A \ / 5 e z 2 \ � . � CY) m ¥ j u j \ _ j e _ f c 7 /7 /0 2 / ƒ ƒ f \ §7 ) ± ƒ •± e 7 ° D o § -C § =2 \/ \2 c — °7 222 7ƒ 0 k G 0 .� .@ 0 2 .� #% ��� c /ƒ o w (q0 2_0 0 �f 0 2�77'/k �� / / \ \/-0 /f ��• k k � g * ƒ ƒ 3: Q) o �t e 2 _ 7 R ƒ \ (k k J 2 (D ®� f 6 ± \ \ / \ ƒ 2 C 0 o s 7 Q) G±@ 7 E 0 0 p 7 o e 2 o §/ E _ n -a o 2T c/ o GS\ _ + - \ 0 c \ / ƒ g C % 0 0 k : � \ \ § < -ao) < \co ac)/ � . � CY) m ¥ j u j \ _ j e _ f c 0� � ƒ §$ / §k \ 2 � '; ƒ $ -C � o b 2 J \f \ t� / ƒ� ƒ ƒ 2��7 C)27 _0 > eT e \\ 0 / / / ƒ \ \ / / ƒ \ 6 V) -0 & / / § o r 2 'a 2 0, 0-- 7§ a c, o / 0 7/±.±o00 0) 7� r\ƒ s — Q)C3 ,ac �yJ� -0 =±�� ƒ2 ƒ ƒoS S / f J \ 0 § ƒ ƒ § / % ƒ 7 n / o _0 e « o@r¥ 0 --o E�Jt -0o C G-0 \� o >;/ 3 m f 3 0. e ( o& 2 0 -0 . 6 c E u 3 7—_0 k u% 2 2 2 § §.g.? C3 c \.@ m Q u 5 aƒ t — a a 2 G �• -� � ��±0� k / / �� >-0 u / ��±g r n .& u _ _� a t o u-0 o £ m E ƒ 0 -0 ± e ° a ) \ � J § a - & r @eƒt oe§ oE2 0» � so c — co - m 2 ƒ 2 § / ! c ® ƒ / 0 -0 0 ƒ ± G � \ / % / 0 }� t u o— 7 o% 2& ' o _ _ 0 » ° 0 a S±® 2+ n® m U a— 0 2 E 2 -- . 2 /c /� / -0 >0 C3 �� ¥� t T\ moo$)0 / �•` ° ` e , ' 0 ® E 0 ® ® 0 k / 2 : ® _ 2q /J 2�/] _ /�® 87/\ ƒ@Q °G j S 2 -0 o 0 c '� a« co a. m c \ 0 a 0 3 7 0 — a 7 E o\ z 7 ®; e 7 '; 7= 7¥ 7 e o+ k E ƒƒ 9 T +ƒ ƒ \$ S \ / CO -» o o'» F-- m-0 o te a; e-0 o o x m e . / q . . . . . . u _ C-� 10 z m / / 5 2 z 3 In \ \ / / � 0 \ \ O � \ � Q $ 9 9 0 m � C14 CY) \ \ \ j \ _ { u _ \ _ c y / 0 ƒ 0 2 .J 2 � ! '\ = c a ° 0 0 c %, $ c 0 ƒ/ ± 2 $ Q) 0 § @ƒ _0 e K '� ±/ \ o u \ o 0 e ƒ % — P \\ a / Q) \ c ±( f c -C\ c 0 0 \ + b» / 0 0) ` f 7 \ § / { ƒ e 2 t S ƒ / . %_ 0 00 0 ua $ 2� 0- C� o\ / 2$� .�t2ƒ 7D- 2& �/ 2\ % § / /� $ S{� !)ƒ �§ 03 ® 0 g$ o» u' Q » a 2 o& % o $ / S e o•> o P u P o ƒ )) kƒ \ 7( § 0 2/ 0 0 7 %% D k c ° 7 & o $ % ° ƒ e o f c o < / ƒ ! k \ e 7 r` 0 0 _ _0 o± — u{ ` o �.§ © 7 m ƒ o a R u e o'; c cn n 0 _C � a t— ( Q � $ o a a 2 0 D G` u /ƒ /2 \ 7�$ ^§¥ 0 �f f c § ƒ § \ e ¥ % ; ƒ \ c \ \ x o c a @ m o m a# c r o 0 ® 0+ » G ƒE/�C, �% 2ƒ 0) 2k2 0�0 ¥� E &± % 2 0-0 fƒ b U e 2 2 5 m} 7ƒƒ C) » 7 o —0 E ± —0 ƒ ƒ 0 ƒ + e \ ` $ 0 ) / -C @ 2 ƒ ` ± & J ± / k / k I K $ % / \ k 3 7 c u c� ° o Q eƒ Q ± e U u @ Q ® a o% o•- E E e o o o o— m o o e— u ƒ o o o <ƒ k 7 f G E 2± 7 G¢ ± 2- uƒ 2 \ \ \ j \ _ { u _ \ _ \ / / \ j k ;a f o g ƒ± • k 3 0/§ uƒ Ro \ f 2 2 \ °o gTc 0 } / \ » § 'o E c ƒ ° « A 7 = > • c / © § § E ( : \ 2 2 7 / � � § /ƒ -/§ ƒ§T 0� y§ o% 7 / z %§ u w u 2 \i ��a ( 0 \22 0 a. > > o » u 3 0 a o G Gf ƒ77 f 0 / -t /�/ m : o 0 0 6� cn 0 \ o T ƒ [ � ® ƒ \0 ƒ f 2 u Q E // % o E o n c = 2 e - 'a 7 ( ± + - P ƒ / ƒ \ ƒ ) u & e o - c C3 § \ % \ e o a • \ § E V § W 2 J ƒ * \ / ƒ 0 ® r \ § o c 2 o.E \ % / / > u C3 \ f - % 7 2 % ) k § ± j D \ & O q G / / 5 CD z (D \ & A j / § \ Z Lo j u _ % c § 0) 2- d 0) 0 ° E 0 k k / ®Gƒ E> E o.� »- _0 o [ o C 22� ƒ � o Ez ƒ0 ƒ 2 . ./ k %/ a m ` e \& 0 Q / / _0 C: -a § 2 \ o ƒ cn o ® \ 0 J S � m S k 2° /@ e= c 2 o m c m e� �7 ` a ƒ -0 -C- k/ 0 0 2/ o C @ E= E o .9 °§ 2@ s @ § 0 o& o S® /( 2 ƒ "- 'A Lp In /) ƒa\ / \ / \a)e I%Eƒ u o\= / ƒa § aa7�£ G ±3 %�Z) c ± U ƒ2$ \f cn 2 -0 o%a o u — +S- o: c @7 u $ : CE '� ƒ E2 ƒc \0` o b 2ƒ 2— 2 c$ o G f\ s _ � 0» > � 9 u c, \ E»» . »a §�/ 0 00 }7 00 �2 7 2 0 7 7•a + g tƒ s g a 4 2 2ac, .g ±e&7 0�E ƒ/ /\} ka \070 Z E/ 0� S o E a a - b u 7 Z 7 E 2 � . . . . . C-� CY) & A j / § \ Z Lo j u _ % c \ \ \ \ Ln \ 2 � � 0 � � s � : 2 $ � � � M � 0 c: C: / G u 7 2 — � E e cc -a:) 0 J o o e 0 @ 7; ; 7 m m E 0 e-0 o 27 -0 �e § E � E ° \ t § § . -0e o c-cE0t7 §� ±�o * � o k0 / & ®22{7 »u. \ ¥770 \aoƒ 2 c o- C: . c o \/ 3me \ƒ \oƒ 2 7 o 0/§ U— o o t 2+ m f ®> c g -0 = a '§ -c ƒ k 0 E ± 3 # D G -0 e— ou7eet 7 7 2 0 •ƒ o \ \ 0 / ƒ� a 0 0 u u 7 e3 6 m! \ f \ 2 G 0 k % 7 ƒ ± \ t — \ o c o E e 5 o e 2 d § 2 7 k/� f c t° x ƒ 0 2 2 0 k E •c a 0 c-0 m� E / U 2 7 7// S ƒ .ƒ c o E� \ 7� ƒ� \ ƒi0 § t ° . . . . . . . . e — o P'� f 2 u / ƒ k ƒ 0-C =) ' ƒ c 0 a) Cl) ) E / 0 5 e $ LLJ 0. § Cl) j } u CL \ Z } u Z f e ± T � \ 0 S7o ƒ 0 E ƒf E \ � 2 / ; 77: �@\c��� A o e— E t« 7°ƒ 2 u 2 2 / 2 E £ 0 \\ § o y h 2 ° \ oo u-0 \/ / ƒ § § LO §± o o t o o k@ § E» e o� °tee =e 6 ƒ�% & /ki0 a) / °' E $o / /7 /$/ c ® / / ƒ u E 7 (.S ( \ / / 0 ƒ 7 / b/ \ 0 e E 0 g 0 oƒ . e a E 0 o o G C3 C: 2± E CO E § § ; § -0 ƒ f E -6 Pƒ \ 0-ƒ Eƒ o -0 0 7 0 •- 0— u{ — •- ¢ 2 oc U § 0 o— ƒ)ƒ . § §/ Q) E: ƒ ) .- " 0 e C3 U/ 0§ g 0ƒ 0 E . a 2ƒ a- ƒ%f 22 & 2 /ƒ . g � 004)u ( /' 7 E *E -2 0 0 0 .( \ƒ T E IE 'a � cli $ Q E 0 r u± 0 t\[ 0 ± § Cl) j } u CL \ Z } u Z f e a V N V N z a J Q LU 0 Q D V C 0 z V O .. N w Cl) D N a F- Z J m LL O r F- u N M Cl) 0 0 a a 6 C N S 3 c 0 0 N U) C O N � O O Z t C O d a c O N c > '> a c 3 � 0 6 0) c a Ln O > c c v t m a 0 0 0 rn a `o rn c 0 T 6 3 6 O) N O 7. c 3 m � 0 0 s � C 0 o 0 s 0 o O c 3 0 c_ .6 O O7 w C N o C_ 3 C 6 0 a 3 o' o c o 0 —" � o s S -C N E > L N (D ` v `0 3 a o a O 6 m o o E 0 a E a E T t; a a x O a c_ O o O a Z s O) U a) OR o o Z 0 U 0 U C2 Z J m LL O r F- u N M Cl) / j \ z 0 / / E (A / A CN C� cl� § T f c o m / u © \ ƒ — u b ƒ �. 0 5-0 2 *$ c 7 2/ oo �o- & > o E E - 0 g u e / 7 E\ 2 \ ƒ -0� 0 0 c t G/ ƒ 2 ƒ/ U/ 5 ±/ a. e E o$ o m &@§2 20 �ƒ $ƒ _0 70'E C 0U �% ƒ* 7�U70 7� {)7 ƒ /{ E 0% c u 0 %0'- ± » E 7 t -c s ID e .@ e 2 ƒ 'C k U— E / \ T @ k ƒ o E r $ ° O o o 2 ƒ o) ƒ S / \ § E / \\/ E0 �� X0 \ e$ ƒ/ / �% 7 ƒ7 /m (f 57 / moo• \�E ƒz 20 =�T -C T .2 # 7 § \ 7 @ ® / } � ® a 0 E — o c ® D 0� f 7 \ r ƒ t : -0 ƒ ƒ / ƒ ƒ ƒ S ƒ 2 E o a m p o E _± E / 0- 0/ 0 0 0 2 2 3( 0 § G\ 0 0•§° % U © ) 3 / 0 _\ o § 3 % X G # k \ W .E o & / ƒI ®¥ 0 i \G(§ ƒ /i \% A �(n�E -C §/\ ƒ�� /2J k2»E o -0 7 § ƒ a o•` § 2 .g ° 0 p = » G 0 0 0 --0 o c e e ., o 0 t•> — 6§ + (\ �) ! -C 0 ƒ / ` 0) j \ 2 2_ 2 •a ƒ o r C u §» c c 7\ 2 \ //� 0 / '\ 0 0 0 k o u± af q A j } § CL \ z 0 u Z \ V) Z J W z Q V) w 0 a U N N C Ca C a U �i r� N a N 3 0 Z J co 0 LL 0 U M M p Q c � V 3 O V N p `p T U U 2 7 _ O c 6 � N T N E O S _ O 0 $ E 3 p o m rn u o N p N O 6 2 7 O L :3 � m m c O o rn c c a u o C N E V O "p d V p N CD 0 O O c0 6 _N Q n N LU C J J In Y rpn V N N E n. 7 E 'c o E o o fl- C N O 3 -°o E C 3 O 0 ° S L � � o N N ° L O .- 6 O ° c o O N c �_ .O `p a v L a h N O L T Q O 0 C S O O N C a Q O —co S . N T —.T- Y N 7 _ "T O O _ p `o N Q 0 : a N o C w OV CO -p O a O_ O O O_ 7 2 V 6 E N z O LO N p O o L O c V) V) U H Z w ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Z J co 0 LL 0 U M M z 0 5 0 z 0 0 A A j } § CL \ z § u z D a ƒ/ / ƒa) ƒ ƒ/ x±07 C3 ° 0) 3: 0LU0 % C) 7oa 0/ o / § / £ o 2 J _& ƒ \ 0 E a § ® k m § \ &y \ƒ/� - ¥3 t e ƒ w 0 § ./ t ± (D a) % m / t- 0 C 7 o o ®f§ 'B °0 7 9•- 2 E) o-C E\% 0 _ 0 0 0 0 7 2 ƒ � m -» E . §: \ / 9 #_ 2 0- E G o a » E ƒ a- @ \ o ƒo� =c & R �uu , u § o3 u\ \ 6 / u 2 a Lu \ \ �' ƒ \ ƒ U \� E -a) a c 7 c/ ± E` N / 2 0 J .@ t ®° G 0 cyi ƒ ƒ 2 \ / ± \ _ ƒ 2e ƒƒ %kƒ§ & A A j } § CL \ z § u z D / d � � C;) \ u = c \ \o 0 z 3 / ¥ 2 m E D m e z \ \ § u C? A ƒ } b [ \ u § B : 7 \ , 0 ± ( > 0 -6 0 / — \ } } 7 \ \ § \ o T § t = \ \ C � ( f _ ¥ / \ s b { m \) 7 - § 7 o \ / \ 2 ƒ / } / j / . . . . . . . . . . § \ P e , / 2 G . \ / 7 [ { (WD a \ 2 7 \ , ) \_ \ » \ 0 k \ \ z § ƒ ± ` F { } _ § % ® % o § / G ® : \ 7 \ 2 % a @ c a Q) : p \ £ 3 ) / : Z ) 0 ( a \ % 2 / § E § \ ƒ # \±& 3 E w Q a= z u . . . . . . . . . . z \ \ § u C? A / 0 \ z 0 0 ƒ o�$ \ 0 ) ) ƒ \ ƒ ƒƒ m c o m p o § T 00 }2 7 ƒ�. g e a @ * 7 0 2.s -0 ƒ C3 —a �i /�/ \ \(- ��(\\ § �Lo 2 •77 /aQ) / / a § $0 0 2 7 X o— _2o k C ®3 ^ § / /# ƒ 7ƒ 0 7 7 / § 2 Q) 2 ( \ 7 : S o f §° efE ƒ` \ »fcf \ ƒ m$ .9G �0 » —a) m » o y f 2 u e o 7 & •©� E 3 / \ E ® 0 .$ ? = E m g $ \c: ! ) cli ƒ § 0 — o - -a ƒ E ? J % Cl) j } § \ _ ) u Z f e N W Z J W D V Z V N w D (1) 6 U N N C Qi L S� M _N S U N .Q O C C O N 3 N N O 3 N O 0 O c c C 3 3 3 O c c o N S O c � N -0 C C O > > N 3 p N N 3 L N C O 6 C 'C C O N > O Q S C C O 6 O L O H S L C N 3 a c o :) 3 N 2 s O 3 - N L O O O `o 0 y 0 C V V ac E c E ac, ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ c 0 0 0 Cl) 3 O -O � o > N y O m V O\ N L `o o N O m L � � a � E � ac E (D > U 6 0 OT O O O N O C O y O C N O E O CL -0 a o a L o 3 O n. a N O o (D O V C E O O 7 0 N U L C O U- In o 2f T (n Q) d/ a D Cw L E V7 E N a m m a� D Q o d ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ S U .Q O O N 0 3 N O c C 3 3 O O N S O N -0 C C O > > y p N L N C O 6 C 'C C O N > Q S C C O 6 O L O H S L C N 3 a � w o :) 3 N 2 N C O O C o - N L O O O a 0 y 0 C V V ac E c E ac, ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 31 L, Z cc J D O } H U 00 M Cl) \ 0 5 0 z 0 0 ? 0 2 0 R LO (-i C-i F 0 (D �2 . 7 ƒ30 /e 02-0 c o c ?222 \7 Tao . U( i � 0 u 0 2� 3 a— 0) --- E % o E E a-- e c» & o 0 2 0 » E = 2 , 2 0 2 § a� ± co:) c /ƒ °° 0 -uI »% © —ow§� _0 %/ o- G� 2 e 0 \* .& / c7E »[( 2 F § c & o•/ E o : D.[# . c u �0 �Q)�� / o § \ J = S •R § @ j0+ U § $ /0 \� / ' ° 7 �R / /� ' / E /�/ m f G @ ° » a — � _e •- t S o � } oE e � , ° f/ 0± ƒ§ 0 0 7 2 m P n 7 o G� a 6 0� ±: U) ��7±7 / -7 ƒ E� \K ƒ §0 a ƒ�` ± t 2 -0 g 2 0 J 0 2 2 0§ 7 f \ k o 2 0 i 2a 0) oac ƒ E C: — - a) 7 § -0 $ ƒ * - 2 ƒ 7 ƒ$S ƒ§ -E 222§/ J � A CL U § CL \ 2 0 f z Z) e / \ \ \ j / U � � q t k k � C; � � � _ 0 \ 6 — — E \ § ) \ 7 \ \ / \ \ \ \ \ / \ f o { f o $ - ( / $ & \ j ®« 7 \\ Q 3 G\ f §\ \ -0 j $ � § — _ 7 | $ 7 § \ § % a \ 2 $ § \ \ \ ƒ ƒ r f » / / / \ } \ 3 / ƒ * / $ 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \S: . : T 0 IE of IL U , 2\0 E/7 \ 0/� « Q) < § E ;7 \\\ \ ƒ _ $T �7$ / ` $ _ �o o \ E § | \ 9 \ E \ \ — \ § \ ( ! } / { 0 \ / } § \/ »1 [ * $237o4) o f? § : a a 3 & - & / 2�/ f f \% a 0& % I P Z } / J ƒƒ Z yƒ 2¥ . . . . . . . . . . . M \ \ & O 7 m \ 0 5 0 z 0 0 / j U / \ Z / f Z f _ § 2 \ (/ ».$ƒ ƒ \ §% — o= c — 3 f o.9 e a a) u u a) -- 2 ƒ 0 7 0° o k o © > / ƒ g e \ § ) ƒ / \ f \ \ C: u C ° t ® 7 - ® c G / R o ° ° @ o _o ° — a > k ƒ t _\ » ± § \� o� §ƒ ƒ/ 2 v C /y 0 » >o F w — .� o @ 7 •§ � .§ � 0 2 ± ± ` o / E.2 U®\ /[C ^ .� a o a �� / / § U� co tj \ # 3 2 [ / ± � 2 8 0 a o .o Z) 0 2 � ± § 0 G ¥ 7 ± -0 % ® f CYS e z ± 2.- o D c —P T o ƒ cli .� / / d / \ \ % k u 0 / j U / \ Z / f Z f _ N w z J w 0 c� z 0 N w 0 Cl) a i U N N U U N W U s N C a CL N 16 C; N a H Z J m D 0 LL 0 H U N Cl) U ° a� Ql S `o Q1 C S 'c O — o c = C O N E m u u O 'o 3 u Y y ° o U _Z, O u a S S > u N s c Q) O V C N N ° C O - - V C p N � S C v N N 6 o C c N O — > s a o a>i �_ 3 Lo O C D �e N o m o c `c = O 3 O N N O —2 V O - 6 O V N N Q =_ d > C3 0, _ u u O �e O O a 3 O O s 0 ° L ° o c -° c 3 0 3 ° s U N (D Q ° a� O u_ O U O O 0 ne Z J m D 0 LL 0 H U N Cl) ° a� S `o S 'c N 3 — o = o N C m u o 'o 3 u Y y ° o U a S S > u O s c Q) N C O > c 0) ° - - O ° 07 C p N � S C v N N 6 OV C c N O — > s O O O N Lo N 6 > O N O ' O ° c O V > O N N O —2 � O - 6 c c�i o ° ° o C3 0, _ o u E a° M F- 00 J in F�-- 0 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • Z J m D 0 LL 0 H U N Cl) { / 5 0 $ tn 0 Q A j § § CL \ z } u z \ § 0 2 G e o ƒ \ § 7 r ƒ 2 (D �7 ƒ•V) V) of & \r \ƒ�£0 Jq� . ;�eee 77� 0— 5 o e E2=@ --o 0 o ƒ ƒ .0 & & P .@ § 0 § E± e± 0 a ; m [ . o § % C \0 /t o u > 6'; E o = — \: ƒ ƒ E } / C: 2 E G / / o ./±2E 0 •- � m 0 /( ƒb� / \0 7— Q E ƒ2 o a) % E0)D 0 -0 C: u � \ & / ® ) ®% \ @ R : Q) -C ƒmoo co Q) m e% 2 C)4) C: ƒ / 7 7 0 ) k o&/ o ° u / 0 5 e 0 7 • / E 0 t u � ƒ E ° ƒ o E \ u # w ƒ / \±\S %2\ ƒ Q A j § § CL \ z } u z \ r�- N -L W U Z � w N C V � V N w M c cY) H fl Z J Co Z) LL 0 } F U M 0 0 0 6 3 0 c � E N 6 N � N E Z O a � E a� c 3 O o O O N W O o a O O p N O a O N o > W O N O Q" p p 3 s N V O N y N y N ° _ o °o o w o 6 d O c u a� o Q) s rna) o o a 3 c Lo � ° H N U J Q au Q o U a ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ C O .0 3 o c 3 c 3 p 0 a o O N U o N > 3 s aci o V 'a N Lin U C ° H C C a `c > � m rn o O ° p� ° p� - 'p V O -o O V O E s C C w 6 _ N O O O O O O E Q O O O y O E y N OO O V 1 > > s r- p O 0 p a O O O .6 S S V U C -0 E O rn rn N O o y co F- F- in V) H d D ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ fl Z J Co Z) LL 0 } F U M cn 3 / 3 e z e / p A j / § \ _ Ln j u _ f 0 � f e 2�5 9 ƒ ƒ ƒ \ /§o \ 0 o 0 • • ƒ ƒ ` ± § o [�a ` c - \ �G ± o / 0--Q) o ƒ / [ ƒ ° © cƒ 7 /.2 2/ 2 \ 2 X «§ \/ &/ 2 / /�k� /� \ 2 \7a 0 ®\ ®° E c c % » n(D Z ®' a © \ k-0 §ƒ \ k= 2 2) \ o& 0 o u 2 / \ [ a _� 0) \ ƒ I a = 7 /.ƒ § / c° G D/ % 2 3 k \ 0 2 G@ -0 o 4) c: c•- e 7:f2 u 27 ; >§ 2 E 0\ 0 c 2 G G 70 5 ƒ��_ \ƒ x C: o �ƒ �� �� f 2 / \ c S =� E 2 / E o a 0 '$) 0 o \ p e— o o T 2 % » § 2 ' c. t n± o 5 o c E x o 7 u c o '> G $ ® E § — : : � y f ± \ \ \ : � ` Q- ± / m / ƒ § \ / / ± \ 0 U 0 } 7 0 0 0 u / \ / V� ƒƒ ƒ0� �/ 77 ��� §/S 72 § ƒ * F \ / / § _ a t[ .9 In . . . . . . ® E -0 E r o c M 0 e 0 S / 0 m o U o a- U/ p A j / § \ _ Ln j u _ f 0 § � o y ` a 0 \� 2 / k \ - }o� m© 0 0-0 > 0 oo 0 mm 2 E O \._ a t o E± \� �i / ®t \Gk\ %±o Eƒ �o/2( 0 0 0 7 e.[ 0) D f a ± 2 @- o E § -0 �•` 2 c o a»$ o@ -0 e/ 0 y m o & a\ ° o % 2 'B 7 E o 7 o E> E u G §®' o a 2 \ = o 7 f u -0» o 'e § o , m% m> > a 0 / e o e D; c o t G 0 ° -- 0-0 t e } 0 \ ® .2 f 0« e-u u © c / S \ E b z .� m- i) E-0 o f . , o- c> % - ° '- t 0 2 0 ® T / {ƒ 0- — T: 9 » 2 3 0 C — •® e $ \ _u 0 ± o \ \ u 0- t \ = - X' u 0 7 0 J °§ a u/ -0 u .-\ 0 2 E y o u m \ ƒ @ ¥ 0 ® 0 % / \$.)% 0@ \ f§ a o o / E / t 3 0 c= a e o 7 E y ©7 f m Q) C: m� 0 q�C±o ° 2 § ƒQe ƒ«:- .g _0 0 �» / • S / ° ƒ a m= o - e .g e .9 0 z ƒ \ _ 2 - 7 0 \ / 11 § 7 % § 1 ? 0 § _ 0 c -a 7 � ° E o - # c u ± / \ ± 0 \ 7 ƒ [� 0' \/ 2-0 0 t n 0 =° »+ � y o o &. o& 0 2 e. o o uƒ ± 2 g z U@ _ \ '7 0 0\ o e 7 7 G -I-- t. 2.$ § o 0- ® �� / ƒ 2 ¥ ) ƒ 2: / / ƒ f » ± A $ ® 0T§»ƒ z o / / ƒ23��2§§ #§o �\ »@® \ o m - E e.x.g.$ o* t% E u ® 7&§° 2 a 2$ P m z m o. E-u § 0 I U C - o m 0 e- o o 6'� - 0- 3 /; o 3 y§ § e= ._ o\ u o u @ %•ƒ 2® e u c o a / ƒ' c o\ G » 2 7 e - - x c x Got E o 0 0 - t o -0-0 E o o.E o x- E \$ 0.- 0 />/ k i 0 0-% 0 $ 0 0 0 J m S A$ u u 3 7 u z / 5 G z 3 / q . � co / j / j CL \ Z ) u _ D _ �t ± 0 5 � ƒ\ � \\& # ƒ ( 7 3: m / c E/ .Y `* 0 �a � % C C: ` ` (n / k § q /ƒ$/ 0 ƒ7 E & .2 -E- t . § 2 ± o$r- /° �\ \\ Ck \� 2\ ƒ -0 00 o e 0 f \ \ § 0 2 2 ® { $ \ 0- - © 2 \ = E ƒ t E / f ± a) � \ 7 f ƒ % \'J G ) �'- ® '� ' ° m u c \�± �� E\ O C3 � C3 n 2 \� k/ /\ A 7 2 @ ± [ § o y « = E E / \ ƒ f u E E 0 ƒ ƒ ƒ \ / j / ƒ / n cc o a .; ° j Q) q . � co / j / j CL \ Z ) u _ D _ \ \ \ j 0 / : _0 § U _0 \ t � : � 0- m � � q / 0 / ƒ ƒ \ E � LU � m u E U) 0 \ ƒ 7 ± f 22 0 � 2 = ƒƒ 2 22 ƒ� \� 7 ƒ� ƒ o o f 2 § 9 D Q »\ o . E 0 7 c G 2— _ E > E 0 e c o 2 E u u E r \\ `7 EF u2 ±o \\ m T o G± bo/ /-0 ƒ 7 f U 2 � k mo / 4 ƒ S aƒ o& ° 0 0 / c 0 ± 3 _ a c ea © E / a 0 ƒ o _@ / 2 ? ƒ § § ƒ G '� ` a E . $± ° 25 / 7 \ 2 $® ®? �u §§ Rƒ \» ± 0 S c 2.2 7= a G0 7 — )2 t7 _0 §2\ %ƒ 27 o c$ ƒ 2 ƒ.2 00 . G 0 / \ — c g g c 7£\ £ a 0( 7 / 7 _§ 7 7 0 \ % \ ƒ ± r ° r E G± 7 c F m o e f 2ƒ ±' 2 6 - 2 @ _ § � \ § -u » — _ © o ¥ 2 % 2 @ (� g— % 3 0 o 7 7 3 S 7]o u±E o ��� E ƒ ° \ / ƒ u ± % § \ § b \$ S §2 \ e ± + 2 O 0- O � L o § § . . § \ t w Cl) £ / 3 e z 0 / $ A j U- 0 \ _ Ln j 0 Z f 0 E ° Q) ƒt; 0E0 / 3 ƒƒ ƒ. \ \/ ) �/ ƒ// »22-E % G )./ t 2 6 o, fa 2 / 2 §§ $ = E ± $ ' ± a g o t/ 0.2'6 5 U C \ ƒ , ± $ _ - 5 ] ( , g ( 3 % a « / 7 k ) a ƒ / \ \0` 2/ ±_° \� §ƒ /7 ƒ±� ±f �0 �+ Em E . $� § / u ƒ ƒ § / 3 3 \ ( 2 / \ / \ ƒ u 2 ƒ f r- // a T ±U° $ 0.- 0 t® E+ .aa=¥ 2u ƒ2ƒ \)« Q) m». +±Jƒ \7\ %f � ƒ2a ƒ-0 EF » 7 } 5-o 7 m/ m & 6 t o & - e 2 a.e� 0 m\ J`{ 6a 2 ± a m 2., 0 /, T c §a4 a_ � % a o f° ±'� 5 n °§ Qo�G \o± f a7 ®-a o -07� » / ƒ 7 0 ^ ƒ / 3 \ $ § [ ( E \ m e g = � -- .\ ._ G e 7 e e >7 }\ ƒ ƒ.�0 ƒED t 2- 2.0 t ƒi / 5 o § a o e � u� o- 'ƒ ./_ \ j ( \ \ 2 \ 0 / \ / \ / 2 7 \ ) \'\ 8 .7 ( o 7 u\ ± g/) -o E A 7& f ƒ� o / & � m o J » E 4 a � o , E m 7 e u -[ E m Q) % o o % ƒ ƒ y 7 \ S \ \ ) / / 7 / / / ui ƒ ) \ u < + '§ . . . . . . . .k k A 5 $ A j U- 0 \ _ Ln j 0 Z f 0 ( k .] in in V) } ƒ \ � _ $ o G \ \ ./ 0 Cl) U c -.— ). ` \ 7 $ ƒ /» JE 2 b% 2 \ ƒ / ) « 2 m\ 7 c : s± p 2') f m o f % .\ ° G i $ » k / o ° -0 2 $ e ) / o '� e E E E a- n o -» / \ ) \ u § ! £ § ƒ 2 / \ 3 / ° � u / o� u \ @ a 0 u m �/ %} � -0/% u ��00U co \ = n c o u r c —[ /c. F±� u a 2 cn k� Q) Fesƒ 7t ƒ �� / ƒ30 § E0 : o f u 0 c 7 :2 ƒ ® o � { t < \f 2\ 27 e o f 7� o E ) S # f;iQ G - S E E o 2 7 E \ \ o / $ � \ -0 § b ƒ na 0 0 0 \ 0 ƒ 2= % -0 \ u = c 0�o- § f c) ƒƒ k f aƒ® & n® 7 0 ®8 \3 ° E2r /\ nƒ t u� \7 00 —0 %k /% o k0 »° »o- \k $ � k / :o 00 o / 2 §\ E �2 E e E _0 \ i ± / ƒ § ( % u S 2 \ 'E { 0 / 0 c u a 0-0 6 _ ._ /± 0'\ / U 0 c ° E 0 E o o t u » e q / \ \ / � -C \ \ j c c ƒ= � \ c u U) e> 7 ` \ 7 c ƒ 7 — ) % 2 u \ ƒ / « 2 ® c » \ p \ o 2 o = % .\ $ e ƒ 2 m / E 7 \ ( & § ƒ ±ƒ 7$7 ƒ� � ƒ n o G � _ 0 2 & T ! £ 2 ` u a§ 2 ƒ 7 D\ 0 \ a m u \ A ° 'a $ ƒ ® E m ƒ u 7\ co \ = C3 q) c C: g o u /c. F±� / \¥ ■ of4 Fesƒ 7t ƒ c %» t 2ƒ f u ƒ 7 :2 ƒ [ ).§ � { t < a)0 amt 2 a &0- 27 / o f o 0 0 a \ c& e \ m //7 4 • g = Ooƒ . . O — 0 0 0 0 0 \ % -0 \ co Ln } j \ z e \ � 0 LA- � 0 7 � ± 0 ƒ c E ) 0 � 0 0 3 u c a Cie m c >._ >- 0- 7 ƒ 70-0 E \ o± 2 4 § % p.o 20.[ ƒe0 0 \ & § ° cn 3 G U / \ ƒ E c 2 / e a• - - -0 ƒ2 o2u� 2 �.§ o .0 y+ y &§&3 m 2 C3 tr- a —0 C) � 3 ƒ ƒE7ƒ )ƒ c -0 0 < -0 ƒ0>N T / e 0 0 0 E 0 b 0 C14 ƒ E <ƒ[ƒ 0-0 .E '> Q 0 � 2 % oo }2 =20 &0f /, E ® 0 G 2wc> \ 2 % o E 0 r -o ƒ a%=7� kt± &� oFQƒ y %/ -0 @� -0 0 E ƒ -o § o 0 0 0 c ) U E 5L -O 0 .± C- 0) 0 m ƒ- 2 C 0- U) $ .E '0 0 0 ■ I � � a§ƒ§ ƒ ƒ ƒ/ � C)�� k 0 c &_ .g W E (D M0\ 0 . z 0 \ : . / § / / /- k�0 / C: C: G ° . 0- c C: \ cn 0 cn 0 0-0 c_u¥ a 3 7 .P / 2 X222 ±0 �.§ a : o E -o0- / $ m @ 0 0 r#ƒ o7 ay0 ƒ � T R � £ % _0 2 7 R » 7'> 7u o e 0 o o o ame.!# / /E ® ®2 f2[o / ƒ /./ ou k ƒ [ ƒ E � § e =o ®d § r 7 7 § 0 C § 0 u 0 u -0 0 sEco� Q) 0 > m u 4) 2a CP -0 ƒ o ƒ T { 0 m ƒ ± u \ 4 ° c = $ _�} 3\ % ®± / b � 0-0 �$ o /0 -0 _ .c § \ / K 0 D.L § m / \ \ \ _ j 0 Z f c z CO Z) in LL- 0 F- u CV Cn C; -� a) a) — O L O c o O p 0 N 3C3 p p -O 0 O p a) a t o L u C C C i N 0)— c N_ � a) •> C > o O C N N .0 O .N E C L .y c -0 a � � E e. O s O O> -0 O N D Q N x a) E C -o O �_ N L 0 L a N C .� E a) 0-0 C p O- `p CS o c N c 0 o 0 CA O a) .- c L L O N O u .� a) a� 3 O N E a) Q a) a) Q t3 `n s o) �_ o Cl -0 U ,� L s > c o— s> O L u U u a� V U O a) o N a) -o C) O O c a) o 0 os s = a� rn� D L s'°_ •� C) 'O T v N 0 ° E o N O c V V c N E O 0 N 6 C N Q O N E ° N V N Q N N c: V E2 u ° O s p a) s o o Q C �+ U C E O O N N O N C C 6 Q C Q O N N N U) a N c C C — N o N Q 2a Q 3 ] O 0 o C o E :) N c aQ ) T c Q) c Q .2 E o o O o _ � p u U 2 o N Q a) o C-1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ M a) 0) rn 0) 4) u C u C T � `'�- C m E _ C • N N a) 0 O H O C .E o S _U) C N ._ a) V L _�� O S N •C Q N -p u o u s c 0 E U Q -O 0 N o O S C3 0) i 'C 7 O N C 7 N N t N ._ O c L 0 > o U E 3 0 y -0-0-0 O Q T.E y a E c C 3: c o � N p C� u ._� N O Q ui N -D t c O 'O p u t p o) u N U O O _ N O U C . o Os E O L o ' O O —C Q . Q c aO i o L O N — ° -Y o 0 • U 0 u Q p O a) U O L -0 V Q c C c ° a) -0 (1) c r- .0 3 o 4 s UD Q� C 0 O 0 0� c s O L 0 V O S o o> -o a) = Q o s N a) } O O c c } O N c 3 is a) o >- E E o LO ° `s NC Z u T O- Q. o u .L , p E N W = U c N Z3 � Q C L O u v C� .c 0 Z ; 0 0 .0 Q F • E a) c a) o 'C t Q 4) > a) C C O V W Z) a) •+- 7 0 O C N s E C a) 'C a) O a a C N — E N 'o c N o� U— -0 o —>' •a s -0 o E D 0 (n 0 0 o N c c }> E '� C) o c Q a) O U S Q_ o N N N U N o Z .Y Gi H o — a) O '} .s- O — > O -c Q N V Q } Q) 0 •0) .E > U u C O O N C C C /0 70 Q C O L N Q °r c- E Q) s (n E a u u C _ E T Q E o E -° c u a) aLA °° _ Q) cn C1 0 O U Q o u EQ u O - o Cl- a U z CO Z) in LL- 0 F- u CV Cn C; \ / G / \ 2@ c� f ƒ Cl) - g o a W 0 E \ o C3 ± E _D 2 e o -C a 2° a Z » E \ _ -., msƒ \ o $ a •\ 0 ƒ f� b ) u m o n m -0 u o � _ / .0 ± . £ o '; � \ \ ° ) >1 » ' ' a ƒ E - / k % u a = c c E.\ ° u 0 0 a u — o e 0 c �/ G » I@ $I2 c u et2 0- u \@& f \ 2 , % o C3 f E m & / c±> : \; 0- ®Eo 0 % «0(D -0 ��� / }ƒ Ln u E ( u 0 $ s G 0� ® U 0 0 E 0 u % = u E � £ § m; c D E -0 0 c3 § � CL 7 o u X220 m ®- 2 �S §±k@ o �oJ ± `? % Q+ §\§§ 2Q) -etc C: - TQ o °° C3-0 u u )> u u. - 'E o c E /} ± 5 2 ` 0 °' ƒ o- g f o °° r- u= a 6 o c b a 7 o 2 o ±\ 0 > « q .; { , . $ . o o k §{ E o f \% :- ) u ) 0 2 u/ 7 c e t G 7% o 0 Z) o§ 2} -0 E_�± 0 o a o * f± ®� 5 E � E/\ o 2 E ®± 0 0 ƒ f c u E 2 E 2 0 S a S'E E a E° a 2 § m ƒ c- c= 7 ce�� -o caw >�•- e § 0040 u E§ t 0 u Q 3 0 of0)E1ƒ§.7 ; 0) z) -o S/u -o Z U 2 ; gam ., o -0 > u ._ c > a a -0 •- -0 - ®= s o - u + s 4-0 o � o e a e& � 0 5 w -0 -0 -0 o c% o 2 m o-0 ._ -0 -Q u§ c o� cy) . . . . . � � / / \ / \ cn 2 .\ C3 U � 9 � 0 %F F ƒ ƒE \ S § -0 § ƒ f a @ P _ 7 \±.§ \ \ 0 § _0 6 e3 �- § f S J o / 2 { o y J y G \: ƒ/ / 7/ƒ u f , § e >$Ee q . Ln co \ 7 ./ � 0 � � M k Cƒ o e a ) B § » � $ / k f q 2 / E » ƒ( ƒ ƒ 2 * ƒ ƒ/ > \ .2 'u 2 E § a 3 ® 4 »20 -0 c kQ) 2 F�\ (/ ± y » ¥ E X27 <G � 4 ._ ,q . � � j \ \ § u 7 A / / 5 e z e / G A j U j \ Z j u Z f c / \3 b E7 a) C k ƒ / - ƒ R'\ o ƒ 2 a _0 •' ° E §§ f 0 2 2ƒ t c $ \ 7�� - c f§-0 — ¢ /k7 \23°$±% ° * 2 a� U n b U o.F o o g m o ue s §0 ƒ�T , •- 2 — c &oT k / § (n � \ ® ( $ a § ° ƒ \ ©\ ƒ / ) ± J 'Q c - 0) o = _0 2 0 2 .- 0 •2 7 cƒ c 2ff 11 0-0 : k § / ƒ.g ƒ \2G// n e E # ® a —• o 0 o » / S — — 0±\§ ® G 0ƒ ° t / U� kE 0 -0±0 kT 2 0 7\ cc -0 o —2®» 7 =+ 7 ƒ i± 'o . . � cl� G A j U j \ Z j u Z f c ��. i / « ® \ ( 0 o0 _e 0 ) 0 ƒ ; - o £ g — % ƒ ) > 0 _0 $ 7 0 u 0 o ° C3 / 2 § 7 ƒ.\ ƒ \ o. u o » 0 o; 7 _ D 0 a o �7 ¥acE @ ƒ\ U \ f\ a ° E 0 0 > Q) cn E — o o 'E / \ u 0 / \ 0 \ §( : /� M` f o o 0 u > > f \ \ E . 72 a-U o0 k ƒ���� c n o a 0/ o$ c o G ± 5 % § ± @ ' § 0- / E & G 0ƒ e c 2 e o e o u E 0 k � \ § o� e@� % =fo 0)— 0) o n a m a§ e/ 2 E •° �) k/ 27 /i0ƒ \o ©2 '> E 9 0 $ _0 c® G` @ G o o— c cc�� o r o o � 7 Q Q- .s a e o o u 2' j j \ \ § � o 0 _ a e C3 o § f ƒ E \\ cl aC ƒ /0 ƒ0 9\ ƒ 0 0 ± C3 2 0m e y & C 2 0- » ° 0- u)-O 0-0 ° \ t ) 0 0 o o e= o � o \ k � ( _\ 7 ƒ ° ° ± y •• ± E ®� ®J E, -0 % ƒƒ • \ (/ = c 0 o a, ± 0- $ o c o\ o » e -0 t> o•/ X 0 0 2 o ƒ 7 § \ .2 E / \ ./ e E § §k 0� u LU / 0 0 �_ § : ¥ 7 k k �- -3'Q.. ƒ a o o)$ - *m 0 / ƒ ƒ 2 � © ° OT \ ) '` ° ` ° • I °C ƒ / e ƒ��o) ƒ� g\a U 3= 0 0 u 2 / E) q / f § ® § 9 z \ u / ' ®2 ƒ % LD \ Q) 7 ®a t a g •¥ 0 C: 3 0 — n$ o -a o ƒ \ /� \ § \ � ± ± ƒ 0 § 2 ��. i / « ® \ ( 0 o0 _e 0 ) 0 ƒ ; - o £ g — % ƒ ) > 0 _0 $ 7 0 u 0 o ° C3 / 2 § 7 ƒ.\ ƒ \ o. u o » 0 o; 7 _ D 0 a o �7 ¥acE @ ƒ\ U \ f\ a ° E 0 0 > Q) cn E — o o 'E / \ u 0 / \ 0 \ §( : /� M` f o o 0 u > > f \ \ E . 72 a-U o0 k ƒ���� c n o a 0/ o$ c o G ± 5 % § ± @ ' § 0- / E & G 0ƒ e c 2 e o e o u E 0 k � \ § o� e@� % =fo 0)— 0) o n a m a§ e/ 2 E •° �) k/ 27 /i0ƒ \o ©2 '> E 9 0 $ _0 c® G` @ G o o— c cc�� o r o o � 7 Q Q- .s a e o o u 2' j j \ \ § z / \ z e j E 2 � = G 7 E \ ° V) � ( \ / ) \ C3 (- � } \ 2 E d w % a) 2a c.Q® o* / / 2 b 7 ® } / a 7% E[ƒ � m .o y 2 0 c/ c ƒ 0) ± / E c = c $ Q) Q) $ E § 2 $ E ( �� 0 )( § \) \ \T p/ g= e e t f U" / ƒ \ \ E § « ± § § ± .§ \ Cl) j / § \ _ j u Z \ 0 m 2 0 7 2 $ E/ 5' E y r o / -0, eaa 0Tf=2 2a± c ._ ¥ o «•- o - © m 0 V) 2\ 2 7 5 a 5 2 ° 'e -0 @ ° @ \ ƒ n E. 7 ± g§ f E ' ® % &/' 2 a— .> _ ._ %F o = u . -0 , o 0 -0 - e'- \ G 7 -C > ± S 2 ƒ 3.( ° S ƒ 2.c 2 u Q) b e = In E ƒ� ƒ2� 0C3 \ � -± 5 & > C . + ® n 2 q 7 g» o» o- f o 5 - ' @ ® m /_ U �ƒ U) -2 � 7 9 §ƒ - e \ ( G / ` ƒ \ « k / ± -0 z \ 0 . 0 _ j \ ƒ / § § ƒ � a) \ § J ƒ \ T Q o o E» < c E ± e > o \ - D b / . > e � r � -C \ / 2 \. \%� / X00 .[ 2 z o 0 L F \� / tr- 0 o C) / 77E� 7 7 7 2�-C /2 \/ -0 �-0 /C3 a 2 ƒ % t 3 \2\ E Cl) j § \ e ƒ / f j R o 0) 7 t f k � —_ \ E : § ) ° ` / ° Q) 0 ' » § ®c . 222 \2 ±Q) �2� ƒ / ( [ / I \ \ F / % / \ } — E ) a) —0 u # & »2 §2§ t± -0o — \� 00 o�- /±6 o g n o\ E E 7 E o 2 7( §'S a o c o ` 7 / * . \ E 2 2 ƒ ® r S + ` 0 — , - d W -0 / K d \ / E ƒƒ q m u 2— o 2 2ƒ 0- ƒ§ Q E b g f ` G e t 0- ' o e o _0 _ 5 E E i a r 7 D ± t± c c @ ± c o o a&$ o 0 7 0 o 2%— o '2 ® 0 b ƒ § \ ° [ ƒ ± § i \ ± k 0 0 o ° 0 7 E a k 2 ƒ \ ƒ& § T [ { T S { § o 7 ± ƒ u o T ƒ § @ '(n 7; e o u 9— 0 » o o ƒtea 2f 5) 222 e /�: •- 0 G0 2 o 0 0 u & Q_C3 0- c o = i77 o 7 2{ \ / ® c 2ƒ f ± 0 0 b c �_ -0 u 5 Q oct = e\.2 K§ 0)% r72 ���ƒ »� o— §ƒ 7 �� c a 0 0 u m_ 2 �'a o .- Q � 0 2 •- , 0 .- c / 6 W . 0 2 —( u 7 c £ 5 2 k 0 / E / [ 2 ƒ & 7 0 J \ \ \ 2 3 S § %-0 0 « -0 E •� 2 E °° 2° ® o % q 7 o 2f J a» _0 t m > o 3% ° o G ƒ 0) \ �{ f k k e c »° \ 6: - e E ° § / 2 E = 5 2 7 � - � g o \* « c m © -0 P % 0 J 222 ƒ 2 G �C: c Cc /cƒ § ƒ/% 0- @§f��$ ) — Q--o o � G o o f c � o < o» m * o> c 5 * o a ƒƒ <___ 3 0 ®- e_0 c a) 3 o C)) N± n � c aƒ y A} f ƒ.2 o Q 7 = ' CD C 7 9 f S e© § E 0 0 0 3± ƒ 0 0 0 o S 0-0© e o 2* 0 2\ E 9 2 3§ 2 2 2! » o E � � � . . . . . � E Cl) j § \ e ƒ / f j R kn } / / J \ § � t — L Cl) A 7- D \ K G S A o } + o E / � E 7 70 E 0 2 d c 2± [ { \ ± 0 , ± § t 5 5 [ e 0 ƒ� ° ��� ƒ / ) \ � / 2 / C3 0 ® -0 f $ o o \ C e e n =»'Bf.� e/> ƒ« \ - c 2 0 c.2 'B t E 0 E ƒƒ 2/ ± o c C: �� a _0 ƒ `� �� k S o ƒ \� _0 70 o 0# -0 9± ƒ±/ � . / ° 2� 0 0 \ E / ± F / o \ \ 7 § � :k / ƒ q ƒ % 0 § G / E 0- e 7 2 � ' \ 7 CL / � c § $ \ � / \ \7 \ { \� ƒU-g� 05 E$ k a \ƒ co 0-ƒQ- 7- D \ K G S A LU z \ 3 e z 2 / 0 o \ \C: E± 7-0 \ 0 $ § § 0 \ � G 7 �± 2/ %\ u \ 0 V) ( ) C; j / CL § \ Z Ln j 0 Z f _ t -0 ._§ o ƒ > / 0 C/ 0 6 ±ƒ c % ƒ+ 7\ *c0c -C 0 0 u % 9 E o 7- -0�°- G 0 E/ c 7 u a R -0 0 c c m o _0 ® c .; f o = o � 2 7 ® o a o 7 3 2 o g -0 C: 0 s u 5 0 o T7§ c. o& o o c -0 A/± � 0- ƒƒ 7X ®03 ƒ \ § 0 0- / \ 7 / \ 3 / 0 ' ¥ 3 \ 2 e u ° 0 . _0 o �.2E �® ƒ\7 �ƒ ._ ©2e S E E/ o U , E o a±ƒ ®o0c . E $ g§ 2 o �a t «E E§ u 3 - °' 0 ° G ° S J G c E 9¥ 0 c 4 ± 7 r ƒ 0 0: 0— c§ 2± c+ f u 7 0 2 o& 7 @ n± ` ' 0 7 0 0 « _0 o 2 2 7: 0) ƒ 3: Q) _0 (n 0) � \C31: �A �\ou /kƒI:: k C14 . . . . . � � 0 o \ \C: E± 7-0 \ 0 $ § § 0 \ � G 7 �± 2/ %\ u \ 0 V) ( ) C; j / CL § \ Z Ln j 0 Z f _ \ \ / Lo j j j j \ § u g A \+ } a \ /53\ 2 77 : 0 \ o _ : 7 0 0 0 » ± — � 2 . 0 �_ o > u Q) c e = m m ± 2 k 0 » / 7 ƒ) § f q \ \ / / 7 \ \ T 9_0 .§ E o o » a§ o \ 2 o ° o% m E - ) ) e $ƒ t C3 4) §o) \\f E / U) o )\0 \ �'§ 2 @ ^ + 0 / 2 f 2 \ § f »/ i f R\ . ƒ ƒ£ o 2 o 7 _0$ >. o 0 o_ § % u a- -0 CL a o u G e o t o m a P . _ 7 0 0 — ƒ o-0 G» J — ®� 0 �\ o / c) 0- 0 a o ±2 ƒ° 20) 742 .� 000 ° 0) = \ k 2` % t 2 \ 5% &7 ) ° G E $ e E \ 0, X \ -a £ I / ƒ o ƒ e� o 0 0 ƒƒ 3 £ E� a 2 � u o —' 0 G o 0 o E E y $§ƒ ° c. 9 r u 5 Gƒ° m v 2 u> c o D ° 2 2 y) = s y_ 0 ƒ — I — ± § a e E $ G J T£ 0 o.g 2 a± U ± §.s o u . u 0-- ƒ@» c o u @ R/ S ƒ : .0 G \ } i / \ -a / 0 E 0 9 • e o a — e U ƒ } o c F 7 t a e 0 2 c =.y § a § ± \ @— G £ � ƒ ƒ ' o — ) °` 2{ 2 a e+ o e a 2 7 2 0- 2§ J Pƒ CL D--O 0- m ƒ s@ E e-0 7 4 u &$ 7 j j \ § u g A co / / D e z e / g A j } u (D z Ln ) u 2 % 0 c ƒ 0 % o 2 •2 u o ' )\ fQ ®� / / § % u � u o \ ƒ § E . � 7 ( 3 ± § § a 7 -0 C, 0) \�2§§ E E \ƒ \ƒ 9 \ 2} E/ 0 ) 0 2 & — § � o t 0 ± = 7 ( § / • a u o �� o % 7' o G o o#± e kƒ o Q o o§ °±» g o ƒ ƒ C3 d o e e o u\ 2 0± u o o ,ƒ u` 0 u \ E $ e 2 ° w 5 7° ± S e e 2 o 2 -o 2 .s& c § o E E E\ 2/* } \_� f2 2�± = \77 ƒ §2/ m 3 E/ o: a/ 2ƒ o — W o o ± @± \)ak & ƒ arm u2G° ((\ ® ° e e 2 o o r ® a u_0 u g ° k \ o e � o E o _ — 3 ƒ ± % e 2 ± _ " > - 2 O 0 -0 »& /� /�ku0 ���o o § o n u» o % E a rn o e C3 o @ # » — E u u 2 cn e \ (- / T ( a) u .° }. / $ f \ a ƒ j / u e u 0» o c ® u o§ E o o r r 3 E 7+ s E a$ < m e2 ± G o o C� . . . . . NO � g A j } u (D z Ln ) u 2 % 0 } j \ 7 n U) c � C3 � � 0 / 2 @ ? � § / 0 � / e q CL � .) � ":T . 16 C� § j \ F- u 7 G § 0 -0 a6 ae2 0 : k a ._ • 2 2 ± @ 0- ƒ \ 5 \5�§ �2E- \ \t \ / f ° \ b k ƒ & / ƒ § _ z 0§Wc _ems ® aƒ § 0.§ 2 f = ° ® % & ® / 3 2 g ®: �ccn �> ƒ ' % ; � 2 7 / �� / 5 % ' ƒ£ u o' c o 0 c) /�Eƒ ƒ/� ƒQ) a 2\/ ( 7§ 2 T k 7 2/ k CL i o 7 a t e _5 U) c( t G` - 7ƒ m t �$ \2 0 �\ ƒ� / @/� 0 2 c x ±& g D u G c 2 aƒ ƒ7u§E22e.e.ga o% e f 0 oƒƒ 6± 2 -0 ƒ 7 f m o 2 L6/ y{ CL ƒƒ o•e o \ 2¥ \ e . 0 ƒ± � a c r u t E I R// % o f a — \ o .e o ± �•y gv o = \ƒ c >0 / / ƒ��� c �0 C3 , ; a m L) § o )® -I-- a 7# r 7 C 7 o g 0- a U »-C S a o 7 U-- o ":T . 16 C� § j \ F- u 7 G / / \ 7 tn 0 LO A j \ \ } / f j § o e & _ 0 e e E ' (n \� 0 m 5° cu o 2/- 7 u 7 c » 2 # } 0) ƒ ® 2 . \ � 0)--- E ƒ { \ \ � ƒ S ƒ u » § .c e•- c E o E ¥ c p J ` � •- o ƒ o o @ » ƒ o � 0 / « 7 c ��ƒ0 -00.n 7 0 + 2 a), 0-ƒ 7 { - -o o a)§ 0 E D ��� -E \ ®$ § u ±) o o m E ƒ c@ 5-0 2 A E } ` � \ \ �� R ƒ @ c ? o ƒ p u \ § § \ » � 00 0 0— u > 2 2 ƒ 7 7 0 m f t t o ° 2 3 -( u c o, c E E 0 ' t( 0 0 7 .- o f o - Q) C: . &7E /: $2/ 2± \ 5 \ 8 ƒ 3 7« .E @ a a o 0 -.E d e m' / o \ D ° ® — o 0® o r o 5 u o n o 0 0 u u 0 7+$ J E 7 2 7 2 n o k k / - : 0 \ -0 t = 7 0 c ƒ ! ƒ ƒ ƒ 0 3 ° k � _; ° « o 2 7 7 7 � ƒ o E � » e O a C 0 2= o 2 0 0 6> m\ ¥ 2 � .» t .E / ƒ72ƒ e 52� o o aƒ� �� c� ° o z a E 7 G ± »% \/ o § c ƒ § / '[ \ u / b ƒ E a / C3) 0) . £ 2 b f �m._ e o m G ± E 2 © a 7 / ƒ ƒ § 7: - ° C .. _ .R - a 0 _ 0- , o CL t o xo6a ƒ \ $0 ( ƒ ƒ �� ' � § % % §% \ ®�U 0 ` 9 ±�� §�. a a / / . c : - o : Q) _ p� ® § f c 222 -» & f•± zz \ � ; 0 ± # a `� ±c ` U % 2 0 a cc FE &•- o • ± r _ - S ƒ ®o• -e± c .g J - a .� 22E k* ® ao 0 -0 & / 0 ± o o \ + ƒ ƒ -0 # u f ® ] ± 7 ± 4 ƒ u u U« 2 �> G 7 o m 5 a 0 o o C- a ®ƒ § £•- CL % -a -0 o u 2 - >�m o - � c- @ .ge -0 ± o § -0 -0 0 $ c � / .� \ t o = , o_0 2 o o % 2 f\ 0 E- .! ƒ / E u ± ! : \ / ƒ § # ƒ 6 $ o z / § @ _ ± %ec ° @.9 $a a- c.2 §± g E c %@¥ & 2�$§/ g2 a /§ o Z�,_-0 /ƒa) 2) \/ \j7\ -0 rt{ a 02 ao Co ao� »m o - \ yl_o . . . . . . . 0- a ƒ \ ƒ 0 O \ C') LO A j \ \ } / f j § \ ol \ \ \ } CA) �-4 . . . . . . � \ & e o n a o Oa ^ �.� $ ^ � 2 � (a o � � (0 ƒ / 2 g �- \.� / \ / m j \ ƒ \ \ \ \ 2 o = a§� «-< a o e B o o m c f e , \% k +� CD a%ƒ om a$ ƒ »2�� 22+ƒ _ « ƒ&G� ƒ� ®§ : ƒ $ a m § kE ± y� n\� �_ \erg 2 ƒƒ e ®ƒ y Eƒ o q ) D » o § ,_ ] § o y§ °- CD/ 2 2 \� �§ 2 o- + � + ; , / m_ /oy7 o 7 C§C) \` % y» +C , ] q o ; ƒ / % y + ; n 2 \ \ � o a /oƒ ±F \'ƒ _ 0(D o m n � « �< ° e% 0a n- e ƒ_ 7 G E �\ a o +^ ¥ o R ƒ m § ! ` \ \ / $ q C CD n ! — ¢ o 2 Q- ± 2 ƒ ° n y / ƒ / ) ƒ ƒ ` Cr- o ° ; \ G a' 7 6' e 0 3±$ƒ 0-2\ e n§ » \\ƒ / \ \� o%J \ J& a� 3 CD 0 & + ).a � a + ^ k Q- ° / a a y m g. §° 2« a` �L� �ƒ C ƒ 0- / % ; \ _ Et'll'i I � 0 § z Q \ \ / / 5 0 $ 0 § m j U- 0 \ Z Lo 0 U Z Z) ° ƒ \ 7 ƒ I o 0 D —° \ 9 • \• o 5 o m 'Q &•E — � a g } Q) 7 0 . ± + / = c - » 2 2 \ ± ¥ } ƒ , 0 / -0 7 . @ ± 0 £ 5 r° — 5 [ � 9» $ . 2 § [ f ® -0 0 7 / -C 0) \ 0 _ cn o = —= 7 07 0 o ®0 -0 07 ƒ » / E * 7 § ° ° » i / 7 * k f » � ) » ƒ 2 ± ± & 2 ƒ 4 2 0 ¥ , 2 ƒ � f 2 / 0 z D.$ [ E 0 */ 0 .2 \ � ' � � CL0 � ƒ � § i } % Q) k \ ® \ M ƒ - 0) >-0 ( k 0 cn a 7 0 -0 -0= o o --0 o ? ƒ @ o-0 ^ )( ® \[r� 0 S Sf 2��/ §a\ 7 rz % g f C 0— E 0- T k t 2 m 2 ' \& 7 e o e e m 0 E 0 o o@° oƒ D 0 c < E @ o o o R 0-0 7- ƒ n � � m 2 7± c G J E o G & E n c e . E ! 2�.5 ± 20D0D s 2 o-0 > --0 » 9m 2 o &�� —.��o �.0 ƒ ƒ 5 Q p 6 p 7-c a a ± n o iƒ 2 —@ E g-0 ƒ& E n E¥ C� 0 0) 2 i$ c :ƒ °\ > � 9aLUc o 0 u E c& u f o � 3 »C 0 § k® o cn © 0 c —co 2/-0 �f� �0G0 0 � � 7 D � � % 7 7 � Q) o = o \ \0 2% '0 —0 \,±f± 5�- �$ 2 £ 3 5± 5 7 k k U 3 a 5 N / a) § m j U- 0 \ Z Lo 0 U Z Z) \ / / \ 0 $ CL � & _o � � 0 a a NE-90 Ln rl� c"i � 4) / � E 'c � \ S � § �ƒ \ § ƒ ° � ƒ � \� c 2 ± �7 ƒ k �� : � a > E f o � / ƒ \ 2a \ \ f / \k @ �> \ � \ 0 C3 atvmw �\ § a ( ƒ � 2 � 7 2 k\\ � \ � Jam§ e %1 § ■e ■■ � 2 j j \ \ $ A �t 0 R 7� 0 o m -a § o ƒ 0 a ® ® > t 7 % E o 0 e o a §ƒ ��/ ƒ/3 / 7 .r 2 E C3 G I E f Eon Sao gEg o 0 2 �o g c_ 2 c% �E� =2 g._�� a \ CL \ \ -0 u c e E) CO -0 \E / ( 2 % E ± \ 7.2\ a0o 0) a (2>b o 0 0± t a : \ 2 a (� ƒ @ { 0 g c 5 o � # 2 - ./ -C ` '� §7� ��oƒ ��� 0)0 'Jo 5J§ a�§7 ( u- 0 m 0 a§ t & ƒ 3 \\`q t 0) 3-2 \ = m G57 @ � .2 / ƒ . . . / 03 .c \ 0 —0 \ S � § �ƒ \ § ƒ ° � ƒ � \� c 2 ± �7 ƒ k �� : � a > E f o � / ƒ \ 2a \ \ f / \k @ �> \ � \ 0 C3 atvmw �\ § a ( ƒ � 2 � 7 2 k\\ � \ � Jam§ e %1 § ■e ■■ � 2 j j \ \ $ A / 0 / e z 0 0 % A j § § CL \ I ) u Z k _ kƒ � V) 0 f 0 G / c o u / ƒ ƒ C) -C ` CL o ± E - ƒ \\ u c ® 2 ƒ 7 2 g e§ —0 ƒƒ a t 7f §§6f ƒo Q) �2 §r2 §ƒ } / ? � $ § E . ƒ / 2 } / I �@ - c�F-0 0) o e c = o o /o Gm± � > -, _ ƒ —C g [ \ \ » f \ - ƒ � 2 / cn : \ ƒ \ / / f { ƒ % E V) 0 ƒ. ƒE2± MKT® 01 \ E2 -0 k/ ° _ ® b / § ƒ $ § - ƒ ƒ \ \ } ± k %\_ ®y22a\ n �f0 =0 ƒ\ k 0/ 5 f % ƒ E k J E a 0 E c o 3 / -0 U 0 0) U) E o / 2 c IF E# '� c •- o u •� G 7 o •r o f o - ® \ g a _a ., 6-0 C3 a o a r g 0 o / 2 > / 0 2 \ u § / § / � \ / � ° ' § r U t. c t t t m -- t/ K @ f c o c e!- a r e e +» G e@ - a W / 6 % ['/ & $ A e \ 6 ± E. ƒ 6 ƒ § k 3 0 0 c . . . . . \\-0 o a E % A j § § CL \ I ) u Z k _ o ± 7�a 7 ƒ f ƒƒ 0) 2 \&± 7 m c n )�\ / § \ o o $ - cn .- -- -0 ee E E g u® f E -0 ƒ • E c � E /� 0 d am ƒ) 7 'E07 \F} 7& 0) @ 2TG0 ƒ �ƒ &7 _0 _ 'u o c o u a - o o ©> p • g 2 § 0- ƒ & 0- .§ - . E u ƒ = � ® 2 0 0 / G C e a\ e§ E± o o� a&$ r a o 9 o Q--Q o & k& o E§ •a c f A a- / o c Lo \ « 2 7 # f G 7 @° ƒ 2 f J 5@ 2\ o u u: 2 e# 2 0 mu.T ƒc \ 3 7 �0 }} ter•- � � % C, . \! o / 7 • \ / ƒ \ 2 � 5 , u o 2 a 2 2° 2 ±° \ƒ S z / k f_0 2 c; o u u 2» ® o'a o 0 0» o �.> 0» a :/ e\ -0 §§0% / ƒ \ \C7 '\ � /cn §� ƒ9 k7 ƒ� �\ - ƒ�( ±ƒ E2 E e \ƒ e o - @ 2 \ 2 a -0 ® 2 3 2 5ƒ» \ 22 �� ƒ 7ƒ ���[ § %/ §/ % \ \�ƒ - o 7 »/ S ƒ +_ I m o 7 c o E c D D a \ ƒ @ / ' 3 @ E G G - . @ ƒ c / » - & \ . z 5 % \ - 7 0 a \ / §� % % [ & ƒ m 2 > _ -0 a » C c a .g � a - � •- - E o @ e u 2 0 S J 3 E+ 2 4» 7 2 S? 2 a E §-0 & 2 a % ±§ J a a u k f u± E J-0 s a \ \ _ 0 ± _ » u .§ o ® C: ƒ / o . . . . . . 0 y - g$- z 3±7 A / / \ z e lo / % / § 0 El o$ 7 2 0 o t& \ o» t e c o ƒ • ° ® ƒ E f \ b g g a 2 § 2 / ,-0 ƒ § § \ ƒ \ ± ®7 c / ./ § / / u 0 { 0 \E 2 °-0 = _0 '� 5 o G 2 = _0\ 7° u a a o - u& c _P 0 3 u �®° 0 2 c w r o a$ & ƒ% c o o t 2 22 0 0 - & § § -0 /ƒ t ƒ a & 0 c° 6 E _ , 7 0 , o o g § \ \ � \ ƒ / / # A } a Wi . ƒ � \ - ( / F D ƒ_ G } \ § / ƒ \ 0 } J m u cn 0 $ 0 0 \ . o f \�eo t o oE»� 9 m z E e - 2\ /_0 c 2 D f & cu \ u o•- D �t.__c m e = - o k\ o :E r o m o@ _0 J- J 7ƒ 0± ƒ$' o° >& 0 w n # '�•! 0) 7 9 o ± 0 0 c D 0 §t /v ƒ J o a ±. /f ? -0 S 0 > o 0 2� u7u e� -C -- 7 2 0§ -@ .$ 0 r, —0 u o m 0 § W._ @$ c , \ ® ' -a/ Jo@ / \: & ±%R § 2 E 7 oƒ 0 W J }0 c ƒuƒ 7 c 7 ƒ/ E ƒ o a/ o E % oƒ§ ° % � 2 x\ ° Q) \ (n @ Q @ r ® ± / ° �eo�ƒ 0 #Ea \�ƒ[ //t2 °£ @k� e£7 c 00 C: 0 ao e7 § 0 S %:§ m cn c± $7\ 6 u� ƒ/a \ ƒa \ §o t c » o•3 E\- \ \Q)§ ƒ§-0 % e- p° a) u o a o o ©m �$ • g t 0 E T 0 n E > E E> C® E 2 \. �� / c -\ @ m 2 . , u c±> 0 © °'a » o c o m c c m._ & 0) - f/ e u n ® o o= E•- c E» o_% G o 0 o 0.! - o 0 o c 7 o 0 0 5 0 o E -0 0) 0 » 0- 0- 7§ «¢ a o / 2 Eƒ a u D 2% = 7 » E +( $/ 2 E 0--o f _c § 2 , . . . . . . E / ƒ % 0, ƒ� - ƒƒ \ j / § CL \ Z } 0 _ y 0 \ \ / $ 0 m ƒ 0- / � .[ c u & aae 0 \ \: \S2 P •- ��\ 7%. CL -C 0 .7 E 7 E § m 0 a § DEn -0� 22 §§ƒa %r -0/ƒ •0) 8 ° 0 = 03 ±o k \kE� 0 7 \ 7 CL cl- - o & § u § c 2 aft2-0 WSJ c o a %± 7e3 770 0 ƒ \ƒ G £ 0 \-02 a ° c ) a > 0 2 .\ J § ` t $ .\ . ƒ §o c r /C3�0 C3 0 a) K: 3 c.§ o \ \ 2 § % ± 0 ± .\ \ \ ./ 0 � ■ 2 ƒ a ( � � 2 \ .r � � k \ : ) . / �« e 3: _0 r k c 2 2 E\ c § a � ƒ � 0 0 e ° ° —0 / t c o 0 % @ C: 2 0.0) - 10 \ 2 2 ' } ƒ o+ E 0 2 0 E 0 0 0 -c ƒ $ \ ƒ/ 2 f f t 0/ — o-C , C: 2 o0 ' E I ƒ ) ƒ � 7c k o �Z o » 0 �7 / 0 c 2 : x o §7 2 L f / 0\\ � ® a ƒ U S � 7 } o ' ƒ ƒ±E ƒ/§ ±#E ` aC, It 2 ±• m —� ° ° 2 e o \ o— 7 \ { t @± E» ƒo 00 0 E 0) 7 [ 0 \ \ƒ /@ 2 0 -e § E ¥ a C3 \% E -co E •\ ±/ 4 a n•a 0 * -0 a S � ± ( \ \ 2 § % ± 0 ± .\ \ \ ./ 0 � ■ 2 ƒ a ( � � 2 \ .r � � k \ : ) . / �« e 3: _0 r k /ƒ 0 - 3 cn - 10 \ 2 2 ' Q 2 0 . \ 0 a 2 ƒ ƒ E D \ � g C3 / 7 0 -0 ƒ ) ƒ \ U m � u� c» E ƒ c o §7 oe $ a ƒ 'E 7 ° c c 0 � e o/ c 0 0 u § ( \ o ( \ § \ § Q f [ o \� ±� -0 .� — @ƒ 0 2 a o 0 0 0 /± 2 0 3 $ 7 c » E 7 '7 c ® m ± ± r 0 ƒ '§ ,\ » C3 o r C3 /� Q) ) ±��\ c� 0 �§ ai eo.¥ \ � a § \ § /)0 6/ƒ /k ƒƒ Oƒ j j \ \ \ Cl) z / D e z e / p A j / § CL \ _ Ln j 0 Z \ a 0 4 f G ƒ \ k 7 / 0 % � ) o 1 \ \ 0 C3 \ - ƒ ¥ c \ 0-0 ± o D 7» o 6ƒ 0 ± o a a a — § «± \ �ƒ o 7� 0c* 0 \2 rh -0 } § ƒ \ \ 0 f 2 •`� a e .(7 0( e —± \ \ » o ƒ 7 o\ o t t 2 \ 0 o = 0 o f 7 0 D 0e �± / 2 2 / 5 c � ƒ ; 7 a 7 � % : 0 c 2 -0 3 2 /0 �» e /2 �/ '� a E0) e ± e ƒ \ c \ \ 2 \ 0 2) ƒ f m t 7 •n ƒ .g � 7.9 o » 2/ 0) a£ \ 0 / f c% /_0 2 G D 7 ƒ_0 .¢ / 7 \ \ ƒ ƒ \ / 4 k / o (n o J 0 ) . . . . . C c *Fn p A j / § CL \ _ Ln j 0 Z \ a z w D z CD N Lu 0 > _ C N } > > S -Q •� a) N •� C a) -0 O 0) -a — O Q to Q 3 c O N O c u 0 c N O x C: 0 �, a� o c a E ° °' rn> a) a °' h 'O Q) O .N .N fn ,� .� 0 -O .O N O -O O T C c N -6 O O C U U N 0 C O C a) V m 7 v, a) -0 0 c N E 3 o N Q s Q) E 0- p> •°� c -0 N O c N N N N -0 E p c c N N U C -O — V C N a) a) a) y Q. U. N O C -O c N C N a) V E a O s O 0 N O-0 '� ,� •� '� -0 a) Q Q � -p V _� E �/ N C N _O V O O O V O S a) U •Z h c�� 0 Q a O c- �O C C O) 0 c N N a) > in O •x >. N C 0 0 - - .c c 0 r O -0 4) 0 C c 0 O 0 N .E O N c 0 ■ ■ ■ u E E -0 O N 0 U 0 L a) p -0 O ' N 7 C E S O 6 a) > > _ > 0 c s 0 c c s O > > M Cl- u O N. Q V) O D i 0 N i i a U U z CO O F- U n M N N U) O V 0 O O N C N 0 a) �` T .� cn N U 0 0 U E OQ O a) EFE Q E 0 0 Q S V O 0 N C S N 0 0 S N O p E t i O N C O > p N O _) N > O a) _0 Q C a) O p > a) D C a) N a) 0 >,• 0 V C O � 0 0 c 0- 7 O -0 c C N O O cn •C C: c 0 0 -O c 0 U `) c 0 E a) -p O O v a O E v O N N -0 0 O N CD N O °' -° a a - Q N _N S .- .� -6 7 O c 0 -0 o ° Q C: 0 C N� -0 O c ' C E r -� N •2 O E 0 0 O O a) O c E 0 cn N E �'i O O C p c `} C C N -a N N N _N L O1S J u - S L N " O C O� a> c E 'D _0 .a) U — Q c - u .� 0) N O O U 7 •� a) C N i C C 0 Q > O1 0 S -6 a) N N O a) c C U -0 'c 0 0 0 N N N E 0) 0 'O O _ 0 >> U a) N U _ •C C Q a) _ O U > � S •> -0 C O 0 0 u Q -O c a) o N O S 'N O '+ -D D Lu -Q E c Q V 0 D pU U W -0 c- S Q 0 > _ C N } > > S -Q •� a) N •� C a) -0 O 0) -a — O Q to Q 3 c O N O c u 0 c N O x C: 0 �, a� o c a E ° °' rn> a) a °' h 'O Q) O .N .N fn ,� .� 0 -O .O N O -O O T C c N -6 O O C U U N 0 C O C a) V m 7 v, a) -0 0 c N E 3 o N Q s Q) E 0- p> •°� c -0 N O c N N N N -0 E p c c N N U C -O — V C N a) a) a) y Q. U. N O C -O c N C N a) V E a O s O 0 N O-0 '� ,� •� '� -0 a) Q Q � -p V _� E �/ N C N _O V O O O V O S a) U •Z h c�� 0 Q a O c- �O C C O) 0 c N N a) > in O •x >. N C 0 0 - - .c c 0 r O -0 4) 0 C c 0 O 0 N .E O N c 0 ■ ■ ■ u E E -0 O N 0 U 0 L a) p -0 O ' N 7 C E S O 6 a) > > _ > 0 c s 0 c c s O > > M Cl- u O N. Q V) O D i 0 N i i a U U z CO O F- U n M 2!- Q) - N N a) a a) O O a) N N E c a`) a� - - > > N O 3 C C a) C C 0 a) E N . U _ 0 N a a) a) >. OV Q 0 • V) .0 N O .E N U O O - O j 0) N E 0 C 0 0) u u _ N C3 N -� C Q 'C c 7 O 0 0 0 y _N N -0 a, - 0) O N C Q) E E °' -° a a - D ° Q a� o ° Q E > E r 0 0 .� o N E > E rn > E N 0 .E N N p O -O ` O 0 N c - p 0 O C c u � U O N S - -0 °' V O a u a) C z CO O F- U n M \ / / \ 0 � Q -o E §± C �JE 2 0 e f�\ - o a §o ( @ a) @e-C 002 t / o 0 / a) § Q__2 o \CD cn t / / t7 4) E k 0 k CD 0 ./ � m p Cl) j Lu CL \ \ \ 2 \ j S .� § _0 § 0 ± 0 § \ E 2 f. _ ƒ ƒ ƒ & G 0 ° # C a u� @ 7 •E / s [ _0 2 �u _0 ƒ 7 / a \ 0 2 0 \ 0 ±� f % Ca ) ` $ \ o \ 0 E % » / �2 ®'S ƒ $ 2\ -0 0 ƒ ./ g c 7 D» \ '\ c E c \ c o\ 9 0 u ., 7 / 2 § $ c / -0 p Cl) j Lu CL \ \ \ 2 \ j .� § _0 § �\ / 0 § 00 e5 f. G 0 } ƒ0 E § \ u� @ o / s 2 E /-0 2 �u « 3 + a § x a G ±� \ Ca ) ` $ G o7 0 _0 \ /) » 2 � ± ®'S @ £ $ 2\ c- 7 \ J @� c 7 D» c o c o2.2:- / o 2 J / © ƒ o 0 / / § C3 §% 2 / §S [ / $ G E % $ 0 & a ) _ �� o a \ 4 u ® / & / ƒ a u o ` 0 2 0 § * o Sƒ D o D ° aƒ 0 � -0 ƒ / \ / c / / § o \/ / �00- . J o /�� ƒ i 7 2ƒ ® C) f® 0a) o G ƒ o a E t c o e c .g .2 3 E U 7 7 ƒ. �0- f± o — 7 a 7 )o / iƒ \ 0 / E ƒ ƒ § ƒ ƒ \ 0 � 2 f o 0) S 2c $` —§ �7 � 2 0 D 0 0 777D° 07 0 7 2% c z 9/a u/ 0 eU • / o > e' �-0 \ G % / § / \ ƒ ± \ $ § 0 § i . . . . . . E2? / ƒC3 / ' a\7 p Cl) j Lu CL \ \ \ 2 \ j _0 § 0 2 § 7 o U f. —C3 % & } E § / / ƒ k / s 2 E /-0 E (n § g ' x a ±� . § ca 0 G o7 0 /) E 2 ® ®'S �G � 0 7 2 @� ±b -2 c3 o c / $ / o 2 J / © ƒ o 0 J® Q § fƒ 2 ( ^ « ° R 0 0 _ �� (D t ƒ u -0 •� & / �/ 2 0 § \ e Sƒ , t f .G s o a ° aƒ ._ e m e u \ c �00- �U / ® ± f® ± e o o a E o �0- 0) / }. {/ Ln0 )o / iƒ •5 •- 3 ƒ » uu k�.\@ 2c 0% �7 `k - 0 o 07 ± 2% oƒ 2 @ \ E $ k / o > & ± / % ° .g § EE . . . . . E2? / ƒC3 p Cl) j Lu CL \ \ \ 2 \ j N W Z J W 0 D 0 0 / 0 \ $ M o / •- o ƒU ± / -0 ¥ / E e t 2ƒ ƒ e / � \ § �§ k j > f)% c o ccn ® t •2 0 ƒk[ ƒ§/ & A } § \ 2 ƒ ) / j 0) 0 E m ƒ § a \ ƒ 0 6 » § \ $ / » / k \ k c ƒ % g { % c' o \.q7 0 ` J ƒ o 2 ƒ E o § f 7 •; q @ \ ƒ 7 = 2 / 0 $ 0 2 % § \ � ƒ ƒ �•� - � 3 } ) § \ } / � � 4)0 E- 3 .§ E \ 0 § \ 2 2 � 2 2\ �ƒ� � \� § � ƒ \ 7b 0 k�) �_ e cc, -C a) & r\ �03 ® /E\ 0/ E— E— + \ ƒ§ o \o . c E ? c u o »; o\ � a u a Cl — o f g a ƒ± \a P ate �± 2a / E.\ 7\ )0 ��ƒ \ƒ k� §§ e k 0 ƒ/ ƒ 0 U§' ƒ ƒ 0 )( 2 0 f u o c g§ 02 �7— -2 �2; >a / ± 4� , : e E 7� _ u 2k 0 o t _/ Q) ° g o 2 0 c c c o u— c o+ _* 2 ` 0 2 c : `ƒ 5 o 0 0 7 7 ƒ' c u ƒ/ 0ƒ 0/ƒ o§ k o)> u/ o a f ƒ\ ƒ > f 2 n 7 o 2ƒ ƒ + E\ J 3 o G E ƒ± 7 G o 0 � S $ & " k + ¥ � / w §- E \ ƒ � � F E u E ƒ c �7�0 0—cn /W G 0} �J �) ƒ a) k§ X20 -0 ƒ0 >± % P 0- `§ F /* 0 2 2® $ 7 2 02 e f S � \ c 0 rz C\ �$ cee c -t c/ e� $7 e± $m m§= 5 000 �E ƒ § ƒ \ ƒ § , � m ƒ : f \ no ") u o k -c & E ' E . Q ± E U ± & ! 0 & ! § S f e ± 3 &.g S \ ± § 2 ? m O / / E 2 o c $ 2 o ƒ . . . . . . . . . . . . w 2 & A } § \ 2 ƒ ) / j � ƒ ƒ C: -!L' Sye G $ ƒ d�.aD , c E —4) a G 0 \ = ® y 0 0 5 -0 2 ] 0 C: +C:7±�7� � ° & \ / a .�2® / c § o \ \ \ D � f ° \ ƒ � C: /\ \To E o -0 e ono: » = 7Eƒ { C:0Q) 22�fu /E/ m ƒ 0 t 0.g I 7 @± o7E 0 • (f u \ / ƒ \ ƒ )•§ � Q e a C) 0 2 e» c 0 / g 0 S 00 of @8 E 2 E\ k & 0 o Q ®ƒ \ƒ G+ƒ E•§ E e , s 0) 0 -0 — c c i) 2 '( o» c .- c g •- & e » 0 _0 k Eƒ 7/ j §� / f 0 ` ) * - � c m 2-0 E z 7%§+ 2 u 2 > 2 ± E$ o _: 6 o07 2 \ e § m tt= / 0.9 — � § m 2 T & 2> g o ° u e / 2 , f k §° o E® 0 7 f E 0 s —> E / § \ 2 ƒ \ § E § ƒ ± S z / / / f C3 > \ L- 0 z � 2 7 77 c 0 o o t(n m o g � ���� © =2 S o c y m 0/ m ®% )2 4) 0) ƒ d�.aD , c E —4) .00 0 0) a 0 0 5 -0 �.9 2 +C:7±�7� � ° .�2® \ { - 0 § ƒ 2 §/ (� k u E o -0 e ono: » = C:0Q) 22�fu 2 0 5 / ƒ � E / ° 0 0 0)ƒ ] 0 o r;ƒ 0 t@, u 3 S±& G'[ • (f u \ / me � — / \ ƒ Q)— 9 7 Q) 2 » § 5 ± § > 2 f -0 ƒ ƒ a R$® 00 of @8 E 2 E\ k j ®ƒ \ƒ G+ƒ E•§ E f s 2 o•& C U- — c c i) 2 '( o» t� &¥=u0u0 0 0 Eƒ 7/ j §� / f 0 '"n § � * - � c m 2-0 E z 7%§+ 2 u u u o» 2 {ƒ 0 r 6 7 T§ 7 0 9 7ƒ w o u G o e-Q o u o 0 o Cl) z N w 0 CL Q U F- LU z Q z O F- Q U w T ►►e-J z z O. aW .j a W Va �a - V V � H W W Q _ z 5 +- a U N w CL N N z U C L N 0 } U z T Q co co s c 4-o� � � T Qom} X C� �C� s Q) .0 z V) 0 LU CL. U H w LU 0 z a z 0 a D U af e Ul m � o o D o a •�� a N a s o � a 0� Oo 0 0 0 _0 -C N U > U s O -O o O s rn IL a °' U N a o G a) .� oo ° u U Q i a) _ a o L a E O U c. a% N s� N -oa a) •V1 u s a) -o a O O c o N� o y a% C j C OU E Q_ N Q Aa if. Q N a) V N p C a) p aL ) a � Q O C _N a Q) a ao ) S Q L p La) O a -a) 0 C O N di C E 1; Q_ N o p c L 3 a% -0 a aC ) � U 0 V o ° 0 E tA o o U N c o a •y a ° 3 E N N a a) 2 F N >. V N C U c a u s _> u } N N a) C a N V _ Q_ o c3 E oC -0 Q u a a a p 'C) i t a) o T Q a r E a N -a o a) N a 3 > 0 0 N E E O U N O a) '- - a _a E N a Q_ U > -� c •- a) c s s o El i r i c N s Cl) N p a' � C E : a) O ~ Q c v Q a v a t v Z)-a s v °_ a >> u o' 0 ' ° -° u -a c o u _ .rn s s a) o _ O _ O E O C OO N O Cl- a) U d a) Z) Cl.- -a a > E 4) •r af af C ce o of O d aC ) s O s i C a) •N •E a) 0) t E vi -Q -0 U N a) � . 0) a s a) a) p Q N C a U U C C V C t C N a) O O a a N O L ..«. L U o O C a Q N t C E C N C U a >` a N N L - a a o 3 a Q) E z o E ai U) cn N •N a Q) E 4) o -a N O a C C N LL U . C D a N C N o o p o -(n N t O N a c p - -0 E o a : a N a) a T C a o O a) � °X n o a p c 0 o Q -0 a � .r- `n o a a c E a rn c E a) a T i v N a _ U c a O To f O � u O -0 a a 0 Q) -0 Q Q. N aQ 0 aa- � U N °) 0 - a a H 0) a V T U O C o a a) = N a) C a (n C •G a N C U Q L t' vui a) i o s o '3 .N a c m a- - ° 4) o u� - c v a s C) N a N _a _ a) N _a) a Q_ S y_ } N C N .0 o Q V) '- a W > 3 in � c 3 y x N `� T u 0 _. cca ._ 22 s a s a C: a) N a a � _0 N 0 a ] a C N c N> 01 `� •y w a) C m N O. Q N N Q_ a) U) o C a) >. Q_ a 0 C3 E a N -_ 6- > s c s W O N j O c 0 a Z a a N N a N 3 o Q rn E aNi 3 E �' �` c N u> C N 3 a) > c i 0 E a = m U o C O O Q o u a) Q) N N a) N a= u a a) Q > u 0 a a a U 70 . -t 4)s rn 5) 'o c� o Q a) E E' u a 3 3 a .N D N E -o c a) v) o c s Q Q N Q a U a o cn s c () -o U a .a U a o E 0) : Q u o .- o z m 0 0 U r v S P C 0 C: N M � O C Q C O t — 0 0 p In E — ? c a O Q � 3 - Q z (D 0 -C o f C � ic 3 ' E 3 o C3 C N a) C c W E C d V w O U O U u 0 C N y Q U C-a Q L _c i ti O o -0 'C a • a' Q 6 u w LU CL. O O a) C O d O n O -O O C O C ,n u L N a) o a > c O N U O U u s O Q Q c -0 d Q y Q c N Q Z V) H S -c u 0 C Q O N O u a) p C t N 3 w u Q a v t > U N oc w C 3 >CY) c 6 u Q p > '3 H Cc 3 -u V) o � U a UD � CIL S g o Z s 3 a a -C N CU3 U o ` °) 3> > L ° z u a) 0- C C -Q U) in F- 3 s C tc O N Q s o o ° ° , c C° o ° c Q o O) 2 o a ° z cn o _ Q C O O 'Q n C O Q u u C Q _ ' N c O -O fn -0 -p O C ° 0 6 'D O C O -E U O C3 c Q to 0 m O C o c O Q =p L p c V Z3 C Q o -0 O -O p 0 O c aa)i U C C O Q a O Q U Q cn O t 0 ZA p Cl Q O •Z- V O Q -O C V 6 'n u C Q Qv t ' Q Q E N S >' Ct N u H > Cc 3 ) _ S D o } C3 'n O t O `� V_ •N Q O c o o ° o o O Q C3 Q Q c o c0 N Q u ,n u L E fn a Y Ci L C C m U = Q U C3 O E 1 p 0 p - 1 (0 0 C O LO •L 10 h c � p co D` L a Q N 0 in V p'n u -O -O c y ,T O :t: n u C Q C N V Q Q 4 � � U CV Q-- � p (n U— 0 u a O Q C u i C3 C y U C3 �c `� a C U Q a O V L .a N -O C3 u 0 c -O C U 'p .� '- p O u a '� '- u O a •- Q C O a E C3 •- L D O N a 2 •- u •- O :� C3 a •u _ Q S >O •- _ 6 0 O ,,, a C3 •- Q U O c Q a u p E Q -6 U r � CA c w i a Q a a Q a Q Q.� O c n- a c N a Q U a U VO O N U u o > U a a U cn u 'C CD Q N a y o U 0 0 N Q U -o u S P C 0 C: N s H Q c S} C: — 0 0 p O u vi U O -O Q Q O C C3 m j Q -O S _ N o 0 � o f C � Q ' E 3 o •Q E c - c t c Q c Q Q to V -xa L O c C = O N > N n �' V L a n O O ZS O o -0 'C N 0 N M a' Q — O (n u >- N Q p in u— N -p a D — o o C z aEi .� ° a) o a s� � 3 a •� a o C3 °° o cn E c 'Q cn E a) O O - 0 6 0 u a) U U O O N O C O O O O N p Q c Q v s i c Q o C } 3 c o ai L p � > — N U) E a s o u c U a S E E Q a) o r- Q . E2 Q) ` °) 3> > L ° 4) u a) 0- C C ( a) a a m O O O c Q -O m u Q tO CZ p V > (1) > aC > O u o a) o y ° c Q o E N ay ) t CtOL 1 Q o Q � L u u w O Q t3 _ C ° 0 6 'D O L p Z3 _ c Q N C p S N S a p Q Q O o c O Q u Q a S t O Q u a) Q Q � C2 (n i c N C3 to Q a) Q� L C C O Q a O Q U Q cn O t 0 u N O C3 O w U V j N S N C3 s p S_ � V 6 'n L -p O Q Q .0 C3 — i3 C O 3 C p ZS N u C O O- Q a j C - +_ C N L C7) L L C O t O `� V_ O. CA w N C3) V C V L Q N C3 E ;. � a � — cn O Q C3 Q Q c o c0 c a) .O O Q- _O L V CO V O CO 6 Q) w U Q w -O Q> U — V c ZS c W � N a U Q Q c U p 6� O 1 p 0 p - 1 C3 c S c p) Q t3 C 1 a) a) -p N 0) 1 Q= C3 V) — 'u C9 u 0` Q 0) L a 0 N w O M .O Q-0 r W � Q Q — N c= Q Q C Q Q Q 6 E a) > Q O N t V L .a Q O vi 0 O h .N V O C c L V O O s Q U C3) i C3 C3 U} _ Q S >O 0 o j O O M L c N O U> Q `� U 4) Q) -Q _U C1 U Q C O V S t3 > O= CL Q Q a C p a C O CL O c n- O C .? a L = H O L Q Q a —� �_ r U Q .p a u �_ 3 c U S �_ c 'C CD Q N a y o Q �_ s a) c 3 Z) U �_ O LC3 '> o Q O o Q O L c L �- } L Q Q Q> L Q cn U U U a cn 3 U C U U a a U 0 U U o a c U c m z O LU LU Q V LU H W Ln H ❑ Z a z O_ H Q D V C z m D in O r V v V a) N N s O 00 C '~ a -a O a N a s U {A i O _ V L a c N 6 a) N N s 0 0 a Q a C 0 a Ou V) O Q } Q N O N C3 U) C _O C o_ O -a Q a LO Y a) L a N •- ` a) N a) a) > N a) E N= a) U C -o LF U a s L N a) T O o N 2 E a) u () 0 a c Q U L � ~ U V U_ o s a c O N a • c c O s p -a a 3° s a -a N o 0 Z N '� 0 L ,E a L N Q ' .L .� c— o a V L p E o N ° O E a �- o E o L C_ rn ❑ O c a) O v; s C O Q ti E a u C O a o v •� o Q o 0= Q o f 3 7 T V o m -0 u N H Q S u O E ) O C a_ �s Q U L Q O N a) u a O O U a N ,a S s -o 0 O 3 Q s c -a a s u co 0 a c y c o a a) ° a C , a) s L s ° 3 c ; Q a u o a a° - Q 0 o a 4) o N a) ~ V a 3 a O 0 - E a) �s Q s Q a a) O u QC ) a O a a • 0 E •a) _ a V o _ a� a _C s Q o �C .N o� X v :� U N E � •v o JZZ C N � N u a -0 O U a a U 'Li-- O a) c o a a a a a N Q c0 a y N E -4-- O a) LL u O o� o -O E a, N a -O Q C N a) ' C u 0 O O s a) -o a) U -o E a E `} N N c 0 0— O T � E O s N s 0° o o 0 ° i a 0 V a aT) N V C a°'i c U C U (n a a��i �' LL Q N -a o o N (n U a (1) N N �_ -a U C a) o a) a a Q O C o o u U Co o a U L E a) N S N C > U y C O -a t 0 > — (D O a) 0 Q 0 s a) o c o >- ) p Q) a) — c -0 3 LL- C C 'a3 . 0 a a) C N a 4) N a) S a) 6 -a C H C -6 n a N -a a _Q Q c a o aQ Q a) p a) a a E— a Q � S ~ V S N a C U a a) a s 0) a E L _a a N N-° D E N ° --o N c c O a) �-a N O C O J a) a) •- -a a U O L Q) O -a a 6 U -c O 0 Q S U a N .L 0Q n - a � E _ C E O Q s � a -a E o _ O 0 c - N L o n a ) Q a) 5 c u C E L `" � a) a a Q N C E > O o C LL C " c a 0 O O_ O O a u N N N C3 7 a N N Z N S S a) N N C V E a C N _ p E o �, °'-C � s C E a 2-o C a 7. a C C L t -a N U C E L C- Q N o L E o 3 L a —o tea, a> Q) o L �, o E .Q a o Q o Q L N O a) I a)p N I E O a y p N co C E, 0> m a) O -a N c � O c a N N . C o N N C N CL V a a V Q C, a u o o� v Q E D Q u E a u a O N c -0 a E `) 0 a-2 c Q '0--o o 0 U) a) c c 0- a 0- � C O v a C Q- a�i ° U a Lu U 7 U N p L N 4 L z m D in O r V v V Z (D 0 LU Q U r w af C) z Q z O r Q D U A 0 Z c 0 0 U U a� U V m C3 c a .N 0- N CD LL. �.._,.�.. ..._.._..._.._ .._..._,.. iii � :11 IS 1 !1� • _ 1ST � ;; 1 zS 8 j snjueujap 1. 1� .u, 1pqdwYD i _ • �m �a i 7S v � A W 0 I • ° O d L:J C a A * n- ni a w F- F- L ' C mc ar cu t: " Q t C v a m w a v Z U U wCL Ln z 7) Ln O U Z co 0 / Ln \ \ F- LU \ \ \ \ / � \ C3 S U � u m CN C-� -4 0 -C / �.0 c CD ƒ$ c e-0 u 2 u z) E / ± o ± c / & «mom EGf / ƒ ƒEE\® a o 0 C: o \ \ o K -0 e 2 7t C3 — f c 0 � E ' 7 � / o o c o & § 0)/ o\§ \� . 0 0 - 0 0 -u * you 0J' /$07.g 2 �U m0 0 c _Q-o — �> a) V) a) 7 § @ ' o ® \ o0 ° \ c u \ƒ o u e 2 2 ®r . @§c2 /2f \c §.6 \\±f .�.9 % /— \�k(an 7 ƒ± EU ) o c . » /� ƒ %-0 ƒ o { ƒ\¥ &% a) u e f: u El Cn o 0 \ ƒ u Ln ƒ � § � / .0 / ƒ .0 Q) ƒk o 0 g o ° o / 0 t o 0 E — > — © •> -0 ° a l 0-0 0 u e a » > 0. n > o 0--a _0 0 a o % U»±/�7f .. m a u o ? C ® / -0 .E ƒ7o a © ƒƒ\ 0 u -0 ` k \ 0 0 » §•2 U (n u cn ± ƒ / ) § � m o 0 \ 0 ƒ �Da) 00 0 2 ± , ° o c E � c3 E / 7 / O a u [ § 7 e 2 ® 2 u .R �' u+ 0 e 0 4 ± � co OC 0 ƒ -0 n m — & C: > o 'E \Q o 0 o 0 %�6a0 ƒ %%.[7 a e >±% [ §270§7 O t 0 o 7 0 0 0- ± 0 $ ) / / f o 0) -C o � p f 2 a % .a { 0 �\ ƒ0c 3 \ / § 0 % / �gu) °22U �u ±223 k \ 2 o O0 %2a00 ƒƒ E2 ( , z 'B ƒ 0) E 'U a 4) 0 c 7 Ui ƒ ƒ± _ � m o51 k 0 / � 0 .0 � \ � oaf ƒ� \ �Q)2 �± ƒ % \ § �(± ƒS2 /5ƒ m a o u \ ,I- co Q)_0 0 0 o -c\7 §\7 ƒ k-Ck� E ƒ0 o c o U (D� ( u* 2} 0 k- -0U (D .\ / § / G ƒ % Cc) c o D o / u 0�yE / / ƒ\ \ E \ .E \ § 7 j j \ \ ƒ / In \ \ 2 LU / \ / \ _ u U a0 0 ® 2// 0 IS C) o _ .s a c @ e EJE3 Cl- Q) ƒ 0-� / 'j�j o oC -0 ?ƒƒa 20^ o t� � / 0 -0 @ u o 0 ƒ 4) -0 V) LL LL< �4 _ 4 .�m ML � � \ _ } � � OIF AS \ % \ f } t } � ) / E \ \ k § k ƒ � j \ CL \ ƒ j \ Z) c � 2 ) CY) @ / \-0 a 0 mo o u G 0ƒ -0 ƒ C J— o « E/ (E ƒ o k k o u j 7 •; •� ± o 7 \ U Q e °' -e 22��0\�� 3 e7ƒ t m 0 a 9 2 o z. ; > E o c ƒa )52 c o•- a ES2+�r(t S . E2» u/ § e !) 2 P 3 t o��% \ 2 0 0 ƒ } ) \ \ ƒ \ ¥ o' u q 2 2 ?$} o /-0 ± u E 2 P 0 9 aƒ \ 0 f / § Z) 0 7— > m 6-8 , 0 ƒ --C o-C c I e [\ @ o< [ . . \& 2 m / \ ƒ \ \ T / [ 2 / T Q ƒ 0 ƒ co 0 7 [ 2 % �� 2 k § ƒ / c : ( \ ° — 5 ƒ.£ °c c'§ .g 2 0)0 co® �/2± ;_0 §570 a e $ / ƒ t§— t m/ R o = r 0 o a , a{ o R±\ c§ 7-o E pu 7» © f §£ % g 7 0 E 2° rƒ e o o 7 7 » 5 a e � _ a e x =ƒ \ / w : / n § ƒ ƒ / k ƒ 0 D 0 ƒ [ 0 § \ c [ G @ 9 7 0 > a G c- \% _u-0 m 0 7 \m-0o o 0 u P +' \° eu U o, u oƒm /ao oƒ. — \2\$a c� � ƒ o U e § §¥ pm I \ ƒ ƒ; G o u.c --a E ƒ: -0 4 7« 0 2 2� %£ 7 c E 2 c o u E 0 \� 2 \ ƒ \ ± \ m / ƒ 0 k / E§ U ' � c o ct •\ f ƒ 0 o 7 » ) )§— y 2 2 /\ f D %@ m c o I» c d o a §_ e © •- •E o c � .0 a ` ® a @ o 2 + ƒ / / { a O t . . . . . . . . 0 U o »? e 2 u— c 0 / D o c /� _§ 2 0 2 2 0 Q) 0 ° E 0 o- a) S t G/ ƒ$ 0 2 0 a 7 Ft -0 % a/ U o\ o 0-0 C'; C < o U o � j \ CL \ ƒ j \ Z) c •Ee 2F t 0ƒ§ 7 — 2 5 a) o § a o o ; o _ ^ /\� ƒ)72/ / % —* �— �2•- �OD /E ƒ0\� \ +\ e c C) " ` ) � / f z 9 v o o% ) X± 0 +\ / / / ƒ o° V) § ƒ 3 $ ƒ \ &/ a} } oƒ E \ # 2 ƒ \ �: ƒ \ / \� - \ ƒ/; %\• »�E0 /e£ \< m 3 2 \ 0 0 j / o . � 2 u / 0 0 c ! 7§ 7 \ o ƒ o u p �.@ :-0 / \ \ / % / V) / \± 7 £ e 2 2 D- i\ o c © m* t- 2 ' 0 0 S 2 G .- a 0 z c 2- E E T§ o o c f ® a 2 z J ƒ\ . & /$u0 ƒ/ \n�2o 7E g _ / 2 \ f $ \ E u % $ w / 2 7 + ƒ } 2 2 — R o / 2 i = & \ \ (1) a) \ - ` 5 _ _ —D0c n —7 § w ƒ \ Q t \ ƒ J o•J ƒ } e ¥ D » . /77U ƒ� \ //) e�7 v m o, o e 7 62 c 7 ƒ; u e a 2 - z V) w 0 w IL Q U N H W W H Vn Ile L 0 z L V) CD C N X W N N L 0 V) U N HLIJ LU 0 z z _O H U Q) } c N s m 0 �a) a) p> �_ -o Q) 0 3 u a) c 3 U a c a) co N m 3 m O a) - •� c c 3 o a) >" 3 0 aci C3 E ° a o — V) o a °O O Na u� Q) a 0 N - " N u 3 -� 3 >>. � m �' 0 3� 0 0 C3 -� Co s a w o T T N N 0 - a) N 0 — �_ 3 0 a) o o a c 4 o¢ C: 0 U 0 0 o. 3 t t p 0 a) a) -0 3 0 > N E N N c a) o c 0 c� c E � 0 �O -0 -C o— Q t a) N V) ) s. V o �, 0 o 6 0 0 3 3 a 3 E Q) U Q) o N o _° in N 3 E 0 a) 3 o a) c c 0 N-0 O� D a) O a T 0 E ��=p 0`x-6_ Q m N 0 N _ m 0 O D) m> U -0 a'0 cs-0'p p Oss 0� a N N =) C: ,O D O o c a) a N a 0 c a -a- a u-0 c 0 0 a) O 0-0 T 0 a) O E c N a) 3 0 0 u 0 m u 0-7 0) � v 0 N a) a) E 0 a) a) °) m o a) CO c t 3 s o s Q ac) Q) c 0 N 3 t a) Q o }°0 3 E in a) c U C �a0i >` N} N �' `+- N 0 m T a) O- a) 0 c 0 0 U i. 3 a a a) o> > ti 0 0 T H N c a) 5 v 0 > N 0) O a) a-0 o p m o O -� a) > s 3 0 V a a - 3 s a0 E��� p 0) oN ~ N~ 0 0 In c .. -� ¢ ` 0) O -0 0 0 —, s N s U ca) E o a o �cl a) c O 0— 3-0'3 L'-0 0 c U � a) C o O aEi s •Q v 0 p o 0 0 0 -p 0 0 3 3° a) c0 C C C O N a) 0 c �e a) O 0 4) •x 0 0) " a) a) Q) t E c C-0 0 0') aVi O � E N m E > Em �<n UUcn U� a¢ ° 0 ° N N a Lcna� L L T a) -0 Q) s O 0 0 N a) > N O c c t `� E u O O a) ° c N-0 0 .a _ u s 0 _0 N c 70 °) -a — °) o a) a) c s a) 0 a) = c � s N 0 O O C c 0` U 0 0 N 0 � -.Z' N u '3 a) rn -o o c i s N 0 L -0 o 0 -0 ` u _p o u c _° O E N s N� a 0 TQ o 0° a) N N 0 0 0 `) 0 a N 0 0 �' s 3 b 0 p m a) a) 3 0 0 0 L C a) m-0 a m .. 3 ai o S o o N �m -0 3 �-os >v) 0) ** 0-0 a) u 3 o m a) s a3i D V) -V o U� a 2 O Q)~ o p c s N N C C U N a) i •- i a 'N s Z s C >T N O a) E C) N 0 T V N V C a) U D U O 0 s o u N N N a) 0 O O E} N D) p U 6 — E a�ci H a) c 3 4 c o _0 o `0 s c T 3 a) ii 0 0 0 3 u N o > 3 'c s N 0) c - a) O 0 N — O a) 0 _O E s u }_ N _0 _0 s 0 i o -0 N 0 ,u 3 T O p >. a a) a) -0 .� ta- 7- o a) ~ E Q) O s a) a) U p N c a`) 0 U o ;+_ c p 4 3 U 3 c 0 3 a�pi N -a a >� p a) O N V E a •`-' o a) aci c 4 3 Z m u O 0 0 a) N N I lJ a) O c 0— 0 0 a) -0 U U N a) a) aa) .0 rn o - 0 a E :c o f C .3 E c 0 a U N N - N > a) C 0 C N t N 0 vi O 0 V) C > 3 � i E 0 a) (n> a D O c 4) a) -0 c o o •- N o Q�-� a) aci a c O� �s �' E a o '�'N ate' C) u� a E o n E u N o o '� 0 r o aci N N? -a `n i ° 0 c T 0 _ a) E 3 to M Q) y 3 N p p U i N p c 0 _0 T 0 ~ N U° o° 0 3 a c p � n - _x (- U 0 a) .- Q p 0 0 � 0 a a N c a) s° o .4 Q a) p Q E 0_0 •E V �, V 0 E 3 N ;� N a) 0 a) 0 0 Z } a) o O 0) O N N- a) 0 j 0 0 `� 0} O Q) a 0 N N N u> N L 0 `0 a) 4- U- N H .° -D 0 C Q 3 U N cn -0 O S G) O i 0) N 3 N a) m 0 -0 c 3 `°' x s •° 0 0 0 a) '�' a) s p N v, a a) o 0 `n N c c O c 0 p o p 4) O .� N o o _0 ~ O O c 'C c} 3 j a N N 3 C s 0) s a) C Ti u a) N N a s a) a) p C S L .- a c s E -0 c 0 c O a 0 p N N a) u a ,� V) 2 0 M N c a :�, °_) E -0 o .E s E p _ -0 _ u U E p N 0 x N o L c O s N C N O U O O D c o u 0 p p v7 O N C Q a— a a) c u n- 0 U N N 0 _ c 1 V U- 0 c 0 0 U m m m Oo a m O A 0 v N LLJ 0 a Q N H W LU Q' F- N 0 z Q z 0 H Q U i O z L O V C3 CD m O a- 0 M D rn ii ••..a Plo�v. 11 U is 3 .5 Cl - i '/�-Id —H U I / �Qc Pb /Wai{SnoQ g0 2 pntg smwwaQ ji, ! 'Lllla9d-0 ` I D I I A 4 L Ot- "Q ua[,v�, z g V U w CL N N N O V z m 0 V L ro 0 L C I U ro Q Q C .v C aa2.u�a 0 a� 00 J !J ••..a Plo�v. 11 U is 3 .5 Cl - i '/�-Id —H U I / �Qc Pb /Wai{SnoQ g0 2 pntg smwwaQ ji, ! 'Lllla9d-0 ` I D I I A 4 L Ot- "Q ua[,v�, z g V U w CL N N N O V z m 0 z cD N W 0 LU a U r F W W N N Z Q z 0 N Q Z) U e c 0 U N N N N N m 1 N 4 N D LL W N m CL CL Y W 0 rn � Q d W Y 3 m J W W :r a z m a 3 o i J W W �5 �p W LLJ Y m ]C }G IF Z Y J m J Q � V1 W O H Cl) V co a — W M w cl- Q U N I LLI LLI H N 0 z Q z O Q U w Al m N LL- 0 P Q L O d a c a� U a L N C O � V N N � iL N r� Not" r� 7 r - `� Lb Y 00 _0 Q Q a CO Yw zz m H x � z N � � .N-IWd J J w cn 4m M Q zw 'v o: z g o N ~ z S J H W W `o m g 0 a a Y w W CO U) m 75 d z CL U U- U w CL N Z N N O U Z J m D 0 i V) n LU CL U N LU H W H 0 z z _O H V G } 3 m ° C 10 U m o a) N 'o O c rn c v CV C O N C O° a) a°i a) 3 a) o � L N c c "� :s2 O U ° a a 0 _ V LL p a a) N — T — — 3 + aa m '� a- —0_ a a _ ° ° N O o-° -C L3 ) ) Q) V N > - O — a) D a c a 7 a) -0 N a) n -a o a ° cp a a ° O s C s N te 3 10 a) c � a) a U) �_ 7 7 m C�_o m a) N a) a) a) 372-0 a) Nin m a) cn a) -a C N Q) c— _ c 3 a c ='d c(� C) �cn - a) m LL i a6 O C N O u O U C ~ o v V) O o � O c a) 0 p u aa) E ac) 0 E a cn a0) 0 aa) = > u a) 3 N 0) 3 U) > O C:00) N c N — o O o c o ° 0 Q) o e ° ; a �' 0 a°� 3 a) -0 p` V) p 7 O -d N a a -O N C N E Q) v, cn c s j a � N cat -o a) 4) CL.- - t or 3 ° O a) E E U s LL a a) cn.c ti ~-O N inci) E c '� a•E °n — a) 0 U °3 3 o Q 3 C a) °n Q a c L—` (� aa))s U cn a) aai 3 o mLnn ' (D a) O ° N -6 aai a) N a) L ai a) N L O p a .0 a v) _ O O C3 0 6- T N —O a 'n o w l a _ O a H S s ¢ o L a U O a' a cn c u a c a cn o a m D ° a) c 3 �, a) U m Q) � s ° 3 a�°i ai .0 -a a) ° O E (D c c E c _� O c c v .� c 0 Q) v 4) a 0 0 a 0 E E 4 a ( ,n LO C c E E U a) V U in a N s° O D Q) tU a) a 0 ° Q) 6 C a E o U � O u U Q) Q) U C u O O O o ,•� a D o D c Q O - c ° a a) C -p u = a U t C3 a a o m C a cn 3 N "- -a N O Q U N p Q a N O Q a v N a Q; E o C 1' a Q) N a) o m E > a) n D "> a) o `n ° `� •c Q aU 0 °V i LL Vi ¢ //11�� V F- 0 Q N N } rn 7 LL — //�1� ,,nn V H- V a a_> > LL = 0 C t fn —O O U a) a Cb 0 a) a C C a) N Q) C a) N u .o -a c °° E � a N O � a) 3 a) o � L Cn O a) T C o C) T m a°(n N a _ V LL N a) T 3 CO a. O a) N O Q 7 i a) m '� N ^ � N a } Q) 3 .0 a) o c 3 N c a) 3 - s o '� a c a) 3 m c a0i -a p c .N C° a n a0i -0 -0 o T in a°)) o N te 3 CL ° N O C: u o� a E c a E c .a o a) O i ) 'o a O ai o m a Q a° O a c 3 a - a) m i a6 O C N O u O U C � v V) O o ° CL O oc o a 3 U) o c a a ° N > -oo o a c s E > s J N a } -a — s > O a) U a 0 u p y o O a '- N o ° n -3 o a V) � s j a N N ) U o E C3 u) ) LL- a) Co m T a) 3 E a) L L a ¢ c Q U a r-a Q U (n b a o ° a aa 3 n U LL t E a a o N a W 3 a 0 O a) —O � N Cl O O Q. a) -6 a c ° ° a) C 0 o C a a > C3 a a a 0 0 a 0 E E 4 a ( ,n LO C c E 0 E a p . 0 U) n c Q) ° a) a a> a) _ c a E o U � O u U Q) Q) U C u O O O o ,•� a D o D c a) N °U ° a) a -a N a) E O c a o U a� 3 > Q) a) a u N ¢ o Q ) z a_ a) c m C a a -a 3 s a LL- _ a E O > ji a) m L u p cn O o a) a a s 3 n D p 0 j o Q ) a) -0 a) O fn D c 3 3 u 0) a N � L m 0) o -a — �- a u ) o N � o ) a a) -C 3 O a) •C O C -a > D a s O 3 cn a a c _a O ! 'C U a caa aLn � a -0 vQ) ' i r c i aX � V O a 2 o o 0 aO a 0 a � a O O o m - — c ai O N v r 0 zn Q LL w in DU a) o �a v) — Pa —a uco¢ LE U-) a UCD'N -a C7 o=N S O 4 / cl LLJ { / LU 2 � $ \ / e \ _ U s ƒ / 0 / 0 \ .0 / \ V) \ 0 \ & 3a %LL. \ 0 e 0 0 A CL § § CL \ z / f § j c g % j ± a) +/� & 0 r -c ° o \ c 2 -0 — f 7 % c®-0 D 3 $ m ° ƒ u LF ' 2 f o g ± o c $- o§ ° f c/ ƒ c 7 7' o W -c . J g/ U/ƒ c 2� o� e c 0 .- 0 ° \ /¥� 4 0 �� 2� m -0 » o % ®@ 0- 0% o o G u o _ f o= 0 7 o o -0 a m o- / / ) » ƒ ƒ 0- -o ^ L t o S § 0 \ G f 2$§ 7 k } E o 7 0.- 7 q > � 2— %. /§ u« o o g o 7 J/ 2 » m § %`oE 0 § #ƒ E � of ƒ %o u 2 o = °` 0-0 o ƒ. 0 2.1 a e f 0 o ƒ 0- 2 * u c E • a f \ƒ Cu E % A# o ©_0 , ƒ ƒ% ®o o c u 0 ƒ °3*ft\ — e �a >/ 27§ / e « 0 e o o ¥� 2±{ /b 2 G »§22 ;.E J5«�e ® % — ƒ S » — ® % 0 u — � ƒ © e o o , a U b {» 0 0 0 >./ 2 o/ / e 2 E / \ \ 0 3 j \ / ƒ f ƒ ƒ [ \ k } / _$ 9 o 0 / k 0 2 0 0 o U ± S o u® f E a c @ o 0 o.! ± o,> y » ®v c o u/ � a- o a— 7 b t .� o® E 7—o c22a7 iJ ° 7 27rr 7 T _o_o , 0 0 .� (/ 0 E 6 7 0 \.g ® In -cƒ / m§+ a & 2 G\ y/ /® \} a —/ z / t f 2 J 7 2 m \\ E _\ / f§ U Uƒ 0 7 c @ 7 \ 0 ±± Q \/ m > ± u a u _ x 0 /® o b u u ƒ_ > a o 2 2 = —- a e 7 f u = e o•- o u 2 m m �ƒ 2 m 7 = ƒ 0 ° o 0).0 7 0--a = a / , 5 2 § & ® ± -0 \ 0 f & f o §.2 z± i 3§. k§ — ƒ_ ' 2 E® 0 , o — c w c » 2{ƒ @ o., aƒ 7 c G m G 2 n% 2\ \\ _0 o ®e E f o %$° m g 80783 o o .0 ® c U {%29t[ @ r° ° m% > e •- n @e.0 ® -2 0 \$ ƒk% ƒ / /7 /k� k / /\��� ±2± �2E7E A CL § § CL \ z / f § j t N t N z 0 LL- N N p N w CL. u 3 N � F- W D W d f- N p � z U z O F- u U C O v rn a) v LL (n f + t I w U) ao D CL Y J Q bo 1 V5 W O d d W ip Y m J W W a W EN ? z } F- J W O F- J F- W W ip Y Z 00 I z z ap Y Of 1 � a a J W z o to m om D p on a LL > O LU w ip U) U ao — D 10 a v z c� w 0 w CL Q U V) H W W H N 0 Z Q Z O F Q J Z) U w L N m 0 m L rye L a CL L C V L N 0 C L Q 7 •V rn m LL N io m Y � W O a a Y W 3 m W W F-5 Q 2 W LL [V O E2 LU slag S� Y � O N K W i0 w rri a z g U LL U W n_ N (D Z N 0 U Z J m D r) t L N C a PD } N LL O ..a a O w O F- L Q N N O O a) V > } N a � U N — N Cb N N N 7 m D LO LL- .�I J m W U3 Y >- W LU J x W co m a 3 � Q c� J W r ZdW J H � Q a � W 7 b F Z m m U H m U CL CL v z c� In w 0 w CL Q U w w H N Z Q z Q H Q J D U a C V N N N N N t N N N 0 N LL N N N N LL 1 1 l QI W i0 cn LLI m 7 a b z O m joC7 2 M I J W W' Q 3 � 4 x C7 2 W cr Ix N 7 W a co w W m o, v z CL CL U U- V w CL N C� Z Ln N 0 V Z J m D 0 Z V V) w 0 W d Q U H W W H N Z Q Z O H Q J U U L } N N L V N O N N N m L IN V N a N lI C N O V iL N 61 lk z W C6 0- a Y J Q W N Y Y a z 60 a J LLI W Q o Q n r Z w _ J ZQW J Q 3 a w j7� Z J J co LL 0 w r 'n um U a. a O N z - cD z N LU U LL- w V Cl- w Q N CL U U Z w u> w V) O F � U Z J Z m Q 0 Z _O H Q J U u C O .} V N N N to a) N N N w V Q m N LL ml g CL w � 03 �a 3 mlj2 - i o 3 t?IP Y Y T � a � � 3 fl � I io iz C O v N N N O N L N i N D ii W m a o w 0 � � 2 W W ffi s ww o Y U. Z _ r d3 Z J m D 0 A lL 0 � m V R N N v v Z U_ N W 0 a Q U N H W W Q' N V) Z Q Z O F- u w A C O V N to L } N LL N L M a) D P LL- T T T i( 1 r w a Lij Y N r rn a ao I Y Z J b r N K -190 od a � a 3 z� N Q m u K CO M N 4 Z CL CL L) LL V w d N CD Z N N 0 K V Z J co r) $ \ / / F- LU \ / \ / F- u , � 72 § = o.} a _ � t » o /0��E / ƒƒ ± 5 > -0 C/; ( 7 e / ) ) & / b 2 e E a ¥ n� § 8 , % e e E 0 7 e c 7¥ c m# o e 7 2 u {_0 �� 4) -0 c a G ƒƒ o o° /k� ° o' a- ± g 2 0 2 3»ƒ/ .$ 2 §° q 7 3/ g 5 E o/ e // t o ƒƒ a \ k 2 •� ® -&fa o- - 20 ƒ ° - o t ƒ0 ou E� ƒ7'[�° ±'a §60a In V) \ 7 R f §/ \ Q C$ / 7/ G\ 0 / /o\ \\� \ ƒu \-0 !:@ e i I- u G / \\ e % o\ e *%D� ».,�a7 7a coo >.-0 > I / � / � _e � � Y 0 a&� o { -0 t e'Q o f \ § / ° 0,-04)0 \ a ®u { \ Ea / a) 0) 3ƒ ef$ -0 f -i= m c- ° 7f-0 a .9 u' /& u ƒ± 2 f 2 k E f 2 § o o# o E ° t ' e »Jam / -o E o% E J \ _ c 2 n E k\ m \ oƒ$ R m a 7 u / G§ u --- § ° _ # b 2 } J > g e > \ / \ _ \ / \ 2 ƒ G / \ » \ / o f® 2 c °$ 0' o � C m 2 2 § t \ / 2 ƒ \ , 2 ? - / . - a-±\$ƒ ƒ7E a_ T) LES7 ƒ7ƒ 2 z 0 V) w a Q U N LLJ F W H V) 0 Z Q Z _O H Q D U w W 0 V } a� a� N V) CL a v v U- ct 0 1. K 44 m z-M �Q �QS o a Kj Lo e� 3C'u -�o W� m�� oo m me pt Tea ��Q En S� 'a� 'K ���� ���� aQ��Wce- a� i� m'K R� cn�2��� �WEn R 'KZC3 FS R����� 6� C -,Q � cn a zw N Ni wW Ew Z YO p aw DI Q6 M C O z W uj V) • t� N O z N O z W N v F Q U N 0 O z LO N v z g CL U U- U w d N 0 Z N N O w U Z J m D 0 M N NS `al rO N Z W w 0 0 ~ �WzJ WJ d 9 Z ch � < ° z C J+ O r 3 Z En Q� _ �z N N? �7 O W F �$ d p a Z N d' J� a Qo O ~ Z o f5z m Y W - q'i 'a ri 04 pj d N N F O O WZ Z N � W W N ct 0 1. K 44 m z-M �Q �QS o a Kj Lo e� 3C'u -�o W� m�� oo m me pt Tea ��Q En S� 'a� 'K ���� ���� aQ��Wce- a� i� m'K R� cn�2��� �WEn R 'KZC3 FS R����� 6� C -,Q � cn a zw N Ni wW Ew Z YO p aw DI Q6 M C O z W uj V) • t� N O z N O z W N v F Q U N 0 O z LO N v z g CL U U- U w d N 0 Z N N O w U Z J m D 0 z Lu 0 LU Q U LU W r z Q z O F- U ■ e a) c O N O L O D O O t v N a) O ,v � C Q N C) 00 V -O N O O ••- O N ti! u N a N t Q'U (1) 3 0 a} a N Q a c 7 N a a > a) N a) t 7 am c o c -a Q) a°)) O a) + c > 3 N U a) V N 'Q � C C L O C .� a0 o -a a a) c O C o a c O a O O L V Oc Q O t_ o C N a a) 3 a) a)� E a 0 t a � •a' � N t O Q 00 a) a) S t -0 C a) — V) y -aa a 3 z m 0 O r U 10 n v L — a ai > c o c .3 a a E_ 3 p -° } N -0 a Q= L 3 o o N T p C a) • (D 6 L N c a 0) (D c � 0) a) s p a) -a 2 L N p � O a§ Cr-3 L Q a a) O _ O — a) N E N t C a) a) � !2 T w C o v) a) aC E u N o 3 3 a -0 a Q O a o O O c a) O O O = aI m -O E O O a) L O > Q U E O a N m V 0 ._ a) —" C C a Q C/) a) > N a w V N L a) O O T -p C N O da _N t C O Q L O t .� -6 C (D V C o -a a a) N 3 c c } N a) > - -a V u c X J t a) p m c N O +- o a a) :s �-• N c C M N N U N L t C M L 0) U 3c 0 N c) O L a 0 C c 'a — o c > Q a) a c a O °' E 3 p _ ) a o _ v Q 3 Q rn } .0 a > " c C Q L co c N a) 3 a C a N L N> a) o ° O •C f E O t 3 3 O a -O —a- '� -O a) a) m _ — 0 0 °N ) o >. > a a a a Li c Q) 3 c O p ai u CO a C3 o -0 t Q) -0 m � a t u a-a 3 O cn a- c° m e 3 In> 3 a� '� i O— O O N} t —° c a° u n L a 0 N C tNn i C C m' Q) O _ a p Q a ON —_ c 3 H O C Q 0 " �O 'a -a o a �O 3 C a U .0 a) O— a) �- O E a) t O O N u N O a) 0 a _T O '> a) E N t O L c L 0 t O c— CO > a) O ' � U} c 3 C8 ,c O t 0 a� t N U N> p C u O X~ V u L a c .� c a C -0- a U C N U O N N N O N c a c � a � a LJJ U O m Q c vi a) la1 a) N j v O� S v c 0— 3 � E > L > c-' —0 c: o lE c 0 O O V 0 N Q m a) V O O u o r T a a •O C a) N N Q- a 'x p :�_ C N a) a) O c o) > �+- O V' a) N a) a) a) V i) t C -O a i -p C ,N O -_O 0 'v, '_o N M v) () a) u () O a) C 0 N Q L () 2 a) O t LO O i O s M O N O _rn t _� u .� 0 O O N= •> a O s s a X O s 0 P m P D- t t U N .= Q N V) Q 3 -a N t I— V1 N a) c O N O L O D O O t v N a) O ,v � C Q N C) 00 V -O N O O ••- O N ti! u N a N t Q'U (1) 3 0 a} a N Q a c 7 N a a > a) N a) t 7 am c o c -a Q) a°)) O a) + c > 3 N U a) V N 'Q � C C L O C .� a0 o -a a a) c O C o a c O a O O L V Oc Q O t_ o C N a a) 3 a) a)� E a 0 t a � •a' � N t O Q 00 a) a) S t -0 C a) — V) y -aa a 3 z m 0 O r U 10 n v a C: c 'o 3 .-a a } N -0 L U a N L o -0 0) � • (D 6 L N c -0 O _ a N rz a N �-� O a§ Cr-3 L Q O a) a) — E N t C a) a) � !2 T w C v) a) aC C a E m c u O 3 c O a) L O > Q C o O -0 a V O T a c -a L O U V 0 ._ a) —" C C a Q C/) m t > > > a a rz O _u a) L a) N O L t C da Q > O a>i U a) (D N c 0 p o c a C } N a) > - -a V u c -0 C3 0 C M m Q U C V E o a) M L L =) av N c) O L a 0 ao m m in O .c a) c O N O L O D O O t v N a) O ,v � C Q N C) 00 V -O N O O ••- O N ti! u N a N t Q'U (1) 3 0 a} a N Q a c 7 N a a > a) N a) t 7 am c o c -a Q) a°)) O a) + c > 3 N U a) V N 'Q � C C L O C .� a0 o -a a a) c O C o a c O a O O L V Oc Q O t_ o C N a a) 3 a) a)� E a 0 t a � •a' � N t O Q 00 a) a) S t -0 C a) — V) y -aa a 3 z m 0 O r U 10 n v z c� w a Q U N H W w H N Q Z Q Z O F- D V w A C O u m N a) m d L t N L a m O m c D m a L 1 a) L L3 R W z W Y 00 W QZ J � Z M I n J CV U) fw�O J W � N � O m Cl) R W cn Ca D a N v z U LL U w CL N iD Z N N O K V Z 00 M Q UL ti Y O � H n J CV U) fw�O J W � N � O m Cl) R W cn Ca D a N v z U LL U w CL N iD Z N N O K V Z 00 M c c E� % ` / / 2 }0 f ƒ �G% ®% 0i ƒ2§ E0U / ��c \� ƒ / / ƒ ƒ /���\ƒ 2 0 G \ 7 ± m ® \ d ƒ $ / / (� / £ � § \ 7 / o.e § ƒ e 2 0 7 — 0 ± 0 — k 7 o — E o E @ c o° ®•- w 3 •� — ƒ ƒ — d 4 y 7 / ) : -0 ƒ 2 $ $ — 0 0 \ / o»/ 0 2° E® 0 0§ 0 0 k ƒ w 0- u§ % 0 a o g 0 o � /� / \� °�2� -0 0)0 C: t \_0 ° ° _0 ^ 7 k e : 7'»•� — ±.e u o o m.c m » 7 C 7 0 f / » \— I — t° u--ƒ e 0 / 7 S u) 2 0 7 0» c o e< 7 a o *§ -0�° 4« 2— e 7 / $±\ ¢ c7-0 oo�5 ƒV)_0 7ƒ %E F— Q» - 00oo�o «±oƒ0D'*282 ƒ• -o c* \ +� / / � ƒƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ.t \o�' /2(� /\ ° o f _� o o —' m— o 0 e 2 § » E\ e e o o E % @) u ƒ t \ \ -0 a \ ( � �® + 3 / ®[ t o ± % ƒ &7 (»±, /= of -t -0 < m t o %» u a 0 0 3 u o 0 C: u _U 9ƒ z + / \ ± § - .- + < � ƒ + \ 2 0 E 0 \ z /» °§ 2 2 / \ 2) 2 G 0 0 T 0 2 4 o�\ 0 E u°) Eo— ƒ \®� =tƒ /a) ƒ 7 efo - tea& q ®2§0 /o GSo�oo7�7 0u0 %± \ 0)_ \ 2'0 ® » E f ©@ �® g 4 2 e a & c 2> o c-0— o•; -0 o&® = o a O a/ 2 / 7@ $« E» 2// 7 2 E @! — o' 7 2 \ 5 c a o/± t§ a t \ E 2 0 E[ 2 E 0') c § e 2-0 E 2 6% k± a< 2 c U O 0 U 2± u 2 2 g<-0 u 3 u # Q Z (7 N W 0 d Q U N H W W Q' F- N 0 Z Q Z O F- Q J U c O v a> N m a� L N 1 6 V N r rn Y ip O 5 co Q 3 a W W jp Y m r r J W W � � Q 3 LU W J W W F Y z m U' LU 4 J O W � J � H J � an o T o• N 4 Z g a U U- U W a V) 0 Z N N Q U Z J m i i I i Y ip O 5 co Q 3 a W W jp Y m r r J W W � � Q 3 LU W J W W F Y z m U' LU 4 J O W � J � H J � an o T o• N 4 Z g a U U- U W a V) 0 Z N N Q U Z J m C O u V N LO N N a O lie O C_ Q T a > a a CL N a C �U O O t 0) O LE z a O W J W W J W W Q Z ry J H W W � Y m J a LL O H C7 =' 05 Z m LL O r U 0 M v Q lf) 0_ Y J Q c W _0 ry ry W CD Cl) =' 05 Z m LL O r U 0 M v Z E c c a a -a o 0 -0 0O 3— 7 'o c O O N c 'U a N O _a a) a) a '3 a) u w o E o 0 u .c i o Q a) O u Q 3 j •c S a Q o o' a) a) c m-0 Q) -0`-m a o o a N— •gip W a C E o -o u i 7 C a C C V 0 a) N 0 D c 0 p � O° cn - a o rn) 0) o ° E E c 3 O 0 4) o N Q o) V C1 E C -2 V C a) p 0 (n C 0 V a) u 0 0 -E O C C a) p o u C a) S V) E D m � a c p -° S a) o c c .� c oe -0 ' m E 0) N aC ` p c V u °� > a o ° � ° o y � 3 aa c a) a: _a ° W N O a a} i O V) - o u O _0 w O f) o a u N o o o m a) c a c u a O L/-) -- N > O a) o . N U> '.~- n � =° _ Q O c E 0 D a) O 0 a Q O c o c > p O a) a) O a E > 3 c a) t °o f a) -1- 0 0 o a) (a) a Q) C) o) a) 0 o -C -0 wa C _ N U t ° U 'i � a) C o -0 S -a— Z _ O a) 0_0 -C • c a� o > -a C U- 0 c O m c o E o a ° °) a p a) 0 O O a E 0 0 ° a) 0 o 0� a � —i s o - o ai •� ai E o a >0 a ° °c °) u i E o a ° o a) 0m a) a U ° ° 0 2 o S U C o o 0 CO m u .[ o N m ° U) C a) ) U a) ) D u a a) u a) CO C > C a Q a a } ) -- s u a) N m e O1 •� `t O a a) a) N c o N a) C U p O H o a) a) p N 0) ,a) am N u •- m E c O 7 O O : N N -a - o -a c t a "O a a) 0) —_ 'C c ° o O O — O N c c 9) a U U> 0 0— a 0 0 .— c 0 o p E a V' = m m -O �O 0- O a a O' er o Q V) O N N 3 Q > a 0— O N p E= 2 0 N v ° a t'� a) C a) -� U C N i� j N Q '� o o 3 m a U) N C -O. 0 — C a S 6 a t o V) H U Q -o a) O CD _0 O 'U > 0 0 a) c 3 C;) — H U O - H a O c s- X a C73 x O O -0 t N s pC3 � a )-0 a) 3 a) O a) � °) a) D N y ° ° C O o p m O o a a) a a) J 7 -° O a a O N N E V O a _ .O a) o 0 0 m 0 c ° N Z) N u C = a) o N O _ o a O N E� a° -O a) p o -0 c _ 3 L a a op L o _0 c � u a) a) c c C v; N a c a E E a) 0 D 0 0 c 2 ° a a) °) ° o a u °' _2 o a rn p u p E Q N c/7 N O 0 > V Q Q 0 0 0 o) °• j 0 N N O N p m 0 p E 0 E o) V) CO c c N E 0 L y 3 o a) _0 -o _0 v) ci) c E aci s 'c c o a) c c 6 —0 E° o Q Q- - o 0 0 � U U � E a 0 a .N c a) s E a) o o -p aui m O E -0 -o _0 -O -a ° a0) c°_) N � w ° o 'P E a aa)) 0-0 o o o a o o a o c 'N„ c aEi E p s s `� O N 0) o c N -o ° a) a) aa)) a) o O 0 u N> a) o rn rn p c N o > -a -o L - a . ° In D 7 D 'C o a V U U V a S a) 0 -a a) C O C a E° O O o p O O N 0 O h C > a o -a M� `c 0 0 0 2 _ m m m af a V E in o a)'u -aim ' i C V C C C -a -a O O N a) 0 •� C i > O -o O 0 E u -0 u C N a N > 0 0 E _> E c� O a-0 3 p ��S a) i •� i� Cl- m —° ° c u a) a) n c o l t a a) 0 a) d a C C _ _ _ L i c p p p p V) Q Q a�ui a a a 0 s c 0 3� N 0 a) N 4) Q= N O a 0 m O E a N ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ N s 6 N a .E C t > ■ M V) O (1) N >. c N N •- a 0 " S 0 i S C C a a a N u a 0 O Q M Z U U- W N Z N O V Z m 0 IV \ \ \ LU \ \ / F- u e � 4 ƒ § / o 0 ± 0 I 0 ƒ � f0 (ƒ R/ / 6 ƒ � J k \� ƒ \ 2 § k } \ o \� »2 y� \/ \± /0 k > e E \ o y \ \2 @ 0 LL- 0 - a �\ 0 ƒ \ §% $� (n< J § \ƒ [2 CL k7 _ a 2 k 2 ± E t t c 0- < 7 .E E _0 ƒ ƒ ` �0 2 2 0 0 7 I% - - e / u & Erg%/ 2SS0-0 0 o E ° �Eaƒ 0 5 < c o &E: & 0�ƒ 0 o / 7� �/ g�° 2G 7ƒ/ \ § ±/ 2 ƒ f 0 / C: _Q _Q ( \ 0 C) C :(D D_ 0 2 } $ $ \ § 0 a)�/ 2 2 c 0V) \ 0 2 : CL 2 §� \ ƒ6 ) \ ƒ f 0 t0 a/7 � a) G t � o Q) ƒ� ƒ 5 0 ƒ g 0 ƒ_0 Q o / § �ƒ 0 0 _0 ¢ @ƒ �ƒ Q k » Q o -0 o c §-2 / 0 �� \/Ln j D \ \ C14 - \3 c E} /7 ƒ 27ao 0) \ a < 0 0 0 2 0 \ o \7To0'- 0- 0 u 0 S 0\ m 2+ o k\2\/ ƒ ƒ 2 -0 -0 ) u o 20 -0 / \ « < aSeee_?� % ± < - C) = E \' 'i \ ƒ V) ƒ u JGo-0 % -0 C: C: C: 022'47_4 E _0 ƒ ƒ ` �0 2 2 0 0 7 I% - - e / u & Erg%/ 2SS0-0 0 o E ° �Eaƒ 0 5 < c o &E: & 0�ƒ 0 o / 7� �/ g�° 2G 7ƒ/ \ § ±/ 2 ƒ f 0 / C: _Q _Q ( \ 0 C) C :(D D_ 0 2 } $ $ \ § 0 a)�/ 2 2 c 0V) \ 0 2 : CL 2 §� \ ƒ6 ) \ ƒ f 0 t0 a/7 � a) G t � o Q) ƒ� ƒ 5 0 ƒ g 0 ƒ_0 Q o / § �ƒ 0 0 _0 ¢ @ƒ �ƒ Q k » Q o -0 o c §-2 / 0 �� \/Ln j D \ \ C14 - a Q U N H w W 2' H N C 0 V N N L L N m L 0 m C L V) N C6 L D LL. U LL- U w d N C7 Z N N 0 U Z 0 F- Q U w c 0 V V) N L C L t V L L u V i L N Q` N LL v M Z O J U A C O N L C L N d O O C L Q N O L t 1/l J N N 7 m LL N N O d' V \ / uj { / F- LU \ \ \ } � 2 � LU � c 0 � 0 � f 0 R � # Az ƒ; ) ± G /7 — £ 5 5 > u » — _ t en c-2 - 2 CO 2 u \ e o \ \•/ -0 ±� 2 -, ±@ƒ T£ &D) 0 c �� � � 0 E E # E 2 ƒ . -C _0 6 -o p S o k+ §ƒ� o° 2 7 \) 0 7 0 e E 0° LU 0 : / 0- / / - ° / \ �� ) } o a 6 > ± 9 f[ .g$ e E•§ C3 ƒ § & c o a ± ± E \ ) * > / 0 % 2 > m — g o u o 0 o•E \{ 3& / 5 � \ \ j E / \ �/ � E %E /cu `0 Q) 70 ƒ / ; o u — 7 �F < G • c '- e 2± 0 0 C3 7 2* e > 7� 2° e o \ 0 * 2 aƒ E/ ƒ\ 9 o e 2 co 7 u co § f o U o% 3 0¥ C3 %ƒ = c / 3� a kf /Q LL § \�f/ S /7\ 9�) ° -2 -0 \ -0 / / ±& ' » 0 2 >= 0 tQ -0 L / ƒ fc / ƒ 0) / / 7 ƒ > % ƒ %± 4._ co F- 2 a 7 7S/ 4 z \ 0 LU / / F- LU LU F- a z < z O Q < / u � U) s - `7 -2 §E o ko /ƒ / /(D C3 y 2 E : �ƒ d oƒ k o§ ƒ c N E) § - § a -0 § + ± ƒ ƒ�� ƒ� b�R \c T± oD&=$ a) C: ®t7�0 32 77(D / \ƒ2o -0 0o 9c §.g - m E a % > G E - \ \ c 7 \ - / (\� \ a ƒ\ a) 0 2/ $ ! t 3 ' u u �ƒ $ ±:± m ƒ am 0 ƒ\/ G§ \ ] { o o # % ) § D e ( ¥ L / c o U 0 a.ƒ o§ ® \ ƒ \ ƒ 2 ) & ` ƒ \ a E \ a) -0 2 CL U } u � t .§ t-o E 7 D k a o o < m +c@ 2 % ± c -0 o C 2 z -E �TS ƒ 0: /2 \ 0 2 D o o 2 -0 0 ® c° c � _ g C3 \ u 0 G ` ƒ c E m k 7 t c E ° ƒ E \ƒ 0 C3 a) ) � 7 � \ \ � � / u /C LU $ 7 Z) ® : E { @ ƒ 2 G F- \ / ƒ k* 3 ƒ° \ E o �. o o \ o G /�\?\ 0 ��ao C: -.5 a ƒƒ § o.- » J © @ / ® u 9 ° § e / ƒ 2 3 t: a m =- u a D> $ / / k ± � 2 E S / E * ± \ \ f ƒ % u / § # j } § CL \ 2 } u Z f _ D 0 N w O CL. d Q T U a V 3 F- LU } a LU C7 N H LU Q W Z Q � Z O N F- D N U U D 0) V ll Z C7 N W 0 w a- u N H W W d' H Ln U U w CL V) C7 Z N N Q U Z J CL A A O n O c W Z W cn n 0 � p s T 3 0 0 Q Q 0 s rn 3 Q_ :. s O M 0 O O (D CD (Q N 3 3 Q < n s Q Q° _ (D c(D(D C s 3 -0 c � Q 3' S CD Q n D ° p Q3 Q 0 rn -0 3 �_ N (Q 3 3 n o 3 rn W Q a CD °- o d o rn o m i• °° c( cD o cD < Q Q CD N 0 ° Q W Q c i O° Q °° rn cQ 3 �' �' s N cQ' (< Q0 Co � Q OC _ = N -� Q Q S CD T (D �. CD W N cQ _0— rn Cp 3 c Q 0 rn cQ• Q 3 0 3 cD s cn m W m Q N < Q° �, _T � 0° 3( O c Q_ Q "' m Q 0 Q cQ O 3 O — Q CD 3 t c 3 (D Q N= Q Q 3• 3 CD O �• 3 O CD CD 3 3 7 0 3 Q_ (�D r Q_ 7 p rn 0 m Q o 0 Z cQ 3 0 cn o CD— Q CD N� = Q° Q° m Q 3 fl Q ^ O n3� O -0 N ° (D ' S W Q N cQ 3 W 0 CD Q 3 5 _, Q< 3 0 0 Q Qm Q m e m _0 3 N 3— 3 CD °- Q Q N N S p CD N s W Q 3 c Q n (Q CD Q CD CD (D ° Q_ _Q 0 r) 77- Q n Q M. D Q CD CD �_. CO E W W n Q" C Q N -< CD s 3 (Q N s Q p 0 O� 0a s Q CD n C Q N Q N Q S CD U- W CD y -O Q 0 O S n Q_ (D CD CD Q — N (<D CUB (n =z O S 3 3 n 3 °— c o Q �W (cn Q 0 CD s 3 O m Q �3, N 3 cD cQ 3 Q, o_ Q N Q W Q� a Q N 3 O O p CD Q < � n �--, _• 3 c N Q Q CD �' p M Cr CD Q m Q m x Cl- 0 N 0 N `� 0 — _ N Q_ Q O p 3 ^ Q� 0 n CD O Q y N s 0 n ZS Q_ Q 3 0 O Q Q CD 3 N En 3 m N CD D• �. N CQ iQ Q3 3> N 3 Q 3Q S 3 3 3 Q CD CD Q Q Q 0 m(D (n > Q o� Q n o. N• c CD Q(D 3 3 O. A Q 3 0 p Q (D Q_ C 3 W(D N 3 Q' (D ■ ■ ■ ■ 3 n 3. 3 Q_ y =. _ y CD (D (Q 3 cn C/1 cQ• Q 3 N . 7 7 - N �. p ^ V, �'1 V M. cD (D �_ > Q n y s �. O� - - (D 3 N O m 3 m o p Q (D C — rn n" C Q 3 0 QN - = N CD Q ^ (D Q c 3 Q° =• O Qn Q O y y m (Q (D Q n c tT � 3 CD O n 3 p D (n v Q Q 3, C 3' 3 3 m p C Q CD 3 o O C 3 n Q .. rn n N Q c o S CD 0 Q CD S Q U O Q n 3 _ (n s cD O 0 3 0 ° QQ-0 c O 0 D N . N 3 (D O N :3 :1- O c Q 0� = Q 4. 3 c N o Q_ 3• < 3 O 3 D no o rn CD (<o N (D cQ y Q Q Q Q co o_ O Q — 3 Q 3 fD Q Q Q Q n 3 O < Q Q Q- O i CD 0 0 CD — CD N p Q Q Q 0 3 c cD p (Q N n Q Q n_0 c c s Q CD 3 3 30 3 3 c Q (D (D Q ^ N Q (Nj _n CD -. C 3 (D -° Q° 0 �. 3 3 (D 3 Q `n 3 3 �G s n n :,- CD W N �' Q CD (D Q << O (D O Q 3 3 iQ 0 0 3 N Q rn Q s ' 3 cQ �. ^ Q m 3 O O Q < (D (D ^ cQ CD Q Q _ 3 O O 6 (�• N S 3 (D (D N Q_ n 3 to Q- (D fD .< — 3 N — 3 Q c 7• n N s CD cD -0 ° y (Q m m M (�° n — (n Q (D c— CD Q 3 N N Q_ Q 3 O -. N 0 y ca 3 3 � n Q O 3 cQ Q CD Q O 3 < = c 0- Q cn CD N n c D O Z D Z D m C) D m 0 z z c� N W ❑ W a Q v N F W W K H N Z Q Z O H Q J D u O C � p u N C: O � � o h � c C o p o ' • ' `_Q j > j C — O C a Q N s 3 L C s 0 o O E o O -0 C `0 O -0 o a o rnm p 4a p 0 ) U N D D 7 C C O)V O) N E p- o C o E• C cn O a) o C p y ti C U) O O �C C)a) N _ C } s a (n s O1 C a) O C p o o O C _n C O - C E N C i V T Q) C u C— _0 0) C � N s ,T N rn Q E N • -0 = � c '- a) > 'n C3 Q) Z) C' E T ° c aC N p 0) c c p 0) 0 o O rn •- O o u C p_ V E u p � o 0 -o o u u aN s o o C p ° - 3 3 c o u V s t 3 s 0 (n 0 D o c au ) C: a) V p p) + C3 Cl- o o c C N y C C V :•- Q . 3 C C •C N o Q- o s0 o O � A -0 a) c C E H - _ a� .-:.0 u rn a h n C a) s ) a -o C -C ti a o a V —E o) u -O N Q) E C C C _- 6 - E p C C C i • O E V N C _0 7 a) O Q- t N _o y `n ° s Q ° a) c u 'n a�C _ ) •N N d +YL d Q - • l s t V N O V c N c 3 E C a) >aaC ) ) .- > 3 H N O — s •N o a a 0 C C o a) .o a °) a) o c s •i aN rn) — _C) 3 rn o y au C a N U � a Lo O s o T } o) a) a) :o- Zn � C o a) H u o o C o E a- s Q C (n N C E C 0 3 O C C C E E V c a) c o � ) h } c p c Q aT ) —'•. c a) C -0 O o-U a o - -- o p C 'C C ao ° O E - o cL 0) V) O H c E o c'o N a) Q a) E i C - 3 o ti o - > (n o t C C O ' C > a) c c u a O c Q o p -o o N -C C C C C N n -O �-0 -C u c Q C > > r- C a) C c c C3 aa) c C > •0 Q O t � a) -C C C3 .� C C C C C -C > 0 N a O E c a u a) V u 6 V E O � a) U X C N o U u — C T C p _ C s > Q o s + V ) p— N C O o o o-0 o v) Cl- E .N (i :5 (n a L N > C u 0 ce V Z) u ti u 3 -p s a 3 N v v z g a U U W CL N c� Z N N O u Z J m D ❑ @ \ LU / \ \ \ 0 F- D � , � f 2 2 0 ,-r- 0 m / ± 2 4 2 � F- / ) I / ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ 3 c 5 77 _0 3 0 o— o / ¥ o E § 7 0 E cc 7 7 4) -E / \ a D 0 / E 0 E§ 0 0 0 2 C- 0 e = o o -C \ ( ƒ § o / % U D G 72/��� ±(+ // ƒ ' 0 § \ i / o § \ / 0 » % _2 0._ �m ® »_a C3 — �df » 2 a — E — 0 C)0 a) ƒ ƒ6§2E'c o-0 7 _2 7«\ 3 0ƒ 0 o 0[\\ O.§ ƒ 0-o u E � a f c 2 u _@£ o 0 2 a t E§ c tƒ t o t o 2 \ f 02 \ —t —C 'c » V) -1- 3: () c o o § 0 0-u E+ c c /ƒ 3$ o w 0 E / % -\ 2 Q 0 C3 \ -a .2 { G \ .2 / � .% ?aa�a@ #altƒ e = S S » a 2 c[ f o — ® \ - E 0 ° e a 2 0 c c 0 0 c 0 ° 0 0 kE -b 222 %t§J ƒaa j \ 0 4 O } E \ $ ( m = 3 ' , * / \ ` i ƒ j ` ] 0) k d } \ \ \ / 3 c 5 77 _0 3 0 o— o / ¥ o E § 7 0 E cc 7 7 4) -E / \ a D 0 / E 0 E§ 0 0 0 2 C- 0 e = o o -C \ ( ƒ § o / % U D G 72/��� ±(+ // ƒ ' 0 § \ i / o § \ / 0 » % _2 0._ �m ® »_a C3 — �df » 2 a — E — 0 C)0 a) ƒ ƒ6§2E'c o-0 7 _2 7«\ 3 0ƒ 0 o 0[\\ O.§ ƒ 0-o u E � a f c 2 u _@£ o 0 2 a t E§ c tƒ t o t o 2 \ f 02 \ —t —C 'c » V) -1- 3: () c o o § 0 0-u E+ c c /ƒ 3$ o w 0 E / % -\ 2 Q 0 C3 \ -a .2 { G \ .2 / � .% ?aa�a@ #altƒ e = S S » a 2 c[ f o — ® \ - E 0 ° e a 2 0 c c 0 0 c 0 ° 0 0 kE -b 222 %t§J ƒaa j \ 0 4 O } / a�) 2 / e@ / e e / �-1 -0 ® o a) - [ n t Q e E m» G< G u E ƒ ƒ $ § % -0 \ o \ % ` 7 5 ° $ A 3 ® ` o 7 ) > 2 G \ % © m 7 \ / �� Z » o % g \V)Q) 2 ƒ0 moZeEƒ �Da pa }7 %7 22&Q E X777 U y .c» .g .y \ a \ \ ƒ ƒ�� ƒ§ ±�)k m ° $ \ /�EGU G ƒ33 Q ± ' a) _ ° & U-) ƒ G $ C a- ± n S @ \ 9 o . / ƒ C) \ ° - S ° 2 = C) 7 �\< - c / ƒ 0 ƒ .2 / / e U o / a .§/ CL S§ 9% S % 7 T? 2 � a E° E 7 = a`° � % 2 o o * i / ` ° > } / ƒ ) ƒ ƒ / \ / o \ ƒ \ ®$ _/ \ 0 / b / / 7[7 �G)& / 0 » o ( } - _ a =o b® } LU G \ \ / E -0 -o c Q / _0 D ° c e T t m@ / / 0 / - 2 Q) _0 a 0 7 o e G / z ƒ§ ƒG7 \ < -o % E._ w m z ° o E 2 ) -0 ƒ 0 ��S e 0 e± 2 7 0 9 \ / e - e = 7 0` E-0 \ eV) 2 2 \ƒ 7 m a _ % o o c G y 2§ L / $ / $ \ E > o c e �o e 0 o -® % _0�ƒ C-1 E §T® \«.c $ vo4% \C & / \ \ \ ƒ ) t * 4 ( E } & o § 3 ¢ / a�) 2 / e@ / e e / �-1 -0 ® o a) - [ n t Q e E m» G< G u E ƒ ƒ $ § % -0 \ o \ % ` 7 5 ° $ A 3 ® ` o 7 ) > 2 G \ % © m 7 \ / �� Z » o % g \V)Q) 2 ƒ0 moZeEƒ �Da pa }7 %7 22&Q E X777 U y .c» .g .y \ a \ \ ƒ ƒ�� ƒ§ ±�)k m ° $ \ /�EGU G ƒ33 Q ± ' a) _ ° & U-) ƒ G $ C a- ± n S @ \ 9 o . / ƒ C) \ ° - S ° 2 = C) 7 �\< - c / ƒ 0 ƒ .2 / / e U o / a .§/ CL S§ 9% S % 7 T? 2 � a E° E 7 = a`° � % 2 o o * i / ` ° > } / ƒ ) ƒ ƒ / \ / o \ ƒ \ } G G \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ j \ j Cl) wG ' Wu G ' \ f e e e c \ w CL a a s u Cl) a a o C14 r a CO co g § C / ± uj uj 0 E $ u _ 0 G } T / \ j / / \ Ln G - ± \ j = m ƒ m \ \ \ / / / / 7 \ L \ \ \ z 2 , ° / o R g e \ § ( e _ _ o ) \ 0 }` u j § k 2 G g (( & \ \ § ) k ` ` \ 7 / b f b t ( CL 0 k/ \ U U J 3$ 5 on 0 0 §2 / a�) 2 / e@ / e e / �-1 -0 ® o a) - [ n t Q e E m» G< G u E ƒ ƒ $ § % -0 \ o \ % ` 7 5 ° $ A 3 ® ` o 7 ) > 2 G \ % © m 7 \ / �� Z » o % g \V)Q) 2 ƒ0 moZeEƒ �Da pa }7 %7 22&Q E X777 U y .c» .g .y \ a \ \ ƒ ƒ�� ƒ§ ±�)k m ° $ \ /�EGU G ƒ33 Q ± ' a) _ ° & U-) ƒ G $ C a- ± n S @ \ 9 o . / ƒ C) \ ° - S ° 2 = C) 7 �\< - c / ƒ 0 ƒ .2 / / e U o / a .§/ CL S§ 9% S % 7 T? 2 � a E° E 7 = a`° � % 2 o o * i / ` ° > } / ƒ ) ƒ ƒ / \ / o \ ƒ \ � \ LU / V) Lu \ \ / \ \ , � f � / 0 CL � _ E E � A 4 2 � � f @ a CL 2 Ll � � � ) e a $ a a§ 2 2# 2 5 \ / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / \ \ \ \ I k I > { a e e [ % § k o G I g e% 2 I § g _ 2 / / } \ c z ƒ k } \ f 4) $ \ k \ 2 " u ; & ® $ O $ m g j 2 — ƒ 0 ; t § 0/ f o 2 I U$ z m u k= LU ca— . 3 —- U k e�§2 : 0) �) \ ) 2 § 02 u. \3$eu 4) ƒ ƒ .- \2§ƒ 7 / § k / : § ) § \ \ ƒ /$ �4 �c a ƒ * ° °\ (n 0 > e /�0 ± /• \ a m u— 2 0 0 - -Q a) $ ® ° e o E / o E E » ° 7 a S 2 _0 2 a § r z \ \ § u } z O N a Q U LU N af F- 12 Z a z O F- a J U af A N U1 c N U1 N a a 3 O a O N N 00 N N N -,a C0C � 3 3 3 00 3 00C C0C L L JO J J L O < G N O O c E > 0 6 a c E 2 a E c N m m > c O 6 A 7 C E O U1 Q a c c O E N n. u a a c C3 3 3 N a c o a O E � :E Q N > m a a a a m 2 v v a a a a 2 a 2 a a O 6 6 6 6 O O O O O 6 6 6 O N N N N N N d N N N N N N N N N 00 3 3 3 0C 0C 3 3 0C 3 0CC 0CC0C 0CC 3 0 3 0CC 0CC 0CC 3 3 3 0CC 0CC 3 0c O x N -O O O c p 6 O N N N O E p 0 O S V C 3 v a c v — O s a° `� p t °° (� m a z' U m c `o 0 0 co 0 C3 E N O s C U Q p _> O •- CD >. = a N O O T O i N a3i 0 O -0 6� 6 a 6 Cap ��IaI��� O 0 Co cm O V J J J Q = LL m Z , W U C U U J U N L V (n N L J tn v v z g a U _m U CL W N c� Z O w U Z m V) s .\ LL- (D c- C) / (D m Q � a � . �- s aa= C3 -C - »ƒ ° o o (D e ƒ ® \ k c r C) �§» _oƒ72e 2 %3ƒz » ' ® �k`k±a \C ( E �_ 2 s � « e g © a o G ®; J f 0 Z .� � .C: r o c �•- © 2 o± e o e o /L; \k\� �§T§/ =f\\ \ /a. ;o3[7 cn 0 0 o A m o � 'ƒ } ® \ / � / / \ ® a C3 § ° § G � f / \ _ _ = o & � \E o $ ® 2 Q+E= % Q \ ®4\3 f % cE / \ § \ E o e /.0 ƒ ®k�� %� / §t % % (n 0) 20± g @ S \= G_ ® & ± ƒG ' � Q) 2 ® \ E a ƒ ¥ 2 2 $ k \ ƒ z f & £ o G- o 0- � e e `@ e G° ° , " o ' f }�f± y7« /kE\� /- a S§ 2 R/ a \ E a %ƒ d j j \ / 7 - ��� ■ ■ | . �.� . �- s aa= C3 -C - »ƒ ° o o (D e ƒ ® \ k c r C) �§» _oƒ72e 2 %3ƒz » ' ® �k`k±a \C ( E �_ 2 s � « e g © a o G ®; J f 0 Z .� � .C: r o c �•- © 2 o± e o e o /L; \k\� �§T§/ =f\\ \ /a. ;o3[7 cn 0 0 o A m o � 'ƒ } ® \ / � / / \ ® a C3 § ° § G � f / \ _ _ = o & � \E o $ ® 2 Q+E= % Q \ ®4\3 f % cE / \ § \ E o e /.0 ƒ ®k�� %� / §t % % (n 0) 20± g @ S \= G_ ® & ± ƒG ' � Q) 2 ® \ E a ƒ ¥ 2 2 $ k \ ƒ z f & £ o G- o 0- � e e `@ e G° ° , " o ' f }�f± y7« /kE\� /- a S§ 2 R/ a \ E a %ƒ d j j \ / 7 - z \ 0 LU / \ LU e � _ z < z O F- u w u 2 : � � Lr) Lri -4 § c 0 -0 o 3 \ \ 2 o 2 ƒf$�u % *�b777 ± E F 0 , •a / ± ( 0 / ¥ 7 » - $ 2 C: • ua o9 \ CL ) 2&y ƒ / / ƒ /\o o _ m — \ # \ms / ƒ 3 \ %e/. a ®o c =•§ Q) -0 o c ƒ a) C3 — � 0-0 S ± § is .0 o_0 2 0-ƒ o o ® E / / / � } \»+& % a) CY) I o — o 0 7 ƒ E e 472§ ƒ %a t ch a) o G « •- � .- > X S / $ G / (n — � � f � u / § ƒu03± 4) J § § -0 % 0 U) ��£3E2b ±2«o2ƒt 227.9.£ o @ �7 ) o > -0 f ƒ 5 c 0 a \ 7 V/ƒ a D G 0. •-0 c 2 e 0 U) o o C 7 e u/0± / ` \ _0 u & o •- o a - e u =c�r- $ u � ƒ z 0 u 0 2 / r ƒ ®•9§3E0 c :/ 2: t o t 70E E7\ J ® E c g > £ \ y 0 0 o o-0 ao k 0 u // 7t m± o E -0 k ° — D 0) 5§ G 0o = a e ± � >0 0 / ƒ / /� \-0 % / 2 0 oC3 ±2 U E (D @ ._ Q) .2 : / -C g0)0 �2( �fo \ > F \ 0 E / 0 _0 / ƒ � / ƒ % k ƒ 7 § ƒ / / \ m �ƒ } } / § \ I ) u Z f _ J W V LU N U m D fi- r) z QLLJ af v D Q z ca W V D W LL. Im Vf V a- W Z V Lawn J m IL U N N z � L g U C V L � W d C C7 Z u i V O �_ O � v `~ z C U � 3 � Q � � o 0 � 3 u � � � v s � � V � Q S � C N U_ LU 1 N u m Z) CL 0 Z LU Q u H Q af Z a ° m Q a� N V L 0 N N C O E 0 C O N D L( 3 _C1 L L. D rwo„ w ,SKt�rpu� _ o Z N � f . a O 2 a $ a m tod'rtd va , S a� sir � s � j T a a �s � s z � aFF s t ] 12 Z3 N -O ti 3 3 t3 a C Q•• a� E c t .� s N U c N a L Q ° N p •� N C C j �_ u O C N T C3 Z p o S ° yr L N d O S a p —O N O C3 7 _Q C N a� N U h N o) N N O m E L c 4 U U N N C C C3 >. U p >. -0 L � C a t N U O N C i3 O N �' N .O L N ti C3 C '_ t U -2 83 _O v7 N j CO r 3 a •� N O Q N O c .N -0 C a) ZS O C} N T F- Ln L N N vl C _� �[ E C u O _ _U C j, ' '.O CA + N N L N p > C— C L N > > V u • V t3 > 0 2� to p .� H C C _ N O CS -O �> U 3 O7 C i s sp �_ H_ N N N a° u C3 c af U~ N LL C3 3 .x -� ° a o o Q c o = C3 � a� c _° Cn >� c N 0 L a a3 O CT) j Q 3 = N U � O O a 3 O N L 'E E axi o 2 N t u a3 C N C E 3 c E o •C O U C C N �, ° o N o o N >— a > ° �.- t N x ZS N O U in a a L 0) :- c ti N O c N N N N U C3 p E c 0 p L (Dn L N O X c3 u y C • p Op O V O •� H V U C -Q N p 3 V V _ C N C L �- V E > o m a (N a a N ° Ln -2 3 a� > O O ° N O a to c 3 C O LL. a O p _a > C O C3 � -a O C N o E E a a E N L 1 C3 O Q O O " C3 O O u d O h O Co3 a � 2 3 T C O O 0 u v 0 U N E a3 ° �° o C° 'O u -C d a N c N ° a N 0 V L E E C _ C Ln N U N a _ V c O N t a3 a —° s � -a > a3 0 T s a ^ s .N i j O o_ E � N _ 7 .0 F— a o O -C H .0 C in E N E Sri _N _ P N C3 O Q O is O OR Z m Z) O H u r C V L N 0 O 0 u 0 a 0 E u_a Q C a° N _a c c a V) a 0 U •> 0 L 0) °u -0 O m u a O 0 0 0 a) C -0 c N c '0 0 3 N N Q° 3 0 c r a 3 0 s i V)i c 0 3 s i N W 0 p C 0 i N Uf U O E O i O a 0 a 0 N .- c a L m c O 0 O t E 0" 0 a- 2 j U 0 N O ° Q0 a) m oD U -a Q) Q Q �- 0af c } 0 a0 X L 3 > V) O cn a) o a a w 0 o L E L o 0 LO E N c 4) 0 0 0 5 0 a) 0 L O 0 T C C N ON Qn) W 3 0Q�: 0° 0 Q 0 a O r 7 N S 0 �n N a> U U 3 1— c c 0 C3 - .- U N N a Q- -0 Q 0 Q C c 0 a N N O O D s 0 p E 0 0� C i. 0 U Q a a o 0 3 -u a o o Q U p C3 O O t E O a) a � N a a a 3 c 0 DL N i 0° N L N 0 0 S O � C u 0 s a p a 0 a D 0-1- 0 a>i 3 a c m u -° u 0 rn c 0 0 0 c -0 d O X> Q C .0 N 'j Q S O S 3 •X 0 O E O s •C O N D :'a aU 3 U >~ E 0 a° O a°j p a E Q E T a a y p a v>), L C cn N° N 0° 0 N > ° 3 N D- u L o 3 E a a) V) 0 D V) :5 0 E 02 p 0 Ln ` a 3° °- ti -0 0 o- c o v) m -0 a: 0-a o C a 0 0 �o 3 y -a 0 -C 0 O °- a) D .'� h a cn a) a `) Vi a° .- 0) o f 0 O C 0 a s O N ` Q 0 V C ° a 0 _ 0 C 3 tn C � O 0) 0 0 S 0 a .6 s U D u F- .0 3 E u) 0 O a� •� ¢ p •C N 0 u N y a h O U 0 c U O Q 3 rn Q) -•E 0 o a .E 0 a1 .0 a 0_ a M cn C 0 C- c� a E X 0 C 0 N a 0 C .x 0 U L N 0 0 cn a 0 (n c 0 N c a U_ a •� EO L .- T N a L OL O O C L N Q C T a) cn N a 0_ U D 0 0-0 fn C -0 - C) S N N a V 0 W (� -0a 0 0 O y s t C a �, 0) 0 C- 0) C •� V )� C L O 0 C C 0 _Y L c .- a) 0 0 0) a, _ cn 0 a) 3 a �, 0 0 a L 0 L 0 0 °) ° 0> ° 'a 3 0 0 L° 0 a U 0 3 0 -0 > U 0 .0 0) 0- } _° 0 0 H O� N C N y 3 0 c° Q C= u a 0 c ° s CO a) L C a` L U =O a C- ° �' N N 0 O U N N C > 3 y C °) E ID a3) 0 a3) � Q m a E a a c 3 a -0 ° E c s cn c 0 3 O L a o-0 - c °• � �, a 0 0 E 0 a Q O 0^ 0 3 v- 0 L a) a C t a) N L U N N ti a) V C ° ¢ 0 E° a s �i o 3> p c a 0 > c 0 3 0 3 0 0 °) C N 0 0 0 0 V C 'in C U C E t L .in N O E 0 0 .s- O 0 a o a o o a` p -a a c a� O vim) s D 3 a 3 a) p U a rn o N o p N 0 3 c N Q)� 0 3 p U Q 0 0_ u= l0J 'O 0 a) N +- p � I� .0 N O '_ > ` a' � Z) o- N O 0 u I� Q C > O s n 0) V u t� ° 0 N p a) Q c - 0 c O s Q a) u a 0 0 0 .3 'N c a � C c a) 0 r O p 0 3 0 u c C- • X i Q •- o -0 a p C N C c� N .0 c 3 `a U C 0 O p O cn ti i 0 o U 0 O U -a 0 Z, E a o c o U Q U a E 0 0 a_ E N 0 o u o a C) V) o 0 L N O L 0 >, E '� _ 0- C 0 N c a 0 0 0 0 0 yr 0 0 .3 0 0 3 a)-- ° E? o N O N ° 0 0° y- a�i L °- O U 3 0 0- E E o 3 .c o O� N E 'c ° = L .0 0 c 0 Ln- u° N a c N E a s 3 Vl N 0 3 v) a -a O O a � c 3(n 0 a) c n 0 a C O aa) a) 0 r" •° N ° u° s(n E �, a �, c N 0 E E p U ° Q- a L 0 c� a c� •� U a) rn Q -Q � a .� �_ N y ° 0 0� -0-0 0 ° a°) E o ° a3i a�i U a 3 'F .N a) 0 -a Q o N �' c(n m o o =_ 0 3 Q.} 0 0 C 0 to i .. V 0) , a X N u° 0 V) N •N 0- a L a 0 0 U L C 0 w N 0 N to _ 0 M- _T c N C O i a 0 0 0 N a 0 a 0_ C 0 U 0 >' V — H 0 _a b O C p a O `� C ° D U' c aa) t 0 0 cn 0 3 c a) C a) C 3 c o_ d 3: a: v a Q o O 3 •- U' u F s .0 p a 0 6 C- O_ ° V a) Q 0 U ° U N 0 0 N M 3 > a) c i- E c L c 0 N 0 0 'o N 0 0 aui > 0 > •� s >> 0 a) Q i 0 C O p 0) p N n C s j N 0 0 i L O 0} C O N H- a V cn a-0 (n to 0 a. . U 'c U C) a Q 0 V) N (n Q O_ (n cn -o M Ln z CL U LL U w V) z V) N O w U z m O c O : O T w CO U � `O l(j C O 0 0 O0 a N° C > c- aai - o a '1- s a).� 0 -0 Q a a N L � t .E a aw O u 0 � 0 0 T 0) 0 O N o m s " c 0 o C u, � a o u a) . ° c o ai I �� 0 c ,� O d C p-6 N'C a 0-0 N-0 -0N 0 0 o E 0 E a= m a s 3 z Q ce 00 0-0 0 _� 0 3v) s -p 0 0 LU N c ° 0�0. N O 0 QUf p U a 0 c -a 0 L 3 c 0 a F- O U _> E p a— v v> N ° O w � Z) m Q Ile N 3 -0 c p- 0 a u 0 O U L i V) LL.j u 93e LLJ V) u z LU F- u V) O O 0 U N LL f ------ — __— __— j_ - - - - -. t Qu ICUAV -- -------- $; I", 13 SS.9 IS I eL is I — ss.6 S5.9 44, ssa IS 13 4 Is ssxI -mj -- - - - - -- — — — — 71--� --low -- - — — — -- 'S? ;m /,M)d aS-'OH uc) iI I PAiU ' 1—ILU 7= D 0 0 LL LO M, N U LU N U cn 0 LU Z U D t- N LL- Q Z V 0 a 0 a a (D v 0 U M N 2) LL. I I - - -- 'Plj Ploulle - 4 31 I ml I � r it I I) i I 1e t �raoz AA 5 x3 m .z I x� l r j. AA.9ua I 9, 3 I I �1 v 1 n+a iS 3 - - --- Ij i T i r- _ 1 1 IS (] - _ -}---1 AMM —H U-1 Nu - I _ 15 J _._. I. - t_ IS b E pnM3 smuewad i -,n lla9dWPD 2 •m G43 i iIxa/ Al ualae�5 � , I �i Z CL U U d N z V) 0 2 U Z m 0 w _U LU N U m CL cl z LU U z m a� c -a C ° 0 0 V, -a O a ° c a� c C3 C O N af a a) _S V .c a) N E L i -a C O .0 o Q c -a N `� a� O p 'N O p p O T c O c > C O a E O a L H O c c in 3 C C L T a a O a) C a a) U c Q -0 S_ N 'X E c � N N O a 0° N c m V X N S C N -O a t = C a) Q Sl.) 0 N C r N a) N o c -0 o o O - ..0 `T I" O L a) a) + O ,L ° c a .O O L S Z .- ,- N N a) O U N U c L a> 3 3 p -a N O O 'j C N c N 0 0 'V C� wc° a� cL C O a a, c N a 3 N c U o Q O N C `N O N; Q y O Q Q L •x m v� U- N N a c L a Q N C D a) in C C� N E u O a w c Q E •0 u> �' O OU 30 .c O E -o N o E v Q c -0 N N p s L C O N ,,� L U U U C a `� .X N a L T a) U 'o c 3 °' -a 3 0 a) a a) a) ° o E a c a a s -_ a� I O E E i° c O U c C u a�� O L E O L s a u u O L p O O O N D -O O' 3 N O a) a E 0 n a fl 3 ;r N a p — -a s N Q } u a O c u p 'X S O .0 r E N U a C C N U Q .0 �+ N •a 0 E a C ow Co O E� 5 Ln c� N °per �o _ o Q `c D U E� _0 a T s O, t w p -d C C u C +S- N a T� C N 3 t ° E /'X E° N Q N a� t _ lJ E —TO 3 E a Q °� u o '� N E t a= a a C a c aEi r auQ cs c (U. 3 c °� a a� T 0 u� _rn N a. x U a c 3 0 ', s 0 3 E a- a) - E E O = -o N a h a ° a u T O c p ° C: ° o f N -° a °� o a� 'D a U -' w E c a 0> c 3 a p c E E n o N p N c o ._ p m N a c � T o °' Q Q� Q .N ° E o a o -- a� >. � o �' c Z o ,o c V ins _0 O a o ;? c w- N s -a a L a) N a) a C N C a m a O w N p N Q p U )} a 3 N rn° D o E a Q a m a� ° L 4) a C3 ° U) a� u� c p o c E a ,_n o� 0— p — a c c s p _ 0� V a Q T a a N O C C •v •� Q o O N U c N u c p T O O w O E L L L M a �o s c m a U a� a ° o U rn-o a Q L U a� a s a E r O p u O -a L s a O� a) O T c= a) `c u Mam c 0) a m-0 a °c � E N o n E c °v°i N 3.4 0� a3is a E o° o c L -C E o 0 o Q � o N EO � a a s o ° o 0 - Q X 0 V � 3 � n� m� uQ�r V) aU u O au._ o na a N o aL Q .E - z m D 0 U- 0 U 10 N } a a 7 LO -,a 3 a C 0 � �`.0 a) o `� 0 in -C Q = a� 3 ° a •a M -0 aui � .� a Q-0 E O O C `� C O �- 2 N N 0 a a E D N N N _ U a) O Qw o p L 'U U `� N V) C L >- V) � C -t N O O a) > O V S S o L 0 a N U �-f- h C C3 Q ° a c N C N— C c a- a 0 U Q o a� s u-0 a a 3 o a� L 3 > N G o a 3 'a 0 -a 0 O N — T O E v L a� o a Q a) Qp w 0 N E O a C E v o N p 'a C � a� a p d C: N 0 u _ c .- 3° V o _ 3 N c U •= vi += N N a 'p •c -o V L a) > > > a N O a T a) M 3 E O 0 C a N a) p V - -O N U 0- O N •c u� Q� s E c o c E af c° -0 `� U —�s T 3 E` 0 a a aui y 3 v^j 2 0 .CD o o c C: rn a o a° c N 3 3 a N E C' L -o a Co a N -6 X a 3 ?° N a- -0 a) a) N u •� u° .c °� C3 -0 cs� -��0 3 o 0 O = =� =� N } N T 3 N— a L _TLS o u i O u O L i N .L a N p a L- a E -0° U o D a) Q °' a N u = p >- ° a� 0 0 0 0 aEi N of C E> 0 _3 •- C V N a) 3 C a °+ C > a C ° -° � U u O C U •- C a S O a a) V •� .O O N 3 N U- N a -a to a c C N N N N O L= U a -a N t Q C Q E U 3 i Qi a o C L c N a 00 a -6 c 0 -O o .0 a 0 0 N — 3 s N a) T a o 4- > �� E c° o° N c Q c N N O E o .6 a c .a' 4) o U E a) p (n '� c D aui o- a E� o 0 v ` •` .N c aai ° L Q _O 0 L ° ° N a a .� V) o (D u a a a c aa) a _' o .� a' s E E -a C � 3 0 c c 3 a� a u a O L ,_ a 'u E m a v a N a a a° p U U c a ° u a C _ T a) r u aai N O N •C 3 L --r- a) .0 a V Q- u L N '} N a) a) a a) N M u O V _U N N N s N '� a U C a 3 .� - Q� 3 O °� s 0 D a s °� N Ln s o a Q O s a u } c0 CO F- z m D 0 U- 0 U 10 N M, V) u LU N u m CL !] LUZ a H u F- V) LL- a Z E a� 3 V D Q. a) V C O u a) L D LL r- •— •-- ..�......�...�.. —..pa pw�v _ 1 i i rn211i �� t IS] a Y t 3 Ma.0 . 1 �1 .Maz i I 1 S Q 1 N,a.z -is Maa is J � nna.z i Ma.t I MZLFa Zt S 17 N ` � = OW12 I ID v �a as .(Yay$noQ O T l�MM avOH uO q pryg s.mLwwaU I I 1 1 1 I I 'ul lla9d -L j i m E� 0 I I 1 AC] y.. I Ln z CL U LL u w V) V) N O u Z m ' S j `D C5.67 n r�1 j us.9 E mI 2 a s LU _U uj U m D 0 Z Q w H u D vi Q Z OL i asu.n 4 9E o 4 -- 1 zS 3 I~ -I� 1 1 1 —1 41S O j s - -a , AMNd as)OH uO-Jl Q5.9E - OO O5. >L ry ,rte, x Y, X = Tl V) wlio o3�vao�3a _ "�-. t: i til �- a i e � F21 �ua4Snoo F—:—NO sr»ewaa f m4 ° u 11140-1 O 1� I I �y 1 =_ �0 wp—, Z m D O r U Ln Q) 6 u c N E u Q O N O >, c0 O j 6 � :� E 6 6) •.ti 3� T _ V� N� N c aui .E a) U o c o N 6 a) D� 0 C j Q N O 'n o O c c Z o 3 N= '6 vi C N s o -6 o c 6 a) N -0 aNi 3 c c— E O N 6 u E :> N E 6 Q o 6 p-a p u O Q I c a) a) N a0 E 6 0)—� -6 Q� Q O �� �'� o E 3° Q v) a? 0 3 o o E Zn C 6 Q) ai o 0 N p o 6 H Q CO N o Q V -O 6 6) E— C > a) > s ch a) Q c •- s c _ .c a) o 0) a) a) .3 U 6 cn o c o 3 u .Q 'o N o c' 6 a) c p 6 o E o O c c •� aNi D Q 6 n- c E a) 6 0 6- u O -6 t C Q- -6 0 0 u 0 a) � E O cn .0 � o 0 0- Q a) O O Q -p > a) _ V O 3 -p N -p Q C a) V a) h D C •] O � a) -O C) U 6 Q-p .c 0 6 0 6 0 -,..t V Z N S V > 0 6 O Q O a p c O O c a) N s _ u o a) o p co L E c O 0 C a) n o 0 c `� -6 O 6 u O p) p a c c 3 N 3 Q 'p - 0 a) o c o, 0 3 0 0 °) •C '� a u rn a 4) E v) O 6 Q — N N E 6 � O -6 L 6" N 0-0 0 V Q v/ C C E >. O .t0- C 3 C L —_ V N L a) y— `�" -6 O Q 'C o D OV •c N �•- O a) -p C -2-0 Z) 3 i Z E N a) j y ' 3 0 o 'C V) > �i -p U cn —_ E O °L�) .N E Q c c-6 6 3 p a6i a) c_ 0.o o-0 3 0 3 c Q c p 0 Q N a) L L 0 _p 0 - c 0 C o f .O ° u O u E 6 E >' o° '_" a p o c c o f E > O o c E co E' N m N 0 0-0 a .n Qs — o 0 0 0 A °) a s ate ° Q) c �s'o > E 6 0-a o Q a'2 � Q) a) _ _ C'1 _rn > p 6 c 0 6 p 6 a) o a) t 3 p N ~ a) -0 a) -p 3 N Q 'O -p Q° ' E O O u -p `� c 6 E o 6° o o E L 'E 0 z -6 N Q c0 Q N cp a) O 4) 1)i o N O o C- 2 c p c0 0 O Q 'p }O Q V C O _p ' n o Q vi a) d C cn 0 vi 'U 6) N .0 Q) t" u -c E N C o u 6 0 0 6 V �[ 0(n -6 = Lp .L Q V -6 Q V p L — u CF- 6 Q. Q> V u C Q 6 C U C p) c o 0 w O w � OQ OO O D c V)) u O a Q c a) � N 0 E ui > O E o s C D O L N O O E N p) CO - 0 O N N 3 .3 � N 6 6 •U c L 6 .C3 Q 3 Z o 0 a� a Q -o a 'c –0 0 u a- 0 6 Q Q N W 6 a) of — E,a) 0 7t: 0) N v) C –0 Q) C N N N O C — U �n O N u O u U-0 x E O c a 6 Q Q Z c _ L > u o`er O 3 N 0 a) Q 6 N C N �! C p >. 3 -6 a) 6 E L C Lu w 6 E > N a) O N o p c Q N O c V Q) O O a) O N p) _N m O Q E 0 6 C N> O a) O 0 N o N N E Q.0 d Q p N a) L cn �u N C a) a) E ,0 6 �� N (� 6-Z Q D O N L V > C T a) _O O C t E��� °' u y L) V N Z O p E -p 0 -Q OQ pL 0 N V 6 _N E 6 -6 w a) O c Q— c u C3 Q) a)a) o o N -c t _o -6 E c0 a 6 — a) 06 T a) .c O F- 01 6 E .0 C S _Q = N D o }O 3cQU -o -p ` N o a) c o L c E a) E y H U m -0 O p E a) C -p o a) _ � .N -0 c N `t �_ 3 o) -o H 3 6 S V C a) C O N 6 E-E V N N C C O V N of O N O 0) p -p Q .� Q O D Q N a) V s O u v c w D Q _O N � N N 0 = a) Z o a) c Q) Qs 6- 0-p O O 3 �— C ,N E u E N 0 V 6 C p a) _o O p) N -6 •C N `) E 6 w •E _ u O Q a) -6 a) C a) 6 `� a) O 3 a Q E N 3 E Q) 6 u c N E u Q O N O >, c0 O j 6 � :� E 6 6) •.ti 3� T _ V� N� N c aui .E a) U o c o N 6 a) D� 0 C j Q N O 'n o O c c Z o 3 N= '6 vi C N s o -6 o c 6 a) N -0 aNi 3 c c— E O N 6 u E :> N E 6 Q o 6 p-a p u O Q I c a) a) N a0 E 6 0)—� -6 Q� Q O �� �'� o E 3° Q v) a? 0 3 o o E Zn C 6 Q) ai o 0 N p o 6 H Q CO N o Q V -O 6 6) E— C > a) > s ch a) Q c •- s c _ .c a) o 0) a) a) .3 U 6 cn o c o 3 u .Q 'o N o c' 6 a) c p 6 o E o O c c •� aNi D Q 6 n- c E a) 6 0 6- u O -6 t C Q- -6 0 0 u 0 a) � E O cn .0 � o 0 0- Q a) O O Q -p > a) _ V O 3 -p N -p Q C a) V a) h D C •] O � a) -O C) U 6 Q-p .c 0 6 0 6 0 -,..t V Z N S V > 0 6 O Q O a p c O O c a) N s _ u o a) o p co L E c O 0 C a) n o 0 c `� -6 O 6 u O p) p a c c 3 N 3 Q 'p - 0 a) o c o, 0 3 0 0 °) •C '� a u rn a 4) E v) O 6 Q — N N E 6 � O -6 L 6" N 0-0 0 V Q v/ C C E >. O .t0- C 3 C L —_ V N L a) y— `�" -6 O Q 'C o D OV •c N �•- O a) -p C -2-0 Z) 3 i Z E N a) j y ' 3 0 o 'C V) > �i -p U cn —_ E O °L�) .N E Q c c-6 6 3 p a6i a) c_ 0.o o-0 3 0 3 c Q c p 0 Q N a) L L 0 _p 0 - c 0 C o f .O ° u O u E 6 E >' o° '_" a p o c c o f E > O o c E co E' N m N 0 0-0 a .n Qs — o 0 0 0 A °) a s ate ° Q) c �s'o > E 6 0-a o Q a'2 � Q) a) _ _ C'1 _rn > p 6 c 0 6 p 6 a) o a) t 3 p N ~ a) -0 a) -p 3 N Q 'O -p Q° ' E O O u -p `� c 6 E o 6° o o E L 'E 0 z -6 N Q c0 Q N cp a) O 4) 1)i o N O o C- 2 c p c0 0 O Q 'p }O Q V C O _p ' n o Q vi a) d C cn 0 vi 'U 6) N .0 Q) t" u -c E N C o u 6 0 0 6 V �[ 0(n -6 = Lp .L Q V -6 Q V p L — u CF- 6 Q. Q> V u C Q 6 C U C p) c o 0 w O w � OQ OO O D c V)) u O a Q c a) � N 0 E ui > O E o s C D O L N O O E N p) CO - 0 O N N 3 .3 � N 6 6 •U c L 6 .C3 Q 3 Z o 0 a� a Q -o a 'c –0 0 u a- 0 6 Q Q N W 6 a) of 0 7t: –0 Q) C N N a) X a) 0 V Z N u O u U-0 x E O c a 6 Q Q Z CL o`er O _O E N N U �! C p >. 3 -6 a) N 6 y 0 a) LL - > N a) u O s O W U N c V Q) O O a) O V .� > t >. N O O> N N CD E 0 6 C N> O a) O N a) a) 6) a) —_ C C C Z Q p N a) L cn �u N C �— H� a) 0 3 V) N �� N (� 6-Z Q D O u .X C wx t E��� °' u y L } E �(D E -p 0 -Q OQ pL 0 p' N N o N t a_ O c Q— c u C3 Q) a)a) o o N -c w L u >, 3 =p U .E o 06 T a) .c O F- 01 6 E Q- s }O 3cQU -o -p ` N o a) Q N a) > o O O p E a) C -p o V y vi o} 0 L _L O •Q p Q E 'y p 7 p V S V C a) C O N 6 E-E V E C L N Q Q O a) C of 6) t= Co _ L c vU'3 a o-0 6,3 •c O L o U a) p,N C1 �> +• U C i N— C a) 6 a) c a) o a) - •C N _ u C a p 3 p t u E N 6 c N `n -p C -p O O -6 E OQ U w C o O N O o V N L -6 -0 N V L 6 6 N O u N o U c C 6 _6 t -6 a) o a) 0 a) 0)l- rn 2 p N a) Q a) N j Q L C _o C cn O u y v Q r T V a) C O N C p U to 3 N-0 v >> 6 E c LA O c t E ax) O a-0 aa)) a LO a6. C � -a E Q a Q) 6 u c N E u Q O N O >, c0 O j 6 � :� E 6 6) •.ti 3� T _ V� N� N c aui .E a) U o c o N 6 a) D� 0 C j Q N O 'n o O c c Z o 3 N= '6 vi C N s o -6 o c 6 a) N -0 aNi 3 c c— E O N 6 u E :> N E 6 Q o 6 p-a p u O Q I c a) a) N a0 E 6 0)—� -6 Q� Q O �� �'� o E 3° Q v) a? 0 3 o o E Zn C 6 Q) ai o 0 N p o 6 H Q CO N o Q V -O 6 6) E— C > a) > s ch a) Q c •- s c _ .c a) o 0) a) a) .3 U 6 cn o c o 3 u .Q 'o N o c' 6 a) c p 6 o E o O c c •� aNi D Q 6 n- c E a) 6 0 6- u O -6 t C Q- -6 0 0 u 0 a) � E O cn .0 � o 0 0- Q a) O O Q -p > a) _ V O 3 -p N -p Q C a) V a) h D C •] O � a) -O C) U 6 Q-p .c 0 6 0 6 0 -,..t V Z N S V > 0 6 O Q O a p c O O c a) N s _ u o a) o p co L E c O 0 C a) n o 0 c `� -6 O 6 u O p) p a c c 3 N 3 Q 'p - 0 a) o c o, 0 3 0 0 °) •C '� a u rn a 4) E v) O 6 Q — N N E 6 � O -6 L 6" N 0-0 0 V Q v/ C C E >. O .t0- C 3 C L —_ V N L a) y— `�" -6 O Q 'C o D OV •c N �•- O a) -p C -2-0 Z) 3 i Z E N a) j y ' 3 0 o 'C V) > �i -p U cn —_ E O °L�) .N E Q c c-6 6 3 p a6i a) c_ 0.o o-0 3 0 3 c Q c p 0 Q N a) L L 0 _p 0 - c 0 C o f .O ° u O u E 6 E >' o° '_" a p o c c o f E > O o c E co E' N m N 0 0-0 a .n Qs — o 0 0 0 A °) a s ate ° Q) c �s'o > E 6 0-a o Q a'2 � Q) a) _ _ C'1 _rn > p 6 c 0 6 p 6 a) o a) t 3 p N ~ a) -0 a) -p 3 N Q 'O -p Q° ' E O O u -p `� c 6 E o 6° o o E L 'E 0 z -6 N Q c0 Q N cp a) O 4) 1)i o N O o C- 2 c p c0 0 O Q 'p }O Q V C O _p ' n o Q vi a) d C cn 0 vi 'U 6) N .0 Q) t" u -c E N C o u 6 0 0 6 V �[ 0(n -6 = Lp .L Q V -6 Q V p L — u CF- 6 Q. Q> V u C Q 6 C U C p) c o 0 w O w � OQ OO O D c V)) u O a Q c a) � N 0 E ui > O E o s C D O L N O O E N p) CO - 0 O N N 3 .3 � N 6 6 •U c L 6 .C3 Q 3 Z o 0 a� a Q -o a 'c –0 0 u a- 0 6 Q Q N W 6 V) LU V_ LU Ln V m D CL cl z Q w D F- V D F- H V) z w V 7 N N C N u a O C C C Q� c c N } O u C c c a C u p c p Q .� C •� a r C Q a) O O a N E N 0) u N a O c U U U C Q C Q a a� 0 C 2-o -a Q Q Z c °' 0 r a s N-0 p� N N a a E Q� c a c 3 a 3 O c a s 0 o� a Q- ` O Q D Q- a T U cn 7 3 c ,Z)„ o O -p += 0 Q a Q 00 ° a N} U u p C C i C V— u •C N Q •U C N O E u cn U a c h c LO U C N O `� 3 N i T a a- = >> E 'Q �- vE i C 7 -O s a 0) s (n Q a Qa � _ Q Q C U c m a O S a N + O E •- s Q O O � O > E U Q N c U > — O O >' d N Q C7 > N c a c Q U L Q O O o ; S in N c c a �Q ' 'V 'N C > N O O N Q V Q a d N > c > •+Q C Q U � Q p O� a 0 N V j T O Q Q O E X N a N Q •C U Q .0 U t 0 O Q a c N N CI- s O N Ln U u p O c Q Q L� O U � Q O O a Q U Q o a N p � -C •- s N Q N Q S a N Q a p a a _ a M O o ~ •� C S a) N N Q N Q c C) Q p Q N O O O u O 0 c Q s a) C > ' 0) Q a 'o O V O E N u Ol O Q O a -P p E - C O -o C E n 0 0 NO E E -O Q o 00 � _ : N N 0 C > Q O O Q O O aC ) Q Q N D Q c a Q N c Q N Q Q ,C p c cn E C } ► c 0 _d Q i Q > i s O Q a v O N a v Q Ln a ' O O V p — N c O N ' > V a - N a7 VI M c Q z Esc c 'n u 0S N a E c a U a _ E _T E u> > c cnZ � E V O U Q o Q Q c o Q- a- s N E p o a -O E - N -p Q O o v u O O Q -C _ .O c a O s � O Q N 0 O c . V) V) V) u o a D _ a) U u . a 0 0 a O N- u O Q Q C o N O U E E u N 5" s N O 00 Q C U LL Q Q > S t D` U S N Q z m D 0 LL- O V 0 LA a V C Q a a Q a c p o 0 U T N N Q O O a N E N 0) u o O •C Q C Q a a� 0 ii N s N p Q C r a s U D Q E s a C `*= } V Ou E E u EO O Q- O Q D Q- a T U cn a ) d Q O( Q � 'C j - O O - C Q y S N C V— u •C N Q •U C N O E u U a s a = 3 O `� 3 E Z C o E L a o �' C) Q 0 3 °� Q: N � N .Q a c p Q Cp -0 c `c v w > a cn —_ E c c U 0 0 Q E •- s O a Q N °� O N E U Q c o O E o Q U -a _o u >' d N Q C7 > N ] N a O o ; S in N c c Q 4 E N U� F- a Q .Q Q Q a) s N N -p Q- a �_ a c o a) a Q a C_ O c 0--o E E t —_ C j t -p c 'N C V U V T N 7 O N N-0 a s X N a N Q •C U Q .0 U O Q . Q > + p O c Q Q L� u .O - U u� a V � U U Q o a N p � -C •- s N > N U a � a s 7 i O C S CI- C C a a Q Q- U) D = Q C -a a 3 n U) E o E o N F- a a° p G� O u Q o 0- 0) 0 Q O c N O N a s _a Q U E c u s N° a U LL Q a c" aoi o a a Q Q aC3 i O E '� u u QS a o c N } _ N Lu Q 7 C p N' E Q M 0— Q C -6 -p �_ r Q t u c Lri 'n u 0S N a E c a -a o � _ E _T E u> > c �p 0- rn0 E Q a a s � rn-Q o U U D cn a 0- rte- 0 t 3 z m D 0 LL- O V 0 LA M N LU _U w N U_ J m D a 0 Z Q W H U N Q K LL Z c a) a) 3 c a) a) C C C Q s O 3 � O L •- Q V O O a s o •V aj C � U X V E a) L = o _N y () E a) V U O O U TI'S, Z CL V Y- u a 'N V Z N O d' U Z J CO D 0 -O � O : C O o) D o C 0 p o O N c rn (D o c a °s s a ° a) ) N a D o S ) N0 O o -0 ' V 'o Q c- u N c Q o o 0 0 � 3 o ' o Q) E 3 -a a U s o a se u o a) '� 0 0 y p ) — Q _ V a L :D — } C C S > O a w D c a O O N � E c .� O ~ a� c a� N U C c p) O p Q o O N a) u O p a}i ._ c .� N L= a� O o �; c Q} a) 0) o Q O -o 3- " E c c 0 c O N c O c 0> u> c s a O o a) O a) a u 0 O _0 O-o a) 0 (D a) v .� 0 `c o a) U .O a 0 N 6u S • N C} o o -O O N 0 s O p n -O u ` O V h N o C C o s -o - •N- N E O% U Q- Q) a) E O _N O o o CO O u 6 o a) 0 rn aci E O a) U •c � o p) `� tii 2 -a o u o E ^� O w 3 t c= -Z -o -o N : -6 0 O_ o C C N -O O V o c N O N N (n C N a) N -o WO o y o o s . S_ T c O j 0 -o Q o V i O 3 O N s .� E •- -� c Q) o U 0 0 U Z E o�� 3 aui �, } v, c� N o O� o � - aci rn o (D c :2i E o O p u U o c �— o} o o Q o s Q) ass o a u co o rn 3 o 0> s a� H .c o O N O c N Q Q o s •� a) .V .N a) c ` i a) C U .O U .N N Q T o) y o ) .- U) .- 3 ti u N c m rn s N a� -a 'a o� c os 0 D os o E o 3 3 �O� °� ��UD•TUa Q-- 3 °�._�U�.Y =_�"3 1 00 U -- Q C C C) Q) .N � O i O N i >. C o U o ,_ } C CV in E C O •- -o N o a) a) E o �' } c o a) o -n p ti c N O v o a 0 U U r, N a) J a) a) i p Q u w Q O s o 0 O C O Cn .o o p > a O -o p U a) �j a) c u u O 0 rn E N C3 s} u s a) N w -� c p u s c a� -o i o) O s c c -o o) a) o u o c c a) i rn O } 00 o o u o 0 3 u p `� a) d� h v o .o p o} o� a� o f a� >��� C Q m O O h} O O '� 6 � 07 O 1 •-O U N p� E a) 'l c u 0 O _o Q O O � c O O O _ V) O t `= a) N CL �' c O Q N O U-0 L 0 0 CO u N p S S L S 4) N Q L : C O 7 t S C o) V S o N -o } O C, Q N N fn �% Ou N Ou N N (n VO I - U U Q 3 o 3 O N o O— uu i-- Q N TI'S, Z CL V Y- u a 'N V Z N O d' U Z J CO D 0 IN N w J U a U in D Cl- U CL a w O LUN Y a a U Lull, ca z IL a U U a C7 Z N N O U z m 0 -0 O (1) } -0 L O aa0 0) i4- Q) O LaW vZ- •� Q W m a V �0 CL LL t/� V O C � m a� ... a z IL a U U a C7 Z N N O U z m 0 -0 O (1) } -0 L O 0) i4- Q) O C: O •� Q O C cn � O O � Z Ln s o �s Q U Q U cn z IL a U U a C7 Z N N O U z m 0 _6 _0 i -a i c ° ti c v ° ° c N -° ? 3 `- u ° _ °' a) ° ° 4) �� ° - c O u �'u C: C: L) N N a) O= ° 0 O� a) = a) L= a) Q c Q N Q Q° c `~ ° O p N a O a) Q c ° p U vi CI- O. 0 0 o p N a) i a°i O c °) Q 4 p a) c u E � L� u = a) 6 _ N _ ° 3 m N o Q)° a °� Q a a° E _rn 0 3 u 3 0= CL U) U N v) ° m u o a) Q° c o Q- a o o° U a) = o ° S C o° `0 o Q� a) ° 3 o V N => Q} ° s O N a) c c u �e Q cn u Q O V N u N a) o °° s° a) a) O L i Q N = a) >� N 'N �� L a) -0 u C: a) a) 3 = V N U ° :r a) ° >' ° O '� V a) c N Q V ° V 'E — ° C3 c-0 °V O O rn Q C a) 0 2 •u a� p_) U`° V N c ° aEi a) c a) -0 ° c c — — ° E u a) _ ° ° 'c 3 .� a a `) Q —aEi ° .0 o -° a3i E •� Z a c E •O _ N N �e N O Q) a) '° ° L —O 0 L __ C O L a Q.' QQ ° ° � ° � ` o 3 N C ° 0 Qr ° _ Q - - - = S -0 E V a) �e a) •} Q .a) S T Q C a) V >. � N O N Q) _ > c _° O c c a) s_ N c a a) > m L �. a) E N . c E 0 Q) o Li °— c-a c o c u a o a l a) o c 4) p c o . o o C C °° rn ° c o ° p � p S4) o = Q 0)-0 E a rn O c L a d 3 a) c vi U c3 �O c O � u ° ` v a) - C O 0 p ° s a U c a V = ° -2 c O N N S C O _ a O (n o U Q 0 Q N d > h • C u > L U ° ° w a) ° ° V) a) ° C ° Q Q Q d N- d Q a- d— . S Q Q Q Q O V Q-0 d. - N 3 _? 0 0 i a) —° V a) T c S U V `m `•T -° 5 ° V O c N Q Nc ° —N ac > c ) - —N t E W O c c C a —Z) 0) ° c ° s u o 0 ° a O ,° u O= O° ° N " ° E ° ° a) c Q Q 'F i N o 0 S a) Q N 0 L ' 3 Q u a � co °LL a)— N a) ° o a E u— Cl. -°' S c _ 0 ° c u -° O N a) O c O s a) N Q) in a O U °- -0 u o 0 0> O ° r c s N -o c Q) s °> ° c N ' a E 6 � ° ° o c c� t� O -0 o� Q) u a ° aQ w s o Q 0 o o 0) c E� _ s ) aa3 ) 0 E = ° U D a U 0) 0> a c CL U N 0 -4) O s ° c E a c Q E -0 >` o c cn O ° ° a ° ° ° c ° ° V) O Q E O > a3 = c c — a a) ° Q Z U U 0 ` ° Q �a) o ° N t -° LU -0 >, C N D - N o c E o O u N U D m _ N s a ) s o a) = Y p ` Q u — E s Q c N a a° c N° E E -° < a E o � c o c •- O V u a) E c O a) O Q •c u O a ° O° ° O > °) N Q J " 0 = c M ) N s Cl) U ) te o N U O N = C N Nai > . Q N O° N C) t a N t 2 >Q � - cn Q Q ° p) O S C6 C) ' a) O N u N i N s O a -° c v ° Q U O Q o c 0 u u ° O '° p a) U N O p Q 0 O S p u ° a) � '0 ° Q) -0 > o o °0 u m aw E e Z S = N Q V Q O C = O E c _U a E 3 o- a) o-a o ° Q 0 a a Q E ° C� - E o) -a a) 0) ° -+ O E -o-o -° ° Q)-C N o-C c 0 '� u -° O C c m °° m e •c -° a) O} CO O a) Q) C a) ° ° C i C U u� C a) fl- _ ° i r N U C ° N a) � N ° a) c ° a) a) = a) a) a) -D _ u ° ° a) O E E >0 ° j U u X a) c U o d V C3 E � D E U E U N a N T °o ° ° c -° E O V -0 d E Q N O V Z Q O V ° u -O A c -2 L r u ° N V 10 r LU F U LL- V m w U CL Q Z LLI O LLJY a i Q U m D CL. i O a L V vi L a a y � W Im a i 0 �a V ti N -a S N � O S 0 —_ a a C 0 — O a -p N s 0 N C — 0 '0) a _ N � V C 0 O C L O a a1 s a) C N > 0 p S -o o a L � O a � � -a o E 0 E o 0 L U 0 O -� Q c Q L O O 0 O � c � a) E N v s Q a c a) L a QS N ~ O rn Q O O N 0 c c E 0 c c � E Q i � N a a N N � V_ 0 a L N a N N O a -a U 0 V d N C EC In N aL O E U Q :F 0 0 o a c a > N E N � �[ -o a W w c c N a a ,T 0) U N C -a U C N j c N a a OL Fs- Q c T C � 0 s c N —� N N L O ` -2 t > V) i 7 .0 a T O a N a m a -0 -0 Q E c c c a� a E o 0� 0 N 0 S O p 0 = U C $ : c N O a a a N N N -a d T 0 L U a a a s a) V o N .E — c Q x p,U .N N LO � Q N 0 Q 0 _a Q a _0 o o 0 0 C� a) a g -0 t s Q'0 a Q D O a 'E N V C 0 Q) -a a) N S � C: -0 L C) Q) a) 0 Z) S S LO 0) U F- a (D _,- o N N i N Q 0 a N C) 0 S Q O j N a) a C C Q) 3 T i -a O 0 •- N C C a O_ .y N s � O Cl- u a a S O_ 0 a) C: C C 2 O a C 0 U a U a a V 0 0 Q� 0 C a 0 c O (D .c C t C) S a (D C c — E C: o c a_)— 3 a a 0 0 N N U 3 a� a u o o U 0 co 0 U a v U c0 N N O 0 s O s Q a N p u U� S 7 0 u El- U -0 Qa a L a T a)O t a- 0a a n Q E w S 0 L 0 N a c Q) s D L 00 0-0 S V a) 3 N T . C a a w a Z) V O a E a a 0 0) C -a 00 -a a a N L C 6) u a Q a a= Q N 0 Q C 0 a N O E a 0 -a vi O w N 0 -t N N O U a Q V V0 O'a a aa) E u E -Q— a a 0 L w vi p _ V a -a S N a a 0 0 a 0 0 N p w ?- -a N -� H a } to C: C V C c 0 •c -a u N > •3 Q -0 a Q U .3 a a, a c E c L w p o a a v v L H C C V N 0 _ O L 0 0 C N a) N C) N — O Q E 0 p— N V a) N E � } E L E U s O o a N w� a Q u N Q L N L 0 0 •E (D O — V a N O = C t 0 ) O cl -a V 5 N _ a) (D a p O O a OV .:0 O °' rn�s � U 0 O N U Vin a �O a L Q ') cO a — -a N C aa)i -a 0 —4)04)4)u—= 4-- N U= N p V) o 1 N a m 0 C 0 T Q F- 0 N o p 0 h s N > � �' L a� 0) O o -°a 3 0 3 c O E p 0> _U w a T 07.2 "- E V 0 c E a) a U a O L c 0 Q CL 'x V 0 a S Q Q +) N � P o a .c o E 3 O � N u p c a O > U U a -a 0 c � aU a p O c O E a a a — p �F- U L a ¢ a O S O > O N 0U o a E0 O C C m O = a C V C s s O C S —�-0 O O a a _a 0)-0 0 S 0 C a) > V ti R N c x a s C L 0 Q 0) O U } y O A 2 � a a U N a) 3 'o N a 0 i N s — — a a P U a d F- M 10 Z CL V V U., CL V) V) O V Z m D C) N U Q U m D a U CL In Q Z LU O Y ne LU a Q K U m CL Q) D O U t a s _N a a) U c O U O N C O L N > N a) 7 U O N � (D a 0) L a CL 0) U c 3 •� 0-0 a) u s c Z J m D 0 O F- F- u v �o i V a) L p N -0 D Q) O C O L _ O _ O O N U aN c 0 a c > L c c O O . c O N C - 2 C � a t U ._ c _N > p a Q p (n E p U a) a) :- Q _ > p c c O O _ a O .- O m E c O � N O O � -o N O O > O O_ C3 •C U -0 C a) a } O a) O p U 0 c 3 -p }N U a) L O U a) c U C N S U C p o � -6 o, -d a) O C C O a =o a p N 0) CL o �, U o o a) y a N _ a) E o o s a O— V) vi o C C N O a) a) o O a) O N t O c N 3= L a a) > L a s E c Q a N Q t O O N a E O O c U 0 0 O > N Z a O a C ai -p a) L c '.-v � O s 0 S _ t a () = a p a p E a) a a) a t a O 0) cn O E N pN p p a O 0 O C 6 J O n L c N a >a) U m > 3 a o� o O a a c E ai o E p ,L � > ) L a ---a a p ao -p = c O s > p -a a -0 L pc Q) -v -a C QL -v � U � Q) C ) — a� U aa ) i o u- 2 �O � c a '3 Q � a s - - a ) a a U d-0 O— O O S U a) V -p 0 -p O O 0 p a -t a O O O p U •p O ac ) p V) > > u °) 21 N s 0) 0) z) 6 u t °° U a) E c p -D a O V S a) N t O a a a� O r 4) c 0 p c c 3 -0 a o �O s � s O cn D c p s o O ° _ C N c N o a O N -o c s a D O a a a — o a LU a O E 0 O 2 c N 0 0 Q) E O L � _ . D 0 N N a) a c U o= I N -O -O Ca) E � 6 t h a) a N s o 4 v 0 CL a U V) 3 U-F o o 3 a U o U — > (na o F a U a) (1) a o x ° a Z J m D 0 O F- F- u v �o _ » 0 .% a o /� ! 0 / § E -o E / ._ 0 .a (a % ƒ/ƒ . 7 - ƒg @ / 0 a_ E 0 ƒ�ƒ � (�® o % \� o \ § g E [ S 0 E E E 0 0 ƒ 2 U? 10 j 2 j \CL z / f j _ _ / ƒ 0 ® g / / 0 / . & °f In 9 D \ Q ƒ , E 2 § ƒ/ . R 7 -0 \ � §2 \ U z 0 z LU / > . o a 4 2 §ƒ/ } \ / / § \ _I_- L �E O Or _07, u q) 0 _ � } Q$§-0 qC e CO o S _ » 0 .% a o /� ! 0 / § E -o E / ._ 0 .a (a % ƒ/ƒ . 7 - ƒg @ / 0 a_ E 0 ƒ�ƒ � (�® o % \� o \ § g E [ S 0 E E E 0 0 ƒ 2 U? 10 j 2 j \CL z / f j _ _ N W H J V a LL V_ J D n_ w V Q N z uj O v� Y Q d Q W ce V m a N 7 O V a m a) v O m C a N_ �C C 6 N N a m -O T a) Z) w L O 0 O � Q Q -6 O O V V O N S � C N O t � O Q O O a) a) U O V N C O N t N a) � o a) O E a u O Q O N D u O V O m a) O1 N � a 0 0 a) 0 M a C N � i a) a c U � � o El r z CD D 0 Ll- O V 10 16 LU & \ \ _ § u CL z LU \ 2 } « j j CL c 0 \ \ ƒ � ( / k/ ƒ/ 5 J /ƒ o � % c �= 2 \ 0. ƒ \ 0/\ & ƒ a 0 ƒ U' u &5 §± U a u t �a0 ° \ 0 I / a o -0 § 0 0 0 c .9 § \ w ® .s T o � o = $ # / ®G7 °7e ± � 7a� § ( � % G � (� J \ \ � 4 :. .$ \ / k ( / / k (D 0 o \&� w 10 j u \ CL \ j } u z ? 0 _0 \ ƒ t 0 0 § NO C3 0 D- o) . C3 \R � 3 = 0 / E� ƒ o / § ukS/ / ƒ� o S C3 e 0 0 0 > ƒ § /` ƒ 7 � Gfo2 §ƒ272 CL w c -0 a 0 2 / ƒ - S \� &o / & %ƒ @ S \ 2 \ / 0-0 &0 � ® u0 00 0 0) C .0 0 0 'ƒ o \ ■ 0 * 2 •k z D c \ F- 0? Q < § <� 6 \ 3 2 \ / § ƒ ƒ % oJ% /E / §ƒ // U� ƒ k § 2 f U /\SU2 j 2 u CL. e ° 3 u ® \ \ 7 / ƒ / / 0 a ( LU Cl e o° \ } (1) U -0 , m ��- 7 < G u c o 2 a » \ �3 0 © e ® 5 2 j E e � k E§ $ �` 3 o g u _ \ \ }// CL • >' 0 \2n ƒa2 Q 4 E 7 /\ E $ D ƒ 2 e D u G a 2 0 � / G ) 0 .9 u �E 3 § 0 e e P % ƒ/ o E C 0 0 / d3a & ± j \ LLJ \ \ O f § f C) N W J U LL U 00 v CL N Z LU CL O Y a w U m a ►M V_ c — 0 3 C3 a� o � N i 5 S O O Q V t i Q) N � c c N i O 7 N a) � O � � N Q > � O L a ] O > 6 N O E D 7 O O a m N c ._ 7 O 0 O Q E 0 c N S c o � o Q � L y T O N 0 C3 3 a N V O o U L N O N c O .y N U c O U a L E O N V QJ 3 N � T -O t; N c c O 1 N O N ; t U — Q T _0 Q) c — ° -° 3 (D c s c O s -0 o .3 u O c O O N i Q_ Q O u N E� ° ? E 3 W • °- o 0 -� V Q N > ON T O p —_ V O N V_ N O O O E N -Q a - O O O '_ v N O 4) LL. Q C3 :N 7 m O H :A 0 10 IN LU Q G / \ } / / tn § O 2 ce § / \ } � § 0 N ƒ / � MI, � � a § ƒ k E 0 /% ƒ/ ƒ G . S > \(n D m .9 0 E \ 01 \ o 1: -2/ ƒ 2± \$u 0 `0 0 - o =oa 9_I-_9 (� ( 0 0) 0-) \ / ƒ/ / a) < o z E 0 EO a) Z) ƒ±may -0 CL & ® 3 7 / C: [ /%3 = u 0 7 o -c .R ±ƒ�) D /�\ o o q »_ a t 'a 0 E'\ % /ƒqb o L e a o e A e o -a % - o = c— J 0 0 0 0 o —±a / / e 7 & b � j § / \ z } u j / N W H J U Q U m D d LL; U Q N Z W CL O V LU Y Q a Q ce U m D d EM 'a L a c 0 o°c m L O Z C O L 0 c O V N C C 0 V N O Q O _N D •3 L 6 Q N s C O 0 C3 C o c rn o 04 o � o v = d C C � L c s U) .Q C L N � � _O V N - C � s v N � � N C C L - O N � N Q O � � -0 -0 a) C O E V O N C C' S V S N N O � S c V i O N C O C N O p .(D L L _ C o c U C _ s O 0) O E N D *V O 0 Q a Q N II m D 0 O U N 10 _N C -0 > a 4! N O O b 0) C _0 L N � v V C O a E N O O� O -0 Q S N O N � •� S N � > N O U C <n O - V U L � � o s C � a s s o a c ol LE E a a a �-0 E C u Q Q .E 3 M 1O Z g a U U d C7 Z N !n O U Z m D 0 N C "' a T u J � � E U p o Q W O V N •- U_ o O J [� y s N � t 0 W C O N t a N Q V7 N C Z p c W d O C � u E N L O E a o o c LL a W o E 0 o-0 LL a > _U J m 3 C N Z - p 0 O Q Q _N C -0 > a 4! N O O b 0) C _0 L N � v V C O a E N O O� O -0 Q S N O N � •� S N � > N O U C <n O - V U L � � o s C � a s s o a c ol LE E a a a �-0 E C u Q Q .E 3 M 1O Z g a U U d C7 Z N !n O U Z m D 0 w H J U LL- Q U J an Cl- W U a N Z W O LU N Q �C L J Q U CO a M N } c a� E a� L a� L T a� a N C C3 N A) 0) _O O C S U N N _N C � N t N N t U U U N a � T V L � N j N E C Q a i, T +- a o 0 a a A m c 6 C � N C -E O N E E 3 ro o Q Q S u V �- �3 Q N � C � L t O C -d N C C N Q � Q N d O N E 0 E E E O O O O N oaC 6 � E Z co J O r U V uj \ G / j \ / \ j / } � » j j § 2 m -0± 7 2 0 2 9 § q \ 0 § § § § 0--d 0 o m% E / o -o / 0 o c o > 7 o'E 0ƒ± U T T \/ 2 >- o t ° o 0 ƒ /{ - -E±a-0 c— 7 ® e c f 0 2 ) ƒ C3 \ u / / Q) 4) C: 2 \ 7 u f © _ 22�o/G\ 70 » \ ƒC7$\3 /0 0 \ 2 o ƒ;i0cn ƒ »0 G ƒ % 2 0 (D —2 ƒ $ � ^ ° 9.r22c :a)U 0 5°£/ G m % . -a 0 c � / e / r z o ». ƒ § \� � _C E e 0 o o r C o-0 ® u I 2\ —c00 o & / Q) a) a 7 §° o t§ u § m g S 7\ % /¥ ƒƒ 7 < ± a)� 7 §22 u �2CD §9\ a E± .§ 2 0 a) 0 0-/ - ƒ 2 /( / / ±t\9 22\ƒ � o & 0 u�0J CL @ .s G S }7 22 Uo22 0%0§ o e2 2a 2 2 \ // 0- ƒ 0- f /m\ -C C: /u�\ 6ƒ0 0 0 C3 0) a- 0 = o a •- 0 �C3 Fƒ 5 e e t 22/- 000\ 0- - ._ -C D- c o t o o c- 0 t # ` ¥u2 §U /\ 2000 \ .o- 7 E 0 a 5 ® § ( u / > Qar %cc: A / \ LU CL \ \ O f § j LU \ / / j § \ } \ 2 � § } / \ EM ƒ ƒ / 7 \ \ u j D \ \ j 7 r\ ƒ5 o= om a-Q -:2 CL ) -0- o 30 2/§ a) 0 >22722m ƒ3 % o® c e o ®9 =§ 2� / U Q) $ / 0 \ k \ / ¥ k 2 % U -°�° a» 2/f " \ J \ =\ \ § - » : \ \ \ 0 - ° /§)$ \ -0 � Q) &o f C3 r i\ ai ƒ0 � U �CL / E¥ e n n a 0; ° e ƒ0- U X22 2ƒ§� ƒ2D 5 e r o a) a� / .0 C o r c U z o , D� ƒ\ ƒ070 o o» J o >-0 2 u c \o c 0- �C± U U D U) 0 � C3.0 T ° / + +o9 E' /\� ƒmoo 0/ U U $ 3/\ c Q� C --0 E o- k 3 -0 3 c o ,g >C:� � \ / / -.\ / 7 ƒ \ C T e 3 0 / st u Q) '� ƒ \/ƒ \) U� -0 u 2/��±± 0 C: 77� £ ƒ a ®� , r § % ®� 2 ' / \ \ C: . 2 0) o - c £ + o �., n » % m 2:£ &� o a 0 5 & 7 §§ n a m 3 §- a§ 2 7 O m. E 2§) u u( G 7 oƒ 2 S ƒ ƒ / 7 \ \ u j D \ \ j LU / / / j \ u � LU \ 2 } \ } u Q § \ V � \ .\ ; ( ~ \ / * \ j } / \ / ) u § D : c . -C o t Q) / / . %k( 0 ¥6d 0 2 0�b ƒ ¥ 7 + § m /±oEz + % o Q) ® \ � - \ f cJ7 ƒ e o 0- 0- 7 .@ e -^ � 0 U 2 m § 2 t\ 0- _0 � \ c ƒ � ` 0 § /(_//z / 0 U 0 / G O @ \ 0 0 0 2 0 7 0& & � ±7760±w 7 2 f f \0 § \ § u ` ®\ T f e § 7 ' \ ƒ�// 0\ U )\ U t® 3 0 E F -C 0 §� ƒ ± / ƒ / ƒ � 2 a @ ± 7 o .@ u -C e t e t 0 0 7F s U± _.� o� ° e t ° ± U n 9 \ / / \ @ z y � >/ / —u2\ // E / ( \ 2 o n t a N ; E \ % \ / 2 a * \ j } / \ / ) u § D NW / � L r �ƒ Q $ƒ 2 2 o t 7 ¥ a o r § o f t c G o e e Q_ �ƒDok aƒa) 7 .g* a / : ƒ 7 [ \ ( / ^ ± ) a 0 w 2 S § 3 d tc7o� ao \cam ±cƒ2 2 k .g D7.2/ g { § » �ƒ ® � -0 c -(ƒ o 7 ®� / E o e _ u 2 .g o E o o = E% } ° ¥ ° = u ƒ § � ± 0( » ® _ § \ *_0 7\ Q) o ƒ E f / 2 G a/ / 7 U) C3 0 + * a m 0 T } c) . < / 722 ±ƒf0 % �o�omff�/ ±\ y 3«! e 5 e o ƒ $\ o= 0 z .- a C: C: ƒƒ o mg u 2 2 ƒ ; o \ E ƒ£ e® » ° 2 S o o 0 ? * ` . / - / o $ [ / C � / ( / E r o Cl- § \ u u � ƒ \� 0 -000 r �ƒ � / \ © ƒ » ƒ 0 ƒ 2 k \ t { 0 3 •� o\ o \_ ƒ © E Q® t 3 §\ o oƒ © a E a E �'- 2 =» a- ƒ = 0 2 0 �» %a) R =4)0 �$ $ * a % + 2 G? § : » ± o 2 j j _ c E c _0 Z'! a % a£ e _ o ƒ u 2 « % o p 7 •m d 2-0 k \ 0 :'2 2/ c g ' f 2 f° 0 20)-o —770 —Rates / v t *�\0 \ - 2 ?»»:$oot /yEo2e I fA 0) g79 \ 4c): C: f /&a\ \\ @ �7 % %/ E o o •� m o 7 0 0 /0§0u0 0 / ) ƒ/ 0 .»fe2.% 7 < < <$ j ƒ/ g 2 2 u ± 7 % 3\ f O 2 \ 0 z U Z Q Z LL 0 Z Q Z O H Q Z LU w CL z O Q w z 0 Q Z O Q z Vf p Z _ to V c aLUZ _ > Q) V N N WZ a: i -j a aZ N o s u O" _LL. o z g U U w c� Z N N O d' U z m D 0 c _ > Q) } U N N U N a: i Q) E t N o s u O" o C O V) D c U m 4 O O Q s Q u U Q t O C L" D U N p Q a Q c Q.O a) .- o u cn C- V C E Ln Q) O , L E Q) Q) Q) 0 O N U O 0 N N U s E s o (-n a� U +- s o � a� Q =) ° �QQ�=< z g U U w c� Z N N O d' U z m D 0 c7 Z U z a z_ LL 0 Z Q z O a N Z Cw G Cl- WC L z O_ Q Z Q M. o c c o N Qa _p c p O Cl- N > a) > O a) Q O U p) C p p V vi u -p Q ¢I `n C p O a) a) E N •u u O O N O u Q G-0 c Q QC� L U N O O c C Q N a) L O O L s L p - L Q c� p y Q p E a) C c E O Q O — � _p � � -0-0 -- p p p -p C3 p -p s p t •- .- p) s u 0) Q C � > N — C Z O p w s � v) L OL O O p w 0 0 p p p iQ Q Q O C- 0 3 N N U , c n -p 0 ap n ) p p ) O O '- -p E a u -p c O O Q v O N N Q Q O p s C Q p a O C: Q) O O Q I s E O O CL u > O > O O E V O L u a) > O 'N Q `u Q U E cM p u Q .O Q Q c � U C N Q p N O -p a) Q Q c O 0 c`C L O O u Q Q O Q N _ c V) Q > O � E Q E O � Q Q E E p u tC o c Q E Q U) O Q u p u O p N O LL > Q E N p p N N N L C p O N Q u ) o Q U O a) ) , O d Q O L E u O c - C Q aa3) a) a) d ] p Q Q O Q p p s N p N 0 p p c c c c p p Q c u e p c c ,U O c ai E r c O E t p Q E z) p Q. V) p p N N O -0) Q FQ - H O c p O N a) -0 Z E u u E C O O p O 0) p — > O N N p N a) N p � p a v _ N C C c N N Q a) U p O aci Q Q i a s w a) -d Q a) a) U (D (D c a) c E Q c Q E N O U N p :�i in N (D p C U O o o o(D p cn cn p p Q. V) E a) L D U- ` L p 'O — L) N U C p O O C C •N u N C V p O rn p .c C Q C p p p iQ � V c s c 0— p U N -p V O t C .•� N i O ..,- -p Qi • 'j -D -p — cn •C , a) p •C CL E 0 N O 0 T N C) c Q) U Q) N 0) O 0 u a N C « C C p p O ° o O s p E u Q c CI- p U V) U Q N c = s NC Q Q 4= +c - c Q c p c ai c U p o > p N-a Q c 2 E p u a) O 3 Q c O c N p -p vi C s u c N a) ? c Q E Q Q w Q Q E Q p) p O Q p C N Q p N C u N o c •E N a E Q •7 N V a E O N Q) Q p O O O Q c > O> d uQ LU p C- L 'o a) .vOUs .p N N_o > c0 Cs-p �O U N 3 Q-- V1 •_ N d N C .N C N d -p Q � 7 Q `p -� °) Q Q O a) '� u Q p V Q u u, E aui Q Q N p — N s C 'n Q p O O g E C cn 0 U a) C j � 7L-Q t p a) L a �— N E_ �= Q n u p O Q 0 N w w N u •N L a) -o a N j `� E Q c Q u u O p Q p a) a) u —> N c O cn LO � U Q N s V Q Q o p N Q E `� s a 0� N a c L Q m uui a } N Q o N a _ O Q c c D a) Q u a a O c o Q o E a 3 a) s 0 o O o c Q s o c o .- = Q c '� 'a) o p _ u C3 .L > z , 3 a c c E a p Q V o c Q o d G1 p> Q ti L -t X Q c Q w a- 0 u o s O -O O N V s CL _p) N Q 3 O uj Q p a) Q ,E u -p D p) c/') c p O N _Q t C Q C c o 0 p E c 0 Q r- •v c Q o ,c t c *' p -p O p V) Q O C C Q Q w = U C c p u Q 'u > E -p O c O Q — N j c ° Q O s 0 >. Q E W p a) .� O _O ? O Q Q w u d E a�i Q ._ N Q= a) _O V N -p N U N u N o } L O, C a) w a- E w N _ W u u 0 0 o c v Q p N c c E ■ ■ Q O Q •� O a) -6 C O O r Q c ■ N C p .N u ' Q -p c s Q p 0 a) p 14 p d O y — p Z m 0 O r U CV n N c •N C� ° O N C a E ° o Q c N p ° a o Q= 3 ° U p s T s 3 '- O u U c � ' a) s > a) — o v Z L N O N a p > N J •° C Z V — ° N s a p Os o V o Q) o p - . o E - E aa) Q) V Z a c Ln N C C � O •C 0 � c p S_ CC � O 0 O _p u O C -0 O C a a a) N > V U W a) W O p E O N N N a) E Q N a V a — t C C O a --"Z N u o a) s C O O :t E U 0) Q) a Q Q O Q E O a) 3 —O -o E o a C 4 V -a a) ' V H a H t C -a V O O O Q In t Q a) a a) L h - a) O C V N a) a V Z N Z a N s a) U y a) O C E Q N L C a 0— Q .27) a, Q Q Q a _ Q ti O >O p> Q a) O (D .N p N o N QC N E Q o ° o _ � > o (D 0 v -o v y Q � L a s ° V 0 V) CC a >' a Z Q s 0 N W (D C C 7 c d p 3 7 N Q' Q a) a s a _ N m O Q C O O '0 _ s N ii c a w c O Q -a N Z •t -0 W c o� O CL o -° °' o ° a v a) O L N ° 6 ' a) a Q >s E °� o oa � O N 6 c c 0 C > a -a a a) o a) -O c o Q o V u ,.� W N J O d L N C a E L a) a) C Q) LU > a C Q �' 0 -0 h 0 ) aC O V d a _0 N C a a a C a) N a O N N a) r- L o a) CL -a U NN ¢ a a) a) -a C a) Q a S C a ~ u t E -a N -) ti a a) O � N . 0 0 Z O O s L N N V C') J C N U � O — s Q p N c N a V _ N -C C C a a) a C V O °u C C N -C aa ) a L 6 3 V/ a) O- -O E 0 a) u Q Q .� Cl- a 3 p c O E -Q ° � O s ° N a s o °) 3 C Z) � �� a O a y -a U E -C t O 2 C 0 'N p > O a) }C � C c L L N ) N a$ c aV O cn n a) } a) c N Q) O a> N > — p c a a a Q aL a) C u V o N . Q c () _C O .- L C a) a p Q c 0 Q� p N c a T Q C a s O d U ° V N c •N C� ° O N C a E ° o Q c N p ° a o Q= 3 ° U p s T s 3 '- O u U c � ' a) s > a) — o a > a) a C j CQ — ° N s a p Os o o a L cn 3 0 E - E aa) Q) C c Ln C a O "- N E E 0 . a) N s a o L L O 0 O a) C c C> C Q p O N ,u N O a h p E O N N N a) E Q N a V a — t ? o N a) C3 _L 0 o a) U 0) Q) a Q Q O Q E O a) 3 —O -o E o a C 4 V -a a E o C a) V O O Q) .N '� << _ 0 (D = N d h L C m V E F- u Q a N s a) U y a) O C E Q N L C C J _O i > 62 O U N p} -a _ V c Q Q Q a > .. i s N L N c) Q •� N p+ Cl- 0) L 0 >O p> Q a) O (D .N p N o N QC N E Q C N .c 3 L O ti a) V U •u � > � o N� 3 � C E a a) N— Q � L a s V E N •> a a) S O o -t u p�� Q Q 0 N W (D C C 7 p 3 7 N Q' Q a) c C a s u a) N U Q a O a N - c L T 3 N a) a a 0) s s a) O O '0 C _ s N ii c a w c p .O a) O Q .E a -C T F- a C c a) Q) o� a o -° °' o ° a) o � v a) a, a L Z -0 O L N -° C ' a) a y >s E °� o oa � a Q O E O Q p -6 —Q c o Q o V u ,.� O C —C ° E a a E � E Q) LU > O =' > 0) U f a) Q > O V a) N a) F- a N O > c aN ) C> a C s C ° — cn C o °a -° a o a) CL -a U a) a) -a C a) Q a S C a ~ u t E -a N 0) ) — t C: N 0) a v a E E . 0 0 O a a) . - :2 u -a rn o O s O : F C N V> V C') J -a •� a) J J a Q -� Q N a) — s Q p N c r N a E Q a>) I� v c U E °u ^ L� N aC) C C L vQi ,a Cl- Q .� H Q i, N 3 J)) Q 3 0 Z U Z Q Z 0 Z Q Z O_ H Q H Z LU w Z O H Z i 0 Q AM O � a) C N L s OC C u N 0 C p C) _0 a) C N C 0 -0 N } u N rn N p X L 0 2 0- O p 0 c c O C 3 .s N Q) c N_ U 0} � rn) 0 0 u u c _ c •- u _ 0 � c 4)° o .3 3 =o O N E c rn c N ° a) o -0 3 s = o U } c -0 a -0 Q) O a) •- } O o �, 0 u� a) _V C C E 3 0 J Q 0 LP C X a) Q O T `.'� -O 0 0 .� Q N V a) CO E o C3 o N E C3 C a) Q N U E O T— 0 s N Q c Q} E u� O O` N E N E -p U 0 _� C) S Q - -O 0 'O C O = Q Q; a) -0 7 3 0 N N N c c N 0 0 O _a) c a) 0 O C) o N 0) O yr p N c O p c s U U � u F- .� E -o O C3 N QV Q a) 0 U c c C 3 O O O O-0 O p O u) o 0 0 C 0- c c u 0 a) ti c a 0 c c c Q C D c o 'E o p -6 ° "' U 3 Q ,N L o 0 aa) N o -0 0- 3 3° CL 3 .E 3 � o u 0 6 E Ci O} V) L C CZ -S .� a) C U c _ C cn Q C N >o _ 0 °' -0 N 0 O 'C ,� C) L CL ° � o > O a) E L — _ a) V o E Q a) E a) a) p E E 0) V Q ,u V c� c N N N 0 c a) : 0 -0 C N �O Q N O y C H- •Q N CL O '- (/i _ _ 0- > 0 O L —_ () ? L V) a) a) O a) D O N S CL .i C N O c 0) C V O O L L v_r Q O •> E -O a) O E -0 > -O .L -O `� u C 0> a) N C C _� O O 0-0 0 a) 0> 0 N 0 T N E C c E N-0 a) s a) C o a) a) °) °) Q) 2 5 0 cn o O C D cn 0 O N -O a) c E -0 N O N a) a) U -0 O p cy- -0 O Q ( 7 E 7 O O N D N +s- O Q °N' C V C a) o a) ii N E O] N 0 N r p N N _� p a) E a s c U > o L � c/) o 2 T " °' a E v o-0 0 m X s a > ° a) > a) E s 0 a) E s c >� a) ° a) L s � D a Q c -D N N j 0 E 0 E -0 O F- L F- 7 Q ._ N L a C C O D p p 0 (} _O C i O C CI- ■ N .l1 -D U L a Cj > > O u L a) E E -0 ■ ■ ■ ■ L s '- O U 0- r o � E c c E E cS au) I� c c 2 o a V-) U -0 Ln C C 0 O -Q T S V T � t C ± 0 C Q a) N C �' C a) U O C _ cn a) c D U u V a) N o L a '� a) .N a) N L a) > CL 6 . O> N `) _ 0 0- O-0 7 0 U U O a -0 U C c C 0 m L O _ O L L c p 0 O N O _ 0) C0O C< a) a LL _O - N 0 N N— ai 'Q 3 r •� u> > s u CL O S 6 C O C 0 E E CO E V L 7 O D L O s N u E ,N O-0 L s O a) 0-0 L a) O s -O .o m V V a) c 0 U a) L > c a) a) U U N U � D-0 C U N C Q Q p F- C C C _0 -0 U L N CY) _ N N s __ 0 0 U) 0) N Q L >, 0 0 O 0 0 -O w E - C C O C C 0 Q- 0 J O -Q > 0 a) N U S E c o 0 a C0 .� L C (/7 .0 C _0 O `'� N V N a) C . C N S_ C -0 O C S N —Q N S V `•t- E a) a) 0 4- CS a} 0-- o 0 a) `} N p 3 a) D U a yr CL >� V 0) 0° C N O V i t C3 D Q 0 V CL C O CL • N `) U Q a) V .0 N C C -0 a) Q) E CL -0 C S N a) a 0 S _ > C u C S O Q C > (n 0 a) N '_ N •_ 0 fn 3 r- < a) `�- N �/ �- o-.- 0) -O C °- 0 .0 C Q- p) CS C E C •C c } 0 a) �_0 2 T-o E N ) o• -0 3 o a) a) C Q a) — O-0 a) E C C U Q 0 N U - a) OL Q O N s -0 0-0- 0 SvOi N a) Q- X� Q H O v -0 O L C o E N O o Q c s s u a) 0 0 0- — > Q °) c > H '3 O 0 j rn C Q O •` u O a) N 0 S >. -0 0 0 0 -0 Q 0 N a) E O�— > �+- N C) } N 3 Q> s a) E Q E U, L- -0 'C -O a) `-' p a) Q a) C N C- -O `� N > S C U N 0 0 L 0) Q c N V) u O L Un o Q v L O Q- O O -0 C 0 _� N 3 0 -� E s C 0 a) 0) -0 a) t C L -0 C O 0 0 O 0 0- ._ -O 0-V 0 a) L Q-0 s L O 0 > •3 0 H O p a .N t 0 a) o O C O Q-a -° O a) L Q� O S Q p 0) 0� � a) c c E u p .N C am_ Q— Q -p Q in N a) o p u c Q ,u Cn c> p 3 N N a) s N t a) } s a `o ) a o C3 U Z) Q °-a o 0�v) o = o~ o� a'3 �- �� V E - E 0 N m� � m� 0 Q 3 E ci u p O _ m D p- L C> CL c O � CL O D p p� p O O D) •� a) Q _ O a) N C ■ ■ } O C N O D O N -0 t c s 0) t O -O a U Q S 0 D D u D .N 0-0 V C V -O r L O O X_ t C (n C C S — C N S {L 3 a cn Q. =_ O -0 - -0 o E U °� N� 3 ��� a E a Z J m D O U q CD z u z a z LL- 0 Z a z O F- ¢ H z ui LU J z O F- F- V) Z_ 0 Q L9 V i Q) ° o c � N Ln a > C N m z Q a a) r a 0_ — O o N Q E o o u N E 0 c a 0 u E M O E o U LL . ° E u N > X o - r > E a) a) O` g °' w 0 U D u c E tr Q) Q 0 p° E c ° E V u p O N rn C ° 0 o uuiU E a c E c o �— E o-6 a O s m 3 — 6> .� N C o d ° Oo Q N 0 L '� O V 0 C 3 _ U D N U 0 C -2 -0 x -o O s ~ a) U° o u C ° V c }-0 o o -° NN _° >, -5: 0) C > = N -0 °) ? Q _ � a)° ° N �o u p U _0 p ° p Q) a) E 0 _ > -O u a 0 o Q o-C (D C ° � -° s a) LL C c a) N O E s 0 N c°) _ ° u a) aE) 'a a °� c C3 a c N m c° o D .- a) 'c a `c C G! o° E 2- E o p c 0 0 .� s c m `o a U '� (D a E u N i s aEi a E a) 0_ �} Q-8 c O u E s U E `~ a) a) .°) ° u > Z) ' } .2 E O Q o a a) ° u o E c ° � c o a) . — N a a) a) E o ° = s c o a E Q ° o ° '� °E o (1) E ) ' E c _ °-0 0_ Q 0_ 0 06 o C •- ° O O p x aN ) Q c s-0 O a a) a) a>) a) aui N s c E O a>i ci M a>i > ° Q ►- ° U� .S t 0 0 2-0 o a) E m N o 0 0 f- 0 -0 o w• N .E N a) w o ° .E a) ° O C ° C N N N N E a) o L° m C a) �= o o E o E E 3 p N °: c a) u> c > a) O c� c c D u o c -O N c a) c o C d ° _ L N ° -p C a) ° U 0° >° U N C L E `� °U U N y+ ° a m° w a) s z) c E s a) T 0 ° E = '3 v) a) u a) `� o °° ° C -° U °' u° a E 0 ° a) N N .E a)� j c ° 0 '� s° 0 .fl a) "- o O a) u U •- c � �% y —_ 0_ N S N U 0° a) N,- u V a a) a) c N p c° N 'C O c O C N '- a) O ° (n s a) s _ N C Q) o V 0 tE V c Q a) °7 C N M _ '"° E c C: i C N N ° s° ° c > ° U u ° a) O C— N O a Q:f N ° 0 O N ° O _a) E � u w ° y c N N ) o C N a) N 3 _0 c o U u c E p N- u° u— t N c° 3 C cn p d ` u ° Q 0 3 .E c Q as ° o o c° a) o u Q ° o o N > o v) E a° -o c° E 3 c E a °' u _° c° c 0- 1;-- c p =� N c c o u u� u N E c a Q N u C E Q — c s 3 a) o D c E° u c 0 E u a) c E ,ai -0 o ° � -° �, ° u `� r a) N } V) N E 'u- E'3 E ° rnp o— ut N N ° c u Ur*, ° _a �'3 (n _u a) a) c Q° c a) a� 0 .� '� 0 3� m a) a 0 0) 0 c C ° a) s u p O 0 C: O° ° N ° vOi O E a) in a) p a) •� U c Q U a) ° u o a) +- N c 7 '— w a) p O c :_ '� > c ° 7 0) -° O a) ° 7 N -p u N ;+_- O Q O ° cn 0 C > N m C p � o 0 a) } 3 N L c ,E ti° E -° B O O 6 0) C a) a) s N U N E u N-0 E i a) — -° U D v '� ° ° L L N N v, ° c ,O ° u ° O ° O s O Q a 0 ° a) aui a) � s 0 o -° > _°) E 2 a) 3 -° E 3 V) c a o s U s o N s a) c 0_ in -C a) H c O t c c c 1- 0 U 0°°° 0_ E} 0 °° s u a) N O U } V>} c> 0 C V O C C a) 0 C: 0 c E 0 °) O E E ° ■ ■ ■ ■ 0 .� -0 ^ ° .N '-° L > E =a0U a a�oaac�° Z m LL O H v 10 p) C O i) � •Y � � u N stj Q V •C ,V a) C N s N t "a — -O C N N N p L •Q a) > O O E "p N O O a o) E a) U a E p O C Q)a s > C C p a a) U c c o> 0 O Q O O N L N ° E > N E O N E V Q E 0 N a) > a) E p E Q) a) p a Q � c c O u > Q) p � SO c a) 0 O O� O N E . -p v S N N H E p Q s E s Cc: Q E Q U -p c p 0 u p O c > O Q N E E N c S p u > N L Q C: O O O1 Q a V > D p u- i O + i > N u p O Q- E O O N U L O Q V 0 C 'p O N O Q U V _Q L Q_ -O • -0 U O C O N p N E O O a E U N p d 0) (n Q) a) ~� p p N s > N p U -p a) C 3 Q E 3 c> > Q) N L t o N N p O Q Q y n j ) N p v p -O N -p Cl) L) •_ o E E —p —.° E QN N O N Q m C a) U — ) -O aL N L p E o Q) N a) L c E Es p ° U N p , v �E N p O a E E = c c p o ay p C i O Q O C p N Q Q Q p N p N _N N- N Q) V p Q) N z) ( N _ p C o .+° - t Q_ 0 c O N L () O . N N u c o a C Q > Q N 0) O c L c C n L p N u c N •3 E E p -— E E o o O a cn Q 'E p Q_ - c � a) p 0- c ?c o () C ) a� Q - U 0 ) E 0 -c p N v•a� ) = 0 O Q Q Q) p _ p -0 u y _r_ V 0 p S p u p .E ■ ■ ■ —N N vi vi O V Q 0 N p a) N Q p N C� p p cp C C E . � -p p C O U — p L � a) n Q 3: -t; --o a) E O O U O Q Q_ s C p Q) -O S .N -O C (-4 LO 0 Q) c E iii Q- 0) ti a p (� > L c p) c -O C p S p V O C C p t .0 N c p N Z O Q Q_ �� a� c p s V O a� p� s •p N a c� c s � c � a� � j E O N � V N o � S 0 � o s D Q_ D u E :.� _0 Z p Q Q N N U N N p t C U O Q N O Q a) L CN N Q) p L N C -p c c p c N E N U s s Q c > p 0 p U c - — C N p Q d Q_ E N p Q 0 ) Q— — •j L a) c Q) Q) V N Q_ N p p p Q C Q � Z S N i O E p -Qp ) o p Q c .•0 -0 O O C _0 0- _ U N O L p 0) Q) p Q --j Q S C -p N O j Q_ p p Q_ C CO 'ai N p O p a) .E � _ p N Q _ ~ y _ C T = p O p E s O p L V O N a Z Q 1 t c p V E N L > p U p o p 0 Qo _ C S N U C _p W (D O_ c u p O V N . -p p N p U p J u U Q p > t° p v p 3 p c i a) c E ° a a -0 — a) CL 4) 0 . y • a) O � N U _ N E V c p a) p p a) C C p C3 p) -a) E , -0 -p Z a O O N N Z -p " S Q_ 0 O C 0d a) + Q_ - p 7 O -O _ a C O V) s u S c v) N C a) O > u Q) 0 N O O 0') � c O E c Q Q Q N t `c c — 0 -` a) S Q; p �— N O C O � O Q) p `n s O .c , a O f N — - a c V E t N Q_ O C ' a) -0 c Q) p' N � ' N O O O c Q) a) U- -p Z O Q 3 0 -Fn p u u O u s `~ Q_ Q_ > s N cn E E p C O N � O O Q Q O : p Q a � � p O u p ■ c O M n_ p N .c p > O Q) V _ L U U Qu ^ Q) r O U 'p F- p N o in p T Q 3 JE JE Q- uo uo LL P- N .E N O Z m LL O H v 10 V Z U Z uiZ Z Z H H cZ G W i Z O V) z 0) C .6 C a) E a O a) > O L t O 0 N C N O a) � U U a C3 o a) '.d 'j a) o L Y- a 0 O c N � a) L c a) .N C a) � N � N N V p S Q o Q Q U c a c c 0 0 v a Al rn � � L a) N U CCd � N CL U) O C v C -0 > AL a) d O N S O O O c •� N U u O d a) -0 N L 4) V Q O D u N d o N L o d N 0 d c- N V E0 E aci rn a rn c m O O N d N N C O C O C O a) E �; -a a 0 � N a _o ° ° u O — o u ` U d C N u N N •O L L U ° 0 a c i E d —O ° u h a) .0 L C > d > H D °V a-d C) O) N C S 0 -C � C N d T d Q) _ 3 � V o — d d O } O >, d Q V d � C3 c N d U () .� c d o d a� c a) rn- C3 w C a) E d c -0-0� c o a) - C ,C t O Q w- 2 Lp O _U 0-2 N E m N a v L c ° a t a) d C _O N 6' Q N L •- Q 3 ° o s a) a) a O d L O L d >_ c -d o L u c a) ° c } C d> V U> d 0 .p '� C S a) 7 a) d a) '- C d) - p E d E� S 0-0-0 a s 0 C .0 >� U d 3 . ) � O C d U < w ; 0 a) E p U 0 U E d p -0 O C3 d > a a p L a) o — _u O- a- p Q 3 C O a O 2 a 0 C d a d S a d V) � S O a) U Q.o V p d ad) d u C u Q ° d u V N L L N N N 0-0 } 6 E N a •C a O p d N o c O C a) O N .0 p � N a ° ° C O O Sv) a) E o N O N N s d 4 0 N L n d D C � p a p E c3 � S >. o 0- ° Q O S N -O d) m O d Q� L 0 i a N O O S N c N ° E U E � C O o cn >p o O c 0 d ) c a C a u m o u - ' ° (n L L a) Q V _ S — a) Q > Q Q E O a o -d o d 0 O E Q 0) '� m lir- -S O o a a) >° C N Q N ° 3 u O --j -0 a p C3 d V —c E 0) O a E a) c N 3 N a n o ° - a) a � �° ° ° S ai s a p c u u 0 M O a) >> N > Q a ad) O d d 0 0 - S .� N '"d d) cn N C C C L Q O O O C C L C S N _d d > V a) >' L N Q p o 0 V a) a) C Q a) N d) C >•, V Q 3 s N O O C O N S Q In 'O O N O y _0 N C � a o Q � a o o d L � a 3 V a a_0 o S a- C ) o ° c °- ° L — E � >> a) , O Q. E a) a) d U) d — a V) p S E O ' aU o a) d O N u a E d- a) a) 0 7 aS O a o d .O (n u S c L U a) CL -0 d u N a d O o Q N a — N c u u u d c L E d C h 0) a) o E N v y (V c Q} . a '° •c aa E ) `� � O H d d � � d u s aO d N O ' a a) a) d aN L ) ) y N o c a) d d i In `v U V O _ S O a O o S C a d u t U U d) a) U C O ° ' a) N c: CL C3 O a E 01 o > U) a) d a O d V d S � . C) -0 -a c c C N N L E C d o 'O U N� a) —0 C) a 0 p Qc E 0 m c -� a V C C p , L a 0 E° u N .O -o O C o u (n p Q a E N 7 a) O a N c d ao u a) aC i aui •N -d N d� N >� d C d) E t C +) d C a o a o 0 Q a) E E rn a c p a 3 'E a) ° c ', aci a) V) o d cn L m c O c Q a) .0 0 - a O D in 0 0 a ° m c E c 3 N m a)S F'0 C 0 a a) o � U a) E pO c > •C d O Q F V "U 6) C� U N d) t'? -d a) a c E M p t p U U i7 d s S N -0 C O � O d ) a s °' O E O — - i a Q .0 d o N d CO Q- 0 0 V Z CL V w CL N O Q' V Z m D O _ a u _ a a) c a O N N a � C ° � `p C E � 3 `) E 3 ai cn aai E> o Q° E ` u E •.� •�L s u .c 'y 0 a o u • n N v u C a c L c E C u V) ❑ 0 V U 0 a - c >- = s c Q a a) 4) C: s o s o i °� a c o Q) O) U) _ Q ) O � a) O O � C 0 o a t N � "-0 N i Q 3� � c ° a s o . a 3 3 N °) o ) a - `0 . >Q a s a o u c a) o > 3 a N E� s _0 -0 > °Q) -0 � s o p °� t a � o� � ° a a a 4a a O a V -C CL ) ' O a Q C s ° a V o� a a E � E 0 c 0 a p Q O B E `o � c S a U D o > >> o u a u • s O a) s F- c Q a u a o c -a N X b a) a s O Z) a) N C o O °' ° V S N t ° O va E s u '1) -a oc a N a❑ N Q�— ❑ N a N 0 U Q ° s o p c N a ) a) a o a c a) =) p 0 s Q o 3 a ac ) Q ° N S N a s S a a af U � C - 3 3 � a ° a m a C: o ° a) > U U) U� 3 C a N E u o E a)o a 4) a � Qo 0)'n a -� — -a ) o a a a) N a) a � a 3 a E o o u a _ s c c X c U s E 0 S O U 0 o a O s o c O N a0 a 3 a a a a s u- CL -0 a ai a o -O u -a N L a c L a a >` O UQ) ai ) N 7 U C N ~ 0 a- 0 ° C NN - n ❑ Q i o u c _0 z t ° -a — a a E ,, a a a) Q E a ) 0) U o p s N -0 o u U U a C Q° N° s > o .� a� o f o�° c E° E �' a z H F `� N U N p 0 S 0_ t Q Oa O -a `) — N� Q Q � a • . E °� � ° c E z c -a C c C T C z s a c o 3 ._� a❑ y a - " O C a (n u aE) L �_ ° p u C: I F= N s E a a) O > Os a u Q Q 3 u a ) _2:- -a a a a v) cj s E E n a a Z a c � N E � . c N ❑ `n p ai p c V p LU a E V) 0) ° v a o ° N o -� Eu o a c c a w a � a E c t O� O � a) o _0 a N ° ca) ❑ a — a c a o N 'X a 3 a) u a a a a 0) E a o --E E — O -o c � a u o 3 N o a O z O a ) o ED No (D c O O w _ 3" N 'a O o a) y a) -a � a U Q a) 3: a a s m ° - X o m cZ F o c t O oo ,0 a) o a s 48 ax) a O c a) O c 3❑ a E o =Q) a u >- O U s L v �a) a u o V U- CY) .0 ° ap LLJ U ° O s O U c N N N S Q a u) V) N -a a i N O (A F- a 1� 1 C� Z U Z Q z 0 Z Q Z 0 F- Q z LU W a Z 0 H Q F z_ L Q Q) -2 L > `c C a) 0 Q) ° N N Q) CA C C 0 — ') o V N a o° C o Ci -t3 0° Z 0 Q C ° Q) N CL a) �.- C -0 F- v O 0 t ,O V a) N 0 u C3 -C U .Q) ,:.u_ 0 +- a) .2 C3 O i U O 0 •N C 0 Cl � 3 L i 0 U a) V -0 0) U ,> 0 N o Q Q) J a) N N o u o a) a) E a) > 0° LL N C > Q N— C a) o u V N O c C3 o i N s p a) a) 0) aa) E a N T ° aa) o° E c- c o 3 0 '� v' ° 0 o N v) a o p °� o ° -� a� � o E Q O i u O O 0 o c 0 L ° 0- > o C O Q Z O ° y C N > 0 Q ° 0 () N -0 cn a) N 0 ' a) O 0 o i c o E > 0 E ° ° V E O > s o _ o C ° c u 0 0- 0 Z °� ° s u t N E Q a) C3 N E c a3 t o p _O u o 0 N a) O C N-0 iP ° ` 0 .� N C O N c 0 a o L N � _ i3 i3 0 N O Q C o O C _ N p a) a) _ to U- -O ,CF 0 ° C3 O E 0) C3 N Q J 0 0 U O .E 3 N a) i 3 a) a) o -o _Q) N p — .v o i) N p ti a) O 0). .- _� 0 t c u a E in C -a ° o U o V) 0 3~ 0 t ° °) 3 °> ai N o -0 c c 0 a�i o C c a) O 0 o 0 -o U -0 N >. 0 0 N u s N N a) }-0 0-0 Q V N t C c c 0 Cl c a) o o o E a a) c p o a) i c c o o a) t o o O 3 N C a) .E o Z i� c _O 'a o 0 O N 0-0 CL [L � V 0) Q 3 E N } »- m E a O° o a� CL 0 c° L, Q" — E o ° o C E °� c c E o N E O Q v-0 Q o� 0 C 0 0- Qp c -0 N p c N o i3 o'0 u N U o c 6 N 0) C U L a) N > 0 Q a 0 0 0 0 0 0� o i i3 a) Q" N ' c p tj 0 -° N is C U o i a N c 'E c> o° �) O o v F o u C3 E o E E o o o o 3 'r- CL 3 �, o) o c o) a) rn C3 a) c E c o o 3 -t 0) '� 0 o Q c' U o N 0) o L 3> O-0 O p O� N c c O C O Z) c C o N-0 Q- N O- > 0 E > 0 C o o N O 3 = N s c C3� 0 N o} i7 i) N �Qp U N O V N a) = C3 cn O N C3 t s t 0 a) - t �Q Q-o 3 C3-o p ap cL ►- a� o � N Ca o � � °� o °_o E a') _ a N a) -0 > o C c U- 4) 4u ) o oa ° E C s a . o O O N vr c C 3 _0 0 0- p u Q N ° J -O 0 CN 0 .2-0 a V— N C- o y c s U C3 O c v p O 0 0 u o o -i3 0 N CO C_ -0 N Q- N> 0 -o `" s i d N Q o aa)) 0 0 C2 c N o E >- -x a) 0 o N v 0 c L C 0 N N 0 E} o u> '� in i o C c Q) a N -o E - iA 0 0 a C o N 0 Es ° °> o a) c `� o o N N t E o c 0 U a) -0 a) s Q c° a) c 00) c ? a o Q -a C3 a) o (D C3 o a 0 0 C3 o a) Q° C - s E °' c c N o N a� a) 3 a N o O° o N p °� -C o N a) a C) m 0 E o o N U o- 0 m o o a) > c o o E 0 c � a) p o a° o 0 } ; N o 3 3 0 --E o 3 a' a w o a 0) LO o o y >>> a`) U a) 0 -0 rn 3 N E E 0 aUi ° E 0 ° c o u E O E .Q) J 0 '0 O u_ > C. �: _O 3 E a) N C N C -0 0 a) o C 0- o N °� E :2 d E< ° N> •- a) a) w N N t 0 u T p N .0 C U ° 0 0 E o N .� s a) N a) t a� p U? i a) 'N L u c a) O N N Np •C JO i 0- 0) o° o u o '_ Ou N c n 6 o - U Q 0 C3 O _ E > 0) aUi ,�, L c 0 2 «- a) _ C Q- 0 0> O O O E o c: a� 0 -0 0 0 c a) Q) a) N N Ou _O 0 Q p 0 v 0 d ° c p Q— Q 0 N 0 C Q) V L N N 0 c— E V im+- o ` < ° o N — c U 0 0 N `'� C p > N 0 o 3 N C i _ o C 3 'a N '0 0 Q p N U � 7 o o N > C N -0 > ° af . 3 °) a) .rn c C3 C V)i > a) 0 0 0 a) C — i Q U N 0 - V o C 3 N N a) a) O O p j N U -0 -0 N o p V) O Q-o a) 0 Qj •� N N 0 s Q u o o af U= E 0 � V) i 3~ t a 0 c o O 0--- C 0 E 3 ° N -0 0 0 N .N O E C N O i a) N` O o N i-0 p w s _? CTS o O 4) L6 ° o ° o s a) T C) -o N p s o d- Q D o} s O O p a: 3. 3 N 0 0 -o -t; a L T — Sc,n 7 a ai 0 m L a t C •L S N C C 0 MO C) -_a a u o u o ai L o p Q-- C ° a -C -a a N o a � u 0 *N a (D a C a o p S a N a p p a ° ' C 0 c � E c a 0 > -a a o � — 0 a ? a Q D o Q O - - u- o u O E E 0 o a t 3 L Q N c 0 s c E a Q T y O Q Q a Q a -a a N 0 t p E- p > a u a 4) QQ o 0) a u a a> S E a c ai C H -a U -a o f -0 N Q) T C s ° 0 fl a Q) 0-0 ° 0 -p 0) C 2 S 0) � 2 O a L V) 2 0 0 O Y N jr- -o N Uf a a� a E 0 a .� a� C c u - L C O D o} L 3 O° _> s cn - 3 N E O a ° a 0 a) g o a) o a a -� u O_0 — u a a) T_0 E a V) E 0 a s y C a j -:FS Q Q a Q U a \p T Q L E a O a a> u S S N L y a C L O C a i _0 C C a) o S 0 s 0 c --y ' S Ea n a E E c � s ai �u O N a p a-- O a U u a 0 -ot E au a aE N N t n T S w O 1; N V V V) N— � i L N a a O N N C3 U a as a p } -a U O C a 0 y ff-a a i T -a a E N C a ° O c ¢ a � a)3 0 a; �c s c oC o a o E a, o a) ° a U) u o o � o C a 0-0 M E 'r- Y) � u Q o " 0 p a — • E U a L t a o a Q) cm E -a o Q a N a) u c C T Q- C 0 C u -0 V O > N U a a a E a a U "_ N C a) _a a a C u y > E C > >. Q_ N C O j .s a Z) 0 a a U a u a E 0- Ce Q oO a o CL N V) a a O L N O s E 0 -0 a -p c O V c � L a a s O L u a E a) 0 o a E> o -0 a o C a v a a N L_0 c C a' a a— s Z C a a C -0 N C •> V O a .v a L o-0 CO a) L w N U a s -a c c a a o a- 0 Q C a S `*- a E O cn a c Q af a Q� a a a c Z t a a X a N .� N- o C -� -0 N -a t o a) —T �_ �_ Z S� a C C a a C •C N a a O C y a) `� p ._ E O a a U a L a N CC a a c o L 0 > 7 a ;} E S _a N Q y -p G a a _� Q 7 N N .6 0 3 0 o a L U O a 3 -0 o N L a 0 m a a 0 > o a Q (D E" a � a °-0 D CQ I a) Z T E N .Q- -0- c u C y •C c S (D a N a ° Q u y E -a T C Q a L a .0 a Q- N 0 p p o C N ° t Q} C r S y C a y a) Z E 4) o o' aui C� 6 u E o N a E a N _� O 0 u O N — C S C O .�' Q a) T° `� a a s 7 S :� -a a a) — O O Q O y L L c u U L N 0- Q N O a -a N C s ' 3 Q -p t S C— a 7 O L .- O N .- V a N N C -a c 3 _V E S y U C L — Q a O a- > N D- -0 a a u a C L w � a Q L Q 0 0 a c 0 O- o C u p a 0 O � > 0 0- a o L o a E O a 0 N S -a - -a O h LU N ° N c -a 0 E C o a a y lL D s t p a V c u C S0 V a a V E N T C U o a a y 0 T a) 0-0 a O — N C `a N u a) c -0 }y C � a u a c E E O E Z � a T E ° o O T N T a N a) V O S c V N c a E 0� - j S a C a 0) o y D u a p O X L Z Q- O a y a C a V) S Q) 'n C) i L V a -6 -a _O a � c L c E E a p a a a a 0 3 0 — a > N . o o v a 0 0 0 Q) 'L a- , u > o ) u C a o z ao a a O_ O c - �} °y p , O auC:_0 Q, -0 a a o E u o u J m > 0 ° Q c o o CO a) a o Q u u N u _ V c a L C o C Q S a Q a > a a O a S a E Q O L a O a 0 a N o O N S C V) u a Q—o p -a o UL U y E D o � a u 6 0 n V — a) O c a 0 a) a3i a) O v) r z o N N 4) p i a a) C z c _ c c o N C o a p 2 a a E a) N c w c p p m 0 g U o-a z' �� c °' (D 0-a _0 3 a s �' 3 0 a a c U ti oC1� a u o ° c 0 °' c a3 a) a�� z_ a) a E a 0- a U N o a) c a N C -O ° w LL t E C a C t N a ai O �'U O a) N N (%') c -o 0 C a s a 0 a) s 0 _N a) c > N L n- n O _Q) 0--a N ° c c E a a) a C a s a t N E c •� E O a �E� -° a° c E U ° _a _4) c as rn_ct Z N '� a) m E N O 'u a a) c rn E O c ° c aU a> a z c O c c w o a a t 0° E} - Q) 0 > N 0 a) -j 0 O u T° s •� D a cl- a� c c � o 0 E 0 c N c m a c Q) u Z c° .o -o a) LU '°' O _ o E J O c u } a N a N z w a 0 a C E 0 T 3 c 0 N � a p .cs aN D J E a) 0) u O - O O _a 0 U a N U -a 0_0 a) u -0 E T-a E 0 0 a'3 O E c o —C) -C a) } c 0 0 o 0 0 C3 73 o-0 N 0 0 O a 0 N '3 _a t T a) N °v_ E a) D N m= a a' — p 0 ° o 3 0 0 .o E m 3 0 o .� z 3 c 0 0 u .N o E o ) U u a) a a 0 0 E E ° a a) a) 0 O o —a > a>> cn c} a c °s N a 0 E° o° o °' Q _o Q N a° E o ���U v �,•E a m° o o a0i a �= c a a} E 0 0 a O� F a -a 0 N ° E o 0 a) .o a O a> .- 0 E Q Q N a" `y o N a) o a) o ° ° a) Q) 0 c s-o o °) E O U a L W c a) a 4 z C C) a— S a) �- c O a) N Cl- V a) ° i a s -0 L O F- -C a U C F- a s a O C 0 O c a a ° (D 0 O T C c a) 3 N ,0 a Q ,� E .a a t C ■ ■ ■ ■ E a -0 a) -p N a c0 H> U > f -0 0- 0) o a 0 a u 0 E aci 0 a) O E 0 a) o -° � o� T E N D- o o E a .E a ._ O N o 0 O Q, a) o¢ U _ _0 s c s N p U a c T o a _a CY) E - N N p 4) c u a N a a 0 a) a U C C N a) a m N a) -6 c a o o N o E a) D° c Q 0 E c o T Q c Q -00 c U T 0 0 s c° a) u N N c a) ~ -0} u 0 a) = u O N u o E c a) 0 N a w i o 0 o a, a) N C O O Q c N a a) ( a a E c a a) U 0 a > o a N s- a Q o u '� a U 0 m 3 U a) E p E 0 c 'C +? a a) c" O N C N c� a) a) a) O 'p V 0 '~ > 0 a U y a O C3 3 p m 0 a a p a) }} > Q a a) E a N o 0 o c E E O c L � 0) a) -a E 0 E E t u ass a a— ,c i> 0 o� E� N o c aci �� _c 0 0 3 - 3 N. a a o 0 0 � aci 0 3 0 u a N 0 0 a). _ Ir- a .a _a U U o s 0 c '�" �, 0 0 a) 0 0 0 0> m N o _ ° o -°ate rn � -0 o f > o o� o o> Q 0 N o 0) a) 0 E Q) a •� .0 -0 O .c C C 0 0 a fl- " 0 C 0 E 0 -o L -a ` O c rn N 0 u N w a y N � � � O a) a) s. a) — N � E y — U u s C 0 U a) s `� c F- > 0 c o 0 o p a) E o 6 °) 0 > E _a u Z) a m o — 0 u F- a) a) -a o c a s N c u — a) o ° N c u o E o N E m 0 c a) rn £ -0 ° o o a N u O O c o N a C o a o E 0 4)> c c 0 O m O c o `a N a 0 p Q) -0 �� m ��� a)= ° �, a��i > oO a E aa) N at N E E a) p o C E N p U •y a "-O O Q.c `� a) a a i a) O C C 6 N 0 3 N s u "-0 o a) a 0° o E 0 E rn. a°'i E a —a a) E rn '- o O c '0 a y 0) U)-C Q =o E a a) .c m E m a as o o O N 'Q v7 O) �U .V .3 v4) a 4) -a C3 t C O 0- a) a 4) s N N p D • a a c o = � o ao E c a 0 'T L a a o O o Q) 0- a O a U L y O1 a Q ? O c O a N Q p p E F 6 0 0 a N c a- � M � a> c N S N a) > U a 0 > a a O 0 Fn o a a o a N Q a > E Q° T W o -0 4) � u � c C s o a) a _ N o p -O , O c p N C C > > N V .c C t Q N E �+.• p ° Q p a o- U •} —_ N N B C V L s Q .y E 'V n C N O N ° E a) a C s c U a Q) a) v7 L p N a) V L a) t 0 L C N C a) T N C S a c _O O Q) C O _ o Q a O L C L C 0 0 > o U a) S O E L V — U Q N E U 0 D O � p a c _ c C3 a a � V s _ O o E a a) a Q 0 c p V O Z a) o D ° O p v) 0) N 0) o t V _0 o V T .- 07 a V Q N r cC C -i - O -0 p N C C . N N -p a Q c a) c o 'N o} U a E ° n p ) C U O E _ 3 C s O -p w o � O� a> ) a) O c p p N O O N t N N V _ E t O N p U p � c V > O O E N V 0O ) 0 p O a) c ) -0 O Q O V U U a> N ai C: _C N C: N Q Q. O V a N O N a) C ) Q � S N O C t OQ Q U a) Q a p Q N O p c j o o N U M 0 Q N c -C N O-0 u V a) (Al ° C :' m Q c rn o o s c .0 Q m Q_ a� a E L V o LL N C Q -O O N ,O O N N O O s O 0 � C c V _ Q u C C U S o u (Al to ( a) a) E p s N ° 0 0 O V - � a a C o -0 o o 0aa Q c- 0 V 3 p c E 3 > Q O N � N O � O Q) > O a s u C: E N � ' 0) � s o o f Q N Q -o D a c > .° C Q O N - N N c O0 a -° as c Q c N 2 O .a Q O u L o C� 2 C U i a) a N crj O O > > O .p a) -a M - a O a> - L a) V s v t N a) p 0 � p O a 0 E o 0 V •N s Q Z a) C2 CL H O -O U N L CL Q Q L -0 C L L C_ L_ C N t N O Q O s C c c N N p 0 N c 0 W E L C V 3 ° Q N —_ >>� Z C> � O —_ .� > ° N u C C C V C T C C O _� c m O Q 0) c N C c C a) a) rn C C p 0 -a a n N V o E a) c p N D E a Q a) c L 'o U Z a) O — O C -C Z -p o a) O -p — a) -C -O 4 C o � Q O - p E Ei T a) S c E N p .0 •� N .c c i L) uNi a) C a) p _C •> N O •V C Z N C Q t h N ti) C 'C N y H T a) > T a) V N Q N O C S C O E U- E> L E c c E -p -o E� a) : 0-0-0 S p Q •c o> _ Z -p Q d ,� C ° j O p L t t N -0 C 3 L _O O O N ° C N C Q N > N C -p 3 N a) L U 0) i ) N N O CO O ° Q Q a) .L a U Z L C a) .E •C C3 yj C N C N T C E N p a) V V .V N U C < C > C p V O o -° o c s N O E a� '0 E> a) � 1) E o a) a O Q) L Z . r- E C CO) N 4) E o o a S 0) a) a — N Q ~ c Q o E a) a) - Q a a) O L Z O C N C Q C c > E — N C p Q E p •L) C � c o u o 0 p) O C "a p C U O E � Q E ) a3 s C- c° ° N ° C N 0 N .2 ~ C O 0 — o a 0 U O C V O 3 s a V s 0) Q C ,c 4 = ) aL c o — � u 3 Q ` `acL > � E L — 0 Q N N O a V> a a Q C .N V O Z O -0 O a N c L N ° o � _N - Q O c N N V E o— a N O a Q E E s 4) C ° ) N Z Z) O Z p a) a O Q a p U� p� p O a) E s c m D S c N 0 O C : p H Q) c a) E- Q aE p O N 'O 0 ° c O ,c s O c t O O _ p L O Q p a O Z U V Q° 4)) -0 ° ° °' W� c rn ' � c O E L >o i a) O o -O N Q C o n c O N _ s 2 Q N 2 a c ° a a o V • V v N O d V p > o N -° C Q 04 N> N p > p o ° O O s ° a a) O� 0 C C Q' U C V N L V ; -C O n r o / � ± _0co q� f f ƒ / 3 tee/ �a z u a j 0• 'E / •@ m u 7 ' u / \ § _ E0D o C R'n E c ± _ ; _ e ! 0 -0 t e e 2 .g t m c ' Q cu7 E / f % /Tk °oƒ u / . /372/§ V) \§ 0 0 ®= o' 7 t ) / 0 o o e 2 ƒ E\ ° / ƒ q) 0 0 C: ƒ 7ƒ o z ƒ a �� e o a / m u m o n o / / m s m u 'n g 2 ._ ° o u 7 - p -0 § u \ t ^ \ § ƒ 7 �� § 6- G C ©o c= ® t a / \/ k\ 0 \ ke\ \/ƒ n 0 n e E 7 7 7 0 E c: 7§ » U / c— / c> m 0 0- ' 2/ � k \/ 7 c 0 C » u 3 2- \± \ \ /o =g®�7g ._ o o - 0.o . o u % / s §emu % a -.— n2 e @ (n $ § \ / $ /7 \ o a ; ¥ _ f CL \\Ff0 / ƒ ± ' � G % k if%t 9 � \ƒ a) / S / /S¢09Eƒ / oƒ � G* `� °J ms's - 0 7® 2 ƒ c -i o o =) E 0 0 o < z 3 = u a. u o \.§ ƒ. tƒ o / ± _0co q� f f / \ Qƒ 0) o 0• _0 /\ 7 ' u \ u/ § y 0\ o t 0 -/ ±\ ƒ E o c° a/ t U-e 2 E e ' « u -0 t e e 2 .g t J o 0 u o.- 2 f % ` 0 °« c m t f e f . ._ E a 2 g \§ ƒ o REa /�.2• F($ ƒ E\ ° 0 u 0 0 C: ƒ 7ƒ o /- c ƒ a �� e o m u m o n o / / ¥ % �._ .> o - ® o ^ } ƒ ._ ° o m m ,) < 7 - p -0 t ^ \ / 6- G ± % 13 -a .y ® t a / \/ k\ 0 $ $ ±_ } %\ 0 n 7 7§ » U ƒ \ ƒ c 0 C » T « 07 u 2 ± \- ± ® r o -� 2 2 o.-© _ 99• % / s §emu - =7 m - & / ± ° C'- a � a t o a ; ¥ C, 7 � ( / ƒ ± ' � G % k 9 � U a) 7° / ® u 2 2/` 7 0 oƒ \\ 0-\ 0 0 7® 2 ƒ 0 > % -0 0 U \ § e o / E o o \.§ ƒ. 0 y ' &yC: —CZ) o �� JCL ± Eo7- \� 7 E -o /�ƒ 7 / Pf / ƒ a 9 7 � 0 9 f § g$ 7 \/\ o\ 7} 7 Q) S- 7 V)) Q) 0) 2 // 0 ' o 0 u G c o c o c o Q) - a 0 2 5 t c -0 * ;° \ t-0 § c- c g t c 7 .) n_ Q) .2 a t ° t -® i 7$ 9 0ƒ 2 2 %: f o e.� - ■ 2 a E �f -0 e = e 0) 2 \'\ °�3J 2 c° ± 2/ 0D ©q off/ °o :a)E ± �ƒ §� 70 0 003:00 �In -077 c m ks o� ° \�- o�7t8< � 0.1 0) a � • �3 c > 0) _0 '2 0.g % ± 0 o - �._ c t ? - o . . m o / � k ƒ / : § 2 � \ $ / 7 o ƒ ) 2 E 2 3 � 2 > 0- 0 2 2 o 5 t ( @ u_.- e o f `O e c z D •- m o 0 0 b.g e C 9 'g o �.t • c o } G » + ; [ 2 , 7 c a c o 0 n ) % ) ƒ / ƒ ƒ .\ % o o ƒ a \ 2 ( E W o E 2 : o ƒ o _ ƒ / OF \ < / u 2 U 2 % M FI uit� l7 U S d 'AAtO{d avow U01 ISO PNq SMUEWaQ a ulIpqdw?J N Q �o c� X L CL v, a O a za c W U c W �� v 0 � J ro i C a -o U U Cry o c T v _EE uu /ot U U v v 'pb /,)+aySnoa ro CL ' CA n a � U N c ^V r� 4J CL a� u c 4 u G o� r Z J � r z r 2 0 U a ATTACHMENT 4 Summary of General Plan Amendments The General Plan amendments proposed are as follows. Text that is proposed to be deleted from the General Plan is shown in strokethro g- and text that is proposed to be added to the General Plan is shown in underline: The Table of Contents will be amended to reflect the changes noted below. Chapter 1: Background Figure 1 -1 (Land Use exhibit) shall be amended to include one new General Plan land use designation: "Dublin Crossing" All property in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan project area boundary shall have the Dublin Crossing land use designation. Figure 1 -1 shall also be revised to include the Dublin Crossing Planning Area boundary. Figure 1 -2 (Planning Areas exhibit) shall be amended to include the Dublin Crossing Planning Area Boundary Section 1.4 Primary and Extended Planning Areas shall be amended to read: The General Plan includes policies for all three four of the City's Planning Areas: the Primary Planning Area, Eastern Extended Planning Area Western Extended Planning Area, and the Dublin Crossing Planning Area. The Primary Planning Area consists of the original 1982 City boundaries and those annexations occurring to the west between 1985 and 1991 and is roughly 3,100 acres. The Eastern Extended Planning Area is located east of the Primary Planning Area while the Western Extended Planning Area is located west of the Primary Planning Area. The Eastern and Western Extended Planning Areas are coterminous with the City's Sphere of Influence and are described in further detail below. The Dublin Crossing Planning Area consists of approximately 189 acres north of Dublin Boulevard between Scarlett Drive and Arnold Road. New Section 1.4.3 shall be added. 1.4.3 Dublin Crossing Planning Area The Dublin Crossing Planning Area boundaries are coterminous with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan boundary. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is a plan for the orderly development of approximately 189 acres that includes 8.7 acres owned by Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, an 8.9 acre parcel owned by NASA, and an approximately 172 acre portion of the 2,485 -acre Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Camp Parks) in the center of Dublin, north of Interstate 580 and Dublin Boulevard. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan addresses the future development of the project area, which includes demolition of the existing buildings and other improvements on the site and construction of a residential mixed -use project as described in the Specific Plan. Section 1.8.1.3 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and Employee Density Measurements for Non - Residential Classifications shall be amended to read: Unless otherwise identified in a Specific Plan or other policy document, Floor Area Ratio (FAR) measurements for General Plan purposes are based on gross acreage. Gross acreage shall be determined by calculating the area of the site and by adding one -half of the area of abutting streets, provided that the street width used for calculation shall not be less than 25 feet or more than 50 feet. Public or private streets within the boundaries of the site, as well as streets abutting the site, shall be calculated within the gross acreage total. Employee density measurements for General Plan purposes are based on gross building square footage and are used to estimate the number of jobs within each classification. The minimum and maximum permitted FAR's, where applicable, and employee density measurements are shown in parentheses next to each land use classification. New Section 1.8.1.8 shall be amended to read: 1.8.1.8 Dublin Crossina Plannina Area Dublin Crossing. This designation allows for a range of residential and commercial uses at a variety of densities and FARs consistent with the Dublin Crossinq Specific Plan. Employee densities for commercial uses in this Planninq Area are consistent with other commercial land use designations at 200 — 450 square feet per employee. Existing Section 1.8.1.8 shall be renumbered to 1.8.1.9 Chapter 2: Land Use Element New Section 2.5 shall be amended to read. 2.5 Dublin Crossinq Planninq Area The Dublin Crossinq Planninq Area is approximately 189 acres that includes 8.7 acres owned by Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, an 8.9 acre parcel owned by NASA, and an approximately 172 acre portion of the 2,485 -acre Camp Parks Reserve Forces Traininq Area (Camp Parks) in the center of Dublin, north of Interstate 580 and Dublin Boulevard. The Dublin Crossinq Specific Plan addresses the future development of the proiect area, which includes demolition of the existing buildings and other improvements on the site and construction of a residential mixed -use proiect. The development potential of the Dublin Crossinq Planninq Area is noted in Table 2.4. Table 2.4: Land Use Development Potential — Dublin Crossinq Planninq Area Specific Plan Land Use District Total Net Acreage') Permitted Density Total Residential Development Potential Total Commercial Development Potential Dublin Crossing Medium 41.9 6.0 -14.0 units /net acre Up to 1,995 dwelling units n/a Density Residential (DC MDR) Dublin Crossing Medium- 46.5 14.1 -25 units /net acre High Density Residential (DC M -HDR) Mixed Use (MU) (2) 13.2 20.1 -60 units /net acre 75,000 to 200,000 0.25 to 1.0 FAR General Commercial /DC 9_1 14.1 -25 units /net acre gross square feet Medium -High Density 0.25 to 1.0 FAR Residential (GC /DC M- Specific Plan Land Use District Total Net Acreage�' Permitted Density Total Residential Development Potential Total Commercial Development Potential HDR)IJ General Commercial /DC 9 -9 20.1 -60 units /net acre High Density Residential 0.25 to 1.0 FAR (GC /DC HDR) School (S)�5� 12 6.0 -14.0 units /net acre n/a Park P T 30 n/a n/a n/a Open Space (OS) 2_6 n/a n/a n/a Roadways, Utilities, and 23.8 n/a n/a n/a other Infrastructure Total Protect Area 189 acres Total Population 5,387 persons (1,995 units at 2.7 persons per dwelling unit) Total Employment 444 to 1,000 lobs Notes: (1) Net acreage is defined as the gross acreage less backbone street, public street, and right -of -way area. (2) The Mixed Use land use district shall contain a minimum of 75,000 gross square feet of commercial uses (with a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.0 for the area designated for commercial development) and a 5 acre neighborhood park. In conjunction with an application that meets these commercial and park requirements, residential uses are permitted with a density of 20.1 to 60 units /net acre. FAR applies only to commercial uses. (3) Can have commercial only, mixed -use, or residential -only uses. FAR applies only to commercial uses. (4) Park acreage is net usable acres. In the case of the 30 net -acre Community Park, the park is exclusive of Chabot Creek. (5) The school site may be developed at the Dublin Crossing Medium Density Residential (DC MDR) use and density if the site is not utilized by the Dublin Unified School District and if the Specific Plan maximum of 1,995 residential units is not exceeded. Existing Section 2.5 shall be renumbered to 2.6 Section 2.6.6 shall be amended to read. 2.6.6 Dublin Crossing Planning Area A. Guiding Policy 1. Any commercial development in the Dublin Crossing Planning Area shall be in compliance with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. B. Implementing Policies 1. Concentrate commercial uses near the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road. Commercial development should be focused in the Mixed Use (MU) land use district and a minimum of 75,000 square feet of commercial uses will be located in this land district prior to allowing commercial in the General Commercial /Dublin Crossing Medium -High Density Residential (GC /DC M -HDR) and General Commercial /Dublin Crossing High Density Residential (GC /DC HDR) land use districts. 2. Commercial development shall be designed to be consistent with the development standards and design -guidelines of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Existing Section 2.6 shall be renumbered to 2.7 New Section 2.7.7 shall be added: 2.7.7 Dublin Crossing Planning Area A. Guiding Policy 1. Any residential development in the Dublin Crossing Planning Area shall be in compliance with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. B. Implementing Policies 1. Locate higher density residential uses along Dublin Boulevard and within one -half mile walking or biking distance to transit facilities. 2. Promote development of a wide variety of housing types and housing alternatives for Dublin residents. 3. Allow the development of residential units consistent with the Dublin Crossing Medium Density Residential (DC MDR) land use district, development standards, and design guidelines should DUSD choose to not construct a school facility on the site designated for school uses. 4. Residential development shall be designed to be consistent with the development standards and design guidelines of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Chapter 3: Parks and Open Space Element Figure 3 -1 (Parks and Open Space exhibit) shall be amended to include the Dublin Crossing Planning Area Boundary, the location of future parks in the Planning Area, and the location of future bike lanes in the Planning Area as identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. New Section 3.2.3 shall be added. 3.2.3 Dublin Crossing Planning Area A. Guiding Policy 1. The creation of any new parks or open space areas for the preservation of natural resources or for public health and safety in the Dublin Crossing Planning Area shall be in compliance with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. B. Implementing Policies 1. Provide pedestrian and bicycle facilities to meet the goals and objectives of the Specific Plan and to promote alternatives to automobile use and reduce parking demand. Pedestrian sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and multi -use trails shall safely connect residential. commercial. and recreational uses to each other and to transit facilities. 2. Community and Neighborhood Park land shall be owned by the City of Dublin and shall be used in accordance with the Specific Plan. Land designated as open space, creeks and waterways, and water treatment /detention /bioretention facilities required to serve the Specific Plan area will not be owned or maintained by the City of Dublin. 3. Underground water detention facilities shall be allowed within the envelope of Central Park and shall be designed to enable the development of or programming of above - ground facilities. 4. The re- aligned drainage channel (now referred to as Chabot Creek) shall be allowed within the Central Park land envelope, but shall not be included within the 30 net -acre calculation of usable park land. Chabot Creek shall not be a part of the public -owned park land, but shall be owned and maintained by a separate entity that is acceptable to the City. New Section 3.4.4 shall be added. 3.4.4 Dublin Crossing Planning Area A. Guiding Policy 1. The creation of any new parks or open space areas for outdoor recreation in the Dublin Crossing Planning Area shall be in compliance with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. B. Implementing Policies 1. Locate the Community Park near the intersection of Dublin Boulevard, Scarlett Drive and the Iron Horse Regional Trail to provide physical and visual access to the Dublin Community and to enable a strong connection between the parks in the Specific Plan area and the Iron Horse Regional Trail. 2. The park and open space system shall be designed to reinforce a sense of community identity and character for the Specific Plan area and the City of Dublin. 3. Create a park system in which each park satisfies the recreation needs of a variety of user groups and a range of active and passive activities. 4. Create public open spaces that are active, safe, and inviting, and allow for playful elements, such as interactive sculptures and furniture. Chapter 4: Schools, Public Lands, and Utilities Elements Figure 4 -1 (Schools and Public Lands exhibit) shall be amended to include the Dublin Crossing Planning Area Boundary and the location of the future school site in the Planning Area as identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Section 4.2.1 shall be amended to read: 4.2.1 Wmar-i and - xtendedAll Planning Areas Section 4.3.1 shall be amended to read: 4.3.1 Primary and xtendedAll Planning Areas Section 4.4.1 shall be amended to read: 4.4.1 Primary and xtendedAll Planning Areas Section 4.5.1 shall be amended to read: 4.5.1 Primary and xtendedAll Planning Areas Section 4.6.1 shall be amended to read: 4.6.1 Primary and - xtendedAll Planning Areas Section 4.7.1 shall be amended to read: 4.6.1 Drimar-i and - xtendedAll Planning Areas Chapter 5: Circulation and Scenic Highways Element Figure 5 -1 (Roadway Classifications) shall be amended to include the new roadways identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Figures 5 -2a and 5 -2b (Transit Map) shall be amended to include the new roadways, school site, parks, and open space areas identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Figures 5 -3a and 5 -3b (Bicycle Circulation) shall be amended to include the new bicycle facilities and roadways identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Figures 5 -4a and b (Multi -Modal Map) shall be amended to include all new public facilities identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Section 5.2.2 shall be amended to read: 5.2.2 'r;mar„ and xtender'All Planning Areas Section 5.2.6 shall be amended to read: 5.2.6 Dublin Crossinq Planning Area — Additional Policies The Dublin Crossinq Specific Plan contains policies and guidelines which aim to create a multi -modal circulation system to serve the project area as well as provide safe and convenient connections to the rest of the City. The policies contained in Chapter 4 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan shall be implemented as development in the Planning Area is carried out. Existing Section 5.2.6 shall be renumbered to Section 5.2.7 Section 5.3.1 shall be amended to read: 5.3.1 °rimary and ExtendeIAII Planning Areas Section 5.4.3 shall be amended to read: 5.4.3 Primary and xtender'All Planning Areas Section 5.5.1 shall be amended to read: 5.5.1 Primary and ExtendedAll Planning Areas Section 5.6.1 shall be amended to read: 5.6.1 Primary and ExtendeIAII Planning Areas Section 5.7.1 shall be amended to read: 5.7.1 PWmary and x- tendedAll Planning Areas Section 5.9.1 shall be amended to read: 5.9.1 Primary and ExtendedAll Planning Areas Chapter 7: Conservation Element The headings of Sections 7.2.1, 7.3.1, 7.5.1, 7.6.1, 7.7.1, and 7.8.1 shall be amended to read. Or;mar„ and ExtendedAll Planning Areas Chapter 8: Seismic Safety and Safety Element Figure 8 -1 (Geologic Hazards and Constraints) shall be amended to be in conformance with updated information on the location of fault traces through the Dublin Crossing Planning Area. The headings of Sections 8.2.1, 8.3.1.1, 8.3.2.1, 8.3.3.1, and 8.3.4.1 shall be amended to read. °r;mar„ and ExtendedAll Planning Areas Chapter 9: Noise Element Section 9.2.1 shall be amended to read: Primary and ExtendedAll Planning Areas Chapter 10: Community Design and Sustainability Element Figure 10 -5 (Villages) shall be amended to change the "Camp Parks Exchange Areas" designation to "Dublin Crossing Specific Plan" New Section 10.2.E shall be amended to read: E. Dublin Crossing Specific Plan The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (DCSP) provides policies and regulations for development in this 189 acre area north of Dublin Boulevard between Scarlett Drive and Arnold Road. The Specific Plan includes regulations on permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited land uses, development standards, and design guidelines, and provides the framework for the development of future public facilities. All other section shall be renumbered appropriately. Section 10.7.4.K shall be amended to read. Create a SpeGi 1 n to gee —the Implement the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, which has been created to incorporate many policies and guidelines from the Community Design and Sustainability Element. ORDINANCE NO. xx — 13 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN * * * * * * * * * * * * ** APPROVING ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO CREATE A NEW CHAPTER: 8.31 (DUBLIN CROSSING ZONING DISTRICT), REZONE PROPERTY WITHIN THE DUBLIN CROSSING SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT AREA TO THE DUBLIN CROSSING ZONING DISTRICT, AMEND THE ZONING MAP TO IDENTIFY THE LOCATION OF THE NEW ZONING DISTRICT, AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 8.12 (ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED USES), AND AMEND CHAPTER 8.104 (SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW) PA 08 -049 WHEREAS, the Applicant, Dublin Crossing LLC (SunCal Companies) has submitted a Planning Application to enable private development on approximately 189 acres of property that is currently part of the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area. The proposal includes the approval of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, General Plan Amendments, Zoning Ordinance Amendments, Rezoning properties to a new Dublin Crossing Zoning District, and consideration of a Development Agreement and certification of an Environmental Impact Report, among other related actions. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the "Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Project" or the "Project "; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan requires that certain amendments be made to the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map to assist in the implementation of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan and related General Plan Amendments; and WHEREAS, on , 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution XX -13 certifying the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR and adopting CEQA findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project prior to adopting this Ordinance; and; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan and related General Plan Amendments were adopted by City Council on , 2013 via Resolution xx -xx; and WHEREAS, an implementing action of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is to create a new Dublin Crossing Zoning District (Chapter 8.31) that will apply to all of the property identified in Figure 1 -2 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. The new zoning district identifies permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited uses as well as development standards for properties within the project area; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Zoning Map is amended to include the location of the new Dublin Crossing Zoning District that will include all property identified in Figure 1 -2 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, all property identified in Figure 1 -2 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan shall be rezoned from their existing zoning district to Dublin Crossing Zoning District; and WHEREAS, Staff has identified additional amendments to the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Chapters 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) and 8.104 (Site Development Review)) that will further implement the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the text amendments to Chapters 8.12 and 8.104 and the text of the new zoning district (Chapter 8.31) are shown in Sections 3 through Section 5 of this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a properly noticed public hearing on the Project on , 2013 and adopted Resolution 13 -xx recommending that the City Council approve amendments to Title 8 (Zoning Ordinance) of the Municipal Code and the Zoning Map set forth in this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on , 2013; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the City Council approve the Project, including the Zoning Ordinance Amendments and Zoning Map Amendment; and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 8.120.050.13 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council finds that the Zoning Ordinance Amendments and Zoning Map Amendment are consistent with the Dublin General Plan, as amended, and the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan adopted by Resolution No. xx -xx in that the proposed Zoning Amendment creates a new zoning district that identifies the allowable uses and development standards stated in the Specific Plan as the zoning standards for the district; and WHEREAS, Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.31, and the other related Zoning Ordinance Amendments identified in this Ordinance, are consistent with the Specific Plan, and the Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan in that the City Council adopted Resolution No. xx -xx, finding that the development envisioned by the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is consistent with the guiding and implementing policies of the General Plan in each of the Elements; and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 8.120.050A of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council makes the following findings for the Zoning Ordinance Amendments and Zoning Map Amendment: (1) the proposed Amendments would be harmonious and compatible with existing and potential development in surrounding areas because the allowable land uses, development standards, and design guidelines identified in the Dublin Crossing Zoning District reflect uses, designs, and densities that are already found in the project vicinity; (2) the Project site is physically suitable for the type, intensity of the zoning district being proposed because it is flat, easily accessible, served by existing utilities, within the City's existing circulation network, and in close proximity to transit facilities; and (3) the proposed Amendments 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 because the Dublin Crossing Zoning District, and the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, contains development standards and design guidelines specifically created to ensure that new development will be an enhancement, not detriment, to the community; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use its independent judgment and consider the FEIR, all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows: Page 2 of 7 Section 1: California Environmental Quality Act Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "): In compliance with CEQA, the City Council certified a Final EIR for the Project, including the zoning actions, and adopting CEQA findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project on 2013, via Resolution xx -xxx prior to adopting this Ordinance. Section 2: Zoning Map Amendment Pursuant to Chapter 8.102, Title 8 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code, the Dublin Zoning Map is amended to include a new zoning district: Dublin Crossing Zoning District. In approving this Ordinance, the Dublin City Council does rezone the following project area ( "the Property ") to the Dublin Crossing Zoning District: Approximately 189 acres bound generally by 5t" Street to the north, Scarlett Drive to the west, Dublin Boulevard to the south, and Arnold Road to the east. APNs 986- 0001- 001 -15 (partial), 986- 0034 - 002 -00, and 986- 0034 - 006 -00 The project area that will be changed to the Dublin Crossing Zoning District is shown below: Page 3 of 7 Section 3: New Chapter 8.31 (Dublin Crossing Zoning District) is added to Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code to read as follows: CHAPTER 8.31 DUBLIN CROSSING ZONING DISTRICT 8.31.010 Purpose. The purpose of this Chapter is to establish a zoning district to implement the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan and to ensure that all development in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan area is reviewed for substantial compliance with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. 8.31.020 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, adopted by the City Council on xxx by Resolution xx -xx, and as may be amended thereafter, shall be used to guide the review of all applications in the Dublin Crossing Zoning District. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan contains all information regarding permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited uses, development standards, and design guidelines to direct the development and use of properties within the Specific Plan area. All new development in the Dublin Crossing Zoning District shall be reviewed for consistency with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. 8.31.030 Applicability. A. Zoning District. The Dublin Crossing Zoning District applies to all properties within the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan area boundary as shown on the Dublin Zoning Map. B. Relation to Previous Zoning District. All uses and structures within the Dublin Crossing Zoning District that were previously subject to the uses, standards and other regulations set forth in the Agricultural (A) Zoning District, existing as of the adoption date of this ordinance, may continue to remain in accordance with Chapter 8.140 (Non- Conforming Structures and Uses). 8.31.040 Site Development Review. Site Development Review is required for all development in the Dublin Crossing Zoning District. A. Application. The Applicant shall submit a complete Site Development Review application pursuant to Chapter 8.104 (Site Development Review) and Chapter 8.124 (Applications, Fees and Deposits), accompanied by a fee and such materials as required by the Director of Community Development. B. Findings. To approve a Site Development Review application in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan area, the following findings (in lieu of the findings listed in Chapter 8.104) must be made and shall be supported by substantial evidence in the public record: 1. The proposed development is in substantial compliance with all applicable aspects of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan and is consistent with the applicable design guidelines and development standards contained therein; Page 4 of 7 2. The proposed development is in compliance with the Dublin Crossing Infrastructure Master Plan; and 3. Approval of the proposed development will not result in a new, significant unmitigated environmental impacts nor a significant increase in impacts previously identified in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report. If one or more of the above findings cannot be made, such decision must be supported by substantial evidence in the record, and the Site Development Review application shall be denied. 8.31.050 Permitted Uses. Permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited uses are as specified per district in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan in Section 2.7. For any substantially similar uses not listed in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, their permissibility shall be determined by the Community Development Director. 8.31.060 Development Standards. The development standards for the Dublin Crossing Zoning District are as contained in 2.6 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. 8.31.070 Relation to Zoning Ordinance. Except as provided in Sections 2.6 and 2.7 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, all development in the Dublin Crossing Zoning District shall be subject to the zoning regulations of the closest comparable zoning district, as determined by the Director of Community Development, and the regulations of the Zoning Ordinance where the Specific Plan and the provisions of the Dublin Crossing Zoning District are silent. In the event of conflict between other zoning provisions and the Specific Plan, the Specific Plan provisions shall control. Section 4: Section 8.12.050 of Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) of Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code is amended to read as follows. All other sections of Chapter 8.12 remain unchanged and in full effect. 8.12.050 Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Land Uses. The following "Land Use Matrix" lists the permitted and conditionally permitted Use Types, as defined in Chapter 8.08, Definitions, in each Zoning District, and the decision making- authority. Uses in the Downtown Dublin Zoning District are set forth in Chapter 8.30 (Downtown Dublin Zoning District) of the Zoning Ordinance. Uses in the Dublin Crossing Zoning District are set forth in Chapter 8.31 (Dublin Crossing Zoning District) of the Zoning Ordinance. (No changes made to the Land Use Matrix itself, so it is not reprinted here) Section 5: Section 8.104.040 of Chapter 8.104 (Site Development Review) of Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code is amended to modify Section 8.104.040.H and add a new Section 8.104.040.1 Page 5 of 7 as follows. All other sections of Chapter 8.104 remain unchanged and in full effect. Note that the new Section 8.104.0401 contains the same language as existing Section 8.104.040H H. Dublin Crossing Zoning District. All improvements within the Dublin Crossing Zoning District shall be reviewed in accordance with and subject to Chapter 8.31, Dublin Crossing Zoning District. I. All Other Improvements. All other improvements to structures or a site, which are not otherwise mentioned in this Chapter, shall be subject to a Site Development Review Waiver or Site Development Review, as determined by the Community Development Director. Section 6: Severability. In the event any section or portion of this ordinance shall be determined invalid or unconstitutional, such section or portion shall be deemed severable and all other sections or portions hereof shall remain in full force and effect. Section 7: Savings Clause. All code provisions, ordinances, and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this chapter are repealed. The provisions of this chapter, insofar as they are substantially the same as existing code provisions relating to the same subject matter shall be construed as restatements and continuations thereof and not as new enactments. With respect, however, to violations, rights accrued, liabilities accrued, or appeals taken, prior to the effective date of this ordinance, under any chapter, ordinance, or part of an ordinance shall be deemed to remain in full force for the purpose of sustaining any proper suit, action, or other proceedings, with respect to any such violation, right, liability or appeal. Section 8: This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its final adoption. 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 Section 39633 of the Government Code of California. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin on this _ day of , 20137 by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Page 6 of 7 ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor G :1PA #12007107 -036 Downtown Dublin Specific PlaMPC 12.14.20100DSP ZOAs.doc Page 7 of 7 Dublin Crossing Community Benefit and Potential Land Use Package June 12 2013 .... Dublin Crossing Community Benefit and Potential Land Use Package Development Agreement Points The following package would be the basis for a Development Agreement between SunCal (Dublin Crossing Venture LLC) and the City of Dublin. It is based upon a land plan that would include approximately 1,600 residential units (with a CEQA allowance to go up to 1,995 residential units) and 75,000 to 200,000 of commercial development pending appropriate CEQA review. Parks • SunCal will dedicate to City 30 net acres for Central Park, of which 8.7 acres will be subject to the ACSPA exchange described below. City agrees to the Chabot Creek on a privately owned 1.5 acre parcel within the boundaries of Central Park, but not included in the 30 acres. Underground detention facilities to be allowed within the 30 net acres. Ownership of Chabot Creek storm water flow area and underground detention facilities to be at City's discretion to be owned and or maintained by either a future HOA or other entity acceptable to both parties. • SunCal will dedicate to City 5 net acres of Neighborhood Park(s). • As the value of the park dedications (Central Park and Neighborhood Park) described below exceed the park dedication and improvement obligations that would otherwise be required to be offered or paid for the 1,600 -1995 units and all commercial development proposed in the Specific Plan, all park land components of the Public Facilities Fee and Quimby requirements will be deemed fully satisfied and paid through these dedications. In order to receive park land credits prior to dedications being made, SunCal shall provide security acceptable to the City (including but not limited to bonds or quitclaim deeds in escrow for some or all of acreage to be dedicated) that ensures that fees in -lieu of land dedication (Quimby) and the Public Facilities Fee community park land component will be received even if future dedications are not made. • Other components of the Public Facility Fee as described in the City Fee Schedule (not related to park land acquisition and park improvements) shall continue to apply. • Phase I of Central Park and dedication to City to coincide with phase two (of five) of master plan build out. Phase 2 of Central Park and dedication to City to coincide with phase three (of five) of master plan build out. Phase 3 of Central Park and dedication to City to coincide with phase five (of five) of master plan build out. Each Central Park dedication to City to be ten acres in size. Neighborhood Park dedication to City to coincide with phase four (of five) of master plan build out. • Subject to the provisions of the CFD section below, SunCal shall pay through the Dublin Crossing Development Agreement Fee $15 million (divided equally across 1,600 units) that shall be used by the City solely for development of Central Park and the Neighborhood Park within the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan area to enable construction of all 35 acres of parks within the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Fees to enable construction schedule based upon dedication schedule above. • City will spend the $15M only on the two parks in the Specific Plan area. No more than six - sevenths of the $15M collected shall be spent on the Community Park. • City agrees to complete construction of Community Park phases within 24 months following dedication of the park land by SunCal and acceptance of the park land by the City and provided —1— Dublin Crossing Community Benefit and Potential Land Use Package June 12 2013 .... that SunCal has funded park construction for that phase of the park in the amount of $4,285,714 per phase. • City agrees to complete construction of Neighborhood Park within 24 months following dedication of the park land by SunCal and acceptance of the park land by the City and provided that SunCal has funded park construction for the Neighborhood Park in the amount of $2,142,858. • For maps creating lots for which park construction has not been fully funded, SunCal shall provide security acceptable to the City that ensures that the community park land component of the Public Facilities Fee will be paid. Such security will be released when the park construction is funded. • City will accept each phase of the Community Park and will accept the Neighborhood Park upon completion of rough grading of dedicated park site and completion of associated improvements (including park frontages with curb, gutter, sidewalk and access roadways) with the required improvements to be defined in the approved Tentative Map. City agrees to utilize additional funding sources for construction of entire Central Park • Above fees due at builder Final Map recordation on a per unit basis spread equally across the entire project at 1,600 units. Once fees have been paid for 1,600 units, further units will not be subject to this fee. • No maps smaller than 40 units will be allowed to pay on a per unit basis. If a map is filed for less than 40 units that filing will be required to pay for 40 units. ACSPA Parcel Prior to Council adoption of the DA, City to secure an agreement with the ACSPA to purchase the 8.7 acre ACSPA parcel with an option to purchase until at least December 2016. • The City to use funds not provided by SunCal plus a $2.8M contribution (subject to the provisions of the CFD section below) from SunCal in the Dublin Crossing Development Agreement Fee to purchase the ACSPA parcel, which contribution shall be made by SunCal within Phase Two of master plan. • In order to consolidate the park lands to create a larger Central Park, SunCal and the City will exchange land. The City will exchange the 8.7 acre ACSPA parcel for 8.7 acres of parkland to be dedicated in the 30 acre Central Park, which properties are agreed to have equivalent value. It is anticipated that the property swap will coincide with City's acquisition of the property from ACSPA and SunCal's ownership of and improvements to Phase 1 of the Community Park site. Improvements shall include rough grading and completion of associated improvements (including park frontages with curb, gutter, sidewalk and access roadways) with the required improvements to be defined in the approved Tentative Map. • Subject to the provisions of the CFD section below SunCal agrees to lend to the City an additional amount to be agreed to by the parties for ACSPA land acquisition (as early as phase two of master plan build out). If accepted by the City, the loan shall be repaid over a four year period by City beginning in Fiscal Year 2017 -2018 or one year after the loan is executed, whichever date is later. —2— Dublin Crossing Community Benefit and Potential Land Use Package June 12 2013 .... Transportation Fees • SunCal will pay a transportation fee at each building permit based on the amount such development would be subject to under the City's Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee ( "EDTIF "). The amounts will be fixed for the term of the Development Agreement based on current EDTIF rates on the effective date of the Development Agreement. • SunCal will receive a credit against the transportation fee obligation for EDTIF projects constructed by it above its fair share of project expense based on traffic mitigation measures in the EI R. Amount of the credit will be based on actual construction costs. Developer will not receive any credit for necessary project right of way owned by it, but costs associated with all other right of way acquisitions will be eligible for transportation fee credit. Iron Horse Trail /Dublin Bridge • SunCal agrees to fund $50,000 for bridge design upon execution of DA. This advance will be credited against per -unit Dublin Crossing Development Agreement Fee obligations until exhausted. • Subject to the provisions of the CFD section below, SunCal agrees to contribute $1 million through the Dublin Crossing Development Agreement Fee which shall be used by the City toward construction of the potential future Iron Horse Trail /Dublin Bridge. The Iron Horse Trail /Dublin Bridge contributions will be made on a per unit basis at each phase. The $1 million contribution is agreed to satisfy any fair share contribution which may be a recommended mitigation measure for project related traffic impacts to this intersection. Above Fees due at builder final map recordation on a per unit basis spread equally across the entire project at 1,600 units. Once fees have been paid for 1.600 units, further units will not be subject to this fee. • No maps smaller than 40 units will be allowed to pay on a per unit basis. If a map is filed for less than 40 units that filing will be required to pay for 40 units. Central Park Maintenance Endowment • Subject to the provisions of the CFD section below, SunCal agrees to a $2.51VI Park Endowment contribution through the Dublin Crossing Development Agreement Fee. • Endowment contributions to be paid proportional upon completion of Central Park acreage construction as outlined above ($2.5 million divided by total Central Park acres). • SunCal to provide security for each phase of endowment contributions in the form of a bond or other acceptable instrument due 18 months prior to the City's obligation to improve a particular park or park phase. The bonds or other security attributable to a phase will be released upon payment of such phase's endowment contribution. If security is not provided, City is not obligated to improve a particular park or park phase. Use of Funds by City Fees paid by SunCal pursuant to the Dublin Crossing Development Agreement Fee (and not Public Facility Fees) shall be allocated by the City in the timing and manner as described herein and in accordance with Table 1 (below), so that project funding is coordinated with the timeline —3— Dublin Crossing Community Benefit and Potential Land Use Package June 12 2013 .... for development of on -site improvements described herein. The Dublin Crossing Development Agreement Fee is fixed (not subject to escalation). In total, the various components of the Dublin Crossing Development Agreement Fees payable on a per unit basis (spread over 1600 units) equal $25,031. The components are: Park Construction, $9,375; Community Benefit, $11,688; Iron Horse Bridge Design, $31; Iron Horse Bridge Construction, $625; ACSPA parcel contribution, $1,750; and Park Maintenance Endowment, $1,563. All advances of components of the Dublin Crossing Development Agreement Fee will be treated as credits against future per unit Dublin Crossing Development Fees, without respect to the individual component for which the advance was made. For example, the $50,000 initial contribution due for the Iron Horse Trail Bridge Design will be credit against the entire $25,031 fee, rather than just against the $31 component associated with the Bridge Design. So, the first two units will pay $62 (2 units times $25,031 per unit fee minus $50,000 credit from Bridge Design advance. • Community Benefit Payments use shall be limited to municipal capital improvements and available for any projects citywide which are CFD eligible. • Park Construction contributions shall be used for park construction in the Specific Plan area only. • Iron Horse Trail Bridge Construction contribution shall be used for construction of the bridge. Should the bridge not be constructed, the $1M shall be considered an additional Community Benefit Payment for use on other municipal capital projects which are CFD eligible. CFD • SunCal will apply for and City will process and consider for approval a CFD(s) for up to 1.75% effective tax rate; 2% escalator; 35 year bond. • SunCal shall not be obligated to make the foregoing Community Benefit Payments, Park Construction Payments, Park Endowment and Iron Horse Trail Bridge Construction Payment if SunCal applies for a CFD (consistent with the foregoing requirements) and the City Council elects not to approve it (and resolution of necessity and all other formation documents and instruments irrevocably approved). In the event such obligations are terminated, SunCal will be required to pay the community park improvement component of the Public Facilities Fee. • If after formation by the City of the CFD as described above, a Community Benefit Payment, Park Construction contribution, or Iron Horse Trail Bridge Construction contribution is not made in accordance with the terms of this Development Agreement, the City shall have the right, in accordance with the process described in the development agreement statute, to take action to terminate the development agreement. • City /DCSP /DSRSD /Zone 7 /DUSD fees may be included in CFD as are various infrastructure improvements. • Any legally allowable uses can be reimbursed with CFD funds with the exception of Park facility construction fee. Semi - Public land No exclusive Semi - Public land will be required in GP, SP or zoning package. Semi Public uses will continue to be allowed within other commercial /industrial zoning districts in the Specific Plan. ME Dublin Crossing Community Benefit and Potential Land Use Package June 12 2013 .... Civic /Designated Development site dedication No Civic /Designated Development site will be required for dedication to the City. Affordable Housing compliance with inclusionary zoning ordinance and additional Payment • City to make finding of compliance with inclusionary zoning ordinance based upon alternative method of compliance which shall include the project meeting the City's affordability and Housing Element goals through the construction of medium and high density of a certain size which shall exceed more than 25% of the project's total unit count and payment of a Community Benefit Payment as outlined below. • Any affordable units required above the 1,600 unit baseline shall comply with the City's Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. Community Benefit Payment • Subject to the provisions of the CFD section above, SunCal agrees to a Community Benefit Payment of $18.7 million • City agrees to designate funds solely to municipally owned capital projects so that these funds are CFD reimbursable /fundable. • Above Fees due at builder Final Map recordation on a per unit basis spread equally across the entire project at 1,600 units until the maximum is reached. Once fees have been paid for 1,600 units, further units will not be subject to this fee. • Maps of fewer than 40 units must advance the difference between actual units and 40 units. Any such advance will be credited against per -unit Dublin Crossing Development Agreement Fee obligations until exhausted. • Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent the City has not received payments (with Final Maps or CFD disbursement) in the amounts specified below by the applicable due date, SunCal shall advance the difference by the due date: o $5 million at 12 months, o $5 million at 30 months, o $5 million at 48 months, o $2.5M at the recordation of the last Final Map in Phase 4, and o $1.2M at the recordation of the last Final Map in Phase 5. Periods above to start following project approval and expiration of statute of limitations for challenges to project approvals or the successful completion of litigation challenges. Any such advances will be credited against per -unit Dublin Crossing Development Agreement Fee Payment obligations until exhausted. Advances may be paid via CFD disbursement/ reimbursement, builder Final Map recordation fees or check from Dublin Crossing Venture to achieve these funding levels on these dates. Land use designations • Require commercial development of a minimum 75,000 SF as defined in the Specific Plan and maximum of 200,000 SF of commercial buildings. • School site to have a residential overlay. Any additional units built on this parcel would be subject to the 1,995 unit CEQA clearance maximum. —5— Dublin Crossing Community Benefit and Potential Land Use Package June 12 2013 .... Development Agreement Term 15 year DA with option to extend for 5 additional years at $200K per year 2092724.2 ORDINANCE NO. XX - 13 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND DUBLIN CROSSING VENTURE LLC RELATING TO THE DUBLIN CROSSING PROJECT PA 08 -049 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Rartinn 1 RFrITAI R A. A request has been made by the Dublin Crossing Venture LLC (SunCal Companies)( "Applicant ") to enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Dublin for the property known as the Dublin Crossing Project site, which includes properties identified by Assessor Parcel Numbers 986- 0001 - 001 -15 (partial), 986- 0034 - 002 -00, and 986- 0034 - 006 -00, an approximately 189 acre site; and B. The Applicant is proposing to obtain approvals for a development project that includes demolition of the existing buildings and other improvements on the site and construction of a residential mixed -use project with up to 1,995 single- and multi - family residential units; up to 200,000 square feet of retail, office and /or commercial uses; a 30 acre Community Park; a 5 acre Neighborhood Park, and a 12 acre elementary school site to serve approximately 900 students; and C. The project is located within the proposed Dublin Crossing Specific Plan area, which is the subject of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse number 2012062009. On , 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution XX -13 certifying the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR and adopting CEQA findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project. The Development Agreement was part of the Project analyzed in the EIR and the impacts of the activities under the Development Agreement were analyzed in the EIR; and D. The Applicant has applied for a Development Agreement which will vest the Project Approvals. E. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement on October 22, 2013, for which public notice was given by law; and F. The Planning Commission made its recommendation to the City Council for approval of the Development Agreement by Resolution. G. A public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement was held before the City Council on , 2013 for which public notice was given as provided by law. H. The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission, including the Planning Commission's reasons for its recommendation, the Agenda Statement, all comments received in writing, and all testimony received at the public hearing. Section 2. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS Therefore, on the basis of: (a) the foregoing Recitals which are incorporated herein, (b) the City of Dublin General Plan; (c) the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, (d) the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan EIR; (e) the Staff Report; (f) information in the entire record of proceeding for the Project, and on the basis of the specific conclusions set forth below, the City Council finds and determines that- 1 . The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified and contained in the City's General Plan, and in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan in that: (a) the Development Agreement incorporates the objectives policies, general land uses and programs in the General Plan and Specific Plan and does not amend or modify them; and (b) the project is consistent with the fiscal policies of the General Plan and Specific Plan with respect to the provision of infrastructure and public services. 2. The Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use districts in which the real property is located because the Development Agreement does not amend the uses or regulations in the applicable land use district. 3. The Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare, and good land use policies in that the Developer's project will implement land use guidelines set forth in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan and the General Plan as articulated in Resolution No. xx -xx, amending the General Plan and adopting the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, adopted by the City Council on , 2013. 4. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare in that the Developer's proposed project will proceed in accordance with all the programs and policies of the General Plan, Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, and future Project Approvals and any Conditions of Approval. 5. The Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values in that the project will be consistent with the General Plan, the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, and future Project Approvals. 6. The Development Agreement specifies the duration of the agreement, the permitted uses of the property, the density or intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes. The Development Agreement contains an indemnity and insurance clause requiring the developer to indemnify and hold the City harmless against claims arising out of the development process, including all legal fees and costs. Rartinn fl APPRCWAI The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement (Exhibit A -1 to the Ordinance) and authorizes the City Manager to execute it. Section 4. RECORDATION 2 Within ten (10) days after the Development Agreement is fully executed by all parties, the City Clerk shall submit the Agreement to the County Recorder for recordation. Section 5. EFFECTIVE DATE AND POSTING OF ORDINANCE This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause the Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this day of , 2013 by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor 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 Space above this line for Recorder's use DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT :�' /_1,1I.: 21111 THE CITY OF DUBLIN MEN DUBLIN CROSSING VENTURE LLC RELATING TO THE DUBLIN CROSSING PROJECT EXHIBIT A -1 TO ATTACHMENT 7 THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this "Development Agreement" and sometimes this "Agreement ") is made and entered in the City of Dublin on this day of , 2013, by and between the City OF DUBLIN, a Municipal Corporation (the "City ") and DUBLIN CROSSING VENTURE LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ( "Developer ") pursuant to the authority of § §65864 et seq. of the California Government Code and the Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter 8.56. City and Developer are, from time - to -time, individually referred to in this Agreement as a "Party," and are collectively referred to as the "Parties." NOW, THEREFORE, with reference to the Recitals below, and in consideration of the mutual promises, obligations and covenants herein contained, City and Developer agree as follows: RECITALS A. In order to strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic costs and risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California enacted California Government Code § §65864 et seq. ( "Development Agreement Statute ") and the City Council enacted Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code (hereafter "Chapter 8.56 "), which authorize the City to enter into a Development Agreement for the development of real property with any person having a legal or equitable interest in such property in order to establish certain development rights in such property. B. Developer is party to that certain agreement dated March _, 2011 with the United States Army Corps of Engineers (the "Army ") that gives Developer the equitable right to acquire 172 acres of real property located in the City of Dublin, County of Alameda, State of California known as Assessor Parcel Nos. , (the "Army Property ") as is more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. C. Developer is also a party to that certain agreement with National Aeronautics and Space Administration ( "NASA ") dated (the "NASA Agreement ") that gives Developer a right to purchase 8.5 acres of real property located adjacent to the Army Property in the City of Dublin, County of Alameda, State of California known as Assessor Parcel Nos. , (the "NASA Property ") as is more particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. D. Pursuant to this Agreement, Developer has a right to acquire from the City an 8.7 acre parcel of real property currently owned by the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority ( "ACSPA ") located in the City of Dublin, County of Alameda, State of California known as Assessor Parcel Nos. (the "ACSPA Property ") as is more particularly described in Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which as and when acquired by Developer will automatically become subject to this Agreement. DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -2- E. The Army Property, the NASA Property and the ACSPA Property are collectively referred to as the "Property" in this Agreement. F. Developer proposes the development of the Property in five separate phases (as identified and depicted in Exhibit D) with up to 1,995 residential units, up to 200,000 square feet of commercial uses, a 30 net acre community park, a 5 net acre neighborhood park, privately owned open space, a 12 acre elementary school site, and associated infrastructure to serve the project area and the immediate vicinity as further described in the Specific Plan (collectively the "Project "). G. On , 2013 the City Planning Commission held a public hearing with respect to this Agreement, the Project Approvals described below and the sufficiency of the FEIR for analysis of the Project pursuant to CEQA requirements and, pursuant to Resolutions , made certain findings and determinations with respect thereto and, among other things, recommended to the City Council of the City that this Agreement be approved. H. On , 2013, the City Council held a public hearing with respect to the FEIR (defined below) and the following approvals and certified the FEIR and approved the following: General Plan Amendment No. ^ (Resolution No. ); the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, (Resolution No. ) (the "Specific Plan "), a zoning amendment (Ordinance No. ), and the DA Approving Ordinance (defined below), which collectively are referred to herein as the "Existing Project Approvals" and together with any Subsequent Project Approvals (defined below), are referred to herein as the "Project Approvals." I. On , 2013, the City Council again considered and approved the DA Approving Ordinance and the other ordinances described above. J. Additionally, development of the Property by Developer may be subject to other future discretionary and non - discretionary City approvals and permits (collectively, the "Subsequent Project Approvals ") including subdivision maps and site development review approvals, which if granted by the City in accordance with this Agreement, shall automatically become part of the Project Approvals. K. City has determined that by entering into this Agreement: (1) City will ensure the productive use of property and foster orderly growth and quality development in City; (2) development will proceed in accordance with the goals and policies set forth in the City of Dublin existing General Plan (the "General Plan ") and will implement City's stated General Plan policies; (3) City will receive substantially increased property tax revenues; and (4) City will benefit from increased housing and employment opportunities for residents of City that are created by the Project. L. As required by Government Code Section 65867.5 and the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council has found that, among other attributes, this Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and the Specific Plan; has been reviewed DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -3- and evaluated in accordance with the Development Agreement Statute, Chapter 8.56 and the Dublin Municipal Code Inclusionary Zoning Regulations, Chapter 8.68 and that any tentative map prepared for the subdivision will comply with the provisions of Section 66473.7 related to availability of water. M. City and Developer have reached agreement and desire to express herein a Development Agreement that will facilitate development of the Project subject to conditions set forth herein. N. City has undertaken, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., hereinafter "CEQA "), the required analysis of the environmental effects that would be caused by the Project and has determined those feasible mitigation measures which will eliminate, or reduce to an acceptable level, the adverse environmental impacts of the Project. The environmental effects of the proposed development of the Property were analyzed by the Final Environmental Impact Report (the "FEIR ") certified by City on , 20_ City has also adopted a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (the WMRP ") to ensure that those mitigation measures incorporated as part of, or imposed on, the Project are enforced and completed. Those mitigation measures for which Developer is responsible are incorporated into, and required by, the Project Approvals. O. City has given the required notice of its intention to adopt this Development Agreement and, as described above, has conducted public hearings thereon pursuant to Government Code Section 65867. P. On , 2013, the City Council of the City of Dublin adopted Ordinance No. approving this Development Agreement ( "Approving Ordinance "). The Approving Ordinance will take effect on ( "Approval Date "). As part of the Approving Ordinance, the City has made the findings required by the Dublin Municipal Code with respect to this Agreement. TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. Description of Property. The Property which is the subject of this Development Agreement is described in the Recitals. 2. Interest of Developer; Effectiveness of Agreement Prior to Developer's Acquisition of Title to Property. 2.1 The Developer has an equitable interest in the Property in that it is (a) party to an exchange agreement with the Army that obligates the Army to transfer specified portions of the Property to Developer upon Developer's construction of certain improvements benefiting the Army, (b) party to the NASA Agreement that gives Developer a right to purchase the NASA Property, and (c) pursuant to this Agreement has a right to acquire the ACSPA Property from ACSPA or the City. DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -4- Dublin Municipal Code section 8.56.040 specifies that, unless the property owner is party to development agreements, development agreements are "conditional upon the close of escrow vesting fee title to the property in the Developer." Accordingly, although this Agreement, once executed, shall become effective and shall be fully binding and enforceable by the Parties as of the Approval Date, the rights and obligations under this Agreement shall become applicable as to each portion of the Property only upon the Developer's acquiring fee title to the specific portion of the Property (as to each such Portion, the "Acquisition Date "). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the foregoing, Developer shall be obligated to make the contribution for the Iron Horse Trail Grade Separated Crossing Design described in Section 10.6.1 and the Community Benefit Payment described in Section 7.1 at the times specified even if Developer has not yet acquired title to all of the Property specified for a particular phase by the dates specified in Sections 10.6.1 and 7.1. 3. Relationship of City and Developer. This Agreement has been negotiated and voluntarily entered into by City and Developer. The Developer is not an agent of City. The City is not the agent of the Developer. The City and Developer hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making the City and Developer joint venturers or partners. 4. Effective Date and Term. 4.1 Term. The effective date of this Agreement ( "Effective Date ") shall be the Approval Date of the Approving Ordinance as defined in Recital L. 4.2 Term of Agreement. 4.2.1 The "Term" of this Development Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue for fifteen (15) years from the Effective Date, unless otherwise extended or terminated as provided in this Agreement. 4.2.2 Optional Extension. Prior to the termination of this Development Agreement, as provided in Section 4.2, Developer may extend the term of the Development Agreement. To do so, Developer shall give City written notice at least 90 days prior to the termination date of the Development Agreement. At the time Developer provides such notice, Developer shall make a contribution to City in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000) (adjusted for inflation from the Effective Date using the CPI -U, San Francisco - Oakland -San Jose Area) for each year of extension requested under this provision. Upon receipt of the notice and the contribution, the City Manager shall approve the extension and shall notify the Developer in writing that the term of the Development Agreement has been automatically extended for an additional time period equal to the time period requested by Developer under this provision, commencing on the date the Development DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -5- Agreement would otherwise have terminated; provided Developer may exercise its option to extend the Development Agreement no more than five times, for a maximum total term of the Development Agreement of twenty (20) years. Provided there is an extension period remaining, Developer may request the extension for multiple years and provide the payment due for each year's extension. 4.3 Term of Project Approvals. Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code § 66410 et seq.), and in particular, Government Code Section 66452.6(a), the term of any tentative or vesting tentative map, parcel map or vesting parcel map for the Property or any Portion thereof, shall be extended automatically for the Term of this Agreement, such that such tentative or vesting tentative maps or parcel maps remain in effect for no less than the Term, and shall also be extended by any other extension(s) granted under the Subdivision Map Act and /or City ordinance consistent with the Subdivision Map Act. 5. Vested Rights /Use of the Property /Applicable Law/Processing- 5.1 Right to Develop. Developer shall have the vested right to develop the Project on the Property in accordance with, and subject only to, the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Project Approvals (as and when issued), and any amendments to any of them as shall, from time to time, be approved pursuant to this Agreement, and the City's ordinances, codes, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing the development, construction, subdivision, occupancy and use of the Project and the Property including, without limitation, the General Plan, the Dublin Municipal Code, and the Specific Plan, the permitted uses of the Property, density and intensity of use of the Property and the maximum height, bulk and size of proposed buildings, and the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes that are in force and effect on the Effective Date of this Agreement (collectively, "Applicable Law "). In exercising its discretion when acting upon Subsequent Project Approvals, City shall apply the Applicable Law as the controlling body of law (within which Applicable Law such discretion shall be exercised). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, this Agreement shall not supersede any rights Developer may obtain pursuant to City's approval of any vesting tentative tract map or vesting tentative parcel map for the Project. 5.2 Fees, Exactions, Dedications. Except as otherwise set forth in this Agreement, City and Developer agree that this Agreement does not limit the City's discretion to impose or require payment of any fees in connection with the development of the Project for purposes of mitigating environmental and other impacts of the Project, dedication of any land, or construction of any public improvement or facilities, except that the City may not apply to the Project any development impact fee that it first enacted after the Effective Date. 5.3 Construction Codes. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 5.1 above, to the extent Applicable Law includes requirements under the state or locally adopted building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical and fire codes (collectively the "Codes "), the Codes included shall be those in force and effect at the time the DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -6- Developer submits its application for the relevant building, grading, or other construction permits to City. In the event of a conflict between such Codes and the Project Approvals, the Project Approvals shall, to the maximum extent allowed by law, prevail. For construction of public infrastructure, the Codes applicable to such construction shall be those in force and effect at the time of execution of an improvement agreement between City and Developer pursuant to Chapter 9.16 of the Dublin Municipal Code. 5.4 New Rules and Regulations. 5.4.1 During the term of this Agreement, the City may apply new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies of the City to the Property which were not in force and effect on the Approval Date and which are not in conflict with the vested rights granted by this Agreement, the Applicable Law, the Project Approvals or this Agreement. In addition to any other conflicts that may occur, each of the following new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies shall be considered a per se conflict with the Applicable Law: (a) Any application or requirement of such new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies that would (i) cause or impose a substantial financial burden on, or materially delay development of the Property as otherwise contemplated by this Agreement or the Existing Project Approvals, (ii) frustrate in a more than insignificant way the intent or purpose of the Existing Project Approvals or preclude compliance therewith including, without limitation, by preventing or imposing limits or controls in the rate, timing, phasing or sequencing of development of the Project; (iii) prevent or limit the processing or procuring of Subsequent Project Approvals; or (iv) reduce the density or intensity of use of the Property as a whole, or otherwise requiring any reduction in the square footage of, or total number of, proposed homes and other improvements, in a manner that is inconsistent with or more restrictive than the limitations included in this Agreement and Specific Plan; and /or (b) If any of such ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies do not have general (City -wide) applicability. Developer specifically acknowledges that it will be subject to new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies that implement the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the San Francisco Bay Region from time to time (the "MRP ") to the extent that the permit does not include exemptions that apply to the Project. 5.5 Moratorium Not Applicable. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, if an ordinance, resolution, policy, directive or other measure is enacted or becomes effective, whether by action of City, by initiative, referendum, or otherwise, and if it imposes a building moratorium which affects all or any part of the Project, City agrees that such ordinance, resolution or other measure shall not apply to the Project, the Property, this Agreement or the Project Approvals unless the building moratorium is imposed as part of a declaration of a local emergency or state of DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -7- emergency as defined in Government Code section 8558, provided that to the extent a moratorium applies to all or any part of the Project then the Term shall automatically be extended for a period of time equal to the period of the moratorium. 5.6 Revised Application Fees. Notwithstanding section 5.2 above, any existing application, processing and inspection fees that are revised during the Term of this Agreement shall apply to the Project provided that (1) such fees have general applicability, (2) the application of such fees to the Property is prospective, and (3) the application of such fees would not prevent, impose a substantial financial burden on, or materially delay development of the Project in accordance with this Agreement. By so agreeing, Developer does not waive its rights to challenge the legality of any such application, processing and /or inspection fees. 5.7 New Taxes. This Agreement shall not prohibit the application of any subsequently enacted city -wide taxes to the Project provided that (1) the application of such taxes to the Property is prospective, and (2) the application of such taxes would not prevent development in accordance with this Agreement. By so agreeing, Developer does not waive its rights to challenge the legality of any such taxes. 5.8 Development of the Project; Phasing, Timing. Since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo (1984) 37 Cal. 3d 465, that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties' agreement, it is the Parties' intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that, except as specified in Section 6 with respect to payment of fees, this Agreement contains no requirements that Developer must initiate or complete any action, including without limitation, development of the Project within any period of time set by City. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to create nor shall it be construed to create any affirmative development obligations to develop the Project at all or in any particular order or manner, or liability in Developer under this Agreement if the development fails to occur. It is the intention of this provision that Developer be able to develop the Property in accordance with its own time schedules and the Project Approvals. 5.9 Processing. 5.9.1 Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to limit the authority or obligation of City to hold necessary public hearings, nor to limit the discretion of City or any of its officers or officials with regard to those Subsequent Project Approvals that require the exercise of discretion by City, provided that such discretion shall be exercised consistent with the vested rights granted by this Agreement, the Applicable Law and this Agreement. 6. Development Agreement Fee; Advances. 6.1 Development Agreement Fee; Due On a Per -Unit Basis at Final Map. Prior to the City's approval of each final map creating individual lots for residential DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -8- units, Developer shall pay the City a development agreement fee (the "Development Agreement Fee ") calculated as follows: the number of residential lots (or condominium parcels) that would be created by the final map multiplied by $25,031.25. For maps that create condominiums, the tentative and final map shall indicate the maximum number of units permitted by the final map, and the Development Agreement Fee paid shall be based on the maximum number of units permitted by the map. For maps creating fewer than 40 lots or condominium units, the Development Agreement Fee shall be based on 40 lots or condominium units. In the event that Developer seeks a site development review ( "SDR ") approval for residential units for which the per unit fee has not been paid (e.g. apartment projects), Developer shall pay the per -unit fee amount at the time of SDR approval. The per -unit fee amount ($25,031.25 per residential unit) shall not be adjusted for inflation. At such point as Developer has paid Development Agreement Fees or advances equal to $40,050,000 in the aggregate, Developer shall no longer be obligated to pay the Development Agreement Fee required by this subsection. As detailed in Exhibit E, the $25,031.25 per residential unit fee generates $40,050,000 at the point when 1,600 units are mapped in the Project. The Development Agreement Fee was determined based on six separate components described in this Agreement: (a) Park Construction, § 9.6; (b) Community Benefit, § 7; (c) Iron Horse Bridge Design, § 10.3.1; (d) Iron Horse Bridge Construction; § 10.3.2; (e) ACSPA Property Acquisition Contribution, § 9.8; and (f) Park Maintenance Endowment, § 9.7. The City is requiring the payment of the Development Agreement Fee as a condition to development of the Property. The Parties agree that the City shall be deemed for all purposes to be requiring the payment of the Development Agreement Fee as a condition to development of the Property and that the Development Agreement Fee should be considered a supplemental fee and, in all aspects of its application and implementation, should not be deemed a waiver or fee reduction of any kind. If at any point the City Council determines that at full buildout development on the Property will not or is unlikely to produce 1,600 units, the City may withhold further approvals, including final maps, until such time as Developer provides adequate assurances that the City will receive the entire $40,050,000 in Development Fee revenue. 6.2 Revised Fee if City Elects Not to Form Developer- Proposed Community Facilities District. In the event that the City Council elects not to form a community facilities district ( "CFD ") proposed by Developer that meets the requirements of Section 8 and applicable law, Section 6.1 shall not apply and Developer shall pay a revised development agreement fee (the "Revised Development Agreement Fee ") in the amount of $2,406.25 per unit. The revised fee reflects the termination and retention of the following components of the Development Agreement Fee: Terminated Park Construction, § 9.6 Community Benefit, § 7 Park Maintenance Endowment, § 9.7 Retained Iron Horse Bridge Design, § 10.3.1 Fair share of Iron Horse Bridge Construction, § 10.3.2 ACSPA Property Acquisition Contribution, § 9.8 DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -9- At such point as Developer has paid the Revised Development Agreement Fees in sufficient amounts for the City to apply $50,000 toward the Iron Horse Trail Grade Separated Crossing Design, $1,000,000 toward Iron Horse Trail Grade Separated Crossing Construction, and $2,800,000 toward ACSPA Property Acquisition Contribution, Developer shall no longer be obligated to pay the Revised Development Agreement Fee required by this subsection. The fee amount ($2,406.25 per residential unit) shall not be adjusted for inflation. Developer shall not be entitled to apply or obtain a refund for Development Agreement Fees or advances paid prior to the City Council election not to form a CFD, except that Developer shall be entitled to apply any such payment against future Development Agreement Fees for the first Community Benefit Payment advance required by Section 7.2 below and any Development Agreement Fees paid prior to that time. The Parties agree that, in the event this section is applied, the City shall be deemed for all purposes to be requiring the payment of the Revised Development Agreement Fee as a condition to development of the Property and that the Revised Development Agreement Fee should be considered a supplemental fee and, in all aspects of its application and implementation, should not be deemed a waiver or fee reduction of any kind. 6.3 Accounting; Advances; Allowances. This Agreement specifies that City shall receive and obligates Developer to make certain payments at specified times in the event that Development Agreement Fees have not been collected in sufficient amounts to meet those obligations at the specified times. The City shall account for the Development Agreement Fee revenues in a way that records the application of previously collected Development Agreement Fee revenues toward one of the payment obligations and the Developer's advance of Development Agreement Fee payments in order to satisfy Developer's payment obligations. Any such advances will be applied toward future Development Agreement Fees due and shall be "Allowances" hereunder. The Allowances shall be expressed in residential units and be documented contemporaneously with the payments in a manner acceptable to both Parties, and generally consistent with the procedures currently used in the City's Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee ( "EDTIF ") program. Developer and its successors may transfer the Development Agreement Fee Allowances to subsequent owners of all or a portion of the Property. Exhibit F includes examples, under different development scenarios, of the timing and operation of the payment application, advances, and allowances. 7. Community Benefit Payment. 7.1 Developer has agreed, as partial consideration for the City's entering into this agreement, to contribute to the City over the course of the Project the sum of $18,700,000 as a Community Benefit Payment, in accordance with the following schedule and requirements. 7.2 The Community Benefit Payment is a component of the Development Agreement Fee and will be paid as specified in section 6.1, except that, if the City has not received the following amount, exclusive of Development Agreement Fee component payments previously applied, by the applicable deadline below, Developer shall, on or before the applicable deadline, make an advance of DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -� O- Development Agreement Fees equal to the difference between the amount of Development Agreement Fees the City had previously received, exclusive of Development Agreement Fee component payments previously applied, and the amount set out below. Payment Amount Deadline First $10,000,000 24 months following the Project Approval Date Second $5,000,000 48 months following the Project Approval Date Third $2,500,000 At recordation of the last final map in Phase 4 of the Project (see Exhibit D) Fourth $1,200,000 At recordation of the last final map in Phase 5 of the Project (see Exhibit D) The "Project Approval Date" shall be the date upon which all appeal, legal challenge and rehearing periods relating to the Existing Project Approvals shall have expired without legal challenge, or, if any appeal, legal challenge or rehearing request is filed against the City challenging such Project Approvals, the date upon which all such challenges are finally dismissed and either (a) all of such Project Approvals remain effective or, (b) have been reaffirmed, if required by the resolution of the challenge(s). Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the Developer shall not be required to make the foregoing payments if the City Council elects for any reason not to form a CFD proposed by Developer that meets the requirements of Section 8. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, if any payment under this subsection is not received in full by the City by the deadline for such payment, the City may withhold further issuance of building permits and other approvals, including final maps, for the Project until such time as Developer has made the required payment. 8. Community Facilities District Standards. 8.1 Developer intends to propose the formation of a community facilities district or districts by the City pursuant to the Mello Roos Community Facilities District Act of 1982 (Gov. Code §§ 53311 - 53368.3) (the "Mello -Roos Act ") to finance public facilities. The City agrees that upon Developer's presentation of a landowner's petition and Developer's payment of a fee, as described in subdivision (d) of Government Code section 53318, use its best efforts to commence proceedings to form a CFD to finance certain public facilities so long as Developer's proposal is consistent with Exhibit G (Community Facilities District Financial Provisions). The City Council is not obligated to approve the CFD, although certain consequences would occur pursuant to Section 6.2 if it does not approve a CFD that meets the requirements of this Section. DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT _11- 8.2 The City's obligation to consider Developer's CFD formation proposal is limited to proposals that meet the standards set forth in Exhibit G. 9. Parks. 9.1 Parkland Dedication. Except as specified in Section 9.8, the Project proposed by Developer includes the dedication of 30 net acres of community parkland and the dedication of 5 net acres of neighborhood parkland. Developer shall dedicate the specified parkland with the first final map in the Project phase specified below, or earlier: Project Size of dedication Phase 1st Phase 2 10 net acres of community park land (includes 8.7 acres in exchange for ACSPA Property transfer by City under section 9.8.) 2nd Phase 3 10 net acres of community park land 3rd Phase 4 5 net acres of neighborhood park land 4th Phase 5 10 net acres of community park land Net acreage is measured at the property line of the park parcels dedicated by Developer and does not include land area currently owned by the City or land area within adjacent existing or future street right of ways. Net acreage does not include land that is encumbered by use restrictions, unless the use restrictions are approved by the City. The City acknowledges that the portions of the 30 acres may be subjected to the following reasonable restrictions: active sports fields, certain species of plantings, and the use of motorized vehicles. If resource agencies require use restrictions that are not acceptable to the City on land proposed to be within the net 30 acre community park, or that exceed the 50 -foot buffer boundary on either side of the creek from top of bank, Developer shall identify additional acreage to meet the net 30 acre requirement. This obligation shall be satisfied prior to the issuance of the first building permit in Phase 2, and the City may withhold further building permits outside of Phase 1 until it is satisfied. The Parties agree that, in the event of substantial revisions to the geography of the Project phases (as determined by the City Manager), this Agreement shall be promptly amended to revise Exhibit D and to reflect the impact the revised phases have on provisions of this Agreement that reference the Project phases, which include, but are not limited to, this Section 9.1 and Sections 9.6, and 9.8. The City Manager may approve insubstantial revisions to Exhibit D requested by Developer and if such revisions are so approved the revised Exhibit D shall automatically become annexed to this Agreement and shall replace the prior Exhibit D and the Parties shall be authorized to and shall replace the prior Exhibit D with the new Exhibit D in each copy of the Agreement. DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -� 2- 9.2 Public Facilities Fee and Quimby Requirements For Land Dedications. In the aggregate, the dedications required by this Agreement, even without the 8.7 acre dedication associated with the City's anticipated transfer of the ACSPA Property to Developer, satisfy the community park land component of the City's Public Facilities Fee and the parkland dedication requirements of Chapter 9.28 of the Dublin Municipal Code for up to 1,995 residential units and for all of the commercial development proposed on the Specific Plan. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement, development in the Project and on the Property shall be subject to all other components of the Public Facilities Fee. At the time of dedication on the final map, provided that Developer (a) enters into an improvement agreement in conjunction therewith and (b) provides evidence, acceptable to the City Engineer, demonstrating that the land to be conveyed (including any imported fill) meets California Department of Toxic Substances Control standards applicable to residential development or such lesser standard acceptable to the City, the City will promptly upon receipt of such evidence indicate in its records that Developer has made such a dedication, and those records will be used to determine whether the Developer has satisfied its obligations under the community park land component of the City's Public Facilities Fee and the parkland dedication requirements of Chapter 9.28 of the Dublin Municipal Code. The City's records of the dedications shall be expressed in acres of community and neighborhood parkland as follows: Dedication Neighborhood Park Community Park 1st 3 acres 7 acres 2nd 0.39 acres 0.91 acres 3rd 1.5 acres 3.5 acres 4th 3 acres 7 acres When the previous dedications are used to satisfy the obligations as to individual maps and building permits, the unapplied dedications reflected in the City's records shall be reduced to reflect the equivalent in acreage of the fee component for which previous dedications were used. If Developer does not have sufficient unapplied dedication acreage when it seeks approval for a particular map or building permit, it may, instead of paying the applicable fees in lieu of parkland dedication or the community park land component of the Public Facilities Fee, provide security acceptable to the City that secures payment of such fees. Upon its receipt of parkland dedications to satisfy the obligations so secured, the City will promptly reduce the security in an equivalent amount. 9.2.1 Under the City's Public Facilities Fee, the community park land component of the public facilities fee for a single family unit is currently equal to $11,863 and for a multi - family unit is currently equal to $7,413. Based on the assumed populations of 3.2 persons per single family unit (defined in the PFF as a dwelling DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -� 3- constructed on land designated for 6 or fewer units per acre) and 2.00 persons per multi - family unit (defined in the PFF as a dwelling constructed on land designated for 6.1 or more units per acre) in the PFF, and the parkland standard of 3.5 acres of community parkland per thousand persons and 1.5 acres of neighborhood parkland per thousand persons, a single family unit reduces the unapplied community parkland dedication acreage by 0.0112 acres and the unapplied neighborhood parkland dedication acreage by 0.0048 acres, and a multifamily unit reduces the unapplied community parkland dedication acreage by 0.007 acres and the unapplied neighborhood parkland dedication acreage by 0.003 acres. 9.3 Stormwater Facilities. The City will allow underground stormwater detention facilities within the 30 acre net community park, not to exceed a footprint of 87,120 square feet, and in locations acceptable to the City. The underground stormwater facilities shall include a minimum cover acceptable to the City. The Chabot Creek channel will be a separate not -to- exceed 1.5 acre third -party -owned "island /peninsula" parcel within the boundaries of the community park. A homeowners' association, or other entity or mechanism acceptable to the City, shall be responsible for the maintenance of the underground stormwater facilities and the Chabot Creek channel parcel and for regulating access to the Chabot Creek channel. 9.4 Acceptance of Parkland. City will accept dedicated parkland upon completion of rough grading of the particular phase of dedicated park site and completion of associated improvements (including park street frontage improvements, including, but not limited to, curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscape, irrigation, and access roadways on all sides of the dedicated parcel that are adjacent to current and future roadways) all as specified in the approved tentative map associated with the dedication and upon receiving evidence, acceptable to the City Engineer, demonstrating that the land to be conveyed (including any imported fill) meets California Department of Toxic Substances Control standards applicable to residential development or such lesser standard acceptable to the City. 9.5 Cit�gation to Improve Parkland. City will complete each of the four park phases within 24 months of (a) the City accepting the applicable dedication pursuant to Section 9.4 and (b) Developer providing the required funds for the applicable park phase's construction pursuant to section 9.6. The 24 -month period will not commence until the Parties have confirmed in writing that the criteria have been satisfied. 9.6 Project's Obligation to Fund Park Construction. The Project's contribution to fund park construction shall be $4,285,714 for each of the three community park phases, and $2,142,858 for the neighborhood park phase, which may reimbursed through the CFD. These contributions exceed the amounts otherwise required to be contributed by Developer under the Public Facilities Fee for park improvements and shall therefore be deemed to satisfy the Project's obligations to fund park improvements under the Public Facilities Fee. Upon request of Developer, the City shall apply previously collected Development Agreement Fees revenues, exclusive of Development Agreement Fee component payments previously applied, toward the DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -� 4- required contribution. If such application of Development Agreement Fees is insufficient to satisfy the required contribution, Developer may advance the necessary funds under Subsection 6.3 in order to trigger the City's park improvement obligations under Section 9.5. In any event, Developer shall make the following contributions for each phase of the park, by requesting application of previously collected Development Agreement Fees toward the contribution, making a Development Agreement Fee advance, or both, no later than: the first recorded subdivision map creating residential lots for a $100,000 contribution to be used for the preparation of a master plan for the community park; the first recorded subdivision map in Phase 2 for the first $4,285,714 contribution (less the $100,000 contribution previously for the master plan); the first recorded subdivision map in phase 3 for the second $4,285,714 contribution; the first recorded subdivision map in phase 4 for the $2,142,857 contribution; and the first recorded subdivision map in phase 5 for the last $4,285,714 contribution. In addition, with the submission of the first subdivision map creating residential lots in Phase 1, the Developer shall prepare, at its own expense, a traffic circulation analysis to determine the appropriate location of the Community Park parking lot and driveway entrance(s) for review and approval by the City Engineer. The report shall evaluate the location of potential driveways on Scarlett Drive and how they would interact with the existing intersection at Houston Place as well as consider connectivity of the future parking lot(s) to both G Street and Scarlett Drive. The results of the analysis will be incorporated in the subsequent Project Approvals. The Developer shall not be required to make the contributions required by this paragraph to the extent that they are due after the contingent event described in Section 6.2 above occurs. If such contingent event does occur, and the contributions required by this paragraph cease, Developer shall, so as to avoid a significant impact pursuant to Impact 3.11 -4 described in the FEIR, thereafter be required to pay the community park improvements component of Public Facilities Fee and the neighborhood park improvement component of the Public Facilities Fee as it applies in Eastern Dublin. The City shall use the contributions made pursuant to this Section only for the improvement of parks within the Specific Plan area. At least $2,142,858 must be used for the improvement of the neighborhood park. 9.6.1 Public Facilities Fee Payment Security. Developer's contributions as specified above shall be deemed to satisfy its obligation to contribute to Community and Neighborhood Park Improvements under the Public Facilities Fee Program. If, however, at the time Developer seeks to file a final map Developer has not made the required contributions in amounts sufficient to satisfy the final map's Park Construction obligation, Developer shall provide security acceptable to the City that ensures payment of the community park improvements component of Public Facilities Fee for the units and the neighborhood park improvement component of the Public Facilities Fee applicable in Eastern Dublin. For the purposes of this paragraph, Developer shall upon each $4,285,714 contribution be deemed to have satisfied its obligations for 570 residential units; and shall upon each $2,142,858 contribution be deemed to have satisfied its obligations for 285 units. The contributions may be used to reduce previously posted security under this paragraph and to avoid the requirement to post security under this paragraph. DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -� rJ- 9.7 Developer's Obligation to Provide Maintenance Endowment for Each Community Park Phase. At or prior to the City's completion of each phase of community park construction, pursuant to Subsection 9.5 above, Developer shall make a contribution to fund the maintenance costs of the community park. The contribution shall be $840,000 for each of the first two phases and $820,000 for the last phase. Upon request of Developer, the City shall apply previously collected Development Agreement Fees revenues, exclusive of Development Agreement Fee component payments previously applied, toward the required contributions. If such application of Development Agreement Fees is insufficient to satisfy the required contribution, Developer may advance the necessary funds under Subsection 6.3. At least 18 months prior to the City's obligation to complete each phase of the community park, pursuant to Subsection 9.5 above, Developer shall provide security acceptable to the City that secures payment of the endowment contribution. If the Developer fails to secure the payment when due, the time period that the City has to complete of the specified park phase shall be extended for a period of time equal to the time period of the delay in posting the security. The City shall release the security upon Developer's submission of evidence demonstrating that it has made the required contribution, either through an advance or through a previous Development Agreement Fee payment. The Developer shall not be required to make the contributions required by this paragraph to the extent that they are due after the contingent event described in Section 6.2 above occurs. 9.8 ACSPA Parcel Acquisition and Exchange. 9.8.1 Intent. It is the intent of the City and Developer that the City enter into a purchase agreement and acquire the ACSPA Property from ACSPA and, concurrently with such acquisition (and through a common escrow) or promptly thereafter, convey the ACSPA Property to Developer. The City may elect to structure the escrow in a manner that avoids it taking title to the ACSPA Property. In exchange for such conveyance, Developer has agreed to make a contribution of 8.7 acres of community parkland in excess of that which would be required by the City's parkland dedication requirements. In the event that ACSPA or the City has not conveyed the ACSPA Property to the Developer prior to the recordation of the Phase 2 final map, the obligation of Developer in Section 9.1 to dedicate community park land shall be reduced by a net 8.7 acres (equivalent to the acreage of the ACSPA Parcel). In such event (a) Developer shall not be required to acquire the ACSPA Property pursuant to this Section or make the $2,800,000 contribution toward its acquisition, (b) the 1st community park dedication at the recording of the Phase 2 final map (described in Section 9.1) shall not be required and Developer shall instead make a dedication at the recording of the Phase 3 final map of 11.3 net acres of community parkland and (c) notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement or the Specific Plan, the Developer shall have no obligation to construct commercial development on the Property. The foregoing shall not affect or reduce the total number of residential units that may be constructed on the remainder of the Property pursuant to the Project Approvals. 9.8.2 Purchase Agreement. As of the Effective Date, the City intends to enter into a purchase agreement with ACSPA (the "Purchase Agreement ") pursuant to which the City has the irrevocable right to purchase the ACSPA Property DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -� 6- prior to or concurrently with the Phase 1 dedication of Community Park (in Phase 2 of the Project). The City hereby agrees that it will use commercially reasonable efforts to enter into the Purchase Agreement upon the terms set forth in this Section 9.8 and in ........................ .... . that certain letter of intent between ACSPA and the City dated (the "1011"). The City further agrees with respect to the Purchase Agreement that (a) it will take all steps necessary to exercise the Purchase Agreement prior to or concurrently with the dedication of Phase 1 of the Community Park (in Phase 2 of the Project), (b) it will carry out all obligations, if any, under the Purchase Agreement in a timely manner in order to fulfill the intent of the Parties that the ACSPA Property be conveyed to City or Developer in conjunction with the Phase 2 final map, and (c) it will not terminate, amend, modify or allow the lapsing of the Purchase Agreement or the LOI, or assign its rights under the Purchase Agreement to any party other than Developer, without the consent of Developer in its sole discretion. The Purchase Agreement shall provide Developer with the right to notice of any defaults by the City under the Purchase Agreement and the right to cure such defaults. If the Developer exercises its cure rights under the Purchase Agreement, the cost of such cure shall be an offset against the next Community Benefit Payment due under this Agreement. 9.8.3 Funding. City shall be obligated to transfer sufficient funds into escrow to purchase the ACSPA Parcel pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, less Developer's $2,800,000 contribution toward the acquisition of the ACSPA Parcel. Upon request of Developer, the City shall apply previously collected Development Agreement Fee revenues, exclusive of Development Agreement Fee component payments previously applied, toward the $2,800,000 contribution. Developer's $2,800,000 contribution may be reimbursed through the CFD. If such application of Development Agreement Fees is insufficient to satisfy the required contribution, Developer may advance the necessary funds under Subsection 6.3. 9.8.4 Optional Loan. If requested by City, Developer shall loan City up to $6,000,000 for the acquisition of the ACSPA Parcel. Developer shall be obligated to make the loan in conjunction with the City's obligation to contribute funds into escrow for Developer's acquisition of the ACSPA Property. The loan shall not bear interest. The City shall repay the loan in four equal annual installments on June 30 beginning in 2018 or the anniversary date of the loan if executed later than July 1, 2017. 9.8.5 Fair Market Value Exchange. The Parties agree that the fair market value of the ACSPA Parcel (comprised of 8.7 acres) and of the 8.7 acres that Developer will transfer to the City in exchange for the ASCSPA parcel are equal and that there is no subsidy provided by the City in connection with such exchange. This analysis is made prior to taking into account the $2.8 million contribution by Developer pursuant to Section 9.8.3. 10. Transportation Improvements. 10.1 Transportation Fee. Developer and the City acknowledge that there are several transportation improvements necessary for the implementation of the Project and that, except as set forth in Section 10.7, the Property is not in the EDTIF. DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -� 7- Construction or financial contributions toward some of the improvements have been identified as mitigation measures in the FEIR, and some improvements are required project commitments for the safe circulation of multimodal traffic. The City has determined that the fair share obligation of Developer toward improvements that are identified in the FEIR will be satisfied by payment of a transportation fee (the "Transportation Fee ") at each building permit and has established the amount due based on the amount such development would be subject to under the EDTIF, if the development were in the EDTIF. The amounts are fixed for the term of the Development Agreement based on the EDTIF rates on the Effective Date, which are set out for reference in Exhibit H. 10.2 Application of Transportation Fees. To the extent the cost of construction for EDTIF projects constructed by Developer exceeds the amount Developer is obligated to pay as its fair share of project expense based on traffic mitigation measures in the FEIR, Developer shall be entitled to apply the amount of any such overage to future Transportation Fees or to satisfy the project's obligations, if any, to pay the EDTIF pursuant to section 10.7. The amount applicable to such future fees and obligations will be calculated in accordance with the Consolidated Administrative Guidelines (Resolution No. 122 -13) for EDTIF improvements, not to exceed the values established in the EDTIF. Developer will not be entitled to apply as overage its contribution of necessary project right of way owned by it, but costs associated with all other right of way acquisitions will be eligible to be so applied. 10.3 Transportation Improvements. Developer agrees to complete the transportation improvements as specified in Exhibit I at the times therein specified. 10.4 School Site Circulation. Access to proposed new school will require detailed review and coordination with the Dublin Unified School District (DUSD) and the City. To meet appropriate access and circulation to and from the school, Developer shall work cooperatively and in good faith with the DUSD and the City. Developer shall ensure that all sidewalks, bike lanes and pathways, and vehicular lanes that provide access and circulation to and from the school are constructed and connected regardless of the timing of the required frontage improvements associated with school parcel and /or any other Project parcels. 10.5 Preservation of Iron Horse Trail. Developer agrees to complete its construction work in a manner that ensures the availability of the Iron Horse Trail. In particular, Developer shall ensure that a suitable detour is available for Iron Horse Trail users during any construction activities that disrupt the trail and shall minimize the time that such detours are in place. Prior to any construction work that impacts Iron Horse Trail access, Developer shall submit a Traffic Control Plan for the City review and approval. Developer shall be responsible for securing any rights -of -way or easements required to construct any necessary detours of the Iron Horse Trail. 10.6 Iron Horse Trail Grade Separated Crossing. Mitigation Measure 3.12 -3 in the Project EIR identifies the need for a grade separated crossing at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Scarlett Drive to maintain adequate levels of DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -� $- service at that intersection and specifies that the Developer shall contribute the Project's fair share toward the improvements as specified in this Agreement. The Parties agree that the contributions required by this Section 10.6 satisfy the "fair share monetary contribution" required by Mitigation Measure 3.12 -3. 10.6.1 Contribution toward Desiqn. Developer will, concurrently with its execution of this Agreement, contribute $50,000 to the City for the City's use in designing a grade- separated crossing at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Scarlett Drive. The contribution required by this Subsection shall be treated as an advance under Subsection 6.3. 10.6.2 Contributions toward Construction. Developer agrees to contribute, as a component of the Development Agreement Fee, $1,000,000 towards the construction of the proposed grade- separated crossing. If the City later determines that it is not feasible to construct the Iron Horse Trail Grade Separated Crossing, the City may treat the contribution required by this Subsection as an additional portion of the Community Benefit Payment. The Developer shall not be required to make the contributions required by this paragraph to the extent that they are due after the contingent event described in Section 6.2 above occurs. If such contingent event does occur, and the contributions required by this paragraph cease, Developer shall, so as to avoid a significant cumulative impact with respect to such crossing, thereafter be required to pay only the fair share of improvements required by Mitigation Measure 3.12 -3 ( "Fair Share of Iron Horse Bridge Construction "). 10.6.3 Cooperation in Design. Developer agrees to cooperate in good faith with the City on the City's plan to construct a Class I bicycle /pedestrian grade separated crossing across Dublin Boulevard serving the Iron Horse Trail. The approach will be located at or near the northeast corner of the future Dublin Boulevard /Scarlett Drive intersection. The ultimate location of the approach will be determined by the City Engineer in coordination with the Developer to provide optimum connectivity to the Iron Horse Trail in terms of vertical grade and horizontal alignment. Should the City decide to move forward with the grade separated crossing project, the Developer shall dedicate the necessary right -of -way for the northern approach in addition to public access easements if the limits of the approach are outside the ultimate Dublin Boulevard or Scarlett Drive rights -of -way. 10.7 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee for ACSPA Property. The ACSPA Property, unlike the remainder of the Property, is within the boundary of and subject to the EDTIF. The City's present intention is to remove the ACSPA Property from the EDTIF. Nonetheless, if the ACSPA Property remains in the EDTIF boundary, the Developer shall pay the EDTIF as required by the EDTIF for any development on the ACSPA Property. Developer may use overages created under Section 10.2 to satisfy this EDTIF obligation to the extent the EDTIF permits EDTIF fee credits to be used. 11. Compliance with Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT _19- 11.1 Developer proposes residential development on the Property. Pursuant to the City's Inclusionary Zoning Regulations (Chapter 8.68 of the Dublin Municipal Code) (the "Regulations "), Developers of more than 20 residential units are required to set aside 12.5% of the units in the project as affordable units as specified. 11.2 Under the Regulations, certain exceptions permit Developers to satisfy the obligation other than through on -site construction. For instance, part of this obligation can be satisfied through the payment of a fee in -lieu of construction of units. In addition, Developers can satisfy their affordable housing obligations by, among other mechanisms, obtaining City Council approval of an alternative method of compliance that the City Council finds meet the purposes of the Regulations. 11.3 Developer shall satisfy its affordable housing obligation, for up to 1600 residential units, through the following "alternative method of compliance" under section 8.68.040.E of the Regulations: The Project will meet affordability goals by providing a substantial mix of higher density residential units of relatively smaller sizes that will promote the City's affordability and Housing Element goals. The City has determined that a large proportion of residential unit types that the Project will include are likely to meet the City affordability standard for "moderate income" units. Of the approximately 88.4 acres of residentially designated land in the Project, approximately 46.5 acres are designated for between 14.1 and 25 units per net acres, the density of which is likely to produce smaller units that are likely to meet the affordability standard for moderate - income units. Furthermore, the project also includes mixed use land use categories along Dublin Boulevard that will permit residential development at even higher densities between 20.1 and 60 units per acre. 11.4 Through its approval of this agreement, the City Council hereby finds that the "alternative method of compliance" in this subsection 11.3 meets the purposes of the Regulations and will promote the City's affordability and Housing Element goals, and hereby waives all requirements of the Regulations with respect to the first 1600 units. 11.5 Development above 1600 units shall be subject to the requirements of the Regulations. 12. School Site. If the school district has not acquired the school site identified in the Specific Plan by the first map in Phase 5, the City agrees to process an application for a tentative map and Site Development Review for residential uses on the school site in accordance with the standards and guidelines of the Specific Plan 13. Amendment or Cancellation. 13.1 Modification Because of Conflict with State or Federal Laws. If state or federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date or an action of any state or federal agency prevents or precludes compliance with one or more provisions DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -20- of this Agreement or the Existing Project Approvals or require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by the City, the Parties shall meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this Agreement to comply with such federal or state laws or regulations or with the actions of state or federal agencies in a manner that protects, to the greatest extent feasible, the vested rights of Developer under this Agreement. Any such amendment of the Agreement shall be consented to by Developer and considered by the City Council (in accordance with Chapter 8.56). Each Party agrees to extend to the other its prompt and reasonable cooperation in so modifying this Agreement or approved plans. 13.2 Amendment by Mutual Consent. This Agreement may be amended (in whole or part) in writing from time to time by mutual consent of the Parties hereto (or their successors), and in accordance with the procedures of State law and Chapter 8.56. When a Party seeking such an amendment owns or, prior to the Acquisition Date, has an equitable right to only a portion of the whole of the Property ( "Portion "), then such Party may only seek amendment of this Agreement as directly relates to the Portion, and the Party owning the other Portion shall not be required or entitled to be a signatory or to consent to an amendment that affects only the other Party's Portion. If any Portion of the Property is subject to a document which creates an association which oversees common areas and any construction or reconstruction on or of the same, then the association shall be deemed to be the "owner" of that Portion of the Property for the purpose of amending this Agreement. 13.3 Insubstantial Amendments. Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding Section 12.2, any amendments to this Agreement which do not relate to (a) the term of the Agreement as provided in section 4.2; (b) the permitted uses of the Property as provided in section 5.1; (c) provisions for "significant" reservation or dedication of land; (d) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent discretionary actions; (e) the density or intensity of use of the Project; (f) the maximum height or size of proposed buildings; or (g) monetary contributions by Developer as provided in this Agreement, shall not, except to the extent otherwise required by law, require notice or public hearing before either the Planning Commission or the City Council before the Parties may execute an amendment ,hereto. City's Public Works Director shall determine whether a reservation or dedication is "significant ". 13.4 Cancellation by Mutual Consent. Except as otherwise permitted herein, this Agreement may be canceled in whole or in part only by an amendment which complies with Section 13.2. Any fees paid pursuant to this Agreement prior to the date of cancellation shall be retained by City. 14. Annual Review. 14.1 Review Date. The annual review date for this Agreement shall be between July 15 and August 15, 2014 and each July 15 to August 15 thereafter. 14.2 Initiation of Review. The City's Community Development Director shall initiate the annual review, as required under Section 8.56.140 of Chapter 8.56, by DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -2 - giving to Developer at least thirty (30) days' written notice that the City intends to undertake such review. Developer shall provide evidence to the Community Development Director prior to the hearing on the annual review, as and when reasonably determined necessary by the Community Development Director, to demonstrate good faith efforts to comply with the provisions of this Agreement. The burden of proof, by substantial evidence, is upon the Developer. 14.3 Staff Reports. To the extent practical, City shall deposit in the mail and transmit by electronic mail to Developer a copy of all staff reports, and related exhibits concerning contract performance at least five (5) days prior to any annual review. 14.4 Notice of Non - Compliance. If on the basis of the annual review, the City Council finds and determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that Developer has not complied in good faith with the terms or conditions of this Agreement, or if the City determines that Developer has failed to cure a default in accordance with Section 14.2, the City Council may commence proceedings to enforce, modify or terminate this Agreement. The City shall provide Developer with forty -five (45) days, or such longer period as the City and Developer may agree in writing, to respond in writing to such finding by specifying either how its non - compliance has been cured (or is diligently being cured) or the grounds upon which it believes that it is complying with this Agreement. If the response to the Notice of Non - Compliance has not been received in the offices of the City within the prescribed forty five (45) days, or within such additional period of time as mutually agreed, the Notice of Non - Compliance shall be conclusively presumed to be valid, and the City may commence proceedings on termination or modification of the Agreement. If Developer responds within the time period provided, the Parties agree to meet in good faith at reasonable times and from time to time for a period of at least sixty (60) days to arrive at a mutually acceptable resolution of the matters asserted in the Notice of Non - Compliance and disputed in the response. If after sixty (60) days, or any extension of time as mutually agreed to by the Parties, the Parties have failed to arrive at a mutually acceptable resolution of such matter(s), the City may commence proceedings on termination or modification of this Agreement pursuant to Section 14.5 of this Agreement. 14.5 Modification or Termination. If the City Council determines to proceed with modification or termination of this Agreement after following the procedure under Section 13.5 of this Agreement, the City Council shall give notice to Developer or successor in interest thereto of its intention to do so in accordance with the procedures for such notice set forth in Section 8.56.060 and Government Code Section 65858. The City Council may take such action as it deems necessary to protect the interests of the City, including but not limited to, the receipt of additional evidence as to Developer's compliance with the terms of this Agreement. 14.6 Costs. Costs reasonably incurred by City in connection with the annual review shall be paid by Developer in accordance with the City's schedule of fees in effect at the time of review. DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -22- 15. Default. 15.1 Other Remedies Available. Upon the occurrence of an event of default, the Parties may pursue all other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in City's regulations governing development agreements, expressly including, without limitation, the remedy of specific performance of this Agreement; provided the non - defaulting Party has complied with the provisions of Section 14.2 hereof. 15.2 Notice and Cure. Upon the occurrence of an event of default by any Party, the nondefaulting Party shall serve written notice of such default upon the defaulting Party. If the default is not cured by the defaulting Party within thirty (30) days after service of such notice of default, the nondefaulting Party may then commence any legal or equitable action to enforce its rights under this Agreement; provided, however, that if the default cannot be cured within such thirty (30) day period, the nondefaulting party shall refrain from any such legal or equitable action so long as the defaulting party begins to cure such default within such thirty (30) day period and diligently pursues such cure to completion. Failure to give notice shall not constitute a waiver of any default. 15.3 No Damages. In no event shall either Party be liable in damages for any default or upon termination of this Agreement, it being expressly understood and agreed that the sole legal or equitable remedy available to either Party for a breach or violation of this Agreement by the other Party shall be an action in mandamus, specific performance or other injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce the provisions of this Agreement by the other Party, or to terminate this Agreement. This limitation on damages shall not preclude actions by a Party to enforce payments of monies or the performance of obligations requiring an obligation of money from the other Party under the terms of this Agreement including, but not limited to obligations to pay reasonable attorneys' fees and obligations to advance monies or reimburse monies. 15.4 City Right to Terminate Agreement Upon Certain Uncured Defaults. In the event that Developer fails to make any of the monetary contributions required by this Agreement when due and thereafter fails to cure after being provided notice and an opportunity to cure pursuant to Section 14.2, the City shall have an immediate right, subject to the requirements of Government Code Section 65858, to terminate this Agreement. The City may do so by notifying the Developer, pursuant to Section 25 below, of its election to do so as of the date specified in the notice of termination. 16. Estoppel Certificate. 16.1 Any Party may, at any time, and from time to time, request written notice from the other Party requesting such Party to certify in writing that, (a) this Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties, (b) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments, and (c) to the knowledge of the certifying Party the requesting Party is not in default in the performance of its obligations under this DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -23- Agreement, or if in default, to describe therein the nature and amount of any such defaults. 16.2 A Party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate within twenty (20) days following the receipt thereof, or such longer period as may reasonably be agreed to in writing by the Parties. City Manager of City shall be authorized to execute any certificate requested by Developer. The certificate shall be addressed to and may be relied upon by the requesting Party. 17. Mortgagee Protection; Certain Rights of Cure. 17.1 Mortgagee Protection. This Agreement shall not prevent or limit Developer, in any manner, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property ( "Mortgage ").This Agreement shall be superior and senior to any lien placed upon the Property, or any portion thereof after the date of recording this Agreement, including the lien for any Mortgage. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach hereof shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, but all the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and effective against any person or entity, including any deed of trust beneficiary or mortgagee ( "Mortgagee ") who acquires title to the Property, or any portion thereof, by foreclosure, trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise. 17.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 16.1 above, no Mortgagee shall have any obligation or duty under this Agreement, before or after foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, to construct or complete the construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction or completion, or to pay, perform or provide any fee, dedication, improvements or other exaction or imposition; provided, however, that a Mortgagee shall not be entitled to devote the Property to any uses or to construct any improvements thereon other than those uses or improvements provided for or authorized by the Project Approvals or by this Agreement or as may be otherwise authorized by the City. 17.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee and Extension of Right to Cure. If City receives notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given Developer hereunder and specifying the address for service thereof, then City shall deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with service thereon to Developer, any notice given to Developer with respect to any claim by City that Developer has committed an event of default. Each Mortgagee shall have the right during the same period available to Developer to cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy, the event of default claimed set forth in the City's notice. City, through its City Manager, may extend the cure periods provided in section 14.2 for not more than an additional sixty (60) days upon request of Developer or a Mortgagee. DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -24- 18. Severability; Conflict. The unenforceability, invalidity or illegality (collectively, "illegality" or "illegal ") of any provisions, covenant, condition or term of this Agreement (collectively, "provision(s) ") shall not render the other provisions of this Agreement illegal, and shall be considered "severed" from this Agreement. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement or any provision hereof and the Project Approvals or any provision thereof, this Development Agreement shall control. 19. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. 19.1 Prevailing Party. If City or Developer initiates any action at law or in equity to enforce or to interpret the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and costs in addition to any other relief to which it may otherwise be entitled. 19.2 Third Party Challenge. If any person or entity not a party to this Agreement initiates an action at law or in equity to challenge the validity of any provision of this Agreement, the Parties shall cooperate in defending such action or proceeding. Developer shall bear its own costs of defense as a real party in interest in any such action, and shall reimburse City for all reasonable court costs and attorneys' fees expended by the City in defense of any such action. 20. Transfers and Assignments. 20.1 Agreement Runs with the Land. All of the provisions, rights, terms, covenants, and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties and their respective heirs, successors and assignees, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Property, or any portion thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and shall constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable laws, including, but not limited to, Section 1468 of the Civil Code of the State of California. Each covenant to do, or refrain from doing, some act on all or any part of the Property, (a) is a burden upon such property, (b) is for the benefit of each other portion of the Property, (c) runs with such properties, and (d) is binding upon each Party and each successive owner during its ownership of such properties or any portion thereof, and shall be a benefit to and a burden upon each Party and its property hereunder and each other person succeeding to an interest in such properties. The provisions of this Section 19.1 are subject and subordinate to the provisions of Section 12.2 which permit amendment of this Agreement. 20.2 Developer's Right to Assign. All of Developer's rights, interests and obligations hereunder (or any portion of such rights which Developer wishes to transfer) may be transferred, sold or assigned in conjunction with the transfer, sale, or assignment of the Property subject hereto, or any portion thereof, at any time during the term of this Agreement, provided that no transfer, sale or assignment of Developer's rights, interests and obligations hereunder shall occur without the prior written notice to City and approval by the City Manager, which approval shall not be unreasonably DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -25- withheld or delayed. The City Manager shall consider and decide the matter within twenty (20) business days after Developer's notice provided and receipt by City Manager of all necessary documents, certifications and other information required by City Manager to decide the matter. In considering the request, the City Manager shall base the decision upon the proposed assignee's reputation, experience, financial resources and access to credit and capability to successfully carry out the development of the Property to completion. The City Manager's approval shall be for the purposes of: a) providing notice to City; b) assuring that all obligations of Developer are allocated as between Developer and the proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee as provided by this Agreement; and c) assuring City that the proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee is financially capable of performing the Developer's obligations hereunder not withheld by Developer. 20.3 Release Upon Transfer. Upon the transfer, sale, or assignment of Developer's rights, interests and obligations hereunder pursuant to sections 19.2 or 19.3 of this Agreement, Developer shall be released from the obligations under this Agreement with respect to the Property transferred, sold, or assigned pertaining to the Portion of the Property transferred to such transferee, purchaser or assignee to the extent that such obligations are expressly assumed by the transferee, purchaser, or assignee. In any event, the transferee, purchaser, or assignee shall be subject to all the provisions hereof pertaining to the Portion of the Property transferred to such transferee, purchaser or assignee, and shall provide all necessary documents, certifications and other necessary information prior to City Manager approval if required by the provisions of this Agreement. The allocation of rights and responsibilities between the transferor and transferee shall be set forth in the assignment agreement executed by such parties. 20.4 Developer's Right to Retain Specified Rights or Obligations. Developer may withhold from a sale, transfer or assignment of this Agreement or any portion of the Property transferred, certain rights, interests and /or obligations which Developer wishes to retain, provided that Developer specifies such rights, interests and /or obligations in a written document to be appended to this Agreement and recorded with the Alameda County Recorder prior to the sale, transfer or assignment of the Property. Developer's purchaser, transferee or assignee shall then have no interest or obligations for such rights, interests and obligations and this Agreement shall remain applicable to Developer with respect to such retained rights, interests and /or obligations. 20.5 Termination of Agreement Upon Sale of Individual Lots to Public. Notwithstanding any provisions of this Agreement to the contrary, the burdens of this Agreement shall terminate as to any lot which has been finally subdivided and individually (and not in "bulk ") leased (for a period of longer than one year) or sold to the purchaser or user thereof (including a homeowners' association or the like) and thereupon and without the execution or recordation of any further document or instrument such lot shall be released from and no longer be subject to or burdened by the provisions of this Agreement; provided, however, that the benefits of this Agreement shall continue to run as to any such lot until a building is constructed on such lot, or until DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -26- the termination of this Agreement, if earlier, at which time this Agreement shall terminate as to such lot. 21. Bankruptcy. The obligations of this Agreement shall not be dischargeable in bankruptcy. 22. Indemnification. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, and its elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs) and liability for any personal injury or property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or inactions by the Developer, or any actions or inactions of Developer's contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in connection with the construction, improvement, operation, or maintenance of the Project, provided that Developer shall have no obligation under this Section 21 with respect to negligence or wrongful conduct of City, its contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees or with respect to the maintenance, use or condition of any improvement after the time it has been delivered or dedicated to and accepted by the City or another public entity (except as provided in an improvement agreement or maintenance bond). If City is named as a party to any legal action for which Developer has a duty to defend or indemnify City then City will cooperate with Developer, will appear in such action and will not unreasonably withhold approval of a settlement otherwise acceptable to Developer. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in this Section 21 or elsewhere in this Agreement, it is understood that each Party or successor or transferee of Developer is providing the indemnities described in this Section 21 as to its respective development on its respective Portion only. 23. Insurance. 23.1 Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance. At all times that Developer is constructing any improvements that will become public improvements, Developer shall maintain in effect a policy of commercial general liability insurance with a per- occurrence combined single limit of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) and a deductible of not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) per claim. The policy so maintained by Developer shall name the City as an additional insured and shall include either a severability of interest clause or cross - liability endorsement. 23.2 Workers' Compensation Insurance. At all times that Developer is constructing any improvements that will become public improvements, Developer shall maintain Workers' Compensation insurance for all persons employed by Developer for work at the Project site. Developer shall require each contractor and subcontractor similarly to provide Workers' Compensation insurance for its respective employees. Developer agrees to indemnify the City for any damage resulting from Developer's failure to maintain any such insurance. DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -27- 23.3 Evidence of Insurance. Prior to commencement of construction of any improvements which will become public improvements, Developer shall furnish City satisfactory evidence of the insurance required in Sections 22.1 and 22.2 and evidence that the carrier is required to give the City at least fifteen (15) days prior written notice of the cancellation or reduction in coverage of a policy. 24. Sewer and Water. Developer acknowledges that the Project requires water and sewer permits from the Dublin San Ramon Services District ( "DSRSD ") which is another public agency not within the control of City. 25. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing. Notices required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows: City Manager City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Fax No: 925.833.6651 With copies to: City Attorney Notice required to be given to Developer shall be addressed as follows: Dublin Crossing Venture LLC 2392 Morse Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Attention: Email: Bruce Cook 2392 Morse Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Email: A Party may change address by giving notice in writing to the other Party and thereafter all notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. Notices shall be deemed given and received upon personal delivery, or if mailed, upon the expiration of 48 hours after being deposited in the United States Mail. Notices may also be given by overnight courier which shall be deemed given the following business day or by facsimile transmission which shall be deemed given upon verification of receipt. 26. Recitals. The foregoing Recitals are true and correct and are made a part hereof. DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -28- 27. Agreement is Entire Understanding. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the parties with respect to this Agreement. 28. Exhibits. The following documents are referred to in this Agreement and are attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full: Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit 1 29. Counterparts. Legal Description and Plat of Army Property Legal Description and Plat of NASA Property Legal Description and Plat of ACSPA Property Diagram of Project Phases Components of Development Agreement Fee Examples of Operation of Development Agreement Fee Advances and Applications Community Facilities District Financial Provisions Current EDTIF Rates Transportation Improvements and Triggers This Agreement is executed in three (3) duplicate originals, each of which is deemed to be an original. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date and year first above written. CITY OF DUBLIN By: Joni Pattillo, City Manager Attest: DEVELOPER DUBLIN CROSSING VENTURE LLC, a Delaware limited liability company DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -29- Caroline Soto, City Clerk Its: Approved as to form John Bakker, City Attorney 2185475.1 DUBLIN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -30- Exhibit A Legal Description and Plat of the Army Property • R 46 • Line Table Line Bearing Distance L 1 N46!2846 "W 1113.05' L2 N43 °31'14 "E 100.00' L3 N46 02846 "W 112,3 43' L4 N01 *13'09"E 105.60' L5 N88 *24'09 "W 3107.51' L6 N381421037E 720.96' L7 N88T4'09 "W 1353.13' L8 NOl X3'35 "E 1480.06' L9 N52 040'34 1E 871.28' L10 N88 046'31 "W 1214.28' L11 N4602846 "W 525.48' L12 N8802623 "W 1245.99' L13 N01 035'20"E 315.58' L14 N42012'34 E 4781' L15 N88024'15 "W 823.94' Curve Table Curve Radius Delta Length C1 11309.19' 1033390 308.06' C2 1905.00' 38 13255" 1281.68' L5 NA SA e; L10 DU15q N BOULEVAM EXHIBIT A PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PROPERTY CITY OF DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Nn- A 1 :11 •11 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 800 ft. L7 ALAMEDA t ouffY DUBL/11 BOULEVARD • 1,pe�elm,onW�varuclwnrsu�� 1 Z RUGGERI- JENSEN -AZAR ENGINEERS ■ PLANNERS " SURVEYORS 4690 CHABOT DRIVE, SUITE 200 PLEASANTON, CA 94588 PHONE: (925) 227 -9100 FAX: (925) 227 -9300 SCALE: DATE: JOB NO.: 1" =800' 10 -17 -2013 081076 Exhibit B Legal Description and Plat of the NASA Property -N- 0 200 400 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 200 ft. I\ \ LEGEND P.O.B. POINT OF BEGINNING UNITED STATES OF AMERCA S88026'33 "E 1245.99' �r�N05 °53'45 "W 46.11' P. 0.8. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EXHIBIT B PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR NASA PROPERTY CITY OF DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 9 3 N 0 9 u G 1,aezaoel PSJO7B W.ICVHeyu 75yuuDNG x 1 RUGGERI- JENSEN -AZAR ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SURVEYORS 4690 CHABOT DRIVE, SUITE 200 PLEASANTON, CA 94588 PHONE: (925) 227 -9100 FAX: (925) 227 -9300 SCALE: DATE: JOB NO.: 1 " =200' 10 -17 -2013 081076 PE IV C1 � LEGEND P.O.B. POINT OF BEGINNING UNITED STATES OF AMERCA S88026'33 "E 1245.99' �r�N05 °53'45 "W 46.11' P. 0.8. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EXHIBIT B PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR NASA PROPERTY CITY OF DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 9 3 N 0 9 u G 1,aezaoel PSJO7B W.ICVHeyu 75yuuDNG x 1 RUGGERI- JENSEN -AZAR ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SURVEYORS 4690 CHABOT DRIVE, SUITE 200 PLEASANTON, CA 94588 PHONE: (925) 227 -9100 FAX: (925) 227 -9300 SCALE: DATE: JOB NO.: 1 " =200' 10 -17 -2013 081076 Exhibit C Legal Description and Plat of the ACSPA Property H W H Q Z F- C? W 0 w 0. 0 H W Q 0 O O 0 0 O � C) O 6q 6 q O fd 0 O 0 0 0 C) 00 N LL LL 6q � U 00 O O O 69. O O O O O O 66r}- � 0 0 0 0 0 LLI oo0 00 eq O 000 Q 00 Ln T-: (V LL V T-- 60- 69 69 O LO O LO N O N C) L M I- 00 M L6 N O LO N (0 CL O M Cfl 69 CO I- LO LL LO O r 1- +. N 69 69 Eft C Ef} 69 N E O O O O O O O Q O O O O O O O W LO O O O O fl- lC) 69 O O O 00 O LO �+ O E Q O � Lc) r 00 T- r- 69 N 69 N 60- 0 6q 6F} 613- O K W � N � O O _ O �- N C O 0 V c i C6 CC) ti O CO) O O � O CO O Oi N r r O Q. E O U c�a c a� E U o ° c m CU U O Lu 0 0 _ O C f! F, c — m �' N C I— O + C C N c W U cn ° U c N O o c O ,= O .� Q c Fn E Y E (n U) Y U 0U Q n FO- U �U Exhibit F Examples of Operation of Development Agreement Fee Advances and Applications b cd cd ..n U U O � O U O 0 44 ,a; o � o o W U m 00 w U 0 0 o , rz U O tb,Q O y O Z O .zy U 'n O 0 U U 00 Cq N O O O O O O $g)= EF} 0 0 0 0 0 00 cV 00 Ln N N ff} O O O o 0 CD O ono ono ono tn r N N 00 0O a: s 0 0 N M = 0 C 0 O A sr N u 0 0 0 c C 0 0 w N ° � V 0 pq f--4E)- O O O O O y O O O O O O O O O O Cq to � � � N O W GFD- U O � O U O 0 44 ,a; o � o o W U m 00 w U 0 0 o , rz U O tb,Q O y O Z O .zy U 'n O 0 U U 00 Cq N O O O O O O $g)= EF} 0 0 0 0 0 00 cV 00 Ln N N ff} 0 0 00 o cn M M c- M O t t t - O ono ono ono tn r N N 00 0 0 00 o cn M M c- M O O O 44 v an N u a) U 4w ++ �+ v� (n v m , m V) O �4 O d 00 H U as ra� as aa� a cn U N -r cn N F r F O y W C) o � U ... F O O H U O 0 0 0 U O O O U U U 0 U U U U cd bq b 0 0 a� w 0 0 U O O U N O O 0 U 0 H a: s N M M L L u 0 O sr N u 0 N F r F O y W C) o � U ... F O O H U O 0 0 0 U O O O U U U 0 U U U U cd bq b 0 0 a� w 0 0 U O O U N O O 0 U 0 H v U M . t- tt O f..)- d4 y It N V 00 O M ++ O M N V O 0 V O N H U4 rL 4-� '++ > 0 + U - W 0 Cl) � U O � a� V v O o 0 0 Cl) U a� O 't 00 0 0 O .- � 0 0 OLr� Lr N Ln N N d' O O Ln G.) 1051= L 4 V r Ln- ��„ -Ell • � 6UJ V U U W 00 rn 00 rn O O \0 LLr) O Q) Ln rn N M O r O O y y M I- O O r dI- O o ^° � O a s a � � U 3-r Cd O M N N O .0 O N 00 M O .--� M � U � U � O O V N 4 � ACT U N .N u O W .- N M G Exhibit G COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FINANCING PROVISIONS 1.1 Formation of CFDs and Designation of Improvement Areas (a) Background. Developer and the United States of America, represented by The Department of the Army (the "Army "), executed the Exchange Agreement, dated March _, 2011 (the "Exchange Agreement ") whereby the Army will convey certain property (the "Exchange Property ") to Developer following completion of certain improvements by Developer to other property owned by the Army. Under the Exchange Agreement, the Exchange Property is divided into six phases, known as Phases 1A, 1B, 2, 3, 4, and 5. The Army will convey the Exchange Property to Developer in five separate transactions, with the first conveyance consisting of Phase 1A and Phase 1B (herein, the "Initial Phases ") and the four additional conveyances consisting of Phase 2, Phase 3, Phase 4, and Phase 5 (each, a "Subsequent Phase "). Both the Initial Phases and each Subsequent Phase will be conveyed only upon the completion of certain improvements by Developer, as detailed in the Exchange Agreement. (b) Formation. City shall, if it elects to do so, establish a community facilities district ( "CFD") pursuant to the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended (the "CFD Act ") in the manner described in this Section 1, consisting initially of the Initial Phases. As each Subsequent Phase is acquired by Developer, it will be annexed into the CFD in the manner described in this Section 1. The Initial Phases and each Subsequent Phase will be designated as its own improvement area of the CFD ( "Improvement Area ") under the CFD Act. (c) Petition. At any time after acquisition of the Initial Phases by Developer, Developer may petition City under the CFD Act to (i) establish the CFD over the Initial Phases, (ii) to designate the Initial Phases as Improvement Area No. 1, (iii) identify each Subsequent Phase as property to be annexed into the CFD in the future, and (iv) designate each Subsequent Phase as a separate Improvement Area. In its petition, Developer may include proposed specifications for each Improvement Area of the CFD, including special tax rates, CFD boundaries and any proposed tax zones within the Improvement Areas of the CFD, the total tax burden that will result from the imposition of the special taxes (subject to the 1.75% Limitation (as defined below) for residential units), and other provisions. Developer's proposed specifications will be based on Developer's development plans, market analysis, and required preferences, but in all cases will be subject to this Development Agreement and the CFD Goals (as defined herein). (d) Commencement of Formation of CFD. (i) Within ninety (90) days following City's receipt of a petition and any deposit required by Section 53318 of the CFD Act, the City Council shall adopt a resolution of intention to form the CFD and to designate the Improvement Areas consistent with the petition. The CFD shall be formed initially over the Initial Phases and each Subsequent Phase shall be identified in the proceedings to form the CFD as property for future annexation. The Initial Phases shall be designated as Improvement Area No. 1, and shall have a separate rate and method of apportionment of special tax (an "RMA "), authorization to issue one or more series of special tax bonds ( "CFD Bonds "), and an appropriations limit. Each Subsequent Phase shall be designated as a separate Improvement Area to be annexed in the future, complete with a separate RMA, authorization to issue CFD Bonds, and appropriations limit. A separate notice of special tax lien required by Section 3114.5 of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "Notice of Special Tax Lien ") shall be recorded against the Initial Phases and each Subsequent Phase upon completion of formation of the CFD or annexation to the CFD, as applicable. (e) Annexation of Subsequent Phases. As each Subsequent Phase is acquired by Developer pursuant to the Exchange Agreement (an "Acquired Phase "), Developer may submit to the City a written consent, unanimous approval, and ballot of all owners of the Acquired Phase (collectively, the "Unanimous Approval ") to the annexation of the Acquired Phase to the designated Improvement Area of the CFD. The Unanimous Approval will specifically agree to the special tax rates set forth in the RMA for such Improvement Area, the bond authorization for such Improvement Area, and the appropriations limit for such Improvement Area, and will direct the City to record a Notice of Special Tax Lien against the Acquired Phase. Upon receipt of the Unanimous Approval, the City shall take all steps necessary to record a Notice of Special Tax Lien against the Acquired Phase. Pursuant to Section 53329.6 of the CFD Act, from and after the recordation of the Notice of Special Tax Lien on the Acquired Phase, the Acquired Phase shall be considered annexed to the CFD within its designated Improvement Area without any further action on the part of the City. City and Developer acknowledge that upon recordation of the Notice of Special Tax Lien on the Acquired Phase (A) the newly- created Improvement Area shall be authorized to finance any of the Facilities (as defined herein) and (B) the Acquisition Agreement (as defined herein) shall be applicable to the newly- created Improvement Area such that the Facilities may be financed pursuant to the Acquisition Agreement from any CFD Bonds and Remainder Taxes (as defined herein) of such newly- created Improvement Area. (f) Authorized Facilities. The CFD and each Improvement Area shall be authorized to finance all of the Facilities (as defined in Section 1.2), irrespective of the geographic location of the improvements financed. The City has determined that the Facilities benefit the CFD and each Improvement Area as a whole, and therefore any of the Facilities may be financed in any Improvement Area without regard to specific benefit to such Improvement Area. K (g) Joint Community Facilities Agreements. Under the CFD Act, City may be required to enter into one or more joint community facilities agreements with other governmental entities that will own or operate any of the Facilities to be financed by the CFD. The City and Developer agree that they will take all steps necessary to procure the authorization and execution of any required joint community facilities agreements with other governmental entities before the issuance of any CFD Bonds that will finance the construction or acquisition of Facilities that will be owned or operated by such other governmental entities. 1.2 Scope of CFD- Financed Costs. The CFD and each Improvement Area shall be authorized to finance all or any portion of the facilities described in Section 53313.5 of the CFD Act and any capital fees, including, but not limited to the Community Benefit Payment (collectively, the "Facilities "). 1.3 Parameters of CFD Formation. (a) Cooperation. Developer and City agree to cooperate reasonably in developing each RMA to be used in each Improvement Area of the CFD. Each RMA shall be consistent with this Development Agreement and the Developer's petition. Developer and City will each use good -faith reasonable efforts at all times to furnish timely to the other, or to obtain and then furnish to the other, any information necessary to develop each RMA, such Developer's plans for the types, sizes, numbers, and timing for construction of buildings, within each Improvement Area. Each Improvement Area of the CFD will be subject to its own RMA. (b) Assigned Special Tax Rates for Developed Property. Each RMA will specify special tax rates for Developed Property (property for which a building permit has been pulled) within the Improvement Area (each an "Assigned Special Tax Rate "). The Assigned Special Tax Rates for Developed Property may vary based on sizes, densities, types of buildings to be constructed, and other relevant factors. Each RMA will establish Assigned Special Tax Rates assuming that any CFD bonds issued will have a debt service coverage -ratio of one hundred ten percent (110 %). (c) Total Tax Obligation. The Assigned Special Tax Rates will be set so that the Total Tax Obligation (as defined below) on any residential unit within an Improvement Area will not exceed one and three - fourths percent (1.75 %) of the anticipated sales price of that residential unit (the 1.75% Limitation "). The anticipated sales price of a residential unit may be based on reasonable projections of value over time. If an RMA for an Improvement Area is modified to increase the special tax rates through Change Proceedings (as defined herein), the increased Assigned Special Tax Rates will be not exceed amounts that will cause the Total Tax Obligation on any residential unit within such Improvement Area to exceed the 1.75% Limitation when the proposed modification goes into effect. 3 (i) For purposes of this Section 1.3, the term "Total Tax Obligation" means, with respect to a residential unit at the time of calculation, the sum of: (a) the ad valorem taxes actually levied or projected to be levied if the residential unit were developed at the time of calculation; (b) the Assigned Special Tax Rates levied or projected to be levied if the residential unit were developed at the time of calculation; (c) all installments of special assessments if the residential unit were developed at the time of calculation; and (d) all other special taxes (based on assigned special tax rates) or assessments secured by a lien on the residential unit levied or projected to be levied if the residential unit were developed at the time of calculation. (d) Escalation of Special Tax Rates. At Developer's request, each RMA will provide for annual increases in the special tax rates in an amount not to exceed two percent (2 %) per year. (e) Priority for Annual Levy of Special Taxes. Each RMA will provide for the levy of special taxes to fund debt service on CFD Bonds (not including capitalized interest), administrative costs, and Facilities (collectively, the "Special Tax Requirement ") according to the priorities set in the Indenture, which shall be as follows: (i) first, special taxes will be levied on each parcel of Developed Property at the applicable Assigned Special Tax Rate, regardless of whether City has issued CFD Bonds or the debt service requirements for any existing CFD Bonds, before applying any capitalized interest; (ii) second, to the extent the funds to be collected under clause i will not be sufficient to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement in full after application of any capitalized interest, special taxes will be levied proportionately on each parcel of Undeveloped Property, up to one hundred percent (100 %) of the applicable Maximum Special Tax Rate; and (iii) third, to the extent the funds to be collected under clauses (i) and ii will not be sufficient to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement in full after application of any capitalized interest, additional special taxes will be levied proportionately on each parcel of Developed Property, so long as the total levy on Developed Property under clauses (i) and Liiq does not exceed the applicable Maximum Special Tax Rate. (f) Use of Remainder Taxes. (i) Developer and City contemplate that, within each Improvement Area of the CFD, Facilities will be paid from Remainder Taxes (as defined below) both before and after the issuance of CFD Bonds for such Improvement Area. Accordingly, each RMA will provide that Remainder Taxes may be used to finance Facilities. For each CFD, annually, on the day following each Principal Payment Date (as defined below) for such Improvement Area, all Remainder Taxes for such Improvement Area will be deposited in the applicable Remainder Taxes Project Account (as defined below). (1) The term "Remainder Taxes" means, in each year, as of the 4 day following the Principal Payment Date for an Improvement Area, all special taxes collected prior to such date in such Improvement Area in excess of the total of: (a) debt service on the outstanding CFD Bonds for the applicable Improvement Area due in the current calendar year, if any; (b) priority and any other reasonable administrative costs for the applicable Improvement Area payable in that fiscal year; and (c) amounts levied to replenish the applicable reserve fund as of the Principal Payment Date, including amounts reserved for reasonable anticipated delinquencies, if any. (2) The term "Principal Payment Date" means, either before or after CFD Bonds are issued, September 1 of each year, regardless of whether principal payments are actually due in any particular year. (3) The term "Remainder Taxes Project Account" means a separate account created by City for the CFD and maintained by City to hold all Remainder Taxes for all of the Improvement Areas of the CFD to be used for financing Facilities. (g) No Pledge for Debt Service. Remainder Taxes deposited in the Remainder Taxes Project Accounts will not be deemed or construed to be pledged for payment of debt service on any CFD Bonds, and neither Developer nor any other person will have the right to demand or require that the City or Fiscal Agent, as applicable, use funds in the Remainder Taxes Project Account to pay debt service. (h) Prepayment. The RMA will include provisions allowing a property owner within an Improvement Area that is not in default of its obligation to pay special taxes to prepay special taxes in full or in part based on a formula that will require payment of the property owner's anticipated total special tax obligation. Prepaid special taxes will be placed in a segregated account in accordance with the applicable Indenture. The RMA and the Indenture will specify the use of prepaid special taxes. Before CFD Bonds are issued for an Improvement Area, all prepayment amounts other than those required for administrative expenses shall be used to finance Facilities. 1.4 Issuance of CFD Bonds (a) Issuance. Subject to the Bond Issuance Conditions Precedent (defined below), City, on behalf of the CFD, intends to issue one or more series of CFD Bonds on behalf of each Improvement Area for purposes of this Development Agreement. Developer may submit written requests that City issue CFD Bonds, specifying requested issuance dates, amounts, and main financing terms. Following Developer's request, Developer and City will meet with City's public financing 5 consultants to determine reasonable and appropriate issuance dates, amounts, and main financing terms that are consistent with this Development Agreement and the CFD Goals. The CFD Bonds shall be issued pursuant to an indenture, trust agreement, or fiscal agent agreement (however denominated, an "Indenture ") between the CFD and a fiscal agent or trustee (however denominated, the "Fiscal Agent "). (b) Bond Issuance Conditions Precedent. The Developer and City agree that the following three conditions must be satisfied with respect to the property that is the security for the CFD Bonds before the City will issue a series of CFD Bonds (collectively, the "Bond Issuance Conditions Precedent "): (i) The Alameda County Assessor's Office confirms that the property upon which special taxes will be levied as security for the series of CFD Bonds is on the secured tax rolls of Alameda County and is subject to ad valorem taxation. The purpose of this condition is to ensure that the property securing the CFD Bonds is no longer owned by the Army or other governmental agency and is subject to tax levy by the County. (ii) Compliance with the CFD Goals. (iii) With respect to the public improvements required as conditions to development approval for any phase of the development project, and before any CFD bonds are issued upon the security of special taxes to be levied on the property within that phase, Developer shall have provided information to City that describes to the City's reasonable satisfaction how Developer will finance any of those improvements that are not to be acquired with bond proceeds. (c) Payment Dates. So that Remainder Taxes may be calculated on the same date for all Improvement Areas and CFD Bonds, each issue of CFD Bonds shall have interest payment dates of March 1 and September 1, with principal due on September 1. (d) Term. CFD Bonds will have a term of not less than thirty (30) years and not more than thirty -five (35) years unless Developer and City agree otherwise. 1.5 CFD Goals (a) CFD Goals. Under Section 53312.7 of the CFD Act, prior to formation of the CFD, the City must consider and adopt local goals and policies concerning the CFD (the "CFD Goals "). The City has not yet established the CFD Goals, but will prior to formation of the CFD. The City shall not adopt CFD Goals that are inconsistent with this Development Agreement unless required under the CFD Act or other controlling State or federal law. In particular, the CFD Goals shall include the following provisions, each of which the Developer is relying on: N (i) Value -to -Lien Ratio. The appraised or assessed value -to- lien ratio required for each CFD Bond issue will be three to one (3:1), unless a lesser amount is mutually agreed to by the City and Developer. (ii) Coverage Ratio. An issue of CFD Bonds will not have a debt service coverage -ratio of less than one hundred ten percent (110 %), unless otherwise agreed to by City. (iii) Letter of Credit. So long as the value of the property in the Improvement Area is at least equal to the required value -to -lien ratio, the City shall not require the Developer or any property owner in the Improvement Area provide a letter of credit or other credit enhancement as security for the payment of special taxes in the CFD. 1.6 Miscellaneous CFD Provisions (a) Reserve Fund Earnings. The Indenture for each issue of CFD Bonds will provide that earnings on any reserve fund that are not then needed to replenish the reserve fund to the reserve requirement will be transferred to: (i) the project fund for the CFD Bonds for allowed uses until it is closed in accordance with the Indenture; then (ii) the debt service fund held by the Fiscal Agent under the Indenture. (b) Authorization of Reimbursements. City will take all actions necessary to satisfy section 53314.9 of the Government Code or any similar statute subsequently enacted to use CFD Bond proceeds and Remainder Taxes to reimburse Developer for: (i) CFD formation and CFD Bond issuance deposits; and (ii) advance funding of Facilities or costs. (c) Acquisition Agreement. Contemporaneously with the formation of the CFD, Developer and City will execute an acquisition and funding agreement (the "Acquisition Agreement ") that will apply to the acquisition and construction of the Facilities for each and every Improvement Area of the CFD. The Acquisition Agreement shall be structured so that it is automatically applicable to any financing by special taxes levied in, or CFD Bonds issued for, a Subsequent Phase annexed into its respective Improvement Area of the CFD, without requiring any modifications to the Acquisition Agreement or any further approvals by the City. The Acquisition Agreement shall contain an acknowledgment by the City and Developer as to the following: (i) Developer may be constructing Facilities before CFD Bond proceeds and Remainder Taxes (herein, "Funding Sources ") will be used to acquire them are available; (ii) The Department of Public Works will inspect Facilities and process payment requests even if Funding Sources for the amount of pending payment requests are not then sufficient to satisfy them in full; (iii) Facilities may be conveyed to and accepted by the City or other governmental entity before the applicable payment requests are paid in full; (iv) If the City or other governmental entity accepts Facilities before the applicable payment requests are paid in full, the unpaid balance will be paid when sufficient Funding Sources become available, and the Acquisition Agreement will provide that the applicable payment requests for Facilities accepted by the City or other governmental entity may be paid: (A) in any number of installments as Funding Sources become available; and (B) irrespective of the length of time payment is deferred; and (v) Developer's conveyance or dedication of Facilities to the City or other governmental entity before the availability of Funding Sources to acquire the Facilities is not a dedication or gift, or a waiver of Developer's right to payment of Facilities under this Development Agreement or the Acquisition Agreement. (d) Initial and Continuing Disclosure. In connection with each issue of CFD Bonds, the Developer shall provide customary disclosure about the Developer and its development and financing plans. In addition, Developer shall comply with all of its obligations under any continuing disclosure agreement it executes in connection with the offering and sale of any CFD Bonds. Developer acknowledges that a condition to the issuance of any CFD Bonds may be Developer's execution of a continuing disclosure agreement. (e) No Other Land - Secured Financings. Other than the CFD, City shall not to form any additional land- secured financing district over any portion of the property in the Project without Developer's written consent which may be given in its sole discretion. (f) Prevailing Wages. If a CFD is formed, the Developer shall require, and the specifications and bid and contract documents shall require, all contractors engaged to perform work on a public work of improvement to pay prevailing wages and to otherwise comply with applicable provisions of the California Labor Code. 2188364.1 0 I EASTERN DUBLIN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE Effective May 17, 2010 Health Club Residential (Within Transit Center) Bowling Center High Density Dwelling (more than zA units per acre) $3,429 /unit Residential (Outside of Transit Center) Tennis Courts Low Density Dwelling (up to 6 units per acre) $8,410 1unit Medium Density Dwelling (6.1 -14 units per acre) $8,410 /unit Medium /High Density Dwelling (14.1 -25 units per acre) $5,887 1unit High Density Dwelling (25.1 or more units per acre) $5,046 1unit Second Units per Sec. 8.80 of the Municipal Code $5,046 /unit Non - Residential Industrial (without retail) Development Other Than Residential $ 735 /trip LAND USE ESTIMATED WEEKDAY VEHICLE INon- Residentiall TRIP-GENERATION RATE' HOTEL/MOTEL OR OTHER LODGING: 10 /room OFFICE: Standard Commercial Office 20/1,000 sf RECREATION: Recreation Community Center 26/1,000 sf Health Club 40/1,000 sf Bowling Center 33/1,000 sf Golf Course 8 /acre Tennis Courts 33 /court Theaters: 3 1bed Movie 220 /screen Live 0.2/seat Video Arcade 9611,000 sf EDUCATION Private Schools 1.5 /student Daycare/ Pre - school 2.41student HOSPITAL: General 12/bed Convalescent/Nursing 3 1bed Clinic 24/1,000 sf CHURCH: 9/1,000 sf INDUSTRIAL: Industrial (with retail) 16/1,000 sf Industrial (without retail) 8/11,000 sf * Sources of Information for Trip Generation Rates: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). These trip generation rates are based on averages. Most retail uses are given a 35% pass -by reduction. Land uses that are shaded will always pay at the individual trip rate as these uses tend to generate destination trips. Commercial /retail and certain recreation uses will pay at the individual trip rate if the site Is a stand -alone land use; if.the land use is part of a larger shopping center, the appropriate shopping center trip rate will apply. Page 1 of 2 2/26/2010 g:LEDT1F UPDATEIExhibli C -Fee Rates 2009 Translf Center Fee Reducifan Update I)RAFT EASTERN DUBLIN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE Effective May 17, 2010 ESTIMATED WEEKDAY VEHICLE LAND USE TRIP GENERATION RATE (Non - Residential) WITH PASS -BY) RESTAURANT: Located Within a Shopping Center (may be separate legal parcels but with shared parking and Internal vehicle/ pedestrian connections to adjacent commercial parcels): Quality (leisure) See appropriate Shopping Center Rate Sit -down, high turnover (usually chain other than fast food) See appropriate Shopping Center Rate Bar/Tavern See appropriate Shopping Center Rate Fast Food (w /o drive through �_._. _ See ap ropriate Sh�ing Center R;a�tge Restaurant uses shall be as defined in the Trip Generation Manual, Institute Final determination shall be made by the Public Works'Director, AUTOMOTIVE: Transportation Engineers, 8th Ed FINANCIAL: Located Within a Shopping Center 4may be separate legal parcels but with shared parking and Internal vehicle/ pedestrian connections to adjacent commercial parcels): Bank/Savings and Loan See appropriate Shopping Center Rate COMMERCIAURETAIL: Super Regional Shopping Center 22/1,000 sf (More than 600,000 SF; usually more than 60 acres; with usually 3+ major stores) and not biscted by a public arterial street Regional Shopping Center 33/1,000 sf (300,000 - 600,000 SF; usually 30 -60 acres; w /usually 2+ major stores) and not bisected by a public arterial street Community or Neighborhood Shopping Center 46/1,000 sf (Less than'300,000 sf; less than 30 acres; wl usually 1 major store or grocery store and detached restaurant and detached restaurant and/or drug store) and not bisected by a public arterial street Commercial Shops: RetaiVStdp Commercial (no major store) 26/1,000 sf ;�eF�di��.t'��# Discount Store � 46/1,000 00 sf sf Page 2 of 2 2/26/2010 9:1EDT1F UPDATE1Exhfbrt C -Fee Rates 2009 TraW Center Fee Reduction Update DRAFT I EASTERN DUBLIN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE Effective May 17, 2010 Residential (Within Transit Center) High Density Dwelling (more than 25 units per acre) $3,429 /unit Residential (Outside of Transit Center) Low Density Dwelling (up to 6 units per acre) $8,410 /unit Medium Density Dwelling (6.1 -14 units per acre) $8,410 /unit Medium /High Density Dwelling (14.1 -25 units per acre) $5,887 /unit High Density Dwelling (25.1 or more units per acre) $5,046 /unit Second Units per Sec. 8.80 of the Municipal Code $5,046 /unit Non - Residential Development Other Than Residential $ 735 /trip LAND USE ESTIMATED WEEKDAY VEHICLE (Non - Residential) TRIP GENERATION RATE' HOTEL /MOTEL OR OTHER LODGING: 10 /room OFFICE: Standard Commercial Office 20/1,000 sf RECREATION: Recreation Community Center 26/1,000 sf Health Club 40/1,000 sf Bowling Center 33/1,000 sf Golf Course 8 /acre Tennis Courts 33 /court Theaters: 24/1,000 sf Movie 220 /screen Live 0.2 /seat Video Arcade 96/1,000 sf EDUCATION Private Schools 1.5 /student Daycare/ Pre - school 2.4 /student HOSPITAL: General 12 /bed Convalescent /Nursing 3 /bed Clinic 24/1,000 sf CHURCH: 9/1,000 sf INDUSTRIAL: Industrial (with retail) 16/1,000 sf Industrial (without retail) 8/1,000 sf * Sources of information for Trip Generation Rates: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). These trip generation rates are based on averages. Most retail uses are given a 35% pass -by reduction. Land uses that are shaded will always pay at the individual trip rate as these uses tend to generate destination trips. Commercial /retail and certain recreation uses will pay at the individual trip rate if the site is a stand -alone land use; if the land use is part of a larger shopping center, the appropriate shopping center trip rate will apply. Page 1 of 2 10/17/2013 g:IEDTIF UPDATEIEzhibit C - Fee Rates 2009 Transit Center Fee Reduction Update DRAFT EASTERN DUBLIN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE Effective May 17, 2010 ESTIMATED WEEKDAY VEHICLE LAND USE TRIP GENERATION RATE (Non- ResidentIC (WITH PASS -BY) RESTAURANT: Located Within a Shopping Center (may be separate legal parcels but with shared parking and internal vehicle/ pedestrian connections to adjacent commercial parcels): Quality (leisure) See appropriate Shopping Center Rate Sit-down, high turnover (usually chain other than fast food) See appropriate Shopping Center Rate Bar/Tavern See appropriate Shopping Center Rate Fast Food (w /o drive through) See appropriate Shoppin Center Rate +' Restaurant uses shall be as defined in the Trip Generation Manual, Institute of Transportation tngineers, tsm tai Final determination shall be made by the Public Works Director. AUTOMOTIVE: FINANCIAL: Located Within a Shopping Center (may be separate legal parcels but with shared parking and internal vehicle/ pedestrian connections to adjacent commercial parcels): Bank/Savings and Loan See appropriate Shopping Center Rate COMMERCIAL /RETAIL: Super Regional Shopping Center 22/1,000 sf (More than 600,000 SF; usually more than 60 acres; with usually 3+ major stores) and not biscted by a public arterial street Regional Shopping Center 33/1,000 sf (300,000 - 600,000 SF; usually 30 -60 acres; w /usually 2+ major stores) and not bisected by a public arterial street Community or Neighborhood Shopping Center 46/1,000 sf (Less than 300,000 sf; less than 30 acres; w/ usually 1 major store or grocery store and detached restaurant and detached restaurant and /or drug store) and not bisected by a public arterial street Commercial Shops Retail /Strip Commercial (no major store) 26/1,000 sf Supermarket Stand_ Alone) 98/11,000 sf � t ..�` (p INY Discount Store 46/1,000 sf Page 2 of 2 10/17/2013 g:IEDTIF UPDATEIExhibit C - Fee Rates 2009 Transit Center Fee Reduction Update DRAFT Exhibit I Transportation Improvements and Triggers The following additional conditions are hereby imposed pursuant to Paragraph 10.3 of the Agreement. Infrastructure Sequencing Program 1. Internal Subdivision Improvements Right -of -way dedication and construction of public improvements internal to the Project shall be completed in accordance with the Phasing Plan identified in the Dublin Crossings Specific Plan and the requirements of section 10.4 of this Agreement and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. The City Engineer shall identify all improvements necessary to serve and access the lots created with each subdivision map. All rights -of -way and improvements, including new traffic signals, identified by the City Engineer for construction within the boundaries of each phase of the development shall be required with the subdivision map for that phase. 2. External Subdivision Improvements Right -of -way dedication and construction of public improvements external to the Project shall be done in accordance with the phases described below and the Dublin Crossings Specific Plan. The following table identifies the external improvements and the phase in which said improvements are to be constructed. More detailed information of each external improvement is provided in the subsections following the table. Improvement Subsection Construction EIR EIR Fair Transportation During Mitigation Share Fee Credit Phase (Yes /No) Contribution Eligible Yes /No Yes /No Arnold Road a. 3 No No Yes Widening Arnold Road b. 3 No No Yes & Central Parkway Signal Modifications Arnold Road c. 4 No No No & G Street Signal Dublin Crossing Development Agreement I Exhibit I Dougherty d. 1 Yes Yes Yes Road & (MM 3.12 -1) Amador Valley Boulevard Intersection Dublin e. 3 No No No Boulevard Auxiliary Lane Dublin f. 3 No No Yes Boulevard & Arnold Road Intersection Dublin g. 3 No No No Boulevard & Demarcus Boulevard Intersection Dublin h. 4 Yes Yes Yes Boulevard & (MM 3.12 -4) Iron Horse Parkway Intersection Dublin i. 5 Yes Yes Yes Boulevard & (MM 3.12 -5) Hacienda Drive Intersection Dublin j. 5 Yes Yes Yes Boulevard & (MM 3.12 -6) Tassajara Road Intersection Scarlett Drive k. 2 or Year No No Yes Extension/ 2020, Widening whichever between comes first Dougherty Rd & southerly boundary of Phase 2 park parcel Dublin Crossing Development Agreement L Exhibit I Scarlett Drive k. 3 No No Yes Extension between southerly boundary of Phase 2 park parcel and Dublin Blvd a. Arnold Road Widening (i) Overview - The Developer agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 3, to (a) widen Arnold Road to four lanes between Central Parkway and Dublin Boulevard and (b) dedicate land associated with the improvements. Widening includes the realignment of the existing Arnold Road drainage canal north of Central Parkway. (ii) Timing - Developer shall complete construction of or shall agree to and provide bonds guaranteeing construction of the Arnold Road Widening in accordance with the approved final design before the first subdivision map is recorded for Phase 3. (iii) Transportation Fee Credits — The Developer shall be eligible for Transportation Fee Credits for Arnold Road Widening. b. Arnold Road & Central Parkway Signal Modifications (i) Overview - The Developer agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 3, to (a) modify the existing signal, construct a northbound left turn lane on Arnold Road, and construct pedestrian, streetscape, and bicycle access improvements at the Arnold Road and Central Parkway intersection and (b) dedicate land in conjunction with those improvements. Bicycle and Pedestrian improvements shall include specific improvements to ensure safe and appropriate connection between Class I and Class II bikeways in the vicinity of the intersection. (ii) Timing - Developer shall complete construction of or shall agree to and provide bonds guaranteeing construction of the Arnold Road & Central Parkway Signal modifications in accordance with the approved final design before the first subdivision map is recorded for Phase 3. (v) Transportation Fee Credits — The Developer shall be eligible for Transportation Fee Credits for the portions of the Arnold Road & Central Parkway Signal modifications that are included in the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee. C. Arnold Road & G Street Signal Dublin Crossing Development Agreement 3 Exhibit I (i) Overview - The Developer agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 4, to (a) install a traffic signal, construct a southbound right turn lane on Arnold Road, construct a northbound left turn lane on Arnold Road, and construct pedestrian, streetscape, and bicycle access improvements at the Arnold Road and G Street intersection and (b) dedicate land in conjunction with those improvements. The improvements shall include specific pedestrian and bicycle improvements to ensure safe and appropriate connection between Class I and Class II bikeways in the vicinity of the intersection. (ii) Timing - Developer shall complete construction of or shall agree to and provide bonds guaranteeing construction of the Arnold Road & G Street Signal in accordance with the approved final design before the first subdivision map is recorded for Phase 4. (iii) Transportation Fee Credits — The Developer shall not be eligible for Transportation Fee Credits for Arnold Road and G Street Traffic Signal. d. Dougherty Road & Amador Valley Boulevard Intersection (i) Overview - The Developer agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 1, to (a) either (1) install a second north bound left turn lane on Dougherty Road at the Dougherty Road and Amador Valley Boulevard Intersection or (2) pay its fair share thereof. (ii) Timing - Developer shall make the fair share contribution to, complete construction of, or shall agree to and provide bonds guaranteeing construction of the required improvements at the Dougherty & Amador Valley Intersection in accordance with the approved final design before the first subdivision map is recorded for Phase 1. (iii) Transportation Fee Credits — The Developer shall be eligible for Transportation Fee Credits for land acquisition and construction of the additional northbound left turn lane at the Dougherty Road & Amador Valley Boulevard Intersection in excess of its fair share obligation. e. Dublin Boulevard Auxiliary Lane (i) Overview - The Developer agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 1, to (a) construct a westbound right turn and auxiliary lane on the Dublin Boulevard frontage of the Project and (b) dedicate land in conjunction with those improvements. (ii) Timing - Developer shall complete construction of or shall agree to and provide bonds guaranteeing construction of the Dublin Boulevard Auxiliary Lane in accordance with the approved final design before the first subdivision map is recorded for Phase 3. (iii) Transportation Fee Credits — The Developer shall not be eligible for Transportation Fee Credits for the Dublin Boulevard Auxiliary Lane. Dublin Crossing Development Agreement 4 Exhibit I f. Dublin Boulevard & Arnold Road Intersection (i) Overview - The Developer agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 3, to (a) construct intersection improvements at the Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road intersection and (b) dedicate land in conjunction with those improvements. (ii) Timing - Developer shall complete construction of or shall agree to and provide bonds guaranteeing construction of the Dublin Boulevard & Arnold Road Intersection improvements in accordance with the approved final design before the first subdivision map is recorded for Phase 3. (iii) Transportation Fee Credits — The Developer shall be eligible for Transportation Fee Credits for the Dublin Boulevard & Arnold Road Intersection improvements. g. Dublin Boulevard & Demarcus Boulevard Intersection (i) Overview - The Developer agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 3, to (a) to construct pedestrian, and streetscape improvements at the Dublin Boulevard and Demarcus Boulevard intersection and modify signal to accommodate 4t" leg (B Street) at this intersection as specified in the Specific Plan and the EIR and (b) dedicate land in conjunction with those improvements. The improvements shall include specific bicycle and pedestrian improvements to ensure safe and appropriate connection between Class I and Class II bikeways in the vicinity of the intersection. (ii) Timing - Developer shall complete construction of or shall agree to and provide bonds guaranteeing construction of the Dublin Boulevard & Demarcus Boulevard Intersection improvements in accordance with the approved final design before the first subdivision map is recorded for Phase 3. (iii) Transportation Fee Credits — The Developer shall not be eligible for Transportation Fee Credits for Dublin Boulevard & Demarcus Boulevard Intersection improvements. h. Dublin Boulevard & Iron Horse Parkway Intersection (i) Overview - The Developer agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 4, to mitigate the impact at the intersection of Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard as specified in the EIR. The mitigation would require the removal of parking on the east side of Iron Horse Parkway, traffic signal modifications, and changing the travel lane configuration and alignment to create: one 16 -foot wide southbound receiving lane on Iron Horse Parkway; two 10 -foot wide northbound left turn lanes on Iron Horse Parkway; and one 14 -foot wide northbound shared through -right turn lane. Other improvements include modifying the existing traffic signal to add D Street to the intersection and constructing a westbound right turn Dublin Crossing Development Agreement 5 Exhibit lane on Dublin Boulevard at the Dublin Boulevard, Iron Horse Parkway /D Street intersection. (ii) Timing - Developer shall complete construction of or shall agree to and provide bonds guaranteeing construction of the Dublin Boulevard & Iron Horse Parkway Intersection improvements in accordance with the approved final design before the first subdivision map is recorded for Phase 4. (iii) Transportation Fee Credits — The Developer shall be eligible for Transportation Fee Credits for improvements along the south leg of Iron Horse Parkway as per the EIR mitigation. All other required improvements at the Dublin Boulevard and Iron Horse Parkway /D Street intersection will not be eligible for such credits. Dublin Boulevard & Hacienda Drive Intersection Improvements (i) Overview - The Developer agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 5, to modify and restripe the Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive intersection as specified in the EIR. (ii) Timing - Developer shall complete construction of or shall agree to and provide bonds guaranteeing construction of the Dublin Boulevard & Hacienda Drive Intersection improvements in accordance with the approved final design before the first subdivision map is recorded for Phase 5. (iii) Transportation Fee Credits — The Developer shall be eligible for Transportation Fee Credits for the Dublin Boulevard & Hacienda Drive Intersection improvements. j. Dublin Boulevard & Tassaiara Road Intersection Improvements (i) Overview - The Developer agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 5, to construct, or pay its fair share of, a new eastbound through and receiving lane on Dublin Boulevard at the Dublin Boulevard and Tassajara Road Intersection. (ii) Timing - Developer shall complete construction of or shall agree to and provide bonds guaranteeing construction of the Dublin Boulevard & Tassajara Road Intersection in accordance with the approved final design before the first subdivision map is recorded for Phase 5. (iii) Transportation Fee Credits — The Developer shall be eligible for Transportation Fee Credits for the Dublin Boulevard & Tassajara Road Intersection improvements. k. Scarlett Drive Improvements (i) Overview — The Developer agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 2 or prior to the Year 2020, whichever occurs Dublin Crossing Development Agreement 6 Exhibit I first, to : widen and extend Scarlett Drive and realign the existing Iron Horse Trail between Dougherty Road and the southerly boundary of the Phase 2 park parcel as shown in Figure 2 -4 of the Specific Plan; signalize the G Street and Scarlett Drive intersection and /or the Houston Place and Scarlett Drive intersection as per Section 9.6.; and construct Pedestrian /Streetscape /Bicycle access improvements to Scarlett Drive and G Street intersection and the Scarlett Drive and Houston Place intersection. The Developer further agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 3, to : extend Scarlett Drive and realign the existing Iron Horse Trail between the southerly boundary of the Phase 2 park parcel as shown in Figure 2 -4 of the Specific Plan and Dublin Boulevard. (ii) Right -of -Way — The Developer agrees not to oppose conditions on tentative maps that require it, in conjunction with Phase 2 or Phase 3 as outlined above in subsection (i), to offer for dedication the right -of -way necessary to construct those portions of the Scarlett Drive Improvements identified above. If any right -of -way, access rights and other consents and approvals from other property owners is necessary to complete and dedicate those portions of the Scarlett Drive Improvements outside of the Project site limits ( "Necessary Rights of Way "), the Parties agree to comply with Government Code section 66462.5. The Parties further agree that the agreement contemplated by Government Code section 66462.5 will require Developer to use diligent commercially reasonable efforts to obtain, at its cost, any Necessary Rights of Way and, if those efforts are unsuccessful, require the Developer to pay all of the City's costs of acquiring the Necessary Rights of Way, including, but not limited to, the costs of appraisals and attorneys' fees. (iii) Timing - Developer shall complete construction of or shall agree to and provide bonds guaranteeing construction of the Scarlett Drive Improvements in accordance with the approved final design before the first subdivision map is recorded for Phase 2 or Phase 3, as outlined above in subsection (i). (iv) Transportation Fee Credits - The Developer shall be eligible for Transportation Fee Credits for the Scarlett Drive Improvements, except for improvements associated with signalization of G Street and Scarlett Drive intersection and /or the Houston Place and Scarlett Drive intersection as per Section 9.6 of this Agreement. 2186843.1 Dublin Crossing Development Agreement 7 Exhibit RESOLUTION NO. xx -13 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN CERTIFYING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM UNDER CEQA FOR THE DUBLIN CROSSING SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT PA 08 -049 WHEREAS, the City has processed a Planning Application to enable private development on approximately 189 acres of property that is currently part of Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area. The proposal includes the approval of the Dublin Crossing General Plan Amendments, Specific Plan, Zoning Ordinance Amendments, Rezoning properties to a new Dublin Crossing Zoning District, and consideration of a Development Agreement, among other related actions. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the "Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Project" or the "Project "; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (Specific Plan) project area is approximately 189 acres in size and is generally bound by 5t" Street to the north, Scarlett Drive to the west, Dublin Boulevard to the south, and Arnold Road to the east. The project area includes properties identified by Assessor Parcel Numbers 986- 0001 - 001 -15 (partial), 986- 0034 - 002 -00, and 986- 0034 - 006 -00; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State CEQA Guidelines and City environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared. It was determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be prepared to analyze the Project; and WHEREAS, the City circulated a Notice of Preparation, dated June 4, 2012, to public agencies and interested parties for consultation on the scope of the EIR. The City also conducted a public scoping meeting on June 20, 2012; and WHEREAS, the City prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated June 2013 for the proposed Project that reflected the City's independent judgment and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project. The Draft EIR is a separately bound document on file at City Hall and is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated for public review for 45 days, from June 24, 2013 to August 8, 2013; and WHEREAS, the City received comment letters from state, regional, and local agencies as well as interested individuals and organizations during the public review period. In accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the City prepared written responses to all the comments received during the public comment period. The City prepared a Final EIR dated October 2013, that includes the comment letters, written Responses to Comments, and clarifications and minor 1 corrections to information presented in the Draft EIR. The Final EIR is attached as Exhibit A and is incorporated herein by reference. The responses to comments provide the City's good faith, reasoned analysis of the environmental issues raised by the comments. The documents included in a flash drive that accompanied Comment Letter 9 were responded to to the extent that they were specifically referenced in or incorporated into the actual written comments regarding the Project included in Letter 9. Overall, the documents included in the flash drive were general resource materials that did not relate to the Project and, therefore, no specific response was required under CEQA; and WHEREAS, following release of the Final EIR, the City discovered a typographical error in the Final EIR that should be corrected as follows: In Final EIR section 2.6, last paragraph under "General Commercial /Dublin Medium Density Residential (GC /DC MDR), second to last line, the reference to "20 units /net acre" is changed to "25 units /net acre" for consistency with Table 2 -1 and other text references to density for this district; and WHEREAS, the EIR for the Project includes the Draft EIR and the Final EIR collectively (EIR); and WHEREAS, the City carefully reviewed the comments and written responses and determined that the Final EIR, including the clarifications and minor corrections to the Draft EIR, do not constitute significant new information requiring recirculation of the Draft EIR under the standards in CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated October 22, 2013 and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Project and EIR for the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Staff Report, the EIR, including comments and responses, at a noticed public hearing on October 22, 2013 at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, on October 22, 2013, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 13 -32 recommending that the City Council certify the EIR for the project, which resolution is incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated November 5, 2013 and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Project and EIR for the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Staff Report, the EIR, including comments and responses, at a noticed public hearing on November 5, 2013 at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the EIR, including comments and responses, reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis on the potential for environmental impacts from the Project; and WHEREAS, the EIR identified several potentially significant impacts that will be reduced to a less than significant level with specified mitigation measures; therefore, approval of the project will require adoption of findings on impacts and mitigations as set forth in attached Exhibit B; and 2 WHEREAS, the EIR identified significant and unavoidable environmental impacts of the project; therefore approval of the project will require adoption of findings concerning mitigations as set forth in attached Exhibit B, findings concerning alternatives as set forth in attached Exhibit C, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations as set forth in attached Exhibit D; and WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as required by CEQA, is attached as Exhibit E; and WHEREAS, the EIR and all of the documents relating to the Project are available for review in the City Planning Division at the Dublin City Hall, file PA 08 -049, during normal business hours. The location and custodian of the EIR and other documents that constitute the record of proceedings for the Project is the City of Dublin Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568, file PA 08 -049. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Dublin City Council certifies the following: A. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. B. The EIR, consisting of the Draft EIR, the separately bound Final EIR attached as Exhibit A, and the additional typographical correction identified in the recitals above, has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines. C. The City Council has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR, including the written comments received during the Draft EIR review period and the oral and written comments received at the public hearing, prior to acting on the proposed Project. D. The EIR reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis on the potential environmental impacts of the Project. The EIR provides information to the decision - makers and the public on the environmental consequences of the Project. E. 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 adopts the mitigation measures and impact and mitigation findings set forth in Exhibit B, the findings concerning 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. Exhibits A, B, C, D and E are incorporated herein by reference, all in compliance with the requirements of CEQA. vote: AYES: PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 5t" day of November, 2013 by the following 3 NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 2187772.1 fk If 'fie •' Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report SCH # 2012062009 Prepared for City of Dublin October 2013 Introduction .. Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR M The Draft Program Environmental Impact Report was circulated for a 45 -day public review period from Monday, July 24, 2013 through Thursday, August 8, 2013, as assigned by the State of California Governor's Office of Planning and , Research State Clearinghouse and consistent with CEQA regulations. Copies of the document were distributed to state, regional, and local agencies, as well as organizations and individuals, for their review and comment. This document has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and state and local CEQA Guidelines and represents the independent judgment of the Lead Agency. This Response to Comments volume, together with the DEIR, technical appendices, and other written documentation prepared during the EIR process, as those documents may be modified by the City Council at the time of certification, will constitute the Final EIR, as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15132, and the City of Dublin's environmental document reporting procedures. Document Organization and Framework This Response to Comments package is organized as follows: Section 1 provides a brief introduction to this report. Section 2 provides a list of agencies and interested persons commenting on the DEIR. This section also contains individual comments followed thereafter by responses. To facilitate review of the responses, an index number (e.g., 1 -1, 1 -2, 2 -1) has been assigned to each comment and to its corresponding responses. Section 3 contains revisions to the Draft EIR as a result of the comments by agencies and interested persons. The responses to comments contained in this section contain material and revisions which will be added or made to the text of the Final EIR. r City Staff has reviewed this material and determined that none of this material W constitutes the type of significant new information that requires a recirculation to period for further public comment under CEQA Guideline Section 15088.5. None of this new material indicates that the project will result in a significant new environmental impact not previously disclosed in the DEIR. Additionally, none of this material indicates that there would be a substantial increase in the severity Page 1 "'� Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR of a previously identified environmental impact that will not be mitigated, or that there would be any of the other circumstances requiring recirculation as described in Section 15088.5. 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... CEQA does not require a lead agency to conduct every test or perform all research, study, and experimentation recommended or demanded by those submitting comments. 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." few M Page 2 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR List of Commenters on the Draft Program EIR This section includes all written responses received on the DEIR and the City's responses to each comment. Comment letters and specific comments are given letters and numbers for reference purposes. Where sections of the DEIR are excerpted in this document, the sections are shown indented. Changes to the DEIR text are shown in underline for additions and °*rlt-Ail t for deletions. The following is a list of agencies and persons that submitted comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR during the public review period: Table 2 -1: List of Written Comments Received on the Draft EIR Comment Letter No. 1 Commenting Person/Agency CA Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Date August 7, 2013 2 Alameda County Community Development Agency - Planning Department August 7, 2013 3 Alameda County Community Development Agency - Surplus Property Authority August 8, 2013 4 Alameda County Fire Department July 12, 2013 5 Alameda County Transportation Commission August 1, 2013 6 Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Zone 7 August 8, 2013 7 Dublin San Ramon Services District August 7, 2013 8 Dublin Unified School District August 7, 2013 9 California Clean Energy Committee August 2, 2013 10 William M. (Tim) Neilson June 27, 2013 11 Jasmeet July 10, 2013 12 Thomas McKinney July 24, 2013 13 Thomas McKinney July 29, 2013 14 Dublin Crossing, LLC July 22, 2013 Page 1 w E Sent BY: CALTRANS TRANSPORTATIO PLANNING; 510 268 5559--_ Aug -7 -13 3;2f >Ff1; 919163233018 Comment Letter # 1 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION' 111 GRAND AVE, NUB P. 0. BOX 23660 OAKLAND, CA 94623 -0660 PHONE (5.10) 288.6053 FAX (510) 266.5559 ibt 11 'I"I'X 711 August 7, 2013 I AUG 08 2013 Ms. Kristi Bascom City of Dublin STATE CLEARING HOUSE 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA. 94568 Dear Ms. Bascom: Dublin Crossing Specific Plan — Draft Environmental Impact Report r4 H'tcs�ot)r pou.crl energy 1'ffiril:nt/ ALA-5 f,'086-1 A1,An580 -19.." SC:H0012062009 Thank you for continuing to include the California Depannent of Transportation (Caltrat13) in the environmental review process for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan- The. followinf; comments are based on the Draft Environmental Impact kcport. Trip Generation Table 3,12 -7 on page 3 -226 states that the proposed project will generate 1,829 AM and 2,393 PM peak hour trips respectively, Due the significant increase in traffic, please provide tuming 1 -1 traffie diagrams, including distribution, leer study intersection under Existing, Project Only, Cumulative, Cumulative plus Project Conditions fol our review. Highway operratlrms Comparing Year 2020 in Table 3.12 -9 on page 3.242 and Year 2035 in Table 3.1, 2 -10 ort page :i 246, it appears some of aic intersection delays would reduce without mitigation. For eximiple., foot' Intersection #19, Hopyard Road and Interstate (I -) 580 eastbound ramps under Wi.di Project condition, in Year 2020 PM, it would have a delay of 34.9 seconds and in Year 2035 PM it would reduce to 22.0 seconds. Please elm-ify. 1 -2 Fri�,e-vvay volumes under.No Project and Plus Project conditions appear to bo the ssirif, fa-e 201:x, 2020 mid 2035 analysis, F- or example, in Table 3.12 -14 on page, 3 -255, Y(i ?,r 2012 oxl c:ar;;bot.rn:l 1 -580 between 1 -680 and Foothill Road, both AM volumes are 4,784. Further,. in ` ='able 112 -16 on page 31 -257, Year 2020 on northbound 1 -680 between Stoneridge Drive. and Bernal Avenue:, both AM volumes are 4,936. Please explain why the same volumes are used. Signal Operations Please provide electrordc copies of Synchro files for. our rcvicw, 1 -3 En "Caloous in)proves ntobili)y armi-v Cull /unaiu" Sent By: CALTAANS TRANSPOBTATIO PLANNING; 510 206 5559; Ms. %risti Bascorn/City of'Dublin August 7, 2013 Page 2 ALIg -7 -13 3:25F1M; Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please call Yatman t~ wan, MEP ol"I,.y su;ff at (510) 622 -1670. Sincerely, ERIK ALM, AICP District Branch Chief Local Development e [ntergovertun.ental Review C: State Clearinghouse "Caltrcans inapi•oiY9 mobility tWross WifOr iiO" Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment Letter #1 from Mr. Erik Alm, CA Department of Transportation, dated August 7, 2013 Response to Comment 1 -1- Trip Generation For calculating the project trip generation rates, the project land uses were added to the baseline land uses and then the model was run to evaluate the traffic impacts. In the absence of layering approach, it is not feasible to create project only trips at intersections. Please see detailed explanation on this approach on page 3 -228 of the DEIR (June 2013). Turning traffic diagrams, including distribution per study intersection for all scenarios, is provided in Appendix I of the Draft EIR and is available through the City of Dublin website at: http : / /dublinca.gov /index.aspx ?NID =202. Response to Comment 1 -2 - Highway Operations Intersection Delays The decrease in delay of intersections under future conditions would be reduced due to existing roadway improvements that are planned by the City of Dublin and funded by transportation impact fees. The model results reflect not only changes in the land uses, but also changes to the street network over time. The reason some of the impacts are lower in future year of 2035 is due to the fact that some of the improvements to the street network are expected to come on -line between 2020 and 2035. Therefore the model shows redistribution of traffic due to these anticipated changes. Please refer to pages 3 -225 to 3 -234 of the Draft EIR (June 2013) for detailed description of street network changes. Freeway Volumes The traffic volumes for the study freeway segments were developed using the Alameda County Travel Demand Forecast (TDF) model for forecast years 2020 and 2035. Because the Alameda County TDF model does not include a 2012 land use data set, the City of Dublin TDF model was used for the 2012 forecast year. For each horizon year (2012, 2020, and 2035), the proposed project was coded into the appropriate model and the output traffic volumes were reported directly from the model. There are several reasons why the study scenarios show no increase in traffic volumes on some study freeway segments. First, the proposed project would be an "infill" development, which would change the origin /destination trip pairs in the project vicinity. For example, the proposed project would include a retail component. Some of these trips are currently made from residents of Dublin to retail destinations outside of Dublin. With more local retail options, residents of Dublin are now more likely to stay in Dublin (on local streets) as opposed to using the freeway to access retail establishments outside of the area. In addition, the project includes a large residential component and is located (1) directly west of an existing industrial park in Dublin and (2) north of a large industrial park in Pleasanton. In some cases, project trips would replace RW Page 1 MM Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR longer home -based work trips that currently commute to /from these industrial parks from outside the area. Second, the TDF models consider the travel time of each route between origin /destination pairs, and the models will divert ambient traffic in accordance with the quickest path between origin /destination trip pairs. For example, when the project adds traffic to a freeway segment, this creates an increase in delay for existing users. As a result, some existing freeway users will change their routes because using a local street may result in a shorter net travel time. Thus, the proposed project could add traffic to a freeway segment, but the diversion of ambient traffic may result in little or no increase in the overall peak hour traffic volume. Third, the TDF models consider the lengthening of the peak commute period (commonly referred to as "peak hour spreading "). In areas that are congested (such as I -580 and I -680), TDF models will spread trips throughout the commute period, rather than just assigning them during the peak hour. This behavior is common among motorists. For example, if traffic around the project site is heavily congested during the 5:00 PM to 6:00 PM period, the model will consider the travel time for each origin /destination trip pair and move a small number of trips outside of the peak hour (to 4:50 PM instead of 5:05 PM). When all of these aspects of the TDF models are considered, the unadjusted (raw) model output showed small decreases in traffic volumes on some study roadway segments with the addition of the proposed project. In an effort to disclose the ow impacts of the project as conservatively as possible, decreases in baseline traffic were not permitted as part of the TDF model adjustment process. For example, if the unadjusted TDF model output showed a "no project" traffic volume on a study segment as 5,000 vehicles per hour (vph) and a "with project" traffic volume of 4,985 vph, the "with project" traffic volume was reported as 5,000 vph. Response to Comment 1 -3 - Signal Operations Copies of the Syncho files utilized in the Traffic Impact Analysis are provided in Appendix I of the Draft EIR and are available through the City of Dublin website at http: / /dublinca.gov /index.aspx ?NID =202. Page 2 im En Comment Letter #2 ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Chris Bazar August 7, 2013 Agency Director Ms, Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner Albert Lopez Planning Director City of Dublin - Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza 224 West Winton Ave Dublin, CA 94568 Room 1 1 1 Hayward Subject: Response from County Planning Staff to Notice of Availability of California 94644 draft r3rivironmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, State Clearinghouse Number 2012062009 phone 510.670.5400 fax Dear Ms. Bascom: 510,785,8793 www.aegov.org/cda Thank you for your Notice of Availability for, and copy of, the DEIR for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan.. As we understand it, the Specific Plan covers an area of 189 acres total, completely within both the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area and the boundaries of the City of Dublin, with no boundary contact with any other jurisdiction including the unincorporated County of Alameda. The site is generally north of Interstate 580 wid Dublin Boulevard, and east of Tnterstate- 680. It is bounded by various streets in the City of Dublin. The Specific Plan addresses the orderly development of the 189 acre site,, including the demolition of existing buildings, improvements and equipment on the site, the construction of up to 1,995 single and multifamily residential, units, a portion of which would be integrated as part of a 13.2-acre mixed use development, up to 200,000 square feet of retail, office, or cot-nmercial -uses; a, 30-acre comm, unity park, a 5-acre neighborhood park, and a 12-acre elernenuiry school site to serve up to about 900 students. '111e Draft EJR covers the entire Specific Plan area and the proposed land use and project elements, and includes discussion of all possible environmental effects, including cumulative in-1pacts, and an array of feasible alternative projects. The Draft FIR.- After review of the Draft EIR, County Planning Staff is pleased with the quality and thoroughness of the document, and we find ourselves in general agreement I with the analysis of the impacts and the proposed mitigation measures. County Planning Staff also acknowledges that few of the impact categories fall under Alameda County land use planning jurisdiction, and the County Planning Department is not tecl-inically a responsible agency for any aspect of the proposed Specific Plan. Furthermore, the physical separation of the Plan Area Page I Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner .� City of Dublin - Community Development Department Dublin Crossing Specific Plan - Draft EIR August 7, 2013 �.. from County Planning jurisdictional lands or County roadways limits the effects of the Plan on County facilities or citizens of the unincorporated areas. Most of the effects that reach beyond the Plan area boundaries to unincorporated lands are satisfactorily mitigated to less - than - significant levels, with exceptions as noted below under Project Comments. Overall, then, we have no comments on or concerns with the quality or findings of the EIR analysis or the mitigation measures proposed therein. Project Comments: In general, County P1arming Staff favor good quality broad land use design and we •�•� believe that this Specific Plan comports well with that concept. Based on the findings of the DEIR, however, we have concerns about the effect the project may have on facilities and citizens of the unincorporated area beyond the boundaries of the City of Dublin. Air Quality. The DEIR identifies an impact, Impact 3.2 -3, which. states that buildout of the proposed project would result in regional air emissions from operational sources in .R exceedance of BAAQMD significance thresholds. These air emissions in turn contribute to exceedances of regional concentrations of criteria pollutants, including ozone and particulates, beyond state and federal standards. The Bay Area in general, and the Tri- 2 -1 Valley area in particular, suffer from excess levels of these criteria pollutants on some days of the year, and the impact is rightly identified in the DEIR as a significant and .� unavoidable impact. This unavoidable impact, and the cumulative effect it would have on regional air quality, reaches well beyond the boundaries of the Plan Area and the City of Dublin to include much of eastern Alameda County, and with possible additional effects downwind. Traffic and Transportation: Impact 3.12 -7 states that the proposed Plan would add project trips to the certain freeway on -ramps at Hacienda Boulevard and Tassajara Road, which would not be consistent with the Alameda County CMP criteria for freeway ramps; 2 -2 •� specifically, it would contribute to cumulative irnpacts on level of service at these interchanges with Interstate 580 in which LOS F would exist. The impact is identified as significant and unavoidable, with which we agree, and no feasible mitigation is identified for increased vehicle loads on these roadways. This will undoubtedly affect„ operations on not only the major surface streets but also I -580, which is used by citizens of the unincorporated area as well as other surrounding cities. Both of these impacts were also identified as cumulatively considerable. .. Alternatives: As no feasible measures were identified that could mitigate these impacts 2 -3 to less -than- significant levels, in the interests of the health, safety and welfare of the .. citizens of the County of Alameda, County Planning Staff recommends choosing an Page 2 W Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner City of Dublin — Community Development Department Dublin Crossing Specific Plan — Draft EIR August 7, 2013 alternative that would inherently lessen the severity of these impacts and reduce or delay the onset of these significant impacts. While recognizing the No Project Alternative (Alternative No. 1) as the environmentally superior alternative (and which may be feasible in theory, even if it does not fulfill all of the goals of the Plan), County Staff suggests that Alternative No. 2, Reduced Development, inherently helps to lessen or delay the onset of these unavoidable impacts. County Planning Staff recommends one of these two alternatives, or a similar reduced development Plan that may yet- to -be- determined, as a more environmentally desirable choice than the proposed Specific Plan. At this point in tune, County Planning Staff encourages the City of Dublin to select either Alternative No. 1 or Alternative No. 2. We also encourage the City to consider other options, such as a stronger level of mixed use and high density residential development as close as possible to the Dublin BART station, which would help to minimize the necessity of using single- occupancy vehicles for commuting and shopping; and possibly the requirement that new homes and businesses all use photovoltaic and solar hot water systems to the extent possible as integral parts of their construction. Both of these possible options would help to reduce pollutant air emissions, and would also contribute to improved energy conservation and reduced greenhouse gas generation as well. This concludes the comments of the Alameda County Planning Department; other County Departments may have additional comments or concerns. Tharnk you for your notification and interest in our commments. If you have any questions or concerns please contact Bruce Jensen of my staff at (510) 670 -6527. Sincerely, n Albert Lopez, Planning Director Alameda County Planning Department Cc: Chris Bazar, Community Development Director Stuart Cook, Director, Alameda County Surplus Property Authority Sandi Rivera, Assistant Planning Director Elizabeth McElhgott, Assistant Planning Director Bruce Jensen, Senior Plainer M Page 3 M 2 -3 (cont'd.) 2 -4 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment Letter #2 from Mr. Albert Lopez, Alameda County Community Development Agency - Planning Department, dated August 7, 2013 Response to Comment 2 -1- Air Quality Comment noted. Response to Comment 2 -2 - Traffic and Transportation Comment noted. Response to Comment 2 -3 - Alternatives •. As described in Section 15126.6(f) of the CEQA Guidelines, the range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by the "Rule of Reason" that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The alternatives shall be limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. As part of the project approval process, the City will prepare written findings (as defined by Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines). Possible findings include: (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have .. been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. The findings will provide the basis for selection of the proposed project or one of the alternatives, based on direction as determined by the City of Dublin City Council. Response to Comment 2 -4 - Air Quality / Greenhouse Gas Emissions Comment noted. The City will consider whether photovoltaic structures or solar water heaters are feasible mitigations to reduce air quality impacts as part of its .. findings in considering approval of the project. The Specific Plan land use designations for those portions of the project area that are closest to Dublin Boulevard and the BART station permit residential density up to 60 units /net acre and allow for a combination of residential and commercial uses, so the ability to construct high density residential development, as suggested by the commenter, is already being accommodated. Page 3 w A AdEL Chris Bazar Agency Virecto, Stuart Cook 224 West Winton Ave Room 110 Hayward California 94544-1215 phone 510.670.5333 fax 510.670,6374 www. acgov.org/cda Comment Letter ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY SURPLUS PROPERTY AUTHORITY August 8, 2013 Kristl Bascorn, Principal Planner City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin. CA 94568 RE: Dublin Crossing Specific Plan DEIR Dear Ms. Bascom. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Repoli (DEIR) for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan project. As you are aware, the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority is the master developer of both the Dublin Transit Center just to the south and the forl-ner Santa Rita property Just to the cast of this project. The Authority has four development sites directly across Dublin Boulevard from the Dublin Crossing area, including two that are currently under contract with developers. One of these sites (Site 16A) is under contract with Regency Centers for a shopping center development (the Village @% Dublin), for which a DEIR has just been released by the City, approximately five weeks after the Dublin Crossing DEIR was published. We are therefore concerned that the Dublin Crossing EIR accurately describe potential impacts and adequately mitigate those impacts, and that the analysis and proposed mitigation measures for the Dublin Crossing EIR be consistent with the analysis and proposed mitigation measures in the Village @ Dublin EIR, especially since the Dublin Crossing project is very similarly situated and includes a 150,000 square foot shopping center at the northwest comer of Arnold Road and Dublin Boulevard, kitty-comer to the proposed 153,000 square foot Village Ca Dublin project, located at the southeast corner of Arnold Road and Dublin Boulevard, Trip Generation Rates: The Dublin Crossings DEIR (page 3-224) uses ITE's 2008 Eighth Edition of 7141) Generation for trip generation rates, including a daily trip rate of 42.94 foi- "shopping centers". In addition, all trip generation rates (including the shopping center rate) are reduced by 5% "since the project area is located near the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station". In contrast, the Village Cf4 Dublin DEIR (page 44) uses ITE's 2012 Ninth Edition of Trip Generation, with a "shopping center" daily trip rate of 56.73 ) (for tile non-Whole Foods portion of the project), and no reduction for proximity to BART, 40 even though the two projects are essentially the same distance from the BART station. 9 3-1 Kristi Bascom August 8, 201-31 Page 2 Both project areas are also considered to be within the BART station's "walkshed", as documented in the City of Dublin's 2010 Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Update report. 3-1 (cont'd) Given the very similar characteristics of the "shopping center" component of these two projects, the City should be consistent in its analysis by using the same trip generation rates and reductions due to BART, Project Timing and "Cumulative" Traffic: The DEIR states (page 2-16) that anticipated build-out of the 180 acre Dublin Crossing project is assumed to occur "over a period of approximately eight to twelve years", which seem-,, reasonable, given the scale of the project. What's not clear is when the "period" might begin, given the complexity of the Army's phasing plan, the need to negotiate extensive biological and wetland impacts with Federal and State agencies, and the need to build significant amounts of infrastructure, both on and off -site. It's most likely that construction of the project will not begin until 2015, at the earliest, making "build-out" in 2025 or even later. Because the identified traffic impacts associated with the Dublin Crossing project are largely related to the timing of the project relative to other projects in the vicinity, please clarify when build-out of the project can reasonably be assumed. For instance, the Village cq�, Dublin DEIR assumes that the Dublin Crossing project is built-out in 2020, and that the Village project traffic will then be added to this cumulative condition. In fact, given the relative scales and complexity of the two projects, the opposite is more likely, with the Village @ Dublin project being completed prior to the majority of the Dublin Crossing project being constructed. The traffic analysis should reflect this. Eastern Dublin TIF: The Dublin Crossings project is literally surrounded on three sides by roadways and intersections that have been, or will be, improved through the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee program, including Dublin Boulevard, Dougherty Road and Arnold Road. The TIF-funded extension of Scarlett Drive from Dublin Boulevard to Dougherty Road and the TIF-funded widening of Arnold Road to four lanes north of Dublin Boulevard are almost entirely within the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan area, and Dublin Crossing traffic would necessarily utilize many other TIF-funded improvements. Yet the DEIR and the draft Specific Plan are unclear as to how the Dublin Crossings project will (or will not) participate in the Eastern Dublin TIF program, or otherwise provide mitigation. For instance, on page 3-223, the DEIR states that "presently, the proposed Dublin Crossing project is not part of the most recent update of the TIF progranY. Similarly, it's unclear whether the project will be responsible for constructing the Arnold Road widening and Scarlett Drive extension as part of the project — or if it is being assumed that these improveinents — estimated to cost over $18 million- will continue to be funded through the TIF, I_— =3 3-2 W M 3-3 Krist) Bascom August 8, 2013 Page 3) Given the Dublin Crossing project's location and dependence on existing and planned TIF improvements, and the fact that several planned TIF improvements are within the boundary of the project, it seems rnost logical for the project to be directly incorporated into the Eastern Dublin TIF program. This would create a clear method for the project's large volume of "new" traffic to help fund TI F improvements that would otherwise be funded by others for the benefit of this project. The Final EIR should clarify what relationship the Dublin Crossing project will have to the Eastern Dublin TIF and the responsibility of the project to construct the Scarlett Drive and Arnold Road improvements. Traffic Mitigation: The DEIR states that the project would degrade the Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard intersection fi•orn LOS C to LOS F under 2035 cumulative conditions, and states that the project applicant would be responsible for mitigating this condition (page 3-267). However, the proposed mitigation of adding a second northbound left turn lane on Iron Horse Parkway by widening the roadway 12 feet along approximately 400 feet the east side of It-on Horse Parkway appears to be infeasible without the loss of most (or all) of the existing /planned sidewalk and street parking. This would be contrary to the adopted Dublin Transit Center street design standards and could impact the existing and planned residential projects along Iron Horse through the loss of pedestrian access and/or on-street parking spaces. The Final El R should assess the practicality of this mitigation measure and the impacts the mitigation measure may create on its own. Biological Impacts ol The DEIR states (page 3-82) that the "Eastern Alameda Conservation Strategy (SACS) is still in the developing process and has not been approved or adopted. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan.... Therefore the prolvscd project would have no impact ". The Final East Alameda County Conservation Strategy (EACCS) was released in 2010, and was subsequently adopted by the City of Dublin. The Final EIR should therefore assess the proposed project's biological impacts against the Conservation Strategy's policy prior to determining whether or not there is an impact. As noted above, the Village @i!, Dublin DEIR was recently released by the City of Dublin for the development of a shopping center on a 14.2 acre site located directly across the street frorn the Dublin Crossing project. The Village project is located on similar terrain (relatively flat, highly disturbed grassland) as the ISO acre Dublin Crossing project, and has similar habitat characteristics as the grassland portions of the Dublin Crossing DEIR. While similar potential biological impacts have been identified for the two projects (impacts to special-status plants, 0 3-3 (cont'd) 3-4 3-5 3-6 L_J nn am Krist I Bascom August 8, 2013 Page 4 impacts to burrowing owls and impacts to nesting birds) – the proposed mitigation measures in 3-6 the Dublin Crossing DEIR for these potential impacts tend to be much less stringent than the (cont'd)— proposed mitigation measures for the Village @, Dublin project. For instance, even though Congdon's tarplant populations have been documented within the Dublin Crossing project area, the proposed mitigation measure (MM 3.3-2b because Congdon's tarplant is not a federal or state-listed plant) is to notify CDFW and prepare a mitigation plan that .,shall include such measures such as transplanting plants, collecting seed or clippings and replanting species in an on-site location, if feasible or other location approved by Department of Fish and Game ". 3-7 In contrast, in the Village DEIR (where neither Congdon's tat-plant nor any other special-status plant species has ever been identified), the special-status plant mitigation measure requires that, if populations/stands of a special-status species are identified and impacts are unavoidable, compensatory mitigation be provided, such as acquisition of off-site mitigation areas or credits at a mitigation bank, and such "mitigation shall be acquired at a minimum acreage ratio of 1:1 (acquired: impacted). For either off site mitigation option, measures shall be implemented (including contingency measures) providing for the long-term protection of the species". Another example is proposed mitigation for burrowing owls. While the Village DEIR requires that pre-construction surveys and (if owls are found on the site) mitigation conform to both the 3-8 CDFW 2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and the EACCS, the Dublin Crossing DEIR burrowing owl mitigation measures omit any mention of the more stringent standards of W the EACCS. on Similarly, while both projects identify potential impacts to nesting birds during construction, the Village DEIR has a much more stringent mitigation measure. The Dublin Crossing mitigation measure (MM 3.1-6) states that, between March I and September 15, the project applicant shall have a qualified biologist conduct nest surveys no more than 30 days prior to any demo litio n/construction or ground-disturbing activities within 300 feet of "potential nest trees" for non-raptor species and 500 feet of potential nest trees for raptor species. In contrast, the Village DEIR mitigation measure requires that, for any construction between February I through August 31, at least three surveys of the site, spaced over several months, with the last to be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of work. Furthen-nore, the proposed mitigation measure requires that all trees, shrubs and other suitable nesting habitat within 250 feet of the project site "shall be searched for nests" (even this is off the property). 3-9 The City of Dublin needs to consistently apply mitigation measures to projects with similar biological Impacts. Based oil a comparison with the Village Dublin DEIR, the Dublin 3-10 Crossing DEIR does not meet this standard. The Dublin Crossing FEIR should address this issue by modifying the proposed biological mitigation measures so that they are consistent with other City of Dublin EIRs. T". M Kristi Bascom August 8.1 2013 Page 5 Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the Dublin Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Report. We look forward to reviewing the Final EIR and cornmenting on the draft Dublin Crossing Specific Plan in the future. CC: Pete Knoedler, Regency Centers En M3 Sincerely, -...Stuart Cook Director nw Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment Letter #3 from Mr. Stuart Cook, Alameda County Community Development Agency - Surplus .Property Authority, dated August 8, .R 2013 Response to Comment 3 -1- Trip Generation Rates In determining the trip generation rates for any transportation analysis, the City uses the standards in place at the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) is published for the EIR. In the case of the Dublin Crossing analysis, the NOP was published on June 4, 2012. At that time, the traffic analysis commenced and the trip generation rates used were those from the ITE manual in place at the time. The NOP for The Village @ Dublin, another Draft EIR that was recently prepared by the City of Dublin, was published on January 7, 2013. The ITE manual reference is updated regularly` and it is a normal practice to use the most current version. A change in the trip generation to the 2012 ITE (Ninth Edition) rates is not anticipated to change the Ow impact conclusions in the Draft EIR. With regards to the question on the five percent overall trip reduction and its application to the Dublin Crossing project, but not to The Village @ Dublin project, it is important to recognize that the two proposed land uses scenarios are different. It ..p is a normal practice to apply the trip credits based upon the land use categories and other factors including proximity to a key traffic generator. Additionally, The Village @ Dublin has been allocated a 30 percent pass by trip credit as compared to 20 •� percent for commercial uses at Dublin Crossing. This difference is due to the different land use scenarios, proximity to the freeway, and overall differences between two projects. Response to Comment 3 -2 - Project Timing and Cumulative Traffic The citywide traffic model, which was used for both the Dublin Crossing and The Village @ Dublin traffic analyses, assumed that approximately twenty percent of the residential units in the Dublin Crossing project would be fully occupied in Year 2020. However, in the project -level traffic analysis for 2020 for both the Crossing project and Regency project the City took a more conservative approach, and changed the assumptions to assume that the entire Dublin Crossing project would be built out and occupied by Year 2020. This approach examined the highest Project trip generation for Year 2020 and minimized the need for conducting additional interim model runs. •�.� Response to Comment 3 -3 - Eastern Dublin TIF There are several transportation improvements needed for the implementation of the Dublin Crossing project. Construction or financial contributions toward some of the improvements have been identified as mitigation measures in the Draft EIR, and some improvements are required project commitments for the safe circulation of multimodal traffic. As a means of contributing its fair share toward improvements that are identified in the EIR, the developer will be required to pay a transportation Page 4 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR fee at each building permit based on the amount such development would be subject to under the Eastern Dublin TIF, if the development were in the EDTIF. The Draft Development Agreement between the developer and the City contains language requiring the developer to complete specific transportation improvements by specific deadlines. These improvements are both EDTIF and non -EDTIF projects, and include the extension and widening of Scarlett Drive and the widening of Arnold Road from two lanes to four lanes between Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway. The developer will receive a credit against their transportation fee obligation for EDTIF projects constructed by it above its fair share of project expense based on the traffic mitigation measures in the EIR. Response to Comment 3 -4 - Traffic Mitigation Based on comments received during the Draft EIR comment period, the City is reconsidering proposed Mitigation Measure 3.12 -4, which would require the addition of a northbound left -turn lane on Iron Horse Parkway at the intersection of Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard. In an effort to conserve as much of the on- street parking and sidewalk area as possible in the Transit Center, the proposed alternative mitigation is proposed that will achieve the same mitigation result, but a more compact design will have fewer impacts on the surrounding streetscape and pedestrian mobility. MM 3.12 -4 on pages ES -55 and ES -56 and pages 3 -281 and 3 -282 in the Draft EIR have been changed as follows: "To mitigate the impact at the intersection of Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard would require an additional northbound left turn lane on Iron Horse Parkway. Based on the 2035 cumulative plus project conditions, the two northbound left turn lanes would need to be 400 feet each. This improvement would require the removal of parking on the east side of Iron Horse Parkway, traffic signal modifications, and changing the travel lane configuration and alignment to create: One 16 -foot wide southbound receiving lane on Iron Horse Parkway; ff Two 10 -foot wide northbound left turn lanes on Iron Horse Parkway; and One 14 -foot wide northbound shared through -right turn lane. Because the proposed project causes the change in operation from LOS C to LOS F, the proposed project is responsible for constructing these improvements. The timing of these improvements will be determined in the project's mitigation monitoring program." Under this configuration, parking would be removed on the east side of Iron Horse and the southeast corner of the intersection would need to be reconstructed, but little (if any) landscaping would be removed and no sidewalks would be removed Page 5 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan as Final EIR ■w from the proposed intersection. Operationally, this would allow for normal eight - phase signal operation and crosswalks on all four legs of the intersection. ■* Response to Comment 3 -5 - Biological Resources Comment noted and the respective change has been made to page 3 -89 in the Draft EIR. The East Alameda County Conservation Strategy ( EACCS) was released in December 2010. On August 21, 2012, the City of Dublin City Council adopted a resolution accepting the East Alameda County Conservation Strategy as guidance for environmental permitting for public projects affecting habitat and endangered species in Eastern Alameda County. The City recognizes that compliance with the M„ EACCS by local jurisdictions, individual landowners, and developers who need regulatory permits is strictly voluntary. There is no requirement on behalf of the City, or private developers, to comply with the Conservation Strategy, rather the City acknowledges the EACCS as a guidance tool that could enable a more straightforward review and permitting process for projects with impacts to biological resources. Therefore, the project's compliance with the EACCS is not a ,.. regulatory standard for determining biological impacts under CEQA. Response to Comment 3 -6 - Biological Resources The mitigation measures relating to Congdon's tarplant, Burrowing owls, and nesting birds in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR have been modified to be consistent with the mitigation measures identified in the Village @ Dublin Draft EIR. See Response to Comment 3 -7, 3 -8, 3 -9, and 3 -10 below. Response to Comment 3 -7 - Biological Resources: Congdon's tarplant See response to Comment 3 -6. The respective changes to mitigation measures MM 3.3 -2a and MM 3.3 -2b on pages ES -16 to ES -18 and pages 3 -74 to 3 -75 have been .. made to the Draft EIR. This revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 3 -8 - Biological Resources: Burrowing owls W See response to Comment 3 -6. The respective changes to mitigation measure MM 3.3 -3a on pages ES -18 to ES -21 and pages 3 -76 to 3 -77 have been made to the Draft .. EIR. This revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 3 -9 - Biological Resources: Nesting birds M7 See response to Comment 3 -6. The respective changes to mitigation measure MM �- 3.3-6 on pages ES -27 through ES -29 and pages 3 -84 to 3 -85 have been made to the Draft EIR. This revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Page 6 MM MI Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment 3 -10 - Biological Resources See response to Comment 3 -6. As described above, the respective changes to the mitigation measures MM 3.3 -2a, MM 3.3 -2b, MM 3.3 -3a, and MM 3.3 -6 have been made to the Draft EIR. This revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Page 7 Comment Letter # 4 Alameda County Fire Department Fire Prevention Bureau City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California 94568 Phone: 925- 833 -6606 Fax: 925- 829 -9248 APPLICATION REFERRAL LETTER COMMENTS DATE: 07/12/2013 TO: Kristi Bascom, Contract Planner FROM: Bonnie S. Terra, Division Chief /Fire Marshal SUBJECT /PERMIT #: Draft EIR and Specific Plan ADDRESS: Dublin Crossings Comments: 1. Street widths provided may not be adequate given the proposed heights of buildings. In those locations where buildings over 30 feet in height are to be built, the road width will need to be 26 feet. The 26 feet must be free and clear of any obstructions parking or medians. 2. In areas where there are fire hydrants the street widths shall be 26 feet. 3. Given that the site plan and unit configuration provided is illustrative and not definitive at this time. It is not possible to determine if there are enough ingress and egress points. Please note that multiple - family residential areas having more than 200 units, commercial projects greater than 30 feet in height and /or more than 124,000 square feet shall be provided with at least two points of access. 4 -1 sR W No G:\PA# \2008 \PA 08 -049 Camp Parks Dublin Crossing\2011 Restart \CEQA -EIR does \DEIR \DEIR comment letters \Fire Dept.doc o' CO Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment Letter #4 from Ms. Bonnie Terra, Alameda County Fire Department, dated July 12, 2013 Response to Comment 4 -1 - Internal Circulation Comment noted. The recommended changes have been incorporated into the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. Rw Page 8 `\`" of j / /%� Comment Letter # 5 ALAMEDA 333 Broadway, Suites 220 & 300 4 Oakland, CA 94612 Counly TrcinsRnrtoiion Commission r August 1, 2013 Kristi Bascom Principal Planner City of Dublin, Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 kristi.bascom@dublin.ca.gov PH: (510 ) 208 -7400 www.AlamedaCTC.org SUBJECT: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (PA 08 -049) Dear Ms. Bascom, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. The project area is located on a portion of the 2,485 -acre Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Camp Parks) in the center of Dublin. The Project site is generally bounded by 5th Street to the north, Scarlett Drive to the west, Dublin Boulevard to the south, and Arnold Road to the east. The Specific Plan addresses future development in the project area, which includes demolition of the existing dwellings and other improvements on the site and construction of a residential mixed -use project with up to 1,995 single- and multi- family residential units; up to 200,000 square feet of retail, office, and /or commercial uses; a 30 acre Community Park; a 5 acre Neighborhood Park, and the provision for a 12 acre elementary school site to serve up to 900 students. The Alameda CTC respectfully submits the following comments: • The DEIR refers to the Alameda County CMA in numerous locations. The Alameda 5 -1 CTC is the successor agency to the Alameda County CMA. The DEIR should update all references to the new agency. On page 3 -253, the DEIR states that "The level of service standard for the CMP analysis is LOS E." This is statement is not accurate and should be removed. The LOS E threshold is used as to determine deficiencies during biannual Level of Service monitoring of existing conditions that the Alameda CTC conducts as the CMA for Alameda County, but is not a threshold of significance for development impact analysis. The next sentence in the DEIR is accurate and sufficient: "The Alameda County CMA does not have a policy for determining a threshold of significance for CMP requirements and expects that professional judgment will be used to determine project impacts." .w, 0 ■, 5 -2 m. • On page 3 -253, the DEIR defines a threshold of significance for CMP analysis with the 5 -3 following statement: "For the purpose of this traffic analysis, if a segment operates at an unacceptable LOS without the project, the impact of the project is considered significant if August 1, 2013 Page 2 the contribution of project traffic results in an increase in the volume -to- capacity ratio of at ( 5 -3 least 0.02." This statement should clarify what constitutes an "unacceptable LOS." (cont'd.) • The DEIR states on page 3 -225 that Figure 3.12 -7 illustrates the trip distribution however 5 -4 this figure shows the project trip generation, not the trip distribution. The DEIR should include a graphic illustrating the assumptions regarding project trip distribution. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan is an opportunity to consider multimodal transportation network designs based on complete streets principles as it falls within a Priority Development Area, is accessible by high quality public transit options including BART and the LAVTA RAPID, and is planned to accommodate significant new growth including some higher density and mixed use development. The Specific Plan identifies as a guiding principle that it will "Maximize the use of pedestrian and bicycle friendly connections through the strategic placement and variation of land uses and densities, and the creation of safe multi -modal transportation networks both through the site and into the larger community." In addition, large portions of the project area overlap an Area of Countywide Significance from the Alameda Countywide Pedestrian Plan and several streets adjacent to the Project site are Countywide Bicycle facilities. Given these considerations, the DEIR should consider whether the circulation impacts identified can be mitigated through Transportation Demand Management strategies and /or investments in transit and active transportation infrastructure, rather than roadway capacity increases. To the extent that TDM strategies or multimodal improvements are infeasible, the DEIR should provide more analysis of the consequences that mitigation measures proposed will have on all road users. Specific mitigation measures that should be analyzed for secondary impacts on other road users include: o On page 3- 266 -7, the DEIR discusses elimination of the crosswalk on the east leg of the Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard intersection as a mitigation measure, if the City's preferred mitigation measure (a grade- separated bicycle and pedestrian bridge) is not possible. Opportunities for maintaining the crosswalk should be considered if bridge construction is not feasible. o On page 3 -267, the DEIR proposes adding a second northbound left -turn lane at the intersection of Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard as a mitigation measure. Opportunities for accommodating increased transit, bicycle and pedestrian activity should be considered at this location. o On page 3 -268, the DEIR proposes increasing the number of eastbound through lanes at the Dublin Boulevard and Tassajara Road intersection to four lanes (above and beyond the increase to three lanes already planned for in the City of Dublin's Traffic Impact Fee mitigation program). Opportunities for accommodating increased transit, bicycle and pedestrian activity should be considered at this location. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this DEIR. Please do not hesitate to contact me at (510) 208 -7405 or Matthew Bomberg of my staff at (510) 208 -7444 if you require additional information. El r7 09 Sincerely, r Beth Walukas Deputy Director of Planning Cc: Matthew Bomberg, Assistant Transportation Planner File: CMP — Environmental Review Opinions — Responses - 2013 W August 1, 2013 W& Page 3 e Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment Letter #5 from Ms. Beth Walukas, Alameda County Transportation Commission, dated August 1, 2013 Response to Comment 5 -1 - Agency Name Reference Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to pages 3 -267 to 3- 269 of the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 5 -2 - Level of Service (LOS) Standard Comment noted and the respective change has been made to page 3 -269 of the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 5 -3 - Definition of "Unacceptable" LOS Comment noted and the respective change has been made to page 3 -269 of the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 5 -4 - Figure 3.12 -7 Correction Figure 3.12 -7 presents the trip distribution for the proposed project. The title of the figure has been revised on page 3 -241 in the Draft EIR in the figures at the end of Chapter 3.12 of the Draft EIR. The trip generation for the proposed project is described in Table 3.12 -7: Dublin Crossing Trip Generation. Response to Comment 5- 5- Multimodal /Complete Street Design Considerations The Alameda CTC has requested that additional Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures should be considered instead of physical improvements like addition of lanes. Following this general discussion, the letter asks for analyzing secondary impacts to other modes due to the proposed mitigations. Then three specific mitigations are recommended for additional analysis to evaluate secondary impacts. The impacts to transit, bicycle and pedestrian modes of transportation are evaluated in the EIR. Pages 3 -234 to 3 -236 of the Draft EIR (June 2013) provide a description of impacts on bicycle and pedestrian modes. Furthermore, on page 3 -272 of the Draft EIR, Mitigation Measure 3.12 -10 provides a specific mitigation to address bicycle and pedestrian circulation impacts. Additionally, the Specific Plan would incorporate the following measures from the City's Bikeways Master Plan: • Develop a bicycle commuter route system that connects residential neighborhoods to employment areas, multi -modal terminals, and schools. • Encourage employers to provide secure bicycle parking, showers and changing rooms for bicycle commuters. • As a condition of project approval, require major development projects with major transportation impacts to construct adjacent bicycle facilities included in the proposed bicycle system. Few Page 9 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR • Install bicycle stencils and bicycle- sensitive loop detectors (or other detector type) on bikeways as part of new signals, signal upgrades, and resurfacing /restriping projects. With regards to the specific mitigation measures, the following responses are provided: MM 3.12 -3: The City is pursuing multiple sources of funding to conduct a feasibility analysis of the Iron Horse Trail connectivity from Dougherty Road to the (East) Dublin /Pleasanton BART station. It is recognized that a grade- separated crossing in this location could significantly enhance bike and pedestrian access to and from the project area and beyond. To support this project, the developer of the Dublin Crossing project is contributing $50,000 towards the feasibility analysis, and the City is seeking additional funding from ACTC's own Sustainable Communities Technical Assistance Program. It is the City's full intent to pursue a grade- separated crossing at this location, and at this time the alternative mitigation measure of removing a portion of the crosswalk across Dublin Boulevard will remain in the EIR. MM 3.12 -4: See response to comment 3 -4 (above). MM 3.12 -6: Design of the intersection improvements will be reviewed for consistency with the City's Bikeways Master Plan and reviewed for consistency with the City's Complete Streets Policy (adopted by the City Council in December 2012). N F M Page 10 w Comment Letter # 6 ON ALAMEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT ZONE 7 100 NORTH CANYONS PARKWAY • LIVERMORE, CA 94551 • PHONE (925) 454 -5000 • FAX (925) 454 -5727 August 8, 2013 Ms. Kristi Bascom City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Re: Dublin Crossing Specific Plan & Draft EIR Kristi: Zone 7 Water Agency (Zone 7) has reviewed the referenced CEQA document in the context of Zone 7's mission to provide drinking water, non - potable water for agriculture /irrigated turf, flood protection, and groundwater and stream management within the Livermore - Amador Valley. We have the following comments for your consideration: Section 2, Project Description, and Section 3.11, Public Services and Utilities: Zone 7's 24- inch Santa Rita /Dougherty Pipeline runs just outside of the western boundary of this study area. A portion of Zone 7's 18 -inch Hopyard Pipeline is located within the project area along with our DSRSD Turnout No. 3. Please see the attached figure. Per Figure 5 -5, it shows a relocated drainage ditch along with two underground storage ponds which may interfere with our pipeline. Any work which may interfere with Zone 7's use of its waterline and/or turnout or full enjoyment of its easement rights requires an encroachment permit to be obtained from Zone 7. It appears that the turnout is located in what is planned to be a park/recreation area located westerly of A Street and southerly of G Street. We request that the developer provide more detailed information on the plans for that portion of the project located adjacent to our Hopyard Pipeline and DSRSD Turnout No. 3. Zone 7 does not generally allow permanent structures or trees to be planted within our easements. Any work within our easement will require an encroachment permit. Please contact John Koltz at 925- 454 -5067 for obtaining an encroachment permit. 6 -1 2. On page 3 -149 in Section 3.8.3: the DEIR mentions that the onsite recycled water demands will be 131 ac -ft/yr to 144 ac- ft/yr, but we don't find any reference to its associated salt loading or potential effect on groundwater TDS. The RWQCB's Basin Plan objective for this part of the 6 -2 groundwater basin is 1,000 mg /l TDS, but the current TDS conditions are not mentioned despite the project area having several groundwater monitoring wells located on it; some were installed for this EIR effort. El 3. On page 3 -142, under Groundwater Basin: While there is mention of Zone 7 serving as the groundwater Basin Manager (page 3 -142), our salt management plan (SMP), as well as a groundwater demineralization plant to manage and mitigate salt buildup in the Main Basin (pages 3 -143), the document lacks discussion of the State's recent Recycled Water Policy which now requires salt management plans to provide for management of "nutrient loading" and "monitoring of contaminants of emerging concern (CEC)" by 2014. Zone 7 is working with DSRSD and other local water purveyors on an update of its SMP to meet these State's requirements, which should be noted. Furthermore, we request Dublin's support of these efforts to ensure a safe and reliable water source for future generations. wr r 6 -3 4. In Section 3.8: The numerous wells located on the site could lead to a groundwater contamination conduit issue if abandoned or buried during the construction of the project. Please 6 -4 incorporate a discussion as well as a mitigation measure that requires any existing or discovered well that is not needed for the project or groundwater basin management to be properly sealed or �• destroyed under a Zone 7 permit. 5. On p.2 -13, under 2.8 Infrastructure Improvements: typo in last word in 2nd paragraph — 6 -5 change "are" to "area" Also, it is not clear what "existing trapezoidal channel across the w.m southeastern portion of the project area" the author is referring to, as none of the Figures on stormwater drainage identify it by this name. 6. On p.2 -14, 1St paragraph: there is a reference to Figure 2 -11 which presents the Conceptual Stormwater Drainage and Detention System, yet Figure 3.8 -3 presents the Proposed Drainage for 6 -6 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. It is unclear which is the most current plan, as there are major differences associated with the use of underground storage basins. 7. On p.3 -144, 2 "d paragraph: Gleason is misspelled as " Gleeson." I 6 -7 w� 8. On p. 3 -149, under On -site Surface Water Runoff: a reference to Figure 3.8 -3 is called out. ow The two underground HMP storage basins proposed have a storage capacity of 3.3 acre -feet and 1.6 acre -feet; however, Figure 2 -11 indicates 3.0 acre -feet and 1.5 acre -feet, respectively. Please 6 -g clarify as to which is correct. Also, it is not clear how a basin size of 150'x75'x8', as shown in Figure 3.8 -3, can contain 3.3 acre -feet of storage; nor is it plausible how a 60'x40'x10.5' basin can contain 1.6 acre -feet. This requires discussion, or possibly revision. 9. On p.3 -150, 2 "d paragraph should refer to the use of DUAL 96 -inch diameter storm drain pipes. ift It is unclear how the proposed underground dual 96" storm drain pipes would act as detention 6 -9 basins as there is no description of how it would function or operate. Further review of the .. Hydrologic model is required. 10. On p.3 -150, under Off -site Surface Water Runoff Management, third paragraph: "n" value 6 -10 is referred as "water flow velocity rate" instead of the typical designation, Manning's coefficient. The proposed "n" value of 0.5 appears to be extremely high. Please review and correct as needed. 11. On p.3 -157, Mitigation Measure 3.8 -4a: it is unclear how the proposed detention basin will be 16 -11 operated and maintained, and by whom. "" 12. Hydraulic Model: Staff is still reviewing the Hydrologic Model associated with the proposed 6 -12 project and will not be able to provide comment before August 16. Zone 7 requests an extension of time to provide comments on the model. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this Draft EIR. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (925) 454 -5005 or via email at crank @zone7water.com. Sincerely, " fl-6k Elke Rank cc: Carol Mahoney, Rhett Alzona, Joe Seto a Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment Letter #6 from Ms. Elke Rank, Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Zone 7, dated August 8, 2013 Response to Comment 6 -1- Public Services and Utilities The existing DSRSD turnout and Zone 7 pipelines are located within the future City of Dublin Community Park parcel. The future planning and design of the park (which has not yet begun) will take into consideration the location of the turnout and pipeline and Zone 7 and DSRSD will be consulted on any issues relating to these facilities in the park design, including obtaining encroachment permit(s) if required. Response to Comment 6 -2 - Salt Loading Effects on Groundwater Recycled water is planned for use at the project site. Potential impacts of recycled water delivered to the local groundwater basin — the Livermore - Amador Valley Groundwater Basin — was addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the San Ramon Valley Recycled Water Program (Report), adopted in December 1996 by the DSRSD /EBMUD Recycled Water Authority which is incorporated herein by reference. Potential impacts to groundwater quality were discussed in Section 3.1 of the EIR; the impacts and mitigation summary for groundwater was outlined in Table 3 -2. The project site is located over the Fringe Basin, groundwater basin that is not used for domestic water supply. Impacts to the Fringe Basin from the San Ramon Valley Recycled Water Program were found to be potentially significant. Potential increase in salt loading to the main basin, which is used for domestic water supply, is less than significant. Potential rise in shallow groundwater levels is possible, though unlikely; therefore the impact is also less than significant. As the Livermore - Amador Valley Groundwater Basin manager, Zone 7 developed a Salt Management Plan (SMP) in 2004 to address the increasing concentrations of salt in the groundwater basin, and to protect the long -term water quality of the Main Basin into the future. The adoption and implementation of an approved SMP was required under Provision D.1.c.ii of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board's "Master Water Recycling Permit," Order No. 93 -159. Zone 7's Mocho Groundwater Demineralization Plant, which was completed in 2009, was one of the salt management strategies that were selected in the SMP. In 2005, Zone 7 prepared and adopted a Groundwater Management Plan (GWMP). It consisted mostly of a compilation of all of Zone 7's then - current groundwater management policies, programs, and practices but also provided basin management objectives and included stakeholders and the public during its adoption process. The SMP was incorporated into the GWMP since it dealt with managing the sustainability of the groundwater basin's water quality. In 2009, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted a new Recycled Water Policy (SWRCB Res No. 2009 - 0011). It mandated that a Salt and Nutrient Management Plan (SNMP) be prepared for basins where recycled water was to be used, and required it include plans for Constituents of Emerging Concern (CEC) 4A RW Page 11 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR 73 0 monitoring. The plans are to be completed by May 2014, and include collaboration from local water, wastewater, and contributing stakeholders. Zone 7's current SMP �* does not address either nutrient management or the CEC monitoring requirements. , Starting in 2011, Zone 7 began working on the update of its SMP to incorporate the .m recent regulatory requirements. The key goals and objectives of the update effort , include: 1) verifying strategies for reducing salt loading in the Main Basin, 2) addressing nutrient and CEC monitoring requirements, 3) assessing the potential salinity impacts of the water supply "portfolios" outlined in Zone 7's 2011 Water Supply Evaluation, including increased recycled water use in the region, and 4) updating future salt and nutrient management plans. The update to the SMP is in "' progress. Based on compliance with these regulatory requirements and plans, the project's impact to groundwater due to salt loading and total dissolved solids would be less than significant. Response to Comment 6 -3 - Salt Loading Effects on Groundwater See Response to Comment 6 -2. Response to Comment 6 -4 - On -site Wells It is the City's standard practice to include a condition of approval with any site " improvement /grading plan or approval of a tentative map as follows: "Any wow groundwater wells found on the project site that are not needed for the project or groundwater basin management shall be properly sealed and /or destroyed under a Zone 7 permit." Response to Comment 6 -5 - Infrastructure Improvements Comment noted and the respective change has been made to page 2 -15 of the EIR. aw The location of the existing "open" trapezoidal channel is shown in Figure 3.8 -2: 0 Existing Drainage. Response to Comment 6 -6 - Clarification to Figures 2 -11 and 3.8 -3 Figure 2 -11: Conceptual Stormwater Drainage and Detention System represents the conceptual storm water drainage and detention system. Figure 3.8 -3: Proposed Drainage represents the proposed Q100 project flows and the title of the figure has been revised on pages v, 3 -159, and 3 -220 of the EIR to read accordingly. Response to Comment 6 -7 - Misspelling "Gleeson" Comment noted and the respective change has been made to page 3 -153 of the EIR. Page 12 .. Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR t Response to Comment 6 -8 - Onsite Surface Water Runoff The correct volumes are 3.3 acre -feet and 1.6 acre -feet and Figure 2 -11: Conceptual Stormwater Drainage and Detention System will be revised accordingly. The corresponding basin sizes reflect the bottom dimensions of the proposed basins. With 3:1 side slopes, the basins as shown will carry the proposed volumes. Page 2- 15 of the EIR has been revised to clarify the dimensions are of the bottom of the basin. Response to Comment 6 -9 - Storm Drain Pipes M In order to address the C.3 requirements, developed runoff must be mitigated to existing flow conditions. To accomplish this in drainage basins XX -1 and XX -2 of Dublin Crossing, flow will be routed to, and detained, in dual 96" diameter underground storage pipes. The storage pipes will be placed in a public storm drain easement. The runoff from drainage basins XX -1 and XX -2 will be conveyed to the dual 96" diameter underground storage pipes via public storm drain systems in the streets. Detailed design for the proposed dual 96" pipes will part of the construction documents approved at a later date, but the general concept is that the dual pipe systems will be connected at each end with vaults /manholes. At the downstream end of the system, the vault /manhole will have pipes or slots to meter runoff back into the City's public storm drain system. The pipes /slots will be designed per the BAHM software to match the proposed runoff to the existing hydrograph. This storage system will be designed during the improvement plan process and will include construction details for the dual pipes and the vault /manhole structures. Response to Comment 6 -10 - Off -site Surface Water Runoff Management ( "n" value) The value noted (0.5) was a typographic error and has been corrected on page 3- 160 of the EIR. Calculations shown in Appendix F were done based on 0.05 n- value. Response to Comment 6 -11- Mitigation Measure 3.8 -4a (Detention Basin) The underground detention basins are proposed to be owned, operated, and maintained by a future Homeowners Association (HOA) or by a public agency (if an agency exists that is interested in serving in this capacity). A maintenance agreement will be executed between the City and the HOA (or agency) to ensure that the detention basins, and the Chabot Creek Channel, will be maintained properly and operated in a manner that does not impede the use of the Community Park (in which these facilities are proposed to be located). Response to Comment 6 -12 - Hydraulic Model Comment noted. Additional comments were not provided by Zone 7 on the hydraulic model. RW Page 13 DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner City of Dublin Community Development Department LOCI Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Comment Letter #7 August 7, 2013 7051 Dublin Boulevard Dublin, California 94565 Phone: 925 8,28 0515 FAX: 925 829 1180 Avww, iIsrsdLcom Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) Dublin Crossing Project (PA 08 -049) Dear Ms. Bascom, Thank you for providing Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Dublin Crossing Project (Project). DSRSD has a significant role in the area to be developed by the Project and the cantonment area of Camp Parks that will be affected. Our agency has a role in the fallowing concerns: Laird Use and Plannit: Potable Water Su"b, and Service Recgeled Watery . AM/r and Service Wastelllater Treatment and D4osa Our agency took note of this same list of environmental issues to be covered by the Draft EIR in the "Notice of Preparation" and provided comments in our letter of June 27, 2012. Our concerns in the letter are still 7 -1 pertinent to the Project, We have reviewed the material regarding those issues in the Draft EIR and believe they have adequately addressed our comments and concerns. For your reference, attached is a copy of the letter dated June 27, 2012 regarding the Notice of Preparation. Thank you for notifying DSRSD of the Draft EIR. Please contact Stain Kolodzie at (925) 875 -2253 or me at (925) 875 -2255 should you have any questions. SK1st Enclosure cc: David Regtla Stan Kolodzie incere ,' RHODORA N. BIAGT Principal Engineer Duum $.n Rmn-'n Srrcice O!'td,.I,— )'atbik F -utp 1LTNGDE,PPC.EQA\DSRSD Response to CEQA DoctimentslCily or Dtiblint2013tConvttents on DEIR - Dublin Crossing Project - PA 0g =049 3- 7- 13.doc tal! p 0 I_.: Im DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICBS DISTRICT Kristi Bascom, Principal Planter City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 civic .Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 June 27, 2012 evard aubl , CAr ri�,� ra Phone: 925,928 0AJIQ FAX: l25 Avg 11 � 0 ��'' 1�; 6 u +vnv.dsr �cl,rottt � Subject. Continents on Notice of Preparation of Draft Environmental Impact Deport (EIR) Dublin Crossing Project (PA 08 -049) Dear Ms, Bascom: Thank you for providing Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD, District) the opporltuiif r to review and comment ou the Notice of Preparation ofthe Draft Envirotunental Iinpact Report (EIR) for the Dublin Crossing Project (Project), DSRSD has a significant ole in the area to be developed by the Project and the cantonment area of Camp Parks that will be affected. Our agency took note of the list of environmental issues to be covered by the Draft EIR. We Have included our comments below oil the environmental topics that bear on our agency 's responsibilities in file area of the Project. .Lagl Use caulEl —an rirr DSRSD currently serves as the potable water, recycled -water, wastewater collection and wastewater treatment utility for the area of the Project, tine cantonment area of Camp Parks and surrounding areas. As the provider for these utilities, DSRSD is responsible for tine planning and development of file infrastructure necessity for those services. Our intent is to ensure the infrastructure is adequately planned to meet the interim as well as the ultimate build -out needs of the area. The Dublin Crossing Project is a large and complex project, and has associated with it a corresponding development it, tite iron- Project area, the "cantonment area" of Camp Packs. As noted in "Background" on page 3 of the Notice, 191 acres is to be privatized and developed in the Dublin Crossing Project, and, "Iii return, Camp Parks would receive new installation facilities at a value commensurate -with the value of the exchanged land," DSRSD will be responsible for providing the -,voter, recycled water and wastowater services to those new facilities within tics cantonment area and tiie project area, and requires a master utility plan showing planned potable, recycled water, and sanitaty sower systems that will serve the proposed facilities. The master utility plan should indicate the ultimate build -out land uses of the new facilities and the schedule for the development. DSRSD is also the utility provider for the currently developed sections of Camp Parks. The itiffastructure for those current soi-viecs passes through tine 19I acres of the Dublin Crossing Project. The development of services for the Dublin Crossing Project must be done in a way that does not disrupt or „ eliminate the services for the active portions of Camp Parks. Those services are to remain ongoing throughout the construction and c0rit)rsaA,z:rcr,n Lit} Kristi Bascom City of Dublin �• June 27, 2012 Page 2 Ie The notice also points out that the Project will be developed in six distinct Phases and each phase will last two to three years. The Project is to be completed in 2030. DSRSD will need to be involved in the writing of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, and to work closely with the developer during the planning, design and construction of the Project to ensure that the needed infrastructure and services can be provided in a timely and efficient manner. Usually, for a project of this size, DSRSD willlnake a ••+ planning agreement with the developer to create a comprehensive plan and schedule for the infrastructure. The planning agreement will specify performing a set-vice analysis based on the land uses described in the Specific Plan. Ow Potarri. jg Dater- Srtply arul Set -vice DSRSD retails potable water to Catnp Parks and will provide potable water to the Project, The, wholesale provider for the District is Zone 7 Water Agency. Zone 7 provides potable water to these retailers in the Tri- Valley area: DSRSD City of Pleasanton, City of Livermore and California Water Company (also in Livermore). Zone 7 provides wholesale water to the Tri- Valley area and regulates the withdrawal and recharge of the underlying groundwater, , Zone 7 prepares a Sustainable Water Supply Report annually. The most recent final Report was issued in July 2011 and should be used as part of the basis for determination of available water supply for future water demand. Additional information is available front the Water Supply Status Report issued at the annual retailer meeting of May 18, 2012, The Draft Ell{ should take into account the current year or latest available sustainable water supply information provided by Zone 7 Recycleci Watet- S101 y and Se Wce DSRSD does not currently provide recycled water service to Camp Parks. As a condition of potable water service, DSRSD will require the Dublin Crossing Project to plan for and build a recycled water distribution network for landscape Irrigation in the Project area. This is a potable }eater conservation t..e element. An increase in the use of recycled water in the Tri- Valley area has an impact reducing the total potable water demand on Zone 7's water supplies. Currently DSRSD owns and operates a facility for recovering recycled water at its wastewater treatment plant at 7399 Johnson Drive in Pleasanton. sw DSRSD is also framing plans to increase the production and distribution of recycled water from the plant. Wasterpater Treatment DSRSD believes that current capacity at the wastewater treatment plant is adequate to serve the proposed Project. However, because Dublin Crossing is a largo project with a significant number of netiv wastewater collection customers, DSRSD will require tluo developer to enter into a planning agreement with DSRSD to cover wastewater collection and wastewater treatment. The planning agreement will include conducting a service analysis to ensure that any necessary infrastructure will be built in a timely schedule to meet the anticipated wastewater demand. +*� Wastenpater DtVosal The proposed project would increase the amount of treated wastewater leaving the Tri- Valley area. Disposal of treated effluent from DSRSD's wastewater treatment plant is the responsibility of the Livermore Amador Valley Water Management Agency (LAV WMA), LAV WMA currently exports secondary treated wastewater to the East Bay Dischargers Authority (EBDA) interceptor pipeline for Chron(Fite: Miso .Corrospondenco with City ofDublin H:U3NGDEPIICEQAN DSRSD Rosponso to CEQADocimtents \aty ofpublin120121Conmrents to SHOP for DEIR - Dublin Crossing ho]"t - PA 08.0 #9 - 5- 27- 12,doc ii Kristi Bascom City of Dublin Julie 27, 2012 Page 3 ultimate discharge to the San Francisco Bay viii a deepwater outfall. Water treated at DSRSD's treatment plant that is not converted to recycled water for landscape irrigation is disposed of through the LAV WMA system. Thank you for notifying DSRSD of tiie upcoming Draft FIR, Please contact Stan Kolodzie at (925) 875- 2253 or me at (925) 875 -2255 should you have tiny questions. RHODORA N. BIAGTAN Principal Engineer SK/st cc; David Requa, DSRSD Stan Kolodzie, DSRSD chrontFite; Misc. CONO-spondoneo %kith City ofDablin HMNODIRMCEQAU33ItSt3 Responso to CEQA DocumentslCity otDublinVOlMoinmenis to NoP f0r DHfR - Dublin Crossing Project - PA 0 8,449 � 6- 27- 12,doa .. Dublin Crossing Specific Plan wk Final EIR Response to Comment Letter #7 from Ms. Rhodora Biagtan, Dublin San Ramon Services District, dated August 7, 2013 Response to Comment 7 -1- General Comment noted. e s Page 14 .R M IComment Letter #8 DUBLIN SCHOOLS, DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT All Dublin Students Will Stephen Hanke, Ed. D., Superintendent +7471 Larkdale Ave., Dublin, CA 94568+ 925 - 828.2551 • Become Lifelong Learners ww.dublinusd,org August 7, 2013 Kristi Bascom City of Dublin- Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Alp Dublin, California 94568 RE: Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Draft EIR (State Clearing House Number 2012062009) Dear Ms. Bascom: Thank you for giving the Dublin Unified School District the opportunity to comment on the above referenced project. The District has the following comments and questions regarding this application. • Page 2 -7, Table 2-1. The schools land use should have the note that total acreage is net 18 -1 usable acreage. * Page 2 -11, Schools Section. The 12 acres of land identified for the school site should note "net usable acreage." The school capacity number should be changed from up to 900 children 8 -2 to read approximately 900 students. The features of the campus should be revised to remove sports courts, and to change gymnasium to multi - purpose room. • Page 2 -12, Internal Circulation. The District would like it noted that internal circulation allows 1 8 -3 for adequate and safe pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle access and drop off to the school site. • Page 2 -13, Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation. The District would like to work with you to look 18 -4 for opportunities to include the school site in this circulation plan. • Page 2 -15, Soil Remediation. Remediation to state and federal requirements should also 8 -5 include school level site DTSC clearance. I • Page 2 -16, Project Phasing, Phasing Plan. The District would like to be an active participant in the phasing discussion as the exact timing for the need of the school site is unknown. The 8 -6 ability to participate or provide input into this discussion will allow the timing of student need to be factored in to the planning. • Page 3 -128, Hazardous Materials, The District will need a School Level Phase 1 clearance in 8 -7 order for the site to be approvable by the California Department of Education. I • Page 3 -187, Table 3.11 -1 The column heading `Optimum Capacity' should be revised to read 8-8 capacity. Fallon school listed under the elementary category should be moved under middle schools. Page 3 -187, second paragraph. The first sentence should be revised from service area to current attendance boundaries. A sentence should be added to this paragraph that indicates 8 -9 that depending on space available students may be overflowed to another campus with available capacity. EM W • Page 3 -192, School Facility Act of 1998. It should be noted that the School Facilities Act 1 8-10 provides a portion of the funding needed to provide new schools. • Page 3 -199 Impact 3.11 -3. The word optimum should be removed before capacity. The 8 -11 school site acreage should be revised from the 11 acre site listed to 12 net usable acres. • Page 3 -199 Table 3.11 -3. The word optimum should be removed from the capacity column .. and the district does not agree with the developer determination of excess capacity. Capacity 8 -1: information is reviewed annually to adjust for program related capacity changes. Enrollment information should be updated with current numbers. - • Page 3 -199, 3rd paragraph. The site acreage should be noted as 12 new usable acres. I8 -13 School capacity should be noted as approximately 900 students. • Figure 3.5 -1. The District is interested in understanding further the impact of faults within the 8 -14w area of the school site. Fault zones could impact the California Department of Education site approval. Thank you again for giving the District the opportunity to comment. We look forward to working with you on this project. _' Sincerely, Kim McNeely Director of Facilities Cc: Beverly Heironimus, CPA - Assistant Superintendent Business Services MW M Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment Letter #8 from Ms. Kim McNeely, Dublin Unified School District, dated August 7, 2013 Response to Comment 8 -1 - School Acreage Comment noted and the respective change has been made to page 2 -8 of the EIR. Response to Comment 8 -2 - School Site Description Comment noted and the respective change has been made to page 2 -12 of the EIR. Response to Comment 8 -3 - Internal Circulation Comment noted and the respective change has been made to page 2 -13 of the EIR. Response to Comment 8 -4 - Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation The narrative description of the pedestrian and bicycle circulation is conceptual at this stage. Should the Dublin Unified School District (DUSD) develop an elementary school within the project area, the City of Dublin will work collaboratively with the DUSD to accommodate school- related pedestrian and bicycle circulation requirements into the final circulation plan. Response to Comment 8 -5 - Soil Remediation As described on page 3 -136 of the Draft EIR (June 2013), the U.S. Army and NASA are responsible for environmental remediation of existing hazardous materials within the project area and have agreed to remediate the project area to state and federal requirements. There will be no Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) land use controls on the site, which means that site uses are unrestricted. Contamination that remains after the U.S. Army and NASA transfer the property to the project applicant and /or that needs to be remediated to a higher standard will either be remediated by the project applicant or by the U.S. Army or NASA prior to and during site grading and demolition activities associated with future development. Therefore, the proposed school site would be remediated and cleared to a level suitable for construction of an elementary school site. Response to Comment 8 -6 - Project Phasing Comment noted. The DUSD will be consulted regarding project phasing in coordination with District needs and the availability of various parcels of land for development. Response to Comment 8 -7 - Hazardous Materials Comment noted. The City acknowledges that a School Level Phase 1 clearance would be required in order for the site to be approved by the California Department of Education. Page 15 w Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment 8 -8 - Clarifications to Table 3.11 -1 Comment noted and the respective change has been made to page 3 -200 of the EIR. Response to Comment 8 -9 - Text Clarifications to Page 3 -187, 2nd Paragraph Comment noted and the respective change has been made to page 3 -200 of the EIR. Response to Comment 8 -10 - School Facility Act of 1998 Comment noted and the respective change has been made to page 3 -205 of the EIR. Response to Comment 8 -11- Clarification to Impact 3.11 -3 Comment noted and the respective change has been made to pages 3 -212 and 3 -213 of the EIR. Response to Comment 8 -12 - Clarification to Table 3.11 -3 Comment noted. The City has confirmed with DUSD that the existing data in the table is the most current data available. Response to Comment 8 -13 Acres and Capacity References Comment noted. The clarifications are reflected on pages 3 -212 and 3 -213 of the EIR. Response to Comment 8 -14 - Clarification regarding Seismic Faults Identified in Figure 3.5 -1 Comment noted. A detailed discussion regarding potential fault rupture impacts and seismic ground shaking is discussed starting on page 3 -105 of the Draft EIR (June 2013) and Appendix D to the Draft EIR contains both a Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation that was conducted in March 2012 and a Fault Ground - Rupture Investigation that was conducted in March 2013, which should be consulted for more information. s Page 16 cm Comment Letter # 9 California Clean Energy Committee August 2, 2013 VIA FIRST CLASS Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, California 94568 Re: Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Report Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (SCH # 2012062009) Dear Ms. Bascom: This letter will constitute comments by the California Clean Energy Committee on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (DEIR). The California Clean Energy Committee (Clean Energy) is a California non - profit corpora- tion headquartered in Davis which seeks to promote energy conservation, greenhouse gas reduction, and the development of clean - energy resources in California. Clean Energy has extensive experience in the analysis of energy efficiency and renewable energy designs including residential and commercial projects. Clean Energy actively supports the application of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to energy conservation and related environmental impacts. Over twenty individuals in the Dublin area have joined Clean Energy's campaign to request that that city require robust energy conservation and environmental steward- ship in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. All notices regarding this project are request- ed to be sent to 3502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, California 95616 -7531. Please feel free to contact the undersigned for additional information. Accompanying this letter is a USB flash drive containing electronic copies in pdf format of each of the documents listed in the appendix to this letter. Please contact us if you have any difficulty displaying the documents. The EIR should be amended to incorporate a thorough and quantitative analysis of energy conservation, to recognize the significant cumulative contribution to GHG emis- yai Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 2 sions, to frilly address transportation impacts and mitigation, and to incorporate a rea- 9 -1 (confd.) sonable range of alternatives and then be recirculated. " GLOBAL WARMING Scientists now inform us that even if existing pledges to reduce GHG emissions were met, the planet is still likely to warm 3.5 — 4.o degrees Celsius by end of century. The International Energy Agency reported in the 2011 World Energy Outlook that the planet is headed toward 6 degrees Celsius (11 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming. Global temperatures and CO2 levels are closely linked. Atmospheric CO2 levels have increased 41 percent since the Industrial Revolution, and the climate is just beginning to react. A considerable amount of additional warming is already built into the atmos- phere. When atmospheric concentrations of CO2 were last this high, sea level was 6o or 8o feet higher., This past May the average daily level of atmospheric CO2 exceeded 400 ppm for the first time in three million years. The average daily concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is now rising at a rate of 1.8 ppm per year. Global emissions are now approximately 36 trillion metric tons of CO2 per year. By 202o emissions are expected to rise to 41 trillion metric tons annually. South Florida is an example of the nature of the impending disaster. More than a third of South Florida would be inundated by a three -foot rise in sea level. By the end of this century, scientists expect a six foot sea level rise. Nor can South Florida be protected by sea walls. The rock which underlies South Florida is porous. Sea walls would not be effective. Sea water already percolates underground .2 The San Francisco Bay Area and the Sacramento Delta will face huge sea -water intru- sion impacts over coming decades threatening buildings, public infrastructure, agricul- ture, water supplies, and public health. All countries will feel the effects of climate change, but poor and developing countries — regions that have the least financial, technological, and scientific resources to fight back —will experience the worst impacts.3 1 See J. Gillis, "Heat- Trapping Gas Passes Milestone, Raising Fears," New York Times (May 10, 2013). 2 See J. Goodell, "Goodbye, Miami," Rolling Stone (Jun. 20, 2013). 3 The World Bank, Turn Down the Heat (Nov. 2012). '-A W L_J .. Im Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 3 Most of the excess heat energy is now being trapped in the oceans, which are subject to thermal expansion as their temperatures increase. Over the 201h Century, Ocean levels rose by about 15 to 20 centimeters. The rate of sea -level rise is accelerating and has now reached 3.2 centimeters per decade. Arctic sea ice reached a new low in 2012. The area covered has been reduced to half what it was in past decades. Scientists are warning that a 50 Gigatonne (Gt) methane pulse from thawing Arctic permafrost could destabilize the climate system and trigger costs as high as the entire world's GDP.4 The frequency and intensity of heat waves has increased. The Russian heat wave of 2010 resulted in 55,00o human deaths, 25 percent crop failure, and one million hectacres burned. Increased temperatures have been observed to have a negative effect on agricultural production. A recent MIT study reported a significant correlation between increased temperatures in poor countries and reduced industrial output, reduced agricultural output, and reduced political stability. Extreme drought is projected for many parts of the American West. Levels of aridity similar those reached during the Dust Bowl may cover areas from Kansas to California.5 These losses are expected to take place while world population expands to some 9 billion by mid - century leading to increased food insecurity. Despite the epic proportions of these problems, the city has relied on a consulting firm to prepare a draft EIR for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, which treats climate change and the related issues in a superficial and dismissive manner. The dilemma of climate change can be addressed at no net cost to society, and as we will make clear in this comment letter, there are multiple opportunities for the city to ad- dress the climate impacts of this project while it reduces economic costs. 9 -2 (cont'd.) GHG EMISSIONS The analysis of GHG emissions consists of two pages where the city reports without explanation what it calls the business -as- usual, operational emissions of the project. 9 -3 The city reports that mobile source GHG emissions will be 16,941 MT per year and that 4 Vidal, J., Rapid Arctic Thawing Could Be Economic Timebomb, Scientists Say The Guardian (Jul. 24 2013), 5 J. Romm, "Desertification: The Next Dust Bowl," Nature (Oct. 27, 2011). 0 ffr Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 4 area source emissions will be lolg MT and "energy consumption emissions" will be 6,818 MT per year. Numbers are also reported for water and solid waste. This is not a sufficient discussion. It does not reflect the underlying data used or the assumptions made. These numbers are totaled and divided by the number of residents and jobs that will result from the project. This leads to a 4.32 MT CO2e per service population number which, being less than the 4.6 threshold from BAAQMD, is cited to support a finding of a less than significant impact. There is no substantial evidence to support the GHG emissions threshold adopted by the city. The project's 26,145 metric tons of GHG emissions plainly constitutes a cumula- tively considerable impact to climate change. This single project will cause an increase Of 7 percent in GHG emissions over the city's baseline of 357,211 MT CO2e. The proposed project will result in 35,106 net new vehicle trips per day and the 115,399 additional vehicle miles travelled per day. The GHG emissions plainly have a cumula- tively considerable impact (EIR 3 -42.) The impacts on GHG emissions are significant because of the human health impacts. The human health impact must be addressed. The GHG emissions from the project are more than 23 times greater than the BAAQMD bright -line threshold of 110o metric tons per year. According to the city's own data, the 110o MT of CO2e per year threshold is equivalent to approximately 6o single family units, 78 multi- family units, a supermarket exceeding 800o square feet and an office park exceeding 50,00 square feet. (Climate Action Plan 14.) The U.S. EPA equivalency calculator shows that the GHG emissions from this pro- 9 -3 ow (contt. r Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page s ject are equivalent to the annual emissions from 5,447 passenger vehicles.6 Alternative- ly, it would take 670,385 tree seedlings grown for a period of 10 years to sequester that 3 ( much CO2. This is plainly a considerable contribution to global warming impacts. cont'd.) The city attempts to support this analysis by citing the BAAQMD guidelines, but those standards do not serve the purposes of CEQA. They were designed to ensure that new land development meets its fair share of emission reductions. AB 32 does not purport to avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative impact of climate change. There is no plausible basis given for the assumption that implementing AB 32 would ensure that the incremental contribution of the project is not cumulatively con- siderable. AB 32 contains no requirements that would result in the reduction of the project impacts to a level of less than significant. AB 32 is only intended to be an achievable a mid -term target. GHG emissions must be reduced to at least 8o percent below 1990 levels by 2050 to stabilize the climate. AB 32 does not contain a plan or mitigation program that the City can use to conclude that the contribution of the proposed project to global warming is not cumulatively considerable. BAAQMD relied on the GARB Scoping Plan which contains a program for achieving the maximum technologically - feasible and economically cost - effect reductions in GHG emissions by 2020. The Scoping Plan does not purport to determine what would be a 9 -4 cumulatively considerable contribution to GHG emissions. What is feasible to do by 202o has nothing to do with what it will take to render the cumulative impact less than significant. BAAQMD calculated the expected state -vdde growth in GHG emissions resulting from land development through 2020. It reduced that amount by the reductions that would result from statewide regulations, and determined that GHG emissions from that sector would grow at 2.3 percent annually. That analysis fails to meet CEQA requirements. The EIR must contain a cumulative impact analysis for GHG emissions. The city should determine whether the project would be consistent with Executive Order S -3 -o5, which provides that GHG emissions must be reduced 8o% below 1990 levels by 2050 to stabilize climate impacts. S -3 -05 was established to address an environmental objective which is relevant under CEQA. Project impacts are no less significant because they were caused by a larger number of people. Increasing GHG emissions by 26,145 metric tons per year cannot be deemed environmentally benign simply because it is the result of the actions of a large number of people. 6 http: / /wwtir.epa.gov /cleanenergy /energy- resources /calculator.html #results. im K Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 5 The EIR states that there are "934 residents and employees" on the project site current- ly. The EIR does not describe any residential housing currently on the 189 acre site so the environmental setting is inadequate. (EIR 2 -1– 2 -5.) There are 18 buildings, but there is no explanation of what the existing usage of these buildings is. The EIR describes three parcels -8.5 acre NASA parcel, 8.7 acre Alameda surplus par- cel, and 172 acres of Camp Parks— totaling to 189 acres. 127 acres is vacant. The EIR does not disclose where the "NASA parcel" is located or what its use is. The EIR should explain what the existing usage of the parcels is and calculate the increase in GHG emis- sions from the current site usage. If current per - capita GHG emissions on the site are as much as those of the proposed project, i.e., 4.32 metric tons per service population per year, the existing 934 residents and employees would produce 4035 metric tons of carbon per year. According to the EIR, the project will result in 6,046 people residing and working on the site and 26,145 metric tons of carbon emissions per year. (EIR at 3 -122.) That is the result of the proposed 1995 residential units, 50,000 square feet of office space, 150,000 square feet of shopping center, goo- student elementary school, and 3o -acre park. This constitutes an increase of 600 percent in GHG emissions, and it constitutes a con- siderable contribution to global warming. The city cannot tier from its Climate Action Plan (CAP). No environmental impact re- port was prepared for the CAP. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan was not considered in the CAP and is not consistent with it. 9 -6 .W .. 6,4 9 -7 OW WW Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 7 The CAP does not provide specific requirements that will avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative global warming problem in Dublin. The contribution of past, present and probable future projects to global warming will not substantially lessen under the CAP and the cumulative global warming problem will not be substantially avoided. There is currently no plausible way to avoid the impacts of global warming, and State of California policy calls for reducing emissions to 8o percent below lggo levels by 2050 in order to avoid the worst impacts. The city postulates a "business -as -usual scenario' (BAU) in the CAP but it fails to identi- fy what is included in that scenario and what is not. Further, there is no evidence the measures proposed in the CAP would reduce GHG emissions below the BAU forecast for 2020. 'There has never been any analysis of what conditions are assumed in the baseline or how those conditions might be changed by the measures proposed in the CAP. The CAP is unsupported. Even if some of the mitigation in the CAP differed significantly from BAU, the mitiga- tion measures identified in the CAP are so vague and undefined that they do not provide any specific requirements that would avoid the cumulative global warming problem. The policies in the CAP are unfunded and unenforceable. The CAP is not a plausible tool to accomplish the objectives of CEQA. According to the CAP, past and present projects in the community of Dublin, as of 2005, emitted approximately 357,211 MT of CO2e. The CAP concludes that GHG emissions would grow by 31.9 percent to 471,205 MT per year by 2020 under the BAU scenario. (CAP 10.) The reduction measures under the CAP allegedly would reduce annual emis- sions by gg,000 MT. (CAP 53.) This would result in annual emissions from past, pre- sent and future projects to be 372,205. Obviously, the CAP does not avoid the cumula- tive contribution to global warming in the Dublin area. Even if the CAP were to be fully implemented and were to be as effective as claimed, annual GHG emissions in the Dub- lin would still increase through 2020. Beyond that, the CAP ignores impacts. E3 Ii .; Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 8 Metric Tons of CO2 Emitted Under the Dublin Climate Action Plan 400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 - 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 Year2005 Year202O Year2035 Year 2050 The proposed project is not consistent with the CAP. The CAP calls for reducing com- munity -wide GHG by 20 percent below business -as -usual by 2020. The 20 percent reduction target requires the city to achieve a 4.2 MT CO2e per service population. (CAP 10.) The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan would result in 4.32 MT CO2e per service popu- lation. The failure of the CAP to deliver on its objectives is undeniable since the project is allegedly consistent with the CAP. The CAP makes the unsupported claim that bicycle mode share will increase by a factor of five due to the implementation of the proposed Bikeways Master Plan and that this gill reduce GHG emissions by 3,5o6 MT per year. (CAP 35.) This expansion of the Bikeways Master Plan is unfunded and aspirational. The city should adopt mitigation requiring the implementation of a fair share fee to fund the Bikeways Master Plan and commit to funding the plan. The CAP makes the unsupported claim that requiring 50 points under the GreenPoint Rating system will reduce citywide emissions by 15,287 MT. There is no support for what the GreenPoint system will or will not do. Builders using the GreenPoint system can opt for a variety of features to earn points. Those points are not geared to the GHG reductions, but relate to a variety of different building practices that may or may not affect GHG emissions. OW W 9 -8 .. (cont'd.�. II Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 9 The CAP claims 2,922 MT of emissions reductions from the Multi -Modal Map, but no such map has been put into circulation or used by the public in Dublin, and there are no plans to correct this situation identified on the city's web site. The CAP claims 2,922 MT of emissions reductions from the Streetscape Master Plan, but the city has no funding and has done nothing to implement such a plan outside development projects. The claims for reductions from the Streetscape Master Plan are unsupported. The CAP claims 1,461 MT of emissions reductions from working with LAVTA on plan- ning improved transit. However, the city has worked with LAVTA since its inception and nothing in the CAP suggests that anything different has been or will be done. Under the CAP the city provides no additional funding for transit operations, does not require developers to provide additional funding for transit operations, and has no new program with LAVTA that makes any measurable difference in transit usage. The city claims 4,480 MT of emissions reductions from Energy Upgrade California, but that program has run out of ARRA funding and is not operating at the level that was assumed when the CAP was adopted. There is no substantiation for any reductions as a result of Energy Upgrade California. The city claims 4,500 MT of emissions reductions from solar conversion programs. The city relies on PACE programs which have since been cancelled as a result of resistance from federal agencies. The city has no residential PACE program and no evidence to demonstrate that the number of solar conversions which would achieve the emissions reductions projected. The city claims 4,911 MT of emission reductions from achieving a 75 percent citywide solid waste diversion goal. However, the city has not achieved this goal and does not expect to achieve this goal for several years. The CAP erroneously assumes this diver - sion rate would be achieved from the time the CAP is adopted. These measures will not substantially avoid or lessen the global warming problem in Dublin. By and large they will not be implemented by the project. The EIR fails to ex- plain how implementing these requirements could ensure that the project's incremental contribution to global warming is not cumulatively considerable. The CAP does not meet CEQA standards because it has not been evaluated under CEQA, is not supported by substantial evidence, and does not constitute a binding program that will actually mitigate the impacts involved. M rN 9 -8 (cont'd.) Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 10 ENERGY CONSERVATION The analysis of energy conservation should be based on scientific and factual data. The EIR should not rely on a subjective comparisons With other construction projects and other development. Energy conservation requires that a project's cost - effectiveness be reviewed in terms of energy requirements. There is no evidence to support the assertion that adherence to Title 24, Part 6, would insure that the project would avoid the ineffi- cient use of energy. 9 -9 There is no support for the city's assertion that reducing emissions from off -road equipment will reduce energy consumption. There is no support for the assumption 9 -10 that typical construction or building operation practices are energy efficient. The EIR should provide the total energy requirements of project operation by fuel type and end use, and it should identify, the energy supplies that would serve the project and discuss their relative impact. The city should disclose the quantities of energy that have been projected and the factors used to derive the GHG emissions. Natural gas factors should reflect leakage and impacts related to fracking. Energy use efficiency should be provided by amount and fuel type. The cumulative effect of the project on regional energy supplies should be discussed. The EIR should include an energy efficiency calculation demonstrating how residential and commercial structures will use energy for lighting, water heating, space heating, water heating, pool pumps, pipe loss, cooling, plug load, appliances, etc. and determine whether upgrading to more energy efficiency systems would be cost - effective in view of energy savings. The project will result in 115,399 daily vehicle miles travelled. (DEIR 3 -42.) This is a potentially significant impact to transportation energy usage and should be evaluated to determine whether it constitutes a significant energy impact. The fact that transit exists in the area is not determinative of transportation energy efficiency. The EIR should discuss the energy characteristics of the project site and the available off -site energy resources. The discussion should include the relative impacts and tech- nologies related to bio- energy from the organic waste stream and sewage, wind, geo- thermal, thermal, solar, natural gas, and grid - sourced electricity. The energy setting should discuss the renewable content of the energy to the project. It should discuss the average efficiency achieved of the generation and distribution systems. The EIR should discuss adequacy of the substations, distribution, and transmission resources to be used and the cumulative impact of the expansion of those systems. The EIR should address peals energy usage. 9 -11 9 -12 f Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 11 The EIR should evaluate the economic viability of renewable energy strategies and ener- gy efficiency tools that could reduce energy demand from the project. The EIR should evaluate options for putting the entire project on loo percent renewable energy, or some lesser percentage as may be feasible, and evaluate the extent to which transportation systems associated with the construction and operation of the project can be fueled from renewable electrical generation or other reduced - emission fuels such as hydrogen, bio- diesel, and natural gas. The EIR should compare the relative efficiencies of different technologies to provide energy to the project for operation, construction, transportation, and other uses. The EIR should discuss energy use and the impact of requiring additional generation facilities to serve the anticipated load. Loads should be reported for typical building lighting, space conditioning, battery recharging, equipment, transportation, water heat - ing, etc. Facilities for electric vehicle charging should be discussed as a cost - effective way to reduce energy impacts. The EIR should evaluate ways in which the projected electric demand can be served in an efficient and environmentally - sustainable way. The EIR should evaluate strategies for reducing reliance on fossil fuels, increasing reliance on renewable resources, reduc- ing peals loads, and reducing the impacts of reliance on remote generation facilities. The project involves 200,000 square feet of commercial space and up to 1995 residen- tial units which provide space for rooftop solar. There will also be a considerable amount of land dedicated to parking that could be covered with solar PV parking cano- pies. Such a project could readily produce sufficient electricity to meet all of the de- mand of project operation by using solar panels on buildings and over parking lots. This is an efficient use of land and reduces the demand on other environments that they be covered with solar panels or degraded by natural gas fracking in order to supply Dublin with electricity. The cost of electricity supplied by solar panels would be less than the cost of relying on PG &E to provide electricity. Data from the California Energy Commission on retrofitted rooftop solar systems, which would be more expensive than solar systems installed as a part of new development, show that a 3 kilowatt AC system cost on average $ 12, 810 in California after federal tax credits. 0 rw 9 -13 �015V 9 -15 Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 12 Installed Price 3 kW Solar System Installed Price per Watt $6.10 System Size (Watts AC) 3000 Installed Cost $18,300 30% Tax Credit (IRC 48C) - $5,490 After Tax Installed System Cost $12,810 Such a system produces electricity at a cost of approximately 9 cents per 1cWh. Per kWh Price of Residential Solar Power After Tax Installed System Cost (3 kWac) $12,810.00 Operation and Maintenance $1,500.00 Annual Output (kWh) 5040 System Lifetime (yrs.) 30 Lifetime Output (kWh) 151,200 Cost per kWh $0.09 As the following chart shows, rate is considerably less expensive than purchasing elec- tricity from PG &E. 7 ($12,8io = $1,500) / 151,200 = $0.094 r 9 -15 (cont'd.) F-a ,a P-� O O N N M co 9 -15 (cont'd.) 0 0 Ln tr �o v} 0 d 0 Ln m m � o - m > o 4-J i4l U L Ln U a W 0 V L U) O o V -6 o o L o m 0 O V) O Q O O O 0 aJ G al C a) Id" c o \° ru C 0 � O It O 00 D H N y M c'i H N C (O m f0 m IO m I I 0 (Q c i ro m 4- O O Q) O .--1 v O O vl f0 o E r-1 Cd 0 E 4- r-A L E v O -f E 0 C E : \ t Y 0 :3 E x CL 0 � ai o + L a a m o W a a a a U a w ° a N O Y O ami a 0 9 -15 (cont'd.) Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 14 Actually, the 9 cents per kWh price considerably over - states the price of rooftop solar when it is installed by a residential developer and therefore understates the savings to the consumer. The 9 cent figure is based on the cost to retrofit rooftop solar, which is more expensive. A residential developer can reduce costs given the buying power of the devel- oper and due to the ease of installing electrical conduits and other components in a fully sequenced, ground -up construction process. A residential developer also avoids the costs and overhead that are built into a solar retrofitting company's prices such as a separate permitting process and customer acquisition process. Alternatively, the developer can use an outside firm to install solar at little cost to the developer. The cost savings from rooftop solar is considerably more for commercial buildings where the average cost of retrofitting rooftop solar PV is approximately ro percent less per kW of installed genera- tion. The discussion should address the savings produced by a solar system over time as a result of utility rates increasing over time. The costs of solar remain fixed based on the initial purchase price. Over time the economic advantage that accrues to the homeowner or business owner from on -site renewable generation increases. The following chart compares the fixed cost of a small, retrofitted solar system against the PG &E Baseline and Tier 2 rates. It assumes a growth trend of 3 percent. Utility Rates v. Residential Solar Over 30 Years $0.35 -- -- $0.30 $0.25 $0.20 Utility Tier 2 $0.15 Utility Baseline $0.10 — ---Rooftop Solar Retrofit $0.05 $ 0.00 1 3 5 7 9 1113 15 17 19 2123 25 27 29 California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530-756-61411 Facsimile: 530 - 756 - 5930 .a 9 -15 (cont'y.) aw Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 15 The proposed project involves a potentially significant impact to energy conservation and the EIR should be revised and recirculated to fully discuss the impact on energy conserva- tion and appropriate solar mitigation adopted. The EIR should discuss how failing to implement efficient renewable generation would pre -empt future clean energy develop- ment. By failing to adopt renewable energy when the project is implemented, project occupants become subject to administrative and financial obstacles as well as additional construction costs associated A -vith retrofitting renewable generation to operating com- mercial and residential buildings, rather than installing it as a component of the initial construction. The EIR should also discuss various scenarios under which utility rates could rise at a more drastic rate than 3 percent per year. For example, PG &E's 2014 -2016 general rate case seeks authority to collect an additional $5.25 billion from ratepayers raising the typical homeowner utility bill by 15.6 percent. And California Energy Commission pro- jections show electricity prices increasing by 2.6 to 3.9 percent per year. Moreover, grid - sourced power is subject to the volatilities of the fossil fuel markets. Dependence on grid - sourced power exposes consumers and businesses to the risk of utility rate spikes. Based on estimates from solar water heater experts, a homeowner who retrofits an exist- ing residence with solar water heating (SWH) can expect a total installed system price in area of $75Oo. This price would typically be reduced by a federal tax credit of 30 percent. When a SWH is installed by the original developer as a part of new home construction, system costs fall dramatically. We spoke to the national sales manager for a major U.S. SWH manufacturer and were informed that that the materials and components for a SWH for a typical tract of 10o units would be $2500 per home. The costs of installing a SWH would also be considerably less for a housing tract. All of the trades — plumbers, framers, electricians, and roofers —are already on site to install the related components of the SWH, on a mass production basis. Permits have already been pulled. Work proceeds on an open and accessible wood frame. The additional labor required to integrate a SWH into residential construction would be approximately $500 per home. California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530-756-61411 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 6 9 -15 (cont'd.) Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 16 Solar Water Heater New Construction Cost SWH Equipment $2,500 Installation Labor $500 Avoided Gas Water Heater Cost -$500 30 Percent Tax Credit (IRC 25D) _$900 CSI Rebate $0 Total Cost After Tax Credit $1,600 Per Year Cost of Construction Over 20 Years $80 A typical family in PG &E service territory now pays approximately $15 per month for natural gas water heating in summer or $18o per year. Winter gas usage would be some- what higher due to lower ambient temperatures. Based on the CEC projections, there will be 78.9% increase in natural gas prices over a 12 year period on a mid - demand scenario. This would amount to a 6.58 percent increase per year through 2024. We confirmed projected natural gas price increases with one expert who stated that the best forecasts for wholesale natural gas prices is that they will re- bound by up to 5o% between now and 2o2o due to an expected demand surge in the power sector, and then continue upwards on a slower trajectory. That would amount to about 7 percent per year through 2020. We adopt a 5 percent per year linear increase in natural gas prices which means that the annual water heating bill for the typical Dublin household will rise from $18o per year to $351 per year over the next 20 years. This is conservative given that the U.S. Department of Energy currently shows the typical U.S. household paying on average $400 to $boo per year for water heating alone. On average a SHW system tvill reduce water heating bills by 50 to 8o percent according to the U.S. DOE. Given the solar characteristics of Dublin, we use an 8o percent reduction in natural gas costs for solar water heating. An 8o percent reduction in the current $18o per year water heating cost results in a $36 per year water heating cost for a SWH. The typical useful life of a SWH according to the Department of Energy is 20 years. The resulting first year cost for SWH was $116 ($8o + $36). The SWH systems saves $64 in the first year over a natural gas system. By the 20th year the natural -gas system rises to California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530-756-61411 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 ■w 9 -15 " (cont'dk� W 4M Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 17 $361 per year and the solar system to $150 per year, representing household savings $201 per year. Annual Household Water Heating Costs for System Installed with New Construction $400 $350 $300 $250 $200 - Natural Gas $150 Solar $100 $50 $a ,- -z -- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 The total net savings for a typical household over the 20 year lifetime of a typical SWH system installed in a new home would be $2,648. The Legislature has declared that it is in the interest of California to promote solar water heating systems to protect consumers from rising energy costs and reduce the demand for natural gas. (Pub. Util. Code § 2862.) The EIR should analyze the savings from SWH and identify the failure to implement SWH as a significant impact that should be mitigated. The total cost of ownership of LED lamps is considerably less than incandescent and florescent lamps. The EIR should consider requiring LED lighting throughout including the use of LED lighting in parking lots because of the reduced energy requirements of LED lighting. pProjects now are cost - effectively exceeding Title 24, Part 6. Where there are cost- effective ways to reduce energy consumption, it is wasteful not to adopt them. The EIR should evaluate incorporating additional energy efficiency up to 40 percent beyond Title 24 and determine whether that can be done in a cost - effective way. The CALGreen Code encourages a 15 percent energy use reduction over that required by Title 24, Part 6. California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530-756-61411 Facsimile; 530 -756 -5930 9 -15 (cont'd.) M Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 18 AIR QUALITY AND TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION The EIR concludes that the project operations will have a significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts on air quality and transportation. The EIR should discuss and rec- ommend mitigation to reduce those impacts by including unbundled parking, a transpor- 9 -16 tation management district, funded offsite bicycle enhancements, and accelerated electric vehicle adoption. Where on -site mitigation is infeasible, the EIR should recommend feasible off-site mitigation. The EIR should evaluate the safety and utility of the bicycle connections off -site with particular attention to impacts on bike traffic to Pleasanton, to the Pleasanton ACE sta- tion, and to employers south of the 58o due to the extreme traffic intensity to the south of the project site. There are currently no designated bicycle facilities crossing the 580. Increased cycling traffic at the 58o intersections creates safety hazards for cyclists and motorists that should be evaluated. A study of the freeway crossings needs to be undertaken to identify ways of reduc- ing /eliminating hazards while riding over the freeway where on- and off-ramps are locat- ed. Providing adequate connections across 1 -58o would likely increase bicycle commut- ing and recreational riding between the Dublin and Pleasanton. (Bikeways Master Plan 28.) The route is highly- intimidating to cyclists at this time and will be more so after the 9 -1 construction of this project. The project conflicts with adopted city bicycling policies in the general plan and in the Bikeways Master Plan. Improved bicycle facilities should be discussed and adopted as mitigation for significant and unmitigated transportation and air quality impacts. Project impacts could further be reduced by providing walking and bicycle access to "* commercial areas. Although the project will contain a considerable amount of commer- cial zoning, it does not require access directly from residential areas to the commercial sites. As designed, residents may be required to travel by car to Arnold Road or Dublin Blvd. and then to drive into a parking lot to access commercial associated with the site. There is no necessity that the land use plan provide pleasant or convenient access by bike or on foot to commercial centers that are part of the site or that are near to it. There is no consideration of whether residents will be able to access commonly used or needed loca- tions on foot or on bicycle. California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530-756-61411 Facsimile: 530 -756 - 5930 Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 19 The layout of the project does not create a network of non - vehicular routes or pathways through the development that would enhance connectivity between the elements of the project or to adjacent uses. The project does not specify an internal circulation system that enhances the use of alternative modes within the site or from adjacent high - occupancy residential. Commercial uses have not been distributed in a way to promote access to retail services through non - vehicular modes. People who want to travel by non - vehicular modes are required to take routes that are laid out for intense car usage and designed for cars which require them to go by long routes that no pedestrian or cyclist would chose. This is true both respect to internal routes and routes that would cross the project boundaries. This problem could become worse because no layout is specified. The project should be amended to include a requirement for non - vehicular routes. Requiring convenient and commonly - needed commercial services on site, e.g., a grocery 9 -18 store, would not only reduce impacts from project residents, it would also mean that the large projects south of Dublin Boulevard could be served by commonly -used commercial within walking distance. Local- serving retail should be a project condition. Having any type of commercial located in this area, e.g., a carpet shop, an auto repair shop, or other appropriately -zoned but seldom needed use, fails to recognize the opportunity to reduce transportation and air quality impacts. The project requires people to drive to meet their everyday needs. The project should be modeled using ITE or other internal capture data to scientifically determine maximize local trips can be captured within the project. Air quality and transportation impacts can be further reduced by specifying a minimum density for the project and requiring that it be designed as a complete community so that residents can work shop, recreate and live within it thereby reducing the need to travel outside the community. The development should be oriented toward pedestrians to encourage walking to transit and local commercial development and to encourage a more community - oriented life style. By increasing the use of zero - emission electric vehicles (ZEVs) and plug -in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), the project can reduce its air quality emissions. There are a variety of 9 -19 measures the project could adopt to increase the adoption of ZEVs and PHEVs and to avoid locking into an inefficient and costly deign. California Clean Energy Committee ( 3502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice; 530-756-61411 Facsimile; 530- 756 -5930 E3 ii Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 2 0 • Mitigation should be discussed and adopted that requires the commercial compo- nents of the project to provide priority parking to ZEVs and PHEVs. • All new single - family residences in the project should be pre- IA!red for electric ve- hicle charging including adequate panel capacity. • Multifamily residences should be required to provide a sufficient number of spaces with installed charging equipment and to allow residents to charge at off -peak rates. • Public charging stations should be installed in parking lots preferably to provide free charging for a limited time in order to incentivize EV usage. • Public signage should indicate directions to charging stations. • Off -site mitigation should include funding the installation of charging stations at select city -owned parking lots or a city program to cooperatively develop more EV charging facilities in the city. A commuter benefits program provides alternatives and incentives that encourage com- muting by more sustainable modes such as transit, rail, biking, van pools, and car- pooling. Commuter benefits programs are based on a traffic mitigation plan that includes public outreach to commuters through various media including workplace promotion, social media, on -line ride matching, signage, on -site transit pass sales, on -site transit information, discounted transit passes, and coordination with transit agencies. New residents should be provided with a free one -year transit pass to encourage their use of transit. Such a program could be operated by a transportation management association under the joint administration of the City of Dublin and the Livermore Amador Valley Transit Au- thority using an incentive - driven contract. It could be funded through mitigation fees potentially leveraged by other transit funds or by a Mello -Roos district. Parking fees from metered public lots serving local businesses could fund a transportation management association. Other existing and future projects in the city should participate in the mitigation, as is the case in San Francisco, to pool resources. Such a project would reduce transportation impacts by marketing less expensive alternatives already provided by local agencies. 9 -19 (cont'd.) .. M L_ California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530-756-61411 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 no E.7; Ms. Kiisti Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 - Page 2l Transportation management associations are low cost tools with short lead times. Reduc- tions in transportation demand achieved by a transportation management association would reduce the cost to developers of new transportation infrastructure and parking thus providing a financial boost for developers while reducing impacts. All employers owning or leasing buildings in the project site should be required to offer parking cash -out to employees. Parking cash out requires employers to offer employees the option to choose cash in lieu of any parking subsidy offered. Implementation of park- ing cash -out by individual employers can be used to reduce transportation impacts. The project should adopt shared parking through either a parking district or public park- ing in lieu of minimum parking requirements. Employers should be allowed to reduce the number of shared parking spaces they construct or lease based upon (i) the likelihood that multiple facilities will not all require maximum parking at the same time and (ii) the extent to which individual facilities can implement cash -out parking. This reduces costs to employers and moderates single - occupant vehicle demand. The supply of free or inexpensive parking at the final destination is a key decision factor cited for choosing to drive a personal auto rather than taking a bus, bike, walk or carpool. Requiring that parking spaces be leased or sold separately ( "unbundled ") from the rent or sale prices (residential and commercial) gives a financial incentive inducing individuals to drive less or own fewer cars, or encouraging companies to increase transit commute rates among their employees. Overall, this serves to reduce parking demand and shift peak - hour commute trips to non -SOV modes. Including the price of parking in an overall lease can increase costs by as much as 25% — whether or not the tenant has a car — but be per - ceived as an "invisible" cost by the customer. Shared parking should be required for commercial space and supplied by dedicated pub - lic parking lots so that each store is not required to pay the cost of building and maintain- ing a parking lot sufficiently large to meet its discrete peals parking demand and so that parking will be metered. Shared public parking increases the pedestrian ambiance of retail centers and helps to avoid driving between different stores, ZEVs and PHEVs can be incentivized by allowing them free parking and charging for a limited time. Use of shared public parking allows employers to either buy monthly passes or refund an equivalent sum to employees who use sustainable modes thus incentivizing reduced im- pacts. Employers who own their parking cannot reduce their parking costs on an incre- California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530- 756 -6141 1 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 rn N 9 -19 (cont'd.) Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 2 2 mental basis. Shared parking simplifies employer compliance with California's parking cash out law. (Health & Safety Code § 43845.) On- street parking should be eliminated from the project and replaced with bike lanes to avoid competition with metered parking lots and to provide a more human -scale and pedestrian- oriented community and to reduce the amount of unused paved areas that the developer is required to build and to reduce heat island effect. California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530 -756 -6141 1 Facsimile; 530 - 756 -5930 9 -19 (cont'd ti:wo .w Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 2 3 TRANSPORTATION The EIR states that the project site currently contains 934 residents and employees. (EIR 2 -4.) Since there is no reported housing on the site, the 934 may mostly employees. Site employment could be reduced by up to 934 jobs. The EIR projects boo employees for the project site (EIR 3 -122.) Thus there will be a net loss of up to 334 employees on the pro- ject site. This design conflicts with Plan Bay Area, and the EIR should discuss that con - flict and mitigate it. Plan Bay Area designates approximately half the site for an increase Of 50 -1,000 employees per acre. (Plan Bay Area 144.) The project size is 189 acres (EIR ES 1). Increasing employment on half of the project site by 50 employees per acre would require an increase of 4725 jobs on site, and the proposed project is reducing jobs by 934, The project anticipates that there will be only 6o employees on the project site. (EIR 3- 122.) The data reported in the EIR suggests that there would be 21 vehicle miles travelled (VMT) per day for project residents.$ This is approximately equivalent to current Bay Area VMT. (Plan Bay Area EIR 2.1 -10, 2.1 -13.) This conflicts with Plan Bay Area which calls for a 10 percent per capita decrease in VMT. (Plan Bay Area 103.) This constitutes a significant impact which must be analyzed and mitigated. Impacts to Bic,ycles, The EIR should evaluate the adverse impacts on bicycling and pedestrian traffic as the result of more cars, more lanes, expanding Scarlet Drive, and wider intersections and mitigate the impacts with improved facilities for alternative modes. There are numerous destinations including employment centers in Pleasanton that would be difficult to access via bike because of the difficult and dangerous crossing of the 58o and Dublin Blvd. The proposed project will result in additional bike traffic south to Pleasanton, and the EIR should consider the safety of cyclists attempting to cross the 58o as well as the poten- tial mitigation for air quality and transportation impacts if cycling can be made safer and less intimidating. A study of the cycling impacts of the project including freeway crossings needs to be un- dertaken to identify ways of reducing /eliminating hazards while riding over the freeway where on- and off -ramps are located. Providing adequate connections across I -58o 8115,399 / 5470 (DEIR 3 -42). California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530- 756 -6141 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 F9 6 -elm 9 -21 Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 24 would increase bicycle commuting and recreational riding between the two cities and reduce air quality and traffic impacts of the project. The Bikeway Master Plan requires that major development projects with major transpor- tation impacts be required to construct adjacent bicycle facilities included in the proposed bicycle system. The project should be required to comply with that requirement. The project proposes that B Street would serve as the primary bike route for fixture resi- dents to access the Dublin BART station (DEIR 3 -236.) This is not a safe route because there are no bicycle facilities connecting B Street to the BART station. Demarcus Blvd. is lined with parked cars and has no bike facilities. Dublin Blvd. is nine lanes wide at that point and has no facilities for bicycle crossing. The Iron Horse Regional Trail ends before 9-21 reaching Demarcus so cyclists cannot use it to reach the BART station. There is a high (cont'() volume of bus traffic on Demarcus Road which has a large transit facility and no segrega- tion or routing for cyclists who would be expected to make a left turn to continue on Demarcus and then to navigate the dangerous space around multiple large buses and to make their way under the freeway. Past the freeway bikes are blocked from proceeding further by development, by walk only signs, by lack of signage, and by fences and various obstacles the leave no efficient way to reach employment centers and other destinations beyond the 580. This is a huge impediment to cycling from a project which is nearby. The EIR and the specific plan ignore all off site connectivity for bikes. This is not con- sistent with the Bikeway Master Plan, is a hazard to cyclists, and fails mitigate the trans- portation and air quality impacts. The conclusion that the project contains adequate bike connections to existing facilities is unsupported. The EIR makes bicycle travel unsafe and difficult and thereby encourages greater automobile use. The EIR fails to evaluate im- pacts to cyclists. Iron -Horse Regional Trail will run along the west boundary of the project where Scarlett Drive will be widened and extended to Dublin Blvd. The EIR should address the contin- ued operation of Iron Horse Regional Trail along the extended Scarlett Drive. The bike route may be reduced to Class 2. The increased bike traffic on Iron Horse Regional Trail 9-22, will create safety issues for cars and bikes in the area because cyclists have no facilities to cross Dublin Blvd. and are required to dismount their bikes in the middle of a street crossing in order to carry them over the curbs and the raised median resulting in a signif- icant impact to pedestrians and cyclists. The proposed mitigation is a grade - separated crossing. (DEIR 3 -266.) The EIR must determine whether the mitigation is feasible, make it enforceable, identify the environmental impacts, and commit to resolving the problem. California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530-756-61411 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 """ Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 2 5 9 -22 The city must have a fair share mitigation program that is adopted and that will effective- (cont'd.) ly mitigate the bike and pedestrian impacts. The project will generate 22,047 net new daily trips (DEIR 3 -226) and 115,399 new vehi- cle miles travelled daily. According to AAA, total cost of driving in 2013 is 60.8 cents per mile. At that rate the 115,399 new vehicle miles travelled in connection with this project will cost consumers over $25 million annually. Beyond that is the cost of the road infra- structure internal to the project, the cost of improvements to the Dublin city streets, the costs of incrementally expanding regional freeway system, the costs of road and freeway maintenance, and the cost of policing the system. This State of California recognizes that this transportation paradigm is leading to an unprecedented environmental tragedy. Far more cost - effective systems are available including electric vehicles, transit, light rail, ride- sharing, biking and walking. These cost - effective solutions are discouraged by neighborhood configurations that make them inconvenient and by scientific mass mar- keting for driving- oriented solutions. For example, the huge cost of providing parking for cars is ordinarily bundled into the cost of consumer goods. The project would invest considerable sums in expanded roadway facilities including construction of G Street, B Street, and Central Parkway East and improvements to Scar - lett Drive, Arnold Road, and Dublin Boulevard. Other intersection and roadway expan- sion will be generated by the project through the city's traffic impact fee program. All of this is ultimately paid for by the public, either in the form of taxes or in the cost of prod- ucts purchased. Typically, the cost of these facilities is packaged with other products leaving consumers no opportunity to elect lower -cost, sustainable modes. The EIR assumes that traffic mitigation must be achieved through street widening and other investment in the most costly transportation mode. Nothing demonstrates that the public necessarily favors this approach. There is a great deal of evidence now that people would rather have more sustainable modes and less of a driving - intense, street - intense, freeway - intense life experience, especially if such a system is less expensive. The city's approach to mitigation is not without environmental impacts. The decision to build additional road capacity to meet transportation demand itself engenders more traffic. By compelling new development to build auto - centric transportation solutions, the city insists on the system with the highest environmental impacts. People will use the transportation systems that the city chooses to invest in because those systems are con- venient and available. Additional investment in the automobile -based systems Ieads to California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530- 756 -6141 1 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 9 -23 Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 2 6 more use of automobiles. The city is required to evaluate the impact of its auto - centric 9 -23 mitigation measures and mitigate them. (cont'd. , feectf,,7 mi ed, Wilson En closures California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 M, Voice: 530-756-61411 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 w. E Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 2 7 APPENDIX Appendix 1 The World Bank, Turn Down the Heat: Whay a 4° Warmer World Must be Avoided (Nov. 2012). Appendix 2 New York Times, Carbon Dioxide Level Passes Long -Feard Milestone (May 10, 2013). Appendix 3 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Managing the Risks of Ex- treme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation: Summary for Policymakers (2012). Appendix 4 Union of Concerned Scientists, Infographic: Western Wildfires and Cli- mate Change. Appendix 5 California Department of Public Health and the Public Health Institute, Public Health Impacts of Climate Change in California: Community Vul- nerability Assessments and Adaptation Strategies. Appendix 6 U.S. EPA, Endangerment Finding, 74 Fed, Reg. 66496, 66517 (Dec. 15, 2009), Appendix 7 California Climate Change Center, Public Health- Related Impacts of Cli- mate Change in California (March, 2oo6) Appendix 8 Wikipedia, Heat Wave. Appendix 9 California Energy Commission, The Effect of Temperature on Hospital Admissions in Nine California Counties (2009). Appendix 10 U.S. EPA, Greenhouse Gas Equivalency Calculator. Appendix 11 BAAQMD, Revised Draft Options and Justification Report: California Environmental Quality Act Thresholds of Significance. Appendix 12 City of Dublin, City of Dublin Climate Action Plan (Oct. 2010) California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530- 756 -6141 1 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 M Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 ^�^ Page 2 8 Appendix 13 Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Plan Bay Area. Appendix 14 San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, 16 -Inch Sea Level Rise by Mid - Century San Francisco Bay Area. Appendix 15 San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, Living with a Rising Bay: Vulnerability and Adaptation in San Francisco Bay and on it Shoreline (Oct. 2011). Appendix 16 California Energy Commission, Climate Change Scenarios for the San Francisco Region (Jul. 2012). Appendix 1'7 California Natural Resources Agency, 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy. Appendix 18 Governor of the State of California, Executive Order S -3 -05 (June, 2005). Appendix 19 Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Environmental Impacat Report Plan Bay Area Draft, 2.5 ow Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases (April, 2013). Appendix 20 Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Environmental Impact Report Plan Bay Area Draft, 2 Revi- sion to the Draft EIR (Jul. 2013 ).' Appendix 21 BAAQMD, Revised Draft Options and Justification Report: California .� Environmental Quality Act Thresholds of Significance." Appendix 22 California Attorney General's Office, Climate Change, the California Envi- ronmental Quality Act, and General Plan Updates: Straightforward An- swers to Some Frequently Asked Questions (2009). Appendix 23 California Air Resources Board, Climate Change Scoping Plan (Dec. 2008). Appendix 24 California Air Resources Board, Resolution o8 -47 (Dec. 2oo8). Appendix 25 Office of Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Executive Order S- 13 -08. California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530-756-61411 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 M am i e Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 29 Appendix 26 Shea Homes, SheaXero: the No Electric Bill Home. Appendix 27 Shea Homes, What Is Shea Xero? Appendix 28 Solar City, SolarCity Energy Explorer. Appendix 29 Berkeley Law & Center for Law, Energy & the Environment, California's ' Transition to Local Renewable Energy: 12,000 Megawatts by 2020 (Jun. 2017) . Appendix 30 Solar Energy Industries Association, Solar Means Business: Top Commer- cial Solar Customers in the U.S. (Sept. 2012). Appendix 31 GoSolar California, Welcome to California Solar Statistics. Appendix 32 GoSolar California, Clean Power Estimator. Appendix 33 California Energy Commission, New Home Builder Information Guide. Appendix 34 California Energy Commission, California Energy Demand (CED) 2013 Preliminary Electricity and Natural Gas Forecast (May, 2013). Appendix 35 Solar City, Clean Energy Is Good Business When You Partner with SolarCity. Appendix 36 Solar City, Commercial Client Portfolio. Appendix 37 Davis Energy Group, California Zero Net Energy Buildings Cost Study (2012). Appendix 38 California Energy Commission, New Solar Homes Partnership: Home Builder's Case Study. Appendix 39 California Energy Commission, Home Builder's Case Study: Laureate, Ironcrest and Wayfarer - Roseville, CA Appendix 40 California Energy Commission, Home Builder's Case Study: Wisteria - Rocklin, CA California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530 - 756 -6141 Facsimile: 530 -756 -5930 M i Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 ^� Page 3 0 Appendix 41 Building Industry Research Alliance, Seastar Communities: Sonata Appendix 42 U.S. Department of Energy, Premier Oaks - Roseville, California. Appendix 43 U.S. Department of Energy, Vista Montana, Watsonville, California - Mov- ing Toward Zero Energy Homes. Appendix 44 U.S. Department of Energy, Case Study: Grupe - Carsten Crossings Appendix 45 Woody, T., Now, Starter Homes Boast Solar Arrays, New York Times (Mar. �. 24, 2011.) Appendix 46 Kelly, J. et al., Mesa del Sol: A Path to Perfect Power (Dec., 2007). �. Baker, D., PG &E Rate Plan Would Cost 15.6% More Typically, SFGate (JUL 26, 2012). Appendix 47 PG &E, Electric Schedule E -1: Residential Services. Appendix 48 PG &E, Electrict Rate Schedule E -6: Residential Time -of -Use Service. I; Appendix 49 PG &E, Net Energy Metering: Understanding Your Bill Appendix 5o California Energy Commission, California Energy Demand (CED) 2013 Preliminary Electricity and Natural Gas Forecast (May, 2013) at page 19. Appendix 51 SunPower, SunPower Limited Product and Power Warranty for Residen- tial PV Modules (Apr. 1, 2013). Appendix 52 Statewide Energy Efficiency Collaborative, City Planners' Energy Action Resource Guide (November, 2o11). Appendix 53 U.S. Department of Energy, Estimating the Cost and Energy Efficiency of a Solar Water Heater. Appendix 54 Wikpedia, Solar Water Heating. Appendix 55 Johnson Controls, White Paper Solar Thermal Energy: The Time Has Come. California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530- 756 -6141 1 Facsimile: 530- 756 -5930 • 00 ii EM Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 31 Appendix 56 U.S. DOE Estimating the Cost and Energy Efficiency of a Solar Water Heater. Appendix 57 U.S. DOE, Sizing a New Water Heater. Appendix 58 U.S. DOE, Type of Water Heaters. Appendix 59 U.S. DOE Building Technologies Office, LEDs and Specifiction for Park- ing Lots Lighten Enegy Load. Appendix 6o U.S. DOE, Product Snapshot: LED Replacement Lamps (2012) Appendix 61 California Energy Commission, Local Ordinances Exceeding the 2oo8 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Dec. 2012). Appendix 62 City of Malibu, Local Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance (April, 2011). Appendix 63 City of Santa Monica, Green Building Standards Code. Appendix 64 City of Mountain View, Application to CEC for Green Building Standards Code Local Amendments (April, 2011). Appendix 65 City of Healdsburg, Ordinance Adopting by Reference Part 11 of the solo California Building Standards Code and Amendments Thereto (April, 2011). Appendix 66 City of Dublin, City of Dublin Bikeways Master Plan (Jun. 2007). Appendix 67 Litman, R. Generated Traffic and Induced Travel: Implications for Transport Planning (March, 2010). Appendix 68 U.S. EPA, Our Built and Natural Environments: A Technical Review of the Interactions between Land Use, Transportation, and Environmental Qual- ity (Jan. 2001). Appendix 69 Cervero, R., Road Expansion, Urban Growth, and Induced Travel: A Path Analysis, APA Journal (Spring, 2003). California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530 - 756 -6141 1 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013, Page 3 2 Appendix 70 Duranyon, G. & Turner, M., The Fundamental Law of Road Congestion: Evidence from U.S. Cities. Appendix 71 Federal Highway Administration, Mitigating Traffic Congestion: The Role of Demand -Side Strategies. Appendix 72 City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco Transportation Sus - ^° tainability Fee Nexus Study (Mar. 2012). Appendix 73 City of Seattle, Best Practices in Transportation Demand Management ow Appendix 74 U.S. DOT, Bellingham, WA Individualized Marketing Demonstration Pro- gram. Appendix 75 U.S. DOT, Cleveland, OH Individualized Marketing Demonstration Pro- ject Appendix 76 U.S. DOT, Durham, NC Individualized Marketing Demonstration Project. Appendix 77 U.S. DOT, Sacramento, CA Individualized Marketing Demonstration Pro- gram. Appendix 78 U.S. DOT, Federal Transit Administration's Individualized Marketing Demonstration Program (2006). Appendix 79 Plug -In Electric Vehicle Collaborative, A Toolkit for Community Plug -In Electric Vehicle Readiness (Aug 2012). Appendix 8o U.S. DOE, The eGallon: How Much Cheaper Is It to Drive on Electricity? Appendix 81 Governor's Interagency Working Group on Zero - Emission Vehicles, 2013 ZEV Action Plan (Feb. 2013). Appendix 82 ChargePoint, Create and EV- Friendly Community (Dec. 2012). No Appendix 83 Texas A &M Transportation Institute, Transportation Management Associ- ations. Appendix 84 Victoria Transportation Policy Institute, Marketing. California Clean Energy Committee I 3502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 bw Voice: 530-756-61411 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 ow b EM Ms. Kristi Bascom Principal Planner August 2, 2013 Page 3 3 Appendix 85 Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Transport Management Associations. Appendix 86 Institute for Transportation & Development Policy, U.S. Parking Poli- cies: An Overview of Management Strategies (February, 2010). Appendix 87 U.S. EPA, Parking Cash Out: Implementing Commuter Benefits as One of the Nation's Best Workplaces for Commuters (Mar. 2005). Appendix 88 California Air Resources Board, California's Parking Cash -Out Program. Appendix 89 Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Shared Parking: Sharing Panting Facilities Among Multiple Users (2013). Appendix go Victoria Transport Institute, Parking Management. Appendix 91 Brown, Edmund G., Executive Order 3 -23 -2012. Appendix 92 American Council for an Energy - Efficient Economy, Financing for Multi - Tenant Building Efficiency: Why This Market Is Underserved and What Can Be Done to Reach It. Appendix 93 Nelson /Nygaard Consulting. Crediting Low - Traffic Developments: Ad- justing Site -Level Vehicle Trip Generation Using URBEMIS (Aug. 2005). Appendix 94 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Handbook, Chpt. 7• California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530-756-61411 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 August 4, 2013 VIA FIRST CLASS AND FACSIMLE Ms. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner City of Dublin Community Development Department loo Civic Plaza Dublin, California 94568 Re: Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Dear Ms. Bascom: DIU &LE( i' / M13 441VAII Enclosed is the petition from the California Clean Energy Committee which should be attached to our comment letter which was mailed to you on August 2. We inadvertently did not attach it to the comment letter so we are sending in separately with a request that it be attached to and made a part of the comment letter. Sine y yo )s Eu ene S. Wilson California Clean Energy Committee 13502 Tanager Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 -7531 Voice: 530 -756 -6141 1 Facsimile: 530 - 756 -5930 a s Petition for Energy Efficient Design Dublin Draft • Page of We, the undersigned, support the effort of the California Clean Energy Committee that the City of Dublin require robust energy conservation and environmental stewardship in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan project: Name Address Email Date: 3 C xl ilk06 • GC%7i/ Date: V u ` ` ,`kt� sz;'-) 7 Date: ` 1,4' / vI 0i, R'(43 ['Z l / U /Yve�'t- ! � �I Yl zAi✓r-c. Date: G� 5 o \" a 12-14 0 �p rr`A-� Date: ///--3 L��� rr%" I-e (,t Lo4so 1)q6ike ✓t je,4 Date: Date: fi*AF)- N kj UJ� G Date: r� _ `_ U California Clean Energy Committ(2o Petition for Energy Efficient Design Dublin Crossing Draft EIR Page of We, the undersigned, support the effort of the California Clean Energy Committee that the City of Dublin require robust energy conservation and environmental stewardship in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan project: Name Address Email Lf 6ki Date: lYf `� �� Date: O �" • 4.�,y�� h,- /I/ Date: / / C) Date: 3 f d VVI j Date: ) 1 LA (1--\ , [\J I rl J �� ( Date: Date: i 1� Date: V v I t [ California Clean Energy Committoe w.s so Petition for Energy Efficient Design Dublin Crossing Draft EIR Page of We, the undersigned, support the effort of the California Clean Energy Committee that the City of Dublin require robust energy conservation and environmental stewardship in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan project; Name Address Email Date: -fl M ro h Sb S� l-I� pr . Date: V3 , , Q IiYJvI �� "e Sktct 6 � Csr � er+aac,�C�r�c .cam Date: lJ I ! Z ✓3 wa Date: 7/" Y ' I l ���( DY' r Date: Ca, C..A Date: A-� `7 1 Y Date: fA California Clean Energy Committee e Petition for Energy Efficient Desig Dublin Crossing Page of We, the undersigned, support the effort of the California Clean Energy Committee that the City of Dublin require robust energy conservation and environmental stewardship in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan project: Name Address Email Date• � — Wq +f� Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: California Clean Energy Committee � iv, 0 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment Letter #9 from Mr. Eugene Wilson, California Clean Energy Committee, dated August 2, 2013 Response to Comment 9 -1- Introduction This comment provides background and introductory information about the California Clean Energy Committee. The comment does not raise any issue with respect to the contents of the Draft EIR, or any environmental issue regarding the proposed project. Because the comment does not specifically reference the Draft EIR or raise any other CEQA issue, no further response is necessary. The general summary of environmental issues raised in the letter are addressed in the responses to the specific comments on these issues below. Response to Comment 9 -2 - Global Warming The comment provides background about global climate change, including providing general predictions of future global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the potential effects. This comment does not specifically reference the Draft EIR or raise any other CEQA issue. Response to Comment 9 -3 - GHG Emissions As described on page 3 -118 of the Draft EIR, "Business as Usual" emissions refer to the emissions that would be expected to occur in the absence of GHG emission reductions. The baseline "Business as Usual" emissions for the project were calculated with the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), as recommended by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and the other air districts throughout California. CaIEEMod utilizes emission factors provided by the various California air districts to account for local requirements and conditions. The emissions provided in the Draft EIR are based on a variety of inputs, including but not limited to, the land uses proposed for the project (1,995 residential dwelling units, 50,000 square feet of office uses, 150,000 square feet of shopping center uses, a 900 - student elementary school, and 31.7 acres of park space), construction information (phases, lengths, and equipment used), and operational mobile trip generation (additional 22,047 gross daily vehicle trips). CaIEEMod utilized the project information, as described above, to generate GHG emissions for the proposed project. CaIEEMod contains several land use categories that are mainly based on data for land use categories published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The Draft EIR described that emissions would result directly from mobile and area sources, and indirectly from energy consumption, water demand, and waste generation. Emissions were calculated based on consumption rates and emissions factors from CARB, EPA, the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), CEC, California Climate Action Registry (CCAR), and the Pacific Institute. Page 17 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR ew i —? WA The proposed project's GHG emission outputs are categorized by pollutant /GHG, land use, and source; refer to Appendix B, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data, of the Draft EIR for detailed model input /output data. The most common GHGs emitted in association with land use developments include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CHa) and nitrous oxide (N20). Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2eq) values are also reported. In order to obtain the CO2eq, an individual GHG is multiplied by its global warming potential (GWP). The GWP designates on a pound for pound basis the potency of the GHG compared to CO2. CaIEEMod calculates the emissions associated with on -road mobile sources. These m are associated with residents, workers, customers, and delivery vehicles visiting the land use types in the project. The emissions associated with on -road mobile sources includes running and starting exhaust emissions, evaporative emissions, brake and tire wear, and fugitive dust from paved and unpaved roads. Starting and evaporative emissions are associated with the number of starts or time between vehicle uses are also included. The emissions from mobile sources were calculated with the trip rates, trip lengths, and emission factors for running from the CARB's Emissions Factors 2011 (EMFAC2011), which is the recommended by CARB and the BAAQMD. Area sources include emissions calculated from hearths, consumer product use, architectural coatings, and landscape maintenance equipment. Landscape maintenance includes fuel combustion emissions from equipment such as lawn mowers, roto - tillers, shredders /grinders, blowers, trimmers, chain saws, and hedge trimmers, as well as air compressors, generators, and pumps. The emissions , associated from landscape equipment use were processed using OFFROAD 2011 and CARB's Technical Memo: Change in Population and Activity Factors for Lawn and Garden Equipment (June 13, 2003).1 Prepared by the CEC, the California Commercial End Use Survey (CEUS)2 database was used to develop energy intensity values (electricity or natural gas usage per square feet per year) for non - residential buildings. The energy use from residential land uses is calculated based on the Residential Appliance Saturation Survey (RASS)3. The project's emissions inventory also included emissions from natural gas so consumption. The emission factors for natural gas combustion are based on the Wk California Air Resources Board, Technical Memo: Change in Population and Activity Factors for Lawn and Garden to Equipment, June 13, 2003. Available at: http:// www. arb. ca. gov/ msei/ offroad / techmemo /Lawn_and_Garden_Activity.doc w z California Energy Commission, California Commercial End -Use Survey Results, 2006. s California Energy Commission, Residential Appliance Saturation Study, 2009. Page 18 + Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR EPA's AP -42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factor (AP -42) compilation of air pollutant emission factors and data from CCAR. The emissions from electricity were calculated by multiplying the energy use times the carbon intensity and other GHGs of the utility district per kilowatt hour. The amount of water used and wastewater generated by a project has indirect GHG emissions associated with it. These emissions are a result of the energy used to supply, distribute, and treat the water and wastewater. Emissions from residential water use are based on data from the Pacific Institute Waste Not Want Not report4. These values were divided by the total number of occupied households in California to give water demand per dwelling unit. Data for most commercial and industrial land uses was also obtained from the Pacific Institute's Waste Not Want Not report.5 Total gallons of water used per day per metric were reported, where the metric is employee, student, room, acre, or square foot, depending on the land use. Indoor water end -use intensities were also obtained from the Pacific Institute report.6 Emissions from wastewater treatment are based on the CARB's Local Government Operations Protocol (LGOP)7, which are in turn based on EPA methodologies.8 The Project's BAU emissions do not include the reductions in GHG emissions from Specific Plan measures. Those reduction measures are described in the Draft EIR (June 2013) on pages 3 -123 - 3 -126, in particular Table 3.6 -4. The quantification methods and reduction factors associated with the Specific Plan GHG reduction measures identified in the Draft EIR were developed and calculated using the CalEEMod model (see Appendix B to Draft EIR). CalEEMod uses the methodology prescribed by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA).9 The CAPCOA methodology presents the emissions reductions in terms of percentage reductions. For mitigation measures where the source metric is reduced, reductions are generally assessed based on a ratio comparison of a common "denominator" source metric for each source category in order to assist in the quantification of strategy impacts. For mitigation measures involving emission factor reductions, a ratio comparing the mitigated and baseline emissions factor is utilized to quantify the emission reductions. The CAPCOA source data that is used in the CalEEMod model is derived from CAPCOA's Quantifying GHG Mitigation Measures documentation.'() The CalEEMod model allows GHG reductions to be taken for neighborhood enhancements; transit improvements; and reducing commute trips, 'Pacific Institute, Waste Not, Want Not: The Potential for Urban Water Conservation in California, 2003. s Ibid. 6 Ibid. I California Air Resources Board, Local Government Operations Protocol. Chapter 10: Wastewater Treatment Facilities, 2008. 8 United States Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 -2006. Chapter 8: Waste, 2008. 9 Environ International Corporation, California Emissions Estimator Mode Users Guide, page 9, February 2011. to CAPCOA, Quantifying GHG Mitigation Measures, August 2010. Page 19 PAM Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR water usage, energy consumption, and solid waste generation. Specific categories that were utilized in the analysis for which a GHG reduction was quantified were for w. increasing density, improving walkability, improving transit accessibility, providing traffic calming measures, limiting parking supply, and implementing a trip reduction program. With the reduction measures that are part of the project, the Project GHG emissions would be 18,686.60 which results in an efficiency level of 3.08 MTCO2eq /SP /year. As indicated in Section 3.6 of the Draft EIR, the City of Dublin decided to rely on the thresholds within the CEQA Thresholds of Significance Revised Draft Operations and Justification Report (dated October 2009) prepared by the BAAQMD. The BAAQMD CEQA Thresholds of Significance Revised Draft Operations and Justification Report established thresholds based on substantial evidence" and are consistent with the thresholds outlined in the BAAQMD's 2010 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. City staff believes that these thresholds represent the best available science on the subject of what constitutes significant air quality and /or GHG effects under CEQA. Furthermore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(c), "...a lead agency may consider thresholds of significance previously adopted or recommended by other public agencies or recommended by experts, provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence." Therefore, the City is permitted to use BAAQMD's thresholds to analyze the project's GHG impacts on climate change, per CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(c). Note that ..� BAAQMD's adoption of its CEQA Guidance, including its recommended thresholds of significance, has been upheld in court. The First District Court of Appeal, reversing a trial court's decision, upheld BAAQMD's adoption of the thresholds finding that the .. adoption was not a project subject to CEQA review. The court reasoned that the State CEQA Guidelines establish a procedure for adopting significance thresholds, and CEQA review of the thresholds themselves is not part of that procedure. Moreover, in adopting the thresholds, BAAQMD had undertaken a public review process and considered substantial evidence in compliance with the State CEQA Guidelines, so that requiring a specific CEQA analysis and document (ex. Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report) would be duplicative. The GHG analysis in the Draft EIR uses the BAAQMD's efficiency approach, which considers efficiency in terms of the GHG emissions compared to the sum of the number of jobs and the number of residents at a point in time, which is referred to as the service population (project jobs plus project residents) (SP). The efficiency metrics is intended to avoid penalizing well - planned communities that propose a large amount of development. GHG efficiency metrics act to encourage the types of 11 "Substantial evidence" includes facts, reasonable assumptions predicated upon facts, or expert opinions supported by facts, but does not include argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion or narrative, evidence that is clearly inaccurate or so erroneous, or evidence of social or economic impacts that do not contribute to, or are not caused by, physical impacts on the environment. Cal. Pub. Res. C. §21080(c); see also CEQA Guidelines §15384. w: Page 20 w R Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR development that BAAQMD and California Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) support (i.e., infill and transit - oriented development) because these types of development result in a lower amount of GHG emissions per service population than greenfield development or development outside urban areas. 12 Additionally, it should be noted that the BAAQMD bright line threshold would not be appropriate to apply to the proposed specific plan project which is not an individual development project. The BAAQMD CEQA Guidance states that the CEQA threshold of significance for Plan -level entitlements, such as Specific Plans, should use the threshold of 4.6 CO2e /SP /yr or compliance with a locally- adopted Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy or Climate Action Plan (CAP).13 The Draft EIR applies both of these thresholds in analyzing the level of significance for the Project's GHG emissions. The analysis in the Draft EIR shows that the Project emissions are below the threshold of 4.6 CO2e /SP /yr and the Project complies with the City adopted CAP. (See analysis of Impacts 3.6 -1 and 3.6 -2 in Draft EIR, pp. 3 -118 - 3 -126.) In addition, the BAAQMD states that the bright line threshold applies to "...areas where a qualified Climate Action Plan has not been adopted.... "; the Dublin Climate Action Plan was adopted by the City in October, 2010. Therefore, the bright line threshold would not apply to the proposed project in this regard. Response to Comment 9 -4 - BAAQMD Guidelines /AB 32 The BAAQMD developed their California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines for the purpose of assisting lead agencies in evaluating air quality impacts of projects and plans proposed in the San Francisco Bay Area Basin (SFBAAB). The Guidelines provide BAAQMD- recommended procedures for evaluating potential air quality impacts during the environmental review process consistent with CEQA requirements. The purpose of California's legislative mandate (AB 32) is to reduce total projected 2020 GHG emissions to 1990 levels. The BAAQMD and CARB analysis relied on the initial estimate of this reduction to equal approximately 30 percent.14 However, this is likely an overestimate of the amount of the reduction needed based on recent data. In 2011 ARB revised its "business as usual" GHG emission estimate for 2020, in order to account for the recent economic downturn in its emission projections. The estimate presented in the Scoping plan (596 MMTCO2eq) was based on pre - recession, 2007 data from the Integrated Energy Policy Report. In 2011 the CARB adopted the Final Supplement to the AB 32 Scoping Plan Functional Equivalent 12 BAAQMD, CEQA Thresholds of Significance Revised Draft Options andJustification Report, October 2009. 13 BAAQMD, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, May 2010, pp. 2 -7 - 2 -8., . 14 BAAQMD, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, 2012 and California Air Resources Board, Assembly Bill 32 Scoping Plan, 2009. RW Page 21 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR M_ r_ Document (2011). In the Final Supplement, CARB updated the 2020 BAU based on revised growth projections and considering the influence of the recent recession +�* and reduction measures that are already in place. Based upon revised growth projections only, statewide emissions would need to be reduced approximately 20% from the Updated 2020 BAU of approximately 545 MMTCO2eq to meet 1990 levels. So, to the extent the BAAQMD's CEQA Guidelines (2011 and 2012) and the CEQA Thresholds of Significance Revised Draft Operations and Justification Report (2009) rely on the GHG emission reduction goals established by AB 32, it overestimates the reduction needed by using the 30% reduction goal. In addition, courts have upheld the use of a CEQA significance threshold for GHG emissions based on a percentage reduction from BAU derived from AB 32. The use of a significance threshold based on an adopted plan or law to determine whether a project's impact is cumulatively considerable is also specifically authorized by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3) Unlike the 2020 target under AB 32 and the Scoping Plan, the 2050 target is only a .. goal set forth in Executive Order S -3 -05. The Executive Order is not an adopted plan or regulation that provides specific requirements for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions as defined under CEQA Guidelines 15064(h)(3). In addition, BAAQMD (or any other agency) does not provide methodology or emissions factors to determine 2050 emissions. It is beyond the scope of the analysis tools available at this time to examine emission levels and reasonable emissions reductions in the year 2050 in a CEQA analysis. The quantitative GHG efficiency metric threshold was used based on the BAAQMD CEQA Thresholds of Significance Revised Draft Operations and Justification Report. ' The BAAQMD provides several threshold options for significance of GHG emissions, including an efficiency threshold. Normalizing projected emissions from land use - related emissions sectors by utilizing a demographic unit (e.g., population and ` employment) provides evaluation of the GHG efficiency of a project and the ..� opportunity to evaluate the project's consistency with AB 32 targets. The BAAQMD established the efficiency metric threshold to avoid penalizing well - .. planned communities that accommodate projected growth. Instead, GHG efficiency metrics act to encourage the types of development that BAAQMD and the OPR support (i.e., infill and transit - oriented development) because they tend to reduce .• GHG and other air pollutant emissions on a per capita basis. oil Response to Comment 9 -5 - Existing Uses The existing uses on -site include the Camp Parks U.S. Army Reserve Training Area, the NASA parcel, and the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority parcel. In 2002, the US Army formally requested an amendment to the General Plan to change the land use designation from "Public Lands" to a combination of commercial retail, office space, residential, and open space uses. Page 22 ..F Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR The project description indicates that there are 934 residents and employees throughout the entire Camp Parks base. It should be noted that these residents and employees are not located on the project site. The buildings on the project site are currently vacant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15125 the baseline conditions for the analysis consist of the uses that exist at the time that the notice of preparation is published. Therefore, the on -site buildings were not included in the existing conditions for the project site. As a result, all emissions from the proposed project were considered new emissions and were not reduced to reflect emissions from any prior or existing uses on the project site. Response to Comment 9 -6 - GHG Emissions As described in the Draft EIR, total build -out under the Specific Plan would result in a service population increase of approximately 6,070 people. The significance threshold used in the Draft EIR is not solely based on the amount of emissions for the project. It is based on the amount of emissions per service population per year (See Responses to Comments 9 -3 and 9 -4). The project emissions with GHG reductions that will result from Specific Plan measures will be 18, 686.60 MTCO2eq. This equates to a emission level of 3.08 MTCO2eq /sp /yr which is 33% below the significance threshold of 4.6 MTCO2eq /sp /yr. The overall project emissions are also 28.5% below the 2020 BAU projection for the proposed project. Response to Comment 9 -7 - GHG Emissions Growth Refer to Response to Comment 9 -6, above. Response to Comment 9 -8 - City CAP This comment addresses the City of Dublin Climate Action Plan (dated October 2010). The Draft EIR analyzes the project's consistency with the Climate Action Plan (CAP) (Draft EIR Impact 3.6 -2) in response to the second CEQA Appendix G checklist item (Consistency with applicable GHG plans, policies, or regulations). The Draft EIR analyzes the compliance of the proposed Project with applicable measures in R the Climate Action Plan (Table 3.6 -3). The Draft EIR also analyzes whether the proposed project BAU emissions will be consistent with the goal of the CAP to reduce GHG emissions to 20% below projected Year 2020 BAU emissions by 2020 which will result in an overall level of emissions of 4.2 MTCO2eq /sp /yr. The proposed project will reduce Year 2020 BAU emissions by 28.5% which exceeds the CAP's reduction target and will result in an overall level of 3.08 MTCO2eq /sp /yr which is below the CAP level of 4.2 MTCO2eq /sp /yr. The Draft EIR does not rely on the CAP for the GHG cumulative impacts analysis or quantification of reduction measures for the proposed project under the streamlining provisions of CEQA Guidelines section 15183.5(a) &(b) (2) This comment has detailed objections to the content and adoption of the City CAP. Since the Draft EIR does not use the CAP to calculate project emissions or reductions or rely on the CAP for the impacts analysis under CEQA Guidelines section Page 23 W Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR 15183.5(a) &(b)(2), these objections to the CAP are not relevant to the proposed project. Since the objections to the methodology, assumptions and reduction OW measures under the CAP are not relevant to the proposed project analyzed in the Draft EIR, no response is necessary. Furthermore, the CAP and the Negative Declaration for the CAP were adopted by the City in November 2011 and are no MW longer subject to challenge. Since the specific comments on the CAP do not raise any wk issue with respect to the contents of the Draft EIR, or any environmental issue regarding the proposed project, no further response is necessary. Response to Comment 9 -9 - Energy Conservation The energy analysis was prepared pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21100(b)(3) and Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines, which require a description (where relevant) of the "wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy caused by a project ". The design guidelines in the proposed Specific Plan encourage sustainable design solutions that reduce energy consumption and create simple building designs through the efficient use of space, materials, and resources while maintaining a level of design integrity and authentic architectural style (see pages 3 -2 to 3 -3, 3 -5 to 3 -8, 3 -32 to 3 -33, and 4 -12 to 4 -14 of the Specific Plan). M, MW Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations was established to ensure energy efficiency in new developments. Therefore, project compliance with Title 24 would ensure the project's efficient use of energy. Cases have held that a project's �^ compliance with Title 24 energy efficiency measures supports a finding that a project will not result in a wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy. Response to Comment 9 -10 - Energy Conservation The reduction of emissions from off -road equipment would occur from efficient fuel consumption. The use of cleaner off -road equipment would reduce energy consumption through the reduction of fuel use. According to page 3 -7 of the Draft EIR, there would not be any inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary energy usage in comparison to similar development projects of this nature regarding construction - related fuel consumption. The proposed project would adhere to, and exceed, all Federal, State, and local requirements for energy efficiency, including Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations regarding building energy efficiency standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of building energy. See Response to Comment 9 -9 on building energy efficiency. Response to Comment 9 -11 - Energy Conservation Refer to Response to Comment 9 -9, above. The energy analysis was prepared in accordance with Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines. The energy requirements of the proposed project were calculated with CalEEMod and are provided in Appendix B ' (Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emission Data) of the Draft EIR. Appendix B OW Page 24 M0 i Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR provides the projected unmitigated /mitigated operational energy consumption emissions for criteria pollutants and GHGs for the Specific Plan using CalEEMod. Energy consumption reduction measures used in the CalEEMod run include the installation of high efficiency lighting, and energy efficient appliances for all land uses proposed in the Specific Plan. The outputs in Appendix B also provide natural gas usage by land use. Please note that that the items listed in Appendix F relating to energy impacts of the project are not mandatory and not required to be addressed in the EIR for every project. Appendix F states that the items should only be discussed "to the extent relevant and applicable to the project" and "in many instances specific items may not apply ". Given the nature of the project as an infill, mixed use residential and commercial project, the project does not present any special or unusual circumstances regarding energy use that would result in wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary energy consumption. Therefore, many of the specific items of information requested in the comment letter are not required to be discussed or disclosed under CEQA. In addition, the project includes measures to reduce energy use as described below. The proposed project includes numerous measures and design features that would reduce energy consumption. The Specific Plan design guidelines promote or require energy efficient windows on exterior walls; rooftop gardens and green roofs; energy effective roof materials to meet or exceed Energy Star requirements for solar reflectance; rooftop solar panels; small -scale wind turbines; energy efficient appliances and mechanical equipment; strategic location of mechanical equipment; energy efficient, low voltage lighting; and energy efficient street lighting, among others. Furthermore, the Specific Plan requires builders to implement energy conservation measures and construction practices per Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. The applicable Project design features mentioned above were inputted into CalEEMod as measures to reduce energy consumption from the proposed project; please refer to Table 3.6 -5 of the Draft EIR. CalEEMod quantified the project's reductions in energy consumption from the use of high efficiency lighting and energy efficient appliances. These design features would result in a reduction of 2,116 megawatt hours (MWh) per year to 11,066 MWh; a reduction of approximately 16 percent (refer to Appendix B, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data, of the Draft EIR). The Specific Plan also promotes green building concepts to improve the health, welfare, and public safety by encouraging innovative and sustainable design and construction techniques through the use of green building practices. Green Street - Design Project and cumulative level energy consumption and the effect on energy y supplies are discussed in Section 3.11 of the Draft EIR. As described in the Draft EIR, the proposed project would not result in the need for new energy infrastructure to support the site. Since the project will not result in wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy, the project will not result in a significant impact. Therefore, there is no legal basis for requiring mitigation measures to increase energy- efficiency under CEQA. Page 25 �r wu Dublin Crossing Specific Plan' Final EIR W Response to Comment 9 -12 - Energy Conservation The siting, orientation, and design of the project are measures that reduce energy consumption, including transportation energy. As described in Section 4.6, Streetscape Design, of the Specific Plan, the proposed project would incorporate green streets and sustainable landscape design to minimize the detrimental environmental effects of streets, and further reduce vehicle trips and fossil fuel emissions from the proposed project. The Specific Plan area is located approximately 0.3 miles from the Dublin /Pleasanton BART Station. The proposed mixed -use development is within close proximity to transit and would encourage residents and employees within the Specific Plan area to utilize transit. In addition, the Specific Plan Design Guidelines and proposed circulation improvements also provide innovative design elements /provisions to further reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from the proposed project. Namely, the Specific Plan includes .. Transit Oriented Development (TOD), mixed -use development, and multi -modal circulation to reduce vehicular use and encourage alternative transportation choices. Plan -level design elements such as a "park once and walk" environment, •+ multi - purpose trails (combined bicycle and pedestrian routes), improved bike lanes and routes, bulbouts, textured crosswalks, pedestrian linkages (to parks, schools, BART, mixed -use, transit stops, residential to commercial areas), and adequate bicycle facilities would reduce the project's transportation energy consumption. As �rw described in Section 3.11 of the Draft EIR, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG &E) (the electric service provider to the project area) has indicated that sufficient infrastructure exists to support the proposed project. Renewable energy makes up 19.04 percent of PG &E's energy portfolio.15 Additionally, refer to Response to Comment 9 -11. Response to Comment 9 -13 - Energy Conservation As described above, the energy analysis was prepared in accordance with Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines. Appendix F does not require or recommend an analysis of the economic viability of renewable energy strategies and energy efficient tools. ..e Additionally, the analysis in the Draft EIR determined that the project will not result in a wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy. In addition, GHG emissions would be less than significant. Mitigation measures require an essential nexus with project impact and must also be roughly proportional to the impacts. Therefore, mitigation that requires 100 percent or some lesser percentage of renewable energy would not meet the nexus and rough proportionality standards pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4 because the mitigation would not relate to a significant environmental impact of the proposed project. Therefore, they were properly not included in the Draft EIR. It should be noted, however, that is California Public Utilities Commission, California Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS), Accessed September 3, 2013. httl2://www.cl2Lic.ca.gov/PUC/energy/Renewables/index.htm Page 26 a Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR the Specific Plan promotes the use of renewable sources of energy (such as solar panels and small -scale wind turbines) in the Plan area (pages 3 -6 and 3 -7 of the Specific Plan). Response to Comment 9 -14 - Energy Conservation Refer to Response to Comment 9 -12 and 9 -13, above. As discussed in the Draft EIR, the electric service provider to the project area has stated that sufficient infrastructure exists to support the proposed project and that additional generation facilities would not be required. The Draft EIR analyzes the various transportation and energy efficiency design features of the proposed project. The project's close proximity to the BART station would reduce vehicle trips (i.e., improve transportation energy efficiency), and the project's various energy efficiency design features, as described in Response to Comment 9 -11 above, would reduce electricity and natural gas consumption. Response to Comment 9 -15 - Energy Conservation Refer to Response to Comment 9 -11, 9 -12 and 9 -13, above. As discussed in the Draft EIR, the proposed project and design features will not result in a wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy. In addition, GHG emissions would be less than significant. Furthermore, the Specific Plan promotes the design and implementation of rooftop solar panels, and the strategic location of solar panels to effectively capture solar energy. Although rooftop solar may be included in the proposed project, it would not be required per CEQA standards because impacts are less than significant (See Response to Comment 9 -13). The discussion in the comment of the costs of various types of energy sources and utility rates are economic issues which are not the proper subject of analysis under CEQA (CEQA Guidelines section 15131 (economic effects shall not be treated as environmental effects under CEQA)). Additionally, most of the information provided in the comment is opinion or speculation which is not supported by substantiated facts. The comment also provides information about various topics including utility rates, rooftop solar, and solar water heating. To the extent the comments are proposing solar power, solar water heating and LED lighting as mitigation measures, the measures could not be required as mitigations per CEQA standards because energy impacts of the project are less than significant (See Response to Comment 9 -13). The other components of the comments do not raise any issue with respect to the contents of the Draft EIR, or any environmental issue regarding the proposed project. Because the comment does not specifically reference the Draft EIR or raise any other CEQA issue, no further response is necessary. Page 27 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR ■w Response to Comment 9 -16 - Air Quality and Transportation Mitigation The Draft EIR identifies certain air quality impacts as significant and unavoidable w (Draft EIR, Chapter 3.2). The Draft EIR identifies one significant and unavoidable traffic impact - Impact 3.12 -7 - impact to certain freeway onramps. If the City decides to approve the proposed Project with these significant and unavoidable impacts, it will have to make findings that potential mitigation measures or alternatives to reduce these impacts to less than significant are infeasible and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations. As part of these findings the City will consider whether proposed mitigation measures would substantially reduce these significant and unavoidable impacts and whether the proposed mitigation measures are feasible. The City will consider the mitigation measures proposed in the comment as part of its findings. However, note that some of the mitigation measures proposed in the comment will not substantially reduce the significant •• unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project. The Dublin Crossing Specific Plan includes project design features that would reduce potential vehicle trips and transportation (mobile source) emissions. These features include increased density and diversity, improved walkability design, increased destination and transit p accessibility, improved pedestrian network, limited parking supply, traffic calming measures, and trip reduction, ride sharing, and employee vanpool programs. It should be noted that the BAAQMD thresholds for criteria pollutants were primarily developed for analyzing individual development projects, not plan level (e.g., specific plan) or multiple development projects. Response to Comment 9 -17 - Air Quality and Transportation Mitigation The Draft EIR analyzes bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the proposed project. For example, the proposed project is adjacent to and would be connected with the Iron Horse Regional Trail. The Iron Horse Regional Trail would be reconfigured with the new project frontage and Scarlett Drive, and a secondary trail pathway could be integrated along the southwestern edge of the Central Park, depending on the eventual park design. According to the Bikeways Master Plan, The Iron Horse Trail .. continues to the Bart station and in the future would go under Interstate 580 and travel along the alignment of Owens Drive. M Associated uses along the secondary trail pathway through the park could include a cafe /concession, bicycle racks, wayfinding signage, lighting, restrooms, and landscaped gardens. The proposed project would also include a pedestrian trail adjacent to Dublin Boulevard that would connect to the existing trail corridor, as well as sidewalks and bicycle paths throughout the project area. The internal circulation of the proposed project would be designed in a grid pattern Not of different street types. The internal "backbone" street system is designed to establish connections to the existing exterior roadway network as well as internally between residential neighborhoods, parks, open spaces, an optional elementary school site, and business /commercial areas. With sidewalks on all streets, and Page 28 Fm Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR bikeways on many, the streets will become the framework for the pedestrian and bicycle network as they connect to uses both internally and beyond the project area. Pedestrian and Bicycle Mobility impacts were analyzed in the Section 3.12 of the Draft EIR and were determined to be less than significant. Consistency of the proposed project with the Bikeways Master Plan was evaluated on pages 3 -234 to 3- 236 of the Draft EIR (June 2013). Additionally, the Specific Plan would incorporate the following measures from the City's Bikeways Master Plan: • Develop a bicycle commuter route system that connects residential neighborhoods to employment areas, multi -modal terminals, and schools. • Encourage employers to provide secure bicycle parking, showers and changing rooms for bicycle commuters. • As a condition of project approval, require major development projects with major transportation impacts to construct adjacent bicycle facilities included in the proposed bicycle system. • Install bicycle stencils and bicycle- sensitive loop detectors (or other detector type) on bikeways as part of new signals, signal upgrades, and resurfacing /restriping projects. Response to Comment 9 -18 - Air Quality and Transportation Mitigation Refer to Response to Comment 9 -16 and 9 -17, above. As noted above, the project's internal circulation would be designed in a grid pattern of different street types, which enhance and enable non - vehicular connectivity. Additionally, the project proposes a mix of commercial and residential uses that would reduce vehicle trips in the area. It should be noted that the Specific Plan identifies the proposed land uses within the project area, but does not specify actual end users. Therefore, while end users such as grocery stores are not specifically identified in the project description, they are also not precluded from the project. As described above, the project's mix of uses as well as pedestrian and transit friendly design would reduce vehicle trips, thereby reducing emissions. Response to Comment 9 -19 - Air Quality and Transportation Mitigation The comment suggests the use of zero - emission electric vehicles, commuter benefits programs, and shared parking in the Specific Plan. Although the project does not specifically mention zero - emission vehicles (ZEVs) or plug -in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), the project design includes internal circulation and amenities that would support these vehicles, such as opportunities for electric vehicles charging stations. The circulation network would accommodate a wide variety of vehicles and alternative modes of transportation. Sidewalks, multi -use trails, bicycle parking, transit stops with shelters, and traffic calming measures all encourage the more environmentally sustainable modes of travel. This approach is often referred to as green streets. RW Page 29 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR The project site would be connected by a network of on- and off - street walking and bike trails and sidewalks, to encourage safe pedestrian and bicycle access and ^° interconnectivity. The proposed project is a mixed use development that is located approximately 0.3 miles from the Dublin /Pleasanton BART station. The mixed -use development within close proximity to transit would encourage residents and employees within the Specific Plan area to utilize transit. As described in the Draft EIR, existing transit service in the project vicinity is provided by the Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA), Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), and the Altamont Commuter Express (ACE). The Specific Plan includes various methods to reduce parking including utilizing shared parking. A major direct benefit of transit - oriented development is the reduced need for motor vehicles and vehicle parking. Mixed -use developments have differing peak parking times and may allow for shared parking between various uses. The Specific Plan encourages the reduction in off - street parking, shared parking, and time limits on on- street parking to encourage the use of alternative transportation. As described above, the Specific Plan incorporates several of the features identified in the comment. Additionally, several measures noted in the comment, including commuter benefits programs, transportation management .. associations, and parking cash -out programs are not specifically identified in the proposed specific plan. However, the benefits of such measures are inherent to mixed - use /transit oriented projects and are encouraged in Specific Plan policy CIR ow 4.22. Response to Comment 9 -20 - Transportation /Plan Bay Area The comment states that the proposed project is inconsistent with Plan Bay Area. Plan Bay Area does not establish development standards or criteria for projects in Dublin or other local jurisdictions. Plan Bay Area contains a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as part of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) that meets greenhouse gas reduction targets adopted by the California Air Resources Board pursuant to SB 375. Local development is not required to be consistent with OW Plan Bay Area. Cities are not required to revise their land use policies and plans (including General Plan and Specific Plans) to be consistent with Plan Bay Area (Government Code section 65080(b)(2)(J)). Nonetheless, the Crossing Project site is OW part of a Priority Development Area (PDA) for Dublin identified in the Plan which is called the Transit Center. The Transit Center includes the Dublin Crossing area and other adjacent development areas, such as the Dublin Transit Center adjacent to the Dublin/ Pleasanton BART Station. Therefore, the employment, population and vehicle miles traveled projections for the Transit Center PDA in Plan Bay Area include significant development outside the Dublin Crossing project. The final projections for growth in the Plan Bay Area are not completely consistent with the IW information on projected growth envisioned by the City. However, the Dublin .. Crossing Project is consistent with the type of development envisioned for PDA areas - mixed use, higher density, infill, transit - oriented development that promotes Page 30 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR the use of alternative modes of transportation and results in lower greenhouse gas emissions from development. Response to Comment 9 -21 - Transportation /Impacts to Bicycles The impacts to transit, bicycle and pedestrian modes of transportation are evaluated in the EIR. Pages 3 -234 to 3 -236 of the Draft EIR (June 2013) provide an analysis of the project impacts on bicycle and pedestrian modes. Furthermore, on page 3 -272 of the Draft EIR, Mitigation Measure 3.12 -10 provides a specific mitigation to address bicycle and pedestrian circulation impacts. Consistency of the proposed project with the Bikeways Master Plan was evaluated on page 3 -236 of the Draft EIR. Additionally, the Specific Plan would incorporate the following measures from the City's Bikeways Master Plan: • Develop a bicycle commuter route system that connects residential neighborhoods to employment areas, multi -modal terminals, and schools. • Encourage employers to provide secure bicycle parking, showers and changing rooms for bicycle commuters. • As a condition of project approval, require major development projects with major transportation impacts to construct adjacent bicycle facilities included in the proposed bicycle system. • Install bicycle stencils and bicycle- sensitive loop detectors (or other detector type) on bikeways as part of new signals, signal upgrades, and resurfacing /restriping projects. The proposed project is adjacent to and would be connected with the Iron Horse Regional Trail. The Iron Horse Regional Trail would be reconfigured with the new project frontage and Scarlett Drive, and a secondary trail pathway could be integrated along the southwestern edge of the Central Park, depending on the eventual park design. According to the Bikeways Master Plan, The Iron Horse Trail continues to the Bart station and in the future would go under Interstate 580 and travel along the alignment of Owens Drive. Response to Comment 9 -22 - Transportation /Impacts to Bicycles The Iron Horse Regional Trail will continue to operate as a Class 1 facility and the development of the project will not change the function or the general location of the trail. A grade- separated crossing is the preferred mitigation measure to ensure that bicycle and pedestrian mobility across Dublin Boulevard is maintained. To this end, the City is pursuing multiple sources of funding to conduct a feasibility analysis of the Iron Horse Trail connectivity from Dougherty Road to the (East) Dublin /Pleasanton BART station. It is recognized that a grade- separated crossing in this location could significantly enhance bike and pedestrian access to and from the project area and beyond. To support this project, the developer of the Dublin Crossing project is contributing $50,000 towards the feasibility analysis, and the City is seeking additional funding from the Alameda County Transportation Page 31 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR ■.s Commission (ACTC) Sustainable Communities Technical Assistance Program. It is the City's full intent to pursue a grade- separated crossing at this location, although the City is also including the alternative mitigation measure of removing a portion of wit the crosswalk across Dublin Boulevard in the EIR. Under the alternative mitigation, bicyclists will continue to be able to cross Dublin Boulevard. Response to Comment 9 -23 - Transportation /New road construction Chapter 4 of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan describes the pedestrian and bicycle circulation network in the project area, including sections on pedestrian circulation (Section 4.2.1), bicycle circulation (Section 4.2.2), and public transit (Section 4.2.3). These provide alternative means of transportation to automobile use. Chapter 4 also contains a multitude of figures and exhibits that illustrate roadway cross sections and generous provisions for sidewalks and dedicated bike lanes (both Class 1 and Class 2) throughout the project area. Section 4.3.5 describes the intersections that connect to the street network outside of the project area and notes that these connections shall be enhanced to support the safe crossing of existing perimeter streets. So, overall, the Project development does not focus on creating additional roadway facilities and capacity. The comments on the economic costs of roadway development and automobile use are not required to be analyzed under CEQA .� because they are not environmental impacts. (CEQA Guidelines section 15131 (economic effects shall not be treated as environmental effects under CEQA)). aw I- M Page 32 w.. Wiseman, Bill Comment Letter # 10 From: AlamedaTim @aol.com Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 10:37 PM To: Kristi Bascom Subject: Dublin Crossing Comment Kristi, I and my family own a condo in the Elan project facing DeMarcus Blvd. I am thrilled that mixed use development will take place across Dublin boulevard from us. If done well, it can only benefit us, both economically (our home value) and for our convenience (with nearby retail). My one big concern is traffic mitigation on DeMarcus with so many residential units looking to BART as a primary transit provider. It appears that DeMarcus cannot be widened (with residential projects on both sides) and I'm not sure how it can take more traffic - we're already a little anxious to see what impact the current construction of added residential units on the old BART parking lot will have on DeMarcus. We enjoy our proximity to BART, one of the main reasons we bought there, but don't want it to become a drawback that would drive us away. I hope this will be considered, and look forward to hearing details on this aspect of the plan. Sincerely, William M. (Tim) Neilson 6[1351 w� Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR ww rw Response to Comment Letter (via email) #10 from NIr. William Neilson, dated June 27, 2013 Response to Comment 10 -1 - Traffic Mitigation on DeMarcus Boulevard The transportation and circulation analysis prepared for the EIR analyzed 37 intersections, including Demarcus Boulevard and Dublin Boulevard (study intersection No. 14). The existing Level of Service at this intersection in the AM peak hour is LOS C and in the PM peak hour is LOS B (see EIR Table 3.12 -5). With the Dublin Crossing project and full buildout of the General Plan ( "2035 Cumulative Plus Project "), the Levels of Service will measure LOS B in the AM peak hour and LOS C in the PM Peak hour (see EIR Table 3.12 -10). The traffic impacts at this intersection with the proposed project are less than significant. .o Page 33 Comment Letter # 11 From: jasnew99 @yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 5:52 PM To: Kristi Bascom Subject: Camp Parks Exchange / Dublin Crossing comments Hi, I strongly disagree with having more dense housing build in Dublin. I have lived in Dublin for a long time and have seen congestion and other issues including crime come up. I think dense housing is great for builders but just those is not good for the city. Our schools are now congested along with the other infrastructure like hospitals, roads, 11- parks. Dublin lacks office spaces. As a small business owner there is hardly decent choices for office space in 1 Dublin. Compare this with San Ramon and Pleasanton the city needs to think long term rather than short term gain. regards Jasmeet Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR F Response to Comment Letter (via email) #11 from Jasmeet, dated July 10, 2013 Response to Comment 11 -1- Proposed Project Land Uses Comment noted. Since the comment relates to the merits of the project and not environmental impacts, no further response is necessary. 0 E Page 34 From: Sent: To: Subject: By e -mail and US mail Ms Bascom: Comment Letter # 12 Thomas McKinney <tfmckinney @gmail.com> Wednesday, July 24, 2013 5:18 PM Kristi Bascom Comments on the DEIR for Dublin Crossing Project I am a retired geologist living in Dublin and provide the following comments on Appendix D - Geology and Soils. I have additional concerns about Hazardous Material raised by the Phase 1 site assessment but have not completed a review of that section. APPENDIX D - Preliminary Geotechnical Analysis - Geological Hazards Page 7 - Potential For Surface 12 -1 Rupture This paragraph is inappropriate and misleading, and does not adequately summarize the findings of the Fault to Ground - rupture investigation discussed at length later in Appendix D. It should be updated to better reflect these studies and related comments on the DEIR. Page 8 - Liquefaction - bottom paragraph indicates that the thickness of potentially liquefiable sandy layers used in the analysis of liquefaction was 1/2 to 2 feet. However, on p.5 it is indicated that the sandy soil layers were generally encountered below depths of 15 ft, with thicknesses ranging to 6 feet, What was the thickness of sandy layers that was used in the analysis and did it include layers up to 6 ft and if not why not? Fault To Ground - Rupture Investigation - Page 3 - Faulting Reference is made to Plate 5 - Fault Activity Map with no discussion in the text or a reference in the text to its source. Full disclosure would indicate that the reference is CGS (2010) and should include a discussion of the fact that Plate 5 shows that site is in the southern part of the Pleasanton Fault Zone and is mapped at the site as - "Holocene fault displacement (during the past 11,700 years) without historical record" (orange color). The site is in the southern portion of this zone and is shown as a solid line while areas of the fault to the north of the site are shown as the same classification (orange) but as a dashed line. The southern part of the Pleasanton Fault Zone south of Highway 580 is designated as "Quaternary Fault (age undifferentiated)" (Purple). Page 3 - 2nd paragraph - last sentence. "The Pleasanton Fault Zone at the site is depicted by short dashed lines on the Pleasanton Fault Zone Map, which indicates that the CGS considers this trace to be an inferred location." This is true but again full disclosure would require that it should be pointed out that study maps of the site area (CGS FER 109 - 1/30/81 and Division of Mines and Geology Open File Report - 81 -9 (198 1) which apparently formed the basis for CGS FER 109 10/31/81, show both solid and dashed lines for the fault traces within the site boundary. The map legend indicates " Solid lines indicate well defined features; dashed lines indicate less - well defined features." All of the trenches examined in this site investigation were located in the southern part of the site where CGS indicates that the races are less -well defined and did not include any in the northern portion where CGS indicates that they are well - defined. `" TRENCH STRATIGRAPHY 12 -2 12 -3 12 -4 u 71 Page 10 first paragraph indicates that Log Unit D, the inferred base of the modern soil profile (Holocene) W which occurs in trenches across the site is an uninterrupted layer without distortion. This does not appear to be 1 2,m the case. The northeastern portion of T -1 at about 0 + 70 ft Log Unit D as well as six other Log Units is -5 interrupted along a straight steep line and is indicated on the trench profile with question marks along its length. Page 10 - last Paragraph indicates that this feature in T -I and other segments of T -2 and T -3 trenches are channel features which have channel deposits which have channel deposits which do not extend up into the modern soil (Log Units A thru D) and are inferred to be older than about 3,000 years. Again this is not true for 1 ift for the feature in T -1 where Unit D is interrupted. In addition this questioned feature is distinctly different from -6 the other channel features and deposits elsewhere in the trenches (T -2 and T -3). The feature in T -1 is much steeper and deeper that the other inferred channels. The T -1 feature is about 14 ft deep while the inferred channels in T -2 and T -3 are 4 to 5 ft deep, comparable to the current drainage culvert. In addition, the log comment on T -! "Failure Slicks" is not addressed in the text and lends additional support for a structural and not I .� a channel origin for this feature in T -1. CONCLUSION .m Thus, the siting of trenches away from the northern portion of the site where the fault traces are well defined, the interruption of portion of the modern soil profile, Log Unit D in T -1, the steep and deeper nature of the �* questioned feature in T -1 compared to other areas which show channel deposits and the notation of "Failure Slicks" in the T -1 log, do not support the conclusion that ".. it is unlikely that surface rupture due to fault displacement will occur at the site." Thomas F. McKinney, PhD 2 ■r Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment Letter (via email) #12 from Mr. Thomas McKinney, dated July 24, 2013 Note: All comments are in reference to Appendix D - Preliminary Geotechnical Analysis Response to Comment 12 -1- Potential For Surface Rupture The paragraph the commenter refers to is in Appendix D, the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Dublin Crossing Project at Camp Parks, Dublin California that was completed in March 2012. Additional analysis related to potential fault rupture (Fault Ground - Rupture Investigation Proposed Dublin Crossing Mixed Use Development, Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area, Dublin CA) was later completed in March 2013, which is also included in Appendix D. The paragraph in the March 2012 document is superceded by the 2013 analysis. The Draft EIR reflects the conclusions of the more detailed fault rupture study that was completed in March 2013. Response to Comment 12 -2 - Liquefaction The only dimensions in the bottom paragraph on page 8 of the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation are to half an inch to two inches of differential settlement and there are no comments on the thickness of potentially liquefiable sand layers. Pages 8 -9 of the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation states: "Settlement calculations due to liquefaction indicate that the potential for liquefaction- induced settlement can range from half an inch to two inches with differential settlement on the order of 1 inch." For liquefaction- induced settlement calculations, the engineers used sandy layers with a thickness up to six feet, which was indicative of the site -soil conditions as presented by the boring logs. Response to Comment 12 -3 - Plate 5 - Fault Activity Map Source of the Fault Activity Map is shown on Plate S. The map was included in the report to show the most recently published and generalized fault setting with respect to the San Francisco Bay Area. As stated in the report immediately preceding the citing of Plate 5 - "The project site and the San Francisco Bay Area are located in an area characterized by moderate to high seismic activity ". The detail suggested by the commenter is presented on the Fault Activity Map and is not needed in the report text because it would have no impact on the interpretation or findings presented in the report. Response to Comment 12 -4 - Pleasanton Fault Zone The California Geologic Survey (CGS) Revised Official Special Studies Zones (SSZ) Map of the Dublin quadrangle (effective January 1, 1982) was published after both CGS FER 109 - 1/30/81 and Division of Mines and Geology Open File Report - 81 -9 (1981). The 1982 CGS SSZ map provides CGS' most up -to -date and official best estimate of where faults may be located. The map shows all three fault traces law Page 35 0 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR through the entire SSZ as short dashes (inferred) and shows the two longer traces as queried (additional uncertainty). The authors of the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation conclude, and the EIR supports the conclusion, that the locations of the exploratory trenches with respect to project -site coverage are adequate, reasonable, and comply with the intent of the Alquist - Priolo Act. Response to Comment 12 -5 - Trench Stratigraphy The "straight steep line" noted by the commenter is the west margin of "clayey sand /sandy clay (CL), light to medium brown, wet, loose to medium dense, channel deposit". The contact is queried to indicate an indistinct boundary between the channel deposit and soil stratigraphic layers. No sharp contact, slickensides, gouge, distorted beds adjacent to the contact, or other features that would be associated with fault offset are present along the contact. The contact conforms to an erosional feature and not a structural feature. Response to Comment 12 -6 - T -1, T -2, and T -3 Trench Features Because of the presence of caving and an erosion channel at the location of Trench T -1, Trench T -6 was later excavated and logged between Trenches T -1 and T -2. Trench T -6 was located to fill in information that was obscured in Trench T -1 and provided an overlapping profile of the soil layers observed in Trenches T -1 and T -2. The overlapping configuration of Trenches T -1, -2, and -3 shows that Log Unit D, and other soil layers, are continuous and uninterrupted across that part of the project site. The depth of the channel deposit logged in Trench T -1 is based on exposure in the trench and would be expected to be deeper or shallower at other locations. Channel deposits can be of differing depths depending on relief of base level, energy and volume of the water flow, localized erodability of the soil, and other factors. .� Evidence observed in Trench T -1 including continuity of soil layers across the project site indicates that the feature east of about Station 0 +70 is an erosional channel cut into the soil layers. The "Failure Slicks" notation on trench log T -1 is included in the shaded area of the log representing caving and refers to slickensides in the clay soil that failed during caving of the trench. The most recent and official SSZ map shows the inferred fault traces as similarly uncertain across the project site and throughout the SSZ. The possible fault traces in northern portion of the site are no more certain than in the southern portion. The location of the BSA trenches adequately covers the project site. The soil profile in Trench T -1 is locally eroded by a clayey sand / sandy clay channel deposit that has an indistinct (queried) contact with adjoining older soil layers. The contact is without features that would be associated with fault offset. An additional Trench (T -6) was excavated and logged between and overlapping T -1 and T -2 that Page 36 M ii Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR showed that Log Unit D is continuous and uninterrupted by faulting. The steep and deep nature of the channel deposit appears to be a consequence of several local factors causing erosion, none of which are associated with fault displacement. Based on geologic interpretation of the six exploratory trenches and other evidence presented in the March 2013 Fault Ground - Rupture Investigation report, it was concluded that an active trace of the inferred Pleasanton fault does not cross the Dublin Crossing project site. The conclusion in the report that "it is unlikely that surface rupture due to fault displacement will occur at the site" is an apt and appropriate interpretation of the observed evidence and complies with the intent of the Alquist - Priolo Act. The report and findings have been peer reviewed and approved by a consulting geologist for the City of Dublin as required by the State of California Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972 and represents accurate information and analysis for the purposes of this EIR. M Page 37 a Comment Letter # 13 From: Thomas McKinney <tfmckinney @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 3:10 PM To: Kristi Bascom Subject: Comments on Appendix E on the DEIR for Dublin Crossing Project By E -mail and US Mail Ms Bascom: Appendix E - Impact 3.7 -4 Results in the Disturbance of Contaminated Soil and Groundwater Page 3 -135 Indicates based on the Phase I ESA that 3 sites are identified which have potentially significant impact but indicates that the US Army has committed to remediating them to regulatory approval. ,.. There is only one paragraph which addresses groundwater contamination and indicates that an upgradient property has affected the underlying groundwater with petroleum hydrocarbons and concludes without 13— providing any information that based on the distance of this site, it is unlikely that the property could have _1 affected the project area. Is this property mentioned the Federal Correction Institute located a few blocks away on 8th Street? This dismissal of potential affects at the project area cannot be accepted without location and time of occurrence information, and a groundwater analysis evaluating contaminant and groundwater travel times and �** distances. Provide these further details. 13 What are the plans, if any, for a Phase II ESA and when would it occur, it's focus and its relationship to the EIR -2w process? Trench Contamination - There is no mention of the petroleum odor contamination observed in Fault Rupture 13= Study Trench T -3 which was found at and below the water table. What soil and groundwater investigations, if -3, any, have been conducted for this contamination. Provide their results. Secondary Impacts - The proposed action includes the removal of Army facilities and activities from the 13`x' project area. What, if any, of these activities will be relocated and /or developed in adjacent areas and what will be their short- and long -term impacts and the cumulative impacts from these relocation actions and the project -4'° area impacts? Thanks for your consideration. Thomas F. McKinney, PhD 1 W w� Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment Letter (via email) #13 from Mr. Thomas McKinney, dated July 29, 2013 Response to Comment 13 -1 - Potential Effects from the Federal Correction Institute The Federal Correction Institute is located at 5701 8th Street approximately 0.298 miles northwest of and up- gradient of the project area. On April 25, 2008, a 3,000 - gallon diesel aboveground storage tank overflowed at the property, releasing approximately 100 gallons of diesel. Excavation of the diesel- impacted soil and asphalt within the spilled area was conducted from April through May 2008. A soil and groundwater investigation was performed in September 2008 to initially characterize the impact of the spill. Results of the investigation indicated elevated concentrations of diesel in the soil samples and detectable concentrations of diesel in the groundwater samples. A supplementary investigation was conducted in August and September 2009. As part of the investigation, three monitoring wells were installed. Soil and groundwater analytical data from the investigation indicated elevated diesel concentrations within the spilled area. A closure report prepared by the U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons was submitted to Alameda County Environmental Health for their review in October 2010. The report concluded that the impacted area was limited to the immediate vicinity of the spilled area and that the residual contaminants present in the soil and groundwater should naturally attenuate over time. Based on the localized impacted area and distance from the project area (approximately one - quarter mile or greater), it is unlikely that the property could have impacted the project area. Response to Comment 13 -2 - Preparation of a Phase II ESA There are currently no plans for a Phase II ESA. As described on page 3 -136, the U.S. Army and NASA are responsible for environmental remediation of existing hazardous materials within the project area and have agreed to remediate the project area to state and federal requirements. Contamination that remains after the U.S. Army and NASA transfer the property to the project applicant and /or that needs to be remediated to a higher standard (e.g. residential) will either be remediated prior to and during site grading and demolition activities associated with future development within the project area. Response to Comment 13 -3 - Trench Contamination Remedial activities to remove the impacted material that was observed in Trench T- 3 is being conducted by the U.S. Army in conjunction with the local regulatory agencies. The remedial activities are still ongoing. Response to Comment 13 -4 - Secondary Impacts from Relocation of Existing Army Facilities Page 38 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR The existing Army facilities located within the project area would be demolished and new facilities constructed within the remaining portion of Camp Parks outside the proposed project area. An analysis of impacts associated with redevelopment of Camp Parks was analyzed previously in the U.S. Army Draft and Final EIR on Master Planned Redevelopment at Camp Parks (2009). Page 39 Comment Letter # 14 ES -2 proposed project includes up to 1,995 residential units (not including secondary units); 14 -1 Need to delete reference to secondary units being above the cap ES -10 MM 3.2 -5: Locate Sensitive Receptors Away from Existing Toxic Air Contaminants and Implement HVAC systems for Sensitive Receptors in the vicinity of BAAQMD permitted Toxic Air Contaminant sources. Prior to building permit issuance, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the City of Dublin Community Development Director that the following mitigation measures will be implemented in order to reduce the potential impact from TAC exposure due to the potential siting of residential or other sensitive receptor development within 1,000 feet of a BAAQMD identified stationary TAC source: This gets into more detail later, but it is very unclear if this is claiming that there are any instances of land use controls which need to exist on the project site due to any sort of TAC. ES -12 All new commercial development projects that have the potential to emit TACs shall be located 1,000 feet away from existing and proposed development used by sensitive receptors, unless a project- specific evaluation of human health risks is conducted and the results of the evaluation determine that no significant impact would occur. Same as above ES -13 prepare a wetland mitigation plan that ensures no- net -loss of wetland and waters habitat and is approved by the City and applicable resource agencies. Approval by City? Page ES -15 MM 3.3 -2a ....If no special- status plants are located during the surveys, no further mitigation measures would be required. If any federal or state plant ESA listed species are found during the rare plant surveys, the project applicant shall consult with the CDFW and USFWS to obtain incidental take permits under Section 2081 of the CESA and either Section 7 or 10 of the FESA. Request clarity that this initigation measure applies to plants listed under the State or Federal ESA, and that MM 3.3 -2b applies to other special status plant species Page ES -21 The project applicant sha4 could preserve additional upland habitat within a USFWS approved conservation area as determined in consz- iltation 1vith the US1 T S. The pi,apeiieHt hall e pdiH .t„ a l t» This measure would be determined in consultation with the USFWS, if required. Impact 3.3 -5: Protocol level surveys for vernal pool invertebrates were conducted throughout Camp Parks in 2002 and 2003 by the U.S. Army, Comments on Draft EIR from SunCal Page 1 July 22, 2013 14 -2 M943 14 -4 14 -5 sHmmep ef 2n 12 (6h�, seaseH) i a 2013 we* seaseii b,, GaF6ble Ewi _ No vernal pool fairy shrimp, vernal pool tadpole shrimp or longhorn fairy shrimp were found during these surveys. California linderiella was found during the 2002 -2003 stu-yeys_ but not within the project area. New surveys are currently being conducted by Cardno ENTR.IX. Since the new surveys have not been completed at this time, the presence of this species within the project area is assumed in the analysis of project impacts. They list the surveys and say that there are no shrimp, but then they contradict themselves and say that neNv surveys are being conducted and that presence is assumed. 1 aln fine with the mitigation measures, as we don't have concurrence on the survey results from the USFWS yet, but it needs to be clear that the 2012 -2013 surveys were conducted as MM 33-5, not in addition to it. MM 3.3 -5: Consult with the USFWS and Reduce Impacts on Vernal Pool Invertebrates and Their Habitat. The project applicant shall prepare a habitat assessment for the vernal pool invertebrates. If vernal pool invertebrates are found within the project area during the habitat assessment, the project applicant shall comply with the following steps to ensure protection of vernal pool invertebrates and their habitat and that impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. a. The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct habitat assessments for protected vernal pool invertebrates and based on the results of the habitat assessments, determine in consultation with the USFWS if protocol level vernal pool invertebrate surveys will be required within the project area. b. If suitable habitat is present, the project applicant, in consultation with the USFWS and CDFW, shall either (1) conduct a protocol -level survey for federally listed vernal pool crustaceans, which will identify other protected vernal pool invertebrates (curvefooted Hygrotus beetle and San Francisco fork- tailed damselfly), or (2) assume presence of federally- listed vernal pool crustaceans and curve footed Hygrotus beetle and San Francisco fork- tailed damse fly in areas of suitable habitat. Surveys shall be conducted by qualified biologists in accordance with the most recent USFWS guidelines or protocols to determine the time of year and survey methodology (survey timing for these species is dependent on yearly rainfall patterns and seasonal occurrences, and is determined on a case -by -case basis). The USFWS protocol level surveys shall be conducted as part of the Section 404 permit process within 2 -years of the application. If surveys reveal no occurrences of federally listed vernal pool crustaceans or other protected vernal pool invertebrates, no further mitigation would be required. C. If surveys determine that one or more special- status vernal pool invertebrate species occurs within the project area, or if the project applicant, in consultation with the USFWS and /or CDFW, assumes presence of federally- listed vernal pool invertebrates in all affected habitats, the project applicant shall provide information to the USA CE to support Section 7 consultation with the USFWS and the project applicant shall ensure no net loss of habitat shall be achieved through avoidance, preservation, creation and /or purchase of credits as apart of the Section 7 Consultation process. The selected measures may be part of the permitting process. Comments on Draft EIR from SunCal Page 2 July 22, 2013 14 -5 Cont'd 14 -6 w� w� USFWS and C;DFC have no published protocol For curvefooted Hygrotus beetle and San Francisco fork- tailed damselfly. It is likely best to exclude all reference to the 20121-2013 Branchiopod Surveys to avoid confusion. By including referencing to 14 -6 them fi , but ornitting the negative ndings, it 111,1v obliaate the project to additional Confd surveys that tivould not be necessary otherNNise. Pg. ES -37 MM 3.8 -4b .Discuss with City the intent of the proposed I 14 -7 rerouting of the Basin #2 outfall . ES -38 MM 3.8 -4b: Re -align Stormwater Outflow from Proposed North Basin #2. Prior to issuance of the grading permit associated with the construction of the proposed community park, the project applicant shall submit to the City a revised stormwater drainage plan that realigns the stormwater outflow associated with the proposed North Basin #2 from the 1.7 acre Chabot Creek riparian channel (as is currently proposed) to a separate underground pipe that connects directly with the existing box culvert located at proposed Scarlett Court Extension and Dublin Boulevard, and thereby avoids stormwater discharge into the 1.7 acre Chabot Creek riparian channel. This is a new proposal. It is unclear why it is necessary ES -48 IHT. I —n -- t—h—e -- e—v—e—n—t -- t—h—a—t — _t_h_e_ _g_r_a_d_e_ _s_e_p_a_r_a_t —e_d_ _c_r_o_s_s_i_n_g_ _p_r_o i_e_c_t_ _c_a_n_n_o_t_ _b_e_ _c_o n_s_t_r u_c_t_e_d_ _y_e_a_r_ _2_0_3_5_,_ _a_n_ _a_I_t_e_r_n_a_t_i_v_e_ _ m_i_t_i_g_a_t_i_o_n_ _b_y_ w_o_u_I_d_ _b_e_ _t_o_ _e_I_i_m_i— n_a_t_e_ — t_h_e_ — _c_r— o— s_s_w_a_I_k_ o n t h e e a s t — — — — _I_e_g_ _o —f_ _t_h_e _ S c a r l e — — — — — — t t — — — e a n d D u D r — i — v — - - — — — — — — — b l i n - - — — —B_o —u — I_e v a — — r d_ _i_n_t_e_r — — s — — e c t — — — -- — — i_o —n -- _T_h_i —s — w_o — -- — — — — — u I —d_ _r_e_q_u_i_r_e_ _p_e_d_e_s_t_r_i_a_n_s_ _a_n —d_ _b_i_k —e_s_ _f_r_o_m_ _t_h_e_ _T_r_a_i_I_ —t—o— _c_r_o_s_s_ _t_h_r_e_e_ _I_r_o_n_ _c_r_o_s_s_w— a_I_k_s_ _H_o_r_s_e_ _r_a_t_h_e_r_ _o_n_e_._ _B_e_c_a_u_s_e— —o—f— _t_h_e_ _e_f_f_e_c_t_s_ —o—f— _t_h_a_n_ _a_I_t_e_r_n_a_t_i_v_e_ _m_i_t_i_g_a_t_i_o_n_ _t_h_e_ —o—n— _p_e_d_e_s_t_r_i_a_n_ _b_i_k_e_ _m_o_b_i_I_i_t_y_,_ _t_h_e_ _g_r_a_d_e_ _s_e_p_a_r_a— t _a_n_d_ —e_d_ _c_r_o_s_s i_n_g_ _i_s_ _t_h_e_ _C_i_t_y_'s_ _p_r_e_f_e_r_r_e_d_ _m_i_t_i_g_a_t_i_o_n_ a — - t this - -- -- - l -- o c — — a t i o n - -- — - -- Pragmatically this seems to be a nonfunctional solution. Should we reference changing the timing of pedestrian triggered light sequencing? ES -51 The project impacts to freeway ramps could be mitigated by changing the ramp metering rates so that more vehicles could access the freeway. However, the freeway ramps are operated by Caltrans, which sets metering rates based on overall operations in the freeway corridor. In the future, major improvements are planned for 1 -580 in the project vicinity, including the addition of High Occupancy Vehicle and auxiliary lanes. In addition, as the Cities surrounding the 1 -580 corridor continue to build out and additional parallel east /west connectors such as the Stoneridge Drive and Dublin Boulevard extensions are completed, it is likely that the ramp meter rates would change over time to accommodate the demand on both the freeway ramps and freeway segments. If "major improvements are planned" then should we have language that if these improvements were to occur that our significant unavoidable impact could be mitigated? If impact is same in no project scenario is it still a significant impact of project? Comments on Draft EIR from SunCal Page 3 July 22, 2013 `LK:3 14 -9 14 -10 .. W Pg. 2 -7 2.6 Proposed Land Use & Development Plan - Should reference I 14 -11 Figure 2 -7, not 2 -9. Pg. 2 -7 Table 2 -1 - Header should read "net" acreage instead of "total" I 14 -12 acreage Pg. 2 -10 Central Park and Iron House Trail Realignment - 31"1 paragraph should read "two underground onsite storm drainage detention 14 -13 basins..." t" 2 -13 T_h_e_ _C_a_m_p_ _P_a_r_k_'s_ _e_n_t_i_r_e_ _1_,_8_0_0_ +_ _a_c_r_e_ 14 -14 _w a_t_e —r s— h_e_d_ _d_r a_i_n_s_ _t_h_r o_u_g_h_ _t_h_e_ _p_r_o j_e_c_t_ a r e a . W Pg. 2-14 Storm Drain Infrastructure - Last paragraph should read "two 14 -15 underground onsite storm drainage detention basins..." 2 -15 Former Building 109 /Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (PRFTA) 2 - Former Building 109 /PRFTA 2 located at the southwestern portion of the project area containing concentrations of dioxin and lead within the surficial soil above the acceptable risk -based screening levels for closure. The U.S. Army is awaiting confirmation from the regulatory agencies regarding the remediation of this site (Personal Communication with Mark Hall, Environmental Coordinator, U.S. Army, .� Camp Parks on May 21, 2013). This site is fully remediated. The only remaining activity is monitoring wells. 14 -16 =Area 761 /PRFTA 13 - Area 761 /PRFTA 13 is located at the central portion of the ' project area and requires land use controls by the CRWQCB to obtain an NFA w, status. The CRWQCB issued a Pre -NFA determination on May 28, 2008. This determination acknowledged that groundwater cleanup objectives have been met. However, a deed restriction (land use control) is required to achieve a full NFA designation due to the presence of soil which contains diesel concentrations greater than acceptable levels. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) concurred with these findings in January 20, 2012. Page 2 -15 (twice), Page 3 -128 (twice), Page 3 -135 (twice), Page 3 -145 Deference to Central Valley Flood Board or CR_WQCB is inapplicable to this project. All 14 -17 ■** instances should reference the San Francisco RWQCB, which had jurisdiction in this area. Comments on Draft EIR from SunCal Page 4 July 22, 2013 �* M" Pg. 2 -17 Table 2 -2 Phasing Plan — Footnote #1 missing. 14 -18 3 -11 Building heights associated with the proposed project would range from a maximum height of 40 feet and three stories for the DC Lower Density Residential (DC LDR) and DC Medium Density (DC MDR) land use districts to 75 feet and six stories for the General Commercial /DC Medium Density Residential (GC /DC MDR) and General Commercial /DC High Density Residential (GC /DC HDR) land use districts. We need to identify methodology of measuring. What start and end point? 3 -34 under total emissions: Due to the scale of the proposed project, which would generate 19,641 new trips per day, emissions would exceed the BAAQMD thresholds This total trip number is different than the one in traffic section (22, 047). 3 -36 There are no mobile TAC sources located within 1,000 feet of the project area as Interstates 580 and 680 are located 1,500 feet to the south and 5,000 feet to the west of the project area, respectively. However, there are several stationary TAC and PM2.5 sources located within 1,000 feet of the project area ( BAAQMD 2013). Including several diesel generators associated with the commercial area approximately 300 feet east of the project area, and three diesel engines located within Camp Parks, adjacent to the northern site boundary. Based on the screening level data provided by the BAAQMD, these stationary TAC sources have the potential to exceed the BAAQMD cancer risk thresholds of 10 in one million ( BAAQMD 2012). Again this is unclear if there are controls being suggested? Page 3 -45 Cardno Entrix prepared a biological resource technical report on behalf of the project applicant in June 2013, which updates previous biological technical studies that were prepared by the U.S. Army for the Final Environmental Impact Statement on Master Planned Redevelopment at Camp Parks (U.S. Army 2009). This technical report was peer � reviewed by RBF Consulting for technical accuracy and is included as Appendix C. May should be June In addition to approximately 77 acres of developed and semi - developed land within the project area, wetlands and non - native grasslands are also located within the project area. The acreage of these vegetation communities is shown below in Table 3.3 -1: Habitats and Vegetation Communities within the Project Area and on Figure 3.3 -1: Existing Biological Habitats. The table and figure do not represent the Project Area as defined in the docunient.`10 data Ireferences for the Alaineda County Surplus Property (ACSP). Overall, section El Comments on Draft EIR from SunCal Page 5 July 22, 2013 6 EAS 14 -20 14 -21 14 -22 provides insufficient data to reach conclusion for this area, as the biological resources technical report Study Area is not synonymous with the Project Area. Table 3.3 -1. Habitats and Vegetation Communities within the Project Area Appears to include acreages for other waters (as included in the Cardlro biological resources technical report Study Area) located outside the Project Area as defined in the DEIR. Page 3 -47 Wetlands Drainage Ditches This section only addressed the drainage ditches (Linear features) within the project that qualify as wetlands per the USACE protocol. that is, wetland drainage ditches. Other wetlands are included on page 3 -48. Other waters of the U.S. include Chabot Canal (Canal 01), and an unnamed canal (Canal 02). A portion of Canal 02 addressed in the Cardno biological resources technical report falls outside the Project Area as defined in the DEIR. Page 3 -50 According to the CNDDB, USFWS, and CNPS queries, a total of 68 special- status species and three rare natural communities and USFWS - designated critical habitat for California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), California red- legged frog (Rana draytonii), Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus), and vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) are known to occur in the 19pejeet dred within the Dublin, Livermore, Diablo and Tassajara 7.5 minutes topographical giiadrangle. Produce reference for statement regarding SSP occurrence in project area (as defined in the DEIR): According to biological resources technical report these species are known to occur within the Dublin, Livermore, Diablo and Tassajara 7.5 Minutes topographical quadrangles, not the Study Area or Project Area. Cardno Entrix performed queries of the California Department of Fish and Game, Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Online Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPSEI) and the United States Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) Online Species List of Federal Endangered and Threatened Species to identify known biological resources within the greater project vicinity. This is incorrect, the Cardno report identified known biological resources within the overall project vicinity, extending greater than 5 miles from the Project Area as defined in the DEIR. Page 3 -51 Previous Biological Surveys Inconsistent with mitigation measures and text; update to include 20 12-201 3 Branchiopods surveys or remove references to 2012 -201 ; in other locations in the DEIR. Surveys should consistently be applied to analysis; and referenced as such throughout the document. One option is to say that updated surreys are m progress, as results have not yet been accepted by the USFWS 14 -22 Cont'd 14 -23 m 14 -24 14 -25 14 -26 14 -27 14 -28 P" 0 Comments on Draft EIR from SunCal Page 6 July 22, 2013 �` M Life histories ofspecial- status plant and animal species identified by the CNDDB, USFWS, and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) lists that have a moderate or higher likelihood of occurring in the project area are described below: Inconsistent with species included below, many are listed as havilig a low likelihood of occurrence: conservancy fairy shrimp, Longhorn fairy shrimp, Vernal pool fairy shnnip, curved -foot hygrotus diving beetle, San Francisco forktail damselfly, Cahf'Ornia hnderiella, Western pond turtle, California tiger salamander. California red - legged frog, tricolored blackbird, fernlginous hawk, Swainson's hawk, Prairie falcon, San .loacluin kit fox, Palmate- bracted bird 's -beak, and Northern California black walnut. There are no known occurrences in Alameda County. Although not a target species, this species was not detected in focused surveys between 2002 and 2003 and during wet and dry surveys conducted by Cardno Entrix in 2012 and 2013. Same as above comment regarding 2012 -2013 Branchiopod surveys. If includinrr survice r results they should be consistently incorporated into text and Mitigation Measures, Page 3 -53 Separate paragraph for ''estern pond turtle (FYI: this was a typo in the Cardno Deport as well). Page 3 -54 There are several known CNDDB occurrences for this species within two miles of the project area. The nearest occurrences are 1.4 miles to the north and 1.2 miles to the northeast of the project area. USFWS protocol requires that occurrences be evaluated within one mile of a proposed project. The first occurrence is located within Camp Parks training area. The second 6 ring the Alareh 2012fiek4 swi -ve� occurrence is located ivithin Tassq/ara Creek: Clarify that no occurrences are located in the project area. No CRLF were observed during the March 2012 field survey. Page 3 -55 CRLF were not observed during any of these surveys. No suitable aquatic habitat was observed within the project area during the March 2012 survey conducted by Cardno Entrix Therefore, the likelihood of Gal f r -nia T;, e r„'..m. iide, California Red/ legged frog occurring within the project area is considered low. Should reference CRLFF not California Tiger Salamander Page 3 -61 As the CNDDB contains recorded occurrences of this species within the project area and it was observed during the plant surveys, the likelihood of Congdons tarplant to occur within the project area is considered maderate high. Given that this species is known to occur within the Project area, and conditions have not changed significantly since those occurrences, the likelihood of this species occul7-111g is high. 14 -29 14 -30 14 -31 14 -32 14 -33 14 -34 Page 3 -62 Hairless popcorn flower (Plagiobothrys glaber) This species is believed to have been extirpated in California. CNNDB occurrence is from 2002, but identification is uncertain and has been disputed. All other occurrences 14 -35 are from pre -1954. This species is an annual herb ascending to erect with cauline leave Comments on Draft EIR from SunCal Page 7 July 22, 2013 �rii that occurs in meadows and alkaline seeps, as well as coastal salt marshes and swamps. During floristic surveys, this species was not found within the project area. Hairless popcorn- flower likelihood ol'oecurrenee' 14 -35 Does not state likelihood of occurrence consistent `vlth other species analysis, suggest Cont'd additional text. Page 3 -64 The California Endangered Species Act (CESA, Fish and Game Code of California, Chapter 1. 5, Sections 2050 -2116) prohibits the take of any plant or animal listed or proposed for listing as rare (plants only), threatened, or endangered. 14 -36 CESA does not afford protection to rare species, plants or otherwise. Rare plant protection is granted by the NPPA. 1977. This statement is confusing and inaccurate. Page 3 -65 California Depaptment of Fish and Game Code The California Fish and Game e Code includes regulations governing the use of, or impacts on, many of the state's fish, wildlife, and sensitive habitats. While e California Department of 1�ish and Game (CDFG) and the new of the 14 -37 department, California fish and Wildlife (CDFW), is used inconsistently throughout the document, the regulatory code name has not changed and should be referenced as the California Fish and Game Code in all cases. Page 3 -68 1.4 acres of other waters of the U.S. A portion of this acreage appears to be outside Project area. No analysis of ACSP is 14 -38 included. Page 3 -70 If any federal or state ES4 listed plant species are found during the rare plant surveys, the project applicant shall consult with the CDFW and USFWS to obtain incidental take permits under Section 2081 of the CESA and either Section 7 or 10 of the FESA. 14 -39 Need to clarify that this consultation only applies to ESA listed species. Special Status Wildlife Species AMmma Page 3 -72 Although no surveys specific for Western Pond Turtle have been conducted, Western Pond Turtle was observed within the greater Catnp Parks Training Ar °ea during surveys for California Red Legged Frog. 14 -40 Inaccurate, Western Pond Turtle was observed within the Camp Parks Training area but outside the Project area. Please provide reference for observations within protect area. Page 3 -73 The Cantonment Area of - Camp Parks I 14 -41 Recommend specifying project area for consistency. Page 3 -76 ES -21 I 14 -42 Comments on Draft EIR from SunCal Page 8 July 22, 2013 wit am No The project applicant sh&4 could preserve additional upland habitat within a USFWS approved conservation area as determined in considtaTion. The Pra*eetj9repeHew °' 6tg This measure would be determined in consultation � ith the USF\VS, il` required. Protocol level surveys for vernal pool invertebrates were conducted throughout Camp Parks in 2002 and 2003 by the U.S. Army, as well as during the summer of 2012 (dry season) and 2013 wet season On progress) by Cardno Entrix. Since the new surveys have not been completed at this time, the presence of this species within the project area is assumed in the analysis of project impacts. References new surveys with negative fmdi,_,,s and then contradicts scu-vey findings, needs consistency. Removal of these wetlands could result in the potential take of protected vernal pool branchiopods aiid e e, 9peteeted ;,,.ve tebr tee, if they were to occur, and their habitat. This would be considered a potentially significant impact. Surveys have previously been conducted for curve - footed Hygrotus beetle and Sale Francisco fork - tailed damselfly been conducted with negative findings. Since there is no published survey protocol, and these species would be identified as past of the branchiopod survey protocol, recommend striking, or specifying that then wotdd be identified during branchiopod surveys. MM 3.3 -5 See comments regarding consistency on how in- progress branchiopod surveys are applied. Page 3 -51 (3 times), Page 3 -55 (three times), Page 3 -60, Page 3 -61, Page 3 -74, and Page 4 -10. Recommend that they either define or change the "Cantonment Area." This area is not defined or otherwise identified in the DEIS and it is unclear to a reader that is not familiar with the project background that the project is located within the former Camp Parl<s Cantonment Area. Page 3 -151 and Page 3 -208 Order No. 99- 08 -DWQ is a previously expired regulation (expired in 2004, and extended to 2009) and does not apply to this project. This project is expected to fall under 2009 - 0009- D`v't%Q as amended by 2010- 0014 -DWQ. However, as 2009 - 0009 -DWQ is set to expire September 2, 2014 alternative text may be that the project shall comply with requirements of the NPDES General Permit for Storm 'A'ater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities. (Construction General Permit). Pg.3 -165 School shown under impact 3.9 -3 as 11 acres . 14 -42 Cont'd 14 -43 14 -44 14 -45 14 -46 14 -47 3 -166 table Consistent. The Specific Plan includes a maximum of 1,995 residential units; 200,000 square feet of commercial uses, a 30 net -acre community park; five acres of neighborhood park and an 11 14 -48 acre elementary school site. Comments on Draft EIR from SunCal Page 9 July 22, 2013 Change school to 12 acres. 14 -48 Cont'd 3 -187 A_c_c_o_r_d_i_n_g_ _t_o_ _t_h_e_ _D_u_b_I —i_n_ _U_n_i_f i_e_d_ _S_c_h_o_o_I_ _D_i_s_t r_i_c_t_'s_ _D_e_m_o_g_r_a_p_h_i_c_ _S_t_u_d_y_ _a —n_d_ _F_a_c_i_I_i_t_i_e_s_ _P_I_a_n_,_ _2_0_1_1_- _2_0_1_2_,_ _e_a_c_h_ _n_e_w_ — s_i_n— g_I_e= _f_a_m_i_I_y_ _h_o_m_e_ _(_I_a_r_g_e_ _a_n_d_ _m_e_d_i_u_m_ _I_o_t_ _s_i_n_g_I_e_ _f_a_m_i_I_y_ — h— o_m_e_)_ _g_e_n_e_r_a_t_e_s_ _a_n_ _a_v_e_r_a_g_e_ _o—f— _0_._7_5_ —K---1 _2_ _s_t_u_d_e_n_t_s_ _p_e_r_ _h_o_m_e_;_ _m_e_d_i_u_m_ _d_e_n_s_i_t_y_ _h_o_u_s_i_n_g_ _i_n_c_I_u_d_i_n_g_ _s_i_n_g_I_e_ _f_a_m_i_I_y_ _r e_s— i— d_e_n_t_i —a_I— — w— i —t_h_ _I_o_t_s_ _I_e_s_s_ _t_h_a_n_ _4_,_0_0_0_ 14 -49 — s_q_u— a_r_e_ _feet_ _g_e_n_e_r_a_t —e_s_ —a—n— _a_v_e_r a_g_e_ _o—f- -0—.-5-2-5— —K---1 2 _s_t_u_d_e_n t_s_ _p_e_r_ _h_o_m_e_;— _m_e_d_i_u_m_- _h_i_g_h_ _d_ e_ n_ s_i_t_y_ _a_t_t_a_c_h_e_d_ _h_o_u_s_i_n_g_ _(_o_t_h_e_r_w_i_s_e_ _k_n_o_w_n_ _a_s_ "tow n_h_o m e s_ ")_ _g_e_n_e_r a_t_e_ _a_n_ a_v_e_r a_g_e_ — — — — — -- — — — _0_._2_9_5_ _K_ -_1 _2_ _s_t_u_d_e_n_t_s_ _p_e_r_ _h_o— m —e_;_ _a_n_d_ —a- -n — e w — _h_i_g_h_ _d_e_n_s_i_t_y_ _r_e_s_i_d_e_n_t_i_a_I_ _(__u_I_t_i_f_a_m_i_I_y_ _h_o_u_s_i_n_g_ _d_e_v_e_I_o_p_m_e_n_t_)_ _g_e_n_e_r_a_t_e_s_ _a_n_ _a_v_e_r_a_g_e_ _o—f— _0_._1 _2_5_ _K_ _l _2_ _s_t_u_d_e_n_t_s_ _p_e_r_ _u_n_i_t_ _(_D_U_S_D_ _2_0_1_2_)_._ _ Pg. 3 -199 School shown under impact 3.11 -3 as 11 acres. I 14 -50 3 -200 The project applicant would build both the community park and neighborhood parks, as well as provide a $2.5 million dollar park maintenance endowment to the City. 14 -51 You sure about that? 4 -23 under no project alt Hydrology and Water Quality (less). Surface water runoff under this alternative would be less in comparison to the proposed project since additional development would not occur under the Specific Plan and the project are is anticipated to remain in its current condition. Therefore, the No Project Alternative would result in less impacts in comparison to the proposed project. Not true due to mitigations. The project alternative will have superior water quality impacts. L.J 14 -52 will Pg.3 -265 MM 3.12 -1 left turn Dougherty road- Clarify with City intent of 114 -53 fair share monetary contribution. Pg.3 -266 MM 3.12 -2- Clarify with City intent of fair share monetary 114 -54 contribution. Comments on Draft EIR from SunCal Page 10 July 22, 2013 IM M Pg. 3- 266,67 MM 3.12 -3 — Clarify with City intent of fair share monetary contribution. 114 -55 Pg.3 -267 MM 3.12 -4 - Clarify with City intent of fair share monetary 114 -56 contribution. Pg.3- 268,69 MM 3.12 -6- Clarify with City intent of fair share monetary 114 contribution. -57 4 -26 under Alt 2 Land Use and Planning (greater). Similar to the proposed project, the Reduced Development Alternative would not physically divide an established community and /or conflict with applicable land use plan, policies or regulations. Therefore, the 14 -58 No Project Alternative would result in similar impacts as compared to the proposed project. Says greater but concludes similar Figure 2 -10 FEMA Flood Zones - Project boundary is missing. 114 -59 Figure 2 -11 Conceptual Stormwater Drainage & Detention System - legend incorrectly identifies "ponds" instead of "underground detention 14 -60 basin." Figure 2 -15 Phasing Map - adjust phase boundaries 2, 4 & 5 to follow street. 114 -61 General Please note that Phasing map is being updated to correct two typos. 114 -62 ACSPA parcel sometimes in sometimes out — no references to Transit Village EIR 114 -63 Comments on Draft EIR from SunCal Page 11 July 22, 2013 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment Letter #14 from Dublin Crossing LLC, received July 22, 2013 Response to Comment 14 -1- Secondary Units Comment noted and the respective change has been made to page ES -2 of the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -2 - Toxic Air Contaminants The air toxics analysis in the Draft EIR is based on the BAAQMD's list of permitted toxic air contaminant (TAC) sources located within 1,000 feet of the project boundary (including diesel generators). The BAAQMD has identified emission rates �- and associated health risks for these sources. For residential uses, the BAAQMD requires that either a 1,000 foot buffer from air toxic sources be incorporated or other mitigation measures as identified in Mitigation Measure MM 3.2 -5 of the Draft^ EIR. The closest TAC source is the Camp Parks generator, which is located 200 feet north of the project area. However, most of the sources in the project vicinity are 500 to 1,000 feet from the boundary of the project area." Response to Comment 14 -3 - Approval of a Wetland Mitigation Plan Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to pagesES -15, 3 -72, and 3 -73 of the Draft EIR. This revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -4 - Plants Listed under the State and /or Federal Endangered Species Act OW Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to pages ES -16 to ES- 18 and pages 3 -74 and 3 -75 of the Draft EIR. Revisions to the Draft EIR do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -5 - Preservation of Upland Habitat and Protocol Level Surveys for Vernal Pool Invertebrates ■" Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page ES -25 to ES -26 and page 3 -81 of the Draft EIR. Revisions to the Draft EIR do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -6 - Vernal Pool Invertebrates Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to pages ES -25 to ES- 26 and pages 3 -82 to 3 -83of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or ,W impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Page 40 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment 14 -7 - Stormwater Basin #2 Outfall Mitigation Measure 3.8 -4b on pages ES -43, 3 -168, and 3 -169 of the Draft EIR has been revised to more clearly correlate directly to the project impact, as follows: MM 3.8 -4b: Re -align Stormwater Outflow from Proposed North Basin #2. Prior to issuance of the first grading /sitework permit associated with the construction of the proposed community park, the project applicant shall submit to the City for review and approval, plans, details, and calculations for the proposed underground stormwater detention structure(s) and associated storm drain system within the park parcel to ensure that adequate capacity will be provided; that the resultant discharge flow rates meet the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board; and that the placement of the underground facilities in the park will not impact the park design and construction of recreational facilities. The location and layout of the underground detention structures and the connection of these facilities to the proposed Chabot Creek riparian channel, box culvert or downstream facilities shall be agreed upon by both the project applicant and the City. The method and location of stormwater discharge of the underground facilities shall be reviewed and approved by all appropriate regulatory and /or permitting agencies. This revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -8 - Stormwater Outfall from Proposed North Basin #2 See Response to Comment 14 -7. Response to Comment 14 -9 - Grade Separated Crossing Project The City is pursuing multiple sources of funding to conduct a feasibility analysis of the Iron Horse Trail connectivity from Dougherty Road to the (East) Dublin /Pleasanton BART station. It is recognized that a grade- separated crossing in this location could significantly enhance bike and pedestrian access to and from the project area and beyond. To support this project, Sun Cal is contributing $50,000 towards the feasibility analysis, and the City is seeking additional funding from ACTC's own Sustainable Communities Technical Assistance Program. It is the City's full intent to pursue a grade- separated crossing at this location, and at this time the alternative mitigation measure of removing a portion of the crosswalk across Dublin Boulevard will remain in the EIR. Response to Comment 14 -10 - Significant and Unavoidable Impact at Southbound Hacienda Drive to 1 -580 Eastbound On -Ramp and Southbound Tassajara Road to 1 -580 Westbound On -Ramp Comment noted. Even if the freeway ramps could be mitigated by changing the ramp metering rates so that more vehicles could access the freeway, the proposed project would exacerbate a significant impact until the ramps are metered. Therefore, this would be considered a significant and unavoidable impact. F Page 41 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR La Response to Comment 14 -11- Land Use and Development Plan Figures Comment noted. In Section 2.6, Land Uses and Development Plan, Figure 2 -7 Conceptual Land Use Plan was referenced to show the land use diagram of the proposed project and Figure 2 -8: Illustrative Site Plan was referenced to show a conceptual plan for the proposed project. Figure 2 -9: Proposed Street Network as noted by the commenter is not referenced within Section 2.6. Response to Comment 14 -12 - Table 2 -1 Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 2 -8 of the Draft EIR. This revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -13 - Central Park and Iron Horse Regional Trail Alignment Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 2 -11 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -14 - Camp Parks Watershed Commenter provides text from the Draft EIR that the 1,800+ acre watershed drains through the project area. The text on pages 2 -14 and 3 -153 of the Draft EIR has been revised to state that the majority of the Camp Parks watershed drains through the project area. The off -site watershed area and amount of watershed drainage that flows through the project area in the Draft EIR analysis was based on the correct information. Response to Comment 14 -15 - Storm Drain Infrastructure Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 2 -14 of the Draft EIR. The revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. r Response to Comment 14 -16 - Former Building 109 /Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (PRFTA) 2 Comment noted. According to Mark Hall, Environmental Coordinator at U.S. Army, Camp Parks, the contamination at the Former Building 109 /PRFTA 2 was remediated by the U.S. Army and cleaned to industrial standards. There are " currently groundwater monitoring wells at the site and the U.S. Army has completed three quarters of sampling in coordination with the Department of Toxic Substances and Control (DTSC). The respective changes have been made to page 2 -17 and page 3 -138 and 3 -139 of the Draft EIR. The revision does not change the analysis or -e impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Page 42 L7 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment 14 -17 - Reference to the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to pages 2-17,3-137,3- 146, 3 -154 in the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -18 - Footnote to Table 2 -2: Phasing Plan Comment noted. The project applicant has been noted in the footnote of Table 2 -2: Phasing Plan on page 2 -18 in the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -19 - Building Heights Comment noted. Method of building height measurement has been added to the Specific Plan. Response to Comment 14 -20 - Number of Trips per Day Analyzed in the Air Quality Modeling The air quality modeling modeled 22,047 trips per day (See Appendix B of the Draft EIR). Page 3 -35 in the Draft EIR has been revised to reflect the correct value. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -21 - Toxic Air Contaminants Comment noted. See Response Comment 14 -2. Response to Comment 14 -22 - Date of Technical Report and Alameda County Surplus Property Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to pages 3 -47 and 3 -48 in the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. A Draft EIR was prepared for the Dublin Transit Center included the Alameda County Surplus Property. The EIR was certified by the City Council on November 19, 2002. Based on the analysis completed in the Dublin Transit Center EIR, the Alameda County Surplus Property was not found to contain any special status species or significant biological features (e.g. wetlands), etc. However, the mitigation measures included in the Draft EIR for the proposed project would apply to future development on the Alameda County Surplus Property site as well, which would ensure that the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on biological resources. MW Page 43 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment 14 -23 - Table 3.3 -1: Habitats and Vegetation Communities within the Project Area Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -47 and 3 -48 of the Draft EIR. See Response to Comment 14 -22. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -24 - Wetlands and Drainage Ditches Comment noted and respective changes have been made to page 3 -49 of the Draft EIR. The revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. �* Response to Comment 14 -25 - Other Waters of the U.S. and an Unnamed Canal (Canal 02) -� Comment noted and respective changes have been made to pages 3 -50 and 3 -51 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -26 - Reference for Special Status Species Occurrence in the Project Area Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -53 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -27 - Identification of the Project Area Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -54 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -28 - Previous Biological Surveys Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -54 of the -* Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -29 - Previous Biological Surveys we Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -54 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -30 - Previous Biological Surveys Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -54 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Page 44 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment 14 -31 - Western Pond Turtle Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -56 of the Draft EIR. The revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -32 - California Red Legged Frog Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -58 of the Draft EIR. The revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -33 - California Red Legged Frog Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -58 of the Draft EIR. This revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -34 - Congdon's Tarplant Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -64 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -35 - Hairless popcorn -flower Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -64 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -36 - Regulatory Framework, California Endangered Species Act Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -68 of the Draft EIR. The revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -37 - California Fish and Game Code Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -69 of the Draft EIR. The revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -38 - Other Waters of the U.S. and the Alameda County Surplus Property Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -72 to 3 -73 of the Draft EIR. The Alameda County Surplus Property is addressed in Response to Comment 14 -22 IMF Page 45 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment 14 -39 - Endangered Species Act Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to pages 3 -74 and 3 -75 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -40 - Western Pond Turtle Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -77 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -41- Reference to Cantonment Area of Camp Parks Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -79 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -42 - California Red Legged Frog w No Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -79 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft •• EIR. -. Response to Comment 14 -43 - Vernal Pool Invertebrates Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -82 and 3 -83 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -44 - Mitigation Measure 3.3 -5 Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -83 the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -45 - Reference to Cantonment Area of Camp Parks Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to pages 2 -2, 3 -53, 3- 54, 3 -79, and 4 -11 the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -46 - Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPs) Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -161 of the Draft EIR. Page 46 Q Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment 14 -47 - Acreage of the School Site Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -177 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -48 - Acreage of the School Site Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to pages 3 -178 and 3- 179 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -49 - Student Generation Commenter does not provide a specific comment on the student generation rates. Therefore, no response is necessary. Response to Comment 14 -50 - Acreage of the School Site Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 3 -212 and 3- 213 in the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -51 - Funding for the Community Park and Neighborhood Parks The project will provide the funds for and the City will design and construct both the Community Park and the two neighborhood parks. Response to Comment 14 -52 - No Project Alternative Comment noted. The No Project Alternative would result in a reduction of impacts to hydrology and water quality in comparison to the proposed project as the alternative would not result in a significant increase in impervious surfaces compared to existing conditions. FMF Page 47 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR cz Response to Comment 14 -53- Fair Share Monetary Contribution Comment noted. The project adds vehicle trips to an improvement already identified by the City's Traffic Impact Fee program. The fair share monetary contribution mitigates the impact of the project's additional trips. ww Response to Comment 14 -54- Fair Share Monetary Contribution Comment noted. The project adds vehicle trips to an improvement already identified by the City's Traffic Impact Fee program. The fair share monetary contribution mitigates the impact of the project's additional trips. Response to Comment 14 -55- Fair Share Monetary Contribution Comment noted. The project contributes to the cumulative impact at this location. The fair share monetary contribution mitigates the impact of the projects additional trips. Response to Comment 14 -56- Fair Share Monetary Contribution Comment noted. The mitigation measure requires the project to complete this improvement. There is no provision for fair share contribution. Response to Comment 14 -57 - Fair Share Monetary Contribution w Comment noted. The project adds vehicle trips to an improvement already �.. identified by the City's Traffic Impact Fee program. The fair share monetary contribution mitigates the impact of the project's additional trips. Response to Comment 14 -58 - Alternative #2 Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to page 4 -27 of the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -59 - Figure 2 -10 Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to Figure 2 -10 in the Draft EIR. The revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the •� Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -60 - Figure 2 -11 Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to Figure 2 -11 in the Draft EIR. The revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -61 - Figure 2 -15 Ow Comment noted and the respective changes have been made to the Draft EIR. The wo revision does not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. .. Page 48 0 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Response to Comment 14 -62 - Phasing Map Comment noted. An updated Phasing Map (to correct minor typographical errors) is included in the Draft EIR. Revisions do not change the analysis or impact conclusion in the Draft EIR. Response to Comment 14 -63 - Alameda County Surplus Property Comment noted. See Response to Comment 14 -22. ME 11,E Page 49 Changes to the Draft EIR Changes to the Draft EIR are shown on the following pages. Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Page 50 La Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Table of Contents Figure 3.7 -1: Sound Levels and Human Response Figure 3.8 -1: Hydrologic Features Figure 3.8 -2: Existing Drainage Figure 3.8 -3: nr^pesed Dr -aina 4, , Proposed Q100 Project Flows Figure 3.10 -1: Sound Levels and Human Response Figure 3.12 -1: Site Location and Off -Site Study Intersections Figure 3.12 -2: Future Project Study Intersections Figure 3.12 -3: Existing Bicycle Facilities Figure 3.12 -4: Existing Transit Routes Figure 3.12 -5a and 3.12 -5b: Existing Lane Configurations Figure 3.12 -6a and 3.12 -6b: Existing Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Figure 3.12 -7: Project Trip Distribution Figure 3.12 -8a and 3.12 -8b: Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Figure 3.12 -9a and 3.12 -9b: 2020 Background No Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Figure 3.12 -10a and 3.12 -10b: 2020 Background No Project Lane Configurations Figure 3.12 -11: 2020 Background No Project Roadway Configurations Figure 3.12 -12a and 3.12 -12b: 2020 Background Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Figure 3.12 -13a and 3.12 -13b: 2035 Cumulative No Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Figure 3.12 -14a and 3.12 -14b: 2035 Cumulative No Project Lane Configurations Figure 3.12 -15: 2035 Cumulative No Project Roadway Improvements Figure 3.12 -16a and 3.12 -16b: 2035 Cumulative Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Figure 3.12 -17: 2035 Cumulative Plus Project Lane Configurations Page v 9W Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final FIR Executive Summary ow In 2004, the US Army developed a master plan summary report describing the proposed future development and revitalization of the portion of the project area .� within Camp Parks. The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) on Master Planned Redevelopment at Camp Parks (U.S. Army Garrison Camp Parks 2009) was the federal environmental document prepared to analyze the environmental^ consequences of implementation of the master plan for redevelopment of Camp Parks. The FEIS included consideration of the proposed project. In December 2007 the Army prepared a "Notice of Availability" to solicit a master developer for the Camp Parks Real Property Exchange Area. The Exchange Agreement provides the Army with an opportunity to modernize facilities through the provision of 180 -acres of Army owned property (including the NASA parcel but excluding the 8.7 -acre Alameda County Surplus Property Authority parcel), to a developer in exchange for Camp Parks facilities improvements. The Exchange .. Agreement is not a part of the Specific Plan but was necessary to facilitate acquisition of the property by the project developer. In October 2008, the Army announced the selection of the master developer for the Project. In April 2011, the developer and the U.S. Army officially finalized the Exchange Agreement, authorizing the developer to commence the Specific Plan process. Project Description The Specific Plan addresses the future development of the project area, which is comprised of residential, commercial, parks and open space, and an elementary school. Specifically, the proposed project includes up to 1,995 residential units-(-x -t J- Helnding seeendar-y units); up to 200,000 square feet of commercial uses, 30 net - acre community park; five acres of neighborhood parks; and provisional space for a 12 -acre elementary school site. Summary of Environmental Impacts All impacts identified in the subsequent environmental analysis are summarized in Table S -1: Executive Summary of Project Impacts, which identifies impacts by each technical section. Summary of Cumulative Considerable Effects The proposed project would result in a significant cumulative impact from short - term construction air quality emissions and long -term operational air quality emissions, as well as a significant cumulative impact to the Southbound Hacienda Drive to I -580 Eastbound On -Ramp and the Southbound Tassajara Road to I -580 Westbound On -Ramp. Summary of Alternatives CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR describe and evaluate alternatives to the "W project that could eliminate significant adverse project impacts or reduce them to a am Page ES -2 Faw ro x } W c c E C � U w Q U [1 LI cn p U O O Q G cCt bA cn p h O p U U S-. U L. O N N N R O 0 R oA O z U GO Y � U bA � N cC U w_ U bA V p 0 ^ Q G is N td b-0 N Q O P. L Q O � fi1 U O N ° C O N h V) Q O m Q O cC O O O p a O ° "t� a� o 0 � •�, sue. z ° � y °',� o o V) a H 0'�� V noa3 = as 0 V) 0 U 3. N O � U O N a. 3 3 o bA .. axi M U GO Y � U bA � N U w_ O bA V p 0 ^ Q G is N td � U p N O P. L Q O � fi1 U O N ° C O N Q O m Q O cC O O O p 0 O ° "t� a� o 0 � •�, sue. z ° � y °',� p U w M in G O Ln a Q � O Ln CD x. o y y O ° � o 'in o a O M ° O m > ° O CC U .�-� �. a. • � a. � � b�'q vOi U Ln V) w a� tao U w_ O bA cin td N O P. O N ° C O V^ O w t3. O O O p O ° "t� a� o V) � •�, sue. � � y °',� noa3 Ln V) w a� tao w a U w •v s. CZ bA E G E o x a> v > ° ^� U ra w is w a) bG � o. �11*1 s S; Y O p Y c o O r- U O° a) N� C C S: -W. p0 .fl C O Y O Y o U C -10- ..O p IZ ° N o O CL U U N -O s n O pp S3 a) p in o v -p cz U 'U ^ >� U Y U p p N •p_ z. 3 N b�D > O bO.D i� N 0 N Q. cp4 v O w � .Y. -- S'. "a � = N N cp U .� ^r CC G1. ° f6 Q to - - m U Q _ a) 4= ^„� V1 . 3 o w. p Q Y ° 3 o a o o c o" Y a� _c o ° 4--i ° �, h p N (YE C .� G U ° �- (YE TU�. Y 3 Y N C O n a) 0 U C V C p� p �� aJ V a ° cs wo ro `�' m ° Q 3 o > � °�° ° .� m ° ca o ° c Ln a o ° a n cj do c ca N �" p0 cC 0 s .bn \ ° �' cd N (d a) ^ .i m cn u U O 75 s. O O ° c G cE s-. L .� U 3 N -, v7 o Y 3 y Q) H o° u Y r- a) U S- ° to C t. a) U to i. Q] S-. E"" Qr O a) (� �"'� „Q U V7 •� Z�" 0 .� N a) N c 3 a' o � Y ' � N '= H � ca � in. � � •� 03 O u cz 3 a .� 0 aa)i 0 s� m c)> 0 C)i C° �..,.....: co N Y ... O Q .r. 3 E U Cl. 3 > U Cc 'L3 co s: w a U w •v s. CZ bA E G E o x a> v > ° ^� U ra w is w a) bG � o. �11*1 s it a. O z. O Ou pU cC o o C) C CL) (1) -C� (1) (1) CD j 44 w Z 4Q z Ln cn (�) F" Cz C3 h ca N > C, rj " o bpi 0 QJ 0 En bZ C) t u > u 7� 0 u E " .— z C-n u V) in w > 0 C) CA tD 0 o 0 IZ5 Ln > Ln > C) > 0 Q U L) > a) U V) u C) Ln Ln r Ca L. C Ln cn NO! A, 0 Cz > a) o- m u u tDi m u cc 3 0 m M (1) v) -s—n C) M C u C Lr, OJ C) u U Q) > 0 E 0) CZ C). Q) 0 4W cu 0 o C) 0 V) Ito U CT) m bo u 0 v) (1) STS > CL) C) y M u 0 C) C, > E v, ro CU CO o C) u cn C) m CA C) U� > V) V) En V) AMR-[ U C) . . . . . . . . . . :z ce) u V) - En (1) a) 'LS 'z > u o u C) > 6 V) 4, U C) u - 0 rl) o cn Q) L. u z — u 0 O3 v) Cz �L) u u C13 U (1) cn M C) V) (1) m ('73 Ln • (1) u bA C) o V) (1) cn V, U * -1z -C U V) > I- u c n U gaU ca , u 0 m 3 L) Z. CL -t -0 Ou a W w a U W O V) v > � •N u � U � U Q w w' O .r 6i ra u 0 L7 61 p0 •� O O O r u c C cq O ' pNj +p-' W O cc U M G' U W d' L s. O �� 'i O ��� '� s0 O G O O (ZD C) 0 .� C > cn O C vOi - >' Cl. O O w Ca O t.. LC O �,.,, +� •-- O � � O bD RS ''i"' T5 ' � Cz, O cn � � •�+ � .O' U .fl •'� w I p �' ° cn 3 °' a 3 o U 3 m c Ln O m. > w o a �, � .� O 'CT3 0 LS =— C Q O 00 cl V) o '� +`� Q x °� O a.+ C) o � U ° N _ (4 O bA C1 = cn h v p N >> N .fl y,,, C •. •a.; w u ti n O a' p) p v w w> C Q O U 0 E c4 C O 'O � O OU � CZ O 7� +:� U n . •—• C4 �„ O �+ .� U `/� O 7., ciw... U w �+ ,O Cn ca V) ;Z 1.-+ 'C3 .0 L7. p CZ ' n C) N w O O p .0 ,� p O cU6 O O t 4 co C O o ° ti O C �n Q M y a o. o U > � �' m � a o •o � ca o °J . uu o U U � V �, o °�' ,� M � °° z. o � a � a� -° x O c .° o d v o` a o 0 ,a3 cz Ln N N Y CAS ' .C1 Q � U O Qi O U N i1 i 00 w N bD ! a 0- C4 w ° E E o ° U w � °w b-0 V) O U G .-O O Q 0" V) w b b4 ° a ■ O U Qi d b0 B N CZ ° cz U U> w U N, i 3� U U., o 3 N O c03 c E o cq u c U o n.� > o Q �' N a o °° °°° '� a� o o 3 0 U c�a C 7 -- A E p0 p p z> ti E p Q 9 o En Z a., t: O O .bn O �— cC ° ... M — O .. u cz �-' �' -O p U p U Q . : 4Q Q Q y� i.. Q jJ iJ ..-� Q M CZ � m O O O �\ M . U z _� E "O O 3 E 'c3 ct p O u a� p +' p w E �. r- c N N >_ C U Ln U +� cn a CZ G. U L U o .� ,_, w 3 oon O C) o +� o .� o ° O ��-+ ° m>�°'�oo� U Q m v .o 3 -r- -- .� u c) E a a- '� o c o v b cn ° bA C o :::5 bbL .E -- ti U O G1.7� I a) N m m m sue. cC w v7 U E C1..0 A-0 O L-0 O U O O U U Q V7 . � u O 0" V) w b b4 ° a ■ R 0 w 0 R a v 4.. U a) V U C 'i+ � U Q W w Q a� a R •� .� O N O� Q N O �� � _� Q) Q) O p R R U�9 tj s c6� al LO R R O R �- >.3 3 CZ o. U cn O U O .� Ll O> C w w p U O N .p p .O •y p a) vrO E O O oV) R x C p_ n 3 R° E o o u It O R R -- O Ca , > x N R R cn U O C En o z, o w o o o °o' '0 cz o v � M o o a v n M cps axi R axi v � o � a V CO 4} i! r i O N W a) R a h cG ,,� o ao I it L--� I cz ts C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............... . ... . . A Z c ll 1 1 4.1 C, 4- C3 . 5 Ll t.0 C) K. :� E :� 6 3 7Ej 4MI -05 C) C, E V) 0 V, Xj w tn . . . ...... . 3 C5 V) co V) 0 Q) V c 3 c 3 h > -13 r- U V, cu Cc Cc "I'll C) -6 cz c CU C) c cc 0 C5 L- cz E w L) o C 4.1 —c C) ca = to C) C) Ct ca m Ft El 0 r- "0 u - ::S 2 H 473 V) m E cz u US 11 fj-, A, C ............ . . - C) a rl C) E Q) N N i w b w c V) C) ............ CZ V, 'A cz V, V) C) > c) M to cc = U cc V) a W cz N O .4;1 cz -� u r. N CL) > CZ 3 U E In a) ca o 4� r= V) 0 V) C) > J©i W rq M w C) V, CC vii 0 M V) L. V) u u it L--� I a-- C4 ca > C) 4 O O r- Q) V) (1) w 0 0 r" w W N M. -,� C, b0.0 u g-_ 0 U, u a) _J -0 Ex u �:-- C) — a) V) > C) Q) 0 0 (1) cu nz� c) -0 V) V) wu m ul U 0 U CZ E c) V) W -9-- C) V) Ln r, L/) cr > r- V) V) C-n Ct -0 U M in C) V) V) Lz. w V) V) > Ln -40 E cn cz V) cn u V) :1 z 0 o V) V) C) m In I- w V) in m C) L. ET gi a) E M M cu cz m cr O O u 0 UO w L. m cu 7a tj J- V, 0 V) m V) 0 "a V) a) -S- 0 �Ll 2 0 C) 0. = • Ln Gp -K-- s., '0 t� m .O N y >, .(Z "' "' y„ ^O Q) N 'tS >, N r— s- � C 'C� uj O x .� RS N U O h O O W '3 •s. u ° O u C L. s. '6 to y., Lz. Q' O O ca cn ,, 6, ^' cC ¢, -O y0, O +-' s�'. .fl .� O '� O •LS 7 c0 N .� ':$ O m U U ca G O �+ 4� O p v� N C N O O O 00 f N W cn ° Ll. -0 -a A N U .fl � O O u TS O t0. vi O N O" v��i c�E vj cC U ° Q. N �n t. Z bA U c6 O L =' W O W W 4 >O Ll. t, cC �y .� U) �'' yam., U O .� O Cl. w O a. i. R O +-+ N V N S�. O O nS cz U U N bD CS' L U ¢ V N O N w aj C w C3 .N U> o w0 En m w 9 N F O En v N O °. o u u.= o f a° E -0 u �r c w 0 a U w U ¢, L C/) R bA O U L. Q U Q Cz it N Ln W N bD 0.. I�R NOR ww to fi. O a v-. b-0 O z. U C O G1 U) N V) W O bA 0. e p 'd _U V) tei C � W 2 O U 'O O w 41 CU O ��.� W ' U sp. U E vi s' U X � 7 E i' � sp n p U W C - p E N O .� c. m N v s.. O C cn �-' i � ,� 1, ,- -' O O m U O C U O R C ,a `�°3a�.L o m� 3° °UE U a-0� 3L 3 w °�° u U .y 3 0 _° a= c v C) Z c y n U ro ai b °' c° U ado a .� 3 E� •� +� C N s] a� z. U 0. s. N O ro °' p y C� o C .0 p Q w U U c6 "' c0 O +-' U p c0 C O °° 1 p ,a , cl) cm m v y n CL .� ^ v a O w 'C3 O u ice-+ t0. a= 'n 'y y CA O O Q p CL p .0 sp, U �D E-• �. cC s. g M u ti 77- C prd�F��w^ w i ° °o o o � a M 12 M U) N V) W O bA 0. e z ZS dD V) — — (L) � >, Z 4- M — I— p , ') , -�z -a , C) — V) -C� j -t� - 0 cz -r- V) C) 44 u w m C) V, — 0 cz CL cz CL) cz — , — " r� — — .— 0 $M. u CL C) > C) cu Q C) C) C). 0 E E c) o C) C'3 4� C) tic m m u C SO bn > c) > Ln u CU (1) V V) C) ) CU CL) cz 0 4,1 V) U C) U cz cz bn r- = r. u Ln C) > 4� 0 W cu r (2) Q) V) C) tn V) M V) > CU Lf) U (1) CA C u V) u = U 'cn) 4CI U C) CN > m 0 CL) CZ 4;� C.L, cu u C) C3) 'n m (n > 75 V) -0 0 " 0 -S -05 U V) 0 0 cu (n m m V) Ln m > c.) M V) cc 0 -0 Ln V) V) V) V) V) V) cu ;z Q) 75 -= E CZ v cnz cul 0 cn U u E cu 0) cz -a rq v w rn (1) cn (L) V) x 75 r- >' r- m (n V) (1) w (u C) C) S! .— 0 (2) cz C) > a d- "a u C) u > 0 C\j >' Co C'4 rL �: V M ,, y y rq 4.1 V) V) V) u u V) (3) .. . . . . . ....... . a) (Z u t C-4 CU m CL) > O CD O 0 -a 0 L. 4-1 w -05 -VI V) V) s 1 N cu -0 V) CZ u U V) cz C5 Q) m 0 C) Q) In. to ca C) T ,-- �D. V) 75 V, a) O CD m "a E V) cz -0 1- a) -a cz > V) u L� cz > ca = E U 'C) s. 4� V) O V) O x. cz C) u 0. C) Q) C) m M Z' cz (z > — u -= m C-q 4 z C, '— U -r5 Ln Q. U CZ 4.3 it • ass YEN V) Mrb *W C4 W � c0 p "L 6 Cl. 4. U � Q U U u ) ao 0 cn V) 0 0 Q 6 C) N 'CS r = d' O O- 'CS � s0, rO+ p C S O O N v] O -1 s C m p O O "-� txl S- ,C m v) "" O O =- s.: O O cn O O. c/) i. r4 v) ate-+ co O O ,cv',,, > ^O L' ° v) R O U t4 N N O O U p n0 p N zU. p N SO., r0 c� , cn a) x p p O U p , co �' a� = a) U O 5 U p �. O O >, N '_" O '� U 'Z N W �_ Q. O U N cn O >' U ..0 O >, s0. c0 0.. �' v > R M v a ° `�° z fl a�i ca �� coa \ w C u U o o U U o U o �- o°? �, o .� ,� o o bn O > w 4-- � � t. �, �_ C].. co s, � co ,� +-' Cl. •-- 'ts �1. O O > O O S3. o a o v) o 0 o U o' Q° v, 4U > o ° > O CS N O O U O En Ln x u fs. `+- to O O O cC \ N N y O O `n }' O C O .a) cn w0 p- U o as U z. o U N o y ro U o n .O s>. v ¢. u c p O� C O w0 vi �O.+ p s, w O N T5 a) U w U O s '+ N N 4-+ 4- O> O U 7O z. a) s. p o Q .� Ems- n a ra o Q> c a a p a. cn c�a C u n a c Ln w > x cu m U w cif N U cn a. s. p cz O H N OU v7 > p '� U L O w '> N LD. p C N O •O ,; o; s. ° O V, O m O V) N W O �A ,f. E, is O U U O Ln E E v) 0 00 V) C) by yes 41 U V) V, 0 VS C) U bj -a Q6) bz U u o C) V) a) �-: 0 CL) 7.1 W 75 t: C) (1) C13 > L. 2 4-1 V) bll 4= V) V) u C U E V) U (2) un m m > M Ln L- 4Q > CZ w U Q6) o) u m (vn) CL) En 4. C,3 u U Ln u a ,° > > bj () V) cz iii (n ", .................... G c4 � (1) s0. � c) 0 O cu cc m u a In C) -0 CU .2 E ai > Cz N m V) u V) •= 0 Q (A CZ Ln CZ Q) U E -g-- V) C) (1) V) 00 V) C) by yes ■ o CL bA V) rssw V) 0 011 GD 0. low N u 0 lu 'E —u .0 > 3 4.1 4.1 4.1 k % 4-1 4. 4. 4 > >) 4 do 5 s a O T. 75 4. C) u > r- 0 u L ) � I V) CL 14 r- c) .- Z C cc >1 (1) > u cc 4.5 Tj . .. ... . .... > V) a V) C V) 4 V) c u C) U a) > :z V) V) 'Z r u C) 4- X O. V) V) v) m 411, 4-1 4-1 r- V, r. o R MS 4-1 u I I L I t.0 L I L I cc 3" 4 1 1 c L X bt L L V) L 441 AO� Vi C) Q) -I-- = -C ." t u E -, 4- 2 o V) :3 °L' V) V, CLO V) 0 tz 'CI 2 > CU C) U V) 111 4� m 0 L.. V) Ln cz N bt V) CZ c) (n V) V) C) C CL) 011 GD 0. low a. O bA o V) o u -r- o Lo o -a C) -0 (3) C) o u C2 bz in M V) E bi a U tio Ln V) z CL) > u ca C, U V) 'A CZ bb E u E a Ln V) 'A (3) V) E tD.0 Ln c) A E V) Lf) V) N V) V (3) 75 r r- C) U o V) -0 U M Ln a Co z C) V) M U (2) a — Z3 C) —1 zi 75 0 C=) Ln (1) W u u U E C) 0 bz cz V, -tz 7:7 (L) L- M ;z 'bi V) V, V) C/) u cl V, r- !El E s 4 2 L. 4S 0) wW Ut , O bA W � v F- F � U O � aZ U U U U W V bA V) O T.. CJ C O Q W % � p3 CA Vl C U w a0 ca N v- �• U bA TS C U O 'o O U •� a> C >, w ca c0 .� O •^ ,� O M O � O N4 3 cn c4 ^ O a� v O— ^ ° r- -; s0 O N '9 �O cn °~ .Y U +-+ ... s.. CC +-' S3' o O v7 G U LO 00 ,� O •� p c6 S. yU.i O N N j • .� ^ O O O O '+' w• C bA `� U N N Lo U 4=. c U O O O r4 CR ° o C u U Q O L .° U 7o m N O O p C V) G C R '� c06 C U ..-. o y .0 p L- � V U vOi 3 O caa c C > o bA y O O. U T3 i. U GO L. O Q p Q tC n � z n . O O cO C O I N p O U w N Ll V) h a� C O U w bA >, C U O a a a c w U a > cv V) ° o t� .� N U O 0 p , ' ro O O U o c0 N pC" 'CS E O z O ►. ciS w � M W U RS L�. cz • I LLw� bA see um 4* CO ca m 0) C) Cl) U V) Cl) (3) cz a Cl) (3) vp o O u 0 w 75 ai Cl) 8 u 0 m Cl) tz Cl) 75 M CD cl) Ln cz cz cz cv)) Ln o 'v cz 0 0 v z 1 0 . .. .. .. ........ 11111111� 3 Z 1 N, En Ln V) CU V) Cl) Q) V) a) V) m O -u Ni cz V) 0) Q) cn (n -T.3 CZ W Vn 0 C) m N CZ o" W Cl) U W m N u cz 71 ;Z cl) 4� M V) u C, o cz cz Ln m V) (1) Q) V) C) r. 0 cz 0 Cl) u "Z� m C) -cs Cl) (2) L. r- u C) 4�1 j W j) (:) _ , .�: N" �: - u cz cz u W E a Ln C) a < -0 Ln >1 cz 0 U u V u cl) u 0) -0 u a) 4.+ u > "Z3 in C13 cz C) ON u E 0 U V) E CD • I LLw� bA see um cz U bq O V) r- bA u u u biC w bn V N -a , c06 Ll S, m m x r_ M E It C) 4-1 Ln Z cz O 0 -0 V) Q ax 14 ........... Ln sin cn Ln 0 cz N Q) cz 0 Ln V) m Ln E T. m M cz u u 0 p c) bno r- 0 0 E m > 0 CL) Q) V) 41 C) E 4' C) —) CZ C U '4= V) , 7a -0 U 7a (3) bn 0 rL so. (1) (1) C) ol ct gn. Ct > cz M bz r:L. V) 0 :5 -0 > (1) r. = E ;64 m L. V) 75 7� - . bA w ro w 0 a U w N ,7 R ao E E � o `! v o x Q w O L C 3 > 0 0 t E O O � h E >, 0 0 cn o x c� o °o 1 �r w 0 an cz a w Im M d N O O O O ° o� ° ° o C °' a 0 ° 0 3 0 �_ 3 °v ^a Ln U U ~ G) U O z. �+ N > O i'•' U vY U ,� O p p C �" '� }-+ C Ll c,.., cn ciS c4 O c0 O C > U t, t]. ¢' �' > C rU+ cn O '-' w �, .~ C O .� c6 .�+ .O cn — z a O Sx U C C ° U O O 'o .v 0� ,co a¢ O O CL y= p .. ° .� .� F O w C bA N y � �' G L C � � � •V v �`" ¢� .i C6 N N co w vi N O 'LS N cn .� O O w U O U U m N O bA •� C .� ?✓ "" p O p m , z. L p �+ c6 �.., .O Ln ❑ o U d' 'A CU o o C �s °' v 0 a o W o v o o cc .N a. N t M U w C E U u It O O s. �+ v p N v N C cz ` O O %- cC ... �, cn t i, N O . .0 .� d U U U C� 0. c� v U w mn E .� ..0 N U v -0 -0 E ,� L C 3 > 0 0 t E O O � h E >, 0 0 cn o x c� o °o 1 �r w 0 an cz a w Im M d 5 ± \ � = E Ln \ C) 3/ \ \ %2 � / / u _ / c \ % 7 § f \ \ \ 0 _ £ m ( \ @ § _ 0 � E 0 2 \ \ \ / \ t=a», =3[00 / ° \ \ \ o \ \ \ \ \.�.[ \ c E f o© t// °x& ==c t£ kEm2 = m �._ = z \ E ® _ c o 0 2 7/ \\\ // \2//�\ m o L. 5 / � - c = R /.§ a \ \ [ 5 W \ w U ^ � ¥ ® t / 3 2 a m / g — A' z ° \ \ 2 § 5 \ \ / / £ _ \ 2 \ / � \ 2 \ \ 2 § f \ to=7oV) © -0 »z=— ° / \•- ` ° ° S a 5 '/ /3 v� \E /3u2 /bnM 0 5 u 0 ®x o 0 3 ° = _ _. ._ _ \ / ƒ /\�5\ / \ \\ _ § & 2 \ \ U t 2 \ t 0 @ { / \ \ \ \ / / a I CG W Ci. C a. V N � R bA cn V o a U � k Q Lz 0 w® 0 �n W N b-0 ww N f1, ewx cz cn m Ln U U W W U V N N Ln V) N 4J L. cz cz m J� 1� Ln V) N V) C V) N h 0 w® 0 �n W N b-0 ww N f1, ewx cz cn m Ln cn V) v U V N N N 4J L. cz m Ln N V L. i. C V) N h m ca U U E E G C O O ro m to oA E 0 0 z z 0 w® 0 �n W N b-0 ww N f1, ewx CA C C N O m O u ti O wu 3 O� .� ^O N � O - O p "" w C U •� U U �• .p N •�-, O .� (6 U N O cn i, N Fes-' 1'' C> U '� O •+' p, O cC� tU, C y C' L v O .z� q_ cc U O cc a� ro 'O t, ri dJ O i M r 1 O O Q O N 7 N C p L, . LS O O � L.. cp6 V) �"� U C= C] N OU O O G U � N •� cU6 vi ray Q •� N V) u u v w U N U U U �, O O .� N cn O cn C_l V s. N 7p. U N s. ��., Ln V O w co N '. O N O C. '� O U O O 00 N w v •� �O S O N OU N 'C N N +�.+ .Fi U z �.., .�. O Q U �--I � '�-+ c4 M. r-+ m -0 w � 0 w® 0 �n W N b-0 ww N f1, ewx Cis G. ao O bA O LOI) 0 CU V) LO L a0 V) d—, LI) cn cn ;5 to U (3) Q) u E (3) Ln 0 lat U E) -0 C 0 ca > Q) cq '-a) N O 0 Ln -:- CO cz U0 �7n 7F� C) -lg w V) a) 0 C) u ca 0 -0 0 m :— M 0 0 CL) ca, C:) C) Z5 M C) m ln. CN > C) (1) U m O Q) C) c 1) m (2) m U "U , u E) a) r (1) -5 6 (2) '4_� — 0 " 0 tz O cu O O ca sn .. C, ca > r. Q_ _011, r-I u Cq O TS C,4 Ij u a) L u Cu ca a) _C5 m m C6 75 r- cn o O bA O Rl ZS O U V) V) c7. C. C. C. >1 4 it U') Q) she C13 C) C) (2) t 2 1>1-1 E g L" C:, v-) -2--, 4-1 =Cl h 11 � -0 L C, 17 4 cc am 4(,-' CD -S E -0 M� -4 42 T t E �3 ct E cz C5 � '1� '' $ mw m C) w E 'r— cn) (,1),2 C .2 C", C) 75 5 49 4Q E *Z '4 En C-Z C) .2 Cl) 4-1 C) m u Itnl (n CZ LDo rC-) 49 C) > 7 'a mm u M. 2 (11 CZ cz C) 0 > >: -2 7 .2 tM 4.1 u CZ Cc 11 V, C) co 0 CU c 15 C) Ac E 0 In cz (1, C>" c Mo 1. O cz o Qj U" E b "I L. 0 M ?: E u C) F- 11) cz bn P. r- 74= M := Z C) Q) im" 4� U u .— = , m 4-1 " M W M cz W Q) C) -�l :::s C 0 0 V) 0 > cz L. 0 C (1) o Q) bn in. c-) ra- 0 c) u m u E E u cz "Q Ln 0) LO fA cn cul -0 V) V) V) m Q) O C) 0 U Z >r: M E) C) > ca C) o C Lr) cz 0 m ;z C) C) Cl) > M. 0 C) u C14 4 it U') Q) she C7, aJ bA Ln V) Ca Ln C) CID ct r—I w co T C) V) V) (1) A r- A- cj C) u V) M cc 0 U V) 4-1 to 44 u tz tz C5 Q) U (1) C.) E m > O C, m -0 U CL) m m tr U U C) 17' C) Ste. c O cz TS T3 CL u E ca ci U 0 U C) aj -) c) 0) v) 0) tz V Q. "I = = (Z U (a) Z=°0 0 m c I u cn �2 (:) b-C tz " m r- 0 &� = d, U i M u CO r- 0 o 0 u o 72 4-- , E- C) -0 r- 4. tz m w 0 Z. t:Lc 12 C.) 4. V) c — C 0 _4 t:U = 4 Q) 4-. (1) 0 0 CL) a) 0 cu a bz P� Cl 0 r- o C) 0 L 4-1 M (3) (3) C 7.1 U 0 0 M a , L; -�3 E vl u 0 u 0 It :P- 0 E E 0 C) cz c) (a) V) a u Cl, C) L) > u C) ctS C) Ln V) C) Cl) u 4MI E E-- u 'n V) C Ln 0 w Ca M° > Ln -C� > V) 0 > u U C) CL 0 cz 0 -5-- U > U Ln -C; C) cz u L1 0 V) Ln C) CID ct r—I Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Project Description M M M consequences of implementation of the master plan for redevelopment of Camp Parks. The FEIS included consideration of the proposed project. .. In December 2007 the Army prepared a "Notice of Availability" to solicit a master developer for the Camp Parks Real Property Exchange Area. The Exchange .. Agreement provides the Army with an opportunity to modernize facilities through the provision of 180 -acres of Army owned property (including the NASA parcel but excluding the 8.7 -acre Alameda County Surplus Property Authority parcel), to a .. developer in exchange for Camp Parks facilities improvements. The Exchange Agreement is not a part of the Specific Plan but was necessary to facilitate acquisition of the property by the project developer. '* In October 2008, the Army announced the selection of the master developer for the Project. In April 2011, the project applicant and the U.S. Army officially finalized the "" Exchange Agreement, authorizing the project applicant to commence the Specific Plan process. 2.2 Regional Location The project area is located in the City of Dublin in northern Alameda County, near am the center of the Tri Valley region. Regional access to the City is from Interstate 580, Interstate 680, and the Dublin /Pleasanton line of Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART). Cities that border Dublin include San Ramon to the north (in Contra Costa County), Pleasanton to the south and Livermore to the east. The regional location is shown in Figure 2 -1: Regional Location. 2.3 Project Location The project area is centrally located in the City of Dublin, between the major urban areas of West and East Dublin. The project area is bound by a network of streets; 5th and 6th street to the north, Arnold Road to the east, Dublin Boulevard to the south and Scarlett Drive (with future extension) and the Iron Horse Regional Trail to the west. The project area would connect with the Iron Horse Regional Trail, which provides access to the Dublin /Pleasanton BART station, approximately one -third mile to the south. The project vicinity map is shown in Figure 2 -2: Project Vicinity. The project area is generally flat and a significant portion is undeveloped. Two seasonal drainages traverse the project area, one north to south generally through the middle of the project area and another along the eastern border, parallel to Arnold Road. Existing Setting /Baseline Conditions The project area was historically used as grazing land prior to the installation of Camp Parks in the 1940s. The portion of the project area within Camp Parks is .w known as the "Cantonment" area. The project area contains former and /or existing supply buildings and warehouses, infrastructure maintenance facilities, vehicle Page 2 -2 M rw Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Proiect Description the Environmental Impact Report. The City of Dublin and the project applicant have provided the following project objectives for the proposed project: • Ensure a long -term financially viable infill project that provides for the creation of new jobs, recreational opportunities, and expanded housing opportunities. • Create a community that is compatible in scale and design with surrounding land uses. • Create a project that has a fiscally- neutral impact on the City's financial and services resources. • Create a community with a strong sense of place and a range of recreation and mobility amenities by designing a unique streetscape that will serve to tie the neighborhoods together with an integrated design theme. • Establish a cohesive community feel in the project area through the development and implementation of design guidelines that ensure consistency between individual neighborhoods while allowing unique architectural expression. • Provide sufficient land for the Dublin Unified School District (DUSD) to construct an elementary school within the project site. • Provide a new community park that will be the centerpiece of Dublin Crossing and serve as the focus for major social, cultural, and recreational events for the project, residents of Dublin, and the Tri- Valley region. • If the City of Dublin, the Dublin Crossing project developer and the County of Alameda come to an agreement on the transfer of the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority ( ACSPA) property to either the City of Dublin or the Dublin Crossing project developer, include the 8.7 -acre ACSPA parcel in the project area and plan for its full integration into the project design while maintaining the park acreage at some location within the project area. • Create a distinctive Dublin Boulevard with amenities and facilities that are consistent with the City of Dublin Streetscape Master Plan, Bikeways Master Plan, and the City of Dublin General Plan. • Provide a range of transportation choices; including walking, bicycling, and access to transit (BART and bus service), ridesharing, and vanpooling to reduce traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. • Provide enhanced transportation amenities that encourage non - vehicular access to and on the Iron Horse Regional Trail, the Dublin /Pleasanton BART station, and to both on -site and adjacent commercial services. Provide an east -west roadway through the project site area to enhance circulation between the points east and points west of the area. Page 2 -6 RW Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Project Description Construct one or more neighborhood parks that are conveniently located and serve as a focal point of recreation and neighborhood events. • Provide flexibility in land use regulations to allow for site constraints, variations in housing styles, and changing market conditions. • Provide a mixture of residential unit types appropriate to the projected housing needs as identified in the City of Dublin General Plan Housing Element. Mitigate the unusual phasing impacts of the proposed project by ensuring that each phase (or combination of phases) can stand alone as a well - designed neighborhood with an adequate circulation network and an alternative transition between the proposed project and the remaining Camp Parks base. , Promote environmental stewardship through the inclusion of progressive energy programs and standards in construction and ongoing operation of residential and commercial buildings. 2.6 Proposed Land Uses and Development Plan The proposed project will redevelop the project area into a new, mixed -use community with residential, commercial, retail, and parks and open space land uses. Figure 2 -9: Land Use Diagram shows the proposed land use designations at the project area. Development within the project area would be constructed according to the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (Specific Plan). The Specific Plan is a planning document for the proposed project identifies the ultimate land use plan, circulation, infrastructure, and fiscal impacts on public services. The Specific Plan also includes a set of development regulations and design guidelines that will be referenced as part of all subsequent development reviews and approvals. The proposed project includes up to 1,995 residential units; 200,000 square feet of commercial uses, a 30 -net acre community park (exclusive of the creek corridor); five acres of neighborhood parks; and provisional space for a 12 net usable acre elementary school site. The land use breakdown is included in Table 2 -1: Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Land Use Breakdown. The land use diagram for the proposed project is shown in Figure 2 -7: Conceptual Land Use Plan. An illustrative site plan, which is a conceptual plan for the proposed project is shown in Figure 2 -8: Illustrative Site Plan. w. 07 Page 2 -7 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Project Description Table 2 -1: Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Land Use Breakdown The proposed project will be connected by a hierarchy of streets, trails, linked open spaces, and interconnected neighborhoods. Land uses will also visually and physically connected by circulation infrastructure, continuity of streetscapes, complementary design features, and by the nature of their compatibility. Land uses in the project area reflect the optimal type and mix necessary to achieve the vision of a livable and sustainable, transit - oriented urban village. The types of uses and transportation network proposed support transit - oriented development (TOD) for the Dublin /Pleasanton BART station, local transit service. It will also link to the Iron Horse Regional Trail and reinforce a stronger connection between West and East Dublin. Page 2-8 Total Permitted Total Development Land Use Acreage' Density Potential Dublin Crossing LoweF Medium Density Residential (DC 41.9 6.0 -14.0 MDR units /net acre Up to 1,995 dwelling units.' Dublin Crossing Medium -h Hig 14.1 - 2&25 Density Residential DC M -HDR 46.5 units/net acre Mixed Use (MU)2 20.1 - 60 units /net 13.2 acre 0.25 to 1.0 FAR General Commercial /DC Medium 14.1 - 2-8-25 Density Residential (GC /DC M- 9.1 units /net acre 75,000 to 200,000 HDR )3 0.25 to 1.0 FAR gross square feet General Commercial /DC High 20.1 - 60 units /net Density Residential (GC /DC 9.9 acre HDR )3 0.25 to 1.0 FAR Park (P)4 30 n/a n/a Open Space OS 2.6 n/a n/a School (S )l 12 n/a n/a Roadways, Utilities, and other n/a Infrastructure 23.8 n/a Total Net Project Area Acreage 189 Notes: (1) Acreages are rounded to the nearest whole number. Net acreage is defined as the gross acreage less backbone street, public street, and right -of -way area. (2) The Mixed Use land use district shall contain a minimum of 75,000 gross square feet of commercial uses (with a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.0) and a 5 acre neighborhood park. In conjunction with an application that meets the commercial and park requirements above, residential uses are permitted with a density of up to 60 units /net acre. FAR applies only to commercial uses. (3) Can have commercial only, mixed -use, or residential -only uses. FAR applies only to commercial uses. (4) Park acreage is net usable acres. In the case of the 30 net -acre Community Park, the park is exclusive of Chabot Creek, the north -south drainage in the western portion of the project area. (5) Net usable acreage. The school site can be developed at the Dublin Crossing Lower Density Residential (DC LDR) use and density if the site is not utilized by the Dublin Unified School District and if the Specific Plan maximum of 1,995 residential units is not exceeded. The proposed project will be connected by a hierarchy of streets, trails, linked open spaces, and interconnected neighborhoods. Land uses will also visually and physically connected by circulation infrastructure, continuity of streetscapes, complementary design features, and by the nature of their compatibility. Land uses in the project area reflect the optimal type and mix necessary to achieve the vision of a livable and sustainable, transit - oriented urban village. The types of uses and transportation network proposed support transit - oriented development (TOD) for the Dublin /Pleasanton BART station, local transit service. It will also link to the Iron Horse Regional Trail and reinforce a stronger connection between West and East Dublin. Page 2-8 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Project Description Residential Neighborhoods The proposed project will contain 88.4 acres of residential neighborhoods accommodating up to 1,995 residential units with densities ranging from 6 to 2 -0-25 dwelling units per net acre. Dublin Crossing Lower-Medium Density Residential (DC 144RMDR ) has a density of 6 to 14 units per net acre; Dublin Crossing Medium -High- Density Residential (DC M -HDR) has a density of 14.1 to 2 -0-25 units per net acre-,-a-n4 Three other non - residential land use districts and the school site also allow the potential for residential uses, some up to a maximum of 60 units per acre depending on the district. However, the maximum number of residential units allowed within the project area is 1,995 units, which includes any units in these non - residential land use districts. There will be a variety of housing types throughout the project area including single - family detached, single- family attached and multi - family units. They will be located to provide a logical transition from the existing high density residential development adjacent to the BART station and from the existing medium - density residential neighborhood east across Scarlett Drive. Residential density ranges within each residential neighborhood are allowed to provide flexibility of subdivision design and to adapt to changing future housing market conditions. Commercial Mixed Use Q The Mixed Use (MU) land use district is proposed for 13.2 acres at the northwest corner of Arnold Road and Dublin Boulevard. The Mixed Use land use district will contain a minimum of 75,000 and a maximum of 200,000 gross square feet of w commercial uses (with a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.0) and a 5 acre neighborhood park. In conjunction with an application that meets the commercial and park requirements above, residential uses are permitted with a density of up to 60 units /net acre that is not included in the commercial FAR calculations. Residential -only uses are not permitted. Mixed -use can take the form of vertical mixed -use, horizontal mixed -use, or a combination of both. Vertical mixed -use is characterized by residential use above and adjacent to the base commercial. Horizontal mixed -use is characterized by residential use adjacent to the base commercial, as either attached or detached units, but the project is designed so that the residential and commercial uses are .. integrated and built simultaneously to function as a single project. Page 2 -9 OW a Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Project Description Typical permitted commercial uses include a variety of eating and drinking establishments, hotel, entertainment, retail stores, bank branches, bookstores, markets, personal and professional services, and office uses. A five acre Neighborhood Park will be located north of the commercial uses and will be designed in concert with the surrounding development. A gateway plaza located at the northwest corner of Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road will create a public focal point along Dublin Boulevard. This gateway plaza will include generous landscape and hardscape treatment around a water feature with trellises and seating areas to encourage activation of the space. A second plaza is envisioned in an internal courtyard between the commercial and /or mixed -use buildings. This plaza will feature a smaller water feature, and possibly an outdoor eating area for restaurants. Accent planting in pots and planters will be located throughout the interior plaza to provide color. These plazas will be constructed concurrent with the commercial and /or mixed -use development. General Commercial /Dublin High Density Residential (GC /DC M -HDR) General Commercial /Dublin Crossing Medium -High Density Residential (GC /DC M- HDR) is proposed for 9.9 acres on the periphery of the project area along Dublin Boulevard, as shown in Figure 2 -7, Conceptual Land Use Plan. Uses allowed in this district are commercial, mixed use (as described in the MU land use district above), and residential. In combination with the Mixed Use land use district (which will contain a minimum of 75,000 square feet of commercial uses), the GC /DC M -HDR land use district can contain an additional 125,000 of commercial uses, up to a Specific Plan area total of 200,000 square feet. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of commercial uses in the district is 1.0 and the maximum density for residential development in the land use district is 68--25 units /net acre. Residential uses do not count toward the commercial FAR limits. General Commercial /Dublin Medium Density Residential (GC /DC MDR) To provide flexibility to accommodate future market conditions and City housing needs, a combination land use district is proposed for areas along Arnold Road - north of the Mixed Use land use district. General Commercial /Dublin Crossing Medium Density Residential (GC /DC MDR) is proposed for 9.1 acres on the periphery of the project area along Arnold Road, as shown in Figure 2 -7, Conceptual Land Use Plan. Uses allowed in this district are commercial, mixed use (as described in the MU land use district above), and residential. In combination with the Mixed Use land use district (which will contain a minimum of 75,000 square feet of commercial uses), the GC /DC MDR land use district can contain an additional 125,000 of commercial uses, up to a Specific Plan area total of 200,000 square feet. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of Page 2 -10 RW Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Project Description VW commercial uses in the district is 1.0 and the maximum density for residential development in the land use district is 20 units /net acre. Residential uses do not ow count toward the commercial FAR limits. Parks, Open Space, and Public Facilities The project area contains a total of 73.4 acres of land designed for public use which ­1 includes parks /open space (including the five acre neighborhood park within the om Mixed Use land use district), an elementary school site, and public roadways. Central Park and Iron Horse Regional Trail Realignment Located at the crossroads of Dublin Boulevard, Scarlett Drive and the Iron Horse Regional Trail is the proposed 30 net usable acre Dublin Crossing Central Park Wo (Central Park). The Central Park is envisioned as an innovative and uniquely designed community gathering place for the residents of Dublin Crossing and the broader community of Dublin. The Central Park will provide high - quality recreational amenities for both passive and active recreation and civic events (e.g., festivals, farmer's market, art shows, etc.). Amenities could include an amphitheater, organized and informal sports aw fields, sport courts, restrooms, walking paths, parking, a community garden, demonstration vineyards, play areas, picnic grounds, a carousel, a rose garden, and possibly a museum. Chabot Creek extends north to south along the eastern side of the proposed Central Park. This channel has intermittent seasonal flows and provides regional drainage .� from Camp Parks (to the north) and eventually flows under I -580 and into the Chabot channel. This channel will be relocated and grade contoured as a natural riparian corridor and could include a multi -use trail with staggered observation lookouts and interpretive signage and will be located adjacent to the eastern border , of the Central Park. The daylit section of the riparian corridor is not included in the net usable park acreage total. Two underground onsite storm drainage detention basins (sized at 1.5 and 3.0 acre -feet) will be constructed within the Central Park. A gateway plaza at the southeast corner of Central Park at the visually prominent corner of Dublin Boulevard and the future extended Scarlett Drive will serve as the primary entrance into the park. The Dublin Boulevard frontage will create an opportunity for a strong visual civic statement at a key central location within the City. The gateway plaza will include a large signage treatment and significant landscaping, seating and other street furniture and a sculptural element(s). The Iron Horse Regional Trail will be reconfigured with the new project frontage and Scarlett Drive, and a secondary trail pathway will be integrated along the southwestern edge of the Central Park. Associated uses adjacent to the secondary trail pathway through the park could include a cafe /concession, bicycle racks, wayfinding signage, lighting, restrooms, and landscaped gardens. RW Page 2 -11 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Project Description Neighborhood Parks The five net -acre Neighborhood Park will be located within the Mixed Use land use district. The amenities and facilities within the park will depend to a great deal on the land use adjacencies, so therefore design details in the Specific Plan have been limited. The intent is to create a Park Master Plan that is highly responsive to the surrounding uses, land use pattern, and neighborhood needs. School The proposed project provides an opportunity for the Dublin Unified School District - ( (DUSD) to acquire 12 net usable acres of land for a public elementary school site which is designated as School (S) on Figure 2 -7: Conceptual Land Use Plan. This elementary school will be designed to accommodate up teapproximately 900 children and will - -may include classrooms, a gymnasiummulti- purpose room, administrative offices, a multi -use sports field, a playground, and parking. The school site will have an overlay designation of Dublin Crossing bower Medium Density Residential (DC MDR). In the event that DUSD does not acquire the site, residential uses will be allowed in accordance with the DC LPR MDR land use district, development standards, and design guidelines contained in the Specific Plan. 2.7 Site Access and Circulation Vehicular Circulation Regional and Local Circulation ■ Interstate Highways - Interstate Highway access to the Specific Plan area is provided by I -580 and I -680. I -580 runs south of the Specific Plan area and connects to I -680 and I -880 to the west and I -5 to the east. I -680 runs west of the Specific Plan area and connects to the northerly cities of San Ramon, Danville, Walnut Creek and Concord and the southerly cities of Fremont, Milpitas, San Jose, and Silicon Valley. ■ Dublin Boulevard - Dublin Boulevard is the main east -west arterial that runs through the city and is the southern boundary of the Specific Plan area. Dublin Boulevard provides access to the Dublin /Pleasanton and West Dublin /Pleasanton BART stations and commercial, office, and residential areas in the downtown and West and East Dublin. Dublin Boulevard has an existing bikeway network consisting of Class I bike paths and Class II bike lanes. Livermore - Amador Valley Transit Authority (Wheels) bus transit service and a bus rapid transit (BRT) line run along Dublin Boulevard. ■ Arnold Road - Arnold Road is a local roadway extending north from Dublin Boulevard into Camp Parks. Existing office buildings are located on the east side of the roadway. The City of Dublin has future plans for a Class I bike path Page 2-12 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Proiect Description � along one side of the road at the Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road intersection, which will connect to an existing Class II bike lane on both sides MW of the street. ■ Scarlett Drive - Scarlett Drive is a local roadway located along the west side of the Specific Plan area. The current alignment terminates at Houston Place and picks up again at Dublin Boulevard. To implement the City's existing approved Capital Improvement Plan street network it is anticipated that the ^R Specific Plan development will provide for construction of the planned extension of Scarlett Drive from Houston Place to Dublin Boulevard, adjacent to the Iron Horse Regional Trail. Internal Circulation A grid pattern of streets, each with different character and function, will serve the transportation needs of the proposed project. The internal "backbone" street system is designed to establish connections to the existing exterior roadway network as well as internally between residential neighborhoods, parks, open spaces, a potential elementary school site, and business /commercial areas. With sidewalks on all public streets, and bikeways on many, these backbone streets will become the framework for the pedestrian and bicycle network that connect to uses both internally and beyond the project area. This internal circulation network will also allow for adequate and safe pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle access and drop off to the school site. Internal roadway classifications include Collector Streets, Local Streets, and Private Streets, each of which is described below. The proposed backbone street network is shown in Figure 2 -9: Proposed Backbone Street �.. Network. Collector Streets so Collector Streets will serve as the primary conduits for interior neighborhood traffic and provide access to and from neighborhood residential streets and perimeter streets outside of the project area. These streets are not intended to support regional traffic, but they may provide direct access to schools and parks. Collector Streets include B Street, Central Parkway, and G Street, as well as the future extension of Scarlett Drive. .. Local Streets F_ Local Streets will provide direct multi -modal access to neighborhoods by residents and visitors while discouraging through traffic and high speeds. Local Streets are intended to provide low -speed access between and within neighborhoods, promoting a multi -modal network with an emphasis on comfort, safety, and amenities for pedestrians and bicyclists. M Private Streets Private Streets will be privately owned and maintained streets that provide access to common interest subdivisions (future development subdivisions) and .� Page 2 -13 M Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Project Description commercial and mixed -use developments. Private Streets will be designed for a low volume of traffic with limited vehicular access. Private Streets may be narrower than public residential streets and may or may not include sidewalks, on- street parking, or other street features. Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation The project area is adjacent to and will be connected with the Iron Horse Trail which is the longest trail system in Alameda and Contra Costa counties. The Iron Horse Trail provides a direct link with the Dublin /Pleasanton BART station, located one - quarter of a mile south of the project area. The proposed project would also include a pedestrian trail adjacent to Dublin Boulevard that would connect to the existing trail corridor, as well as sidewalks and bicycle paths throughout the project area. Public Transportation The proposed project would be served by the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) and the Livermore - Amador Valley Transit Authority (Wheels). BART - BART is the regional rail service in the San Francisco Bay Area, with stations and stops throughout the greater Bay Area, including the Dublin /Pleasanton and West Dublin/ Pleasanton stations. The Dublin /Pleasanton BART station is located approximately a quarter mile south of the Specific Plan area. Livermore- Amador Valley Transit Authority (Wheels) - The Livermore - Amador Valley Transit Authority provides services in Dublin and the Tri- Valley area via Wheels, which provides local, regional, and paratransit bus service. Nearby stops are located along Dublin Boulevard and at the Dublin /Pleasanton BART station. The project proposes to provide new bus shelters along Dublin Boulevard. 2.8 Infrastructure Improvements Storm Drain Infrastructure The Epp PaFk's entire 809 A majority of the Camp Parks watershed drains through the project area. The majority of the runoff from this watershed is conveyed through Camp Parks in natural and man -made swales. These swales cross the project area and are intercepted along the north side of Dublin Boulevard and conveyed to various existing Zone 7 drainage facilities. The main drainage channel for runoff from Camp Parks crosses the project area and is currently a mapped FEMA 100 -year floodplain as shown in Figure 2 -10: FEMA Flood Zone. To the northeast and east of Camp Parks, runoff is collected in an existing channel and conveyed south along Arnold Road. Near Arnold Road and Central Parkway, a flow "splitter" divides flow between two existing Zone 7 drainage facilities. A portion of this flow continues down Arnold Road, while the remainder is conveyed Page 2 -14 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Project Description 6d in an existing trapezoidal channel across the southeastern portion of the project area. Two underground ensue -storm drainage detention basins (sized at 1.15 6 and 3.8-3 acre -feet) will be constructed within the Central Park to accommodate a range of 10 percent of the 2 year storm flows to the 10 year storm flows. The basin size reflects the bottom dimensions of the proposed basins with 3:1 slopes. An offsite basin (sized at 76 acre -feet) to meet the 950 cfs maximum requirement is proposed north of the Specific Plan area along the existing drainage channel. Additionally, best management practices (BMPs) shall be implemented in new developments within the project area to ensure that runoff in storm drains does not lower water quality within or outside of the project area. Refer to Figure 2 -11: Conceptual Stormwater Drainage and Detention System. MM Wastewater The wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal services provider for the project area will be provided by the Dublin San Ramon Services District ( DSRSD). DSRSD provides wastewater collection and treatment at the Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility located in the City of Pleasanton. Several existing sanitary sewer mains currently convey wastewater through and around the project area. These sewer mains will be rerouted through the project area as required to accommodate phased development (see Figure 2 -12: Conceptual Sanitary Sewer System). Wastewater generated from the proposed project would be collected and conveyed through a conventional gravity system of pipes located within the new street network. The onsite wastewater system will connect to the existing DSRSD sewer conveyance facilities surrounding the site. Potable Water Supply Infrastructure The DSRSD owns and operates potable water system within the boundaries of Camp Parks including the project area. They also maintain potable water facilities in the streets adjacent to Camp Parks, including Dougherty Road, Scarlett Drive, Dublin Blvd. and Arnold Road. Several existing water mains currently traverse the project area providing service to existing buildings through a looped water system. As shown in Figure 2 -13: Conceptual Potable Water System, these water mains will be rerouted through the project area as required to accommodate phased development. Recycled Water am The DSRSD produces and distributes recycled water for landscape irrigation in Dublin as part of its Potable Water Conservation and Water Recycling Program. Ma Except for certain isolated locations, all new irrigation systems serving parks, streetscapes, and common area landscaping for multi - family or commercial FBI— Page 2 -15 L" Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Project Description Former Building 109 /Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (PRFTA) 2 - Former Building 109 /PRFTA 2 located at the southwestern portion of the project area containing concentrations of dioxin and lead within the surficial soil above the acceptable risk -based screening levels for closure. The contamination was remediated by the U.S. Army and cleaned to industrial standards. There are currently groundwater monitoring wells at this site and the U.S. Army has completed three quarters of sampling in coordination with the Department of Toxic Substances and Control (DTSC). The U.S. n,-my is awaiting con€irniatien fi€ em the --reg latoFy agencies r-egaFding —he reed-iatien of this site (Personal Communication with Mark Hall, Environmental Coordinator, U.S. Army, Camp Parks on May 21, 2013 and September 17, 2013). Area 761 /PRFTA 13 - Area 761 /PRFTA 13 is located at the central portion of the project area and requires land use controls by the San Francisco CRWQCB to obtain an NFA status. _The GRW �GB San Francisco RWQCB issued a Pre -NFA determination on May 28, 2008. This determination acknowledged that groundwater cleanup objectives have been met. However, a deed restriction (land use control) is required to achieve a full NFA designation due to the presence of soil which contains diesel concentrations greater than acceptable levels. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) concurred with these findings in January 20, 2012. Potential Construction Debris Dump Sites (ECP 36, 37, 39) - The eastern portion of the potential construction debris dump sites consists of large mounds of soil and debris north of Dublin Boulevard and east of the installation entrance road. Construction and demolition debris, asbestos containing material (ACM), waste asphalt, drill cuttings, and grass clippings were observed in the mounds during site visits conducted from 1990 through 2002. DTSC stated that the area may need further investigation prior to receiving an NFA. Soil samples revealed that there were high hydrocarbons in the soil. The soil has been removed and re- sampled with negative results and have been subsequently submitted to DTSC for review (Personal Communication with Mark Hall, Environmental Coordinator, U.S. Army, Camp Parks on May 21, 2013). In addition, many of the existing structures located within the project area that would be demolished contain Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) and Lead Based Paints (LBPs). Contamination that remains after the U.S. Army or NASA transfers the property to the project applicant will either be remediated by the project applicant or by the U.S. Army or NASA, prior to and during site grading and demolition activities with future development activities. Page 2 -17 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Project Description wr 2.10 Project Phasing Phasing Plan Development of the project area will include five development phases, with anticipated build -out occurring over a period of approximately eight to twelve years. Ultimate development timing will depend on market demands, U.S. Army contracts, and according to an orderly extension of roadways, infrastructure, public services, and utilities, and the provision of parks, recreational facilities, school, and other public amenities. Figure 2 -15: Conceptual Phasing Plan and Table 2 -2: Phasing Plan identifies the proposed phasing plan for development within the project area. The development phases shall occur sequentially, although portions of phases may occur concurrently. Development of each phase shall include all infrastructure, services, facilities and amenities, both public and private, needed to serve the uses and structures within that phase in accordance with the Specific Plan. Development of each phase will result in a project that could "stand alone" if future phases were not constructed. It is anticipated that each phase may include sub - phases which may result in multiple Final Maps. .. Table 2 -2: Phasing Plan Project Phase Gross Area r Maximum Number of Residential Units Maximum Amount of Commercial Square Footage 1 33 570 2 54 421 75,000 3 48 435 50,000 4 26 156 75,000 5 28 413 - Total 189 acres Up to 1,995 residential units Up to 200,000 Commercial SF Source: Dublin Crossing LLC 2.11 Requested Actions, Entitlements, and Required Approvals Initial entitlements required for future development in the Specific Plan area include the following actions to be taken by the Dublin City Council: EIR Certification: Certification of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), including findings that identify significant environmental impacts of the Project and mitigation measures that must be implemented as part of the Project, which will be reflected in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and imposed as conditions of approval on subsequent discretionary approvals. This action will be adopted by resolution. Page 2 -18 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Aesthetics and Visual Resources Deizradation of the Visual Character of the Project Area and Surrounding Area Impact 3.1 -2: Implementation of the proposed project would alter the existing aesthetic character of the project area by redeveloping the project area with residential, commercial and mixed -use development. However, the project area has been partially disturbed as part of its use as the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area. In addition, the proposed Specific Plan includes development standards and design guidelines that are designed to create a more visually appealing environment within the project area. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to degrade the visual character of the project area and surrounding uses and is therefore considered a less than significant impact. The project area contains approximately 62 acres of developed land, which is primarily located in the western portion of the project area and includes 18 buildings, which are currently used for installation operations, academic activities, administration, equipment storage and maintenance for Camp Parks. Buildings are interspersed with open areas, which consist of primarily non - native grasslands. The proposed project would result in the conversion of the project area from partially developed land to urban uses, which would change the existing views to and from surrounding properties and roadways. As shown in the Figure 2 -7: Conceptual Land Use Plan and Figure 2 -8: Illustrative Site Plan, the proposed project includes development of up to 1,995 residential units; 200,000 square feet of commercial uses, a 30 net -acre community park, five acres of neighborhood park, and a 12 net usable acre elementary school site, which would be developed within five phases over ten years. Figures 3.1 -1a, 3.1 -1b and 3.1 -1c: Visual Simulations illustrate future development of the project area from Dublin Boulevard, Scarlett Drive and the Iron Horse Regional Trail, and Arnold Road including the construction of buildings and the installation of new landscaping (e.g. trees) within the project area'. As shown in the visual simulations, development of the proposed project would further urbanize the project area and would slightly detract the viewer from these distant views of the hills along these roadways. However, the project area is partially degraded and the views have already been compromised because portions of the project area were previously developed associated with the Camp Parks. The proposed Specific Plan includes both development standards and design guidelines to guide site design, architecture, circulation, parking, lighting, and other distinguishing features. The design guidelines will address overall building design 1 The visual simulations are for illustrative purposes and building heights could be higher than what is shown in the simulations. . Page 3 -11 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Aesthetics and Visual Resources W (e.g. siting, architectural details), building articulation, building massing, indoor - outdoor relationship, building materials, colors, and finishes, base and top treatments, entry designs, windows and doors, roofs, mechanical equipment and utilities, service, storage and loading areas, perimeter walls and fences, onsite public art, and exterior lighting. These development standards and design guidelines will also be used during the design review process to guide future development. Building heights associated with the proposed project would range from a maximum height of 40 feet and three stories for the DC Lower- Medium Density Residential (DC LDRMDR) and DC Medium Density (DC M -HDR) land use districts to 75 feet and six stories for the General Commercial /DC Medium -High Density Residential (GC /DC M -HDR) and General Commercial /DC High Density Residential (GC /DC HDR) land use districts. The overall change in the visual character of the project area from a partially w" developed area to more urban and suburban land uses would result in a permanent change in the character of the project area. However, the project area is surrounded by primarily by urban uses and would be of high quality design, which would complement the surrounding uses. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would help ensure that properties and buildings contribute to visually appealing neighborhoods, commercial areas, parks and environments and would not result in the degradation of the visual character of the project area and surroundings. Therefore, the proposed project would be considered a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required. Light and Glare Impact 3.1 -3: The project area and its surroundings are currently developed with some buildings and site improvements that were part of the Camp Parks facility, which generate daytime and night -time light and glare. Additional sources of daytime glare and nighttime lighting would be introduced through build -out of the Specific Plan. The proposed, Specific Plan includes development standards and design guidelines to reduce light and glare. This is considered a less than significant impact. Implementation of the proposed project would introduce new development within the Specific Plan area, increasing the potential for daytime and nighttime light and glare. The main sources of daytime glare would be from sunlight reflecting from structures with reflective surfaces, such as windows. The main sources of nighttime light and glare would be from additional lighting, including, but not limited to, .� internal and external building lights, parking lot lights, street lighting, site lighting, lights associated with vehicular travel (i.e., vehicle headlights), and any new security lighting associated with future development. .W The proposed Specific Plan includes design guidelines that address lighting in the project area, including, but not limited to the following: am Page 3 -12 a z Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Air Quality Threshold Exceeded ? Yes Yes Yes No Notes: 1. Emissions estimates calculated using CaIEEMod. 2. Area source mitigation includes the use of low VOC paints and only natural gas hearths, which are proposed for the project. Refer to Appendix B, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Data, for detailed model input /output data. Energy Source Emissions Energy source emissions would be generated as a result of electricity and natural gas (non- hearth) usage including space heating and cooling, water heating, ventilation, lighting, appliances, and electronics. Mobile Source Emissions Mobile sources are emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions. According to the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Hexagon in 2-2013, the proposed project would generate 19,64122.047 net new daily vehicle trips. Project - generated vehicle emissions were calculated using the CalEEMod model and are shown in Appendix B. This model was utilized to predict ROG, NOx, and PM10 emissions from motor vehicle traffic associated with the proposed project based on the trip generation in the iTraffic Impact Analysis. As shown in Table 3.2 -6: Proposed Project Long -Term Operational Emissions, unmitigated mobile source emissions generated by vehicle traffic associated with the proposed project would not exceed established BAAQMD thresholds for PM2.5, but would exceed thresholds for ROG, NOx, and PMlo. The proposed project includes project design features that would reduce potential mobile source emissions. Section 3.0 (Design Guidelines) of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan provide the basis for development that includes increased density and diversity, improved walkability design, increased destination and transit accessibility, improved pedestrian network, limited parking supply, traffic calming measures, and trip reduction, ride sharing, and employee vanpool programs, which were applied in CalEEMod air quality model; refer to Appendix B, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Data for a description of model inputs and design features /mitigation measures. Total Emissions As shown in Table 3.2 -6: Proposed Project Long -Term Operational Emissions, the total unmitigated operational emissions associated with build -out of the proposed project would exceed BAAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOx, PM1o, and PM2.5. Stationary source emissions would be reduced with compliance with BAAQMD Regulation 6, Rule 3 (Wood- Burning Devices), which restricts wood burning and places limits on excessive smoke. However, as indicated in Table 3.2 -6: Proposed Project Long - Term Operational Emissions, mobile source emissions are the largest contributor to the estimated air pollutant levels. Due to the scale of the proposed project, which would generate 19,641722.047 new trips per day, emissions would exceed the BAAQMD thresholds. As described above, the proposed project is a mixed use project in proximity to the Dublin /Pleasanton BART station and associated transit Page 3 -35 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources 3.3 Biological Resources za Several sensitive biological resources are known to occur or have the potential to occur within and adjacent to the project area as identified during biological studies and surveys that were conducted as part of the Master Planned Development at the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area between 1995 and 2003. Several of these , sensitive biological resources have the potential to be affected by the proposed project. Therefore, this section describes the existing biological resources within and adjacent to the project area; assesses the potential impacts to these biological resources associated with the proposed project; and recommends mitigation measures for impacts that are considered significant under Federal, State and Local policies and regulations, including, but not limited to, the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and City of Dublin Ordinances. Cardno Entrix prepared a biological resource technical report on behalf of the project applicant in une 2013, which updates previous biological technical studies that were prepared by the U.S. Army for the Final Environmental Impact Statement on Master Planned Redevelopment at Camp Parks (U.S. Army 2009). This technical report was peer reviewed by RBF Consulting for technical accuracy and is included as Appendix C. Environmental Setting In addition to appFoximately 77 aeFe f the developed and s d- evelope 'a ^a within of the project area surveyed by Cardno Entrix, two other vegetation communities are located within the project area: wetlands and non - native grasslands aFe also located within the p -ojeer area. The acreage of these vegetation �* communities is shown below in Table 3.3 -1: Habitats and Vegetation Communities ; within the Project Area and on Figure 3.3 -1: Existing Biological Habitats. Table 3.3 -1. Habitats and Vegetation Communities within the Project Area �1`abxtat � lip i����tatiCrsi Curi�t�urnt Wetlands and Other Waters 2-1.61 Acres Non - native grassland 44--'+-104.32 Acres? Developed, or semi - developed 7-7-73.66 Acres' Total 49-3- 179.59 acres Notes: 1. Includes buildings, roadways, and landscaped areas. Approximately 62 acres are impervious. Source: Cardno Entrix 2013 Page 3 -47 ow Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources The Alameda County Surplus Property Dortion of the project area was surveyed as ,part of the Dublin Transit EIR and is comprised of non - native grassland The EIR was certified by the City Council on November 19 2002 Based on the analysis completed in the Dublin Transit Center EIR the Alameda County Surplus Property was not found to contain any pecial status species or significant biological features (e.g. wetlands), etc. Wetlands and Other Waters Drainage Ditches There are seven drainage ditches within the project area as shown in Figure 3.3 -2: Preliminary Wetlands and Other Waters. All are manmade features created to channel runoff away from various parts of the project area. These drainage ditches were either dry or were saturated due to recent rains at the time of the survey conducted by Cardno Entrix in March 2012, but did not contain standing water and did not appear to be subject to high - velocity flows as there was no scour or distinct bed and bank. Based on the vegetation present, these features function as intermittent drainages to channel runoff during rain events. Individual descriptions of the ditches are - provided below. Ditch 01 is a shallow roadside drainage ditch designed to carry flows from an asphalt pad and adjacent paved roads in a southern direction along Keppler Avenue, before entering a culvert under the road, and flowing north of 5th Street into a culvert east of Hutchins Avenue to Chabot Canal (Canal 01). The majority of the ditch is dominated by annual grassland vegetation including brome species, yellow star thistle, and stinkwort, and lacked evidence of hydrology or an ordinary high water mark. A portion of the drainage ditch has begun to fill in with sediment along Keppler Avenue near 5th Street; this portion is discussed as Wetland Drainage Ditch 01 in Wetland Drainage Ditches below. Ditch 02 is a drainage ditch designed to flow in a southern direction from 6th Street, becoming progressively deeper before tying into Chabot Canal (Canal 01) at approximately the ordinary high water mark. The majority of the ditch is dominated by annual grassland vegetation and lacks an ordinary high water mark. An existing culvert allows for vehicle access over the ditch into an industrial yard approximately 155 feet south of 6th Street. This drainage appears to receive sheet flow from the adjacent roadway, and developed areas, as well as seasonal irrigation runoff from landscaping to the west and lacks an OHW, scour, or evidence of high flows. Ditch 03 begins north of 4th Street near Hutchinson Avenue, and flows west towards Chabot Canal, becoming progressively deeper before tying into the Canal at approximately the ordinary high water mark. This drainage ditch is dominated by annual grassland vegetation and lacks an ordinary high water mark, scour, or evidence of high flows. The drainage is encased in existing culverts, each Page 3 -48 law 0 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources approximately 100 -feet long, in two areas. This drainage appears to receive sheet flow from Hutchison Road, 4th Street, and the adjacent annual grasslands. Ditch 04 consists of a very shallow, poorly drained portion south of 4th Street, a maintained ditch flowing north to south that intersects with an east to west flowing segment that eventually discharges into Ephemeral Drainage 01. This ditch exhibits - variable vegetation and hydrology. In three locations (Wetland Drainage Ditch 02, 03 and 04) the ditch is shallow and poorly drained and has developed wetland indicators that are discussed in more detail below. The north to south flowing portion near 4th Street is maintained through dredging of sediment, vegetation removal, and grading to maintain flows and prevent stormwater from ponding on 4th Street. Further south the ditch was used to direct water away from temporary facilities on an adjacent concrete pad, and existing drainage pipes from the pads to the ditch were observed. The southern portion of the ditch no longer appears to receive maintenance and does not have positive flow towards Chabot Canal during low flow events resulting in stormwater ponding in Wetland Drainage Ditch 04 (discussed below). Ditch OS is a shallow roadside ditch that may have originally overtopped into Canal 02, but does not appear to receive sufficient flows to exhibit wetland characteristics or evidence of an ordinary high water mark. No surface water connection to Canal 01 or Canal 02 was observed. Ditch 06 is an incised feature south of a industrial yard that flows to Chabot Canal that exhibits evidence of intermittent flow, and is dominated by non - native grassland species and canary grass (Phalaris minor). Ditch 07, is a section of open ditch that transfers water from storm drain pipe draining road runoff from Dublin Boulevard into Chabot Canal. Wetlands a+4-Drainage Ditches In four locations, the above described drainage ditches pond water for a sufficient period of time to develop hydric soils, a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, and exhibit primary or secondary hydrology indicators for wetlands. These areas are indicated as Wetland Drainage Ditch 01, 02, 03, and 04 as shown in Figure 3.3 -2: Preliminary Wetlands and Other Waters. M Soil samples SP6 and SP8 that were conducted by Cardno Entrix exhibit typical wetland indicators observed within the wetland drainage ditches. These samples were taken in depressions and /or poorly drained locations within the manmade drainage ditches. These areas were dominated by a variety of facultative wetland or obligate wetland plants species, such as tall flatsedge (Cyperus eragrostis), Baltic rush Uuncus balticus), western dock (Rumex occidentalis), and common spikerush ° (Eleocharis macrostachya) and exhibited depleted or gleyed soils. Hydrology indicators included ponding water, saturation, or surface soil cracks. Wetland Drainage Ditch 01 appears to have formed due to a blocked culvert in roadside low drainage ditch, while Wetland Drainage Ditch 02, 03, and 04 are the result of poor M Page 3 -49 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biolovical Resources flow due to low initial grade or sediment buildup in manmade drainage ditches. All associated drainage ditches flow to Chabot Canal. Ephemeral Drainage A portion of drainage ditch between Camp Parks Boulevard and Chabot Canal displays evidence of an ordinary high water mark with minor shelving and rilling and receives intermittent flows. The ditch is dominated by upland grasses, but was observed ponding at a higher frequency then adjacent drainage ditches. This drainage connects Drainage Ditch 04 to Chabot Canal and is approximately 905 feet (0.2-89-29 acres). Canal Other waters of the U.S. include Chabot Canal (Canal 01), and an unnamed canal (Canal n— 2). Both —canals —are Canal 01 is an ephemeral feature-S with water marks /staining and drift deposits indicating the ordinary high water mark. This ordinary high water mark was used to delineate the edge of the feature. Margins of Canal 01 were dominated by Harding grass (Phalaris aquatica) and canary grass. Canal 02 is a maintained concrete lined channel with evidence of flow, but dominated by ruderal vegetation and mowed /maintained annual grasses. These features appear to be improved flood control channels, designed to convey high flows during rain events and have steep sides that extend well past the ordinary high water mark. Chabot Canal (Canal 01), exhibited minor scouring in areas that appear to be from frequent low flows, and shelving in the southern section due to higher flows. Indicators of hydrology range from ponding and saturation to water stained leaves and drainage patterns. Vegetation with Chabot Canal ranges from emergent vegetation such as cattails, rushes and sedge in the southern section, to a small area of riparian vegetation in the central portion, to mowed or cleared vegetation with a shallow low -flow channel and annual grassland margins in the northern section. Chabot Canal is primarily a vegetated canal, but is concrete lined at the southern perimeter of the project area and has rip -rap and /or concrete at culverts and where existing storm drain systems outfall into the Canal. The Canal receives nuisance flows from existing storm drain systems and manmade drainage ditches throughout the project area, and conveys off -site flows from north of the project area through the area into the City of Dublin storm drain system. �. Page 3 -50 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources Emergent Wetland M Two emergent wetlands (Emergent Wetland 01, Emergent Wetland 02) located west of Chabot Canal, were dominated by cattails, stinkwort, curly dock, and canarygrass, and exhibited gleyed sandy clay soils. Both features exhibited primary hydrology indicators including saturation, surface water, water marks and /or water - stained leaves. These features are a direct result of a leaking potable water pipeline containing chlorinated and fluoridated water, and owned by the Dublin San .• Ramon Services District, and as such would not typically be considered jurisdiction wetlands by the USACE. Seasonal Wetland A 0.492--024 acre marginal seasonal wetland feature is located north of 3rd Street and east of Fernandez Boulevard, which is dominated by non - native facilitative wetland plants consisting primarily of common plantain (Plantago lanceolata) and seaside barley (Hordium Marinum). This feature lacked hydrology and was dry during two of three wet season site visits. .. Soils are fill material and lack strong hydric indicators. The feature is adjacent to intermittent Drainage Ditch 01. IM Potential Section 404 Jurisdictional Wetland and Other Waters Based on the area delineated, approximately 1.605 -61 acres of potentially jurisdictional wetlands and Other Waters were identified within the project area,`` including 0.103 11 acres of wetland drainage ditch, 0.0924 acres of seasonal ( M wetland, and 1.4827 acres of other waters of the U.S. These features appear to be subject to the United States Army Corps of Engineers' (USACE) jurisdiction pursuant to the Clean Water Act for the following reasons: 1.449 -27 Acres of Other Waters: Chabot Canal (Canal 01) and Canal 02 ar °is an ephemeral surface tributaries to Alamo Creek, which is a relatively permanent water. Ephemeral Drainage 01 is a tributary to Chabot Canal that displays n+i4- ordinary high water mar-k OHW . ,■, 0.196 24 Acres of Wetlands: The seasonal wetland and wetland drainage ditches meet the USACE's three - parameter wetland criteria (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology); and are hydrologically linked to Chabot Canal, thus, the wetlands has a significant nexus to a non - relatively permanent water that flows directly to a Traditional Navigable Water. Drainage ditches (Drainage Ditch 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, and 07) within the project area are man -made drainage features designed to drain adjacent upland areas ^� toward Chabot Canal and did not exhibit a dominance of wetland vegetation, hydric , soils, or hydrology. Additionally, they lacked indicators of an ordinary high water mark and appear to be only sporadically inundated. ­q# Page 3 -51 ... a Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources Manmade ditches created in upland habitats to direct runoff from upland habitats are typically not classified as jurisdiction wetlands by the USACE. Emergent wetlands (0.022- acres) were found to be a direct result of a leaky potable water pipe and are not typically considered jurisdictional. Waters of the State Using the USACE guidance, all wetlands and other waters of the U.S mapped within the project area using would likely be considered jurisdictional by the Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB) under the Porter - Cologne Act. Additionally, 0.494 acres of drainage ditch (Drainage Ditch 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06 and 07) that were created in uplands to drain uplands may be considered jurisdictional by the RWQCB Non - native grasslands Non - native grassland is composed of annual grasses, with cover ranging from sparse to dense, and associated species of native and non - native flowering forbs. Most of the plants are dead in the summer and fall seasons. Non- native grassland usually occurs on fine - textured soils that are moist or very wet during the winter rainy season and very dry during the summer. It is distributed throughout the valleys and foothills of most of California, and generally ranges from sea level up to about 3,000 feet elevation. Non - native grasslands within the project area contain both native and non - native species. The plant composition within the project area has not changed since the previous surveys (2003 to 2004) were conducted. Dominant species include slender wild oat (Avena barbata), wild oat (Avena fatua), Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), slender wild oat (Avena barbata), ryegrasses (Lolium spp.) and several barley species (Hordeum spp.) and canarygrass (Phalaris ssp.). Associated annual forbs include primarily non - native plants such as black mustard (Brassica nigra), short pod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), bristly ox- tongue (Picris echioides), alkali mallow (Malvella leprosa), stinkwort (Dittrichia graveolens), annual fireweed (Epilobium brachycarpum), and yellow star - thistle (Centaurea solstitialis). The ruderal grassland habitat covers approximately 104.69 acres and occurs in previously disturbed areas, evident by concrete footings, asphalt, rebar, and pipes from demolished buildings. Some of these ruderal grassland areas are mowed or disked for fuel control. Developed Areas The project area includes approximately 77 acres of developed areas that include hardscape and landscape areas. Developed areas include buildings, parking areas, storage areas and roads. The developed areas within the project area are concentrated towards the west. However, the eastern portion also includes a few buildings, storage yards and associated parking lots. Page 3 -52 law 46 OF, Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR ow Biological Resources Special Status Species According to the CNDDB, USFWS, and CNPS queries, a total of 68 special- status species and three rare natural communities and USFWS- designated critical habitat for California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), California red - legged frog (Rana draytonii), Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus), and vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) are known to occur in the rr^j ^r* ar-eawithin the Dublin. Livermore. Diablo and Tassaiara 7.5 minutes tonoLyranhical .�. quadrangle. Information gathered during the site visits and data on range, habitat requirements, and known localities was used to refine the species list and determine which species were likely to occur based on the plant communities (i.e. habitat types) within the project area. Based on the database queries and biological surveys, nine wildlife species and one plant species have a moderate or higher likelihood of occurrence in the project area. No rare natural communities occur within the project area. Similarly, there is no -USFWS designated critical habitat within the project area. Survey Methods Cardno Entrix performed queries of the California Department of Fish and Game, Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Online Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPSEI) and the United States Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) Online Species List of Federal Endangered and Threatened Species to identify known biological resources within the greater project vicinity. Results of those queries are shown in the technical appendices in Appendix C. A reconnaissance -level survey was conducted by Cardno Entrix biologist on March 6, 2012. The survey consisted of walking meandering transects through accessible representative vegetation or plant communities that occur within the project area to assess their suitability for native plant and animal species. Particular attention was ° given to areas that appeared to provide the most suitable habitat for special - status species expected to occur in the region. Previous Biological Surveys A special- status plant species survey was completed at Camp Parks in 1995 by Jones & Stokes (as cited in US Army 2006), followed by a field reconnaissance in 1997 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Louisville District 2003 (as cited in US Army ■* 2006). An extensive two -year floristic survey, which included three performance of surveys coinciding with the progression of flowering, was conducted between spring 2001 and spring 2003. In 2003, a sensitive plant survey was conducted in appropriate habitat within Camp Parks with special focus ^^ the AFeaon the project area and southwest portion of the Training Area. No federal or state - listed or candidate plant species were detected during any survey, site conditions have not changed significantly since the surveys were conducted and none are believed to occur within the project area. Page 3 -53 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources An installation -wide faunal survey focusing on rare species was completed in 1995 by Jones & Stokes (as cited in U.S. Army, 2006). In addition, surveys were performed in 2003 for vernal pool invertebrates, California red - legged frog, burrowing owls, San Joaquin kit foxes, and other sensitive species including raptors and loggerhead shrikes. Most of the latter surveys focused on the project area (Cantonment Areal and adjacent portions of the southwest Training Area at Camp Parks. However, the vernal pool surveys were done in appropriate habitat throughout Camp Parks and the San Joaquin kit fox surveys addressed appropriate habitat in the project area Cantonment and southern training area. Site conditions have not changed significantly since these surveys were conducted as confirmed by Cardno Entrix in the March 2012 reconnaissance survey. A United States Fish and Wildlife Service protocol dry season branchiopod survey was conducted April 17. 2012 by Cardno Entrix. Wet season vernal pool invertebrate surveys were conducted winter through spring of 2012 -2013 However, results of these surveys shall be considered preliminary until accepted by the USFWS. Species Accounts Life histories of special- status plant and animal species identified by the CNDDB, USFWS, and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) lists that have a modeF to 0r h'gheF like) hood Of OCCUFrirrt the potential to occur in the project area are described below: Conservancy fairy shrimp (Branchinecta conservation) The conservancy fairy shrimp is endemic to California's Central Valley, with one outlying population in Ventura County, southwest of the Valley. Within the Central Valley, records for this species come from Tehama, Butte, Glenn, Solano and Yolo County. There are no known occurrences in Alameda County. Although not a target species, this species was not detected in focused surveys between 2002 and 2003. This species was also not detected and-during wet and dry surveys conducted by Cardno Entrix in 2012 and 2013. However. these surveys are considered preliminary until accepted by the USFWS. Suitable large playa pools that this species typically occurs in are not present in the project area. Therefore, the likelihood of Conservancy fairy shrimp occurring within the project area is considered low. Longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna) Typical habitats for Longhorn fairy shrimp include vernal pools, seasonally ponded areas within vernal swales, and ephemeral freshwater habitats. There are only eight known populations of the longhorn fairy shrimp. The nearest occurrence of this species is within the Altamont Pass and these occurrences occur within clear depression pools in sandstone outcrops. Vernal pools in other parts of California that support these fairy shrimp consist of either loam and sandy loam or shallow, Page 3 -54 RW u: Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources alkaline pools. The seasonal pool habitat is subject to seasonal variations, and longhorn fairy shrimp are dependent on the ecological characteristics of such variations. These characteristics include duration of inundation and presence or absence of water at specific times of the year. The longhorn fairy shrimp is capable of living in vernal pools of relatively short duration (pond 6 to 7 weeks in winter and 3 weeks in spring). This species was not found during USFWS protocol level surveys conducted from 2002 to 2003 of by the surveys conducted in 2012 and 2013 by Cardno Entrix. Therefore, the likelihood of Longhorn fairy shrimp occurring within the project area is considered low. Vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta Imchi) Vernal pool fairy shrimp are federally listed as threatened. Vernal pool fairy shrimp occur in vernal pools and seasonal wetlands that fill during winter and spring rains and then dry up fall until rains return. Cysts lie in the soil through dry periods, hatching with the next season's rains, or may even remain dormant for decades before hatching. _There are known occurrences of this species within Springtown in northeast Livermore, approximately eight miles east of the project area. This species was not detected during focused biological surveys from 2002 to 2003 or the 2012 and 2013 surveys conducted by Cardno Entrix. The results of the 2012 and 2013 surveys are considered preliminary until accepted by the USFWS. Therefore, the likelihood of Vernal pool fairy shrimp occurring within the project area is considered low. Curved -foot hygrotus diving beetle ( Hygrotus curvipes) The curved -foot hygrotus diving beetle is not state or federally listed or a species of concern, but is included on the CDFG CDFW Special Animals list. This aquatic beetle occurs in small seasonal pools and wetlands and small pools left in dry creek beds, and is typically associated with alkaline tolerant vegetation. Occurrences of this species are known from the northeast portion of Livermore and Altamont Pass. Suitable habitat within the project area exists along the drainage canals. This species was not detected during focused biological surveys from 2002 to 2003 and site conditions have not changed significantly since that time. Therefore, the likelihood of Curved -foot hygrotus diving beetle occurring within the project area is .� considered low. �. San Francisco forktail damselfly (Ischnur•a gemina) The San Francisco forktail damselfly is found from Tomales Bay in Marin County, south to the north side of Monterey Bay in Santa Cruz County. This species is known to occur in and around seeps, ponds, small creeks and canals. Males and females are extremely sexually dimorphic, showing a great range of color. Females deposits eggs in plant stems, generally without being guarded by a male. This species is believe to be restricted to the San Francisco Bay region and may have disappeared from locations in the southern part of its former range, perhaps from hybridization with black - fronted damselflies. Suitable habitat within the project area exists along the Page 3 -55 M10 ' Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources drainage canals. This species was not detected during focused biological surveys conducted from 2002 to 2003 and site conditions have not changed significantly since that time. Therefore, the likelihood of San Francisco forktail damselfly occurring within the project area is considered low. California linderiella (Linderiella occiderztalis) California linderiella is not state or federally listed or a Species of Special Concern, but is included on the CDFW Special Animals list. This small fairy shrimp occurs in vernal pools and other seasonal wetlands. Their life history is very similar to that of the vernal pool fairy shrimp, but this species is more widespread. California linderiella commonly occur in Alameda County, the nearest CNDDB occurrence is approximately 1.17 miles to the northeast just south of the Air Force Communication Annex. This species was not detected during focused biological surveys between 2002 and 2003 or during the surveys conducted by Cardno Entrix in 2012 and 2013. Therefore, the likelihood of California linderiella occurring within the project area is considered low. Western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) Wester Pond Turtle The western pond turtle (WPT) is a California Species of Special Concern. This aquatic turtle ranges throughout much of the state, from the Sierra Nevada foothills to the coast, and in coastal drainages from the Oregon border to the Mexican border. They typically inhabit ponds, slow- moving streams and rivers, irrigation ditches, and reservoirs with abundant emergent and /or riparian vegetation. The turtle requires adjacent (i.e., within 200 to 400 meters of water) uplands for nesting and egg laying, typically in soils with high clay or silt component on unshaded, south - facing slopes. In colder climates, they may spend the winters hibernating in these upland habitats. There are known CNDDB occurrences for this species within one - half mile of the project area within ponds and perennial drainages that provide potential habitat for this species. This species was not detected during focused biological surveys from 2002 to 2003. Therefore, the likelihood of Western pond turtle occurring within the project area is considered low. California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) The California tiger salamander (CTS) is federally listed as threatened and a California threatened species. CTS is most commonly found in annual grassland habitat, but also occurs in grassy understory of open valley foothill hardwood habitats. The species occurs from near Petaluma, Sonoma County, east through the Central Valley to Yolo and Sacramento counties and south to Tulare County, and from the vicinity of San Francisco Bay south into Santa Barbara County. Adults spend most of the year in subterranean refugia, especially burrows of California ground squirrels, and occasionally man -made structures. The primary cause of decline of CTS populations is the loss and fragmentation of habitat from human activities and the encroachment of nonnative predators. Page 3 -56 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources W There are several known CNDDB occurrences for this species within two miles of the project area. The nearest occurrences are 1.4 miles to the north and 1.2 miles to the northeast of the project area. USFWS protocol requires that occurrences be evaluated within one mile of a proposed project. The first occurrence is located within Camp Parks training area. The second d-u the Mar-eh — 2012 field SUFveyoccurrence is located within Tassajara Creek._ No suitable habitat for the CRLF was observed during the March 2012 field survey. The ephemeral drainage /storm drainage canal in the center of the project area does not support deep pools where this species may breed. Similarly, the drainage canal along the eastern border of the project area is channelized and concrete lined. In both of these ow canals, cattails were present. Booz Allen Hamilton and GANDA surveyed the project area and additional sections of the Cantonment Area of Camp Parks in 2003. The survey concentrated on sixteen wetlands within or immediately north of the .., Cantonment Area. Of sixteen sites visited, two areas within the Cantonment Area contained standing water. The first wetland (ephemeral drainage/ storm drainage "{ canal) is located just southwest of the intersection of 8th Street and Hutchins .. Avenue. The second wetland is grassy ditch located just west of the intersection between 8th Street and Davis Ave. The Booz Allen Hamilton (2004) report state that it was abnormal for this grassy ditch, to contain water during the summer months *� and it was believed that this water was due to runoff from landscaping; this ditch is nearly surrounded by developed areas with several landscaped areas. Although these areas did not contain sufficient water for breeding, additional surveys were conducted. CRLF were not observed during any of these surveys. No suitable aquatic habitat was observed within the project area during the March 2012 survey conducted by Cardno Entrix. Therefore, the likelihood of EaTif i-a Tiger SalamandeFCRLF occurring within the project area is considered low. r Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii) This hawk is found throughout California, except in the high altitudes of the Sierra Nevada. The Cooper's hawk is protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Cooper's hawks typically breed in forest, or in groves of trees along rivers, but also in low scrub of treeless areas. The wooded area is often near the edge of a field or a water - opening. The nesting season for this hawk begins late February, however, lost clutches are replaced. The Audubon eBird database contains observations of Cooper's hawks in the Dublin and Livermore area. Based on the survey conducted in March 2012 by Cardno Entrix there is limited nesting habitat in the project area, Cooper's hawk is a year round resident of the project vicinity. Therefore, the likelihood of Cooper's hawk occurring within the project area is considered moderate. Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) Golden eagle is a California fully protected species and is protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. One of North America's largest predatory birds, the golden eagle is more common in southern California than in northern California. Ranging from sea level up to 11,500 feet, the golden eagle's habitat typically consists Page 3 -58 W Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Bioloeical Resources The 2003 San Joaquin Kit Fox survey identified potentially suitable habitat, but no kit foxes were observed. Site conditions have not changed significantly since the 2003 surveys. Therefore, the likelihood of San Joaquin kit fox to occur within the project area is considered low. Plant Species A query of the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) lists 34 plant species that occur within the project vicinity. Based on habitats within the project area during the March 2012 survey by Cardno Entrix, the list was reduced to four species including: Congdon's tarplant Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii), Palmate - bracted Bird's -beak (Chloropyron palmatum), Northern California Black Walnut Uuglans hindsii), and Hairless popcorn -flower (Plagiobothrysglaber). Congdon's tarplant (Centromadia panyi ssp. congdonii) The Congdon's tarplant is listed as a Rare Plant Rank (RPR) 113.2 by the CNPS. Congdon's tarplant is a prostrate to erect, yellow flowered annual herb in the Sunflower Family (Asteraceae). It generally occurs in annual grasslands with poorly - drained, somewhat alkaline, clay or sandy -loam soils, at elevations between sea level and 230 meters (754 feet). It has historic occurrences in Alameda, Contra M Costa, Monterey, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obispo and Solano Counties, but is thought to be extirpated from Santa Cruz and Solano Counties (Tibor 2001 as cited in Booz Allen Hamilton 2004). Congdon's tarplant is described as severely threatened by development (Tibor 2001 as cited in Booz Allen Hamilton 2004), although it is evidently tolerant of mowing and some other physical disturbances within the ruderal grasslands within the project area. Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. surveyed for nine of the potential special- status plant species at Camp Parks in 1995 and 1997. Congdon's tarplant populations were first observed during the 1997 survey. Before its discovery at Camp Parks, this species had not been recorded in the Amador Valley, which includes Camp Parks, for more than 30 years. Subsequent surveys in August 1999 and July 2000 confirmed that known populations occur in 107 acres in the Training and Cantonment Areas. In addition, the potential habitat for this species covers more than 1,200 acres. According to the CNDDB, over 10,000 plants were estimated for this area in 1997. Additionally, a small patch of approximately 26 plants was identified in 2000 just south of Camp Parks, across Dublin Boulevard in the vicinity of a BART facility. The majority of the populations are found in highly disturbed or mowed areas (i.e., along the edge of parking lots and abandoned roads) and along the edges of annual grasslands at PRFTA. The soil in these locations is heavy alkaline clay in the Clear Lake and Diablo series. As the CNDDB contains recorded occurrences of this species within the project area and it was observed during the plant surveys, the likelihood of Congdon's tarplant to occur within the project area is considered mader4tehigh. Page 3 -64 go Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR go Biological Resources M Palmate - bracted Bird's -beak (Chloropvron palmatum). Palmate - bracted bird's -beak is known to occur in seven meta - populations with the closest in the Springtown alkali sink in the Livermore Valley, approximately six miles east of Project area. It was federally designated as endangered in 1986 (FR 51:23767 as cited in US Army 2006) and state designated as endangered in 1984 due to agricultural conversion; it is threatened by agriculture, urbanization, a vehicles, altered hydrology, grazing, and development.26 This species occurs on .., saline - alkaline soils and is a component of alkali sink scrub vegetation (CDFW 1998 as cited in Booz Allen Hamilton 2004). During floristic surveys, this species was not found within the project area. Therefore, the likelihood of Palmate - bracted Bird's- �- beak to occur within the project area is considered low. Northern California Black Walnut (Juglans hindsii) Northern California black walnut is designated RPR 113.1, rare and endangered in California and elsewhere, in the CNPS inventory. It is a deciduous tree in the Walnut Family (Juglandaceae) that is approximately 50 to 80 feet tall with dark, narrowly furrowed bark. Its male flowers are arranged in greenish - yellow catkins and its small green female flowers are borne singly or in small clusters near the ends of the new twigs. Its habitat is riparian scrub and woodland. Northern California walnut grows in deep, alluvial soils associated with rivers and creeks, in riparian forest or riparian woodland (Hickman 1993, CNPS 2001 - as cited in Booz Allen Hamilton 2004). The original range of Northern California black walnut appears to have been limited to Contra Costa, Napa, Sacramento, Solano, and Yolo Counties. This species was reported to occur along the Sacramento River prior to 1949, but is now extirpated in Sacramento, Solano, and Yolo Counties (Smith 1949 in CNDDB 2001 as cited in Booz Allen Hamilton 2004). Currently, only two native occurrences are known: one stand in Napa County and one stand in Contra Costa County (Tibor 2001; CNDDB 2002; CNPS 2001 as cited in Booz Allen Hamilton 2004). Native stands of Northern California black walnut are threatened by hybridization with orchard trees, conversion to agriculture and development. Although specimens have been observed within Camp Parks none have been observed within the project area. Therefore, the likelihood of Northern California Black Walnut to occur within the project area is considered low. Hairless popcorn -flower (Plagiobothrys glaber) This species is believed to have been extirpated in California. CNNDB occurrence is from 2002, but identification is uncertain and has been disputed. All other occurrences are from pre -1954. This species is an annual herb ascending to erect with cauline leave that occurs in meadows and alkaline seeps, as well as coastal salt marshes and swamps. During floristic surveys, this species was not found within the project area. Therefore, hairless popcorn -flower has a low likelihood of occurrence. I �, Page 3-65 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources California Endangered Species Act In accordance with the California Endangered Species Act fCESAJ, the CDFG CDFW has jurisdiction over state - listed species. The CPF& -CDFW regulates activities that may result in "take" of individuals listed under the Act (i.e., "hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill "). Habitat degradation or modification is not expressly included in the definition of "take" under the Fish and Game Code. The GDFGCDFW, however, has interpreted "take" to include the "killing of a member of a species which is the proximate result of habitat modification." California Environmental Qualit. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is a state law that requires state and local agencies, such as the City, to document and consider the environmental implications of their actions and to refrain from approving projects with significant environmental effects if there are feasible alternatives or mitigation measures that can substantially lessen or avoid those effects. CEQA requires the full disclosure of the environmental effects of agency actions, such as approval of a general plan update or the projects covered by that plan, on resources such as air quality, water quality, cultural resources, and biological resources. The State Resources Agency promulgated guidelines for implementing CEQA known as the State CEQA Guidelines. Section 15380(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines provides that a species not listed on the federal or state lists of protected species may be considered rare if the species can be shown to meet certain specified criteria. These criteria have been modeled after the definitions in FESA and CESA and the section of the California Fish and Game Code dealing with rare or endangered plants or animals. This section was included in the guidelines primarily to deal with situations in which a public agency is reviewing a project that may have a significant effect on a species that has not yet been listed by either the USFWS or GBFG CDFW or species that are locally or regionally rare. The CDFG CDFW has produced three lists (amphibians and reptiles, birds, and mammals) of "species of special concern" that serve as "watch lists." Species on these lists are of limited distribution or the extent of their habitats has been reduced substantially, such that threat to their populations may be imminent. Thus, their populations should be monitored. They may receive special attention during environmental review as potential rare species, but do not have specific statutory protection. All potentially rare or sensitive species, or habitats capable of supporting rare species, are considered for environmental review per the CEQA Guidelines Section 15380(b). Page 3 -68 I Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources The CNPS, a non - governmental conservation organization, has ranked plant species of concern in California. Vascular plants included on these lists are ranked as follows: Rank 1A Plants considered extinct. Rank 1B Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. Rank 2 Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere. am Rank 3 Plants about which more information is needed - review list. "M Rank 4 Plants of limited distribution -watch list. These CNPS listings are further described by the following threat code extensions: 1. Seriously endangered in California 2. Fairly endangered in California 3. Not very endangered in California. Although the CNPS is not a regulatory agency and plants in these ranks have no formal regulatory protection, plants appearing in Rank 1B or Rank 2 are, in general, considered to meet CEQA's Section 15380 criteria, and adverse effects to these species may be considered significant. Impacts on plants that are listed by the CNPS as Rank 3 or 4 are also considered during CEQA review, although because these species are typically not as rare as those in Rank 1B or 2, impacts on them are less frequently considered significant. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Code The California Fish and Wildlife Game Code includes regulations governing the use of, or impacts on, many of the state's fish, wildlife, and sensitive habitats. The CDFW exerts jurisdiction over the bed and banks of rivers, lakes, and streams according to provisions of Sections 1601 -1603 of the Fish and Game Code. The Fish and Game Code requires a Streambed Alteration Agreement for the fill or removal of material within the bed and banks of a watercourse or water body and for the removal of riparian vegetation. Certain sections of the Fish and Game Code describe regulations pertaining to .. certain wildlife species. For example, Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 2513, and 3800 (and other sections and subsections) protect native birds, including their nests and eggs, from all forms of take. Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and /or �► loss of reproductive effort is considered "take" by the CDFW. Raptors (i.e., eagles, falcons, hawks, and owls) and their nests are specifically protected in California under Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5. Section 3503.5 states that it is "unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the order of Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird WT Page 3 -69 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources Impacts and Mitigation Measures Standards of Significance A proposed project would result in a significant impact to biological resources if it were to result in a: • Substantial effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any candidate, sensitive, or special- status species; • Substantial effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community; • Substantial effect on protected wetlands; • Substantial interference 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; or • Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Jurisdictional Wetlands, Other Waters of the U.S. and Waters of the State Impact 3.3 -1: Based on a preliminary wetland delineation of the project area, the proposed project could result in the fill of wetlands, which would result in a potentially significant impact. Based on the preliminary wetland delineation of the project area by Cardno Entrix, approximately 0.99 -24 acres of seasonal wetlands; 0.11 acres of wetland drainage ditch; and 1.4-27 acres of other waters of the U.S. were mapped within the boundaries of the project area. Additionally, 0.-5 -49 acres of drainage ditch, created in uplands to drain uplands may be considered jurisdictional by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Based on the conceptual land use plan for the proposed project, the ephemeral drainage canals would be partially avoided and a small section (approximately 900 linear feet) will be re- routed due to construction. All other wetlands within the project area would be permanently filled due to construction activities. Since fill of wetlands and "other waters of the U.S." are prohibited under state and federal regulations described above, without first obtaining permits and approvals from the federal and state agencies, fill of wetlands, waters of the U.S., and waters of the State would result in a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure MM 3.3 -1 Prepare and Implement a Wetland Mitigation Plan. Prior to commencing any activities that would impact wetlands or waters habitat, the project applicant shall obtain all required public agency Page 3 -72 NP Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources permits and shall prepare a wetland mitigation plan that ensures no- net -loss of wetland and waters habitat and is appFo e by th C y a*4that is approved by the applicable resource agencies and submitted to the City. _The wetland mitigation plan shall include measures for avoidance, minimization, and compensation for wetland "* impacts. Avoidance and minimization measures may include the designation of buffers around wetland features to be avoided, or project design measures, such as free -span bridges. Compensation measures shall include the preservation and /or creation of wetland or waters. The final mitigation ratios (the amount of wetlands and waters created or preserved compared to the amount impacted) shall be determined by the applicable resource agencies and the City. The wetland mitigation and monitoring plan shall include the following: ■ Descriptions of the wetland types, and their expected functions 'g and values; ■ Performance standards and monitoring protocol to ensure the success of the mitigation wetlands over a period to be determined by the resource agencies; ■ Engineering plans showing the location, size and configuration of wetlands to be created or restored; ■ An implementation schedule showing that construction or preservation of mitigation areas shall commence prior to or concurrently with the initiation of construction; and ■ A description of legal protection measures for the preserved wetlands (i.e., dedication of fee title, conservation easement, .� and /or an endowment held by an approved conservation organization, government agency or mitigation bank). Special- Status Plant Species Impact 3.3 -2: A query of the CNPS lists 34 plant species that occur within the project vicinity. Based on habitats within the project area during the March 2012 survey by Cardno Entrix, the list was reduced to four special status plant species that have the potential to be located within the project area including: Congdon's tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. Congdonii), Palmate - bracted bird's -beak (Cordylanthus palmatus), Northern California Black Walnut Uuglans hindsii), and Hairless popcorn -flower (Plagiobothrys glaber). Out of these four special status plant species, the only special status plant species that has the woo potential to be located within the project area is the Congdon's Am tarplant, which was documented as occurring within the project area based on floristic surveys conducted between 1995 and 2000. The Page 3 -73 ow Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources potential loss of Congdon's tarplant within the project area would be considered a potentially significant impact. The majority of the Congdon's tarplant populations within the project area are found in highly disturbed or mowed areas (i.e., along the edge of parking lots and abandoned roads) and along the edges of ruderal grasslands at Camp Parks. Disturbance or removal of grassland and wetland habitat could potentially result in the loss of this special status species, which would be considered a potentially significant impact. The following mitigation measures would reduce this potentially significant impact to special status species to a less than significant level by identifying the presence or absence of this plant species through a floristic survey for special- status plant species and if any special- status plant species are found, avoiding, transplanting, and monitoring plants that would be affected by the proposed project. Mitigation Measures MM 3.3 -2a Conduct a Floristic Survey and Consult with GDFG —CDFW and USFWS if State or Federally ESA Listed Plants are Found and Comply with Incidental Take Permits. The project applicant shall retain a qualified botanist to conduct rare plant surveys within the construction zone for Congdon's tarplant or other state or federally listed plant species with potential habitat within the project area during the blooming period of those species for which suitable habitat is present appropriate time of YeaF in accordance with agency protocols. These plant surveys shall be conducted in accordance with the 2009 C.--lifer—pi--, Department of Fish and Gann,, CDFW and United States Fish and Wildlife Ser-VieeUSFWS rare plant survey protocols. Two or three separate surveys may be required to cover the blooming periods of species where suitable habitat is present. The results of the surveys shall be summarized in a report and submitted to CDFW and If USFWS, and would be valid for two years. _If no special- status plants are located during the surveys, no further measures would be required. If any federal or state ESA plant species are found during the rare plant surveys, the project applicant shall consult with the CDFW and USFWS to obtain incidental take permits under Section 2081 of the CESA and either Section 7 or 10 of the FESA. Consultation w with USFWS under Section 7 of the FESA could occur as part of the CWA Section 404 permit process as part of the wetland mitigation, described under Mitigation Measure MM 3.3 -1. MM 3.3 -2b Develop and Implement Mitigation in Consultation with CDFW if Other Special Status Plant Species Are Found. If populations or stands of Congdon's tarplant or other special- status plant species (excluding federal or state listed plants) are found during the rare Page 3 -74 W Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR ' Biological Resources wm plant surveys, the project applicant shall notify the CDFW. A mitigation plan shall be developed in consultation with and approved "" by the CDFW and the City prior to the commencement of any activities fib that would impact any special status plants, such as the acquisition of off -site mitigation areas presently supporting the species in question or purchase of credits in a mitigation bank that is approved to sell to credits for the affected species. The location of mitigation sites shall be determined in consultation with, and subject to approval of USFWS ow and CDFW. Off -site compensatory mitigation shall be acquired at a 't" ./or minimum acreage ratio of 1:1 (acquired: impacted). For either off -site mitigation option, measures shall be implemented (including contingency measures) providing for the long -term protection of the The dude species. mitigation plan shall — lgeasUFes such as transplanting plants, collecting seed or- clippings and replanting species in an an site location if feasible location „ l h. OF etlgeF Special Status Wildlife Species - Mammals IM Impact 3.3 -3: Several California burrowing owl pairs have been documented within the project area, including during the winter and breeding season. Due to the security fencing that surrounds Camp Parks, low human use, and maintenance activities, the project area provides suitable breeding, foraging and wintering habitat for the California burrowing owl. Implementation of the proposed project could result in the �. displacement of burrowing owls during construction activities, and once completed, the proposed project could result in the removal of suitable burrowing owl (breeding and wintering) habitat. Permanent �•• loss of occupied burrow(s) and habitat would be considered a potentially significant impact. IM The following mitigation measure would reduce impacts to the California burrowing Ito owl to a less than significant level by documenting information on burrowing owls in the project area and by conducting a California burrowing owl survey and if any �* burrowing owls are found, avoiding, or excluding the owls outside the breeding season, and mitigating for the loss of habitat that would be affected by the proposed project. Because California burrowing owls have been observed within the project area, the following mitigation measures would reduce this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures MM 3.3 -3a Conduct a Burrowing Owl Survey and Impact Assessment. The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a California burrowing owls, take avoidance surveys 14 days prior to ground disturbing activities and impact assessment—following the MW Page 3 -75 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources 2012 California Department of Fish and Game Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012) or as updated at the time of the implementation of the proposed project. If no owls are found during this first survey, a final survey shall be conducted within 48- hours prior to ground disturbance to confirm that burrowing owls are still absent. If ground disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 14 days after the initial take avoidance survey, the project area shall be resurveyed including the final survey within 48- hours of disturbance. The report(s) shall be submitted to r"''cai oFnia Department of Fist, and Game CDFW as indicated in the CDFW 2012 Staff Report. If it is determined that project activities may result in impacts to nesting, occupied, and satellite burrows and /or burrowing owl habitat, the project applicant shall consult with the CDFW_ More specifically, if the surveys identify breeding or wintering burrowing owls on or adjacent to the project area, occupied burrows cannot be disturbed and shall be provided with protective buffers. Where avoidance is not feasible during the non - breeding season a site specific exclusion plan (i.e. a plan that considers the type and extent of the proposed activity, the duration and timing of the activity, sensitivity and habituation of the owls, and the dissimilarity of the proposed activity with background activities) shall be implemented to encourage the owls to move away from the work area prior to construction and to minimize the potential to affect the reproductive success of the owls. The exclusion plan shall be subject to the CDFW approval and monitoring requirements Compensatory mitigation could also be required by the CDFW as part of the approval of an exclusion plan. Mitigation may include the permanent protection of habitat at a nearby off-site location acceptable to the CDFW. a+4 .. Page 3 -76 rMhafts— 6 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources i Avoid impacting 13uFr-ows rl,,r;Rg the br- sway by migFato -y - occupied „ , at.., -y r sident non eeding h„rr,... iRg „ .,1S hl� season • Avoid dir destrlletloR b1_1r126wS thFOUgh eaG7Taining (dragging heavy -ect o ch� to diskingy cultivation — a— „rhan oveF an area industr4al, remove shFubs), development. and OF afficultur-al f Develop implement t& ease— the and site��e� —L^'L NVE)"r'ke —LTwaFe'ness ition pTegFaffl i rc h„ Rg t Pllacn —on e e.l protection. _ - reed b of and commitment tv— faFM w� equipment and visible .,therm aFkeFS neaF ws eh;nery does not eallapse te-I"SUFe —that buFi=o..e •. Do not fiamigate, use tFeated bait n in bUrr$wMg othy of poisoning t „nor nuisanee —mss to areas where (e.g., —$wlr, al:p suspected use Restrict OeEUF J y the sites observed with tFeated to nesting owls, to the 4 r— mnnthc- c,f 44M 3.3 3e T- ,,,,,ar -ci and Conduct use of Fehr -uar.i Bur-Few Tlvn)I.sinn in all the event that California bur- eels, located trrrr he the Fole.ing plieant hall — are e nduet — within project a1-7,R,,„rr Owl Aeloeat;on area, Plan if ayoidanee nf�Q�,irig— 7e,,l�.�ing isr ,. Tl��r— CtttJ1z rti'iff- ws not with the California poJ"c�'( pr-ojeet Denartment r4sh _l;eant and gip& consultation of rn>� WzB12 cuff Rt Metoter- 44g—of tl adoll exel„ded e .,le _the hall he t r the pfft. Galifernia Department Fish and Game 2012 earviedd a as Staff T?ennrt Mitigation far permanent imparts of to buFr-ow bur-Fowing A nesting, be developed occupied, and based satellite and/oF the CDFW 2012 Staff owls shall- Owl -on ce p o r-t -on u-rr-owing w Special- Status Species - Amphibians and Reptiles Impact 3.3 -4: Habitat assessments or surveys for special- status amphibians and .R reptiles were performed within the project area by the U.S. Army in 2006, including California Red Legged Frog and California Tiger Salamander. Although no surveys specific for Western Pond Turtle have been conducted, Western Pond Turtle was observed within the ect greater Camp Parks Training Area during surveys for California Red Legged Frog. During the field surveys conducted by in March 2012, the project area was not found to provide suitable breeding habitat for these species. However, the proposed project Page 3 -77 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources includes re- alignment of the ephemeral drainage, which could result in the potential "take" of Western Pond Turtle and /or California Red Legged Frog if found within the project area. Therefore, this would be considered a potentially significant impact. During the 2012 field surveys conducted by Cardno Entrix, the ephemeral drainage located within the project area did not contained deep pools that could provide suitable breeding habitat for California Red Legged Frog. In addition, none of the seasonal wetlands retain water long enough to provide suitable breeding habitat for the California Tiger Salamander. Similarly, the ephemeral drainage does not provide suitable habitat for the Western Pond Turtle since it dries during the summer months and does not appear to provide suitable nesting or refuge habitat for this species. California Tiger Salamander During installation wide surveys conducted at Camp Parks in 2005, California Tiger Salamander breeding locations were identified within the Camp Parks Training Area, however no breeding habitat was identified within the project area. The project area is approximately 1.4 miles away from the nearest known breeding location and approximately 0.90 miles south of an upland observation during the 2005 surveys. Existing development (i.e. buildings, roads and parking areas) between the project area and the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area would likely hinder dispersal and reduce the survival potential of dispersing California Tiger Salamander (CTS). Potential of CTS occurring within the project area decreases with distance from known breeding habitat, potential breeding habitat, and suitability of habitat. Based on existing conditions and the lack of habitat, it is unlikely that CTS would occur within the project area. Additionally, implementation of the proposed project is not expected to result in habitat modification or degradation because potential dispersal habitat within the project area lacks suitable aquatic components, thus breeding, sheltering, and feeding of CTS would not be significantly impaired. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would have no impact on this species and no mitigation is required. Western Pond Turtle Although a survey specific for Western Pond Turtle has not been conducted within the project area or the Camp Parks Forces Training Area, WPT have been 4)bserved l,,,ithi,4 the instal atig within the greater Camp Parks Training Area during surveys for CTS and CRLF by the U.S. Army in 2006. All of the observations have been made within man -made ponds in the Training Area. No observations of WPT have been made within the project area (US Army 2006). The habitat within the project area does not provide suitable breeding or aestivating habitat for the WPT. Implementation of the proposed project calls for the re- alignment of the ephemeral drainage. It is expected that this realignment would occur during the dry season Page 3 -78 RW Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources eue and thus it would be unlikely that a Western Pond Turtle would be present. Nevertheless, re- alignment of the stream could result in the "take" of Western Pond Turtle. This would be considered a potentially significant impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce impacts to i1° Western Pond Turtle to less than significant level by identifying the presence or absence of WPT by conducting a pre- construction survey for Western Pond Turtle and if any Western Pond Turtles are found, avoiding, excluding and /or relocating the Western Pond Turtle to a more suitable habitat within the immediate vicinity of the project area but away from the construction zone. _ Mitigation Measure VA MM 3.3 -4a Conduct Pre - Construction Surveys for Western Pond Turtle (WPT) no Prior to Re- Alignment of the Ephemeral Drainage. The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct pre- construction surveys for Western Pond Turtle no more than 30 days prior to work .� in or adjacent to any habitat suitable for WPT within the project area. If no Western Pond Turtles are found, no further mitigation is required. If Western Pond Turtles are found, the consulting biologist .� shall consult with the California Department of Fish and Game for authorization to relocate the species to suitable habitat away from the construction zone. The turtle shall be relocated to either a pond within the Training Area (if authorization from the US Army is granted) or downstream from the construction zone to similar or better habitat. California Red -Leg4 ed Frog T.an ment Affe., of _ Camp Parks The pro.Ject area was previously surveyed in August 2003. The survey followed the measures prescribed in the USFWS Guidance on Site Assessment and Field Surveys for California Red - Legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii). None of the six potential wetlands within the project area were found to provide suitable habitat for the California Red Legged Frog based on a habitat assessment prepared in 2003. Based on the surveys conducted by Cardno so, Entrix in March 2012, conditions within the project area have not changed since 2003 and thus the habitat within these areas is primarily unchanged. However, since the surveys were conducted in 2003, new focused field surveys may be .. warranted. The habitat within the project area does not provide breeding habitat for the CRLF, and the nearest known CRLF breeding site is 1.32 miles north of the project area within Camp Parks. Existing development (i.e. buildings, roads and parking areas) between the project area and the Camp Parks Training Area likely hinders dispersal and reduces the survival potential of dispersing CRLF. Nevertheless, there is a possibility that CRLF could disperse within the project area and therefore could be Page 3 -79 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Bioloeical Resources not be limited to, onsite and offsite preservation and creation of CRLF habitat, purchase of credits at mitigation banks, payment of in lieu fees approved by the agencies, or other agency approved and required mitigation measures. d. Avoidance measures may include the following or equivalent protective measures: • To minimize disturbance of breeding and dispersing CRLF, construction activity within CRLF upland habitat shall be conducted during the dry season between Apri115 and October 15 or before the onset of the rainy season, whichever occurs first. If construction activities are necessary in CRLF upland habitat between October 15 and April 15, the project applicant would contact the USFWS for approval to extend the work period. ■ To minimize disturbance and mortality of adult and juvenile CRLF in aquatic habitat and underground burrows, the project applicant could minimize the extent of ground - disturbing activities within these habitats by requiring the contractor to limit the work area to the minimum necessary for construction. In addition, the project applicant could ensure that the contractor would install temporary exclusion fence between the construction work area and potential aquatic habitat for all construction within grasslands near aquatic habitat. ■ The project applicant could ensure that a qualified wildlife biologist monitors all construction activities within CRLF upland habitat. This would ensure no take of individual CRLF occurs during project construction. If a CRLF is found, then the monitor would immediately stop construction in that area and contact USFWS for advice. —The project applicant shall could preserve additional upland habitat within a USFWS approved conservation area. The Project proponent shall c .,r-di at This measure shall be determined in consultation with the USFWS. if required. Vernal Pool Invertebrates Impact 3.3 -5: Protocol level surveys for vernal pool invertebrates were conducted throughout Camp Parks in 2002 and 2003 by the U.S. Army, as well as during the summer of 2012 (dry season) and 2013 ]wet season] by �'� Page 3-81 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources Cardno Entrix. No vernal pool fairy shrimp, vernal pool tadpole shrimp or longhorn fairy shrimp were found dur ing these California linderiella was found during the 2002 and 2003 surveys, but not within the project area. The Nev., surveys aFe GUFFeRtly being conducted by Cardno Entrix have not been accepted by USFWS. knee the hell, surveys i, not be completed -,t this ,-imeTherefore, the 111E presence of this species within the project area is assumed in the analysis of project impacts. Surveys for curve - footed Hygrotus beetle and San Francisco fork - tailed damselfly were also conducted within Camp Parks in 2002 and 2003 and neither of these species were observed. Site conditions have not changed significantly and these species are not expected to occur. Potentially suitable habitat was observed within the survey area for vernal pool invertebrates and these areas would be removed during proposed construction activities. Removal of these wetlands could result in the potential take of protected vernal pool branchiopods and other protected invertebrates, if they were to occur, and their habitat. This would be considered a potentially significant .� impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to vernal pool invertebrates to a less than significant level by preparing a habitat assessment for vernal pool invertebrates. If the habitat assessment concludes that vernal pool invertebrates could be located within the project area, .� the project applicant could either conduct protocol -level surveys or assume presence. If any federally - protected vernal pool invertebrates are found within the project area or if the project applicant assumes presence, then the project applicant shall ensure no net loss of habitat occurs and shall be achieve through avoidance, reservation, creation and /or purchase of mitigation credits. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure MM 3.3 -5 Consult with the USFWS and Reduce Impacts on Vernal Pool Invertebrates and Their Habitat. The project applicant shall prepare .� a habitat assessment for the vernal pool invertebrates. If vernal pool invertebrates are found within the project area during the habitat' assessment, the project applicant shall comply with the following steps to ensure protection of vernal pool invertebrates and their habitat and that impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. a. The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct habitat assessments for protected vernal pool"` invertebrates and based on the results of the habitat �. Page 3 -82 Few MM Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources assessments, determine in consultation with the USFWS if protocol -level vernal pool invertebrate surveys will be required within the project area. b. If suitable habitat is present, the project applicant, in consultation with the USFWS and CDFW, shall either (1) conduct a protocol -level survey for federally listed vernal pool crustaceans which will identifv— another protected vernal pool invertebrates (curve- footed Hygrotus beetle and San Francisco fork - tailed damselfly), or (2) assume presence of federally- listed vernal pool crustaceans and curve footed Hygrotus beetle and San Francisco fork - tailed damselfly in areas of suitable habitat. Surveys shall be conducted by qualified biologists in accordance with the most recent USFWS guidelines or protocols to determine the time of year and survey methodology (survey timing for these species is dependent on yearly rainfall patterns and seasonal occurrences, and is determined on a case -by -case basis). The USFWS protocol level surveys shall be conducted as part of the Section 404 permit process within two years of the application. If surveys reveal no occurrences of federally listed vernal pool crustaceans or other protected vernal pool invertebrates, no further mitigation would be required. C. If surveys determine that one or more special- status vernal pool invertebrate species occurs within the project area, or if the project applicant, in consultation with the USFWS and /or CDFW, assumes presence of federally- listed vernal pool invertebrates in all affected habitats, the project applicant shall provide information to the USACE to support Section 7 consultation with the USFWS and the project applicant shall ensure no net loss of habitat shall be achieved through avoidance, preservation, creation and /or purchase of credits as a part of the Section 7 Consultation process. The selected measures may be part of the permitting process. d. Where feasible, all vernal pool invertebrate habitat shall be avoided. If habitat that can be avoided during construction activities is identified at a distance determined in consultation with USFWS, a USFWS- approved biologist (monitor) shall inspect any construction - related activities to ensure that no unnecessary take of listed species or destruction of their habitat occurs. The Project proponent will establish monitoring and reporting protocols to reduce impacts to vernal pool invertebrate species and habitat. Rw Page 3 -83 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources aw 71 u e. The project applicant shall ensure that an appropriate number of acres, as approved by USFWS during consultation, are 1° preserved to mitigate for direct or indirect impacts on vernal pool crustacean habitat. Water quality in the avoided wetlands shall be protected using erosion control techniques, such as silt fencing or straw wattles during construction in the watershed. .� Migrant Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) — Nesting Birds Impact 3.3 -6: A variety of special- status birds are expected to be located within the project area. Some of these species are resident species and some are migratory species that breed within the project area. The special - status birds known to nest in the Livermore Valley area include the Golden eagle, white - tailed kite, tricolored blackbird, northern harrier, California horned, prairie falcon, Cooper's hawk and loggerhead shrike. Trees, fresh emergent wetland vegetation and grassland could provide potentially suitable nesting habitat for these species, which are protected under the Migrant Bird Treaty Act and the Fish and Game Code. The proposed project would require grading and possible removal of existing trees and vegetation. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project could result in the loss of active nests, which would be considered a potentially significant impact on special - status bird species and birds protected under the MBTA. The proposed project includes creation of an open space area along the ephemeral " drainage canal, which would provide potentially suitable nesting habitat for some of these species following construction. However, implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce impacts to nesting birds to less than significant level by requiring that pre- construction bird surveys are conducted and that the project applicant avoid any nests if found. , Mitigation Measure MM 3.3 -6 Protect Birds Covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (Including, but not limited to White - Tailed Kite, golden eagle, Cooper's hawk, Loggerhead Shrike, and Other Special- Status Species). Project contractors shall avoid construction activities during the bird nesting season (February 1 through August 311. If ;sw^^n 44ar- h ' and SeptembeF 4--sconstruction activities are conducted during the nesting season, the project applicant shall have a qualified biologist conduct at least three nest surveys of the project area to develop a baseline of nesting activity on and adjacent to the project area. Depending on the construction schedule, preconstruction surveys shall be initiated prior to the planned construction activity to allow adequate time for Page 3-84 �� MM Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources multiple site visits (e.2. for construction activities planned for mid May, the first survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of • MA MM MW .. If active nests of protected bird species are identified in the focused nest surveys, the project applicant will shall consult with the appropriate regulatory agencies to identify project -level mitigation requirements, based on the agencies' standards and policies as then in effect. Performance measures may include the following, based on current agency standards and policies. a. The project applicant, in consultation with California Department of Fish and Game, would shall delay construction in the vicinity of active nest sites during the breeding season (February 1 through S°r 41SAugust 31) while the nest is occupied with adults and /or young. A qualified biologist would monitor any occupied nest to determine when the nest is no longer used. If the construction cannot be delayed, avoidance measures weld —shall include the establishment of protective buffer zones around the nests as follows: for raptor nests, the size of the buffer zone shall be a minimum 250 foot radius centered on the nest: for other birds the size of the buffer zone shall be a 50 -foot radius centered on the nest. In some cases, these buffers may be increased or decreased depending on the bird species and the level of disturbance that will occur near the nest. Changes to the buffer should be made by the project biologist in consultation with the CDFW.4 -a Ire d iStxF]3 arree buffer- zone -aTe aREthe ReSt site. T-4e law Page 3 -85 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources r b. No intensive disturbance (e.g., heavy equipment operation associated with construction, or use of cranes) or other project - related activities that could cause nest abandonment or forced fledging would be initiated within the established buffer zone of an active nest between February 1 and SeptembeF 14&Zust 31. C. If construction activities are unavoidable within the buffer zone, the project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to monitor the nest site to determine if construction activities are disturbing the adult or young birds. d. If fully protected species (white - tailed kites, golden eagles) are found to be nesting near the proposed construction area, their nests would be completely avoided until the birds fledge. Avoidance would include the establishment of a non - disturbance buffer zone of 500 feet, or as determined in consultation with the CDFW. Special Status Bat Species Impact 3.3 -7: Removal of trees and /or buildings or structures from the project area could impact roosting sites for pallid bat and Yuma myotis. Disturbance of roosting sites during the maternity season (May 1st - Oct1st) could result in a potentially significant impact. No bat surveys have been conducted within the project area. However, trees and existing old buildings or structures may represent potentially suitable roosting habitat for a variety of regionally occurring bat species. The two bat species with a likelihood of occurrence include the pallid bat and Yuma myotis. These species have been documented as roosting approximately 2.06 miles southwest of the project area. Removal of trees and /or buildings or structures from: the project area could .� impact roosting sites for these species. These roosting sites can also be used as maternity roosts. Disturbance of roosting sites during the maternity season (May 1st- Oct1st) could result in a potentially significant impact. Implementation of the following measure would reduce the potentially significant impact on special - status bats and their roost sites to less than significant level. Page 3 -86 RW '— – b. No intensive disturbance (e.g., heavy equipment operation associated with construction, or use of cranes) or other project - related activities that could cause nest abandonment or forced fledging would be initiated within the established buffer zone of an active nest between February 1 and SeptembeF 14&Zust 31. C. If construction activities are unavoidable within the buffer zone, the project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to monitor the nest site to determine if construction activities are disturbing the adult or young birds. d. If fully protected species (white - tailed kites, golden eagles) are found to be nesting near the proposed construction area, their nests would be completely avoided until the birds fledge. Avoidance would include the establishment of a non - disturbance buffer zone of 500 feet, or as determined in consultation with the CDFW. Special Status Bat Species Impact 3.3 -7: Removal of trees and /or buildings or structures from the project area could impact roosting sites for pallid bat and Yuma myotis. Disturbance of roosting sites during the maternity season (May 1st - Oct1st) could result in a potentially significant impact. No bat surveys have been conducted within the project area. However, trees and existing old buildings or structures may represent potentially suitable roosting habitat for a variety of regionally occurring bat species. The two bat species with a likelihood of occurrence include the pallid bat and Yuma myotis. These species have been documented as roosting approximately 2.06 miles southwest of the project area. Removal of trees and /or buildings or structures from: the project area could .� impact roosting sites for these species. These roosting sites can also be used as maternity roosts. Disturbance of roosting sites during the maternity season (May 1st- Oct1st) could result in a potentially significant impact. Implementation of the following measure would reduce the potentially significant impact on special - status bats and their roost sites to less than significant level. Page 3 -86 RW Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Biological Resources Preservation of Heritage Trees and Tree Preservation Impact 3.3 -8: Trees are located within the project area and a detailed tree survey has not been conducted for the proposed project. Nevertheless, trees within the project area could fall under the definition of heritage trees per Section 5.60 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code. Removal of protected trees, due to construction activities within the project area would be considered a potentially significant impact. If the proposed project were to remove and /or damage trees that are considered heritage trees per Section 5.60 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code, this would be considered a potentially significant impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level by requiring that the project applicant survey all the trees within the project area and identify those that shall be removed with implementation of the proposed project Mitigation Measure MM 3.3 -8 Conduct Tree Survey and Replace Trees at Suitable Ratios. The project applicant shall retain a certified arborist to survey all trees located within the project area in order to identify and evaluate those trees that shall be removed with implementation of the proposed project. An arborist report shall be prepared consistent with the certified arborist to survey trees within the project area and identify and evaluate trees that shall be removed. The arborist report shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Dublin to document the trees that are to be removed. If any of the trees fall under the jurisdiction Section 5.60 of the City's Municipal Code, the project applicant shall then mitigate impacts to trees based on the following or equivalent protective measures depending on the size and health of trees to be removed. a. Prior to the start of construction, the project applicant shall install exclusion fencing at the dripline of any tree that will not be affected by the construction and prohibit any parking or storage of construction materials or other materials inside the fence. b. Mitigation, at an inch -by -inch ratio, shall be provided for native trees larger than 24inches in circumference measured at four (4) feet six (6) inches above natural grade. Potential Conflicts with a Habitat Conservation Plan There is no habitat conservation plan within Alameda County or the City of Dublin that the proposed project would be able to participate in. The Eastern Alameda Conservation Strategy (EACS) is still -i-n- the - developing pFeeess unarm -been was released in December 2010 and the City of Dublin adopted Page 3 -88 1W Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR"' Biological Resources WO a resolution accepting the EACS as guidance for environmental 13ermitting for public proiects affecting habitat and endangered species in Eastern Alameda County. The City acknowledges the EACS as a guidance tool. Therefore the proposed project would not have a conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact. M MW Page 3 -89 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final E1R GeoIOLiV and Soils expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking which would reduce this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure MM 3.5 -3 Preparation of Design -Level Geotechnical Report. Future development within the project area shall consult with a registered geotechnical engineer to prepare a design level geotechnical report that incorporates the recommendations in the preliminary geotechnical investigation by Berlogar, Stevens and Associates (March 2012). The design level geotechnical report shall address site preparation and grading (including measures to address potential liquefaction and expansive soils), building foundations, CBC seismic design parameters, and preliminary pavement sections. This report shall be submitted in conjunction with Building Permit application(s) and reviewed and approved by the City. The Report's recommendations shall be incorporated into the project design and construction documents. Liquefaction Impact 3.5 -4: Future development associated with the proposed project could expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects of liquefaction. This is considered a potentially significant impact. Generally, when liquefaction occurs because of earthquakes, the conditions of cohesionless surface material accompanied with relatively shallow water tables underlying the area were the factor. In such cases, ground vibration increases the pore pressure resulting in water moving upward whereby turning the sand or silt into a quicksand like condition. The surface characteristics include the development of sand boils, surface cracks, ground settlement and differential compaction. Without proper soil engineering, foundation design, and construction, the project area could expose people and /or structures to hazards associated with seismic - related ground failure. The project area is located within a CGS Seismic Hazard Zone where liquefaction may occur during a strong earthquake. Based on the geotechnical investigation there is the potential for liquefaction to occur within the occasional interbedded layers of loose to medium dense sandy soils that exist below the groundwater table. These potentially liquefiable layers generally range from approximately half a foot to two feet thick and are overlain by at least ten feet of non - liquefiable cover. As pant 4-The results of the settlement calculations performed for the liquefaction analysis, the re-sults- indicate that the potential liquefaction- induced settlement would likely range from approximately half an inch to two inches. Differential settlement is estimated to be on the order of one inch. Surface manifestation of liquefaction (e.g. sand Page 3 -116 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Geologv and Soils boils, ground fissures) are not anticipated due to the presence of at least ten feet of non - liquefiable cover. Future development within the project area would be required to comply with the City's Building Code, liquefaction regulations of the CBC, and the City's standard engineering practices and design criteria. In addition, Mitigation Measure MM 3.5 -3 would require that the project applicant prepare a design -level geotechnical report, which would address liquefaction and reduce this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level. Cnd Frncinn Impact 3.3 -5: Implementation of the proposed project may result in soil erosion or the loss of topsoil during short -term construction activities within the project area. This is considered a less than significant impact. A portion of the project area is covered by roads, buildings, parking lots, and sidewalks from the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area. However, earth - disturbing activities associated with future construction activities within the project area have the potential to increase erosion if proper sedimentation and erosion° control methods are not in place. According to the Natural Resources Conservation (NRCS) service, the Clear Lake soil is characterized as having slow to very slow erosion potential and the Diablo Clay soils has a moderate erosion potential. The City of Dublin Public Works Department Policy No. 95 -11 requires that all plans specify both long -term and short -term erosion control measures that will be implemented during construction activities to control runoff, erosion, and sediment movement prior to issuance of a building permit. In addition, in order to comply with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit process for storm drainage and construction site discharge, projects involving construction that are greater than one acre in size within the project area is required to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) which would be submitted for review by the City of Dublin Public Works Department during the Grading /Site Work and Building Permit process, The SWPP describes the .� stormwater BMPs (structural and operational measures) that would control the quality (and quantity) of stormwater runoff. In addition, the NPDES permit requires implementation of non -point source control of runoff through the application of a number of Best Management Practices (BMPs). These BMPs are meant to reduce the amount of constituents, including eroded sediment, that enter streams and other water bodies. Examples of BMPs typically used in the City of Dublin include �+* vegetated swales in parking areas. Compliance with the City of Dublin Public Works Department Policy No. 95 -11: the �^ NPDES permit process; and the City's Building Code requirements the proposedd project would result in a less than significant impact from erosion during construction activities. Page 3 -117 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials Livermore Municipal Airport Master Plan, the project area is not located within the airport influence area and is not located within an unacceptable noise contour. North of the project area, is a heliport, which is used infrequently at approximately18 days a year. Wildland Fire Hazards Due to the urban nature of the project area, the proposed project is not located within an area that would be subject to the requirements of the City's Wildfire Management Plan (City of Dublin 2002). Project Setting The project area was historically used as grazing land prior to the installation of Camp Parks in the 1940s. The project area contains former and /or existing supply buildings and warehouses, infrastructure maintenance facilities, vehicle repair facilities, fueling points, hazardous waste accumulation sites, office and administration buildings, a buried construction debris deposition area, several railroad spurs, former lumber yards, and soil stockpiles. The majority of the existing buildings are located within the western portion of the project area on approximately 77 acres. Approximately 112 acres in the eastern portion of the project area is generally undeveloped. There are approximately 16 existing buildings /structures warehouses that are interspersed amongst fields of non - native grasslands where other buildings once stood. Most of the buildings /warehouses were constructed as World War II temporary buildings and consist of rectangular structures that are primarily comprised of horizontal wood siding and a flat built -up roof. Hazardous Materials A total of 41areas with environmental conditions of concern were identified at the project area. Environmental remediation activities been conducted at the 38 of the 41 areas and have received or are in the process of receiving a no further action (NFA) /case closure from the regulatory agencies. The following sites, which may require additional remedial action in order to obtain a NFA status include: Former Building 1091 Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (PRFTA) 2 - Former Building 109 /PRFTA 2 located at the southwestern portion of the project area eantaining contained concentrations of dioxin and lead within the surficial soil above the acceptable risk -based screening levels for closure. The contamination was remedaated by the U.S. Army and cleaned to industrial standards. There are currently groundwater monitoring wells at this site and the U.S. Army has completed three quarters of sampling in coordination with the Department of Toxic Substances and Control (DTSCI. (Personal Communication with Mark Page 3-138 RW �V Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hall, Environmental Coordinator, U.S. Army, Camp Parks on May 21, 2013and September 17, 2013)." Area 761 1PRFTA 13 - Area 761 /PRFTA 13 is located at the central portion of the project area and requires land use controls by the San Francisco �. GRWQCB to obtain an NFA status. The San Francisco CRWQCB issued a Pre- NFA determination on May 28, 2008. This determination acknowledged that groundwater cleanup objectives have been met. However, a deed restriction .. (land use control) is required to achieve a full NFA designation due to the presence of soil which contains diesel concentrations greater than acceptable levels. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) concurred with ^� these findings in January 20, 2012. Potential Construction Debris Dump Sites (ECP 36, 37, 39) - The eastern portion of the potential construction debris dump sites consists of large mounds of soil and debris north of Dublin Boulevard and east of the installation entrance road. Construction and demolition debris, asbestos aw containing material (ACM), waste asphalt, drill cuttings, and grass clippings were observed in the mounds during site visits conducted from 1990 VO through 2002. DTSC stated that the area may need further investigation OW prior to receiving an NFA. Soil samples revealed that there were high hydrocarbons in the soil. The soil has been removed and re- sampled with negative results and have been subsequently submitted to DTSC for review •�* (Personal Communication with Mark Hall, Environmental Coordinator, U.S. „ Army, Camp Parks on May 21, 2013). Asbestos containing materials (ACM) and Lead Based Paints (LBPs) in existing structures - Asbestos is a strong, incombustible, and corrosion resistant material, which was used in many commercial products between the 1940s and the early 1970s. If inhaled, asbestos fibers can result in serious health problems. Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) are building materials containing more than one percent asbestos (some state and regional regulators impose a one -tenth of one percent (0.1 percent) threshold). Until 1978, when the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) phased out the sale and distribution of residential paint containing lead, many homes were treated with paint containing some amount of lead. It is estimated that over 80 percent of all housing built prior to 1978 contains some Lead -Based Paints (LBP). The mere presence of lead in paint may not constitute a material to be considered hazardous. In fact, if in good condition (no flaking or peeling), most intact LBP is not considered to be a hazardous material. LBPs can create a potential health hazard for building occupants, especially children when in poor condition. ACMs and LBPs are associated the structures located within the project area that were constructed more than 40 years ago. Page 3 -139 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials Result in the Disturbance of Contaminated Soil or Groundwater Impact 3.7 -4: The project area is not located on a hazardous material site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. However, based on the Phase I ESA there are three sites currently being evaluated by the U.S. Army. Hazardous materials may be encountered during construction. This would be considered a potentially significant impact. There are approximately three sites where remedial action activities are still required to attain a commercial /industrial NFA status, which is the standard used by the U.S. Army. These sites include: Building 109 /PRFTA 2; Area 761 /PRFTA 13; and the eastern portion of the potential construction debris dump sites (ECP 36, 37, and 39) as described below. Former Building 109 1PRFTA - Former Building 109 /PRFTA 2 located at the southwestern portion of the project area contained concentrations of dioxin and lead within the surficial soil above the acceptable risk -based screening levels for closure. The contamination was remediated by the U.S. Army and cleaned to industrial standards. There are currently groundwater monitoring wells at this site and the U.S. Army has completed three quarters of sampling in coordination with the Department of _Toxic Substances and Control (DTSCI. The 1-1.S. Armv J,; AwAitippi site (Personal Communication with Mark Hall, Environmental Coordinator, U.S. Army, Camp Parks on May 21, 2013 and September 17.2013). Area 761 1PRFTA 13 - Area 761 /PRFTA 13 is located at the central portion of the project area and requires land use controls by the San Francisco GRWQCB to obtain an NFA status. The San Francisco CRWQCB issued a Pre - NFA determination on May 28, 2008. This determination acknowledged that groundwater cleanup objectives have been met. However, a deed restriction (land use control) is required to achieve a full NFA designation due to the presence of soil which contains diesel concentrations greater than acceptable levels. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) concurred with these findings in January 20, 2012. Potential Construction Debris Dump Sites (ECP 36, 37, 39) - The eastern portion of the potential construction debris dump sites consists of large r� mounds of soil and debris north of Dublin Boulevard and east of the installation entrance road. Construction and demolition debris, asbestos containing material (ACM), waste asphalt, drill cuttings, and grass clippings were observed in the mounds during site visits conducted from 1990 through 2002. DTSC stated that the area may need further investigation prior to receiving an NFA. Soil samples revealed that there were high hydrocarbons in the soil. The soil has been removed and re- sampled with negative results and have been subsequently submitted to DTSC for review Page 3 -146 FMF OW Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR wr Hazards and Hazardous Materials w (Personal Communication with Mark Hall, Environmental Coordinator, U.S. Army, Camp Parks on May 21, 2013). In addition, a property located up- gradient of the project area has affected the underlying groundwater with petroleum hydrocarbons. However, based on the distance of this site from the project area, it is unlikely that the property could have affected the project area. W The U.S. Army and NASA are responsible for environmental remediation of existing hazardous materials within the project area and have agreed to remediate the project area to state and federal requirements (Personal Communication with Mark a.. Hall, Environmental Coordinator, U.S. Army Camp Parks on June 17, 2013). Contamination that remains after the U.S. Army or NASA transfers the property to the project applicant and /or that needs to be remediated to a higher standard (e.g. residential) will either be remediated by the project applicant or by the U.S. Army or NASA, prior to and during site grading and demolition activities with future development activities. Construction activities would be restricted within these portions of the project area until an NFA status has been achieved. If contamination is discovered during construction activities in the vicinity of these sites, this would be considered a potentially significant impact. The following mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure MM 3.7 -4 Remediation of Hazardous Materials. Future development within the vicinity of Former Building 109 /PRFTA, Area 761 /PRFTA 13, and the Potential Construction Debris Dump Sites shall not proceed until a, NFA status is granted and the project area has been cleaned to the appropriate land use standard to the satisfaction of Department of Toxic Substances and Control (DTSC). The NFA status paperwork shall .. be submitted to the City in conjunction with the Building and Grading /Site work permit and shall be found acceptable by the City prior to ground disturbance. -� Implementation of mitigation measure MM 3.7 -4 would reduce potential impacts associated with contaminated soils within the project area to a less than significant �.. level. Emit Hazardous Materials in the Vicinity of a School .W Impact 3.7 -5: There are no schools located within a quarter mile of the project area. However, the proposed project includes construction of an 44-12 net usable acre school site that would be located adjacent to proposed residential uses. In addition, commercial businesses proposed within the project area would be required to comply with federal, state and ... NMI— Page 3 -147 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials local regulations regarding hazardous substances. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to the school proposed within the project area. There are no schools located within a quarter mile of the project area. However, the proposed project includes a 12 net usable acre school site and the project area is located within two miles of several existing schools: Dublin High School (8151 Village Parkway, Dublin), Valley High School and Wells Middle School (6800 Penn Drive, Dublin), Fallon Middle School (3601 Kohnen Way, Dublin), Murray Elementary School (8435 Davona Drive, Dublin), Green Elementary School (3300 Antone Way, Dublin) Dougherty Elementary School (5301 Hibernia Drive, Dublin) and Frederikson Elementary School (7243 Tamarack Drive, Dublin). New businesses that locate near residential areas or within a quarter mile from a school may expose these sensitive land uses to greater risk of exposure to hazardous materials, wastes, or emissions. While the risk of exposure to hazardous materials cannot be eliminated, measures can be implemented to maintain risk to acceptable levels. As noted in the project description, future new development will include residential, commercial, office and retail uses, as well as a community park. Hazardous materials would be typical for these types of uses with no high -risk materials such as those that are expected with industrial uses. Under these circumstances, required compliance with regulations established by federal, State and local regulatory agencies is considered adequate to avoid the negative effects related to the use, storage, emission and the transport of hazardous materials at future development /redevelopment sites within the project area. In addition, the proposed school site would be surrounded by proposed residential uses and therefore would not be in the vicinity of future commercial uses proposed within the project area. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on the proposed elementary school and schools in the vicinity of the project area with compliance of applicable federal, State, and local regulations. Page 3 -148 W Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Hydrology and Water Quality In developed portions of the City of Dublin, storm drainage is conveyed in underground pipes, channels, and to a lesser extent, swales. New development is required to install adequately -sized storm drains, connected to the City's system, to accommodate increased runoff volumes. Stormwater drainage is managed by the City of Dublin Public Works Department and all runoff in the vicinity is directed to regional storm drain facilities owned and maintained by Zone 7 of the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 7). Flooding As shown in Figure 3.8 -1: Hydrologic Features, a portion of the project site -area is .� located within Zone X and Zone AE floodplains as mapped on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps prepared by FEMA (Panel 309). Zone X is defined as "areas of 0.2 percent annual chance flood; areas of 1 percent annual chance flood with average depths of less than one foot or within drainage areas less than one square mile; and areas protected by levees from one percent annual flood." The areas adjacent to the Chabot Channel are mapped by FEMA as Zone AE, which are designated as special flood hazard areas subject to inundation by the one percent annual flood with Base Flood Elevations determined as shown in the Flood Insurance Rate Map, Plate 5. Reservoirs /Dams There are 29 reservoirs /dams in Alameda County. The following reservoirs are located within 12 miles of the proposed project: Don Castro Reservoir is located approximately 9 miles to the east of the proposed project in Hayward. It is maintained by the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for flood control, and by the East Bay Regional Park District as a recreational facility. a, Lake Chabot Reservoir is located approximately nine miles west of the project area. It was completed in 1875 by damming San Lorenzo creek and served as the primary water source for the East Bay Area. • The Upper San Leandro Reservoir is located approximately 13 miles northwest of the project area. It was built by the East Bay Water Company in 1926 and is maintained by the East Bay Municipal Utility District. • The San Antonio Reservoir is located approximately 13 miles south - southeast of the project area. Built in 1964 by the City and County of San Francisco, it is managed by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission ( SFPUC). The reservoir captures local rain and runoff from the Alameda Watershed and contributes surface water supplies to the SFPUC Water System. Lake de Valle is located approximately 14 miles southeast of the project area. -- De Valle Dam and Lake de Valle were built in 1968 as part of the State Water Project. It provides storage for the South Bay Aqueduct and flood control for Page 3 -150 W A �w Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Hydrology and Water Quality export of concentrated minerals or salts from the Main Basin and the delivery of treated water with reduced TDS and hardness levels to Zone 7's customers. Water Quality The quality of surface and groundwater at the proposed project area is affected by land uses within the entire watershed. Drainage from the project area affects the quality of water in larger creeks and drainages downstream, including Arroyo de la Laguna, Alameda Creek, and San Francisco Bay. Water quality in surface and groundwater bodies is regulated primarily by the State and Regional Water Quality Control Boards (discussed below). Project Site Setting Watershed Characteristics As shown in Figure 3.8 -2: Existing Drainage, the Camp PaFk's -mire 1,800+ aer-a majority of the Camp Parks watershed drains through the project area. The majority of the runoff from this watershed is conveyed through natural and man - made swales. These swales cross the project area and are intercepted along the north side of Dublin Boulevard and conveyed to various existing Zone 7 drainage facilities. The largest portion of the watershed is located north of Camp Parks and drains south within the main channel, concentrating near the intersection of the proposed Scarlett Drive extension and Dublin Boulevard in Line G -1, which is currently a mapped FEMA 100 -year floodplain. The smaller portion of the upstream watershed to the northeast of Camp Parks collects runoff in an existing concrete trapezoidal channel (G -5) and conveys it to the intersection of Arnold Road and Broder Boulevard. Just north of this intersection, there is a headwall with two to 48 -inch pipes. These pipes currently "split" the channel flow, diverting a portion towards Camp Parks and Line G -1. The remaining flow is conveyed south under the Arnold Drive / Broder Boulevard intersection, through a small basin between Gleaeson Drive and Broader Boulevard and into an open channel along the west side of Arnold Drive. Per Zone 7, the maximum flow of 950 cubic feet per second (cfs) at Line G -1 assumes that this splitter has been removed. Based on the offsite detention basin proposed in the "Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis for the Proposed Camp Parks Detention Basin Study" (RJA 2013), the splitter will remain in place. A second flow splitter was installed at the Arnold Road open channel, near Central Parkway dividing flow between Drainages G -5 and G -2. A seven foot and four foot box culvert down Arnold Road to Line G -2, while a trapezoidal channel conveys runoff into the project area to Line G -5. Per the Santa Rita Drainage Master Plan, a maximum of 350 cfs can be "split" and directed to Line G -5. FaW Page 3-153 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Hydrology and Water Quality .�n Underground Drainage Facilities MP Underground drainage facilities include the Line G -1 channel that runs along the west side of Hutchins Avenue and across the project area towards the future Scarlett " Avenue extension at Dublin Boulevard. A 48 -inch corrugated metal pipe (CMP) intercepting an existing open channel is located just north of the 8th Street and west of Davis Avenue. The pipe assumed to flow south to 5th Street (RJA 2013). An approximately 30 -inch re- enforced concrete pipe (RCP) exiting a curb inlet at the northwest corner of Sth Street and Davis Avenue connects to another inlet just to the west on 5th Street. This inlet is assumed to intercept the northerly 48 -inch CMP. The outlet pipe from this inlet flow flows in a southeasterly direction. A box culvert discharging to Line G -1 is located in the middle of the project site. A surface investigation of the project by RJA engineers found that the size of the box .w culvert was indeterminable due to the amount of silt and vegetation at the outfall to the channel. It was assumed that this is the discharge point for the above mentioned drainage facilities (RJA 2013). M Regulatory Setting Federal Clean Water Act The principal law governing pollution of the nation's surface waters is the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act [CWA]). Originally enacted in 1948, it was amended in 1972 and has remained substantially the same since. The CWA consists of two major parts: provisions that authorize federal financial assistance for municipal sewage treatment plant construction and regulatory requirements that apply to industrial and municipal dischargers. The CWA authorizes the establishment of effluent standards on an industry basis. The CWA also requires states to adopt water quality standards that "consist of the designated uses of the navigable waters involved and the water quality criteria for such waters based upon such uses ". National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System To achieve its objectives, the CWA is based on the concept that all discharges into the nation's waters are unlawful, unless specifically authorized by a permit. The NPDES is the permitting program for discharge of pollutants into surface waters of the United States under Section 402 of the CWA. Thus, industrial and municipal dischargers (point source discharges) must obtain NPDES permits from the appropriate RWQCB (i.e., the Central Valley region). The existing NPDES (Phase I) *�* stormwater program requires municipalities serving more than 1,000,000 persons to obtain a NPDES stormwater permit for any construction project larger than five acres. Proposed NPDES stormwater regulations (Phase I1) expand this existing national program to smaller municipalities with populations of 10,000 persons or more and construction sites that disturb more than one acre. For other dischargers, NAM Page 3 -154 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Hydrology and Water Quality Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program The City of Dublin is a co- permittee of the Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program which was started in 1991. This local government and community Program educates the public on how to keep businesses and homes from contributing to stormwater pollution, and also coordinates its activities with other pollution prevention programs, such as wastewater treatment plants, hazardous waste disposal, and water recycling. 3.8.3 Relevant Project Characteristics Water Demand According to the Water Supply Assessment prepared by DSRSD, the proposed project would require additional water demand for residential and commercial uses. Water demand for the proposed uses would be approximately 371 acre feet per year for the proposed project with the proposed elementary school and 365 acre feet per year without the elementary school. Recycled water demand for the proposed project would be 144 acre feet per year for the proposed project with the elementary school and 131 acre feet per year without the elementary school (West Yost Associates 2013). Surface Water Management Surface water management consists of both on -site runoff and the management of off -site runoff extending through or around the site. On -site Surface Water Runoff As shown in Figure 3.8 -3: PFopo,Ld DFaina,% Proposed Q100 Project Flows surface waters within the project area would be divided into four drainage sheds. Drainage sheds A9 -A (63.3 acres) and A9 -B (81.7 acres) would ultimately flow into the Line G- 1 drainage channel. Two underground detention basins, located within the proposed community park, would be constructed. Preliminary estimates by Ruggeri Jensen Azar (RJA) call for the construction of two underground basins (RJA 2013). Park Basin #1, which captures drainage from A9 -B, would have a storage capacity of 3.3 acre feet and an outflow rate of 80 cfs. Park Basin #2, which captures drainage from A9 -A, would have a storage capacity of 1.6 acre feet and an outflow of 71 cfs.7 Based on project plans, drainage from both of these underground basins would be conveyed via an underground pipe to the proposed Chabot Creek riparian channel that would be realigned through the proposed community park. This analysis assumed two open -air basins and that the bottom 2 '/z feet of each basin was inundated with runoff from the previous storm event. Given the fact that these two basins are now proposed to be underground, the ultimate storage capacities would be determined as part of detailed engineering design. However, the basins would be designed so that there is sufficient capacity to ensure that runoff capacities to not exceed pre- condition flow conditions. RW Page 3-159 we Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR aw Hydrology and Water Quality Drainage sheds XX -1 (23.1 acres) and XX -2 (20.9 acres), which are located in the southeast corner of the site, would ultimately flow into the Line G -5 drainage channel. Two underground detention basins consisting of 96 inch diameter storm drain pipes would be constructed along the proposed Central Parkway, or other suitable public roadway. Basin 3 -1 would be capable of storing 1.6 acre feet and Basin 3 -2 would be capable of storing 1.7 acre feet. Off -site Surface Water Runoff Management W There are two main sources of existing offsite runoff that would have to be is conveyed around or through the proposed project to accommodate development. W The first off -site flow is a portion of the main 1,800 acre watershed located north of the project area. The majority of this flow currently drains from the north to via the .. existing Line G -1 channel, discharging at the intersection of proposed Scarlett Drive extension and Dublin Boulevard. Based on discussions with the City and the project applicant, a new offsite detention basin will be constructed on currently Army - •• owned property, north of the project site. This new off -site basin will be designed to reduce Q100 (storm event that occurs every 100 years) runoff flows from currently 924 cfs to 604 cfs. Water flowing out from this new off -site basin would then flow into the 1.7 acre Chabot Creek riparian channel through the proposed community park. Preliminary plans call for this drainage channel to be constructed with a four and a half foot wide channel base, 3:1 side slopes and an "n" value (water flow velocity rate. or Manning's coefficient) of 0.050. 17 The second offsite flow is from the area east and north of Arnold Road. This includes the watershed north of Broder Boulevard, and the separate developed area east of Arnold Drive. Improvements would include undergrounding the existing open channel along Arnold Drive via a new double 4 foot by 8 foot re- enforced concrete box culvert. The existing second flow "splitter" near the proposed Central Parkway would be removed and a new "splitter" structure would be new underground flows south on Arnold Road and the required flow split between Lines G -2 and G -5. A new dual 60 inch re- enforced concrete pipe would be constructed .� along Central Parkway, or other suitable public roadway, intercepting Basin's 3 -1 and 3 -2, and ultimately flowing into Line G -5 south of Dublin Boulevard. Hydromodification and Water Quality Management Hydromodification (stormwater management) for the proposed project as a whole ,. would be addressed the construction of the four basins, described above. These facilities would be constructed prior to, or in concert with any "upstream" site development. Ow Backbone roadway infrastructure would be constructed in phases consistent with the development of adjacent parcels. Each portion of the roadway will incorporate Page 3 -160 ,l Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Hydrology and Water Quality roadside bioretention area to treat stormwater runoff from the roadways (see Figure 2 -11: Conceptual Stormwater Drainage and Detention System, above, and roadway cross - sections in the Draft Dublin Crossing Specific Plan). These bioretention areas will be connected to the roadway stormwater systems which would then discharge into one of the four basins. In accordance with the Alameda County Clear Water Program, low impact design (LID) site design measures for water quality protection will be implemented as individual parcels are developed, to adequately address the impacts of their proposed development and to show compliance with the post- construction, long- term requirements of Provision C.3. Water quality features include bioretention areas, flow - through planters, tree well filters, median filters and "treatment trains." Trash capture facilities would also be incorporated into the system. These on -site facilities would be connected to the stormwater drain system in the backbone roadways. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) would also be prepared, as a separate document, to control short -term construction - related discharge pollutants as required by the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities he CA Impacts and Mitigation Measures Criteria for Determining Significance In accordance with the CEQA, State CEQA Guidelines, and agency and professional standards, a project impact would be considered significant if the project would: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements; Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted; • Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site; • Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site; MOW! Page 3 -161 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Hydrology and Water Quality Li E3 Additionally, drainage from the proposed Park Basin #2 (the northerly basin) is shown by RJA to discharge directly into the proposed 1.7 acre Chabot Creek riparian aw channel, which would be realigned and extend through the proposed community park. At this point, it is unclear what entity will own the Chabot Creek riparian channel, and what measures will be put in place to ensure it is adequately managed and maintained. This could result in a potential significant environmental impact with the long -term viability of the stormwater management system as is currently MP proposed. Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce these impacts to MW less than significant. Mitigation Measure MM 3.8 -4a Construction of a new Off -site Detention Basin North of the Project Site. Prior to the issuance of grading permits for Phase 2 of the proposed project, the project applicant shall work in coordination .r with the U. S. Army (Camp Parks) to design and construct a new off - site detention basin designed to ensure that flow rates to Line G -1 do not exceed the maximum Q100 discharge flow rate of 950 cfs as MW required by Zone 7. The design plans for this new off -site detention basin will be reviewed by the City, in coordination with Zone 7, for verification of compliance with all applicable regulations and consistency with on -site drainage requirements, prior to construction. MM 3.8 -4b Re -align Stormwater Outflow from Proposed North Basin #2. Prior "* to issuance of the first grading /sitework permit associated with the construction of the proposed community park, the project applicant shall submit to the City for review and approval, .plans, details, and calculations for the proposed underground stormwater detention w structure(s) and associated storm drain system within the park parcel to ensure that adequate capacity will be provided; that the resultant discharge flow rates meet the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Boards and that the placement of the underground facilities in the park will not impact the park design and construction of recreational facilities. The location and layout of the underground detention structures and the connection of these facilities to the proposed Chabot Creek riparian channel box culvert or downstream facilities shall be agreed upon by both the project applicant and the City. The method and location of stormwater discharge of the underground facilities shall be reviewed and approved by all agencies. appropriate regulatory and /or permitting te dTaTii�at —Sc6iwat e-- ^Cci^w - - —r ea the NeFth Basin 42 frern 1.7 a e Ch- ahot ass ciaterl with pFepased the t� separate channel (as is tly ) u CFeek cr .� �. FipaFian re i.v pFoprnsed Page 3 -168 ow ii Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Hydrology and Water Quality located at proposed SeaFlett Court Extension and Dublin Bouievar-El, and theFeby avoids st FpAwateF disehaFge into— the -1.7 aff e Chabot . .. ek a.Yua auc, channel. Flooding Exposure /.Risk. Including the Failure of a Levee or Dam Impact 3.8 -5: The proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. Structures and personnel would not be subject to greater risk with implementation of the proposed project as compared to existing conditions. This is considered a less than significant impact. According to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Dam Failure Inundation Maps, a very small portion of the southwestern portion of the project area is located within the limits of potential inundation zone from a catastrophic failure of the dam at Lake del Valle, which is located approximately 10.5 miles southeast of the project area (ABAG 2013). However, the State Division of Safety of Dams under the authority of the Department of Water Resources inspects this and other dams under its jurisdiction on an annual basis to confirm if each dam is safe, performing as intended and is not developing problems. Roughly a third of these inspections each year include in -depth instrumentation reviews of the dam surveillance network data. The Division also periodically reviews the stability of dams and their major appurtenances in light of improved design approaches and requirements, as well as new findings regarding earthquake hazards and hydrologic estimates in California. Based on the continued dam - safety compliance inspection conducted by the Division of Safety of Dams, the risk of flooding from catastrophic dam failure is considered low. Therefore, this would be considered a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required. M Page 3 -169 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Land Use and Planning 17 uses and would not physically divide an established community. Therefore, this would be considered a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required. Conflict with Applicable Land Use Plans, Policies, or Regulations Impact 3.9 -3: Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with goals and policy of the City of Dublin General Plan, nor the City of Dublin Zoning Code. This is considered a less- than - significant impact. As described in the project description, residential, commercial, mixed -use and public uses could be developed within the project area under the proposed Dublin +■' Crossing Specific Plan. The Specific Plan includes a maximum of 1,995 residential units; 200,000 square feet of commercial uses, a 30 net -acre community park; five acres of neighborhood park and a 12 an 11 net usable acre elementary school site. The proposed residential uses would be consistent with the existing surrounding residential uses, which are of similar density and design. Currently the majority of the project area is designated Public Facilities in the City of Dublin General Plan and is zoned Agriculture. The City of Dublin General Plan, including the General Plan Land Use Map, will be amended concurrent with the adoption of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan to include the proposed land use designations to replace the existing General Plan land use designations for the area as shown in Figure 2 -7: Conceptual Land Use Plan. The Zoning Map for the project area would be amended concurrent with the adoption of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan to rezone the project area to Specific w. Plan Planned Development (PD -DX). Where land use regulations and /or development standards in the Dublin Zoning Ordinance are inconsistent with the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, the standards and regulations of the Specific Plan prevail. Any issue not specifically addressed in the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan shall be subject to the Dublin Zoning Ordinance and /or Municipal Code. Interpretations may be made by the Community Development Director if not specifically covered in the City's existing regulations. Proposed land use designations would include Dublin Crossing Lower Density Residential (DC LDR) with a density of 6 to 14 units per net acre; Dublin Crossing Medium Density Residential (DC MDR) with a density of 14.1 to 20 units per acre; Mixed Use with a density of 20.1 to 60 units per net acre; General Commercial /DC Medium Density .. Residential (GC /DC MDR) with a maximum floor to area ratio (FAR) of 1.0 and a maximum density for residential development within this district of 20 units per acre; General Commercial /DC High Density Residential (GC /DC HDR) with a maximum floor to area ratio (FAR) of 1.0 and a maximum density for residential , development within this district of 55 units per acre; Parks /Open Space (P); Open Space (OS), and School (S). With the adoption of the General Plan amendments, the proposed uses would be allowed within the project area. Page 3 -177 `10 9 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Land Use and Planning The proposed project's consistency with the City of Dublin General Plan discussed in Table 3.9 -1: City of Dublin General Plan Consistency Analysis. Consistency with policies related to environmental effects are addressed in each technical section of the EIR. As demonstrated, the proposed project would not be in conflict with the applicable land use policies of the General Plan. Therefore, this would be considered a less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Table 3.9 -1: City of Dublin General Plan Consistency Analysis Land Use Element 2.1.1 Housing Availability Implementing Policy B - Designate site available for residential development in the primary planning area for medium to medium high density where site capability and access are suitable and where the higher density would be compatible with existing residential development nearby. Parks and Open Space Element 3.1 Open Space for Preservation of Natural Resources and For Public Health and Safety Implementing Policy C - Acquire and improve parklands in conformance with the standards and policies recommended in the City's General Plan. Implementing Policy D - Encourage an efficient and high intensity of use of the flat and gently sloping portions of the planning area as a means of minimizing grading requirements and potential impacts to environmental and aesthetic resources. Implementing Policy I - Require land dedication and improvements for the parks designated in the General Plan for the Eastern Extended Planning Area and based on a standard of 5 net acres per 1,000 residents. Collect in -lieu park fees as required by City policies Schools, Public Lands and Utilities Element 4.1 Public Schools Page 3 -178 Consistent. The Specific Plan includes a maximum of 1,995 residential units; 200,000 square feet of commercial uses, a 30 net -acre community park; five acres of neighborhood park and an Ila 12 net usable acre elementary school site. The proposed residential uses would be consistent with the surrounding residential uses to the south and west of the project area. Consistent. The proposed project includes a 30 net -acre community park and five acres of neighborhood park within the project area. Consistent. The project area is generally flat and higher- density urban development with residential and commercial uses would be facilitated by the proposed project. Consistent. Based on a population estimate of 2.73 persons per household and a maximum of 1,995 residential units, the proposed project would increase the population by approximately 5,446 persons. Based on 30 net acres of park space within the project area, the proposed project exceeds the City standards, which would require approximately 27 acres of parks space. W Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Land Use and Planning �� h, ��waa �a�;(iSs�tY* t� Implementing Policy C. Initiate preparation of Consistent. The proposed project includes an site plans or specific plans jointly with the 12 net usable acre site for development of a Dublin Unified School District prior to sale. future elementary school. The project applicant has been working with the Dublin Unified School District to coordinate future dedication of this school site to the District. Circulation and Scenic Highways Element 5.1.1 Roadway Standards Guiding Policy A - Design non - residential streets Consistent. The Specific Plan includes a to (1) accommodate forecasted average daily circulation network to accommodate additional traffic demand on segments between traffic associated with future development. The intersections, and (2) minimize congested Transportation section of this Draft EIR conditions during peak hours of operation at analyzed the transportation circulation impacts intersections and serve a balance of vehicles, associated with the proposed project and bicycles, pedestrian, and transit. includes mitigation measures to help reduce traffic congestion at affected intersections. Page 3 -179 M ift ww Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Noise Exposure to Long -Term Stationary Noise Impact 3.10 -3: Compliance with design guidelines and development standards contained within the Specific Plan will ensure that potential future development within the project does not exceed established noise standards. This is considered a less than significant impact. The proposed project could result in long -term stationary noise impacts on sensitive receptors in the project vicinity, which consist of residential uses adjacent to and within the project area. Examples of stationary noise sources that could be located within the project area include commercial operations, generators, air conditioning facilities, and stationary noise sources at the proposed community park including an amphitheater, carousel, etc. As shown in Figure 2 -7: Conceptual Land Use Plan, the proposed commercial uses would be located in the eastern portion of the project area along Arnold Road and Dublin Boulevard. The proposed 44-12 net usable acre school site would be located within the center of the project area and the proposed community park would be located at the corner of Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard. Conceptual plans for the community park show the amphitheater and carousel located within the central portion of the park and would not be immediately adjacent to residential uses. Uses at parks and schools are generally compatible with residential uses as the generation of stationary noise sources typically occur during the daytime hours. The purpose of the Specific Plan is to guide development and design within the project area. This will be accomplished by a set of regulations, design principles, and related implementing actions designed to foster quality development and prevent excessive noise. For example, to reduce noise from service, storage, and loading areas, the Specific Plan recommends that the location and hours of loading and unloading areas should be designed to minimize noise impacts on the surrounding residential neighborhood (Specific Plan Design Guidelines Section 3.1.11). For drive - through and drive -up uses, the Design Guidelines specify that outdoor ordering systems are to be located to direct sound away from residential uses and common areas, or otherwise minimize noise impacts to these uses. Entertainment uses should be separated from residential and other uses that may conflict with the higher levels of light, noise, and pedestrian traffic. The Specific Plan proposes development that is consistent with existing land uses in the vicinity of the project area and is anticipated to generate similar noise levels. Where new development would abut noise sensitive uses (within the project area, as well as between the project area and existing offsite uses), the Specific Plan includes design guidelines and development standards that are aimed at reducing noise levels, including building orientation, setbacks, and buffers. By providing the necessary regulatory and design guidance, the proposed project ensures that future development within project area implements the policies of the Noise Element in the City of Dublin General Plan as well as the Municipal Code noise regulations. Page 3 -193 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Public Services and Utilities police also enforce city ordinances and state laws within the limits of the City of Dublin. r Schools The Dublin Unified School District (DUSD) provides public education in the City of Dublin and the surrounding area (including the proposed project area). The DUSD includes five elementary schools, one K -8 school, one middle school, a comprehensive high school, a continuation high school, and a K -3 parent participation program. The elementary schools all feature before and after school child care. Primary and secondary school facilities, 2011 -2012 student enrollment," and the school's optimum capacity are identified in Table 3.11 -1: Optimum Capacity ., of Schools Serving the Project Area Table 3.1.1 -1: Optimum Capacity of Schools Serving the Project Area Grade Level and School Name Student Enrollment in 2011 -2012 Optiffmn - Capacity Elementary Dougherty 758 749 Dublin 621 755 Green 781 749 Frederiksen 641 705 Murray 393 457 Kolb 760 820 b Middle School Fallon (based on 6 -8 grade only) 824 1,212 Wells 718 1,063 High School Dublin HS 11747 21500 Valley Continuation HS 80 160 Source: Dublin Unified School District, 2012. The proposed project is located within the service ar°acurrent attendance boundaries of Frederiksen Elementary School, Wells Middle School, and Dublin High School. Depending on space availability, students may be overflowed to another campus with available capacity. W For planning purposes, a school district's projected student generation rates are ow based on dwelling units. Student generation rates are the average number of students residing in a home. It is also an indicator of the number of students that will come from new housing developments. According to the Dublin Unified School District's Demographic Study and Facilities Plan, 2011 -2012, each new single - family Page 3 -200 law •R Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Public Services and Utilities The project area is generally flat with elevations ranging from 357 feet at the northeast corner of the project area to a low of approximately 336 feet at the southwest corner of the project area near the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and the Iron Horse Regional Trail. The entiFe 1,800 aeFe a t .. Shed within Camp D 1 majority of the Camp Parks drains through the project area. The majority of the runoff from this watershed is conveyed through Camp Parks in natural and engineered swales which cross the project area and are intercepted along the north side of Dublin Boulevard and the project area and are intercepted along the north side of Dublin Boulevard and conveyed to various existing Zone 7 drainage facilities. The main drainage channel for runoff from Camp Parks crosses the project area and is currently mapped as a FEMA 100 -year floodplain. Zone 7 has indicated that the peak 100 -year storm runoff within this main channel concentrated at Dublin Boulevard shall not exceed 950 cubic feet per second (cfs). To the northeast and east of Camp Parks, runoff is collected in an existing channel and conveyed south along Arnold Road to a flow "splitter" near Central Parkways, which divides flow between two existing Zone 7 drainage facilities. A portion of this flow continues down Arnold Road, while the remainder is conveyed in an existing trapezoidal channel across the southeastern portion of the project area. Water The Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) is the purveyor of potable water in the City of Dublin. DSRSD has provided drinking water to more than 60,000 people in Dublin since March 1961 and in Dougherty Valley since May 2000. In addition to potable water, DSRSD also provides recycled (reclaimed) water for irrigation and other non - potable uses. DSRSD Ordinance No. 301 requires recycled water use for approved customer categories for all new land uses, including commercial, multi- family residential, and institutional irrigation uses with the DSRSD potable water service area. The City of Dublin also has Water- Efficient Landscaping Regulations that reduce water use for irrigation (refer to the Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter 8.88). DSRSD's Urban Water Management Plan (June 2011) (hereinafter "DSRSD UWMP ") includes a projection of future potable and reclaimed water use through the year 2030. This projection is shown in Table 3.11 -2: DSRSD Current and Projected Water Meter Connections by Customer Type (Potable and Reclaimed). Page 3 -202 RW 4W Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR ' Public Services and Utilities jurisdictions. The City of Dublin currently contracts with Amador Valley Industries (AVI), a private company for residential and commercial garbage collection within the City limits. The City of Dublin also has an aggressive and comprehensive recycling program and collects both recycling and organics. All single - family residences are provided with recycling containers. In addition, free recycling service is available to all commercial customers that subscribe to garbage service. .� In regards to construction and demolition debris, the City requires all construction w" and demolition projects to recycle at least 50- percent of waste generated on a job .W site. Solid waste generated within the project area would be deposited at the Altamont Landfill. The Altamont Landfill has a total estimated permitted capacity of 62,000,000 cubic yards. The total estimated capacity used is 16,280,000 cubic yards (or 26.3 percent), and the remaining estimated capacity is at 45,720,000 cubic yards (or 73.7 percent). The estimated closure date of this landfill is January 2029. Electricity and Natural Gas Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG &E) provides electricity to all or part of 47 counties in California, and provides natural gas to all or part of 39 counties in California, constituting most of the northern and central portions of the state. PG &E �* provides electricity and natural gas service to the City of Dublin. PG &E charges connection and user fees for all new development, in addition to sliding rates for electrical and natural gas service based on use. Electricity and gas services are currently offered in the project vicinity. w Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations, entitled "Energy Efficiency W Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings," specifies requirements to rft achieve the State's minimum energy efficiency standards. The standards apply to new construction of both residential and nonresidential buildings, and regulate energy consumed for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating and lighting. Compliance with these standards is verified and enforced through the local building permit process. Projects that apply for a building permit on or after January 1, 2010, must comply with the 2008 Energy Efficiency Standards. In addition, the California Energy Commissions' Energy Aware Planning Guide is available as a reference tool to .R assist in project planning. Regulatory Setting ., State Schools School Facilities Act of 1998 W The School Facilities Act of 1998 (also known as Senate Bill [SB] 50), provides state funding for a portion of the funding needed for new school construction projects I "� that can satisfy certain criteria for such funding, including eligibility due to growth, Division of State Architect plan approval. However, the Act also dramatically limits the maximum amount of impact fees, which can be charged by school districts as .. F�' Page 3 -205 .. K" Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Public Services and Utilities that there is a five - minute response time to all emergency calls. The City of Dublin has 51 sworn personnel with a population of 46,572, for a ratio of 1.09 sworn personnel per 1,000 residents (Personal Communication with Lieutenant Nate Schmidt, Alameda County Sherriff; Department /City of Dublin Police Department, June 5, 2013). Although the addition of new residents to the project area would slightly increase the demand for police services, implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to have an adverse effect on response times for police services and would not affect the Department's ability to serve the proposed project (Personal Communication with Lieutenant Nate Schmidt, Alameda County Sherriff; Department /City of Dublin Police Department, June 5, 2013). Future development within the project area would be required to comply with Chapter 7.32.300 (Building Security) and Chapter 7.32.310 (Nonresidential building security) of the City's Building Code, which includes building standards aimed at reducing law enforcement calls within the City. In addition, the City would collect public facilities fees (Chapter 7.78 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code) from future development to help off -set police service capital improvements and on -going maintenance expenses incurred by the new development prior to issuance of a Building Permit to ensure that the proposed project will not cause impacts on law enforcement services that would result in significant environmental impacts. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on law enforcement services, and no mitigation is required. Increased Demand for Educational Facilities Impact 3.11 -3: Implementation of the proposed project would increase the number of students in the Dublin Unified School District (DUSD) with the construction of a maximum of 1,995 residential units, which would increase the capacity of the schools, which are operating above capacity. The proposed project includes an 12 net usable acre school site and future development would be required to pay school impact fees as required under State law to the DUSD. This is considered a less than significant impact. The proposed project would allow for a future net new development potential with a maximum of 1,995 residential units within the project area. Children from the proposed residential dwelling units would likely attend DUSD schools including: Frederiksen Elementary School; Wells Middle School; and Dublin High School. Based on the DUSD's student generation rate for medium density housing (single family residential with lots less than 4,000 square feet) of 0.525 K -12 students per home and a maximum of 1,995 homes within the project area the proposed project would generate approximately 1,047 students. As shown in Table 3.11 -3: Enrollment Capacity of Schools Serving the Project Area, the DUSD has an excess of capacity of 990 students. Page 3 -212 RW Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Public Services and Utilities Table 3.11-3: Enrollment Capacity of Schools Serving the Project Area Grade Level and School Name Student Enrollment in 2011 -2012 Optimum Capacity Excess Capacity Elementary Frederiksen 641 705 64 Middle School Wells 718 1,063 345 High School Dublin HS 1,474 2,500 581 Source: Dublin Unified School District, 2012. W The proposed project includes a 12 net usable acre site for a future elementary W school, which would be dedicated to the DUSD for a proposed school that would Of serve the proposed project and surrounding uses. This elementary school will be designed to accommodate up teapproximately 900 children and will include classrooms, a gymnasium, administrative offices, a multi -use sports field, sport courts, a playground, and parking. In addition, future development within the project area would be required by law to pay school impact fees at the time of the building permit issuance. The DUSD currently charges development fees in the amount of $2.97 per square foot of residential development and $0.47 per square foot for commercial and industrial uses. These fees are used by the DUSD to mitigate impacts associated with long -term operation and maintenance of school facilities. A project applicant's fees would be determined at the time of the building permit issuance and would reflect the most current fee amount established by the DUSD. School fees exacted from residential and commercial uses would help fund necessary school service and facilities improvements to accommodate anticipated population and school enrollment growth within the DUSD service area, and would allow for the DUSD to allocate these funds as deemed necessary. Therefore, the r increased demand on the DUSD is considered a less than significant impact on school services, and no mitigation is required. •s• Increased Demand for Parks and Recreation Facilities .s Impact 3.11 -4: The proposed project would increase the demand for park and recreational uses within the project area. However, development projects within the project area would be required to pay the City's Public Facilities Fee prior to Building Permit issuance. This is considered a less than significant impact. Implementation of the proposed project would increase the demand for neighborhood and community parks due to the projected increase in the residential .�. population generated by future development within the project area. The proposed Page 3- 213 ,,,. Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Public Services and Utilities project Infrastructure Master Plan, which the City will be reviewing and approving in accordance with the requirement of the Specific Plan. The Infrastructure Master Plan should identify the development trigger for the future tank. The future tank should be installed prior to approval of the Final Map for the trigger point. With implementation of these measures, this would be considered a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required. Stormwater Runoff Impact 3.11 -8: Implementation of the proposed project may result in increased off -site stormwater flows and future development within the project area would be required to install proposed drainage improvements and pay applicable impact fees at the time of issuance of the building permits. This is considered a less than significant impact. As previously mentioned, the City of Dublin Public Works Department maintains the City's storm drain pipelines that are located within public streets. Zone 7 owns and operates regional storm drain facilities that collect runoff from the City. Surface water management consists of both on -site runoff and the management of off -site runoff extending through or around the site. On -site Surface Water Runoff As shown in Figure 3.8 -3: Proposed ageQ100 Project Flows, surface waters within the project area would be divided into four drainage sheds. Drainage sheds A9 -A (63.3 acres) and A9 -B (81.7 acres) would ultimately flow into the Line G -1 drainage channel. Two underground detention basins, located within the proposed community park, would be constructed. Preliminary estimates by Ruggeri Jensen Azar (RJA) call for the construction of two underground basins (RJA 2013). Park Basin #1, which captures drainage from A9 -B, would have a storage capacity of 3.3 acre feet and an outflow rate of 80 cfs. Park Basin #2, which captures drainage from A9 -A, would have a storage capacity of 1.6 acre feet and an outflow of 71 cfs.9 Based on project plans, drainage from both of these underground basins would be conveyed via an underground pipe to the proposed Chabot Creek riparian channel that would be realigned through the proposed community park. Drainage sheds XX -1 (23.1 acres) and XX -2 (20.9 acres), which are located in the southeast corner of the site, would ultimately flow into the Line G -5 drainage 9 This analysis assumed two open -air basins and that the bottom 2 '/ feet of each basin was inundated with runoff from the previous storm event. Given the fact that these two basins are now proposed to be underground, the ultimate storage capacities would be determined as part of detailed engineering design. However, the basins would be designed so that there is sufficient capacity to ensure that runoff capacities to not exceed pre - condition Flow conditions. Page 3 -220 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Transportation and Circulation (ITE code 220), elementary school use (ITE code 520), office use (ITE code 710), shopping centers (ITE code 820), and City Park (SANDAG), the project would generate 24,563 gross daily vehicle trips, with 1,924 gross trips occurring during the AM peak hour (7:00 to 9:00) and 2,695 gross trips occurring during the PM peak hour (4:00 to 6:00). Since the proposed development would relocate the existing Camp Parks entrance on Dublin Boulevard, the trips generated by the existing use were redistributed from the current base entrance to the proposed new entrance at Dougherty Road and Amador Valley Boulevard. �r 71 0 A retail pass -by trip reduction of 20 percent (based on prior analysis in the City of Dublin) was applied to the PM peak hour trip generation. Pass -by -trips are trips that would already be on the adjacent roadways (and are therefore already counted in the existing traffic) but would turn into the site while passing by. Justification for applying the pass -by -trip reduction is founded on the observation that such retail traffic is not actually generated by the retail development, but is already part of the ambient traffic levels. Pass -by -trips are therefore excluded from the PM peak hour traffic projections at most offsite intersections, but were assigned to the site's planned driveways and the intersection of Arnold Road /Dublin Boulevard. .. Since the project area is located near the Dublin /Pleasanton BART station, a transit reduction of five percent was applied to the overall project trip generation based on results from the City of Dublin travel demand forecasting model. After applying the appropriate trip reductions, the project would generate 22,047 aw net new daily trips, with 1,828 net new trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 2,393 net new trips occurring during the PM peak hour. The project trip generation estimates are presented below in Table 3.12 -7: Dublin Crossing Trip Generation. It ■. should be noted that some of the trips generated by the project would be internal to the site. For example, some of the project's residential trips would occur to and from the proposed school. While these internal trips would represent new trips on the �► on -site roadway network, they would not result in new trips to the off -site roadway network. The internal capture of these trips is accounted for in the Travel Demand Forecast Model assignment process. Project Trip Distribution and Assignment As part of the project trip distribution, an estimate is made of the directions to and from which the project trips would travel. In the project trip assignment, the project trips are assigned to specific streets and intersections. The directional distribution of site - generated traffic to and from the project area was developed based on a select zone analysis from the City of Dublin Travel Demand Forecast model and shown in Figure 3.12 -7: Proposed- Project Trip Generation Rates Distribution. The peak hour trips generated by the proposed uses were assigned to the roadway system by the model at each study location. M Page 3 -240 Faw MM Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Transportation and Circulation 'Table 3.12 -13: 2035 Cumulative Plus Project Freeway Ramp Capacity Analysis JUUL- nexa6'Vll LV 1L C— A44CTC /MTS System Analysis Results The 2011 Alameda County Congestion Management Program (CMP) includes a Land Use Analysis component to determine the impacts of land use decisions made by local jurisdictions on the regional transportation system. The intent of this program is to: better tie together local land use and regional transportation facilities decisions; better assess the impacts of developments in one community on another community; promote information sharing between local governments when decisions a made by one jurisdiction will have an impact on another. Local jurisdictions have responsibilities regarding the analysis of transportation impacts of land use decisions. Among those is an analysis of project impacts on the Metropolitan Transportation System (NITS) for the 2020 and 2035 horizon years. For projects that generate more than 100 peak -hour vehicle trips, a CMP traffic analysis is required using the Alameda Countywide Transportation Demand Model law Page 3-267 2035 NoPro'ect 2035 Plus Project V/C V/C Peak Capacity Freeway Rams Hour y h ' Volumes'` Ratio3 Volumes2 Ratio' I -580 at Dougherty Road /Hopyard Road SB Hopyard to WB I -580 On Ramp AM 900 627 0.70 672 0.75 PM 1800 326 0.18 399 0.22 SB Hopyard to EB I -580 On Ramp AM 1800 777 0.43 777 0.43 PM 360 213 0.59 213 0.59 I -580 at Hacienda Drive SB Hacienda to WB I -580 On Ramp AM 720 513 0.71 564 0.78 PM 1800 588 0.33 588 0.33 SB Hacienda to EB I -580 On Ramp AM 1800 337 0.19 410 0.23 L52, PM 300 443 1.48 457 I -580 at Tassajara Road /Santa Rita Road SB Tassajara to WB I -580 On Ramp AM 720 698 0.97 755 1.05 0.38 PM 1800 676 0.38 676 SB Tassajara to EB I -580 On Ramp AM 1800 324 0.18 324 0.18 PM 300 342 1.14 343 1.14 Note: Bold and shaded V/C ratio indicates a significant impact. Capacities obtained from observations at existing ramp meters. z Volumes obtained from Dublin TDF Model. s Volume-to-capacity ratio. JUUL- nexa6'Vll LV 1L C— A44CTC /MTS System Analysis Results The 2011 Alameda County Congestion Management Program (CMP) includes a Land Use Analysis component to determine the impacts of land use decisions made by local jurisdictions on the regional transportation system. The intent of this program is to: better tie together local land use and regional transportation facilities decisions; better assess the impacts of developments in one community on another community; promote information sharing between local governments when decisions a made by one jurisdiction will have an impact on another. Local jurisdictions have responsibilities regarding the analysis of transportation impacts of land use decisions. Among those is an analysis of project impacts on the Metropolitan Transportation System (NITS) for the 2020 and 2035 horizon years. For projects that generate more than 100 peak -hour vehicle trips, a CMP traffic analysis is required using the Alameda Countywide Transportation Demand Model law Page 3-267 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Transportation and Circulation (ACTDM). In accordance with the Technical and Policy Guidelines of the Congestion Management Program, the CMP analysis requires evaluation of the traffic impacts of the project on the MTS. The Consulting firm Fehr & Peers developed a travel demand model for the City of Dublin based on the August 2011 ACTDM. Refinements were made to the Countywide model within the City of Dublin and surrounding areas to provide more detail in terms of local land uses, and the roadway and transit transportation systems. The City of Dublin Travel Demand Model ( CDTDM) was developed (a) to provide daily and peak -hour traffic flow projections on freeways, arterial and collector roadways for the General Plan update, and (b) to provide a tool to analyze future land use development proposals and transportation network changes within the City. Documentation of the Dublin Citywide model, including model validation is provided in the City of Dublin Final Model Development Report, dated April 2012. Traffic impact analyses for relatively small projects typically add project traffic on top of the existing (or future no- project) volumes. This "layering" method is reasonable when the addition of project traffic is unlikely to change the travel patterns of existing traffic on the roadway system. As a result, the traffic volumes on roadway segments are by definition always higher than without the project. With large scale developments, such as the Dublin Crossing project, layering project traffic on top of existing traffic is not realistic, especially when the project is located in an area where roadways are already projected to be congested and new .. roadways are proposed as part of the project. There are two main reasons for this: (1) drivers may alter their route to avoid the areas where the additional project traffic is added to the roadway system because an alternate route would be faster •�• and (2) the project would result in a change of travel patterns in the area. Two examples of this include: Some residents of Dublin that now shop at retail uses in Pleasanton would shop at the retail center of the Dublin Crossing instead. Thus, their shopping trip would have a different destination and they would use different roads to get there. This would result in an increase in traffic on some facilities and a , decrease of traffic on other facilities. Without the project, I -580 operates at congested conditions during commute hours. Because some project traffic from the Dublin Crossing development would add to the traffic congestion on this freeway, ambient traffic would start using other facilities instead. Thus, some traffic that uses the I- 580/I- 680 interchange would shift to alternate routes such as Dougherty Road, Dublin Boulevard, and Bollinger Canyon Road. Because I -580 and I -680 already operate at or near capacity, there is not much room left to add more vehicles to these facilities. Travel demand models, such as the CDTDM and the ACTDM, account for these changes in traffic patterns resulting from large development projects. For that reason, these models were used to forecast the impacts on the freeways and NITS system in the vicinity of the project. The MA— Alameda County Transportation Page 3-268 Pam– r Faze Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Transportation and Circulation Commission (Alameda CTCI requires project's to conduct the roadway segment and freeway analysis for the years 2020 and 2035 using the ACTDM. The most recent version of the ACTDM was obtained from the AGGMA Alameda CTC and future peak - hour forecasts were developed, with and without the project. Since the ACTDM set does not include a 2012 forecast year, the freeway analysis for existing and existing plus project conditions were based on forecasts developed with the CDTDM. It should be noted that, although the project would add a substantial amount of peak -hour trips to the adjacent segment of Dublin Boulevard, this does not necessarily result in the same substantial increase of vehicles on that roadway segment. Some of the ambient traffic on Dublin Boulevard would change their route and use other facilities to get to their destination (including diversion to the new proposed parallel route on G Street). Thus, the increase in traffic volumes on the freeway segments and the NITS system forecasted by the model would result in a smaller increase in traffic when compared to the layering of project trips method. The level of serV4ce staTdaFcl foF the C44P analysis is LO The Alameda Goun�y CUACTC does not have a policy for determining a threshold of significance for CMP requirements and expects that professional judgment will be used to determine project impacts. The City Engineer, in his expert professional judgment has determined that the level of service for the CMP Land Use analysis is LOS E Therefore, for the purpose of this traffic analysis, if a segment operates at an unacceptable LOS (Dee Drufessional -Judg 'e�� without the project, the impact of the project is considered significant if the contribution of project traffic results in an increase in the volume -to- capacity ratio of at least 0.02. This threshold is consistent with prior traffic impact analyses for development in the City of Dublin. In order to determine the impact of the project, peak -hour traffic volumes on the 16 directional NITS roadway segments (for 2020 and 2035) and 16 directional freeway segments (for 2012, 2020, and 2035) in the vicinity of the project were analyzed. During the AM peak hour, the 2012 existing no project and plus project data at the freeway segments is shown on Table 3.12 -14: 2012 No Project and Plus Project AM Peak Hour Freeway Level of Service. During the PM peak hour, the 2012 existing no project and plus project data at the freeways is shown on Table 3.12 -15: 2012 No Project and Plus Project PM Peak Hour Freeway Level of Service. During the AM peak hour, the 2020 background no project and plus project data at the freeways and roadway segments is shown on Table 3.12 -16: 2020 No Project and Plus Project AM Peak Hour Freeway and Roadway Segment Level of Service. During the PM peak hour, the 2020 background no project and plus project data at these facilities is shown on Table 3.12 -17: 2020 No Project and Plus Project PM Peak Hour Freeway and Roadway Segment Level of Service. During the AM peak hour, the 2035 cumulative no project and plus project data at these segments is shown on Table 3.12 -18: 2035 No Project and Plus Project AM Peak Hour Freeway and Roadway Segment Level of Service. During the PM peak hour, the 2035 cumulative no project and plus project data at these facilities is shown on Table 3.12 -19: 2035 No Project and Plus Project PM Peak Hour Freeway and Roadway Segment Level of Service. EM,93"MI Page 3 -269 W Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR MW Transportation and Circulation Ar crossing should be utilized. The grade separated crossing would eliminate the need for at -grade pedestrian actuations at the traffic signal, which would allow more green time to be allocated to through traffic on Dublin Boulevard. Although this project has not been environmentally cleared, nor has engineering or right of way analysis been completed with regards to the feasibility of this improvement, the City is aggressively pursuing this project to improve pedestrian and bicycle mobility along the Iron Horse Trail. The City also plans to include a grade separated crossing at this location in its ■ update to the TIF program to secure project funding. Because the impact is caused by future land use growth in the region as well as this proposed project, the mitigation for this impact is for the project to make a fair share monetary contribution toward these improvements. The ` timing of these improvements will be determined in the Mitigation .. Monitoring and Reporting Program and developer obligations will be outlined in the Developer Agreement. In the event that the grade separated crossing project cannot be constructed by year 2035, an alternative mitigation would be to eliminate the crosswalk on the east leg of the Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard intersection. This would require pedestrians and bikes from the Iron Horse Trail to cross three crosswalks rather than one. .. Because of the effects of the alternative mitigation on pedestrian and bike mobility, the grade separated crossing is the City's preferred mitigation at this location. Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard Intersection Impact 3.12 -4: During the PM peak hour, the study intersection of Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard would degrade from LOS C under 2035 cumulative no project conditions to an unacceptable LOS F under 2035 cumulative plus project conditions. This is considered a potentially significant impact. To mitigate this impact, the project applicant would be required to construct an additional northbound left turn lane on Iron Horse Parkway. With implementation of the following mitigation measure, the intersection would operate at LOS D during the PM peak hour. .. Therefore, this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure: MM 3.12 -4: Addition of a Northbound Left -Turn Lane on Iron Horse Parkway at the Intersection of Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard. To mitigate the impact at the intersection of Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard would require an additional northbound left turn lane on Iron Horse Parkway. Based on the 2035 cumulative plus project conditions, the two A. northbound left turn lanes would need to be 400 feet each. This improvement would require widening r,-o 14or-se PaFkjway by appFwinga 4 > Page 3 -284 ,� an Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Transportation & Circulation 12 feet along the east side in advance of the inteFsection. it may also require re-eVal Of PaFlO g, r ali,rr.M£'RC- l')i-t-Favel lanes rtC1h E)Ugh the t rr - 1 Felocat-ten --of sidewalks, - and — tr-a€f e signal mean cations the removal of parking on the east side of Iron Horse Parkway, traffic signal modifications and changing the travel lane configuration and alignment to create: • One 16 -foot wide southbound receiving lane on Iron Horse Parkwav: • Two 10 -foot wide northbound left turn lanes on Iron Horse Parkwaynaand • One 14 -foot wide northbound shared through -right turn lane Because the proposed project causes the change in operation from LOS C to LOS F, the proposed project is responsible for constructing these improvements. The timing of these improvements will be determined in the project's mitigation monitoring program. Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard Impact 3.12 -5: During the PM peak hour, the study intersection of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard would operate at an unacceptable LOS E under both 2035 cumulative no project conditions and 2035 cumulative plus project conditions. The City of Dublin level of service standard for this intersection is LOS D. Because the intersection would operate at an unacceptable level of service under no project conditions, the addition of project trips would result in a potentially significant impact to the intersection based on the City of Dublin impact criteria. With implementation of the following mitigation measure, the Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard intersection would operate at LOS D during the PM peak hour. Therefore, this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure: MM 3.12 -5: Convert One of the Through Lanes to a Second Right -Turn Lane at the Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard Intersection. As part of the City of Dublin's Traffic Impact Fee program, the intersection of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard has a planned northbound approach geometry of three left turn lanes, three through lanes, and one right turn lane. To mitigate the impact at the intersection of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard would require converting one of the through lanes to a second right turn lane, which is the existing northbound geometry at the intersection. Because no improvements relative to the existing geometry are necessary, the City of Dublin should modify its planned improvement at the northbound approach of the intersection back to the existing configuration. With this mitigation, the intersection would operate at LOS D during the PM peak hour. Page 3-285 u ■ Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR Transportation and Circulation Mitigation Measure: MM 3.12 -9: Coordination with LAVTA. As the plan area develops, the project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Dublin and LAVTA to determine if route changes and /or increased service is required in the project area. In addition, the project shall provide additional bus duckouts and transit shelters to .� support project trips, where appropriate. Pedestrian /Bicycle Mobility Impacts Impact 3.12 -10: The proposed project does not include detailed information such as intersection layouts, crosswalk locations, wheelchair ramp locations, and driveway locations. For this reason, impacts to bicycle and pedestrian safety cannot be evaluated at this time, which is considered a potentially significant impact. As more detail becomes available, a detailed analysis of pedestrian and bicycle mobility should shall be completed. With implementation of the following mitigation measures, the impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure: Ow MM 3.12 -10: Review of Intersection Layouts and Driveway Locations. As each ; individual site develops within the Specific Plan and more details are available, additional review by the City of Dublin will be necessary to insure that individual elements of the project do not conflict with the pedestrian /bike accessibility and are consistent with the policies and guidelines in the Dublin Bikeways Master Plan. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Marked crosswalks shall be provided at all onsite intersections, where appropriate, based on the layout of the local streets. Prior to final design of the streets and pathways, the intersection designs should be reviewed by City staff to insure that the pathway crossings are clearly marked and include Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant wheelchair ramps. Bollards may also be considered so that vehicles are restricted from driving on the 10 -foot wide paths. The layout of private and minor streets within the site shall minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the number of crossings with the proposed ^^ onsite 10 -foot pedestrian paths. This includes potentially realigning the Iron Horse Trail onto the Central Park site so that the driveway access to the park at Scarlett Drive does not conflict with trail operations. • Bike parking, showers, and changing rooms shall be considered at the park, office and shopping center uses, where appropriate. • During construction along Scarlett Drive, Dublin Boulevard, and Arnold Road, temporary traffic control plans shall be prepared to minimize the Page 3 -290 FWF Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR CEQA Considerations cannot be predicted with certainty, the project impacts to freeway ramps would be considered a significant and unavoidable impact. 4.2 Significant Irreversible Changes Section 15126.2(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to discuss the significant irreversible environmental changes that would be involved if the proposed project would be implemented. Examples include the following: uses of nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the project, since a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse thereafter unlikely; primary and secondary impacts of a project that would generally commit future generations to similar uses (e.g., highway improvements that provide access to a previously inaccessible area); and /or irreversible damage that could result from any potential environmental accidents associated with the proposed project. Analysis The proposed project would allow for the future development of residential, commercial, parks and open space, and an elementary school. Specifically, the proposed project includes a maximum of up to 1,995 residential units; 200,000 square feet of commercial uses, 35 acres of parks; and a 12 net usable acre elementary school site. A variety of nonrenewable and limited resources would be irretrievably committed for construction and operation, including but not limited to: oil, natural gas, gasoline, lumber, sand and gravel, asphalt, steel, water, land, energy, and construction materials. With respect to operational activities, compliance with all applicable building codes, as well as project mitigation measures or project requirements, would ensure that all natural resources are conserved or recycled to the maximum extent feasible. The proposed project would result in an increase in demand on public services and utilities. For example, an increase in the intensity of land uses within the project area would result in an increase in regional electric energy consumption to satisfy additional electricity demands from the proposed project. These energy resource demands relate to initial project construction, transport of goods and people, and lighting, heating, and cooling of buildings. However, the proposed project would not involve a wasteful or unjustifiable use of energy or other resources, and energy conservation efforts would occur with new construction. In addition, new development associated with the proposed project would be constructed and operated in accordance with specifications contained in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. Therefore, the use of energy on -site would occur in an efficient manner. Although portions of the Camp Parks property have already been developed, increased development within the project area to support urban uses may be regarded as a permanent and irreversible change. The proposed project would Page 4 -2 IZA Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR CEQA Consideration OW Cumulative Impacts Analysis and Assumptions Impacts associated with cumulative development were analyzed based on the proposed project's effects in combination with a summary of projections in the " adopted City of Dublin General Plan (February 11, 1985, Updated May 2013), the .� City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP); and implementation of the Camp Parks Master Plan. M Implementation of the Camp Parks Master Plan would involve redevelopment of tl+e what is known as the "Cantonment Area " -of Camp Parks to provide more modern and better - organized facilities. Beneficial features of the Master Plan include: peripherally located family housing, minimal impact on range training, aggregation of similar land uses, a campus -style training center, and controlled access at a main entry gate. The Camp Parks Master Plan anticipates a population increase at build - out of 11 percent for daily personnel (from 920 to 1,020 people) , the average daily use of the installation from Army stationing and full -time units /staff, and 85 percent for total of assigned personnel (from 2,297 to 4,242 people). The total of assigned personnel is projected to increase by 1,945 people between 2002 and 2012, due to increases in enlisted personnel and warrant officers. OW Aesthetics and Visual Resources The proposed project is located within an already urbanized area of the City; neither the project area nor surrounding area has any scenic resources. Although implementation of the proposed project would allow redevelopment of the project area from its former use as the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area, the proposed project includes both development standards and design guidelines to guide the design of future development within the area. The design guidelines would also ensure that the proposed project does not introduce substantial light .�. and glare which would pose a hazard or nuisance. The proposed project would also be required to comply with a number of other City policy documents that address urban design and aesthetics. These include: Streetscape Master Plan, Community Design and Sustainability Element of the General Plan and the Bikeways Master Plan. In addition, future development would be required to undergo Site Development Review to ensure that the Specific Plan guidelines are implemented. The above considerations ensure that cumulative development would result in a less than significant cumulative impact. Conclusion: The proposed project would be required to comply with the design guidelines in the Specific Plan as well as other City policy documents, which would ensure that the proposed project does not contribute to cumulative light and glare in the City and surrounding areas, and would ensure that the proposed project is of quality design. The existing setting together with the design features of the Specific Plan would ensure the project's cumulative contribution to aesthetics and visual quality, would Page 4 -11 am a 03 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR CEOA Consideration impacts to several special status and animal species and there would be similar impacts to protected trees. Assuming the same biological mitigation measures under this alternative, impacts would be similar in comparison to the proposed project. Cultural Resources (similar]. The Reduced Density Alternative would not eliminate potential damage to any unknown cultural resources, including historic, archaeological, or paleontological resources, and /or human remains that could result with construction of the proposed project. Similar to the proposed project, the Reduced Density Alternative would result in a less than significant impact to cultural resources with mitigation measures incorporated herein and therefore, would have similar impacts in comparison to the proposed project. Geology and Soils (similar). Impacts under the Reduced Density Alternative would be similar to the proposed project in that the project area would still be exposed to seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, soil erosion, and expansive soils with development within the project area. Because this alternative would be required to comply with the City's Building Code, and the California Building Code, the Reduced Density Alternative would result in similar impacts to the proposed project. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change (greater). An increase in direct and indirect sources of greenhouse gas emissions associated with the proposed project would also occur under the Reduced Density Alternative. The reduction in development and density is anticipated to increase the per capita GHG emissions since the service population would decrease. The Reduced Density Alternative would locate fewer people near transit and other commercial uses and therefore vehicle trips are not anticipated to decrease proportionally. Therefore, the Reduced Development Alternative is anticipated to result in greater greenhouse gas emissions in comparison to the proposed project. Hazards and Hazardous Materials (slightleLless). The Reduced Density Alternative would result in similar impacts with respect to hazards and hazardous materials due to the types of uses proposed under this alternative (e.g. residential and commercial uses). Therefore, the Reduced Development Alternative would also result in a less than significant impact. Hydrology and Water Quality (similar). Surface water runoff under this alternative would be slightly less in comparison to the proposed project due to development at lower densities, which would result in a reduction of impervious surfaces. Mitigation measures would also be required under this alternative to reduce potentially significant impacts to short and long -term surface water hydrology. Therefore, the Reduced Density Alternative would result in similar impacts in comparison to the proposed project. Land Use and Planning (g~`e�similarl Similar to the proposed project, the Reduced Development Alternative would not physically divide an established community and /or conflict with applicable land use plan, policies or regulations. fi , W Page 4-27 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Final EIR References Cardno Entrix. Biological Technical Report for Dublin Crossing. June 2013. Cal Engineering and Geology. Second Geotechnical and Geologic Review, Preliminary Geotechnical Report and Fault Ground Rupture Investigation, Dublin Crossing Project` at Camp Parks, Dublin, California. April 2013. .. City of Dublin. Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. June 2013. City of Dublin. City of Dublin General Plan, adopted February 11, 1985, updated January 19, 2010. City of Dublin. City of Dublin Municipal Code. City of Dublin. City of Dublin Final Model Development Report. April 2012. City of Dublin. Wildfire Management Plan, Adopted July1996. Revised November 2010. City of Dublin. Dublin Transit Center General Plan Amendment. 2002. Citv of Dublin. Dublin Transit Center EIR. 2002. City of Dublin. Village @ Dublin Retail Project Supplemental EIR. 2013. City of Dublin. City of Dublin Climate Action Plan. 2010. Cyril M. Harris. Handbook of Noise Control. 1979. Dublin San Ramon Community Services District (DSRSD). 2010 Urban Water Managemen t Plan. June 2011. Dublin Unified School District. Ca1PADS Enrollment. October 2012. Dublin Unified School District. Demographics Update, Board of Trustees Meeting March 2012. Economic and Planning Systems (EPS). City of Dublin Economic Development Strategy. November 2012. ECORP Consulting, Inc. Supplemental Cultural Resources Assessment for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report Alameda County, California. April 2012. Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines, May 2006. Hall, Mark, Environmental Coordinator, U.S. Army, Camp Parks. Personal Communication with Erika Spencer, RBF Consulting on May 21, 2013 and September 17, 2013. ICF International (ICF). East Alameda County Conservation Strategy. October 2010. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate Change, The Science of Climate Change - Contribution of Working Group I to the Second Assessment Report of the IPCC. 1996. Page 5 -2 t ow 10 i Pa PIOWV U Q 'mod asaOH uOal 1 IS 9 'P ^I9 snDjuwaQ cm c D 0 m Q) 'ul llagdwE:) aQ V) > N a CD _ c a o cn d 0 0- } o F 'a4 4aPEaS p Q) ao : ) N CO U U +� � L � O L L O p t E E E E 0 o U U ot. U U po0 p p C7 (7 PLI X),IayBnoQ w b V V 4) d N bA C 2 U C L r p to J cd 4J A0. W V 0 V MINIM M N N L W N co O O N q LIL M O N O C� t7 Z n ■ E f. o J • z • Z v< C n a w c m v w V N d N d0 C U C_ 7 N CL 4) 4J W 4J i 4J N i LL N co M 8 O z M O N_ O N ro to c' ■ ? E F v° J • z W • Z 0 U a III w HI, ti I� C L w w 0 'W' N �Ev 0 �0 o- LL Q W LL N co M O O O n z M O N n O N ro N L 7 LL (� c Z n h � • 7 W • Z U a r m ,o x W M � I -is V HJ"G (J31VJ013d 6' a0 -0 mwG X20 s f j& v• �Qt boa j% O �r �f o ' o 0 f 7 e +" O _ J O� r w 'Pd XIja4noo o' w o_ 4J v ` v7 .N U Q z 4J 4J tv 0) L to 3 E L 0 4J A� W 0 g O Z V I --o � O %WI ol ■ Z E F a J ■' dl ■ Z 13 U a N C J � � ._: i J C_ m Q � � o O � [D C ci O N N � N Q O w O � CL a- d m ,o x W M � I -is V HJ"G (J31VJ013d 6' a0 -0 mwG X20 s f j& v• �Qt boa j% O �r �f o ' o 0 f 7 e +" O _ J O� r w 'Pd XIja4noo o' w o_ 4J v ` v7 .N U Q z 4J 4J tv 0) L to 3 E L 0 4J A� W 0 g O Z V I --o � O %WI ol ■ Z E F a J ■' dl ■ Z 13 U a kJ .. n V V N d N amp 0 Ln U c a tv x s a co M g 0 Z TWI N L M�M^ �V LL ■ Z E J ■ 7 tll • Z 0 U a ir. 7i Ll O LCL' 4J Uzi CL 2 LLI 0 4J U tmzo Z5 .2 o E it 0 0 13 V 2 to Lt ARNOLD ROAD O O co 4J L LU ir. Ll ir. O C LLI 0 U tmzo 0 0 13 7 F- L r �3 x, ww "on mU N � g k a` =m x N c cO Ev m � J m w c a � E w 3 3 0 > w° z a__ 1 o 7 F- L r �3 x, ww "on mU C,�(A w c L. ww`` � W V U N d N UCO U �. W os 4J O ed -o L a N co 8 0 Z N O N I ate+ o =tl N N M M L rn x w � � ° za Fo ■ V w • Z o0 N [] a g k a` =m LL �° cO Ev � J w C,�(A w c L. ww`` � W V U N d N UCO U �. W os 4J O ed -o L a N co 8 0 Z N O N I ate+ o =tl N N M M L rn x w � � ° za Fo ■ V w • Z o0 N [] a n u n n Source: Ruggeri- Jensen -Azar (2013) f - W.. CONSULTING Date: 09 /17/2013 JN:70- 100382 A Company 6 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan EIR Proposed Q 100 Project Flows Figure 3.8 -3 EXHIBIT B FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines section 15091, the City Council hereby makes these findings with respect to the potential for significant environmental impacts from adoption and implementation of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan Project (Specific Plan, or Project), PA 08 -049, and means for mitigating those impacts. For the purpose of these findings, the term "Final EIR" means the Draft and Final EIR documents collectively, unless otherwise specified. These findings do not attempt to describe the full analysis of each environmental impact contained in the Final EIR. Instead, the findings provide a summary description of each impact, describe the applicable mitigation measures identified in the Final 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 Final EIR, and these findings hereby incorporate by reference the discussion and analysis in those documents supporting the Final 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 Final EIR, and ratifies, adopts, and incorporates in these findings the determinations and conclusions of the Final 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. Impact 3.2 -1: The proposed project would result in future short -term air quality impacts associated with construction activities, including grading, operation of equipment, and demolition of existing structures within the project area. However, future development within the project area would be required to comply with the BAAQMD Control Measures for particulate matter and equipment emissions during construction activities. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.2 -1 a: Implement Short -term Construction Best Management Practices. Prior to issuance of any Grading Permit, the Public Works Director and the Building Official shall confirm that the Grading Plan, Building Plans, and specifications stipulate that the following basic construction mitigation measures shall be implemented for all construction projects : 1 • 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 mph. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. • Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five 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. • A publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints shall be posted. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. M M 3.2 -1 b: Implement Additional Short -term Construction Best Management Practices. Prior to issuance of any Grading Permit, the Public Works Director and the Building Official shall confirm that the Grading Plan, Building Plans, and specifications stipulate that the following additional construction mitigation measures shall be implemented for all construction projects: • All excavation, grading, and /or demolition activities shall be suspended when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph. • Wind breaks (e.g., trees, fences) shall be installed on the windward side(s) of actively disturbed areas of construction. • Vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast - germinating native grass seed) shall be planted in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established. • All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site. • Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road shall be treated with a 6 to 12 inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel. • Sandbags or other erosion control measures shall be installed to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent. 2 • The applicant shall reduce exhaust emissions during construction and, in particular, emissions of NOX, when using construction equipment and vehicles by implementing the following measures: o Require the use of diesel haul trucks (e.g., material delivery trucks and soil import /export) that meet EPA 2007 model year NOX emissions requirements o The following note shall be included on all grading plans: During project construction, all internal combustion engines /construction, equipment operating on the project area shall meet EPA - Certified Tier 3 emissions standards, or higher according to the following: - January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2014: Off -road diesel - powered construction equipment greater than 50 hp shall meet Tier 3 off -road emissions standards. Alternatively, construction equipment shall be outfitted with BACT devices certified by CARB. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 3 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by CARB regulations. - Post - January 1, 2015: Off -road diesel - powered construction equipment greater than 50 hp shall meet the Tier 4 emission standards, where available. Alternatively, construction equipment shall be outfitted with BACT devices certified by CARB. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 3 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by CARB regulations. • The contractor and applicant, if the applicant's equipment is used, shall maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them tuned and regularly serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. • Utilize existing power sources (i.e., power poles) when available. This measure would minimize the use of higher polluting gas or diesel generators. • Construction - related equipment, including heavy -duty equipment, motor vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for more than five minutes. • Use low VOC (i.e., ROG) coatings beyond the local requirements (i.e., Regulation 8, Rule 3: Architectural Coatings). • Require that all construction equipment, diesel trucks, and generators be equipped with Best Available Control Technology for emission reductions of NOX and PM. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable 3 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 Final EIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: The project will implement Basic and Additional measures identified by BAAQMD to mitigate short term construction impacts. The measures are designed to reduce and control both fugitive dust from construction activities and emissions from construction equipment through techniques such as watering exposed surfaces, covering haul trucks, minimizing equipment idling time, and other specified measures. However, the project is large and will be implemented through multiple developments whose timing is currently unknown. Therefore, the project could potentially violate Federal and State ambient air quality standards, even with implementation of the identified mitigation measures. The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Impact 3.2 -3: Build -out of the proposed project would result in regional air emissions from operational sources in exceedance of BAAQMD significance thresholds. Mitigation Measures: No feasible mitigation measures beyond the design features included as part of the Project would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Design features of the project and design guidelines for implementing developments will lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the project would result in new long -term operational emissions, including new area, energy, and mobile source emissions. The project includes design guidelines that would reduce potential area source emissions, e.g., using only natural gas hearths and using low VOC paint. The project takes advantage of its location by proposing a mixed use project in proximity to the Dublin /Pleasanton BART station and associated transit facilities. The project design together with design guidelines in the Specific Plan further ensure that implementing development will include increased density and diversity, improved walkability, increased destination and transit accessibility, improved pedestrian network, limited parking supply, traffic calming measures, trip reduction, ride sharing, and employee vanpool programs. These design features will reduce mobile source emissions to the extent feasible; however, operational emissions would still exceed thresholds for ROG, NOX, and PM10 emissions. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the project. The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Impact 3.2 -5: The proposed project could result in exposure of sensitive land uses in excess of applicable Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC) standards. Mitigation Measures: 3.2 -5: Locate Sensitive Receptors Away from Existing Toxic Air Contaminants and Implement HVAC systems for Sensitive Receptors in the vicinity of BAAQMD permitted Toxic Air Contaminant sources. Prior to building permit issuance, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the City of Dublin Community Development Director that the following mitigation measures will be implemented in order to reduce the potential impact from TAC exposure due to the potential siting of residential or other sensitive receptor development within 1,000 feet of a BAAQMD identified stationary TAC source: • All new development projects that include sensitive receptors shall be located 1,000 feet away from existing TAC sources, unless a project- specific evaluation of human health risks is conducted and the results of the evaluation determine that no significant impact would occur.. Sensitive receptors include residential, schools, day care facilities, congregate care facilities, hospitals, or other places of long -term residency. • Mixed -use, residential, or school development within 1,000 feet of a BAAQMD permitted TAC source shall implement sealed HVAC systems for all multi - family development. The sealed air system shall be certified to achieve a performance effectiveness, For example, to remove at least 85 percent of ambient PM2.5 concentrations from indoor areas. Air intakes shall be located away from emission sources areas, such as major roadways and stationary sources. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable 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 Final EIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. 5 Rationale for Finding: Mitigation Measure 3.2 -5 will ensure that future sensitive receptors are located a sufficient distance from existing TAC sources. If future sensitive receptors cannot be located at a sufficient distance from existing TAC sources, on -site mitigation measures such as mechanical ventilation with enhanced filtration would be required. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.2 -5 would reduce exposure to TAC and PM2.5 emissions, but the reduction may not be enough to meet BAAQMD's criteria. The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Impact 3.2 -6: The proposed project would not result in increased generation of Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) or exposure of sensitive land uses in excess of applicable TAC standards. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.2 -6: Locate Commercial Development That Emits Toxic Air Contaminants Away From Sensitive Receptors and Consult with the BAAQMD to identify Toxic Air Contaminant Sources and Determine the Need for Health Risk Assessment. Prior to building permit issuance, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the City of Dublin Community Development Director that the following measure is implemented to reduce the potential for new TAC sources to be sited within 1,000 feet of residential or other existing or planned sensitive receptors: • All new commercial development projects that have the potential to emit TACs shall be located 1,000 feet away from existing and proposed development used by sensitive receptors, unless a project- specific evaluation of human health risks is conducted and the results of the evaluation determine that no significant impact would occur. Sensitive receptors include residential, schools, day care facilities, congregate care facilities, hospitals, or other places of long -term residency. The determination of development projects that have the potential for TAC emissions and adequate distances from sensitive receptors are identified in the California Air Resources Board's —Air Quality and Land Use Handbook —A Community Health Perspective (April 2005). Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The specific commercial uses within the Specific Plan area are unknown, but could include TAC emitters such as gas stations, dry cleaners, and diesel backup generators that are subject to regulatory requirements and permitting. The mitigation measure requires that such uses will not be located close to sensitive receptors unless the proposed use provides a project- specific evaluation 6 showing no significant impact would occur. Implementation of the above mitigation measure and compliance with applicable regulatory standards that are part of the permitting process will ensure that project impacts are less than significant. Impact 3.3 -1: Based on a preliminary wetland delineation of the project area, the proposed project could result in the fill of wetlands. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.3 -1: Prepare and Implement a Wetland Mitigation Plan. Prior to commencing any activities that would impact wetlands or waters habitat, the project applicant shall obtain all required public agency permits and shall prepare a wetland mitigation plan that ensures no- net -loss of wetland and waters habitat that is approved by the applicable resource agencies and submitted to the City. The wetland mitigation plan shall include measures for avoidance, minimization, and compensation for wetland impacts. Avoidance and minimization measures may include the designation of buffers around wetland features to be avoided, or project design measures, such as free -span bridges. Compensation measures shall include the preservation and /or creation of wetland or waters. The final mitigation ratios (the amount of wetlands and waters created or preserved compared to the amount impacted) shall be determined by the applicable resource agencies and the City. The wetland mitigation and monitoring plan shall include the following: • Descriptions of the wetland types, and their expected functions and values; • Performance standards and monitoring protocol to ensure the success of the mitigation wetlands over a period to be determined by the resource agencies; • Engineering plans showing the location, size and configuration of wetlands to be created or restored; • An implementation schedule showing that construction or preservation of mitigation areas shall commence prior to or concurrently with the initiation of construction; and • A description of legal protection measures for the preserved wetlands (i.e., dedication of fee title, conservation easement, and /or an endowment held by an approved conservation organization, government agency or mitigation bank). (Mitigation as revised in FEIR) Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: Through the required Wetland Mitigation Plan, the project will identify ways that development can be designed with measures such as buffers or free -span bridges to avoid or minimize the potential loss of wetland and waters 7 habitat. Where habitat cannot be avoided, the measure ensures that permanent compensating habitat is created or preserved so that there is no net loss of this resource. Impact 3.3 -2: A query of the CNPS lists 34 plant species that occur within the project vicinity. Based on habitats within the project area during the March 2012 survey by Cardno Entrix, the list was reduced to four special status plant species that have the potential to be located within the project area including: Congdon's tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. Congdonii), Palmate - bracted bird's -beak (Cordylanthus palmatus), Northern California Black Walnut (Juglans hindsii), and Hairless popcorn - flower (Plagiobothrys glaber). Out of these four special status plant species, the only special status plant species that has the potential to be located within the project area is the Congdon's tarplant, which was documented as occurring within the project area based on floristic surveys conducted between 1995 and 2000. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.3 -2a: Conduct a Floristic Survey and Consult with CDFW and USFWS if State or Federally Listed ESA Plants are Found and Comply with Incidental Take Permits. The project applicant shall retain a qualified botanist to conduct rare plant surveys within the construction zone for Congdon's tarplant or other state or federally listed plant species with potential habitat within the project area during the blooming period of those species for which suitable habitat is present in accordance with agency protocols. These plant surveys shall be conducted in accordance with the 2009 CDFW and USFWS rare plant survey protocols. Two or three separate surveys may be required to cover the blooming periods of species where suitable habitat is present. The results of the surveys shall be summarized in a report and submitted to CDFW and USFWS, and would be valid for two years. If no special - status plants are located during the surveys, no further mitigation measures would be required. If any federal or state ESA plant species are found during the rare plant surveys, the project applicant shall consult with the CDFW and USFWS to obtain incidental take permits under Section 2081 of the CESA and either Section 7 or 10 of the FESA. Consultation with USFWS under Section 7 of the FESA could occur as part of the CWA Section 404 permit process as part of the wetland mitigation, described under Mitigation Measure MM 3.3 -1. (Mitigation as revised in FEIR). MM 3.3 -2b: Develop and Implement Mitigation in Consultation with CDFW if Other Special Status Plant Species Are Found. If populations or stands of Congdon's tarplant or other special- status plant species (excluding federal or state listed plants) are found during the surveys and impacts are unavoidable, the project applicant shall notify the CDFW. A compensatory mitigation plan shall be developed in consultation with and approved by the CDFW and the City prior to the commencement of any activities that would impact any special status plants, such as the acquisition of off -site mitigation areas presently supporting the species in 8 question or purchase of credits in a mitigation bank that is approved to sell credits for the affected species. The location of mitigation sites shall be determined in consultation with, and subject to approval of USFWS and /or CDFW. Off -site compensatory mitigation shall be acquired at a minimum acreage of 1:1 (acquired: impacted). For either off -site mitigation option, measures shall be implemented (including contingency measures) providing for the long -term protection of the species. (Mitigation as revised in FEIR). Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the mitigations ensures that any special status plant species, including but not limited to Congdon's tarplant, will be identified through appropriately timed floristic surveys. The mitigations further ensure that if such species are found, species- specific mitigation will be developed to avoid or transplant plants, or the loss of plants will be offset by at least 1:1 compensation through permanent offsite mitigation. Impact 3.3 -3: Several California burrowing owl pairs have been documented within the project area, including during the winter and breeding season. Due to the security fencing that surrounds Camp Parks, low human use, and maintenance activities, the project area provides suitable breeding, foraging and wintering habitat for the California burrowing owl. Implementation of the proposed project could result in the displacement of burrowing owls during construction activities, and once completed the proposed project could result in the removal of suitable burrowing owl (breeding and wintering) habitat. Permanent loss of occupied burrow(s) and habitat would be considered a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.3 -3a: Conduct a Burrowing Owl Survey and Impact Assessment. The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a California burrowing owl take avoidance survey 14 days prior to ground disturbing activities following the 2012 California Department of Fish and Game Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012) or as updated at the time of the implementation of the proposed project. If no owls are found during this first survey, a final survey shall be conducted within 48 -hours prior to ground disturbance to confirm that burrowing owls are still absent. If ground disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 14 days after the initial take avoidance survey, the project area shall be resurveyed including the final survey within 48 -hours of disturbance. The report(s) shall be submitted to CDFW as indicated in the CDFW 2012 Staff Report. 9 If it is determined that project activities may result in impacts to nesting, occupied, and satellite burrows and /or burrowing owl habitat, the project applicant shall consult with the CDFW. More specifically, if the surveys identify breeding or wintering burrowing owls on or adjacent to the project area, occupied burrows cannot be disturbed and shall be provided with protective buffers. Where avoidance is not feasible during the non - breeding season, a site specific exclusion plan (i.e. a plan that considers the type and extent of the proposed activity, the duration and timing of the activity, the sensitivity and habituation of the owls, and the dissimilarity of the proposed activity with background activities) shall be implemented to encourage the owls to move away from the work area prior to construction and to minimize the potential to affect the reproductive success of the owls. The exclusion plan shall be subject to the CDFW approval and monitoring requirements. Compensatory mitigation could also be required by the CDFW as part of the approval of an exclusion plan. Mitigation may include the permanent protection of habitat at a nearby off -site location acceptable to the CDFW. (Mitigation as revised in FEIR). Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: Because burrowing owls have been observed in the project area, the mitigation provides a detailed series of presence /absence surveys and resurveys to ensure that the owls are not present where and when ground- disturbing construction activities are imminent. The mitigation further ensures that buffer areas are created so that breeding or wintering burrowing owls are not disturbed. The mitigation ensures that any required exclusion plan during the non - breeding season shall be tailored to the specific site and circumstances to encourage the owls to move away from the construction area. Where offsite mitigation is included in the exclusion plan, the mitigation allows for permanent protection of the offsite mitigation location. CDFW oversight and monitoring ensure that the most current survey techniques and effective avoidance and compensation measures are implemented. Impact 3.3 -4: Habitat assessments or surveys for special- status amphibians and reptiles were performed within the project area by the U.S. Army in 2006, including California Red Legged Frog and California Tiger Salamander. Although no surveys specific for Western Pond Turtle have been conducted, Western Pond Turtle was observed within the greater Camp Parks Training Area during surveys for California Red Legged Frog. During the field surveys conducted by in March 2012, the project area was not found to provide suitable breeding habitat for these species. However, the proposed project includes re- alignment of the ephemeral drainage, which could result in the 10 potential "take" of Western Pond Turtle and /or California Red Legged Frog if found within the project area. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.3 -4a: Conduct Pre - Construction Surveys for Western Pond Turtle (WPT) The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct pre- construction surveys for Western Pond Turtle no more than 30 days prior to work in or adjacent to any habitat suitable for WPT within the project area. If no Western Pond Turtles are found, no further mitigation is required. If Western Pond Turtles are found, the consulting biologist shall consult with the California Department of Fish and Game for authorization to relocate the species to suitable habitat away from the construction zone. The turtle shall be relocated to either a pond within the Training Area (if authorization from the US Army is granted) or downstream from the construction zone to similar or better habitat. MM 3.3 -4b: Consult with United States Fish and Wildlife Service and Reduce Impacts on California Red - Legged Frog. The project applicant shall comply with the following requirements: a. The project applicant shall retain a qualified herpetologist to conduct habitat assessments for CRLF and based on the results of the habitat assessments, determine in consultation with the USFWS if protocol -level CRLF surveys will be required within the project area. The project area consists of multiple phase areas within which separate CRLF habitat assessments may be conducted. It shall then be determined on a phase -by -phase basis, if further surveys will be required. The project applicant can forgo the habitat assessments and conduct protocol -level surveys. If required, the focused surveys shall follow the Revised Guidance on Site Assessment and Field Surveys for the California Red - legged Frog (USFWS 2005). A CRLF survey report prepared to meet the protocol guidelines shall be submitted to the USFWS. If no CRLF are found then no further mitigation is required. b. If CRLF are found then the project applicant shall provide information to the USACE to support Section 7 consultation with the USFWS and the project applicant shall ensure no net loss of habitat that shall be achieved through avoidance, preservation, creation and /or purchase of credits. The final selected measures may be part of the Section 7 permitting process. c. The project applicant shall obtain a biological opinion from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and comply with the conditions and mitigation requirements of those agencies to ensure that no net loss of habitat occurs. Mitigation may include, but would not be limited to, onsite and offsite preservation and creation of CRLF habitat, purchase of credits at mitigation banks, payment of in lieu fees approved by the agencies, or other agency approved and required mitigation measures. d. Avoidance measures may include the following or equivalent protective measures: • To minimize disturbance of breeding and dispersing CRLF, construction activity within CRLF upland habitat shall be conducted during the dry season 11 between April 15 and October 15 or before the onset of the rainy season, whichever occurs first. If construction activities are necessary in CRLF upland habitat between October 15 and April 15, the project applicant would contact the USFWS for approval to extend the work period. • To minimize disturbance and mortality of adult and juvenile CRLF in aquatic habitat and underground burrows, the project applicant could minimize the extent of ground- disturbing activities within these habitats by requiring the contractor to limit the work area to the minimum necessary for construction. In addition, the project applicant could ensure that the contractor would install temporary exclusion fence between the construction work area and potential aquatic habitat for all construction within grasslands near aquatic habitat. • The project applicant could ensure that a qualified wildlife biologist monitors all construction activities within CRLF upland habitat. This would ensure no take of individual CRLF occurs during project construction. If a CRLF is found, then the monitor would immediately stop construction in that area and contact USFWS for advice. • The project applicant could preserve additional upland habitat within a USFWS approved conservation area. This measure shall be determined in consultation with the USFWS, if required. (Mitigation as revised in FEIR.) Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: Western Pond Turtles are unlikely to occur on the project site, but because they have been observed in the general area, MM 3.3 -4a ensures that preconstruction surveys will be conducted to determine whether the species is present prior to any construction activity. If any Western Pond Turtles are found, the mitigation ensures that they will be relocated, in consultation with CDFW, to a more suitable habitat within the immediate vicinity of the project area but away from the construction zone. The project site does not include breeding habitat for CRLF. However, because there is a possibility it could provide dispersal habitat, MM 3.3 -4b ensures that preconstruction surveys will be conducted to identify the presence or absence of CRLF prior to construction activity. If CRLF are identified, implementation of the mitigation ensures there will be no net loss of habitat, using techniques for habitat avoidance, preservation, creation and /or purchase of credits. Impact 3.3 -5: Protocol level surveys for vernal pool invertebrates were conducted throughout Camp Parks in 2002 and 2003 by the U.S. Army, as 12 well as during the summer of 2012 (dry season) and 2013 (wet season) by Cardno Entrix. No vernal pool fairy shrimp, vernal pool tadpole shrimp or longhorn fairy shrimp were found. California linderiella was found, during the 2002 and 2003 surveys, but not within the project area. The surveys conducted by Cardno Entrix have not been accepted by the USFWS. Therefore, the presence of this species within the project area is assumed in the analysis of project impacts. (Impact statement as revised in FEIR.) Surveys for curve- footed Hygrotus beetle and San Francisco fork - tailed damselfly were also conducted within Camp Parks in 2002 and 2003 and neither of these species were observed. Site conditions have not changed significantly and these species are not expected to occur. Potentially suitable habitat was observed within the survey area for vernal pool invertebrates and these areas would be removed during proposed construction activities. Removal of these wetlands could result in the potential take of protected vernal pool branchiopods and other protected invertebrates, if they were to occur, and their habitat. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.3 -5: Consult with the USFWS and Reduce Impacts on Vernal Pool Invertebrates and Their Habitat. The project applicant shall prepare a habitat assessment for the vernal pool invertebrates. If vernal pool invertebrates are found within the project area during the habitat assessment, the project applicant shall comply with the following steps to ensure protection of vernal pool invertebrates and their habitat and that impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. a. The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct habitat assessments for protected vernal pool invertebrates and based on the results of the habitat assessments, determine in consultation with the USFWS if protocol - level vernal pool invertebrate surveys will be required within the project area. b. If suitable habitat is present, the project applicant, in consultation with the USFWS and CDFW, shall either (1) conduct a protocol -level survey for federally listed vernal pool crustaceans, which will identify other protected vernal pool invertebrates (curve- footed Hygrotus beetle and San Francisco fork - tailed damselfly), or (2) assume presence of federally - listed vernal pool crustaceans and curve footed Hygrotus beetle and San Francisco fork - tailed damselfly in areas of suitable habitat. Surveys shall be conducted by qualified biologists in accordance with the most recent USFWS guidelines or protocols to determine the time of year and survey methodology (survey timing for these species is dependent on yearly rainfall patterns and seasonal occurrences, and is determined on a case -by -case basis). The USFWS protocol level surveys shall be conducted as part of the Section 404 permit process within two years of the application. If surveys reveal no occurrences of federally listed vernal pool 13 crustaceans or other protected vernal pool invertebrates, no further mitigation would be required. c. If surveys determine that one or more special- status vernal pool invertebrate species occurs within the project area, or if the project applicant, in consultation with the USFWS and /or CDFW, assumes presence of federally - listed vernal pool invertebrates in all affected habitats, the project applicant shall provide information to the USACE to support Section 7 consultation with the USFWS and the project applicant shall ensure no net loss of habitat shall be achieved through avoidance, preservation, creation and /or purchase of credits as a part of the Section 7 Consultation process. The selected measures may be part of the permitting process. d. Where feasible, all vernal pool invertebrate habitat shall be avoided. If habitat that can be avoided during construction activities is identified at a distance determined in consultation with USFWS, a USFWS- approved biologist (monitor) shall inspect any construction - related activities to ensure that no unnecessary take of listed species or destruction of their habitat occurs. The Project proponent will establish monitoring and reporting protocols to reduce impacts to vernal pool invertebrate species and habitat. e. The project applicant shall ensure that an appropriate number of acres, as approved by USFWS during consultation, are preserved to mitigate for direct or indirect impacts on vernal pool crustacean habitat. f. Water quality in the avoided wetlands shall be protected using erosion control techniques, such as silt fencing or straw wattles during construction in the watershed. (Mitigation as revised in FEIR.) Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The mitigation ensures that a habitat assessment for vernal pool invertebrates will be conducted by a qualified biologist and followed up by protocol -level surveys if suitable habitat is present. If any federally - protected vernal pool invertebrates are found or assumed present in the project area, implementation of the mitigation assures that there will be no net loss of habitat. Habitat mitigation techniques shall consider avoidance during construction activity first, with monitoring and reporting by a qualified biologist to avoid unnecessary take of listed species or destruction of their habitat. Where avoidance is not feasible, the mitigation ensures that an appropriate amount of habitat will be reserved, created and /or compensated through purchase of mitigation credits in order to ensure no net loss of habitat. Impact 3.3 -6: A variety of special- status birds are expected to be located within the project area. Some of these species are resident species and 14 some are migratory species that breed within the project area. The special - status birds known to nest in the Livermore Valley area include the Golden eagle, white - tailed kite, tricolored blackbird, northern harrier, California horned, prairie falcon, Cooper's hawk and loggerhead shrike. Trees, fresh emergent wetland vegetation and grassland could provide potentially suitable nesting habitat for these species, which are protected under the Migrant Bird Treaty Act and the Fish and Game Code. The proposed project would require grading and possible removal of existing trees and vegetation. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.3 -6: Protect Birds Covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (Including, but not limited to White- Tailed Kite, golden eagle, Cooper's hawk, Loggerhead Shrike, and Other Special - Status Species). Project contractors shall avoid construction activities during the bird nesting season (February 1 through August 31). If construction activities are conducted during the bird nesting season, the project applicant shall have a qualified biologist conduct at least three nest surveys of the project area to develop a baseline of nesting activity on and adjacent to the project area. Depending on the construction schedule, pre- construction surveys shall be initiated prior to planned construction activity to allow for multiple site visits (e.g. for construction activities planned for mid -May, the first survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of work). If active nests of protected bird species are identified in the focused nest surveys, the project applicant shall consult with the appropriate regulatory agencies to identify project -level mitigation requirements, based on the agencies' standards and policies as then in effect. Performance measures may include the following, based on current agency standards and policies. a. The project applicant, in consultation with California Department of Fish and Game, shall delay construction in the vicinity of active nest sites during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31) while the nest is occupied with adults and /or young. A qualified biologist shall monitor any occupied nest to determine when the nest is no longer used. If the construction cannot be delayed, avoidance measures shall include the establishment of protective buffer zones around the nests as follows: for raptor nests, the size of the buffer zone shall be a minimum 250 foot radius centered on the nest; for other birds, the size of the buffer zone shall be a 50 -foot radius centered on the nest. In some cases, these buffers may be increased or decreased depending on the bird species and the level of disturbance that will occur near the nest. Changes to the buffer should be made by the project biologist in consultation with the CDFW. b. No intensive disturbance (e.g., heavy equipment operation associated with construction, or use of cranes) or other project - related activities that could cause 15 nest abandonment or forced fledging would be initiated within the established buffer zone of an active nest between February 1 and August 31. c. If construction activities are unavoidable within the buffer zone, the project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to monitor the nest site to determine if construction activities are disturbing the adult or young birds. d. If fully protected species (white - tailed kites, golden eagles) are found to be nesting near the proposed construction area, their nests would be completely avoided until the birds fledge. Avoidance would include the establishment of a non - disturbance buffer zone of 500 feet, or as determined in consultation with the CDFW. (Mitigation as revised in FEIR.) Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The mitigation avoids disturbance of nesting birds through controls on the location and timing of construction activity. The mitigations include a suite of techniques including delaying construction during breeding season, and creating appropriately sized buffers around the nests if construction activities cannot be delayed. Other techniques include avoiding use of heavy equipment or cranes in the buffer areas; if the equipment must be used, an onsite biologist will monitor whether the birds are being disturbed. For fully protected species, the mitigation ensures that a non - disturbance buffer of 500 feet will be created so that construction completely avoids their nests. Impact 3.3 -7: Removal of trees and /or buildings or structures from the project area could impact roosting sites for pallid bat and Yuma myotis. Disturbance of roosting sites during the maternity season (May 1St -Oct 1s) could result in a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.3 -7a: Conduct Bat and Bat Roosting Site Surveys. Prior to construction activities, the project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a focused survey for bats and potential roosting sites within the project area. The surveys can be conducted by visual and acoustic identification and can assume presence of pallid bats or the bats can be identified to a species level with the use of an acoustic detector unit. If no roosting sites or bats are found within the project area, a letter report confirming absence shall be sent to the California Department of Fish and Game and no further mitigation would be required. MM 3.3 -7b: Implement Avoidance Measures If Bat Roosts are Identified. If bats are detected during the focused surveys then the project applicant shall 16 perform monitoring and implement exclusion measures in consultation with the regulatory agencies. If bats are found during focused surveys, the project applicant shall consult with the regulatory agencies and implement the following measures based on the agencies standards and policies: a. If bats are found roosting in the project area outside of nursery season (May 1 through October 1), then they would be evicted using bat exclusion techniques developed by Bat Conservation International (BCI) and in consultation with CDFW, that allow the bats to exit the roosting site but prevent re -entry to the site. This would include but not be limited to the installation of one -way exclusion devices. The devices would remain in place for seven days and then the exclusion points and any other potential entrances shall be sealed. This work would be completed by a BCI recommended exclusion professional. b. If bats are found roosting during the nursery season, then they shall be monitored to determine if the roost site is a maternal roost. Monitoring by either visual inspection of the roost bat pups, if possible, or monitoring the roost after the adults leave for the night to listen for bat pups. If the roost is determined to not be a maternal roost, then the bats would be evicted as described above. Because bat pups cannot leave the roost until they are mature enough, eviction of a maternal roost cannot occur during the nursery season. A buffer zone as determined in consultation with CDFW would be established around the roosting site within which no construction shall occur. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The mitigation ensures that the presence or absence of bats or roosting sites will be identified prior to any construction activities. If roosting bats are present outside of the nursery season, the mitigation ensures that they will be excluded through established techniques approved by CDFW. Similar exclusion techniques will be used to exclude roosting bats during nursery season if the roost is not a maternal roost. For maternal roosts during nursery season, creation of a no- construction buffer ensures that bat pups will not be disturbed by project construction activity. Impact 3.3 -8: Trees are located within the project area and a detailed tree survey has not been conducted for the proposed project. Nevertheless, trees within the project area could fall under the definition of heritage trees per Section 5.60 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code. Mitigation Measures: 17 MM 3.3 -8: Conduct Tree Survey and Replace Trees at Suitable Ratios. The project applicant shall retain a certified arborist to survey all trees located within the project area in order to identify and evaluate those trees that shall be removed with implementation of the proposed project. An arborist report shall be prepared consistent with the certified arborist to survey trees within the project area and identify and evaluate trees that shall be removed. The arborist report shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Dublin to document the trees that are to be removed. If any of the trees fall under the jurisdiction Section 5.60 of the City's Municipal Code, the project applicant shall then mitigate impacts to trees based on the following or equivalent protective measures depending on the size and health of trees to be removed. a. Prior to the start of construction, the project applicant shall install exclusion fencing at the dripline of any tree that will not be affected by the construction and prohibit any parking or storage of construction materials or other materials inside the fence. b. Mitigation, at an inch -by -inch ratio, shall be provided for native trees larger than 24 inches in circumference measured at four (4) feet six (6) inches above natural grade. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The mitigation requirement for a tree survey ensures that any trees protected under City regulations will be identified. Those trees to remain will be protected from construction damage through exclusion fencing to keep construction activities out of the dripline of the trees. The mitigation ensures that protected trees to be removed will be replaced at an appropriate ratio based on the size of the tree. Impact 3.4 -2: The proposed project has been previously disturbed from its use as the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area. Based on the prior archaeological surveys conducted within the project area, the project area is not anticipated to contain any archaeological, cultural or pre- historic resources. However, site preparation and grading activities could disrupt undiscovered archaeological and cultural resources of importance under CEQA and /or eligible for listing on the California Register. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.4 -2: Halt Work/Archaeological Evaluation /Site - Specific Mitigation. If any potential archaeological, pre- historic or cultural artifacts are encountered during site grading or other construction activities, all ground disturbance within 18 50 feet of the discovery shall be halted until a qualified archaeologist can identify and evaluate the resource(s) in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines 15064.5(f). The archeological consultant shall immediately notify the project sponsor and the City staff of the encountered archeological deposit. If the deposit does not qualify as an archaeological resource, then no further protection or study is necessary. If the deposit does qualify as an archaeological resource then the impacts shall be avoided by project activities. If the deposit cannot be avoided, adverse impacts to the deposit shall be addressed in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines 15126.4(b). Measures may include, but are not limited to archaeological data recovery, etc. Upon completion of the assessment by the archaeologist, a professional - quality report shall be submitted to the City, the project applicant, and the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park. The project applicant shall fund and implement the mitigation in accordance with Section 15064.5(c) through (f) of the CEQA Guidelines and Public Resources Code 21083.2. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The mitigation measure ensures that any undiscovered archaeological, cultural or pre- historic resources will be identified and will not be inadvertently destroyed as a result of project construction activities. Impact 3.4 -3: No paleontological resources are known to exist within the project area. However, the presence of unknown paleontological resources could be discovered during site preparation and grading activities. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.4 -3: Halt Work/Paleontological Evaluation /Site - Specific Mitigation. If paleontological resources are encountered during subsurface construction activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected until a qualified paleontologist can evaluate the finds. If the paleontological resources are found to be significant, they shall be avoided by project construction activities and recovered by a qualified paleontologist. Upon completion of the recovery, a paleontological assessment shall be conducted by a qualified paleontologist to determine if further monitoring for paleontological resources is required. The assessment shall include: 1) the results of any geotechnical investigation prepared for the project area; 2) specific details of the construction plans for the project area; 3) background research; and 4) limited subsurface investigation within the project area. If a high potential to encounter paleontological resources is confirmed, a monitoring plan of further project subsurface construction shall be 19 prepared in conjunction with this assessment. After project subsurface construction has ended, a report documenting monitoring, methods, findings, and further recommendations regarding paleontological resources shall be prepared and submitted to the Director of Community Development. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The mitigation measure ensures that any undiscovered paleontological resources will be identified and will not be inadvertently destroyed as a result of project construction activities. Impact 3.4 -4: Due to the disturbed nature of the project area, there are no known human remains interred outside of formal cemeteries that are anticipated to be disturbed during short -term construction activities. However, human remains could be discovered during site preparation and grading activities. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.4 -4: Halt Work/Coroner's Evaluation /Native American Heritage Consultant/Compliance with Most Likely Descendent Recommendations. In the event that human remains are encountered during grading and site preparation activities, all ground- disturbing work within 50 feet of the remains shall cease immediately and a qualified archaeologist shall notify the Office of the Alameda County Coroner and advise that office as to whether the remains are likely to be Native American. If determined to be Native American, the Alameda County Coroner's Office shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission of the find, which in turn will then appoint a "Most Likely Descendent. (MLD)." The MLD in consultation with the archaeological consultant and the project sponsor will advise and help formulate an appropriate plan for treatment of the remains, which might include recordation, removal, and scientific study of the remains and any associated artifacts. After completion of the analysis and preparation of the report of findings, the remains and associated grave goods shall be returned to the MLD for burial. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. 20 Rationale for Finding: The mitigation measure ensures that any uncovered human remains will be identified and will not be inadvertently destroyed as a result of project construction activities. The mitigation measure ensures that appropriate procedures will be followed if any uncovered remains are determined to be Native American. Impact 3.5 -3: Ground shaking is likely to occur in the project area in the event of a major earthquake on one of the nearby faults resulting in the exposure of people and /or structures to potentially significant adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.5 -3: Preparation of Design -Level Geotechnical Report. Future development within the project area shall consult with a registered geotechnical engineer to prepare a design level geotechnical report that incorporates the recommendations in the preliminary geotechnical investigation by Berlogar, Stevens and Associates (March 2012). The design level geotechnical report shall address site preparation and grading (including measures to address potential liquefaction and expansive soils), building foundations, CBC seismic design parameters, and preliminary pavement sections. This report shall be submitted in conjunction with Building Permit application(s) and reviewed and approved by the City. The Report's recommendations shall be incorporated into the project design and construction documents. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The mitigation measure ensures that groundshaking shall be examined specific to the project's proposed site preparation and grading, structures and improvements and that appropriate engineering and design elements, including the stringent CBC standards, are incorporated into the design level plans before building permits are issued Impact 3.5 -4: Future development associated with the proposed project could expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects of liquefaction. Mitigation Measures: Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 3.5 -3. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 21 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: Future development in the project area would be required to comply with the City's Building Code, liquefaction regulations of the CBC, and the City's standard engineering practices and design criteria. In addition, Mitigation Measure 3.5 -3 ensures that potential liquefaction conditions are incorporated into design level project plans. Impact 3.5 -6: Implementation of the proposed project would include future development within the Specific Plan area in an area with expansive soils. With adherence to the City's Building Code and CBC requirements, this is considered a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measures: Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 3.5 -3. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: Future development in the project area would be required to comply with the City's Building Code, the CBC, and the City's standard engineering practices and design criteria. In addition, Mitigation Measure 3.5 -3 ensures that appropriate techniques for potential expansive soil conditions are incorporated into design level project plans. Impact 3.7 -4: The project area is not located on a hazardous material site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. However, based on the Phase I ESA there are three sites currently being evaluated by the U.S. Army. Hazardous materials may be encountered during construction. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.7 -4: Remediation of Hazardous Materials. Future development within the vicinity of Former Building 109 /PRFTA, Area 761 /PRFTA 13, and the Potential Construction Debris Dump Sites shall not proceed until a NFA status is granted and the project area has been cleaned to the appropriate land use standard to the satisfaction of Department of Toxic Substances and Control (DTSC). The NFA status paperwork shall be submitted to the City in conjunction with the Building and Grading /Site work permit and shall be found acceptable by the City prior to ground disturbance. 22 Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The mitigation ensures that no development or construction in the affected areas of the project site will occur until NFA status is granted and the area is remediated to a level appropriate for planned uses of the area. Impact 3.8 -4: Implementation of the proposed project would substantially increase the impervious surface area on the project site, thereby altering the existing drainage pattern and amount of surface runoff resulting in a potential increase in peak storm water flows (i.e., 10- and 100 -year storm events). MM 3.8 -4a: Construction of a new Off -site Detention Basin North of the Project Area. Prior to the issuance of grading permits for Phase 2 of the proposed project, the project applicant shall work in coordination with the U. S. Army (Camp Parks) to design and construct a new off -site detention basin designed to ensure that flow rates to Line G -1 do not exceed the maximum Q100 discharge flow rate of 950 cfs as required by Zone 7. The design plans for this new off -site detention basin will be reviewed by the City, in coordination with Zone 7, for verification of compliance with all applicable regulations and consistency with on -site drainage requirements, prior to construction. MM 3.8 -4b: Re -align Stormwater Outflow from Proposed North Basin #2. Prior to issuance of the first grading /sitework permit associated with the construction of the proposed community park, the project applicant shall submit to the City for review and approval, plans, details, and calculations for the proposed underground stormwater detention structure(s) and associated storm drain system within the park parcel to ensure that adequate capacity will be provided; that the resultant discharge flow rates meet the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board; and that the placement of the underground facilities in the park will not impact the park design and construction of recreational facilities. The location and layout of the underground detention structures and the connection of these facilities to the proposed Chabot Creek riparian channel, box culvert or downstream facilities shall be agreed upon by both the project applicant and the City. The method and location of stormwater discharge of the underground facilities shall be reviewed and approved by all appropriate regulatory and /or permitting agencies. (Mitigation as revised in FEIR.) Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 23 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The mitigation measures ensure that proposed offsite and onsite detention facilities will be designed and constructed to meet applicable flow rate standards and provide adequate storm drain capacity. Impact 3.10 -1: The proposed project could result in short -term construction - related noise at nearby noise sensitive land uses. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.10 -1 a: Prepare Construction Noise Management Plan. The project applicant shall prepare a construction noise management plan that identifies measures to be taken to minimize construction noise on surrounding sensitive receptors (e.g., residential uses and schools) and includes specific noise management measures to be included into project plans and specifications subject to review and approval by the City. These measures shall include, but not be limited to the following: • All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and sound control devices (e.g., intake silencers and noise shrouds) no less effective than those provided on the original equipment and no equipment shall have an un- muffled exhaust. • The contractor shall maintain and tune -up all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions. • Stationary equipment shall be placed so as to maintain the greatest possible distance to the sensitive receptors. • All equipment servicing shall be performed so as to maintain the greatest possible distance to the sensitive receptors. • The project applicant(s) shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City of Dublin Planning Department, a qualified "Noise Disturbance Coordinator." The Disturbance Coordinator shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. When a complaint is received, the Noise Disturbance Coordinator shall notify the City within 24 hours of the complaint and determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, malfunctioning muffler, etc.) and shall implement reasonable measures to resolve the compliant, as deemed acceptable by the Dublin Planning Department. If any notices are sent to residential units immediately surrounding the construction site by the City and all signs posted at the construction site shall include the contact name and the telephone number for the Noise Disturbance Coordinator. • Select demolition methods to minimize vibration, where possible (e.g., sawing masonry into sections rather than demolishing it by pavement breakers). 24 MM 3.10 -1 b: Construction Routes Less Disruptive to Sensitive Receptors. Construction trucks shall utilize a route that is least disruptive to sensitive receptors, preferably major roadways (Interstate 580, Interstate 680, Dublin Boulevard, Dougherty Road, and Arnold Road). Construction trucks should, to the extent practical, avoid the weekday and Saturday a.m. and p.m. peak hours (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.). Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The required construction noise management plan will identify measures to minimize construction noise on nearby sensitive receptors (e.g., residential uses and schools) and include specific noise management measures to be incorporated in project plans and specifications subject to review and approval by the City. The measures ensure that construction will be limited to less noise sensitive periods of the day and ensure that proper operating procedures are followed during construction to minimize noise exposure for nearby sensitive receptors. Impact 3.12 -1: During the PM peak hour, the study intersection of Dougherty Road and Amador Valley Boulevard would operate at an unacceptable LOS E under both 2020 background no project conditions and 2020 background plus project conditions. The City of Dublin level of service standard for this intersection is LOS D. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.12 -1: Addition of Northbound Left -Turn Lane on Dougherty Road. The proposed project shall add an additional northbound left -turn lane on Dougherty Road at the Dougherty Road and Amador Valley Boulevard intersection. Based on the 2020 background plus project conditions, the two northbound left turn lanes would need to be 325 feet each. This improvement would require widening Dougherty Road by approximately 12 feet along the east side in advance of the intersection. It would also require realignment of travel lanes through the intersection and traffic signal modifications. This improvement has already been identified by the City of Dublin's Traffic Impact Fee program as part of the widening of Dougherty Road between Sierra Court and City limits. Because the impact is caused by the proposed project, future land use growth, and is included in the Traffic Impact Fee program, the mitigation for this impact is for the project to make a fair share monetary 25 contribution toward these improvements. The timing of these improvements will be determined in the project's mitigation monitoring program. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the mitigation measure will result in acceptable LOS D operations at the intersection and ensures that the project contributes its fair share to the cost of the planned improvements. Impact 3.12 -2: During the PM peak hour, the study intersection of Dougherty Road and Scarlett Drive would degrade from LOS D under 2035 cumulative no project conditions to an unacceptable LOS E under 2035 cumulative plus project conditions. The City of Dublin level of service standard for this intersection is LOS D. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.12 -2: Converting the Eastbound All- Movement Lane to a Shared Through Right Lane and Adding an Eastbound Left -Turn Lane at Dougherty Road and Scarlett Drive. To mitigate the impact at the intersection of Dougherty Road and Scarlett Drive would require converting the eastbound all- movement lane to a shared through -right lane and adding a new 60 -foot eastbound left turn lane. In addition, the eastbound and westbound legs should be converted from split phasing to protected phasing. This improvement would require widening the west approach of the intersection by approximately 12 feet into the existing pork chop island. Further improvements at this intersection have already been identified by the City's Traffic Impact Fee Program as part of the Scarlett Drive extension to Dublin Boulevard. Implementation of the identified mitigation at this location should be coordinated with the City's planned TIF improvements. Because the impact is caused by both the proposed project and future land use growth, the mitigation for this impact is for the project to make a fair share monetary contribution toward these improvements. The timing of these improvements will be determined in the project's mitigation monitoring program. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. 26 Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the mitigation measure will result in acceptable LOS D operations at the intersection and ensures that the project contributes its fair share to the cost of the planned improvements. Impact 3.12 -3: Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard. During the PM peak hour, the study intersection of Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard would operate at an unacceptable LOS F under both 2035 cumulative no project conditions and 2035 cumulative plus project conditions. The City of Dublin level of service standard for this intersection is LOS D. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.12 -3: Construction of a Grade Separated Crossing at the Intersection of Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard. To mitigate the impacts at the intersection of Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard due to higher rate of pedestrians /bicyclists crossings at Dublin Boulevard, a grade separated crossing shall be utilized. The grade separated crossing would eliminate the need for at- grade pedestrian actuations at the traffic signal, which would allow more green time to be allocated to through traffic on Dublin Boulevard. Although this project has not been environmentally cleared, nor has engineering or right of way analysis been completed with regards to the feasibility of this improvement, the City is aggressively pursuing this project to improve pedestrian and bicycle mobility along the Iron Horse Trail. The City also plans to include a grade separated crossing at this location in its update to the TIF program to secure project funding. Because the impact is caused by future land use growth in the region as well as this proposed project, the mitigation for this impact is for the project to make a fair share monetary contribution toward these improvements. The timing of these improvements will be determined in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and developer obligations will be outlined in the Developer Agreement. In the event that the grade separated crossing project cannot be constructed by year 2035, an alternative mitigation would be to eliminate the crosswalk on the east leg of the Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard intersection. This would require pedestrians and bikes from the Iron Horse Trail to cross three crosswalks rather than one. Because of the effects of the alternative mitigation on pedestrian and bike mobility, the grade separated crossing is the City's preferred mitigation at this location. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. 27 Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the mitigation measure will eliminate the need for at -grade pedestrian actuation at the traffic signal, which would allow more green time to be allocated to through traffic on Dublin Boulevard and would result in acceptable LOS C operations at the intersection. The mitigation ensures that the project contributes its fair share to the cost of constructing the grade separated crossing. Impact 3.12 -4: During the PM peak hour, the study intersection of Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard would degrade from LOS C under 2035 cumulative no project conditions to an unacceptable LOS F under 2035 cumulative plus project conditions. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.12 -4: Addition of a Northbound Left -turn lane on Iron Horse Parkway at the Intersection of Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard. To mitigate the impact at the intersection of Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard would require an additional northbound left turn lane on Iron Horse Parkway. Based on the 2035 cumulative plus project conditions, the two northbound left turn lanes would need to be 400 feet each. This improvement would require the removal of parking on the east side of Iron Horse Parkway, traffic signal modifications, and changing the travel lane configuration and alignment to create: • One 16 -foot wide southbound receiving lane on Iron Horse Parkway; • Two 10 -foot wide northbound left turn lanes on Iron Horse Parkway; and • One 14 -foot wide northbound shared through -right turn lane. Because the proposed project causes the change in operation from LOS C to LOS F, the proposed project is responsible for constructing these improvements. The timing of these improvements will be determined in the project's mitigation monitoring program. (Mitigation as revised in FEIR.) Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the mitigation measure will result in acceptable LOS D operations at the intersection. Impact 3.12 -5: During the PM peak hour, the study intersection of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard would operate at an unacceptable LOS E under both 2035 cumulative no project conditions and 2035 cumulative plus project conditions. The City of Dublin level of service standard for this intersection is LOS D. 28 Mitigation Measures: MM 3.12 -5: Convert one of the through lanes to a second right turn lane at the Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard Intersection. As part of the City of Dublin's Traffic Impact Fee program, the intersection of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard has a planned northbound approach geometry of three left turn lanes, three through lanes, and one right turn lane. To mitigate the impact at the intersection of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard would require converting one of the through lanes to a second right turn lane, which is the existing northbound geometry at the intersection. Because no improvements relative to the existing geometry are necessary, the City of Dublin should modify its planned improvement at the northbound approach of the intersection back to the existing configuration. With this mitigation, the intersection would operate at LOS D during the PM peak hour. Therefore, this improvement would mitigate the intersection to less than significant levels. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the mitigation measure will result in acceptable LOS D operations at the intersection. Impact 3.12 -6:: During the PM peak hour, the study intersection of Tassajara Road and Dublin Boulevard would degrade from LOS D under 2035 cumulative no project conditions to an unacceptable LOS E under 2035 cumulative plus project conditions. The City of Dublin level of service standard for this intersection is LOS D. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.12 -6: Install a Fourth Eastbound Through Lane on Dublin Boulevard. To mitigate the impact at the intersection of Tassajara Road and Dublin Boulevard would require a fourth eastbound through lane on Dublin Boulevard. The widening of Dublin Boulevard to six through lanes is included in the City of Dublin's Traffic Impact Fee program. The planned eastbound approach geometry supplied by the City includes two left turn lanes, two right turn lanes, and three through lanes. To return the intersection to an acceptable LOS would require converting one of the right turn lanes to a fourth through lane. A fourth eastbound through lane would require an additional receiving lane east of the Tassajara Road and Dublin Boulevard intersection. It may also require realignment of travel lanes through the intersection and traffic signal modifications. 29 Because the impact is caused by both the proposed project and future land use growth, the mitigation for this impact is for the project to make a fair share monetary contribution toward these improvements. The timing of these improvements will be determined in the project's mitigation monitoring program. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the mitigation measure will result in acceptable LOS D operations at the intersection and ensures that the project contributes its fair share to the cost of the planned improvements. Impact 3.12 -7: The proposed project would add project trips to the following freeway on- ramps, which would not be consistent with the Alameda County CMP criteria for freeway ramps: Southbound Hacienda Drive to 1 -580 Eastbound On -ramp. During the PM peak hour, the southbound Hacienda Drive to 1 -580 eastbound on -ramp would degrade from a V/C ratio of 0.98 under existing conditions to a V/C ratio of 1.13 under existing plus project conditions. According to the Alameda County CMP, the acceptable V/C ratio on all MTS segments is 0.99 or less. Southbound Hacienda Drive to 1 -580 Eastbound On -ramp. During the PM peak hour, the southbound Hacienda Drive to 1 -580 eastbound on -ramp would degrade from a V/C ratio of 1.48 under 2035 cumulative no project conditions to a V/C ratio of 1.52 under 2035 cumulative plus project conditions. According to the Alameda County CMP, for a segment that would operate with a V/C ratio above 0.99 under no project conditions, an increase in the V/C ratio of more than 0.02 would be considered a significant impact. Southbound Tassajara Road to 1 -580 Westbound On -ramp. During the AM peak hour, the southbound Tassajara Road to 1 -580 westbound on -ramp would degrade from a V/C ratio of 0.97 under 2035 cumulative no project conditions to a V/C ratio of 1.05 under 2035 cumulative plus project conditions. According to the Alameda County CMP, the acceptable V/C ratio on all MTS segments is 0.99 or less. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.12 -7: Freeway Ramp Metering Rates. The project impacts to freeway ramps could be mitigated by changing the ramp metering rates so that more vehicles could access the freeway. However, the freeway ramps are operated by 30 Caltrans, which sets metering rates based on overall operations in the freeway corridor. In the future, major improvements are planned for 1 -580 in the project vicinity, including the addition of High Occupancy Vehicle and auxiliary lanes. In addition, as the Cities surrounding the 1 -580 corridor continue to build out and additional parallel east /west connectors such as the Stoneridge Drive and Dublin Boulevard extensions are completed, it is likely that the ramp meter rates would change over time to accommodate the demand on both the freeway ramps and freeway segments. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Changes or alterations identified in the EIR would avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. However, the identified mitigation measure requires action by another public agency, Caltrans. The City therefore finds that the mitigation is within the responsibility and jurisdictions of Caltrans, and not the City. The City further finds that there is no certainty that Caltrans will implement the mitigation measure prior to the completion of the proposed Project. This impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable. The City concludes, however, that the Project's benefits outweigh the significant unavoidable impacts of the Project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: If implemented, MM 3.12 -7 would change the ramp metering rates so that more vehicles could access the freeway. However, the freeway ramps are operated by Caltrans, which sets metering rates based on overall operations in the freeway corridor. While Caltrans can change the ramp metering rates, there is no substantial evidence in the record to show that they will make such changes. Neither the City nor the project has any control over setting the ramp metering rates. The Draft EIR notes that as planned improvements for 1 -580 are completed in the future, ramp meter rates could change over time to accommodate the demand on both the freeway ramps and freeway segments. While possible, future metering rates cannot be predicted with certainty making implementation of the mitigation uncertain. The Draft EIR also notes that the project could consider implementing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs to reduce project impacts on the freeway ramps; however, the City can encourage but not require, employer TDM programs. In addition, TDM programs are not feasible mitigations for residential development which constitutes the largest portion of the Project development. Unlike an employment setting where a single employer can incentivize alternative transportation for many employees, the residential project will have up to 1,995 individual dwellings. There is no central or concentrated control of the residential travel patterns through which incentives could be offered and managed. 31 However, like TDM measures, the project overall encourages alternative transportation use, e.g., providing mixed uses and higher density near the south boundary of the project along transit - friendly Dublin Boulevard and near the BART station. The project design guidelines also provide for future implementing development with a high degree of on- and off -site connecting facilities between the site and bicycle, pedestrian and transit opportunities. Based on these circumstances, the City Council finds that the identified mitigation is infeasible and no other feasible mitigations have been identified (see findings in Exhibit C). Therefore, the impact remains significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Impact 3.12 -8: The proposed project does not include detailed information such as intersection layouts and driveway locations. For this reason, impacts to roadway safety may be potentially significant. Mitigation Measure: MM 3.12 -8: Roadway Layout and Driveway Locations. As more detail for the roadway layout and driveway locations become available, the following mitigation shall be implemented: • The precise roadway alignments at both the onsite and site access intersections have yet to be designed. City staff shall review the proposed intersection alignments to insure that opposing left turn lanes can operate simultaneously, sufficient radii is provided for truck turn movements, and through lanes line up reasonably well with their respective receiving lanes across the intersection. • To maintain adequate corner sight distance consistent with Caltrans Highway Design Manual requirements, parking shall not be permitted on major onsite roadways (Central Parkway East, G Street, and, B Street) within close proximity to intersections. At all onsite intersections, landscaping, signing, and parking shall be designed so that adequate corner sight distance is achieved. • A site circulation and access study shall be conducted for the proposed school to insure that loading areas are adequately designed and the adjacent streets are safe for school age children. Flashing beacon warning signs, high visibility crosswalks, raised crosswalks, and school zone speed limit signs shall be considered, where appropriate. • The traffic control and turn pocket lengths shall be reviewed by the City as site specific development plans move forward to insure that the orientation of the private roadways (which will feed into the major and minor collector streets onsite) do not result in level of service or safety issues. • Private street roadway segments with perpendicular parking shall be relatively short in length (approximately 400 feet or less) to discourage excessive vehicle speeds. This is necessary to allow a vehicle backing out of a perpendicular parking stall to react to through traffic on the private street. 32 Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The mitigation measure requires that specified design and performance standards be included in detailed roadway plans for the project. Implementation of the mitigation will ensure adequate and safe onsite circulation for the project. Impact 3.12 -9: The proposed project will increase transit demand, generating an estimated 1,228 weekday daily transit trips (bus and BART combined). This will create the need for bus route adjustments and /or increased bus frequency. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.12 -9: Coordination with LAVTA. As the plan area develops, the project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Dublin and LAVTA to determine if route changes and /or increased service is required in the project area. In addition, the project shall provide additional bus duckouts and transit shelters to support project trips, where appropriate. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The Draft EIR notes that existing bus service is expected to be adequate to serve the additional peak hour bus trips generated by the project. Implementation of the mitigation ensures that the system will be reviewed to determine if changes in the existing bus routes should be considered to enhance transit accessibility for future project residents. Impact 3.12 -10: The proposed project does not include detailed information such as intersection layouts, crosswalk locations, wheelchair ramp locations, and driveway locations. This is a potentially significant impact MM 3.12 -10: Review of Intersection Layouts and Driveway Locations. As each individual site develops within the Specific Plan and more details are available, additional review by the City of Dublin will be necessary to insure that 33 individual elements of the project do not conflict with the pedestrian /bike accessibility and are consistent with the policies and guidelines in the Dublin Bikeways Master Plan. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: • Marked crosswalks shall be provided at all onsite intersections, where appropriate, based on the layout of the local streets. Prior to final design of the streets and pathways, the intersection designs should be reviewed by City staff to insure that the pathway crossings are clearly marked and include Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant wheelchair ramps. Bollards may also be considered so that vehicles are restricted from driving on the 10 -foot wide paths. • The layout of private and minor streets within the site shall minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the number of crossings with the proposed onsite 10- foot pedestrian paths. This includes potentially realigning the Iron Horse Trail onto the Central Park site so that the driveway access to the park at Scarlett Drive does not conflict with trail operations. • Bike parking, showers, and changing rooms shall be considered at the park, office and shopping center uses, where appropriate. • During construction along Scarlett Drive, Dublin Boulevard, and Arnold Road, temporary traffic control plans shall be prepared to minimize the disruption to bike and pedestrian activities through the construction zone. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The mitigation measure requires that specified pedestrian and bicycle facilities and features be included in detailed roadway plans for the project. Implementation of the mitigation will ensure that individual elements of the project do not conflict with pedestrian /bike accessibility and are consistent with the policies and guidelines in the Dublin Bikeways Master Plan.. Impact 3.12 -11: Project construction would occur over a period of an estimated time period of eight to ten years and has the potential to result in hundreds of construction staff on -site at one time. However, due to the nature of the project phasing over the course of time, the amount of construction traffic that may take place during peak traffic volume periods can only be estimated. The construction phase also would increase the number of daily truck trips in the project vicinity while the site is graded and materials are delivered. All truck movements to and from the site during construction would likely occur on the arterials and collector streets around the project site. The land uses to the east and south of the project along Arnold Road and Dublin Boulevard are primarily industrial and commercial uses, with some high density residential uses along the south 34 side of Dublin Boulevard. To the west of the project site, there are low density residential townhouses along Scarlett Drive. While heavy vehicle traffic is common on arterial streets near industrial, commercial, and high density residential land uses, truck traffic on streets directly adjacent to low density residential development should be minimized to the greatest extent possible. Mitigation Measures: MM 3.12 -11: Construction Traffic Mitigation Plan(s). Prior to the issuance of any grading permit or any permit that authorizes construction activities on the Specific Plan site or construction of off -site improvements relating to the Specific Plan, the project applicants shall provide Construction Traffic Mitigation Plan(s) for City Staff review and approval as part of the permit application. The Mitigation Plan(s) shall include measures to minimize the construction traffic entering the roadway system during periods of peak traffic volumes (i.e. AM and PM Peak Hour). The Mitigation Plan(s) shall also include measures to minimize the number of truck trips on Scarlett Drive and should route heavy vehicle traffic to driveways on Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road to access the site during the construction phase of the project. At a minimum, the Construction Traffic Mitigation Plan should include the following implementation measures: • Construction truck routes shall be prepared to designate principal haul routes for trucks delivering materials to and from the construction site. • Should a temporary road and /or lane closure be necessary during construction, the project applicant shall provide traffic control activities and personnel, as necessary, to minimize traffic impacts. This may include detour signage, cones, construction area signage, flagmen, and other measures as required for safe traffic handling in the construction zone. • The project applicant shall be required to keep a minimum of one lane in each direction free from encumbrances at all times on perimeter streets accessing the project site. In the event a full road closure is required, the contractor shall coordinate with the Alameda County Fire Department and the Dublin Police Department/ Alameda County Sherriff's Department to designate proper detour routes and signage to appropriate proper access routes. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: The required Construction Traffic Mitigation Plan will ensure that construction truck traffic adjacent to low density residential 35 development in the project area will be minimized through controls on the timing and routes of construction vehicles. Impact 3.12 -12: The proposed project may require the closure of travel lanes on Dublin Boulevard, Scarlett Drive, and Arnold Road while constructing frontage improvements, intersection improvements for new proposed roadways (G Street, B Street, Central Parkway East, E Street, D Street and A Street), and traffic signal modifications where new intersection legs are proposed. Closure of travel lanes during peak commute hours could result in restricted traffic flow on the public streets surrounding the project area. Mitigation Measure: MM 3.12 -12: Restrict Lane Closures Along Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road to Off -Peak Hours. During project construction, the lane closures along Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road shall be restricted to off -peak hours to the greatest extent feasible. In addition, traffic handling plans shall be prepared for construction work in the public right -of -way in accordance with current California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards and guidelines. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 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 Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the mitigation will limit lane closures on busy project area roadways to off -peak hours, thereby minimizing the effects of project construction and improvements on area traffic flows. 2185556.3 36 EXHIBIT C FINDINGS CONCERNING INFEASIBILITY OF ALTERNATIVES AND PROPOSED ADDITIONAL MITIGATION MEASURES CEQA provides that decisionmakers 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 Project EIR identified feasible mitigation measures that would reduce most of the potentially significant impacts to less than significant, as further set forth in the Exhibit B findings above. However, the following four impacts in the EIR either remained significant after mitigation or no feasible mitigation was identified: (1) Air Quality Impact 3.2 -1 — Short -term air quality impacts from construction. (2) Air Quality Impact 3.2 -3 - Operational emissions exceed thresholds for ROG, NOX, and PM10. (3) Air Quality Impact 3.2 -5 - exposure of sensitive land uses to Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC). (4) Transportation Impact 3.12 -7 - Southbound Hacienda Drive to 1 -580 Eastbound On- ramp under Existing Plus Project and Cumulative Plus Project conditions in PM peak hour, and Southbound Tassajara Road to 1 -580 Westbound On -ramp under Cumulative Plus Project conditions in AM peak hour. 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 four 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 decisionmaker 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 City Council hereby makes these findings with respect to alternatives. The Project objectives are set forth in Section 2.5 of the DEIR. Alternatives are identified and analyzed in Section 4.7 of the DEIR and include the required No Project Alternative, a Reduced Development Alternative and an Alternate Use Alternative. Each of the alternatives was assessed for each resource topic and compared to potential Project impacts. As further set forth below, the City Council considered the alternatives identified and analyzed in Section 4.7 of the DEIR and finds them to be infeasible for specific economic, social, or other considerations pursuant to CEQA 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.) Alternative #1: No Project Alternative 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: the project area remaining in its current state or development of the project area under its current General Plan land use and zoning designations. Because the project proposes General Plan land use changes, Alternative #1 — No Project Alternative considers the environmental effects of not approving the proposed project, with the continuation of the existing permitted land uses and the "public" land use designation associated with the Camp Parks into the future. By eliminating project construction and operation, the No Project Alternative would eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts from short -term construction emissions and long -term operational emissions. The No Project Alternative would also eliminate 22,047 trips to the project area, which would eliminate the significant and unavoidable impact to the freeway ramps at Southbound Hacienda Drive and 1 -580 Eastbound On -Ramp under project conditions and the significant and unavoidable impact to the Southbound Hacienda Drive to 1 -580 Eastbound On -ramp and Southbound Tassajara Road to 1 -580 Westbound On -Ramp during cumulative conditions in comparison to the proposed project. The No Project Alternative would not create any new significant impacts. It would, however, increase aesthetics impacts compared to the project since the existing scattered project site structures are not consistent with the urban mixed use character to the west and south of the project site. This alternative would also continue military uses on the project site and the storage of potentially hazardous materials in proximity to nearby residential uses, which would be a greater impact compared to the project. The No Project Alternative avoids the project's significant unavoidable impacts; however the City finds this alternative infeasible because it would increase aesthetics and hazardous materials impacts compared to the project and would not be consistent with the project's objectives. The No Project Alternative is inconsistent with the most basic objectives of ensuring a long -term financially viable infill project on a portion of the Camp Parks, providing housing to meet the City's projected housing needs in its Housing Element; and creating a desirable livable community with a strong sense of place and a range of amenities and housing options for the residents of the City of Dublin. This alternative does not take advantage of the site's proximity to either the BART station or the Iron Horse Trail and the opportunities these facilities provide for alternative transportation choices and amenities. Under this alternative, the project's development standards and design guidelines would not be adopted to facilitate upgraded development that would be an attractive and distinctive amenity to the area. 2 This alternative would not provide streetscape amenities or parkland. It would retain existing development that is not compatible with the urban mixed use character of development to the west and south. Finding: The City Council considered the No Project Alternative and declines to adopt it because it will not avoid or substantially lessen all of the project's significant unavoidable impacts and is infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations described above, as supported by the administrative record for the project. Alternative #2: Reduced Development Alternative (Single Family Residential and Commercial Uses) Alternative #2 — Reduced Development Alternative assumes construction of all single family development at much lower density in comparison to the proposed project for a maximum of 1,121 units at an average of 10 dwelling units per acre for a total population within the project area of 3,060 residents. This alternative also includes 200,000 square feet of general commercial uses similar to the proposed project. This alternative assumes that the development standards and design guidelines in the Specific Plan would apply to future development. With the reduction in residential units, the Reduced Density Alternative would decrease the amount of long -term operational emissions compared to the proposed project. However, the significant and unavoidable impacts would remain as short -term construction and long -term operational air quality emissions are still anticipated to exceed the BAAQMD thresholds. The Reduced Density Alternative would reduce the number of daily trips by approximately 1,070 trips, which would reduce the number of trips to the Southbound Hacienda Drive to 1 -580 Eastbound On -Ramp during both project and cumulative conditions, as well as the impacts to the Southbound Tassajara Road to 1 -580 Westbound On -Ramp under cumulative conditions. However, the reduced number of trips would not be enough to result in acceptable V/C ratios based on applicable CMP standards; thus, it is anticipated that the significant and unavoidable impact to the ramps would remain. The Reduced Development Alternative would not cause any new significant impacts, but would increase Greenhouse Gas Emissions impacts compared to the project because it would increase per capita GHG emissions. Alternative #2 is consistent with the project's objectives to the extent that it provides for infill development on the site and would upgrade the visual quality of the site through implementation of proposed design guidelines. This alternative would not be consistent with several important project objectives and would promote project objectives to a lesser extent than the proposed Project. With the reduced number of units and the single family character, this alternative would not create a strong desirable living environment with a range and mix of housing alternatives. Similarly the lower density and single family residential use would not be at a compatible scale and design that integrates with the nearby higher density and mixed uses. The reduced number of units would reduce the ability to provide additional new housing supply by nearly half 3 compared to the project. With the reduced number of units, this alternative would not take advantage of nearby transit opportunities and amenities, especially the BART station located approximately' /4 mile south of the site, and would provide reduced alternative transportation options compared to the project. Finding: The City Council considered the Reduced Development Alternative and declines to adopt it because it will not avoid or substantially lessen the project's significant unavoidable impacts and is infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations described above, as supported by the administrative record for the project. Alternative #3: Alternate Use Alternative (Residential and a Regional Serving Commercial Complex) Alternative #3 - Alternate Use Alternative would alter the mix of land uses with a reduction in the amount of residential development and construction of a 20 to 30 acre regional - serving commercial complex. This alternative would result in a reduction of 735 residential dwelling units for a total of 1,260 residential dwelling units and an increase of 126,700 square feet of commercial uses for a total of 326,700 square feet. The proposed commercial uses would be mostly comprised of big -box retail. This alternative assumes that the development standards and design guidelines in the Specific Plan would also apply to future development. The Alternate Use Alternative would not eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts from short -term construction emissions and long -term operational air quality emissions. In addition, the Alternate Use Alternative would not eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts to the Southbound Hacienda Drive to I -580 Eastbound On- Ramp under project and cumulative conditions, as well as the impact to the Southbound Tassajara Road to I -580 Westbound On -Ramp under cumulative conditions. This alternative would not create new significant impacts but would increase a number of impacts compared to the project, mostly related to the regional serving commercial complex with its big -box retail uses. The proposed design guidelines would be implemented and would visually upgrade the site; however, aesthetics impacts would be greater than the project due to the large commercial buildings with expansive parking lots. The extensive parking lots would also increase the impervious surfaces compared to the project, increasing runoff and related hydrology and water quality impacts. This large scale commercial development would less likely be compatible with the urban character of nearby higher density residential and mixed use areas. Traffic generation from the increased commercial component would be higher than for the project, resulting in greater air quality and traffic impacts. Regional serving retail, commercial uses under this alternative are more likely to be auto - dependent. These uses would be incompatible with more compact higher density and transit - oriented development in the area. Alternative #3 is consistent with the project's objectives to the extent that it provides for infill development on the site, provides new housing, and would upgrade the visual M quality of the site through implementation of proposed design guidelines. This alternative would not be consistent with several important project objectives and would promote project objectives to a lesser extent than the proposed Project. With the reduced number of units and the location of housing near a regional retail center, this alternative would not create a strong desirable living environment with a range and mix of housing alternatives. Similarly, the combination of residential units near a large big - box oriented retail center would be very different from the existing residential, commercial and mixed use character in the area; as such, this alternative would not be compatible in scale and design that integrates with the nearby higher density and mixed uses. The retail center would be more characteristically suburban, with large buildings and expansive parking lots, while nearby existing higher density housing and mixed uses tend to be more compact. The reduced number of units would supply substantially less new housing to meet the City's housing need. With the reduced number of units and a regional serving big box retail focus, this alternative would not take advantage of nearby transit opportunities and amenities, especially the BART station located approximately' /4 mile south of the site. Finding: The City Council considered the Alternate Use Alternative and declines to adopt it because it will not avoid or substantially lessen the project's significant unavoidable impacts 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 ALTERNATIVES PROPOSED IN COMMENTS In comments on the DEIR, one commenter (Comment 2 -4), in general terms, suggested an alternative to the Project. The City does not consider the comment to propose a specific alternative that is required to be considered under CEQA. In addition, the proposed alternative is not substantially different from the project or other alternatives already considered in the EIR. Nevertheless, the City has carefully considered the proposed alternative, and finds it infeasible as further described below even though the City believes that these findings are not required under CEQA. Comment 2 -4. The commenter generally suggest that the project incorporate a stronger level of mixed use and high density residential development as close as possible to the BART station so as to minimize the necessity of using single- occupancy vehicles for commuting and shopping. Finding: See Response 2 -4 in the Final EIR. The base density for residential uses in the Project extends up to 25 du /acre; however, the Mixed Use district allows up to 60 du /acre on a 13.2 acre portion of the Project site. This juxtaposition of high density residential use near supporting jobs and shopping accomplishes exactly what the commenter is suggesting. The rest of the residential density in the Project area is consistent with densities in nearby residential and commercial uses. It would not be feasible to substantially increase the Project density and still be consistent with the character of the nearby areas. The Project proposes medium density and medium -high density residential uses in the east and west portions 5 of the site for consistency with existing residential development. Substantially increasing density in these areas would create a marked difference in scale that would not be consistent with Project objectives to be compatible with the scale of surrounding land uses. Further, the Project already facilitates increased density potential up to 60 units /acre in the south part of the Project site which would be compatible with similar existing development in the mixed use areas south of the site. In any case, substantially increasing the intensity of the Project would also increase aesthetic impacts and would likely increase vehicle trips and related significant unavoidable regional air emissions and freeway ramps impacts compared to the project. While increased densities over the Project could place more people closer to BART and other transit facilities, there is no guarantee that all additional residents and commuters would use those facilities. The end result is more likely to be an increase in vehicle trips compared to the Project. The City finds that the suggested alternative would not avoid, and could exacerbate, the Project's significant unavoidable traffic and regional air emissions impacts, and declines to adopt or consider it further and further finds it 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 PROPOSED IN COMMENTS In comments on the DEIR, commenters suggested additional mitigation measures and /or modifications to the measures recommended in the DEIR. The City carefully considered the proposed mitigations, and finds the proposed mitigations infeasible, not necessary to avoid identified significant impacts of the Project, or otherwise rejected the suggested mitigation, as further described below. In considering specific recommendations on mitigation measures from commenters, the City is guided by CEQA's legal standard to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental effects to the extent feasible. The mitigation measures recommended in the Project EIR represent the professional judgment and long experience of the City's expert staff and environmental consultants. The City therefore believes that these recommendations should not be modified unless necessary to comply with CEQA legal standards. Thus, in considering commenters' suggested changes or additions to the mitigation measures, the City, in determining whether to accept such suggestions, either in whole or in part, has considered the following factors, among others: 1) whether the suggestion relates to a significant and unavoidable environmental effect of the Project, or instead relates to an effect that can already be mitigated to less- than - significant levels by mitigation measures identified in the EIR; 2) whether the suggested mitigation represents a clear improvement, from an environmental standpoint, over the EIR mitigation that a commenter seeks to replace; 3) whether the suggested mitigation is sufficiently clear as to be easily understood by those who will implement the mitigation as finally adopted; 4) whether the suggested language might be too inflexible to allow for pragmatic implementation; 5) whether the suggestions are "feasible" as defined under CEQA including being able to be accomplished in a successful manner in a reasonable period of time taking into account economic, environmental, technical, legal, 6 social or other factors; and 6) whether the proposed mitigation is consistent with the project objectives. Comment 2 -4. The commenter suggests that new homes and businesses use photovoltaic and solar hot water systems to reduce pollutant air emissions, and improve energy conservation and greenhouse gas generation. Finding: No significant energy or greenhouse gas impacts will result from the Project, so these measures are not needed to avoid a significant unavoidable impact for those resources. The measures could possibly reduce air emissions and will be offered to homebuyers as an option. However, it is not possible to quantify the emissions reductions that could be achieved, so any reduction in long term operational emissions would be speculative. The measures would not reduce construction emissions or TACs, and would not affect trip generation. Further, the suggested systems are costly to implement and could increase construction costs, having an adverse impact on the economic viability of the Project. Also, it is the City's policy to encourage, but not require photovoltaic and solar hot water systems in new homes and businesses as a condition of approval. For these reasons, the suggested measures are infeasible and the City declines to impose them. Comment 5 -5. The commenter addresses circulation impacts and requests additional TDM measures be considered instead of improvements like addition of lanes. Finding: See Response 5 -5 in the Final EIR. As noted in the response, the Project already includes TDM measures to encourage bicycling and walking as alternate modes for commuting. Like TDM measures, the Project design itself encourages alternative transportation choices by placing higher residential densities near commercial uses, the BART station, the Iron Horse Trail, and along the Dublin Boulevard transit corridor. Also, implementing development will be required to include bicycle access and support facilities consistent with the Specific Plan and the City's Bicycle Master Plan (see, e.g., Specific Plan policies 4.14, 4.17 and 4.18), and to reduce parking demand and allow shared parking (see Specific Plan policies 4.23, 4.24). Further, as noted in Response 5 -5, the developer will be contributing $50,000 to a feasibility study for analysis of the Iron Horse Trail connectivity from Dougherty Road to the BART station. If developed, a grade- separated crossing at this location would significantly improve bicycle access in the project area. The City can encourage but not require employer TDM measures. However, the above features of the Project design and implementation support the same goals of facilitating alternative modes of transportation. For the above reasons, it is infeasible for the City to impose additional TDM measures beyond those already included in the Project. Comment 9 -15. The commenter suggests that commercial and residential units provide for rooftop solar and that solar PV parking canopies be provided in parking areas as energy conservation measures. The comment also suggests that LED lighting be required throughout, including parking lots. Finding: As discussed in Response 9 -15 in the Final EIR, the Specific Plan already encourages rooftop solar. In any case, there are no significant unavoidable energy impacts identified for the Project, therefore no additional mitigation measures are required. The measures could possibly reduce air emissions off -site energy sources and will be offered to homebuyers as an option. 7 However, it is not possible to quantify the emissions reductions that could be achieved, so any reduction in long term operational emissions would be speculative. The measures would not reduce construction emissions or TACs, and would not affect trip generation. Further, the suggested systems are costly to implement and could increase construction costs, having an adverse impact on the economic viability of the Project. Also, it is the City's policy to encourage, but not require photovoltaic systems in new homes and businesses as a condition of approval. For these reasons, the City finds the additional mitigation measure infeasible and declines to impose the suggested measures. Comments 9 -16, 9 -19. The commenter suggests that a number of measures be required relating to electronic vehicles, including electric vehicle charging facilities, homes prewired for electric vehicles, and public charging stations on -site and off -site. The comment also suggest unbundled parking, and creation of a Transportation Management District. Finding: See Responses 9 -16 and 9 -19 in the Final EIR. With respect to the Project's significant unavoidable traffic impact, the suggested measures would not reduce vehicle trips using the freeway ramps and thus, would not substantially reduce the impact. Similarly, the suggested measures would likely have little if any effect on the Project's significant unavoidable air quality effects regarding short term construction and TAC emissions. The effect of the measures on long term regional emissions is uncertain. Electric vehicle facilities may be offered by the homebuilder as an option; however requiring the systems would add costs to homes with no guarantee that the systems would be used. As noted in Response 9 -19, the project itself is designed to reduce vehicle trips and related emissions by providing higher density housing near existing transit facilities such as BART, local transit, and the regional Iron Horse Trail. These facilities all provide readily available and practical means for Project residents and employees to use alternative transportation modes to reduce automobile emissions. Because the suggested measures could be of uncertain effect and /or would not substantially reduce the Project's significant unavoidable air quality and traffic impacts, the City finds them infeasible and declines to impose them. Comments 9 -17, 9 -18. The commenter suggests that off -site bicycle enhancements such as freeway crossings be required, as well as walking and bicycle connections between residential and commercial components of the Project. The commenter further suggests that local grocery and other retail uses be required. Finding: See Responses 9 -17 and 9 -18 in the Final EIR. The Project will provide direct connections to the Iron Horse Trail. As noted in Response 9 -17, the Iron Horse Trail is a regional facility providing access to the BART station and planned to extend under 1 -580 in the future. As such, the Project already reflects the potential for off -site bicycle facilities that Project residents and employees could use to reduce automobile trips. While individual developments within the Project have not been designed, the transportation backbone network is defined and includes connections within the site for bicyclists and pedestrians. Future development projects are required to implement and be consistent with the Specific Plan, its design guidelines, and the City's Bikeways Master Plan; therefore, the suggested measures are already included in the Project. As for requiring particular uses, Response 9 -18 notes that the Project provides for retail opportunities, 8 but does not specify (or preclude) particular uses. As a predominantly residential project, neighborhood serving uses such as a grocery store would be reasonably anticipated for the Project commercial areas. The City finds that the suggested measures are not needed because they are already substantially present in the Project. Comment 9 -19. The commenter suggests increasing the use of zero emissions electric and plug -in hybrid electric vehicles, establishment of commuter benefit programs, adopting shared parking, and eliminating on- street parking from the Project. Finding: See Response 9 -19 in the Final EIR for discussion of these suggestions. The Project supports and would not preclude the use of zero emissions and similar vehicles; however, it is not feasible to require the use of particular vehicles in implementing residential or commercial projects. The Project exemplifies "green street" principles by accommodating alternative modes of transportation for residents and commuters and providing related connectivity within and beyond the Project. As to commuter benefit programs, the Project as designed and with proximity to commuter facilities such as BART and the Iron Horse Trail, similarly supports and encourages commuting alternatives. The suggestion for shared parking is already included in the Project. The elimination of on -site parking is not consistent with the City policies for street design for the type of residential development proposed by the project. In addition, the on- street parking does not adversely affect the use of alternative modes of transportation which as provided for a part of the Project design. For the above reasons, the City finds that requiring zero emission or similar vehicles is infeasible and that the other suggested measures are already present in the Project. Therefore, the City declines to adopt the suggested measures. Conclusion. As evident from the specific responses given to specific suggestions, City staff and consultants spent a significant amount of time carefully considering and weighing alternatives and mitigation language proposed in comments on the DEIR. For those suggested alternatives and mitigation measures not incorporated or adopted by the City, the City finds them either not necessary to reduce a significant impact to less than significant, already present in the Project, or infeasible, as explained above. 2188848.4 9 EXHIBIT D STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 1. General. Pursuant to 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 Dublin Crossing Specific Plan project (Project) to the City of Dublin against the significant adverse impacts identified in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that cannot be reduced to less than significant through feasible mitigations or alternatives. Pursuant to 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 adverse environmental effects 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 considerations that support approval of the project. 2. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. The following significant unavoidable air quality and traffic impacts are associated with the Project as identified in the EIR. Short -term Construction Air Quality — The proposed project would result in future short -term air quality impacts associated with construction activities, including grading, operation of equipment, and demolition of existing structures within the project area. The BAAQMD requires the construction mitigation measures to be implemented at all construction sites, regardless of size. However, as the proposed project would facilitate future development and generate construction emissions that could potentially exceed BAAQMD thresholds, a significant unavoidable impact would occur. (Impact 3.2 -1.) Long -term Operational Air Quality — The total unmitigated operational emissions associated with buildout of the proposed project would exceed the BAAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5. With application of the measures /design features regarding area and mobile source emissions within the Specific Plan, operational emissions would still exceed the thresholds for ROG, NOx, and PM10. The proposed project could also result in exposure of sensitive land use in excess of applicable Toxic Air Contaminant standards, even with mitigation. Therefore, these would be considered significant and unavoidable impacts. (Impacts 3.2 -3, 3.2 -5.) 1 Long -term Operational Impacts to Freeway Ramps — The proposed project would result in a significant impact to the following freeway ramps: Southbound Hacienda Drive to 1 -580 Eastbound On -ramp under project and cumulative conditions and Southbound Tassajara Road to 1 -580 Westbound On -ramp under cumulative conditions. Mitigation measures 3.12 -7 would require modification of the ramp metering rates so that more vehicles could access the freeway. However, the freeway ramps are operated by Caltrans, which sets metering rates based on overall operations in the freeway corridor. As the cities surrounding the 1 -580 corridor continue to build out and additional parallel east/west connectors such as the Stoneridge Drive and Dublin Boulevard extensions are completed, it is likely that the ramp meter rates would change over time to accommodate the demand on both the freeway ramps and freeway segments. Because the future metering rates cannot be predicted with certainty, the project impacts to freeway ramps would be considered a significant and unavoidable impact. (Impact 3.12 -7.) 3. Overriding Considerations. The City Council has carefully considered each impact in reaching its decision to approve the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan project. The City Council now balances those unavoidable impacts against its benefits, and hereby determines that the unavoidable impacts are outweighed by the benefits of the Project as further set forth below. Any one of 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 Project will facilitate development of an infill area, fully served by public utilities, and convenient to major arterials, services, BART and public transit. The Project includes medium and medium -high density residential and commercial uses to make more efficient use of its infill location and proximity to transit facilities. The Project includes design standards for residential and commercial uses as well as streetscapes that will result in an attractive and vibrant community. The Project emphasizes higher density, compact development patterns appropriate to its location near the BART station and the Iron Horse Trail where a diverse mix of uses would be readily accessible through alternative transport modes. It also emphasizes pedestrian level development where walking and bicycling would be safe, feasible alternatives to automobile trips within the Project area and to or from nearby neighborhoods, transit and commercial uses. Development standards and design guidelines provide measures for ensuring attractive, visually appealing development of private projects and public spaces. The Project includes a significant residential component that will assist the City in meeting its Housing Element RHNA goals. The potential housing will be at densities complementary to existing residential and non - residential uses in the area. The Project will also provide approximately 35 net acres of new parkland as well as funding for future construction and maintenance of a 30 -acre community park and 5- 2 acre neighborhood park. This amount of parkland and funding exceeds what the Project would otherwise be required to provide. The Project provides an elementary school site. In addition, the developers will contribute $18.7 million to the City for use on municipal capital projects and other benefits as part of the Development Agreement relating to the Project. The Project includes a minimum of 75,000 square feet (and potential up to 200,000 square feet) of revenue producing commercial development that will create new jobs and sales and property taxes. The Project is also expected to have a fiscally beneficial impact on the City's financial and services resources, estimated by the City's financial consultant to be a net benefit of over $100,000 annually upon full build out. Future development of the site will provide construction employment and permanent employment opportunities for Dublin residents. The Project provides an effective means to implement the City's objectives for the area, as described in the Specific Plan and EIR. For all of the above reasons, the benefits of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan project outweigh its significant unavoidable air quality and traffic impacts. 2188842.1 3 IT! Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Schedule Moniiori , ng ' Reporting flatibi Monitor's Initials Impact 3.2-1: The proposed project would MM 3.2-1a: Implement Short-term Construction Best Management Practices. Prior Prior to Issuance of any City of Dublin Public Works result in future short-term air quality impacts to issuance of any Grading Permit, the Public Works Director and the Building Official Grading Permit Department, Building and associated with construction activities, shall confirm that the Grading Plan, Building Plans, and specifications stipulate that the Planning Divisions including grading, operation of equipment, following basic construction mitigation measures shall be implemented for all and demolition of existing structures within construction projects: the project area. However, future All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded development within the project area would areas and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. be required to comply with the BAAQMD Control Measures for particulate matter and All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be equipment emissions during construction covered. activities. 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 mph. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five 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. A publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints shall be posted. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. MM 3.2-1b: Implement Additional Short-term Construction Best Management Practices. Prior to issuance of any Grading Permit, the Public Works Director and the Building Official shall confirm that the Grading Plan, Building Plans, and specifications stipulate that the following additional construction mitigation measures shall be implemented for all construction projects: All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph. Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Schedule Monitoring Resppnsibilityl Reporting hate/ Monitor's Initials` Wind breaks (e.g., trees, fences) shall be installed on the windward side(s) of actively disturbed areas of construction. Vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast - germinating native grass seed) shall be planted in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established. All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site. Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road shall be treated with a 6 to 12 inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel. Sandbags or other erosion control measures shall be installed to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent. The applicant shall reduce exhaust emissions during construction and, in particular, emissions of NOX, when using construction equipment and vehicles by implementing the following measures: • Require the use of diesel haul trucks (e.g., material delivery trucks and soil import/export) that meet EPA 2007 model year NOX emissions requirements • The following note shall be included on all grading plans: During project construction, all internal combustion engines /construction, equipment operating on the project area shall meet EPA - Certified Tier 3 emissions standards, or higher according to the following: - January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2014: Off -road diesel - powered construction equipment greater than 50 hp shall meet Tier 3 off -road emissions standards. Alternatively, construction equipment shall be outfitted with BACT devices certified by CARB. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 3 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by CARB regulations. - Post - January 1, 2015: Off -road diesel - powered construction equipment greater than 50 hp shall meet the Tier 4 emission standards, where available. Alternatively, construction equipment shall be outfitted with BACT devices certified by CARB. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 3 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Schedule Monitoring Responsibility/ Reporting hate/ Monitor's Initials` CARB regulations. • The contractor and applicant, if the applicant's equipment is used, shall maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them tuned and regularly serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. • Utilize existing power sources (i.e., power poles) when available. This measure would minimize the use of higher polluting gas or diesel generators. • Construction - related equipment, including heavy -duty equipment, motor vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for more than five minutes. Use low VOC (i.e., ROG) coatings beyond the local requirements (i.e., Regulation 8, Rule 3: Architectural Coatings). Require that all construction equipment, diesel trucks, and generators be equipped with Best Available Control Technology for emission reductions of NOX and PM. Impact 3.2 -5: The proposed project could MM 3.2 -5: Locate Sensitive Receptors Away from Existing Toxic Air Contaminants Prior to Issuance of a City of Dublin Building and result in exposure of sensitive land uses in p and Implement HVAC systems for Sensitive Receptors in the vicinity of BAAQMD Building Permit Planning Divisions excess of applicable Toxic Air Contaminant permitted Toxic Air Contaminant sources. Prior to building permit issuance, the (TAC) standards. project applicant shall demonstrate to the City of Dublin Community Development Director that the following mitigation measures will be implemented in order to reduce the potential impact from TAC exposure due to the potential siting of residential or other sensitive receptor development within 1,000 feet of a BAAQMD identified stationary TAC source: All new development projects that include sensitive receptors shall be located 1,000 feet away from existing TAC sources, unless a project- specific evaluation of human health risks is conducted and the results of the evaluation determine that no significant impact would occur.. Sensitive receptors include residential, schools, day care facilities, congregate care facilities, hospitals, or other places of long -term residency. Mixed -use, residential, or school development within 1,000 feet of a BAAQMD permitted TAC source shall implement sealed HVAC systems for all multi- family development. The sealed air system shall be certified to achieve a performance effectiveness, for example, to remove at least 85 percent of ambient PM2.5 concentrations from indoor areas. Air intakes shall be located away from emission sources areas, such as major roadways and stationary sources. Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Schedule Monitoring Responsibility/ Reporting hate/ Monitor's Initials: Impact 3.2 -6: The proposed project would MM 3.2 -6: Locate Commercial Development That Emits Toxic Air Contaminants Prior to Issuance of a City of Dublin Building and not result in increased generation of Toxic Away From Sensitive Receptors and Consult with the BAAQMD to identify Toxic Building Permit Planning Divisions Air Contaminants (TACs) or exposure of Air Contaminant Sources and Determine the Need for Health Risk Assessment. sensitive land uses in excess of applicable Prior to building permit issuance, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the City of TAC standards. Dublin Community Development Director that the following measure is implemented to reduce the potential for new TAC sources to be sited within 1,000 feet of residential or other existing or planned sensitive receptors: All new commercial development projects that have the potential to emit TACs shall be located 1,000 feet away from existing and proposed development used by sensitive receptors, unless a project- specific evaluation of human health risks is conducted and the results of the evaluation determine that no significant impact would occur. Sensitive receptors include residential, schools, day care facilities, congregate care facilities, hospitals, or other places of long -term residency. The determination of development projects that have the potential for TAC emissions and adequate distances from sensitive receptors are identified in the California Air Resources Board's —Air Quality and Land Use Handbook —A Community Health Perspective (April 2005). Impact 3.3 -1: Based on a preliminary MM 3.3 -1: Prepare and Implement a Wetland Mitigation Plan. Prior to commencing Prior to Issuance of a City of Dublin Public Works wetland delineation of the project area, the any activities that would impact wetlands or waters habitat, the project applicant shall Grading Permit or Department, Building and proposed project could result in the fill of obtain all required public agency permits and shall prepare a wetland mitigation plan commencing any activities Planning Divisions wetlands. that ensures no- net -loss of wetland and waters habitat that is approved by the that could impact wetlands applicable resource agencies and submitted to the City. The wetland mitigation plan or waters. shall include measures for avoidance, minimization, and compensation for wetland impacts. Avoidance and minimization measures may include the designation of buffers around wetland features to be avoided, or project design measures, such as free -span bridges. Compensation measures shall include the preservation and /or creation of wetland or waters. The final mitigation ratios (the amount of wetlands and waters created or preserved compared to the amount impacted) shall be determined by the applicable resource agencies and the City. The wetland mitigation and monitoring plan shall include the following: Descriptions of the wetland types, and their expected functions and values; Performance standards and monitoring protocol to ensure the success of the mitigation wetlands over a period to be determined by the resource agencies; Engineering plans showing the location, size and configuration of wetlands to be created or restored; An implementation schedule showing that construction or preservation of mitigation areas shall commence prior to or concurrently with the initiation of construction; and Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Responsibility/ Monitoring Schedule Reporting Bate/ Monitor's Initials` A description of legal protection measures for the preserved wetlands (i.e., dedication of fee title, conservation easement, and /or an endowment held by an approved conservation organization, government agency or mitigation bank). Impact 3.3 -2: A query of the CNPS lists 34 MM 3.3 -2a: Conduct a Floristic Survey and Consult with CDFW and USFWS if Prior to Issuance of a City of Dublin Public Works plant species that occur within the project State or Federally Listed ESA Plants are Found and Comply with Incidental Take Grading Permit or Department and Planning vicinity. Based on habitats within the project Permits. The project applicant shall retain a qualified botanist to conduct rare plant commencing any activities Division area during the March 2012 survey by surveys within the construction zone for Congdon's tarplant or other state or federally that could impact plant Cardno Entrix, the list was reduced to four species with potential habitat within the project area during the blooming period of communities on the special status plant species that have the those species for which suitable habitat is present in accordance with agency protocols. project site. potential to be located within the project These plant surveys shall be conducted in accordance with the 2009 CDFW and area including: Congdon's tarplant USFWS rare plant survey protocols. Two or three separate surveys may be required to (Centromadia parryi ssp. Congdonsi), cover the blooming periods of species where suitable habitat is present. The results of Palmate - bracted bird's -beak (Cordylanthus the surveys shall be summarized in a report and submitted to CDFW and USFWS, and palmatus), Northern California Black Walnut would be valid for two years. If no special- status plants are located during the surveys, (Juglans hindsii), and Hairless popcorn- no further mitigation measures would be required. If any federal or state ESA plant flower (Plagiobothrys glaber). Out of these species are found during the rare plant surveys, the project applicant shall consult with four special status plant species, the only the CDFW and USFWS to obtain incidental take permits under Section 2081 of the special status plant species that has the CESA and either Section 7 or 10 of the FESA. Consultation with USFWS under Section potential to be located within the project 7 of the FESA could occur as part of the CWA Section 404 permit process as part of area is the Congdon's tarplant, which was the wetland mitigation, described under Mitigation Measure MM 3.3 -1. documented as occurring within the project area based on floristic surveys conducted between 1995 and 2000. MM 3.3 -2b: Develop and Implement Mitigation in Consultation with CDFW if Other Special Status Plant Species Are Found. If populations or stands of Congdon's tarplant or other special- status plant species (excluding federal or state listed plants) are found during the surveys and impacts are unavoidable, the project applicant shall notify the CDFW. A compensatory mitigation plan shall be developed in consultation with and approved by the CDFW and the City prior to the commencement of any activities that would impact any special status plants, such as the acquisition of off -site mitigation areas presently supporting the species in question or purchase of credits in a mitigation bank that is approved to sell credits for the affected species. The location of mitigation sites shall be determined in consultation with, and subject to approval of USFWS and /or CDFW. Off -site compensatory mitigation shall be acquired at a minimum acreage of 1:1 (acquired: impacted). For either off -site mitigation option, measures shall be implemented providing for the long -term protection of the species. Impact 3.3 -3: Several California burrowing MM 3.3 -3a: Conduct a Burrowing Owl Survey and Impact Assessment. The project Prior to Issuance of a City of Dublin Public Works owl pairs have been documented within the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a California burrowing owl take Grading Permit or Department and Planning project area, including during the winter and avoidance surveys 14 days prior to ground disturbing activities following the 2012 commencing any ground- Division breeding season. Due to the security fencing California Department of Fish and Game Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation disturbing activities. that surrounds Camp Parks, low human use, (CDFW 2012) or as updated at the time of the implementation of the proposed project. Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Schedule Monitoring Responsibility/ Reporting Bate/ Monitor's Initials` and maintenance activities, the project area If no owls are found during this first survey, a final survey shall be conducted within 48- provides suitable breeding, foraging and hours prior to ground disturbance to confirm that burrowing owls are still absent. If wintering habitat for the California burrowing ground disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 14 days after the owl. Implementation of the proposed project initial take avoidance survey, the project area shall be resurveyed including the final could result in the displacement of burrowing survey within 48 -hours of disturbance. The report(s) shall be submitted to CDFW as owls during construction activities, and once indicated in the CDFW 2012 Staff Report. completed the proposed project could result If it is determined that project activities may result in impacts to nesting, occupied, and in the removal of suitable burrowing owl satellite burrows and /or burrowing owl habitat, the project applicant shall consult with (breeding and wintering) habitat. Permanent the CDFW. More specifically, if the surveys identify breeding or wintering burrowing loss of occupied burrow(s) and habitat. owls on or adjacent to the project area, occupied burrows cannot be disturbed and shall be provided with protective buffers. Where avoidance is not feasible during the non - breeding season, a site specific exclusion plan (i.e. a plan that considers the type and extent of the proposed activity, the duration and timing of the activity, the sensitivity and habituation of the owls, and the dissimilarity of the proposed activity with background activities) shall be implemented to encourage the owls to move away from the work area prior to construction and to minimize the potential to affect the reproductive success of the owls. The exclusion plan shall be subject to the CDFW approval and monitoring requirements. Compensatory mitigation could also be required by the CDFW as part of the approval of an exclusion plan. Mitigation may include the permanent protection of habitat at a nearby off -site location acceptable to the CDFW. Impact 3.3 -4: Habitat assessments or MM 3.3 -4a: Conduct Pre - Construction Surveys for Western Pond Turtle (WPT) Prior to Issuance of a City of Dublin Public Works surveys for special- status amphibians and The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct pre- construction Grading Permit or Department and Planning reptiles were performed within the project surveys for Western Pond Turtle no more than 30 days prior to work in or adjacent to commencing any activities Division area by the U.S. Army in 2006, including any habitat suitable for WPT within the project area. If no Western Pond Turtles are that could impact suitable California Red Legged Frog and California found, no further mitigation is required. If Western Pond Turtles are found, the habitat on the project site. Tiger Salamander. Although no surveys consulting biologist shall consult with the California Department of Fish and Game for specific for Western Pond Turtle have been authorization to relocate the species to suitable habitat away from the construction conducted, Western Pond Turtle was zone. The turtle shall be relocated to either a pond within the Training Area (if observed within the greater Camp Parks authorization from the US Army is granted) or downstream from the construction zone Training Area during surveys for California to similar or better habitat. Red Legged Frog. During the field surveys MM 3.3 -4b: Consult with United States Fish and Wildlife Service and Reduce conducted by in March 2012, the project Impacts on California Red - Legged Frog. The project applicant shall comply with the area was not found to provide suitable following requirements: breeding habitat for these species. However, the proposed project includes re- alignment a. The project applicant shall retain a qualified herpetologist to conduct of the ephemeral drainage, which could habitat assessments for CRLF and based on the results of the habitat result in the potential "take" of Western Pond assessments, determine in consultation with the USFWS if protocol -level Turtle and /or California Red Legged Frog if CRLF surveys will be required within the project area. The project area consists of multiple phase areas within which separate CRLF habitat Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Schedule Monitoring Resppnsibilityl Reporting hate/ Monitor's Initials` found within the project area. assessments may be conducted. It shall then be determined on a phase -by- phase basis, if further surveys will be required. The project applicant can forgo the habitat assessments and conduct protocol -level surveys. If required, the focused surveys shall follow the Revised Guidance on Site Assessment and Field Surveys for the California Red - legged Frog (USFWS 2005). A CRLF survey report prepared to meet the protocol guidelines shall be submitted to the USFWS. If no CRLF are found then no further mitigation is required. b. If CRLF are found then the project applicant shall provide information to the USACE to support Section 7 consultation with the USFWS and the project applicant shall ensure no net loss of habitat that shall be achieved through avoidance, preservation, creation and /or purchase of credits. The final selected measures may be part of the Section 7 permitting process. c. The project applicant shall obtain a biological opinion from the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service and comply with the conditions and mitigation requirements of those agencies to ensure that no net loss of habitat occurs. Mitigation may include, but would not be limited to, onsite and offsite preservation and creation of CRLF habitat, purchase of credits at mitigation banks, payment of in lieu fees approved by the agencies, or other agency approved and required mitigation measures. d. Avoidance measures may include the following or equivalent protective measures: To minimize disturbance of breeding and dispersing CRLF, construction activity within CRLF upland habitat shall be conducted during the dry season between April15 and October 15 or before the onset of the rainy season, whichever occurs first. If construction activities are necessary in CRLF upland habitat between October 15 and April 15, the project applicant would contact the USFWS for approval to extend the work period. To minimize disturbance and mortality of adult and juvenile CRLF in aquatic habitat and underground burrows, the project applicant could minimize the extent of ground- disturbing activities within these habitats by requiring the contractor to limit the work area to the minimum necessary for construction. In addition, the project applicant could ensure that the contractor would install temporary exclusion fence between the construction work area and potential aquatic habitat for all construction within grasslands near aquatic habitat. The project applicant could ensure that a qualified wildlife biologist monitors all construction activities within CRLF upland habitat. This would ensure no take of individual CRLF occurs during project construction. If a CRLF is found, then the monitor would immediately stop construction in that area and contact USFWS for advice. Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Schedule Monitoring Responsibility/ Reporting Bate/ Monitor's Initials` The project applicant could preserve additional upland habitat within a USFWS approved conservation area. This measure shall be determined in consultation with the USFWS, if required. Impact 3.3 -5: Protocol level surveys for MM 3.3 -5: Consult with the USFWS and Reduce Impacts on Vernal Pool Prior to Issuance of a City of Dublin Public Works vernal pool invertebrates were conducted Invertebrates and Their Habitat. The project applicant shall prepare a habitat Grading Permit or Department and Planning throughout Camp Parks in 2002 and 2003 assessment for the vernal pool invertebrates. If vernal pool invertebrates are found commencing any activities Division by the U.S. Army, as well as during the within the project area during the habitat assessment, the project applicant shall comply that could impact suitable summer of 2012 (dry season) and 2013 (wet with the following steps to ensure protection of vernal pool invertebrates and their habitat on the project site. season) by Cardno Entrix. No vernal pool habitat and that impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. fairy shrimp, vernal pool tadpole shrimp or a. The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct habitat longhorn fairy shrimp were found. California assessments for protected vernal pool invertebrates and based on the results linderiella was found, during the 2002 and of the habitat assessments, determine in consultation with the USFWS if 2003 surveys, but not within the project protocol -level vernal pool invertebrate surveys will be required within the area. The surveys conducted by Cardno project area. Entrix have not been accepted by the b. If suitable habitat is present, the project applicant, in consultation with the USFWS. Therefore, the presence of this USFWS and CDFW, shall either (1) conduct a protocol -level survey for species within the project area is assumed federally listed vernal pool crustaceans, which will identify other protected in the analysis of project impacts. vernal pool invertebrates (curve- footed Hygrotus beetle and San Francisco Surveys for curve- footed Hygrotus beetle fork - tailed damselfly), or (2) assume presence of federally - listed vernal pool and San Francisco fork - tailed damselfly crustaceans and curve footed Hygrotus beetle and San Francisco fork - tailed were also conducted within Camp Parks in damselfly in areas of suitable habitat. Surveys shall be conducted by qualified 2002 and 2003 and neither of these species biologists in accordance with the most recent USFWS guidelines or protocols were observed. Site conditions have not to determine the time of year and survey methodology (survey timing for changed significantly and these species are these species is dependent on yearly rainfall patterns and seasonal not expected to occur. Potentially suitable occurrences, and is determined on a case -by -case basis). The USFWS habitat was observed within the survey area protocol level surveys shall be conducted as part of the Section 404 permit for vernal pool invertebrates and these process within two years of the application. If surveys reveal no occurrences areas would be removed during proposed of federally listed vernal pool crustaceans or other protected vernal pool construction activities. Removal of these invertebrates, no further mitigation would be required. wetlands could result in the potential take of c. If surveys determine that one or more special- status vernal pool protected vernal pool branchiopods and other protected invertebrates, if they were to invertebrate species occurs within the project area, or if the project applicant, occur, and their habitat. in consultation with the USFWS and /or CDFW, assumes presence of federally - listed vernal pool invertebrates in all affected habitats, the project applicant shall provide information to the USACE to support Section 7 consultation with the USFWS and the project applicant shall ensure no net loss of habitat shall be achieved through avoidance, preservation, creation and /or purchase of credits as a part of the Section 7 Consultation process. The selected measures may be part of the permitting process. d. Where feasible, all vernal pool invertebrate habitat shall be avoided. If habitat that can be avoided during construction activities is identified at a distance determined in consultation with USFWS, a USFWS- approved Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Schedule Monitoring Responsibility/ Reporting Bate/ Monitor's Initials` biologist (monitor) shall inspect any construction - related activities to ensure that no unnecessary take of listed species or destruction of their habitat occurs. The Project proponent will establish monitoring and reporting protocols to reduce impacts to vernal pool invertebrate species and habitat. e. The project applicant shall ensure that an appropriate number of acres, as approved by USFWS during consultation, are preserved to mitigate for direct or indirect impacts on vernal pool crustacean habitat. f. Water quality in the avoided wetlands shall be protected using erosion control techniques, such as silt fencing or straw wattles during construction in the watershed. Impact 3.3 -6: A variety of special- status MM 3.3 -6: Protect Birds Covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (Including, but Prior to Issuance of a City of Dublin Public Works birds are expected to be located within the not limited to White - Tailed Kite, golden eagle, Cooper's hawk, Loggerhead Grading Permit or Department and Planning project area. Some of these species are Shrike, and Other Special- Status Species). Project contractors shall avoid commencing any Division resident species and some are migratory construction activities during the bird nesting season (February 1 through August 31). construction activities on species that breed within the project area. If construction activities are conducted during the bird nesting season, the project the project site. The special- status birds known to nest in the applicant shall have a qualified biologist conduct at least three nest surveys of the Livermore Valley area include the Golden project area to develop a baseline of nesting activity on and adjacent to the project eagle, white - tailed kite, tricolored blackbird, area. Depending on the construction schedule, pre- construction surveys shall be northern harrier, California horned, prairie initiated prior to planned construction activity to allow for multiple site visits (e.g. for falcon, Cooper's hawk and loggerhead construction activities planned for mid -May, the first survey shall be conducted no more shrike. Trees, fresh emergent wetland than 14 days prior to the start of work). vegetation and grassland could provide If active nests of protected bird species are identified in the focused nest surveys, the potentially suitable nesting habitat for these project applicant shall consult with the appropriate regulatory agencies to identify species, which are protected under the project -level mitigation requirements, based on the agencies' standards and policies as Migrant Bird Treaty Act and the Fish and then in effect. Performance measures may include the following, based on current Game Code. The proposed project would agency standards and policies. require grading and possible removal of existing trees and vegetation. a. The project applicant, in consultation with California Department of Fish and Game, would delay construction in the vicinity of active nest sites during the breeding season (February 1 through September 15) while the nest is occupied with adults and /or young. A qualified biologist shall monitor any occupied nest to determine when the nest is no longer used. If the construction cannot be delayed, avoidance measures shall include the establishment of protective buffer zones around the nests as follows: for raptor nests, the size of the buffer zone shall be a minimum 250 foot radius centered on the nest; for other birds, the size of the buffer zone shall be a 50- foot radius centered on the nest. In some cases, these buffers may be increased or decreased depending on the bird species and the level of disturbance that will occur near the nest. Changes to the buffer should be made by the project biologist in consultation with the CDFW. b. No intensive disturbance (e.g., heavy equipment operation associated with construction, or use of cranes) or other project - related activities that could Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Schedule Monitoring Responsibility/ Reporting Bate/ Monitor's Initials` cause nest abandonment or forced fledging would be initiated within the established buffer zone of an active nest between February 1 and August 31. c. If construction activities are unavoidable within the buffer zone, the project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to monitor the nest site to determine if construction activities are disturbing the adult or young birds. d. If fully protected species (white - tailed kites, golden eagles) are found to be nesting near the proposed construction area, their nests would be completely avoided until the birds fledge. Avoidance would include the establishment of a non - disturbance buffer zone of 500 feet, or as determined in consultation with the CDFW. Impact 3.3 -7: Removal of trees and /or MM 3.3 -7a: Conduct Bat and Bat Roosting Site Surveys. Prior to construction Prior to Issuance of a City of Dublin Public Works buildings or structures from the project area activities, the project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a focused Grading Permit or Department and Planning could impact roosting sites for pallid bat and survey for bats and potential roosting sites within the project area. The surveys can be commencing any Division Yuma myotis. conducted by visual and acoustic identification and can assume presence of pallid bats construction activities on or the bats can be identified to a species level with the use of an acoustic detector unit. the project site. If no roosting sites or bats are found within the project area, a letter report confirming absence shall be sent to the California Department of Fish and Game and no further mitigation would be required. MM 3.3 -7b: Implement Avoidance Measures If Bat Roosts are Identified. If bats are detected during the focused surveys then the project applicant shall perform monitoring and implement exclusion measures in consultation with the regulatory agencies. If bats are found during focused surveys, the project applicant shall consult with the regulatory agencies and implement the following measures based on the agencies standards and policies: a. If bats are found roosting in the project area outside of nursery season (May 1through October 1), then they would be evicted using bat exclusion techniques developed by Bat Conservation International (BCI) and in consultation with CDFW, that allow the bats to exit the roosting site but prevent re -entry to the site. This would include but not be limited to the installation of one -way exclusion devices. The devices would remain in place for seven days and then the exclusion points and any other potential entrances shall be sealed. This work would be completed by a BCI recommended exclusion professional. b. If bats are found roosting during the nursery season, then they shall be monitored to determine if the roost site is a maternal roost. Monitoring by either visual inspection of the roost bat pups, if possible, or monitoring the roost after the adults leave for the night to listen for bat pups. If the roost is determined to not be a maternal roost, then the bats would be evicted as described above. Because bat pups cannot leave the roost until they are mature enough, eviction of a maternal roost cannot occur during the nursery season. A buffer zone as determined in consultation with CDFW would be established around the roosting site within which no construction shall occur. Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Responsibility/ Monitoring Schedule Reporting Bate/ Monitor's Initials: Impact 3.3 -8: Trees are located within the MM 3.3 -8: Conduct Tree Survey and Replace Trees at Suitable Ratios. The project project area and a detailed tree survey has applicant shall retain a certified arborist to survey all trees located within the project not been conducted for the proposed area in order to identify and evaluate those trees that shall be removed with project. Nevertheless, trees within the implementation of the proposed project. An arborist report shall be prepared consistent project area could fall under the definition of with the certified arborist to survey trees within the project area and identify and heritage trees per Section 5.60 of the City of evaluate trees that shall be removed. The arborist report shall be prepared and Dublin Municipal Code. submitted to the City of Dublin to document the trees that are to be removed. If any of the trees fall under the jurisdiction Section 5.60 of the City's Municipal Code, the project applicant shall then mitigate impacts to trees based on the following or equivalent protective measures depending on the size and health of trees to be removed. a. Prior to the start of construction, the project applicant shall install exclusion fencing at the dripline of any tree that will not be affected by the construction and prohibit any parking or storage of construction materials or other materials inside the fence. b. Mitigation, at an inch -by -inch ratio, shall be provided for native trees larger than 24inches in circumference measured at four (4) feet six (6) inches above natural grade. Cultural Resources Impact 3.4 -2: The proposed project has MM 3.4-2: Halt Work/Archaeological Evaluation /Site - Specific Mitigation. If any Ongoing throughout City of Dublin Public Works been previously disturbed from its use as potential archaeological, pre- historic or cultural artifacts are encountered during site construction. Department and Planning the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training grading or other construction activities, all ground disturbance within 50 feet of the Division Area. Based on the prior archaeological discovery shall be halted until a qualified archaeologist can identify and evaluate the surveys conducted within the project area, resource(s) in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines 15064.5(f). The archeological the project area is not anticipated to contain consultant shall immediately notify the project sponsor and the City staff of the any archaeological, cultural or pre- historic encountered archeological deposit. If the deposit does not qualify as an archaeological resources. However, site preparation and resource, then no further protection or study is necessary. If the deposit does qualify as grading activities could disrupt undiscovered an archaeological resource then the impacts shall be avoided by project activities. If archaeological and cultural resources of the deposit cannot be avoided, adverse impacts to the deposit shall be addressed in importance under CEQA and /or eligible for accordance with State CEQA Guidelines 15126.4(b). Measures may include, but are listing on the California Register. not limited to archaeological data recovery, etc. Upon completion of the assessment by the archaeologist, a professional - quality report shall be submitted to the City, the project applicant, and the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park. The project applicant shall fund and implement the mitigation in accordance with Section 15064.5(c) through (f) of the CEQA Guidelines and Public Resources Code 21083.2. Impact 3.4 -3: No paleontological resources MM 3.4 -3: Halt Work/Paleontological Evaluation /Site - Specific Mitigation. If Ongoing throughout City of Dublin Public Works are known to exist within the project area. paleontological resources are encountered during subsurface construction activities, all construction. Department and Planning However, the presence of unknown work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected until a qualified paleontologist Division paleontological resources could be can evaluate the finds. If the paleontological resources are found to be significant, they discovered during site preparation and shall be avoided by project construction activities and recovered by a qualified paleontologist. Upon completion of the recovery, a paleontological assessment shall be Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Responsibility/ Monitoring Schedule Reporting Bate/ Monitor's Initials` grading activities. conducted by a qualified paleontologist to determine if further monitoring for paleontological resources is required. The assessment shall include: 1) the results of any geotechnical investigation prepared for the project area; 2) specific details of the construction plans for the project area; 3) background research; and 4) limited subsurface investigation within the project area. If a high potential to encounter paleontological resources is confirmed, a monitoring plan of further project subsurface construction shall be prepared in conjunction with this assessment. After project subsurface construction has ended, a report documenting monitoring, methods, findings, and further recommendations regarding paleontological resources shall be prepared and submitted to the Director of Community Development. Impact 3.4 -4: Due to the disturbed nature of MM 3.4 -4: Halt Work/Coroner's Evaluation /Native American Heritage Ongoing throughout City of Dublin Public Works the project area, there are no known human Consultant/Compliance with Most Likely Descendent Recommendations. In the construction. Department and Planning remains interred outside of formal event that human remains are encountered during grading and site preparation Division cemeteries that are anticipated to be activities, all ground- disturbing work within 50 feet of the remains shall cease disturbed during short -term construction immediately and a qualified archaeologist shall notify the Office of the Alameda County activities. However, human remains could Coroner and advise that office as to whether the remains are likely to be Native be discovered during site preparation and American. If determined to be Native American, the Alameda County Coroner's Office grading activities. shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission of the find, which in turn will then appoint a "Most Likely Descendent. (MLD)." The MLD in consultation with the archaeological consultant and the project sponsor will advise and help formulate an appropriate plan for treatment of the remains, which might include recordation, removal, and scientific study of the remains and any associated artifacts. After completion of the analysis and preparation of the report of findings, the remains and associated grave goods shall be returned to the MLD for burial. Impact 3.5 -3: Ground shaking is likely to MM 3.5 -3: Preparation of Design -Level Geotechnical Report. Future development Prior to Issuance of any City of Dublin Building occur in the project area in the event of a within the project area shall consult with a registered geotechnical engineer to prepare Building Permit on the Division major earthquake on one of the nearby a design level geotechnical report that incorporates the recommendations in the project site. faults resulting in the exposure of people preliminary geotechnical investigation by Berlogar, Stevens and Associates (March and /or structures to potentially significant 2012). The design level geotechnical report shall address site preparation and grading adverse effects, including the risk of loss, (including measures to address potential liquefaction and expansive soils), building injury or death. foundations, CBC seismic design parameters, and preliminary pavement sections. This report shall be submitted in conjunction with Building Permit application(s) and reviewed and approved by the City. The Report's recommendations shall be incorporated into the project design and construction documents. Impact 3.7 -4: The project area is not MM 3.7 -4: Remediation of Hazardous Materials. Future development within the Prior to Issuance of a City of Dublin Public Works located on a hazardous material site vicinity of Former Building 109 /PRFTA, Area 761 /PRFTA 13, and the Potential Grading Permit or Department and Planning pursuant to Government Code Section Construction Debris Dump Sites shall not proceed until a NFA status is granted and the commencing any Division 65962.5. However, based on the Phase I project area has been cleaned to the appropriate land use standard to the satisfaction construction activities on ESA there are three sites currently being of Department of Toxic Substances and Control (DTSC). The NFA status paperwork the project site. evaluated by the U.S. Army. Hazardous shall be submitted to the City in conjunction with the Building and Grading /Site work Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Responsibility/ Monitoring Schedule Reporting hate/ Monitor's Initials` materials may be encountered during permit and shall be found acceptable by the City prior to ground disturbance. construction. Impact 3.8 -4: Implementation of the MM 3.8 -4a: Construction of a new Off -site Detention Basin North of the Project Prior to Issuance of a City of Dublin Public Works proposed project would substantially Area. Prior to the issuance of grading permits for Phase 2 of the proposed project, the Grading Permit for Phase Department and Planning increase the impervious surface area on the project applicant shall work in coordination with the U. S. Army (Camp Parks) to design 2 of the project. Division project site, thereby altering the existing and construct a new off -site detention basin designed to ensure that flow rates to Line drainage pattern and amount of surface G -1 do not exceed the maximum Q100 discharge flow rate of 950 cfs as required by runoff resulting in a potential increase in Zone 7. The design plans for this new off -site detention basin will be reviewed by the peak storm water flows (i.e., 10- and 100- City, in coordination with Zone 7, for verification of compliance with all applicable year storm events). regulations and consistency with on -site drainage requirements, prior to construction. MM 3.8 -4b: Re -align Stormwater Outflow from Proposed North Basin #2. Prior to Prior to Issuance of the City of Dublin Public Works issuance of the first grading /sitework permit associated with the construction of the first Grading Permit Department and Planning proposed community park, the project applicant shall submit to the City for review and associated with the Division approval, plans, details, and calculations for the proposed underground stormwater construction of the detention structure(s) and associated storm drain system within the park parcel to proposed Community ensure that adequate capacity will be provided; that the resultant discharge flow rates Park. meet the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board; and that the placement of the underground facilities in the park will not impact the park design and construction of recreational facilities. The location and layout of the underground detention structures and the connection of these facilities to the proposed Chabot Creek riparian channel, box culvert or downstream facilities shall be agreed upon by both the project applicant and the City. The method and location of stormwater discharge of the underground facilities shall be reviewed and approved by all appropriate regulatory and /or permitting agencies. Impact 3.10 -1: The proposed project could MM 3.10 -1a: Prepare Construction Noise Management Plan. The project applicant Prior to Issuance of any City of Dublin Public Works result in short -term construction - related shall prepare a construction noise management plan that identifies measures to be Grading Permit Department, Building and noise at nearby noise sensitive land uses. taken to minimize construction noise on surrounding sensitive receptors (e.g., Planning Divisions residential uses and schools) and includes specific noise management measures to be included into project plans and specifications subject to review and approval by the City. These measures shall include, but not be limited to the following: All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and sound control devices (e.g., intake silencers and noise shrouds) no less effective than those provided on the original equipment and no equipment shall have an un- muffled exhaust. The contractor shall maintain and tune -up all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions. Stationary equipment shall be placed so as to maintain the greatest possible distance to the sensitive receptors. All equipment servicing shall be performed so as to maintain the greatest Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Responsibility/ Monitoring Schedule Reporting hate/ Monitor's Initials: possible distance to the sensitive receptors. The project applicant(s) shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City of Dublin Planning Department, a qualified "Noise Disturbance Coordinator." The Disturbance Coordinator shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. When a complaint is received, the Noise Disturbance Coordinator shall notify the City within 24 hours of the complaint and determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, malfunctioning muffler, etc.) and shall implement reasonable measures to resolve the compliant, as deemed acceptable by the Dublin Planning Department. If any notices are sent to residential units immediately surrounding the construction site by the City and all signs posted at the construction site shall include the contact name and the telephone number for the Noise Disturbance Coordinator. Select demolition methods to minimize vibration, where possible (e.g., sawing masonry into sections rather than demolishing it by pavement breakers). MM 3.10 -1b: Construction Routes Less Disruptive to Sensitive Receptors. Ongoing and throughout City of Dublin Public Works Construction trucks shall utilize a route that is least disruptive to sensitive receptors, construction. Department preferably major roadways (Interstate 580, Interstate 680, Dublin Boulevard, Dougherty Road, and Arnold Road). Construction trucks should, to the extent practical, avoid the weekday and Saturday a.m. and p.m. peak hours (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.). Transportation and Circulation Impact 3.12 -1: During the PM peak hour, MM 3.12 -1: Addition of Northbound Left -Turn Lane on Dougherty Road. The Before the first City of Dublin Public Works the study intersection of Dougherty Road proposed project shall add an additional northbound left -turn lane on Dougherty Road Subdivision Map is Department and Amador Valley Boulevard would operate at the Dougherty Road and Amador Valley Boulevard intersection. Based on the 2020 recorded for Phase 1. at an unacceptable LOS E under both 2020 background plus project conditions, the two northbound left turn lanes would need to be background no project conditions and 2020 325 feet each. This improvement would require widening Dougherty Road by background plus project conditions. approximately 12 feet along the east side in advance of the intersection. It would also require realignment of travel lanes through the intersection and traffic signal modifications. This improvement has already been identified by the City of Dublin's Traffic Impact Fee program as part of the widening of Dougherty Road between Sierra Court and City limits. Because the impact is caused by the proposed project, future land use growth, and is included in the Traffic Impact Fee program, the mitigation for this impact is for the project to make a fair share monetary contribution toward these improvements. Impact 3.12 -2: During the PM peak hour, MM 3.12 -2: Converting the Eastbound All- Movement Lane to a Shared Through Prior to recordation of the City of Dublin Public Works the study intersection of Dougherty Road Right Lane and Adding an Eastbound Left -Turn Lane at Dougherty Road and first Subdivision Map for Department and Scarlett Drive would degrade from LOS Scarlett Drive. To mitigate the impact at the intersection of Dougherty Road and Phase 2 or Year 2020, D under 2035 cumulative no project Scarlett Drive would require converting the eastbound all- movement lane to a shared whichever comes first. conditions to an unacceptable LOS E under through -right lane and adding a new 60 -foot eastbound left turn lane. In addition, the Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Responsibility/ Monitoring Schedule Reporting hate/ Monitor's Initials` 2035 cumulative plus project conditions. The eastbound and westbound legs should be converted from split phasing to protected City of Dublin level of service standard for phasing. This improvement would require widening the west approach of the this intersection is LOS D. intersection by approximately 12 feet into the existing pork chop island. Further improvements at this intersection have already been identified by the City's Traffic Impact Fee Program as part of the Scarlett Drive extension to Dublin Boulevard. Implementation of the identified mitigation at this location should be coordinated with the City's planned TIF improvements. Because the impact is caused by both the proposed project and future land use growth, the mitigation for this impact is for the project to make a fair share monetary contribution toward these improvements. Impact 3.12 -3: Scarlett Drive and Dublin MM 3.12 -3: Construction of a Grade Separated Crossing at the Intersection of Prior to recordation of the City of Dublin Public Works Boulevard. During the PM peak hour, the Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard. To mitigate the impacts at the intersection of last Subdivision Map for Department study intersection of Scarlett Drive and Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard due to higher rate of pedestrians /bicyclists Phase 5 Dublin Boulevard would operate at an crossings at Dublin Boulevard, a grade separated crossing shall be utilized. The grade unacceptable LOS F under both 2035 separated crossing would eliminate the need for at -grade pedestrian actuations at the cumulative no project conditions and 2035 traffic signal, which would allow more green time to be allocated to through traffic on cumulative plus project conditions. The City Dublin Boulevard. Although this project has not been environmentally cleared, nor has of Dublin level of service standard for this engineering or right of way analysis been completed with regards to the feasibility of intersection is LOS D. this improvement, the City is aggressively pursuing this project to improve pedestrian and bicycle mobility along the Iron Horse Trail. The City also plans to include a grade separated crossing at this location in its update to the TIF program to secure project funding. Because the impact is caused by future land use growth in the region as well as this proposed project, the mitigation for this impact is for the project to make a fair share monetary contribution toward these improvements. The timing of these improvements will be determined in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and developer obligations will be outlined in the Developer Agreement. In the event that the grade separated crossing project cannot be constructed by year 2035, an alternative mitigation would be to eliminate the crosswalk on the east leg of the Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard intersection. This would require pedestrians and bikes from the Iron Horse Trail to cross three crosswalks rather than one. Because of the effects of the alternative mitigation on pedestrian and bike mobility, the grade separated crossing is the City's preferred mitigation at this location. Impact 3.12 -4: During the PM peak hour, MM 3.12 -4: Addition of a Northbound Left -turn lane on Iron Horse Parkway at the Prior to recordation of the City of Dublin Public Works the study intersection of Iron Horse Parkway Intersection of Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard. To mitigate the impact at first Subdivision Map for Department and Dublin Boulevard would degrade from the intersection of Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard would require an Phase 4 LOS C under 2035 cumulative no project additional northbound left turn lane on Iron Horse Parkway. Based on the 2035 conditions to an unacceptable LOS F under cumulative plus project conditions, the two northbound left turn lanes would need to be 2035 cumulative plus project conditions. The 400 feet each. This improvement would require the removal of parking on the east side City of Dublin level of service standard for of Iron Horse Parkway, traffic signal modifications, and changing the travel lane Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Responsibility/ Monitoring Schedule Reporting hate/ Monitor's Initials` this intersection is LOS D. configuration and alignment to create: • One 16 -foot wide southbound receiving lane on Iron Horse Parkway; • Two 10 -foot wide northbound left turn lanes on Iron Horse Parkway; and • One 14 -foot wide northbound shared through -right turn lane. Because the proposed project causes the change in operation from LOS C to LOS F, the proposed project is responsible for constructing these improvements. Impact 3.12 -5: During the PM peak hour, MM 3.12 -5: Convert one of the through lanes to a second right turn lane at the Prior to recordation of the City of Dublin Public Works the study intersection of Hacienda Drive and Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard Intersection. As part of the City of Dublin's first Subdivision Map for Department Dublin Boulevard would operate at an Traffic Impact Fee program, the intersection of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard Phase 5 unacceptable LOS E under both 2035 has a planned northbound approach geometry of three left turn lanes, three through cumulative no project conditions and 2035 lanes, and one right turn lane. To mitigate the impact at the intersection of Hacienda cumulative plus project conditions. The City Drive and Dublin Boulevard would require converting one of the through lanes to a of Dublin level of service standard for this second right turn lane, which is the existing northbound geometry at the intersection. intersection is LOS D. Because no improvements relative to the existing geometry are necessary, the City of Dublin should modify its planned improvement at the northbound approach of the intersection back to the existing configuration. With this mitigation, the intersection would operate at LOS D during the PM peak hour. Therefore, this improvement would mitigate the intersection to less than significant levels. Impact 3.12 -6:: During the PM peak hour, MM 3.12 -6: Install a Fourth Eastbound Through Lane on Dublin Boulevard. To Prior to recordation of the City of Dublin Public Works the study intersection of Tassajara Road mitigate the impact at the intersection of Tassajara Road and Dublin Boulevard would first Subdivision Map for Department and Dublin Boulevard would degrade from require a fourth eastbound through lane on Dublin Boulevard. The widening of Dublin Phase 5 LOS D under 2035 cumulative no project Boulevard to six through lanes is included in the City of Dublin's Traffic Impact Fee conditions to an unacceptable LOS E under program. The planned eastbound approach geometry supplied by the City includes two 2035 cumulative plus project conditions. The left turn lanes, two right turn lanes, and three through lanes. To return the intersection City of Dublin level of service standard for to an acceptable LOS would require converting one of the right turn lanes to a fourth this intersection is LOS D. through lane. A fourth eastbound through lane would require an additional receiving lane east of the Tassajara Road and Dublin Boulevard intersection. It may also require realignment of travel lanes through the intersection and traffic signal modifications. Because the impact is caused by both the proposed project and future land use growth, the mitigation for this impact is for the project to make a fair share monetary contribution toward these improvements. The timing of these improvements will be determined in the project's mitigation monitoring program. Impact 3.12 -8: The proposed project does MM 3.12 -8: Roadway Layout and Driveway Locations. As more detail for the Ongoing and throughout City of Dublin Planning not include detailed information such as roadway layout and driveway locations become available, the following mitigation shall review of Site Division and Public Works intersection layouts and driveway locations. be implemented: Improvement Plans, Small Department For this reason, impacts to roadway safety The precise roadway alignments at both the onsite and site access Lot Subdivision Maps, cannot be evaluated at this time. intersections have yet to be designed. City staff shall review the proposed and Site Development Review applications for Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Responsibility/ Monitoring Schedule Reporting Bate/ Monitor's Initials` intersection alignments to insure that opposing left turn lanes can operate specific development simultaneously, sufficient radii is provided for truck turn movements, and sites. through lanes line up reasonably well with their respective receiving lanes across the intersection. To maintain adequate corner sight distance consistent with Caltrans Highway Design Manual requirements, parking shall not be permitted on major onsite roadways (Central Parkway East, G Street, and, B Street) within close proximity to intersections. At all onsite intersections, landscaping, signing, and parking shall be designed so that adequate corner sight distance is achieved. A site circulation and access study shall be conducted for the proposed school to insure that loading areas are adequately designed and the adjacent streets are safe for school age children. Flashing beacon warning signs, high visibility crosswalks, raised crosswalks, and school zone speed limit signs shall be considered, where appropriate. The traffic control and turn pocket lengths shall be reviewed by the City as site specific development plans move forward to insure that the orientation of the private roadways (which will feed into the major and minor collector streets onsite) do not result in level of service or safety issues. Private street roadway segments with perpendicular parking shall be relatively short in length (approximately 400 feet or less) to discourage excessive vehicle speeds. This is necessary to allow a vehicle backing out of a perpendicular parking stall to react to through traffic on the private street. Impact 3.12 -9: The proposed project will MM 3.12 -9: Coordination with LAVTA. As the plan area develops, the project Ongoing throughout City of Dublin Planning increase transit demand, generating an applicant shall coordinate with the City of Dublin and LAVTA to determine if route project construction. Division and Public Works estimated 1,228 weekday daily transit trips changes and /or increased service is required in the project area. In addition, the project Department (bus and BART combined). This will create shall provide additional bus duckouts and transit shelters to support project trips, where the need for bus route adjustments and /or appropriate. increased bus frequency. This is a significant impact on bus transit Impact 3.12 -10: The proposed project does MM 3.12 -10: Review of Intersection Layouts and Driveway Locations. As each Ongoing and throughout City of Dublin Planning not include detailed information such as individual site develops within the Specific Plan and more details are available, review of Site Division and Public Works intersection layouts, crosswalk locations, additional review by the City of Dublin will be necessary to insure that individual Improvement Plans, Small Department wheelchair ramp locations, and driveway elements of the project do not conflict with the pedestrian /bike accessibility and are Lot Subdivision Maps, locations. consistent with the policies and guidelines in the Dublin Bikeways Master Plan. The and Site Development following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Review applications for Marked crosswalks shall be provided at all onsite intersections, where specific development appropriate, based on the layout of the local streets. Prior to final design of sites. the streets and pathways, the intersection designs should be reviewed by City Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Schedule Monitoring Responsibility/ Reporting Bate/ Monitor's Initials: staff to insure that the pathway crossings are clearly marked and include Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant wheelchair ramps. Bollards may also be considered so that vehicles are restricted from driving on the 10- foot wide paths. The layout of private and minor streets within the site shall minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the number of crossings with the proposed onsite 10 -foot pedestrian paths. This includes potentially realigning the Iron Horse Trail onto the Central Park site so that the driveway access to the park at Scarlett Drive does not conflict with trail operations. Bike parking, showers, and changing rooms shall be considered at the park, office and shopping center uses, where appropriate. During construction along Scarlett Drive, Dublin Boulevard, and Arnold Road, temporary traffic control plans shall be prepared to minimize the disruption to bike and pedestrian activities through the construction zone. Impact 3.12 -11: Project construction would MM 3.12 -11: Construction Traffic Mitigation Plan(s). Prior to the issuance of any Prior to the issuance of City of Dublin Planning occur over a period of an estimated time grading permit or any permit that authorizes construction activities on the Specific Plan any grading permit or any Division and Public Works period of eight to ten years and has the site or construction of off -site improvements relating to the Specific Plan, the project permit that authorizes Department potential to result in hundreds of applicants shall provide Construction Traffic Mitigation Plan(s) for City Staff review and construction activities construction staff on -site at one time. approval as part of the permit application. The Mitigation Plan(s) shall include However, due to the nature of the project measures to minimize the construction traffic entering the roadway system during phasing over the course of time, it is difficult periods of peak traffic volumes (i.e. AM and PM Peak Hour). The Mitigation Plan(s) to estimate the amount of construction traffic shall also include measures to minimize the number of truck trips on Scarlett Drive and that may take place during peak traffic should route heavy vehicle traffic to driveways on Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road to volume periods. The construction phase access the site during the construction phase of the project. At a minimum, the also would increase the number of daily Construction Traffic Mitigation Plan should include the following implementation truck trips in the project vicinity while the site measures: is graded and materials are delivered. All Construction truck routes shall be prepared to designate principal haul routes truck movements to and from the site during for trucks delivering materials to and from the construction site. construction would likely occur on the arterials and collector streets around the Should a temporary road and /or lane closure be necessary during project site. The land uses to the east and construction, the project applicant shall provide traffic control activities and south of the project along Arnold Road and personnel, as necessary, to minimize traffic impacts. This may include detour Dublin Boulevard are primarily industrial and signage, cones, construction area signage, flagmen, and other measures as commercial uses, with some high density required for safe traffic handling in the construction zone. residential uses along the south side of The project applicant shall be required to keep a minimum of one lane in each Dublin Boulevard. To the west of the project direction free from encumbrances at all times on perimeter streets accessing site, there are low density residential the project site. In the event a full road closure is required, the contractor shall townhouses along Scarlett Drive. While coordinate with the Alameda County Fire Department and the Dublin Police heavy vehicle traffic is common on arterial Department/ Alameda County Sherriff's Department to designate proper streets near industrial, commercial, and high detour routes and signage to appropriate proper access routes. Project Impacts Mitigation Measures Implementation and Monitoring Schedule Monitoring Responsibility/ Reporting hate/ Monitor's Initials` density residential land uses, truck traffic on streets directly adjacent to low density residential development should be minimized to the greatest extent possible. Impact 3.12 -12: The proposed project may MM 3.12 -12: Restrict Lane Closures Along Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road to Ongoing and throughout City of Dublin Planning require the closure of travel lanes on Dublin Off -Peak Hours. During project construction, the lane closures along Dublin Boulevard project construction Division and Public Works Boulevard, Scarlett Drive, and Arnold Road and Arnold Road shall be restricted to off -peak hours to the greatest extent feasible. In Department while constructing frontage improvements, addition, traffic handling plans shall be prepared for construction work in the public intersection improvements for new proposed right -of -way in accordance with current California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control roadways (G Street, B Street, Central Devices (MUTCD) standards and guidelines. Parkway East, E Street, D Street and A Street), and traffic signal modifications where new intersection legs are proposed. Closure of travel lanes during peak commute hours could result in restricted traffic flow on the public streets surrounding the project area. Krisfi Bascom Prom: Angela Rex 1 i Sent: Friday, Octo er , 2013 M6 AM Subject: Camp Parks Burrowing Owls I am writing to you as I am incredibly concerned over the proposed SunCal development at Camp Parks, and the Impact it will have on the Burrowing Owl.coiony on that land. I am a Wildlife Biologist, and I have witnessed first hand how development has destroyed Burrowing Owl habitat around the southern region of San Francisco Bay, I have read SunCal's response to these accusatlons, describing their proposed mitigation, and I don't believe it Is sufficient or acknowledges the current science (which Indicates that evicted owls do not move to human created 'habitat.' or find new burrows in which to breed). I believe that the owl colony and it's habitat need to be preserved as they are, Although Burrowing Owls are currently listed as a species of concern, actions like this will quickly push them to further listing, Please do what you can to make Dublin a model for habitat conservation and species preservation. Thank you, Angela Rex I A,TTACHMENIr 9 �t BY: CALTRANS TRANSPQRTATIQ PLANNING; 510 288 5bb9; Oct -18 -13 3:Z1PPA3 Pago 111 AT&0V CAWF0RhffA--- ..CJ41 -1F MI6aM1-jtTRANgpo TATp;A01iNc _ ME M) a- fill C �1sr��R.. C�ati-ctirnor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION III GRAND AVENUE F. 0.13OX 28660 OAE AND, CA 94623.0660 PNOT:E (8 10) 288.6058 Fix (6710) 260 -6668 TTY 711 October 18, 2013 Ms. Kristi Bascom City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Dear Ms. Btist:um: Dublin Crossing Specific flan — Final EnvironnieTktal Impact Report Y'laxyaur p�u�Crt P4 Oltew elfrtiend ALA580864 ALA- 580 -19.34 SCH #201206200 Thank YOU fvr ac)ntinuing to include the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environrnental review process for the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan. The following comm ants are based on the Final Environmental Impact Report. Response 1-,1 Although, Appendix I of the Draft Envirotunentai Impact Report shows AM slid PM turoitag traffic diagrazlts per study intersection per level -of ,service calculation sheet, it is, very difficult to review and validate project - related traffic volumes in its entirety without turning diagrams that ittolude all studied hitersectiorls. An envi>fonnlental document should be clear and concise for reviewers to evaluate project impacts. As a restult; please provide a turning traffic diagram that includes All studied intersections for each condition for our review. Should you have any questions regarding this loth, please tail Yatman Kwan, AMP of my staff at (510) 622. 1670, Sincerely, 1?,RIK ALM, AICP District Branch Chief Local Development - Irltergovo mental Reviow c: State Clearltlghouse "(1i11rarta inlprotw ru;bility aoroas California" Received Time OA 18. 2013 3;57PM No.3447 Alameda Creek Alliance P,O, Box 2626 • Niles, CA • 94536 Phone: (510) 499 -9185 E-mail. a famed acreek @hotma€ €,corn Web: www,alamedacreek.org October 21, 2093 PlanningCommission a@ci.dublin.ca.us; kristi.bascoi*n@dublin.ca.gov, tim.sbrantI(g)dublln.ca,gov Comments on Dublin Crossing Project The Alameda Creek Alliance urges the Dublin Planning Commission to suspend action on the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan and not to certify the flawed Environmental Impact Report for the project. On October 18, 2013, the Alameda Creek Alliance, Ohlone Audubon Society, Burrowing Owl Conservation Network, Center for Biological Diversity and Golden Gate Audubon Society requested that the City of Dublin reopen the public comment period on the draft Environmental Impact Report for the Dublin Crossing project, due to undisclosed significant project impacts on western burrowing owls. We have not yet heard back from the City or the Planning Department regarding our request. The EIR failed to disclose the size of the breeding burrowing owl colony at Camp Parks and does not mention its regional significance as one of the largest In Alameda County and the last large burrowing owl colony remaining in the Livermore- Amador Valley. Other than the burrowing owl population at Altamont Pass, the colony at Camp Parks is the largest in Alameda County and the Livermore - Amador Valley. Loss of this breeding burrowing owl colony would be a significant Impact under CEQA. According to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, there were 12 pairs of nesting burrowing owls documented at Camp Parks In 2009 and 14 pairs in 2010. The 189 -acre project area had b nesting pairs of burrowing owls in 2009, 2 pairs in 2010, and 7 pairs in 2013, according to CDFW. The EIR has an inadequate evaluation of the impacts of the proposed development project on breeding western burrowing owls and their habitat within the project area and the viability of the breeding colony after the planned development. The proposed mitigation measures in the EIR for Impacts to burrowing owls are inadequate to preserve the owl colony at Camp Parks, and are guaranteed to result In the loss of a significant breeding owl colony. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife has provided recommendations that the project should conserve burrowing owl habitat at Camp Parks and avoid any impacts to nesting burrowing owls or their habitat. However, the proposed development does not do that -- it allows destruction of currently occupied owl breeding and foraging habitat after the breeding season, and exclusion of owls from their nesting areas. Purchase of mitigation credits or off -site mitigation in other areas does not adequately address the loss of this significant owl colony. The October 22, 2013 staff report erroneously claims that mitigation measure 3.3 -3a will reduce impacts to burrowing owls to a less than significant level under CEQA, when In fact It does not. Please suspend consideration of the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan and reopen the public comment period on the EIR so that correct and adequate information about the significance of the Camp Parks burrowing owl population and an adequate analysis of Impacts of the proposed project can be considered. Sincerely, Jeff Miller, Director Alameda Creek Alliance P.O. Box 2626 Niles, CA 94636 aiarnedacreek aWhotmall.com Krisfi Bascom From- Krist€ Bascom Sent; Monday, October 21, 2013 1:59 PM To: CC: Subject: RE: Request to Reopen Comment Period for Dublin Crossing Project Draft FIR Attachments; PCSR.pdf Dear Mr, Miller (and other signatories), This email Is In response to your request, dated October 18, 2013, to reopen the public comment period for the Dublin Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft FIR) released by the City on June 24, 2013. After careful consideration of your request, the City has decided not to reopen the public comment period. Discussion regarding possible private development on a 130 -acre portion of Camp Parks became a topic of public conversation In 2002, when the Army first requested the initiation of a General Plan Amendment Study from the City of Dublin. In 2004 and 2005 the City and Army held a series of public design charettes regarding the property, and in 2005 the Army selected a Master Developer for the project site, now known as Dublin Crossing. Since the Master Developer began engaging the City In discussions regarding possible future development on the property In April 2011, the project has been brought forward to the City Council for direction at five different public meetings. A Notice of Preparation of an FIR was prepared and published in May 2012 and a publicly - noticed CEQA Scop€ng Meeting was held on June 20, 2012, A Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIR was published in the newspaper on July 27, 2013 and was posted on the City's website for the duration of the public review period (as are all public notices). In addition, the NOA was sent by mall and email directly to the following; 1. The California State Office of Planning and Research (OPR), 2. All state, regional, and local agencies that are on the City's list of interested parties for all CEQA notices; 3. All Individuals and organizations that have requested to receive public notices published by the City, and 4. All property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the 189 -acre Dublin Crossing project site, The Draft FIR was properly noticed In compliance with all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), During the public comment period, the Draft Specific Plan and Draft FIR was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a publicly- noticed meeting on July 9, 2013. The Draft FIR properly analyzed the Impact on burrowing owls and the mitigation measure compiles with the California State Department of Fish and Wildlife recommendations and protocol. The concerns you expressed In your email October 3, 2013 were considered and addressed In Planning Commission Staff Report (attached for your Information), The City will not re --open the Draft FIR comment period, but your letter will be entered Into the public record (as were your other comments). All members of the public have the opportunity to present any Issues and concerns at both the Planning Commission public hearing on October 22, 2013 and at any future City Council public hearings on the proposed project. Regards, Krlsti Bascom Y� CITY 01 DUBLIN r(d Uub loll Kristi Bascom Principal Planner, Community Development Department City of Dublin loo Civic plaza I Dublin, CA 94568 (925) 556.4557 i (925) 833 -6628 FAX kristl.bascomQdublin.ca,gQY 1 m -,--dam ca goy Follow us on Twitter: @DublinP10 Mission Statement: The City of Dublin promotes and supports a high quality of life Mich ensures a safe and secure envlromnent that fosters new opportunfttes. From; Alameda Creek Seat: Friday, October i , 2013 11 :45 AM To: Krlstl Bascom; Tim Sbrand Subject: Request to Reopen Comment Period for Dublin Crossing Project Draft EIR October 18, 2013 City of Dublin - Community Development Department Attn: Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner 900 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Dublin Mayor and City Council Council Chamber 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Reopen Comment Period for Dublin Crossing Project Draft EIR Our organizations are writing to request that the City of Dublin reopen the public comment period on the draft Environmental Impact Report for the Dublin Crossing project. We understand the comment period ran from June 24, 2093 to August 8, 2013. Unfortunately, our organizations were not aware of the release of the draft EIR or the opening of the public comment period. The reason we request that the comment period be reopened is concern for project impacts on western burrowing owls, a state and federal species of concern, and an increasingly rare native grassland bird in the Bay Area. The draft EIR fails to disclose the size of the breeding burrowing owl coiony at Camp Parks and does not mention its regional significance as one of the largest in Alameda County and the last large burrowing owl colony remaining in the Live rmore- Amador Valley. The draft EIR has an Inadequate evaluation of the impacts of the proposed development project on breeding western burrowing owls and their habitat within the project area and the viability of the colony after development. The proposed mitigation measures in the draft EIR for impacts to burrowing owls are inadequate to preserve the owl colony at Camp Parks, Sincerely, Jeff Miller, Director Alameda Creek Alliance P.O< Box 2626 Niles, CA 94536 alamedacreekCab-hotmaii.com Evelyn Cormier, President Ohlone Audubon Society 1922 Hillsdale Street Hayward, CA 94541 PresidentO- ohloneaudu bon. org Scott Artis, Executive Director Burrowing Owl Conservation Network 2150 Allston Way Suite 460 Berkeley, CA 94704 scott@burrowing- owl.ora Peter Galvin, Director of Programs Center for Biological Diversity 351 California St., Ste. 600 San Francisco, CA 94104 alvin biolo icaldiversit .or Mike Lynes, Executive Director Golden Gate Audubon Society 2530 San Pablo Avenue Berkeley, CA 94702 mly__nes@goldengateaudubon.org Jeff Miller Director Alameda Creek Alliance 510 499 -9185 www.alatnedacreek.org Kristl Bascom From: slittiehale @gmali.com on behalf of Scott Littlehale I Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 4:07 PM To, Kristi Bascom; Debra LeClair Subject: Comment Re Dublin Crossing & related Development Agreement Chair Sean 0' Keefe Vice Chair Tara Bhuthimethee Commissioners Lynna Do, Arun Goel and Rameet Kohl[ c/o Kristl Bascom, Planning Department October 22, 2013 Re: Dublin Crossing General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan, Rezoning, Development Agreement, and Environmental Impact Report Honorable Planning Commissioners: On behalf of the members of Carpenters Local Union 713, for whom I serve as a research analyst, I respectfully submit the following comments on the proposed Dublin Crossing project ( "Project ") and its related Development Agreement, Local 713 respects the efforts of the City to ensure that the Project complies with CECIA's mandate to minimize the Project's potential environmental impacts. As disclosed in the Final EIR, however, the Project will have certain significant and unavoidable environmental impacts. The City will therefore adopt a statement that affirms that specific "economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers," override the unavoidable and significant environmental impacts. When the lead agency approves a project which Wit result In the occurrence of significant effects which are identified In the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state In writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and /or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence In the record. (CEQA Guidelines section 15093(b), emphasis added) My review of the documents that are before the Planning Commission reveals no substantial evidence in the record that touches on the Implications of the proposed Project for one of the Bay Area's most acute challenges economic and social challenges: the poor fir between, on the one hand, the prices and rents of the ho_ using units that ultimately will be built and, on the other hand, the jobs generated by projects such as Dublin Crossings. urge the City to take careful measure of the Project's jobs ;housing "fit" before It executes a final Development Agreement. The production of housing for moderate and low-income households in Dublin has fallen well short of the City's goals (see City of Dublin Housing Element 2003 - 2014, Table 1, Summary of Quantified Accomplishments since 1999). Production of housing for upper - income households, on the other hand, was 240 percent of the number of units that the Association of Bay Area Governments targeted in its Regional Housing Needs Assessment. The Development Agreement being contemplated for the Dublin Crossing project will reduce funds for Affordable Housing relative to the requirements of the City's Inclusionary zoning Ordinance (IZO). Furthermore the Development Agreement is silent on the question of employment of highly trained workers at family - sustaining levels of wages and benefits. The "Development Agreement Points" for the Project include an exemption for the Dublin Crossing developer to meet the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance's obligations to pay up to $26,751,250 in "'in-Lieu Inclusionary Zoning /Affordable Housing fees." As was discussed at the May 7, 2013 City Council Meeting, SunCal and the City negotiated to reduce fees to levels equivalent to $56,000 each for 200 units of affordable housing that the IZO would have required (based on a 1,500 unit Project build -out). Members of the City Council wrestled with the concept of carving out an "in -Ileu of an in -lieu" fee when the Development Agreement Points were considered at the May 7th Regular Meeting, but ultimately approved the staff recommendation at its June 18, 2013 meeting. The current draft of the Development Agreement Points specifies that the Project developer will maize Community Benefit Payments that total only $18.7 million, to be used at the City Council's direction (see Staff Report, Item 7.1, June 18, 2013), The Project's contemplated Development Agreement therefore will culminate In less Affordable Housing funds than otherwise would have been collected had a similar land use program been bound by the IZO. This reduction almost certainly will require leveraging greater amounts of other public funds (or tax credits) to make production of 200 units of below- market -rate housing possible. The Project developer, in short, has shifted the burden off of Itself and its future homebuilder buyers, and onto the broader taxpaying public. The opposite side of the jobs- housing fit "coin" is the level of wages and benefits of Project - related jobs. A minority of the construction workers for the Project - those associated with the infrastructure work - can be expected to benefit from a State requirement for Mello Roos- financed work to meet California's Prevailing Wage standards. However, the homebuilders who will build the "vertical" phases of the Project will be under no obligation to observe these family - sustaining standards. As illustrated In the table below, many residential construction workers who live and work in the East Bay themselves could qualify for subsidized below- market -rate housing due to persistent pressure by Homebuilders on construction wages. Alameda County, 2011 Section 8 Housing °Love' income Limit, 4 person household $64,950 Average Annual Pay, construction employees of Specialty Contractors $58,360 Low Income Housing Tax Credit "Lower income Limit, 4 person household $55,380 Very Low- (50 %) Income Limit, 4 person household $$461150 Average Annual Pay, construction employees of Residential Drywall Contractors $38,048 Source: HUD Income Limits, California Employment Development Department Census of Employment and Wages, adjusted to reflect that construction workers average pay In the Specialty Trades is 90% of average pay for all employees, per the 2007 Economic Census Of Construction for California. Absent a local - hiring preference, there is little basis for assuming that that the majority of the work on the "vertical" phases of the Project will provide employment opportunities for the region's highly trained construction workforce. Many recently built residential projects In Dublin have been constructed with workers who have traveled with Contractors based in non -Bay Area Counties. These workers on average make wages lower than the wages described above, For example, AvalonBay's Dublin Station project utilized a carpentry subcontractor from Santa Barbara County. Estimated average annual pay for carpenters who frame houses Is just over $41,000 per year, which is below the "very low' income limit for a household of four. (based on a 90% adjustment of the average annual pay for all employees in the Residential Framing Contractors sub- sector) Absent a commitment by the Developer to ensure that homebuilders who bulld -out the Project will pay area standard wages and benefits to the construction workers, this Project most likely will aggravate the poor fit between jobs and housing in the Bay Area, and Increase the distances that construction workers have to travel, from relatively less expensive communities outside of the Bay Area to increasingly out -of -reach communities within the Bay Area. 1 urge you to pause and consider how this Project relates to one of the Bay Area's great challenges. I look forward to reviewing the full text of the Project's Development Agreement that will soon go before City Council. Sincerely, Scott Littlehale Research - Analyst