HomeMy WebLinkAbout*February 15, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting PacketFebruary 15, 2022 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
COUNCILMEMBERS City Council Chamber
Melissa Hernandez, Mayor Dublin Civic Center
Jean Josey, Vice Mayor 100 Civic Plaza
Shawn Kumagai, Councilmember Dublin, CA 94568
Dr. Sherry Hu, Councilmember www.dublin.ca.gov
Michael McCorriston, Councilmember
Regular Meeting of the
DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, February 15, 2022 Location: City Council Chamber
Civic Center
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
CLOSED SESSION 5:30 PM
REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM
This meeting will be held in person for the public, and all members of the City Council will
be participating in person from the City Council Chamber at Civic Center, 100 Civic
Plaza, Dublin, California. Pursuant to Alameda County Health Officer Order No. 21-03, members
of the public attending the meeting must wear a face covering over the nose and mouth at all times
while indoors, even while speaking at the podium.
Additional Meeting Procedures Available During the COVID-19 Pandemic
This City Council meeting will be broadcast live on Comcast T.V. channel 28
beginning at 7:00 p.m. This meeting will also be livestreamed at www.tv30.org and
on the City’s website at: https://dublin.ca.gov/ccmeetings
Members of the public who wish to participate in the meeting electronically have the
option of giving public comment via Zoom, subject to the following procedures:
Fill out an online speaker slip available at www.dublin.ca.gov. The speaker slip will
be made available at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, February 15, 2022. Upon submission, you
will receive Zoom link information from the City Clerk. Speakers slips will be
accepted until the staff presentation on an agenda item ends, or until the public
comment period on non-agenda items is closed.
Once connected to the Zoom platform using the Zoom link information from the
City Clerk, the public speaker will be added to the Zoom webinar as an attendee and
muted. The speaker will be able to observe the meeting from the Zoom platform.
When the agenda item upon which the individual would like to comment is
addressed, the City Clerk will announce the speaker in the meeting when it is their
time to give public comment. The speaker will then be unmuted to give public
comment via Zoom.
1
February 15, 2022 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
CLOSED SESSION 5:30 PM
I. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: 1
case.
II. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (d) of
Section 54956.9: 1 case.
Facts and circumstances: Letter from Kevin Shenkman to City Clerk, dated December
29, 2021
REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM
1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
3.1 Employee Introductions
New City of Dublin Staff members, Sarah Monnastes, Human Resources Director and
Oliver Castillo, Assistant Civil Engineer with Public Works, will be introduced.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Welcome the new City of Dublin Staff members.
Staff Report
3.2 St. Patrick’s Day Celebration Preview
The City Council will receive a presentation that previews the annual St. Patrick’s Day
Celebration which will be held the weekend of March 11-13, 2022, including protocols
related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Receive the presentation.
Staff Report
Item 3.2 - PowerPoint Presentation
3.3 Public Comment
At this time, the public is permitted to address the City Council on non-agendized items. Please step to the
podium and clearly state your name for the record. COMMENTS SHOULD NOT EXCEED THREE (3)
MINUTES. In accordance with State Law, no action or discussion may take place on any item not appearing
on the posted agenda. The Council may respond to statements made or questions asked, or may request
Staff to report back at a future meeting concerning the matter. Any member of the public may contact the
City Clerk’s Office related to the proper procedure to place an item on a future City Co uncil agenda. The
exceptions under which the City Council MAY discuss and/or take action on items not appearing on the
agenda are contained in Government Code Section 54954.2(b)(1)(2)(3).
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar items are typically non-controversial in nature and are considered for approval
by the City Council with one single action. Members of the audience, Staff or the City Council who
2
February 15, 2022 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
would like an item removed from the Consent Calendar for purposes of public input may request
the Mayor to remove the item.
4.1 Approval of the February 1, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes and February
5, 2022 Special City Council Meeting Minutes
The City Council will consider approval of the minutes of the February 1, 2022 Regular
City Council Meeting and February 5, 2022 Special City Council Meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the minutes of the February 1, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting and February
5, 2022 Special City Council Meeting.
Staff Report
Attachment 1 - February 1, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes
Attachment 2 - February 5, 2022 Special City Council Meeting Minutes
4.2 Heritage Park Public Art Selection
The City Council will consider the artwork selections and locations for the Heritage Park
Public Art Project as recommended by the Heritage and Cultural Arts Commission and
the Parks and Community Services Commission and adopt resolutions approving Public
Art Agreements with Romo Studios and Brian Keith for Public Art Projects at Heritage
Park.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the artwork selections and locations, adopt the Resolution Approving a Public
Art Agreement with Romo Studios for a Public Art Project at Heritage Park, adopt the
Resolution Approving a Public Art Agreement with Brian Keith for a Public Art Project at
Heritage Park, and approve the budget change.
Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Resolution Approving a Public Art Agreement with Romo Studios for a
Public Art Project at Heritage Park
Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to the Resolution - Public Art Agreement with Romo Studios
Attachment 3 - Resolution Approving a Public Art Agreement with Brian Keith for a Public
Art Project at Heritage Park
Attachment 4 - Exhibit A to the Resolution - Public Art Agreement with Brian Keith
Attachment 5 - Budget Adjustment
Attachment 6 - 2020-2025 CIP - Current and Post Adjustment Budget
4.3 City Treasurer's Informational Report of Investments for the Quarter Ending
December 31, 2021
The City Council will receive an informational report of the City’s investments through
the quarter ending December 31, 2021 including a monthly transaction ledger. The City’s
investment portfolio for this period totaled $382,522,878 (market value) with an average
market yield of 0.60%. As required by the Policy, the City Treasurer (Administrative
Services Director) affirms that the City is able to meet its expenditure requirements for
the next six months.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Receive the City Treasurer's Informational Report of Investments for the Quarter Ending
December 31, 2021.
Staff Report
Attachment 1 - City of Dublin Investment Report for Period Ending December 31, 2021
Attachment 2 - Transaction Ledger - October through December 2021
3
February 15, 2022 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
4.4 Payment Issuance Report and Electronic Funds Transfers
The City Council will receive a listing of payments issued from January 1, 2022 - January
31, 2022 totaling $13,690,767.41.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Receive the report.
Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Payment Issuance Report for January 2022
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION – None.
6. PUBLIC HEARING
6.1 Fallon East General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment (PLPA-2021-
00009)
The City Council will consider approval of a General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan Amendment for approximately 73 acres east of Fallon Road on the GH PacVest and
Alameda properties. The amendment would change the existing General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designation from General Commercial to General
Commercial/Campus Office. Additionally, the City Council will consider an Addendum to
the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Environmental Impact Reports.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Conduct a public hearing, deliberate and adopt the Resolution Approving an Addendum
to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Environmental Impact Reports and Approving the
General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment for 72.1 Acres of the GH
PacVest Property and the 1.25-Acre Alameda Property.
Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Resolution Approving an Addendum to the East Dublin Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Reports and Approving the General Plan and Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan Amendment
Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to the Resolution - CEQA Addendum
Attachment 3 - Planning Commission Resolution No. 21-12
Item 6.1 - PowerPoint Presentation
6.2 Citywide Multi- Family Objective Design Standards, Zoning Ordinance Amendments,
and Master Fee Schedule Amendments (PLPA-2022-00002)
The City Council will consider approval of the Citywide Multi-Family (MF) Objective
Design Standards (ODS) and companion amendments to Title 8 (Zoning) of the Dublin
Municipal Code. State law requires local jurisdictions to provide a streamlined ministerial
approval process for eligible multi-family residential developments, subject to objective
zoning and design review standards. The proposed MF ODS and Zoning Ordinance
Amendments would ensure that objective zoning and design review standards are in
place. The City Council will also consider adopting amendments to the Master Fee
Schedule to establish a fee for Zoning Clearances for Housing Projects Eligible for
Streamlined Approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Conduct a public hearing, deliberate, waive the reading and INTRODUCE the Ordinance
approving the Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design Standards and amendments to
Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.36 (Development Regulations), Chapter 8.104 (Site
4
February 15, 2022 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
Development Review), and Chapter 8.116 (Zoning Clearance), and adopt the Resolution
amending the Master Fee Schedule by establishing one new application fee, based on
time and materials, for Zoning Clearances for Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined
Approval.
Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Ordinance Approving the Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design
Standards and Related Zoning Ordinance Amendments
Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to Attachment 1 - Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design
Standards
Attachment 3 - Redlines of Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments
Attachment 4 - Resolution Amending the Master Fee Schedule by Establishing an
Application Fee, Based on Time and Materials, for Zoning Clearances for Housing
Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval Effective Citywide
Attachment 5 - Planning Commission Resolution No. 22-01 (without exhibits)
Item 6.2 - PowerPoint Presentation
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
7.1 SCS Property Community Outreach
On March 2, 2021, the City Council approved a City-led Community Outreach process for
the SCS Property to create a foundation for future discussions about appropriate land uses
for the property. Staff and the consultant team lead by ELS Architecture & Urban Design
and Urban Field Studio in concert with the community, Planning Commission and City
Council have worked to develop a Preferred Plan for the SCS Property. The City Council
will receive a presentation and consider approving the Preferred Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Receive presentation and adopt the Resolution Approving the Preferred Plan for the SCS
Property.
Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Resolution Approving the Preferred Plan for the SCS Property
Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to the Resolution - Preferred Plan
Attachment 3 - Planning Commission Resolution No. 22-02
Attachment 4 - Public Comment
Item 7.1 - PowerPoint Presentation
Item 7.1 - SB 343
7.2 Authorize a Budget Shift to Fiscal Year 2021-22 for the Iron Horse Nature Park and
Open Space Project
The City Council will consider shifting funds to Fiscal Year 2021-22 for the Iron Horse
Nature Park and Open Space project (CIP No. PK0422) to allow for design work to begin in
the current fiscal year on the first phase of the project to meet a State Grant deadline for a
completed project by December 31, 2023.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve a budget change authorizing the shifting of funds to Fiscal Year 2021-22.
Staff Report - Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Project
Attachment 1 - CIP No. PK0422 as Approved in 2020-2025 CIP
Attachment 2 - CIP No. PK0422 with Funding Shift
Attachment 3 - Budget Change
Attachment 4 - Approved Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Master Plan Excerpts
5
February 15, 2022 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
Item 7.2 - PowerPoint Presentation
8. NEW BUSINESS
8.1 Transition to District-Based Councilmember Elections
Earlier this year, the City received a notification threatening litigation under the
California Voting Rights Act if the City did not convert from at-large elections for electing
members of the City Council to district-based elections. The City Council will consider
adopting a resolution of intent to transition from at-large elections to a district-based
councilmember election system.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the Resolution Declaring Its Intention to Transition From an At-Large Election
System to a District-Based Election System.
Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Resolution Declaring Its Intention to Transition From an At-Large
Election System to a District-Based Election System
Attachment 2 - Demand Letter from Shenkman and Hughes
Item 8.1 - PowerPoint Presentation
8.2 Discussion Regarding City Council Salaries
The City Council will discuss options regarding adjustments to Councilmember salaries.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Discuss and provide direction to Staff regarding adjustments to City Council salaries.
Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Ordinance No. 10-20 Amending Dublin Municipal Code Section 2.08
Attachment 2 - Dublin Municipal Code Section 2.08.020
9. OTHER BUSINESS
Brief information only reports from City Council and/or Staff, including committee
reports and reports by City Council related to meetings attended at City expense (AB1234).
10. ADJOURNMENT
This AGENDA is posted in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2(a)
If requested, pursuant to Government Code Section 54953.2, this agenda shall be made
available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section
202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Section 12132), and the federal
rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. To make a request for disability-
related modification or accommodation, please contact the City Clerk’s Office (925) 833-6650 at
least 72 hours in advance of the meeting.
Mission
The City of Dublin promotes and supports a high quality of life, ensures a safe and secure
environment, fosters new opportunities, provides equity across all programs, and champions a culture
of diversity and inclusion.
6
February 15, 2022 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
7
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Page 1 of 1
Agenda Item 3.1
DATE:February 15, 2022
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:Employee IntroductionsPreparedby:Marsha Moore,MMC,City Clerk
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:New City of Dublin Staff members, Sarah Monnastes, Human Resources Director and Oliver Castillo, Assistant Civil Engineer with Public Works, will be introduced.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Welcome the new City of Dublin Staff members.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:None.
DESCRIPTION:New City of Dublin Staff members, Sarah Monnastes, Human Resources Director and Oliver Castillo, Assistant Civil Engineer with Public Works, will be introduced to the City Council.
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:None.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:The City Council Agenda was posted.
ATTACHMENTS:None.
8
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Page 1 of 4
Agenda Item 3.2
DATE:February 15, 2022
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:St. Patrick’s Day Celebration PreviewPreparedby:Lauren Marriott,Recreation Coordinator
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:The City Council will receive a presentation that previews the annual St. Patrick’s Day Celebration which will be held the weekend of March 11-13, 2022, including protocols related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Receive the presentation.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:The budget for the St. Patrick’s Day Celebration is included as part of the City’s annual operating budget.
DESCRIPTION:The City of Dublin’s 38th annual St. Patrick’s Day Celebration will be held the weekend of March 11-13, 2022. The Celebration weekend includes the Shamrock Gala, the Lions Club Parade, the Pancake Breakfast, Festival and Fun Run. St. Patrick’s Day FestivalThe signature event is the St. Patrick’s Day Festival, which runs March 12 and 13 from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the Dublin Civic Center. While the event is returning and will provide an experience that the community is accustomed to, the ongoing impacts related to the COVID-19 pandemic will result in certain changes to the event as outlined below. The Festival will have a strong focus on Irish music, dance, food, and drink, and will feature three outdoor stages. The Dance Stage will be devoted to Irish dancers performing Irish Step Dance. The
9
Page 2 of 4
Pub Stage will offer a mix of Irish music including Celtic rock, Irish pub, and traditional Irish folk music as well as a roaming bagpiper and leprechaun. The Main Stage headliner bands include the popular Celtic rock band, Tempest, The U2 experience band Zoo Station, the high energy Irish Band Fast & Vengefully, CaliCeltic, and Piano Madness, a dueling piano act.The Festival will also feature an authentic Irish Tea Cottage. This year, the event will be moved outside into the Civic Center courtyard allowing for an open-air experience. Guests will be servedtea cookies, scones, and shortbread along with freshly brewed Irish tea. Celtic Food Court vendors will sell traditional Irish fish and chips, bangers and mash, and boxty (Irish potato pancakes) along with the Irish American favorite, corned beef and cabbage. Guests can also find Irish-inspired food items such as Guinness marinated tri-tip, corned beef sliders, and banger corn dogs. The Dublin Rotary Club will again manage beverage operations, with two bars serving Guinness, Harp, and Smithwick's beers on tap, in addition to wine.Vendors in the Irish Marketplace will sell Irish tartan kilts, scarves, wraps and capes, Celtic jewelry, artwork, metalwork, pottery, Irish shortbread, scones, and cakes. More than 100 other arts and crafts vendors will also be on hand. Carnival rides will be set up in a portion of the Dublin Sports Grounds parking lot. New this year will be a Petting Zoo featuring an array of miniature animals such as mini-horses, goats, sheep, silkie chickens, rabbits, ducks, and pony rides.In collaboration with the Dublin Arts Collective, an art project that combines the Celebration of the City’s 40th Anniversary and St. Patrick’s Day will be included. Additionally, the City recently contracted with two artists to commission works of art using wood recovered from a fallen oak tree. These pieces of art will be unveiled and on display for the duration of the Celebration.To mitigate traffic and parking issues throughout the weekend, Staff has arranged offsite parking for sponsors, volunteers, vendors, and the public at Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., 5300 Central Parkway, with a free shuttle bus operating 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. both days. Staff is reaching out to localcorporations, particularly those west of Civic Center, to request use of their parking lots. The City provides participating business owners with insurance and arranges to have their lots swept clean after the event. Additionally, all neighboring businesses will be provided event information sheets related to impacts on traffic and parking. Furthermore, the City is once again partnering with BART and LAVTA to offer free bus rides from both BART stations via the Wheels Rapid 30R bus and discount rides within Dublin via Lyft, Uber, and DeSoto Cab. Cycling to the Festival is also encouraged, and the City will provide free secure bike parking at two bike valet stations.Overall, while the 2022 St. Patrick’s Day Festival will return and provide for an experience that the community is accustomed to, noticeable changes will be in place to ensure the safety of all those in attendance. Following a meeting with the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), in which the City presented details on the Festival, the following safety measures were identified:
Provide mass marketing, outreach, and messaging related to vaccines, negative testing, masking, and inherent health risks.
10
Page 3 of 4
Adjust the Festival footprint to allow for additional spacing in highly congested areas including the carnival.
Collaborate with service providers including CA Notify to offer testing services 48-72 hours ahead of the event and additional onsite services.
Offer the Tea Cottage completely outdoors.
Provide masks and sanitization products on site, as well as increased sanitizing of high touch areas.
Coordinate with vendors to encourage mask wearing of those frequently interacting with the public.The City will continue to monitor guidance from the CDPH related to the COVID-19 pandemic and outdoor events and make adjustments as necessary. Impacts to the Civic Center and Library parking lots will begin Wednesday, March 9, 2022, while setup is taking place.Shamrock Gala – New EventIn addition to the Festival, the weekend kicks off on Friday evening with a new event called the Shamrock Gala, hosted by the Dublin Historical Society. The event will be ticketed and hosted at The Wave. Tickets are $50 and will be available at the Society’s website. Pancake BreakfastOn Saturday morning Fire Station #16 and International Association of Fire Fighters Local 55 will host the annual Firefighters Pancake Breakfast starting at 7:00 a.m. The breakfast will featuregreen pancakes, sausage, eggs, juice, and coffee. Lions Club ParadeAlso on Saturday, The Dublin Lions Club will host the 38th annual St. Patrick's Day Parade starting at 9:30 a.m. The parade begins at Dublin Boulevard and Amador Plaza Road, traveling east on Dublin Boulevard, north on Village Parkway, and west on Amador Valley Boulevard to end near the Dublin Senior Center. The parade is expected to feature more than 80 entries, including local marching bands, floats, equestrian groups, bagpipers, and community groups.Fun RunSunday morning, the City will sponsor the Shamrock 5K Fun Run and Walk, with the race ending at the Festival Main Stage. Runners will enjoy live music, refreshments and other giveaways in the post-race area, and many Festival vendors will open early to welcome runners at the finish line. The Shamrock 5K is expected to attract more than 1,500 participants.Sponsorship and vendor recruitment are underway for this year's events. Sponsors for the Festival and Fun Run include UDR at Dublin Station, Dick’s Sporting Goods, All Natural Stone, and many more.
11
Page 4 of 4
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:None.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:The City Council Agenda was posted.
ATTACHMENTS:None.
12
Preview of the 2022
St. Patrick’s Day Celebration
City Council Meeting –February 15, 2022
13
COVID Safety & Precautions
14
Shamrock Gala
Friday, March 11 –6:00 p.m.
15
Firefighter’s Pancake Breakfast
Saturday, March 12 -7:00 a.m.
16
37th Annual Lion’s Club Parade
Saturday, March 12 –9:30 a.m.
17
23rd Annual Shamrock
5K Fun Run & Walk
Sunday, March 13 –8:30 a.m.
18
38th Annual St. Patrick’s Day Festival
Saturday, March 12 & Sunday, March 13
10:00 a.m. –5:00 p.m.
19
Pub & Main Stage
20
Tea Cottage & Irish Dance Stage
21
Carnival & Petting Zoo
22
Vendors & Food Court
23
Sponsors
24
See You There!
25
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item 4.1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:The City Council will consider approval of the minutes of the February 1, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting and February 5, 2022 Special City Council Meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Approve the minutes of the February 1, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting and February 5, 2022 Special City Council Meeting Minutes.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:None.
DESCRIPTION:The City Council will consider approval of the minutes of the February 1, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting and February 5, 2022 Special City Council Meeting.
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:None.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:The City Council Agenda was posted.
DATE:February 15, 2022
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:Approval of the February 1, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes and February 5, 2022 Special City Council Meeting MinutesPreparedby:Marsha Moore,MMC,City Clerk
26
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENTS:1) February 1, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes2) February 5, 2022 Special City Council Meeting Minutes
27
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
Regular Meeting: February 1, 2022
DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 1, 2022
Attachment 1
The following are minutes of the actions taken by the City of Dublin City Council. A full video recording of the meeting with the agenda items indexed and time stamped is available on the City’s website at: https://dublin.ca.gov/ccmeetings
CLOSED SESSION 6:01 PM
I.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: 1 case.
II.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATIONSignificant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: 1 case.Facts and circumstances: Letter from Kevin Shenkman to City Clerk, dated December 29, 2021
REGULAR MEETINGA regular meeting of the Dublin City Council was held on Tuesday, February 1, 2022, in the City Council Chamber. The meeting was called to order at 7:09 PM., by Mayor Hernandez.
1)CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCEAttendee Name StatusMelissa Hernandez, Mayor PresentJean Josey, Vice Mayor PresentShawn Kumagai, Councilmember PresentMichael McCorriston, Councilmember PresentDr. Sherry Hu, Councilmember Present
2)REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Hernandez reported there was no reportable action.
28
DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 1, 2022
3)ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
3.1)Recognition of Dublin’s 40th AnniversaryThe City Council recognized the City’s anniversary and City of Dublin Poet Laureate,James Morehead, performed an original poem.
3.2)Employee IntroductionThe City Council welcomed new City of Dublin Staff member, Taryn Gavagan Bozzo, Special Projects Manager with the City Manager’s Office.
3.3)Public CommentClay provided public comment.Alex Cho provided public comment.Matthew Aini provided public comment.
4)CONSENT CALENDARThe City Council pulled item 4.4 for public comment.
4.1)Approved the January 11, 2022, Regular City Council Meeting Minutes.
4.2)Approved the following proclamations for the month of February in the City of Dublin: American Heart Month, Black History Month, and National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention Month.
4.3)Adopted Resolution No. 06-22 titled, “Declaring Weeds and Combustible Refuse a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Abatement Thereof.”; directed Staff to notify the public of the adoption of this Resolution; and to schedule a public hearing for the April 5, 2022 City Council meeting at which time the City Council will hear and consider objections to this abatement order.
4.5)Adopted Resolution No. 08-22 titled, “Approving Commercial Façade Improvement Grant Program Agreements Between the City of Dublin, Dublin Plaza, and Dublin Cyclery; and the City of Dublin,Dublin Plaza, and Hair Emporium.”
29
DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 1, 2022
4.6)Adopted Resolution No. 09-22 titled, “Granting Consent to the City of Pleasanton to Renew the Tri-Valley Tourism Marketing District.”
4.7)Adopted Resolution No. 10-22 titled, “In Support of Bay Adapt: Regional Strategy for a Rising Bay.”
4.8)Adopted Resolution No. 11-22 titled, “Approving the Maintenance Agreement for Downtown Gateway Sign at 7944 Dublin Boulevard Between the City of Dublin and VP-RPG Dublin, LLC.”On motion by Vice Mayor Josey, seconded by Councilmember Kumagai, and by unanimous vote the City Council adopted the remaining Consent Calendar items.RESULT:ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]MOVED BY:Jean Josey, Vice MayorSECOND:Shawn Kumagai, CouncilmemberAYES:Hernandez, Kumagai, Josey,McCorriston, Hu
4.4) Approval of 2022 City of Dublin Legislative PlatformTom Evans provided public comment.On motion by Vice Mayor Josey, seconded by Councilmember Kumagai, and by unanimous vote the City Council adopted Resolution No. 07-22 titled, “Approving the 2022 City of Dublin Legislative Platform.”RESULT:ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]MOVED BY:Jean Josey, Vice MayorSECOND:Shawn Kumagai, CouncilmemberAYES:Hernandez, Kumagai, Josey, McCorriston, Hu
5)WRITTEN COMMUNICATION –None.
6)PUBLIC HEARING –None.
30
DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 1, 2022
7)UNFINISHED BUSINESS
7.1 Community Task Force on Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Recommendation
Review and Implementation PlanThe City Council received a presentation on the Implementation Plan for the Community Task Force on Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion’s recommendations. The City Council provided direction on the following recommendations:
Recommendation BC-7, the City Council directed Staff to not limit the term limit for Commissions and Committees to four years.
Recommendation IP-5, the City Council shared ideas for promoting local restaurants and small businesses that are owned and operated by under-represented groups and referred this item to the Economic Development Committee.
Recommendation CO-1, the City Council supported having a Community Liaison within the City Manager’s Office and shared suggestions for reaching out to community leaders and local organizations.
Recommendation O-5, the City Council suggested that Staff check in a year from now with the Community Task Force members to review progress on the implementation plan and provide any feedback. On motion by Vice Mayor Josey, seconded by Councilmember Kumagai, and by unanimous vote the City Council approved the Implementation Plan for the Community Task Force on Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion’s recommendations.RESULT:APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]MOVED BY:Jean Josey, Vice MayorSECOND:Shawn Kumagai, CouncilmemberAYES:Hernandez, Kumagai, Josey, McCorriston, Hu
8)NEW BUSINESS –None.
9)OTHER BUSINESS –None.The City Council and Staff provided brief information-only reports, including committee reports and reports by City Council related to meetings attended at City expense (AB1234).
31
DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 1, 2022
10)ADJOURNMENTMayor Hernandez requested a moment of silence in memory of former City Councilmember Linda Jeffery Sailors and adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m.
MayorATTEST:
City Clerk
32
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting: February 5, 2022
MINUTES 1
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
FEBRUARY 5, 2022
Attachment 2
A Special Meeting of the Dublin City Council was held on Saturday, February 5, 2022, at the
Regional Meeting Room. The meeting was called to order at 9:02 a.m., by Mayor Hernandez.
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
Attendees Present Title
Melissa Hernandez Mayor
Jean Josey Vice Mayor
Shawn Kumagai Councilmember
Michael McCorriston Councilmember
Dr. Sherry Hu Councilmember
2.Public Comment - None.
3. Welcome and Review of Strategic Plan Strategies and Objectives from 2020-2022
The City Council reviewed and celebrated accomplishments from 2020-2022.
4. Discussion of Operating and Capital Budgets
The City Council discussed the City’s Fiscal Years 2022-23 and 2023-24 preliminary budget and
reviewed and prioritized projects in the Five-Year Capital Improvement Program for 2022-2027.
5. Discuss Strategic Plan Strategies and Objectives for 2022-2024
The City Council discussed and updated the City’s Strategic Plan Strategies and Objectives for
2022-2024.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned by Mayor Hernandez at 1:58 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
33
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Page 1 of 3
Agenda Item 4.2
DATE:February 15, 2022
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:Heritage Park Public Art Selection Prepared by:Shaun Chilkotowsky,Heritage and Cultural Arts Manager
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:The City Council will consider the artwork selections and locations for the Heritage Park Public Art Project as recommended by the Heritage and Cultural Arts Commission and the Parks and Community Services Commission and adopt resolutions approving Public Art Agreements with Romo Studios and Brian Keith for Public Art Projects at Heritage Park.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Approve the artwork selections and locations, adopt the Resolution Approving a Public Art Agreement with Romo Studios for a Public Art Project at Heritage Park, adopt the ResolutionApproving a Public Art Agreement with Brian Keith for a Public Art Project at Heritage Park, and approve the budget change.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:This project is included in the Fiscal Year 2020-2025 Capital Improvement Program (CIP No. PK0222)and is funded by the Public Art Fund. There is no impact to the General Fund.The Public Art Agreement between the City of Dublin and Romo Studios for Artistic Park Features has a compensation not to exceed $100,000. The Public Art Agreement between the City of Dublin and Brian Keith for a monumental sculpture has a compensation not to exceed $350,000. The initial estimated artist stipend for the monumental sculpture was $275,000. Upon deliberation and recommendation by the Heritage and Cultural Arts Commission and Parks and Community Services Commission, the artist scope of work was recommended for expansion, resulting in a cost increase of $75,000, to $350,000 total. Additionally, this project is currently ahead of schedule with funding for artist stipends budgeted in Fiscal Year 2022-23. Should the City Council approve the project to move forward, a budget
34
Page 2 of 3
adjustment is necessary to shift funding for the artist stipends to the current year. A budget increase of $75,000 is also necessary due to the expanded scope of work for the monumental sculpture. Sufficient funding is available in the Public Art Fund to cover the increase.
DESCRIPTION: BackgroundOn June 1, 2021, the City Council approved the 2020-2025 Five-Year Capital Improvement Program Update which included public art to be installed at Heritage Park. Specifically, this project provides for artistic park features as well as a monumental sculpture and falls within the goals and guidelines of the City’s Public Art Master Plan which emphasizes highly visible artwork along major throughfares and incorporation of art into the built environment. On June 21, 2021, Staff issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ), seeking qualified artists.Interested artists submitted a portfolio and resume to be considered for invitation to develop a site-specific design proposal for either artistic park features or a monumental sculpture for Heritage Park. The City received 25 responses from qualified artists by the deadline of July 23, 2021.In August 2021, ad-hoc art selection committees met to review portfolios and resumes. The committees selected 10 artists, five each for artistic park features and monumental sculpture, andinvited them to develop site-specific design proposals. The committees reconvened in October 2021 to review the site-specific design proposals. After deliberation, five proposals were selectedto be recommended to the Heritage and Cultural Arts Commission (HCAC). Artistic Park FeaturesAt its regular meeting on December 9, 2021, the HCAC recommended the artistic park features proposal by Adan Romo, with a minor modification, to the City Council for approval. The minor modification was to revise the farming scene to be reflective of farming from the 1930’s to 1940’s. Adan Romo has revised the proposal to incorporate this feedback. The Parks and Community Services Commission (PCSC) reviewed the proposal from Adan Romo at its regular meeting on December 20, 2021 and was in support of the HCAC recommendation. Adan Romo’s design is a series of small bronze sculptures that are snapshots of what life may have been like in and around the historic facilities that are on site today. These small-scale scenes that depict a moment in life will be placed at locations around Heritage Park and are designed to engage visitors in a way that provokes thought and reflection. The full proposal with location details is included as Attachment 2.
Monumental SculptureAt its regular meeting on December 9, 2021, the HCAC recommended the monumental sculpture proposal by Brian Keith, with modification, to the City Council for approval. The modification includes the addition of a fourth bronze figure that depicts a Native American figure weaving a basket. The artist revised the proposal to incorporate this feedback, which result in an increase of
35
Page 3 of 3
$75,000 to the compensation. The PCSC reviewed the proposal at its regular meeting on December 20, 2021 and was in support of the HCAC recommendation. Brian Keith’s design is a sculpture featuring four cast bronze figures, at 115% life size, atop a rock formation. The sculpture is intended to capture the steadfastness, perseverance, inspiration, and historical influence of the pioneering families and Native Americans who lived in what is now known as present-day Dublin. The rock formation will include functional seating elements for visitors to enjoy. The sculpture will be located at the corner of Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way. This site does require the removal of a non-Heritage tree that is in the proposed location. In consultation with Public Works, replacement trees of the appropriate species, will be planted at other locations within Heritage Park. Should the City Council desire to preserve the existing tree and landscape of that intersection, alternative locations may be considered. A full copy of the detailed proposal is included in Attachment 4. As is Dublin’s practice, the proposals were reviewed by the City’s contract art conservator and City Staff. The artworks are expected to be successful upon installation, of the utmost permanence, and able to be maintained utilizing traditional art conservation methods.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:The City Council Agenda was posted, and a copy of the Staff Report was provided to the artists.
ATTACHMENTS:1) Resolution Approving a Public Art Agreement with Romo Studios for a Public Art Project at Heritage Park2) Exhibit A to the Resolution – Public Art Agreement with Romo Studios3) Resolution Approving a Public Art Agreement with Brian Keith for a Public Art Project at Heritage Park4) Exhibit A to the Resolution – Public Art Agreement with Brian Keith 5) Budget Change6) PK0222 2020-2025 CIP - Current and Post Adjustment Budget
36
Attachment 1
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted 2/15/2022 Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION NO. XX – 22
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING A PUBLIC ART AGREEMENT WITH ROMO STUDIOS FOR A PUBLIC ART
PROJECT AT HERITAGE PARK
WHEREAS,the 2020-2025 Capital Improvement Program Update includes a project to
design, fabricate, and install permanent Public Art, Artistic Park Features, at Heritage Park; and
WHEREAS,an open call was solicited according to the Public Art Master Plan process,
with five of the seven responding artists selected to submit site specific design proposals; and
WHEREAS,the proposal by artist Adan Romo, or Romo Studios, was recommended by
the Ad-Hoc Selection Committee, Heritage and Cultural Arts Commission, and Parks and
Community Services Commission; and
WHEREAS,Adan Romo has demonstrated ability to perform said services and a third
party art conservator reviewed the design proposal; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does
hereby authorize the execution of a Public Art Agreement with Romo Studios for the design,
fabrication, and installation of a Public Art project at Heritage Park.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is authorized to execute
amendments to the agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit A,and make any necessary, non-
substantive changes to carry out the intent of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of February 2022, by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
City Clerk
37
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 1 of 19
PUBLIC ART AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND ROMO STUDIOS
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Dublin (“City”) and Romo Studios (“Artist”) as of
February 15, 2022, for the purposes and on the terms and conditions set forth below.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City requires the services of Artist to perform artistic services described in the Agreement for a
public art project as described under Section 8.58 of the Dublin Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Section 2.36.050 of the Dublin Municipal Code to contract for the specialized
services of the artist contemplated by this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Artist is qualified and desires to perform the artistic services required by the City as set forth in this
Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, on February 15, 2022, authorized the City Manager to execute an agreement
between City and Artist for the preparation of a final design, fabrication and installation for a public art sculpture at
Heritage Park.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties hereto agree as
follows:
AGREEMENT
Section 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Artist shall provide to
City the services necessary to provide the artwork (“Work”) described in the Artist Proposal described in Exhibit A, and
in the Scope of Work attached as Exhibit B at the time and place, and in the manner specified therein. In the event of
a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit B, the Agreement shall prevail.
1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the date first noted above and shall
end on the date of completion specified in Exhibit B, and Artist shall complete the Work described in
Exhibit A prior to that date, unless the term of the Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended,
as provided for in Section 17. The time provided to Artist to complete the services required by this
Agreement shall not affect the City’s right to terminate the Agreement, as provided for in Section 17.
1.2 Standard of Performance. Artist shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement in
the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession
in which Artist is engaged in the geographical area in which Artist practices its profession. Artist shall
prepare all work products required by this Agreement in a substantial, first-class manner and shall
conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Artist’s profession.
1.3 Assignment of Personnel. Artist shall assign only competent personnel to perform services
pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term
of this Agreement, desires the reassignment of any such persons, Artist shall, immediately upon
receiving notice from City of such desire of City, reassign such person or persons.
Attachment 2
Exhibit A to the Resolution
38
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 2 of 19
1.4 Time. Artist shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as
may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance provided in Section 1.1 above
and to satisfy Artist’s obligations hereunder.
Section 2. SCOPE OF WORK: Artist shall provide a final design, fabrication and installation of the public art
project for Heritage Park as more specifically described in Exhibits A and B of this Agreement.
2.1 The City shall be responsible for providing the Artist, without cost, copies of designs, drawings, reports,
and other relevant data needed by the Artist to design and execute the Project.
2.2 The Artist shall, whenever required during the term of this Agreement, present to the City in writing,
drawing, or other appropriate media for further review and approval any significant changes in the
scope, design, color, size, material, utility, support requirements, texture, or location of the site or the
Work. A significant change is any change that could affect the future installation, scheduling, site
preparation, or maintenance of the Work, or the concept of the Work as represented in the original
concept design included in Exhibit A.
2.3 The City may, at any time, request the Artist in writing to (a) revise portions of the services that he/she
has previously completed in a satisfactory manner; (b) delete portions of the Scope of the Work that
the Artist has not yet performed; (c) perform additional work beyond the Scope of Work to be provided
in Exhibit B; and, (d) make other changes within the General Scope of the Work to be performed under
this Agreement. In the event of such a written request, the Artist may, but shall not be obligated to
agree to any such request.
2.4 In the event the request for change is agreed to by the Artist, this Agreement shall be amended, in
writing, specifying the agreed changes, including, but not limited to, a description of services, additional
budget, payment schedule, and timetable. In the event that the Artist does not agree to the request,
the City shall be entitled to terminate the Agreement for cause pursuant to Article 17 herein.
2.5 No services for which additional compensation will be charged shall be provided by the Artist without
the prior written authorization by the City.
Section 3. COMPENSATION. City hereby agrees to pay Artist a sum not to exceed $100,000 as specified in
Exhibit C, notwithstanding any contrary indications that may be contained in Artist’s proposal, for services to be
performed under this Agreement; or subject to additional amounts for any revisions requested and change order
approved by the City as provided for in Section 2.3 above or elsewhere in this Agreement. In the event of a conflict
between this Agreement and Artist’s proposal, attached as Exhibit A, regarding the amount of compensation, the
Agreement shall prevail. City shall pay Artist for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the time and in the
manner set forth herein. The payments specified in Exhibit C shall be the only payments from City to Artist for services
rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Artist shall submit all invoices to City in the manner specified herein. Except as
specifically authorized by City, Artist shall not bill City for duplicate services performed by more than one person.
Artist and City acknowledge and agree that compensation paid by City to Artist under this Agreement is based upon
Artist’s estimated costs of providing the services required hereunder, including salaries and benefits of employees and
subcontractors of Artist. Consequently, the parties further agree that compensation hereunder is intended to include
the costs of contributions to any pensions and/or annuities to which Artist and its employees, agents, and
subcontractors may be eligible. City therefore has no responsibility for such contributions beyond compensation
required under this Agreement.
39
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 3 of 19
3.1 Invoices. Artist shall submit invoices as specified in Exhibit B and C, not more often than once a
month during the term of this Agreement, based on the cost for services performed and reimbursable
costs incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information:
Serial identifications of each billable phase; i.e., Bill No. 1 Phase I for the first invoice, etc.;
The beginning and ending dates of the billing period;
A Task Summary containing the original contract amount, the amount of prior billings, the
total due this period, the balance available under the Agreement, the Artist’s signature.
3.2 Total Payment. City shall pay for the services to be rendered by Artist pursuant to this Agreement.
City shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or cost whatsoever incurred by Artist in
rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. City shall make no payment for any extra, further, or
additional service pursuant to this Agreement.
In no event shall Artist submit any invoice for an amount in excess of the maximum amount of
compensation provided above either for a task or for the entire Agreement, unless the Agreement is
modified prior to the submission of such an invoice by a properly executed change order or
amendment.
3.3 Payment of Taxes. Artist is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under
this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.
3.4 Payment upon Termination. In the event that the City or Artist terminates this Agreement pursuant
to Section 17, the City shall compensate the Artist for all outstanding costs and reimbursable
expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as of the date of written notice of termination.
Artist shall maintain adequate logs and timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to that date.
3.5 Authorization to Perform Services. The Artist is not authorized to perform any services or incur
any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of authorization from the
Contract Administrator.
Section 4. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth herein, Artist shall, at its sole cost and expense,
provide all facilities and equipment that may be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement. City
shall make available to Artist only the facilities and equipment listed in Exhibit B, and only under the terms and
conditions set forth herein.
Section 5. RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ARTIST
5.1 The Artist agrees that an essential element of this Agreement is the skill and creativity of the Artist.
The Artist shall not assign the creative or artistic portions of the Work to another party for the
production of the Work without the written consent of the City. Failure to conform to this provision
may be cause for termination of this Agreement, at the sole option of the City.
5.2 The Artist shall be responsible for providing services described in Exhibit B, including but not limited
to, the quality and timely completion of the services. As part of the Work, Artist shall be responsible
for designing the artwork, as described in Exhibit A, so that it can be constructed without exceeding
the approved overall budget for the artwork of $100,000. The Artist shall, without additional
compensation, correct or revise any errors, omissions, or other deficiencies in his/her Work.
40
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 4 of 19
5.3 The Artist shall complete the fabrication and installation of the Work in substantial conformity with
the attached Exhibit B, Scope of Work.
5.4 The risk of loss or damage to the Work shall be borne by the Artist until final acceptance by City. The
Artist shall take such measures as are necessary to protect the Work from loss or damage until final
acceptance by City.
Section 6. TIMELY PROVISION OF SERICES; DAMAGES FOR DELAYED PERFORMANCE: The parties
agree that in the performance of the terms and requirements of this Agreement by the Artist that time is of the essence.
Artist shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably
necessary for satisfactory performance of Artist's obligations pursuant to this Agreement.
6.1 Damages for Delayed Performance. Subject to reasonable proof and documentation confirming
the same submitted by the City, Artist shall be liable for all incidental and consequential damages
resulting, directly or indirectly, from delays in performance caused by Artist's acts or omissions.
Damages may include, but are not limited to the cost to retrofit the Work installation area should
Artist not meet installation schedule as specified in Exhibit B. The Artist shall not be liable to City for
damages resulting from delays caused by force majeure or by acts or omissions of City, Architect or
the General Contractor; or third party vandalism, except to the extent Artist failed reasonably to
mitigate such damages.
6.2 Illness, Injury, Death or Incapacity. Should Artist die, become ill, injured or otherwise incapacitated
(collectively, “incapacitated”) such that Artist is unable to work for any period not exceeding 30 days
(whether consecutive or non-consecutive), any delay arising out of such incapacity will be allowed
by City whenever it is practicable to do so, considering the facts and circumstances of the Work, the
Project, the Architect, the General Contractor and the Client. City may require Artist to provide
medical certification of any claimed incapacity. In the event Artist is incapacitated such that Artist is
unable to work for a period exceeding a total of 30 days (whether consecutive or nonconsecutive),
City may, at its option, undertake to complete and install the Work in Artist’s absence, so long as the
final Artwork is substantially similar to that designed by Artist. If City undertakes to complete the
Work, City shall give due consideration to Artist’s suggestions, and Artist may disclaim authorship of
the Work. If City exercises its option to implement the Artwork in Artist’s absence, any compensation
paid or payable to Artist shall be reduced by the costs and expenditures of City in completion and
installation of the Work. In case of incapacity exceeding 30 days, the following person shall be Artist’s
representative vis-à-vis the City for purposes of this Section 6 unless otherwise directed in writing by
the Artist:
Teresita Romo
2375 5th Ave.
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916)833-6974
jntromo2018@gmail.com
Section 7. APPROVAL AND FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF ARTWORK. Payment does not imply acceptance of
work. The granting of any payment by City, or the receipt thereof by Artist, shall in no way lessen the liability of Artist
to replace unsatisfactory work, equipment, or materials, although the unsatisfactory character of such work, equipment
or materials may not have been apparent or detected at the time such payment was made. Materials, equipment,
components, or workmanship that does not conform to the requirements of this Agreement may be rejected by City
and in such case must be replaced by Artist without as soon as possible.
41
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 5 of 19
7.1 The granting or withholding of any approval by the City shall be determined by the City in its sole
and reasonable discretion. However, the City shall approve all deliverables if they materially conform
to plans or Contract Documents previously approved by the City. If the City withholds approval of
any deliverables or Phase, in addition to other rights or remedies available to the City under the
Agreement or applicable law, the City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement immediately
and shall have no further obligations under this Agreement.
7.2 Final Acceptance. Artist shall advise the City in writing when Artist has completed all obligations,
services and deliverables under this Agreement and all modifications. The City promptly shall send
a Notice of Response identifying in writing any obligations, services or deliverables that Artist has
not satisfactorily met, any defects in Artist’s performance, and the requirements for Artist to cure any
such default. Artist shall have 20 days from dispatch of the Notice of Response to cure any defects
in Artist’s performance identified in the City’s Notice of Response. The Artwork shall not be officially
accepted by City unless the City has issued a resolution of Final Acceptance. City shall make a good
faith effort to make a determination as to Final Acceptance promptly.
7.3 Public Art Collection. Upon Final Acceptance, the City shall accession the Artwork into the Public
Art Collection.
Section 8. WARRANTIES/STANDARDS
8.1 Unique. Artist warrants that the design of the Artwork as expressed in the Proposal, Exhibit A, is an
edition of one, and that neither Artist nor Artist’s agents will execute or authorize another to execute
another work of the same or substantially similar image, design, dimensions and materials as the
Artwork. Artist may create works that utilize or incorporate various individual art elements that
comprise the Artwork, so long as the work utilizing or incorporating such individual elements (1) does
not consist predominantly of such elements, (2) is not the same or substantially similar in image,
design, dimensions and materials as the Artwork, and (3) is not displayed in an environment that is
the same or substantially similar to the environment in which the Artwork is to be displayed at the
site.
8.2 Warranty of Title. Artist represents and warrants that Artist is the sole author of the Artwork and that
Artist is the sole owner of any and all copyrights pertaining to the Artwork. Artist further represents
that the Artwork is free and clear of any liens and that there are no outstanding disputes in connection
with property rights, intellectual property rights or any other rights in the Artwork or any parts of the
Artwork.
8.3 The Artist shall faithfully perform the work required under this Agreement in accordance with
standards of care, skill, training, diligence, and judgment provided by highly competent professionals
who perform work of a similar nature to the Work described in this Agreement. Artist shall assign
only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in
its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the removal of any such
persons, Artist shall, immediately upon receiving notice from City of such desire of City, cause the
removal of such person or persons, unless in the Artist's sole opinion, the skill or creativity of such
person or persons is essential to the creation of the Work.
8.4 Warranty of Workmanship. The Artist shall guarantee his/her Work to be free from faults of material
and workmanship for a period of one (1) year after installation and final acceptance by the City. The
Artist shall deliver the Work to the City free and clear of any liens from any source whatsoever. The
foregoing guarantees shall apply only to the Work that is entirely that of the Artist or persons
42
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 6 of 19
responsible to the Artist, as installed, and shall not apply to materials or workmanship of projects in
which the Work of the Artist is integrated or combined, or to materials purchased, acquired, or
installed by a person or entity not responsible to the Artist.
8.5 Warranty of Public Safety. Artist represents and warrants that the Work will not pose a danger to
public health or safety in view of the possibility of misuse, if such misuse is in a manner that was
reasonably foreseeable at any time during the term of this Agreement.
8.6 Warranty of Acceptable Standard of Display and Operation. Artist represents and warrants that:
8.6.1 Occasional or minimal cleaning and repair of the Artwork and any associated working parts
and/or equipment will maintain the Work within an acceptable standard of public display;
8.6.2 Foreseeable exposure to the elements and general wear and tear will cause the Work to
experience only minor repairable damages and will not cause the Work to fall below an
acceptable standard of public display; and
8.6.3 With general routine cleaning and repair, and within the context of foreseeable exposure to
the elements and general wear and tear, the Work will not experience irreparable conditions
that do not fall within an acceptable standard of public display, including mold, rust,
fracturing, staining, chipping, tearing, abrading and peeling.
8.7 Manufacturer’s Warranties. To the extent the Work incorporates products covered by a
manufacturer’s warranty, Artist shall provide copies of such warranties to City.
Section 9. MAINTENANCE OF ARTWORK
9.1 Unless specifically provided in this Agreement, Artist shall not be responsible for ongoing
maintenance of the Artwork.
9.2 Artist shall provide the City with a General Maintenance Plan for the Artwork, with a detailed
description of future anticipated maintenance requirements; a recommended maintenance schedule;
anticipated and required care and/or replacement/upgrade of any part of the Artwork and associated
moving parts or equipment including any staff time involved in displaying or operating artwork and
the frequency of such staff involvement; and written instructions and manufacturer’s specifications
for reasonably foreseeable maintenance and preservation activities relating to the Artwork.
9.3 The Artwork shall be durable, taking into consideration that the installation site is an unsecured public
space that may be exposed to elements such as weather, temperature variation, and considerable
movement of people and equipment. Artist shall ensure that all maintenance requirements will be
reasonable in terms of time and expense.
9.4 Although City strives to maintain the Public Art Collection in good repair and condition, City is not
required by this Agreement to maintain the Artwork to any particular standard. City may determine
to allow the Artwork to deteriorate in accordance with the Artwork’s temporary life span, if deemed
appropriate by City or if City lacks sufficient funds for required maintenance and/or conservation. If
the Artwork suffers deterioration, City shall have sole discretion to determine whether to remove the
Artwork from display as a result of deterioration, whether to replace any portion of the Artwork or
translate any component into new media, or whether to maintain the Artwork on display despite its
deteriorated condition.
43
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 7 of 19
9.5 The anticipated life span of the Artwork is 25 years from the date of final acceptance by the City.
After that time, the City in its sole discretion may re-evaluate the Artwork to determine if it retains its
identity as a work of art and, if not, whether to take appropriate action, including the possibility of
destroying the Artwork. If the City determines that, through decay, vandalism or other forces, the
Artwork has lost its integrity to the point where it should be destroyed, the City shall first offer the
Artwork to Artist free of charge and in writing.
Section 10. ARTIST’S RIGHTS; CITY’S OWNERSHIP RIGHTS
10.1 The City intends to display the Artwork as originally created by Artist in Exhibit A and to maintain the
Artwork in good condition. Public artworks commissioned by the City are sometimes integrated into
their site, such that they become an integral, permanent and site-specific part of the building’s
architecture or landscaped environment and removal of the artwork would result in significant
changes to the artwork and the building’s architecture. City, however, shall preserve complete
flexibility to operate and manage City property in the public’s interest. Therefore, City retains the
absolute right to alter the Artwork in City’s sole judgment. For example, City may alter the Artwork to
eliminate hazard, to comply with the ADA, to otherwise aid City in the management of its property
and affairs, or through neglect or accident. If, during or after the term of this Agreement, City finds
the Site to be inappropriate, City has the right to install the Artwork at an alternate location that City
chooses in its sole discretion. If the Artwork is free-standing such that it can be removed without
significant damage to the Artwork or the Site, and if the City authorizes the removal of the Artwork,
the City shall take reasonable precautions to minimize alteration of the Artwork during removal.
10.2 With respect to the Artwork produced under this Agreement, and in consideration of the procedures
and remedies specified in this Agreement, Artist waives any and all claims, arising at any time and
under any circumstances, against City, its officers, agents, employees, successors and assigns,
arising under the federal Visual Artists Rights Act (and 113(d)), the California Art Preservation Act
(Cal. Civil Code §§987 et seq.), and any other local, state, federal or international laws that convey
rights of the same nature as those conveyed under 17 U.S.C. §106A, Cal. Civil Code §§987 et seq.,
or any other type of moral right protecting the integrity of works of art. If the Artwork is incorporated
into a building such that the Artwork cannot be removed from the building without alteration of the
Artwork, Artist waives any and all such claims against any future owners of the site, and its agents,
officers and employees, for alteration of the Artwork.
10.3 If City intends to take any action with respect to the site or the Artwork that would alter the Artwork,
other than routine cleaning and maintenance, the following procedures shall apply:
10.3.1 Notice. Where time permits, City shall make reasonable good faith efforts to notify Artist at
least 20 calendar days prior to authorizing any alteration of the Artwork, at the last phone
number or address provided by Artist to the City’s Contract Administrator. Where time does
not permit prior to alteration of the Artwork – for example, in cases of public hazard, accident
or unauthorized alteration – City shall notify Artist within 30 calendar days after such
alteration.
10.3.2 Consultation. After receiving such notice, Artist shall consult with City to determine whether
the Artwork can be restored or relocated, and to attempt to come to a mutually agreeable
plan for disposition of the Artwork. Such consultation shall be without charge by Artist unless
otherwise specifically agreed in writing. If City intends to remove the Artwork, Artist shall
44
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 8 of 19
consult regarding methods to minimize or repair any Alteration to the Artwork caused by
such removal and the potential costs of such removal.
10.3.3 Restoration. If the Artwork is altered, with or without prior notice to Artist, and City intends
to maintain the Artwork on display, City shall make a reasonable good faith effort to engage
Artist in the restoration of the Artwork and to compensate Artist for Artist’s time and efforts
at fair market value, which may be the subject of a future Agreement between Artist and
City. However, City has no obligation under this Agreement to restore the Artwork to its
original condition, to compensate Artist for any restoration work, or to maintain the Artwork
on display. If Artist fails or refuses to negotiate with City in good faith with respect to any
restoration, City may contract with any other qualified art conservator or artist for such
restoration. During Artist’s lifetime, City shall make best efforts not to display or de-
accession only a portion of the Artwork without Artist’s consent.
10.3.4 Removal by Artist. Where time permits, if City intends to take action that will destroy or
significantly alter the Artwork, such as destruction of all or part of the site, and City
determines that it will not remove the Artwork itself, City shall allow Artist to remove the
Artwork at Artist’s expense within 60 days of notice from the City of the need to remove the
Artwork, in which case title shall revert to Artist. If Artist fails to remove the Artwork within
that 60 day period, City may alter the Artwork in any manner, including destroying it, in City’s
sole discretion.
10.3.5 Remedies. If City breaches any of its obligations under this Section, Artist’s remedies shall
be limited as follows: If City inadvertently fails to provide a required prior notice of alteration,
City will provide notice as soon as it discovers the omission, and before alteration of the
Artwork if that remains possible. If City alters the Artwork without providing Artist a required
prior notice of alteration, Artist shall be given the first right of refusal to restore the Artwork
at the same location and City shall make reasonable efforts to provide funding for the
restoration. If City funds cannot be made available after reasonable efforts are made to
secure such funding, Artist may, but is not obligated to, restore the Artwork at Artist’s
expense. If Artist elects not to restore the Artwork, City may retain another artist or
conservator to restore it, or may Alter the Artwork in any manner, at City’s sole discretion.
10.4 If City alters the Artwork without Artist’s consent in a manner that is prejudicial to Artist’s reputation,
Artist retains the right to disclaim authorship of the Artwork in accordance with California Civil Code
§987(d) and 17 U.S.C. §106A(a)(2).
10.5 Except as provided in this Agreement, with respect to third parties who are not officers, employees,
agents, successors or assigns of City, Artist retains Artist’s moral rights in the Artwork, as established
in the Visual Artists Rights Act (17 U.S.C. §§106A and 113(d)), the California Art Preservation Act
(Cal. Civil Code §§987 and 989), or any other local, state, federal or international moral rights laws
that protect the integrity of works of art. Accordingly, nothing herein shall prevent Artist from pursuing
a claim for alteration of the Artwork against a third party who is not an officer, employee, agent,
successor or assign of City. City has no obligation to pursue claims against third parties to remedy
or prevent alteration of the Artwork. However, as owner of the Artwork, City may pursue claims
against third parties for damages or to restore the Artwork if the Artwork has been altered without
City’s authorization.
Section 11. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND PUBLICITY RIGHTS
45
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 9 of 19
11.1 Copyright. Subject to usage rights and licenses granted to City hereunder, Artist shall retain all 17
U.S.C. §106 copyrights in all original works of authorship produced under this Agreement. Artist’s
copyright shall not extend to predominantly utilitarian aspects of the Work, such as landscaping
elements, furnishings, or other similar objects. If Artist is comprised of two or more individual persons,
the individual persons shall be deemed joint authors of the Work.
11.2 City’s Intellectual Property License. Artist grants to City, and to City’s agents, authorized
contractors and assigns, an unlimited, non-exclusive and irrevocable license to do the following with
respect to the Work, the Artwork, and any original works of authorship created under this Agreement,
whether in whole or in part, in all media (including electronic and digital) throughout the universe:
11.2.1 Implementation, Use and Display. City may use and display the Work (to the extent the
Work includes graphic representations or models) and the Artwork. To the extent the Work
involves design elements that are incorporated by City into the design of the site, City may
implement such elements at the site.
11.2.2 Reproduction and Distribution. City may make and distribute, and authorize the making,
display and distribution of, photographs and other 2-dimensional reproductions. City may
use such reproductions for any City-related purpose, including advertising, educational and
promotional materials, brochures, books, flyers, postcards, print, broadcast, film, electronic
and multimedia publicity, gifts for City benefactors, documentation of City’s Public Art
Collection, and catalogues or similar publications. City shall ensure that such reproductions
are made in a professional and tasteful manner, in the sole and reasonable judgment of the
City. The proceeds from the sale of any such reproductions shall be used to maintain and
support City’s Public Art Collection or for any other public purposes that City deems
appropriate. The license granted hereunder includes the right to create 2-dimensional
reproductions on items such as tote-bags, T-shirts, coffee mugs and similar merchandise.
Nothing hereunder shall be construed to constrain Artist from creating posters, note cards,
or other reproductions of the Artwork with appropriate credit to the City.
11.2.3 Public Records Requests. Any documents provided by Artist to City are public records
and City may authorize third parties to review and reproduce such documents pursuant to
public records laws, including the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance and California Public
Records Act.
11.3 Third Party Infringement. The City is not responsible for any third party infringement of Artist’s
copyright and not responsible for protecting the intellectual property rights of Artist.
11.4. Credit. All reproductions by the City shall contain a credit to the Artist and a copyright notice
substantially in the following form: “Adan Romo – Romo Studios(c), 2022.” The Artist shall use his/her
best efforts to include a credit reading substantially "An original work commissioned by the City of
Dublin, California" in any public showing under the Artist's control of reproductions of the Work.
11.5 Publicity. City shall have the right to use Artist’s name, likeness, and biographical information, in
connection with the display or reproduction and distribution of the Artwork including all advertising
and promotional materials regarding City or the City. Artist shall be reasonably available to attend
any inauguration or presentation ceremonies relating to the public dedication of the Artwork.
46
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 10 of 19
11.6 Trademark. In the event that City’s use of the Artwork creates trademark, service mark or trade
dress rights in connection with the Artwork, City shall have an exclusive and irrevocable right in such
trademark, service mark, or trade dress.
11.7 Resale Royalty. If City sells the Artwork as a fixture to real property, and if the resale value of the
Artwork is not itemized separately from the value of the real property, the parties agree that the resale
price of the Artwork shall be presumed to be less than the purchase price paid by City under this
Agreement. Thus, City has no obligation to pay resale royalties pursuant to California Civil Code
§986 or any other law requiring the payment of resale royalties. If City sells the Artwork as an
individual piece, separate from or itemized as part of a real property transaction, City shall pay to
Artist a resale royalty to the extent required by law, based upon the sale price of the Artwork.
11.8 If for any reason the proposed design is not implemented, all rights to the proposed artwork shall be
retained by the Artist. The City shall have no right to implement the proposed artwork, whether or
not protected by copyright, unless and until the City and the Artist enter into a subsequent agreement
for the implementation of the proposed design.
Section 12. OWNERSHIP OF RESULTS AND RISK OF LOSS
12.1 Title Transfer. Except in the case of early termination of this Agreement, title to the Artwork shall
transfer from Artist to City upon the City’s Final Acceptance of the Artwork. Title transfer shall be self-
executing upon City’s Final Acceptance. Artist will cooperate in providing to City any title transfer
documents City may request or require during or after the Term of this Agreement.
12.2 Risk of Loss. The risk of loss or damage to the Artwork shall be borne solely by Artist until Final
Acceptance of the Artwork by the City. Artist shall take steps to protect the Artwork from loss or
damage. The City staff shall make a good faith effort to inspect the Artwork within 15 days after
completion so that the City can approve the Artwork by resolution in a timely fashion.
12.3 Ownership of Documents. Conceptual Design, Design Development Documents, Construction
Documents, Samples, Mock-ups and all other documents prepared and submitted by Artist to the
City pursuant to this Agreement shall belong to the City. Artist may retain originals of such
documents and items and provide copies to City.
Section 13. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Before beginning any work under this Agreement, Artist, at its own
cost and expense, shall procure "occurrence coverage" insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to
property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Artist and its agents,
representatives, employees, and subcontractors. Artist shall provide proof satisfactory to City of such insurance that
meets the requirements of this section and under forms of insurance satisfactory in all respects to the City. Artist shall
maintain the insurance policies required by this section throughout the term of this Agreement. The cost of such
insurance shall be included in the Artist's bid. Artist shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any
subcontract until Artist has obtained all insurance required herein for the subcontractor(s) and provided evidence
thereof to City. Verification of the required insurance shall be submitted and made part of this Agreement prior to
execution.
13.1 Workers’ Compensation
13.1.1 General Requirements. Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain
Statutory Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance for any
and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Contractor. The Statutory Workers’
47
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 11 of 19
Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance shall be provided with limits of
not less than $1,000,000 per accident. In the alternative, Contractor may rely on a self-
insurance program to meet these requirements, but only if the program of self-insurance
complies fully with the provisions of the California Labor Code. Determination of whether a
self-insurance program meets the standards of the California Labor Code shall be solely in
the discretion of the Contract Administrator.
The Workers’ Compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor
of the City for all work performed by the Contractor, its employees, agents, and
subcontractors.
13.1.2 Submittal Requirements. To comply with Subsection 4.1, Contractor shall
submit the following:
a. Certificate of Workers’ Compensation Insurance in the amounts specified
in the section; and
b. Waiver of Subrogation Endorsement as required by the section.
13.2 Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance.
13.2.1 General requirements. Artist, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain commercial
general and automobile liability insurance for the term of this Agreement in an amount not
less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence, TWO MILLION
DOLLARS ($2,000,000.00) aggregate, combined single limit coverage for risks associated
with the work contemplated by this Agreement. If a Commercial General Liability Insurance
or an Automobile Liability form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either
the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this
Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence
limit. Such coverage shall include but shall not be limited to, protection against claims
arising from bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and damage to
property resulting from activities contemplated under this Agreement, including the use of
owned and non-owned automobiles.
13.2.2 Minimum scope of coverage. Commercial general coverage shall be at least as broad as
Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form CG 0001 (ed.
11/88) or Insurance Services Office form number GL 0002 (ed. 1/73) covering
comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404
covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability. Automobile coverage shall be at
least as broad as Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (ed. 12/90)
Code 8 and 9 (“any auto”). No endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage.
13.2.3 Additional requirements. Each of the following shall be included in the insurance
coverage or added as an endorsement to the policy:
a. City and its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be covered as
additional insureds with respect to each of the following: liability arising out of
activities performed by or on behalf of Artist, including the insured’s general
supervision of Artist; products and completed operations of Artist; premises
48
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 12 of 19
owned, occupied, or used by Artist; and automobiles owned, leased, or used by
the Artist. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of
protection afforded to City or its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.
b. The insurance shall cover on an occurrence or an accident basis, and not on a
claims-made basis.
c. An endorsement must state that coverage is primary insurance with respect to the
City and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers, and that no insurance or
self-insurance maintained by the City shall be called upon to contribute to a loss
under the coverage.
d. Any failure of Artist to comply with reporting provisions of the policy shall not affect
coverage provided to City and its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers.
e. An endorsement shall state that coverage shall not be canceled except after thirty
(30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been
given to the City. Artist shall notify City within 14 days of notification from Artist’s
insurer if such coverage is suspended, voided or reduced in coverage or in limits.
13.3 All Policies Requirements.
13.3.1 Acceptability of insurers. All insurance required by this section is to be placed with
insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII.
13.3.2 Verification of coverage. Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement, Artist shall
furnish City with certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting coverage
required herein. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be
signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The City
reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at
any time.
13.3.3 Subcontractors. Artist shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or
shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages
for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.
13.3.4 Variation. The City may approve a variation in the foregoing insurance requirements, upon
a determination that the coverages, scope, limits, and forms of such insurance are either
not commercially available, or that the City’s interests are otherwise fully protected.
13.3.5 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Artist shall disclose to and obtain the approval
of City for the self-insured retentions and deductibles before beginning any of the services
or work called for by any term of this Agreement.
During the period covered by this Agreement, only upon the prior express written
authorization of Contract Administrator, Artist may increase such deductibles or self-insured
retentions with respect to City, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers. The
Contract Administrator may condition approval of an increase in deductible or self-insured
retention levels with a requirement that Artist procure a bond, guaranteeing payment of
49
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 13 of 19
losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses that is
satisfactory in all respects to each of them.
13.3.6 Notice of Reduction in Coverage. In the event that any coverage required by this section
is reduced, limited, or materially affected in any other manner, Artist shall provide written
notice to City at Artist’s earliest possible opportunity and in no case later than five days after
Artist is notified of the change in coverage.
13.4 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Artist fails to provide or maintain any
insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, City may,
at its sole option exercise any of the following remedies, which are alternatives to other remedies
City may have and are not the exclusive remedy for Artist’s breach:
Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance
from any sums due under the Agreement;
Order Artist to stop work under this Agreement or withhold any payment that becomes due to
Artist hereunder, or both stop work and withhold any payment, until Artist demonstrates
compliance with the requirements hereof; and/or
Terminate this Agreement.
Section 14. INDEMNIFICATION AND ARTIST’S RESPONSIBILITIES. Artist shall indemnify, defend with
counsel mutually selected by the City and Artist, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees,
agents, and volunteers from and against any and all losses, liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of
action arising out of any personal injury, bodily injury, loss of life, or damage to property, or any violation of any federal,
state, or municipal law or ordinance, to the extent caused, in whole or in part, by the willful misconduct or negligent
acts or omissions of Artist or its employees, subcontractors, or agents, by acts for which they could be held strictly
liable, or by the quality or character of their work. The foregoing obligation of Artist shall not apply when (1) the injury,
loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law arises wholly from the negligence or willful misconduct of the City or
its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers and (2) the actions of Artist or its employees, subcontractor, or agents
have contributed in no part to the injury, loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law. It is understood that the
duty of Artist to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California
Civil Code. Acceptance by City of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not
relieve Artist from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless
clause shall apply to any damages or claims for damages whether or not such insurance policies shall have been
determined to apply. By execution of this Agreement, Artist acknowledges and agrees to the provisions of this Section
and that it is a material element of consideration.
In the event that Artist or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Artist providing services under this Agreement is
determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) to be
eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of City, Artist shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the
payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Artist or its employees, agents,
or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise
be the responsibility of City.
Section 15. STATUS OF ARTIST AS INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
15.1 Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Artist shall be an
independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. City shall have the right to control
50
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 14 of 19
Artist only insofar as the results of Artist's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement and
assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3; however, otherwise City shall not have the
right to control the means by which Artist accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this
Agreement. Notwithstanding any other City, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or
ordinance to the contrary, Artist and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing
services under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive
any and all claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including
but not limited to eligibility to enroll in the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)
as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer
contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.
15.2 Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as limiting the right of Artist to engage in
his/her profession separate and apart from this Agreement so long as such activities do not interfere
with the performance by Artist of his/her obligations as set forth in this Agreement.
15.3 Artist No Agent. Except as City may specify in writing, Artist shall have no authority, express or
implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Artist shall have no authority,
express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
Section 16. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.
16.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.
16.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Artist and any subcontractors shall comply with all laws
applicable to the performance of the work hereunder.
16.3 Other Governmental Regulations. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by fiscal
assistance from another governmental entity, Artist and any subcontractors shall comply with all
applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance
program.
16.4 Licenses and Permits. Artist represents and warrants to City that Artist and its employees, agents,
and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature
that are legally required to practice their respective professions. Artist represents and warrants to
City that Artist and its employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and expense,
keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals that
are legally required to practice their respective professions. In addition to the foregoing, Artist and
any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement valid Business
Licenses from City.
16.5 Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity. Artist shall not discriminate, on the basis of a
person’s race, sex, gender, religion (including religious dress and grooming practices), national
origin, ancestry, physical or mental disability, medical condition (including cancer and genetic
characteristics), marital status, age, sexual orientation, color, creed, pregnancy, genetic information,
gender identity or expression, political affiliation or belief, military/veteran status, or any other
classification protected by applicable local, state, or federal laws (each a “Protected Characteristic”),
against any employee, applicant for employment, subcontractor, bidder for a subcontract, or
participant in, recipient of, or applicant for any services or programs provided by Consultant under
this Agreement.
51
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 15 of 19
Artist shall include the provisions of this Subsection in any subcontract approved by the Contract
Administrator or this Agreement.
16.6 Prevailing Wage. Artist shall comply with any applicable state and local laws regarding payment of
prevailing wages for Public Works projects.
Section 17. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.
17.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written notification
to Artist.
Artist may cancel this Agreement upon thirty (30) days’ written notice to City and shall include in such
notice the reasons for cancellation.
In the event of termination, Artist shall be entitled to compensation for services performed to the
effective date of termination; City, however, may condition payment of such compensation upon
Artist delivering to City any or all documents, photographs, computer software, video and audio
tapes, and other materials provided to Artist or prepared by or for Artist or the City in connection with
this Agreement.
17.2 Extension. City may, in its sole and exclusive discretion, extend the end date of this Agreement
beyond that provided for in Subsection 1.1. Any such extension shall require a written amendment
to this Agreement, as provided for herein. Artist understands and agrees that, if City grants such an
extension, City shall have no obligation to provide Artist with compensation beyond the maximum
amount provided for in this Agreement. Similarly, unless authorized by the Contract Administrator,
City shall have no obligation to reimburse Artist for any otherwise reimbursable expenses incurred
during the extension period.
17.3 Amendments. The parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the parties.
17.4 Assignment and Subcontracting. City and Artist recognize and agree that this Agreement
contemplates personal performance by Artist and is based upon a determination of Artist’s unique
personal competence, experience, and specialized personal knowledge. Moreover, a substantial
inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was and is the professional reputation and
competence of Artist. Artist may not assign this Agreement or any interest therein without the prior
written approval of the Contract Administrator. Artist shall not subcontract any portion of the
performance contemplated and provided for herein, other than to the subcontractors noted in the
proposal, without prior written approval of the Contract Administrator.
17.5 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all provisions of this
Agreement allocating liability between City and Artist shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
17.6 Options upon Breach by Artist. If Artist materially breaches any of the terms of this Agreement,
City’s remedies shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
17.6.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement;
17.6.2 Retain the plans, specifications, drawings, reports, design documents, and any other work
product prepared by Artist pursuant to this Agreement;
52
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 16 of 19
17.6.3 Retain a different Artist to complete the work described in Exhibit A not finished by Artist; or
17.6.4 Charge Artist the difference between the cost to complete the work described in Exhibit A
that is unfinished at the time of breach and the amount that City would have paid Artist
pursuant to Section 2 if Artist had completed the work.
Section 18. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS.
18.1 City Access to Artwork; Inspection of Work and Artwork. City shall have the reasonable right to,
at its sole expense, inspect the Work, including the Artwork, at the fabrication Site during any phase
of the project at any time. In the event that all or part of the Work is created in a location other than
the Site, the City shall have the right to inspect the Work, including the Artwork, at any phase of the
project following 48 hours written notice from the City to the Artist. The Artist shall be responsible for
facilitating City’s prompt access to Artist’s property or the property of the Artist’s subcontractors
where the Work or portions of the Work are being fabricated or installed.
18.2 Status Reports. Artist shall submit written reports regarding the status of the Work, including the
Artwork, as may be reasonably requested by the City. The City shall determine the format for the
content of such reports. The timely submission of all reports is a necessary and material term and
condition of this Agreement. The reports, including any copies, shall be submitted on recycled paper
and printed on double-sided pages to the maximum extent possible.
18.3 Artist Availability. Artist or Artist’s authorized agent shall be available at Artist’s sole expense for
up to 2 visits to Dublin to ensure the proper installation and operation of the Artwork. During each
visit to Dublin, unless otherwise agreed upon by the City, the Artist’s visit shall last for at least a full
8 hour day.
18.4 Records Created as Part of Artist’s Performance. With the exception of model submitted with
initial proposal, all reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda,
plans, studies, specifications, records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any
other form, that Artist prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters
covered hereunder shall be the property of the City. Artist hereby agrees to deliver those documents
to the City upon termination of the Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the documents and
other materials, including but not limited to those described above, prepared pursuant to this
Agreement are prepared specifically for the City and are not necessarily suitable for any future or
other use. City and Artist agree that, until final approval by City, all data, plans, specifications, reports
and other documents are confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written
consent of both parties. It is also agreed that proposal model remains property of the Artist and will
be returned to Artist after the finished sculpture is installed.
18.5 Artist’s Books and Records. Artist shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices,
vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for
services or expenditures and disbursements charged to the City under this Agreement for a minimum
of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to the Artist
to this Agreement.
18.6 Inspection and Audit of Records. Any records or documents that Section 9.2 of this Agreement
requires Artist to maintain shall be made available for inspection, audit, and/or copying at any time
during regular business hours, upon oral or written request of the City. Under California Government
Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds expended under this Agreement exceeds TEN
53
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 17 of 19
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000.00), the Agreement shall be subject to the examination and audit
of the State Auditor, at the request of City or as part of any audit of the City, for a period of three (3)
years after final payment under the Agreement.
Section 19. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
19.1 Attorneys’ Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for declaratory
relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to
reasonable attorneys’ fees in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled. The
court may set such fees in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose.
19.2 Venue. In the event that either party brings any action against the other under this Agreement, the
parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in
the County of Alameda.
19.3 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement
is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so adjudged shall remain in
full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not
void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.
19.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this Agreement
does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other term of this Agreement.
19.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall
apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the parties.
19.6 Use of Recycled Products. Artist shall prepare and submit all reports, written studies and other
printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or less cost than virgin paper.
19.7 Conflict of Interest. Artist may serve other clients, but none whose activities within the corporate
limits of City or whose business, regardless of location, would place Artist in a “conflict of interest,”
as that term is defined in the Political Reform Act, codified at California Government Code Section
81000 et seq.
Artist shall not employ any City official in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. No officer
or employee of City shall have any financial interest in this Agreement that would violate California
Government Code Sections 1090 et seq.
Artist hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12) months, an
employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City. If Artist was an employee, agent, appointee, or
official of the City in the previous twelve months, Artist warrants that it did not participate in any
manner in the forming of this Agreement. Artist understands that, if this Agreement is made in
violation of Government Code §1090 et.seq., the entire Agreement is void and Artist will not be
entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including
reimbursement of expenses, and Artist will be required to reimburse the City for any sums paid to
the Artist. Artist understands that, in addition to the foregoing, it may be subject to criminal
prosecution for a violation of Government Code § 1090 and, if applicable, will be disqualified from
holding public office in the State of California.
54
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 18 of 19
19.8 Solicitation. Artist agrees not to solicit business at any meeting, focus group, or interview related
to this Agreement, either orally or through any written materials.
19.9 Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by the City Manager or his/her
designee ("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be directed to or through the Contract
Administrator or his or her designee.
19.10 Notices. Any written notice to Artist shall be sent to:
Adan Romo, Romo Studios, LLC
2409 U Street
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916)505-5753
aromo@romostudios.com
www.romostudios.com
Any written notice to City shall be sent to:
City Manager
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
(925) 833-6645
19.11 Professional Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the contract administrator, the first
page of a technical report, first page of design specifications, and each page of construction drawings
shall be stamped/sealed and signed by the licensed professional responsible for the report/design
preparation. The stamp/seal shall be in a block entitled "Seal and Signature of Registered
Professional with report/design responsibility," as in the following example.
_________________________________________
Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with
report/design responsibility.
19.12 Integration. This Agreement, including the proposal, scope of work, and payment schedule
attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibits A, B and C, represents the entire and integrated
agreement between City and Artist and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or
agreements, either written or oral.
SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE
55
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Romo Studios Page 19 of 19
The Parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. The persons whose signatures appear
below certify that they are authorized to sign on behalf of the respective Party.
CITY OF DUBLIN ARTIST
____________________________ ______________________________
City Manager Adan Romo, Artist
Attest:
____________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
____________________________
City Attorney
2559640.1
56
EXHIBIT A
ARTIST PROPOSAL
57
The Heritage Park site represents a special place where people from all over the world, from
different backgrounds and traditions, gathered at various points during this land’s history to
gather, work, raise families and build the community that thrives today in the City of Dublin.
This rich history is difficult to represent and celebrate in one singular piece. Here at Romo
Studios we took on this challenge by proposing six different small sculptures placed around
the park.
Walking around the park we realized that there are several historic large buildings- the Kolb
house, the Hay barn, the Old St. Ramon church and Murray school- but it was hard to imagine
what life was like back in Dublin’s rich history. Our minds wondered and envisioned the original
Native tribes that lived here and what their daily life looked like. Or how farming was done prior
to engines and tractors. What it was like for the blacksmith that worked here and his working
conditions. Or visiting Murray school we wondered how it was possible for children to attend a
school with only a single room. With so many thoughts about the past, we thought a fun and
creative way to bring scenes of past life was to propose making several small sculptures that
were snapshots of what people did here. These small scenes will be ideal for children who, like
us, often times wonder what the past was like. These small scale scenes will entice adults as
well - who can resist miniature scenes of activity.
Many of the people depicted in these small scene celebrate the many men and women who
came here - famous and not so famous - from all over the world to contribute to the building of
the city. The Native American tribes of the Seunen, Souyen and the Pelnen will be depicted in a
small bronze sculpture with a creek and waterway that once existed here in Dublin where local
tribes would gather fish, food, acorns and plants for making baskets. The sculpture of the small
Murray school celebrates the educators and children - past and present - who through
education have contributed to the city’s growth and success. The farmland being tilled
represents all the farmers in the region who have labored to feed a growing city. The
blacksmith scene depict highlights the industries that existed here at this site - a blacksmith
shop and a wheel wagon fabrication shop. Needless to say these two crafts contributed to
the growth of the city of Dublin as it emerged from a being a small town to a thriving city.
Scattered around the park, visitors will walk around in search of these small bronze works.
Each scene will be made of bronze and each depict a moment in life that took place here at
Heritage Park. The sculptures will be mounted to a corten steel pedestal that will be anchored
to concrete foundations. The corten steel bases will look rusty and match the rusty look of
hinges and farm equipment that currently exists in the park. Each work - bronze sculpture on
its pedestal - will be around 32” high. At the base of each pedestal we propose the placement
of a large stone, much like the ones found in the Heritage Park landscape, where children can
stand and take a peek into these tiny little worlds. On the side of each pedestal will be a
plaque welded firmly with information about the scenes and the Dublin history it depicts.
58
MAINTANENCE -
The bronze figures and corten steel pedestals will need little to no maintenance - aside from
cleaning every 2 years.
FABRICATION + INSTALLATION -
Fabrication and installation of the artwork will be completed by
Artworks Foundry
729 Heinz Ave #10
Berkeley, CA 94710
(510) 644-2735
Tipping Structural Engineers
1906 Shattuck Ave
Berkeley, CA 94704
(510) 549-1906
The sculptures with pedestals will delivered by large truck and will be anchored into a
reinforced concrete base.
59
CITY OF DUBLINHERITAGE PARK ARTISTIC FEATURESPROPOSAL60
61
BLACKSMITHSHOPTHIS SCULPTURE CELEBRATE THE INDUSTRIES THAT TOOK PLACE AT THE SITE OF HERITAGE PARK - A BLACKSMITH SHOP AND WAGON WHELL FABRICATION - BOTH PAID A VITAL ROLL IN HELPING BUILD THE CITY.62
EARLY OHLONE SETTLERS THESE FLIUD FORMS REPRESENTTHE SMALL CREEK AND WATERWAYSTHAT ONCE RESIDED HERE AT HERITAGEPARK AND WHERE NATIVE TRIBESCOLLECTED FOOD, ACORNS AND PARTICULAR PLANT LIFETO WEAVE BASKETS.THE SEUNEN, SOUYEN AND PELNEN TRIBES63
DUBLIN PIONEERCEMETERY64
DUBLINFARMERSFARM FIELDS BEING PLOWED, CELEBRATING THEACRES OF FARMLANDTHAT MADE UP LARGE AREAS OF DUBLINAND PROVIDED THEFOOD NECESSARY FOR A GROWING CITY. 65
GOLD MINERSAND GOLDSETTLERS THIS SCULPTURE REPRESENTSTHE AREAS HISTORY OF PROVIDING HOUSINGAND SUPPLIES FOR GOLD MINERSAS WELL AS JOSE AMADOR, MICHAEL MURRAY, JEREMIAH FALLONAND JAMES DOUGHERTY.66
MURRAYSCHOOL HOUSEMURRAY SCHOOL HOUSEHELPED EDUCATED GENERATIONSOF EARLY CITIZENS OF DUBLIN ANDWAS A FOUNDATION FOR HELPING BUILD THE CIOTY.67
CHILDREN INTERACTING WITHARTWORK68
EXHIBIT B
SCOPE OF WORK
SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION OF WORK. The following schedule shall be adhered to in the
performance of the work. During the term of this Agreement, the City Project Manager must
approve Artist’s work at each phase of development before the Artist proceeds to the next phase.
The City Project Manager for this Agreement is:
Shaun Chilkotowsky
Heritage and Cultural Arts Manager
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
(925) 556-4565
Shaun.Chikotowsky@dublin.ca.gov
EXECUTION OF CONTRACT
DELIVERABLES: DUE DATE:
x Fully Executed Contract
x Evidence of All Required Insurance, Dublin Business
License
February, 2022
February, 2022
PHASE I: CLAY MODELS
The scope of work under this phase includes completion of the six clay models of the six artwork
figures.
x Artist will complete the clay models, according to the artist proposal previously approved by
the City. This includes thoughtful research to ensure accurate representation of the figures
while the clay models are being developed.
x Phase will be considered complete when all deliverables have been received by City Project
Manager. Payment may be released earlier than date specified should Phase be deemed
complete.
x Should artist wish to make changes during the process, Artist will obtain City’s written
approval for any changes substantial enough to be visible to a layperson.
DELIVERABLES: DUE DATE:
69
x Studio tour for City representatives to verify production of
the clay models of the six artwork figures.
x Clay Models Complete. Following the City’s approval, there
will be no changes to the design without mutual consent of
the Artist and the City.
June 30, 2022 (EST.)
Aug 30, 2022 (EST.)
PHASE II: MOLDS/WAX
The scope of work under this phase includes completion of the six clay molds/wax of the six
artwork figures.
x Artist will complete the molds/wax, according to the clay figures previously approved by the
City.
x Phase will be considered complete when all deliverables have been received by City Project
Manager. Payment may be released earlier than date specified should Phase be deemed
complete.
x Should artist wish to make changes during the mold/wax process, Artist will obtain City’s
written approval for any changes substantial enough to be visible to a layperson.
DELIVERABLES: DUE DATE:
x Studio/Foundry tour for City representatives to see and sign
off on clay molds/wax of the six artwork figures. Following
the City’s approval, there will be no changes to the design
without mutual consent of the Artist and the City.
x Progress Report to indicate any potential change to project
timeline.
October 30, 2022 (EST.)
October 30, 2022 (EST.)
PHASE III: BRONZE CAST, METAL BASES
The scope of work under this phase includes the bronze casting of the six artwork figures and
fabrication of the Corten steel metal bases for each artwork figure.
x Artist and foundry will complete the bronze castings, according to the molds created in the
previous phase.
70
x Artist will complete the fabrication of the Corten steel bases for the six artwork figures.
x Artist shall work cooperatively with the City to draft interpretative language, which is to be
incorporated into the plaque installed on the steel base of each artwork figure. The City
requires that all signage to be displayed on City property adhere to conventionally accepted
spelling and punctuation, proper grammar and City style preferences, as determined by the
City.
x Should artist wish to make changes during the process, Artist will obtain City’s written
approval for any changes substantial enough to be visible to a layperson.
x Phase will be considered complete when all deliverables have been received by City Project
Manager. Payment may be released earlier than date specified should Phase be deemed
complete.
DELIVERABLES: DUE DATE:
x Studio/Foundry tour for City representative to verify the
completed casting of the bronze artwork figures.
x Studio/Foundry tour for City representative to verify the
completed fabrication of the six Corten steel bases for the
artwork figures.
x Progress Report to indicate any potential change to project
timeline.
January 30, 2023 (EST.)
January 30, 2023 (EST.)
December 15, 2022 (EST.)
PHASE IV: CONCRETE, INSTALL, & CLOSEOUT
The scope of work under this phase includes the completion of the footing elements and
installation of the steel bases, artwork figures, and signage:
x Phase will be considered complete when all deliverables have been received by City Project
Manager. Payment may be released earlier than date specified should Phase be deemed
complete.
x Artist shall create an installation plan indicating the staging and sequence of all aspects of
installation. The Installation Plan must include a detailed description of the estimated duration
of installation, the equipment to be used, and all workers who will be on site to assist.
x Working in cooperation with the City, Artist will complete the installation of the concrete
footings, in preparation for installation of the Corten steel bases and bronze figures.
71
x Prior to installation of Artwork, Artist’s shall verify in writing that the preparation of the artwork
attachment or mounting system and installation is being implemented in accordance industry
standard best practices and approved by City.
x Artist shall supply all hardware necessary for installation.
DELIVERABLES: DUE DATE:
x Delivery and installation plan developed with City.
x Successful installation of concrete and artwork bases.
x Successful installation of artwork figures and interpretative
signage.
x Inspection of the Artwork immediately after installation.
x Final inspection by the City of Dublin.
x Receipt of Artwork Maintenance Records
January 1, 2023 (EST.)
February 30, 2023 (EST.)
March 30, 2023 (EST.)
March 30, 2023 (EST.)
Within 30 Days of Installation
Within 30 Days of Installation
72
EXHIBIT C
PAYMENT SCHEDULE
% COMPLETION
PHASE OF WORK DESCRIPTION OF PHASE By Phase Overall ARTIST FEE
EXECUTION Execution of Contract 10% 10% $10,000
Phase I Clay Models 20% 30% $20,000
Phase II Molds 20% 50% $20,000
Phase III Bronze Cast, Metal Bases 20% 70% $20,000
Phase IV Concrete, Install and Closeout 30% 100% $30,000
TOTAL ARTIST FEE $100,000
73
Attachment 3
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted 2/15/2022 Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION NO. XX – 22
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING A PUBLIC ART AGREEMENT WITH BRIAN KEITH FOR A PUBLIC ART
PROJECT AT HERITAGE PARK
WHEREAS,the 2020-2025 Capital Improvement Program Update includes a project to
design, fabricate, and install a permanent Public Art Monumental Sculpture, at Heritage Park;
and
WHEREAS,an open call was solicited according to the Public Art Master Plan process,
with five of the 18 responding artists selected to submit site specific design proposals; and
WHEREAS,the proposal by artist Brian Keith was recommended be the Ad-Hoc
Selection Committee, Heritage and Cultural Arts Commission, and Parks and Community
Services Commission; and
WHEREAS,Brian Keith has demonstrated ability to perform said services and a third
party art conservator reviewed the design proposal.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does
hereby authorize the execution of a Public Art Agreement with Brian Keith for the design,
fabrication, and installation of a Public Art project at Heritage Park.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is authorized to execute
amendments to the agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit A,and make any necessary, non-
substantive changes to carry out the intent of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of February 2022, by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
City Clerk
74
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 1 of 19
PUBLIC ART AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND BRIAN KEITH
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Dublin (“City”) and Brian Keith (“Artist”) as of February
15, 2022, for the purposes and on the terms and conditions set forth below.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City requires the services of Artist to perform artistic services described in the Agreement for a
public art project as described under Section 8.58 of the Dublin Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Section 2.36.050 of the Dublin Municipal Code to contract for the specialized
services of the artist contemplated by this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Artist is qualified and desires to perform the artistic services required by the City as set forth in this
Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, on February 15, 2022, authorized the City Manager to negotiate an agreement
between City and Artist for the preparation of a final design, fabrication and installation for a public art sculpture at
Heritage Park
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties hereto agree as
follows:
AGREEMENT
Section 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Artist shall provide to
City the services necessary to provide the artwork (“Work”) described in the Artist Proposal described in Exhibit A, and
in the Scope of Work attached as Exhibit B at the time and place, and in the manner specified therein. In the event of
a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit B, the Agreement shall prevail.
1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the date first noted above and shall
end on the date of completion specified in Exhibit B, and Artist shall complete the Work described in
Exhibit A prior to that date, unless the term of the Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended,
as provided for in Section 17. The time provided to Artist to complete the services required by this
Agreement shall not affect the City’s right to terminate the Agreement, as provided for in Section 17.
1.2 Standard of Performance. Artist shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement in
the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession
in which Artist is engaged in the geographical area in which Artist practices its profession. Artist shall
prepare all work products required by this Agreement in a substantial, first-class manner and shall
conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Artist’s profession.
1.3 Assignment of Personnel. Artist shall assign only competent personnel to perform services
pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term
of this Agreement, desires the reassignment of any such persons, Artist shall, immediately upon
receiving notice from City of such desire of City, reassign such person or persons.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695 Attachment 4
Exhibit A to the Resolution
75
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 2 of 19
1.4 Time. Artist shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as
may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance provided in Section 1.1 above
and to satisfy Artist’s obligations hereunder.
Section 2. SCOPE OF WORK: Artist shall provide a final design, fabrication and installation of a monumental
art sculpture for the Heritage Park public art project as more specifically described in Exhibits A and B of this
Agreement.
2.1 The City shall be responsible for providing the Artist, without cost, copies of designs, drawings, reports,
and other relevant data needed by the Artist to design and execute the Project.
2.2 The Artist shall, whenever required during the term of this Agreement, present to the City in writing,
drawing, or other appropriate media for further review and approval any significant changes in the
scope, design, color, size, material, utility, support requirements, texture, or location of the site or the
Work. A significant change is any change that could affect the future installation, scheduling, site
preparation, or maintenance of the Work, or the concept of the Work as represented in the original
concept design included in Exhibit A.
2.3 The City may, at any time, request the Artist in writing to (a) revise portions of the services that he/she
has previously completed in a satisfactory manner; (b) delete portions of the Scope of the Work that
the Artist has not yet performed; (c) perform additional work beyond the Scope of Work to be provided
in Exhibit B; and, (d) make other changes within the General Scope of the Work to be performed under
this Agreement. In the event of such a written request, the Artist may, but shall not be obligated to
agree to any such request.
2.4 In the event the request for change is agreed to by the Artist, this Agreement shall be amended, in
writing, specifying the agreed changes, including, but not limited to, a description of services, additional
budget, payment schedule, and timetable. In the event that the Artist does not agree to the request,
the City shall be entitled to terminate the Agreement for cause pursuant to Article 17 herein.
2.5 No services for which additional compensation will be charged shall be provided by the Artist without
the prior written authorization by the City.
Section 3. COMPENSATION. City hereby agrees to pay Artist a sum not to exceed $350,000 as specified in
Exhibit C, notwithstanding any contrary indications that may be contained in Artist’s proposal, for services to be
performed under this Agreement; or subject to additional amounts for any revisions requested and change order
approved by the City as provided for in Section 2.3 above or elsewhere in this Agreement. In the event of a conflict
between this Agreement and Artist’s proposal, attached as Exhibit A, regarding the amount of compensation, the
Agreement shall prevail. City shall pay Artist for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the time and in the
manner set forth herein. The payments specified in Exhibit C shall be the only payments from City to Artist for services
rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Artist shall submit all invoices to City in the manner specified herein. Except as
specifically authorized by City, Artist shall not bill City for duplicate services performed by more than one person.
Artist and City acknowledge and agree that compensation paid by City to Artist under this Agreement is based upon
Artist’s estimated costs of providing the services required hereunder, including salaries and benefits of employees and
subcontractors of Artist. Consequently, the parties further agree that compensation hereunder is intended to include
the costs of contributions to any pensions and/or annuities to which Artist and its employees, agents, and
subcontractors may be eligible. City therefore has no responsibility for such contributions beyond compensation
required under this Agreement.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
76
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 3 of 19
3.1 Invoices. Artist shall submit invoices as specified in Exhibit B and C, not more often than once a
month during the term of this Agreement, based on the cost for services performed and reimbursable
costs incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information:
Serial identifications of each billable phase; i.e., Bill No. 1 Phase I for the first invoice, etc.;
The beginning and ending dates of the billing period;
A Task Summary containing the original contract amount, the amount of prior billings, the
total due this period, the balance available under the Agreement, the Artist’s signature.
3.2 Total Payment. City shall pay for the services to be rendered by Artist pursuant to this Agreement.
City shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or cost whatsoever incurred by Artist in
rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. City shall make no payment for any extra, further, or
additional service pursuant to this Agreement.
In no event shall Artist submit any invoice for an amount in excess of the maximum amount of
compensation provided above either for a task or for the entire Agreement, unless the Agreement is
modified prior to the submission of such an invoice by a properly executed change order or
amendment.
3.3 Payment of Taxes. Artist is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under
this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.
3.4 Payment upon Termination. In the event that the City or Artist terminates this Agreement pursuant
to Section 17, the City shall compensate the Artist for all outstanding costs and reimbursable
expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as of the date of written notice of termination.
Artist shall maintain adequate logs and timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to that date.
3.5 Authorization to Perform Services. The Artist is not authorized to perform any services or incur
any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of authorization from the
Contract Administrator.
Section 4. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth herein, Artist shall, at its sole cost and expense,
provide all facilities and equipment that may be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement. City
shall make available to Artist only the facilities and equipment listed in Exhibit B, and only under the terms and
conditions set forth herein.
Section 5. RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ARTIST
5.1 The Artist agrees that an essential element of this Agreement is the skill and creativity of the Artist.
The Artist shall not assign the creative or artistic portions of the Work to another party for the
production of the Work without the written consent of the City. Failure to conform to this provision
may be cause for termination of this Agreement, at the sole option of the City.
5.2 The Artist shall be responsible for providing services described in Exhibit B, including but not limited
to, the quality and timely completion of the services. As part of the Work, Artist shall be responsible
for designing the artwork, as described in Exhibit A, so that it can be constructed without exceeding
the approved overall budget for the artwork of $350,000. The Artist shall, without additional
compensation, correct or revise any errors, omissions, or other deficiencies in his/her Work.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
77
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 4 of 19
5.3 The Artist shall complete the fabrication and installation of the Work in substantial conformity with
the attached Exhibit B, Scope of Work.
5.4 The risk of loss or damage to the Work shall be borne by the Artist until final acceptance by City. The
Artist shall take such measures as are necessary to protect the Work from loss or damage until final
acceptance by City.
Section 6. TIMELY PROVISION OF SERICES; DAMAGES FOR DELAYED PERFORMANCE: The parties
agree that in the performance of the terms and requirements of this Agreement by the Artist that time is of the essence.
Artist shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably
necessary for satisfactory performance of Artist's obligations pursuant to this Agreement.
6.1 Damages for Delayed Performance. Subject to reasonable proof and documentation confirming
the same submitted by the City, Artist shall be liable for all incidental and consequential damages
resulting, directly or indirectly, from delays in performance caused by Artist's acts or omissions.
Damages may include, but are not limited to the cost to retrofit the Work installation area should
Artist not meet installation schedule as specified in Exhibit B. The Artist shall not be liable to City for
damages resulting from delays caused by force majeure or by acts or omissions of City, Architect or
the General Contractor; or third party vandalism, except to the extent Artist failed reasonably to
mitigate such damages.
6.2 Illness, Injury, Death or Incapacity. Should Artist die, become ill, injured or otherwise incapacitated
(collectively, “incapacitated”) such that Artist is unable to work for any period not exceeding 30 days
(whether consecutive or non-consecutive), any delay arising out of such incapacity will be allowed
by City whenever it is practicable to do so, considering the facts and circumstances of the Work, the
Project, the Architect, the General Contractor and the Client. City may require Artist to provide
medical certification of any claimed incapacity. In the event Artist is incapacitated such that Artist is
unable to work for a period exceeding a total of 30 days (whether consecutive or nonconsecutive),
City may, at its option, undertake to complete and install the Work in Artist’s absence, so long as the
final Artwork is substantially similar to that designed by Artist. If City undertakes to complete the
Work, City shall give due consideration to Artist’s suggestions, and Artist may disclaim authorship of
the Work. If City exercises its option to implement the Artwork in Artist’s absence, any compensation
paid or payable to Artist shall be reduced by the costs and expenditures of City in completion and
installation of the Work. In case of incapacity exceeding 30 days, the following person shall be Artist’s
representative vis-à-vis the City for purposes of this Section 6 unless otherwise directed in writing by
the Artist:
Lanisa Keith
36 Canyon Hills Place
San Ramon, CA 94582
(925)642-5400
lanisa@lanisa.com
Section 7. APPROVAL AND FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF ARTWORK. Payment does not imply acceptance of
work. The granting of any payment by City, or the receipt thereof by Artist, shall in no way lessen the liability of Artist
to replace unsatisfactory work, equipment, or materials, although the unsatisfactory character of such work, equipment
or materials may not have been apparent or detected at the time such payment was made. Materials, equipment,
components, or workmanship that does not conform to the requirements of this Agreement may be rejected by City
and in such case must be replaced by Artist without as soon as possible.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
78
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 5 of 19
7.1 The granting or withholding of any approval by the City shall be determined by the City in its sole
and reasonable discretion. However, the City shall approve all deliverables if they materially conform
to plans or Contract Documents previously approved by the City. If the City withholds approval of
any deliverables or Phase, in addition to other rights or remedies available to the City under the
Agreement or applicable law, the City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement immediately
and shall have no further obligations under this Agreement.
7.2 Final Acceptance. Artist shall advise the City in writing when Artist has completed all obligations,
services and deliverables under this Agreement and all modifications. The City promptly shall send
a Notice of Response identifying in writing any obligations, services or deliverables that Artist has
not satisfactorily met, any defects in Artist’s performance, and the requirements for Artist to cure any
such default. Artist shall have 20 days from dispatch of the Notice of Response to cure any defects
in Artist’s performance identified in the City’s Notice of Response. The Artwork shall not be officially
accepted by City unless the City has issued a resolution of Final Acceptance. City shall make a good
faith effort to make a determination as to Final Acceptance promptly.
7.3 Public Art Collection. Upon Final Acceptance, the City shall accession the Artwork into the Public
Art Collection.
Section 8. WARRANTIES/STANDARDS
8.1 Unique. Artist warrants that the design of the Artwork as expressed in the Proposal, Exhibit A, is an
edition of one, and that neither Artist nor Artist’s agents will execute or authorize another to execute
another work of the same or substantially similar image, design, dimensions and materials as the
Artwork. Artist may create works that utilize or incorporate various individual art elements that
comprise the Artwork, so long as the work utilizing or incorporating such individual elements (1) does
not consist predominantly of such elements, (2) is not the same or substantially similar in image,
design, dimensions and materials as the Artwork, and (3) is not displayed in an environment that is
the same or substantially similar to the environment in which the Artwork is to be displayed at the
site.
8.2 Warranty of Title. Artist represents and warrants that Artist is the sole author of the Artwork and that
Artist is the sole owner of any and all copyrights pertaining to the Artwork. Artist further represents
that the Artwork is free and clear of any liens and that there are no outstanding disputes in connection
with property rights, intellectual property rights or any other rights in the Artwork or any parts of the
Artwork.
8.3 The Artist shall faithfully perform the work required under this Agreement in accordance with
standards of care, skill, training, diligence, and judgment provided by highly competent professionals
who perform work of a similar nature to the Work described in this Agreement. Artist shall assign
only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in
its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the removal of any such
persons, Artist shall, immediately upon receiving notice from City of such desire of City, cause the
removal of such person or persons, unless in the Artist's sole opinion, the skill or creativity of such
person or persons is essential to the creation of the Work.
8.4 Warranty of Workmanship. The Artist shall guarantee his/her Work to be free from faults of material
and workmanship for a period of one (1) year after installation and final acceptance by the City. The
Artist shall deliver the Work to the City free and clear of any liens from any source whatsoever. The
foregoing guarantees shall apply only to the Work that is entirely that of the Artist or persons
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
79
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 6 of 19
responsible to the Artist, as installed, and shall not apply to materials or workmanship of projects in
which the Work of the Artist is integrated or combined, or to materials purchased, acquired, or
installed by a person or entity not responsible to the Artist.
8.5 Warranty of Public Safety. Artist represents and warrants that the Work will not pose a danger to
public health or safety in view of the possibility of misuse, if such misuse is in a manner that was
reasonably foreseeable at any time during the term of this Agreement.
8.6 Warranty of Acceptable Standard of Display and Operation. Artist represents and warrants that:
8.6.1 Occasional or minimal cleaning and repair of the Artwork and any associated working parts
and/or equipment will maintain the Work within an acceptable standard of public display;
8.6.2 Foreseeable exposure to the elements and general wear and tear will cause the Work to
experience only minor repairable damages and will not cause the Work to fall below an
acceptable standard of public display; and
8.6.3 With general routine cleaning and repair, and within the context of foreseeable exposure to
the elements and general wear and tear, the Work will not experience irreparable conditions
that do not fall within an acceptable standard of public display, including mold, rust,
fracturing, staining, chipping, tearing, abrading and peeling.
8.7 Manufacturer’s Warranties. To the extent the Work incorporates products covered by a
manufacturer’s warranty, Artist shall provide copies of such warranties to City.
Section 9. MAINTENANCE OF ARTWORK
9.1 Unless specifically provided in this Agreement, Artist shall not be responsible for ongoing
maintenance of the Artwork.
9.2 Artist shall provide the City with a General Maintenance Plan for the Artwork, with a detailed
description of future anticipated maintenance requirements; a recommended maintenance schedule;
anticipated and required care and/or replacement/upgrade of any part of the Artwork and associated
moving parts or equipment including any staff time involved in displaying or operating artwork and
the frequency of such staff involvement; and written instructions and manufacturer’s specifications
for reasonably foreseeable maintenance and preservation activities relating to the Artwork.
9.3 The Artwork shall be durable, taking into consideration that the installation site is an unsecured public
space that may be exposed to elements such as weather, temperature variation, and considerable
movement of people and equipment. Artist shall ensure that all maintenance requirements will be
reasonable in terms of time and expense.
9.4 Although City strives to maintain the Public Art Collection in good repair and condition, City is not
required by this Agreement to maintain the Artwork to any particular standard. City may determine
to allow the Artwork to deteriorate in accordance with the Artwork’s temporary life span, if deemed
appropriate by City or if City lacks sufficient funds for required maintenance and/or conservation. If
the Artwork suffers deterioration, City shall have sole discretion to determine whether to remove the
Artwork from display as a result of deterioration, whether to replace any portion of the Artwork or
translate any component into new media, or whether to maintain the Artwork on display despite its
deteriorated condition.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
80
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 7 of 19
9.5 The anticipated life span of the Artwork is 30 years from the date of final acceptance by the City.
After that time, the City in its sole discretion may re-evaluate the Artwork to determine if it retains its
identity as a work of art and, if not, whether to take appropriate action, including the possibility of
destroying the Artwork. If the City determines that, through decay, vandalism or other forces, the
Artwork has lost its integrity to the point where it should be destroyed, the City shall first offer the
Artwork to Artist free of charge and in writing.
Section 10. ARTIST’S RIGHTS; CITY’S OWNERSHIP RIGHTS
10.1 The City intends to display the Artwork as originally created by Artist in Exhibit A and to maintain the
Artwork in good condition. Public artworks commissioned by the City are sometimes integrated into
their site, such that they become an integral, permanent and site-specific part of the building’s
architecture or landscaped environment and removal of the artwork would result in significant
changes to the artwork and the building’s architecture. City, however, shall preserve complete
flexibility to operate and manage City property in the public’s interest. Therefore, City retains the
absolute right to alter the Artwork in City’s sole judgment. For example, City may alter the Artwork to
eliminate hazard, to comply with the ADA, to otherwise aid City in the management of its property
and affairs, or through neglect or accident. If, during or after the term of this Agreement, City finds
the Site to be inappropriate, City has the right to install the Artwork at an alternate location that City
chooses in its sole discretion. If the Artwork is free-standing such that it can be removed without
significant damage to the Artwork or the Site, and if the City authorizes the removal of the Artwork,
the City shall take reasonable precautions to minimize alteration of the Artwork during removal.
10.2 With respect to the Artwork produced under this Agreement, and in consideration of the procedures
and remedies specified in this Agreement, Artist waives any and all claims, arising at any time and
under any circumstances, against City, its officers, agents, employees, successors and assigns,
arising under the federal Visual Artists Rights Act (and 113(d)), the California Art Preservation Act
(Cal. Civil Code §§987 et seq.), and any other local, state, federal or international laws that convey
rights of the same nature as those conveyed under 17 U.S.C. §106A, Cal. Civil Code §§987 et seq.,
or any other type of moral right protecting the integrity of works of art. If the Artwork is incorporated
into a building such that the Artwork cannot be removed from the building without alteration of the
Artwork, Artist waives any and all such claims against any future owners of the site, and its agents,
officers and employees, for alteration of the Artwork.
10.3 If City intends to take any action with respect to the site or the Artwork that would alter the Artwork,
other than routine cleaning and maintenance, the following procedures shall apply:
10.3.1 Notice. Where time permits, City shall make reasonable good faith efforts to notify Artist at
least 20 calendar days prior to authorizing any alteration of the Artwork, at the last phone
number or address provided by Artist to the City’s Contract Administrator. Where time does
not permit prior to alteration of the Artwork – for example, in cases of public hazard, accident
or unauthorized alteration – City shall notify Artist within 30 calendar days after such
alteration.
10.3.2 Consultation. After receiving such notice, Artist shall consult with City to determine whether
the Artwork can be restored or relocated, and to attempt to come to a mutually agreeable
plan for disposition of the Artwork. Such consultation shall be without charge by Artist unless
otherwise specifically agreed in writing. If City intends to remove the Artwork, Artist shall
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
81
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 8 of 19
consult regarding methods to minimize or repair any Alteration to the Artwork caused by
such removal and the potential costs of such removal.
10.3.3 Restoration. If the Artwork is altered, with or without prior notice to Artist, and City intends
to maintain the Artwork on display, City shall make a reasonable good faith effort to engage
Artist in the restoration of the Artwork and to compensate Artist for Artist’s time and efforts
at fair market value, which may be the subject of a future Agreement between Artist and
City. However, City has no obligation under this Agreement to restore the Artwork to its
original condition, to compensate Artist for any restoration work, or to maintain the Artwork
on display. If Artist fails or refuses to negotiate with City in good faith with respect to any
restoration, City may contract with any other qualified art conservator or artist for such
restoration. During Artist’s lifetime, City shall make best efforts not to display or de-
accession only a portion of the Artwork without Artist’s consent.
10.3.4 Removal by Artist. Where time permits, if City intends to take action that will destroy or
significantly alter the Artwork, such as destruction of all or part of the site, and City
determines that it will not remove the Artwork itself, City shall allow Artist to remove the
Artwork at Artist’s expense within 60 days of notice from the City of the need to remove the
Artwork, in which case title shall revert to Artist. If Artist fails to remove the Artwork within
that 60 day period, City may alter the Artwork in any manner, including destroying it, in City’s
sole discretion.
10.3.5 Remedies. If City breaches any of its obligations under this Section, Artist’s remedies shall
be limited as follows: If City inadvertently fails to provide a required prior notice of alteration,
City will provide notice as soon as it discovers the omission, and before alteration of the
Artwork if that remains possible. If City alters the Artwork without providing Artist a required
prior notice of alteration, Artist shall be given the first right of refusal to restore the Artwork
at the same location and City shall make reasonable efforts to provide funding for the
restoration. If City funds cannot be made available after reasonable efforts are made to
secure such funding, Artist may, but is not obligated to, restore the Artwork at Artist’s
expense. If Artist elects not to restore the Artwork, City may retain another artist or
conservator to restore it, or may Alter the Artwork in any manner, at City’s sole discretion.
10.4 If City alters the Artwork without Artist’s consent in a manner that is prejudicial to Artist’s reputation,
Artist retains the right to disclaim authorship of the Artwork in accordance with California Civil Code
§987(d) and 17 U.S.C. §106A(a)(2).
10.5 Except as provided in this Agreement, with respect to third parties who are not officers, employees,
agents, successors or assigns of City, Artist retains Artist’s moral rights in the Artwork, as established
in the Visual Artists Rights Act (17 U.S.C. §§106A and 113(d)), the California Art Preservation Act
(Cal. Civil Code §§987 and 989), or any other local, state, federal or international moral rights laws
that protect the integrity of works of art. Accordingly, nothing herein shall prevent Artist from pursuing
a claim for alteration of the Artwork against a third party who is not an officer, employee, agent,
successor or assign of City. City has no obligation to pursue claims against third parties to remedy
or prevent alteration of the Artwork. However, as owner of the Artwork, City may pursue claims
against third parties for damages or to restore the Artwork if the Artwork has been altered without
City’s authorization.
Section 11. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND PUBLICITY RIGHTS
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
82
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 9 of 19
11.1 Copyright. Subject to usage rights and licenses granted to City hereunder, Artist shall retain all 17
U.S.C. §106 copyrights in all original works of authorship produced under this Agreement. Artist’s
copyright shall not extend to predominantly utilitarian aspects of the Work, such as landscaping
elements, furnishings, or other similar objects. If Artist is comprised of two or more individual persons,
the individual persons shall be deemed joint authors of the Work.
11.2 City’s Intellectual Property License. Artist grants to City, and to City’s agents, authorized
contractors and assigns, an unlimited, non-exclusive and irrevocable license to do the following with
respect to the Work, the Artwork, and any original works of authorship created under this Agreement,
whether in whole or in part, in all media (including electronic and digital) throughout the universe:
11.2.1 Implementation, Use and Display. City may use and display the Work (to the extent the
Work includes graphic representations or models) and the Artwork. To the extent the Work
involves design elements that are incorporated by City into the design of the site, City may
implement such elements at the site.
11.2.2 Reproduction and Distribution. City may make and distribute, and authorize the making,
display and distribution of, photographs and other 2-dimensional reproductions. City may
use such reproductions for any City-related purpose, including advertising, educational and
promotional materials, brochures, books, flyers, postcards, print, broadcast, film, electronic
and multimedia publicity, gifts for City benefactors, documentation of City’s Public Art
Collection, and catalogues or similar publications. City shall ensure that such reproductions
are made in a professional and tasteful manner, in the sole and reasonable judgment of the
City. The proceeds from the sale of any such reproductions shall be used to maintain and
support City’s Public Art Collection or for any other public purposes that City deems
appropriate. The license granted hereunder includes the right to create 2-dimensional
reproductions on items such as tote-bags, T-shirts, coffee mugs and similar merchandise.
Nothing hereunder shall be construed to constrain Artist from creating posters, note cards,
or other reproductions of the Artwork with appropriate credit to the City.
11.2.3 Public Records Requests. Any documents provided by Artist to City are public records
and City may authorize third parties to review and reproduce such documents pursuant to
public records laws, including the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance and California Public
Records Act.
11.3 Third Party Infringement. The City is not responsible for any third party infringement of Artist’s
copyright and not responsible for protecting the intellectual property rights of Artist.
11.4. Credit. All reproductions by the City shall contain a credit to the Artist and a copyright notice
substantially in the following form: “Brian Keith (c), 2023.” The Artist shall use his/her best efforts to
include a credit reading substantially "An original work commissioned by the City of Dublin,
California" in any public showing under the Artist's control of reproductions of the Work.
11.5 Publicity. City shall have the right to use Artist’s name, likeness, and biographical information, in
connection with the display or reproduction and distribution of the Artwork including all advertising
and promotional materials regarding City or the City. Artist shall be reasonably available to attend
any inauguration or presentation ceremonies relating to the public dedication of the Artwork.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
83
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 10 of 19
11.6 Trademark. In the event that City’s use of the Artwork creates trademark, service mark or trade
dress rights in connection with the Artwork, City shall have an exclusive and irrevocable right in such
trademark, service mark, or trade dress.
11.7 Resale Royalty. If City sells the Artwork as a fixture to real property, and if the resale value of the
Artwork is not itemized separately from the value of the real property, the parties agree that the resale
price of the Artwork shall be presumed to be less than the purchase price paid by City under this
Agreement. Thus, City has no obligation to pay resale royalties pursuant to California Civil Code
§986 or any other law requiring the payment of resale royalties. If City sells the Artwork as an
individual piece, separate from or itemized as part of a real property transaction, City shall pay to
Artist a resale royalty to the extent required by law, based upon the sale price of the Artwork.
11.8 If for any reason the proposed design is not implemented, all rights to the proposed artwork shall be
retained by the Artist. The City shall have no right to implement the proposed artwork, whether or
not protected by copyright, unless and until the City and the Artist enter into a subsequent agreement
for the implementation of the proposed design.
Section 12. OWNERSHIP OF RESULTS AND RISK OF LOSS
12.1 Title Transfer. Except in the case of early termination of this Agreement, title to the Artwork shall
transfer from Artist to City upon the City’s Final Acceptance of the Artwork. Title transfer shall be self-
executing upon City’s Final Acceptance. Artist will cooperate in providing to City any title transfer
documents City may request or require during or after the Term of this Agreement.
12.2 Risk of Loss. The risk of loss or damage to the Artwork shall be borne solely by Artist until Final
Acceptance of the Artwork by the City. Artist shall take steps to protect the Artwork from loss or
damage. The City staff shall make a good faith effort to inspect the Artwork within 15 days after
completion so that the City can approve the Artwork by resolution in a timely fashion.
12.3 Ownership of Documents. Conceptual Design, Design Development Documents, Construction
Documents, Samples, Mock-ups and all other documents prepared and submitted by Artist to the
City pursuant to this Agreement shall belong to the City. Artist may retain originals of such
documents and items and provide copies to City.
Section 13. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Before beginning any work under this Agreement, Artist, at its own
cost and expense, shall procure "occurrence coverage" insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to
property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Artist and its agents,
representatives, employees, and subcontractors. Artist shall provide proof satisfactory to City of such insurance that
meets the requirements of this section and under forms of insurance satisfactory in all respects to the City. Artist shall
maintain the insurance policies required by this section throughout the term of this Agreement. The cost of such
insurance shall be included in the Artist's bid. Artist shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any
subcontract until Artist has obtained all insurance required herein for the subcontractor(s) and provided evidence
thereof to City. Verification of the required insurance shall be submitted and made part of this Agreement prior to
execution.
13.1 Workers’ Compensation
13.1.1 General Requirements. Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain
Statutory Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance for any
and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Contractor. The Statutory Workers’
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
84
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 11 of 19
Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance shall be provided with limits of
not less than $1,000,000 per accident. In the alternative, Contractor may rely on a self-
insurance program to meet these requirements, but only if the program of self-insurance
complies fully with the provisions of the California Labor Code. Determination of whether a
self-insurance program meets the standards of the California Labor Code shall be solely in
the discretion of the Contract Administrator.
The Workers’ Compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor
of the City for all work performed by the Contractor, its employees, agents, and
subcontractors.
13.1.2 Submittal Requirements. To comply with Subsection 4.1, Contractor shall
submit the following:
a. Certificate of Workers’ Compensation Insurance in the amounts specified
in the section; and
b. Waiver of Subrogation Endorsement as required by the section.
13.2 Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance.
13.2.1 General requirements. Artist, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain commercial
general and automobile liability insurance for the term of this Agreement in an amount not
less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence, TWO MILLION
DOLLARS ($2,000,000.00) aggregate, combined single limit coverage for risks associated
with the work contemplated by this Agreement. If a Commercial General Liability Insurance
or an Automobile Liability form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either
the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this
Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence
limit. Such coverage shall include but shall not be limited to, protection against claims
arising from bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and damage to
property resulting from activities contemplated under this Agreement, including the use of
owned and non-owned automobiles.
13.2.2 Minimum scope of coverage. Commercial general coverage shall be at least as broad as
Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form CG 0001 (ed.
11/88) or Insurance Services Office form number GL 0002 (ed. 1/73) covering
comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404
covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability. Automobile coverage shall be at
least as broad as Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (ed. 12/90)
Code 8 and 9 (“any auto”). No endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage.
13.2.3 Additional requirements. Each of the following shall be included in the insurance
coverage or added as an endorsement to the policy:
a. City and its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be covered as
additional insureds with respect to each of the following: liability arising out of
activities performed by or on behalf of Artist, including the insured’s general
supervision of Artist; products and completed operations of Artist; premises
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
85
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 12 of 19
owned, occupied, or used by Artist; and automobiles owned, leased, or used by
the Artist. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of
protection afforded to City or its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.
b. The insurance shall cover on an occurrence or an accident basis, and not on a
claims-made basis.
c. An endorsement must state that coverage is primary insurance with respect to the
City and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers, and that no insurance or
self-insurance maintained by the City shall be called upon to contribute to a loss
under the coverage.
d. Any failure of Artist to comply with reporting provisions of the policy shall not affect
coverage provided to City and its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers.
e. An endorsement shall state that coverage shall not be canceled except after thirty
(30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been
given to the City. Artist shall notify City within 14 days of notification from Artist’s
insurer if such coverage is suspended, voided or reduced in coverage or in limits.
13.3 All Policies Requirements.
13.3.1 Acceptability of insurers. All insurance required by this section is to be placed with
insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII.
13.3.2 Verification of coverage. Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement, Artist shall
furnish City with certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting coverage
required herein. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be
signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The City
reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at
any time.
13.3.3 Subcontractors. Artist shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or
shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages
for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.
13.3.4 Variation. The City may approve a variation in the foregoing insurance requirements, upon
a determination that the coverages, scope, limits, and forms of such insurance are either
not commercially available, or that the City’s interests are otherwise fully protected.
13.3.5 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Artist shall disclose to and obtain the approval
of City for the self-insured retentions and deductibles before beginning any of the services
or work called for by any term of this Agreement.
During the period covered by this Agreement, only upon the prior express written
authorization of Contract Administrator, Artist may increase such deductibles or self-insured
retentions with respect to City, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers. The
Contract Administrator may condition approval of an increase in deductible or self-insured
retention levels with a requirement that Artist procure a bond, guaranteeing payment of
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
86
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 13 of 19
losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses that is
satisfactory in all respects to each of them.
13.3.6 Notice of Reduction in Coverage. In the event that any coverage required by this section
is reduced, limited, or materially affected in any other manner, Artist shall provide written
notice to City at Artist’s earliest possible opportunity and in no case later than five days after
Artist is notified of the change in coverage.
13.4 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Artist fails to provide or maintain any
insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, City may,
at its sole option exercise any of the following remedies, which are alternatives to other remedies
City may have and are not the exclusive remedy for Artist’s breach:
Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance
from any sums due under the Agreement;
Order Artist to stop work under this Agreement or withhold any payment that becomes due to
Artist hereunder, or both stop work and withhold any payment, until Artist demonstrates
compliance with the requirements hereof; and/or
Terminate this Agreement.
Section 14. INDEMNIFICATION AND ARTIST’S RESPONSIBILITIES. Artist shall indemnify, defend with
counsel mutually selected by the City and Artist, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees,
agents, and volunteers from and against any and all losses, liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of
action arising out of any personal injury, bodily injury, loss of life, or damage to property, or any violation of any federal,
state, or municipal law or ordinance, to the extent caused, in whole or in part, by the willful misconduct or negligent
acts or omissions of Artist or its employees, subcontractors, or agents, by acts for which they could be held strictly
liable, or by the quality or character of their work. The foregoing obligation of Artist shall not apply when (1) the injury,
loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law arises wholly from the negligence or willful misconduct of the City or
its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers and (2) the actions of Artist or its employees, subcontractor, or agents
have contributed in no part to the injury, loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law. It is understood that the
duty of Artist to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California
Civil Code. Acceptance by City of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not
relieve Artist from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless
clause shall apply to any damages or claims for damages whether or not such insurance policies shall have been
determined to apply. By execution of this Agreement, Artist acknowledges and agrees to the provisions of this Section
and that it is a material element of consideration.
In the event that Artist or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Artist providing services under this Agreement is
determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) to be
eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of City, Artist shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the
payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Artist or its employees, agents,
or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise
be the responsibility of City.
Section 15. STATUS OF ARTIST AS INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
15.1 Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Artist shall be an
independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. City shall have the right to control
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
87
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 14 of 19
Artist only insofar as the results of Artist's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement and
assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3; however, otherwise City shall not have the
right to control the means by which Artist accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this
Agreement. Notwithstanding any other City, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or
ordinance to the contrary, Artist and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing
services under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive
any and all claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including
but not limited to eligibility to enroll in the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)
as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer
contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.
15.2 Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as limiting the right of Artist to engage in
his/her profession separate and apart from this Agreement so long as such activities do not interfere
with the performance by Artist of his/her obligations as set forth in this Agreement.
15.3 Artist No Agent. Except as City may specify in writing, Artist shall have no authority, express or
implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Artist shall have no authority,
express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
Section 16. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.
16.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.
16.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Artist and any subcontractors shall comply with all laws
applicable to the performance of the work hereunder.
16.3 Other Governmental Regulations. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by fiscal
assistance from another governmental entity, Artist and any subcontractors shall comply with all
applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance
program.
16.4 Licenses and Permits. Artist represents and warrants to City that Artist and its employees, agents,
and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature
that are legally required to practice their respective professions. Artist represents and warrants to
City that Artist and its employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and expense,
keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals that
are legally required to practice their respective professions. In addition to the foregoing, Artist and
any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement valid Business
Licenses from City.
16.5 Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity. Artist shall not discriminate, on the basis of a
person’s race, sex, gender, religion (including religious dress and grooming practices), national
origin, ancestry, physical or mental disability, medical condition (including cancer and genetic
characteristics), marital status, age, sexual orientation, color, creed, pregnancy, genetic information,
gender identity or expression, political affiliation or belief, military/veteran status, or any other
classification protected by applicable local, state, or federal laws (each a “Protected Characteristic”),
against any employee, applicant for employment, subcontractor, bidder for a subcontract, or
participant in, recipient of, or applicant for any services or programs provided by Consultant under
this Agreement.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
88
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 15 of 19
Artist shall include the provisions of this Subsection in any subcontract approved by the Contract
Administrator or this Agreement.
16.6 Prevailing Wage. Artist shall comply with any applicable state and local laws regarding payment of
prevailing wages for Public Works projects.
Section 17. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.
17.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written notification
to Artist.
Artist may cancel this Agreement upon thirty (30) days’ written notice to City and shall include in such
notice the reasons for cancellation.
In the event of termination, Artist shall be entitled to compensation for services performed to the
effective date of termination; City, however, may condition payment of such compensation upon
Artist delivering to City any or all documents, photographs, computer software, video and audio
tapes, and other materials provided to Artist or prepared by or for Artist or the City in connection with
this Agreement.
17.2 Extension. City may, in its sole and exclusive discretion, extend the end date of this Agreement
beyond that provided for in Subsection 1.1. Any such extension shall require a written amendment
to this Agreement, as provided for herein. Artist understands and agrees that, if City grants such an
extension, City shall have no obligation to provide Artist with compensation beyond the maximum
amount provided for in this Agreement. Similarly, unless authorized by the Contract Administrator,
City shall have no obligation to reimburse Artist for any otherwise reimbursable expenses incurred
during the extension period.
17.3 Amendments. The parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the parties.
17.4 Assignment and Subcontracting. City and Artist recognize and agree that this Agreement
contemplates personal performance by Artist and is based upon a determination of Artist’s unique
personal competence, experience, and specialized personal knowledge. Moreover, a substantial
inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was and is the professional reputation and
competence of Artist. Artist may not assign this Agreement or any interest therein without the prior
written approval of the Contract Administrator. Artist shall not subcontract any portion of the
performance contemplated and provided for herein, other than to the subcontractors noted in the
proposal, without prior written approval of the Contract Administrator.
17.5 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all provisions of this
Agreement allocating liability between City and Artist shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
17.6 Options upon Breach by Artist. If Artist materially breaches any of the terms of this Agreement,
City’s remedies shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
17.6.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement;
17.6.2 Retain the plans, specifications, drawings, reports, design documents, and any other work
product prepared by Artist pursuant to this Agreement;
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
89
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 16 of 19
17.6.3 Retain a different Artist to complete the work described in Exhibit A not finished by Artist; or
17.6.4 Charge Artist the difference between the cost to complete the work described in Exhibit A
that is unfinished at the time of breach and the amount that City would have paid Artist
pursuant to Section 2 if Artist had completed the work.
Section 18. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS.
18.1 City Access to Artwork; Inspection of Work and Artwork. City shall have the reasonable right to,
at its sole expense, inspect the Work, including the Artwork, at the fabrication Site during any phase
of the project at any time. In the event that all or part of the Work is created in a location other than
the Site, the City shall have the right to inspect the Work, including the Artwork, at any phase of the
project following 48 hours written notice from the City to the Artist. The Artist shall be responsible for
facilitating City’s prompt access to Artist’s property or the property of the Artist’s subcontractors
where the Work or portions of the Work are being fabricated or installed.
18.2 Status Reports. Artist shall submit written reports regarding the status of the Work, including the
Artwork, as may be reasonably requested by the City. The City shall determine the format for the
content of such reports. The timely submission of all reports is a necessary and material term and
condition of this Agreement. The reports, including any copies, shall be submitted on recycled paper
and printed on double-sided pages to the maximum extent possible.
18.3 Artist Availability. Artist or Artist’s authorized agent shall be available at Artist’s sole expense for
up to 2 visits to Dublin to ensure the proper installation and operation of the Artwork. During each
visit to Dublin, unless otherwise agreed upon by the City, the Artist’s visit shall last for at least a full
8 hour day.
18.4 Records Created as Part of Artist’s Performance. With the exception of model submitted with
initial proposal, all reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda,
plans, studies, specifications, records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any
other form, that Artist prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters
covered hereunder shall be the property of the City. Artist hereby agrees to deliver those documents
to the City upon termination of the Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the documents and
other materials, including but not limited to those described above, prepared pursuant to this
Agreement are prepared specifically for the City and are not necessarily suitable for any future or
other use. City and Artist agree that, until final approval by City, all data, plans, specifications, reports
and other documents are confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written
consent of both parties. It is also agreed that proposal model remains property of the Artist and will
be returned to Artist after the finished sculpture is installed.
18.5 Artist’s Books and Records. Artist shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices,
vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for
services or expenditures and disbursements charged to the City under this Agreement for a minimum
of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to the Artist
to this Agreement.
18.6 Inspection and Audit of Records. Any records or documents that Section 9.2 of this Agreement
requires Artist to maintain shall be made available for inspection, audit, and/or copying at any time
during regular business hours, upon oral or written request of the City. Under California Government
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
90
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 17 of 19
Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds expended under this Agreement exceeds TEN
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000.00), the Agreement shall be subject to the examination and audit
of the State Auditor, at the request of City or as part of any audit of the City, for a period of three (3)
years after final payment under the Agreement.
Section 19. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
19.1 Attorneys’ Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for declaratory
relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to
reasonable attorneys’ fees in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled. The
court may set such fees in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose.
19.2 Venue. In the event that either party brings any action against the other under this Agreement, the
parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in
the County of Alameda.
19.3 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement
is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so adjudged shall remain in
full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not
void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.
19.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this Agreement
does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other term of this Agreement.
19.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall
apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the parties.
19.6 Use of Recycled Products. Artist shall prepare and submit all reports, written studies and other
printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or less cost than virgin paper.
19.7 Conflict of Interest. Artist may serve other clients, but none whose activities within the corporate
limits of City or whose business, regardless of location, would place Artist in a “conflict of interest,”
as that term is defined in the Political Reform Act, codified at California Government Code Section
81000 et seq.
Artist shall not employ any City official in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. No officer
or employee of City shall have any financial interest in this Agreement that would violate California
Government Code Sections 1090 et seq.
Artist hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12) months, an
employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City. If Artist was an employee, agent, appointee, or
official of the City in the previous twelve months, Artist warrants that it did not participate in any
manner in the forming of this Agreement. Artist understands that, if this Agreement is made in
violation of Government Code §1090 et.seq., the entire Agreement is void and Artist will not be
entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including
reimbursement of expenses, and Artist will be required to reimburse the City for any sums paid to
the Artist. Artist understands that, in addition to the foregoing, it may be subject to criminal
prosecution for a violation of Government Code § 1090 and, if applicable, will be disqualified from
holding public office in the State of California.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
91
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 18 of 19
19.8 Solicitation. Artist agrees not to solicit business at any meeting, focus group, or interview related
to this Agreement, either orally or through any written materials.
19.9 Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by the City Manager or his/her
designee ("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be directed to or through the Contract
Administrator or his or her designee.
19.10 Notices. Any written notice to Artist shall be sent to:
Brian Keith
36 Canyon Hills Place
San Ramon, CA 94582
(925)642-0400
Brian@BrianKeithFineArt.com
www.briankeithfineart.com
Any written notice to City shall be sent to:
City Manager
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
(925) 833-6645
19.11 Professional Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the contract administrator, the first
page of a technical report, first page of design specifications, and each page of construction drawings
shall be stamped/sealed and signed by the licensed professional responsible for the report/design
preparation. The stamp/seal shall be in a block entitled "Seal and Signature of Registered
Professional with report/design responsibility," as in the following example.
_________________________________________
Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with
report/design responsibility.
19.12 Integration. This Agreement, including the proposal, scope of work, and payment schedule
attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibits A, B and C, represents the entire and integrated
agreement between City and Artist and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or
agreements, either written or oral.
SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
92
Public Art Agreement between the February 15, 2022
City of Dublin and Brian Keith Page 19 of 19
The Parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. The persons whose signatures appear
below certify that they are authorized to sign on behalf of the respective Party.
CITY OF DUBLIN ARTIST
____________________________ ______________________________
City Manager Brian Keith, Artist
Attest:
____________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
____________________________
City Attorney
2559640.1
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
93
EXHIBIT A
ARTIST PROPOSAL
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
94
Dublin Heritage Crossroads Monument
The use of sculpture has a way of capturing the essence of what a thousand words cannot describe. It can tell a rare,
often unheard tale about an unrecognized life. Public art can also cause the footsteps of a person to slow down and
ponder something of great value and meaning the way nothing else can. In considering the City of Dublin’s Monument
Sculpture for the Heritage Park and Museum, I hope to convey a story of history that captures the steadfastness and
perseverance of the pioneering families of Dublin, and the historical influence and inspiration of the Ohlone native tribes
who lived in the East Bay.
My concept designs were inspired by painters of the pioneer era such as Morgan Weistling. The storytelling of Norman
Rockwell has also influenced my design by helping me to create engaging sculptures that tell a tale through expression,
animated poses, and authentic clothing and time-era tools. In the design that I am submitting, I hope to have a work of
art that engages the community and invites them to experience elements within the pioneering story of Dublin.
The overall rock-base is placed on a concrete footprint with granite pavers that are measured in an oval of 23 feet by 17
feet. The location of this artwork would be on display near the entry to the park on the corner of Dublin Blvd. and
Donlon Way. I have integrated an oval design that is similar to that of the stage area located near to the bank. This
allows for there to be a continued landscape design element within the park and this artwork. The pavers on the
footprint will be a natural stone color, with an intersecting set of green pavers that depict a set of stagecoach tracks.
Being the actual location of the Crossroads, I felt this was a very important element to include within the design.
Standing on top of the rock formation are four (115% life-size) figures at different elevations. A young girl(64” tall) is
feeding sheep with a large feeding bottle that depicts how younger children had responsibilities and chores during ranch
life. A teenage boy(73” tall) has his hands on the plow as he takes a brief rest, looking at the job he has just finished.
The hard work is seen on his expression that he has on his satisfied and happy face. Also, a Blacksmith(84” tall) holds his
hammer above the anvil depicting the way a rancher would need to be strong in his abilities to forge new tools and
improvise ways of reusing items throughout the property. And finally, an Ohlone woman(72” figure) is sitting while she
is weaving a basket, depicting the importance of this essential craft to their way of life. This location within the
monument will allow for viewers to sit next to and have photo opportunities or textile learning experiences with.
This monument will be made of cast bronze and the foundation will be concrete and granite pavers. The sculptures for
the bronze monument will be cast at Artworks Foundry in Berkeley, California, which is a premiere foundry for casting
work. The timeline for the overall artwork to be sculpted, cast, and installed would place it at a March/April 2023
unveiling date.
The installation of the bronze figures would require a concrete pad to be poured, and masonry work to be completed
displaying the beautiful granite pavers which would be the footprint for the rockwork that the figures stand on. The rock
work(plans included in proposal) would be created on a metal structure that has concrete formed around it. This plan
was created by OTL who does this similar work for locations throughout the country, and much of the rockwork at the
San Diego Zoo. This allows for children to sit on the bench locations within the design and to include elements
embedded within the sides of the rock formation including a pick axe, a mining plate, and several items depicting the
presence and influence of the Native Tribes known within the East Bay. Installation would be relatively simple and would
involve on site assembly of the rocks. And then the four sculpture elements with threaded rods and industrial epoxy
would be permanently installed. Maintenance would be very minimal due to the durability of bronze, requiring only a 6-
8 month wash and waxing of the bronze figures.
I am very honored to be considered for this important project. It is my intention to create a monument that will
commemorate the legacy of pioneering families of Dublin, the City’s unique Ohlone heritage, and the history of this
particular Crossroads location. I look forward to working with you to ensure that my efforts are as meaningful as
possible and reflects the values and hopes for this monument.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
95
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
96
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
97
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
98
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
99
-5+0)9-)
3-?1*3-3)5,:+)7--,/15/5/<3)9+9<:0-,:;65-#)=-9:/9)51;-69+65+9-;- & 65469;)9*-,65:3)*9;1.1+1)396+2:+<37;<9-*):--5+0)9-)-5+0)9-) 3-?1*3-3)5,:+)7--,/15/5/<3)9+9<:0-,:;65-;01+29-15.69+-,+65+9-;-:3)* *)9:" ( #)=-9:+<;;6.1;)96<5,)9;1.1+1)396+2$6+2>692+69-/-6.6)4 /9)=-3 69+65+9-;-9;1.1+1)396+2>692:0-33:06;+9-;-697<47-,+65+9-;- *)9:" ( 415 ;01+25-::9;1.1+1)396+2>692+)9=-+6); &01+25-::=)91-:
-5+0)9-) 15)30-1/0;
& *@9;1:;;01+29-15.69+-,+65+9-;-:3)* *)9:" ( #)=-9:65:-;;15/*-,;01+2+65+9-;-:;917 9--5/9)51;-7);0)++-5;71-+-:+4 ? -6;-?;13-.)*91+ -6;-?;13-.)*91+5/<3)9+9<:0-,:;65-;01+2+65+9-;-:;917 9--5/9)51;-7);0)++-5;71-+-:+4 ?
9--5/9)51;-7);0)++-5;71-+-:+4 ?'5;1;3-,%+<37;<9-91)5 -1;0
9;1:;%+<37;<9-):-%+)3-
%+<37;<9-):-#3)5
%+)3-
%+<37;<9-):-%-+;165%+)3-
%+<37;<9-):- 3-=);165%+)3-
%+<37;<9-):- 3-=);165!6;;6%+)3-%+<37;<9-):-#-9:7-+;1=-!6;;6%+)3-%+<37;<9-):-$-5,-915/!6;- 151:0;-?;<9-+6369;64);+0-?)473-706;6::<7731-,*@9;1:;!6;-:&0-96+2>692:06>51:)/-64-;91+:14731.1+);1654-)5;;6-:;)*31:0:+)3- 796769;165: )5,/-5-9)3+65+-7; 15)396+2>692;6*-+)9=-,)5,;-?;<9-,15)9-)31:;1+4)55-9 ;64);+09-.-9-5+-706;6::<7731-,*@;0-9;1:; 3);)9-):.69:+<37;<9-15:;)33);165;64);+04)8<-;;-*@9;1:;%+)3-
%-+;165 -;)13%+)3-
%-+;165 -;)13DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
100
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
101
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
102
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
103
EXHIBIT B
SCOPE OF WORK
SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION OF WORK. The following fabrication schedule shall be adhered
to in the performance of the work. During the term of this Agreement, the City Project Manager
must approve Artist’s work at each phase of development before the Artist proceeds to the next
phase. The City Project Manager for this Agreement is:
Shaun Chilkotowsky
Heritage and Cultural Arts Manager
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
(925) 556-4565
Shaun.chilkotowsky@dublin.ca.gov
EXECUTION OF CONTRACT
DELIVERABLES: DUE DATE:
• Fully Executed Contract
• Evidence of All Required Insurance, Dublin Business
License
February, 2022 (EST.)
February, 2022 (EST.)
PHASE I: DESIGN/ENGINEERING
The scope of work under this phase includes research phase and completion of engineering
documents for the artwork and base.
• The Artist shall work with a California licensed engineer to provide the City with stamped
drawings for the Artwork and base. Drawings include civil/landscape drawings the include site
location, utilities, and electrical connections, and structural drawings that include all necessary
calculations
• Phase shall be considered complete when stamped engineering documents are received by
the City Project Manager and approved by the City. Payment may be released earlier than the
date specified should the Phase be deemed complete.
DELIVERABLES: DUE DATE:
• Engineered Drawings April 30, 2022 (EST.)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
104
PHASE II(A&B): SCULPTURE FABRICATION - CLAY MODELS
The scope of work under this phase includes completion of the clay models of the four artwork
figures.
• Artist will complete the clay models, according to the designs previously approved by the City.
This includes thoughtful research to ensure accurate representation of the figures while the
clay models are being developed.
• Should artist wish to make changes during the clay modeling process, Artist will obtain City’s
written approval for any changes substantial enough to be visible to a layperson.
• Phase will be considered complete when all deliverables have been received by City Project
Manager. Payment may be released earlier than date specified should Phase be deemed
complete.
• This Phase will have two milestones, with 50% of the clay models completed and approved
followed by the remaining 50% of the clay models completed and approved.
DELIVERABLES: DUE DATE:
• Progress Report to indicate any potential change to project
timeline.
• Studio Tour for City Representatives to see and sign off on
Clay Models of the four Artwork Figures. Following the
City’s approval, there will be no changes to the design
without mutual consent of the Artist and the City.
August 1, 2022 (EST.)
October 30, 2022 (EST.)
PHASE III: SCULPTURE FABRICATION – MOLDS/WAX
The scope of work under this phase includes the completion of the mold/wax process:
• Artist will complete the molds/wax, according to the clay figures previously approved by
the City.
• Should artist wish to make changes during the wax/mold process, Artist will obtain City’s
written approval for any changes substantial enough to be visible to a layperson.
• Phase will be considered complete when all deliverables have been received by City
Project Manager. Payment may be released earlier than date specified should Phase be
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
105
deemed complete.
DELIVERABLES: DUE DATE:
• Studio/Foundry tour for City representatives to see and sign
off on clay molds/wax artwork figures. Following the City’s
approval, there will be no changes to the design without
mutual consent of the Artist and the City.
• Confirmation to the City that the molds/wax have been
completed and are acceptable for casting.
• Progress Report to indicate any potential change to project
timeline.
December 1, 2022 (EST.)
December 1, 2022 (EST.)
November 15, 2022 (EST.)
PHASE IV: SCULPTURE FABRICATION – BRONZE CASTING, SITE & STONE WORK
The scope of work under this phase includes casting of all bronze parts and concrete/electrical
work for the artwork base, which is considered part of the Artwork:
• Artist and Foundry will complete the bronze castings, according to the molds created in the
previous phase.
• Artist shall coordinate Artist’s on-site work for the artwork base through the City Project
Manager.
• Artist’s, in cooperation with concrete and electrical subs will complete the artwork base, as
shown in previously approved engineered drawings, in preparation for installation of the
bronze figures.
• Artist shall work cooperatively with the City to draft Artist Statement, which is to be
incorporated into the plaque installed at the site. The City requires that all signage to be
displayed on City property adhere to conventionally accepted spelling and punctuation, proper
grammar and City style preferences.
• Phase will be considered complete when all deliverables have been received by City Project
Manager. Payment may be released earlier than date specified should Phase be deemed
complete.
DELIVERABLES: DUE DATE:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
106
• City approval of an Artist Vision Statement and signage
text.
• Foundry Tour for City Representatives to see and sign off
on bronze castings of the four Artwork Figures. Following
City approval, there will be no changes to the design
without mutual consent of the Artist and the City.
• City Project Manager’s and/or Special Inspector’s sign off
on concrete and electrical portions of the project.
• Progress Report to indicate any potential change to project
timeline.
December 1, 2022 (EST.)
January 30, 2023 (EST.)
January 30, 2023 (EST.)
December 15, 2022 (EST.)
PHASE V: INSTALLATION
The scope of work under this phase includes the installation of the figures and plaque and
signage:
• Prior to transportation and installation of Artwork, Artist’s structural engineer shall verify in
writing that the preparation of the artwork attachment or mounting system and installation is
being implemented in accordance with the signed stamped structural engineering drawings.
• Artist shall prepare the Artwork for transportation in accordance with customary industry
standards for the transportation of fine works of art.
• Artist shall create with the City Project Manager an installation plan indicating the staging and
sequence of all aspects of installation. The Installation Plan must include a detailed
description of the estimated duration of installation, the equipment to be used, and all workers
who will be on site to assist.
• Artist shall coordinate Artist’s on-site work for the artwork base through the City Project
• No damages or claims by Artist will be allowed other than an extension of time for the
completion of Work. Such an extension will be for the period of time City shall consider Artist
to have been delayed in the completion of Work by reason of the work of other Contractors or
workers.
• Artist shall deliver all information necessary for the City to properly care for and maintain the
Artwork, including information regarding the physical make-up of the Artwork, methods and
materials, and information about the artistic intent of Artist in the Design, Fabrication and
Installation of the Artwork
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
107
• Phase will be considered complete when all deliverables have been received by City Project
Manager.
• Artist is invited, but not required, to attend artwork dedication event. Artist will be given at least
one months’ notice of the selected dedication date. While every effort will be made to
coordinate with the Artist’s schedule, the dedication event will not be rescheduled in the event
that the Artist is unable to attend on the selected date.
DELIVERABLES: DUE DATE:
1. Delivery and Installation Plan developed with City Project
Manager and Design Team
2. Successful installation of Artwork.
3. Final inspection of the Artwork immediately after
installation.
4. Final inspection by the City of Dublin and closed permits.
5. Receipt of Artwork Maintenance Records
February 1, 2023 (EST)
March 15, 2023 (EST)
March 30, 2023 (EST)
Within 30 Days of Installation
Within 30 Days of Installation
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
108
EXHIBIT C
PAYMENT SCHEDULE
% COMPLETION
PHASE OF WORK DESCRIPTION OF PHASE By Phase Overall ARTIST FEE
EXECUTION Execution of Contract 15% 15% $52,500
Phase I Engineering 10% 25% $35,000
Phase II(a) Clay Models 15% 40% $52,500
Phase II(b) Clay Models 15% 55% $52,500
Phase III Molds/Casting 15% 70% $52,500
Phase IV Concrete/Electrical 15% 85% $52,500
Phase V Installation and Closeout 15% 100% $52,500
TOTAL ARTIST FEE $350,000
DocuSign Envelope ID: 31D7914B-4714-4D24-843C-BA4AF8670695
109
Budget Change Reference #:
From Un-Appropriated Reserves X Budget Transfer Between Funds
From Designated Reserves Other
Account Amount Account Amount
PK0222.9400.9401 (Improvements)$375,000
PK0222.9400.9401 (Improvements)$75,000
3500.9501.49999 (Transfers In)$450,000
PK0222.2801 (2801.9501.89101) -Public Art Fund Transfers Out $450,000
2/15/2022
Posted By: Date:
As Presented at the City Council Meeting
**********Finance Use Only**********
CITY OF DUBLIN
REASON FOR BUDGET CHANGE
FISCAL YEAR 2021-22
BUDGET CHANGE FORM
DECREASE BUDGET AMOUNT INCREASE BUDGET AMOUNT
City Council's Approval Required
EXP: Heritage Park Public Art (PK0222)
Move project budget in FY 22-23 in the amount of $375,000 to FY21-22 as project is ahead of schedule; and increase the project budget
by $75,000 for the Monumental Sculpture
G:\PUBLIC ART\CURRENT CITY PROJECTS\Heritage Park\Council Approval ‐ Staff Reports\08_PK0222 Public Art ‐ Heritage_02152022
Attachment 5
110
Number PK0222ProgramPublic ArtPRIOR YEARS 2020-2021 BUDGET 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 FUTURE YEARSTOTALS9100$9,700$9,7009200$100,000$100,0009400$375,000$375,0009500$35,000$35,000$144,700 $375,000$519,700PRIOR YEARS 2020-2021 BUDGET 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 FUTURE YEARSTOTALS2801$144,700 $375,000$519,700$144,700 $375,000$519,700ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACTSalaries & BenefitsContract ServicesImprovementsTOTALMiscellaneousESTIMATED COSTSFUNDING SOURCETOTALPublic Art Fund2020-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMPROJECT DESCRIPTIONThis Public Art project will be completed at Dublin Heritage Park and Museums, located at the corner of Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way. The project budget is based on the Public Art in-lieu contribution required by the Schaefer Ranch Development agreement. This project could include a monument piece at the northern edge of the park along Dublin Boulevard as well as sculpture benches, culture walks, diversity streams, and artifact cubes as originally outlined in the Heritage Park Master Plan. These artistic elements will represent Dublin's rich heritage, culture, and diversity. Project planning is expected to begin in Fiscal Year 2021-2022.ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACT: NoneMANAGING DEPARTMENT: Parks & Community ServicesAttachment 6Heritage Park Public Art - CIP 2020-2025 Current Budget111
Number PK0222ProgramPublic ArtPRIOR YEARS 2020-2021 BUDGET 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 FUTURE YEARS TOTALS9100$9,700$9,7009200$100,000$100,0009400$450,000$450,0009500$35,000$35,000$594,700$594,700PRIOR YEARS 2020-2021 BUDGET 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 FUTURE YEARS TOTALS2801$594,700$594,700$594,700$594,700ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACTSalaries & BenefitsContract ServicesImprovementsTOTALMiscellaneousESTIMATED COSTSFUNDING SOURCETOTALPublic Art Fund2020-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMPROJECT DESCRIPTIONThis Public Art project will be completed at Dublin Heritage Park and Museums, located at the corner of Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way. The project budget is based on the Public Art in-lieu contribution required by the Schaefer Ranch Development agreement. This project could include a monument piece at the northern edge of the park along Dublin Boulevard as well as sculpture benches, culture walks, diversity streams, and artifact cubes as originally outlined in the Heritage Park Master Plan. These artistic elements will represent Dublin's rich heritage, culture, and diversity. Project planning is expected to begin in Fiscal Year 2021-2022.ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACT: NoneMANAGING DEPARTMENT: Parks & Community ServicesAttachment 6Heritage Park Public Art - CIP 2020-2025 - Post Adjustment Budget112
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Page 1 of 5
Agenda Item 4.3
DATE:February 15, 2022
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:City Treasurer's Informational Report of Investments for the Quarter Ending December 31, 2021Preparedby:Chris Rhoades,Financial Analyst
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:The City Council will receive an informational report of the City’s investments through the quarter ending December 31, 2021 including a monthly transaction ledger. The City’s investment portfolio for this period totaled $382,522,878 (market value) with an average market yield of 0.60%. As required by the Policy, the City Treasurer (Administrative Services Director) affirms that the City is able to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Receive the City Treasurer's Informational Report of Investments for the Quarter Ending December 31, 2021.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:There is no financial impact resulting from this report. Investments are made in accordance with the City Investment Policy and State Law. Interest earned is apportioned between funds (i.e.,General Fund, Gas Tax Fund, etc.) based upon their proportionate share of the total cash balance. Based on the financial needs of the City including the timing of revenues and expenditures, the quarterly cash balance can vary from quarter to quarter.
DESCRIPTION:The total investment portfolio (market value) consists of $233,062,790 managed by Chandler Asset Management (Chandler), and $149,460,088 invested by the City in local government pools, the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) and the California Asset Management Program (CAMP). The average market yield of the Chandler portfolio and the local pools was 0.91% and 0.11% respectively.
113
Page 2 of 5
The total investment portfolio balance fluctuates throughout the year due to normal cash flow needs and includes both discretionary and restricted funds. Economic Update HighlightsThe following are some highlights from the Economic Update included in the Investment Report prepared by Chandler (Attachment 1).Chandler believes economic growth is likely to moderate but remain above trend in 2022, as US fiscal support begins to wane and the Federal Reserve becomes less accommodative. Chandlerexpects that continued improvement in the labor market, particularly an increase in the participation rate, will help drive economic growth this year as the health situation improves. Consumer spending, the largest component of US GDP, should also remain solid, supported by healthy consumer balance sheets and an improving labor market, in Chandler’s view. Chandleranticipates inventory rebuilding will likely be a significant driver of US GDP growth in the second half of the year as well. Chandler’s outlook is predicated on an improving global health backdrop, though risks to the downside remain. Over the near term, Chandler believes the Omicron variant will hinder economic growth and expects financial market volatility will be elevated. Inflation readings continue to run hot, but Chandler believes inflation may be at or near a peak and pricing pressures are likely to abate as we move through the year.City of Dublin PortfolioThe City's aggregate portfolio has maintained a healthy balance of investment types with minimalchange from the prior quarter as shown below in Chart 1.
114
Page 3 of 5
Chart 1: Investments by TypeDecember 31, 2021 and September 30, 2021
The market value of the City's portfolio increased by $54,394,775 from the September 30, 2021quarter. A significant component of this increase from the prior quarter and, in turn, the increase over the prior year, is the receipt of the 2021 Lease Revenue Bond funds, exceeding $20 million. Outside the receipt of the bond funds, the quarterly change results from the normal fluctuations in the timing of incoming revenue, predominantly the receipt of property tax allocations, over $22 million, and sales tax revenue, and expenditures on Capital Projects as well as payments to Alameda County for Police and Fire Services. The City’s portfolio increased $55.4 million from the same quarter the prior year due to the excess of revenues over expenditures trending on an annual basis (see Table 1 below). Overall market yield-to-maturity stays consistent at 0.60%(shown in Table 2) due to the factors discussed in the Economic Update Highlights. For detailed monthly transactions, see Attachment 2.
115
Page 4 of 5
Table 1: Portfolio Values and Yield to Maturity
Table 2: Quarterly Holdings (Market Value) by Type, and YTM, 5 Quarters
December 31, 2020
Holdings
Market
Value
Market
Value
Par
Value
Book
Value
Market
Value
% of
Subtotal
% of Total
Portfolio
Book
Yield
Market
Yield
Managed by City
LAIF 50,189,403 50,364,764 50,395,433 50,395,433 50,395,433 33.7%13.3%0.22%0.22%
CAMP 59,605,094 43,129,270 99,038,042 99,038,042 99,038,042 66.3%26.1%0.05%0.05%
SUBTOTAL 109,794,497 93,494,034 149,433,475 149,433,475 149,433,475 100.00%39.35%0.11%0.11%
Accrued Interest 73,594 27,810 26,613
109,868,091 93,521,844 149,460,088
Managed by Chandler
ABS 8,651,697 13,665,558 14,798,561 14,798,588 14,715,444 6.3%3.9%0.60%0.80%
Agency 88,099,396 65,306,279 63,570,000 63,862,223 64,567,126 27.8%16.7%1.63%0.78%
CMO - 2,138,464 2,000,000 2,128,606 2,102,544 0.9%0.5%0.72%1.19%
Money Market 1,494,033 809,873 287,150 287,150 287,150 0.1%0.1%0.01%0.01%
Negotiable CD 2,500,588 5,000,000 5,000,099 4,996,560 2.2%1.3%0.23%0.34%
Supranational 9,291,429 22,656,506 22,740,000 22,701,331 22,424,573 9.7%6.0%0.96%1.01%
Corporate 49,090,006 57,831,563 55,155,000 55,606,179 56,130,717 24.2%14.5%1.93%1.13%
US Treasury 59,632,976 68,951,352 66,750,000 66,661,201 66,952,848 28.8%17.6%1.47%0.87%
SUBTOTAL 216,259,536 233,860,181 230,300,712 231,045,377 232,176,962 100.00%60.65%1.49%0.91%
Accrued Interest 996,234 746,077 885,828
217,255,770 234,606,258 233,062,790
TOTAL PORTFOLIO 327,123,861 328,128,102 379,734,186 380,478,852 382,522,878 100.00%0.60%
23,267,576 55,399,017
(4,131,027) 54,394,775
December 31, 2021
Change from Prior Year
Change from Prior Quarter
September 30, 2021
Holdings (Market Value)12/31/20 3/31/21 6/30/21 9/30/21 12/31/21
LAIF/CAMP 109,794,497 95,786,151 97,647,167 93,494,034 149,433,475
ABS 8,651,697 7,785,198 9,835,052 13,665,558 14,715,444
Agency 88,099,396 78,831,782 75,581,659 65,306,279 64,567,126
CMO - - - 2,138,464 2,102,544
Money Market 1,494,033 7,546,801 756,163 809,873 287,150
Negotiable CD - - 2,499,825 2,500,588 4,996,560
Supranational 9,291,429 14,391,293 19,043,767 22,656,506 22,424,573
Corporate 49,090,006 48,771,479 54,161,172 57,831,563 56,130,717
US Treasury 59,632,976 67,900,673 71,745,729 68,951,352 66,952,848
Accrued Interest 1,069,828 847,391 988,596 773,887 912,441
TOTAL 327,123,861 321,860,767 332,259,129 328,128,102 382,522,878
YIELD TO MATURITY 0.28%0.39%0.39%0.44%0.60%
116
Page 5 of 5
Funds Managed by the City The City participates in two local agency investment pools managed by government finance professionals and treasurers: the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) and the California Asset Management Program (CAMP). The following table reflects the most recent quarterly yields.
Table 3: Quarterly Portfolio Yields, Recent 8Quarters
Market Yield LAIF CAMP Chandler
12/31/19 2.03%1.77%1.75%
3/31/20 1.74%1.50%0.89%
6/30/20 1.15%0.48%0.36%
9/30/20 0.66%0.25%0.30%
12/31/20 0.52%0.12%0.27%
3/31/21 0.35%0.07%0.46%
6/30/21 0.25%0.05%0.49%
9/30/21 0.21%0.05%0.56%
12/31/21 0.22%0.05%0.91%
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:Strategy 2, Objective D: Continue to maintain strong fiscal policies.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:The City Council Agenda was posted.
ATTACHMENTS:1) City of Dublin Investment Report for Period Ending December 31, 20212) Transaction Ledger – October through December 2021
117
CHANDLER ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC. | 800.317.4747 | www.chandlerasset.com
INVESTMENT REPORT
Period Ending December 31, 2021
City of Dublin
Attachment 1
118
SECTION 1 Economic Update
SECTION 2 Account Profile
SECTION 3 Consolidated Information
SECTION 4 Portfolio Holdings
SECTION 5 Transactions
Table of Contents As of December 31, 2021
1
119
SECTION |Section 1 |Economic Update
2
120
Economic Update
We believe economic growth islikely to moderate but remain above-trend in 2022,as US fiscal support begins to wane, and
the Federal Reserve becomes less accommodative. We expect continued improvement in the labor market,particularly an
increase in the participation rate,will help drive economic growth this year as the health situation improves.Consumer
spending,the largest component of US GDP,should also remain solid,supported by healthy consumer balance sheets and
an improving labor market,in our view.We anticipate inventory rebuilding will likely be a significant driver of US GDP
growth in the second half of the year as well.Our outlook is predicated on an improving global health backdrop, though
risks to the downside remain.Over the near-term,we believe the omicron variant will hinder economic growth and we
expect financial market volatility will be elevated. Inflation readings continue to run hot, but we believe inflation may be at
or near a peak and pricing pressures are likely to abate as we move through the year.
The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC)kept the fed funds target rate unchanged in December,in a range of 0.0%-
0.25%,but announced plans to accelerate the pace of their tapering process.The Fed will reduce the magnitude of their
monthly asset purchases by $30 billionin January,doubling the pace of the monthly reduction in asset purchases that began
in November.Should the Fed continue to reduce their monthly asset purchases at the new pace,their bond-buying
program would end this spring (late-March or mid-April).The FOMC’s updated Summary of Economic Projections indicates
that policymakers may be prepared to hike the fed funds rate three times in 2022 (based on the median estimate),up from
the previous projection of just one 25 basis point hike.The Fed’s updated projections suggest that these hikes would be
amid a backdrop of strong economic growth.With inflation now more elevated and prolonged than originally anticipated,
we believe the Fed’s decision to accelerate the tapering process is prudent.However,we do not believe that monetary
policy is on a pre-set course and expect the Fed will adjust policy if necessary,depending on developments in the
economy.
In December,the 2-year Treasury yield increased nearly 17 basis points to 0.73%,the 5-year Treasury yield increased ten
basis points to 1.26%,and the 10-year Treasury yield increased about seven basis points to 1.51%in the month.So far in
January, we have seen a relatively swift move upward in Treasury yields across the curve.
3
121
Source: US Department of Labor Source: US Department of Labor
Employment
Job growth slowed in December,with US nonfarm payroll growth of just 199,000 in the month versus the consensus forecast of 450,000,but the
unemployment rate still declined to 3.9%,the lowest level since February 2020.On a trailing 3-month and 6-month basis,payrolls increased an
average of 365,000 and 508,000 per month,respectively,which still compares favorably to the average job gains in the five years leading up to
the pandemic of about 196,000 per month.We believe a variety of factors are keeping some workers out of the labor force for now,which
continues to hold back job growth despite strong demand from employers.The labor participation rate was unchanged in December at 61.9%
and remains lower than the pre-pandemic level of 63.4%.The employment-population ratio increased to 59.5%in December form 59.3%in
November,but also remains below the pre-pandemic level of 61.2%.The U-6 underemployment rate,which includes those who are marginally
attached to the labor force and employed part time foreconomic reasons,declined to 7.3%in December from 7.7%in November (versus 7.0%
in February 2020).Annualized average hourly earnings rose 0.6%month-over-month and were up 4.7%year-over-year in December versus
5.1% in November.
-22,000
-18,000
-14,000
-10,000
-6,000
-2,000
2,000
6,000
MOM Change In (000's)Nonfarm Payroll (000's)
Non-farm Payroll (000's)
3 month average (000's)
0.0%
4.0%
8.0%
12.0%
16.0%
20.0%
24.0%
Unemployment Rate
Underemployment Rate (U6)
Unemployment Rate (U3)Rate (%)4
122
Initial Claims for Unemployment
-
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
In thousandsInitial Jobless Claims
Continuing Claims
Initial Claims For Unemployment May 01, 2020 -January 14, 2022
In the most recent week,the number of initial jobless claims was 286,000,versus 231,000 in the prior week.The level of continuing
unemployment claims (where the data is lagged by one week)declined to 1.635 million from 1.551 million in the prior week.Continuing
jobless claims have declined significantly from the peak of nearly 25 millionin May 2020,and are in the range of pre-pandemic levels (the 2019
average was 1.7 million).
Source: US Department of Labor
5
123
Source: US Department of Labor Source: US Department of Commerce
Inflation
The Consumer Price Index (CPI)was up 7.0%year-over-year in December,versus up 6.8%year-over-year in November.Core CPI (CPI less food
and energy)was up 5.5%year-over-year in December,versus up 4.9%in November.Pricing pressures were widespread in December,with
notable gains for used cars and trucks,new vehicles,food,and rent.The Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE)index was up 5.7%year-
over-year in November,up from 5.1%in October.Core PCE was up 4.7%year-over-year in November,versus up 4.2%in October.Current
inflation readings continue to run well above the Fed’s longer-run target of around 2.0%.While we believeyear-over-year inflation may be at
or near a peak, and pricing pressures are likely to abate as we move through the year,we expect inflationary pressures will remain elevated
over the near-term.
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
8.0%
Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE)
PCE Price Deflator YOY % Change
PCE Core Deflator YOY % Change
YOY( %) Change0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
8.0%
Consumer Price Index (CPI)
CPI YOY % Change
Core CPI YOY % Change
YOY( %) Change6
124
On a year-over-year basis,retail sales were up 16.9%in December versus up 18.2%in November.On a month-over-month basis,retail sales
were softer than expected in December,down 1.9%versus expectations of down 0.1%,following a modest gain of just 0.2%in November.
Excluding vehicles and gas,retail sales were down 2.5%month-over-month.In our view,the data suggests that consumers started shopping
early in the holiday season and that high gas prices are likely taking some wallet share.We believe the surge in Omicron virus cases likely
hindered December sales as well.We remain constructive on the outlook for consumerspending this year,but we believe the current surge in
virus cases is likely to take a toll on January retail sales.Looking further ahead,we believe high levels of consumer savings along with
improvement in the health situation and continued improvement in the labor market,should provide a healthy tailwind for consumer
spending.The Consumer Confidence index increased to 115.8 in December from 111.9 in November.The improvement came despite the
arrival of the omicron variant and still elevated inflation.
Source: US Department of Commerce Source: The Conference Board
-30.0%
-20.0%
-10.0%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
Retail Sales YOY % Change
YOY (%) Change80
90
100
110
120
130
140
Index LevelConsumer Confidence
Consumer
7
125
Source: The Conference Board Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
Economic Activity
The Conference Board’s Leading Economic Index (LEI)increased 0.8%month-over-month in December,following a 0.7%increase in November.
On a year-over-year basis,the LEI was up 8.5%in December versus up 8.4%in November.The Conference Board believes the December
increase in the LEI suggests that the economic expansion will continue into the spring, but they caution that headwinds from the virus,labor
shortages,inflation,and expected rate hikes by the Fed pose risks to the outlook.The Conference Board expects GDP growth to moderate in
the first quarter to 2.2%but they are forecasting 3.5%growth for the full year.Meanwhile,the Chicago Fed National Activity Index (CFNAI)
declined to -0.15 in December from 0.44 in November, suggesting that economic growth declined in December. We believe the rapid spread of
the Omicron variant in December contributed to the overall decline.On a 3-month moving average basis,the CFNAI increased to 0.33 in
December versus 0.40 in November.
-8.00
-6.00
-4.00
-2.00
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
Chicago Fed National Activity Index (CFNAI)3 Month Average-8.0%
-6.0%
-4.0%
-2.0%
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
Leading Economic Indicators (LEI)MOM ( %) Change8
126
Source: US Department of Commerce Source: S&P
Housing
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
MOM Change (In Thousands of Units)Housing Starts
Multi Family Housing Starts
Single Family Housing Starts
0.0%
3.0%
6.0%
9.0%
12.0%
15.0%
18.0%
21.0%
24.0%
S&P/Case -Shiller 20 City Composite Home Price Index YOY( %) ChangeTotal housing starts increased 1.4%in December to an annual pace of 1,702,000.Single-family starts declined 2.3%while multi-family starts
increased 10.6%, month-over-month. On a year-over-year basis total housing starts were up 2.5% in December. According to the Case-Shiller 20-
City home price index,home prices were up 18.4%year-over-year in October versus up 19.1%year-over-year in September,suggesting the
acceleration in home prices is easing. However, tight supply will likely continue to support prices.
9
127
Source: Institute for Supply Management Source: Federal Reserve
Manufacturing
The Institute for Supply Management (ISM)manufacturing index declined to 58.7 in December from 61.1 in November. Nevertheless,readings
above 50.0 are indicative of expansion in the manufacturing sector.The Industrial Production index was up 3.7%in December,versus up 5.0%
in November.On a month-over-month basis,the Industrial Production index declined 0.1%in December,following an upwardly revised 0.7%
increase in November.Manufacturing production likely remains constrained by supply chain bottlenecks,and capacity utilization declined to
76.5%in December from 76.6%in November.Although capacity utilization remains below its longer-run average of 79.6%,itis running above
the pre-pandemic level of 76.3%.
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
Institute of Supply Management Purchasing Manager
Index
EXPANDING
CONTRACTING
-20.0%
-15.0%
-10.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
Industrial Production
YOY( %) Change10
128
Source: US Department of Commerce Source: US Department of Commerce
12/20 3/21 6/21 9/21
2.3% 7.4% 7.9% 1.4%
4.0% -0.4% -0.7% 2.1%
-1.7% -1.6% -0.2% -1.3%
-0.2% 0.8% -0.4% -0.4%
0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5%
4.5% 6.3% 6.7% 2.3%
Gross Private Domestic Investment
Personal Consumption Expenditures
Components of GDP
Federal Government Expenditures
State and Local (Consumption and Gross
Investment)
Net Exports and Imports
Total
-35.0%
-30.0%
-25.0%
-20.0%
-15.0%
-10.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
GDP QOQ % Change
GDP YOY % Change
Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
Real US gross domestic product (GDP)growth decelerated in the third quarter of 2021 amid widespread supply chain disruptions and a surge in
the Covid Delta variant.However,third quarter growth was slightly better than previously estimated.According to the final estimate,third
quarter GDP grew at an annualized rate of 2.3%in the third quarter,revised up from the second estimate of 2.1%and the advance estimate of
2.0%.This follows a much stronger pace of growth in the first half of 2021,with first and second quarter annualized GDP growth up 6.3%and
6.7%,respectively.The consensus estimate is 5.9%GDP growth in the fourth quarter,and 2.9%GDP growth in the current quarter.We
anticipate the recent surge of omicron cases in the US will hamper current quarter economic growth.
11
129
Federal Reserve
Source: Federal Reserve Source: Bloomberg
Last year,the Fed took a wide range of aggressive actions to help stabilize and provide liquidity to the financial markets.The Fed lowered the
fed funds target rate to a range of 0.0%-0.25%and started purchasing Treasury and agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS)to support
smooth market functioning.Last year,policymakers reinstated the Commercial Paper Funding Facility and Money Market Mutual Fund
Liquidity Facility,and established the Primary Market Corporate Credit Facility,Secondary Market Corporate Credit Facility,Term Asset-Backed
Securities Loan Facility,Paycheck Protection Program Liquidity Facility,Main Street Lending Facility,and Municipal Liquidity Facility.The Fed
has also provided short-term funding through large-scale repo operations and lowered the reserve requirement for depository institutions.
Many of the Fed's lending facilities expired at the end of 2020.In June 2021,the Fed announced plans to unwind its corporate credit facility.
The Fed started to taper their Treasury and agency MBS purchases in November 2021,and we believe the Fed's bond-buying program islikely
to end in the spring of 2022. The Fed has also signaled that they are likely to start hiking the fed funds target rate in 2022.
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
Effective Federal Funds Rate
Yield (%)2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,000,000
8,000,000
9,000,000
Federal Reserve Balance Sheet Assets
In$ millions12
130
Source: Bloomberg Source: Bloomberg
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
US Treasury Note Yields
2-Year
5-Year
10-Year
Yield (%)0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
US Treasury Yield Curve
Dec-21
Sep-21
Dec-20
Yield (%)Bond Yields
At the end of December,the 2-year Treasury yield was about 61 basis points higher and the 10-Year Treasury yield was about 60 basis points
higher,year-over-year.The spread between the 2-year Treasury yield and 10-year Treasury yield was 78 basis points at year-end compared to
the average historical spread (since 2002) of about 135 basis points.
13
131
Section 2|SECTION |Section 2 |Account Profile
14
132
Objectives
Chandler Asset Management Performance Objective
The performance objective of the City of Dublin is to earn a return that equals or exceeds the return on of
the ICE BAML 1-5 Year Treasury and Agency Index.
Investment Objectives
The investment objectives of the City of Dublin are first,to provide safety of principal;second,to provide
adequate liquidity to meet all requirements which might be reasonably anticipated;third,to attain a
market average rate of return on its investments throughout economic cycles;and fourth,to be diversified
to avoid incurring unreasonable and avoidable risks regarding specific security types or individual financial
institutions.
Strategy
In order to achieve this objective,the portfolio invests in high quality fixed income instruments consistent
with the City's investment policy and California Government Code.
As of December 31, 2021
15
133
Compliance As of December 31, 2021
Category Standard Comment
U.S. Treasury Issues No limitations; Full faith and credit of the U.S. are pledged for payment of principal and interest.Complies
Federal Agencies
35% max per agency issuer; 25% max callables for agency securities; Federal Agencies or U.S. Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE),
participations, or other instruments, including those issued by or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by federal agencies or U.S.
GSEs.
Complies
Municipal Securities "A" rated or higher by a NRSRO; 5% max per issuer; Obligations of the State of California, any of the other 49 states, or any local agency
within the state of California; Complies
Supranational Securities
"AA" rating category or better by a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization ("NRSRO"); 30% maximum; 10% max per issuer;
U.S. dollar denominated senior unsecured unsubordinated obligations issued or unconditionally guaranteed by the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development ("IBRD"), the International Finance Corporation ("IFC") or the Inter-American Development Bank ("IADB")
Complies
Asset-Backed Securities/Mortgage-
Backed Securities/ Collateralized
Mortgage Obligations
"AA" rated or higher by a NRSRO; 20% maximum (combined); 5% max per issuer Complies
Corporate Medium Term Notes "A" rated or higher by a NRSRO; 30% maximum; 5% max per issuer; Issued by corporations organized and operating within the U.S. or by
depository institutions licensed by the U.S. or any state and operating within the U.S.Complies
Negotiable Certificates of Deposit
"A" long-term debt rated and/or "A-1" short-term rated or higher by a NRSRO; 30% maximum; 5% max per issuer; 20% max amount
invested in NCDs with any one financial institution in combination with any other debt from that financial institution; Issued by a
nationally or state-chartered bank, a savings association or a federal association, a state or federal credit union, or by a state-licensed
branch of a foreign bank.
Complies
Time Deposits/ Certificates of Deposit 10% maximum; Collateralized/FDIC Insured; 1 year max maturity Complies
Commercial Paper
"A-1" rated or higher by a NRSRO; 25% maximum; 5% max per issuer; 10% max of the outstanding commercial paper of an issuing
corporation; 20% max amount invested in CP of any one issuer in combination with any other debt from that issuer; 270 days max
maturity; Issuer of the commercial paper shall meet all conditions in either A) (1) Organized and operating in the U.S. as a general corp, (2)
Has AUM > $500 million, (3) "A" rated issuer debt (if any) or higher by a NRSRO; or B) (1) Organized in the U.S. as a special purpose corp,
trust, LLC, (2) Has program wide credit enhancements including, but not limited to, over collateralization, LOC, or surety bond, (3) "A-1"
rated or higher by a NRSRO
Complies
Banker’s Acceptances "A-1" short-term rated or higher by a NRSRO; 40% maximum; 5% max per issuer; 20% max amount invested in BA with any one financial
institution in combination with any other debt from that financial institution; 180 days max maturity Complies
Money Market Mutual Funds and
Mutual Funds
Highest rating or "AAA" rated by two NRSROs; SEC registered adviser with AUM >$500 million and experience > 5 years; 20% maximum in
Mutual Funds and Money Market Mutual Funds; 20% max in Money Market Mutual Fund; 10% max per one Mutual Fund Complies
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) Maximum permitted by LAIF; Not used by investment adviser Complies
California Asset Management Program
(CAMP)Issued by joint powers authority organized pursuant to California Government Code; Not used by investment adviser Complies
Prohibited Securities Inverse floaters; Ranges notes, Mortgage-derived, Interest-only strips; Any investment in a security not specifically listed as an Authorized
and Suitable Investment in the policy.Complies
Max Per Issuer 5% max per issuer, except US Government, its Agencies and instrumentalities (including agency backed-mortgage pools), Supranational
securities, or Money Market Mutual Funds Complies
Maximum Maturity 5 years, unless otherwise stated in the policy Complies
City of Dublin
Assets managed by Chandler Asset Management are in full compliance with state law and with the City's investment policy.
16
134
Portfolio Characteristics
City of Dublin
12/31/2021 9/30/2021
Benchmark*Portfolio Portfolio
Average Maturity (yrs)2.64 2.67 2.80
Average Modified Duration 2.57 2.47 2.58
Average Purchase Yield n/a 1.49%1.52%
Average Market Yield 0.85%0.91%0.56%
Average Quality**AAA AA/Aa1 AA/Aa1
Total Market Value 233,062,790 234,606,258
*ICE BofA 1-5 Yr US Treasury & Agency Index
**Benchmark is a blended rating of S&P, Moody’s, and Fitch. Portfolio is S&P and Moody’s respectively.
As of December 31, 2021
17
135
City of Dublin
Sector Distribution
ABS
6.3%
Agency
27.8%
CMO
0.9%
Corporate
24.2%
Money Market
Fund
0.1%
Negotiable CD
2.1%
Supranational
9.6%
US Treasury
28.8%
December 31, 2021 September 30, 2021
ABS
5.8%
Agency
28.0%
CMO
0.9%
Corporate
24.8%
Money Market
Fund
0.4%
Negotiable CD
1.1%
Supranational
9.7%
US Treasury
29.5%
As of December 31, 2021
18
136
Issue Name Investment Type % Portfolio
Government of United States US Treasury 28.82%
Federal National Mortgage Association Agency 11.71%
Federal Home Loan Bank Agency 8.68%
Inter-American Dev Bank Supranational 5.31%
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Agency 4.57%
Intl Bank Recon and Development Supranational 4.33%
Federal Farm Credit Bank Agency 2.87%
JP Morgan Chase & Co Corporate 1.79%
Bank of America Corp Corporate 1.62%
Royal Bank of Canada Corporate 1.55%
Honda Motor Corporation Corporate 1.55%
Charles Schwab Corp/The Corporate 1.47%
Toronto Dominion Holdings Corporate 1.46%
Hyundai Auot Receivables ABS 1.42%
Apple Inc Corporate 1.35%
Morgan Stanley Corporate 1.29%
US Bancorp Corporate 1.16%
Chubb Corporation Corporate 1.14%
Honeywell Corp Corporate 1.08%
Bank of Nova Scotia Houston Negotiable CD 1.07%
Svenska Handelsbanken NY Negotiable CD 1.07%
Bank of Montreal Chicago Corporate 1.05%
Toyota Motor Corp Corporate 1.05%
PNC Financial Services Group Corporate 0.99%
John Deere ABS ABS 0.97%
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp CMO 0.90%
Deere & Company Corporate 0.89%
Wal-Mart Stores Corporate 0.87%
Berkshire Hathaway Corporate 0.82%
Honda ABS ABS 0.81%
Amazon.com Inc Corporate 0.79%
Hyundai Auto Lease Securitization ABS 0.61%
Bank of New York Corporate 0.54%
Metlife Inc Corporate 0.54%
Toyota ABS ABS 0.53%
Nissan ABS ABS 0.49%
Mercedes-Benz Auto Lease Trust ABS 0.48%
Toyota Lease Owner Trust ABS 0.46%
Issuers
City of Dublin –Account #10198
As of December 31, 2021
19
137
Issue Name Investment Type % Portfolio
ChevronTexaco Corp Corporate 0.44%
Merck & Company Corporate 0.33%
BMW Vehicle Lease Trust ABS 0.30%
United Health Group Inc Corporate 0.26%
GM Financial Securitized Term Auto Trust ABS 0.25%
Salesforce.com Inc Corporate 0.20%
First American Govt Oblig Fund Money Market Fund 0.12%
TOTAL 100.00%
Issuers
City of Dublin –Account #10198
As of December 31, 2021
20
138
AAA AA A <A NR
12/31/21 15.1%63.7%17.0%1.3%2.9%
09/30/21 14.1%64.5%17.5%1.3%2.7%
Source: S&P Ratings
December 31, 2021 vs. September 30, 2021
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
AAA AA A <A NR
12/31/2021 9/30/2021
Quality Distribution
City of Dublin
As of December 31, 2021
21
139
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
0 - 0.25 0.25 - 0.50 0.50 - 1 1 - 2 2 - 3 3 - 4 4 - 5 5+
City of Dublin ICE BofA 1-5 Yr US Treasury & Agency Index
Portfolio Compared to the Benchmark as of December 31, 2021
0 -0.25 0.25 -0.50 0.50 - 1 1 - 2 2 - 3 3 - 4 4 - 5 5+
Portfolio 2.0% 3.8% 7.6% 24.7% 24.8% 22.8% 14.3% 0.0%
Benchmark*0.0% 0.0% 1.7% 34.8% 27.8% 18.8% 16.8% 0.0%
*ICE BofA 1-5 Yr US Treasury & Agency Index
Duration Distribution
City of Dublin
As of December 31, 2021
22
140
-1.50%
-1.00%
-0.50%
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
3.00%
12 months 2 years 3 years 5 years 10 years Since Inception
City of Dublin ICE BofA 1-5 Yr US Treasury & Agency Index
Total Rate of Return Annualized Since Inception 10/31/2013
Annualized
TOTAL RATE OF RETURN 3 months 12 months 2 years 3 years 5 years 10 years Since
Inception
City of Dublin -0.66%-0.94%1.66%2.63%2.07%N/A 1.65%
ICE BofA 1-5 Yr US Treasury & Agency Index -0.69%-1.09%1.53%2.41%1.88%N/A 1.47%
*ICE BofA 1-3 Yr US Treasury & Agency Index to 12/31/14
Total rate of return: A measure of a portfolio’s performance over time. It is the internal rate of return,which equates the beginning value of the portfolio with the
ending value;it includes interest earnings,realized and unrealized gains and losses in the portfolio.
Investment Performance
City of Dublin
As of December 31, 2021
23
141
Portfolio Characteristics
City of Dublin Reporting Account
12/31/2021
Portfolio
9/30/2021
Portfolio
Average Maturity (yrs)0.00 0.00
Modified Duration 0.00 0.00
Average Purchase Yield 0.11%0.14%
Average Market Yield 0.11%0.14%
Average Quality*AAA/NR AAA/NR
Total Market Value 149,460,088 93,521,844
*Portfolio is S&P and Moody’s, respectively.
As of December 31, 2021
24
142
City of Dublin Reporting Account
Sector Distribution
LAIF
33.7%
Local Gov
Investment Pool
66.3%
December 31, 2021 September 30, 2021
LAIF
53.9%
Local Gov
Investment Pool
46.1%
As of December 31, 2021
25
143
Issue Name Investment Type % Portfolio
CAMP Local Gov Investment Pool 66.26%
Local Agency Investment Fund LAIF 33.74%
TOTAL 100.00%
Issuers
City of Dublin Reporting Account –Account #10219
As of December 31, 2021
26
144
SECTION |Section 3 |Consolidated Information
27
145
Portfolio Characteristics
City of Dublin Consolidated
12/31/2021 9/30/2021
Portfolio Portfolio
Average Maturity (yrs)1.63 2.00
Modified Duration 1.50 1.84
Average Purchase Yield 0.94%1.12%
Average Market Yield 0.60%0.44%
Average Quality*AA+/Aa1 AA+/Aa1
Total Market Value 382,522,878 328,128,102
* Portfolio is S&P and Moody’s respectively.
As of December 31, 2021
28
146
City of Dublin Consolidated
Sector Distribution
ABS
3.8%
Agency
17.0%
CMO
0.6%
Corporate
14.8%
LAIF
13.2%
Local Gov
Investment Pool
25.9%
Money Market
Fund
0.1%
Negotiable CD
1.3%
Supranational
5.9%
US Treasury
17.6%
December 31, 2021 September 30, 2021
ABS
4.2%
Agency
20.0%
CMO
0.7%
Corporate
17.7%
LAIF
15.4%
Local Gov
Investment Pool
13.1%
Money Market
Fund
0.3%
Negotiable CD
0.8%
Supranational
6.9%
US Treasury
21.1%
As of December 31, 2021
29
147
SECTION |Section 4 |Portfolio Holdings
30
148
Holdings Report
City of Dublin -Account #10198
CUSIP Security Description Par Value/Units Purchase Date
Book Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt Price
Mkt YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.
Gain/Loss
Moody/S&P
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
ABS
65479GAD1 Nissan Auto Receivables Trust 2018-B A3
3.060% Due 03/15/2023
98,576.96 07/17/2018
3.08%
98,573.76
98,576.85
100.21
0.48%
98,779.93
134.06
0.04%
203.08
Aaa / AAA
NR
1.20
0.08
89231PAD0 Toyota Auto Receivables Trust 2018-D A3
3.180% Due 03/15/2023
206,220.51 08/29/2019
2.00%
210,626.86
207,713.15
100.44
0.36%
207,126.24
291.46
0.09%
(586.91)
Aaa / AAA
NR
1.20
0.16
44891VAC5 Hyundai Auto Lease Trust 2021-B A3
0.330% Due 06/17/2024
1,420,000.00 06/08/2021
0.34%
1,419,787.00
1,419,838.63
99.37
0.73%
1,411,110.80
208.27
0.61%
(8,727.83)
Aaa / AAA
NR
2.46
1.56
65479JAD5 Nissan Auto Receivables Owner 2019-C A3
1.930% Due 07/15/2024
1,028,763.91 10/16/2019
1.94%
1,028,709.60
1,028,734.79
100.81
0.38%
1,037,068.09
882.45
0.45%
8,333.30
Aaa / AAA
NR
2.54
0.52
89237VAB5 Toyota Auto Receivables Trust 2020-C A3
0.440% Due 10/15/2024
1,025,000.00 07/21/2020
0.44%
1,024,921.08
1,024,947.86
99.92
0.55%
1,024,175.90
200.44
0.44%
(771.96)
Aaa / AAA
NR
2.79
0.74
43813KAC6 Honda Auto Receivables Trust 2020-3 A3
0.370% Due 10/18/2024
1,120,000.00 09/22/2020
0.38%
1,119,835.47
1,119,901.43
99.72
0.65%
1,116,869.60
149.64
0.48%
(3,031.83)
NR / AAA
AAA
2.80
0.99
89239CAC3 Toyota Lease Owner Trust 2021-B A3
0.420% Due 10/21/2024
1,090,000.00 07/27/2021
0.40%
1,089,985.28
1,089,987.76
99.15
0.90%
1,080,742.63
139.88
0.46%
(9,245.13)
Aaa / NR
AAA
2.81
1.79
47787NAC3 John Deere Owner Trust 2020-B A3
0.510% Due 11/15/2024
515,000.00 07/14/2020
0.52%
514,921.51
514,954.09
99.85
0.69%
514,211.54
116.73
0.22%
(742.55)
Aaa / NR
AAA
2.88
0.83
58769KAD6 Mercedes-Benz Auto Lease Trust 2021-B A3
0.400% Due 11/15/2024
1,135,000.00 06/22/2021
0.40%
1,134,914.31
1,134,931.45
99.25
0.81%
1,126,440.97
201.78
0.48%
(8,490.48)
NR / AAA
AAA
2.88
1.85
09690AAC7 BMW Vehicle Lease Trust 2021-2 A3
0.330% Due 12/26/2024
710,000.00 09/08/2021
0.34%
709,926.73
709,936.25
99.24
0.80%
704,580.58
39.05
0.30%
(5,355.67)
Aaa / NR
AAA
2.99
1.64
47788UAC6 John Deere Owner Trust 2021-A A3
0.360% Due 09/15/2025
800,000.00 03/02/2021
0.37%
799,846.24
799,880.97
99.19
0.84%
793,528.00
128.00
0.34%
(6,352.97)
Aaa / NR
AAA
3.71
1.70
44933LAC7 Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 2021-A A3
0.380% Due 09/15/2025
725,000.00 04/20/2021
0.38%
724,923.73
724,940.72
99.25
0.84%
719,587.88
122.44
0.31%
(5,352.84)
NR / AAA
AAA
3.71
1.62
44934KAC8 Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 2021-B A3
0.380% Due 01/15/2026
2,065,000.00 07/20/2021
0.39%
2,064,544.25
2,064,606.74
98.90
0.98%
2,042,194.14
348.76
0.88%
(22,412.60)
NR / AAA
AAA
4.04
1.85
43815GAC3 Honda Auto Receivables Trust 2021-4 A3
0.880% Due 01/21/2026
765,000.00 11/16/2021
0.89%
764,838.74
764,843.91
99.76
0.99%
763,154.06
187.00
0.33%
(1,689.85)
Aaa / NR
AAA
4.06
2.13
47789QAC4 John Deere Owner Trust 2021-B A3
0.520% Due 03/16/2026
965,000.00 07/13/2021
0.52%
964,913.92
964,924.51
98.86
1.02%
954,003.83
223.02
0.41%
(10,920.68)
Aaa / NR
AAA
4.21
2.30
44935FAD6 Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 2021-C A3
0.740% Due 05/15/2026
545,000.00 11/09/2021
0.75%
544,878.36
544,883.10
99.31
1.05%
541,263.48
179.24
0.23%
(3,619.62)
NR / AAA
AAA
4.37
2.19
As of December 31, 2021
31
149
Holdings Report
City of Dublin -Account #10198
CUSIP Security Description Par Value/Units Purchase Date
Book Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt Price
Mkt YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.
Gain/Loss
Moody/S&P
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
362554AC1 GM Financial Securitized Term 2021-4 A3
0.680% Due 09/16/2026
585,000.00 10/13/2021
0.66%
584,985.08
584,985.94
99.25
1.06%
580,606.07
165.75
0.25%
(4,379.87)
Aaa / AAA
NR
4.71
1.98
TOTAL ABS 14,798,561.38 0.60%
14,801,131.92
14,798,588.15 0.80%
14,715,443.74
3,717.97
6.32%
(83,144.41)
Aaa / AAA
Aaa
3.29
1.54
Agency
313378CR0 FHLB Note
2.250% Due 03/11/2022
2,000,000.00 06/19/2017
1.86%
2,035,280.00
2,001,411.20
100.41
0.16%
2,008,110.00
13,750.00
0.87%
6,698.80
Aaa / AA+
NR
0.19
0.19
3135G0T45 FNMA Note
1.875% Due 04/05/2022
3,250,000.00 05/05/2017
1.99%
3,232,125.00
3,249,062.88
100.41
0.30%
3,263,383.50
14,557.29
1.41%
14,320.62
Aaa / AA+
AAA
0.26
0.26
3135G0T94 FNMA Note
2.375% Due 01/19/2023
2,500,000.00 03/28/2018
2.70%
2,463,675.00
2,492,081.69
102.05
0.41%
2,551,347.50
26,718.75
1.11%
59,265.81
Aaa / AA+
AAA
1.05
1.03
313383QR5 FHLB Note
3.250% Due 06/09/2023
1,500,000.00 08/28/2018
2.87%
1,525,005.00
1,507,508.66
103.86
0.56%
1,557,838.50
2,979.17
0.67%
50,329.84
Aaa / AA+
NR
1.44
1.41
3137EAEN5 FHLMC Note
2.750% Due 06/19/2023
2,000,000.00 07/16/2018
2.88%
1,988,360.00
1,996,542.96
103.15
0.59%
2,062,924.00
1,833.33
0.89%
66,381.04
Aaa / AA+
AAA
1.47
1.44
3135G05G4 FNMA Note
0.250% Due 07/10/2023
2,350,000.00 07/08/2020
0.32%
2,344,947.50
2,347,439.14
99.46
0.60%
2,337,404.00
2,790.63
1.00%
(10,035.14)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
1.52
1.52
3133EKZK5 FFCB Note
1.600% Due 08/14/2023
4,000,000.00 08/26/2019
1.54%
4,009,000.00
4,003,667.13
101.96
0.39%
4,078,236.00
24,355.56
1.76%
74,568.87
Aaa / AA+
AAA
1.62
1.59
313383YJ4 FHLB Note
3.375% Due 09/08/2023
5,000,000.00 Various
2.90%
5,102,615.00
5,036,778.37
104.57
0.65%
5,228,470.00
52,968.76
2.27%
191,691.63
Aaa / AA+
NR
1.69
1.63
3130A0F70 FHLB Note
3.375% Due 12/08/2023
5,000,000.00 Various
2.73%
5,147,870.00
5,058,118.98
105.07
0.73%
5,253,670.00
10,781.25
2.26%
195,551.02
Aaa / AA+
AAA
1.94
1.88
3135G0V34 FNMA Note
2.500% Due 02/05/2024
2,000,000.00 02/27/2019
2.58%
1,992,340.00
1,996,749.92
103.56
0.78%
2,071,160.00
20,277.78
0.90%
74,410.08
Aaa / AA+
AAA
2.10
2.03
3130A1XJ2 FHLB Note
2.875% Due 06/14/2024
3,795,000.00 Various
1.96%
3,958,639.85
3,875,338.89
104.87
0.87%
3,979,687.47
5,152.24
1.71%
104,348.58
Aaa / AA+
NR
2.45
2.37
3133EKWV4 FFCB Note
1.850% Due 07/26/2024
2,500,000.00 08/13/2019
1.65%
2,524,140.00
2,512,510.61
102.93
0.70%
2,573,350.00
19,913.19
1.11%
60,839.39
Aaa / AA+
AAA
2.57
2.49
3130A2UW4 FHLB Note
2.875% Due 09/13/2024
2,000,000.00 10/10/2019
1.58%
2,122,020.00
2,066,877.00
105.11
0.95%
2,102,102.00
17,250.00
0.91%
35,225.00
Aaa / AA+
AAA
2.70
2.59
3135G0W66 FNMA Note
1.625% Due 10/15/2024
2,000,000.00 11/08/2019
1.80%
1,983,400.00
1,990,606.56
101.88
0.94%
2,037,648.00
6,861.11
0.88%
47,041.44
Aaa / AA+
AAA
2.79
2.72
3135G0X24 FNMA Note
1.625% Due 01/07/2025
4,200,000.00 Various
1.18%
4,287,898.80
4,254,850.11
101.83
1.01%
4,276,750.80
32,987.50
1.85%
21,900.69
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.02
2.92
As of December 31, 2021
32
150
Holdings Report
City of Dublin -Account #10198
CUSIP Security Description Par Value/Units Purchase Date
Book Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt Price
Mkt YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.
Gain/Loss
Moody/S&P
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
3137EAEP0 FHLMC Note
1.500% Due 02/12/2025
4,200,000.00 Various
1.23%
4,254,786.30
4,234,553.48
101.46
1.02%
4,261,496.40
24,325.00
1.84%
26,942.92
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.12
3.02
3135G03U5 FNMA Note
0.625% Due 04/22/2025
1,825,000.00 04/22/2020
0.67%
1,821,240.50
1,822,512.22
98.64
1.04%
1,800,165.40
2,186.20
0.77%
(22,346.82)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.31
3.26
3135G04Z3 FNMA Note
0.500% Due 06/17/2025
3,435,000.00 06/17/2020
0.54%
3,427,889.55
3,430,076.48
98.03
1.08%
3,367,217.15
667.92
1.45%
(62,859.33)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.46
3.42
3137EAEU9 FHLMC Note
0.375% Due 07/21/2025
1,745,000.00 07/21/2020
0.48%
1,736,309.90
1,738,820.69
97.48
1.10%
1,701,017.28
2,908.33
0.73%
(37,803.41)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.56
3.51
3135G05X7 FNMA Note
0.375% Due 08/25/2025
2,755,000.00 08/25/2020
0.47%
2,742,106.60
2,745,584.43
97.29
1.14%
2,680,314.71
3,615.94
1.15%
(65,269.72)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.65
3.60
3137EAEX3 FHLMC Note
0.375% Due 09/23/2025
2,655,000.00 09/23/2020
0.44%
2,647,008.45
2,649,037.01
97.32
1.11%
2,583,713.25
2,710.31
1.11%
(65,323.76)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.73
3.68
3135G06G3 FNMA Note
0.500% Due 11/07/2025
2,860,000.00 11/09/2020
0.57%
2,849,761.20
2,852,094.59
97.59
1.14%
2,791,119.76
2,145.00
1.20%
(60,974.83)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.85
3.79
TOTAL Agency 63,570,000.00 1.63%
64,196,418.65
63,862,223.00 0.78%
64,567,125.72
291,735.26
27.83%
704,902.72
Aaa / AA+
Aaa
2.33
2.28
CMO
3137BFE98 FHLMC K041 A2
3.171% Due 10/25/2024
2,000,000.00 07/01/2021
0.72%
2,151,406.25
2,128,605.65
105.13
1.19%
2,102,544.00
5,285.00
0.90%
(26,061.65)
Aaa / AAA
AAA
2.82
2.62
TOTAL CMO 2,000,000.00 0.72%
2,151,406.25
2,128,605.65 1.19%
2,102,544.00
5,285.00
0.90%
(26,061.65)
Aaa / AAA
Aaa
2.82
2.62
Corporate
808513AT2 Charles Schwab Corp Callable Note Cont 12/25/2022
2.650% Due 01/25/2023
2,000,000.00 05/21/2019
2.74%
1,993,920.00
1,998,238.93
101.85
0.75%
2,037,098.00
22,966.67
0.88%
38,859.07
A2 / A
A
1.07
0.97
084670BR8 Berkshire Hathaway Callable Note Cont 1/15/2023
2.750% Due 03/15/2023
1,865,000.00 Various
3.35%
1,818,500.75
1,852,729.64
102.11
0.71%
1,904,355.23
15,101.32
0.82%
51,625.59
Aa2 / AA
A+
1.20
1.02
58933YAF2 Merck & Co Note
2.800% Due 05/18/2023
740,000.00 10/26/2018
3.41%
720,996.80
734,256.71
102.95
0.65%
761,828.52
2,474.89
0.33%
27,571.81
A1 / A+
A+
1.38
1.36
46625HRL6 JP Morgan Chase Callable Note Cont 3/18/2023
2.700% Due 05/18/2023
500,000.00 12/20/2018
3.74%
479,055.00
493,453.06
102.28
0.81%
511,383.00
1,612.50
0.22%
17,929.94
A2 / A-
AA-
1.38
1.20
69353RFL7 PNC Bank Callable Note Cont 5/9/2023
3.500% Due 06/08/2023
2,210,000.00 Various
3.53%
2,206,955.80
2,209,126.53
103.76
0.71%
2,293,111.47
4,941.80
0.99%
83,984.94
A2 / A
A+
1.44
1.33
As of December 31, 2021
33
151
Holdings Report
City of Dublin -Account #10198
CUSIP Security Description Par Value/Units Purchase Date
Book Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt Price
Mkt YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.
Gain/Loss
Moody/S&P
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
166764AH3 Chevron Corp Callable Note Cont 3/24/2023
3.191% Due 06/24/2023
1,000,000.00 11/08/2018
3.59%
983,170.00
994,613.20
102.97
0.76%
1,029,695.00
620.47
0.44%
35,081.80
Aa2 / AA-
NR
1.48
1.21
931142EK5 Wal-Mart Stores Callable Note Cont 5/26/2023
3.400% Due 06/26/2023
1,380,000.00 Various
3.41%
1,379,641.30
1,379,893.66
104.03
0.51%
1,435,663.68
651.66
0.62%
55,770.02
Aa2 / AA
AA
1.48
1.38
02665WCJ8 American Honda Finance Note
3.450% Due 07/14/2023
1,000,000.00 Various
3.54%
996,275.00
998,766.51
104.09
0.76%
1,040,940.00
16,004.17
0.45%
42,173.49
A3 / A-
NR
1.53
1.48
06406RAJ6 Bank of NY Mellon Corp Note
3.450% Due 08/11/2023
1,200,000.00 08/24/2018
3.42%
1,201,836.00
1,200,595.76
104.20
0.82%
1,250,414.40
16,100.00
0.54%
49,818.64
A1 / A
AA-
1.61
1.56
06051GHF9 Bank of America Corp Callable Note 1X 3/5/2023
3.550% Due 03/05/2024
2,400,000.00 Various
2.77%
2,434,650.00
2,415,328.52
102.98
1.00%
2,471,510.40
27,453.33
1.07%
56,181.88
A2 / A-
AA-
2.18
1.15
89114QCB2 Toronto Dominion Bank Note
3.250% Due 03/11/2024
2,300,000.00 03/26/2019
2.95%
2,331,234.00
2,313,805.08
104.52
1.16%
2,403,909.40
22,840.28
1.04%
90,104.32
A1 / A
AA-
2.19
2.11
037833CU2 Apple Inc Callable Note Cont 3/11/2024
2.850% Due 05/11/2024
3,000,000.00 Various
2.56%
3,038,334.00
3,018,120.93
104.17
0.92%
3,125,130.00
11,875.00
1.35%
107,009.07
Aaa / AA+
NR
2.36
2.13
023135BW5 Amazon.com Inc Note
0.450% Due 05/12/2024
1,865,000.00 05/10/2021
0.50%
1,862,277.10
1,862,858.45
99.04
0.86%
1,847,062.43
1,142.31
0.79%
(15,796.02)
A1 / AA
AA-
2.36
2.34
24422ETT6 John Deere Capital Corp Note
2.650% Due 06/24/2024
2,000,000.00 Various
1.32%
2,093,680.00
2,064,080.69
103.83
1.08%
2,076,644.00
1,030.56
0.89%
12,563.31
A2 / A
A
2.48
2.40
02665WCZ2 American Honda Finance Note
2.400% Due 06/27/2024
1,500,000.00 07/10/2019
2.49%
1,493,742.00
1,496,864.09
103.02
1.16%
1,545,321.00
400.00
0.66%
48,456.91
A3 / A-
NR
2.49
2.42
79466LAG9 Salesforce.com Inc Callable Note Cont 7/15/2022
0.625% Due 07/15/2024
465,000.00 06/29/2021
0.64%
464,762.85
464,800.18
99.09
0.99%
460,764.32
1,364.32
0.20%
(4,035.86)
A2 / A+
NR
2.54
2.50
78013XZU5 Royal Bank of Canada Note
2.550% Due 07/16/2024
2,500,000.00 09/10/2019
2.28%
2,531,325.00
2,516,415.08
103.34
1.21%
2,583,387.50
29,218.75
1.12%
66,972.42
A2 / A
AA-
2.54
2.44
46647PAU0 JP Morgan Chase & Co Callable Note 1X 7/23/2023
3.797% Due 07/23/2024
2,500,000.00 09/12/2019
2.11%
2,632,175.00
2,569,667.86
104.23
1.06%
2,605,685.00
41,661.53
1.14%
36,017.14
A2 / A-
AA-
2.56
1.50
90331HPL1 US Bank NA Callable Note Cont 12/21/2024
2.050% Due 01/21/2025
2,610,000.00 01/16/2020
2.10%
2,604,440.70
2,606,604.17
102.31
1.25%
2,670,340.59
23,780.00
1.16%
63,736.42
A1 / AA-
AA-
3.06
2.86
00440EAS6 Chubb INA Holdings Inc Note
3.150% Due 03/15/2025
2,500,000.00 Various
0.76%
2,753,600.00
2,687,839.92
105.57
1.37%
2,639,290.00
23,187.50
1.14%
(48,549.92)
A3 / A
A
3.21
3.03
61747YEA9 Morgan Stanley Callable Note Cont 5/30/2024
0.790% Due 05/30/2025
3,040,000.00 05/26/2021
0.73%
3,041,611.70
3,041,375.31
98.71
1.12%
3,000,844.80
2,068.05
1.29%
(40,530.51)
A1 / BBB+
A
3.41
3.36
438516CB0 Honeywell Intl Callable Note Cont 5/1/2025
1.350% Due 06/01/2025
2,500,000.00 06/23/2020
0.85%
2,559,500.00
2,540,853.75
100.44
1.21%
2,511,060.00
2,812.50
1.08%
(29,793.75)
A2 / A
A
3.42
3.25
78015K7H1 Royal Bank of Canada Note
1.150% Due 06/10/2025
1,000,000.00 02/22/2021
0.86%
1,012,240.00
1,009,810.75
99.18
1.39%
991,795.00
670.83
0.43%
(18,015.75)
A2 / A
AA-
3.44
3.36
As of December 31, 2021
34
152
Holdings Report
City of Dublin -Account #10198
CUSIP Security Description Par Value/Units Purchase Date
Book Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt Price
Mkt YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.
Gain/Loss
Moody/S&P
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
02665WDL2 American Honda Finance Note
1.200% Due 07/08/2025
1,000,000.00 08/10/2021
1.00%
1,007,640.00
1,006,879.21
99.65
1.30%
996,531.00
5,766.67
0.43%
(10,348.21)
A3 / A-
NR
3.52
3.41
89114QCK2 Toronto Dominion Bank Note
0.750% Due 09/11/2025
1,000,000.00 02/16/2021
0.81%
997,230.00
997,757.06
97.37
1.48%
973,703.00
2,291.67
0.42%
(24,054.06)
A1 / A
AA-
3.70
3.61
06051GHY8 Bank of America Corp Callable Note Cont 2/13/2025
2.015% Due 02/13/2026
1,250,000.00 03/04/2021
1.09%
1,291,725.00
1,284,805.55
101.33
1.40%
1,266,591.25
9,655.21
0.55%
(18,214.30)
A2 / A-
AA-
4.12
3.92
46647PBH8 JP Morgan Chase & Co Callable Note Mthly 3/13/2025
2.005% Due 03/13/2026
1,000,000.00 04/29/2021
1.20%
1,030,270.00
1,025,000.06
101.22
1.61%
1,012,204.00
6,015.00
0.44%
(12,796.06)
A2 / A-
AA-
4.20
3.08
808513BR5 Charles Schwab Corp Callable Note Cont 4/13/2026
1.150% Due 05/13/2026
1,370,000.00 05/11/2021
1.20%
1,366,821.60
1,367,227.17
98.71
1.46%
1,352,290.01
2,100.67
0.58%
(14,937.16)
A2 / A
A
4.37
4.23
91324PEC2 United Health Group Inc Callable Note Cont 4/15/2026
1.150% Due 05/15/2026
605,000.00 Various
1.08%
606,957.25
606,736.76
98.97
1.39%
598,789.68
889.02
0.26%
(7,947.08)
A3 / A+
A
4.37
4.24
89236TJK2 Toyota Motor Credit Corp Note
1.125% Due 06/18/2026
2,485,000.00 06/15/2021
1.13%
2,483,906.60
2,484,024.56
98.54
1.46%
2,448,674.27
1,009.53
1.05%
(35,350.29)
A1 / A+
A+
4.47
4.33
58989V2D5 Met Tower Global Funding Note
1.250% Due 09/14/2026
1,285,000.00 09/07/2021
1.27%
1,283,817.80
1,283,888.37
97.89
1.72%
1,257,923.77
4,774.13
0.54%
(25,964.60)
Aa3 / AA-
AA-
4.71
4.52
06368FAC3 Bank of Montreal Note
1.250% Due 09/15/2026
2,500,000.00 Various
1.29%
2,495,539.50
2,495,803.32
97.92
1.71%
2,448,000.00
9,201.39
1.05%
(47,803.32)
A2 / A-
AA-
4.71
4.53
931142ER0 Wal-Mart Stores Callable Note Cont 08/17/2026
1.050% Due 09/17/2026
585,000.00 09/08/2021
1.09%
583,894.35
583,958.53
98.94
1.28%
578,776.77
1,774.50
0.25%
(5,181.76)
Aa2 / AA
AA
4.72
4.56
TOTAL Corporate 55,155,000.00 1.93%
55,781,725.10
55,606,179.37 1.13%
56,130,717.49
313,456.23
24.22%
524,538.12
A1 / A
A+
2.81
2.58
Money Market Fund
31846V203 First American Govt Obligation Fund Class Y 287,150.19 Various
0.01%
287,150.19
287,150.19
1.00
0.01%
287,150.19
0.00
0.12%
0.00
Aaa / AAA
AAA
0.00
0.00
TOTAL Money Market Fund 287,150.19 0.01%
287,150.19
287,150.19 0.01%
287,150.19
0.00
0.12%
0.00
Aaa / AAA
Aaa
0.00
0.00
Negotiable CD
06417MQL2 Bank of Nova Scotia Houston Yankee CD
0.200% Due 06/23/2022
2,500,000.00 06/29/2021
0.20%
2,499,999.81
2,499,999.91
99.95
0.31%
2,498,692.50
2,666.67
1.07%
(1,307.41)
P-1 / A-1
F-1+
0.48
0.48
As of December 31, 2021
35
153
Holdings Report
City of Dublin -Account #10198
CUSIP Security Description Par Value/Units Purchase Date
Book Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt Price
Mkt YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.
Gain/Loss
Moody/S&P
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
86959RTW0 Svenska Handelsbanken NY Yankee CD
0.255% Due 10/14/2022
2,500,000.00 10/15/2021
0.25%
2,500,126.08
2,500,099.06
99.91
0.36%
2,497,867.50
1,381.25
1.07%
(2,231.56)
P-1 / A-1+
F-1+
0.79
0.78
TOTAL Negotiable CD 5,000,000.00 0.23%
5,000,125.89
5,000,098.97 0.34%
4,996,560.00
4,047.92
2.15%
(3,538.97)
Aaa / AA+
Aaa
0.63
0.63
Supranational
459058FY4 Intl. Bank Recon & Development Note
2.000% Due 01/26/2022
2,000,000.00 10/26/2017
2.12%
1,990,320.00
1,999,843.77
100.10
0.54%
2,002,020.00
17,222.22
0.87%
2,176.23
Aaa / NR
AAA
0.07
0.07
4581X0CZ9 Inter-American Dev Bank Note
1.750% Due 09/14/2022
2,500,000.00 11/28/2017
2.18%
2,451,675.00
2,492,926.70
100.95
0.40%
2,523,655.00
13,003.47
1.09%
30,728.30
Aaa / AAA
AAA
0.70
0.70
4581X0DZ8 Inter-American Dev Bank Note
0.500% Due 09/23/2024
3,680,000.00 09/15/2021
0.52%
3,677,276.80
3,677,525.27
98.68
0.99%
3,631,240.00
5,008.89
1.56%
(46,285.27)
Aaa / AAA
NR
2.73
2.70
459058JB0 Intl. Bank Recon & Development Note
0.625% Due 04/22/2025
2,260,000.00 04/15/2020
0.70%
2,251,253.80
2,254,218.69
98.37
1.13%
2,223,184.60
2,707.29
0.96%
(31,034.09)
Aaa / AAA
NR
3.31
3.26
4581X0DN5 Inter-American Dev Bank Note
0.625% Due 07/15/2025
1,685,000.00 01/13/2021
0.53%
1,692,329.75
1,690,762.92
98.16
1.16%
1,653,970.73
4,856.08
0.71%
(36,792.19)
Aaa / AAA
NR
3.54
3.47
459058JL8 Intl. Bank Recon & Development Note
0.500% Due 10/28/2025
6,000,000.00 Various
0.55%
5,986,632.00
5,989,226.93
97.46
1.18%
5,847,714.00
5,250.00
2.51%
(141,512.93)
Aaa / AAA
AAA
3.83
3.77
4581X0DV7 Inter-American Dev Bank Note
0.875% Due 04/20/2026
4,615,000.00 04/13/2021
0.97%
4,593,863.30
4,596,826.61
98.44
1.25%
4,542,789.10
7,964.08
1.95%
(54,037.51)
Aaa / AAA
AAA
4.30
4.20
TOTAL Supranational 22,740,000.00 0.96%
22,643,350.65
22,701,330.89 1.01%
22,424,573.43
56,012.03
9.65%
(276,757.46)
Aaa / AAA
Aaa
2.98
2.93
US Treasury
912828XW5 US Treasury Note
1.750% Due 06/30/2022
3,000,000.00 07/25/2017
1.86%
2,984,072.55
2,998,407.26
100.76
0.23%
3,022,734.00
145.03
1.30%
24,326.74
Aaa / AA+
AAA
0.50
0.50
912828L24 US Treasury Note
1.875% Due 08/31/2022
2,000,000.00 09/27/2017
1.92%
1,995,944.20
1,999,454.11
101.05
0.29%
2,020,938.00
12,741.71
0.87%
21,483.89
Aaa / AA+
AAA
0.67
0.66
912828L57 US Treasury Note
1.750% Due 09/30/2022
3,750,000.00 Various
2.02%
3,702,841.80
3,742,827.56
101.07
0.32%
3,789,990.00
16,766.83
1.63%
47,162.44
Aaa / AA+
AAA
0.75
0.74
912828M49 US Treasury Note
1.875% Due 10/31/2022
1,000,000.00 01/30/2018
2.47%
973,359.38
995,344.81
101.25
0.37%
1,012,461.00
3,211.33
0.44%
17,116.19
Aaa / AA+
AAA
0.83
0.83
9128284D9 US Treasury Note
2.500% Due 03/31/2023
3,750,000.00 Various
2.75%
3,706,123.05
3,738,952.70
102.47
0.51%
3,842,580.00
23,952.61
1.66%
103,627.30
Aaa / AA+
AAA
1.25
1.23
912828R69 US Treasury Note
1.625% Due 05/31/2023
1,500,000.00 05/30/2018
2.67%
1,427,167.97
1,479,458.66
101.51
0.55%
1,522,675.50
2,142.86
0.65%
43,216.84
Aaa / AA+
AAA
1.41
1.40
As of December 31, 2021
36
154
Holdings Report
City of Dublin -Account #10198
CUSIP Security Description Par Value/Units Purchase Date
Book Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt Price
Mkt YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.
Gain/Loss
Moody/S&P
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
912828U57 US Treasury Note
2.125% Due 11/30/2023
5,000,000.00 Various
2.53%
4,908,242.19
4,963,782.12
102.70
0.71%
5,134,765.00
9,340.66
2.21%
170,982.88
Aaa / AA+
AAA
1.92
1.88
912828V80 US Treasury Note
2.250% Due 01/31/2024
5,000,000.00 Various
2.32%
4,983,691.41
4,992,951.70
103.09
0.75%
5,154,295.00
47,078.80
2.23%
161,343.30
Aaa / AA+
AAA
2.08
2.02
912828WJ5 US Treasury Note
2.500% Due 05/15/2024
1,750,000.00 06/10/2019
1.91%
1,798,261.72
1,773,192.44
103.90
0.84%
1,818,290.25
5,680.25
0.78%
45,097.81
Aaa / AA+
AAA
2.37
2.30
9128282N9 US Treasury Note
2.125% Due 07/31/2024
2,000,000.00 08/30/2019
1.44%
2,064,531.25
2,033,827.73
103.20
0.87%
2,063,984.00
17,785.33
0.89%
30,156.27
Aaa / AA+
AAA
2.58
2.50
912828YH7 US Treasury Note
1.500% Due 09/30/2024
3,500,000.00 Various
1.65%
3,474,941.41
3,485,805.18
101.60
0.91%
3,556,056.00
13,413.47
1.53%
70,250.82
Aaa / AA+
AAA
2.75
2.68
9128283J7 US Treasury Note
2.125% Due 11/30/2024
3,000,000.00 Various
1.76%
3,051,650.40
3,030,341.63
103.36
0.95%
3,100,899.00
5,604.40
1.33%
70,557.37
Aaa / AA+
AAA
2.92
2.83
912828ZC7 US Treasury Note
1.125% Due 02/28/2025
3,500,000.00 03/24/2020
0.52%
3,603,222.66
3,566,140.45
100.38
1.00%
3,513,398.00
13,378.80
1.51%
(52,742.45)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.16
3.09
912828ZL7 US Treasury Note
0.375% Due 04/30/2025
4,000,000.00 Various
0.38%
3,998,593.75
3,999,040.10
97.81
1.04%
3,912,500.00
2,569.06
1.68%
(86,540.10)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.33
3.29
91282CAM3 US Treasury Note
0.250% Due 09/30/2025
2,500,000.00 10/16/2020
0.32%
2,491,406.25
2,493,494.05
96.88
1.10%
2,421,875.00
1,596.84
1.04%
(71,619.05)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.75
3.71
91282CBC4 US Treasury Note
0.375% Due 12/31/2025
1,000,000.00 12/29/2020
0.38%
999,921.88
999,937.54
96.97
1.15%
969,727.00
10.36
0.42%
(30,210.54)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.00
3.95
91282CBH3 US Treasury Note
0.375% Due 01/31/2026
4,000,000.00 02/23/2021
0.58%
3,960,625.00
3,967,420.57
96.79
1.18%
3,871,564.00
6,277.17
1.66%
(95,856.57)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.09
4.03
91282CBQ3 US Treasury Note
0.500% Due 02/28/2026
2,500,000.00 03/26/2021
0.83%
2,459,960.94
2,466,155.07
97.21
1.19%
2,430,175.00
4,247.24
1.04%
(35,980.07)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.16
4.09
91282CBT7 US Treasury Note
0.750% Due 03/31/2026
5,000,000.00 Various
0.85%
4,974,804.69
4,978,541.17
98.15
1.20%
4,907,615.00
9,581.05
2.11%
(70,926.17)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.25
4.15
91282CCF6 US Treasury Note
0.750% Due 05/31/2026
2,000,000.00 06/18/2021
0.91%
1,985,000.00
1,986,612.19
98.00
1.22%
1,960,000.00
1,318.68
0.84%
(26,612.19)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.42
4.32
91282CCW9 US Treasury Note
0.750% Due 08/31/2026
2,000,000.00 08/30/2021
0.77%
1,998,515.63
1,998,615.62
97.82
1.23%
1,956,406.00
5,096.69
0.84%
(42,209.62)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.67
4.55
91282CDG3 US Treasury Note
1.125% Due 10/31/2026
5,000,000.00 Various
1.25%
4,970,498.06
4,970,898.16
99.40
1.25%
4,969,920.00
9,633.97
2.14%
(978.16)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.84
4.68
TOTAL US Treasury 66,750,000.00 1.47%
66,513,376.19
66,661,200.82 0.87%
66,952,847.75
211,573.14
28.82%
291,646.93
Aaa / AA+
Aaa
2.81
2.75
TOTAL PORTFOLIO 230,300,711.57 1.49%
231,374,684.84
231,045,377.04 0.91%
232,176,962.32
885,827.55
100.00%
1,131,585.28
Aa1 / AA
Aaa
2.67
2.47
TOTAL MARKET VALUE PLUS ACCRUALS 233,062,789.87
As of December 31, 2021
37
155
Holdings Report
City of Dublin Reporting Account -Account #10219
CUSIP Security Description Par Value/Units Purchase Date
Book Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt Price
Mkt YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.
Gain/Loss
Moody/S&P
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
LAIF
90LAIF$00 Local Agency Investment Fund State Pool 50,395,432.88 Various
0.22%
50,395,432.88
50,395,432.88
1.00
0.22%
50,395,432.88
26,612.95
33.74%
0.00
NR / NR
NR
0.00
0.00
TOTAL LAIF 50,395,432.88 0.22%
50,395,432.88
50,395,432.88 0.22%
50,395,432.88
26,612.95
33.74%
0.00
NR / NR
NR
0.00
0.00
Local Gov Investment Pool
90CAMP$00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 99,038,041.80 Various
0.05%
99,038,041.80
99,038,041.80
1.00
0.05%
99,038,041.80
0.00
66.26%
0.00
NR / AAA
NR
0.00
0.00
TOTAL Local Gov Investment Pool 99,038,041.80 0.05%
99,038,041.80
99,038,041.80 0.05%
99,038,041.80
0.00
66.26%
0.00
NR / AAA
NR
0.00
0.00
TOTAL PORTFOLIO 149,433,474.68 0.11%
149,433,474.68
149,433,474.68 0.11%
149,433,474.68
26,612.95
100.00%
0.00
NR / AAA
NR
0.00
0.00
TOTAL MARKET VALUE PLUS ACCRUALS 149,460,087.63
As of December 31, 2021
38
156
SECTION |Section 5 |Transactions
39
157
Transaction Ledger
City of Dublin -Account #10198
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
ACQUISITIONS
Purchase 10/15/2021 86959RTW0 2,500,000.00 Svenska Handelsbanken NY Yankee CD
0.255% Due: 10/14/2022
100.005 0.25%2,500,126.08 0.00 2,500,126.08 0.00
Purchase 10/21/2021 362554AC1 585,000.00 GM Financial Securitized Term 2021-4 A3
0.68% Due: 09/16/2026
99.997 0.68%584,985.08 0.00 584,985.08 0.00
Purchase 11/17/2021 44935FAD6 545,000.00 Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 2021-C A3
0.74% Due: 05/15/2026
99.978 0.75%544,878.36 0.00 544,878.36 0.00
Purchase 11/17/2021 91282CDG3 2,000,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.125% Due: 10/31/2026
99.316 1.27%1,986,328.13 1,056.63 1,987,384.76 0.00
Purchase 11/24/2021 43815GAC3 765,000.00 Honda Auto Receivables Trust 2021-4 A3
0.88% Due: 01/21/2026
99.979 0.89%764,838.74 0.00 764,838.74 0.00
Purchase 12/22/2021 91282CDG3 1,750,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.125% Due: 10/31/2026
99.520 1.23%1,741,591.80 2,828.04 1,744,419.84 0.00
Purchase 12/29/2021 91282CDG3 1,250,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.125% Due: 10/31/2026
99.406 1.25%1,242,578.13 2,291.95 1,244,870.08 0.00
Subtotal 9,395,000.00 9,365,326.32 6,176.62 9,371,502.94 0.00
TOTAL ACQUISITIONS 9,395,000.00 9,365,326.32 6,176.62 9,371,502.94 0.00
DISPOSITIONS
Sale 10/15/2021 912828J76 3,000,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.75% Due: 03/31/2022
100.773 1.85%3,023,203.13 2,163.46 3,025,366.59 24,517.76
Sale 11/17/2021 912828WZ9 1,750,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.75% Due: 04/30/2022
100.766 1.84%1,763,398.44 1,438.19 1,764,836.63 14,038.71
Sale 11/23/2021 912828XR6 250,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.75% Due: 05/31/2022
100.879 1.81%252,197.27 2,103.83 254,301.10 2,267.03
Sale 12/22/2021 912828XR6 1,250,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.75% Due: 05/31/2022
100.719 1.81%1,258,984.38 1,322.12 1,260,306.50 9,279.64
Subtotal 6,250,000.00 6,297,783.22 7,027.60 6,304,810.82 50,103.14
September 30, 2021 through December 31, 2021
As of December 31, 2021
40
158
Transaction Ledger
City of Dublin -Account #10198
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
Call 12/23/2021 91159HHP8 1,000,000.00 US Bancorp Callable Note Cont 12/23/2021
2.625% Due: 01/24/2022
100.000 2.35%1,000,000.00 10,864.58 1,010,864.58 0.00
Subtotal 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 10,864.58 1,010,864.58 0.00
TOTAL DISPOSITIONS 7,250,000.00 7,297,783.22 17,892.18 7,315,675.40 50,103.14
September 30, 2021 through December 31, 2021
As of December 31, 2021
41
159
Transaction Ledger
City of Dublin Reporting Account -Account #10219
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
ACQUISITIONS
Purchase 10/15/2021 90LAIF$00 30,668.44 Local Agency Investment Fund State Pool 1.000 0.21%30,668.44 0.00 30,668.44 0.00
Purchase 10/31/2021 90CAMP$00 2,462.84 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 0.05%2,462.84 0.00 2,462.84 0.00
Purchase 11/30/2021 90CAMP$00 2,908.59 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 0.05%2,908.59 0.00 2,908.59 0.00
Purchase 12/31/2021 90CAMP$00 3,400.69 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 0.05%3,400.69 0.00 3,400.69 0.00
Subtotal 39,440.56 39,440.56 0.00 39,440.56 0.00
Security
Contribution
10/08/2021 90CAMP$00 5,000,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 5,000,000.00 0.00 5,000,000.00 0.00
Security
Contribution
10/18/2021 90CAMP$00 24,000,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 24,000,000.00 0.00 24,000,000.00 0.00
Security
Contribution
11/02/2021 90CAMP$00 1,100,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 1,100,000.00 0.00 1,100,000.00 0.00
Security
Contribution
11/12/2021 90CAMP$00 5,800,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 5,800,000.00 0.00 5,800,000.00 0.00
Security
Contribution
11/29/2021 90CAMP$00 1,800,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 1,800,000.00 0.00 1,800,000.00 0.00
Security
Contribution
12/03/2021 90CAMP$00 2,500,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 2,500,000.00 0.00 2,500,000.00 0.00
September 30, 2021 through December 31, 2021
As of December 31, 2021
42
160
Transaction Ledger
City of Dublin Reporting Account -Account #10219
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
Security
Contribution
12/23/2021 90CAMP$00 28,000,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 28,000,000.00 0.00 28,000,000.00 0.00
Subtotal 68,200,000.00 68,200,000.00 0.00 68,200,000.00 0.00
TOTAL ACQUISITIONS 68,239,440.56 68,239,440.56 0.00 68,239,440.56 0.00
DISPOSITIONS
Security
Withdrawal
10/22/2021 90CAMP$00 3,200,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 3,200,000.00 0.00 3,200,000.00 0.00
Security
Withdrawal
11/05/2021 90CAMP$00 2,200,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 2,200,000.00 0.00 2,200,000.00 0.00
Security
Withdrawal
11/19/2021 90CAMP$00 4,800,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 4,800,000.00 0.00 4,800,000.00 0.00
Security
Withdrawal
12/10/2021 90CAMP$00 2,100,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 2,100,000.00 0.00 2,100,000.00 0.00
Subtotal 12,300,000.00 12,300,000.00 0.00 12,300,000.00 0.00
TOTAL DISPOSITIONS 12,300,000.00 12,300,000.00 0.00 12,300,000.00 0.00
September 30, 2021 through December 31, 2021
As of December 31, 2021
43
161
Transaction Ledger
City of Dublin Consolidated -Account #10221
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
ACQUISITIONS
Purchase 10/15/2021 86959RTW0 2,500,000.00 Svenska Handelsbanken NY Yankee CD
0.255% Due: 10/14/2022
100.005 0.25%2,500,126.08 0.00 2,500,126.08 0.00
Purchase 10/15/2021 90LAIF$00 30,668.44 Local Agency Investment Fund State Pool 1.000 0.21%30,668.44 0.00 30,668.44 0.00
Purchase 10/21/2021 362554AC1 585,000.00 GM Financial Securitized Term 2021-4 A3
0.68% Due: 09/16/2026
99.997 0.68%584,985.08 0.00 584,985.08 0.00
Purchase 10/31/2021 90CAMP$00 2,462.84 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 0.05%2,462.84 0.00 2,462.84 0.00
Purchase 11/17/2021 44935FAD6 545,000.00 Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 2021-C A3
0.74% Due: 05/15/2026
99.978 0.75%544,878.36 0.00 544,878.36 0.00
Purchase 11/17/2021 91282CDG3 2,000,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.125% Due: 10/31/2026
99.316 1.27%1,986,328.13 1,056.63 1,987,384.76 0.00
Purchase 11/24/2021 43815GAC3 765,000.00 Honda Auto Receivables Trust 2021-4 A3
0.88% Due: 01/21/2026
99.979 0.89%764,838.74 0.00 764,838.74 0.00
Purchase 11/30/2021 90CAMP$00 2,908.59 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 0.05%2,908.59 0.00 2,908.59 0.00
Purchase 12/22/2021 91282CDG3 1,750,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.125% Due: 10/31/2026
99.520 1.23%1,741,591.80 2,828.04 1,744,419.84 0.00
Purchase 12/29/2021 91282CDG3 1,250,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.125% Due: 10/31/2026
99.406 1.25%1,242,578.13 2,291.95 1,244,870.08 0.00
Purchase 12/31/2021 90CAMP$00 3,400.69 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 0.05%3,400.69 0.00 3,400.69 0.00
Subtotal 9,434,440.56 9,404,766.88 6,176.62 9,410,943.50 0.00
Security
Contribution
10/08/2021 90CAMP$00 5,000,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 5,000,000.00 0.00 5,000,000.00 0.00
Security
Contribution
10/18/2021 90CAMP$00 24,000,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 24,000,000.00 0.00 24,000,000.00 0.00
Security
Contribution
11/02/2021 90CAMP$00 1,100,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 1,100,000.00 0.00 1,100,000.00 0.00
Security
Contribution
11/12/2021 90CAMP$00 5,800,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 5,800,000.00 0.00 5,800,000.00 0.00
September 30, 2021 through December 31, 2021
As of December 31, 2021
44
162
Transaction Ledger
City of Dublin Consolidated -Account #10221
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
Security
Contribution
11/29/2021 90CAMP$00 1,800,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 1,800,000.00 0.00 1,800,000.00 0.00
Security
Contribution
12/03/2021 90CAMP$00 2,500,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 2,500,000.00 0.00 2,500,000.00 0.00
Security
Contribution
12/23/2021 90CAMP$00 28,000,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 28,000,000.00 0.00 28,000,000.00 0.00
Subtotal 68,200,000.00 68,200,000.00 0.00 68,200,000.00 0.00
TOTAL ACQUISITIONS 77,634,440.56 77,604,766.88 6,176.62 77,610,943.50 0.00
DISPOSITIONS
Sale 10/15/2021 912828J76 3,000,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.75% Due: 03/31/2022
100.773 1.85%3,023,203.13 2,163.46 3,025,366.59 24,517.76
Sale 11/17/2021 912828WZ9 1,750,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.75% Due: 04/30/2022
100.766 1.84%1,763,398.44 1,438.19 1,764,836.63 14,038.71
Sale 11/23/2021 912828XR6 250,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.75% Due: 05/31/2022
100.879 1.81%252,197.27 2,103.83 254,301.10 2,267.03
Sale 12/22/2021 912828XR6 1,250,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.75% Due: 05/31/2022
100.719 1.81%1,258,984.38 1,322.12 1,260,306.50 9,279.64
Subtotal 6,250,000.00 6,297,783.22 7,027.60 6,304,810.82 50,103.14
Call 12/23/2021 91159HHP8 1,000,000.00 US Bancorp Callable Note Cont 12/23/2021
2.625% Due: 01/24/2022
100.000 2.35%1,000,000.00 10,864.58 1,010,864.58 0.00
Subtotal 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 10,864.58 1,010,864.58 0.00
Security
Withdrawal
10/22/2021 90CAMP$00 3,200,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 3,200,000.00 0.00 3,200,000.00 0.00
September 30, 2021 through December 31, 2021
As of December 31, 2021
45
163
Transaction Ledger
City of Dublin Consolidated -Account #10221
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
Security
Withdrawal
11/05/2021 90CAMP$00 2,200,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 2,200,000.00 0.00 2,200,000.00 0.00
Security
Withdrawal
11/19/2021 90CAMP$00 4,800,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 4,800,000.00 0.00 4,800,000.00 0.00
Security
Withdrawal
12/10/2021 90CAMP$00 2,100,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 2,100,000.00 0.00 2,100,000.00 0.00
Subtotal 12,300,000.00 12,300,000.00 0.00 12,300,000.00 0.00
TOTAL DISPOSITIONS 19,550,000.00 19,597,783.22 17,892.18 19,615,675.40 50,103.14
September 30, 2021 through December 31, 2021
As of December 31, 2021
46
164
Important Disclosures
2022 Chandler Asset Management, Inc, An Independent Registered Investment Adviser.
Information contained herein is confidential.Prices are provided by IDC,an independent pricing source.In the event IDC does not provide a price or if the price provided is not reflective of fair market
value, Chandler will obtain pricing from an alternative approved third party pricing source in accordance with our written valuation policy and procedures.Our valuation procedures are also disclosed in
Item 5 of our Form ADV Part 2A.
Performance results are presented gross-of-advisory fees and represent the client’s Total Return.The deduction of advisory fees lowers performance results.These results include the reinvestment of
dividends and other earnings.Past performance may not be indicative of future results.Therefore,clients should not assume that future performance of any specific investment or investment strategy
will be profitable or equal to past performance levels.All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss.Economic factors,market conditions or changes in investment strategies,
contributions or withdrawals may materially alter the performance and results of your portfolio.
Index returns assume reinvestment of all distributions.Historical performance results for investment indexes generally do not reflect the deduction of transaction and/or custodial charges or the
deduction of an investment management fee,the incurrence of which would have the effect of decreasing historical performance results.It is not possible to invest directly in an index.
Source ice Data Indices,LLC ("ICE"),used with permission.ICE permits use of the ICE indices and related data on an "as is"basis;ICE,its affiliates and their respective third party suppliers disclaim any and
all warranties and representations, express and/or implied,including any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use,including the indices,index data and any data included
in,related to,or derived therefrom.Neither ICE data,its affiliates or their respective third party providers guarantee the quality, adequacy, accuracy,timeliness or completeness of the indices or the
index data or any component thereof,and the indices and index data and all components thereof are provided on an "as is"basis and licensee's use it at licensee's own risk.ICE data,its affiliates and their
respective third party do not sponsor,endorse,or recommend chandler asset management,or any of its products or services.
This report is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as a specific investment or legal advice.The information contained herein was obtained from sources believed to be
reliable as of the date of publication, but may become outdated or superseded at any time without notice.Any opinions or views expressed are based on current market conditions and are subject to
change.This report may contain forecasts and forward-looking statements which are inherently limited and should not be relied upon as indicator of future results.Past performance is not indicative of
future results.This report is not intended to constitute an offer,solicitation,recommendation or advice regarding any securities or investment strategy and should not be regarded by recipients as a
substitute for the exercise of their own judgment.
Fixed income investments are subject to interest,credit and market risk.Interest rate risk:the value of fixed income investments will decline as interest rates rise.Credit risk:the possibility that the
borrower may not be able to repay interest and principal.Low rated bonds generally have to pay higher interest rates to attract investors willing to take on greater risk.Market risk:the bond market in
general could decline due to economic conditions, especially during periods of rising interest rates.
Ratings information have been provided by Moody’s,S&P and Fitch through data feeds we believe to be reliable as of the date of this statement,however we cannot guarantee its accuracy.
Security level ratings for U.S.Agency issued mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”) reflect the issuer rating because the securities themselves are not rated.The issuing U.S.Agency guarantees the full and
timely payment of both principal and interest and carries a AA+/Aaa/AAA by S&P,Moody’s and Fitch respectively.
As of December 31, 2021
47
165
Benchmark Disclosures
ICE BofA 1-5 Yr US Treasury & Agency Index*
The ICE BofA 1-5 Year US Treasury &Agency Index tracks the performance of US dollar denominated US Treasury and nonsubordinated US agency debt issued in the US domestic market.Qualifying
securities must have an investment grade rating (based on an average of Moody’s, S&P and Fitch).Qualifying securities must have at least one year remaining term to final maturity and less than five
years remaining term to final maturity, at least 18 months to maturity at time of issuance,a fixed coupon schedule,and a minimum amount outstanding of $1 billion for sovereigns and $250 million for
agencies.
The ICE BofA 1-3 Year US Treasury &Agency Index tracks the performance of US dollar denominated US Treasury and nonsubordinated US agency debt issued in the US domestic market.Qualifying
securities must have an investment grade rating (based on an average of Moody’s, S&P and Fitch).Qualifying securities must have at least one year remaining term to final maturity and less than three
years remaining term to final maturity, at least 18 months to maturity at time of issuance,a fixed coupon schedule,and a minimum amount outstanding of $1 billion for sovereigns and $250 million for
agencies.
As of December 31, 2021
48
166
Holdings Report
As of December 31, 2021
City of Dublin Consolidated
Account #10221
CUSIP Security Description Par Value/Units Purchase Date
Book Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt Price
Mkt YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.
Gain/Loss
Moody/S&P
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
US TREASURY
9128283J7 US Treasury Note
2.125% Due 11/30/2024
3,000,000.00 Various
1.76%
3,051,650.40
3,030,341.63
103.36
0.95%
3,100,899.00
5,604.40
0.81%
70,557.37
Aaa / AA+
AAA
2.92
2.83
912828ZC7 US Treasury Note
1.125% Due 2/28/2025
3,500,000.00 03/24/2020
0.52%
3,603,222.66
3,566,140.45
100.38
1.00%
3,513,398.00
13,378.80
0.92%
(52,742.45)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.16
3.09
912828ZL7 US Treasury Note
0.375% Due 4/30/2025
4,000,000.00 Various
0.38%
3,998,593.75
3,999,040.10
97.81
1.04%
3,912,500.00
2,569.06
1.02%
(86,540.10)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.33
3.29
91282CAM3 US Treasury Note
0.25% Due 9/30/2025
2,500,000.00 10/16/2020
0.32%
2,491,406.25
2,493,494.05
96.88
1.10%
2,421,875.00
1,596.84
0.63%
(71,619.05)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
3.75
3.71
91282CBC4 US Treasury Note
0.375% Due 12/31/2025
1,000,000.00 12/29/2020
0.38%
999,921.88
999,937.54
96.97
1.15%
969,727.00
10.36
0.25%
(30,210.54)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.00
3.95
91282CBH3 US Treasury Note
0.375% Due 1/31/2026
4,000,000.00 02/23/2021
0.58%
3,960,625.00
3,967,420.57
96.79
1.18%
3,871,564.00
6,277.17
1.01%
(95,856.57)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.09
4.03
91282CBQ3 US Treasury Note
0.5% Due 2/28/2026
2,500,000.00 03/26/2021
0.83%
2,459,960.94
2,466,155.07
97.21
1.19%
2,430,175.00
4,247.24
0.64%
(35,980.07)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.16
4.09
91282CBT7 US Treasury Note
0.75% Due 3/31/2026
5,000,000.00 Various
0.85%
4,974,804.69
4,978,541.17
98.15
1.20%
4,907,615.00
9,581.05
1.29%
(70,926.17)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.25
4.15
91282CCF6 US Treasury Note
0.75% Due 5/31/2026
2,000,000.00 06/18/2021
0.91%
1,985,000.00
1,986,612.19
98.00
1.22%
1,960,000.00
1,318.68
0.51%
(26,612.19)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.42
4.32
91282CCW9 US Treasury Note
0.75% Due 8/31/2026
2,000,000.00 08/30/2021
0.77%
1,998,515.63
1,998,615.62
97.82
1.23%
1,956,406.00
5,096.69
0.51%
(42,209.62)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.67
4.55
91282CDG3 US Treasury Note
1.125% Due 10/31/2026
5,000,000.00 Various
1.25%
4,970,498.06
4,970,898.16
99.40
1.25%
4,969,920.00
9,633.97
1.30%
(978.16)
Aaa / AA+
AAA
4.84
4.68
Total US Treasury 66,750,000.00 1.47%
66,513,376.19
66,661,200.82 0.87%
66,952,847.75
211,573.14
17.56%
291,646.93
Aaa / AA+
AAA
2.81
2.75
TOTAL PORTFOLIO 379,734,186.25 0.94%
380,808,159.52
380,478,851.72 0.60%
381,610,437.00
912,440.50
100.00%
1,131,585.28
Aa1 / AA+
AAA
1.63
1.50
TOTAL MARKET VALUE PLUS ACCRUED 382,522,877.50
Execution Time: 1/24/2022 1:15:30 PMChandler Asset Management - CONFIDENTIAL Page 10
Attachment 2
167
Transaction Ledger
As of December 31, 2021
City of Dublin Consolidated
Account #10221
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
ACQUISITIONS
Purchase 12/01/2021 31846V203 16,875.00 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%16,875.00 0.00 16,875.00 0.00
Purchase 12/01/2021 31846V203 4.52 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%4.52 0.00 4.52 0.00
Purchase 12/08/2021 31846V203 123,050.00 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%123,050.00 0.00 123,050.00 0.00
Purchase 12/09/2021 31846V203 24,375.00 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%24,375.00 0.00 24,375.00 0.00
Purchase 12/10/2021 31846V203 5,750.00 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%5,750.00 0.00 5,750.00 0.00
Purchase 12/14/2021 31846V203 54,553.13 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%54,553.13 0.00 54,553.13 0.00
Purchase 12/15/2021 31846V203 378.33 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%378.33 0.00 378.33 0.00
Purchase 12/15/2021 31846V203 375.83 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%375.83 0.00 375.83 0.00
Purchase 12/15/2021 31846V203 313.68 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%313.68 0.00 313.68 0.00
Purchase 12/15/2021 31846V203 390.50 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%390.50 0.00 390.50 0.00
Purchase 12/15/2021 31846V203 229.58 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%229.58 0.00 229.58 0.00
Purchase 12/15/2021 31846V203 653.92 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%653.92 0.00 653.92 0.00
Purchase 12/15/2021 31846V203 218.88 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%218.88 0.00 218.88 0.00
Purchase 12/15/2021 31846V203 240.00 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%240.00 0.00 240.00 0.00
Purchase 12/15/2021 31846V203 418.17 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%418.17 0.00 418.17 0.00
Purchase 12/15/2021 31846V203 44,592.60 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%44,592.60 0.00 44,592.60 0.00
Execution Time: 1/24/2022 1:15:30 PMChandler Asset Management - CONFIDENTIAL Page 11 168
Transaction Ledger
As of December 31, 2021
City of Dublin Consolidated
Account #10221
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
ACQUISITIONS
Purchase 12/15/2021 31846V203 94,036.29 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%94,036.29 0.00 94,036.29 0.00
Purchase 12/15/2021 31846V203 65,591.51 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%65,591.51 0.00 65,591.51 0.00
Purchase 12/16/2021 31846V203 331.50 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%331.50 0.00 331.50 0.00
Purchase 12/17/2021 31846V203 8,587.50 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%8,587.50 0.00 8,587.50 0.00
Purchase 12/18/2021 31846V203 13,978.13 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%13,978.13 0.00 13,978.13 0.00
Purchase 12/19/2021 31846V203 27,500.00 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%27,500.00 0.00 27,500.00 0.00
Purchase 12/20/2021 31846V203 345.33 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%345.33 0.00 345.33 0.00
Purchase 12/20/2021 31846V203 381.50 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%381.50 0.00 381.50 0.00
Purchase 12/21/2021 31846V203 504.90 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%504.90 0.00 504.90 0.00
Purchase 12/22/2021 91282CDG3 1,750,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.125% Due 10/31/2026
99.520 1.23%1,741,591.80 2,828.04 1,744,419.84 0.00
Purchase 12/23/2021 31846V203 1,010,864.58 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%1,010,864.58 0.00 1,010,864.58 0.00
Purchase 12/24/2021 31846V203 42,455.00 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%42,455.00 0.00 42,455.00 0.00
Purchase 12/26/2021 31846V203 23,460.00 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%23,460.00 0.00 23,460.00 0.00
Purchase 12/27/2021 31846V203 18,000.00 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%18,000.00 0.00 18,000.00 0.00
Purchase 12/27/2021 31846V203 195.25 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%195.25 0.00 195.25 0.00
Purchase 12/27/2021 31846V203 5,285.00 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%5,285.00 0.00 5,285.00 0.00
Execution Time: 1/24/2022 1:15:30 PMChandler Asset Management - CONFIDENTIAL Page 12 169
Transaction Ledger
As of December 31, 2021
City of Dublin Consolidated
Account #10221
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
ACQUISITIONS
Purchase 12/29/2021 31846V203 5.23 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%5.23 0.00 5.23 0.00
Purchase 12/29/2021 91282CDG3 1,250,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.125% Due 10/31/2026
99.406 1.25%1,242,578.13 2,291.95 1,244,870.08 0.00
Purchase 12/31/2021 31846V203 28,125.00 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%28,125.00 0.00 28,125.00 0.00
Purchase 12/31/2021 90CAMP$00 3,400.69 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 0.05%3,400.69 0.00 3,400.69 0.00
Subtotal 4,615,466.55 4,599,636.48 5,119.99 4,604,756.47 0.00
Security
Contribution
12/03/2021 90CAMP$00 2,500,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 2,500,000.00 0.00 2,500,000.00 0.00
Security
Contribution
12/23/2021 90CAMP$00 28,000,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 28,000,000.00 0.00 28,000,000.00 0.00
Subtotal 30,500,000.00 30,500,000.00 0.00 30,500,000.00 0.00
TOTAL ACQUISITIONS 35,115,466.55 35,099,636.48 5,119.99 35,104,756.47 0.00
DISPOSITIONS
Sale 12/22/2021 31846V203 484,113.34 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%484,113.34 0.00 484,113.34 0.00
Sale 12/22/2021 912828XR6 1,250,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.75% Due 5/31/2022
100.719 1.81%1,258,984.38 1,322.12 1,260,306.50 9,279.64
Sale 12/29/2021 31846V203 1,244,870.08 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 0.01%1,244,870.08 0.00 1,244,870.08 0.00
Subtotal 2,978,983.42 2,987,967.80 1,322.12 2,989,289.92 9,279.64
Call 12/23/2021 91159HHP8 1,000,000.00 US Bancorp Callable Note Cont
12/23/2021
2.625% Due 1/24/2022
100.000 2.35%1,000,000.00 10,864.58 1,010,864.58 0.00
Subtotal 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 10,864.58 1,010,864.58 0.00
Paydown 12/15/2021 44891VAC5 0.00 Hyundai Auto Lease Trust 2021-B A3
0.33% Due 6/17/2024
100.000 0.00 390.50 390.50 0.00
Execution Time: 1/24/2022 1:15:30 PMChandler Asset Management - CONFIDENTIAL Page 13 170
Transaction Ledger
As of December 31, 2021
City of Dublin Consolidated
Account #10221
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
DISPOSITIONS
Paydown 12/15/2021 44933LAC7 0.00 Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 2021-A
A3
0.38% Due 9/15/2025
100.000 0.00 229.58 229.58 0.00
Paydown 12/15/2021 44934KAC8 0.00 Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 2021-B
A3
0.38% Due 1/15/2026
100.000 0.00 653.92 653.92 0.00
Paydown 12/15/2021 44935FAD6 0.00 Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 2021-C
A3
0.74% Due 5/15/2026
100.000 0.00 313.68 313.68 0.00
Paydown 12/15/2021 47787NAC3 0.00 John Deere Owner Trust 2020-B A3
0.51% Due 11/15/2024
100.000 0.00 218.88 218.88 0.00
Paydown 12/15/2021 47788UAC6 0.00 John Deere Owner Trust 2021-A A3
0.36% Due 9/15/2025
100.000 0.00 240.00 240.00 0.00
Paydown 12/15/2021 47789QAC4 0.00 John Deere Owner Trust 2021-B A3
0.52% Due 3/16/2026
100.000 0.00 418.17 418.17 0.00
Paydown 12/15/2021 58769KAD6 0.00 Mercedes-Benz Auto Lease Trust 2021-
B A3
0.4% Due 11/15/2024
100.000 0.00 378.33 378.33 0.00
Paydown 12/15/2021 65479GAD1 44,228.45 Nissan Auto Receivables Trust 2018-B
A3
3.06% Due 3/15/2023
100.000 44,228.45 364.15 44,592.60 0.00
Paydown 12/15/2021 65479JAD5 92,233.35 Nissan Auto Receivables Owner 2019-C
A3
1.93% Due 7/15/2024
100.000 92,233.35 1,802.94 94,036.29 0.00
Paydown 12/15/2021 89231PAD0 64,873.11 Toyota Auto Receivables Trust 2018-D
A3
3.18% Due 3/15/2023
100.000 64,873.11 718.40 65,591.51 0.00
Paydown 12/15/2021 89237VAB5 0.00 Toyota Auto Receivables Trust 2020-C
A3
0.44% Due 10/15/2024
100.000 0.00 375.83 375.83 0.00
Paydown 12/16/2021 362554AC1 0.00 GM Financial Securitized Term 2021-4
A3
0.68% Due 9/16/2026
100.000 0.00 331.50 331.50 0.00
Execution Time: 1/24/2022 1:15:30 PMChandler Asset Management - CONFIDENTIAL Page 14 171
Transaction Ledger
As of December 31, 2021
City of Dublin Consolidated
Account #10221
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
DISPOSITIONS
Paydown 12/20/2021 43813KAC6 0.00 Honda Auto Receivables Trust 2020-3
A3
0.37% Due 10/18/2024
100.000 0.00 345.33 345.33 0.00
Paydown 12/20/2021 89239CAC3 0.00 Toyota Lease Owner Trust 2021-B A3
0.42% Due 10/21/2024
100.000 0.00 381.50 381.50 0.00
Paydown 12/21/2021 43815GAC3 0.00 Honda Auto Receivables Trust 2021-4
A3
0.88% Due 1/21/2026
100.000 0.00 504.90 504.90 0.00
Paydown 12/27/2021 09690AAC7 0.00 BMW Vehicle Lease Trust 2021-2 A3
0.33% Due 12/26/2024
100.000 0.00 195.25 195.25 0.00
Paydown 12/27/2021 3137BFE98 0.00 FHLMC K041 A2
3.171% Due 10/25/2024
100.000 0.00 5,285.00 5,285.00 0.00
Subtotal 201,334.91 201,334.91 13,147.86 214,482.77 0.00
Security
Withdrawal
12/10/2021 90CAMP$00 2,100,000.00 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 1.000 2,100,000.00 0.00 2,100,000.00 0.00
Security
Withdrawal
12/23/2021 31846V203 104.17 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
1.000 104.17 0.00 104.17 0.00
Subtotal 2,100,104.17 2,100,104.17 0.00 2,100,104.17 0.00
TOTAL DISPOSITIONS 6,280,422.50 6,289,406.88 25,334.56 6,314,741.44 9,279.64
OTHER TRANSACTIONS
Interest 12/01/2021 438516CB0 2,500,000.00 Honeywell Intl Callable Note Cont
5/1/2025
1.35% Due 6/1/2025
0.000 16,875.00 0.00 16,875.00 0.00
Interest 12/08/2021 3130A0F70 5,000,000.00 FHLB Note
3.375% Due 12/8/2023
0.000 84,375.00 0.00 84,375.00 0.00
Interest 12/08/2021 69353RFL7 2,210,000.00 PNC Bank Callable Note Cont 5/9/2023
3.5% Due 6/8/2023
0.000 38,675.00 0.00 38,675.00 0.00
Interest 12/09/2021 313383QR5 1,500,000.00 FHLB Note
3.25% Due 6/9/2023
0.000 24,375.00 0.00 24,375.00 0.00
Execution Time: 1/24/2022 1:15:30 PMChandler Asset Management - CONFIDENTIAL Page 15 172
Transaction Ledger
As of December 31, 2021
City of Dublin Consolidated
Account #10221
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
OTHER TRANSACTIONS
Interest 12/10/2021 78015K7H1 1,000,000.00 Royal Bank of Canada Note
1.15% Due 6/10/2025
0.000 5,750.00 0.00 5,750.00 0.00
Interest 12/14/2021 3130A1XJ2 3,795,000.00 FHLB Note
2.875% Due 6/14/2024
0.000 54,553.13 0.00 54,553.13 0.00
Interest 12/17/2021 3135G04Z3 3,435,000.00 FNMA Note
0.5% Due 6/17/2025
0.000 8,587.50 0.00 8,587.50 0.00
Interest 12/18/2021 89236TJK2 2,485,000.00 Toyota Motor Credit Corp Note
1.125% Due 6/18/2026
0.000 13,978.13 0.00 13,978.13 0.00
Interest 12/19/2021 3137EAEN5 2,000,000.00 FHLMC Note
2.75% Due 6/19/2023
0.000 27,500.00 0.00 27,500.00 0.00
Interest 12/24/2021 166764AH3 1,000,000.00 Chevron Corp Callable Note Cont
3/24/2023
3.191% Due 6/24/2023
0.000 15,955.00 0.00 15,955.00 0.00
Interest 12/24/2021 24422ETT6 2,000,000.00 John Deere Capital Corp Note
2.65% Due 6/24/2024
0.000 26,500.00 0.00 26,500.00 0.00
Interest 12/26/2021 931142EK5 1,380,000.00 Wal-Mart Stores Callable Note Cont
5/26/2023
3.4% Due 6/26/2023
0.000 23,460.00 0.00 23,460.00 0.00
Interest 12/27/2021 02665WCZ2 1,500,000.00 American Honda Finance Note
2.4% Due 6/27/2024
0.000 18,000.00 0.00 18,000.00 0.00
Interest 12/31/2021 912828XW5 3,000,000.00 US Treasury Note
1.75% Due 6/30/2022
0.000 26,250.00 0.00 26,250.00 0.00
Interest 12/31/2021 91282CBC4 1,000,000.00 US Treasury Note
0.375% Due 12/31/2025
0.000 1,875.00 0.00 1,875.00 0.00
Subtotal 33,805,000.00 386,708.76 0.00 386,708.76 0.00
Dividend 12/01/2021 31846V203 421,046.92 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
0.000 4.52 0.00 4.52 0.00
Dividend 12/29/2021 31846V203 259,019.96 First American Govt Obligation Fund
Class Y
0.000 5.23 0.00 5.23 0.00
Execution Time: 1/24/2022 1:15:30 PMChandler Asset Management - CONFIDENTIAL Page 16 173
Transaction Ledger
As of December 31, 2021
City of Dublin Consolidated
Account #10221
Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp
Yield Amount Interest
Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss
OTHER TRANSACTIONS
Dividend 12/31/2021 90CAMP$00 99,034,641.11 California Asset Mgmt Program CAMP 0.000 3,400.69 0.00 3,400.69 0.00
Subtotal 99,714,707.99 3,410.44 0.00 3,410.44 0.00
TOTAL OTHER TRANSACTIONS 133,519,707.99 390,119.20 0.00 390,119.20 0.00
Execution Time: 1/24/2022 1:15:30 PMChandler Asset Management - CONFIDENTIAL Page 17 174
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item 4.4
DATE:February 15, 2022
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:Payment Issuance Report and Electronic Funds TransfersPreparedby:Veronica Briggs,Senior Finance Technician
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:The City Council will receive a listing of payments issued from January 1, 2022 –January 31, 2022totaling $13,690,767.41.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Receive the report.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:SUMMARY OF PAYMENTS ISSUEDJanuary 1, 2022 –January 31, 2022Total Number of Payments: 269Total Amount of Payments: $13,690,767.41
DESCRIPTION:The Payment Issuance Report (Attachment 1) provides a listing of all payments for the period beginning January 1, 2022 through January 31, 2022. This report is provided in accordance with the policy adopted November 15, 2011, in Resolution No.189-11. The listing of payments has been reviewed in accordance with the policies for processing payments and expenditures.The City’s practice of reporting payments to the City Council after the payments have been made is in compliance with California Government Code Sections 37208 (b) and (c), which allow for an agency to make payments without first being audited by the legislative body, as long as such payments are: 1) conforming to a budget approved by ordinance or resolution of the legislative body; and 2) presented to the legislative body for ratification and approval in the form of an
175
Page 2 of 2
audited comprehensive annual financial report.
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:None.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:The City Council Agenda was posted.
ATTACHMENTS:1) Payment Issuance Report for January 2022
176
Print Date: 02/01/2022 City of Dublin
Page 1 of 9 Payment Issuance Report
Payments Dated 1/1/2022 through 1/31/2022
Date Issued Payee Amount Description
01/04/2022 4LEAF INC. 61,210.00 BLDG INSP/PLAN CHECK SVCS NOV 2021
01/04/2022 AMP PRINTING, INC. 166.03 BUSINESS CARDS
01/04/2022 APEX GRADING 17,580.00 MAINTENANCE SVCS-FALLON VILLAGE GHAD
18,800.00 MAINTENANCE SVCS-SCHAEFER RANCH GHAD
Check Total: 36,380.00
01/04/2022 AT&T - CALNET 3 784.05 SERVICE TO 12/14/2021
01/04/2022 BAY ALARM COMPANY 270.00 ALARM SERVICES CORP YARD
207.00 ALARM SERVICES SENIOR CENTER
Check Total: 477.00
01/04/2022 CASCADIA CONSULTING GROUP, INC 4,798.75 SB 1383 IMPLEMENTATION ASSISTANCE
01/04/2022 CENTRO LEGAL 1,539.75 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT OCT 2021
01/04/2022 CINTAS CORP 93.48 FIRST AID KIT SUPPLIES
01/04/2022 DR MANAGEMENT, LLC 56,000.00 IMPACT FEE RIGHTS TO REIMBURSEMENT
01/04/2022 ENGEO INC 362.00 FALLON CROSSING GHAD PROFESSIONAL SVCS
2,212.75 FALLON VILLAGE GHAD PROFESSIONAL SVCS
5,402.25 SCHAEFER RANCH GHAD PROFESSIONAL SVCS
Check Total: 7,977.00
01/04/2022 J+C ENTERPRISES 154.00 EVIDENCE SUPPLIES
01/04/2022 LIVERMORE AUTO GROUP 1,620.19 POLICE VEHICLE MAINT & REPAIRS
01/04/2022 LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION 2,636.36 CIVIC SPARK PRGM TO SUPPORT CLIMATE ACTION PLN
01/04/2022 NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPT OF SAFETY 600.00 DRUG AWARENESS TRAINING REG-COWENS
01/04/2022 NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS 967.50 ENGINEERING SERVICES - JUL 2021
01/04/2022 PG&E 9,152.74 SERVICE TO 11/14/2021
50,686.48 SERVICE TO 12/06/2021
2,883.11 SERVICE TO 12/07/2021
Check Total: 62,722.33
01/04/2022 PHOENIX GROUP INFO SYS. 247.59 PARKING CITATION PROCESSING - NOV 2021
01/04/2022 PRIME TIME ENTERTAINMENT 1,250.00 TREE LIGHTING EVENT AUDIO SYSTEM RENTAL
01/04/2022 QUADIENT LEASING USA, INC. 1,073.36 NEOPOST MAIL MACHINE LEASE NOV 2021-JAN 2022
01/04/2022 SELECT IMAGING 441.57 ELECTRICAL METER TAGS
674.01 SENIOR CENTER BALLROOM SIGN
Check Total: 1,115.58
01/04/2022 SPECTRUM COMMUNITY SVCS INC. 1,677.08 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT NOV 2021
01/04/2022 SURF TO SNOW ENVIRONMENTAL 411.00 SPILL RESPONSE ASSISTANCE & MRP INSPECTION
01/04/2022 THE ECOHERO SHOW, LLC. 5,000.00 DUBLIN SCHOOLS RECYCLING EDUCATION
01/04/2022 TIREHUB, LLC. 4,695.45 POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
01/04/2022 TREASURER ALAMEDA COUNTY 3,017.26 RETURN OF ASSET SEIZURE FUNDS
01/04/2022 TREASURER ALAMEDA COUNTY 1,145.00 PARKING CITATIONS COLLECTED - NOV 2021
Vendor Total: 4,162.26
01/04/2022 TYLER BUSINESS FORMS 65.73 TAX FORMS
01/04/2022 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 5,015.85 TYLER MUNIS ERP SOFTWARE IMPLEMENTATION
01/04/2022 WILLDAN HOMELAND SOLUTIONS 190,185.25 ENERGY EFFICIENCY/INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROV
Payments Issued 1/4/2022 Total: 453,025.59
01/07/2022 CAL PERS 75,857.33 PERS RETIREMENT PLAN: PE 12/31/21
01/07/2022 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT 26,076.08 CA STATE WITHHOLDING: PE 12/31/21
01/07/2022 I C M A 401 PLAN 1,129.78 DEFERRED COMP 401A: PE 12/31/21
01/07/2022 I C M A 457 PLAN 29,433.18 DEFERRED COMP 457: PE 12/31/21
01/07/2022 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE 83,071.10 FEDERAL WITHHOLDING: PE 12/31/21
Attachment 1
177
Print Date: 02/01/2022 City of Dublin
Page 2 of 9 Payment Issuance Report
Payments Dated 1/1/2022 through 1/31/2022
Date Issued Payee Amount Description
01/07/2022 US BANK - PARS 738.94 PARS: PE 12/31/21
Payments Issued 1/7/2022 Total: 216,306.41
01/10/2022 ADVANCED INTEGRATED PEST 5,060.00 PEST CONTROL SERVICES DEC 2021
01/10/2022 AMP PRINTING, INC. 219.40 PRINTING SERVICES FOR HOLIDAY HOME DECOR
01/10/2022 AT&T 2,204.92 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX DATA SERVICES
51.07 SERVICES FOR TOLL FREE NUMBER TO 12/11/21
Check Total: 2,255.99
01/10/2022 AT&T - CALNET 3 313.07 SERVICE TO 12/26/2021 135.77 SERVICE TO 12/27/2021
Check Total: 448.84
01/10/2022 BAY ALARM COMPANY 541.86 ALARM SERVICES SHANNON CENTER 264.00 ALARM SERVICES CIVIC CENTER 330.00 ALARM SERVICES CORP YARD 138.00 ALARM SERVICES FIRE STATION #16 352.75 ALARM SERVICES FIRE STATION #17 108.00 ALARM SERVICES HERITAGE CENTER 1,802.13 ALARM SERVICES HERITAGE PARK 484.30 ALARM SERVICES SENIOR CENTER 842.41 ALARM SERVICES SHANNON CENTER 1,972.00 ALARM SERVICES THE WAVE
Check Total: 6,835.45
01/10/2022 BFS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 15,642.50 FALLON SPORTS PARK DESIGN SVCS - PHASE 3
01/10/2022 BKF ENGINEERS 38,494.50 ANNUAL STREET RESURFACING PROJECT 251.00 SAN RAMON RD TRAIL LIGHTING DESIGN 9,993.75 TASSAJARA RD GAP CLOSURE PROJECT
Check Total: 48,739.25
01/10/2022 BLUETOAD, INC. 570.00 SPRING 2022 ACTIVITY GUIDE DIGITAL EDITION
01/10/2022 BSK ASSOCIATES INC. 4,930.50 PRE-CONSTRUCTION SOIL SAMPLING 1,018.25 TESTING/INSP DON BIDDLE COMMUNITY PARK 419.25 TESTING/INSP FALLON SPORTS PARK PH3 2,511.50 TESTING/INSP HERITAGE PARK CEMETARY IMPROV
Check Total: 8,879.50
01/10/2022 CAL PERS HEALTH PREMIUM 141,804.07 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM - JAN 2022
01/10/2022 CALLANDER ASSOCIATES INC. 37,203.51 WALLIS RANCH PARK DESIGN SERVICES
01/10/2022 COMCAST 118.63 CIVIC CENTER CABLE SERVICE JAN 2022
01/10/2022 DEDECKER SCULPTURES INC. 650.00 REIMBURSEMENT FOR HCAC PRESENTATION
01/10/2022 DU-ALL SAFETY, LLC 999.90 SAFETY INSPECTION REPORT WRITE-UP
01/10/2022 DUTCHOVER & ASSOCIATES 880.00 LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK & INSPECTIONS
01/10/2022 EAST BAY CHAPTER ICC 180.00 ICC EAST BAY CHAPTER MEMBERSHIP-SHREEVE
01/10/2022 EVERYTHING GROWS INTERIOR 204.51 PLANT SERVICE JAN 2021
01/10/2022 HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY 300.00 BASKETBALL LEAGUE PHOTOGRAPHY
01/10/2022 HARRIS & ASSOCIATES 1,080.00 DESIGN/CONSTR SUPPORT-2021 SLURRY SEAL PROJ
01/10/2022 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOC. INC. 11,777.46 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE CONSULTING SERVICES 2,851.50 PREPARE CEQA DOCS FOR EAST RANCH PROJECT
Check Total: 14,628.96
01/10/2022 LANLOGIC INC. 31,773.05 SONICWALL FOR VARIOUS FACILITIES
01/10/2022 MCE CORPORATION 9,497.42 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DSRSD DEC 2021
01/10/2022 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 77.50 CONSTR MGMT/INSP-SLIDE TOWER ANCHOR INSTALL
178
Print Date: 02/01/2022 City of Dublin
Page 3 of 9 Payment Issuance Report
Payments Dated 1/1/2022 through 1/31/2022
Date Issued Payee Amount Description
4,340.00 DON BIDDLE COMMUNITY PARK INSPECTIONS 4,840.48 FALLON SPORTS PARK PH3 PW INSPECTIONS 2,015.00 INSPECTIONS/CONSTR MGMT SR RD TRAIL LIGHTING 8,082.00 IRON HORSE TRAIL BRIDGE AT DUBLIN BLVD
Check Total: 19,354.98
01/10/2022 PAKPOUR CONSULTING GROUP, INC. 8,550.00 CONSTRUCTION MGMT-DON BIDDLE COMM PARK 16,371.50 CONSTRUCTION MGMT-FALLON SPORTS PARK PH3
Check Total: 24,921.50
01/10/2022 PG&E 836.06 SERVICE TO 11/30/2021 247.38 SERVICE TO 12/02/2021 5,427.59 SERVICE TO 12/07/2021 258.06 SERVICE TO 12/08/2021 82.81 SERVICE TO 12/09/2021 4,026.91 SERVICE TO 12/12/2021 428.68 SERVICE TO 12/13/2021 9,665.21 SERVICE TO 12/14/2021 65.56 SERVICE TO 12/15/2021
Check Total: 21,038.26
01/10/2022 PGADESIGN INC. 11,029.18 HERITAGE PARK IMPROVEMENTS DESIGN SVCS
01/10/2022 PLEASANTON EVENT RENTALS INC 123.48 VETERANS DAY LUNCH SUPPLIES
01/10/2022 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 86.12 MAT SERVICE - SENIOR CENTER
01/10/2022 RAYNE OF SAN JOSE 194.00 WATER SOFTENER SERVICE-FIRE STATION 17
01/10/2022 ROBERT HALF INC 792.00 PW TEMPORARY OFFICE STAFF-DYER
01/10/2022 RRM DESIGN GROUP, A CA CORP 5,867.75 CONSULTING SVCS-MULTI-FAM DEV & ADU'S
01/10/2022 SAN FRANCISCO ELEVATOR SVC INC 394.70 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE/INSPECTION DEC 2021
01/10/2022 SELECT IMAGING 71.28 EMPLOYEE NAME BADGES 297.99 NAME PLATES, CAR MAGNETS FOR CC MEMBERS
Check Total: 369.27
01/10/2022 SESAC, INC. 1,025.00 ANNUAL MUSIC LICENSE 2022
01/10/2022 SNG & ASSOCIATES INC. 5,585.00 ON-CALL PLAN REVIEW SERVICES-CIP/PARKS
01/10/2022 SUAREZ & MUNOZ CONSTRUCTION 424,737.58 FALLON SPORTS PARK-PH 3 CONSTRUCTION
01/10/2022 T-MOBILE USA, INC. 6,066.77 EQUIPMENT-IPADS & IPHONES
01/10/2022 TPX COMMUNICATIONS 2,805.53 INTERNET & PHONE SERVICES T0 12/09/21
01/10/2022 TREASURER ALAMEDA COUNTY 4,253,730.11 POLICE SERVICES 8/22/21 - 10/30/21
01/10/2022 TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITY TV 1,257.99 RECORD/TELEVISE CITY COUNCIL/PLNG COMM MTGS
01/10/2022 TRI-VALLEY JANITORIAL INC. 22,002.75 JANITORIAL SERVICES DEC 2021 30,228.39 JANITORIAL SERVICES-CAMP PARKS DEC 2021
Check Total: 52,231.14
01/10/2022 URBAN PLANNERS PARTNERS, INC. 5,316.50 PLANNING SVCS-REGIONAL ST. AFFORDABLE HSNG
01/10/2022 W. BRADLEY ELECTRIC 15,671.20 LIGHT POLE INSTALL/FOUNDATION-SR RD TRAIL
Payments Issued 1/10/2022 Total: 5,180,569.04
01/11/2022 HEALTHEQUITY, INC. 90,287.37 HEALTHEQUITY: PE 12/31/21
Payments Issued 1/11/2022 Total: 90,287.37
01/12/2022 CALPERS 89,999.28 2022 REPLACEMENT CHARGES FOR CITY OF DUBLIN
Payments Issued 1/12/2022 Total: 89,999.28
179
Print Date: 02/01/2022 City of Dublin
Page 4 of 9 Payment Issuance Report
Payments Dated 1/1/2022 through 1/31/2022
Date Issued Payee Amount Description
01/14/2022 DELTA DENTAL OF CALIFORNIA 12,632.02 DELTA DENTAL PREMIUM - JAN 2022
01/14/2022 UNUM LIFE INS CO OF AMERICA 9,956.54 LIFE AND AD&D PREMIUM - JAN 2022
01/14/2022 VISION SERVICE PLAN - (CA) 1,867.65 VISION INSURANCE PREMIUM - JAN 2022
Payments Issued 1/14/2022 Total: 24,456.21
01/18/2022 ACCOPSA -ALAMEDA COUNTY CHIEFS 950.00 POLICE POST EXECUTIVE SEMINAR 2022-HOLMES
01/18/2022 ADVANCED MOBILITY GROUP 600.00 TASSAJARA RD ARTERIAL MGMT PROJECT 14,030.00 TASSAJARA RD ARTERIAL MGMT PROJECT 10,930.00 TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEMS SUPPORT
Check Total: 25,560.00
01/18/2022 ALAMEDA CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE 93.06 CRIME PREVENTION PRINTING 150.51 POLICE LETTERHEAD STOCK 25.68 POLICE PHOTO PRINTING
Check Total: 269.25
01/18/2022 ALAMEDA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 1,239,753.25 FIRE SERVICES JAN 2022
01/18/2022 ALEX, ROSEMARY 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SVCS INC 15,156.00 CROSSING GUARD SERVICES 10/31/21-11/13/21 6,971.76 CROSSING GUARD SERVICES 11/14/21-11/27/21 16,766.33 CROSSING GUARD SERVICES 11/28/21-12/11/21
Check Total: 38,894.09
01/18/2022 AMADOR VALLEY INDUSTRIES LLC 25,693.83 CAMPS PARKS SOLID WASTE SERVICES DEC 2021
01/18/2022 AMP PRINTING, INC. 79.38 BUSINESS CARDS-THE WAVE
01/18/2022 AT&T - CALNET 3 129.06 SERVICE TO 01/01/2022 49.55 SERVICE TO 01/06/2022
Check Total: 178.61
01/18/2022 BAKSA, JAY 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 BAY AREA NEWS GROUP 451.92 LEGAL NOTICES DEC 2021
01/18/2022 BHATIA, PRATYUSH 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 BIG O'TIRES #7 128.46 POLICE VEHICLE MAINT & TIRE INSTALLATION 305.88 POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
Check Total: 434.34
01/18/2022 BLAISDELL'S BUSINESS PRODUCTS 2,725.23 OFFICE SUPPLIES-DEC 2021 1,820.20 OFFICE SUPPLIES-OCT 21
Check Total: 4,545.43
01/18/2022 BLANCO, ROEL 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 BRIGGS, VERONICA 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 BRINKS, INC. 31.71 ARMORED CAR SERVICE-DEC 2021 230.75 ARMORED CAR SERVICE-JAN 2022
Check Total: 262.46
01/18/2022 CAIRES, SANDRA 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 CASS, MICHAEL 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 CENTENO, CAMILLE 6.27 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT DEC 2021
01/18/2022 CHANDLER ASSET MANAGEMENT 13,061.03 INVESTMENT CONSULTING SERVICES
01/18/2022 CHARGE POINT, INC. 10,437.00 ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION FOR EV CHARGING STATIONS
01/18/2022 CHILKOTOWSKY, SHAUN 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 CHING, ERWIN 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 CLEVENGER, MARISSA 85.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 CSW/STUBER-STROEH ENGINEERING 1,175.00 STANDARDS FOR MICRO TRENCHING SERVICES
01/18/2022 DETERMAN, EMILY 89.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 DUBLIN HIGH SCHOOL BAND 3,951.00 2021 BREAKFAST WITH SANTA EVENT
180
Print Date: 02/01/2022 City of Dublin
Page 5 of 9 Payment Issuance Report
Payments Dated 1/1/2022 through 1/31/2022
Date Issued Payee Amount Description
01/18/2022 DUTCHOVER & ASSOCIATES 1,571.25 LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK & INSPECTIONS
01/18/2022 DWYER, ANDREA 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 ECS IMAGING INC. 8,100.00 PROFESSIONAL SVCS & LASERFICHE LICENSES
01/18/2022 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT 270.00 2020 EMPLOYMENT & WAGE DATA
01/18/2022 EUROPEAN MOBILE WERKS 6,092.01 POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIR
01/18/2022 FABRIGAS, CIERRA L. 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 FOSS, JORDAN 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 FRANKLIN, RHONDA 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 GOLDEN STATE FLEET SVCS INC 375.00 POLICE VEHICLE TOW
01/18/2022 HANNA, MEAGAN C. 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 HATZIKOKOLAKIS, JACQUI 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 HISATOMI, LISA 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 IRON MOUNTAIN 341.39 POLICE RECORDS STORAGE - JAN 2022
01/18/2022 JACKMAN, SHARLENE 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 JAMMAL, LAURA 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 JOHE, JILL 75.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 8,306.00 CITYWIDE BIKE/PED MASTER PLAN UPDATE 7,620.00 DOWNTOWN PREFERRED VISION MODELING 1,583.00 ENGINEERING SVCS-LOCAL RD SAFETY PLAN 3,470.00 SB 743 VMT IMPLEMENTATION & MODEL
Check Total: 20,979.00
01/18/2022 KLOSS, DAVID A. 2,000.00 EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT-KLOSS 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
Check Total: 2,150.00
01/18/2022 LI MARZI, JENNIFER 126.08 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 LI, CARY 79.99 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 LIVERMORE AUTO GROUP 3,506.74 POLICE VEHICLE MAINT & REPAIRS
01/18/2022 LSA ASSOCIATES INC. 633.16 CEQA DOC PREP-BRANAUGH PROP STAGE 2 DEV 455.15 CEQA DOC PREP-RIGHETTI PROPERTY STAGE 2
Check Total: 1,088.31
01/18/2022 MARRIOTT, LAUREN 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 MCE CORPORATION 571,870.94 MAINTENANCE SERVICES NOV 2021
01/18/2022 MCGUIRE, SHARON 125.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 MENDEZ, JENNIFER 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 M-GROUP 6,270.00 PLANNING SVCS-BLVD PH1-5 & TASSAJARA HILLS
01/18/2022 MIDIDIDDI, SAI 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 MOORE, MARSHA 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 MORAN, RYAN 75.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 NOVANI, LLC. 3,000.00 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES
01/18/2022 PATEL, MAYANK 75.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 PG&E 7,985.38 SERVICE TO 12/07/2021 1,628.86 SERVICE TO 12/12/2021 26,484.29 SERVICE TO 12/15/2021 590.75 SERVICE TO 12/23/2021 119.04 SERVICE TO 12/24/2021 154.65 SERVICE TO 12/27/2021 2,901.15 SERVICE TO 12/28/2021 470.90 SERVICE TO 12/29/2021 145.91 SERVICE TO 12/31/2021
181
Print Date: 02/01/2022 City of Dublin
Page 6 of 9 Payment Issuance Report
Payments Dated 1/1/2022 through 1/31/2022
Date Issued Payee Amount Description
Check Total: 40,480.93
01/18/2022 PRO CYCLES 920.66 POLICE MOTORCYCLE MAINTENANCE - 19M73
01/18/2022 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 86.12 MAT SERVICE - SENIOR CENTER
01/18/2022 QUADIENT, INC. 99.06 POLICE POSTAGE METER LEASE
01/18/2022 RAYNE OF SAN JOSE 172.90 WATER SOFTENER SERVICE-FIRE STATION 16 145.35 WATER SOFTENER SERVICE-FIRE STATION 18
Check Total: 318.25
01/18/2022 REDWOOD TOXICOLOGY LAB. INC. 632.00 FORENSIC DRUG AND ALCOHOL EXAMS
01/18/2022 SABOO INC. 131,420.62 CONSTRUCTION-HERITAGE PARK CEMETARY IMPROV
01/18/2022 SANTA RITA TOW 345.00 POLICE VEHICLE TOW
01/18/2022 SHREEVE, GREGORY 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 SIMPLER SYSTEMS, INC 1,500.00 SIMPLER SOFTWARE LICENSING SUPPORT
01/18/2022 SOLIS, LISA 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 SUCGANG, LAURIE 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 TAYLOR, YVONNE L. 100.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 TJENG, YULIANA 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 TRI-VALLEY JANITORIAL INC. 4,030.63 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES NOV 2021
01/18/2022 UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CA INC 665.57 BLDG INSP TRAILER SEPTIC TANK SERVICES
01/18/2022 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES & 566.00 CARPET CLEANING SERVICES-CIVIC CENTER DEC 2021 1,298.00 CARPET CLEANING SERVICES-SHANNAN CTR DEC 2021 828.00 CARPET CLEANING SERVICES-THE WAVE DEC 2021 700.00 WINDOW CLEANING SVCS LIBRARY DEC 2021
Check Total: 3,392.00
01/18/2022 VALES, NORMAN 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 VISION COMMUNICATIONS CO 425.00 SPLATTER FESTIVAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL
01/18/2022 WAHBEH, WILLIAM 145.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 WANZENRIED, NICOLE 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 WEBER, DANIEL 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 WELLS, CATHY 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 WETHERFORD, HAZEL 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 WHEELER, KRISTIE 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 XU, KAN 99.66 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 YIP, KA WUN 118.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
01/18/2022 YOUNG, SHANNAN 150.00 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT JUL-DEC 2021
Payments Issued 1/18/2022 Total: 2,181,776.07
01/21/2022 CAL PERS 80,988.92 PERS RETIREMENT PLAN: PE 1/14/22
01/21/2022 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT 18,548.75 CA STATE WITHHOLDING: PE 1/14/22
01/21/2022 HEALTHEQUITY, INC. 3,287.37 HEALTHEQUITY: PE 1/14/22
01/21/2022 I C M A 401 PLAN 979.78 DEFERRED COMP 401A: PE 1/14/22
01/21/2022 I C M A 457 PLAN 30,816.23 DEFERRED COMP 457: PE 1/14/22
01/21/2022 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE 60,088.50 FEDERAL WITHHOLDING: PE 1/14/22
01/21/2022 US BANK - PARS 1,745.05 PARS: PE 1/14/22
Payments Issued 1/21/2022 Total: 196,454.60
01/24/2022 AMP PRINTING, INC. 331.36 BUSINESS CARDS-POLICE SERVICES
01/24/2022 ANGEL HOUZE CLAY ART 70.00 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR
01/24/2022 ARORA, AKSHAY 16,904.40 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR
01/24/2022 AT&T - CALNET 3 1,207.56 SERVICE TO 01/12/2022
01/24/2022 CA DEPT. OF TAX & FEE ADMIN 2,722.00 SALES & USE TAX RETURN CAL YR 2021
182
Print Date: 02/01/2022 City of Dublin
Page 7 of 9 Payment Issuance Report
Payments Dated 1/1/2022 through 1/31/2022
Date Issued Payee Amount Description
01/24/2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS 7,132.50 GREEN BUILDING FEES OCT-DEC 2021
01/24/2022 CARBONIC SERVICE 369.20 POOL CHEMICALS FOR THE WAVE
01/24/2022 CMC NEPTUNE 1,200.00 WAVE PUBLIC MUSIC & ANNOUNCEMENT SYSTEM
01/24/2022 COMMUNICATION ACADEMY 90.30 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR
01/24/2022 CONTRACT SWEEPING SERVICES 26,539.59 STREET SWEEPING SERVICES DEC 2021
01/24/2022 DEAM, VALERIE 1,861.29 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR
01/24/2022 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 288.00 EMPLOYEE FINGERPRINTING SERVICES
01/24/2022 DEPT OF CONSERVATION 46,682.30 SEISMIC HAZARD MAPPING FEE OCT-DEC 2021
01/24/2022 DEPT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS 998.75 THE WAVE SLIDE INSPECTION
01/24/2022 DISABILITY ACCESS DAC 2,650.00 ADA TRANSITION PLAN CONSULTING SVCS
01/24/2022 DUBLIN CHEVROLET 1,880.62 POLICE VEHICLE MAINT & REPAIRS
01/24/2022 ECUBE LABS CO. 24,994.30 SOLAR POWERED WASTE COMPACTORS
01/24/2022 FOLSOM CHEVROLET 149,281.58 REPLACE POLICE VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT
01/24/2022 FRANCISCO & ASSOCIATES, INC. 13,972.50 ACQUISITION AUDIT CFD SERVICES
01/24/2022 GIRISH, VIDYA 156.00 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR
01/24/2022 GRAFIX SHOPPE 1,905.77 POLICE VEHICLE GRAPHICS
01/24/2022 HEALTHEQUITY, INC. 590.75 FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNT FEES DEC 2021 5.25 TRANSIT SERVICE FEE JAN 2022 50.00 WAGEWORKS MONTHLY COMPLIANCE FEE JAN 2022
Check Total: 646.00
01/24/2022 IMAGE SALES, INC. 166.74 BADGE PRINTER RIBBONS
01/24/2022 JOHNSON CONTROLS SECURITY 580.00 FIRE ALARM INSTALLATION
01/24/2022 KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 8,638.75 CITYWIDE BIKE/PED MASTER PLAN UPDATE 7,909.00 ENGINEERING SVCS-LOCAL RD SAFETY PLAN
Check Total: 16,547.75
01/24/2022 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 2,520.00 EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS CONSORTIUM MEMBERSHIP
01/24/2022 LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION 2,636.36 CIVIC SPARK PRGM TO SUPPORT CLIMATE ACTION PLN
01/24/2022 MICHAEL BAKER INT'L, INC. 4,855.00 CONSULTING SVCS-AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING
01/24/2022 MILLER STARR REGALIA A 6,655.00 LEGAL CONSULTING FEES-SOFI APARTMENTS
01/24/2022 MONKEY BEAR YOGA, INC. 210.00 PRESCHOOL IN-HOUSE FIELD TRIP
01/24/2022 NOVANI, LLC. 6,735.00 TRAFFIC HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE
01/24/2022 PARS 967.50 TRUSTEE AND ADMINISTRATIVE FEES FY 20-21
01/24/2022 PG&E 2,865.14 SERVICE TO 01/04/2022 1,516.06 SERVICE TO 01/05/2022 9,890.67 SERVICE TO 12/14/2021 2,068.87 SERVICE TO 12/29/2021 1,555.89 SERVICE TO 12/30/2021
Check Total: 17,896.63
01/24/2022 POSITIVE COACHING ALLIANCE 2,100.00 JUNIOR WARRIORS COACHING WORKSHOP
01/24/2022 PRO CYCLES 826.82 POLICE MOTORCYCLE MAINTENANCE
01/24/2022 QUADIENT FINANCE USA, INC. 250.00 POSTAGE FOR POLICE DEPT - DEC 2021
01/24/2022 REGIONAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES 2,138.52 HR ADVERTISING SERVICES 1,775.00 HR RECRUITMENT SERVICES
Check Total: 3,913.52
01/24/2022 SHIR MARTIAL ARTS 249.90 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR
01/24/2022 SHUMS CODA ASSOCIATES INC 625.00 PLAN CHECK SERVICES AUG 2021 125.00 PLAN CHECK SERVICES DEC 2021
Check Total: 750.00
01/24/2022 SQUAD ESTATES 396.00 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR
01/24/2022 STANFORD HEALTH -VALLEYCARE 216.76 EMPLOYEE MEDICAL SERVICES
183
Print Date: 02/01/2022 City of Dublin
Page 8 of 9 Payment Issuance Report
Payments Dated 1/1/2022 through 1/31/2022
Date Issued Payee Amount Description
01/24/2022 TERRYBERRY 1,119.05 EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARD
01/24/2022 TIREHUB, LLC. 165.29 POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE - D36
01/24/2022 TRB AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 74,450.00 BLDG INSP/PLAN CHECK & CODE ENFORCEMENT SVCS
01/24/2022 TRI-VALLEY JANITORIAL INC. 6,777.25 EXTRA JANITORIAL SERVICES NOV 2021
01/24/2022 VERIZON WIRELESS 1,748.46 POLICE SITCAM SIM CARDS TO 01/03/22 638.92 POLICE VEHICLE MODEM & CITY CELL PHONES
Check Total: 2,387.38
01/24/2022 WC3-WEST COAST CODE CONSULTANT 12,651.25 BLDG INSP/PLAN CHECK SVCS DEC 2021
01/24/2022 WESCO GRAPHICS INC 2,144.53 CITY OF RENEWABLE ENERGY POSTCARDS
Payments Issued 1/24/2022 Total: 470,051.75
01/27/2022 U S BANK ST. PAUL 2,431,899.91 SPECIAL TAX REVENUE COLLECTED CFD 2015-1
01/27/2022 U S BANK ST. PAUL 294,336.15 SPECIAL TAX REVENUE COLLECTED CFD 2015-1
Vendor Total: 2,726,236.06
Payments Issued 1/27/2022 Total: 2,726,236.06
01/31/2022 ALPHA OMEGA WIRELESS, INC 2,530.00 ANNUAL WIRELESS SUPPORT TO CORP YARD
01/31/2022 APWA-AMERICAN PUBLIC WORK ASSN 2,978.50 PUBLIC WORKS ASSN AGENGY MEMBERSHIP DUES
01/31/2022 ARORA, AKSHAY 17,612.40 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR
01/31/2022 AT&T 2,090.50 CIVIC CENTER FIBER SERVICES 425.31 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX DATA SERVICES 44.52 SERVICES FOR TOLL-FREE NUMBER TO 01/11/22
Check Total: 2,560.33
01/31/2022 AT&T - CALNET 3 623.97 SERVICE TO 01/14/2022
01/31/2022 AXIS COMMUNITY HEALTH 2,283.75 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT OCT-DEC 2021
01/31/2022 CAL-ALHFA 300.00 CAL-ALHFA MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL
01/31/2022 CDW GOVERNMENT INC 4,737.62 COMPUTER EQUIPMENT
01/31/2022 CENTRO LEGAL 2,286.17 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT DEC 2021 1,880.47 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT NOV 2021
Check Total: 4,166.64
01/31/2022 CIVICPLUS, LLC 48,366.81 SEECLICKFIX SOFTWARE SUBSCRIPTION
01/31/2022 COGENT COMMUNICATIONS, INC 4,438.00 CIVIC CENTER INTERNET SERVICE DEC 2021
01/31/2022 COMCAST 2,300.00 CIVIC CENTER & FIRE STATION INTERNET
01/31/2022 COMCAST 1,863.08 INTERNET / CABLE SVC VARIOUS CITY DEPTS
01/31/2022 CSW/STUBER-STROEH ENGINEERING 5,204.00 CONCEPT PLANS- CIVIC CENTER BACK PARKING
01/31/2022 DIV OF THE STATE ARCHITECT 406.40 DIVISION OF STATE ARCHITECT CASP OCT-DEC 2021
01/31/2022 DSRSD 1,152.46 SERVICE TO 12/31/2021
01/31/2022 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT 165.00 2019 EMPLOYMENT & WAGE DATA 538.00 2020 EMPLOYMENT & WAGE DATA
Check Total: 703.00
01/31/2022 ENGEO INC 6,790.85 FALLON VILLAGE GHAD PROFESSIONAL SVCS 3,881.10 SCHAEFER RANCH GHAD PROFESSIONAL SVCS
Check Total: 10,671.95
01/31/2022 EVERBRIDGE, INC. 5,000.00 EMERGENCY ALERT SOFTWARE
01/31/2022 HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY 750.00 TREE LIGHTING PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES
01/31/2022 HUBER, JENNIFER B. 1,000.00 UTILITY BOX PAINTING
01/31/2022 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOC. INC. 3,627.50 TRAFFIC & ENGINEERING SERVICE
01/31/2022 LANLOGIC INC. 4,992.50 INFORMATION SYSTEMS CONSULTING SVCS 1,050.00 MALWARE PROTECTION SERVICES 425.00 NETWORK MONITORING SERVICES
184
Print Date: 02/01/2022 City of Dublin
Page 9 of 9 Payment Issuance Report
Payments Dated 1/1/2022 through 1/31/2022
Date Issued Payee Amount Description
Check Total: 6,467.50
01/31/2022 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 20,859.00 LEAGE OF CA CITIES MEMBERSHIP 2022
01/31/2022 LYNX TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 4,500.00 GIS CONSULTING SERVICES FY21-22
01/31/2022 OPEN HEART KITCHEN 8,500.00 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT OCT-DEC 2021
01/31/2022 PETIT, CHRISTINE 67.20 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR
01/31/2022 PG&E 43,120.15 SERVICE TO 01/04/2022 7,777.69 SERVICE TO 01/05/2022
Check Total: 50,897.84
01/31/2022 QUINCY ENGINEERING 7,905.00 BRIDGE & STRUCTURE ASSET INSPECTION PH1
01/31/2022 SHAMROCK OFFICE SOLUTIONS, LLC 2,107.23 COPIER CHARGES
01/31/2022 SKATESATIONAL 540.00 REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR
01/31/2022 STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL 26,498.00 STATE WATER RESOURCES ANNUAL PERMIT FEE
01/31/2022 TREASURER ALAMEDA COUNTY 9,500.60 ANIMAL CONTROL FIELD SERVICES FY21-22 46,326.59 EAST COUNTY ANIMAL SHELTER SVCS FY21-22
Check Total: 55,827.19
01/31/2022 U.S. POSTAL SERVICE 3,994.70 POSTAGE FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY POSTCARDS
01/31/2022 U.S. POSTAL SERVICE 4,510.24 POSTAGE FOR 2022 SPRING ACTIVITY GUIDE &
Vendor Total: 8,504.94
01/31/2022 URBAN FIELD STUDIO 2,292.25 DOWNTOWN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN SERVICES
01/31/2022 VALES, NORMAN 12.10 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT AUG 2021
01/31/2022 WESCO GRAPHICS INC 8,591.27 CITY REPORT & ACTIVITY GUIDE PRINTING
01/31/2022 WESTEK SYSTEMS INC. 7,215.00 AMAG SOFTWARE MAINT & SUPPORT
01/31/2022 WILLDAN HOMELAND SOLUTIONS 1,722,044.10 ENERGY EFFICIENCY/INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROV
01/31/2022 WILLIAM AVERY & ASSOCIATES INC 5,500.00 HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT SERVICES
Payments Issued 1/31/2022 Total: 2,061,605.03
Grand Total for Payments Dated 1/1/2022 through 1/31/2022: 13,690,767.41 Total Number of Payments Issued: 269
185
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Page 1 of 6
Agenda Item 6.1
DATE:February 15, 2022
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:Fallon East General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment (PLPA-2021-00009)Prepared by:Amy Million,Principal Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:The City Council will consider approval of a General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment for approximately 73 acres east of Fallon Road on the GH PacVest and Alameda properties. The amendment would change the existing General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) land use designation from General Commercial to General Commercial/Campus Office. Additionally, the City Council will consider an Addendum to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Environmental Impact Reports.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Conduct a public hearing, deliberate and adopt the Resolution Approving an Addendum to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Environmental Impact Reports and Approving the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment for 72.1 Acres of the GH PacVest Property and the 1.25-Acre Alameda Property.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:None.
DESCRIPTION:Background: The City Council identified in their Two-Year Strategic Plan the objectives of looking to establish an Economic Development Zone to prioritize commercial and industrial development east of Fallon Road, and working with area property owners in conjunction with the Dublin Boulevard extension project on issues such as road and project mitigation, entitlements, and supporting infrastructure. The properties east of Fallon Road are situated along the designated right-of-way
186
Page 2 of 6
for the future Dublin Boulevard extension. The GH PacVest property (approximately 190 acres) is bound by Fallon Road to the west, I-580 to the south, and Croak Road to the south and east. The Alameda property (1.25 acres) is located north of the I-580 off ramp bound by Fallon Road to the west, and Croak Road to the north and east. See Figure 1 below. Figure 1. Location Map and Property Ownership
On September 15, 2020, the City Council received an initial report on the Fallon East Property Planning and Development Framework. The City Council was supportive of the Staff recommendation to create a hybrid land use designation to provide flexibility desired by the existing landowners while supporting the City’s goal of these properties developing with economic and job-rich uses such as Life Science, Advanced Manufacturing, Clean/Green Technology, Automation and Robotics, Technology Startups, and Incubators.On October 20, 2020, the City Council received a second report on the Fallon East Property Planning and Development Framework that provided the initial framework for the creation of an Economic Development Zone (EDZ). On March 16, 2021, the City Council received a third report on the Fallon East Property Planning and Development Framework and initiated a General Plan Amendment Study for the proposed amendment.On April 20, 2021, the City Council’s Economic Development Committee (EDC) received a presentation on the proposed EDZ incentives package, and supported it as presented. On May 18, 2021, the City Council established the Fallon East Economic Development Zone to encourage private investment in the targeted industry sectors as prioritized by the City Council. Establishment of the economic development zone included a description of the properties within the zone, and an Incentives Package to assist with the attraction of job-rich and/or high-wage
187
Page 3 of 6
businesses within the targeted industries.Over the past year, the City has been holding discussions with the larger landowners of these properties to better understand their vision for developing their properties. These meetings also included discussions on proposed land use changes, creation of the economic development zoneand the Dublin Boulevard extension project. Proposed AmendmentThe proposed project is a City-led General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from General Commercial to General Commercial/Campus Office on 72.1 acres of the GH PacVest property (APN: 985-0027-002-00) and on the 1.25-acre Alameda property (APN: 985-0027-003-00). The project also includes amending the land use designation for these properties in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP). Figure 2 shows the existing Land Use Map and Figure 3 shows the proposed Land Use Map. Figure 2. Existing Land Use Map
188
Page 4 of 6
Figure 3. Proposed Land Use Map
The proposed General Commercial/Campus Office land use designation will retain all the land uses currently allowed under the General Commercial designation and create additional flexibility allowed by the Campus Office designation. This hybrid land use designation allows for a wide variety of minimum-impact, light industrial uses as well as commercial uses which are compatible with the overall character and economic health of the area.The project area is located within the Fallon Gateway area of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. In response to City Council’s input at their March 16, 2021 meeting on the vision for sustainable development of this area in conjunction with the future economic development zone, the amendment also includes the following additional language encouraging sustainable development for the Fallon Gateway area: The commercial and industrial land east of Fallon Road and south of the AirportProtectionAreaservesastheentrytoDublinfromtheeastandisenvisionedforsustainabledevelopmentthatprovidesemploymentopportunitiesandconnects thosejobstotheregionalandlocalpublictransportationsystem.Developments are required toincorporatethefollowingsustainabilitypractices:
Build off the City’s Complete Streets Policy and incorporate complete streetsconceptswithintheprivatedevelopment’s circulation system to ensure strongbicycle,pedestrian,and transit connections within and between the privatedevelopmentsandconnectionstotheCity’s streets and existing and future transithubs.
189
Page 5 of 6
Strong bicycle and pedestrian connections per the vision and goals of the City’sBicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
Electric vehicle charging stations within each development.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to reduce the demand ofsingle occupancy vehicles, such as transit subsidy programs, shuttles,showers/lockers, bike share programs, parking, mobility and micromobility hubs.
Buildings and related private infrastructure to help with electric gridmanagement, by incorporating load shifting technologies, solar panels, batterystorage and micro-grids.
Reduce consumption of materials through reuse or recycling of all municipal solidwaste materials back into nature or the marketplace in a manner that protectshuman health and the environment toward zero-waste goals.
Incorporate smart cities technology infrastructure, and fiber-opticcommunications infrastructure.
Street infrastructure for private drive aisles and streets and public streetscertified as Greenroads.org Gold level or greater, ASCE Envision Rating of Gold orgreater or similar equivalent.
Design and construct buildings that meet the requirements to achieve LEED Goldstatus or above.The City Council Resolution approving the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment is included as Attachment 1. Planned Development ZoningThe existing zoning for the GH PacVest portion of the project area is Planned Development Ordinance No. 32-05, which is the Stage 1 Development Plan for Fallon Village. The existing zoning for the Alameda property is Planned Development Ordinance No. 11-94, adopted with the annexation of 1,538 acres west of Fallon Village as part of the General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The Planned Development zoning for these properties designated them as General Commercial which is consistent with the existing General Commercial and proposed General Commercial/Campus Office land use designations and, therefore, no amendment to the Planned Development zoning districts is required at this time. However, all future development would need, at minimum, a Planned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan. It is anticipated that future development on these parcels will include an amendment to the existing Planned Development Zoning to broaden the allowable uses to incorporate all new land uses allowed under the General Commercial/ Campus Office land use designation.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with State Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures, require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared. Prior CEQA analysis for the Fallon East project area includes: 1) the East Dublin General Plan and Specific Plan EIR (1993); 2) the East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation Supplemental EIR
190
Page 6 of 6
(2002); and 3) the Fallon Village Supplemental EIR (2005). Collectively, these three environmental review documents are referred to as the “EDSP EIRs.” Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines and using the City’s Initial Study Checklist, the City assessed whether any further environmental review is required for the proposed project and determined an Addendum to the EDSP EIRs is the appropriate CEQA review. The Addendum is included as Attachment 2. Staff recommends that the City Council to approve the Addendum to the EDSP EIRs before approval of the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment.
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:Strategy 5: Large Land Tract Development and Open Space.Objective A: Look to Establish an Economic Development Zone to prioritize commercial and industrial development east of Fallon Road.Objective B: Work with the area property owners in conjunction with the Dublin Blvd. extension project on issues such as road and project mitigation, entitlements, as well as supporting infrastructure.
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:On December 14, 2021, the Planning Commission considered the proposed General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment. Three representatives of the property owner, GH PacVest, spoke during the public hearing and requested that action on the proposed amendment be postponed to incorporate land use changes they would like to pursue for a future developmenton their property and for the City to prepare further CEQA analysis to support those changes. After discussing the property owners request, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend postponement to the City Council (Attachment 3). In their deliberations, the Planning Commission said they did not see any draw back in postponing action and also commented that they liked the economic development zone and vision for the area east of Fallon Road and thought the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment was a move in the right direction.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:In accordance with State law, a public notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the proposed project to advertise the project and the upcoming public hearing. A public notice was also published in the East Bay Times and posted at several locations throughout the City. Additionally, the City Council agenda was posted, and all Fallon East property owners were notified of this meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:1) Resolution Approving an Addendum to the East Dublin Specific Plan Environmental Impact Reports and Approving the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment for 72.1 Acres of the GH PacVest Property and the 1.25-Acre Alameda Property2) Exhibit A to the Resolution – CEQA Addendum 3) Planning Commission Resolution No. 21-12 without Exhibit A
191
Attachment 1
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted 2/15/22 Page 1 of 9
RESOLUTION NO. XX – 22
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO THE EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS AND APPROVING THE GENERAL PLAN AND
EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT FOR
72.1 ACRES OF THE GH PACVEST PROPERTY AND THE 1.25-ACRE ALAMEDA
PROPERTY APN: 985-0027-002-00 AND 985-0027-003-00
(PLPA-2021-00009)
WHEREAS,the City Council identified in their Two-Year Strategic Plan the objectives of
establishing an economic development zone to prioritize commercial and industrial development
east of Fallon Road, and working with area property owners in conjunction with the Dublin
Boulevard extension project on issues such as road and project mitigation, entitlements, as well
as supporting infrastructure; and
WHEREAS,on September 15, 2020, the City Council received an initial report on the Fallon
East Property Planning and Development Framework supporting the City Council’s Two-Year
Strategic Plan objectives. The City Council was supportive of the Staff recommendation to create
a hybrid land use designation to provide flexibility desired by the existing landowners while also
supporting the City’s goal of these properties developing with economic and job-rich uses such as
Life Science, Advanced Manufacturing, Clean/Green Technology, Automation and Robotics,
Technology Startups, and Incubators; and
WHEREAS, on March 16, 2021, the City Council approved the initiation of a General Plan
Amendment Study to evaluate changing the land use designation from General Commercial to
General Commercial/Campus Office for 72.1 acres of the GH PacVest property and the 1.25-acre
Alameda property (“the Project”); and
WHEREAS,the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the CEQA
Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be
reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, prior CEQA analysis for the Project area includes: 1) the East Dublin General
Plan and Specific Plan EIR (1993); 2) the East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation Supplemental EIR (2002); and 3) the Fallon Village Supplemental EIR (2005).
Collectively, these three environmental review documents are referred to as the “EDSP EIRs;”
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the City prepared an Addendum for
the Project (the “Addendum”) shown as Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference; and
WHEREAS, the Addendum reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis of the
potential environmental impacts of the Project, and concludes that the Project would not result in
any new significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of any significant impacts
identified in the EDSP EIRs and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met; and
192
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted 2/15/22 Page 2 of 9
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; and
WHEREAS,following a public hearing on December 14, 2021, the Planning Commission
adopted Resolution No. 21-12, recommending that the City Council postpone taking action on the
General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment for 72.1 acres of the GH PacVest
property and the 1.25-acre Alameda property, which Resolution is incorporated herein by
reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours; and
WHEREAS, the Dublin Planning Commission considered the Addendum as well as the
EDSP EIRs referenced above, before taking action on the Project, and the Planning Commission
did further hear and consider all said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove as
set forth before taking any action; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated February 15, 2022, and incorporated herein by
reference, described and analyzed the Project for the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project,
including the proposed General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, on February
15, 2022, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use independent judgment and considered all
said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Addendum 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 and Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, 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 proposed Project is consistent with the guiding and implementing policies of the General Plan
in each of the elements and will support additional employment opportunities through commercial
and light industrial developments. The General Plan Amendment noted below will ensure that the
implementation of the proposed Project 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:
Figure 1-1 (Dublin General Plan Land Use Map) shall be amended to change the General Commercial
land use designation to General Commercial/Campus Office land use designation as follows: NOTE: No
changes are proposed to the Airport Protection Area or the Airport Safety Zone 6 overlay boundaries. The
overlays have been removed from this image for clarity.
193
Reso.No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted 2/15/22 Page 3 of 9
Table 2.2 (Land Use Development Potential: Eastern Extended Planning Area) shall be amended to read
as follows:
Table 2.2. LAND USEDEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL: EASTERN EXTENDED PLANNING AREA
CLASSIFICATION ACRES INTENSITY UNITS1 FACTOR YIELD1
RESIDENTIAL Acres DwellingUnits/Acre Dwelling Units Persons/ Dwelling Unit Population
High Density 56.14 25 .1+1,409+2 .7 3,804+
Medium-High
Density 137.81 14 .1-25 .0 1943-3,445 2 .7 5,246-9,302
Medium-High Density and Retail Office
0 14 .1-25 .0 0 2 .7 0
Medium-Density 405.4 6 .1-14 .0 2,473-,5,676 2 .7 6,667-15,325
Single Family 725 0 .9-6 .0 652-4,350 2 .7 1,7,60-11,745
Estate Residential 30 .5 0 .01-0 .8 0-24 2 .7 0-65
Rural Residential/ Agriculture 329.8 0 .01 3 2 .7 9
TOTAL:1,684.65 6,415-14,757+17,321-39,845+
COMMERCIAL Acres Floor AreaRatio(Gross)Square Feet(millions)Square Feet/ Employee Jobs
General Commercial 225.75 .20-.60 1.9-5.9 510 3,856-11,569
General Commercial/ Campus Office
168.57 .20-.80 1.46-5.87 385 3,814-15,258
Mixed Use 6.7 .30-1 .00 ..9-.29 490 178-596
Mixed Use 2/ Campus Office 22 .9 .45 max .45 260 1,731
Neighborhood
Commercial
0.4 .25-.60 .004-.01 490 9-21
Campus Office 195 .58 .25-.80 2 .13-6 .82 260 8,192-26,214
Industrial Park 56 .4 .35 max .86 590 1,458
194
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted 2/15/22 Page 4 of 9
Industrial Park/ Campus Office 0 .25-.35 0 425 0
Campus Office 137.58 .25-.80 1.50-4.79 260 5,763-18,440
Medical Campus 42.88 .25-.80 .46-4.49 260 1,796-5,747
Medical Campus / Commercial 15.85 .25-.80 .17-.41 510 338-812
TOTAL:872.61 9.83-29.89 27,135-81,846
PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC/OPEN SPACE
Acres Floor AreaRatio(Gross)Square Feet(millions)Square Feet/ Employee Jobs
Public/Semi-Public 98.96 .50 max 2 .15 590 3,653
Semi-Public 2.09 .50 max .045 590 77
Acres Number
Parks/Public
Recreation
204-.9
Regional Parks 1 .2 1
Open Space 699 .56
Schools Acres Floor AreaRatio(Gross)Square Feet(millions)Square Feet/ Employee Jobs
Elementary School 38 .50 max 1 .06 590 1,797
Middle School 27 .8 .50 max .61 590 1,034
High School 23.46 .50 max .51 590 866
TOTAL:1,095.97 5.38 7,427
Acres Dwelling Units Population Square Feet(millions)Jobs
GRAND TOTAL:3,653.23 6,415-14,757+17,321-39,845+15.21-35.27 51,883-129,118
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts the following
amendments to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan:
Section 2.3 Ownership Patterns shall be amended to update the land ownership of Chen to GH PacVest
as follows:
2.3 OWNERSHIP PATTERNS
Ownership patterns in the planning area as shown in Figure 2.4. There are 49 recorded parcels
in the planning area which are owned by 33 different landowners. Since 1993, approval of
subsequent amendments, such as the addition of the Dublin Transit Center and portions of Fallon
Village, as well as the subdivision of land has increased the number of parcels and landowners.
Landowners' names and size of holdings are listed in Figure 2.4. Ownership holdings range in
size from 0.4 acres to 1,251 acres. The acreage of two small properties, the EBJ Properties (1.1
acres) and Pleasanton Ranch Investment parcels (0.4 acres), was included on maps and in tables
with the GH PacVest property prior to 2005. Figure 2.4 illustrates only the original parcels prior to
their being subdivided.
Figure 2.4 Ownership Patterns shall be amended to update the land ownership of 21 and 22 from Chen
195
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted 2/15/22 Page 5 of 9
and Anderson, respectively, to GH PacVest
Table 4.1 (Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Land Use Summary) shall be amended to read as follows with no
modifications to the footnotes:
TABLE 4.1
EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN
LAND USE SUMMARY
(Amendment Reso# 66-03, 47-04, 223-05, 58-07, 37-08, 210-08, 176-09, 76-10, 55-12, 92-12, 210-12, 198-13, 159-14, 101-
15, 165-15, 151-16, xx-22)
Land Use Description LAND AREA DENSITY YIELD
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
General Commercial 283.45 acres .25-.35 FAR 3.087 MSF
General Commercial/Campus
Office
160.37 acres .28 FAR 1.956 MSF
Industrial Park*61.3 acres .25-.28 FAR .747 MSF
Neighborhood Commercial 36.76 acres .30-.35 FAR .516 MSF
Mixed Use 0 acres .30-1.0 FAR .005 MSF
Mixed Use 2/Campus Office****25.33 acres .45 FAR .497 MSF
Campus Office 94.28 acres .35-.75 FAR 1.840 MSF
Medical Campus 42.88 acres .25-.80 FAR .950 MSF
Medical Campus/Commercial 15.85 acres .25-.60 FAR .250 MSF
Subtotal 720.22 acres 9.848 MSF
RESIDENTIAL
High Density 58.74 acres 35 du/ac 2,056 du
Medium High Density 156.61 acres 20 du/ac 3,132 du
Medium Density**492.71 acres (1)10 du/ac 4,744 du
Single Family***947.25 acres 4 du/ac 3,789 du (3)
Estate Residential 30.4 acres 0.13 du/ac 4 du
Rural Residential/Agric.539.55 acres .01 du/ac 5 du
Mixed Use 0 acres 15 du/ac 115 du
Subtotal 2,225.26 acres 13,950 du
PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC
Public/Semi-Public 98.96 acres .24 FAR .99 MSF
Semi-Public 2.09 acres .25 FAR .03 MSF
Subtotal 101.05 acres 1.02 MSF
SCHOOLS
Elementary School 55.8 acres (2)5 schools
Junior High School 21.3 acres 1 school
High School 23.46 acres 1 school
Subtotal 100.56 acres
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
City Park 56.3 acres 1 park
Community Park 93.3 acres 3 parks
Neighborhood Park 50.9 acres 7 parks
Neighborhood Square 16.7 acres 6 parks
Natural Community Park 10.4 acres 1 park
Subtotal 227.6 acres 18 parks
Open Space 684.06 acres
TOTAL LAND AREA 4,058.75 acres
Table 4.2 (Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Population and Employment Summary) shall be amended to read
as follows with no modifications to the footnotes:
196
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted 2/15/22 Page 6 of 9
Section 4.9.4 Fallon Gateway shall be amended to update the land use concept for the area east of
Fallon Road as follows:
4.9.4 FALLON GATEWAY
LOCATION
This subarea is located at the Fallon Road interchange with I-580 and occupies the areas east
and west of Fallon Road between Dublin Boulevard and the freeway, and extending north to the
Airport Protection Area boundary. The subarea also extends north to include the northeast and
northwest quadrants of the intersection of Fallon Road and Dublin Boulevard (see Figure 4.2). In
2006, the Fallon Village amendment expanded the Fallon Gateway Subarea to the west and
north to encompass the entire GH PacVest property (as the Dublin Boulevard alignment had
shifted north) except for the areas designated as Community Park and Medium High Density
Residential. Also, the EBJ Partners, Pleasanton Ranch Investments parcels and the areas of
the GH PacVest, Righetti and Branaugh properties within the Livermore Airport Protection Area
(formerly the Industrial subarea) were added to the Fallon Gateway Subarea.
LAND USE CONCEPT
TABLE 4.2
EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN
POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY
(Amended Per Resolution No. 47-04, 223-05, 58-07, 37-08, 176-09, 76-10, 55-12, 92-12, 210-12, 198-13, 159-14, 165-15, 151-
16, xx-22)
Land Use Designation Development Sq Ft/Employees Persons/du Population
Commercial
Industrial Park .747 MSF 590 1,266
General
Commercial/Campus
Office*
1.956 MSF 385 5,081
General Commercial 3.087 MSF 510 6,053
Neighborhood Commercial .516 MSF 490 1,053
Mixed Use**0 MSF 490 0
Mixed Use 2/Campus
Office****
.497 MSF 260 1,910
Campus Office 1.840 MSF 260 7,077
Medical Campus .950 260 3,654
Medical Campus/
Commercial
.250 510 490
Public/Semi Public .99 MSF 590 1,678
Semi-Public 0.03 MSF 590 51
TOTAL:10.863 MSF 28,313
Residential
High Density 2,056 2.0 4,112
Medium High Density 3,132 2.0 6,264
Medium Density 4,749 2.0 9,498
Single Family***(1)3,789 3.2 12,125
Estate Residential 4 3.2 13
Mixed Use**0 2.0 0
Rural Residential/Agric.5 3.2 16
TOTAL:13,735 32,028
197
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted 2/15/22 Page 7 of 9
The land use concept for the Fallon Gateway encourages the development of General
Commercial and Campus Office uses that will benefit from the visibility and easy access
provided by their location near I-580, Dublin Boulevard, and Fallon Road. The focus for this area
is to develop with economic and job-rich uses such as Life Science, Advanced Manufacturing,
Clean/Green Technology, Automation and Robotics, Technology Startups, and Incubators.
Given the subarea’s eastern location away from Downtown Dublin and the Town Center in
eastern Dublin, it is anticipated that the commercial development will accommodate retail uses
that are less suited for the commercial core areas either because they require larger land areas,
better freeway access, and/or different development standards. Uses in this category include
that segment of the retail market that typically deals with high sales volumes and/or bulky or big-
ticket items; has relatively low-overhead; draws from a regional market area; and is highly auto-
oriented. Examples of such uses include large-scale retail, commercial recreation and
entertainment facilities, home improvement centers, nurseries, and similar uses. The subarea
should not include uses that would directly compete with and/or decrease the vitality of the
commercial areas in the Town Center or Downtown Dublin.
The commercial and industrial land east of Fallon Road and extending north to the Airport
Protection Area boundary serves as the entry to Dublin from the east and is envisioned for
sustainable development that provides employment opportunities and connects those jobs to
the regional and local public transportation system. Developments are required to incorporate
the following sustainability practices:
Build off the City’s Complete Streets Policy and incorporate complete streets concepts
within the private development’s circulation system to ensure strong bicycle, pedestrian
and transit connections within and between the private developments and connections to
the City’s streets and existing and future transit hubs.
Strong bicycle and pedestrian connections per the vision and goals of the City’s Bicycle
and Pedestrian Master Plan.
Electric vehicle charging stations within each development.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to reduce the demand of single
occupancy vehicles, such as transit subsidy programs, shuttles, showers/lockers, bike
share programs, parking, mobility and micromobility hubs.
Buildings and related private infrastructure to help with electric grid management, by
incorporating load shifting technologies, solar panels, battery storage and micro-grids.
Reduce consumption of materials through reuse or recycling of all municipal solid waste
materials back into nature or the marketplace in a manner that protects human health
and the environment toward zero-waste goals.
Incorporate smart cities technology infrastructure, and fiber-optic communications
infrastructure.
Street infrastructure for private drive aisles and streets and public streets certified as
Greenroads.org Gold level or greater, ASCE Envision Rating of Gold or greater or similar
equivalent.
Design and construct buildings that meet the requirements to achieve LEED Gold status
or above.
198
Reso.No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted 2/15/22 Page 8 of 9
Table 4.7 (Fallon Gateway Subarea Development Potential) shall be amended as follows:
1In 2006, the Fallon Village amendment expanded the Fallon Gateway Subarea to the west and north to
encompass the entire GH PacVest property (as the Dublin Blvd. alignment had shifted north) except for the areas
designated as Community Park and Medium High Density Residential. Additionally, the EBJ Partners and
Pleasanton Ranch Investments parcels and the areas of the GH PacVest, Righetti and Branaugh properties
within the Livermore Airport Protection Area (formerly the Industrial subarea) were added to the Fallon Gateway
Subarea. See Figure 4.2.Medical Campus 42.88 .51 FAR .950 msf
Figure 4-1 (Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Land Use Map) shall be amended to change the General
Commercial land use designation to General Commercial/Campus Office land use designation for the
Project site as follows:
Appendix 3 Land Use Summary by Planning Areas section “Fallon Gateway” shall be amended as
follows:
APPENDIX 3
EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN
LAND USE SUMMARY BY PLANNING SUBAREAS
Planning Subareas
Land Use Category Area Density Square Feet Units
Fallon Gateway
General Commercial 47.85 .25 521,087
TABLE 4.7
FALLON GATEWAY
SUBAREA DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL1
Designation Acres Density Development Potential
General Commercial 47.85 .25 FAR 521,087
General Commercial/Campus
Office
146.05 .28 FAR 1,781,343
Medical Campus 42.88 .51 FAR 950,000
Industrial Park 61.3 .28 FAR 747,664
TOTAL 298.08 ---4,000,094
199
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted 2/15/22 Page 9 of 9
General Commercial/ Campus
Office
146.05 .28 1,781,343
Medical Campus 42.88 .51 950,000
Industrial Park 61.3 .28 747,664
Total 298.08 ---4,000,094
Appendix 4 Land Use Summary by Land Owner “#21 GH PacVest” shall be amended to read as follows:
APPENDIX 4
EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN
LAND USE SUMMARY BY LAND OWNERS
Owner/Land Use Category Acres Density Square Feet Units
#21 GH PACVEST (FORMERLY
CHEN)
Medium High Density
Residential 4.0 20 130
General Commercial /
Campus Office 90.6 .28 1,105,030
Semi-Public*0
Public / Semi-Public*2.5
Community Park 7.2
Open Space 35.8 -
Total 140.1 1,105,030 130
Appendix 4 Land Use Summary by Land Owners “#22 Anderson” shall be amended update the land
ownership of Anderson to “#22 GH PacVest (Formerly Anderson)”.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15
th day of February 2022, by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
City Clerk
200
Fallon East
General Plan Amendment/
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment
CEQA Addendum
August 25, 2021
Planning Application Number: PLPA-2021-00009
201
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Addendum | Page 1
8/27/21
Fallon East General Plan Amendment/Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan Amendment
CEQA Addendum
August 25, 2021
Project Overview
The project, or proposed project, is a General Plan Amendment to change the land use
designation from General Commercial to General Commercial/Campus Office on 72.1 acres of
the GH PacVest property (APN: 985-0027-002-00) and on the 1.25-acre Alameda property (APN:
985-0027-003-00). The proposed project would also include amending the land use designation
in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The existing Planned Development zoning for these
properties is generally consistent with the proposed General Commercial/Campus Office land
use designation and, therefore, no amendment to the Planned Development zoning is required
at this time.
The City Council’s Two-Year Strategic Plan includes an objective to look at establishing an
Economic Development Zone to prioritize commercial and industrial development east of Fallon
Road. This action would further that strategic priority.
The project site is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) area, and the Fallon
Village project area.
Prior CEQA Analysis
Prior CEQA analysis includes: 1) the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan
EIR (1993), 2) the East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation
Supplemental EIR (2002), and 3) the Fallon Village Supplemental EIR (2005). Collectively, these
three environmental review documents are referred to as the “EDSP EIRs” or “previous CEQA
findings,” and are described below.
Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan EIR (1993)
The Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) and an addendum (1993 GPA/SP EIR) were certified by the City Council on August 22,
1994. This EIR analyzed General Plan Amendments affecting a 6,920-acre area and the adoption
of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP), which encompassed a 3,328 -acre area and provides a
comprehensive planning framework for future development in Eastern Dublin. The area
considered in this EIR included the project site within the General Plan Amendment area.
The 1993 GPA/SP EIR identified the following significant and unavoidable impacts: cumulative
loss of agriculture and open space land, cumulative traffic, extension of natural gas, electric,
and telephone service community facilities, consumption of non-renewable natural resources,
202
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Addendum | Page 2
8/27/21
increases in energy uses through increased water treatment and disposal and through
operation of the water distribution system, inducement of substantial growth and
concentration of population, earthquake ground shaking, loss/degradation of botanically
sensitive habitat, regional air quality, noise, and aesthetics.
Pursuant to Resolution No. 53-93, the City adopted a Mitigation Measures and Monitoring
Program, which mitigation measures and monitoring program continue to apply to
development in Eastern Dublin. The Council also adopted a Statement of Overriding
Considerations in connection with their certification of the 1993 GPA/SP EIR.
East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Supplemental EIR (2002)
In 2002, the City of Dublin approved an annexation, pre-zoning, and related PD-Planned
Development District Stage I Development Plan for the East Dublin Properties area (same area
later named “Fallon Village”). The East Dublin Properties project site consists of 1,132 acres
within the EDSP area, and includes in its entirety the 165 -acre East Ranch project site.
An Initial Study (IS) was prepared to determine if the East Dublin Properties project required
additional environmental review beyond that analyzed in the 1993 GPA/SP EIR. The IS found
that many of the anticipated impacts of the East Dublin Properties project were adequately
addressed in the 1993 GPA/SP EIR given: 1) the comprehensive planning for the development
area; 2) the 1993 GPA/SP EIR‘s analysis of buildout under the EDSP land use designations and
policies; 3) the long term 20-30 year focus of the EDSP and the 1993 GPA/SP EIR; 4) the fact
that the East Dublin Properties project was specifically contemplated in the 1993 GPA/SP EIR;
and 5) the fact that the East Dublin Properties project consisted of the same land uses analyzed
in the 1993 GPA/SP EIR.
Although the IS concluded that the 1993 GPA/SP EIR adequately analyzed most of the potential
environmental impacts of the East Dublin Properties project, it also identified the potential for
some new significant impacts or substantially intensified impacts beyond those previously
analyzed. As a result, the 1993 GPA/SP EIR was updated and supplemented by the
Programmatic East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Supplemental
EIR (2002 Supplemental EIR) which updated the analyses of agricultural resources, biology, air
quality, noise, traffic and circulation, schools, and utilities.
In certifying the 2002 Supplemental EIR, the City adopted a Mitigation Measures and
Monitoring Program and a Statement of Considerations for cumulative air quality and traffic
impacts that continues to apply to development in Eastern Dublin, including the project site.
Fallon Village Supplemental EIR (2005)
In 2005, the City of Dublin considered additional approvals for the 1,132-acre Fallon Village
area. These requested approvals had three components:
203
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Addendum | Page 3
8/27/21
1. Amendments to the General Plan and EDSP to include the entire 1,132-acre Fallon
Village area into the EDSP and to reflect changes to the land use designations on the
site;
2. Revisions to the 2002 approval of the Stage I Planned Development Planned Zoning
and Stage I Development Plan to increase the number of dwellings units by 582 to a
total of 3,108 units and increase non-residential uses from 1,081,725 square feet to
2,503,175 square feet of commercial and office uses; and
3. A Stage II Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Map, Development Agreement, and
Lot Line Adjustment for the development of the northernly 488 acres of the Fallon
Village area to allow 1,078 dwelling units, a school, parks and associated use.
The City approved all three components of the Fallon Village project request.
On December 6, 2005, the City certified the Final Supplemental Fallon Village Project
Environmental Impact Report (2005 Supplemental EIR) that analyzed the new uses and
revisions to the previous approvals for the Fallon Village project.
The 2005 Supplemental EIR identified potentially significant environmental impacts and related
mitigation measures. The City adopted a Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Program for this
approval that continues to apply to development in the Fallon Village area, including the project
site. In addition, as part of Resolution No. 222-05, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for the following significant and unavoidable impacts: traffic impact to
Dublin/Dougherty intersection, cumulative impacts to local roadways, consistent with the
Alameda County Congestion Management Plan, demolition of the Fallon Ranch House and an
increase in regional emissions beyond Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
thresholds.
The City intended this 2005 Supplemental EIR to be used by state or regional agencies in their
review of permits required for development in the Fallon Village area (e.g., California
Department of Fish and Wildlife Streambed Alteration Agreements, California Endangered
Species Act permits, Water Quality Certification or waiver by the Regional Water Quality
Control Board under the Clean Water Act) (see, Draft 2005 Supplemental EIR, p. 27).
Proposed CEQA Analysis in this Document
The City prepared a CEQA analysis using the City’s Initial Study Checklist, dated August 25, 2021,
incorporated herein by reference, to assess whether any further environmental review is
required for the proposed project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, the City
determined that no subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration is required for the project and an
Addendum to the EDSP EIRs is the appropriate CEQA review per the following:
204
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Addendum | Page 4
8/27/21
No Subsequent Review is Required per CEOA Guidelines Section 15162
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 identifies the conditions requiring subsequent environmental
review. After a review of these conditions, the City determined that no subsequent EIR or
Negative Declaration is required for this project. This is based on the following analysis:
a) Are there substantial changes to the project involving new or more severe significant
impacts?
There are no substantial changes to the project as analyzed in the EDSP EIRs. The
proposed project would create additional flexibility allowed by the proposed General
Commercial/Campus Office land use designation. This hybrid General
Commercial/Campus Office land use designation allows for a wide variety of minimum-
impact, light industrial uses as well as commercial uses which are compatible with the
overall character and economic health of the surrounding industrial area. As
demonstrated in the Initial Study, the project does not constitute a substantial change to
the EDSP EIRs analysis, will not result in additional significant impacts, and no additional
or different mitigation measures are required.
b) Are there substantial changes in the conditions which the project is undertaken involving
new or more severe significant impacts?
There are no substantial changes in the conditions assumed in the EDSP EIRs. The
proposed project would create additional flexibility allowed by the proposed General
Commercial/Campus Office land use designation which are compatible with the overall
character and economic health of the surrounding industrial area. This is documented in
the attached Initial Study.
c) Is there new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not
have been known at the time of the previous EIR that shows the project will have a
significant effect not addressed in the previous EIR; or previous effects are more severe; or,
previously infeasible mitigation measures are now feasible but the applicant declined to
adopt them; or mitigation measures considerably different from those in the previous EIR
would substantially reduce significant effects but the applicant declines to adopt them?
As documented in the attached Initial Study, there is no new information showing a new
or more severe significant effect beyond those identified in the EDSP EIRs. Similarly, the
Initial Study documents that no new or different mitigation measures are required for the
project. All previously adopted mitigations continue to apply to the project. The EDSP EIRs
adequately describe the impacts and mitigations associated with the proposed
development on portions of the EDSP area.
205
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Addendum | Page 5
8/27/21
d) If no subsequent EIR-level review is required, should a subsequent negative declaration be
prepared?
No subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration is required because there are no significant
impacts of the project beyond those identified in the EDSP EIRs and no other standards
for supplemental review under CEQA are met, as documented in the attached Initial
Study.
Conclusion
This Addendum is prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 based on the attached
Initial Study. Through the adoption of this Addendum and related Initial Study, the City
determines that the proposed project does not require a subsequent or supplemental EIR or
Negative Declaration under CEQA Section 21166 or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163 .
The City further determines that the EDSP EIRs adequately address the potential environmental
impacts of the Fallon East General Plan Amendment/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment.
As provided in Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, this Addendum need not be circulated for
public review, but shall be considered with the prior environmental documents before making a
decision on this project.
The Initial Study and EDSP EIRs are incorporated herein by reference and are available for
public review during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00
p.m. and 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., in the Community Development Department, Dublin City Hall,
100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA.
206
Fallon East
General Plan Amendment/
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Checklist/Initial Study
August 25, 2021
Planning Application Number: PLPA-2021-00009
207
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study| Page i
Table of Contents
Project Background 1
Project Purpose 2
Project Description 3
CEQA Analysis 9
Determination 10
Aesthetics ................................................................................................................................... 11
Agricultural and Forestry Resources .......................................................................................... 13
Air Quality .................................................................................................................................. 15
Biological Resources ................................................................................................................... 18
Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................................... 22
Energy ........................................................................................................................................ 24
Geology and Soils ....................................................................................................................... 26
Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................................................ 29
Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................................................................. 30
Hydrology and Water Quality .................................................................................................... 32
Land Use and Planning ............................................................................................................... 36
Mineral Resources ..................................................................................................................... 37
Noise .......................................................................................................................................... 38
Population and Housing ............................................................................................................. 40
Public Services ............................................................................................................................ 41
Recreation .................................................................................................................................. 44
Transportation ........................................................................................................................... 46
Tribal Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................... 53
Utilities and Service Systems ..................................................................................................... 54
Wildfires ..................................................................................................................................... 58
208
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study| Page ii
Appendices
A Traffic Generation Evaluation Memorandum
List of Figures
Figure 1: Project Location and Property Ownership
Figure 2: Existing General Plan Land Use Map
Figure 3: Proposed General Plan Land Use Map
List of Tables
Table 1: General Plan Comparison of Semi-Public and Public/Semi-Public Uses
Table 2: Estimated Trip Generation for General Commercial at 0.25 FAR
Table 3: Estimated Trip Generation for General Commercial/Campus Office at 0.28 FAR
Table 4: Estimated Trip Generation Comparison
209
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 1
Fallon East
General Plan Amendment/
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment
CEQA Initial Study
Project Background
Project Title
Fallon East General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment
PLPA-2021-00009
Lead Agency
City of Dublin
Community Development Department
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Contact
Amy Million
Principal Planner
Phone: 925-833-6610
amy.million@dublin.ca.gov
Project Location & Setting
The project site is located east of Fallon Road and north of I -580. As shown in Figure 1: Project
Location and Property Ownership, the project site is located in Eastern Dublin along the
designated right-of-way for the future Dublin Boulevard extension. The project site consists of
72.1 acres on the GH PacVest property (APN: 985-0027-002-00) and is bound by Fallon Road to
the west, I-580 to the south, and Croak Road to the south and east. The 1.25-acres Alameda
property (APN: 985-0027-003-00) is located north of the I-580 off ramp and is bound by Fallon
Road to the west, and Croak Road to the north and east. Combined, the two propertie s total
73.35 acres.
Both properties are currently undeveloped, consisting of open grassland. Surrounding land uses
consists of open grassland to the north, east and south, and commercial development west of
Fallon Road.
The project site is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) area, and the Fallon
Village project area.
210
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 2
Figure 1: Project Location and Property Ownership
Project Applicant
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Designation
General Commercial
Zoning
PD Planned Development Ordinance No. 32-05 and Ordinance No. 11-94
Project Background and Purpose
The City Council identified in their Two-Year Strategic Plan the objectives of looking to establish
an Economic Development Zone to prioritize commercial and industrial development east of
Fallon Road, and working with area property owners in conjunction with the Dublin Boulevard
extension project on issues such as road and project mitigation, entitlements, and supporting
infrastructure.
On September 15, 2020, the City Council received an initial report on the Fallon East Property
Planning and Development Framework. The City Council was supportive of the Staff
211
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 3
recommendation to utilize the hybrid General Commercial/Campus Office land use designation
to provide flexibility desired by the existing landowners while supporting the City’s goal of these
properties developing with economic and job -rich uses such as Life Science, Advanced
Manufacturing, Clean/Green Technology, Automation and Robotics, Technology Startups, and
Incubators.
On October 20, 2020, the City Council received a second report on the Fallon East Property
Planning and Development Framework that provided the initial framework for the creation of
an Economic Development Zone. On May 18, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 50-
21 approving the establishment of the Fallon East Economic Development Zone Map and
Incentives Package.
Over the past year, the City has been holding discussions with some of the larger landowners of
these properties to better understand their vision for developing their properties. In January
and February 2021, Staff met with the Fallon East property owners to discuss the City Council’s
discussions to date including the preliminary land use changes, creation of the Economic
Development Zone, and the Dublin Boulevard extension project.
Project Description
The project, or proposed project, is a General Plan Amendment to change the land use
designation from General Commercial to General Commercial/Campus Office on 72.1 acres of
the GH PacVest property (APN: 985-0027-002-00) and on the 1.25-acre Alameda property (APN:
985-0027-003-00). The existing and proposed General Plan land use changes are shown in
Figures 2: Existing General Plan Land Use Map and Figure3: Proposed General Plan Land Use
Map, respectively.
212
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 4
Figure 2: Existing General Plan Land Use Map
Figure 3: Proposed General Plan Land Use Map
213
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 5
The proposed project would also include amending the land use designations in the Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP). The existing zoning for the GH PacVest portion of the project area is
Planned Development Ordinance No. 32-05, which is the Stage 1 Development Plan for Fallon
Village. The existing zoning for the Alameda property is Planned Development Ordinance No.
11-94, adopted with the annexation of 1,538 acres west of Fallon Village as part of the General
Plan Amendment and EDSP. The Planned Development zoning designations for these properties
is generally consistent with the existing General Commercial and proposed General
Commercial/Campus Office land use designations and, therefore, no amendments to the
Planned Development zoning districts are required at this time. It is anticipated that future
development on these parcels will include an amendment to the existing Planned Development
zoning to broaden the allowable uses to incorporate all the new land uses allowed under the
General Commercial/Campus Office land use designation.
The proposed project does not propose any specific development project. Any such
development would occur subsequently as part of a Stage 2 Development Plan application. As
such, the analysis in this Initial Study is considered programmatic as it relates to a change in
land use designation as a matter of policy and regulation.
The proposed General Commercial/Campus Office land use designation will retain all the land
uses currently allowed under the General Commercial designation and create additional
flexibility allowed by the Campus Office designation. This hybrid General Commercial/Campus
Office land use designation allows for a wide variety of minimum-impact, job-rich and high-
wage businesses, which are compatible with the overall character and economic health of an
industrial area, and are consistent with the City Council’s strategic objectives. The target
industry sectors prioritized by the City Council include:
J Life Sciences 1
J Advanced Manufacturing
J Clean/Green Technology
J Automation and Robotics
J Technology
J Startups and Incubators
The proposed project also includes additional policy language encouraging sustainable
development for the Fallon Gateway area as provided in the EDSP. The commercial and
industrial land east of Fallon Road and south of the Airport Protection Area serves as the entry
to Dublin from the east and is envisioned for sustainable development that provides
employment opportunities and connects those jobs to the regional and local public
transportation system. Developments would be required to incorporate sustainability practices
1 The life sciences sector includes but is not limited to companies operating in the fields of biotechnology (including
genetics), pharmaceutical, medical device and diagnostics, food science/food processing, a nd other efforts
towards the discovery, development and delivery of products to improve the lives of organisms.
214
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 6
related to transportation to reduce the demand on single occupancy vehicles, energy efficiency,
and waste reduction.
Other Public Agencies Whose Approval Is Required
None.
215
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 7
For reference, the Dublin General Plan defines the relevant land use designations as follows:
General Commercial (FAR: .20 to .60; Employee Density: 510 square feet per employee)
This designation accommodates a range of regional- and community-serving retail, service,
and office uses. Uses allowed in this designation include, but are not limited to: retail uses,
including major community-serving uses (e.g., supermarkets, drug stores, hardware stores,
apparel stores, etc.) and regionally-oriented retail uses (e.g., high-volume retail uses such as
discount centers, promotional centers, home improvement centers, furnitu re outlets, and
auto malls); all office uses; hotels; banks; service uses; and restaurants and other eating and
drinking establishments. Mixed use projects incorporating retail, service, and/or office uses
are encouraged, with residential uses also allowed as part of the mix when location and
design ensure compatibility.
Campus Office (FAR: .25 to .80; Employee Density: 260 square feet per employee)
This designation is intended to provide an attractive, campus-like setting for office and
other non-retail commercial uses that do not generate nuisances related to emissions,
noise, odors, or glare. Allowed uses include, but are not limited to, the following:
professional and administrative offices; administrative headquarters; research and
development; business and commercial services; and, limited light manufacturing, assembly
and distribution activities. Ancillary uses which provide services to businesses and
employees in the Campus Office area are permitted. These uses include restaurants, gas
stations, convenience shopping, copying services, branch banks, and other such services.
Under special circumstances (e.g., where a mixed-use development would decrease
potential peak-hour traffic generation, meet a specific housing need, encourage pedestrian
access to employment and shopping, or create an attractive, socially-interactive
neighborhood environment), residential uses may be permitted as part of a master planned
mixed use development. In such developments, the residential component would not be
permitted to occupy more than 50% of the developed area.
General Commercial/Campus Office (FAR: .20 to .80; Employee Density: 385 square feet
per employee)
Combined land use district. See designations under Eastern Extended Planning Area for
General Commercial and Campus Office. Example: Lowe’s and Fallon Village.
For reference, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan defines the relevant land use designations as
follows:
General Commercial (.20 to .60 Floor Area Ratio)
Accommodates a range of regional and community-serving retail, service, and office uses.
Mixed use projects incorporating retail, service, and/or office uses are encouraged, with
216
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 8
residential uses also allowed as part of the mix when location and design ensure
compatibility.
Note: There is one area indicated on the amended land use map, located on the southwest
quadrant of Area H of Dublin Ranch that could develop as either general commercial or
campus office uses. This flexibility has been provided in this area to respond to changing
market conditions that may occur in the future. The shift from general commercial (the
underlying land use designation) to campus office would be permitted if the established
traffic levels of service are not exceeded. Appropriate traffic studies may need to be
conducted in order for the City to make the proper determination regarding traffic levels of
service. The development of either general commercial or campus office uses will be
established at the Stage 2 Planned Development application process.
Campus Office (.25 to .80 Floor Area Ratio)
Provides an attractive, campus-like setting or office and other non-retail commercial uses
that do not generate nuisances related to emissions, noise, odors, or outdoor storage and
operations. Ancillary uses which provide support services to businesses and employees are
permitted. Under special circumstances (e.g., where a mixed-use development would
decrease potential traffic generation and/or contribute to greater social interaction and
more vital live/work environment), residential uses may be permitted as part of a master
planned mixed use development. In such developments, the residential component would
not be permitted to occupy more than 50% of the developed area. A floor area ratio of up
to 1.2 may be granted at the discretion of the City Council for the 37-acre parcel adjacent to
the eastern Dublin BART station in the southwest quadrant of Hacienda Drive and Dublin
Boulevard. A 5-acre hotel site is anticipated within this 37-acre parcel. The precise location
of the hotel site will be established through the planned development application process.
Note: There are several areas indicated on the land use map that could develop as either
general commercial or campus office uses. This flexibility has been provided in these key
areas to respond to changing market conditions that may occur in the future. The shift from
campus office (the underlying land use designation) to general commercial would only be
permitted if the established traffic levels of service are not exceeded. Appropriate traffic
studies may need to be conducted in order for the City to make the proper determination
regarding traffic levels of service.
General Commercial/Campus Office (.20 to .80 Floor Area Ratio)
Provides flexibility in permitting a range of regional and community-serving retail and office
uses. Mixed use projects incorporating retail, service and office uses are encouraged.
217
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 9
CEQA Analysis
The discussion below analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project per
the criteria as described in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section
15162. For convenience, this analysis uses Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines as a framework.
Different from the standard CEQA checklist included in Appendix G of the CEQA Guid elines are
the impact options included in this analysis.
Prior CEQA analysis includes: 1) the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan
EIR (1993); 2) the East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation
Supplemental EIR (2002); and 3) the Fallon Village Supplemental EIR (2005). Collectively, these
three environmental review documents are referred to as the “EDSP EIRs” or “previous CEQA
findings.”
The impact check-boxes indicate that the project would not result in a new impact, a
substantial increase in the severity of an impact, or an equal to or less severe impact, than
those identified in previous CEQA findings.
As such, no new environmental review is required because none of the standards under Public
Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are met which would trigger
the need for additional CEQA documentation. There are no significant project changes, new
information, or change in circumstances that result in a new or substantial increase in severity
of a significant impact from those identified in the EDSP EIRs. Therefore, no standards for
requiring supplemental environmental review or documentation under CEQA are met and none
are required for the project.
218
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 10
Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or
agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the project MAY have a potentially significant or a potentially significant unless
mitigated impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed
in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain
to be addressed.
I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation
measures that are imposed upon the project, nothing further is required.
X
CITY OF DUBLIN
_____________________ _____________________________
Amy Million, Principal Planner Date
219
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 11
Aesthetics
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial Increase
in the Severity of an
Impact Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not
limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
X
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings? X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
X
Previous CEQA Documents
The previous EDSP EIRs identified the following impacts and mitigations for visual resources:
▪ Impact 3.8/A: Standardized "Tract" Development within the project area which did not
respond to natural site conditions could cause a significant impact. Adherence to
Mitigation Measure 3.8/1.0, which requires consistency with EDSP Goal 6.3.4 , reduces
this impact to an insignificant level.
▪ Impact 3.8/B: Alteration of Rural/Open Space Visual Character was identified as a
significant and unavoidable impact even with adherence to Mitigation Measure 3.8/ 2,
which would implement the EDSP plan with retention of predominant natural features
and encourages a sense of place in Eastern Dublin.
▪ Impact 3.8/C: Obscuring Distinctive Natural Features identifies the potential of EDSP
buildings and related improvements to obscure or alter existing features and re duce the
visual uniqueness of the Eastern Dublin area. Implementation of Mitigation Measure
3.8/3.0, which would implement EDSP Policy 6-28, reduces this impact to an
insignificant level.
▪ Impact 3.8/D: Alteration of Visual Quality of Hillsides notes that grading and excavation
of building sites in hillside areas would compromise the visual quality of the EDSP area.
Mitigation Measures 3.8/4.0 through 3.8/4.5 are included in the EDSP EIR to reduce
Impact 3.8/D to an insignificant level. These mitigation measures require
implementation of EDSP Policies 6-32 through 6-38.
▪ Impact 3.8/E: Alteration of Visual Quality of Ridges states that structures built in
proximity to ridges may obscure or fragment the profile of visually sensitive ridgelines.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.8/5.0 through 3.8/5.2 would reduce this
220
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 12
impact to a less-than-significant level. These measures require the implementation of
EDSP Policies 6-29 and 5-30 and General Plan Amendment Guiding Policy E.
▪ Impact 3.8/F: Alteration of Visual Character of Flatlands is identified as a significant and
unavoidable impact. No mitigation measure has been identified which can either fully or
partially reduce this impact.
▪ Impact 3.8/G: Alteration of the Visual Character of Watercourses which involves the
potential for elimination of the visibility and function of watercourses would be
mitigated to an insignificant level by adherence to Mitigation Measure 3.8/ 6.0, which
required future development to implement EDSP Policy 6-39.
▪ Impact 3.8/H: Alteration of Dublin's Visual Identity as a Freestanding City is mitigated to
a level of insignificance by implementation of the EDSP land use plan (Mitigation
Measure 3.8/5.0).
▪ Impact 3.8/I: Scenic Vistas includes the alteration of the character of existing scenic
vistas and important sightlines. With implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.8/7.0
and 3.8/7.1 this impact would be reduced to an insignificant level. Mitigation Measure
3.8/7.0 requires adherence to EDSP Policy 6-5 and Mitigation Measure 3.8/7.1 requires
the City to conduct a visual survey of the EDSP site and to identify and map viewsheds of
scenic vistas.
▪ Impact 3.8/J: Scenic Routes identifies that the urban development of the EDSP will
significantly alter the visual experience of travelers on scenic routes in Eastern Dublin.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.8 / 8.8 and 8.1 will reduce this impact to an
insignificant level. These two measures require implementation of EDSP Action
Programs 6Q and 6R.
The EDSP EIRs found significant and unavoidable aesthetic impacts (Impact 3.8/B and Impact
3.8/F) associated with the alteration of the visual character of rural/open space and flatlands.
The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for these impacts, which includes
the project.
No additional impacts or mitigation were identified in either the 2002 or 2005 Supplemental
EIRs.
The project would be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in the
EDSP EIRs.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Scenic vistas, views
The project site is vacant and classified by the EDSP EIR as “dry-farming rotational cropland.”
The EDSP does identify certain ridgelands and ridgelines as visually sensitive and the City
pursuant to Specific Plan Policy 6-5 and Action Program 6Q adopted the Eastern Dublin Scenic
Corridor, Policies and Standards as means to preserve scenic vistas.
221
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 13
Previous CEQA findings found potentially significant impacts to scenic vistas and views. Th e
impacts were addressed with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.8/3.0, 3.8/4.0-4.5,
3.8/5.0-5.2, 3.8/6.0, 3.8/7.0 and 3.8/7.1. EDSP Policies 6-29 through 6-38, which provide
guidelines for grading and building design as a means to preserve scenic vistas and view
corridors, apply to the project and EDSP area.
(b) Scenic resources
The EDSP EIRs found potentially significant impacts to scenic resources. The impacts were
addressed with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.8/8.0 and 3.8/8 and EDSP Poli cies 6-
30 through 6-31. These mitigation measures are implemented at a project level as means to
preserve scenic vistas and view corridors.
No scenic resources exist on the project site, including but not limited to significant stands of
trees, rock outcroppings, or bodies of water, so there would be no impact from future
development as a result of this land use change.
(c) Substantially degrade the visual character of the site or surrounding area
The EDSP EIRs found that development within the EDSP area wo uld alter the existing visual
character of rural/open space and flatlands. No mitigation measure could be identified to fully
or partially reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. The City adopted a Statement
of Overriding Consideration for these impacts; thus, no additional analysis was found necessary.
(d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
Previous CEQA findings found less than significant impacts at both the program and
development level. Future development associated with the project would not increase the
amount of light and glare that was not previously anticipated in the EDSP and would be
required to comply with adopted City regulations for lighting.
Conclusion
The project does not propose changes that were not previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that
would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in EDSP EIRs and this
environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity of the
previously identified aesthetic/visual impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to aesthetic resources beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and
no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met . Therefore, no further
environmental review is required.
222
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 14
Agricultural and Forestry Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in
the Severity
of an Impact
Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional
model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of,
forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section
12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code section
51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land
to non-forest use?
X
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which,
due to their location or nature, could result in conversion
of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
X
Previous CEQA Documents
The previous EDSP EIRs identified the following impacts and mitigations for agricultural
resources:
▪ Impact 3.1/C Discontinuation of Agricultural Uses states that agricultural uses within the
area would be decreased as a result of the implementation of the EDSP. However, since
most land owners at the time the ESDP EIR was written had filed non -renewal notices
for their Williamson Act contracts it was assumed that agricultural uses would decline
independent of the implementation of the EDSP so the impact was insignificant and no
mitigation was required.
▪ Impact 3.1/D Loss of Farmland of Local Importance states that agricultural lands of local
importance would be lost as a result of the EDSP. Since these agricultural lands of local
223
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 15
importance were not classified as prime farmland, however, the impact was insignificant
and no mitigation was required.
The previous EDSP EIRs evaluated if the soils were considered as “prime agricultural soils”
through the adopted criteria established by the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government
Reorganization Act (Government Code Section 56064, referred to as Assembly Bill 2838). It was
determined that no additional prime or agricultural lands beyond those identified in previous
EIRs were found.
No additional impacts or mitigation were identified in either the 2002 or 2005 Supplemental
EIRs.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a-e) Convert farmland or conflict with zoning
Previous CEQA findings found there were no significant impacts with respect to agricultural
resources. No new conditions have been identified for the project with respect to conversion of
prime farmland to a non-agricultural use. No new or more severe significant impacts would
result from the project than were previously analyzed.
No agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contracts presently exist on the project site nor are
any agricultural operations on-going. There is no forest land within the project site.
Conclusion
The project does not propose changes that were not previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that
would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in EDSP EIRs and this
environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity of the
previously identified agricultural impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements, there would be no new or subst antially
more severe significant impacts to agricultural resources beyond what has been analyzed in the
previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met . Therefore,
no further environmental review is required.
Air Quality
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial Increase
in the Severity of an
Impact Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
X
224
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 16
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs identified the following impacts and mitigation measures for air quality:
▪ Impact 3.11/A: Dust Deposition from Construction Activity states that project
construction will generate respirable particulate matter that could potentially impact
nearby areas significantly. Mitigation Measure 3.11/1.0 mitigates this impact to an
insignificant level but dust emissions remain a potentially significant cumulative impact.
▪ Impact 3.11/B: Construction Equipment/Vehicle Emissions acknowledges that operating
construction equipment will generate exhaust pollutants. Since the build out of the
EDSP is long-term the impact of these emissions is potentially significant. Mitigation
Measures 3.11/2.0 through 3.11/4.0 do not sufficiently reduce the anticipated ozone
precursor emission to within Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
standards so air quality impacts remain potentially significant and contribute to a
potentially significant cumulative impact.
▪ Impact 3.11/C: Mobile Source Emissions ROG or NOx states that as a result of vehicle
trips generated by the full build out of the EDSP ROG and NOx emissions will exceed the
BAAQMD threshold causing a significant impact. Mitigation Measures 3.11/5.0 through
3.11/11.0 reduce this impact but not sufficiently to reduce it to an insignificant level.
▪ Impact 3.11/D: Mobile Source Emissions CO2 notes that the EDSP will not cause any new
CO2 emission standard violations and, therefore, has an insignificant impact.
▪ Impact 3.11/E: Stationary Source Emissions notes that project related NO x emissions
from fuel consumption for energy demand exceeds BAAQMD’s significance threshold
causing a significant impact. Mitigation Measures 3.11/12.0 and 3.11/13.0 reduce this
impact but not sufficiently to reduce it an insignificant level. This impact also contributes
to a potentially significant cumulative impact for the area.
The 1993 GP/SPA EIR determined that future project development will have a potentially
significant cumulative impact on air quality as a result of dust deposition, construction
equipment emissions, mobile source emissions of ROG and NOx, and stationary source
emissions. While some measures have been adopted to partially mitigate these impacts, the
impacts remain potentially significant, particularly given the region's existing non-compliance
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
X
e) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
X
225
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 17
with air quality standards. The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for these
four impacts, which includes the project.
In addition to Mitigation Measure 3.11/1.0 of the 1993 GP/SPA EIR, the 2005 Supplemental EIR
included Supplemental Mitigation SM-AQ-1 which requires compliance with BAAQMD CEQA
Guidelines for construction contractors including: to water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil,
and sand; sweep daily impervious surfaces and staging areas; and installing erosion control
measures to prevent silt runoff.
Future development projects resulting from the proposed land use change would be required
to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in the EDSP EIRs.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Consistent with air quality plans
The project would not conflict with the Clean Air Plan adopted by BAAQMD since the project
site has been included in Dublin's planned growth as previously analyzed and is consistent with
the City’s General Plan, which is the basis of the Clean Air Plan.
(b) Violate air quality standards or cause cumulatively considerable air pollutants
The project is located in the Livermore-Amador Valley where, per BAAQMD, air pollution is
high. High temperatures increase the potential for ozone and there is a transport of pollutants
that occurs between Livermore Valley and the San Joaquin Valley to the east. Since certification
of the EDSP EIRs, the thresholds with respect to air quality have been revised. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lowered the national eight-hour standard for ozone
from 0.075 ppm to 0.070 ppm in 2015. The California Air Resources Board also lowered the
state’s one-hour standard for nitrogen dioxide to 0.18 ppm and retained the national average
standard of 0.030 ppm. The new thresholds do not represent “new information” as specifically
defined under CEQA as the information used to develop these new thresholds was known, or
could have been known, when the EDSP EIRs were prepared.
The previous CEQA findings found that proposed development would result in a significant and
unavoidable emission of air pollutants exceeding the applicable BAAQMD standards. Mitigation
Measures 3.11/2.0 through 3.11/4.0, 3.11/5.0 through 3.11/11.0, 3.11/12.0, and 3.11/13.0
were recommended to reduce impacts to a less than significant level but were insufficient to
reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for these significant and
unavoidable impacts that applies to the project.
(c-d) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations or create objectionable odors
The health risk of diesel exhaust from roadway traffic was previously analyzed. The 1999
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines (1999 Guidelines) identified diesel engine particulate matter as a
toxic air contaminant based on California Air Resources Board (CARB) findings. There were
several studies published prior to 2002 that demonstrated potential health impacts to
226
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 18
residences living close to freeways. (See studies cited in CARB's 2005 “Air Quality and Land Use
Handbook".) The 1999 Guidelines encourage lead agencies to address impacts to sensitive
receptors (such as residences, schools and churches) to exposure of high levels of diesel
exhaust from sources such as a high-volume freeway (1999 BAAQMD CBQA Guidelines, p. 47).
The project site is adjacent to I-580 and future development would not include land uses that
are considered sensitive receptors.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified air quality impacts, nor result in
new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to air quality resources beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and
no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required.
Biological Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial Increase
in the Severity of an
Impact Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
X
227
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 19
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial Increase
in the Severity of an
Impact Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs identified the following impacts and mitigation measures for biological
resources:
▪ Impact 3.7/A: Direct Habitat Loss found that the implementation of the EDSP would
result in substantial reduction of habitat and range, a potentially significant impact .
Mitigation Measures 3.7/1.0 through 3.7/4.0 reduce this impact to an insignificant level
though the project does still contribute to a potentially significant cumulative impact
and does result in a significant irreversible change.
▪ Impact 3.7/B: Indirect Impacts of Vegetation Removal recognizes that dust generation
from construction, increased erosion, sedimentation, and potential for slope failure, and
alteration of drainage patterns could cause a potentially significant impact . Mitigation
Measures 3.7/5.0, 3.6/ 18.0, 3.6/22.0, 3.6/23.0, and 3.11/8 reduce this impact to an
insignificant level.
▪ Impact 3.7/C: Loss or Degradation of Botanically Sensitive Habitat recognizes that
habitat could be lost directly or indirectly as a result of the implementation of the EDSP
resulting in potentially significant impacts. Mitigation Measures 3.7/6.0 through
3.7/17.0 reduce this impact to a level of insignificance.
▪ Impacts 3.7/D and 3.7/E pertain to threatened and endangered species. Mitigation
Measures 3.7/18.0 and 3.7/19.0 reduce these impacts to an insignificant level.
▪ Impacts 3.7/F through 3.7/I pertain to species who are federal candidates for listing as
endangered or threatened. Mitigation Measures 3.7/20.0 through 3.7/22.0 reduce these
impacts to an insignificant level.
▪ Impacts 3.7/J through 3.7/R pertain to California species of special concern. Mitig ation
Measures 3.7/23.0 through 3.7/28.0, 3.4/42.0, 3.7/6.0 through 3.7/17, and 3.7/21.0
228
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 20
reduce all impacts to less than significant.
The EDSP EIRs found a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact (Impact 3.7/A) associated
with direct habitat loss. The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for this
impact, which includes the project.
The 2002 Supplemental EIR and the 2005 SEIR discussed potential impacts to special-status
plants and included mitigation to address these impacts. See, e.g., 2002 Mitigation Measure
SM-BIO-2; 2005 Mitigation Measure SSM-BIO-1 (revising 2002 SM-BIO-4). The previously
adopted mitigation would be applied to the current project.
The 2002 Supplemental EIR and the 2005 SEIR discussed potential impacts to C alifornia Red-
legged frog (CRLF) and California Tiger Salamander (CTS) and included mitigation. See, e.g.,
2005 Supplemental Mitigation Measure SSM-BIO-2 (revising 2002 SM-BIO-14) for CLRF. See,
e.g., 2005 Supplemental Mitigation Measures SSM-BIO-3 & SSM-BIO-4 (revising 2002 SM-BIO-
19) for CTS. The previously adopted mitigation would be applied to the current project.
The 2002 Supplemental EIR also included mitigation for impacts to aquatic features. See, e.g.,
2002 Mitigation Measures SM-BIO-5 and SM-BIO-6.
The project would be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in the
EDSP EIRs.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Substantial adverse effect on candidate, sensitive, or special status species
No changes have occurred to the project site since certification of the EDSP EIRs.
The EDSP EIRs included a comprehensive assessment of habitat and wildlife resources (i.e.,
riparian habitat, natural community, and wetlands). They identified potential impacts related to
the general effect of potential development in Eastern Dublin, including direct habitat loss,
indirect habitat loss due to vegetation removal for construction and development activities, and
loss or degradation of sensitive habitat (Impact 3.7 / A, B, and C). The EDSP EIRs also identified
potential impacts related to wildlife species such as the San Joaquin kit fox, CRLF, CTS, and
others (Impact 3.7 /D - S). Raptor electrocutions associated with proposed high-voltage power
lines were addressed in depth in the 1993 Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR (Impact 3.7 /L), and
included a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 3.7 / 26.0a-d). Mitigation
measures were adopted to, among other things, prepare resource management plans, avoid
development in sensitive areas, and revegetate disturbed areas (generally Mitigation Measures
3.7 / 1.0 - 28.0). All mitigation measures adopted upon approval of the Eastern Dublin EIR
continue to apply to the proposed project.
Even with mitigation, the City concluded that the cumulative loss or degradation of botanically
sensitive habitat was significant and unavoidable (Impact 3.7 / A). The City adopted a Statement
of Overriding Considerations for this significant and unavoidable impact (Resolution No. 53 -93).
229
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 21
The 2002 SEIR determined that species and habitats not previously considered or analyzed in
the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR could occur in the project area. Furthermore, designation of
critical habitat for the California red-legged frog and changes in regulatory standards for this
and other species since the certification of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR were thought to
create new potentially significant impacts. To address these issues, the 2002 SEIR described a
number of impacts and mitigation measures to supplement those in the 1993 Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan EIR.
Mitigation Measure SM-B1O-1 in the 2002 SEIR required preparation of a Resource
Management Plan (RMP). The purpose of the RMP was to address biological resource impacts
of future development in a coordinated manner rather than on a parcel-by-parcel basis as
development plans for individual parcels are prepared over time. The RMP was completed in
2004.
The mitigation measures established in the EDSP EIRs fulfill the City's obligations under CEQA
with respect to biological resources. However, the City recognizes that future development
activity within the project area may require one or more permits from a variety of state and
federal resources agencies. Development project proponents will be responsible for obtaining
all such necessary permits. Those permits may impose mitigation requirements which are
different from and/ or greater than the mitigation measures established in the EDSP EIRs.
(b, c) Substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat , natural community, or wetlands
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with the above referenced mitigation measures. Therefore, impacts would
be equal or less severe than those identified in the EDSP EIRs, and no further mitigation is
required.
(d) Interfere or impede the movement of migratory fish or wildlife
The existing vegetation within the project site consists of mostly grasses which are not native
habitat for migratory species. There are no creeks or streams on the project site that would
allow for migration of fish species. Therefore, impacts to migratory fish or wildlife would be
insignificant.
(e) Conflict with local policies or ordinance include tree preservation or any adopted habitat
conservation or natural community conservation plans.
The protection of heritage trees in the City of Dublin is covered by Chapter 5.6 Heritage Trees of
the Dublin Municipal Code. The proposed project does not modify these requirements and they
would continue to apply on future development of these parcels. As a result there would be no
impact.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
230
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 22
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified biological resources impacts, nor
result in new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to biological resources beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and
no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required.
Cultural Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines section
15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5? X
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries? X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs identified the following impacts and mitigation measures for cultural resources:
▪ Impact 3.9/A: Disruption or Destruction of Identified Prehistoric Resources recognized
impacts associated with the disruption or destruction of identified prehistoric resources
which would be reduced to an insignificant level by adherence to Mitigation Measures
3.9/1.0-4.0, which require a program of mechanical or hand subsurface testing for
midden deposits, recordation of identified cultural resources on State of California site
survey forms, preparing a plan testing of each resource and, if required, having the City
retain the services of a qualified archeologist to develop a cultural resource protection
program.
▪ Impact 3.9/B: Disruption or Destruction of Unidentified Pre-Historic Resources identified
an impact related to the disruption or destruction of unidentified pre-historic resources.
Mitigation Measures 3.9/5.0 and 6.0 would reduce this impact to an insignificant level
by requiring a halt to development activities that could impact unidentified cultural
resources and completion of follow-on site surveys within Eastern Dublin.
231
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 23
▪ Impact 3.9/C: Disruption or Destruction of Identified Historic Resources would be
mitigated to an insignificant level by adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.9/7.0 through
3.9/12.0 that requires in-depth analysis of properties with cultural resources,
encouragement of adaptive reuse of historic structures to the extent feasible, review of
potential historic resources by an architectural historian and development of a
preservation program for historic sites and disruption or destruction of unidentified
historic resources.
▪ Impact 3.9/D: Disruption or Destruction of Unidentified Historic Resources would b e
reduced to an insignificant level by adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.9 / 5.0, 6.0, 7.0,
9.0, 10.0, and 12.0.
The project would be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in the
EDSP EIRs.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Historic resources
The project site is vacant and, therefore, there would be no impact to historic resources.
(b) Archaeological resources
Previous CEQA findings require adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.9/5.0 and 6.0, which would
reduce this impact to an insignificant level by requiring a halt to future development activities
that could impact unidentified cultural resources and completion of follow -on site surveys.
(d) Human remains
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
subject to existing cultural resource mitigation measures contained in the previous EDSP EIRs as
well as state and local regulations regarding potential impacts to human remains.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified cultural resources impacts, nor
result in new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to cultural resources beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no
other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met . Therefore, no further environmental
review is required.
232
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 24
Energy
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
6. Energy. Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due
to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project construction or
operation??
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency? X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs did not specifically analyze impacts to energy as it was not a separate topic for
analysis when the EDSP EIRs were completed. Utilities and service systems impacts and
mitigation measures, some of which are related to the demand for energy of additional se rvice
systems, were identified and can be found in the utilities and service systems section of this
document. Additional impacts and mitigations for energy from the EDSP EIRs include:
▪ Impact 3.4/Q: Demand for Utilities Extensions notes that the build out of the GP/EDSP
will significantly increase demand for gas, electric and telephone services. To supply
adequate electrical service to the project, PG&E estimates that a new distribution
system will have to be constructed. Extension of utility lines are nece ssary if the
GP/EDSP is approved and built. There is no mitigation to this impact and it remained a
significant and unavoidable impact.
▪ Impact 3.4/S: Consumption of Non-Renewable Natural Resources noted that the
provision of adequate natural gas and electrical service will require the consumption of
non-renewable natural resources. This impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures 3.4/45.0 and 3.4/46.0 would reduce the impact to the extent
feasible.
The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the significant and unavoidable
impacts of the Eastern Dublin GPA/SP, which includes the project.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with the above referenced mitigation measures. The project would be
required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in the EDSP EIRs.
233
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 25
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Consumption of energy
The EDSP EIRs identified that development of the Eastern Dublin area would result in a
significant and unavoidable impact due to the consumption of non-renewable natural
resources, including energy consumption. Mitigation measures are identified in the EDSP EIRs
that would help mitigate this impact.
Furthermore, since preparation of the EDSP EIRs, the California Building Energy Efficiency
Standards contained in 24 Cal Code Regs pt. 6 have been revised and updated and include more
stringent requirements to prevent the unnecessary consumption of energy. Given the
programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be required to
comply with these standards. In addition, Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building)
encourages sustainable construction practices in planning, design, energy and water efficiency
and conservation, material conservation, resource efficiency and environmental quality.
The proposed project also requires future development project s to incorporate sustainability
practices the related to transportation to reduce the demand on single occupancy vehicles,
energy efficiency, and waste reduction.
(b) State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency
The project does not contain any features that would conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency and is required to comply with state and local
energy regulations, as described above.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified energy impacts, nor result in new
significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measure s identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to energy beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required.
234
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 26
Geology and Soils
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
X
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault?
X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B
of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature? X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs identified the following impacts and mitigation measures for geology and soils:
235
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 27
▪ Impact 3.6/A: Fault Ground Rupture was found to have insignificant impact since n o
known active or potentially active faults traverse the EDSP area and Alquist-Priolo
Special Studies Zones are not located within the EDSP area.
▪ Impact 3.6/B: Earthquake Ground Shaking: Primary Effects identified potentially
significant and unavoidable impacts from primary effects of seismic ground shaking that
were insufficiently mitigated by Mitigation Measure 3.6/1.0.
▪ Impacts 3.6/C through 3.6/L were identified as potentially significant but mitigatable by
Mitigation Measures 3.6 / 2.0 through 3.6/28.0 to a level of insignificance.
The 2005 Supplemental EIR Mitigation Measure SM-GEO-1 requires that prior to construction,
design level geotechnical report(s) and corrective grading plan(s) depicting the locations and
depths of landslide repairs, keyways, and subsurface drains be prepared and submitted to the
City for review.
The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the significant and unavoidable
impacts of the GP/EDSP, which includes the proposed project.
The project would be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in the
EDSP EIRs.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Seismic hazards
As described in the EDSP EIRs, the project site is located in the Coast Range geomorphic
province of California. The project site is not located within an Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map. No faults and/or their traces have been mapped at the site. The EDSP EIRs used
applicable building code data which included Peak Ground Accelerations of 0.6g. The 2019
California Building Code (CBC) increased Peak Ground Acceleration, a seismic design parame ter
used in the previous CEQA analysis, to 0.77g.
The EDSP EIRs analyzed and found potentially significant and unavoidable impacts associated
with primary effects of seismic ground shaking (Impact 3.6/B; MM 3.6/1.0); potentially
significant but mitigable secondary effects of seismic ground shaking including seismically
induced settlement, land sliding, and compaction (Impact 3.5/c; MM 3.6/2.0- 8.0), alterations
of site landforms (Impact 3.6/D; MM 3.6/9-10), groundwater (Impacts 3.6/F and 3.6/G; MM
3.6/11-13), expansive soils (Impact 3.6/H; MM 3.6/14-16), natural slope stability (Impact 3.6/I;
MM 3.6/17-19), cut-and-fill slope stability (Impact 3.6/J; MM 3.6/20-26), and erosion and
sedimentation (Impacts 3.6/K and L; MM 3.6/27-28).
The EDSP EIRs analyzed and found potentially significant and unavoidable impacts associated
with primary effects of seismic ground shaking. The project would over excavate potentially
liquefiable soils and replace them with engineered fill.
236
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 28
USGS maps show areas of potential seismic induced landsliding and liquefaction within the
project area. Implementation of MM 3.6/2.0- 8.0 would reduce these impacts to less than
significant.(b) Erosion/topsoil loss
Construction of the project would modify the existing ground surface and alter patterns of
surface runoff and infiltration and could result in a short-term increase in erosion and
sedimentation caused by grading activities. The project would be required to implement
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) erosion control measures as enforced by the
City in addition to any mitigation measures included in the EDSP EIRs. The City's requirement to
implement site-specific erosion and other controls would reduce erosion impacts from the
project site. The project would also implement erosion control measures such as soil covering
vegetation and landscaping after completion of construction .
(c-d) Soil stability
Previous geotechnical investigations described in the EDSP EIRs did not identify any unstable
geologic or soil units or those that would be unstable after the project site is developed.
Previous geotechnical investigations did identify expansive soils within the project site. Per the
requirements in the EDSP EIRs, future development projects would require remedial grading,
including over-excavation, keyways, subdrains and engineering fill per geotechnical engineer
direction.
(e) Soil capability to support waste water disposal, including septic
Future development would not use a septic tank or alternative wastewater disposal systems
and, therefore, there would be no impact.
(f) Unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature
The EDSP EIRs analyzed and found that no potential of buried prehistoric sites with undisturbed
or partially disturbed sources cultural deposits are associated with the project site.
Conclusion
The project does not propose changes beyond what was previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs
that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in EDSP EIRs and this
environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity of the
previously identified geology and soil impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to geology and soil beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no
other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met . Therefore, no further environmental
review is required.
237
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 29
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial Increase
in the Severity of an
Impact Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X
Previous CEQA Documents
Since certification of the EDSP EIRs, the issue of the contribution of greenhouse gases to climate
change has become a more prominent issue of concern as evidenced by passage of AB 32 in
2006 and SB 32 in 2016.
Because the EDSP EIRs were previously certified, the determination of whether greenhouse
gases and climate change need to be analyzed for this project is governed by the law on
supplemental or subsequent EIRs (Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines,
Sections 15162 and 15163). Greenhouse gas and climate change is not required to be analyzed
under those standards unless it constitutes "new information of substantial importance, which
was not known and could not have been known at the time the previous EIRs were certified as
complete” (CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15162 (a) (3)).
Greenhouse gas and climate change impacts were not analyzed in the prior EIRs; however,
these impacts are not new information that was not known or could not have been known at
the time these previous EIRs were certified . The issue of climate change and greenhouse gases
was widely known prior to the certification of these EIRs. The United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change was established in 1992. The regulation of greenhouse gas
emissions to reduce climate change impacts was extensively debated and analyzed throughout
the early 1990s. The studies and analyses of this issue resulted in the adoption of the Kyoto
Protocol in 1997.
Therefore, the impact of greenhouse gases on climate change was known at the time of the
certification of the EDSP EIRs. Under CEQA standards, it is not new information that requires
analysis in a supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration. No supplemental environmental
analysis of the project's impacts on this issue is required under CEQA .
238
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 30
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a, b) Generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions or conflict with GHG plans or regulations
As discussed above, no additional environmental analysis is required under CEQA Section 21166
and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
Conclusion
The impact of greenhouse gases on climate change was known at the time of the certification
of the EDSP EIRs. Under CEQA standards, it is not new information that requires analysis in a
supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration. No supplement al environmental analysis of the
project's impacts on this issue is required under CEQA.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within ¼ mile of
an existing or proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would
it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
X
239
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 31
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly,
to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires?
X
Previous CEQA Documents
The 1993 GP/SPA EIR did not include an analysis of impacts to hazards and hazardous materials.
However, the 2005 Supplemental EIR identified potential hazard impacts. Supplemental
Mitigation Measure SM-HAZ-1 requires project developers to survey for asbestos and lead-
based paints (which do not apply as there are no structures on the project site). Supplemental
Mitigation Measure SM-HAZ-2 and -3 addresses procedures for the removal of
soil/groundwater contamination, if present.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials
No development project is proposed, only a change in allowable land uses with the intent of
broadening the types of allowed uses to accommodate business such as life sciences, advanced
manufacturing, technology, and startups and incubators. To the extent there are potentially
hazardous materials used in construction or during commercial operations, the impacts would
be less than significant due to compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements.
(b) Potential release of hazardous materials into the environment
The proposed change in land use would not create a significant hazard to the pubic or
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment.
(c) Emit hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school
The proposed land use change would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within on-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school since the expansion of uses would not involve the handling of hazardous
materials.
(d) Listed as a hazardous materials site
The project site is vacant and has not been listed as a hazardous materials site in the EDSP EIRs
and, therefore, there is no impact.
240
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 32
(e) Proximity to a public or private airport
The project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people working in the
project area. The project site is located approximately 1.5 miles from the Livermore Airport and
within its Airport Safety Zone, Airport Protection Area, and Airport Influence Area. However,
the proposed expansion of uses are allowed per the Livermore Executive Airport, Airport Land
Use Compatibility Plan (2012), and would not cause a significant safety hazard.
(f) Impair implementation of an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan
No emergency evacuation plan would be affected since no roadways would be blocked or
otherwise altered.
(h) Expose people or structures to wildland fires
As further discussed in the Wildfire section below, the project would not expose people or
structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in this environmental analysis, the project would result in less than
significant impacts relating to hazards and hazardous materials.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to hazards and hazardous materials beyond what has been analyzed in the previous
EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no
further environmental review is required.
Hydrology and Water Quality
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface
or ground water quality?
X
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin??
X
241
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 33
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
X
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site? X
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on- or offsite?
X
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
X
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation? X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs identified the following impacts and mitigation measures for hydrology and
water quality:
▪ Impact 3.5/P identified significant impacts related to the supply of water to the Eastern
Dublin area. Mitigation Measures 3.5/24.0-3.5/40.0 were adopted to prevent overdraft
of ground water resources by requiring or encouraging annexation and connection to
DSRSD, minimize the effect of additional demand for water by encouraging water
recycling and conservation and by encouraging the development of new facilities and
supplies, and to ensure the development of a water distribution system by generally
preventing development until such facilities are constructed b y developers.
▪ Impact 3.5/Q noted that the EDSP would increase demand to serve development at
build-out under the then-applicable General Plan and required an additional 25,000
acre-feet annually. Mitigation Measures 3.5/26.0 through 3.5/31.0 reduced the impact
to an insignificant level.
242
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 34
▪ Impact 3.5/V identified an impact due to flooding as a result of water storage reservoir
failure but would be mitigated to an insignificant level by Mitigation Measure 3.5/41.0.
▪ Impact 3.5/Y: Potential Flooding was found to be potentially significant but was reduced
to an insignificant level by Mitigation Measures 3.5/44.0 through 3.5/48.0.
▪ Impact 3.5/Z: Reduced Groundwater Recharge was a potentially significant impact but
Mitigation Measures 3.5/49.0 and 3.5/50.0 reduced the impact to an insignificant level.
▪ Impact 3.5/AA: Non-Point Sources of Pollution was found to be a potentially significant
impact but was reduced to an insignificant level by Mitigation Measures 3.5/51.0 and
3.5/52.0.
The 2005 Supplemental EIR identified potential impacts related to “cumulative stormwater
generation/capacity of local channels” and “changes in non-point source water quality
regulations.” Supplemental Mitigation Measures SM-SD-1 and SM-SD-2 were adopted to
reduce these potential supplemental impacts to less than significant. SM -SD-1 required water
quality and hydrologic design recommendations requiring implementation of bio-
retention/filtration facilities with all subsequent individual development projects in the Fallon
Village project area. SM-SD-2 required future individual development projects within the
project area to comply with the storm water quality and hydromodification management
provisions of the Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program as administered by the City of
Dublin.
The project would be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in the
EDSP EIRs.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Violate water quality or waste discharge requirements
Any future development project will be required to be designed to treat all of its storm water
runoff for water quality and hydromodification management to meet curre nt Municipal
Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit,
Provision C.3 requirements as prescribed in the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit issued by the
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. As a result, the project would meet
the current RWQCB C.3 requirements, which are more stringent than those considered in the
EDSP EIRs.
(b) Substantially deplete or interfere with groundwater supplies
Future water sources would rely on surface water supplies from the Dublin San Ramon Services
District (DSRSD) and not local groundwater supplies. The project is required to support Zone 7’s
groundwater recharge program to only pump groundwater it artificially recharges using its
imported surface water or locally-stored runoff from Arroyo del Valley. Compliance with this
would maintain groundwater at a no net loss for the Livermore Valley Groundwater Basin . As a
result, the project would not result in a net increase in groundwater extraction from Livermore
Valley Groundwater Basin.
243
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 35
(c) Substantially alter existing drainage patterns
Future development would not significantly change drainage patterns and proposed storm
drain facilities would be required per City and State regulations to be adequately sized for
project runoff. The project would incorporate and comply with the drainage system master
planned improvements as they were designed and approved in the Dublin Ranch Drainage
Master Plan with appropriate sizing and construction of downstream facilities such as the G3
Culvert Regional Conveyance facility constructed with the Dublin Ranch project, extended by
the Fallon Village project. Future development would also be required to pay fees to the Dublin
Ranch East Side Storm Drain Benefit District for construct ion of the downstream regional
facilities. Per SM-SD-2, future development would also pay required Zone 7 Special Drainage
fees (SDA-7-1) for regional storm drain facilities.
(g) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow
The project site is not located near a major body of water that could result in a seiche . The risk
of potential mudflow is considered low since no historic landslides or mudflows have been
identified on the project site. There would be no impact with implementation of the project.
(h) Conflict with water quality control or groundwater management plan
Future development would be required to incorporate and comply with the drainage system
master planned improvements as they were designed and approved in the Dublin Ranch
Drainage Master Plan.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified hydrology and water quality
impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to hydrology and water quality beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP
EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met . Therefore, no further
environmental review is required.
244
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 36
Land Use and Planning
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
11. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? X
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs identified the following impact for land use and planning:
▪ Impact 3.1/A found that there were significant and unavoidable impacts from the EDSP
as a result of the loss of agricultural and open space lands. No mitigation measures were
identified for those impacts.
The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for this significant and unavoidable
impact, which includes the project.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Physically divide an established community
The proposed General Commercial/Campus Office land use designation will expand the types of
office and light industrial uses already allowed in the area. Allowed future uses would be
compatible with the existing land uses and would not divide an established community.
(b) Conflict with general plan
The project site is located in the EDSP project boundary and would be consistent with
environmental goals and policies contained in the City’s General Plan. The proposed project
includes amendments to the EDSP and the General Plan to ensure consistency between the two
documents.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
245
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 37
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified land use and planning impacts,
nor result in new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements. There would be no new or
substantially more severe significant impacts to land use and planning beyond what has been
analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are
met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required.
Mineral Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
12. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and t he
residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs did not include an analysis of impacts to mineral resources.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a-b) Loss of known or identified mineral resource
The City does not have any mineral extraction areas so there would be no new or substantially
more severe significant impacts to mineral resources.
Conclusion
Because the City does not have any mineral extraction areas, there would be no impact, and no
other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met . Therefore, no further environmental
review is required.
246
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 38
Noise
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
13. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project
in excess of standards established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels? X
c) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs identified the following impacts and mitigation measures for noise:
▪ Impact 3.10/A: Exposure of Proposed Housing to Future Roadway Noise identified
future vehicular traffic associated with development proposed in Eastern Dublin as
potentially significant to future residents. This impact would be mitigated to an
insignificant level through adherence to Mitigation Measure 3.10/1.0 that requires
acoustic studies for all future residential development in the Eastern Dublin area.
▪ Impact 3.10/B: Exposure of Existing Residences to Future Roadway Noise would be a
potentially significant impact to existing residents in the Eastern Dublin area as
development occurs in accord with the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan. This impact would be reduced through adherence to Mitigation Measure
3.10/2.0, which requires future development projects to provide noise protection to
existing residential uses in Eastern Dublin; however, noise impacts to existing residents
along Fallon Road would remain significant and unavoidable.
▪ Impact 3.10/ C: Exposure of Existing and Proposed Development to Airport Noise was
considered an insignificance impact and no mitigation was required.
▪ Impact 3.10/D: Exposure of Proposed Residential Development to Noise from Future
Military Training Activities at Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (RFTA) and the County
Jail identified potentially significant noise for future residents within 6 ,000 feet of Parks
RFTA. This impact would be reduced through adherence to Mitigation Measure 3.10/3.0
that requires acoustic studies for development near Parks RFTA and the County Jail;
247
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 39
however, reduction of noise from Parks RFTA may not be feasible, so this impact would
be significant and unavoidable.
▪ Impact 3.10/E: Exposure of Existing and Proposed Residences to Construction Noise
would be a potentially significant impact related to noise associated with construction
of the EDSP, including but not limited to buildings, roads, and utilities . Adherence to
Mitigation Measures 3.10/4.0 and 3.10/5.0 would reduce construction noise impacts to
a level of insignificance through preparation and submittal of Construction Noise
Management Plans and compliance with local noise standards.
▪ Impact 3.10/F: Noise Conflicts due to the Adjacency of Diverse Land Uses Permitted by
Plan Policies Supporting Mixed-Use Development would result from close proximity of
different land use types that may result in potentially significant impacts. Mitigation
Measure 3.10/6.0 requires the preparation of noise management plans for all mixed-use
developments within the Eastern Dublin area. This measure would reduce noise
generated by mixed-use development to a level of insignificance.
The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the significant and unavoidable
impacts described above, which includes the project.
The 2002 Supplemental EIR identified potential noise impacts associated with commercial land
uses. Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-NOISE-1 requires a noise insulation plan for
commercial and industrial uses. Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-NOISE-2 restricts heavy
truck traffic to designated arterial roadways and truck routes.
The 2005 Supplemental EIR identified potential noise impacts associated with aircraft flyovers
and roadway noise. Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-NOISE-1 requires written notification
to occupants of residential dwellings of the potential for aircraft overflights within the Fallon
Village project area. Supplemental Mitigation M easures SM-NOISE -2 through -4 address
measures associated with reducing roadway noise that may affect sensitive noise receptors
such as residential, schools, and parks.
The project would be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in the
EDSP EIRs.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Exposure to or generate noise exceeding standards
The EDSP EIRs identified the sources of major noise affecting the EDSP area to be vehicular
traffic stemming from Interstate 580, aircraft flyovers from the Livermore Municipal Airport,
Parks RFTA, and County Jail. The short-term noise measurement results noted that other than
site grading associated with the construction of the development the roadway noise and
aircraft flyovers would dominate any noise levels generated by the project.
248
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 40
(b) Exposure to ground borne vibration or ground borne noise
The EDSP EIRs identified a potentially significant impact for future roadway noise as well as
construction noise as a result of the build out of the EDSP, which includes the project site.
Implementation of mitigation measures within the EDSP EIRs reduces this impact to an
insignificant level.
(c) Excessive noise level near a public or private airport
The project would not result in safety hazard or excessive noise for people working in the
project area. The project site is located approximately 1.5 miles from the Livermore Airport and
is located within its Airport Safety Zone, Airport Protection Area, and Airport Influence Area.
However, the proposed expansion of uses are allowed per the Livermore Executive Airport,
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (2012). Furthermore, the type of (light) aircraft and
frequency of noise would not result in excessive noise level impacts to commercial uses,
particularly those that are industrial in nature, nor be different from that previously analyzed.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified noise impacts, nor result in new
significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to noise beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required.
Population and Housing
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
14. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
X
249
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 41
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs did not identify any significant impacts or mitigation measures for population
and housing.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Population growth
Future development would not induce substantial additional population growth in the Eastern
Dublin area since development on the project site has long been envisioned in the Dublin
General Plan and EDSP. Furthermore, no residential development is allowed on the project site
because it is located within the Livermore Airport – Airport Protection Area.
(b) Housing and resident displacement
Since the project site is vacant, no housing units or people would be displaced as a result of the
project.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified population and housing impacts,
nor result in new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements. There would be no new or
substantially more severe significant impacts to population and housing beyond what has been
analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are
met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required.
Public Services
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
15. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or need for new or physical altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significa nt environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of
the public services:
a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection? X
250
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 42
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs identified the following impacts and mitigation measures for public services:
▪ Impacts 3.4/A and 3.4/B are related to the provision of police services. One notes that
there would be a demand for increased police services with implementation of the
Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan and the other identifies an
impact related to the hilly topography of the Eastern Dublin area that could present
accessibility and crime-prevention issues. Adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.4/1.0
through 3.4/ 5.0 would reduce impacts to the Dublin Police Department to an
insignificant level.
▪ Impacts 3.4/C through 3.4/E are related to the provision of fire services. The build out of
the GP/EDSP would increase the demand for fire services and the outlying areas of the
GP/EDSP were beyond the fire response area at the time resulting in extended fire
response times. The build out of the GP/EDSP would also result in the settlement of
population and construction of new communities in proximity to high fire hazard open
space areas. This would pose an increasing wildfire hazard to people and property if
open space areas are not maintained for fire safety. Mitigation Measures 3.4/6.0
through 3.4/13.0 reduce these impacts to an insignificant level.
▪ Impacts 3.4/F through 3.4/J are related to schools. The buildout of the GP/EDSP will
increase the demand for new classroom space and school facilities in proportion to the
number of residential units constructed, far exceeding the current available capacity of
either school district at the time. Overcrowding at existing schools could occur if
insufficient new classroom space is provided. Development of Eastern Dublin under
existing jurisdictional boundaries would result in the area's being served by two
different school districts. The division of the project site by two different school districts
would adversely affect financing of schools in eastern Dublin and complicate provision
of education to planning area students. The cost of providing new school facilities
proposed in the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan could adversely impact local
school districts by creating an unwieldy financial burden unless some form of financing
is identified. Mitigation Measures 3.4/13.0 through 3.4/19.0 reduce these impacts to an
insignificant level.
▪ Impacts 3.4/K through 3.4/N are related to parks and public facilities. Without the
addition of new parks and facilities, the increased demand for new park and recreation
251
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 43
facilities resulting from buildout of the GP/EDSP would create potentially significant
impacts. Acquisition and improvement of new park and recreation facilities may place a
financial strain on existing City revenue sources causing a potentially significant impact.
Development of residential and commercial areas in eastern Dublin without adequate
provision of trail easements may thwart efforts to develop a regional trail system . Urban
development along project stream corridors and ridgelines would adversely impact
outdoor recreational opportunities for future Dublin residents and obstruct the
formation of an interconnected open space system. Mitigation Measures 3.4/20.0
through 3.4/36.0 would reduce this impact to an insignificant level.
The 2002 Supplemental EIR covered the proposed detachment of the Fallon Village project area
from the Livermore Area Recreation and Parks District and annexation into the City of Dublin.
This reorganization was approved by Alameda County Local Formation Agency in 2002.
The 2005 Supplemental EIR analyzed the adequacy of park acreage within the Fallon Village
project area and found it to be consistent with the number, size and locations of parks within
the program level Stage 1 PD and with the City of Dublin Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
The project would be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in the
EDSP EIRs.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Fire
Future development would increase demand for fire and emergency services by increasing the
amount of daytime population (i.e., employees) on the project site. Features would be
incorporated into the project as part of existing City ordinances and development requirements
which assist in reducing impacts. These features include installation of on-site fire protection
measures such as fire sprinklers and installation of new fire hydrants that meet the minimum
fire flow requirements contained in the Uniform Building Code and Uniform Fire Code.
As part of the City’s Development Fee Program, future development would be required to pay
an impact fee for fire facilities to serve new development in the City. This impact fee relates to
funding new fire facilities in Eastern Dublin, ensuring adequate water supplies and pressure for
fire suppression, and minimizing wildland fire hazards.
(b) Police
Incremental increases in the demand for police service could be expected associated with a
future development project. This increase in calls for service would be off-set through
adherence to City of Dublin safety requirements from Dublin Police Services.
(c) Schools
The project area is within in the boundary of the Airport Protection Area for the Livermore
Municipal Airport, where residential is not an allowed use; therefore, there would be no
252
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 44
impacts. In addition, no new impacts to school service are anticipated since payment of
mandated statutory impact fees at the time of issuance of building permits would provide
mitigation of educational impacts of the project pursuant to State law.
(d, e) Parks and other public facilities
Future development would be required to comply with all prior mitigation measures and, if
applicable, would pay the required Park Fee as part of the Public Facility fees.
Construction associated with future development would incrementally increase the long-term
maintenance demand for roads and other public facilities. However, such additional
maintenance demands would be off-set by additional City fees and property tax revenues
accruing to the City and, therefore, impacts would be less-than-significant.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified public services impacts, nor result
in new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to public services beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no
other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental
review is required.
Recreation
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
16. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
X
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction
or expansion of recreational facilities which might have
an adverse physical effect on the environment?
X
253
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 45
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs identified the following impacts and mitigation measures for recreation:
▪ Impact 3.4/K indicated that increased demand for parks as a result of buildout of the
GP/EDSP would represent a significant impact on the ability of the City to provide park
service for future residents. It would also be a potentially significant cumulative impact
for the community due to lack of sufficient city-wide park facilities that would not meet
a standard of five acres of parkland per 1,000 population. Mitigation Measures 3.4/20.0-
28 were included in the Eastern Dublin EIR to reduce this impact to an insignificant level.
▪ Impact 3.4/L identified a park facility fiscal impact on the City of Dublin. The fiscal strain
of providing new park facilities would be a potentially significant impact. Mitigation
Measures 3.4/ 29.0-31.0 would require that each new development in Eastern Dublin
provide a fair share of parks and open space facilities. Development of a parks
implementation plan was also called for. Finally, adoption of a park in-lieu fee program
was required. These mitigation measures reduce this impact to an insignificant level.
▪ Impacts 3.4/ M and N dealt with the regional trail system and open space connections.
Development of residential and commercial areas in Eastern Dublin was anticipated to
have a potentially significant impact to the construction of a regional trail system .
Adherence to Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 32.0 would require the establishment of a trail
system with connections to planned regional and sub -regional trails, which would
reduce this impact to an insignificant level.
▪ Impact 3.4/N notes that urban development along stream corridors and ridgelines
would adversely impact outdoor recreational opportunities for future Dublin residents
and potentially obstruct the formation of an interconnected open space system.
Mitigation Measures 3.4 / 33.0-36.0 would reduce this impact to an insignificant level.
The project would be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in EDSP
EIRs.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a, b) Increase the use of existing recreation facilities causing deterioration or require new
recreation facilities
The City’s park and recreational facilities are composed of neighborhood facilities, community
facilities, community parks and community center. The EDSP identified a total of 17 parks on
219 acres which is consistent with the City of Dublin 2015 Parks and Recreation Master Plan
ratio of 5.0 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. Sufficient park land has been constructed and
it being planned, and future development associated with the proposed project is limited to
commercial uses. The proposed project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood
and/or regional parks such that a substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated; nor would it require the construction/expansion of a recreational facility
elsewhere which would have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
254
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 46
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified recreation impacts, nor result in
new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to recreation beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required.
Transportation
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
17. TRANSPORTATION. Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision (b)?? X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs identified the following impacts and mitigation measures for transportation and
traffic:
▪ Impacts 3.3/A through 3.3/E identified significant, significant cumulative, and significant
and unavoidable adverse impacts related to daily traffic volumes on I-580 for Year 2010
with and without build-out of the GP/EDSP and under a Year 2010 cumulative build-out
scenario. Mitigation Measures 3.3/1.0 through 3.3/5.0 reduced these impacts but not
sufficiently to avoid significant cumulative impacts.
255
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 47
▪ Impacts 3.3/F through 3.3/N identified impacts to levels of service and PM peak hour
traffic volumes at 18 intersections and at I-580 ramps. Mitigation Measures 3.3/6.0
through 3.3/8.0 and 3.3/10.0 through 3.3/14.0 were adopted to reduce these impacts.
Impacts 3.3/I, 3.3/M and 3.3/N were unable to be reduced to an insignificant level.
▪ Impacts 3.3/O and 3.3/P identified significant impacts related to transit service
extensions and the provision of safe street crossings for pedestrians and bicycles.
Mitigation Measures 3.3/15.0-15.3 and 3.3/16.0-16.1 were adopted which reduced
these impacts to a level of insignificance.
The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the remaining significant and
unavoidable cumulative impacts of Impacts 3.3/B, 3.3/E, 3.3/I, 3.3/M and 3.3/N, which apply to
the project.
The 2002 Supplemental EIR identified a number of additional transportation impacts related to
the project area. Supplemental mitigation measures to reduce impacts to less than significant
include:
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-Traffic-1 requires future project developers to
contribute a pro-rata share to the widening of the I-580 eastbound off-ramp approach
at Hacienda Drive to add a third eastbound left turn lane.
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-Traffic-2 requires future project developers to
contribute a pro-rata share to the widening of the northbound Hacienda Drive
overcrossing from three lanes to four lanes including three through lanes and one
auxiliary lane that leads exclusively to the 1-580 westbound loop on-ramp. The
westbound loop on-ramp shall be modified as necessary to meet Caltrans' standards
and design criteria. Project developers also shall contribute to widening the westbound
off ramp approach to add a third westbound left-tum lane.
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-Traffic-3 requires future project developers to
contribute a pro-rata share to construction which converts the eastbound Santa Rita off-
ramp through lane to a shared left tum/through lane. Project developers also shall
contribute to a traffic signal upgrade which includes a westbound right -turn overlap
from Pimlico Drive.
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-Traffic-4 requires that future project developers
to install a traffic signal at the Dublin Boulevard/Street D intersection at the time
development occurs in this area utilizing this intersection.
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-Traffic-5 requires that future project developers
to install a traffic signal at the Fallon Road/Project Road intersection at the time
development occurs in this area utilizing this intersection.
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-Traffic-6 requires that future project developers
to contribute a pro-rata share to configure the eastbound Dublin Boulevard approach to
include one left-tum lane, three through lanes and two right tum lanes.
256
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 48
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-Traffic-7 requires future project developers to
construct an additional through lane on northbound Fallon Road (for a total of four
through lanes), construct an additional left-tum lane on westbound Dublin Boulevard
(for a total of three left-tum lanes) and construct an additional through lane on
southbound Fallon Road (for a total of four through lanes). In addition, the City will
monitor the intersection for peak hour volumes on a periodic basis, as described
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-Traffic-8 requires future project developers to
pay studies to assess the feasibility of locating the Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard
intersection farther north to allow for a signalized Project intersection between the I -
580 westbound ramps/Fallon Road intersection and the Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard
intersection (the "auxiliary intersection").
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-Traffic-9 requires future project developers to be
responsible for widening Fallon Road between 1-580 and Dublin Road to its ultimate
eight lanes and shall be responsible for widening Fallon Road between Dublin Boulevard
and Central Parkway to its ultimate six lane width
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-Traffic-10 requires future project developers to
be responsible for widening Central Parkway between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road
from two lanes to four lanes.
The 2005 Supplemental EIR identified a number of additional transportation impacts related to
the project area. Supplemental mitigation measures to reduce impacts to less than significant
include:
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-TRA-1 requires future project developers to make
a project contribution to Dublin/Dougherty intersection.
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-TRA-2 requires future project developers to
contribute a pro-rata share to the widening of the northbound Hacienda Drive
overcrossing from 3 lanes to 4 lanes including three through lanes and one auxiliary lane
that leads exclusively to the 1-580 westbound loop on-ramp.
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-TRA-3 requires future project developers to
contribute a pro-rata share to construction which converts the eastbound Santa Rita off-
ramp through lane to a shared left tum/through lane.
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-TRA-4 requires future project developers to
install a traffic signal at the Dublin Boulevard/Street D intersection at the time
development occurs in this area utilizing this intersection.
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-TRA-5 requires future project developers to
install a traffic signal at the Fallon Road/Project Road intersection at the time
development occurs in this area utilizing this intersection.
257
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 49
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-TRA-6 requires future project developers to
contribute a pro-rata share to configure the eastbound Dublin Boulevard approach to
include 1 left-tum lane, three through lanes and two right tum lanes.
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-TRA-7 requires future project developers to
construct an additional through lane on northbound Fallon Road (for a total of four
through lanes), construct an additional left-tum lane on westbound Dublin Boulevard
(for a total of three left-tum lanes) and construct an additional through lane on
southbound Fallon Road (for a total of four through lanes).
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-TRA-8 requires future project developers to pay
studies to assess the feasibility of locating the Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard
intersection farther north to allow for a signalized Project intersection between the I -
580 westbound ramps/Fallon Road intersection and the Fallon Road /Dublin Boulevard
intersection (the "auxiliary intersection").
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-TRA-9 requires future project developers to
responsible for widening Fallon Road between 1-580 and Dublin Road to its ultimate
eight lanes and shall be responsible for widening Fallon Road between Dublin Boulevard
and Central Parkway to its ultimate six lane width.
▪ Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-TRA-10 requires future project developers to
responsible for widening Central Parkway between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road from
two lanes to four lanes.
The project would be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in EDSP
EIRs.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Conflict with applicable transportation circulations plans/standards
As described in Appendix A: Traffic Generation Evaluation Memorandum (Kimley-Horn, June 22,
2021), a trip generation evaluation was prepared to determine if the change in land uses would
potentially result in a transportation impact. Vehicle trips generated under the General
Commercial land uses were compared to the uses allowed under the hybrid General
Commercial/Campus Office land use designation.
According to the City’s General Plan, the General Commercial land use designation allows
commercial land uses at a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.20 to 0.60, compared to 0.20 to
0.80 for General Commercia/Campus Office. For the purposes of this evaluation, it was
assumed that the development for the General Commercial/Campus Office land use
designation would be constructed at a density of 0.28 FAR, and the General Commercial land
use designation would be constructed at a density of 0.25 FAR.
Consistent with the City’s strategy to broaden the types of allowed uses to accommodate
business such as life sciences, advanced manufacturing, technology, and startups and
258
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 50
incubators, a General Light Industrial land use category was selected from trip generation rates
published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th
Edition (2017). This was compared to the General Office Building and Shopping Center land use
categories, both of which are currently allowed per the City’s General Plan General Commercial
land use designation. Due to the lower trip rate for the new allowed uses, any combination of
the new allowed uses and previously allowed uses is expected to generate fewer peak hour
trips than the previously allowed uses.
Trip Generation for General Commercial at 0.25 FAR
The daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour trip generation for each allowed land use for
General Commercial at a 0.25 FAR is shown in Table 2: Estimated Trip Generation for General
Commercial at 0.25 FAR.
Table 2: Estimated Trip Generation for General Commercial at 0.25 FAR
ITE
Land
Use
Code Land Use Size Units
Daily
Trips
AM Peak PM Peak
Total In Out Total In Out
710 General Office Building 798.78 KSF 7,782 927 797 130 919 147 772
820 Shopping Center 798.78 KSF 30,156 751 466 285 3,043 1,461 1,582
The highest trip number is shown in bold and shaded.
As shown in Table 2: Estimated Trip Generation for General Commercial at 0.25 FAR, the higher
of the two uses for each period would result in 30,156 daily trips, 927 AM peak hour trips, and
3,043 PM peak hour trips.
Trip Generation for General Commercial/Campus Office at 0.28 FAR
The daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour trip generation for the likely mix of land uses for
General Commercial/Campus Office at a 0.28 FAR is shown in Table 3: Estimated Trip
Generation for General Commercial/Campus Office at 0.28 FAR. This assumes 50 percent of the
building area would be general light industrial, 25 percent would be general office building, and
25 percent would be shopping center.
Table 3: Estimated Trip Generation for General Commercial/Campus Office at 0.28 FAR
ITE Land
Use Code Land Use Size Units
Daily
Trips
AM Peak PM Peak
Total In Out Total In Out
110 General Light Industrial 447.32 KSF 2,220 313 275 38 282 37 245
710 General Office Building 223.66 KSF 2,180 259 223 36 257 41 216
820 Shopping Center 223.66 KSF 8,444 210 130 80 852 409 443
Total 12,844 782 628 154 1,391 487 904
259
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 51
As shown in Table 3: Estimated Trip Generation for General Commercial/Campus Office at 0.28
FAR, likely mix of uses would generate 12,844 daily trips, 782 AM peak hour trips, and 1,391 PM
peak hour trips.
Trip Generation Comparison
The daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour trip generation was compared between the higher
trips for the potential uses for General Commercial at a 0.25 FAR versus the likely mix of uses
for the General Commercial/Campus Office at a 0.28 FAR. This comparison is shown in Table 4:
Estimated Trip Generation Comparison.
Table 4: Estimated Trip Generation Comparison
Scenario
Daily
Trips
AM Peak PM Peak
Total In Out Total In Out
General Commercial 30,156 927 3,043 797 285 1,461 1,582
General Commercial/Campus Office 12,844 782 1,391 628 154 487 904
Difference -17,312 -145 -1,652 -169 -131 -974 -678
As shown in Table 4: Estimated Trip Generation Comparison, the new General
Commercial/Campus Office use would not exceed the existing General Commercial use for the
daily, AM peak hour, or PM peak hour trips and, therefore, the proposed General Plan
amendment would not result in any significant transportation impacts and no further
environmental review is required. However, it should be noted that future proposed
development may need further traffic analysis to determine that there will be no new
significant transportation impacts due to the change in traffic levels since the certification of
the previous EDSP EIRs.
(b) Conflict with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3
Since certification of the EDSP EIRs, the issue of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) has become a
more prominent issue of concern as evidenced by passage of SB 743 in 2013. Previously, CEQA
analysis was conducted using a level of service (LOS) measurement that evaluated traffic delay.
As specified under SB 743, and implemented under Section 15064.3 of the State CEQA
Guidelines (effective December 28, 2018), VMT is the required metric to be used for identifying
CEQA impacts and mitigation. In December 2018, OPR published a Technical Advisory on
Evaluating Transportation Impacts, including guidance for VMT analysis. The Office of
Administrative Law approved the updated CEQA Guidelines and lead agencies were given until
July 1, 2020, to implement the updated guidelines for VMT analysis.
Because EDSP EIRs have been certified, the determination of whether VMT needs to be
analyzed for this project is governed by the law on supplemental or subsequent EIRs (Public
Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15162 and 15163). VMT is not
required to be analyzed under those standards unless it co nstitutes "new information of
substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the
previous EIRs were certified as complete” (CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15162 (a) (3)).
260
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 52
VMT impacts were not analyzed in the prior EIRs; however, these impacts are not new
information that was not known or could not have been known at the time these previous EIRs
were certified. The issue of VMT as a metric for analyzing traffic was widely known prior to the
certification of these EIRs.
Therefore, the impact of VMT was known at the time of the certification of the EDSP EIRs.
Under CEQA standards, it is not new information that requires analysis in a supplemental EIR or
Negative Declaration. No supplemental environmental analysis of the project's im pacts on this
issue is required under CEQA.
(c) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
Future development of the project site would add sidewalks and other vehicular and pedestrian
travel ways where none currently exist and would be required to comply with current City
engineering design standards and other safety standards to ensure that no safety hazards
would be created or exacerbated.
(d) Result in inadequate emergency access
Future development of the project site would be required to go through Stage 2 Planned
Development application, which would ensure that all roadways would be designed consistent
with City roadway design standards.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified transportation impacts, nor result
in new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to transportation beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no
other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental
review is required.
261
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 53
Tribal Cultural Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature,
place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical
resources as defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
X
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c)
of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs did not specifically analyze impacts to tribal cultural resources as it was not a
separate topic for analysis when the EIRs were completed. Cultural resource impacts and
mitigation measures, some of which could pertain to tribal resources, were identified and can
be found in the Cultural Resources section of this document.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources
The project site is vacant and, therefore, there would be no impact to historic resources.
(b) Significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1
The project is subject to existing cultural resource mitigation measures, as described above in
Cultural Resources section. In addition, per Senate Bill 18 the City of Dublin sent letters to eight
California Native American Tribes regarding the proposed project. No requests for consultation
were received.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
262
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 54
on this environmental analysis, the project would not result in new significant impacts to tribal
cultural resources.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements. There would be no new or
substantially more severe significant impacts to tribal cultural resources beyond what has been
analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are
met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required.
Utilities and Service Systems
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
and reasonably foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project projected demand in
addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards,
or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction
goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste? X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs identified the following impacts and mitigation measures for utilities and service
systems:
▪ Impact 3.5/B identified the lack of a collection system as a significant impact. Mitigation
Measures 3.5/1.0-3.5/5.0, generally preventing development until such facilities are
263
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 55
constructed by developers, were adopted to mitigate this impact to an insignificant
level.
▪ Impact 3.5/C noted potential growth-inducing impacts of pipeline construction. These
impacts were mitigated by Mitigation Measure 3.5/6.0, preventing the construction of
facilities greater than those required for the GPA/EDSP, to an insignificant level.
▪ Impacts 3.5/D, 3.5/E and 3.5/G identified current and future inadequate treatment plant
capacity in DSRSD's treatment plan and inadequate disposal capacity as significant
impacts. All were mitigated to an insignificant level by Mitigation Measures 3.5/7.0
through 3.5/9.0 and 3.5/11.0 through 3.5/14.
▪ Impacts 3.5/F and 3.5/H relate to the increased energy usage as a result of Impacts
3.5/D, E, and G. Both were mitigated by Mitigation Measures 3.5/10.0, 3.5/15.0 and
3.5/16.0 but remained significant and unavoidable impacts.
▪ Impact 3.5/I noted that a failure of the export disposal system could have a potentially
significant impact but Mitigation Measure 3.5/17.0 reduce this impact to an insignificant
level.
▪ Impact 3.5/L noted that the proposed recycled water system must be constructed and
operated properly in order to prevent any potential contamination of or cross -
connection with potable water supply systems. Mitigation Measure 3.5/20.0 reduced
this impact to an insignificant level.
▪ Impact 3.5/P identified significant impacts related to the supply of water to the Eastern
Dublin area. Mitigation Measures 3.5/24.0-3.5/40.0 were adopted to prevent overdraft
of ground water resources by requiring or encouraging annexation and connection to
DSRSD, minimize the effect of additional demand for water by encouraging water
recycling and conservation and by encouraging the development of new facilities and
supplies, and to ensure the development of a water distribution system by generally
preventing development until such facilities are constructed by developers.
▪ Impact 3.5/Q noted that buildout of the GP/EDSP will increase water demand.
Mitigation Measures 3.5/26.0 through 3.5/31.0 reduced this impact to an insignificant
level.
▪ Impact 3.5/R noted that there would be a significant impact since t he increase in water
demands through development of the GP/EDSP will require an expansion of existing
water treatment facilities in order to deliver safe and potable water . Mitigation
Measures 3.5/32.0 and 33.0 reduced this impact to an insignificant level.
▪ Impact 3.5/S noted that at the time there was no water service in the area, with the
exception of a Zone 7 water supply connection to Alameda County for the old Santa Rita
Jail. With the development of the GP/EDSP, a water distribution system and storage
system would be required. If a water distribution system was not constructed, this
would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measures 3.5/34.0 through 3.5/38.0 reduced
this impact to an insignificant level.
▪ Impact 3.5/U accounted for the increased energy requirement as a result of increased
water demands requiring a water distribution system. Mitigation Measure 3.5/40.0
264
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 56
mitigated this impact but was insufficient to reduce the impact to a less than potentially
significant level.
▪ Impact 3.5/Z: Reduced Groundwater Recharge was a potentially significant impact but
Mitigation Measures 3.5/49.0 and 3.5/50.0 reduced the impact to an insignificant level.
The 2005 Supplemental EIR analyzed supplemental impacts of wastewater collection and
disposal capacity as changed conditions since the 2002 Supplemental EIR. There were found to
be no supplemental impacts to wastewater collection based on the latest 2005 Wastewater
Collection System Master Plan Update by the Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) using
the latest sewer generation rates and long-term wastewater planning. Wastewater disposal
capacity was found to be adequate based on completion of a 2005 Livermore -Amador Valley
Water Management Agency export pipeline expansion project and no supplemental impacts
were found with regard to wastewater disposal.
The City of Dublin adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for Impacts 3.3/F and H,
which includes the project.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in Eastern Dublin General
Plan Amendment and Specific Plan EIR.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a, c) Wastewater treatment requirements and facilities
DSRSD is the water and sewer provider for the project site . DSRSD has master planned the
wastewater collection system, treatment capacity and disposal capacity in accordance with the
General Plan and EDSP demand levels as documented in the latest 2017 Wastewate r Collection
System and Treatment Facilities Master Plans.
The project area is included within the build out of the GP/EDSP and the proposed project does
not increase the demand for water and sewer; therefore, its demand has already been
accounted for. Connection fees are based on these master plans and also account for the
proposed level of development on the project site. Previous potential impacts due to growth
inducing system expansion no longer apply as the project is located within the DSRSD’s service
area and would not require expansion of the system. Therefore, no supplemental impacts have
been identified.
(b) Sufficient water supplies
DSRSD has master planned their water supply capacity, water distribution system, reservoirs
and pumping in the project area in accordance with the General Plan and EDSP demand levels
as documented in the current Urban Water Management Plan (2016). Connection fees are
based on these master plans and account for the proposed level of development on the project
site. Therefore, no supplemental impacts have been identified .
265
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 57
Per SB 221, future development projects would be required to obtain written verification from
DSRSD that sufficient water supply is available. This may include the use of recycled water as a
way of water conservation. Previous potential impacts due to growth inducing system
expansion no longer apply as the project site is located within DSRSD’s service area.
(d, e) Solid waste disposal and regulatory compliance
Approval of future development projects would incrementally increase the generation of solid
waste. Over the long term, the amount of solid waste reaching the landfill would decrease as a
result of statewide regulations mandating increased recycling and organics diversion. In
addition, future development projects would be required to comply with the Dublin Municipal
Code regarding solid waste which includes DMC Chapter 5.32 - Solid Waste Management; 7.30 -
Waste Management Plan; and Chapter 7.98 - Solid Waste and Recycling Enclosure Standards.
In addition, future development projects would be required to incorporate transportation
sustainability practices to reduce the demand on single occupancy vehicles, energy efficiency,
and waste reduction.
The EDSP EIRs found that there would be adequate capacity within the local landfill to
accommodate increases in the amount of solid waste.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified utilities and service system
impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified
in the EDSP EIRs, as applicable. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to utilities and service systems beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP
EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required.
266
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 58
Wildfires
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
20. Wildfires. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?? X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate
fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts
to the environment
X
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?
X
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs did not specifically analyze impacts of wildfires as it was not a separate topic for
analysis when the EDSP EIRs were completed. Public services impacts and mitigation measures,
some of which related to the provision of fire services pertain to wildfires, were identified and
are discussed in the Public Services section.
The project would be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures as set forth in EDSP
EIRs.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Impair emergency response plan
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development projects
would be required to comply with the City’s Wildfire Management Plan and Chapter 7.32 of the
Dublin Municipal Code to ensure that emergency access and response plans are not impaired .
Future development would also be required to comply with Site Development Review Permit
application requirements to ensure there is adequate fire protection and emergency response
access.
267
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 59
(b) Pollutants or uncontrolled spread
Future development would be required to comply with Site Development Review Permit
application requirements which would minimize the risk that any pollutant concentrations or
wildfire risk as a result of slope, prevailing winds, or other factors that exacerbate wildfire risks
could occur beyond what was analyzed in the EDSP EIRs.
(c) Infrastructure
Future development would be required to comply with Site Development Review Permit
application requirements which would ensure that all infrastructure is constructed according to
the latest City and State fire code requirements.
(d) Slope instability resulting in post-fire slope instability
As discussed in the Hydrology and Water Quality section, the project includes an erosion
control plan that implements slope erosion control measures during and post-construction and
does not change historic drainage patterns outside of the project site. The project would not
result in changes to drainage or slopes beyond what was previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes to the land uses for the project site than
were previously analyzed in the EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based
on the information in EDSP EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not
substantially increase the severity of the previously identified wildfire impacts, nor result in
new significant impacts.
Given the programmatic nature of the proposed project, any future development would be
required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements. There would be no new or
substantially more severe significant impacts from wildfires beyond what has been analyzed in
the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required.
Mandatory Findings of Significance
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Does the project:
a) Have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
X
268
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 60
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
X
c) Have environmental effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
X
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
No New Impact. As discussed and analyzed in this document, the proposed p roject would not
degrade the quality of the environment. Additionally, for the reasons discussed in the Biological
Resources section, the proposed project, with mitigation, would not substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal. Further, for the reasons identified in
the Cultural Resources section, the project site does not contain any significant cultural
resources, and no impacts to such resources would occur. Therefore, implementation of the
proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previousl y
identified significant impact as previously analyzed, and no other CEQA standards for
supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this
impact area.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable futu re projects)?
No New Impact. The proposed project has the potential to result in incremental environmental
impacts that are part of a series of approvals that were anticipated under the EDSP EIRs. The
269
City of Dublin Fallon-East GPA/SPA
CEQA Initial Study | Page 61
EDSP EIRs considered the project’s cumulatively considerable impacts where effects had the
potential to degrade the quality of the environment as a result of build -out of the EEDSP.
Implementation of the proposed project, with mitigation, would not result in any new
cumulative impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant cumulative
impact as previously analyzed, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
No New Impact. The proposed project would not create adverse environmental effects that
would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The
proposed project would allow for a broader variety of land uses, including industrial uses such
as life sciences, advanced manufacturing, technology, and startups and incubators. None of
these uses or activities would result in any substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly, as discussed throughout this document . Therefore, implementation of the
proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously
identified significant impact as previously analyzed , and no other CEQA standards for
supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this
impact area.
270
kimley-horn.com 824 Bay Avenue, Suite 10, Capitola, CA 95010 831 316 1430
MEMORANDUM
August 26, 2021
TO: Amy E. Million, Principal Planner, City of Dublin
Pratyush Bhatia, Transportation and Operations Manager, City of Dublin
FROM: Bill Wiseman and Ben Huie, Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.
RE: Trip Generation Evaluation for the Fallon-East GPA/SPA – CEQA Analysis
Kimley-Horn is preparing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis for a City-
initiated General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment
(SPA) for 72.1 acres on the GH PacVest property and 1.25 acres on the Alameda property in
eastern Dublin, CA. This study evaluates the potential transportation impacts associated
with changing the existing General Plan land use designation for the project sites from
General Commercial to General Commercial/Campus Office to create additional flexibility
allowed by the Campus Office designation. This hybrid land use designation allows for a
wide variety of minimum-impact, light industrial uses as well as commercial uses which are
compatible with the overall character and economic health of the industrial are a.
The purpose of this memorandum is to determine if the change in land use designation
would result in additional vehicles trips generated and, consequently, a potential
transportation impact.
Project Description
The proposed GPA and SPA would occur on 72.1 acres on the GH PacVest property and 1.25
acres on the Alameda property in Eastern Dublin, CA. Both sites are located within the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) area. Prior CEQA analysis includes: 1) the Eastern Dublin
General Plan and Specific Plan EIR (1993); 2) the East Dublin Properties Stage I Development
Plan and Annexation Supplemental EIR (2002); and 3) the Fallon Village Supplemental EIR
(2005). Collectively, these three environmental review documents are referred to as the
“EDSP EIRs”.
This project tiers off of these previous EDSP EIRs which, at that time, significant impacts
related to transportation were based on level of service (LOS) and not vehicle miles traveled
(VMT). Therefore, this transportation evaluation focuses on vehicle trips generated, and
not VMT.
271
Amy Million
City of Dublin
Page 2
According to the City’s General Plan, the General Commercial land use designation allows
commercial land uses at a maximum floor-area ratio (FAR) of 0.20 to 0.60. The General
Commercia/Campus Office land use designation allows commercial land uses at a maximum
floor-area ratio (FAR) of 0.20 to 0.80. Therefore, the only difference between the two land
use designations is the increase in the upper limit of FAR from 0.6 0 to 0.80. However, for
the purposes of this evaluation, it was assumed that the development for the General
Commercial/Campus Office land use designation would be constructed at a density of 0.28
FAR, and the General Commercial land use designation would be constructed at a density of
0.25 FAR.
Trip Generation Evaluation
To determine if the change in land uses would potentially result in a transportation impact,
the vehicle trips generated under the General Commercial land uses were compared to the
uses allowed under the General Commercial/Campus Office land use.
Consistent with the City’s strategy to broaden the types of allowed uses to accommodate
business such as life sciences, advanced manufacturing, technology, and startups and
incubators, a General Light Industrial land use category was selected from trip generation
rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual,
10th Edition (2017). This was compared to the General Office Building and Shopping Center
land use categories, both of which are currently allowed in the City’s General Plan General
Commercial land use designation.
To estimate the land use sizes, it was assumed that the sum of the two parcels (i.e., 73.35
acres) would be developed at a density of 0.25 FAR, resulting in a building area of 798.78
thousand square feet (KSF) for General Commercial or at a density of 0.28 FAR, resulting in
a building area of 894.64 KSF for General Commercial/Campus Office.
Trip Generation for General Commercial at 0.25 FAR
The daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour trip generation for each allowed land use for
General Commercial at a 0.25 FAR is shown in Table 1: Estimated Trip Generation for
General Commercial at 0.25 FAR.
272
Amy Million
City of Dublin
Page 3
Table 1: Estimated Trip Generation for General Commercial at 0.25 FAR
ITE
Land
Use
Code
Land Use Size Units Daily
Trips
AM Peak PM Peak
Total In Out Total In Out
710 General Office
Building 798.78 KSF 7,782 927 797 130 919 147 772
820 Shopping Center 798.78 KSF 30,156 751 466 285 3,043 1,461 1,582
The highest trip number is shown in bold and shaded.
As shown in Table 1: Estimated Trip Generation for General Commercial at 0.25 FAR, the
higher of the two uses for each period would result in 30,156 daily trips, 927 AM peak hour
trips, and 3,043 PM peak hour trips.
Trip Generation for General Commercial/Campus Office at 0.28 FAR
The daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour trip generation for the likely mix of land uses
for General Commercial/Campus Office at a 0.28 FAR is shown in Table 2: Estimated Trip
Generation for General Commercial/Campus Office at 0.28 FAR. This assumes 50 percent of
the building area would be general light industrial, 25 percent would be general office
building, and 25 percent would be shopping center.
Table 2: Estimated Trip Generation for General Commercial/Campus Office at 0.28 FAR
ITE Land
Use
Code
Land Use Size Units Daily
Trips
AM Peak PM Peak
Total In Out Total In Out
110 General Light Industrial 447.32 KSF 2,220 313 275 38 282 37 245
710 General Office Building 223.66 KSF 2,180 259 223 36 257 41 216
820 Shopping Center 223.66 KSF 8,444 210 130 80 852 409 443
Total 12,844 782 628 154 1,391 487 904
As shown in Table 2: Estimated Trip Generation for General Commercial/Campus Office at
0.28 FAR, likely mix of uses would generate 12,844 daily trips, 782 AM peak hour trips, and
1,391 PM peak hour trips.
Trip Generation Comparison
The daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour trip generation was compared between the
higher trips for the potential uses for General Commercial at a 0.25 FAR versus the likely mix
of uses for the General Commercial/Campus Office at a 0.28 FAR. This comparison is shown
in Table 3: Estimated Trip Generation Comparison.
273
Amy Million
City of Dublin
Page 4
Table 3: Estimated Trip Generation Comparison
Scenario Daily
Trips
AM Peak PM Peak
Total In Out Total In Out
General Commercial 30,156 927 3,043 797 285 1,461 1,582
General Commercial/Campus Office 12,844 782 1,391 628 154 487 904
Difference -
17,312
-145 -1,652
-
169 -131 -974 -678
As shown in Table 3: Estimated Trip Generation Comparison, the new General
Commercial/Campus Office use would not exceed the existing General Commercial use for
the daily, AM peak hour, or PM peak hour trips and, therefore, the proposed General Plan
amendment would not result in any significant transportation impacts.
Conclusion
The proposed GPA and SPA of parcels from General Commercial to General
Commercial/Campus Office would not result in any new or substantially more severe
significant impacts to transportation beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP
EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met . Therefore, no further
environmental review is required.
274
RESOLUTION NO. 21 – 12
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL POSTPONE TAKING ACTION ON THE
GENERAL PLAN AND EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT FOR 72.1 ACRES
OF THE GH PACVEST PROPERTY AND THE 1.25-ACRE ALAMEDA PROPERTY; APN:
985-0027-002-00 AND 985-0027-003-00
(PLPA-2021-00009)
WHEREAS, the City Council identified in their Two-Year Strategic Plan the objectives of
establishing an economic development zone to prioritize commercial and industrial development
east of Fallon Road, and working with area property owners in conjunction with the Dublin
Boulevard extension project on issues such as road and project mitigation, entitlements, as well
as supporting infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, on September 15, 2020, the City Council received an initial report on the Fallon
East Property Planning and Development Framework supporting the City Council’s Two-Year
Strategic Plan objectives. The City Council was supportive of the Staff recommendation to create
a hybrid land use designation to provide flexibility desired by the existing landowners while also
supporting the City’s goal of these properties developing with economic and job-rich uses such as
Life Science, Advanced Manufacturing, Clean/Green Technology, Automation and Robotics,
Technology Startups, and Incubators; and
WHEREAS, on March 16, 2021, the City Council approved the initiation of a General Plan
Amendment Study to evaluate changing the land use designation from General Commercial to
General Commercial/Campus Office for 72.1 acres of the GH PacVest property and the 1.25-acre
Alameda property (“the Project”); and
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the CEQA
Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be
reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, prior CEQA analysis for the Project area includes: 1) the Eastern Dublin
General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan EIR (1993); 2) the East Dublin Properties Stage 1
Development Plan and Annexation Supplemental EIR (2002); and 3) the Fallon Village
Supplemental EIR (2005). Collectively, these three environmental review documents are referred
to as the “EDSP EIRs;” and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 and 15162,
the City prepared an Addendum for the Project (the “Addendum”) shown as Exhibit A, attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the Addendum reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis of the
potential environmental impacts of the Project, and concludes that the Project would not result in
any new significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of any significant impacts
identified in the EDSP EIRs and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met; and
WHEREAS, consistent with Section 65352.3 of the California Government Code, the City
Attachment 3
275
Page 2 of 2
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; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted, and incorporated herein by reference, described
and analyzed the Project for the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, on December 14, 2021, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed
public hearing on the Project, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard;
and
WHEREAS, representatives of the property owner, GH PacVest, requested postponement
of the General Plan and Specific Plan Amendment to provide time to incorporate land use changes
necessary for a future development on their property and for the City to prepare further CEQA
analysis to support those changes; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Addendum, the EDSP EIRs, all
above-referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony to evaluate the Project, and the
Planning Commission did further hear and consider all said reports, recommendations, and
testimony hereinabove as set forth before taking any action; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission discussed the necessity of bringing forth the
General Plan and Specific Plan Amendment at this time given GH PacVest’s testimony.
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 postpone approving the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment to
change the land use designation from General Commercial to General Commercial/Campus
Office for 72.1 acres of the GH PacVest property and the 1.25-acre Alameda property to provide
time to incorporate land use changes necessary for a future development on their property and
for the City to prepare further CEQA analysis to support those changes.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of December 2021, by the following
vote:
AYES: Dawn Benson, Catheryn Grier, Janine Thalblum, Renata Tyler, Stephen Wright
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
______________________________
Assistant Community Development Director
276
Item 6.1Fallon EastGeneral Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan AmendmentCity CouncilFebruary 15, 2022277
Project Location278
Background•City Council’s Two-Year Strategic Plan –Establishing an Economic Development Zone to prioritize commercial and industrial development east of Fallon Road•City Council Meetings on Sept 15 & Oct. 20•Economic and job-rich developments –Life Science, Advanced Manufacturing, Clean/Green Technology, Automation and Robotics, R&D, Technology Startups and Incubators279
Background Cont. •City Council March 16, 2021 GPA Initiation•City Council May 18, 2021 Fallon Road Economic Development Zone280
Existing v. Proposed Land Use EXISTINGPROPOSED281
Incorporating Sustainability1. Complete Streets + more2. Bicycle and pedestrian connections3. EV charging stations4. Transportation Demand Management measures5. Smart technology and electric infrastructure6. Reuse and recycling7. LEED (building) and Greenroads (streets)
282
Environmental Review•Prior CEQA Analysis– Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan EIR (1993)– East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation Supplemental EIR (2002)– Fallon Village Supplemental EIR (2005)•Addendum– Equal or Less Severe Impacts
283
Planning Commission Review •December 14, 2021–Vote 5-0•Recommended postponement of GPA–Incorporate the request by GH PacVest284
Recommendation Conduct a public hearing, deliberate and take the following action:Adopt the ResolutionApproving an Addendum to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Environmental Impact Reports and Approving of a General Plan Amendment to Change the Land Use Designation from General Commercial to General Commercial/Campus Office for Approximately 73 acres of the GH PacVest and Alameda Properties285
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Page 1 of 5
Agenda Item 6.2
DATE:February 15, 2022
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design Standards, Zoning OrdinanceAmendments, and Master Fee Schedule Amendments (PLPA-2022-00002)Prepared by:Michael P.Cass,Principal Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:The City Council will consider approval of the Citywide Multi-Family (MF) Objective Design Standards (ODS)and companion amendments to Title 8 (Zoning) of the Dublin Municipal Code.State law requires local jurisdictions to provide a streamlined ministerial approval process for eligible multi-family residential developments, subject to objective zoning and design review standards.The proposed MF ODS and Zoning Ordinance Amendments would ensure that objective zoning and design review standards are in place.The City Council will also consider adopting amendments to the Master Fee Schedule to establish a fee for Zoning Clearances for Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Conduct a public hearing, deliberate, waive the reading and INTRODUCE the Ordinance Approving the Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design Standards and Amendments to Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.36 (Development Regulations), Chapter 8.104 (Site Development Review),and Chapter 8.116 (Zoning Clearance), and adopt the Resolution Amending the Master Fee Schedule by Establishing an Application Fee, Based on Time and Materials, for Zoning Clearances for Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval Effective Citywide.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:The costs associated with preparing the Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design Standards include staff and consultant time. The consultant costs are offset by a Senate Bill 2 grant. Additionally, the City Council will consider adopting changes to the Master Fee Schedule pertaining to ZoningClearance for housing projects eligible for streamlined approval. The new application fee is proposed to be based on time and materials to ensure the City recovers the actual costs associated with processing these applications.
286
Page 2 of 5
DESCRIPTION:BackgroundSenate Bill 35Senate Bill 35 (SB 35) provides for a streamlined ministerial approval process for multi-family residential developments in cities and counties that have made insufficient progress towardmeeting their assigned Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), subject to meeting certain eligibility criteria and objective zoning and design review standards. Eligible developments must include a specified level of affordability, be on an infill site, comply with existing general plan or zoning provisions, and comply with other requirements such as location and demolition restrictions.The legislation defines “objective standards” as standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion. For example, an objective standard for a building setback would provide a specific measurable distance that is required, whereas a subjective or discretionary guidelinemight use a term such as a “generous” setback is required.The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is responsible for annually determining which cities and counties are subject to SB 35 and for publishing Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process Guidelines. The SB 35 streamlined ministerial process is in effect until January 1, 2026. It is unknown if the State legislature will extend or replace SB 35. In accordance with HCD’s most recent determination (last updated July 8, 2021), Dublin has made insufficient progress toward meeting the City’s lower-income RHNA (very-low- and low-income) and is, therefore, subject to the streamlined ministerial approval process for proposed developments with at least 50% affordability.Proposed ProjectIn response to the legislation, Staff prepared Multi-Family Objective Design Standards (MF ODS)with assistance from RRM Design Group (the consultant), and prepared companion amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code. Without the MF ODS, the City would have little control over the design of future eligible housing projects where the developer has requested streamlined approval. The proposed project also includes amending the Master Fee Schedule to establish anapplication fee, based on time and materials, for a Zoning Clearance for Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval.To prepare the Citywide MF ODS, Staff and the consultant completed the following steps:
Review Existing Policy Documents: Reviewed the City’s existing policy documents, including the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, Downtown Dublin Specific Plan, Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, Scarlett Court Design Guidelines, SDR Guidelines, Streetscape Master Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance.
Driving Tour: Conducted a driving tour of multi-family residential developments in Dublin to identify successful and unsuccessful elements of projects.
287
Page 3 of 5
Other Jurisdiction Analysis:Reviewed example MF ODS for other jurisdictions and identified topics and sample standards to be covered in the City’s MF ODS.
Translated Subjective Language to Objective Design Standards:Translated existing subjective design guidelines into objective design standards. The new standards were drafted to reinforce the intent of the existing language.
Review of Draft.Draft MF ODS were reviewed by the Building and Safety Division, and the Public Works Department. AnalysisCitywide Multi-family Objective Design StandardsThe purpose of the MF ODS is to ensure that new multi-family development in Dublin provides high quality architecture, appropriately connects to surroundings, includes well designed amenities and open spaces, promotes sustainability, and contributes to walkable and safe environments. The MF ODS are intended to guide property owners, applicants/developers, and design professionals, and provide clear design direction that enhances an area’s unique character and ensures a high-quality living environment that will be desirable and hold its value over time, while encouraging creative design that enriches the community of Dublin.The MF ODS will be incorporated into the Zoning Ordinance and supplement existing development standards described in the DMC and Planned Development zoning districts, as well as in adopted specific plans. If there is any conflict between these standards and those in another adopted document, the more restrictive standard shall apply. The Citywide MF ODS include four chapters: 1) Introduction; 2) Site Planning; 3) Building Design; and 4) Glossary of Terms. The Site Planning objective design standards cover building placement,vehicular surface parking and access, bicycle parking, pedestrian circulation and access, private outdoor space, and common usable outdoor space. The Building Design objective design standards cover building form and massing, façade articulation, roof forms, building and unit entries,fenestration, parking structures, building materials, colors, and lighting, and ancillary structures, equipment, and utilities.Zoning Ordinance AmendmentsIn addition to the MF ODS, Staff prepared companion amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code(DMC) including, Section 8.36.020 (Agricultural and Residential Development Regulations), Section 8.104.020 (Exemptions from SDR), Section 8.116.020 (Applications Requiring a Zoning Clearance), Section 8.116.030 (Application), Section 8.116.040 (Approval), and Section 8.116.050 (Expiration of Zoning Clearance). The proposed amendments include the following:
Specify that all new multi-family residential development shall comply with the Citywide MF ODS;
Specify that housing projects eligible for streamlined approval are exempt from an SDR Permit in accordance with State law provided that a Zoning Clearance is approved;
Establish a required finding that a proposal for a new multi-family residential development complies with the Citywide MF ODS; alternatively, if the proposal deviates from one or more objective design standards, then the proposal meets the purpose and intent of the
288
Page 4 of 5
applicable standard(s); and
Add housing projects eligible for streamline approval to the Zoning Clearance Chapter of the Zoning Ordinance.ApplicabilityThe Citywide MF ODS would apply to all new multi-family developments within Dublin. Projects that qualify for the SB 35 streamlined ministerial approval process would be required to comply with all of the ODS. All other projects would be subject to the MF ODS but through the City’s discretionary SDR Permit process could be allowed to deviate from the MF ODS when the purpose and intent of the standard is met through alternate means. Allowing flexibility through a discretionary SDR Permit shall not be construed as applying the lowest common denominator that dilutes the quality and character of a project.The Zoning Ordinance will continue to regulate development standards (such as building height, setbacks, and lot coverage), while the new objective design standards will regulate design criteria (such as site layout, building orientation, pedestrian connections, and building design) to ensure that new multi-family housing maintains a design quality reflective of the community.Fee AmendmentsThe California Constitution authorizes local governments to recover the reasonable costs of providing services. Housing projects eligible for a streamlined approval process would be subject to a Zoning Clearance to review the proposal for consistency with the Citywide MF ODS and all other applicable objective standards within the Zoning Ordinance. The actual cost for Planning Staff to review a “Zoning Clearance for Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval” application would vary significantly depending on the scope of work. Therefore, Staff recommends establishing an application fee based on actual time and materials to recover the City’s full costs. Staff prepared a draft Ordinance approving the Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design Standards and approving amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code (Attachments 1 and 2). Refer to Attachment 3 for a redlined version of proposed zoning text changes where underlined text is proposed to be added. In addition, a draft Resolution amending the Master Fee Schedule to establish an application fee for a Zoning Clearance for Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval is included as Attachment 4.Consistency with the General Plan, Specific Plans, and Zoning OrdinanceThe proposed Citywide MF ODS and Zoning Ordinance Amendments are consistent with the Dublin General Plan and all applicable specific plans in that the amendments are necessary to comply with State law and are consistent with applicable land use regulations and development policies. Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance are proposed to ensure consistency with State law and implementation of the MF ODS.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with State Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared. The proposed Citywide
289
Page 5 of 5
Multi-Family Objective Design Standards and Zoning Ordinance Amendments are exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that they would not have a significant effect on the environment and, thus, are not subject to CEQA review.
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:On June 8, 2021, the Planning Commission received a presentation and provided feedback on the City’s MF ODS. On January 25, 2022, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted Resolution No. 22-01 (Attachment 5), recommending City Council approval of the Citywide MF ODS and related Zoning Ordinance Amendments.
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:None.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:In accordance with State law, a public notice was published in the East Bay Times on February 5, 2022, and February 10, 2022, and posted at several locations throughout the City. Additionally, the City Council Agenda was posted.
ATTACHMENTS:1) Ordinance Approving the Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design Standards and Related Zoning Ordinance Amendments2) Exhibit A to Attachment 1 – Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design Standards 3) Redlines of Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments4) Resolution Amending the Master Fee Schedule by Establishing One New Application Fee, Based on Time and Materials, for Zoning Clearance for Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval5) Planning Commission Resolution No. 22-01 (without exhibits)
290
Attachment 1
Ord. No. X-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 1 of 4
ORDINANCE NO. X-22
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING THE CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
AND AMENDMENTS TO DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 8.36
(DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS), CHAPTER 8.104 (SITE DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW) AND CHAPTER 8.116 (ZONING CLEARANCE)
EFFECTIVE CITY-WIDE
PLPA-2022-00002
WHEREAS,the City occasionally initiates amendments to the Zoning Ordinance
to clarify, add, or amend certain provisions to ensure that the Zoning Ordinance remains
current with federal and state law, internally consistent, simple to understand and
implement, and relevant to changes occurring in the community; and
WHEREAS,Senate Bill 35 (SB 35) was part of a legislative package aimed at
addressing the State’s housing shortage and high housing costs; and
WHEREAS,SB 35 provides a streamlined ministerial approval process for multi-
family residential developments in cities and counties that have made insufficient
progress towards meeting their assigned Regional Housing Needs Allocation, subject to
meeting certain eligibility criteria and objective zoning and design review standards; and
WHEREAS,in response, the City of Dublin prepared the proposed Citywide Multi-
Family Objective Design Standards, attached as Exhibit A, and companion Zoning
Ordinance Amendments to meet the requirements of SB 35; and
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on
January 25, 2022, during which all interested persons were heard, and adopted
Resolution No. 22-01 recommending City Council adoption of the proposed Citywide
Multi-Family Objective Design Standards and related Zoning Ordinance Amendments;
and
WHEREAS,a Staff Report was submitted to the Dublin City Council
recommending approval of the proposed Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design
Standards and related Zoning Ordinance Amendments; and
WHEREAS,the City Council held a public hearing on the proposed Citywide Multi-
Family Objective Design Standards and related Zoning Ordinance Amendments on
February 15, 2022, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard;
and
WHEREAS,proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by
law; and
291
Ord. No. X-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 2 of 4
WHEREAS,the City Council did hear and consider all said reports,
recommendations and testimony herein above set forth and used its independent
judgment to evaluate the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows:
Section 1.Pursuant to Section 8.120.050.B of the Dublin Municipal Code, the
City Council hereby finds that the proposed Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design
Standards and related Zoning Ordinance Amendments are consistent with the General
Plan and all applicable Specific Plans in that the amendments are necessary to comply
with State law and are consistent with applicable land use regulations and development
policies. Specifically, General Plan Policy A.3 is to “maintain streamlined procedures for
processing new residential development applications.”
Section 2.The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with
State Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures, require that
certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental
documents be prepared. The City Council hereby finds the proposed Citywide Multi-
Family Objective Design Standards and related Zoning Ordinance Amendments to Title
8 of the Dublin Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) are exempt from the requirements of
CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with
certainty that the amendments will not have a significant effect on the environment and,
thus, are not subject to CEQA review.
Section 3.Thirty days following the adoption of the Ordinance, the Dublin
Municipal Code is amended as follows:
Section 8.36.020 (Agricultural and Residential Development Regulations) of Title
8 of the Dublin Municipal Code is amended to add the following subsection:
B. All new multi-family residential development shall comply with the Citywide Multi-
Family Objective Design Standards, which are hereby adopted and incorporated by
reference herein. Copies of the adopted standards are on file with the Planning Division,
100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California, for use and examination by the public. Said standards
are adopted by reference and incorporated as fully as if set out at length herein, and as
may be amended from time to time pursuant to Government Code Section 65850 et seq.
Section 8.104.020 (Exemptions from Site Development Review) of Title 8 of the
Dublin Municipal Code is amended to add the following subsection:
J. Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval. Housing projects that are
eligible for a streamlined approval process pursuant to Government Code Section
65913.4, provided the Community Development Director or his/her designee approves a
Zoning Clearance in accordance with Chapter 8.116.
Subsection B of Section 8.104.090 (Required Findings) of Title 8 of the Dublin
Municipal Code is amended as follows:
292
Ord. No. X-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 3 of 4
B. The proposal is consistent with the provisions of Title 8, Zoning Ordinance.For new
multi-family residential development only, the proposal is either consistent with all of the
Citywide Multi-family Objective Design Standards adopted pursuant to Section
8.36.020(B); alternatively, if the proposal deviates from one or more objective design
standards, then the proposal is consistent with the purpose and intent of the applicable
standard.
Section 8.116.020 (Applications Requiring a Zoning Clearance) of Title 8 of the
Dublin Municipal Code is amended to add the follow subsection:
J. Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval. Housing projects that meet
all eligibility criteria as set forth in Government Code Section 65913.4.
Section 8.116.030 (Application) of Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code is amended
to add the follow subsection:
J. Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval.If the Zoning Clearance is
for a housing project that is eligible for streamlined approval pursuant to Government
Code Section 65913.4, the Applicant shall submit a “Zoning Clearance for Housing
Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval” application form provided by the Community
Development Department with information requested on the form.
Section 8.116.040 (Approval) of Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code is amended
to add the following subsection:
J. Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval.Housing projects that are
eligible for a streamlined approval process pursuant to Government Code Section
65913.4 shall be reviewed for consistency with the Citywide Multi-Family Objective
Design Standards contained in Section 8.36.020(B) and all other applicable objective
standards within Title 8, Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Clearance approval for a housing
project eligible for streamlined approval shall be a completed “Zoning Clearance for
Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval” application form and any pertinent
attachments as required on the form with the date and signature of the Community
Development Director or his/her designee.
Section 8.116.050 (Expiration of Zoning Clearance) of Title 8 of the Dublin
Municipal Code is amended to add the following subsection:
J. Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval.A Zoning Clearance issued
in conjunction with a housing project eligible for streamlined approval shall expire in
accordance with Government Code Section 65913.4(f).
Section 4.Effective Date.This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced
thirty (30) days following its final adoption.
293
Ord. No. X-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 4 of 4
Section 5.Posting.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 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this __ day of _______ 2022, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
City Clerk
294
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
PUBLIC REVIEW
JANUARY 2022
Attachment 2
Exhibit A to Attachment 1
295
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
296
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
PREPARED FOR
City of Dublin
PREPARED BY
RRM Design Group
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
CITY COUNCIL
Melissa Hernandez - Mayor
Jean Josey - Vice Mayor
Sherry Hu
Shawn Kumagai
Michael McCorriston
PLANNING COMMISSION
Dawn Benson
Catheryn Grier
Renata Tyler
Janine Thalblum
Stephen Wright
Kashef Qaadri - Alternate
CITY STAFF
Jeff Baker - Community Development Director
Kristie Wheeler - Assistant Community Development Director
Michael P. Cass – Principal Planner
297
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
298
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose 1-1
1.2 Organization and Applicability 1-1
CHAPTER 2 – SITE PLANNING
OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
2.1 Building Placement 2-1
2.2 Vehicular Surface Parking and Access 2-3
2.3 Bicycle Parking 2-5
2.4 Pedestrian Circulation and Access 2-6
2.5 Private Outdoor Space 2-7
2.6 Common Usable Outdoor Space 2-7
CHAPTER 3 – BUILDING DESIGN
OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
3.1 Building Form and Massing 3-1
3.2 Façade Articulation 3-3
3.3 Roof Forms 3-4
3.4 Building and Unit Entries 3-5
3.5 Fenestration 3-7
3.6 Parking Structures 3-8
3.7 Building Materials, Colors, and Lighting 3-10
3.8 Ancillary Structures, Equipment, and Utilities 3-11
APPENDIX A
Glossary of Terms A-1
299
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
300
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
301
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
302
1
1-1
INTRODUCTION
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
CHAPTER 1 -
INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of the Multi-family Objective Design Standards is to
ensure that new multi-family development in Dublin provides high
quality architecture, appropriately connects to its surroundings, includes
well designed amenities and open spaces, promotes sustainability,
and contributes to walkable and safe environments. The Multi-family
Objective Design Standards are intended to guide property owners,
applicants/developers and design professionals and provide clear design
direction that enhances an area’s unique character and ensures a high-
quality living environment that will be desirable and hold its value over
time, while encouraging creative design that enriches the community of
Dublin.
1.2 ORGANIZATION AND
APPLICABILITY
The following Multi-family Objective Design Standards are organized
into two primary sections: Site Planning and Building Design. The Site
Planning Chapter includes objective standards for site layout and
building placement, vehicular access and parking, and outdoor spaces and
amenities. The Building Design Chapter includes objective standards for
building form and massing, façade articulation, unit entries, fenestration,
colors and materials, parking structure design, and accessory structures
and utilities.
The Multi-family Objective Design Standards supplement existing
development standards described in Title 8 (Zoning) of the Dublin
Municipal Code and Planned Development zoning districts, as well as
in adopted specific plans, such as the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan,
Dublin Crossing Specific Plan, Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan,
and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. If there is any conflict between these
standards and those in another adopted document, the more restrictive
standard shall apply.
303
1 INTRODUCTION
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS1-2 CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
All new multi-family residential development shall comply with the Multi-
Family Objective Design Standards contained herein. To be eligible for a
streamlined approval process, the development must meet the specific
eligibility criteria as set forth in Government Code Section 65913.4.
Projects that are eligible for streamlined approval shall be consistent
with all Multi-Family Objective Design Standards contained herein. The
discretionary Site Development Review (SDR) Permit process described
in Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.104 shall be used for all
developments that are not eligible for streamlined approval. Applicants
requesting any deviation from these Multi-Family Objective Design
Standards shall be reviewed under the discretionary SDR Permit process.
Allowing flexibility through a discretionary SDR Permit shall not be
construed as allowing dilution of the quality and character of a project.
For a glossary of relevant terms used throughout this document, please
refer to Appendix A.
304
CHAPTER 2
SITE PLANNING
OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
305
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
306
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
2
2-1
SITE PLANNING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
CHAPTER 2 - SITE PLANNING
OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
Site planning refers to the arrangement of buildings and parking areas, the size and
location of pedestrian spaces and parking areas, and how these features relate to
one another. Topics in this Chapter include building placement, vehicular surface
parking and access, bicycle parking, pedestrian circulation and access, and private and
common usable outdoor space.
2.1 BUILDING PLACEMENT
A. Buildings located adjacent to the primary street shall have unit front
entries facing the street.
B. For buildings not located along the primary street, unit front entries
shall be oriented to face internal common open space areas such as
landscaped courtyards, plazas, or paseos.
C. Each dwelling unit fronting a primary or side street shall include at least
one street-facing porch, balcony, and/or patio.
2.1.A Buildings located adjacent to the primary street shall have unit front
entries facing the street
2.1.B Buildings not located along the primary street shall have unit front
entries oriented to face internal common open space areas
307
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
2 SITE PLANNING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
2-2
D. A minimum five-foot wide landscape buffer shall be located adjacent to
all ground level private outdoor spaces to provide additional privacy
and security for the residents. The buffer shall be planted with dense
evergreen shrubs and vines which grow to or are maintained at a three-
foot minimum height. Stoops are permitted to encroach into the five-
foot wide landscape buffer.
E. Ground floor units shall be located, oriented, and/or screened to prevent
visual intrusion of vehicle lights into habitable ground floor spaces.
F. Projects with six or more dwelling units shall cluster mailboxes in a
common centralized location that is internal to the site. Clustered
mailboxes shall utilize the same colors and/or materials to the main
buildings on the site. 2.1.D A minimum five-foot wide landscape buffer shall be located adjacent
to all ground level private outdoor spaces to provide additional privacy and
security
308
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
2
2-3
SITE PLANNING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
Greater than
100 feet
100 feet
or less
Parking B.II:
For projects with less than 100 linear feet of primary street frontage, a maximum of one
vehicle access point from the primary street is permitted. For projects with 100 linear
feet or more of primary street frontage, a maximum of two vehicle access points from
the primary street is permitted.
2.2.B Project entries and pedestrian crossings shall feature enhanced paving
2.2.C Interior lots with a street frontage width less than 100 feet,
one access point is permitted. Interior lots with a street fronting width
greater than 100 feet may have up to two access points.
2.2 VEHICULAR SURFACE
PARKING AND ACCESS
A. When alley or side street access is available, primary access to parking
areas shall be taken from this location, rather than the primary street.
B. Enhanced paving treatment using patterned and/or colored pavers, brick,
or decorative colored and scored concrete shall be used as follows:
i. Entry Drives - Minimum 12 feet deep across the width of each entry
drive.
ii. Pedestrian Crossings - Minimum one foot wider than connecting
walkways across the length of the intersecting primary and side
streets.
C. For interior lots with less than 100 linear feet of street frontage, a
maximum of one vehicle access point from the street is permitted. For
interior lots with 100 linear feet or more of street frontage, a maximum
of two vehicle access points from the street is permitted. For corner
lots, one vehicular access point is permitted per street frontage, with
an overall maximum of two vehicular access points permitted. Vehicle
access points shall be located near the property line furthest from the
intersection.
D. For developments with controlled entrances, including vehicular access
gates to parking areas, access shall be located a minimum of 20 feet
from the back of sidewalk along Collector, Local Residential, or Private
streets, and 40 feet from the back of sidewalk along Arterial roadways to
accommodate vehicle(s) entering the site without queuing into the street.
309
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
2 SITE PLANNING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
2-4
E. Surface parking areas for developments shall be screened from the street.
Screening may be accomplished through building placement, landscape
features, and/or low walls. Low walls for screening shall be set back at
least three feet from the back of public sidewalks with evergreen shrubs
and/or vines provided between the sidewalk and wall.
F. Developments with more than 20 units shall provide at least one ride
share pick-up and drop-off and/or delivery location within 100 feet of an
entrance to the primary building.
i. Ride share pick-up and drop-off and/or delivery locations shall be
clearly visible from the roadway and/or primary driveway entrances
and provide a passenger loading space or temporary parking space to
avoid passenger loading within vehicular circulation routes.
ii. Ride share pick-up and drop-off and/or delivery locations shall provide
waiting area with a minimum of one bench and one waste/recycling
receptacle. Benches shall be covered or located under trees. The
waiting area may be located within a building lobby, clubhouse, or
common building if the pick-up location is visible from this location.
2.2.E Surface parking areas for developments shall be screened
from the street
310
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
2
2-5
SITE PLANNING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
2.3.A Short-term bicycle racks shall be located in a visible location within
200 feet of the building entrance
2.3.C Long-term bicycle parking shall be located in a secure area within a
parking structure or building, or within a lockable storage enclosure
2.3 BICYCLE PARKING
A. Short-term bicycle parking shall be provided in the form of permanent,
readily visible bicycle racks. Bicycle racks must allow both wheels to be
locked to the rack. Racks shall be located within 200 feet of the primary
building entrance. Bicycle racks and associated bicycle maneuvering shall
not impede upon the public sidewalk path of travel and shall not be
placed within the public right-of-way.
B. At least one long-term bicycle storage space is required for each unit and
may be located within a designated space within the unit, within individual
lockable containers outside of the unit, or within a secure, long-term
bicycle parking area.
C. Secure, long-term bicycle parking areas shall be enclosed and designed
within a parking structure or building, or within a lockable storage
enclosure.
i. Lockable storage enclosures shall not be visible from the right-of-way.
ii. Enclosures must be designed with materials and colors used in the
primary building or shall be screened with dense evergreen shrubs
and trees.
311
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
2 SITE PLANNING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
2-6
2.4.A On-site pedestrian circulation and access shall be provided to
connect the site
2.4.B Differing/contrasting paving materials shall be used to distinguish
primary entries to buildings
2.4 PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION AND ACCESS
A. Paved on-site pedestrian circulation and access shall be provided
according to the following standards:
i. Connecting residential units to other areas of the site, such as parking
areas, common outdoor areas, waste and recycling enclosures, pet
waste stations, and pedestrian amenities.
ii. Connecting public sidewalks to building entries and parking areas.
iii. Connecting building entrances to all bus/transit stops directly adjacent
to the project.
B. Primary entries to buildings shall provide decorative paving that contrasts
in color and texture from the adjacent walkway paving to accentuate the
entrances.
C. Pedestrian walkways on private property shall be designed with the
following conditions:
i. Constructed of firm and slip-resistant materials such as concrete,
stamped concrete, or concrete pavers.
ii. Designed with a minimum width of four feet.
iii. Flanked on both sides of the walkways with landscaping, including a
mix of turf or low groundcovers and low shrubs that do not exceed
four feet in height.
iv. Evergreen canopy trees spaced to shade at least 50 percent of the
overall walkway length at maturity.
v. Pedestrian scale lighting fixtures located at least five feet away from
adjacent residential dwellings. Design of pedestrian-scale lighting
fixtures shall be consistent with building lighting fixtures.
312
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
CITY OF DUBLIN
2
2-7
SITE PLANNING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
2.5.A Private outdoor space shall be provided for each unit
2.5.B Private outdoor space shall be provided at a minimum of 60 square
feet per unit with a minimum dimension of six feet in any direction
2.5 PRIVATE OUTDOOR SPACE
A. The equivalent of 10 percent or more of the floor area of each unit shall
be provided as private outdoor space. For units on upper floors, this
outdoor space may be provided by decks and balconies. This requirement
may be satisfied by more than one private outdoor space area.
B. Private outdoor space, including balconies provided to meet private
outdoor space requirements shall be provided at a minimum of 60 square
feet per unit with a minimum dimension of six feet in any direction.
2.6 COMMON USABLE OUTDOOR SPACE
A. Common usable outdoor space shall be provided at minimum 30 percent
of the net site area. For example, a one-acre net site would be required
to provide 13,068 square feet of common usable outdoor space in one or
multiple locations within a project.
B. A minimum of one pet waste bag and disposal station shall be provided
common usable outdoor space where pets congregate with a minimum of
one pet waste bag and disposal station per development.
C. Common usable outdoor space shall be arranged to afford visibility by
on-site users and passers-by. Barriers shall be designed with transparency
to afford opportunities for surveillance through the barrier.
6 feetMin
6 feetMin
Private outdoor space (60 square feet minimum)
313
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
2 SITE PLANNING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
2-8
2.6.D.iv Outdoor Amenity Table
Number of Units Required Number of
Amenities
1 to 25 1
26 to 50 2
51 to 75 3
76 to 100 4
101 to 150 5
151 to 200 6
201 to 300 7
301 to 400 8
401 to 500 9
501 to 1000 2 percent of total
1001 and over 20, plus 1 for each 100, or
fraction thereof, over 100
Total Number of Outdoor Amenities D. Outdoor Amenity Requirements.
i. Outdoor amenities shall be provided as a component of required
Common Usable Outdoor Space.
ii. Each common usable outdoor space shall be designed with a minimum
of 500 square feet of dedicated and improved open space, with a
minimum dimension of 10 feet in any direction.
iii. Each common usable outdoor amenity space shall include a minimum
of one secure in-place waste/recycling receptacle and one covered
seating area, unless otherwise specified in this section.
iv. The number of amenities within common usable outdoor space shall
be based on the number of units within the multi-family project as
shown in the Outdoor Amenity Table. Where more than one amenity
is required, a combination of the outdoor amenities identified in
subsection v. shall be provided.
v. Amenity requirements shall be satisfied with one or more of the
following:
a. Children’s play area, with at least four pieces of play equipment,
designed for children of all abilities and ages five years and younger.
b. A landscaped and improved gathering space,
1. Space shall contain the following:
a. At least four picnic tables or equivalent lounging furniture.
b. A minimum of five shade trees.
c. At least two barbecue fixtures and/or two fire pits,
d. Minimum two secure in-place waste/recycling receptacles,
e. Shade coverage for a minimum of 25% of the gathering
space area (shade sail, umbrella, trellis, gazebo, or additional
evergreen shade trees beyond the minimum requirement),
2. Gathering areas may be provided either at ground level,
or on roof decks/ terraces but shall not be located on
roofs directly adjacent to single-family zoning districts. 2.6.D.v Example of outdoor lounging furniture
314
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
2
2-9
SITE PLANNING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
2.6.D.v.b Gathering areas shall consist of at least four picnic tables, or
equivalent lounging furniture, with at least 25% of the area covered
3. Barbecue fixtures and/or fire pits shall be located at least 20
feet away from adjacent existing and proposed residential units.
c An illuminated, regulation size tennis or multipurpose
court and incorporating shielded cut-off light fixtures.
d. A dedicated and improved illuminated space containing at least
one regulation size Bocce, Petanque, or other similar type court.
The space shall contain a minimum of three benches or equivalent
lounging furniture (at least one covered by an overhead shade
canopy or evergreen tree), at least two secure in-place waste/
recycling receptacles, and a minimum of three shade trees.
e. An enclosed, off-leash dog run/relief/wash area including signage and
pet waste bag and disposal stations adjacent to all entrances/exits.
i. The dog area shall contain at least one three-dimensional dog-
oriented improvement (e.g. rock, jumps, fire hydrant).
ii. One potable water connection with dog bowl refilling and dog
wash capabilities.
iii. A minimum of three benches or equivalent lounging furniture
(at least one covered by an overhead shade canopy or evergreen
tree), at least two secure in-place waste/recycling receptacles, and
a minimum of three shade trees.
f. Enclosed pool area with a minimum of an 800-square-foot
swimming pool with at least one changing area and/or restroom.
The pool area shall include at least three lounge chairs, two
side tables, and one outdoor umbrella. Pool area shall include
perimeter landscaping consisting of evergreen species and at
least three shade trees that do not drop leaves, nuts, or fruits.
2.6.D.v.f &g Amenity areas could include a swimming pool and/or spas
315
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
2 SITE PLANNING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
2-10
g. Enclosed spa area with a minimum of two spas, one
changing area or restroom, and a landscaped area
containing evergreen species and a minimum of two
shade trees, at least two chairs, and one side table.
h. Minimum ¼ mile paved and accessible walking path/trail that is
at least five-feet wide, with at least one pedestrian scale light
and bench or equivalent lounging furniture provided for every
250 feet of path/trail. Seating areas along the path/trail shall
be located adjacent to or in close proximity to the trail, and
shall be covered or located under evergreen canopy trees.
i. Community garden with at least one potting station containing
a minimum two-foot by four-foot table, one compost bin, one
shed sized to accommodate gardening tools and designed to
match the primary building colors, materials, and architectural
style. The community garden shall have at least one potable water
connection and have irrigation provided to all garden beds.
j. Other outdoor amenities mutually agreed upon
between the developer and the City of Dublin.
2.6.D.v.h Paved and accessible walking path/trail shall be at least five-feet
wide with pedestrian scale lighting and seating areas
2.6.D.v.i Community garden shall include at least one potting station,
compost bin, and tool shed
316
CHAPTER 3
BUILDING DESIGN
OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
317
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
318
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
3BUILDING DESIGN OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
3-1PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
CITY OF DUBLIN
3
3-1
CHAPTER 3 - BUILDING DESIGN
OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
Building forms, façades, and detailing influence cohesiveness, comfort, and
aesthetic pride. Topics in this Chapter include building massing and form, façade
articulation, roof forms, building and unit entries, fenestration, parking structure
design, building materials and lighting, and accessory structures and utilities.
3.1 BUILDING FORM AND MASSING
Building massing and design delineate individual units or clusters of units,
articulation, distinction, and identity through varied heights, setbacks, projections,
and recesses. Materials and colors emphasize changes in building elements and
massing.
A. Building façades visible from the primary or side street shall not
extend more than 40 feet in length without a five-foot variation in
depth in the wall plane. Building entrances, front porches, upper-story
setbacks, and projections such as stoops, bays, overhangs, and trellises
count towards this requirement.
B. Buildings greater than two stories shall be designed to differentiate
a defined base, a middle or body, and a top, cornice, or parapet cap.
Buildings less than two stories shall include a defined base and top.
40 feetMax40 feetMax40 feetMax 40 feetMax
40 feetMax
3.1.A Building façades visible from a primary or side street shall not
extend more than 40 feet without a five-foot variation in depth in
the wall plane
3.1 Building design shall include
varied heights, setbacks, and
wall plane variation
Building design lacking materials
and colors is not permitted
319
BUILDING DESIGN OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
3
3-2
C. A building located adjacent to a primary street frontage shall recess
portions of any wall plane above two stories. A minimum of 20 percent
of the upper floor facades (measured by the length of first floor wall
plane adjacent to the primary street) shall be recessed. The average
stepback shall be 10 feet minimum for the upper floors as measured from
the first-floor building wall plane. (See Figure 3.1.C)
D. If the elevation facing a primary street is longer than 50 feet, no more
than 50 percent of a building façade shall be on a single plane. An average
of a five-foot offset, with a minimum of one foot offset, is required for the
remaining 50 percent of the building façade.
E. Elevations not facing a primary street shall have no more than 75 percent
of a building façade on a single plane. An average of a five-foot offset, with
a minimum of one foot offset, is required for the remaining 25 percent of
the building façade.
3.1.D Building elevations longer than 50 feet along a primary street shall
have no more than 50 percent of a building façade on a single plane
3.1.C Upper floor areas stepped back from the primary street
320
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
3BUILDING DESIGN OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
3-3
3.2 FAÇADE ARTICULATION
A. Buildings shall be designed with the same suite of building details,
articulation, and materials on all sides.
B. Walls that are publicly visible from a primary or side street shall not
run in a continuous horizontal plane for more than 40 feet without
incorporating articulation features such as glazing, overhangs, cornices,
canopies, columns, pilasters, trellises, arches, or clearly defined
projecting or recessed architectural element(s).
C. Building elements that do not provide authentic structural support but
are provided to add aesthetic appeal, such as pilasters, columns, and
unsupported trellises shall be designed to appear functional.
i. Cantilevered balconies are only allowed on buildings with
contemporary architectural styles.
ii. All other architectural styles shall incorporate a column, post,
corbel, brace, or decorative support cable to ensure the building
element appears structurally supported and not tacked on or
unsupported.
D. Garage doors shall be recessed into the garage wall, with a minimum
of four inches, provided between the face of the garage door and the
adjacent primary wall plane, to accentuate shadow patterns and relief.
E. Where a balcony or ground floor patio is located adjacent to a window
of an adjoining dwelling unit, the balcony railings or patio wall and/or
fencing shall be constructed with limited openings and utilize materials
which provide a minimum of 85 percent screening of balcony or
ground floor patio areas (measured from the finished floor of private
outdoor spaces to top of the railing, fencing, and/or wall).
3.2.D Garage doors shall be recessed into the wall plane
3.2.B Building walls that are visible from a primary or side street
shall not run in a continuous horizontal plane for more than 40 feet
without incorporating articulation techniques
321
BUILDING DESIGN OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
3
3-4
3.3 ROOF FORMS
A. Roof lines shall not extend more than 40 feet in length without a change
in form or ridgeline as described below:
i. Vary roof forms, such as hip, gable, shed, flat, and mansard.
ii. Incorporate architectural elements, such as parapets, varying cornices,
and reveals.
iii. Vary roof height at least two feet from adjacent roofs, as measured
from the highest point of the roof lines.
B. Parapets shall be provided around the perimeter of a flat roof and shall
be high enough to screen all rooftop mechanical equipment from being
visible from a public area or along the public right-of-way. Parapets shall
be at least six inches above the tallest rooftop equipment.
C. Interior side of parapet wall shall not be visible from the public right-of-
way.
D. Parapet shall be capped with precast treatments, continuous banding, or
projecting cornices, dentils, or similar edge treatment consistent with the
identified traditional or universally recognized architectural style.
3.3.A Roof lines shall be vertically articulated with a change in form or
ridgeline height
3.3.D Parapets shall be articulated to feature stylistic architectural details
322
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
3BUILDING DESIGN OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
3-5
3.4 BUILDING AND UNIT ENTRIES
A. Individual building and/or unit entry design shall incorporate
architectural treatments (e.g., feature window details, tower, decorative
veneer or siding, porch/stoop), projecting elements above the entrance,
and/or changes in roof line or wall planes.
B. Primary entrances located on the ground floor shall include one or
more of the following:
i. Stoop:
a. Serving a maximum of two units.
b. Stair width shall be a minimum four feet in width.
Lowest riser shall be set back to ensure railings
do not encroach in the public right-of-way.
c. Entry landing shall be a minimum five feet in depth.
d. Either projected or recessed weather protection
with a minimum depth of 36 inches.
ii. Front Porch:
a. Minimum dimension of four feet of depth.
b. Either projected or recessed weather protection
with a minimum depth of 36 inches.
c. Maximum porch floor height from the
sidewalk grade shall be five feet.
3.4.B.i Stoop Entry
3.4.B.ii Front Porch Entry
323
BUILDING DESIGN OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
3
3-6
iii. Terrace:
a. May serve as entry to multiple units.
b. Maximum terrace floor height from the sidewalk
or walkway grade shall be five feet.
c. Maximum wall/fence/hedge height surrounding
terrace shall be 42 inches above terrace floor.
d. Lowest riser shall be set back to ensure railings
do not encroach in the public right-of-way.
iv. Frontage Court:
a. May serve as entry to multiple units.
b. Minimum width along primary frontage shall be 25 feet.
c. Maximum width along primary frontage shall be 50 percent
of the façade length or 80 feet, whichever is less.
d. Minimum depth of 15 feet and maximum
depth of 50 feet shall be maintained.
3.4.B.iii Terrace Entry
3.4.B.iv Frontage Court Entry
324
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
3BUILDING DESIGN OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
3-7
3.5 FENESTRATION
A. Functional and decorative shutters shall maintain the same
dimensions as the associated glazing. Functional and decorative
shutters shall be half the width of the associated window glazing
(for paired shutters), or matching width for a single shutter.
B. Window materials, color, and style shall be consistent on all
elevations.
C. Window trim, sills, and shutters shall be differentiated with
accent materials or colors that vary from the adjacent building
wall surfaces.
D. One of the following window treatments shall be provided on
all elevations:
i. Windows shall be recessed at least two inches from
surrounding exterior wall to the window glass surface.
ii. Built-up sills and trim, at a minimum ½ inch thick, shall be
used to create surface relief and texture.
3.5.B Window materials, colors, and style shall be consistent on all elevations
and match the architectural style of the building
3.5.A Shutters shall reflect the same dimensions as the associated glazing
325
BUILDING DESIGN OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
3
3-8
3.6 PARKING STRUCTURES
A. Parking structure walls visible from the street shall not extend more than
40 feet in length without a three-foot variation in depth in the wall plane.
B. Exterior parking structure wall surfaces shall mimic the primary
building(s) on the site in regards to materials, colors, and design elements
such as fenestration, railings, and building opening sizes and shapes and
also utilize one or more of the following articulation methods:
i. Applied materials such as brick, stone, and/or siding which extend
at least six inches from the face of the structure to the face of the
applied materials.
1. Painted, smooth concrete, or stucco walls shall
not be included as articulated materials.
ii. Decorative architectural features such as cut metal screens, awnings,
trellises, louvers, and/or decorative security grills.
iii. Parking structures two-stories or less shall apply such articulation to a
minimum of 25 percent of the total wall area.
iv. Parking structures three stories and more shall apply such articulation
to a minimum of 35 percent of the total wall area.
C. Parking structures facing primary streets shall provide a minimum of a
five-foot planting area between the parking structure wall and public
street.
D. Vertical planting shall be located to provide screening to wall surfaces
located between openings, entrances, and architectural accent features.
Planting shall be evergreen screening vegetation that will grow to a
minimum of 75 percent of the height of the parking structure, with
container size selected to achieve this height of at least 50 percent within
at least two (2) years from time of installation.
3.6.B.ii. Parking structure walls shall feature decorative architectural
elements such as screens, awnings, trellises, louvers, and/or grills to enhance
wall articulation and provide screening
3.6.D Vertical planting shall be provided to quickly screen non-descript
exterior parking structure walls.
326
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
3BUILDING DESIGN OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
3-9
E. For semi-subterranean parking structures facing a primary street, the
parking structure walls shall be limited to four feet in height above
the average grade along the primary street, and articulated materials
requirements per sections A, B, and C shall be incorporated.
F. Parking structures located directly adjacent to a public right-of-way
shall provide at least one centrally located exterior pedestrian gathering
space such as a plaza or courtyard between the parking structure and
the primary roadway. Pedestrian gathering space shall include at least
two benches facing the street (covered or shaded by trees), one waste
receptacle, and at least four short-term bike racks.
G. Parking structures facing Arterial roadways shall provide commercial
mixed-uses and/or habitable uses along 75 percent of the street frontage,
where permitted by zoning. Non-parking structure space shall be a
minimum depth of 30 feet.
H. Stormwater source controls shall be integrated into parking garages.
Projects shall plumb interior parking garage floor drains to a stormwater
treatment measure or the sanitary sewer, with approval from Dublin San
Ramon Services District. Open levels of parking garages shall be directed
to a stormwater treatment measure and sized in accordance with the
Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit.
I. Projects shall incorporate green stormwater infrastructure, sized in
accordance with the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, as
part of landscape and drainage plans.
3.6.G Parking structures facing Arterial roadways shall provide commercial
mixed-uses and/or habitable uses along the street frontage
3.6.F. Parking structures located directly adjacent to a public right-of-way
shall provide at least one centrally located pedestrian gathering space
327
BUILDING DESIGN OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
3
3-10
3.7 BUILDING MATERIALS, COLORS, AND
LIGHTING
A. Building materials shall wrap building corners and changes shall occur at
inside corners of intersecting walls or at architecture features that break
up the wall plane, such as columns.
B. Guardrail and railing design, color, finish, and materials shall be consistent
with the primary structure.
C. Use of accent materials such as glass, tile, brick, stone, concrete, or plaster
shall be incorporated to highlight building features.
D. Bright/vibrant color schemes shall be limited to trim and accent elements.
Bright/vibrant colors are not permitted as a primary wall surface.
E. All building-mounted and site light fixtures shall be fully shielded and
utilize cohesive colors and finishes which reflect the primary building’s
architectural style.
Materials changes shall not be located at the outside corners
or within the wall plane
3.7.D Limit bright and vibrant colors to trim and accent materials
3.7.A Material changes shall occur at inside corners of walls
or at architecture features that break up the wall plane
328
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
3BUILDING DESIGN OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
3-11
3.8.C Equipment/utility elements shall be concealed or
screened from public view
Exposed equipment/utility elements are not permitted
3.8 ANCILLARY STRUCTURES, EQUIPMENT,
AND UTILITIES
A. A minimum of 200 square feet of accessory storage space shall be
provided for each unit within the development. The storage shall be
located within 500 feet of the dwelling unit or within the project’s parking
garage.
B. Accessory storage space may be located within a private garage or
carport, or private outdoor space (e.g. patio, or balcony) assigned to
the unit, and shall not be located within the habitable area. If accessory
storage is provided on a patio or balcony, the amount of storage space
shall be in addition to the private open space requirement and shall be
designed with materials used within the primary building.
C. In ground and wall mounted utility elements such as wires, conduits,
junction boxes, transformers, ballasts, backflow devices, irrigation
controllers, switch and panel boxes, and utilities such as gas and electrical
meters shall be concealed from public view by evergreen landscaping and/
or architectural features, such as a wall or trellis.
D. Equipment and utility wall and fencing screening shall incorporate the
materials and colors of the primary building design. Landscape screening
shall be selected and planted to completely conceal utility elements.
E. Detached garages or carports and other accessory buildings/ structures
shall be designed using roof forms, materials, colors, and details used
on the primary structure. Prefabricated metal carports and accessory
structures are not permitted.
i. If carports are utilized, they shall incorporate decorative support
posts that are at least six inches wide.
329
BUILDING DESIGN OBJECTIVE STANDARDS
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
3
3-12
F. Refuse areas shall be located within a building, incorporated into the
building design, or located within a detached enclosure designed and
placed as follows:
i. To the rear or sides of the buildings, and not visible from the street or
public right-of-way.
ii. Incorporate the materials and colors of the primary building design.
iii. Be screened with a minimum three-foot-wide planting area containing
fast growing evergreen vegetation.
G. All flashing, sheet metal vents, exhaust fans/ventilators, and pipe stacks
shall be painted to match the adjacent roof or wall material and/or color.
All wall mounted utilities shall be located at interior corners of building
walls or behind building elements that conceal the utilities from public
view.
H. Scuppers, downspouts, and drains shall be internalized or located at the
inside edges of building walls, porches, or columns. External scuppers,
downspouts, and drains are not permitted on prominent or highly visible
portions of a wall surface. If they are provided, they shall be painted and/
or constructed of decorative materials that match other building accents.
3.8.G Surface ventilation features shall match the adjacent roof or wall
material and/or color
3.8.H Downspouts shall not be prominently located and shall be placed
at the inside edges of the building walls and designed to match the other
building accents
330
APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY OF TERMSAPPENDIX A
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
331
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
332
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
AGLOSSARY OF TERMS
A-1
APPENDIX A - GLOSSARY
OF TERMS
The following Glossary of Terms provides definitions of terms and
phrases used in the Objective Design Standards. For other definitions,
please refer to Chapter 8.08 (Definitions) of the Dublin Municipal Code.
Brackets. A projection from a vertical surface providing structural
or visual support under cornices, balconies, windows, or any other
overhanging member.
Carport. A structure, or portion of a structure, accessible to vehicles,
with a solid weatherproof roof that is permanently open on at least two
sides, used as parking or storage of one or more motor vehicles.
Common Usable Outdoor Space. Exterior space area that is readily
accessible for use by the residents and users within the development.
Designed and reserved for outdoor living and social gathering, active and
passive recreation, and pedestrian access and amenities.
Contemporary Architectural Style. A building designed utilizing
modern and post-modern character and materials, such as minimal and
non-traditional adornments, simple geometric massing, and flat roofs.
Controlled Entrances. Vehicular access to a residential development
or property that is obstructed by a gate which residents or visitors can
open from their car or home.
Cornice. The uppermost division of an entablature; a projecting shelf
along the top of a wall supported by a series of brackets; the exterior
trim at the meeting of a roof and wall, consisting of soffit, fascia, and
crown molding.
Façade. The exterior face or elevation of the building, extending from
grade to the eaves or the top of the parapet wall and the entire width of
the building elevation.
Fenestration. The arrangement, proportioning, and design of windows,
doors, and other exterior openings in a building.
Frontage Court. An open courtyard area in front of a building’s
entrance(s).
Gable Roof. A roof having a gable at one or both ends; a roof sloping
downward in two opposite directions from a central ridge, so as to form
a gable at each end.
Hipped Roof. A roof which slopes upward from all four sides of a
building, requiring a hip rafter at each corner.
Juliet Balcony. An ornamental railing applied at a full-length window,
projecting slightly beyond the plane of the window, threshold or sill,
having the appearance of a balcony.
333
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
A
A-2
Publicly Visible. Capable of being seen by a person of average height
and visual acuity while walking or driving on a street.
Shutter. Hinged panels, sometimes louvered, fixed on the outside a
window that can be closed for security or privacy or to keep out light.
Side Street. A minor or subsidiary street that may intersects with or
adjoin a Primary Street.
Traditional or Universally Recognized Architectural Style. There
is no predominate residential architectural style in Dublin. Traditional or
universally recognized residential architectural styles include, but are not
limited to Contemporary, Craftsman, European Cottage, Mediterranean,
Monterey, Spanish Eclectic, and Tuscan. Refer to the Dublin Crossing
Specific Plan for additional information on details and styles.
Lounging Furniture. A cohesive set of outdoor furnishings to
comfortably accommodate at least four people, such as exterior couches
and/or chairs.
Luminaire. A complete lighting system, including a lamp or lamps and a
fixture.
Mansard Roof. A roof with a steep lower slope and a flatter upper
slope on all sides, either of convex or concave shape.
Net Site Area. Total area within the property lines of a project that
is available for development, excluding all non-buildable areas such as
the public right-of-way, creek setbacks, and easements which may be
included within the parcel.
Parapet. A low protective wall or railing along the edge of a roof,
balcony, or similar structure; in an exterior wall, the part entirely above
the roof.
Pilaster. A partial pier or column, often with a base, shaft, and capital
that is embedded in a flat wall and projects slightly; may be constructed
as a projection of the wall itself.
Primary Street. A public or private street that provides access to the
major entry of a project or structure.
Private Outdoor Space. Consist of balconies, decks, patios, fenced
yards, and other similar areas located immediately adjacent to a
residence and only available for use by the individuals residing in the
residence.
334
PUBLIC REVIEW
CITY OF DUBLIN
This project was funded by a HCD SB 2 Planning Grant
335
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
336
Attachment 3
SECTION 8.36.020
AGRICULTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
B. All new multi-family residential development shall comply with the Citywide Multi-Family
Objective Design Standards, which are hereby adopted and incorporated by reference herein. Copies of
the adopted standards are on file with the Planning Division, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California, for use
and examination by the public. Said standards are adopted by reference and incorporated as fully as if
set out at length herein, and as may be amended from time to time pursuant to Government Code
Section 65850 et seq.
SECTION 8.104.020
EXEMPTIONS FROM SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
The permit requirements of this Chapter do not apply to the following:
J. Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval. Housing projects that are eligible for a
streamlined approval process pursuant to Government Code Section 65913.4, provided the Community
Development Director or his/her designee approves a Zoning Clearance in accordance with Chapter
8.116.
SECTION 8.104.090
REQUIRED FINDINGS
All of the following findings shall be made in order to approve a Site Development Review and shall be
supported by substantial evidence in the public record:
B. The proposal is consistent with the provisions of Title 8, Zoning Ordinance. For new multi-family
residential development only, the proposal is either consistent with all of the Citywide Multi-family
Objective Design Standards adopted pursuant to Section 8.36.020(B); alternatively, if the proposal
deviates from one or more objective design standards, then the proposal is consistent with the purpose
and intent of the applicable standard.
SECTION 8.116.020
APPLICATIONS REQUIRING A ZONING CLEARANCE
J. Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval. Housing projects that meet all eligibility
criteria as set forth in Government Code Section 65913.4.
337
SECTION 8.116.030
APPLICATION
J. Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval.If the Zoning Clearance is for a housing
project that is eligible for streamlined approval pursuant to Government Code Section 65913.4, the
Applicant shall submit a “Zoning Clearance for Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval”
application form provided by the Community Development Department with information requested on
the form.
SECTION 8.116.040
APPROVAL
The Director shall decide zoning clearance applications as follows:
J. Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval.Housing projects that are eligible for a
streamlined approval process pursuant to Government Code Section 65913.4 shall be reviewed for
consistency with the Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design Standards contained in Section 8.36.020(B)
and all other applicable objective standards within Title 8, Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Clearance
approval for a housing project eligible for streamlined approval shall be a completed “Zoning Clearance
for Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval” application form and any pertinent attachments
as required on the form with the date and signature of the Community Development Director or his/her
designee.
SECTION 8.116.050
EXPIRATION OF ZONING CLEARANCE
J. Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval.A Zoning Clearance issued in conjunction
with a housing project eligible for streamlined approval shall expire in accordance with Government
Code Section 65913.4(f).
338
Attachment 4
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. 22-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
AMENDING THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE BY ESTABLISHING AN APPLICATION FEE,
BASED ON TIME AND MATERIALS, FOR ZONING CLEARANCES FOR HOUSING
PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR STREAMLINED APPROVAL
EFFECTIVE CITYWIDE
WHEREAS,the California Constitution authorizes local governments to recover the
reasonable costs of providing services; and
WHEREAS,the City processes various permits, applications, and licenses; and
WHEREAS,on June 15, 2021, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No. 80-21,
adopting an annual update to the Master Fee Schedule for services provided to the City, effective
July 1, 2021; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 35 (SB 35) was part of a legislative package of bills aimed at
addressing the State’s housing shortage and high housing costs; and
WHEREAS,SB 35 provides a streamlined ministerial approval process for multi-family
residential developments in cities and counties that have made insufficient progress towards
meeting their assigned Regional Housing Needs Allocation, subject to meeting certain eligibility
criteria and objective zoning and design review standards; and
WHEREAS,in response, the City of Dublin prepared the proposed Citywide Multi-Family
Objective Design Standards and companion Zoning Ordinance Amendments to meet the
requirements of SB 35; and
WHEREAS,Housing Projects Eligible for Streamlined Approval are exempt from a Site
Development Review Permit in accordance with State law provided that a Zoning Clearance is
approved; and
WHEREAS,pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA
Guidelines Section 15378(b)(4), revising fees is not a project and, therefore, is exempt from the
requirements of CEQA.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this Resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council adopts amendments to the
Master Fee Schedule by adding the following:
Section 6.1: Planning Division
#Item / Service Description / Unit Fee
575 Zoning Clearance – Housing Projects
Eligible for Streamlined Approval
Per application T&M
339
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 2 of 2
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of February 2022 by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
340
Reso. No. 22-01, Item 6.1, Adopted 01/25/22 Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. 22-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF: 1) THE CITYWIDE MULTI-FAMILY
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS; AND 2) AMENDMENTS TO DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 8.36 (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS), CHAPTER 8.104 (SITE DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW), AND CHAPTER 8.116 (ZONING CLEARANCE) EFFECTIVE CITY-WIDE
PLPA-2022-00002
WHEREAS, the City occasionally initiates amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to clarify,
add, or amend certain provisions to ensure that the Zoning Ordinance remains current with federal
and state law, internally consistent, simple to understand and implement, and relevant to changes
occurring in the community; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 35 (SB 35) was part of a legislative package of bills aimed at
addressing the State’s housing shortage and high housing costs; and
WHEREAS, SB 35 which provides a streamlined ministerial approval process for multi-
family residential developments in cities and counties that have made insufficient progress
towards meeting their assigned Regional Housing Needs Allocation, subject to meeting certain
eligibility criteria and objective zoning and design review standards; and
WHEREAS, in response, the City of Dublin prepared Citywide Multi-Family Objective
Design Standards and companion Zoning Ordinance Amendments to meet the requirements of
SB 35; and
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State
guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be
reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission hereby finds the proposed Citywide Multi-Family
Objective Design Standards and companion Zoning Ordinance Amendments are exempt from the
requirements of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen
with certainty that they will not have a significant effect on the environment and, thus, are not
subject to CEQA review; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on January
25, 2022, during which all interested persons were heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this Resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Dublin Planning Commission does hereby
recommend that the City Council adopt the Ordinance, approving the Citywide Multi-family
Objective Design Standards and approving the Zoning Ordinance Amendments, attached hereto
as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
Attachment 5
341
Reso. No. 22-01, Item 6.1, Adopted 01/25/22 Page 2 of 2
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of January, 2022 by the following
vote:
AYES: Benson, Grier, Thalblum, Tyler, Wright
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Assistant Community Development Director
342
Citywide Multi-Family Objective
Design Standards, Zoning Ordinance
Amendments, and Master Fee
Schedule Amendments
City Council
February 15, 2022
Item 6.2
343
Background
•Senate Bill (SB) 35 provides a streamlined
ministerial approval process for eligible multi-
family residential developments
•In effect until January 1, 2026
344
Background
•SB 35 eligible projects must:
–Include specified level of affordability
–Be located on infill site
–Comply with existing residential and mixed-use general
plan or zoning provisions
–Comply with objective design review standards
–Comply with other requirements such as locational and
demolition restrictions
•HCD annually determines which jurisdictions are
subject to SB 35
345
Senate Bill 35 in Dublin
•As of July 2021, HCD determined the City has
made insufficient progress toward meeting our
lower-income RHNA (very-low and low-income)
•City is subject to streamlined ministerial approval
process for proposed developments with at least
50% affordability
•To date, no applicants have requested SB 35
streamlined ministerial approval process in Dublin
346
Applicability
•Applies to all new multi-family developments
within City
•Projects requesting SB 35 streamlined
ministerial review would be required comply
with all objective design standards
•Other multi-family projects would be subject
to objective design standards, but could deviate
through discretionary SDR Permit process
347
Citywide Multi-Family
Objective Design Standards
Jami Williams, RRM Design Group
348
Project Description
•In response to SB 35, the City identified need to adopt
clear and objective standards related to architectural
review of multi-family residential developments
•This involves replacing existing subjective guidelines
with objective standards
•All cities must now review eligible projects against
adopted objective standards that involve no personal or
subjective judgment by a city official
349
Objective standards:
Involve no personal judgment by a public
official or decision maker and provide
quantifiable and concise direction for
when and how to apply requirements.
Subjective standards:
Lack specificity and may allow arbitrary
interpretation causing incompatible
design and undesired outcomes.
Subjective vs. Objective Standards
350
Existing vs. New Standards
•Zoning Ordinance regulates development
standards, such as:
–Building height
–Setbacks
–Density/intensity
•Objective standards will not replace existing
development standards
•Objective standards will provide additional
design direction and clarity
351
Process to Prepare Objective Design Standards
•Review existing policy
documents
•Driving tour
•Analyze other jurisdictions
•Translated subjective language
to objective design standards
•Review of draft
352
Contents
1.Introduction
2.Site Planning Objective
Standards
3.Building Design
Objective Standards
4.Glossary of Terms
353
Site Planning Objective Standards
•Site Planning objective design
standards cover:
–Building placement
–Vehicular surface parking and
access
–Bicycle parking
–Pedestrian circulation and access
–Private outdoor space
–Common usable outdoor space
354
Example Site Planning Objective Standards
•A minimum five-foot wide
landscape buffer shall be
located adjacent to all ground
level private outdoor spaces to
provide additional privacy and
security for the residents. The
buffer shall be planted with
dense evergreen shrubs and
vines which grow to or are
maintained at a three-foot
minimum height. Stoops are
permitted to encroach into the
five-foot wide landscape buffer.
(2.1.D)
355
Example Site Planning Objective Standards
•The equivalent of 10
percent or more of the
floor area of each unit shall
be provided as private
outdoor space. For units on
upper floors, this outdoor
space may be provided by
decks and balconies. This
requirement may be
satisfied by more than one
private outdoor space area.
(2.5.A)
356
Building Design Objective Standards
•Building Design objective design standards
cover:
–Building form and massing
–Façade articulation
–Roof forms
–Building and unit entries
–Fenestration
–Parking structures
–Building materials, colors, and lighting
–Accessory structures, equipment, and utilities
357
Example Building Design Objective Standards
•Building walls that are visible from a primary or side
street shall not run in a continuous horizontal plane for
more than 40 feet without incorporating articulation
techniques. (3.2.B)
358
Example Building Design Objective Standards
•Parking structure walls
shall feature decorative
architectural elements
such as screens, awnings,
trellises, louvers, and/or
grills to enhance wall
articulation and provide
screening. (3.6.B.ii)
359
Proposed Edits to Draft Standards
•A minimum of one pet waste bag and disposal station shall be
provided per common usable outdoor space where pets
congregate.with a minimum of one pet waste bag and disposal
station per development.(2.6.B)
•Common usable outdoor space shall be arranged to afford
maximize visibility by project residents. on-site users and passers-
by.Barriers shall be designed with transparency to afford
opportunities for surveillance through the barrier. (2.6.C)
•A minimum of 200 square cubic feet of accessory storage space
shall be provided for each unit within the development. The
storage shall be located within 500 feet of the dwelling unit or
within the project’s parking garage. (3.8.A)
360
Zoning Ordinance
Amendments
361
Zoning Ordinance Amendments
•Proposed amendments to Dublin Municipal Code:
–Section 8.36.020 (Agricultural and Residential
Development Regulations)
–Section 8.104.020 (Exemptions from SDR)
–Section 8.116.020 (Applications Requiring a Zoning
Clearance)
–Section 8.116.030 (Application)
–Section 8.116.040 (Approval)
–Section 8.116.050 (Expiration of Zoning Clearance)
362
Amendments Summary
•Proposed amendments would:
–Specify new multi-family residential developments
shall comply with objective design standards
–Specify housing projects eligible for streamlined
approval are exempt from SDR Permit, provided
Zoning Clearance is approved
–Establish required finding for multi-family residential
developments to comply with objective design
standards
363
Planning Commission Review
•On January 25, 2022, the Planning Commission
considered the proposed Citywide Multi-Family
Objective Design Standards and Zoning
Ordinance Amendments and recommended
approval to the City Council
364
Master Fee Schedule
Amendments
365
Master Fee Schedule Amendments
•City can recover reasonable costs of providing
services
•Housing projects eligible for streamlined approval
process would be subject to Zoning Clearance
•Application costs vary depending on project scope
•Recommend establishing an application fee based on
actual time and materials to recover the City’s full
costs
366
Recommendation
•Waive the reading and introduce the Ordinance
approving:
–Citywide Multi-Family Objective Design Standards
with edits to Standards 2.6.B, 2.6.C, and 3.8.A; and
–Amendments to Dublin Municipal Code
•Adopt the Resolution amending the Master Fee
Schedule by establishing an application fee for
Zoning Clearances for Housing Projects Eligible
for Streamlined Approval
367
368
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Page 1 of 9
Agenda Item 7.1
DATE:February 15, 2022
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:SCS Property Community OutreachPreparedby:Amy Million,Principal Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:On March 2, 2021, the City Council approved a City-led Community Outreach process for the SCS Property to create a foundation for future discussions about appropriate land uses for the property. Staff and the consultant team lead by ELS Architecture & Urban Design and Urban Field Studio in concert with the community, Planning Commission,and City Council have worked to develop a Preferred Plan for the SCS Property. The City Council will receive a presentation and consider approving the Preferred Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Receive the presentation and adopt the Resolution Approving the Preferred Plan for the SCS Property.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:All costs associated with the Community Outreach process are paid by the property owner.
DESCRIPTION:BackgroundThe subject 76.9-acre property, known as the SCS Property,is located north of I-580 between Tassajara Road and Brannigan Street and extends to the north of Gleason Drive (refer to Figure 1).On March 2, 2021, the City Council approved a City-led Community Outreach process for the SCS Property and the use of a multidisciplinary consultant team led by ELS Architecture & Urban Design (ELS) to create a foundation for future discussions about appropriate land uses for the property and ultimately develop a Preferred Plan for the SCS Property.
369
Page 2 of 9
Figure 1. Location Map
As part of the process, the City Council established principles to create a foundation for the Preferred Plan as follows:1.The goal of the outreach process is to gain consensus on preferred land uses and future development of the property.2.The outreach process will include a variety of interested parties including the property owner, adjacent property owners (i.e., Grafton, Lowe’s), adjacent homeowner’s associations,and the Dublin Chamber of Commerce.3.The Preferred Plan will create the framework for a mixed-use private project including limited public amenities.4.The Preferred Plan will establish minimum residential densities.5.The Preferred Plan will meet the goals of the property owner to create a financially and economically feasible project in the current market and long-term sustainability for the City.Based on these principles, the consultant team has worked with the community, property owner, City Staff,and other stakeholders to identify viable land uses and development options for the property in the form of a Preferred Plan. The work considered feedback from the community, City Staff,and other stakeholders, as well as financial and economic feasibility, recommendations from the Urban Land Institute Technical Advisory Panel (ULI TAP), and goals of the property owner. The Community Outreach process for the SCS Property began in spring 2021 with “Task A,” which included gathering background information,conducting interviews with community stakeholders, the property owner, and City Staff,as well as a meeting with the newly formed 14-member Community Advisory Committee appointed by the City Council.The Planning Commission and the
370
Page 3 of 9
City Council also provided input at meetings held during this first task on May 25, 2021, and June 1, 2021, respectively. Task A was completed in June 2021 with the ULI TAP providing their findings and recommendations for the SCS Property. The ULI TAP took place June 24 - 29, 2021,and included input and recommendations on land uses that optimize the synergy between land use, economic development, and community compatibility for the SCS Property.The work continued in July and August with “Task B,” which focused on public engagement. During this time, a new project website was launched and became the centralized place for all project information and announcements. In addition, a Community Survey was conducted to gather further input and help inform the outreach process, which generated responses from 71 people. Staff and the consultant team also held the first Community Meeting on August 25, 2021. The meeting was attended by approximately 40 community members who discussed a variety of land use topics for the site including the regional context, public benefits, market demand, economics of development, connectivity, and housing.In the fall of 2021, the work continued with “Task C,” which focused on building consensus and creating the initial conceptual land use framework. The consultant team prepared three broad land use concepts using the information gathered through stakeholder and property owner interviews, Community Advisory Committee meetings, Community Meetings, the Planning Commission, the City Council, and the consultant team’s own research and fiscal analysis of development. The three land use concepts presented in “Task C” were responsive to dominant themes that surfaced throughout the Community Outreach process, ULI TAP recommendations, and fiscal analysis. These three concepts, summarized below and provided in Figure 2, illustrate the level ofamenities that are financially feasible to provide based on the proposed number of residential units that would be needed to fund those amenities.Concept 1 – Base Amenities - “North Street” approaches the site with a minimal amount of housing and commercial uses, and more modest community amenities. Concept 2 - Mid-level Amenities - “Paseo” increases the number of residential units and provides a commensurate increase in amenities with a neighborhood commercial main street on Finnian Way and an open-space greenway for bikes and pedestrians spanning from Dublin Boulevard north to Gleason Drive. Concept 3 - High Amenities - “Finnian Square” concentrates retail and restaurants north of Dublin Boulevard and introduces a finer grain street network and town square with additional residential units to support the additional community amenities.
371
Page 4 of 9
Figure 2. Three Initial Concepts
Review of the initial land use concepts included meetings with the Community Advisory Committee on October 6 and October 28, 2021, a Community Meeting on October 20, 2021, and meetings held with the Planning Commission on October 26, 2021,and City Council on November 2, 2021. The result of “Task C” was support of the Mid-Level Amenities land use concept with recommendations to consider:
Limiting family housing to the 261 units originally planned for the SCS site plus 181 units previously planned for the Emerald Glen High School site. The remainder 208 unitsincluded in Concept 2 (Mid-Level Amenities)could be low-impact senior housing.
If financially feasible, capping the total unit count at 600.
Moving the circular open space area at Central Parkway to Finnian Way.
Enhancing visibility to the grand paseo from Tassajara Road.Preferred PlanThe culmination of all the input provided throughout this process resulted in the development of the Preferred Plan as part of the final task, “Task D.” The Preferred Plan is an illustrative land useplan that will guide the future development of the SCS Property. The Preferred Plan does not create any land uses or development but reflects the balance and location of land uses and densities supported through the outreach process. The Preferred Plan includes development capacity of the site using typical architectural prototypes creating potential building layouts, an illustrative site plan that establishes the connectivity within the site and to the surrounding context, and renderings to convey the character of the overall building massing to express scale of buildings, public streets, parks,and plazas. The Preferred Plan,as provided in Attachment 2 and as shown in Figure 3,focuses on the following concepts:
372
Page 5 of 9
Integrate Paseo and Town Square Concepts Figure 3. Preferred PlanA town square concept is provided in the Preferred Plan to anchor the shops and restaurants on Finnian Way. The town square is located on the grand paseo opening views to Mt. Diablo. In order to accommodate a variety of activities (e.g.,recreation, public gardening, and native plan/pollinator meadows) and compliment adjacent land uses, the width of the grand paseo varies from 25 feet to 110 feet.
Improve Visibility and Access to the PaseoA new north/south street located between BranniganStreet and Tassajara Road is provided in the Preferred Plan along the east side of the grand paseo creating greater access and activity to the public open space. The paseo widens towards Tassajara Road inviting pedestrians and bikes off the major arterial onto the paseo. Generous bike and pedestrian paths connect Gleason Drive to Dublin Boulevard.
Diversify Housing TypesHousing throughout the site is varied with entry-level housing, affordable housing, and family housing, all of which may accommodate senior residents. Types range from traditional single-family homes, courtyard homes, townhomes, and affordable apartments.The Preferred Plan allows for a range of 500 to 550 market rate units and a 2.5-acre site for affordable housing (70 to 150 units)for a total of 570 to 650 units.
Dedicated Affordable Housing SiteThe Preferred Plan includes a parcel to be dedicated for construction of affordable housing. The site location, at the prominent corner of Tassajara Road and Dublin Boulevard,will serve as a gateway to the larger neighborhood. The site is large enough to permit a variety of affordable housing solutions, allowing the design and amount of affordable housing to be tailored to the community’s needs. The number of units could vary substantially to respond to those needs and available funding sources. For example, units in a senior affordable housing project are typically smaller than units in a family affordable housing project and thus a senior project may have greater density than a family project.
Pedestrian-Focused Entertainment DistrictThe entertainment district south of Dublin Boulevard is set around a large pedestrian plaza (roughly 120 feet by 300 feet) creating a regional dining and family entertainment
373
Page 6 of 9
destination.Community EngagementOver the past 11 months, City Staff has worked with ELS to engage the community in a variety of ways to gather maximum input. The following is a summary of the City’s community engagement efforts:
SCS Property Community Outreach WebsiteA new project website was launched and continues to serve as the centralized place for project information, community surveys, and announcements. Presentations and recordings of all the meetings are provided on the website. The website (https://courbanize.com/scsproperty ) also allows visitors to sign up to receive automatic updates on project information. In addition, City Staff created a page on the City’s website with an overview of the project and direct link to the coUrbanize website.
Community Advisory CommitteeA Community Advisory Committee consisting of 14 Dublin residents and business owners was formed to provide input throughout the outreach process. The purpose of the Community Advisory Committee was to:
o Provide a community perspective on development of the SCS Property
o Share thoughts on previous proposals for the SCS Property
o Share thoughts on general priorities for development in Dublin
o Provide input on the greater public engagement strategy
o Provide feedback on the initial land use framework and preferred planThree Community Advisory Committee meetings, plus additional individual meetings, were held throughout the outreach process:
o Meeting #1 (May 19, 2021): The first meeting of the Community Advisory Committee was a brainstorming session on the vision for the site. (14 members contributed)
o Meeting #2 (October 6 and 28, 2021): At this meeting, the three land use concepts were discussed. Due to limited attendance, additional outreach followed the Community Advisory Committee meeting via individual and group meetings. (13 members contributed)
o Meeting #3 (January 6, 2021): The draft Preferred Plan was presented for discussion. The Community Advisory Committee expressed support of the Preferred Plan commenting on the balance of residential units and amenities, diverse mix of housing, the main street along Finnian Way with a town square, and the generous setback along Tassajara Road. (10 members contributed)
Community SurveysThree online community surveys were developed during the process:
374
Page 7 of 9
o Survey #1 (August 26 - September 12, 2021): The first survey continued the effort in gathering background research about the site and a brainstorming. (71 respondents)
o Survey #2 (October 29 - November 12, 2021): The second survey polled the community's thoughts on the scale of public benefits this site can deliver for the larger community. This survey asked questions based on the land planning options presented at Community Meeting #2 and the Planning Commission meeting. (66 respondents)
o Survey #3 (January 14- 31, 2022): The final survey polled the community’s thoughts on the Preferred Plan including which features should be prioritized, the preferred number of affordable housing units, and the breakdown of market rate housing and amenities. (339 respondents)
Community MeetingsThree community meetings took place over the course of the outreach process:
o Community Meeting #1 (August 25, 2021): The first meeting covered background research about the site and an interactive brainstorming session. (40 attendees)
o Community Meeting #2 (October 20, 2021): At the second meeting, the consultant team presented three land use concepts demonstrating possible configurations of the public framework of streets, plazas, parks, and land uses. Breakout rooms for smaller group discussions on the vision for the site were utilized. (10 attendees)
o Community Meeting #3 (January 12, 2021): At the final meeting, the draft Preferred Plan was presented for discussion. The questions and discussion covered a variety of topics including preservation of views, affordable housing including the types and amount required to be provided, construction feasibility, sizing of the plazas, balancing the land uses, range of housing sizes, potential for a Mello Roos or Community Facilities District to pay for infrastructure and schools, and impacts to schools. (25 attendees)
Notify Me and Social MediaOver the course of the outreach, the community was able to subscribe to the City’s Notify Me to receive notifications about opportunities to provide input on the planning process for the SCS Property Community Outreach. The City also used its Social Media platforms (e.g., Nextdoor, Twitter, and Facebook, news flashes, calendar items, and stories in the Backyard Brief), to spread the word on all meetings and surveys. A draft resolution approving the Preferred Plan is included as Attachment 1 to this Staff Report. This resolution incorporates the Planning Commission recommendation, if economically feasible,to include for-sale inclusionary housing units integrated into the project in addition to the affordable housing site, as further discussed below.Next StepsShould the Preferred Plan be approved by the City Council, the next step for the property ownerand/or developer is to prepare a development application to implement the Preferred Plan.
375
Page 8 of 9
Although a development application is not required to follow the Preferred Plan, City Staff and the consultant team have worked closely with the property owner’s representatives though this process and it is anticipated that the development application will utilize the efforts and goals of the Preferred Plan. A General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezone with a Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Tentative Parcel Map, and Site Development Review Permit and Affordable Housing Agreement would be required for a future development project. Evaluation of the development project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) would occur prior to project approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:Approval of the Preferred Plan is exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies) in that it would not have a legally binding effect on later activities.
PLANNING COMMISION REVIEW:On January 25, 2022, the Planning Commission considered the Preferred Plan and adopted Resolution No. 22-02 recommending that the City Council approve the Preferred Plan (Attachment 3). The Planning Commission expressed support and appreciation for the community outreach process and the efforts made by the consultant team. During their deliberations, the Commission discussed school impacts, the placement of the commercial areas, affordable housing, and incorporating inclusionary for-sale units. Regarding the future project, the Commission noted that landscaping will be critical, including the paseo and designing for the wind, and making the plaza larger. The Planning Commission’s recommendation includes providing inclusionary for-sale units integrated into the project in addition to the dedicated affordable housing site to provide homeownership opportunities.The Planning Commission’s recommendation to include for-sale inclusionary units dispersed throughout the project is included in the City Council’s draft Resolution (Attachment 1). It is noted that this addition requires consideration of the economic impacts of including both a dedicated affordable housing site and inclusionary units. The combination of a dedicated site and inclusionary units could require alternative funding sources to make the Preferred Plan economically viable. This would need to be evaluated as part of the future development application.
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:None.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:A webpage was created to provide information on the SCS Property Community Outreach process (https://courbanize.com/scsproperty). This webpage is also accessible from the City’s website for the project (https://dublin.ca.gov/2297/SCS-Property-Community-Outreach). Notification of this meeting was provided on the project webpages, via “Notify Me,” Nextdoor, Twitter, and Facebook,
376
Page 9 of 9
and to all interested persons who requested process updates, including the Community Advisory Committee and property owners. The City Council Agenda was posted.
ATTACHMENTS:1) Resolution Approving the Preferred Plan for the SCS Property2) Exhibit A to the Resolution - Preferred Plan3) Planning Commission Resolution No. 22-024) Public Comments
377
Attachment 1
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. XX- 22
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING THE PREFERRED PLAN FOR THE SCS PROPERTY
(PLPA-2021-000012)
APNs 985-0051-004, 985-0051-005, 985-0051-006, 985-0052-024, AND 985-0052-025
WHEREAS,on August 18, 2020, the City Council denied the At Dublin project on the SCS
Property without prejudice and directed Staff to leave the General Plan Amendment Study open
and work with the property owner to conduct a community outreach process to gather input on
the future use and development of the property; and
WHEREAS,in response to the City Council’s direction, the City released a Request for
Proposals seeking the services of qualified consultants with expertise in land use planning and
community engagement to assist the City with a public outreach process; and
WHEREAS, on March 2, 2021, City Council authorized the City Manager to execute a
Consulting Services Agreement between the City of Dublin and ELS Architecture & Urban Design
to assist the City with a public outreach process and prepare a Preferred Plan; and
WHEREAS,June 24 - 29, 2021, the Urban Land Institute held a Technical Advisory Panel
(ULI TAP) and provided their findings and recommendations for the SCS Property. The ULI TAP
included input and recommendations on land uses that optimize the synergy between land use,
economic development, and community compatibility for the SCS Property; and
WHEREAS,City Staff has worked with ELS Architecture & Urban Design and their
consultant team to engage the community in a variety of ways to gather maximum input. The
Community Outreach process included development of a website to serve as the centralized place
for project information, community surveys and announcements, three Community Advisory
Committee, three Community Meetings, three Community Surveys and updates through Notify
Me and social media; and
WHEREAS,the Preferred Plan considered feedback from the ULI TAP, community, City
Staff and other stakeholders, financial and economic feasibility, and goals of the property owner;
and
WHEREAS, approval of the Preferred Plan is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262
(Feasibility and Planning Studies) in that approval of the Preferred Plan would not have a legally
binding effect on later activities; and
WHEREAS,on January 25, 2022, the Planning Commission received a presentation on
the Preferred Plan and adopted Resolution No. 22-02 recommending that the City Council
approve the Preferred Plan with the added recommendation to include for-sale inclusionary
housing units integrated into the project in addition to the affordable housing site; and
378
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS,the Preferred Plan as shown in Exhibit A, includes the following criteria as
outlined below:
1. Market rate residential housing not to exceed 550 units.
2. Finnian Way and Aviano Way extended through the project site from Brannigan Street
to Tassajara Road.
3. Finnian Way frontage limited to commercial uses on the ground floor, which may be
provided through a “Shop House” concept with substantive commercial space (not less
than 400 square feet).
4. Housing types throughout the site that vary with entry level housing, affordable housing,
and family housing. Types range from traditional single-family homes, courtyard homes,
town homes and affordable apartments.
5. Include a combination of inclusionary for-sale units and a Public/Semi-Public parcel
dedicated for affordable housing.Note: The addition of inclusionary for-sale units
requires consideration of the economic impacts. The combination of a dedicated site
and inclusionary units could require alternative funding sources to make the Preferred
Plan an economically viable plan. This funding could come from a variety of sources
and would be negotiated as part of the future development application.
6. A town square concept to anchor the shops and restaurants on Finnian Way. The town
square is located on the grand paseo opening views to Mt. Diablo. The paseo connects
the square to the residential areas south and north of Finnian Way.
7. The entertainment district south of Dublin Boulevard is set around a large pedestrian
plaza (roughly 120 feet by 300 feet) creating a regional dining and family entertainment
destination; and
WHEREAS,implementation of the Preferred Plan would require approval of a General
Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezone with a Stage
1 and 2 Development Plan, Tentative Parcel Map, Site Development Review Permit and
Affordable Housing Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this Resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Dublin City Council does hereby adopt the
Preferred Plan for the SCS Property as shown in Exhibit A.
{Signatures on the next page}
379
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 3 of 3
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of February 2022 by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
380
Entry-Level
Single Family Detached
Entry-Level
Single Family
Detached
Family Townhomes
Shop Houses
Finnian Way
Central Parkway
Dublin BoulevardTassajara RoadBrannigan StreetAviano Way
Aviano Way
Diablo View DrivePaseoShop Houses
Shop HousesShops
ShopsFamily Townhomes
Entry Level
Townhomes
Large
Single
Family
Homes
Large Single Family Homes
Entry Level
Townhomes
Affordable
Housing
Commercial /
Entertainment District
Commercial /
Entertainment District
Commercial /
Entertainment District
SCS PropertyPreferred Plan
•Integrate the Paseo and Town Square Concepts
•Improve Visibility & Access to the Paseo
•Diversify Housing Types
•Dedicated Affordable Housing Site
•A Pedestrian Focused Entertainment District
Attachment 2
381
P
P
P
Integrate the Paseo and Town Square Concepts:
• Design of the paseo has been changed to lead directly
to a town square on Finnian Way.
• The Paseo narrows as it approaches the plaza to draw
people together and create a more social gathering
space.
• The Paseo varies in width from 25’ to 110’ wide.
• A walk along the Paseo will include a variety of
activities, from retail, recreational, public gardening,
and native plant / pollinator meadows.
PREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
5k 3.5k 3.5k
2.5k2.5k
145’-0”90’-0”FINNIAN WAY
FINNIAN SQUARE TASSAJARA ROADBRANNIGAN STREETCENTRAL PARKWAY
DUBLIN BOULEVARD
EMERALD GLEN PARK
WATERFORD
SHOPS
EMERALD GLEN
HIGH SCHOOL
AVIANO WAY
GLEASON DRIVE
DIABLO VIEW DRIVEPASEO DIABLOPASEO DIABLO382
Improve Visibility and Access to the Paseo:
• Diablo View Drive (20 mph) accompanies the paseo
providing street parking, access to the activities on the
linear park
• The southeast corner of Emerald Glen Park is an
important connection point. Setbacks along the
Central Parkway create a landscaped gateway to the
Paseo.
• The pedestrian and bike oriented paseo will serve the
new development as well as the larger neighborhood
giving an healthy alternative to driving to shops,
restaurants, and schools.
TASSAJARA ROADCENTRAL PARKWAY
Setback
EMERALD GLEN
PARK
The SCS site is within a 1/2 mile of k-12 schools, a
Safeway anchored shopping center, bus service,
Emerald Glen Park and many other services. Bike
access along the paseo combined with dedicated
bike lanes on the Aviano and Finnian Way extensions
will make walking, jogging and biking a fun and family
friendly option.
The Paseo expands towards
Tassajra Road at Gleason to
provide better pedestian access.DIABLO VIEW DRIVEPASEO DIABLOPREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
TASSAJARA ROAD383
P
P
P
Diversify Housing Types
• The affordable housing and higher density townhomes
are located closest to shops, restaurants reducing
vehicle miles traveled and adding life to the retail
district.
• The entry level townhomes consist predominantly
of two bedroom units catering to first time buyers
and those wishing to downsize. These are located
convenient to Emerald Glen Park as well as the shops.
• Single Family homes are located centrally to the three
schools: Kolb Elementary School (.6 miles); Fallon
Middle School (.4 miles); Emerald Glen High School (.5
miles).
• Shophouses will bring small shops and local
businesses to the Finnian Way Neighborhood shops
district.
PREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
FINNIAN WAYTASSAJARA ROADBRANNIGAN STREETCENTRAL PARKWAY
DUBLIN BOULEVARD
EMERALD GLEN PARK
WATERFORD
SHOPS
EMERALD GLEN
HIGH SCHOOL
Entry-Level
Single Family
Detached
Entry-Level
Single Family
Detached
Family Townhomes
Family Townhomes
Entry Level
Townhomes
Large
Single
Family
Homes
Large Single Family Homes
Entry Level
Townhomes
Entry Level
Townhomes
Affordable
Housing
AVIANO WAY
GLEASON DRIVE
DIABLO VIEW DRIVEPASEO DIABLOShophouses
Shops
Shophouses
Shophouses Shops
384
Examples of Affordable Housing courtesy of Pyatok Architecture
The Preferred Plan includes a parcel to be dedicated for construction of affordable housing.
The site location, at the prominent corner of Tassajara Road and Dublin Boulevard, will serve
as a gateway to the larger neighborhood.
The site is large enough to allow a variety of affordable housing solutions, allowing the
design and amount of the affordable housing to be tailored to the community’s needs. The
number of units could vary substantially to respond to those needs and available funding
sources. For example, units in a senior affordable housing project are typically smaller than
units in a family affordable housing project and, thus, a senior project may have greater
density than a family project.
2.5 Acres
Dedicated Affordable Housing Site:
PREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
Dublin BoulevardTassajara Road385
A Pedestrian Focused Entertainment District:
• Central Plaza - Approx. 120’ x 340’
• 55,000 to 60,000 sf of retail, restaurants,
entertainment
• Ample space for restaurant seating, plaza seating
• Plaza comprised of diverse seating options, spatial
experiences, caters to variety of group sizes, all ages
• Space for outdoor music and performance
• Seasonal Programming and Events
• Freeway + Dublin Boulevard access and visibility
open’s door for higher rents and national tenants
• Parking Areas large enough for future parking garages
and increased commercial development (if market
supports)
Family Entertainment
Anchor
7.5k
30k
5k5k
5k5k
PREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
Flex Commercial Zone:
• Office Campus
• Regional Retail or Restaurants
• Hotel
• Top Golf
Retail Parking Retail Parking 340’-0”120’-0”
386
PREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
387
Design to Gather
PREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
388
PREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
389
Design to Play
PREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
390
Reso. No. 22-02, Item 7.1, Adopted 01/25/22
RESOLUTION NO. 22 - 02
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE PREFERRED PLAN FOR
THE SCS PROPERTY
(PLPA-2021-000012)
APNs 985-0051-004, 985-0051-005, 985-0051-006, 985-0052-024, AND 985-0052-025
WHEREAS, on August 18, 2020, the City Council denied the At Dublin project on the SCS
Property without prejudice and directed Staff to leave the General Plan Amendment Study open
and work with the property owner to conduct a community outreach process to gather input on
the future use and development of the property; and
WHEREAS, in response to the City Council’s direction, the City released a Request for
Proposals seeking the services of qualified consultants with expertise in land use planning and
community engagement to assist the City with a public outreach process ; and
WHEREAS, on March 2, 2021, City Council authorized the City Manager to execute a
Consulting Services Agreement between the City of Dublin and ELS Architecture & Urban Design
to assist the City with a public outreach process and prepare a Preferred Plan; and
WHEREAS, June 24-29, 2021, the Urban Land Institute held a Technical Advisory Panel
(ULI TAP) and provided their findings and recommendations for the SCS Property. The ULI TAP
included input and recommendations on land uses that optimize the synergy between land use,
economic development, and community compatibility for the SCS Property; and
WHEREAS, City Staff has worked with ELS Architecture & Urban Design and their
consultant team to engage the community in a variety of ways to gather maximum input. The
Community Outreach process included development of a website to serve as the centralized place
for project information, community surveys and announcements, three Community Advisory
Committee, three Community Meetings, three Community Surveys and updates through Notify
Me and social media; and
WHEREAS, the Preferred Plan considered feedback from the ULI TAP, community, City
Staff and other stakeholders, financial and economic feasibility, and goals of the property owner ;
and
WHEREAS, the Preferred Plan as shown in Exhibit A, includes the following criteria as
outlined below:
1. Market rate residential housing not to exceed 550 units.
2. Finnian Way and Aviano Way extended through the project site from Brannigan Street
to Tassajara Road.
3. Finnian Way frontage limited to commercial uses on the ground floor, which may be
provided through a “Shop House” concept with substantive commercial space (not less
than 400 square feet).
391
Reso. No. 22-02, Item 7.1, Adopted 01/25/22 Page 2 of 2
4. Housing types throughout the site that vary with entry level housing, affordable housing,
and family housing. Types range from traditional single-family homes, courtyard homes,
town homes and affordable apartments.
5. A Public/Semi-Public parcel dedicated for affordable housing.
6. A town square concept to anchor the shops and restaurants on Finnian Way. The town
square is located on the grand paseo opening views to Mt. Diablo. The paseo connects
the square to the residential areas south and north of Finnian Way.
7. An entertainment district south of Dublin Boulevard set around a large pedestrian plaza
(roughly 120 feet by 300 feet) creating a regional dining and family entertainment
destination; and
WHEREAS, implementation of the Preferred Plan would require approval of a General
Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezone with a Stage
1 and 2 Development Plan, Tentative Parcel Map, Site Development Review Permit and
Affordable Housing Agreement; and
WHEREAS, approval of the Preferred Plan is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262
(Feasibility and Planning Studies) in that approval of the Preferred Plan would not have a legally
binding effect on later activities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this Resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Dublin Planning Commission does hereby
recommend that the City Council adopt the Preferred Plan for the SCS Property as shown in
Exhibit A with the added recommendation to include for-sale inclusionary units integrated within
the project in addition to the affordable housing site.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of January 2022 by the following vote:
AYES: Benson, Grier, Thalblum, Tyler, Wright
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Assistant Community Development Director
392
1
Amy Million
From:Tim Sbranti <tsbranti@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, February 9, 2022 5:20 PM
To:Amy Million
Subject:Comments for 2/15 City Council Meeting
Hi Amy‐
Please pass along my email below to the Mayor and City Council for their consideration at next week's meeting. Thank
you.
Tim
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council‐
I am reaching out today as someone who was involved in planning of the SCS area for nearly 12 years during my time as
Dublin Mayor and Council Member, lived in the neighborhood for nearly 7 years, and most recently served on the SCS
Community Advisory Committee, I wanted to reach out today to share my perspective and ask for your support of the
Planning Commission's unanimous recommendation to adopt the Preferred Plan.
The Preferred Plan has several benefits. First and foremost, it creates the potential for a vibrant "Main St." style ground
floor commercial development by extending Finnian Way from Brannigan to the Waterford Plaza. This type of concept is
not found anywhere else in our city, and I am pleased to see a substantial amount of commercial space frontage along
with a town square concept to anchor the shops and restaurants on Finnian Way.
Located on the grand paseo opening with views to Mt. Diablo, this also connects the square to the residential areas
south and north of Finnian way, which is something I surely would have taken advantage of during the many years I lived
in the adjacent Dublin Ranch Villages. Pedestrian‐oriented connections to Tassajara Road and ultimately Emerald Glen
Park that the neighbors can take advantage of is further enhanced with the extension of Aviano Way. The overall
sidewalk and related infrastructure enhancements will be a vast improvement over the current unimproved semi‐rural
conditions of Central Parkway, which will be completely inadequate for connecting to Emerald High School the moment
it opens.
Beyond the immediate benefits to the neighborhood, the entertainment district that is envisioned south of Dublin
Boulevard set around a large pedestrian plaza creates a regional dining and family destination center in one of the
region's most visible and accessible locations with direct access off of I‐580. There is a lot of potential for multiple high‐
profile attractions which can enhance Dublin's prestige, generate revenue, create jobs, and lead to greater investments
and opportunity in our City.
Personally, I would have preferred to see more housing on the site. However, after much deliberation the Community
Advisory Committee settled on a fair compromise to make a recommendation not to exceed 550 market‐rate residential
units. These housing types will be at different price points to meet different preferences and needs, including entry level
housing, affordable housing, and family housing with lower density single‐family homes, courtyard homes, townhomes,
and affordable apartments.
I recognize that some residents in our community are strongly opposed to housing or want to limit it as much as
possible. However, given the depth of the housing crisis we are facing, the reality is we have a responsibility to both
present and future generations who wish to call Dublin home to provide opportunities for upward mobility, particularly
on prime and centrally located properties as the one being discussed this evening. As someone who currently does some
Attachment 4
393
2
consulting with the Innovation Tri‐Valley Leadership Group, the number one challenge we hear from local employers
that is limiting their ability to attract or retain a talented workforce is an inability to find housing for their employees.
The numbers put out by the Silicon Valley Leadership Group and Bay Area Council paint a similarly grim picture of the
future of our region if we continue to fail in our obligations to provide a mixture of affordable and market rate housing.
In addition, as someone who works at Dublin High School and serves as a Trustee for the Chabot‐Las Positas Community
College District, I see the frustration from those who grew up here that realize they are being priced out of the
opportunity to remain in Dublin given the low supply and high demand of housing. This frustration will not be
completely solved of course through the Preferred Plan, but it does help to address the real need that exists.
I also want to point out that the original plan for the SCS property contemplated 261 units, while the "Promenade"
property where Emerald High School is being constructed called for 181 units for a total of 442 units. Thus, the total of
550 units being contemplated now for the neighborhood is within a very similar range. For a mere 108‐unit increase, the
Preferred Plan provides all of the amenities described above. Furthermore, traffic mitigations have already been put in
place for 442 units. If you combine the 442 units and over 1,000,000 square feet of commercial growth originally
envisioned between the SCS property and current Emerald High School site (formerly the Promenade), traffic will be
significantly reduced with the Preferred Plan from the original EDSP. In addition, there will be less demand for water
with the reduced development currently being contemplated for the site as well.
Some argue the schools are overcrowded and cannot handle more growth. The reality is if you take a closer look at the
enrollment numbers for Dublin USD, it is already beginning to level off and is not increasing nearly as much as in
previous years as the city approaches build‐out. In fact, I think Emerald High can benefit from the infusion of students
this project may generate, as otherwise both Emerald and other schools in the EDSP may soon begin seeing declining
enrollment in the not‐to‐distant future. Declining enrollment over time leads to budget cuts and reduced educational
services, something our students cannot afford.
Others argue that they want to see the amount of commercial square footage that was part of the original vision (or
something approaching it). Please keep in mind that 900,000 square feet of commercial envisioned for the SCS in the
EDSP is greater than the size of the Livermore Outlets, which hardly seems appropriate at this juncture. Even if you cut
that amount in half, that would still be larger than Hacienda Crossings. The question I would pose to the Planning
Commission is whether commercial developments of either size are appropriate. I would argue it is way beyond the
scale for an in‐fill site (which is what SCS is at this point), and even if we said we wanted to hold out for this larger grand
commercial vision, the reality is that the market no longer will support that level of commercial development. There was
already a growth in e‐commerce and a decline of brick‐and‐mortar commercial before the pandemic.....trends which
have only been exacerbated in the last 2 years.
In the final analysis, this is the last and best chance to connect and complete the Dublin Ranch community and the
center of the EDSP. The Preferred Plan is one that the market can actually support. Further inaction and waiting for
something better to come along will likely lead to ABAG and/or state‐mandated housing construction that may double
or triple the unit count of what is currently being presented.....with very few of the amenities the Preferred Plan before
you tonight offers.
Thank you again for your consideration of these comments and best of luck to you all in your deliberations. Please feel
free to contact me if you wish to discuss further prior to your meeting.
Sincerely,
Tim Sbranti
Former Dublin Mayor
394
1
Amy Million
From:Dean Barnes <debarnes707@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, February 9, 2022 1:01 PM
To:Amy Million
Subject:CAC member disagrees with proposals for the Dimanto property along Tassajara and Dublin, Blvd,
Gleason area
Hello Amy,
I am writing to voice my opposition to the proposals from the CAC committee of which I am a member to be provided to
the council as I won't be able to attend the city council meeting.
I did not select any of the choices provided to the CAC, not sure how other people felt either as I did not reach out to
anyone to discuss outside of our meetings. I think the city should inquire as to how many in the committee were in favor
and how many in the committee were against each option rather than suggesting we chose one option as that was not
how the material was presented. When we first met for the CAC, I suggested that anything over the vested amounts
(which seemed to be a reluctantly shared metric by the research firm) that the community would not get behind it as they
haven't in the past. I think selecting 500 homes is just another attempt that was made a couple of years ago to build 500
homes where only 266 or so are all that are required to build and I kind of felt that this is where we were going to be led
from the start. The residents already rejected those 500 homes - why do you feel that 500 homes again will win this
time? The city council thankfully rejected that, listening to homeowners, but have again, made attempts to bring the
project back with too many homes.
The research firm summarily dismissed less home options by suggesting more homes allows for subsidized/more retail
and I believe that our committee has not done our collective due diligence in coming up with a community solution that
benefits an already over stressed infrastructure that's lacking real walkable retail - a last opportunity to build a gem in east
Dublin - an opportunity for the council to build a retail establishment the city, and council members, can take pride in. A
solution that represents the constituents of the council. I also think that the city's approval to add 500 more homes nearby
to a property that had zero vesting, should be cause for concern in the committee as that should have been discussed in
coming up with ideas for this project - to identify how more homes around the area impacts our design and build out
goals. That between that property and what is being suggested as the middle ground of 500 homes on this project is
adding 1,000 homes to this community for these two projects (as proposed). We have water shortages, I'm concerned
about safety (someone walked up and stole a bike from my neighbor's front yard over the weekend, not enough police),
we have school overcrowding (even the school spoke against those 500 homes the council approved in Nov 2021), and
the city didn't listen, now the residents are petitioning to overturn that decision. Additionally, the city allowed the developer
to pay in-lieu of fees to side step required affordable housing and I fear it could be done just as easily on this project. You
always sell affordable housing as a reason to allow more homes, then let the developer shirk that responsibility.
I'd like to share with you some data I pulled from the Internet:
* Pleasanton, CA. is 24.27 square miles with 81,717 people (according to 2019 data) or 3,366.99 people per square mile
* San Ramon, CA is 18.72 square miles with 75,648 people (according to 2019 data) or 4,041.02 people per square mile
* Livermore, CA is 26.45 square miles with 89,699 people (according to 2019 data) or 3,391.27 people per square mile
* Dublin, CA is 15.23 square miles with 61,240 people (according to 2019 data, and we've definitely added since then) or
4,021.01 people per square mile.
Why does our city continue to propose we stuff more people into Dublin? Is there a prize if we fit the most people in our
city? It would seem to me that Dublin and San Ramon has built their numbers up and it's time for surrounding cities to
build more to accommodate housing shortages. Dublin should not be the city to solve the state shortage and it's time for
the council to protect Dublin and not allow it to be ruined by overdevelopment of residential units. I'm also concerned that
with state and local practices, people (and businesses) are leaving the state in record numbers. How will empty housing
positively affect our city? How will declining property values due to flooding the market with more homes and declining
population benefit our community? According to KTLA, from July of 2020 to July of 2021, California lost another 173,000
residents. According to ppic.org, California has lost 300,000 residents from January 2020 to July 2021.
I am concerned with the data collected in the committee and how the research firm will share their data with the city. I am
concerned about validity of the results - was each person in the survey validated - do they live here (real person, real
395
2
address). It would be easy for some with alternate plans to sway the survey in the manner in which they wish to lead us
(not accusing anyone, just saying anonymous or unchecked surveys have that concern for me). For the 500 homes the
residents fought against just recently in Nov 2021, the city said the absence of a majority of homeowners means that
overwhelmingly, Dublin residents wanted those 500 more homes to be built (a fact that is not verifiable just because
people didn't show up - I didn't show up, my neighbors didn't show up, and we are opposed to those 500 homes). I fear
the survey results could be misused in the same manner if the city council feels that survey results reflect actual residents
and business owners or a majority of them when the survey does not represent that - I fear the council will incorrectly
make assumptions from the survey data and not properly research the issues that are affecting our community. I am
concerned that the city refused to open the outdated master plan. I am disappointed with the results here and I don't feel
that concerns were adequately addressed with regards to the homes and the community. I am concerned that the city
council always hid behind the developer friendly school board who never spoke out against adding more homes stating
that "well, the school didn't speak up, so there must not be a problem". Okay, the council pretends to be blind and
hide. Okay, so Nov 2021, the school board finally speaks up, and what does the city council do? The approve more
homes anyways which just tells me you used the school board as an excuse in the past to push more homes and had
they complained, you would have approved more homes anyways.
In the end, the research company drew up what we already rejected in the community for the former At Dublin project,
500 homes. I have to be honest - I oppose anything more than the required number of homes - we have too many
already. Just this week, I was stuck in Dublin Blvd/Tassajara intersection because the freeway traffic lights backed up
and I couldn't see around the traffic/cars in front of me to avoid getting stuck in the intersection. We are overcrowded -
how can you not see that? Adding more retail will bring more crowds, true, but those crowds will leave and go home, may
not be there when we take kids to school in the morning or go to work, or come home.
I am opposed to more housing and I don't understand why the city would consider adding more homes than required and
question decisions made by our elected officials when those in attendance of meetings have spoken against these
things. I just don't understand. I wish we could have had more time to come up with more community supportable options
with less housing but I feel like I am being forced into and sold on the idea that building more and more homes is a
foregone conclusion and thus I'm not sure how much value we provided to the committee overall as it feels like this was
already decided - we are just here so the council can check a box and say "See! Even your own peers and residents said
they want 500 homes!" That's NOT what I said nor did I agree to it but that's how the data is being skewed towards.
Ryan from the research firm said in a follow up email to my concerns that "[the firm] received 9 out of 14 CAC members
supporting the mid scheme in task C (5xx homes) and a directive from the City Council to move forward with the mid
option"
In my opinion, I felt like the low option was under developed for retail and looked barren and bereft of retail with the
purpose of showing that more retail requires more homes - meaning if you want more retail, you need to sell out and can't
get away with less homes. I felt like the high option (over 600+ homes) was placed to push you into the mid option which
showed the mid option as a balance of pushing 5xx homes to get the desired results for retail and push the previous
agenda of 500 homes anyways like trying to put a dress on a pig. How do other cities get away with building classy retail
developments (i.e. Bishop Ranch - I know many residents in Dublin who go over there to shop/spend the day - heck I
know many residents who park and walk down Pleasanton main street because our city has failed to deliver something
like that here.), and we are stuck with the 'want retail? You need to add more homes' scenario? I think the city needs to
reject the proposals. The developer only has rights to build 2xx homes and that's all you have to approve and you can
force the developers to build quality retail if they want to have you approve those 2xx homes. If that means we have to
sacrifice retail because we are forced to, then so be it. I would be derelict in my duties representing my community and
neighbors who have voiced time and again opposition to more homes due to overcrowding if I went along with 500+
homes while being wooed with the promise of retail establishments. We don't do justice forcing homes for the prospect of
retail. I don't like feeling forced into a decision like that. In addition to being vested with 2xx homes, they also have to
build retail as part of the package as I recall, so they would owe us that as well - not like they are doing us some favor
building retail - it's the land's designed usage. It would be in the developers best interest to build quality retail to sell their
2xx home scenario. It would be in the city's best interest as well to make Dublin stronger, look better, and receive the
support of residents. We're the joke of surrounding cities. Look at the sardine housing you all approved and put over
where the military base was along Dublin Blvd (across from Bart). I'm ashamed driving through there because it's just so
cramped. There's no liveliness, no yards, and doesn't feel inviting. If you look at that tiny shopping center there, if you've
ever been there, where Whole Foods is, parking is terrible, it's overcrowded, and the parking spaces are cramped as
well. Adding more homes and small amount of retail with no parking and we exacerbate the problems of overcrowding,
once more to say nothing of inviting freeway traffic to stop by and shop if it's overcrowded - they'll just move on to some
other place.
396
3
Again, I didn't feel like I had a choice here - I felt like the three options were tailored to force most into the middle
option. For me, personally, I don't want to pick from the three because there isn't one that I prefer or can get
behind. Option 1 with 2xx homes has too little retail. Option 3 has way too many homes, and for me, the middle option is
a sell out to push more homes to gain much needed retail, thus I honestly can't get behind any of them. I also question
the decision of at least nine of my peers who supposedly agreed with the middle option for 5xx homes. Did any of them
pick that option because they felt they had to pick one and didn't have any other option to reject all three? For me, I don't
see how more homes forced on us to get retail is the best decision and I am left with the decision to respectfully reject all
three as none of them contain the fit our community needs right now. We need less homes and more retail and I feel the
city places obstacles on prospective businesses to make it less appealing for them to setup shop here. One of my
neighbors commented one time that a buddy of theirs wanted to open up a bar in Dublin but said the fees, the hurdles
were so ridiculous that they went to Livermore and Livermore practically rolled out the red carpet for them and they
opened up there. We had a chance for Tesla to build a warehouse/factory here and our city blew that too. Why do you
only see residential housing as the option and don't give me the line about property tax revenue. If you over build and
real estate crashed due to the exodus of the populous - your real estate property taxes will decline. Retail is the only
regularly sustainable income in this matter because through bad times and good, people still need to shop, eat, and buy
things.
Don't make us go get more signatures again to overturn your decisions that fail to listen to residents. You waste our time
and the community doesn't forget that. I mean no disrespect, but I am just so tired of the council continually approving
more and more homes despite opposition to them. Destroying commercial land and adding more and more homes. Our
safety is being threatened due to overpopulation. Our open land spaces are disappearing. Our water is becoming more
scarce. You have the power to make positive changes. Please, do what's right here and don't approve more
homes. Help us save our community, our city. Help make Dublin's last opportunity something our city can be proud
of. The community would remember you for that too.
thank you,
Dean Barnes
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
397
City Council
Meeting 3
PREFERRED PLAN
February 15th, 2022 398
With you tonight
City of Dublin:
Guests: Landowner Representatives
City Consultants:
Amy Million, Principal Planner
Kevin Fryer and Bo Radanovich
Ryan Call, ELS
Jane Lin, Urban Field Studio
Frank Fuller, Urban Field Studio
Christine Firstenberg, RRER
Bob Donnelly, Bernese Lane Partners
Debbie Kern, KMA
FEBRUARY 15TH, 2022
399
Existing Conditions
Spring 2021
Community
Brainstorming
Summer 2021
Vision Options
Fall 2021
Preferred
Vision
Winter 2021 -
2022
Project Schedule
01/06
01/12
01/25
02/15
Develop a
preferred plan
from feedback
on Vision
Options
CAC Meeting 3
Community Mtg. 3
Planning Comm.
City Council
FEBRUARY 15TH, 2022
400
Engagement Process
The Preferred Plan
Community Feedback
Next Steps & Recommendation
Tonight’s Discussion
FEBRUARY 15TH, 2022
401
Why are we talking about the Future of the SCS Site?
SCS PROPERTY : ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
402
P
P
P
FINNIAN WAYTASSAJARA ROADBRANNIGAN STREETCENTRAL PARKWAY
DUBLIN BOULEVARD
EMERALD GLEN PARK
WATERFORD
SHOPS
EMERALD HIGH SCHOOL
Entry-Level
Single Family
Detached
Entry-Level Single Family
Detached
Family Townhomes
Family Townhomes
Entry Level
Townhomes
Large
Single
Family
Homes
Large Single Family Homes
Entry Level Townhomes
Affordable
Housing
AVIANO WAY
GLEASON DRIVE
GRAND PASEOShophouses
Entertainment
District
Shophouses
Shophouses
Entertainment
District
Flex
Commercial
Flex
Commercial
SCS PROPERTY : ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
We are developing an actionable
Land Use Plan for the SCS Site (not
a development plan).
Not Feasible!DIABLO VIEW DRIVEShops
GRAND PASEOTASSAJARA PLACE403
Give the
community a
voice
Gain a better
understanding of
trade-offs
Become more
familiar with the
development
process
Build Consensus
through a public
engagement
process
Build a plan based
on community
input
SCS PROPERTY : ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
Only realistic, economically viable,
and physically feasible options were
developed as choices.
City Council Vision: Build the foundation for a better project at the site
404
City Council Vision: Build the foundation for a better project at the site
Including experts in
development, urban
design, economics,
retail, housing, and
affordable housing.
Consultant Team
Panel included
development
advisors, affordable
housing developers,
economists, and land
use experts.
ULI Technical
Advisory Panel
Committee
included Dublin
Residents that
own homes, rent
homes, work or
own a business
near the area.
Community
Advisory
Committee
Website: https://
courbanize.com/
projects/scsproperty/
information
Three online Community
Meetings and three
surveys were used to
gather feedback.
Online
Community
Meetings and
Surveys
Community driven
ideas were presented
to the property
owner’s team to test
what elements of the
plan were “on the
table”.
Checking in with the
Property Owner
SCS PROPERTY : ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
Give the
community a
voice
Gain a better
understanding of
trade-offs
Become more
familiar with the
development
process
Build Consensus
through a public
engagement
process
Build a plan based
on community
input
405
SCS PROPERTY : ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
406
How did we get feedback?
CoUrbanize Comments
Online Surveys
Community Advisory
Committee
4 CAC Meetings
Small group of diverse
community representation.
4 zoom meetings total
One on One Phone calls
3 Community Meetings
w / Interactive Breakrooms
3 Planning Commission
Meetings
2 City Council Meetings
Additional way to particpate
Identify themes or areas
that are important
Detailed Comments
Not a ballot!
Public Meetings
407
Community Voices
SCS PROPERTY : ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
Green
space is
breathing
Are we going
to have two
downtowns?
We are
concerned
about the
over-crowding
of schools!
How do we
capture the
“intangible”
people want on
this site?
We need to bring work
and play together. Can
retail spaces be flexible
to serve other uses
such as office?
We need to fill in the
retail we already have,
many centers are in need
of an update. We have
so many vacancies.
How do we
get foot
traffic across
Dublin Blvd.?
More
development
causes more
traffic.
Lets be careful to
consider the difference
between parks and
natural open space
Dublin’s culture is diverse,
and getting more diverse.
How can this development
respond to these cultural
forces?
Office space is obsolete
- retail is struggling, how
do we convince people
to embrace what can be
built?
Housing is too
expensive! We need
to require more
affordable housing.
Are we engaging the right
population? What about the
voices of the people who
want to live here but can’t
afford it.
How do we attract
boutique spaces, small
businesses, non-profits?
What about incubator
spaces?
408
The Options
Opportunities
• This could be an opportunity to connect existing
neighborhoods around the site
• This is an opportunity to right size and reconfigure the land
uses with what the market can bear
• This is an opportunity to bring more services to the area
Constraints
• Market Constraints (especially for retail, hotel, and office)
• Desired Physical Scale
• Impacts to shared public services: traffic, schools, parks, etc.
• Expectations are high, but the ability to do something viable
is limited
SCS PROPERTY : ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 850 Units +/-95 Affordable UnitsReduce Green-house gasesLandmark Open Space Pla
c
e
d
w
h
e
r
e
wa
l
k
a
b
l
e
t
o
exi
s
t
i
n
g
h
o
m
e
s
an
d
W
a
t
e
r
f
o
r
d
Sh
o
p
s
En
t
e
r
t
a
i
n
m
e
n
t
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
&
Lo
c
a
l
S
h
o
p
sAffordable by design650 Units +/-Neighborhood Main Street75 Affordable UnitsReduce Green-house gasesLandmark Open Space Pl
a
c
e
d
wh
e
r
e
m
o
s
t
ec
o
n
o
m
i
c
a
l
l
y
via
b
l
e
n
e
a
r
fre
e
w
a
y
En
t
e
r
t
a
i
n
m
e
n
t
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
&
Lo
c
a
l
S
h
o
p
s350 Units +/-Low Density40 Affordable Units For sale deed restrictedPl
a
c
e
d
wh
e
r
e
m
o
s
t
ec
o
n
o
m
i
c
a
l
l
y
via
b
l
e
n
e
a
r
fre
e
w
a
y
En
t
e
r
t
a
i
n
m
e
n
t
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
&
Lo
c
a
l
S
h
o
p
s 650 Units +/-Base Mid High
409
Design Feedback on the Options
Mid: +/- 650 units
Aviano Way
Gleason Drive
Tassajara Rd.Brannigan StreetCentral Pkwy
Finnian WayWaterford
Shops
Dublin Blvd.
Emerald
Glen Park
2
Grand GreenwayGrand GreenwayNeighborhood Main StreetNeighborhood Main Street
Views of Mt. DiabloViews of Mt. Diablo
Office or Retail Office or Retail
Entertainment Entertainment
DistrictDistrict
Hsg.Hsg.Hsg.Hsg.
Hsg.Hsg.
Hsg.Hsg.
Hsg.Hsg.
Hsg.Hsg.
Base: +/- 350 units
Aviano Way
Gleason Drive
Tassajara Rd.Brannigan StreetCentral Pkwy
Finnian Way
Dublin Blvd.
Emerald
Glen Park
1
Waterford
Shops
Office or Retail Office or Retail
Entertainment Entertainment
DistrictDistrict
Neighborhood ParkNeighborhood Park
Hsg.Hsg.
Hsg.Hsg.
Hsg.Hsg.
High: +/- 850 units
Aviano Way
Gleason Drive
Tassajara Rd.Brannigan StreetCentral Pkwy
Finnian Way
Dublin Blvd.
Emerald
Glen Park Hsg.Hsg.
Hsg.Hsg.
Hsg.Hsg.
Hsg.Hsg.
Hsg.Hsg.Hsg.Hsg.
Entertainment Entertainment
DistrictDistrict
Waterford
Shops
3
Finnian SquareFinnian Square
PaseoPaseo
PaseoPaseo
BASE MID HIGH
PREFERRED
ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT
FINNIAN
SQUARE
PASEO
RIGHT BALANCE OF UNITS
AND BENEFITS
+
+
+
+Missing retail north of
Dublin Blvd-Paseo too internalHousing type too uniformStreet wall on TassajaraBetter for
commercial uses
Too
high
Not
enough
benefits --SCS PROPERTY : ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
410
Preferred Plan
Features
Integrate the Grand Paseo and Town Square
A town square concept has been added to anchor the shops and restaurants on
Finnian Way. The square is located on the grand paseo opening views to Mt. Diablo.
Improve Visibility & Access to the Grand Paseo
Diablo View Drive now runs along the east side of the Grand Paseo creating greater
access and activity to the public open space. The paseo now widens towards
Tassajara Road inviting pedestrians and bikes off the major arterial onto the paseo.
Generous bike and pedestrian paths will connect Gleason Drive to Dublin Boulevard.
Diversify Housing Types
Housing throughout the site has been varied with entry level housing, affordable
housing, and family housing. Types range from traditional single family homes,
courtyard homes, town homes and affordable apartments. The draft land use
designations allow for a range of 500 to 550 market rate units and a 2.5 acre site for
affordable housing (70 to 150 units).
Dedicated Affordable Housing Site
The Preferred Plan includes a parcel to be dedicated for construction of affordable
housing. The site location, at the prominent corner of Tassajara Road and Dublin
Boulevard, will serve as a gateway to the larger neighborhood. The site is large
enough to allow a variety of affordable housing solutions, allowing the design and
amount of the affordable housing to be tailored to the community’s needs.
A Pedestrian Focused Entertainment District
The entertainment district south of Dublin Boulevard is set around a large pedestrian
plaza (roughly 120’ by 300’) creating a regional dining and family entertainment
destination.
P P
P
FINNIAN WAY BRANNIGAN STREETTASSAJARA ROADCENTRAL PARKWAY
DUBLIN BOULEVARD
WATERFORD
SHOPS
EMERALD
GLEN PARK
SORRENTO
DEVANY
SQUARE
EMERALD
HIGH SCHOOL
AVIANO WAY
GLEASON DRIVE
DIABLO VIEW DRIVEGRAND PASEOGRAND PASEOSCS PROPERTY: PREFERRED PLAN
411
Integrate the Grand Paseo and Town Square Concepts:
• Design of the Grand Paseo has been changed to lead directly to
a town square on Finnian Way.
• The Grand Paseo narrows as it approaches the plaza to draw
people together and create a more social gathering space.
• The Grand Paseo varies in width from 35’ to 110’ wide.
• A walk along the Paseo will include a variety of activities,
from retail, recreational, public gardening, and native plant /
pollinator meadows.
5k 3.5k 3.5k
2.5k2.5k
Community
145’-0”
Finnian Way Neighborhood Retail District is approximately 40,000 sf 90’-0”SCS PROPERTY: PREFERRED PLAN
P
P
P
FINNIAN WAY BRANNIGAN STREETTASSAJARA ROADCENTRAL PARKWAY
DUBLIN BOULEVARD
WATERFORD
SHOPS EMERA
L
D
H
I
G
H
SCHOO
L
AVIANO WAY
GLEASON DRIVE
DIABLO VIEW DRIVEGRAND PASEOGRAND PASEO412
Improve Visibility and Access to the Grand Paseo:
• Diablo View Drive (20 mph) accompanies the Grand Paseo
providing street parking, access to the activities on the
linear park.
• The southeast corner of Emerald Glen Park is an
important connection point. Setbacks along the Central
Parkway create a landscaped gateway to the Grand Paseo.
• The pedestrian and bike oriented Grand Paseo will serve
the new development as well as the larger neighborhood
giving an healthy alternative to driving to shops,
restaurants, and schools.
TASSAJARA ROADCENTRAL PARKWAY
Setback
EMERALD GLEN
PARK
The SCS site is within a 1/2 mile of k-12 schools, a
Safeway anchored shopping center, bus service,
Emerald Glen Park and many other services. Bike
access along the paseo combined with dedicated
bike lanes on the Aviano and Finnian Way extensions
will make walking, jogging and biking a fun and family
friendly option.
The Grand Paseo widens towards
Tassajara Road as it approaches
Gleason Drive for improved access
and visibility. DIABLO VIEW DRIVEGRAND PASEOTASSAJARA ROADSCS PROPERTY: PREFERRED PLAN
413
Finnian Square
414
Finnian Square
415
P
P
P
Diversify Housing Types
• The affordable housing and higher density townhomes
are located closest to shops, restaurants reducing
vehicle miles traveled and adding life to the retail
district.
• The entry level townhomes consist predominantly
of two bedroom units catering to first time buyers
and those wishing to downsize. These are located
convenient to Emerald Glen Park as well as the shops.
• Single Family homes are located centrally to the three
schools: Kolb Elementary School (.6 miles); Fallon
Middle School (.4 miles); Emerald High School (.5
miles).
• Shophouses will bring small shops and local
businesses to the Finnian Way Neighborhood shops
district.
PREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
FINNIAN WAYTASSAJARA ROADBRANNIGAN STREETCENTRAL PARKWAY
DUBLIN BOULEVARD
EMERALD GLEN PARK
WATERFORD
SHOPS
EMERALD HIGH
SCHOOL
Entry-Level
Single Family
Detached
Entry-Level
Single Family
Detached
Family Townhomes
Family Townhomes
Entry Level
Townhomes
Large
Single
Family
Homes
Large Single Family Homes
Entry Level
Townhomes
Entry Level
Townhomes
Affordable
Housing
AVIANO WAY
GLEASON DRIVE
DIABLO VIEW DRIVEGRAND PASEOShophouses
Shops
Shophouses
Shophouses Shops
416
Affordable Housing
Examples of Affordable Housing courtesy of Pyatok Architecture
Dedicated Site Strategy
To maximize the affordable benefit and provide
flexibility to respond to the City’s specific
Affordable Housing needs, our proposed strategy
for the affordable housing requirement is to
provide a large parcel to be dedicated to the
construction of affordable units.
The site location, at the prominent corner of
Tassajara Road and Dublin Boulevard will serve as
a gateway to the larger district.
The site is large enough to provide a variety of
solutions, allowing the design of the affordable
housing to be tailored to the community’s needs.
Depending on the type of product and
construction type, the number of units could vary
substantially and may be substantially influenced
by the funding sources.
2.5 Acres
PREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
417
A Pedestrian Focused Entertainment District:
• Central Plaza - Approx. 120’ x 340’
• 55,000 to 60,000 sf of retail, restaurants,
entertainment
• 100,000 to 300,000 sf of Flex Commercial
development
• Ample space for restaurant seating, plaza seating
• Plaza comprised of diverse seating options, spatial
experiences, caters to variety of group sizes, all ages
• Space for outdoor music and performance
• Seasonal Programming and Events
• Freeway + Dublin Boulevard access and visibility
open’s door for higher rents and national tenants
• Parking Areas large enough for future parking garages
and increased commercial development (if market
supports)
Family Entertainment
Anchor
7.5k
30k
5k5k
5k5k
PREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
Flex Commercial Zone:
• Office Campus
• Regional Retail or Restaurants
• Hotel
• Top Golf
Retail Parking Retail Parking 340’-0”120’-0”
418
Entertainment District
419
PREFERRED PLAN CONCEPTS
Entertainment District
420
Finnian Way District
42,000 sf Restaurants, Shops, and Services
Tassajara Place Entertainment District
57,000 sf Restaurants, Shops, and Services
+ 150,000 sf to 300,000 sf of Flexible Commercial development
Affordable Housing
70 to 150 units (Depends on size of unit and construction type)
Entry Level Townhomes
Approximately 138 Units
Family Townhomes
Approximately 211 Units
Shop Houses
Approximately 40 Units (24,000 sf retail counted in Finnian Way District)
Entry Level Single Family Detached homes
Approximately 122 Units
Large Single Family Detached homes
Approximately 28 Units
Land Use Feasibility
Commercial UsesResidential UsesAmenities, including retail, the Grand Paseo, plazas, streets, etc.
determined the necessary range of unit counts.
Total
Commercial
Ranges 250,000 sf
to 400,000 sf
Total
Market Rate
Residential
Ranges 500 to 550
units (539 shown)
Total
Affordable
Residential
Ranges 70 to 150
units
Entry-Level
Single Family Detached
Entry-Level
Single Family
Detached
Family Townhomes
Shop HousesShop Houses
Shop Houses
Family Townhomes
Entry Level
Townhomes
Large
Single
Family
Homes
Large Single Family Homes
Entry Level
Townhomes
Entry Level
Townhomes
Affordable
Housing
421
Community Feedback
SCS PROPERTY: COMMUNITY FEEDBACK
Areas of Contention
Areas of Consensus
Focusing on Site Related Issues
422
Base
Mid
High
Areas of Contention How much Housing are we willing to allow
to get amenities?
Split on whether
affordable housing
should serve seniors or
families
Split with a slight
preference for the
dispersed inclusionary
housing limited to 79
units.
No clear lead yet on the
features that are biggest
priorities.
SCS PROPERTY: COMMUNITY FEEDBACK
Which viable options presented below is the
best use of the SCS Property?
Finnian Square is intended to be a neighborhood focused gathering
spot and is intimate in scale. Considering the smaller scale, what
plaza features should be prioritized?
Based on the 550 market-rate units that are needed to support the
amenities desired, there is some flexibility on how much affordable
housing is included. Which of the following do you prefer?
Regarding affordable housing, who do you think it should serve?
(mark as many as you like)
423
Not dense enough! This is an excellent
opportunity for a higher-density project
that would create a large quantity of
housing (both affordable and market rate)
close to jobs, transit, and other amenities..
Do like the main
street, which
Dublin desperately
needs. Don’t like
that it has so much
housing, which
will lead to further
overcrowding of
Need to see plan
for schools to
accommodate kids
from 550 homes.
We should reduce
housing in favor of
more community
space.
Criminally low amount of homes
given the location. There should
be large apartments that can fit
families, instead of single family
homes and rowhouses.
I like that there is housing but
I’d prefer more and denser
housing to create walkable
neighborhoods for even more
families and seniorsMore HousingDesignRetail/DiningGeneralHousing and SchoolsPlease limit the
number houses and
more shopping and
entertainment area,
open and kids play area
I absolutely love the paseo
bike trail and the fully
separated bike lanes. This
particular plan does a good
job at showing sensitivity to
the surrounding land uses.
Thank you for all your hard work
and for providing us the option
to voice our opinions. I really like
the plan and hope that it’s going
to be approved.
Dislike the large
number of regular
market rate
housing units.
Like that there
will be dedicated
affordable
housing.
You need to build
more schools if you
want to build any
housing
Too much single
family housing, retail
and entertainment to
replace it
It’s a good plan with
a balance for the
community. I hope there
will be small single story
family
More emphasis on the local
small stores and restaurants.
We could have a section
for only local shops and
restaurants.
Like the family entertainment
district and Grand Paseo. Focus
on making this a Dublin Landmark
with large, meaningful and
respresentative sculpture or
architectural element.
Love the idea of Finnian Way
being a central main street with
protected bike lanes, the Grand
Paseo, overall friendliness of the
pedestrian / cyclist development,
and housing to retail balance.
Why not mix
housing types?
Too suburban,
isolating
townhomes from
single family etc.,
Like Grand
Paseo walkway,
entertainment
district. Don’t
like too many
housing. The area
around is already
overcrowded with
dense housing.
424
Community Meeting 3
We are asking
the City to
require more
affordable
housing, they
must do more.
Why are our
schools over-
crowded? Why
did previous
planning efforts
let this happen?
Why isn’t there
more retail?
We need more
tax revenue.
Housing is a
burden.
Can a Mello-
Roos be used
to support
schools and
infrastructure?
The affordable
housing needs to
be built on-site.
In-Lieu fees should
not be an option.
Developers
must support
infrastructure
and schools.
SCS PROPERTY: COMMUNITY FEEDBACK
Can we have
a mixed-
use corridor
with greater
connectivity?
Concerns about schools and
affordable housing
425
Yes to amend land uses Yes to public amenities
Highest Priority:
Landmark Open Space
No
Areas of Consensus
Yes to connections to
Emerald Glen Park
Our Neighborhood Needs a Center
Yes to Raised Crosswalks
Yes to Pollinator Plants
and Children’s Play Areas
SCS PROPERTY: COMMUNITY FEEDBACK
426
SCS PROPERTY: COMMUNITY FEEDBACK
Community Advisory Committee
Big improvement
over the previous
proposals
A huge amenity
for the City
that can meet
a variety of
needs and
interests
The plan does
a good job of
merging the
comments from
the previous
schemes
Think about the
key focal points
and remember
shading is
important in
Dublin
Much
consideration
has been taken
so that the
land uses are
not jumbled, it
flows well
The land uses
present a good
balance of
public benefits
and market rate
housing
The
comparison
to The Lot at
City Center is
powerful as
many people
enjoy that
space
Create a connected center
with a distinct sense of place
427
Planning Commission Meeting 3 Commentary January 25th, 2022
SCS PROPERTY: COMMUNITY FEEDBACK
The inclusionary
zoning is critical for
our community to
have some affordable
housing for people
to buy
Overall I think
its quite a
collaborative
and well
thought out
plan
Realistic,
economically
feasible! There
is so much for
everyone who is
going to be part
of the community
here.
Be bold, need
to double the
affordable
housing, make
the square
bigger,
I like the fact that
it is reminiscent to
a downtown area, I
like the nod towards
the open space
maintaining the
view of the hills
It’s amazing the
amount of work
that has gone into
this, the thought,
appreciate
you have been
patient.
An
unprecedented
effort. Want to
thank all of the
neighbors who
got involved,
don’t stop!
428
Additional
Inclusionary
Housing
Planning Commission Recommendation:
SCS PROPERTY: COMMUNITY FEEDBACK
On January 25th, after the consultant presentation, and two public speakers in favor, one against,
the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend the Preferred Plan with the following :
The Planning Commission’s recommendation includes:
Providing inclusionary
for-sale units integrated
into the project in
addition to the dedicated
affordable housing site to
provide homeownership
opportunities
Additional Inclusionary
Housing modifies proforma
requiring additional
funding. Magnitude
depends on quantity and
type of units. May require
additional trade-offs.
Preferred
Plan with
dedicated
2.5 acre
site for
affordable
housing.
429
The following sets expectations for the landuses and public benefits that have been defined through the
community outreach process as key elements necessary for a development of the SCS property to meet the
greater needs of the community:
Must Haves:
1. Market rate residential housing not to exceed 550 units.
2. Finnian Way and Aviano Way extended through the project site from Brannigan Street to Tassajara Road.
3. Finnian Way frontage limited to commercial uses on the ground floor, which may be provided through a “Shop House”
concept with substantive commercial space (not less than 400 square feet).
4. Housing types throughout the site that vary with entry level housing, affordable housing, and family housing. Types range
from traditional single-family homes, courtyard homes, town homes and affordable apartments.
5. Include a combination of inclusionary for-sale units and a Public/Semi-Public parcel dedicated for affordable housing. Note:
The addition of inclusionary for-sale units requires consideration of the economic impacts. The combination of a dedicated
site and inclusionary units would require alternative funding sources to make the Preferred Plan an economically viable plan.
This funding could come from a variety of sources and would be negotiated as part of the future development application.
6. A town square concept to anchor the shops and restaurants on Finnian Way. The town square is located on the grand paseo
opening views to Mt. Diablo. The paseo connects the square to the residential areas south and north of Finnian Way.
7. The entertainment district south of Dublin Boulevard is set around a large pedestrian plaza (roughly 120 feet by 300 feet)
creating a regional dining and family entertainment destination.
Resolution
NEXT STEPS
430
Next Steps for the SCS Property
• The next step is for the property owner to submit
a development project
• A General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
Amendment, Planned Development Rezone with
a Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Tentative
Parcel Map, and Site Development Review Permit
and Affordable Housing Agreement would be
required for a future development project
• Evaluation of the development project under
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
would occur prior to project approval
NEXT STEPS
431
Recommendation
• Receive presentation on the SCS Property
Preferred Plan, provide feedback and adopt a
Resolution recommending that the City Council
approve the Preferred Plan for the SCS Property.
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SCS PROPERTY
432
February 15, 2022
SB 343
Senate Bill 343 mandates supplemental materials
that have been received by the City Clerk’s office that
relate to an agenda item after the agenda packets
have been distributed to the City Council be available
to the public.
The attached documents were received in the City
Clerk’s office after distribution of the February 15,
2022, Regular City Council meeting agenda packet.
Item 7.1
433
1
Amy Million
From:tentguy23@gmail.com
Sent:Thursday, February 10, 2022 7:59 PM
To:Amy Million
Subject:SB343 to the City Council
Hi Amy,
I appreciate the team requesting community input for green space, paths, features, etc. but I feel we were not heard
when it comes to the housing issue. For me, and I have consistently said, my friends, neighbors, and people I meet in
Dublin all have said “enough housing” ‐ we want a downtown with entertainment, family fun, retail, etc. in this space.
In short, we were told the developer/landowner had to subsidized with housing and family entertainment was not
affordable and somehow, Dublin and the surrounding communities could not support these this business type in this
economy. I see Pleasanton, Concord, San Jose, San Ramon and Livermore, it is possible. Fast forward, we were
presented with 3 options “which one we thought was best” – fast forward again, this is what is being presented and now
we are right back where we were with “at Dublin” project with over 500 units, but now “community input” has been
added to the language. Then we were sent a survey supporting this agenda – carefully word crafted questions all in
support of this project “which one you like best”.
To be clear, I do not support this amount of housing. Personally, I would like to see ¾ of this for land for retail,
entertainment, family, downtown and perhaps the smaller lot towards Emerald Glenn to be designated for “some”
housing.
Thank you all for your efforts.
________________________
Kevin McAuliffe
tentguy23@gmail.com
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
434
1
Amy Million
From:Brandon Evans <brandon.m.evans@comcast.net>
Sent:Friday, February 11, 2022 11:32 PM
To:Amy Million
Subject:Letter To City Council
Hello Amy,
Here is my letter addressed to city council in regards to the CAC group I was in to discuss potential development in East
Dublin off of Santa Rita Road.
“
Members of Council,
I hope this reaches you all in good health. My name is Brandon Evans and I have most recently been a member of the
CAC regarding the property boardering Tassajara, Dublin Boulevard and Gleason Road.
I would like to voice my support to move this project forward.
I am a proud resident of Dublin and the Treasurer of my local electrical workers union based out of Dublin (IBEW Local
595). As a proud tradesperson and member of this community I strongly support this project. I think if executed
correctly it can provide not only a fine community space and extra housing but work for skilled and local tradespeople.
There is nothing quite like working close to home and seeing something you helped build on a regular basis. It is my
wish and that of those that I speak for that we get the opportunity to showcase skilled union craftsmanship on this
project.
I fully support the preferred plan for this project as it has been presented and am honored to have been chosen as part
of this CAC.
Sincerely,
Brandon Evans
“
I hope this can still be included. My apologies for mentioning “planning commission” instead of CAC originally.
Regards,
Brandon Evans
Sent from my iPhone
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
435
1
Amy Million
From:Kathy Blackburn <kathyblackburn@comcast.net>
Sent:Saturday, February 12, 2022 1:54 PM
To:Amy Million
Cc:'Ryan Call'
Subject:Comment for City Council on SCS preferred plan
To the City Council regarding SCS preferred plan:
I was part of the Citizens Advisory Council for this project and I want to thank the Council for sponsoring this effort to
solicit community input.
The consultants did as well as could be expected given the parameters around the amount of housing needed. I
preferred this option over the others we were given but in truth, none of the options was in my view good for Dublin. It
is as if we have to develop this parcel so what are we going to do with it, rather than looking at how this parcel fits in
with the larger community. I am concerned that this development decision is being made without looking at 1) how it
will impact traffic, schools and infrastructure; 2) how it fits with the plan to develop a downtown in Dublin; 3) how it will
impact and be impacted by the new school across the street, and 4) how it helps to connect our community which is, in
my view, a bit of a jigsaw puzzle of individual neighborhoods and housing developments rather than a connected
community.
I hope that the Council will consider these bigger picture questions as you consider whether to approve this option or
another for this parcel.
Thank you,
Kathy Blackburn
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
436
1
Amy Million
From:Sri Muppidi <sri13muppidi@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, February 13, 2022 9:02 PM
To:Amy Million
Cc:Ryan Call
Subject:Re: Reminder - NEXT WEEK February 15th! City Council Meeting to discuss the SCS Preferred Plan
Hi Amy‐‐ here are my comments in advance of Tuesday's meetings. Thanks!
Dear Honorary Members of the Dublin City Council‐‐
I'm currently a Dublin resident and was on SCS CAC. I'd encourage the committee to adopt the guiding resolutions.
I think it's important for Dublin to continue supporting affordable and entry‐level housing development and I'd
encourage the committee to agree to supporting the 550 unit count. We should favor more condensed units to
accomodate more residents, especially those who qualify for affordable and/or senior housing. Residents should have
their own parking designated so that traffic from the entertainment area wouldn't encroach and create parking/traffic
pressures for the residents there. Concerns around school pressures can also be mitigated as the development of
Emerald High will reduce immediate, short‐term pressures in the future, especially as it will take time for this
development to finish.
A reduction of single family homes in favor of condensed units will also enable more opportunities for town
square/paseo concepts which will bring more of a sense of community to the East Dublin area and encourage more
traffic from the neighboring Tri‐Valley area for shopping/entertainment/restaurants. I like the paseo and town area
concept on Finnian Way and I think ground‐floor shopping (Shop House) encourages people to stroll around and drive
more business in the area. It's important that safety is considered in the paseo/town traffic area ‐‐ pedestrian safety is
important and should be prioritized over car traffic. Bike lanes should also be incorporated. If possible, parking
structures should be more compact (i.e. vertical or underground) so that there's more pedestrian‐friendly spaces instead
of large parking lots. Stop lights shouldn't be extraordinarily long (from personal experience, for example, Tassajara
pedestrian stoplights tend to be very long and don't encourage pedestrian‐friendly walkways). There should also be a lot
of trees, plants, and gardens to create shady and protected areas for pedestrians.
Thanks,
Sri
‐‐
Sri Muppidi
On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 1:50 PM Amy Million <Amy.Million@dublin.ca.gov> wrote:
Thank you to those that have provided their comments thus far. I was just informed that we will publishing the City
Council agenda packet today, so the first deadline for comments is today at 3:30 p.m. My apologies for the confusion.
437
1
Amy Million
From:Avni Kansara <akansara@haas.berkeley.edu>
Sent:Monday, February 14, 2022 4:28 PM
To:Amy Million
Subject:Notes for City Council Meeting re SCS Property
Hello Amy,
Please see below some notes for the city council meeting:
* I appreciate the residential housing limit to be at 550 units versus over 600. As someone who lives
right across the street from this open lot (Brannigan Street), I generally don't like the idea of more
housing. However, it has been explained that there needs to be more housing in order to afford the
amenities and that is my top priority. I still would be happier if that number could be reduced further
without impact on the amenities offered. Again, amenities are my number one priority.
* I really love the use of Finnian Way to serve as the area with small shops and cafes to create the
community feel while still providing engaging experiences that could attract people from Dublin. Also
it's close distance to the Emerald Glen Park and the Waterford Shopping is also helpful because I
could see families spending a day filled with activities.
* One of my biggest concerns I bring up is parking and while it may seem repetitive, I want to
continue to stress the importance of planning adequate parking to sustain the business and residence
in that plan. The reason I bring this up is that it is already extremely difficult to find parking for a guest
given the current number of houses that currently exists so the addition of new houses and shops
could cram up those spaces even further, making it a bit difficult for people who live there.
* While there may be a lot of limitations (Budget, etc) that might make this impossible at the moment,
but I do think it'll be crucial to think about increasing the ease of pedestrians who want to cross,
specifically near across dublin to get to the entertainment district.
Let me know if you need any further information. Thank you!
Sincerely,
Avni
Avni Kansara | Director of Student Experience
She/Her/Hers
Evening & Weekend MBA Program
Haas School of Business
University of California, Berkeley
akansara@haas.berkeley.edu | 510.642.1281 | @ewmba office
In Office: Tuesday, Thursday
Remote: Monday, Wednesday, Friday
Join me in my virtual office on my remote days to say hi!
438
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Page 1 of 3
Agenda Item 7.2
DATE:February 15, 2022
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:Authorize a Budget Shift to Fiscal Year 2021-22 for the Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space ProjectPreparedby:Laurie Sucgang,City Engineer
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:The City Council will consider shifting funds to Fiscal Year 2021-22 for the Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space project (CIP No. PK0422)to allow for design work to begin in the current fiscal year on the first phase of the project to meet a State Grant deadline for a completed project by December 31, 2023.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Approve a budget change authorizing the shifting of funds to Fiscal Year 2021-22.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:As approved in the 2020 –2025 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the total budget for the Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Project is currently $11,563,000, funded partially by Public Facility Fees ($7,081,000)beginning in Fiscal Year 2022-23 (Attachment 1). The remaining funding is a combination of State Park Grant and unidentified funds. A budget change is proposed to shift the current funding to Fiscal Year 2021-22 to allow the project work to commence immediately.
DESCRIPTION:The adopted 2020-2025 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes the Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Project and provides for the planning, design, and construction of 12.13 acres of a nature park and open space adjacent to the Iron Horse Trail, from the Dublin/San Ramon city limit to the confluence of Alamo and South San Ramon Creeks.In 2013, the City Council adopted the Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Master Plan in
439
Page 2 of 3
partnership with the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Zone 7(Zone) to seek project grant funding and develop the site. The total scope encompasses approximately 35 acres of land, comprising 12 acres owned by the City of Dublin as the public park, as shown on page 1 of Attachment 4, and 23 acres owned by Zone 7.On December 7, 2021, the City Council approved the filing of an application for the Local Assistance Specified Grant from the State of California, Natural Resources Agency, Department of Parks and Recreation, and the Office of Grants and Local Services in the amount of $2,294,000 (Resolution No. 135-21). The State Grant program guidelines require that project construction be completed by December 31, 2023. For Staff to complete the design, environmental, right-of-way, and construction phases by the deadline, the project must begin immediately. Since December, Staff completed the State Grant application and has obtained proposals from the various design consultants to begin work a soon as funding is allocated to the current fiscal year.Given the limited funds secured and the restrictive State Grant deadline, Staff recommends utilizing the grant funds to construct the first phase of the Project, consistent with the adopted Master Plan, which may include the following elements:
Approximately 2,000 linear feet of new trail, 10-feet wide paved with two-foot-wideshoulders on each side. The approximate location is shown on page 2 of Attachment 4.
Gathering spaces
Outdoor classrooms
Shade features
Benches and boulders for sitting
Trail markers, educational signage, and wayfinding signs
Trail entry feature at the intersection of the Iron Horse Trail with Amador Valley Boulevard
Spur trails or connections to the existing paved trail and stub-out trails to future destinations (e.g., Stagecoach Park)Upon approval of the shifting of funds to the current fiscal year, Staff will immediately begin work with the design consultant. Construction of the first phase is anticipated to begin in summer 2023and be completed by the State Grant deadline of December 31, 2023.Status of Zone 7’s Portion of the ProjectCity Staff and Zone 7 staff communicate regularly, and while the City has obtained funding for a portion of the public park and is ready to begin the Project, Zone 7 is currently updating its Flood Management Plan to determine appropriate measures that may be incorporated into the Project as a flood control benefit. Zone 7 has applied for a State Proposition 68 Department of Water Resources grant for their Alamo Creek Pilot Bank Stabilization Project, which is just downstream and immediately adjacent to the Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Project. If Zone 7 is successful in securing the grant and the pilot project is implemented, Zone 7 plans to use similar bank stabilization and enhancement measures within their portion of the Project, as it will improve creek stability, enhance creek vegetation, and add shade and aesthetic amenities for the trail users and residents of the City.
440
Page 3 of 3
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)The City Council adopted Resolution No. 166-13 adopting the mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the Project. No further action is required at this time.
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:None.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:The City Council Agenda was posted.
ATTACHMENTS:1) CIP No. PK0422 as Approved in 2020-2025 CIP2) CIP No. PK0422 with Funding Shift3) Budget Change 4) Approved Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Master Plan Excerpts
441
Number PK0001ProgramPARKSPRIOR YEARS 2020-2021 BUDGET 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 FUTURE YEARSTOTALS9100$60,400 $102,900 $85,000$248,3009200$400,000 $780,000 $646,505$1,826,5059400$1,000,000 $7,867,695$8,867,6959500$1,250 $619,250$620,500$461,650 $2,502,150$8,599,200$11,563,000PRIOR YEARS 2020-2021 BUDGET 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 FUTURE YEARSTOTALS4100$461,650 $2,502,150 $4,117,200$7,081,0009998$4,482,000$4,482,000$461,650 $2,502,150$8,599,200$11,563,000ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACT2020-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMIRON HORSE NATURE PARK AND OPEN SPACETOTALMiscellaneousESTIMATED COSTSFUNDING SOURCETOTALPublic Facility FeesUnidentifiedSalaries & BenefitsContract ServicesImprovementsPROJECT DESCRIPTIONThis project provides for the planning, design, and construction of 12.13 acres of a nature park and open space adjacent to the Iron Horse Trail, from the Dublin/San Ramon city limit to the confluence of Amador and South San Ramon Creeks, that will be developed in partnership with Zone 7 Water Agency. The park size could increase to over 20 acres of usable parkland when combined with adjacent Zone 7 Water Agency property. The park will be designed in accordance with the Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Master Plan, which was approved by City Council on October 1, 2013. The City has already acquired the 12.13 acres and the balance of the parkland would be accessible through an easement and operational agreement with Zone 7 Water Agency. It is anticipated that planning will begin in Fiscal Year 2022-2023.In addition to the Public Facility Fee, possible funding sources are statewide grants for projects that provide non-motorized infrastructure and enhancements that promote new or alternate access to parks, waterways, outdoor recreational pursuits, and forested or other natural environments to encourage health-related active transportation and opportunities for Californians to reconnect with nature, such as Active Transportation Program grants or Proposition 68.ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACT: TBDMANAGING DEPARTMENT: Public Works Attachment 1442
Number PK0422ProgramPARKSPRIOR YEARS 2020-2021 BUDGET 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 FUTURE YEARSTOTALS9100$60,400 $102,900 $42,500 $42,500$248,3009200$400,000 $630,000 $600,000 $196,505$1,826,5059400$2,294,000 $344,100 $6,229,595$8,867,6959500$1,250 $109,250 $255,000 $255,000$620,500$461,650 $3,136,150 $1,241,600 $6,723,600$11,563,000PRIOR YEARS 2020-2021 BUDGET 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 FUTURE YEARSTOTALS4100$461,650 $842,150 $1,241,600 $4,535,600$7,081,0009998$2,188,000$2,188,0002403$2,294,000$2,294,000$461,650 $3,136,150 $1,241,600 $6,723,600$11,563,000ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACTUnidentifiedSalaries & BenefitsContract ServicesImprovements2020-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMIRON HORSE NATURE PARK AND OPEN SPACETOTALState Park GrantMiscellaneousESTIMATED COSTSFUNDING SOURCETOTALPublic Facility FeesPROJECT DESCRIPTIONThis project provides for the planning, design, and construction of 12.13 acres of a nature park and open space adjacent to the Iron Horse Trail, from the Dublin/San Ramon city limit to the confluence of Alamo and South San Ramon Creeks, that will be developed in partnership with Zone 7 Water Agency. The park size could increase to over 20 acres of usable parkland when combined with adjacent Zone 7 Water Agency property. The park will be designed in accordance with the Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Master Plan, which was approved by City Council on October 1, 2013. The City has already acquired the 12.13 acres and the balance of the parkland would be accessible through an easement and operational agreement with Zone 7 Water Agency. The City will continue to pursue the acquisition of the Alameda County portion of the Iron Horse Trail corridor to add to the City's portion of the parkland. It is anticipated that planning and design will begin in Fiscal Year 2021-2022 and construction of the first phase will begin in Fiscal Year 2022-2023.In addition to the Public Facility Fee, possible funding sources are additional statewide grants for projects that provide non-motorized infrastructure and enhancements that promote new or alternate access to parks, waterways, outdoor recreational pursuits, and forested or other natural environments to encourage health-related active transportation and opportunities for Californians to reconnect with nature, such as Active Transportation Program grants or Proposition 68.ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACT: TBDAttachment 2443
Budget Change Reference #:
From Un-Appropriated Reserves X et Transfer Between Funds
From Designated Reserves Other
Account Amount Account Amount
PK0422.9100.9101 (Salary/Benefits) $60,400
PK0422.9200.9202 (Design) $250,000
PK0422.9200.9206 (Testing) $50,000
PK0422.9200.9207 (Professional Svcs) $100,000
PK0422.9500.9203 (Printing) $1,000
PK0422.9500.9505 (Postage) $250
3500.9501.49999 (Transfers In) $461,650
PK0422.4111 (4111.9501.89101) -Community Nature Park Fund Transfers Out $461,650
2/15/2022
Posted By: Date:
As Presented at the City Council Meeting
**********Finance Use Only**********
CITY OF DUBLIN
REASON FOR BUDGET CHANGE
FISCAL YEAR 2021-22
BUDGET CHANGE FORM
DECREASE BUDGET AMOUNT INCREASE BUDGET AMOUNT
City Council's Approval Required
EXP: Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space (PK0422)
Appropriation of funds to Fiscal Year 2021-22 for the Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space project to
allow for design work to begin in the current fiscal year on the first phase of the project to meet a State
Grant deadline for a completed project by December 31, 2023.
G:\CIP\_Active Projects\PK0001 (P‐21) Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space\City Council, Commissions, Resolutions, Etc\CC 2022‐02‐15\09_PK0422
Iron Horse Nature Park_02152022
Attachment 3
444
9B O U L E V A R DSOUTH SAN RAMON CREEK
ZONE 7 FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL
IRON HORSE REGIONAL TRAIL
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
IRON HORSE PARK & OPEN SPACE
FORMER SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD
GAS LINE EASEMENT
ALAMEDA COUNTY PROPERTY
A M A D O R V A L L E Y North
City-owned
Parcels
KEY
Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Master Plan (Excerpts)
Approved by the City Council on October 1, 2013
Attachment 4
445
15
MOSAIC
trail head facilities
picnic meadow
flexible open space
connection to alamo creek
connection to dublin bart station
connection to dublin civic center
new connection to douGherty open space
nearby neiGhborhood connection to project site
existinG connection to douGherty open space
pipeline easement typical
tertiary hikinG trail with restinG areas
crossinG at amador valley boulevard
expanded wetland with boardwalk trails and wildlife viewinG platforms
GatherinG space and outdoor classroom
refurbished railroad trestle historical remnant
expanded and naturalized south san ramon creek
rocky outcrop
re-Grade to enhance physical link with staGecoach park
GatherinG space and outdoor classroom
connection to hiGh school
public access
children’s Garden
community Gardens
re-aliGned iron horse trail - typical
secondary hikinG trail at creek edGe
limited access neiGhborhood connection
oak savannah
Grassland
wetland
wetland
riparian forest
meadow
connection to san ramon
LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN
North
Phase 1
Location
KEY
Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Master Plan (Excerpts)
Approved by the City Council on October 1, 2013
446
Item 7.2
Authorize a Budget Shift to FY
2021-22 for the Iron Horse Nature
Park and Open Space Project
February 15, 2022
447
Background
•Master Plan approved Oct 1, 2013
•Adopted Environmental Document
Property Owners:
•Zone 7 –area of channel and existing Iron Horse Trail
•City of Dublin –12 acres
•Alameda County –gas pipeline easement and fiber optic lease
Stakeholders:
•EBRPD –Maint and License Agreement
•HOAs, homeowners, adjacent property owners
•DUSD –connection to Dublin High School
•KinderMorgan, Fiber Optic, other utilities
Funding:
•Public Facility Fees $7M
•State Grant $2.3M
448
Property Owners
Property Owners:
•Zone 7
•City of Dublin
•Alameda County
449
Master Plan
•12.13 acres
•From San Ramon
City Limit
•To confluence of
Alamo and South
San Ramon Creeks
450
Proposed Phase 1
Challenges:
•Tight Schedule
•State Grant: deadline for a completed project by Dec 31,
2023
•Consistent with adopted Master Plan
•Environmental Permitting
•R/W and Easement Acquisition
•Utility Coordination
451
Consistency with adopted
Master Plan -CENTER
452
Proposed Phase 1
•New trail, spur
trails
•Gathering spaces
•Outdoor
classrooms
•Shade features
•Benches
•Trail markers,
educational sign
age,wayfinding
•Entry feature at
Amador Valley
Blvd
453
Proposed Amenities
Outdoor Classroom/Gathering Space
454
Proposed Amenities
Shade Structures
455
Proposed Trail Gateway
Amador Valley Boulevard
456
Staff Recommendation
•Approve a budget change authorizing the shifting of funds
to Fiscal Year 2021-22
457
Questions
458
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Page 1 of 6
Agenda Item 8.1
DATE:February 15, 2022
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:Transition to District-Based Councilmember Elections
Prepared by: Jordyn Bishop, Assistant City Attorney
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Earlier this year, the City received a notification threatening litigation under the California Voting
Rights Act if the City did not convert from at-large elections for electing members of the City Council to
district-based elections. The City Council will consider adopting a resolution of intent to transition from
at-large elections to a district-based councilmember election system.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the Resolution Declaring Its Intention to Transition From an At-Large Election System to a
District-Based Election System.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
If the City Council concurs with Staff’s recommendation, there will be significant staff time associated
with the transition to district-based elections and to administer the process moving forward, including
the need for at least five public hearings.The City will also incur costs for a demographer to assist with
drawing district maps and soliciting public input in order to draw district maps. These costs are
currently estimated at approximately $50,000.Additionally, the City may be required to reimburse a
prospective plaintiff for its documented attorney’s fees and costs, up to $30,000 (plus an annual
adjustment for inflation). If City Council chooses to maintain at-large elections and defend a potential
lawsuit, the costs and attorneys’ fees would likely approach several million dollars.
459
Page 2 of 6
DESCRIPTION:
Background
The City of Dublin utilizes an at-large election system for electing its Mayor and Councilmembers. An
at-large election system means that all electors in the City elect each of the four (4) Councilmembers
and Mayor. A district-based election system would be one in which the City would be physically
divided into separate districts, each represented by one Councilmember who resides in and is chosen by
the electors residing in that same district. Under such a system, the Mayor would continue to be elected
by the electorate of the entire City.
On January 4, 2022, the City received a letter, included as Attachment 1, from Kevin Shenkman of the
law firm of Shenkman & Hughes, on behalf of Southwest Voter Registration Education Project, alleging
a violation of the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) and demanding that the City move away from
an at-large election system. The letter claims there is “racially polarized voting” in Dublin and threatens
litigation if the City declines to voluntarily convert to district-based elections.
“Racially polarized voting” means voting in which there is a difference in the choice of candidates or
other electoral choices that are preferred by voters of a protected class, than in the choice of candidates
and electoral choices that are preferred by voters in the rest of the electorate. Specifically, the letter
asserts that the City’s current at-large election system dilutes the ability of Indian American voters to
elect candidates of their choice or otherwise influence the outcome of City Council elections, and that,
as a result, Dublin’s at-large election system violates the CVRA.
After discussing the claim in closed session conferences with legal counsel, the City Council directed
staff to move forward with drafting the attached Resolution declaring intent to transition from at-large to
district-based elections, for consideration at the February 15, 2022 meeting.
The California Voting Rights Act
The CVRA prohibits at-large election systems from impairing the ability of a protected class (members
of a race, color, or language minority group) to elect candidates of its choice or its ability to influence
the outcome of an election. Modeled after the Federal Voting Rights Act (FVRA) (42 U.S.C. § 1973),
the CVRA was specifically enacted in 2002 to make it easier for plaintiffs to prevail in lawsuits against
public entities that elected their members to its governing body through “at-large” elections.
To prove a violation of the CVRA, plaintiffs need only show the existence of racially polarized voting.
(Elec. Code §§ 14026(e), 14028(a).) Other factors are also relevant in determining liability. Plaintiffs
are not required to show that members of a protected class live in a geographically compact area or
prove intent to discriminate on the part of voters or officials. If a CVRA violation is found, the court has
authority to impose district-based elections and determine district boundaries with input from the
plaintiff’s attorney. (Elec. Code § 14029).
As a result, cities and other agencies throughout the State have increasingly been facing legal challenges
to their “at-large” systems of electing councilmembers or board members. Almost all have settled
claims out of court by agreeing to voluntarily shift to district-based elections. Locally, the City of
Pleasanton, the City of Livermore, the Dublin Unified School District, the Dublin San Ramon Services
District, and the Pleasanton Unified School District have all transitioned, or are in the midst of
460
Page 3 of 6
transitioning to a district-based election system.
Significant financial costs are associated with litigating a challenge under the CVRA. The CVRA grants
a prevailing plaintiff the right to recover reasonable attorneysʼ fees and expert witness fees. This has
resulted in payment of huge amounts of money in attorneys’ fees by cities that have chosen to litigate
the CVRA challenge. Conversely, a city prevailing against a CVRA challenge has no right to recover
either attorneysʼ fees or costs. Also, the city would remain vulnerable to subsequent litigation brought
under the CVRA by different plaintiffs.
In recent cases brought under the CVRA, awards to prevailing plaintiffs have approached $5 million,
which does not capture other significant costs incurred during the course of litigation, such as citiesʼ
own attorneysʼfees and staff time.
Existing legislation (discussed in the next section) provides a “safe harbor” mechanism for an agency to
consider its options after receiving a CVRA litigation threat and take steps to convert to district-based
elections without fear of paying substantial attorneysʼ fees to the plaintiff.
Safe Harbor under Assembly Bill (AB) 350
Effective January 1, 2017, AB 350 (2016) amended Elections Code section 10010 and attempted to
provide a “safe harbor” for agencies facing CVRA litigation if they take immediate steps to transition to
district-based elections. If a city receives a demand letter from a “prospective plaintiff,” the city is
given 45 days of protection from litigation to assess its situation and determine a course of action. If
within that 45 days, a city adopts a resolution declaring intent to transition from at-large to district-based
elections, outlining specific steps to be undertaken to facilitate the transition, and estimating a timeframe
for action, then a potential plaintiff is prohibited from filing a CVRA action for a 90-day period from the
resolutionʼs passage.
The city and the prospective plaintiff may enter into a written agreement to extend that
90-day time period for up to an additional 90 days in order to provide additional time to conduct public
outreach, encourage public participation, and receive public input. The extension must be in writing and
must require the district boundaries be established at least six months before the next regular election.
Within 10 days of signing the extension agreement, the city must post a tentative public outreach/public
hearing schedule on its website. Thus, the “safe harbor” legislation provides a minimum of 135 days,
and up to 225 days upon mutual agreement, for a city to assess and implement a transition to a district-
based system before a lawsuit may be filed. Under AB 350, a city’s liability is capped at $30,000 (plus
an annual adjustment for inflation) if it follows this safe harbor process after receiving a threat, and the
plaintiff must show financial documentation that these costs were actually incurred.
Regardless of whether the city is transitioning on its own initiative, or under “safe harbor” in response to
a demand letter, the Elections Code sets out a number of steps a city must take in the effort to assess and
transition to a district-based election system, steps which are laid out in further detail below.
Transition from At-Large to District-Based Elections
Under Elections Code section 10010, a city is required to hold at least five public hearings during the
transition process. The first two public hearings will give the community an opportunity to provide
input on the composition of the districts before any maps are drawn. Subsequently, draft district maps
461
Page 4 of 6
will be drawn and two additional public hearings will be held for the public to provide input regarding
the content of the draft maps and the proposed sequence of elections. The maps must be published at
least seven days before the public hearings. The fifth, and final, public hearing will be for the City
Council to consider an ordinance that establishes the district-based elections and approves the maps.
Most communities have taken a phased approach to implementing district-based elections. If district
elections are initiated by the city, the City Council may determine the potential sequence of the
elections. (Elec. Code § 10010(a)(2)). If a city is compelled to adopt district elections as a result of
litigation, district boundaries will be drawn by the presiding court with input from the plaintiff.
In establishing a district-based election system, no councilmember’s term may be cut short (Gov. Code §
34873; Elec. Code § 21606(a)), but when their term ends, an incumbent can only run from the new
district in which he or she resides. The term of office for each councilmember remains four years. (Gov.
Code § 34879). In determining the final sequence of the district elections, the City Council must give
special consideration to the purposes of the CVRA. This may require that the election in a district with a
majority of voters of a protected class be scheduled in the presidential election year when voter turnout
is typically much higher than in the gubernatorial election year.
The district boundary maps must meet certain criteria. In particular, the districts must be roughly equal
in population, excluding incarcerated persons. (Elec. Code, § 21601, subd. (a).) The districts are further
subject to the following criteria in order of priority:
geographical contiguity
minimize the division of any local neighborhood or local community of interest
easily identified and understood by residents
geographical compactness (Elec. Code, § 21601, subd. (c).)
Process and Timeline
The proposed Resolution declares the City Council’s intent to consider adoption of an ordinance
establishing district-based elections beginning with the November 2024 regular municipal election. The
specific steps to be undertaken to facilitate the transition and the estimated timeframe for doing so are
set forth in Exhibit A to the Resolution (Attachment 1), and presented below:
462
Page 5 of 6
Date Event / Action
February - March 2022 City conducts public outreach to explain the districting process and to
encourage public participation
April 2022 City holds first and second public hearings (over a period of no more
than 30 days) to obtain input regarding the composition of the districts
May - June 2022 City prepares and posts draft maps and potential sequence of
councilmember elections
June-July 2022 City holds third and fourth public hearings (over a period of no more
than 45 days) to obtain public input regarding content of the draft maps
and potential sequence of councilmember elections
August-September 2022 Introduction and adoption of ordinance establishing district-based
elections and a final map
The candidate nomination period for the November 8, 2022 regular municipal election opens on
Monday, July 18, 2022. The County Registrar of Voters has asked for final district maps no later than
six months before the election date, which is approximately May 8, 2022. Ordinances take effect 30
days from adoption, meaning the City Council would need to adopt a district-based ordinance and a final
map before approximately April 8, 2022 to meet the County’s requested deadline for incorporating the
City’s new district map in time for the 2022 election.
If the City Council adopts the proposed Resolution on February 15, 2022, that would leave 52 days to
conduct the full districting process, which is not enough time to complete the transition in time for the
November 2022 elections. That timeline would provide insufficient time to meaningfully engage in the
necessary public process to adopt and implement the maps. As stated above, a city is required to hold at
least five public hearings during the transition process. The first and second public hearings must be
held over a period of no more than 30 days, and the third and fourth public hearings must be held over a
period of no more than 45 days. A final, fifth public hearing is required for adoption of the ordinance
and map, and all draft maps must also be published at least seven days before the public hearings.
It is the City’s desire that the to-be-adopted maps reflect, to the greatest extent possible, meaningful
public participation. A 52-day process would severely limit the City’s ability to conduct outreach to the
public to explain the districting process and to encourage public participation. The City’s recent
experience demonstrates that extra effort is required to engage the public during the COVID-19
pandemic. Additionally, the City’s discussions with demographic consultants that will be used to assist
with conducting outreach and hearings and prepare maps indicate that they will continue to be busy
during the next several months, as they complete decennial census redistricting. Their unavailability is
likely to both delay the process and limit the various map options that the community might desire to
consider. In addition, after the maps are completed, the residents of the districts, their various
communities of interest, and potential candidates would have a short period of time to identify, organize,
and develop potential candidacies, potentially disrupting the existing plans of potential candidates and
campaign organizations.
463
Page 6 of 6
As a result, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed Resolution declaring intent to
transition to district-based elections beginning with the 2024 election, outlining specific steps to be
undertaken to facilitate this transition, and establishing the estimated timeframe for doing so.
It is also recommended that the City Council provide the authority to the City Manager to enter into
agreements necessary to initiate and facilitate this process when those contracts exceed $45,000.
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:
None.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:
The City Council Agenda was posted.
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Resolution Declaring Intention to Transition from an At-Large Election System to a District-Based
Election System
2) Demand Letter from Shenkman & Hughes
464
Attachment 1
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 1 of 4
RESOLUTION NO. XX – 22
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO TRANSITION FROM AN AT-LARGE ELECTION
SYSTEM TO A DISTRICT-BASED ELECTION SYSTEM
WHEREAS,members of the City Council of the City of Dublin (“City”) are currently elected
in “at-large” elections, in which each City Councilmember is elected by the registered voters of the
entire City; and
WHEREAS,California Government Code Section 34886 permits the legislative body of a
city to adopt an ordinance to change its method of election from an “at-large” system to a “district-
based” system in which each councilmember is elected only by the voters in the district in which
the candidate resides; and
WHEREAS, the City received a letter on January 4, 2022, from Kevin Shenkman of the law
firm of Shenkman & Hughes, on behalf of Southwest Voter Registration Education Project and its
unidentified members residing within Dublin, alleging that the City’s at-large councilmember
electoral system violates the California Voting Rights Act (“CVRA”) and threatening litigation if the
City declines to voluntarily change to a district-based election system for electing councilmembers;
and
WHEREAS, under Elections Code section 14028(a), a violation of the CVRA is established
if it is shown that racially polarized voting occurs in elections. “Racially polarized voting” means
voting in which there is a difference in the choice of candidates or other electoral choices that are
preferred by voters in a protected class, and in the choice of candidates and electoral choices that
are preferred by voters in the rest of the electorate (Elections Code Section 14026, subd. (e)); and
WHEREAS,the City denies that its at-large councilmember electoral system violates the
CVRA or any other provision of law, and asserts the City’s election system is legal in all respects
and further denies any wrongdoing in connection with the manner in which it has conducted its
City Council elections; and
WHEREAS, under Elections Code section 10010, a prospective plaintiff can file a lawsuit
if the City does not adopt a resolution of intent to transition to district-based elections within 45
days of receipt of a letter sent by certified mail asserting that the City’s method of conducting
elections may violate the CVRA; and
WHEREAS, Elections Code section 10010 provides a method by which a city can
expeditiously change from an at-large elections system to a district-based election system and
avoid the high cost of litigation; and
WHEREAS,under Elections Code section 10010, if the City adopts a resolution outlining
its intention to transition from at-large to district-based elections, including specific steps it will
undertake to facilitate this transition and an estimated timeframe for doing so, then a prospective
plaintiff may not bring a CVRA lawsuit within 90 days after that resolution’s passage and attorneys’
fees would be capped at a maximum of $30,000; and
465
Attachment 1
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 2 of 4
WHEREAS, prior to the City Council’s consideration of an ordinance to establish district
boundaries for a district-based electoral system, Elections Code section 10010 requires all of the
following:
1. Before drawing a draft map or maps of the proposed boundaries of the districts, the City
shall hold at least two public hearings over a period of no more than 30 days, at which the
public is invited to provide input regarding the composition of the districts. Before these
hearings, the City may conduct outreach to the public, including to non-English-speaking
communities, to explain the districting process and to encourage public participation;
2. After all draft maps are drawn, the City shall publish and make available for release at
least one draft map and, if members of the City Council will be elected in their districts at
different times to provide for staggered terms of office, the potential sequence of the
elections. The City shall also hold at least two additional hearings over a period of no more
than 45 days, at which the public is invited to provide input regarding the content of the
draft map or maps and the proposed sequence of elections, if applicable. The first version
of a draft map shall be published at least seven days before consideration at a hearing. If
a draft map is revised at or following a hearing, it shall be published and made available to
the public for at least seven days before being adopted; and
WHEREAS, the City intends to retain an experienced demographer to assist the City to
develop a proposal for a district-based electoral system.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin declares
its intention to consider adoption of an ordinance to transition to a district-based election system
beginning with the November 2024 regular municipal election, as authorized by Government Code
section 34886.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council authorizes and directs staff to work with a
demographer, and other appropriate consultants as needed, to provide a detailed analysis of the
City’s current demographics and any other information or data necessary to prepare a draft map
that divides the City into voting districts in a manner consistent with the intent and purpose of the
CVRA and all other applicable laws.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes the City Manager to enter
into an agreement with a demographer, and other appropriate consultants, in excess of $45,000
to carry out the intent of this Resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council directs staff to make every effort, prior to
the commencement of the hearings required by law, to conduct outreach to the public, including
to non-English speaking communities, to explain the districting process and to encourage public
participation in the process for determining the composition of the districts and the sequence of
district elections.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby declares its intention to take
the specific steps, and approves the estimated timeline for taking such steps, as set forth in
Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof. The City Manager may adjust such timeline
if she deems it necessary, provided that any such adjustments may not prevent adoption of an
ordinance in sufficient time for district-based elections to be used at the November 2024 regular
municipal election.
466
Attachment 1
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 3 of 4
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph,
sentence, clause or phrase in this Resolution, or any part hereof, is held invalid or unconstitutional,
such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections or portions of this Resolution.
The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection,
subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase in this Resolution irrespective of the fact that
any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases
may be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of February 2022, by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
City Clerk
5056821.5
467
Attachment 1
Reso. No. XX-22, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/22 Page 4 of 4
Exhibit A
Estimated Timeframe for Transitioning to District-Based Elections
Date Event / Action
January 4, 2022 City received letter asserting violations of CVRA
February 15, 2022 City adopts resolution of intent to transition to district-
based elections
February - March 2022 City conducts public outreach to explain the districting
process and to encourage public participation
April 2022 City holds first and second public hearings (over a
period of no more than 30 days) to obtain input
regarding the composition of the districts
May - June 2022 City prepares and posts draft maps and potential
sequence of councilmember elections
June - July 2022 City holds third and fourth public hearings (over a period
of no more than 45 days) to obtain public input
regarding content of the draft maps and potential
sequence of councilmember elections
August-September 2022 Introduction and adoption of ordinance establishing
district-based elections and a final map
468
Attachment 2
469
470
471
472
Item 8.1
Transition to District-Based
Councilmember Elections
February 15, 2022
473
Background
•January 4, 2022
–City received a letter from Shenkman & Hughes, on
behalf of Southwest Voter Registration Education
Project, alleging a violation of the CVRA
•California Voting Rights Act (CVRA)
–Prohibits at-large elections from impairing the ability of
a protected class (members of a race, color, or language
minority group) to elect candidates of its choice or its
ability to influence the outcome of an election
474
At-Large vs. District Elections
•At-Large Elections (current)
–All voters in Dublin elect each of the four (4)
Councilmembers and Mayor
•District-Based Elections
–Create maps to physically divide City into separate
districts of equal population
–Each district represented by one Councilmember
who resides in and is chosen by voters residing in
that same district
475
Legal and Financial Impacts
•CVRA lawsuits
–Plaintiff has low bar to prevail in a CVRA lawsuit
–Even if City prevails, another plaintiff may allege
CVRA violation later
•Costs to litigate
–Must pay plaintiff’s legal fees if City is unsuccessful
–Legal fees in past cases have approached $5 million
–Court orders district elections & draws maps
476
CVRA Safe Harbor
•Method to expeditiously change to a district-based
election system and avoid the high cost of litigation
•Within 45 days of CVRA demand letter:
–Adopt a resolution of intent to transition to district-
based elections
•Prospective plaintiff may not bring a CVRA lawsuit
within 90 days after resolution’s passage and
attorneys’ fees capped at $30,000 (plus inflation)
477
Transition Process
•Minimum of Five Public Hearings Required
–2 public hearings for input on the composition of the
districts before any maps are drawn
–2 public hearings on content of the draft maps and the
proposed sequence of elections
–Introduce and adopt ordinance
•2022 Election Dates
–City is committed to engaging in an open and deliberate
public process to educate and seek input from the City’s
various constituencies and communities of interest
–Insufficient time to meaningfully engage in the public process
to adopt and implement the maps for use in 2022 election
478
Estimated Timeframe
Date Event / Action
January 4, 2022 City received letter asserting violations of CVRA
February 15, 2022 City adopts resolution of intent to transition to
district-based elections
February -March 2022 City conducts public outreach to explain the
districting process and to encourage public
participation
April 2022 City holds 1st and 2nd public hearings to obtain
input regarding the composition of the districts
May -June 2022 City prepares and posts draft maps and potential
sequence of councilmember elections
June -July 2022 City holds 3rd and 4th public hearings to obtain public
input regarding content of the draft maps and potential
sequence of councilmember elections
August -September 2022 Introduction and adoption of ordinance establishing
district-based elections and a final map
479
Staff Recommendation
•Adopt a Resolution of Intent to transition to
District-Based Elections outlining the specific
steps to be undertaken to facilitate this
transition, and establishing the estimated
timeframe for doing so
•Authorize the City Manager to enter into
agreements necessary to initiate and facilitate
this process when those contracts exceed
$45,000
480
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item 8.2
DATE:February 15, 2022
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:Discussion Regarding City Council SalariesPreparedby:Marsha Moore,MMC,City Clerk
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:The City Council will discuss options regarding adjustments to Councilmember salaries.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Discuss and provide direction to Staff regarding adjustments to City Council salaries.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:Should the City Council adopt an increase at the maximum allowed by law, the financial impact of a partial year (December 2022 –June 2023), including salary-based taxes and contributions, would be an increase of $3,951.60. The full year (12 months) additional cost would be $7,903.20.
DESCRIPTION:Government Code Section 36516(a) allows a general law city to provide a salary to City Councilmembers. An increase in compensation is allowed by ordinance, and “may not exceed an amount equal to 5% for each calendar year from the operative date of the last adjustment of salary in effect when the ordinance or amendment is enacted” (Government Code Section 36516(4)).The City Council last adjusted salaries for the City Council in December 2020 (Attachment 1), which became effective after the November 2020 election. City Councilmembers’ salary is currently set at $1,285.10 per month. Dublin Municipal Code Section 2.08.40 (Attachment 2) provides an additional $100 per month to the Mayor over the salary received as a Councilmember. The Mayor’s current salary is $1,385.10 per month. The allowable increase for calendar years 2020 through 2022 was calculated as follows:
481
Page 2 of 2
Current compensation (established in 2020):$1,285.105% increase, 2020 to 2021:$1,349.365% increase, 2021 to 2022:$1,416.82If the maximum increase is adopted, the financial impact for a partial year (December 2022 – June 2023) including salary-based taxes and contributions would be $3,951.60. The full year (12 months) additional cost would be $7,903.20.If it wishes to take such action, the City Council can direct Staff to prepare an ordinance for consideration. In accordance with Dublin Municipal Code Section 2.08.020B and State Law, the increase would not become effective until newly elected Councilmembers are sworn into office following certification of the November 2022 election. The City Council could also consider:
Increasing the salaries by an amount less than the maximum permitted by law
Not increasing the current salary (take no action)
Reducing current salaries
Eliminating salaries altogether
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:None.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:The City Council Agenda was posted.
ATTACHMENTS:1) Ordinance No. 10-20 Amending Dublin Municipal Code Section 2.08.020 and Providing for an Increase in the Salary for Members of the City Council
2)Dublin Municipal Code Section 2.08.020
482
Attachment 1
483
484
2.08.020 Salary for members established.
A. Pursuant to Section 36516 of the Government Code which provides that a City Council may enact an
ordinance providing that each member of the City Council shall receive a salary which shall be determined by a
schedule of population for cities, the members of the City Council shall receive a salary of one thousand two
hundred eighty-five dollars and ten cents ($1,285.10) per month.
B. No Councilmember shall be eligible to receive the increase provided herein until one (1) or more
Councilmembers begin a new term of office. (Ord. 10-20 § 2; Ord. 7-18 § 2; Ord. 10-16 § 2; Ord. 2-12 § 2; Ord.
17-09 § 1 (part): Ord. 5-08 § 2; Ord. 3-06 § 2; Ord. 7-04 § 2; Ord. 7-02 § 2; Ord. 23-99 § 2; Ord. 6-91 § 2; Ord. 1-
90 § 2; Ord. 3-89 §§ 2, 3: Ord. 4-88 §§ 2, 3: Ord. 8-87 §§ 3, 4: Ord. 22-85 § 3: Ord. 6, 1982)
2.08.040 Mayor’s salary.
The Mayor shall receive a monthly salary of one hundred dollars ($100), in addition to that which he/she receives
as a Councilmember. (Ord. 17-09 § 1 (part): Ord. 13-92 § 2)
The Dublin Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 10-21, passed December 7, 2021.
Dublin Municipal Code 2.08.020 Salary for members established.Page 1 of 1
Attachment 2
485