Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.4 EDubProp AgStAttach1-5AGENDA STATEMENT CITY CLERK File #620-20 & 600-60 CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 2, 2002 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: PA 00-025 Eastern Dublin Properties Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, Planned Development (PD) Prezone (Stage 1 Development Plan) 1st Reading, Pre-Annexation Agreement, and Resolution for Reorganization Application to LAFCO (Report Prepared by: Andy Byde, Senior Planner) ATTACHMENTS: o o 8. Resolution certifying the Eastern Dublin Properties Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) (with the following Exhibits attached: Exhibit A: CEQA mitigation findings; Exhibit B: Findings Regarding Alternatives; Exhibit C: Statement of Overriding Considerations; and Exhibit D: Mitigation Monitoring Program) Resolution Making Findings Related To The PD-Prezoning And Related Stage 1 Development Plan Ordinance adopting a Planned Development (PD) Prezone (with the following Exhibits attached: Exhibit A-l: Prezoning; Exhibit A-2: Stage 1 Development Plan; Resolution Approving Pre-Annexation Agreement (with Pre- Annexation Agreement with Braddock and Logan Group attached as Exhibit 1) Resolution directing Staff to file an application with Alameda County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) for Reorganization East Dublin Property Owners Stage 1 Development Plan Submittal Revised Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Revised DSEIR) Revised Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report containing responses to comments on Revised DSEIR (Revised FSEIR) Planning Commission Staff Report dated March 26, 2002, incorporated herein by reference* * Not attached, but available at the Planning Department, City Hall RECOMMENDATION: Hear Staff Presentation Open Public Hearing ITEM NO. COPIES TO: Applicant(s) Property Owners PA file 6,1~4 o 4. 5. 6. 7. 10. 11. Hear Applicant's Presentation Question Staff, Applicant and the Public Close Public Hearing Deliberate Adopt a resolution (Attachment 1) certifying the Eastern Dublin Properties Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and making related CEQA findings; Adopt a resolution (Attachment 2) Making Findings Related To approval of the PD-Prezoning And Related Stage 1 Development Plan Waive the Reading and Introduce Ordinance (Attachment 3) approving a Planned Development (PD) Prezone and Stage 1 Development Plan (with the Prezoning Exhibit attached as Exhibit A-1 and Stage 1 Development Plan attached as Exhibit A-2) Adopt a resolution (Attachment 4) approving the Pre-Annexation Agreement (with Pre-Annexation Agreement with Braddock and Logan Group attached as Exhibit 1) Adopt a resolution (Attachment 5) directing staff to file an application with Alameda County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) for Reorganization PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project area is approximately 1,120 acres in size and is located in an unincorporated area of Alameda County bounded by Interstate 580 (1-580) to the south and Fallon Road to the west. The Project area abuts the eastern Dublin City limit boundary. Approximately 472 acres of the Project area are included within the City's Eastern Dublin Specific Plan boundary, while the remainder is within the 1993 Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment area. The entire Project area is located within the City of Dublin's General Plan Planning Area and Sphere of Influence (SOI). The Project area consists of thirteen (13) different parcels of land, under eleven (11) separate ownerships (See Aerial Photo under Project References contained within Attachment 6). · The Eastern Dublin Property Owners (EDPO) are the applicants for the proposed annexation and prezoning/Stage 1 Development Plan Application. The EDPO consist of the following property owners: Campbell, Branaugh, Anderson, Braddock and Logan, Chen, and Fallon Enterprises. The table below includes a list of all of the properties within the Project area and includes the following information: owners, APN's, acreages, locations, and if the property owner is consenting to the annexation (see the aerial photograph included under Project References contained within Attachment 6 for locations of APNs). Assessor Parcel Consent Address Area Property, Owner No. to Annex? 905-0001-004-03 Yes North ofi-580, east 8.8 ac Campbell of Croak Rd. 905-0001-004-04 Yes North ofi-580, east 39.8 ac Branaugh of Croak Rd. 905-0001-005-02 Yes North ofi-580, east 48.8 ac Righetti Partners of Croak Rd. 985-0006-006-03 Yes North ofi-580, east 48.9 ac Anderson Second Family Limited of Croak Rd. Partnership 905-0002-002 Not at Approx. 1 mile 164 ac Croak 905-0002-001-01 this north ofi-580, east time of Fallon Rd., north & east of Jordan Ranch 905-0002-003 Yes Approx. 1 mile 160.9ac Braddock & Logan Group north ofi-580, east of Jordan Ranch 985-0006-004 Yes North east Quadrant 136 ac Chen ofi-580 at Fallon Rd. 985-0006-006-02 Not at North ofi-580, west .8 ac EBJ Partners, L.P. this of Croak Rd. time 905-0001-006-03 Not at North ofi-580, east .2 ac Pleasanton Ranch Investments this of Croak Rd. time 985-0006-010 Not at 4233 Fallon Road 189 ac First American Title Guaranty Co., (Jordan 985-0006-009 this Charitable Trust) time 985-0007-002-14 Yes East of Current City 313.8 ac Fallon Enterprises of Dublin Limits, North of Jordan Ranch The proposed Project includes: prezoning the area to the City of Dublin PD-Planned Development Zoning District and considering a related Stage 1 Development Plan to guide future development of the Project Area, annexation of the Project area into the City of Dublin and Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD), detachment from Livermore Area Recreation and Park District (LARPD), and the execution of a pre-annexation agreement with the consenting property owners. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Development under the proposed PD prezoning and Stage 1 Development Plan would consist of the land uses specified in the current City of Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The uses would include a mix of residential uses at a variety of densities, employment-generating uses such as retail, service, office and light industrial, parks, open spaces, community facilities, roadways and similar land uses. The Stage I Development Plan proposes retail, office and light industrial land uses located primarily within the southern portion of the Project area along the freeway and major arterials, with residential uses located in the more northern and eastern portions of the Project area. The Project also would provide a complement of neighborhood parks, school sites, open space, a portion of a community park, and a multi-use trail system to link the developed areas with the parks and trails within project open space. A Planned Development (PD) Prezoning has been prepared for the subject property to establish regulations for future use. The proposed land uses are as shown on the Exhibit, labeled Exhibit A-2 of Attachment 3. The proposed land uses are consistent with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan. The draft PD District provisions are contained in the Stage 1 Development Plan (see Exhibit A-1 to Attachment 3) and specify the intent, intensity of use, and permitted and conditional uses of the land use designations in accordance with the Specific Plan and General Plan. As required by the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, the Stage 1 Development Plan includes the maximum number of residential units and non-residential square footages (see Exhibit A-2 to Attachment 3). Any future development on the Project site shall conform to the policies and intent of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan including the design gUidelines. No development may occur until a Stage 2 Development Plan is adopted by the City identifying regulations for the improvement and maintenance of the property in accordance with Dublin's Zoning Ordinance. Properties not currently subject to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan would also need to apply for a Specific Plan, prior to or concurrently with the Stage 2 Development Plan. The Stage 1 Development Plan proposes an "Interim Agricultural" land use that would allow the existing residential and agricultural uses approved under Alameda County's Zoning Ordinance to remain until such time as the property owner applies for a Development Plan to develop the property. The regulations and standards governing this land use shall be the Agricultural Districts provisions of the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance, Section 8.16. Staff finds the project to be consistent with the City of Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designations and pOlicies and recommends the City Council find the project consistent with adopted General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. REORGANIZATION The project site is currently within an unincorporated portion of Alameda County. In order for the project to come under the jurisdiction of the City of Dublin and to receive urban services from the Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD), annexation of the site to the City and DSRSD must be approved by the Alameda County Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCo), which is a 'State mandated local agency that oversees boundary changes to cities and special districts, the formation of new agencies including incorporation of new cities, and the consolidation of existing agencies. LAFCo requires that a city prezone an area proposed for annexation, and that prezoning must be consistent with the approved General Plan and Specific Plan uses for the property. The PD Prezoning proposed for adoption would address this requirement, and would establish the appropriate land uses to be in effect at the time the project site becomes a part of the City (See Exhibit A-1 to Attachment 3). LAFCO has established spheres of influence for the City and DSRSD. A "Sphere of Influence" is the probable physical boundary and service area that a local governmental agency is expected to serve in the future. Establishment of this boundary is necessary to determine which governmental agencies can provide services in the most efficient way to the people and property in any given area. The entire Project area is within the sphere of influence (SOI) of Dublin and has been since LAFCo originally established the eastern SOI boundary for the City in 1983. The project area is also with the SO1 for Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD). The property immediately to the west of the Project area was annexed into the City in 1995 and is now being developed in phases and urban infrastructure is being extended to a point immediately adjacent to the Project area by various developers within the Dublin Ranch area. The action propOsed for the City Council is to adopt a resolution (Attachment 5) that would authorize Staff to initiate an application to LAFCo for reorganization. The reorganization proposal includes the annexation of approximately 1,120 acres to the City of Dublin and Dublin San Ramon Services District. The proposal also includes detachment from Livermore Area Recreation District (LARPD) since upon. annexation the area would be served by the City of Dublin Parks and Community Services Department. As mentioned above, the Project area is proposed for detachment from the Livermore Area Recreation and Park District (LARPD). The City has received several letters from LARPD expressing concern regarding the proposed detachment from LARPD's service area (see Attachment 8). However, detaching the area from LARPD's service area is consistent with the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan policies that indicate jurisdictional lines should be revised so that the City of Dublin Parks and Community Services Department and other City departments have jurisdiction over all park land within the Dublin. Sphere of Influence, which includes the project site. In addition, the City has a Park and Recreation Master Plan that addresses park facilities to meet the demand related to development 4 within the Project Area, including facility financing and operating methods, for the project site and the rest of the Eastern Dublin planning area. LARPD's intent of retaining the area would conflict with the Park and Recreation Master Plan policies and programs related to park planning, financing and operations. LARPD's current Master Plan shows no existing or proposed facilities within the Project Area. Moreover, during the adjacent 1994 Dublin Ranch reorganization application, the LARPD Board consented to the detachment. The proposed reorganization is appropriate because of the following: (1) the Project implements Dublin's extensive planning for the Eastern Dublin area; (2) the Project Area is contiguous to existing City limits; (3) the Project is consistent with LAFCo policies, including adopted Spheres of Influence and; (4) the project would provide for the logical and orderly extension of urban services to the eastern portion of Dublin. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Project includes the same land uses and densities as approved in the 1993 Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan, and as analyzed in the related EIR. The City prepared an Initial Study for the Project to determine if any subsequent environmental review was required beyond the 1993 EIR. The Initial Study concluded that much of the impact analysis in the 1993 EIR continues to apply to the Project. However, the Initial Study concluded that additional environmental review was required under CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163 based primarily on newly identified sensitive biological species, increased regional traffic and related noise and air quality effects, and on potential power shortages. A Draft Supplemental EIR was prepared and was circulated in July of 2001, draft responses were prepared to comments on the document and the Project advanced to hearings before the Planning Commission (September 2001) and City Council (October 2001). Extensive comments were received at the October 16, 2001, Council hearing. Staff reviewed the comments, and given the extent of concerns raised on the proposed Supplemental EIR and the project, recommended that the item be removed from City Council consideration. The City Council directed Staff to revise and recirculate SEIR and return to the Council at a later date with a recommendation regarding certification of the SEIR and the associated requests. To address the issues presented during the October 16, 2001, City Council public hearing, Staff reevaluated each of the comments received to determine if each comment was adequately addressed in SEIR. Additional text was prepared to clarify the following: the background, project objectives, project description, project impacts, and mitigation measures. On January 15, 2002, Staff circulated a Revised Draft Supplemental EIR (Revised DSEIR-Attachment 7) for 45-days, with the public comment period concluding on March 1, 2002. During this public review period, the City received 13 comment letters. Responses have been prepared for each of the comments received and the comments and associated responses together constitute the Revised Final SEIR (Attachment 8). The following environmental issues were analyzed in the Revised DSEIR: Agricultural Resources The 1993 EIR analyzed conversion of agricultural lands due to development of the Eastern Dublin area, including the Project site. The Revised DSEIR examined recent changes in the definition of "prime" agricultural lands under AB 2838 and determined that the new definition would not result in conversion of more prime agricultural lands than in the 1993 EIR. The Revised DSEIR also determined that cancellation rather than non-renewal of Williamson Act contracts on the Project area was not a new significant impact. Air Quality The 1993 EIR identified cumulative air quality impacts as a significant unavoidable impact of development in Eastern Dublin. In 1998, the EPA downgraded Bay Area air quality to "non-attainment" for ozone and new, strict standards have been adopted for "precursor" pollutants, which lead to ozone formation. Even with mitigation, the Project exceeds those standards; therefore the Revised DSEIR identifies significant unavoidable air quality impacts. Biology Numerous sensitive habitats and protected species potentially occur on the site, as described in the 1993 EIR, which identified the cumulative loss of sensitive habitat as a significant unavoidable impact of development in Eastern Dublin. The Revised DSEIR identified new sensitive species and habitats, which could potentially be affected by development of the Project area. It also analyzed the effect of recent regulatory changes Such as USFWS' designation of critical habitat for the California Red-Legged Frog. The Revised DSEIR updated previously adopted mitigation measures to ensure implementation of the most current species survey protocols; however even with mitigation, cumulative loss of sensitive habitat was identified as a significant unavoidable impact. Noise The 1993 EIR concluded that projected increases in noise from development of Eastern Dublin could be reduced to less than significant through acoustical mitigation, except in the case of existing residences for which noise impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The Revised DSEIR concluded that noise from increased regional traffic beyond the 1993 EIR projections would also be significant and unavoidable for existing homes. Acoustical mitigation would continue to be required for future residences and businesses in the Project area. Traffic and Circulation The Revised DSEIR concluded that increased regional traffic beyond that anticipated in the 1993 EIR would result in potentially significant impacts on several intersections and road segments. Mitigation measures in the Revised DSEIR proposed improvements to reduce these impacts to less than significant except at Cumulative Buildout for 2025 for three Dublin Boulevard intersections and for 1-580 and 1-680 freeway segments. Utilities and Service Systems The Revised' DSEIR analyzed whether utility and services impacts have substantially changed since the 1993 EIR. Substantial changes were identified with respect to water supplies, and electrical power supply and distribution; mitigation measures were also identified to reduce these impacts to less than significant. Environmental Analysis Conclusion The project is within the Dublin General Plan's Eastern Extended Planning Area and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area, which was the subject of an Environmental Impact Report, certified by the City of Dublin in 1993. The General Plan/Specific Plan EIR is a program EIR, which analyzed the environmental issues related to urbanizing Eastern Dublin through the land use locations, development plans and policies contained in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The EIR also anticipated several subsequent actions related to future development in Eastern Dublin. The EIR did identify some impacts from implementation of the General Plan/Specific Plan that were not able to be mitigated. Upon certification of the EIR, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for several impacts, some of which relate to this project. The City also adopted a mitigation monitoring program, which included measures intended to reduce impacts from the development of Eastern Dublin area. These mitigation measures apply to project approvals and actions 6 at various stages in the development process, and will be applied to this project as applicable. The timing of these mitigation measures is indicated, in the City's EIR mitigation monitoring matrix (City Council Resolution # 53-93). Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program In addition to the mitigation monitoring program adopted as part of the East Dublin EIR, a new mitigation monitoring program will be adopted to supplement the previous mitigation monitoring program. This program is included as Exhibit E of the Agenda Statement. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is required by CEQA to identify the timing of mitigation measures and which agency is responsible for implementing each measure. The Initial Study and Revised Supplemental EIR thoroughly and comprehensively assessed the potential for the Project to cause or contribute to significant impacts beyond those identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Where new potentially significant impacts were identified, appropriate mitigation measures were also proposed to reduce or avoid the impacts. These impacts will be addressed in mitigation findings upon City Council approval of the Project. Even with mitigation, however, certain new impacts cannot be reduced to less than significant and will require a Statement of Overriding Considerations (which is included in Exhibit D to Attachment 1). PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT: The goals and policies of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan require annexation and new development to be revenue neutral. Prior to its submittal of an annexation request to LAFCo, the City requires that an annexation agreement be entered into by the developer, to pay a share of the public services deficit. Braddock and Logan Group has signed a pre-annexation agreement with the City (Refer to Exhibit 1 of Attachment 4), which will guarantee that the cost of providing services to the.area will not exceed the revenue received from the area. The agreement will also assure that the financing goals and policies of the General Plan and Specific Plan are met. The City Council should authorize the execution of the Pre- Annexation agreement by adopting Attachment 4. DUBLIN UNIFIED SCIIOOL DISTRICT: The Dublin General Plan policies state "schools located within the city should be operated by the Dublin Unified School District". It is the intent of the City that the boundaries of the Dublin School District should be coterminous with the City limits. The project site is currently located within the Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District. The detachment of the Project area from the Livermore School District and annexation to the Dublin School District is not subject to LAFCo approval. The Planned Development Prezone contains a provision which requires that the applicant cooperate and actively work with other property owners within the City of Dublin's Sphere of Influence to initiate and complete the annexation process to the Dublin Unified School District. CONCLUSION: The proposed Planned Development Prezone and Annexation request for the Project area is consistent with the Dublin General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and Dublin Zoning Ordinance. The project will accommodate the logical extension of public services within Eastern Dublin and will provide for future land uses anticipated in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and City of Dublin General Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council, open the public hearing, hear Applicant's presentation, question staff, applicant and the public, close the public hearing, deliberate and take the following actions: 1. Adopt a resolution (Attachment 1) certifying the Eastem Dublin Properties Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and making related CEQA findings; 2. Adopt a resolution (Attachment 2) Making Findings Related To approval of the PD-Prezoning And Related Stage 1 Development Plan 3. Waive the Reading and Introduce Ordinance (Attachment 3) approving a Planned Development (PD) Prezone and Stage 1 Development Plan (with the Prezoning Exhibit attached as Exhibit A-1 and Stage 1 Development Plan attached as Exhibit A-2) 4. Adopt a resolution (Attachment 4) approving the Pre-Annexation Agreement (with Pre-Annexation Agreement with Braddock and Logan Group attached as Exhibit 1) 5. Adopt a resolution (Attachment 5) directing staff to file an application with Alameda County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) for Reorganization GAPA#L2000\00-025\CC StaffReport and Reso-March 02\cc.staffreport. mar28.final.doc 8 RESOLUTION NO. XX-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, AND ADOPTING RELATED MITIGATION FINDINGS, FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE EASTERN DUBLIN PROPERTIES ANNEXATION AND PREZONING PROJECT PA 00-025 WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin Property Owners submitted applications for annexation of approximately 1,120 acres of land to Dublin, for prezoning to the Planned Development zoning district including approval of a Stage 1 Development Plan, and related approvals, collectively known as the "Project"; and WHEREAS, the Project area is within the Eastern Extended Planning Area of the Dublin General Plan as amended by the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment, approved in 1993. Portions of the Project area are also within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area as approved in 1993. The Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan are collectively referred to as the GPA/SP Project; and WHEREAS, on May 10, 1993, the City Council certified a program Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the GPA/SP Project and an addendum thereto, dated May 4, 1993 (SCH 91103064). On August 22, 1994, the City Council approved another addendum to update plans to provide sewer service. The May 10, 1993 program EIR, the May 4, 1993 addendum and the August 22, 1994 addendum are collectively referred to as the Eastern Dublin EIR; and WHEREAS, upon approval of the GPA/SP Project, the City Council adopted mitigation findings, a statement of overriding considerations, and a mitigation monitoring program as set forth in Resolution 53-93, included in the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR referenced below; and WHEREAS, the Project is consistent with the type, location and density of land uses approved through the GPA/SP Project for future urbanization in Eastern Dublin. All mitigation measures adopted for the GPA/SP Project continue to apply to implementing projects such as the current annexation and prezoning Project; and all applicable City development ordinances and standards apply to the Project except as otherwise approved through the Project prezoning and related Stage 1 Development Plan; and WHEREAS, the City completed an Initial Study for the Project consistent with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163 and determined that a Supplement to the Eastern Dublin EIR ("Supplemental EIR") was required in order to analyze substantial changes in circumstances and new information since certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR. A Notice of Preparation dated May 25, 2001 was circulated with the Initial Study to public agencies and interested parties for consultation on the scope of the Supplemental EIR; and Attachment 1 WHEREAS, based on the Initial Study and responses to the Notice of Preparation, the City prepared a Draft Supplemental EIR, followed and superseded by a Revised Draft Supplemental EIR dated January 2002 and consisting of two bound volumes. Volume 1 contains the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR text; Volume 2 contains appendices, including the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study. The 2- volume Revised Draft Supplemental EIR (SCH 2001052114) is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR was circulated for the required 45 day Public review period, from January 15, 2002 to March 1, 2002; and WHEREAS, the City received 13 comment letters during the public review period. City staff reviewed all of the comments and prepared written responses to all significant environmental issues raised therein. Through the responses, the City reviewed objections and suggestions from the commentors. Where the City accepted the suggestions, appropriate revisions to the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR were included in the responses. Where the City did not accept the suggestions, the responses explain the City's position in light of the objections. In all cases, the responses clarify and amplify the information contained in the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR and provide the City's good faith, reasoned analysis on the environmental issues raised by the comments. The written responses to comments and revisions to the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR are contained in a separately bound Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ("Final Supplemental EIR") dated March 2002 and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the City reviewed all written responses to comments and all revisions to the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR and determined that none of the responses and/or revisions included significant new information requiring recirculation of the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR; and WHEREAS, a Staff report, dated March 26, 2002, and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR, the Revised Final Supplemental EIR and the Project for the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, on March 26, 2002, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing on the Project at which time the Commission considered the staff report, the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR, the comments and associated responses in the Revised Final Supplemental EIR, and all other oral and written comments presented to them, and based on this evidence, recommended certification of the Supplemental EIR and approval of the Project in Resolutions 02-17, 02-18, and 02-19, dated March 26, 2002, incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the Project would have significant effects on the environment, most of which can be substantially reduced through mitigation measures; therefore, approval of the Project must include mitigation findings as set forth in attached Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, some of the significant effects cannot be lessened to a level of less than significant; therefore, approval of the Project must include findings regarding alternatives as set forth in attached Exhibit B, and must include a Statement of Overriding Considerations as set forth in attached Exhibit C; and WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring Plan, as required by CEQA, is contained in attached Exhibit D; and WHEREAS, the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR together with the Revised Final Supplemental EIR constitute the final Supplemental EIR for the Project; and WHEREAS, on April 2, 2002, the City Council held a noticed public hearing to certify the Supplemental EIR and consider the Project. The Council considered a Staff report dated April 2, 2002, the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR and the Revised Final Supplemental EIR, and all other oral and written comments presented to them. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council certifies as follows: A. That the Supplemental EIR for the Eastern Dublin Properties annexation and prezoning Project has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines. B. That the Supplemental EIR was presented to the City Council who reviewed and considered the information contained in the Supplemental EIR prior to approving the Project. C. That the Supplemental EIR reflects the City's independent judgment and analySis on the potential for environmental effects of the annexation and prezoning Project beyond the effects identified and analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. D. That the custodian of the documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings for the Eastern Dublin Properties Project is the City of Dublin Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568, Attn: Andy Byde, Senior Planner. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council adopts the mitigation findings set forth in Exhibit A, the findings regarding alternatives set forth in Exhibit B, the Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth in Exhibit C, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program set forth in Exhibit D. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 2na day of April, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk G:\PA#\2000\00-025\CC Staff Report and Reso-March 02\Certification of SEIR-3-28-O2.doc EXHIBIT A FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15091 and 15163(e), the City Council hereby makes the following findings with respect to the potential for significant supplemental environmental impacts and means for mitigating those impacts. The impacts identified below are supplemental impacts, that is, significant or potentially significant impacts based on changed conditions or new information since the Eastern Dublin EIR that were not addressed in that EIR, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162 and 15163, and as further set forth in the Project Initial Study and Revised Draft Supplemental EIR ("RDSEIR"). Mitigation measures identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and adopted upon approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan in 1993 continue to apply to implementing projects. As such, they are assumed to be within the annexation and prezoning Project and are not summarized specifically below. Supplemental mitigations ("SM") identified in the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR are described below. Many of the supplemental impacts and mitigation measures in the following findings are summarized rather than set forth in full. The text of the Revised Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs should be 'consulted for a complete description of the impacts and mitigations. Findings pursuant to section 21081 (c) relating to Project alternatives are made in Exhibit B. Section 3.2 Air Quality Supplemental Impact AQ 1. Mobile Source Emissions: Reactive Organics, Nitrogen Oxide, Particulate Matter. Automobile trips generated by the Project will create emissions that will exceed BAAQMD thresholds for pollutants that are precursors to ozone formation, and would result in the formation of substantial quantities of ozone, which already exceed both state and federal standards. This is also a significant cumulative impact. RDSEIR pp. 3.2-4, -5. SM-TRAFFIC-6, -7, -8. These supplemental mitigations include City monitoring of peak hour volumes at key intersections along Dublin Boulevard. They also require implementation of transportation demand management measures such as ridesharing, increased transit use, and staggered work hours in future development projects RDSEIR pp. 3.2-5; 3.6-17 to -20. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Project. However, even with these changes, the impact might not be avoided or substantially lessened. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon approval of the Project. Exhibit A to Attachment 1 Rationale for Finding. The sUpplemental mitigation measures will reduce potential Project-emissions by reducing traffic congestion which is the major source of precursor pollutants. The supplemental mitigations will not only reduce vehicle trips but also reduce single car occupancy, thereby reducing the number of automobiles on City and regional roadways. Section 3.3 Biological Resources Supplemental Impact BIO 1: Direct and Indirect Habitat Loss. Seasonal wetlands and intermittent streams are sensitive habitat types identified as likely to occur within the Project area. New and/or additional sensitive plant and wildlife species have been identified as occurring or likely to occur in the Project area. These habitats and species were not previously identified or analyzed for the Project area. This is also a potentially significant cumulative impact. RDSEIR pp. 3.3-13, - 14. SM-BIO-1. The Project proponents shall prepare a comprehensive Resource Management Plan (RMP) for the entire Project area. The RMP shall reflect all City resource protection programs (e.g., Stream Restoration Program), all applicable mitigation measures from the Eastern DUblin EIR, and all applicable habitat and species mitigations from the Supplemental EIR, including any offsite mitigation lands. The first priority of the RMP shall be avoidance of impacts to and preservation of biological resources in the Project area. The RMP shall be approved prior to or concurrently with any subsequent implementing application, such as Stage 2 Development Plans and tentative maps; and all such implementing applications shall be consistent with the approved RMP. RDSEIR pp. 3.3-14, -15; RFSEIR p. 263. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. The Eastern Dublin EIR acknowledged that loss of existing vegetation would reduce the habitat and range for sensitive species; adopted mitigation measures required the city to implement management programs to protect riparian and wetland resource areas, plant 'diversity, native plant recovery and hillside vegetation. (Impacts 3.7/A, B). These requirements would also apply to the newly identified habitats and species. The RMP refines the adopted mitigations to incorporate all applicable management programs, as well as previously adopted and currently proposed habitat and species mitigations, in one resource program. Through this comprehensive approach, the RMP will minimize direct disturbance of habitat areas and restore disturbed areas to minimize the amount of habitat lost from future development of the Project area. Supplemental Impact BIO 2. Loss of Special Status Plant Species. No special status plant species were identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. At least five special status plants have since been identified as occurring or potentially occurring on the Project site. This is also a potentially significant cumulative impact. RDSEIR p. 3.3-15. 2 SM-BIO-2. Conduct seasonal plant surveys per resource agency protocols and include results in subsequent development applications. RD SEIR p. 3.3-15, - 16. SM-BIO-3. Areas where special status plant species are identified should be avoided. RFSEIR p. 263. SM-BIO-4. If special status plant species cannot be avoided, ensure 1:1 replacement by reserving other on- or off-site acreage that contains the plant or by harvesting and relocating the plants or seeds from the plants to another suitable area on- or off-site to be preserved in perpetuity. RDSEIR p. 3.3-16. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measures ensure that subsequent development projects will identify special status plants onsite and incorporate protective measures in the development application. The measures will further ensure that special status plants are preserved either on- or off-site thereby avoiding the loss of the plant species. Supplemental Impact BIO 3. Loss or Degradation of Botanically Sensitive Habitats. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified direct loss and degradation of the area's unique Arroyo Willow Riparian Woodland and Freshwater Marsh habitats as significant and unavoidable (Impact 3.7/C). Both of these habitats are present in the Project area. Newly identified seasonal wetlands and intermittent stream habitats are additional botanically sensitive habitats that could be affected directly and indirectly by future development of the Project. This is also a potentially significant cumulative impact. RDSEIR p. 3.3-16, - 17. SM-BIO-5. Design and construct future implementing projects to avoid and minimize impacts on wetlands. Examples of design and construction features, include reducing the size of the Project or implementing projects, establishing wetland or upland vegetated buffers to protect streams and other open waters, avoiding the Arroyo Willow Riparian Woodland and red-legged frog habitat in the Fallon Road drainage to the maximum extent feasible or limiting impacts in that area to bridge crossings. RDSEIR p. 3.3-16, - 17. SM-BIO-6. If avoidance and minimization are not feasible, wetlands impacts shall be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio onsite through creation, restoration or enhancement of wetlands or other waters. RDSEIR p. 3.3-17. SM-BIO-7. If mitigation onsite is not feasible, wetlands impacts shall be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio at an offsite location acceptable to the City. RDSEIR p. 3.3-17. SM-BIO-8. Mitigations for botanically sensitive habitats shall" be included in the RMP required by SM-BIO-1. RDSEIR p. 3.3-17. 3 Findine. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Project. These changes will avoid or substantially lessen the Project-related significant ~effects identified in the Supplemental EIR. However, these changes will not avoid the cumulative effects of additional lost or degraded biologically sensitive habitat represented by the seasonal wetlands and intermittent streams. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon approval of the Project. Rationale for Finding. The supplemental measures provide a series of mitigations, phased by preference, i.e., the first preference is for avoidance of sensitive botanical habitat areas represented by wetlands and other water areas. If avoidance is not feasible, the second preference is for replacement or enhancement of wetlands at a different location onsite. If onsite mitigation is not feasible through either of the first two preferences, offsite mitigation shall be required. Through the RMP, the mitigation for botanically sensitive areas, including wetlands, must be established for the entire Project area before any individual development projects are considered. This provides increased opportunities for onsite mitigation than would otherwise be possible on individual development sites, for example, by maintaining 'stream corridors, which cross several properties. Through on- or off-site mitigation at the specified ratios, this Project will ensure that 'the amount of habitat will remain cOnstant. Even with these protections for biologically sensitive habitats including the additional wetlands and intermittent streams, the cumulative impact cannot be fully mitigated. Supplemental Impact BIO 4: San Joaquin Kit Fox. No new impacts were identified in the Supplemental EIR; kit fox impacts remain as described in the Eastern Dublin EIR. However, supplemental rnitigation measures update the previously adopted Eastern Dublin San Joaquin Kit Fox Protection Plan to reflect updated survey and protection measures for kit fox and other special status grassland species. RDSEIR p. 3.3-17. · BIO-SM-9. Future development of the Project shall comply with the amended Eastern Dublin San Joaquin Kit Fox Protection Plan contained in Exhibit E of the Revised Draft SEIR. RDSEIR p. 3.3-17. BIO-SM-10. San Joaquin kit fox habitat shall be included in the RMP required by SM- BIO-1. RDSEIRp. 3.3-18. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. The Original kit fox protection plan provided a comprehensive protection plan addressing a multi-phase approach, from avoidance of potential dens to maintenance of habitat. The supplemental mitigations ensure that the latest protocols and standards of the resources agencies are included in the protection plan. The supplemental mitigations also ensure that off-site mitigation sites will be selected to maximize protection of kit fox. Through the amended plan, the Project will continue to avoid most direct and indirect adverse effects on any kit fox that might be present in the Project area. Supplemental Impact BIO 5: California Red-legged Frog (CRLF). Since the Eastern Dublin EIR, the USFWS has published a draft Recovery Plan and has adopted critical habitat for the CRLF. Related studies have shown that upland areas adjacent to water and riparian features are potential aestivation and dispersal habitat for CRLF. Future development of the Project on the newly identified potential upland habitat could represent a broader impact than previously analyzed. RDSEIR p.3.3-18. SM-BIO-11. Focused surveys following USFWS survey protocols shall be conducted in habitat suitable for CRLF which has not already been surveyed. RDSEIR D- 3.3-18. SM-BIO-12. CRLF habitat areas, including the drainage upstream and east of the current Fallon Road alignment, Shall be included in the RMP required by SM-BIO-1. RDSEIR p. 3.3-18, -19. SM-BIO-13. Future development of the Project area shall, to the extent feasible, avoid CRLF aquatic and dispersal habitat by providing a 300 to 500-foot buffer on either side of any stream that provides CRLF habitat. Limited minor development, such as a trail, bridge crossing, or grading activities along the edge of the buffer zone, may occur within the buffer zone so long as it will have only minor impacts on the habitat. RDSEIR p. 3.3- 19. SM-BIO-14, -15. If avoidance is infeasible, mitigation lands at a 3:1 ratio or other suitable ratio determined by the USFWS shall be set aside in perpetuity. This mitigation shall be proposed in a mitigation and monitoring plan prior to submittal of development applications. Selection of off-site mitigation lands shall give preference to large blocks of land, linkage to open 'space or other high-quality habitat, and shall exclude or limit public useS. If mitigation lands are approved by the City, mitigation guidelines as detailed in SM-BIO-15 shall be implemented prior to and during construction of any development projects. The guidelines include such requirements as fencing wetland areas, controlling removal of vegetation from the fenced areas, preconstruction surveys, and monitoring by the Project Biologist. RDSEIR p. 3.3-19, -20. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. The supplemental mitigation measures refine previously adopted mitigation measures for CRLF to provide open space protection, revegetation, restoration planning, as well as wetland and riparian area protection to minimize impacts to the riparian habitat necessary for CRLF, in accordance with the most current protocols. The expanded stream buffer will extend this protection to the newly identified upland habitat areas. The supplemental mitigations also ensure that off-site mitigation sites will be selected to maximize protection of CRLF. Through mitigation at the specified ratios, the Project will ensure that the amount of habitat will remain constant. Supplemental Impact BIO 6: Special Status Invertebrates. Future development of the Project could disturb potential wetland habitat of two additional special status invertebrate species not identified in the previous EIR. RDSEIR p. 3.3-20. SM-BIO-16. Special status invertebrate habitat shall be included in the RMP required by SM-BIO-1. RDSEIRp. 3.3-20. SM-BIO-IT Vernal pool habitat shall be surveyed. If suitable habitat is identified, the mitigation guidelines as detailed in the Revised Draft SEIR for preservation or creation of habitat shall be implemented. These guidelines address details such as habitat preservation ratios, habitat creation ratios, habitat monitoring and training of construction personnel. RDSEIR p. 3.3-20, -21. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. The RMP and detailed mitigation guidelines will ensure that future development will be planned to avoid wetland and vernal pool habitat for special status invertebrates. Through mitigation at the specified ratios, the Project will ensure that the amount of habitat will remain constant. Supplemental Impact BIO 7: California Tiger Salamander (CTS). Water impoundments and stream courses were previouslY identified as potential habitat for CTS. Since the previous EIR, upland areaS have been recognized as potential aestivation habitat. CTS have been confirmed in the southern portion of the Project area and suitable habitat is present throughout the Project area. Future development of the Project could result in direct and indirect loss of individuals. RDSEIR p. 3.3-21. SM-BIO-18. California Tiger Salamander habitat shall be included in the RMP required by SM-BIO-1. RDSEIR p. 3.3-21. SM-BIO-19. If avoidance of habitat is infeasible, mitigation lands providing aquatic and upland habitat at a 1:1 ratio or other suitable ratio determined by the CDFG shall be set aside in perpetuity, and following the guidelines detailed in the Revised Draft SEIR. This mitigation shall be proposed in a mitigation and monitoring plan prior to submittal of development applications. Selection of off-site mitigation lands shall give preference to large blocks of habitat, linkage to open space or other high-quality habitat, and shall exclude or limit public uses. RDSEIR p. 3.3-21. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. The supplemental mitigation measures refine previously adopted mitigation measures for CTS to provide open space protection, revegetation, and restoration planning for both aquatic and upland habitat. The supplemental mitigations also ensure that off-site mitigation sites will be selected to maximize protection of CTS. Through mitigation at the specified ratios, the Project will ensure that the amount of habitat will remain constant. Supplemental Impact BIO 8: Nesting Raptors. An additional special status raptor species, the short-eared owl, has been identified as potentially nesting within the Project area since the previous EIR. RDSEIR p. 3.3-21, -22. SM-BIO-20. A qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting raptors. If an active nest is found, SM-BIO-21 to -25 shall be implemented. RDSEIR p. 3.3 -22 SM-BIO-21. If construction must occur during nesting season, all potential nesting trees in the development footprint should be removed prior to the nesting season. RDSEIR p. 3.3-22 SM-BIO-22. Construction should occur between August 1 and February 1 to avoid disturbance of owls during the nesting season. RDSEIR p. 3.3-22 SM-BIO-23. If removal of nesting trees is infeasible and construction must occur in the breeding season, a nesting raptor survey shall be performed by a qualified biOlogist prior to tree disturbance. RDSEIR p. 3.3-22 SM-BIO-24. All active nests shall be identified and a buffer zone of at least 200 feet established around the nesting tree. RDSEIR p. 3.3-22 SM-BIO-25. If construction is scheduled when young birds have not yet fledged, an exclusion zone around the nest shall be established or construction shall be delayed until after the young have fledged as determined by a qualified biologist. RDSEIR p. 3.3-22 SM-BIO-26. Nesting raptor habitat shall be included in the RMP required by SM-BI0-1. RDSEIR p. 3.3-22 Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measures ensure that surveys will be conducted to identify active nests before any construction is undertaken. If active nests are identified, the mitigation measures ensure that occupied nests will not be disturbed during nesting season. Supplemental Impact BIO 9: Golden Eagle - Elimination of Foraging Habitat. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified impacts from reduction of the amount and quality of foraging habitat for golden eagles. Since the previous EIR, studies have determined that a breeding pair of eagles uses the northern portion of the Project area for foraging. This area is designated for Rural Residential/Agricultural uses. RDSEIR p. 3.3-22 7 SM-BIO-27. The territory of the golden eagle nesting pair shall be included in the RMP required by SM-BIO-1. Development standards for the Rural Residential/Agricultural uses in this area, and other portions of the Project area within the viewshed of nest sites used by the pair, shall include preservation of foraging habitat by locating homesites in valley bottoms near existing or planned development, by limiting agricultural uses to grazing, and by prohibiting rodent control. RDSEIR p. 3.3-22, -23 Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measures ensure that the Rural Residential/Agricultural area and other areas used for foraging will maintain effective foraging habitat and that the territory of the nesting pair and the integrity of the nesting site is protected. Supplemental Impact BIO 10: Burrowing Owl. No new impacts were identified in the Supplemental EIR; burrowing owl impacts remain as described in the Eastern Dublin EIR. However, supplemental mitigation measures identify new burrowing owl mitigation guidelines from CDFG since the previous EIR. RDSEIR p. 3.3-23 SM-BIO-28. If construction is scheduled during the nesting season (February 1 -August 31), pre-construction surveys should be conducted on the entire Project area and within 150 meters (500 feet) of the Project area prior to any ground disturbance. To avoid take of over-wintering birds, all burrows should be surveyed 30 days prior to ground disturbance between the months of September 1 and January 31. If ground disturbance is delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre-construction survey, the site should be resurveyed. RDSEIR pp. 3.3-23. SM-BIO-29. If over-wintering birds are present no disturbance should occur within 150 feet of occupied burrows. If owls must be moved away from the disturbance area, passive relocation techniques, following CDFG 1995 guidelines, should be used rather than trapping. If no over-wintering birds are observed, burrows may be removed prior to the nesting season. RDSEIR p. 3.3-23. SM-BIO-30. Maintain a minimum buffer (at least 250 feet) around active burrowing owl nesting sites identified by pre-construction surveys during the breeding season to avoid direct loss of individuals (February 1- September 1). RDSEIR p. 3.3-23. SM-BIO-31. If removal of unoccupied potential nesting burrows prior to the nesting season is infeasible and construction must occur within the breeding season, a nesting burrowing owl survey shall be performed by a qualified biologist within 30 days prior to construction. Owls present on site after February 1 will be assumed to be nesting on site or adjacent to the site. All active burrows shall be identified. RDSEIR p. 3.3-23. SM-BIO-32. All active nesting burrows shall have an established 250-foot exclusion zone around the burrow. RDSEIR p. 3.3-23 SM-BIO-33. If construction is scheduled during summer, when young are not yet fledged, a 250-foot exclusion zone around the nest shall be established or construction shall be delayed until after the young have fledged, typically by August 31. RDSEIR p. 3.3-23 SM-BIO-34. When destruction of occupied burrows is unavoidable, existing unsuitable burrows should be enhanced (enlarged or cleared of debris) or new burrows created (by installing artificial burrows) at a 2:1 ratio on protected lands, as provided for below. RDSEIR p. 3.3-23. SM-BIO-35. A minimum of 6.5 acres of foraging habitat per pair or unpaired resident bird, shall be acquired and permanently protected: The protected lands shall be adjacent to occupied burrowing owl habitat and at a location acceptable to CDFG. RDSEIR p. 3.3-23. SM-BIO-36. The project proponent shall provide funding for long-term management and monitoring of the protected lands. The monitoring plan should include success criteria, remedial measures, and an annual report to CDFG. RDSEIR p. 3.3-2. SM-BIO-37. Burrowing owl habitat shall be included in the RMP as required in Mitigation Measure SM-BIO-1. RDSEIR p. 3.3-24. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. The pre-construction surveys and required buffer zone around known nesting and breeding sites will preserve owl burrows by allowing them to be avoided during the construction and development process. The measures 'will also ensure that any unavoidable disturbance will be mitigated in coordination with CDFG. Supplemental Impact BIO 11: Nesting Passerines. The Project area provides potentially suitable nesting habitat, including grassland, arroyo willow riparian woodland, and freshwater marsh habitat, for two additional nesting passerines, the loggerhead shrike and the California homed lark, which were not identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Future development of the Project could destroy nesting habitats or disturb these species. RDSEIR pp. 3.3-24. SM-BIO-38. If construction is scheduled to occur during the nesting season (February 1 - August 15), all potential nesting sites and structures (i.e., shrubs and tules) within the footprint of development should be removed prior to the beginning of the nesting season. However, because the removal of grassland habitat is infeasible, mitigation for impacts to California homed lark are addressed more particularly in Mitigation Measures SM-BIO- 39 to SM-BIO-41, below. RDSEIR p. 3.3-24. SM-BIO-39. If removal of nesting trees and shrubs within the footprint of development is infeasible and construction must occur within the breeding season, a nesting bird survey should be performed by a qualified biologist within 30 days prior to construction. These surveys shall cover grassland habitat for potential nesting California homed lark. Birds present on site after February 1 will be assumed to be nesting onsite or adjacent to the site. RDSEIR p. 3.3-24. SM-BIO-40. _All active nests shall be identified by flagging and a buffer zone, depending on the species, shall be established around the nest site. Buffer zones can range between 75 feet to 100 feet. RDSEIR p. 3.3-24. SM-BIO-41. If construction is scheduled during summer, when young have not yet fledged, an exclusion zone around the nest shall be established or construction shall be delayed until after the young have fledged, typically by July 15. RDSEIR p. 3.3-24. SM-BIO-42. Habitat for nesting passerines shall be included in the RMP as required in SM-BIO-1. RDSEIR p. 3.3-24. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the SuPplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. The pre-construction surveys and required buffer zone around known nesting sites will preserve passerine nests and protect young birds by allowing the sites to be avoided during the construction and development process. Including habitat in the RMP ensures that the integrity of the nesting sites is protected. Supplemental Impact BIO 12: Bat Species. Future development of the Project could destroy roosting habitat for special status bat species potentially occurring on the Project site and identified since the previous EIR. RDSEIR p. 3.3-24 SM-BIO-43. A qualified bat biologist shall conduct occupancy surveys of the Project area to determine whether any mature trees, snags or suitable buildings that would be removed during future project construction provide hibemacula or nursery colony roosting habitat. RDSEIR pp. 3.3-25. SM-BIO-44. If presence is observed, removal of roost habitat should be conducted at specific times of the year. Winter roosts are generally occupied between October 15 through January 30 and maternity colonies are generally occupied between February 15 and July 30. If bats are using roost sites that need to be removed, the roosting season of the colony shall be determined and the removal shall be conducted when the colony is using an alternate roost. RDSEIR p. 3.3-25. SM-BIO-45. Habitat for these bat species, shall be included in the RMP required by SM- BIO-1. RDSEIR p. 3.3-25 Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. l0 Rationale for Finding. The occupancy surveys and limitations on removing roost habitat or roost sites ensure that occupied bat roosts will be avoided during the construction and development process. Section 3.4 Noise Supplemental Impact NOISE 1: Exposure of proposed and existing housing to noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan. As noted in the Revised Draft SEIR traffic analysis, traffic levels on Project area roadways are expected to increase due to regional increases in traffic along 1-580. This increased traffic could also increase traffic noise along those roadways, as reflected in revised noise contours for Project buildout. (RDSEIR Figure 3.4-B). Some land uses within the Project area would be exposed to noise levels that would be considered conditionally acceptable under the City of Dublin's Noise Element. Residential development along Central Parkway, Fallon Road and internal loop roads would be exposed to a CNEL of over 65dBA, exceeding the City's residential noise standard of 60dBA. Existing residences would also be exposed to the increased traffic noise. RDSEIR p. 3.4-3. Supplemental Mitigation Measures. None. Adopted Mitigation Measures 3.10/1.0 and 2.0 of the Eastern Dublin EIR require acoustical studies for new residential development within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour and require mitigation for outdoor living areas of existing residences. These mitigations will continue to apply within the 60 dBA contour as adjusted and will reduce increased traffic noise impacts on new housing to less than significant. No supplemental mitigation measures are recommended. RDSEIR p. 3.4-3. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR with respect to future housing. However, even with these changes, the increased traffic noise impacts on existing residences will not be avoided or substantially lessened. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon approval of the Project. Rationale for Finding. Acoustical mitigation will be identified and incorporated into future new residential development in the Project area and will ensure that applicable noise standards are met. Noise barriers or berms may not be feasible for existing residences due to existing site constraints. The supplemental impact is significant and unavoidable for existing residences. Supplemental Impact NOISE 2: Exposure of future commercial, office and industrial uses to noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan. As reflected in the noise contours for 1-580 and Project area roadways, the general commercial and industrial commercial land uses proposed between Dublin Boulevard and Interstate 580 would be exposed to a CNEL of up to 75 dBA, which is considered conditionally acceptable for these land uses under the guidelines of the Noise Element of the General Plan. RDSEIR p. 3.4-3. SM-NOISE-1. A noise insulation plan shall be prepared for general commercial (including any proposed office-type uses) and industrial development projects located within the future CNEL 70 dBA contour, showing how interior noise levels would be controlled to acceptable levels through means such as sound-rated windows in windows closest to the streets and the freeway. RDSEIR p. 3.4-3. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. The required noise insulation plan allows the developer and City to anticipate noise levels and to propose specific measures to address potentially excessive noise at an early stage in the development process. The insulation measures will be included in future development applications, and will allow projects to make use of a variety of techniques to reduce noise levels. Supplemental Impact NOISE 3: Exposure of people to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. Increased traffic on 1-580 and Project area roadways also could increase ground borne vibrations caused by the passage of heavy trucks or equipment along nearby streets. The discussion of increased noise levels in Supplemental Impact Noise 1 above applies generally to ground borne noise, since both are generated by vehicular traffic, the main source of current and future noise on and within the Project area. Therefore, no additional supplemental impact or mitigation measures are required for ground-borne noise. RDSEIR p. 3.4-4. SM-NOISE-2. Except for local deliveries, restrict heavy truck traffic to designated arterial roadways and truck routes within the Project area and limit the hours of local deliveries to daytime hours as established by the City. RDSEIR p. 3.4-4. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. Restrictions on routes and hours of delivery will ensure that ground borne vibration impacts are avoided during the quieter times of the day so they will be less noticeable, especially in residential areas. Section 3.6 Traffic and Circulation Supplemental Impact TRAFFIC 1: Unacceptable LOS at Hacienda Drive/I-580 eastbound ramps. The intersection of Hacienda Drive/I-580 eastbound ramps would operate at unacceptable levels of LOS E in the AM Peak Hour under the Dublin Baseline Model with or without the Project. RDSEIR p. 3.6-14. SM-TRAFFIC-1. Project developers shall contribute a pro-rata share to the widening of the 1-580 eastbound off-ramp approach at Hacienda Drive to add a third eastbound left turn lane. The City of Dublin shall implement this mitigation measure in coordination with the City of Pleasanton and Caltrans. This improvement shall occur when traffic 12 impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. RDSEIR p. 3.6-15. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. Widening the 1-580 ramp and adding a left-tm lane will provide sufficient capacity for this intersection to operate at an acceptable level of service. Supplemental Impact TRAFFIC 2: Unacceptable LOS at Hacienda Drivefl-580 westbound ramps. The intersection of Hacienda Drive/I-580 westbound ramps would operate at an unacceptable LOS F in thc AM Peak Hour under the Dublin Baseline Model with or without the Project. RDSEIR p. 3.6-15 SM-TRAFFIC-2. Project developers shall 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. 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-mm lane. The City of Dublin shall implement this mitigation measure in coordination with the City of Pleasanton and Caltrans. This improvement shall occur when traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. RDSEIR p. 3.6-15. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. Widening the overcrossing and modifying the loop on-ramp will provide sufficient capacity for this intersection to operate at acceptable levels of service. Supplemental Impact TRAFFIC 3: Unacceptable LOS at Santa Rita Road/I-580 eastbound ramps. The intersection of Santa Rita Road/I-580 eastbound ramps will operate at an unacceptable LOS E in the AM and PM peak hours. RDSEIR Page 3.6-15 SM-TRAFFIC-3. Project developers shall contribute a pro-rata share to construction, which converts the eastbound Santa Rita off-ramp through lane to a shared left mm/through lane. Project developers also shall contribute to a traffic signal upgrade that includes a westbound right-turn overlap from Pimlico Drive. The City of Dublin shall implement this mitigation measure in coordination with the City of Pleasanton and Caltrans. This improvement shall occur when traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. RDSEIR p. 3.6-15. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. 13 Rationale for Finding. Converting the off-ramp to include a shared left turn lane and upgrading the traffic signal will improve intersection operation to acceptable levels of service. Supplemental Impact TRAFFIC 4: New Project Intersection of Dublin Boulevard/Street D. The new Dublin Boulevard/Street D intersection would operate at an unacceptable level of service during the PM peak hour (LOS F) with one-way STOP sign control under the Dublin Model Baseline and TVTM Model, with Project. RDSEIR p. 3.6-15, -16. SM-TRAFFIC-4. The prOject developers shall install a traffic signal at the Dublin Boulevard/Street D intersection at the time development occurs in this area utilizing this intersection. Project developers shall implement this mitigation measure when the traffic signal installation at Dublin Boulevard/Street D becomes warranted based on the estimated additional trips from individual' projects, as determined by traffic impact studies of the individual projects. RDSEIR p. 3.6-16. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. Installing the traffic signal will result in the intersection operating at an acceptable level of service. Supplemental Impact TRAFFIC 5: New Project Intersection of Fallon Road/Project Road. The new Fallon Road/Project Road intersection would operate at unacceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours (LOS F) with one-way STOP sign control. This is a significant impact under the Dublin Model Baseline and TVTM Model, with Project. RDSEIR p. 3.6-16. SM-TRAFFIC-5: The Project developers shall install a traffic signal at the Fallon Road/Project Road intersection at the time development occurs in this area utilizing this intersection. Project developers shall implement this mitigation measure when the traffic signal installation at Fallon Road/Project Road becomes warranted based on the estimated additional trips from individual projects, as determined by traffic impact studies of the individual projects. RDSEIR p. 3.6-16. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding. Installing the traffic signal will result in the intersection operating at an acceptable level of service. Supplemental Impact TRAFFIC 6: Year 2025 Cumulative Buildout with Project Scenario, Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard Intersection. The Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection would operate at LOS E (0.93) in the AM peak hour and LOS F (1.03) in the pM peak hour. This intersection operates at LOS E in the AM and PM peak hours even without the Project and is a significant cumulative impact. Development of the Project creates only a 0.03 impact at this intersection during the PM peak hour and improves the intersection very slightly in the AM peak hour. RDSEIR p. 3.6-16, -17 SM-TRAFFIC-6. Through payment of the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee, Project developers shall contribute a pro-rata share to configure the eastbound and westbound Dublin Boulevard approaches, the northbound and southbound Dougherty Road approaches and to widen the 1-580 westbound diagonal on-ramp from Dougherty Road, as described in the Revised Draft SEIR (p. 3.6-17). The City will implement these improvements. In addition, the City will monitor the intersection for peak hour volumes on a periodic basis, and will apply conditions of approval to implementing development projects to improve levels of service. Such conditions may include transportation demand programs, ride-sharing, transit passes, staggered work hours, vanpools and other trip reduction programs. Current and future phases of the 1-580 Smart Corridor Project involve systems deployment and regional traffic coordination among Tri-Valley cities, the county and Caltrans. RDSEIR p. 3.6-17. Finding. Changes or alterations have been in, or incorporated into the Project. Some of the measures will be implemented by developers and the City of Dublin. Other measures involve the cooperative efforts of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, the county and Caltrans in the Smart Corridor Project. However, even with these changes, the impact will not be avoided or substantially lessened. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon approval of the Project. Rationale for Finding. Additional improvements to reduce the intersection impacts to an acceptable LOS would require adding a fourth northbound left turn lane and other · improvements that raise major safety concerns. Nor would these additional improvements be feasible given the physical constraints at the Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection where adjacent properties to the intersection are already built out. Monitoring the intersection to obtain updated volume forecasts for future horizon years (i.e., Year 2025) can more effectively implement transportation measures to improve levels of service and reduce single car occupancy through future development projects. These City and Project efforts will complement current and future phases of the 1-580 Smart Corridor Project and would likely relieve some congestion at the Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection through ITS (Intelligent Transportation. Systems) measures to discourage traffic from diverting off the freeway due to congestion or incidents. Supplemental Impact TRAFFIC 7: Year 2025 Cumulative Buildout with Project scenario, Hacienda Drive/Dublin Boulevard intersection. The Hacienda Drive/Dublin Boulevard intersection was identified in 'the Eastern Dublin EIR as exceeding the applicable LOS under the cumulative buildout with Project analysis (Impact 3.3M). 15 Mitigation Measure 3.3/13.0 remains applicable. The SEIR analyzed this intersection and found it still to operate at an unacceptable level in the cumulative analysis. The Hacienda Drive/Dublin Boulevard intersection would operate at LOS E (1.00) during the PM peak hour with the Project and would operate at LOS E (0.97) during the PM peak hour even without the Project. These LOS are a significant cumulative impact. RDSEIR p. 3.6-18. SM-TRAFFIC-A1. The City will monitor the intersection for peak hour volumes on a periodic basis, and Will apply conditions of approval to implementing development projects to improve levels of service. Such conditions may include transportation demand programs, ride-sharing, transit passes, staggered work hours, vanpools and other trip reduction programs. Current and future phases of the 1-580 Smart Corridor Project involve coordination among Tri-Valley cities, the county and Caltrans to implement ITS measures. RDSEIR p. 3.6-18. Finding. Changes or alterations have been in, or incorporated into the Project. However, even with these changes on the part of developers, the City and participants in the 1-580 Smart Corridor Program, the impact will not be avoided or substantially lessened. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon approval of the Project. Rationale for Finding. Given the existing right-of-way and improvements at this intersection, there is no opportunity to provide additional mitigation beyond the existing intersection geometries. Additional improvements to reduce the intersection impacts to an acceptable LOS would require adding a fourth northbound left turn lane and other improvements that raise major safety concerns. Similar to the Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection the Hacienda Drive/Dublin Boulevard intersection is nearly built out. Adjacent properties to the east of the intersection are already built out. As part of ITS deployment measures along the 1-580 corridor, the City of Dublin will implement advanced traffic signal timing techniques (e.g., adaptive signal timing) along Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive to improve the operation of this intersection by utilizing the intersections' throughput capacity more efficiently. Supplemental Impact TRAFFIC 8: Year 2025 Cumulative Buildout with Project Scenario, Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard Intersection. The Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection would operate at LOS F (1.11) in the PM peak hour with some increases in turning movements and traffic volumes at this intersection possibly attributable to Project and regional traffic utilizing Dublin Boulevard as an "escape" route from PM peak hour congestion on 1-580. This LOS is a significant cumulative impact. RDSEIR pp. 3.6-19. ~ The Revised Draft SEIR inadvertently omitted an "SM" mitigation measure number for the monitoring and Smart Corridor measures described in the text. For the purpose of these findings, these measures are identified as SM- TRAFFIC-A. 16 SM-TRAFFIC-7. The Project developers shall construct an additional through lane on northbound Fallon Road (for a total of four through lanes), construct an additional left-turn lane on westbound Dublin Boulevard (for a total of three left-tm 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 and will apply appropriate Project conditions based on the results of such monitoring. Project developers shall implement this mitigation measure when traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. Construction of these additional lanes at the intersection would aid in moving vehicles through the intersection and will reduce the impacts to the intersection. However this mitigation cannot reduce the impacts to an acceptable level (LOS D), so this impact remains a significant cumulative impact. RDSEIR p. 3.6-19. SM-TRAFFIC-8. In addition to the additional lane configurations in SM-TRAFFIC-7, the Project developers shall pay for studies to assess the feasibility of locating the Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection farther north to allow for a signalized Project intersection between the 1-580 westbound ramps/Fallon Road intersection and the Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection (the "auxiliary intersection") with lane configurations as detailed in the Revised Draft SEIR (p. 3.6-19). If the studies show that a new Project auxiliary intersection in such location is feasible, the Project developers shall construct such intersection. Project developers shall implement this mitigation measure when traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. Construction of this auxiliary intersection would require modifications to the planned Fallon Road and Dublin Boulevard alignments to provide the necessary 750 feet distance between intersections. Land uses and planned building locations on the west side of Fallon Road may have to be modified to accommodate this new intersection. This new intersection is anticipated to function at LOS B in the AM peak hour and LOS C in the PM peak hour. However, even with this new auxiliary intersection, the Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection would operate at LOS E (0.91) in the PM peak hour, just above the acceptable standard of LOS D (0.90). Therefore, this impact remains a significant cumulative impact. The City will also periodically monitor peak hour volumes and apply transportation demand management measures to future development projects as appropriate. Measures include comprehensive transportation demand programs, and trip reduction programs such as ride-sharing, transit passes, staggered work hours, vanpools and other similar measures. RDSEIR pp. 3.6-19, -20; see also RFSEIR, Response 10.14.b. Finding. Changes or alterations have been in, or incorporated into the Project. However, even with these changes, the impact will not be avoided or substantially lessened. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted. Rationale for Finding. As with other identified intersections along Dublin Boulevard, additional improvements to reduce the impacts at the. Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard 17 intersection to an acCeptable LOS would require adding a fourth westbound left turn lane and would raise the same safety concerns. Monitoring the intersection to obtain updated volume forecasts for future horizon years (i.e., Year 2025) can more effectively implement transportation measures to improve levels of service and reduce single car occupancy through future development projects. These City and Project efforts will complement future phases of the 1-580 Smart Corridor project, including advanced traffic signal timing techniques (e.g., adaptive signal timing) along Dublin Boulevard and Fallon Road to improve the operation of this intersection by utilizing the intersections' throughput capacity more efficiently. Supplemental Impact TRAFFIC 9: Future Base with Project Scenario, Fallon Road. Based on the Dublin Model, ADTs due to Project traffic over future baseline traffic will substantially increase along Fallon Road and will overload planned interim lane configurations. Project traffic volumes would require that certain segments of Fallon Road be widened to accommodate expected average daily traffic volumes. This increase in ADT is considered a significant impact. Dublin Boulevard east of Fallon Road to Street D is expected to reach an ADT of 45,800 vpd and 34,100 vpd west of Fallon Road, based on the TVTM model with Project traffic. RDSEIR pp. 3.6-20, -21. SM-TRAFFIC-9. The Project developers shall 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. The Project developers shall be responsible for widening Fallon Road between Central Parkway and Project Road to four lanes. The Project developers also shall be responsible for widening the Fallon Road overcrossing (between the eastbound and westbound 1-580 ramps) from four lanes to six lanes. Project developers shall implement this mitigation measure when traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. RDSEIR p. 3.6-21 Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding. With the mitigatiOn measures, Fallon Road would be wide enough to carry the expected traffic volumes at an acceptable level. Supplemental Impact TRAFFIC 10: Future Base with Project Scenario, Central Parkway. Based on the Dublin Model, Central Parkway between Fallon Road and Tassajara Road is expected to carry an increase of 1,300 ADT due to Project traffic over future baseline traffic, for a total of 16,800 vpd. This increase in ADT is considered a significant impact. RDSEiR p. 3.6-21 SM-TRAFFIC-10. The Project developers shall be responsible for widening Central Parkway between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road from two lanes to four lanes. Project developers shall implement this mitigation measure when traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. RDSEIR p. 3.6-21. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant'effect identified in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. With the mitigation, Central Parkway would be wide enough to carry the expected traffic volumes at an acceptable level. Supplemental Impact TRAFFIC 11: Year 2025 Cumulative Buildout with Project Scenario, Freeway Segments on 1-580 and 1-680 in the Project Area. Without Project traffic, mainline freeway volumes are deficient in AM and/or PM peak hours for certain segments. While addition of Project traffic would not change the levels of service, Project traffic would contribute to already deficient conditions. RDSEIR pp. 3.6-23, -24. Mitigation Measure. No supplemental mitigation measures are identified. However, the Revised Draft SEIR refers to other adopted mitigations that will reduce cumulative freeway impacts. For example, freeway impacts were analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Mitigation Measures 3.3/3.0 and /5.0 were adopted to require coordination between the City of Dublin, Caltrans, the City of Pleasanton and Eastern Dublin developers to provide auxiliary lanes on 1-580. In compliance with these mitigations, the City of Dublin adopted a Tri-Valley Transportation Development (TVTD) Fee in 1998 for future developments within the City of Dublin. TVTD Fees paid by Project developers pay for regional improvements to the freeway system. Efficiency improvements such as the 1-580 Smart Corridor Program and transportation systems management programs are 'included in SM-TRAFFIC-6 and -7. No additional supplemental mitigations are identified for this cumulative freeway impact. RDSEIR pp. 3.6-24; 1, -22. (See also RFSEIR Responses 3.1, 3.2, 10.14.c regarding freeway impacts and RFSEIR p. 268 regarding text amendments to the significance standard.) Finding. Mitigation measures adopted for other impacts, and through the Eastern Dublin EIR, will reduce freeway congestion but will not avoid cumulative freeway impacts. No supplemental mitigation measures are identified for supplemental freeway segment cumulative impacts, therefore the impacts remain significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon Project approval. Rationale for Finding. Previously identified regional transportation mitigations are being implemented, e.g., through the TVTD fee. Previously identified improvements together with implementation of trip reduction strategies can reduce cumulative impacts through measures to decrease single occupant vehicle use and increase public transit use, but not enough to reduce 1-580 and 1-680 segments to acceptable levels of service. Supplemental Impact UTS 1: Uncertain Energy Supply. California is experiencing an energy crisis that appears to be caused by a lack of sufficient electricity generation facilities. In addition, PG&E has declared .bankruptcy because of billion of dollars of debt owed to generators of electricity for power purchased in California's deregulated markets. Until PG&E emerges from bankruptcy some uncertainty concerning the provision of gas and electricity services to new and existing PG&E customers exists, RDSEIR p. 3.7-9 Supplemental Impact UTS 2: Local Electrical Distribution Constraints. Local electrical distribution constraints limit PG&E's ability to serve the Project area. PG&E has stated that it is able to adequately serve the Tri-Valley with existing facilities until approximately June 2002. PG&E proposes to increase electric service by adding substations in Dublin and North Livermore, expanding the Vineyard Substation in Pleasanton, and installing approximately 23.5 miles of 230 kilovolt (kV) transmission lines to serve the substations. Until the Tri-Valley 202 Capacity Increase Project or a functional equivalent alternative is approved, the impact would be significant. With construction and operation of the Tri-Valley 2002 Capacity Increase Project or an equivalent alternative and project phasing as described in the supplemental mitigation below the proposed annexation and prezoning would result in a less than significant impact. RDSEIR p. 3.7-9, -10. SM-UTS-1. Require '.discretionary City review prior to the installation and use of distributed generators, including emergency generators. RDSEIR p. 3.7-10 SM-UTS-2. Prior to approval of future subdivision maps or Site Development Review applications (as may be applicable) by the City of Dublin, project developers shall submit "will serve" letters from PG&E indicating that adequate electricity and natural gas services are available to serve the proposed development project. RD SEIR p. 3.7-10 Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in Supplemental Impacts UTS 1 and 2 in the Supplemental EIR. Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measures will ensure that there is an available electrical supply for the Project prior to any development. GSPA#L2000\00-025\CC Staff Report and Reso-March 02~Exhibit A mitigation.fmdings.mar28.clean.doc 20 EXHIBIT B FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES The Eastern Dublin EIR identified four alternatives: No Project, Reduced Planning Area, Reduced Land Use Intensities and No Development. The City Council found the No Project, Reduced Land Use Intensities and No Development alternatives infeasible and then approved a modification of the Reduced Planning Area alternative. The Supplemental EIR identified a new alternative, the Mitigated Traffic Alternative. It also updated the analysis of the No Project and No Development alternatives that were analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. These findings are for the Mitigated Traffic Alternative and the No Project and No Development alternatives as revised by the Supplemental EIR. The alternatives analysis is presented in Chapter 4.0 of the Revised DSEIR (RDSEIR); see also Response 10.27 in the Revised FSEIR on the subject of alternatives. The City Council hereby finds that the three alternatives identified and described in the Supplemental EIR were considered and finds them to be infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations set forth below pursuant to CEQA section 21081(c). MITIGATED TRAFFIC ALTERNATIVE. RDSEIR Pages 4-2 to 4-7. Finding: Infeasible. This alternative reduces the number of residential units and commercial floor area by 25% but would occupy the same area and the same development "footprint" as the Project. The Mitigated Traffic alternative is found to be infeasible for the following reasons: 1. Unavoidable Impacts. Even with the reduced number of units, all of the unavoidable impacts for the Project would remain except for the unavoidable cumulative impact at the Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection. Therefore, there is no substantial benefit from adopting this alternative given the other benefits from the Project: 2. Jobs/Housing. This alternative would not improve the ratio of jobs to employed residents in the City and would provide a smaller share of the City's contribution to regional hoUsing needs. 3. Fiscal Impacts. This alternative may have potentially significant fiscal impacts on the City budget's cost/revenue balance by reducing commercial development, which generally generates less service costs and more property tax revenues than housing. NO PROJECT (ECAP) ALTERNATIVE. RDSEIR Pages 4-7 to 4,13. Exhibit B to Attachment 1 Finding: Infeasible. This alternative assumes the Project as proposed would not be built on the site; instead, any development would be pursuant to the County of Alameda's General Plan and East County Area Plan (ECAP). Under this alternative, development of the portion of the Project Area subject to the East Dublin Specific Plan would be similar in terms of land uses and densities; but, with greater commercial development and the non-residential types of uses, it would generate more employment. Development of the areas within the Sphere of Influence but outside the Specific Plan area would be reduced to 6 residential units rather than the .1,286 units pursuant to the Project. The No Project Alternative is infeasible because the City's General Plan has designated 'the entirety of the Project area for planned development as part of its long-range planning for the EaStern Dublin area. As to the portions of the Project area within Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, the No Project Alternative would partially fulfill the City's objectives. However, as to the portions within the Sphere of Influence but outside the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, those objectives would not be fulfilled. In addition, the No Project Alternative would exacerbate the City's existing excess of jobs compared to employed residents. This alternative would not avoid identified significant unavoidable air quality, biology or traffic impacts, and would generate approximately 80% more traffic than the Project. NO DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE. RD SEIR Pages 4-13 to 4-15. Finding: Infeasible. This alternative assumes no development of the Project area beyond existing conditions and assumes no annexation of the Project area. This alternative would avoid all of the Project's impacts, but is not feasible because the City's General Plan has designated the Project area for planned development as part of its long- range planning for the Eastern Dublin area; it therefore would not meet the City's objectives. In addition, the No Development Alternative fails to pro'vide needed housing as set forth in the Housing Element of the City's General Plan and other plan documents. ALTERNATIVES NOT SELECTED. RDSEIR Pages 4-16 to -17; RFSEIR Response 10.27. Through the Eastern Dublin EIR as supplemented by the Eastern Dublin Properties Supplemental EIR, the City has identified and considered a range of reasonable alternative land uses for the Project site. The history of planning for Eastern Dublin reflects the City's commitment to identifying and analyzing alternatives as the current General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land uses derive from Alternative 2 of the 1993 Eastern Dublin EIR. The current Project implements the City's approval of Alternative 2 as the established blueprint for urbanizing Eastern Dublin pursuant to the 1993 Eastern Dublin approvals. Other alternatives were identified during the current Supplemental EIR process, and are analyzed as noted in the above findings. Still other alternatives were identified during the environmental review process, but were not selected for further analysis for the reasons set forth in the Revised Draft and Final SEIR documents. EXHIBIT C STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 1. General. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the City Council of.the City of Dublin makes this Statement of Overriding Considerations for those supplemental impacts identified in the East Dublin Properties Supplemental EIR as significant and unavoidable. The City Council previously adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the unmitigated adverse impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, which remains valid and applicable to the Project. This Statement of Overriding Considerations addresses the supplemental unavoidable adverse impacts identified in the Supplemental EIR. The City Council has carefully considered each impact in reaching its decision to adopt the Project and to allow future urbanization of the Eastern Dublin Project area. Although the City Council believes that many of the unavoidable environmental effects identified in the Supplemental EIR will be substantially lessened by mitigation measures incorporated into the Project, and future development plans as well as future mitigation measures implemented with future approvals, it recognizes that the implementation of the Project carries with it unavoidable adverse environmental effects. The City Council specifically finds that to the extent that the identified adverse or potentially adverse impacts have not been mitigated to acceptable levels, there are specific economic, social, environmental, land use, and other considerations that support approval of the Project. 2. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts. The following unavoidable significant environmental impacts are associated with the proposed Project as identified in the Supplemental EIR. The impacts cannot be fully mitigated by changes or alterations to the Project. Supplemental Impact AQI: Mobile Source Emissions: Reactive Organics (RO), Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) and Particulate Matter (PM-10). Even with mitigation, the Project and cumulative development would result in mobile source emissions that exceed applicable state and federal standards. No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce this impact to a level of insignificance. The only Project alternative that could reduce this impact to a level of insignificance is the No Development Alternative, which was found to be infeasible (see Exhibit B). (RDSEIR p. 3-2-4)- Supplemental Impact BIO 3: Loss or Degradation of Botanically Sensitive Habitats. Even with mitigation, the future development of the Project would result in a cumulative loss of botanically sensitive habitat. This loss is cumulatively significant, given the loss of other botanically sensitive habitat in the area. Exhibit C to Attachment 1 No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce this cumulative impact to a level of insignificance. The '~ only Project alternative that could reduce this impact to a level of insignificance is the No Development Alternative, which was found to be infeasible (see Exhibit B). (RDSEIR Pp. 3.3-16, -17). Supplemental Impact Noise 1: Exposure of Existing Houses to Noise Levels In Excess of Standards Established in the General Plan. Even with mitigation, the Eastern Dublin EIR previously identified traffic noise impacts on existing residences as unavoidable and concluded there were no feasible mitigation measures that could reduce this impact to a level of insignificance. To the extent that increased traffic noise not anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR intensifies this impact, there are no feasible mitigation measures available to reduce this impact to a level of insignificance. The only Project alternative that could reduce this impact to a level of insignificance is the No Development Alternative, which was found to be infeasible (see Exhibit B). (RDSEIR p. 3.4-3). Supplemental Impact Traffic 6: Year 2025 Cumulative Buildout with Project Scenario, Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard Intersection. Even with mitigation, the Level of Service at this intersection cannot be reduced to minimum acceptable level of service. No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce this impact to a level of insignificance, since the configuration required to add another lane would cause major safety concerns, and physical constraints prevent the required configuration. The only Project alternative that could reduce this impact to a level of insignificance is the No Development Alternative, which was found to be infeasible (see Exhibit B). (RDSEIR pp. 3.6-16 to -18). Supplemental Impact Traffic 7: Year 2025 Cumulative Buildout with Project Scenario, Hacienda Drive/Dublin Boulevard Intersection. Even with mitigation, the Level of Service at this intersection cannot be reduced to minimum acceptable level of service. No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce this impact to a level of insignificance given the existing right-of-way and improvements at this intersection. The only Project alternative that could reduce this impact to a level of insignificance is the No Development Alternative, which was found to be infeasible (see Exhibit B). (RDSEIR pp. 3.6-18). Supplemental Impact Traffic 8: Year 2025 Cumulative Buildout with Project Scenario, Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard Intersection. Even with mitigation, the Level of Service at this intersection cannot be reduced to minimum acceptable level of service. No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce this impact to a level of insignificance given the existing right-of-way and improvements at this intersection. The only Project alternatives that could reduce this impact to a level of insignificance are the No Development and the Mitigated Traffic Alternatives, both of which have been found to be infeasible (see Exhibit B). (RDSEIR pp. 3.6-19, 20). Supplemental Impact Traffic 11: Year 2025 Cumulative Buildout with Project Scenario, Freeway Segments on 1-580 and 1-680 in the Project Area. Even with mitigation, the Level of Service on these freeway segments cannot be reduced to 2 minimum acceptable level of service. No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce this impact to a level of insignificance. The only Project alternative that could reduce this impact to a level of insignificance is the No Development Alternative, which was found to be infeasible (see Exhibit B). (RDSEIR pp. 3.6-23 to -25). 3. Overriding Considerations The City Council has balanced the benefits of the East Dublin Properties Project to the City of Dublin against the significant and potentially significant adverse impacts identified in the Supplemental EIR that have not been eliminated or mitigated to a level of insignificance. The City Council similarly weighed the benefits of the Eastern Dublin GPA/SP Project in 1993 against the unavoidable significant impacts of future development of Eastern Dublin and determined that the Eastern Dublin project should be approved. (Resolution 53-93, Section 4). To the extent that the Project would result in unavoidable significant impacts described in the previous statement of overriding considerations as well as impacts referenced above in the Supplemental EIR, the City Council hereby determines that such unavoidable impacts are outweighed by the benefits of Project as further set forth below. The City Council, acting pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, hereby determines that unavoidable impacts of the Project are outweighed by the need for the City to implement and bring to fruition its long-range planning for the Eastern Dublin area. The City Council has considered the public record of proceedings on the proposed Project and had determined that approval of the Project would result in the implementation of the City's long-term programmatic planning goals, policies and programs for Eastern Dublin in general and the Project site in particular. The City of Dublin has carefully and systematically planned for its future, which efforts are reflected in its General Plan and other actions over the last several years. The City has planned for, sought and secured the planning and incremental annexation of those eastern lands within its sphere of influence and the Project completes the City's planning approach. Upon consideration of the public record of proceedings on the proposed Project, the City Council hereby determines that approval and implementation of the Project would result in the following substantial public benefits. Economic Considerations. Substantial evidence is included in the record demonstrating the economic benefits that the City would derive from implementation of the Project. Specifically, the Project will result in: ao Approximately 2,575 new jobs, as well as a substantial number of construction j obs. bo Potential commercial development that will result in increases in sales tax revenues for the City. c. Substantial increases in property tax revenues. 3 Social Considerations. Substantial evidence exists in the record demonstrating the social benefits that the City would derive from the implementation of the Project. Specifically, the Project will result in: ao Increases in housing opportunities in the City and in a region where housing is costly and in short supply. b. Increases in the amount of affordable housing in the community. Increased opportunities for the City to contribute its fair share of regional housing. Provision of diverse types and densities of housing opportunities including higher density housing, medium density and Upper-end executive housing and rural residential areas. Other Considerations. Substantial evidence exists in the record demonstrating other public benefits that the City would derive from implementation of the Project. They include: Comprehensive planning incorporating innovative and extensive environmental mitigation for the entire Project site to allow more opportunity to maintain continuity of onsite resources, including resource and open space corridors. bo Designating substantial areas of land for Open Space and low intensity Rural Residential uses, while also providing neighborhood and community parks for a variety of open space and recreation opportunities, for the Project, the City and the region. G:~PA#L2000\00-025\CC StaffReport and Reso-March 02\exhibit C soc.mar28.doc East Dublin properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation (PA 00-025) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures March 2002 Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule SM-BIO-I: In order to address newly analyzed impacts, and in Project Dublin Planning Prior to or order to address impacts to biological resources in a coordinated developer Department concurrent with manner across the entire Project area (as opposed to addressing submittal of any them solely on a property-by-property basis), the Project future proponents shall prepare and implement a Resource Management development Plan (RMP) as described below. Following approval of the Project, applications but prior to subsequent submittal to the City for discretionary within the review of any specific development proposal for any property Project area within the Project area, the applicant shall prepare and submit to submitted to the the city for its review and approval an RMP encompassing all City for properties within the Project area. The RMP will analyze biological discretionary impacts in more detail and more comprehensively than can this 'review and program-level SEIR, and such impacts will in turn be analyzed to during an even greater, project-level degree when Stage 2 development construction and plans are submitted by individual property owners within the operation Project area to the City for discretionary review. The RMP shall address all properties within the Project area and any necessary off-site mitigation lands. As noted below, it must apply and comply with all biological resource mitigation measures contained in this SEIR (SM-BIO-2 through SM-BIO-45) and in the Eastern Dublin EIR. East Dublin prOperties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule The RMP must address the following special status species and habitats: 1. Botanically sensitive communities: arroyo willow riparian woodland, seasonal wetlands, intermittent streams, freshwater marsh and alkali grasslands. 2. Special Status plant species: San Joaquin spearscale, Congdon's tarplant, palmate bird's beak, caper-fruited tropidocarpum and Livermore tarplant. 3. Special status invertebrates: conservancy fairy shrimp, longhorn fairy shrimp, vernal pool fairy shrimp, and vernal pool tadpole shrimp. · 4. Special status amphibians: California red-legged frog and California tiger salamander. 5. Special status raptors and passerines: golden eagle, burrowing owl, short-eared owl, tricolored blackbird, loggerhead shrike and California horned lark. 6. Special status mammals: San Joaquin kit fOx, pallid bat, Townsend's big-eared bat and Yuma myotis bat. The RMP shall consist of the following: · Overview · Discussion of existing conditions of soil, geology, adjacent and proposed land uses,, creeks and drainages, wetlands, vegetation, and special status plants and animals across the entire Project area · For each special status species and sensitive habitat listed above, a detailed discussion as follows: East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation 2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule 1. General description of the resource - biology, life history and regional distribution 2. Specific description and mapping of occurrence across the Project area (to be based on property-by- property surveys) 3 Potential direct, indirect and cumulative impacts per the Eastern Dublin EIR and Supplemental EIR 4. Description of applicable local, state and federal regulatory requirements. · A comprehensive and detailed plan for managing these resources consistent with the following requirements and principles: 1. Each of the biological resource mitigation measures in the Eastern Dublin EIR and this SEIR 2. All applicable local, state and federal regulatory requirements . 3. Local resource protection policies (e.g., Stream Restoration Program, Grazing Management Plan) 4. To the greatest extent feasible, and consistent with applicable mitigation measures and regulatory requirements, impacts to sensitive biological resources shall be avoided, and such resources shall be preserved and managed on-site (i.e., within the Project area) 5. To the extent impacts to sensitive biological resources cannot be avoided, those impacts shall be mitigated off-site consistent with the applicable mitigation measures. 6. Sensitive biological', resources which are preserved East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule either through avoidance or mitigation shall be permanently protected and managed. The means to accomplish this shall be specified in the plan. 7. Management efforts shall employ principles of adaptive management, and shall be monitored regularly. 8. Funding for such preservation, management and monitoring work must be assured. SM-BIO-2: Plant surveys, as outlined in USFWS and CDFG Project Dublin Planning Prior to or survey protocols (CDFG 1996), shall be conducted across the developer Department concurrent with Project area in early spring, late spring, and late summer to submittal of any confirm presence or absence of special-status plant species. Results future of these surveys shall be addressed in the RMP (SM-BIO-l) and in development project-level environmental review of all subsequent development applications applications in the Project area. within the Project area submitted to the City for discretionary review and during construction and operation SM-BIO-3: Once presence is determined for a special status plant Project Dublin Planning During species, areas supporting the species should be avoided to the developer Department construction extent feasible. SM-BIO-4: If a special-status plant species cannot be avoided, then Project Dublin Planning Prior to the area containing the plant species must be measured and one of developer Department submittal of a the following steps must be taken to ensure replacement on a 1:1 Stage 2 East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation 4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule ratio (by acreage): development plan or tentative a. Permanently preserve, through use of a conservation map easement or other similar method, an equal amount of acreage either within the Project area or off-site that contains the plant; or b. Harvest seeds from the plants to be lost, or use seeds from another source within the Tri-valley area, and seed an equal amount of area suitable for growing the plant either within the Project area or off-site. Such area shall be preserved and protected in perpetuity. If the plants fail to establish after a five year period, then step "a" above must be implemented Prior to submittal of a Stage 2 development plan or tentative map, the developer shall submit a written report to the City for its review and approval demonstrating how the developer will comply with this mitigation measure, including the steps it will take to ensure that transplanting or seeding will be successful. SM-BIO-5: To the extent feasible, implementation of the Project Project Dublin Planning Prior to through subsequent preparation of Stage 2 development proposals developer Department submittal of a on a property-by-property basis shall be designed to avoid and Stage 2 minimize adverse effects to waters of the United States (which development include seasonal wetlands and intermittent streams) within the plan or tentative Project area. Examples of avoidance and minimization include (1) map reducing the size of future individual development projects within the Project area, (2) design future development projects within the Project area so as to avoid and/or minimize impacts to waters of the United States, and (3) establish and maintain wetland or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams. In order to protect the particularly sensitive Arroyo willow riparian woodland and red-legged frog habitat found in the Fallon Road East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule drainage from Fallon Road upstream to its terminus, future development projects within the Project area either shall completely avoid this drainage or limit impacts to bridge crossings (as opposed to fill) or other such minimally impacting features. SM-BIO-6: To the extent that avoidance and minimization are not Project Dublin Planning. Prior to feasible and wetlands, intermittent streams or other waters will be developer Department submittal of a filled, such impacts shall be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio (measured by Stage 2 acreage) within the Project area if feasible, through the creation, development restoration or enhancement of wetlands, intermittent streams or plan or tentative other waters. Such mitigation area shall be preserved and protected map in perpetuity. Prior to submittal of a Stage 2 development plan or tentative map for any proPerty within the Project area, the property owner shall submit a written report to the City for its review and approval demonstrating how the owner will comply with this mitigation measure. SM-BIO-7: If mitigation within the Project area is not feasible, then Project Dublin Planning Prior to the developer shall mitigate the fill of wetlands or other waters at a developer Department submittal of a 2:1 ratio (measured by acreage) at an off-site location acceptable to Stage 2 the City. Such mitigation area shall be preserved and protected in development perpetuity. Prior to submittal of a Stage 2 development plan or plan or tentative tentative map, the property owner shall submit a written report to map the City for its review and approval demonstrating how the owner will comply with this mitigation measure. SM-BIO-8: Botanically sensitive habitats shall be included in and Project Dublin Planning Prior to or shall be protected and enhanced by implementation of the Resource developer Department concurrent with Management Plan, as outlined in Mitigation Measure SM-BIO-l, submittal of any above, future development applications within the East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental MeasuYes City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 6 Mitigation Measure Implementing MOnitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule Project area submitted to the City for discretionary review and during construction and operation SM-BIO-9 Future development of properties within the Project area Project Dublin Planning Prior to or shall comply with the amended Eastern Dublin San Joaquin Kit Fox developer Department concurrent with Protection Plan (Appendix E) which reflects the latest protocols for submittal of any kit fox habitat evaluations, presence/absences surveys, pre- future construction surveys and precautionary construction measures, development applications within the Project area submitted to the City for discretionary review and during construction and operation SM-BIO-10 San Joaquin kit fox habitat shall be included in and Project Dublin Planning Prior to or shall be protected and enhanced by implementation of the Resource developer Department concurrent with Management Plan, as outlined in Mitigation Measure BIO-SM-l, submittal of any above, future development applications within the East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule Project area submitted to the City for discretionary review and during construction and operation SM-BIO-II: Focused surveys following USFWS survey protocol Project Dublin Planning Prior to issuance shall be conducted in habitat considered suitable for California red- developer Department of a grading legged frog (CRLF) on properties within the Project area which permit have not already been surveyed. The current protocol (USFWS 1997b) requires that two daytime and two nighttime surveys be performed over a suitable four-day period. Results of these surveys shall be sent to the City for review. SM-BIO-12: Specific California red-legged frog habitat areas, Project Dublin Planning Prior to or including the drainage upstream and east of the current Fallon developer Department concurrent with Road alignment, shall be included in and protected and enhanced submittal of any by implementation of the Resource Management Plan, as described future in Mitigation Measure BIO-SM-l, above, development applications within the Project area submitted to the City for discretionary review and during construction and operation East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule SM-BIO-13: To the extent feasible, development of individual Project Dublin Planning During properties within the Project area shall avoid all areas of identified developer Department construction suitable California red-legged frog aquatic and dispersal habitat. Specifically, development should avoid such aquatic habitat and provide a 300 to 500-foot buffer on each side of any stream which provides red-legged frog habitat. Limited permanent development may occur within this buffer zone (such as a trail through the length of the buffer zone, or a bridge crossing across the buffer zone), so long as it will have only minor impacts on the habitat. Limited temporary development activity may occur within this buffer zone to create trails, install bridges, etc., and to allow for grading activities along the edge of the buffer zone, so long as such activity will have only minor impacts on the habitat. SM-BIO-14: If avoidance is infeasible, then mitigation lands Project Dublin Plmxrfing Prior to providing similar or better habitat for CRLF at a 3:1 replacement developer Department submittal of a ratio or suitable ratio determined by the USFWS, shall be preserved Stage 2 and protected in perpetuity. This mitigation, to be proposed in a development mitigation and monitoring plan submitted to the City, shall be plan or tentative required prior to submittal of Stage 2 Development Plans and map tentative maps for any specific property within the Project area. In selecting off-site mitigation lands, preference shall be given to preserving large blocks of habitat rather than many small parcels, linking preserved areas to existing open space and other high- quality habitat, and excluding or limiting public use within preserved areas. If the identified mitigation lands have been approved by the City the guidelines set forth in SM-BIO-15 implemented prior to and during construction would reduce impacts to individual CRLF and preserved CRLF habitat. SM-BIO-15: The following construction-related CRLF avoidance Project Dublin Planning Prior to or East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule and protection measures shall be followed for all future developer Department c°ncurrentwith development activity in the Project area, on a property-by-property submittal of any basis: future · Prior to construction, a map shall be prepared to delineate development upland areas from preserved wetland areas, applications within the · The wetland construction boundary shall be fenced to Project area prohibit the movement of CRLF into the construction area submitted to the and control siltation and disturbance to wetland habitat. City for Following installation of fencing, its proper location shall be discretionary verified by a qualified biologist. The biologist shall ensure review and that at no time during construction is vegetation removed during inside of the fenced area. If construction necessitates the construction and removal of vegetation within the fenced area, additional operation mitigation will be required. Additionally, the biologist shall walk the length of the fence once each construction day to ensure that CRLF are not trapped within the enclosure. The biologist shall walk the length of the fence more than once a day in areas where CRLF are most abundant. · Pre-construction surveys within the construction zone shall be conducted by a qualified biologist with appropriate permits to handle CRLF. If no CRLF are detected during these surveys then construction activities may proceed. If CRLF are found within the construction disturbance zone they shall immediately be moved passively, or captured and moved, to suitable upstream sites. · All construction employees shah participate in an endangered species~ special-status habitat education East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Almexation 10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule program to be presented by a qualified biologist prior to construction activities. The program shall cover such topics as identifying wetland habitat and areas used by CRLF, identification of CRLF by photos, the state and federal Endangered Species Acts, and the consequences of violating the terms of these acts. · All construction adjacent to wetlands shall be regularly monitored to ensure that impacts do not exceed those included within the protective standards of the mitigations. Work performed within 500 feet of aquatic habitat shall be monitored by the biologist, who shall document pre-project and post-project conditions to ensure compliance. During construction, the biologist shall be on site whenever construction within any aquatic habitats is to occur. Any construction activity within ordinary high water shall be photo- documented by the biologist. In addition, a biologist with the appropriate permits to relocate CRLF shall be available for consultation as needed. SM-BIO-16: Special-status invertebrate habitat shall be included Project Dublin Planning Prior to or in and shall be protected and enhanced by implementation of a developer Department concurrent with Resource Management Plan, as outlined in Mitigation Measure SM- submittal of any BIO-1. future development applications within the Project area submitted to the City for East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation 11 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule discretionary review and during construction and operation SM-BIO-17: The following vernal pool habitat surveys and Project Dublin Planning Prior to or mitigation shall be implemented for each property within the developer Department concurrent with Project area: submittal of any future · Surveys of potential habitat for special status invertebrates development are required. If suitable habitat is identified, then such applications habitat shall be surveyed to determine whether it is within the occupied by special-status invertebrates. If impacts to Project area ,occupied habitat will occur (including direct impact as a submitted to the result of habitat destruction, and indirect impact due to City for disturbance of areas within 250 feet of occupied habitat), the discretionary following measures shall be followed: review and during (a) Preservation: For every acre of habitat directly construction and impacted at least two vernal pool credits shall be operation dedicated within a USFWS-approved mitigation bank or, in accordance with USFWS evaluation of site-specific conservation values, three acres of vernal pool habitat may be preserved within the Project area or off-site as approved by the USFWS. (b) Creation: For every acre of habitat indirectly impacted, at least one vernal pool credit shall be dedicated within a USFWS-approved mitigation East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation 12 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule bank or, in accordance with USFWS evaluation of site-specific conservation values, two acres of vernal pool habitat may be created and monitored within the Project area or on off-site as approved by the USFWS. · Vernal pool habitat and associated upland areas which are preserved onsite shall be preserved and managed in perpetuity. · All avoided habitat on site shall be monitored by a qualified biologist during the time of construction. The monitoring biologist shall have authority to stop all activities that may result in destruction or take of listed invertebrate species or destruction of their habitat. Resumption of construction shall · occur after appropriate corrective measures have been taken. The biologist shall report any unauthorized impacts to USFWS. · Fencing shall be placed and maintained around any and all preserved vernal pool habitat. All on-site construction personnel shall receive instruction regarding the presence of listed' species and their habitat. SM-BIO-18: California tiger salamander habitat shall be included Project Dublin Planning Prior to or in and shall be protected and enhanced by implementation of a developer Department concurrent with Resource Management Plan, as outlined in Mitigation Measure SM- submittal of any BIO-1. future East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation 13 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule development applications within the Project area submitted to the City for discretionary review and during construction and operation SM-BIO-19: If avoidance is infeasible, mitigation lands, providing Project Dublin Planning Prior to or similar or better aquatic and upland habitat for California tiger developer Department concurrent with salamander (CTS) at a 1:1 ratio shall be set aside in perpetuity, submittal of any Upland habitat shall be mitigated by preserving upland on-site or, if future necessary, by preserving currently occupied upland tiger development salamander habitat off-site. Aquatic habitat shall be mitigated by applications creating an equal number (or acreage) of new aquatic California within the tiger salamander breeding areas within the preserved .upland Project area habitat. This mitigation, included in a mitigation and monitoring submitted to the plan, shall be submitted to the City prior to submittal of Stage 2 City for development plans and tentative maps. In selecting off-site discretionary mitigation lands, preference shall be given to preserving large review and blocks of habitat rather than many small parcels, linking preserved during areas to existing open space and other high-quality habitat, and construction and excluding or limiting public use within preserved areas, operation SM-BIO-20: A qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction Project Dublin Planning Prior to surveys for nesting raptors. If an active nest is found the following developer Department construction mitigation measures shall also be implemented. SM-BIO-21: If construction must occur during the nesting season, Project Dublin Planning Prior to East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation 14 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule all potential nesting trees within the footprint of development developer Department construction should be removed prior to the nesting season to prevent occupied nests from being present when construction begins. SM-BIO-22: Construction should occur between August 1 and Project Dublin Planning Prior to February 1 to avoid disturbance of nesting raptors during the developer Department construction nesting season. This construction window could be adjusted if monitoring efforts determine that nesting was completed before August 1. SM-BIO-23: If removal of nesting trees is infeasible and Project Dublin Planning Prior to construction must occur within the breeding season, a nesting developer Department construction raptor survey shall be performed by a qualified biologist prior to tree disturbance. SM-BIO-24: All active nests shall be identified by flagging and a Project Dublin Planning Prior to buffer zone, depending on the species, shall be established around developer Department construction the nesting tree. Buffer zones shall be no smaller than 200 feet. SM-BIO-25: If construction is scheduled when young birds have Project Dublin Plamfing During not yet fledged, an exclusion zone around the nest shall be developer Department construction established or construction shall be delayed until after the young have fledged as determined by a qualified biologist. SM-BIO-26: Nesting raptor habitat shall be included in and shall Project Dublin Planning Prior to or be protected and enhanced by implementation of the Resource developer Department concurrent with Management Plan as outlined in SM-BIO-1. submittal of any future development applications within the Project area submitted to the City for East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation 15 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule discretionary review and during construction and operation SM-BIO-27: The territory of the golden eagle nesting pair shall be Project Dublin Plarming Prior to or included in and protected and enhanced by implementation of a developer Department concurrent with Resource Management Plan, as outlined in Mitigation Measure SM- submittal of any BIO-1. The protected golden eagle foraging territory affects areas in future the northern portion 'of the Project area designated for Rural development Residential/Agricultural uses. Development standards and uses applications for these areas shall incorporate the following measures: within the Project area · Homesites in this portion of the Project area Shall be submitted to the located in valley bottoms adjacent to existing or City for planned residential development, discretionary · Permitted agricultural uses shall be limited to review and grazing to maintain suitable golden eagle foraging during habitat, construction and · Rodent control in this portion of the Project area shall operation be prohibited. Any additional portion of the Project area that is within the viewshed of all nest sites used by this pair shall also be managed in a similar manner. SM-BIO-28: If construction is SCheduled during the nesting Project Dublin Planning Prior to season (February 1 - August 31), pre-construction surveys should developer Department construction be conducted on the entire Project area and within 150 meters (500 feet) of the Project area prior to any ground disturbance. To avoid take of over-wintering birds, all burrows should be surveyed 30 East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation 16 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule days prior to ground disturbance between the months of September 1 and January 31. If ground disturbance is delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre-construction survey, the site should be resurveyed. SM-BIO-29: If over-wintering birds are present no disturbance Project Dublin Planning During should occur within 150 feet of occupied burrows. If owls must be developer Department construction moved away from the disturbance area, passive relocation techniques, following CDFG 1995 guidelines, should be used rather than,'trapping. If no over-wintering birds are observed, burrOws may be removed prior to the nesting season; SM-BIO-30: Maintain a minimum buffer (at least 250 feet) around Project Dublin Planning During active burrowing owl nesting sites identified by pre-construction developer Department construction surveys during the breeding season to avoid direct loss of individuals (February 1- September 1). SM-BIO-31: If removal of unoccupied potential nesting burrows Project Dublin planning Prior to prior to the nesting season is infeasible and construction must occur developer Department construction within the breeding season, a nesting burrowing owl survey shall be performed by a qualified biologist within 30 days prior to construction. Owls present on site after February 1 will be assumed to be nesting on site or adjacent to the site. All active burrows shall be identified. SM-BIO-32: All active nesting burrows shall have an established Project Dublin Planning During 250-foot exclusion zone around the burrow, developer Department construction SM-BIO-33: If construction is scheduled during summer, when Project Dublin Planning Prior to young are not yet fledged, a 250-foot exclusion zone around the developer Department construction nest shall be established or construction shall be delayed until after the young have fledged, typically by August 31. SM-BIO-34: When destruction of occupied burrows is Project Dublin Planning Prior to unavoidable, existing unsuitable burrows should be enhanced developer Department construction (enlarged or cleared of debris) or new burrows created (by- East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation 17 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporth~g Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule installing artificial burrows) at a 2:1 ratio on protected lands, as provided for below. SM-BIO-35: A minimum of 6.5 acres of foraging habitat per pair or Project Dublin Planning Prior to unpaired resident bird, shall be acquired, and permanently developer Department construction preserved and protected. The protected lands shall be adjacent to occupied burrowing owl habitat and at a location acceptable to. CDFG. SM-BIO-36: The project proponent shall provide funding for long- Project Dublin Planning Prior to term management and monitoring of the protected lands. The developer Department construction monitoring plan should include success criteria, remedial measures, and an annual report to CDFG. SM-BIO-37: Burrowing owl habitat shall be included in and shall Project Dublin Planning Prior to or be protected and enhm~ced by implementation of the Resource developer Department concurrent with Management Plan as outlined in Mitigation Measure BIO-SM-1. submittal of any future development applications within the Project area submitted to the City for discretionary review and during construction and operation SM-BIO-38: If construction is scheduled to occur during the Project Dublin Planning Prior to nesting season (February 1- August 15), all potential nesting sites developer Department construction and structures (i.e., shrubs and tules) within the footprint of development should be removed prior to the beginning of the East Dublin properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 18 Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule nesting season. However, because the removal of grassland habitat is infeasible, mitigation for impacts to California horned lark are addressed more particularly in Mitigation Measures SM-BIO-39 to SM-BIO-41, below. SM-BIO-39: If removal of nesting trees and shrubs within the Project Dublin Planning Prior to footprint of development is infeasible and constructiOn must occur developer Department construction within the breeding season, a nesting bird survey should be performed by a qualified biologist within 30 days prior to construction. These surveys shall cover grassland habitat for potential nesting California horned lark. Birds present on site after February 1 will be assumed to be nesting onsite or adjacent to the site. SM-BIO-40: All active nests shall be identified by flagging and a Project Dublin Planning Prior to buffer zone, depending on the species, shall be established around developer Department construction the nest site. Buffer zones can range between 75 feet to 100 feet. SM-BIO41: If construction is scheduled during summer, when Project Dublin Plmming Prior to young have not yet fledged, an exclusion zone around the nest shall developer Department construction be established or construction shall be delayed until after the young have fledged, typically by July 15. SM-BIO-42: Habitat for nesting passerines shall be included in and Project Dublin Planning Prior to or shall be protected and enhanced by implementation of the Resource developer Department concurrent with Management Plan as outlined in SM-BIO-1. submittal of any future development applications within the Project area submitted to the City for discretionary East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 19 Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule review and during construction and operation SM-BIO-43: A qualified bat biologist shall conduct occupancy Project Dublin Planning Prior to surveys of the Project area to determine whether any mature trees, developer Department construction snags or suitable buildings that would be removed during future project construction provide hibernacula or nursery colony roosting habitat. SM-BIO-44: If presence is observed, removal of roost habitat Project Dublin Planning Prior to should be conducted at specific times of the year. Winter roosts are developer Department construction generally occupied between October 15 through January 30 and maternity colonies are generally occupied between February 15 and July 30. If bats are using roost sites that need to be removed, the roosting season of the colony shall be determined and the removal shall be conducted when the colony is using an alternate roost. SM-BIO45: Habitat for these bat species shall be included in and Project Dublin Planning Prior to or shah be protected and enhanced by implementation of the Resource developer Department concurrent with Management Plan as outlined in Mitigation Measure SM-BIO-1. submittal of any future development applications within the Project area submitted to the City for discretionary review and during construction and · East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 20 Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule operation SM-NOISE-I: Require a noise insulation plan for general Project Dublin Public Prior to issuance commercial (including any proposed office-type uses) and developer Works of grading industrial land uses to be submitted for all such development Department permits projects located within the future CNEL 70 dBA contour. The plan shall show how interior noise levels would be controlled to acceptable levels. The acceptable level will depend on the type of use as set forth in the noise insulation plan. Interior noise levels could be controlled adequately by using sound-rated windows in windows closest to the streets and the freeway. SM-NOISE-2: Except for local deliveries, restrict heavy truck traffic Project Dublin Public During project to designated arterial roadways and truck routes within the Project developer Works operation area and limit the hours of local deliveries to daytime hours as Department established by the City. SM- TRAFFIC-l: Project developers shall contribute a pro-rata Project City of Dublin When traffic share to the widening of the 1-580 eastbound off-ramp approach at developer Public Works impacts from Hacienda Drive to add a third eastbound left turn lane. Department individual projects trigger The City of Dublin shall implement this mitigation measure in the need coordination with the City of Pleasanton and Caltrans. This improvement shall occur when traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. SM-TRAFFIC-2: Project developers shall contribute a pro- Project City of Dublin When traffic rata share to the widening of the northbound Hacienda developer Public Works impacts from Drive overcrossing from 3 lanes to 4 lanes including three Department individual through lanes and one auxiliary lane that leads exclusively projects trigger to the 1-580 westbound loop on-ramp. The westbound loop the need on-ramp shall be modified as necessary to meet Caltrans' standards and design criteria. Project developers also shall East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 21 Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Moriitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule contribute to widening the westbound off ramp approach to add a third westbound left-turn lane. The City of Dublin shall implement this mitigation measure in coordination with the City of Pleasanton and Caltrans. This improvement shall occur when traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. SM-TRAFFIC-3: Project developers shall contribute a pro-rata Project City of Dublin When traffic share to construction which converts the eastbound Santa Rita off- developer Public Works impacts from ramp through lane to a shared left turn/through lane. Project Department individual developers also shall contribute to a traffic signal upgrade which projects trigger includes a westbound right-turn overlap from Pimlico Drive. the need The City of Dublin shall implement this mitgafion measure in coordination with the City of Pleasanton and Caltrans. This improvement shall occur when traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. SM-TRAFFIC-4: The Project developers shall install a traffic signal Project City of Dublin When traffic at the Dublin Boulevard/Street D intersection at the time developer Public Works impacts from development occurs in this area utilizing this intersection. Department individual projects trigger Project developers shall implement this mitigation measure when the need the traffic signal installation at Dublin Boulevard/Street D becomes warranted based on the estimated additional trips from individual projects, as determined by traffic impact studies of the individual projects. SM-TRAFFIC-5: The Project dev.elopers shall install a traffic signal Project City of Dublin When traffic at the Fallon Road/Project Road intersection at the time developer Public Works impacts from East Dublin Properties Stage I DeveloPment Plan and Annexation 22 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule development occurs in this area utilizing this intersection. Department individual projects trigger Project developers shall implement this mitigation measure when the need the traffic signal installation at Fallon Road/Project Road becomes warranted based on the estimated additional trips from individual projects, as determined by traffic impact studies of the individual projects. SM-TRAFFIC-6: Project developers shall contribute a pro-rata Project City of Dublin Prior to or share to configure the eastbound Dublin Boulevard approach to developer Public Works concurrent with include 1 left-turn lane, three through lanes and two right turn Department submittal of any lanes. Project developers shall contribute a pro-rata share to future configure the westbound Dublin Boulevard approach to include development three left-turn lanes, two through lanes, and one shared applications through/right-turn lane. Project developers shall contribute a pro- within the rata share to configure the northbound Dougherty Road approach Project area to include three left-turn lanes, three through lanes and two right- submitted to the turn lanes. Project developers shall contribute a pro-rata share to City for configure the southbound Dougherty Road approach to include two discretionary left turn lanes, three through lanes, and one shared through/right- review and turn lane. The 1-580 westbound diagonal on-ramp from Dougherty during Road shall be widened as necessary to include two single- construction and occupancy vehicle lanes. In addition, the City will monitor the operation intersection for peak hour volumes on a periodic basis, as described below, and will apply appropriate Project conditions based on the results of such monitoring, as suggested below. The Project developers shall pay their pro-rata share of the cost to construct these improvements through payment of the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee. The City .will implement these improvements. East Dublin ProPerties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 23 Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule However, these improvements will not be able to reduce the intersection impacts to an acceptable LOS. Additional improvements to reduce the intersection impacts to an acceptable LOS would require adding a fourth northbound left turn lane and other improvements. Allowing four lanes of traffic to perform a left turn movement simultaneously would raise major concerns regarding the safety of such an operation. In addition, these additional improvements to reduce this impact are not feasible given the physical constraints at the Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection. Adjacent properties to the intersection are already built out and efforts are now being made to acquire additional right-of-way to implement the above improvements (in Supplemental Mitigation Traffic 6) in the future. It is recommended that the City monitor the intersection for peak hour volumes on a periodic basis and continue to obtain updated volume forecasts for ~ future horizon years (i.e., Year 2025). Such monitoring will be done to assist the City and Project developer to comply with General Plan Policies requiring implementation of transportation measures to improve levels of service. Such transportation measures to be considered at the Stage 2 Development Plan include requiring a comprehensive transportation demand program; ride sharing; free or discounted BART or other transit passes for employees; vanpools; staggered work hours; and other trip reduction programs as specified in Chapter 5 (Travel Demand Management Element) of the ACCMA Congestion Management Program. In addition, current and future phases of the 1-580 Smart Corridor Project (i.e., state-of-the-art systems deployment for traffic monitoring, incident management, and regional traffic coordination among the cities of Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton, Alameda County, and Caltrans) East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Am~exation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule would likely relieve some congestion at the Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection through ITS (Intelligent Transportation Systems) measures and discourage traffic from diverting off the freeway due to congestion or incidents. SM-TRAFFIC-7: The Project developers shall construct an Project City of Dublin When traffic additional through lane on northbound Fallon Road (for a total of developer Public Works impacts from four through lanes), construct an additional left-turn lane on Department individual westbound Dublin Boulevard (for a total of three left-turn lanes) projects trigger and construct an additional through larte on southbound Fallon the need 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 below, and will apply appropriate Project conditions based on the results of such monitoring, as suggested below. Project developers shall implement this mitigation measure when traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. SM-TRAFFIC-8: In addition to the above additional lane Project City of Dublin When traffic configurations (in Supplemental Mitigation Traffic 7), the Project developer Public Works impacts from developers shall pay for studies to assess the feasibility of locating Department individual the Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection farther north to projects trigger allow for a signalized Project intersection between the 1-580 theneed westbound ramps/Fallon Road intersection and the Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection (the "auxiliary intersection"). This new Project auxiliary intersection should consist of seven northbound Fallon Road lanes (2 left, 4 through, 1 right), seven southbound Fallon Road lanes (2 left turn, 4 through, 1 right turn), and 4 lanes for the new Project street; in the westbound direction' three left turn lanes and a shared through/right turn lane; and in East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 25 Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule the eastbound direction, two right-turn lanes, one through and two left turn lanes. If the studies show that a new Project auxiliary intersection in such location is feasible, the Project developers shall construct such intersection. Project developers shall implement this mitigation measure when traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. SM-TRAFFIC-9: The Project developers shall be responsible for Project City of Dublin When traffic widening Fallon Road between 1-580 and Dublin Road to its developer Public Works impacts from ultimate eight lanes and shall be responsible for widening Fallon Department individual Road between Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway to its projects trigger ultimate six-lane width. The Project developers shall be responsible the need for widening Fallon Road between Central Parkway and Project Road to four lanes. The Project developers also shall be responsible for widening the Fallon Road overcrossing (between the eastbound and westbound 1-580 ramps) from four lanes to six lanes. Project developers shall implement this mitigation measure when traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the individual projects. SM-TRAFFIC-10: The Project developers shall be responsible for Project City of Dublin When traffic widening Central Parkway between Tassajara Road and Fallon developer Public Works impacts from Road from two lanes to four lanes. Department individual projects trigger Project developers shall implement this mitigation measure when the need traffic impacts from individual projects are determined to trigger the need for this improvement based on traffic impact studies of the East Dublin Properties Stage .1 Development Plan and Annexation 26 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule individual projects. SM-UTS-l: Require discretionary City review prior to the Project City of Dublin Prior to approval installation and use of distributed generators, including emergency developer Public Works of future generators. Department Subdivision Maps or Site Development Review applications SM-UTS-2: Prior to approval of future subdivision maps or Site Project City of Dublin Prior to approval Development Review applications (as may be applicable) by the developer Public Works of future City of Dublin, project developers shall submit "will serve" letters Department Subdivision from PG&E indicating that adequate electricity and natural gas Maps or Site services are available to serve the proposed development project. Development Review applications East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation 27 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D RESOLUTION NO. 02-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS RELATED TON THE PD.PREZONING AND RELATED STAGE 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE EASTERN DUBLIN PROPERTIES ON 1,120 ACRES EAST OF FALLON ROAD PA 00-025 WHEREAS, the applicant, Braddock and Logan on behalf of the Eastern Dublin Property Owners (EDPO), has requested approval of a Planned Development (PD) Prezoning, Stage 1 Development Plan, and reorganization of an area of approximately 1,120-acres generally located in an unincorporated area of Alameda County bounded by Interstate 580 (I-580) to the south and Fallon Road to the west, located east of the current City Limits and within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area (APNs: 985-0007-002-14, 905-0002-003, 985-0006-010, 985-0006-009, 905-0002-002, 905-0002-001-01,985-0006-004, 985-0006- 006-02, 985-0006-006-03, 905-0001-006-03, 905,0001-005-02, 905-0001-004-04, 905-0001-004-03), which reorganization includes the annexation of the territory to the City of Dublin and the Dublin San Ramon Services District and the detachment of the territory from the Livermore Area Recreation and Parks District. The requested approvals are collectively' referred to herein as the "Project"; and WHEREAS, a complete application for the above Project is available and on file in the Planning Department; and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a Prezoning and a Stage 1 Planned Development application to the City as required by Section 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Unless otherwise specified, reference to the Prezoning also includes the required the Stage 1 Development Plan; and WHEREAS, proper notice of the public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, on May 10, 1993, the City Council certified a program Environmental Impact Report (;'EIR") for the Eastern Dublin GPA/SP Project and an addendum thereto, dated May 4, 1993 (SCH 91103064). On August 22, 1994, the City Council approved another addendum to update plans to provide sewer service. The May 10, 1993 program EIR, the May 4, 1993 addendum and the August 22, 1994 addendum are collectively referred to as the Eastern Dublin EIR; and WHEREAS, the Project is consistent with the type, location and density of land uses approved through the 1993 Eastern Dublin GPA/SP Project. All mitigation measures adopted for the GPA/SP Project continue to apply to implementing projects such as the current PD Prezone; and all applicable City development ordinances and standards apply to the Project except as otherwise approved through the Project prezoning and related Stage 1 Development Plan; and WHEREAS, upon approval of the Eastern Dublin GPA/SP Project, the City Council adopted mitigation findings, a statement of overriding considerations, and a mitigation monitoring program as set forth in Resolution 53-93, included in the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR referenced below; and Attachment 2 WHEREAS, the City completed an Initial Study for the Project consistent with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163 and determined that a Supplement to the Eastern Dublin EIR ("Supplemental EIR") was required in order to analyze substantial changes in circumstances and new information since certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR. A Notice of Preparation dated May 25, 2001, was circulated with the Initial Study to public agencies and interested parties for consultation on the scope of the Supplemental EIR; and WHEREAS, based on the Initial Study and responses to the Notice of Preparation, the City prepared a Draft Supplemental EIR, followed and superseded by a Revised Draft Supplemental EIR dated January 2002 and consisting of two bound volumes (SCH 2001052114). Volume 1 contains the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR text; Volume 2 contains appendices, including the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study; and WHEREAS, the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR was circulated for the required 45 day public review period, from January 15, 2002 to March 1, 2002. Responses to comments on the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR were prepared and compiled in a Revised Final Supplemental EIR. The Revised Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs were certified by the City Council as the Supplemental EIR for the Project on April 2, 2002 in Resolution XX-02; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on said applications on March 26, 2002, and adopted a Resolution recommending that the City Council approve a Planned Development Prezoning and Stage 1 Development Plan for PA 00-025; and WHEREAS, a Staff report, dated April 2, 2002, and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR, the Revised Final SEIR containing responses to comments received during the public review period, and the Project for the City Council; and WHEREAS, a properly noticed public heating was held by the City Council on April 2, 2002 and April 16, 2002; and WHEREAS' a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the City Council approve the applications and the City Council heard and considered the Revised Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs, all said reports,' recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth prior to taking action on the proposed PD Prezone/Stage 1 Development Plan. 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 finds as follows regarding approval of the proposed Planned Development Prezone/Stage 1 Development Plan for PA 00-025: 1. The proposed Planned Development Prezone/Stage 1 Development Plan meets the intent and purpose of Chapter 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance because it provides a comprehensive Development Plan which will create a desirable use of land and an environment that will be sensitive to surrounding land uses by virtue of the layout and design of the site plan. 2. The Planned Development Prezone is appropriate for the subject property in terms of setting forth the purpose, applicable provisions of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, range of permitted and conditionally permitted uses and Development Standards, which will be harmonious and compatible with existing and proposed residential, commercial, open 2 space and other uses in the immediate vicinity of the Project and in. surrounding areas, and will enhance the development of the Specific Plan and General Plan Area. 3. The Planned Development Prezone will provide for the future development of the property as contemplated in the Eastern Dublin GPA and Specific Plan with residential, commercial, industrial, and open space uses as well as uses including public schools and parks; the project is consistent with the general provisions, intent, and purpose of the Eastern Dublin GPA and Specific Plan and will contribute towards implementation of said Plans. 4. The Planned Development Prezone is consistent with the general provisions, intent, and purpose of the PD Zoning District of the Zoning Ordinance in that it contains all information required by Section 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance and accomplishes the objectives of Section 8.32.010, A through H, of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. The Planned Development Prezone will provide efficient use of land and will preserve an area of open space and undisturbed hillside along the north and primarily the northeast area of the property; will be compatible with and enhance the general development of the area; and will create an attractive, efficient and safe environment. 6. The Planned Development Prezone will not have a substantial adverse effect on health or safety of persons residing or working in the Project vicinity, or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or public improvement, as all applicable regulations and standards will be inet. Through the proposed Stage 1 Development Plan, including its site plan, development standards and applicable mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR and the Supplemental EIR, the Project site is suitable for the type and intensity of the zoning proposed. 7. The Planned Development Prezone will not overburden public services or facilities as all agencies must commit to the availability of public services prior to the issuance of any building permits as required by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan policies and mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the Eastern Dublin Properties Supplemental EIR. 8. The Planned Development Prezone will be consistent with the policies of the Dublin General Plan. 9. The Planned Development Prezone will benefit the public necessity, convenience and general welfare. 10. The adopted Eastern Dublin Properties Mitigation Monitoring Program applies to the PD Prezone as the reporting and monitoring program required by Public Resources Code 21081.6. The previously adopted Eastern Dublin Mitigation Monitoring Program also continues to apply to the PD Prezone. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this 2d day of April, 2002, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk 4 ORDINANCE NO. 02-XX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO PREZONE PROPERTY AND APPROVING A RELATED STAGE 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 1,120 ACRES EAST OF FALLON ROAD PA 00-025 The Dublin City Council does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Pursuant to Chapter 8.32, Title 8 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code the City of Dublin Zoning Map is amended to prezone the following property ("the Property") to a Planned Development Zoning District: 1,120-acres generally located in an unincorporated area of Alameda County bounded by Interstate 580 (1-580) to the south and Fallon Road to the west, loCated east of the current City Limits and within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area (APNs: 985-0007-002-14, 905-0002-003, 985-0006-010, 985-0006- 009, 905-0002-002, 905-0002-001-01,985-0006-004, 985-0006-006-02, 985- 0006-006-03, 905-0001-006-03, 905-0001-005-02, 905-0001-004-04, 905- 0001-004-03). A map of the prezoning area is shown below: East Dublin Properties -.~.~0~ i Develo~rnerlt Fqan VICYNITY MAP / D~rBLIN PLEASANTON Attachment 3 SECTION 2. The regulations of the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the Property are set forth in the Prezoning and Stage 1 Development Plan for the Project Area (Exhibits A-1 & A-2, hereto) which are hereby approved. Any amendments to the Stage 1 Development Plan shall be in accordance with section 8.32.080 of the Dublin Municipal Code or its successors. SECTION 3. No development shall occur on this property until a Specific Plan, as applicable, and Stage 2 Development Plan have been adopted by the City. Except as provided in the Stage 1 Development Plan, the use, development, improvement and maintenance of the Property shall be governed by the provisions of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 4. , The goals and policies of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan require annexation and new development to be revenue neutral. Prior to the submittal of the annexation request to LAFCo, at least one, or more, property owner(s) within the annexation area will be required to enter into a pre-annexation agreement with the City. The agreement will assure that the financing goals and policies of the Specific Plan are met. SECTION 5. General Plan Policy 4.1 states, "Schools located within the city should be operated by the Dublin Unified School District". It is the intent of the City that the boundaries of the Dublin School District should be coterminous with the City limits. The property owners within this annexation area shall cooperate and actively work with other property owners within the City of Dublin's Sphere of Influence to initiate and complete the detachment process from the Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District and annexation process to the Dublin Unified School District. SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced upon the effective date of the annexation. 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 AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this __ of ,2002, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk th day GSPA#~2000\00-025\CC Staff Report and Reso-March 02~PDord.mar28.doc PREZONING STAGE 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN EASTERN DUBLIN PROPERTIES (PA 00-025) This is a Development Plan pursuant to Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance for the Eastern Dublin Properties project, bounded by Interstate 580 (I-580) to the south and Fallon Road to the west and the City Sphere of Influence line on the east (APNs: 985-0007-002-14, 905-0002-003, 985-0006-010, 985-0006-009, 905-0002-002, 905-0002-001-01, 985-0006-004, 985-0006-006-02, 985-0006-006-03, 905-0001-006-03, 905-0001-005-02, 905-0001-004-04, 905-0001-004-03). This Development Plan meets all of the requirements for Stage 1 review of the project. This Development Plan is also represented by the, Aerial Photo, Stage 1 Site Plan, Master Infrastructure Plan, Phasing Plan, Master Neighborhood Landscape Plan/Pedestrian/Bicycle Circulation Plan, Maximum Non-Residential Square Footage/Residential Units Table, and Street Sections sheets dated November 2000 and Revised July 2001 labeled Exhibit A-2 to the Ordinance approving this Development Plan (City Council Ordinance No. 02 - ), and on file in the Planning Department. The Planned Development District allows the flexibility needed to encourage innovative development while ensuring that .the goals, policies, and action programs of the General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and provisions of Section 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance are satisfied. Zoning: This PD Planned Development Zoning District is to provide for and regulate the development of the Eastern Dublin Properties as shown on Exhibit A-2. (General Plan land use designations include: General Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, Industrial Park, Rural Residential/Agriculture, Single Family Residential, Medium Density Residential, Medium-High Density Residential, High Density Residential, Schools, Parks, and Open Space) 2. Permitted Uses: The following are uses permitted for this site: A) PD General Commercial Intent: General Commercial land use designations are established to: a) accommodate a range of regional-serving and community-serving retail and mixed use projects incorporating retail, service and/or office used with residential used when location and design ensure compatibility: b) provide appropriately located areas for retail stores, offices, service establishments, amusement establishments, and wholesale businesses to concrete for the convenience for the public and in mutually beneficial relationship to each other; d) provide space for community facilities and institutions that appropriately may be located in commercial areas; d) provide adequate space to meet the needs of modem commercial development, including off-street parking and truck loading areas; and e) minimize traffic congestion and to avoid overloading of utilities by preventing the construction of buildings of excessive size in relation to the amount of land around them. 1 Exhibit A-1 Intensity of Use: .20 - .60 Floor Area Ratio Permitted Uses: Office and service establishments including, but not limited to: Accounting Architect Athletic Club Cleaner and dryer, not including on-site processing Communication Technology Development Employment Agency Formal wear/rental Hair/Beauty Salon Internet Technology Development Key Shop Legal Medical and Dental Optometrist Other administrative and professional offices Real Estate / title offices Shoe repair Software Development Tailor Technology access center Tele-commuting center Tele-marketing center Travel Agency Conditional Uses: Community, religious and charitable institutional facilities Drive-through establishments (also drive-in) Eating and drinking establishments In-patient and out-patient faCilities as licensed by the State Department of Health Services Other conditional permitted uses which meet the intent of the zone shall be considered by the Planning Commission on an individual case basis Public facilities and uses Retail commercial establishments to serve site users Veterinary office Accessory Uses: All Accessory Uses shall be in accordance with Section 8.40. of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Temporary Uses: 2 Exhibit A-1 Temporary Construction Trailer Outdoor Sale (on-site)by established business Festival/Street F~tir Office Trailer Christmas Tree/Pumpkin sales lot Arts and Crafts Fair Farmers Market Newspaper Recycling Bin B) PD Neighborhood Commercial Intent: Neighborhood Commercial land use designations are established to: a) provide for the creation of community-oriented and neighborhood-oriented commercial centers to serve local retail, service and entertainment needs; and b) provide for mixed use projects incorporating combinations of commercial, service, office and/or residential uses. Intensity of Use: .25 - .60 Floor Area Ratio Permitted Uses: Automobile/Vehicle Brokerage Banks and Financial Services, including, but not limited to: Mortgage services Investment services Credit unions Copying (photocopying) and blueprinting Office: Administrative Professional, including, but not limited to: Medical Dental Optometrist Legal Counseling Personal Services, including but not limited to: Beauty/barber salons Dry cleaners (no plant on premises) Florists Tailor/seamstress Travel agencies Repair Shop, including but not limited to: Jewelry repair Small appliance repair shops Shoe Watch · 3 Exhibit A-1 Retail stores, including but not limited to: Apparel and shoe stores Art galleries and art supply stores Book/video stores Boutiques/gift shops Drug stores/pharmacies Grocery stores/delicatessens Hardware stores Home d6cor/kitchen supply stores Office supply/stationery stores Post office (US or other) Restaurants (incl. take-out service) Conditional Uses: Schools, including but not limited to: Business General tutoring Music or art schools Trade Studios, martial arts, dance, general fitness (gymnasiums and health clubs), etc. Accessory Uses: All Accessory Uses shall be in accordance with Section 8.40. of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Temporary Uses: Temporary Construction Trailer Outdoor Sale (on-site) by established business Festival/Street Fair Office Trailer Christmas Tree/Pumpkin sales lot Arts and Crafts Fair Farmers Market Newspaper Recycling Bin C) PD Industrial Park Intent: Accommodates a wide variety of minimum-impact, light industrial uses, provided these activities do not produce offensive levels of noise, dust, glare, or odor. Residential uses are not permitted within this designation. Intensity of Use: Maximum .35 Floor Area Ratio 4 Exhibit A-1 Permitted Uses: Ambulance service Industrial- heavy Industrial- light including but not limited to: Laboratory Office- contractors Parking lot/garage- commercial Printing and publishing Research and development laboratory Storage of petroleum products for on-site use Trucking terminal Warehousing and distribution Conditional Uses: Animal sales and service Auction yard Automobile/vehicle rental Automobile/vehicle repairs and service Automobile/vehicle sales and service Automobile/vehicle storage lot Bed and breakfast Inn Caretaker residence Cemeteries, columbariums and mortuaries Community care facility- large Community facility Dance floor Day care center- 15+ children Equipment and materials storage yard Housemovers storage lot Impound yard Industrial transfer/storage/treatment facility Outdoor mobile vendor Recreational facility- indoor Recreational facility- outdoor Recycling facility-commercial Salvage and wrecking yard Service station Small scale transfer and storage facility Temporary outdoor sale not related to on-site established business Vehicle storage yard- commercial 5 Exhibit A-1 Accessory Uses: All Accessory Uses shall be in accordance with Section 8.40. of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Temporary Uses: Temporary Construction Trailer Outdoor Sale (on-site) by established business Festival/Street Fair Office Trailer Storage Container Arts and Crafts Fair Farmers Market Newspaper Recycling Bin D) PD Rural Residential/Agricultural Intent: Rural residential Agriculture land use designations are established to accommodate agricultural activities and other open space uses, such as range and watershed management. They are also established to provide space for and encourage such uses in places where more intensive development is not desirable or necessary for the general welfare. Intensity of Use: .01 dwelling unit per acre Permitted Uses: Agricultural Accessory Use- Office Animal Keeping- Residential Community Care Facility- Small Mobile Home Single Family Residence Small Family Day Care Home Conditional Uses: Agricultural Housing Agricultural Processing Animal Keeping- Agricultural Animal Keeping- Commercial Animal Sales and Services Bed and Breakfast Inn Bird Keeping- Commercial Caretaker Residence Community Facility Crop Production 6 Exhibit A-1 Farm Mobile Home Horse Keeping Horse Stable/Riding Academy Home Occupation Large Family Day Care Home Plant Nursery Recreational Facility- Outdoor Temporary Uses: Temporary Construction Trailer Temporary Mobile Home/Manufactured Home Arts and Crafts Fair Festival Street Fair Accessory Uses: All Accessory Uses shall be in accordance with Section 8.40. of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance E) PD Single Family Residential Intent: Single Family land use designations are established to: a) reserve appropriately located areas for family living at reasonable population densities consistent with sound standards of public health and safety; b) ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling; c) provide space for semi-public facilities needed to complement urban residential areas and for institutions that require a residential environment; and d) accommodate single family housing, including a wide range of units from small-lot and zero-lot line units to large lot estate units. Intensity of Use: .9 - 6.0 dwelling units per acre Permitted Uses: Active adult community Community care facility/small (permitted if required by law, otherwise as conditional use) Home occupation in accordance with Chapter 8.64 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Private recreation facility (for homeowners' association and/or tenant use only) Single family dwelling Small family day care home Conditional Uses: Active Adult/Senior community w/group services (centralized meal service, group activities, etc.) 7 Exhibit A-1 Ambulance service Bed and breakfast inn Day care center Large family day care home Parking lot - residential Religious facility Second unit, temporary mobile home or permanent structure School/private Second unit in accordance with Dublin Zoning Ordinance Temporary Uses: Temporary construction trailer Tract and sales office/model home complex Accessory Uses: All Accessory' Uses shall be in accordance with Section 8.40. of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance F) PD Medium Density Residential Intent: Medium Density land use designations are established to: a) reserve appropriately located areas for family living in a variety of types of dwellings at a reasonable range of population densities consistent with sound standards of public health and safety; b) preserve as many as possible of the desirable characteristics of the one-family residential district while permitting higher population densities; c) ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling unit; d) minimize traffic congestion and avoid the overloading of utilities by preventing the construction of buildings of excessive size in relation to the land around them; e) provide necessary space for off-street parking of automobiles and, where appropriate, for off- street loading of trucks; and f) protect residential properties from the hazards, noise and congestion created by commercial and industrial traffic. Intensity: 6.1 - 14.0 dwelling units per acre Permitted Uses: Community care facility/small (permitted if required by law, otherwise as conditional use) Home occupations (per Chapter 8.64 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance) Multi-family dwelling Private recreation facility (for homeowners' association and/or tenants use only) Single family dwelling Small family day care home 8 Exhibit A-1 Conditional Uses: Active Adult/Senior community with group and life care services Bed and breakfast inn Boarding house Day care center Large family day care home Parking lot - residential Religious facility School/private Community center Accessory Uses: All Accessory Uses shall be in accordance with Section 8.40. of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Temporary Uses: Temporary construCtion trailer Tract and sales office/model home complex G) PD Medium-High Density Residential Intent: Medium High Density land use designations are established to: a) reserve appropriately located areas for family living in a variety of types of dwellings at a reasonable range of population densities consistent with sound standards of public health and safety; b) preserve as many as possible of the desirable characteristics of the one-family residential district while permitting higher population densities; c) ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling unit; d) minimize traffic congestion and avoid the overloading of utilities by preventing the construction of buildings of excessive six in relation to the land around them; e) provide necessary space for off-street parking of automobiles and, where appropriate, for off- street loading of trucks; and f) protect residential properties from the hazards, noise and congestion created by commercial and industrial traffic. Intensity of Use: 14.1 - 25.0 dwelling units per acre Permitted Uses: Community care facility/small (permitted if required by law, otherwise as conditional use) Home occupations (per Chapter 8.64) Multi-family dwelling 9 Exhibit A-1 Private recreation facility (for homeowners' association and/or tenants use only) Small family day care home Conditional Uses: Active Adult/Senior community with group and life care servic'es Bed and breakfast inn Boarding house Community care facility/large Day Care center Large family day care home Parking lot - residential Religious facility School/private Accessory Uses: Ail Accessory Uses shall be in accordance with Section 8.40. of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Temporary Uses: Sales office/model home complex Temporary construction trailer Arts and Crafts Fair H) PD High Density Residential Intent: High Density land use designations are established to: a) reserve appropriately located areas for family living in a-variety of types of dwellings at a reasonable range of population densities consistent with sound standards of public health and safety; b) preserve as many as possible of the desirable characteristics of the one-family residential district while permitting higher population densities; c) ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling unit; d) minimize traffic congestion and avoid the overloading of utilities by preventing the construction of buildings of excessive size in relation to the land around them; e) provide necessary space for off-street parking of automobiles and, where appropriate, for off- street loading of trucks; and f) protect residential properties from the hazards, noise and congestion created by commercial and industrial traffic. Intensity of Use: 25.1+ dwelling units per acre Permitted Uses: Accessory structures and uses Community care facility/small (if required by statute, otherwise it should be a conditional use) 10 Exhibit A-1 Home occupations (per Chapter 8.64) Multi-family dwelling Private recreation facility (for homeowners' association only) Small family day care home and/or tenants use Conditional Uses: Active Adult/Senior community with group and life care services Bed and breakfast inn Boarding house Community care facility/large Community center Day care center Large family day care home Hospital/medical center Parking lot - residential Religious facility School/private Accessory Uses: All Accessory Uses shall be in accordance with Section 8.40. of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Temporary Uses: Sales office/model home complex/rental office Temporary construction trailer . Arts and Crafts Fair I) PD Schools Intent: Provides for the future development of public or private educational facilities. Intensity of Use: No Floor Area Ratio Requirements Permitted Uses: Middle School Elementary School Accessory Uses: All Accessory Uses shall be in accordance with Section 8.40. of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance 11 Exhibit A-1 PD Parks Intent: Provides for the recreation needs of the area. Intensity of Use: No Floor Area Ratio Requirements Permitted Uses: Community Park Neighborhood Park Neighborhood Square K) PD Open Space Intent: Protects areas with important and/or sensitive resources and areas with natural hazard from development. Permitted Uses: Recreational- passive Trails L) M) PD Rural Residential/Agriculture - Future Study Area Permitted Uses: Future land use designations to be determined at a later date. Until then, land uses under this zone shall abide by those listed under PD Rural Residential/Agriculture. Existing land uses may continue and shall be considered to be legal, non-conforming uses subject to the City of Dublin zoning ordinance regarding such uses. Intensity of Use: . O1 dwelling un#per acre PD General Commercial- Future Study Area Permitted Uses: The Rural Residential/Agriculture land use designation is established to accommodate uses under the Rural Residential/Agriculture and Open Space land use designations and also provides for the future study of land use designations to determine the most appropriate use for these lands prior to future PD rezoning of the property. Intensity of Use: . O1 dwelling unit per acre Existing Agricultural and Residential Uses 12 Exhibit A-1 Intent: To allow all existing residential and agricultural uses that were in existence prior to the effective date of annexation. These uses shall be allowed to continue until such time the landowner of this property applies for a Specific Plan as applicable, and Stage 2 Development Plan in accordance with Section 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, to develop the property. Any minor expansion of any existing uses shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development. Permitted Uses: Existing residential and agricultural uses in effect prior to the effective date of annexation Similar and related uses (to the existing residential and agricultural uses) shall be determined by the Director of Community Development Dublin Zoning Ordinance - Applicable Requirements: Except as specifically modified by the provisions of this PD District Rezone/Development Plan, all applicable general requirements and procedures of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance shall be applied to the land uses designated in this PD District Rezone. e Phasing Plan. Refer to Exhibit A-2, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan, Phasing Plan. Landscaping Plan. Refer to Exhibit A-2, Master Neighborhood Landscaping Plan. Maximum Non-Residential Square Footage/Residential Units. Refer to Exhibit A-2 for Table. Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. Dublin's Existing Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance requires five-percent of all housing to be affordable to those of very low, low, and moderate incomes or the developer must pay an in-lieu fee to allow the City to facilitate construction.of such housing. The City Council has adopted a resolution stating its intent that new projects, including this project, will be subject to amendments to the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance, which have not yet been adopted by the City Council. The proposed amendments would require 15% of the units to be inclusionary units affordable to persons of very low, low and moderate incomes and would allow only half of these units (7.5%) to be satisfied through payment of in lieu fees. The EDPO project will, in general, be subject to the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance in effect at the last discretionary approvals. Implementation of the ordinance will be identified when the Stage 2 Development Plan is prepared and submitted for each individual property. G:~PA#k2000\00~025~PC StaffReports-Resos\development plan. DOC 13 Exhibit A-1 LEGE~ID :~ ~'..: i~'i..... - '. -..., . · ~ ' ii~E~ ~ El~menta~'~ ~1~0ol ;/*:" . '. JH'] Juni0r. H~gh'Sch00i ':...'. ~M ~ Medi~-~nsi~ R%idenfial. MH~ M~dlu~.Hig~Densi~ R~sidenfiM'] - NSC Ne[~hborhbod Square' NP:- N~ighborh0.od Park cP- Communi~ Pa~k ~ - Rural Re~de~]O~ ~ Agriculture. NC -'Neighborhood Commercial GC 2 ~e~ai.'C0mmerciM I - industr~ai 05 E st DUbl ffProp r ies '~,i STAOE 1 SITE I EXHIBIT MS CO CP CO DooWn West \l L i FUTUILE STUDY AGRICULTURE East Dublin Properties 5tacje i Development Plan MASTER INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN K~vl~,sd July, 2001 19 I 71-0 Le~3end ~ ~ Recycled Water System R~cycI~d Water System (W others) Pump 5~atlon / Turnout / Tank ProJect 5~t¢ Boundary Not~: This plan is conceptual and based upon D~RSD's Master Plan. Size and location of utilities will be verified as land plans and demands are developed. ......mA :KAYS SOmi, s EXHIBIT ~:~dock ~, Logan Gr?u? ,] ,,, Croak 2 Croak ir~t American Guaran'cy Co./ East Dublin Propertiesl Sta0~ I Development Plan [ PHASING PLAN ~7~a/ o$ lSail'~Ort Investment5 ~_~c~~ EXHIBIT A-~-- MASTER NEIGHBORHOOD LANDSCAPE PLAN. and PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE CIRCULATION PLAN East Dublin Properties 5~age I Development Plan EXHIBIT ~.-~_ Maxi~num number of Residential Units and Maximum Non-Residential Square Footage For the Eastern Dublin Properties PA 00-025 EXHIBIT A-'Z- NORTH SOUTH , ,~_ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ , , PAEK~AY STRIP- SIDEWALK -- PUBLIC SERVICE/ LANDSCAPE EASEMENT j LANI~ LANE /LANE /LANE TURN LANES LANE/ LANE tLANE ILANl~ ~ ~ 148' ROW ROW 1. DUBLIN BOULEVARD - 148' ROW N.T,S. - PARKWAY STRIP - SIDEWALK - PUBLIC SERVICE/ LANDSCAPE EASEMEN'? East Dublin Properties 5~aOe I Development Plan STREET SECTIONS 10' 8~ 8' I 8' , 12' , 12' 14'-18' 12' , 12' , 8' I 8'~ 8' lC PARKWAY STRIP ~- { J IVKG?RAVECi~RAVEiMEDIAN/TRAVEQTRAVEL{PKGI ~ I SIDEWALK ~ND~NE ~NE TURN ~NE· ~NE~N~ { ~ PUBLIC SERVICE/- ~ 48' , ~NES ~ 48' ~NDSCAPE EASEMENT 110'-114' ~ SOW ROW 2, CENTRAL PARKWAY - 110' -114' ROW N.T.S. --I~__PARKWAY STRIP SIDEWALK PUBLIC SERVICE/ LANDSCAPE EASEMENT mAOKAY Sores WEST EAST 10' 6'~ 6'~ 8' 1.12' I~ 12' 12' 16' 12' ~ 1W~L IW .~_6' ~ t~ I ~ IU _/ LANE/LANE'LANE LANE TURN LANE/ LANE I LANE LANE ~_ SIDEWALK / 56' LANES 56' ~ PUBLIC SERVICE/ _/ 128' LANDSCAPE EASEMENT ROW ROW 3. FALLON ROAD (North of Central Parkway) - 128' ROW N,T.S, - PARKWAY STRIP - SIDEWALK - PUBLIC SERVICE/ LANDSCAPE EASEMENT East Dublin Properties 5tage I Development Plan STREET SECTIONS WEST ] 10' 16'16'I 8' ~ 12' ~ 12'.1_ 12'_L12' I PARKWAY STRIP - - ~ 3 [I}IKI~TRAVEL~I'RAVEI~rRAVEL~RAVEI~ SIDEWALK __ _/I LANI~ LANE 'LANE/IANE I~NE[ L ~NDSCAPE EASEMENT ROW EAST 28' MEDIAN/ TURN LANES 164' 12' , 12' , 12'.~. 12'.1_8' , 6_'~6'[ 10' I ~RAVEi ~RAVEL~RAVELITRAVELIBIKEI ~I~I--I- LANE I IANE /LANE /LANE ~AN~ I\~_ _ 68' ', ROW 4. FALLON ROAD (South of Central Parkway) - 164' ROW N.T.S. PARI<WAY STRIP SIDEWALg PUBLIC SERVICE/ LANDSCAPE EASEMENT IllAOKAYO SomPs FXHIRIT A- i ~.o' i 8' ) 8' i 8' 12' 20' PARIO~AY STRIP -- I-~ P~:&I~.AVEM'MEDIAN/~.AWUIP~:6I- ~-{ { {~ PAR~AY STRIP "U~'-~~.~,~-I--I~ ~NE ~NE/ ]~ i~NE ~NE ~ "ULTI-US~ TRAIL PUBLIC SERVICE/~ ' a6' [ 36' ' ~ PUBLIC SERVICE/ ROW ROW 5. CLASS H COLLECTOR - 92' ROW N.T.S. East Dublin Properties 5taOa I Development Plan STREET SECTIONS PARKWAY STRIP SIDEWALK-- PUBUC SERVICE/__ LANDSCAPE EASEMENT ~1-'IPKG[FRAVE~RAVE~PKG{ LI~- --PARKWAY STRIP ~NE LANE LANE'LANE --SIDEWALK 72' --PUBLIC SER;'ICE/ ROW ROW ~NDSCAPE EASEMENT PUBLIC SERVICE/- LANDSCAPE EASEMENT SIDEWALK-- , 8' ~ 5'~ 34' 0[I 36' , 5' 8' ] 44' 0R 46' ROW ROW SIDEWALK PUBLIC SERVICE/ LANDSCAPE EASEMENT 6. RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR- 72' ROW N.T.S. 7. RESIDENTIAL STREET- 44' CUL-DE-SAC OR 46' STREET ROW (Public) N.T.S. mA :KAY 8[ S0mPS RESOLUTION NO. XX-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING THE PREANNEXATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND BRADDOCK AND LOGAN GROUP II, L.P. WHEREAS, an agreement between the City of Dublin and Braddock and Logan Group II, L.P. entitled "Preannexation Agreement Between City of Dublin and Braddock and Logan Group II, L.P.", a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1. WHEREAS, on May 10, 1993, the City Council certified a program Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Eastern Dublin GPA/SP Project and an addendum thereto, dated May 4, 1993 (SCH 91103064). On August 22, 1994, the City Council approved another addendum to update plans to provide sewer service. The May 10, 1993 program EIR, the May 4, 1993 addendum and the August 22, 1994 addendum are collectively referred to as the Eastern Dublin EIR; and WHEREAS, the Project is consistent with the type, location and density of land uses approved through the 1993 Eastern Dublin GPA/SP Project. All mitigation measures adopted for the GPA/SP Project continue to apply to implementing projects such as the current PD Prezone; and all applicable City development ordinances and standards apply to the Project except as otherwise approved through the Project prezoning and related Stage 1 Development Plan; and WHEREAS, upon approval of the Eastern Dublin GPA/SP Project, the City Council adopted mitigation findings, a statement of overriding considerations, and a mitigation monitoring program as set forth in Resolution 53-93, included in the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR referenced below; and WHEREAS, the City completed an Initial Study' for the Project consistent with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163 and determined that a Supplement to the Eastern Dublin EIR ("Supplemental EIR") was required in Order to analyze substantial changes in circumstances and new information since certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR. A Notice of Preparation dated May 25, 2001, was circulated with the Initial Study to public agencies and interested parties for consultation on the scope of the Supplemental EIR; and WHEREAS, based on the Initial Study and responses to the Notice of Preparation, the City prepared a Draft Supplemental EIR, followed and superseded by a Revised Draft Supplemental EIR dated January 2002 and consisting of two bound volumes (SCH 2001052114). Volume 1 contains the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR text; Volume 2 contains appendices, including the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study; and Attachment 4 WHEREAS, the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR was circulated for the required 45 day public review period, from January 15, 2002 to March 1, 2002. Responses to comments on the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR were prepared and compiled in a Revised Final Supplemental EIR. The Revised Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs were certified by the City Council as the Supplemental EIR for the Project on April 2, 2002 in Resolution XX-02; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on said applications on March 26, 2002, and adopted a Resolution recommending that the City Council approve a Planned Development Prezoning and Stage 1 Development Plan for PA 00-025; and WHEREAS, a Staff report, dated April 2, 2002, and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR, the Revised Final SEIR containing responses to comments received during the public review period, and the Project for the City Council; and WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on April 2, 2002 and April 16, 2002; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the City Council approve the applications and the City Council heard and considered the Revised Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs, all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth prior to taking action on the proposed project. WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the approval of said agreement; and WHEREAS, the applicant, Braddock and Logan Group II, L.P., has executed said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT: said agreement is hereby approved and execution thereof by the Mayor of Dublin is hereby authorized. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of April 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk GSPA#~2000\00-025\CC StaffReport and Reso-March 02\CC Reso preannexation 3-28-02.doc City of Dublin When Recorded Mail To: City Clerk City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Space above this line for Recorder's Use PREANNEXATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF DUBLIN and BRADDOCK AND LOGAN GROUP II THIS AGREEMENT dated for identification this __ day of__, 2001, is entered into by and between the City of Dublin, a municipal corporation ("the City") and Braddock and Logan Group II, Limited Partnership ("Developer"). Recitals 1. In 1993, the City Council of the City adopted the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan ("the Specific Plan"). 2. The General Plan and the Specific Plan include goals and policies to prevent development within the Eastern Extended Planning Area and the Specific Plan Area ' (hereinafter collectively "Eastern Dublin") from drawing upon and diluting the fiscal base of the remainder of the City. 3. The fiscal analysis included in the Specific Plan anticipates the last new fire station in Eastern Dublin will become operational in the year 2010. 4. A condition was imposed on the developer of Dublin Ranch Area A in Resolution 00-36 of the Dublin Planning Commission to construct or fund construction of a new fire station in Eastern Dublin. In addition, Condition 109 of said Resolution obligates the Dublin Ranch Area A developer to fund any deficit between costs associated with services to properties in Eastern Dublin and revenues from such area, less amounts which other owners seeking development entitlements should pay for sUch deficit. Development of the Annexation Area will benefit from construction of the new fire station. 5. Braddock and Logan is the fee title owner of that certain real property within Eastern Dublin consisting of approximately 159.5 acres identified as Parcel No. 2 on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Property Map") and described more particularly in Exhibit B (the "Braddock and Logan Property") and holds an option interest to purchase that certain undeveloped real property consisting of approximately 314.42 Preannexation Agreement Between the City of Dublin and Braddock and Logan Group II Page 1 of 10 March 27, 2002 EXHIBIT I acres identified in the Property Map as Parcel No. 1, which property is owned, by Fallon Enterprises, (collectively described as the "Braddock and Logan Interests"). 6. The Developer has filed an application with requesting that the City apply to the Alameda Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") to annex to the City the Braddock and Logan Interests, the Chen Property, and certain other land ("the Annexation Area") within the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment Area (the "Project") and requesting that the City prezone the Annexation Area. Collectively, the following properties, along with the Braddock and Logan Interests and the Chert Property, make up the Annexation Area, all of which are shown on the Property Map and incorporated herein by reference: ao co do Certain real property consisting of approximately 0.8 acres identified in the Property Map as Parcel No. 12 and owned in fee title by EBJ Partners, L.P.; Certain real property consisting of approximately 0.2 acres identified in the Property Map as Parcel No. 13 and owned in fee title by .Pleasanton Ranch Investments; Certain real property consisting, of approximately 48.9 acres identified in the Property Map as Parcel No. 8 and owned in fee title by Anderson Second Family Limited Partnership; Certain undeveloped real property consisting of approximately 39.8 acres ~dentified in the Property Map as Parcel No. 10 and owned in fee title by Branaugh; Certain undeveloped real property consisting of approximately 8.8 acres identified in the Property Map as Parcel No. 11 and owned in fee title by Campbell; Certain undeveloped real property consisting of approximately 164 acres identified in the Property Map as Parcel Nos. 5 and 6 and owned in fee title by Croak; Certain undeveloped real property consisting of approximately 48.8 acres ~dentified in the Property Map as Parcel No. 9 and owned in fee title by Righetti Partners. Certain undeveloped real property consisting of approXimately 135.6 acres identified in the Property Map as Parcel No. 7 and owned in fee title by Robert Chen. Certain undeveloped real property consisting of approximately 189.1 acres identified in the Property Map as Parcel Nos. 3 and 4 and owned in fee title by First American Title Guarantee ("the Jordan Property"). (Properties listed in (a) through (h) are collectively described as "Noncontributing Properties.") 7. It is currently estimated that the cost of providing public services to the Eastern Dublin Area at a level consistent with services provided within the City will not Preannexation Agreement Between the City of Dublin and Braddock and Logan Group II Page 2 of 10 March 27, 2002 exceed revenues generated to the City from property within Eastern Dublin until the new fire station is operational. 10. If new development occurs within the Eastern Dublin Area as anticipated, it is expected to generate revenues to the City that will reduce and, in the near future, eliminate the above-described potential deficit. However, even with development, deficits may occur. Consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and Specific Plan, Developer will pay to City the Developer's proportionate share of any such deficits, as provided herein. Developer's proportionate share shall be 34.01% (thirty-four and one one-hundredths percent), which is the percentage that the Annexation Area (1,120 acres) is of the lands in Eastern Dublin that had not been annexed to the City as of July 25, 2000, the date of Resolution 00-36 (1,929.84 acres)' plus the Dublin Ranch Project (1,363.29 acres). 11. Certain improvements to the 1-580/Fallon Road Interchange ("Fallon Interchange Improvements") must be constructed in order to facilitate development on the Annexation Area. City has previously entered into an agreement with the Lin Family for funding the construction of the Interchange Improvements with developers of property within the City. The Lin Family has agreed to advance approximately $8,000,000 to the City for the Fallon Interchange Improvements. The agreement requires the City to seek reimbursement from non-contributing developers (as defined in the Lin Family agreement) prior to the issuance of building permits tothe non- contributing developer. Development of the Annexation Area will benefit from construction of the Fallon Interchange Improvements. 12. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan anticipates that Fallon Road, currently a two-lane county road along the western edge of the Annexation Area, will eventually be a six-lane roadway. Fallon Road currently runs along the western boundary of the Jordan Property and provides access to a residence on the Jordan Property; the developer of Dublin Ranch Area A is currently improving two-lane Fallon Road in its current location to provide access to Dublin Ranch Area A. The alignment in the Specific Plan would relocate Fallon Road further to the east and into the Jordan Property. The current owners of the Jordan Property do not wish to develop their property for the immediately foreseeable future and wish to continue residing on the property. To temporarily allow the current owners to continue to reside on the Jordan Property, the City is amenable to temporarily increasing Fallon Road to four lanes in its current location ("Interim Location"), so long as the expansion to four lanes in the Interim Location is entirely funded by the Developer. Preannexation Agreement Between the City of Dublin and Braddock and Logan Group II Page 3 of 10 March 27, 2002 AGREEMENT NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and conditions contained herein, the Parties agree as followS: Section I. General Fund Shortfalls A. The Developer's Payment Obligations; Definitions. Developer shall pay the City 34.01% of the deficit, if any, between Public Service Costs and General Revenues. "Public Service Costs" shall mean the City of Dublin General Fund cost of providing public services to the Eastern Dublin Area at a level consistent with public services provided within the incorporated area of the City prior to the annexation. "General Revenues" shall mean those revenues deposited to the City's general fund from property and inhabitants within the Eastern Dublin Area. "Eastern Dublin Area" shall include all lands within the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment area (see map attached as Exhibit C) that are within the City limits of Dublin. B. Duration of Payment Obligations. The Developer's payment obligation under this Section I shall begin when a deficit exists and shall terminate when there is no longer a deficit but in no event shall the obligation extend beyond June 30, 2010 ("Deficit Period"). The Developer's payment obligations may be terminated only by detachment of the Annexation Area from the City or by separate agreement approved by the City. Should development on any portion of the Annexation Area fail to occur by June 30, 2010, and the Annexation Area therefore fails to generate sufficient revenues to the City to provide City services to the property, Developer agrees not to protest the detachment of the Annexation Area (or any portion of the Annexation Area) from the City. C. Annual Fiscal Analyses. The City shall prepare a fiscal analysis each year during the Deficit Period to estimate the amount by which the Public Service Costs will exceed General Revenues. The fiscal analysis will be prepared on a fiscal year basis (July I to June 30) and will calculate the deficit for the preceding fiscal year. D. Payments to the City. No later than October I of each year during the Deficit Period, Developer shall pay to City 34.01% of the deficit between Public Services Costs and General Revenues for the preceding fiscal year, based on the fiscal analysis, plus 34.01% of the cost of'the fiscal analysis described in Section I.C. The payment obligations under this section shall be proportionately reduced if LAFCO approves an annexation of less than 1,120 acres. E. Security for Payment. At such time as requested by the City Manager, Developer will provide the City with security in an amount and form satisfactory to the City Manager, to become effective once the Annexation Area becomes part of the City, to secure the payments to the City described in Section I.D above. The security may consist of a letter of credit or. similar instrument. Developer agrees that the City shall be Preannexation Agreement BetWeen the City of Dublin and Braddock and Logan Group II Page 4 of 10 March 27, 2002 under no obligation to continue processing any land use entitlement applications for Developer's property if security has not been provided, when requested. F. Reimbursement From Noncontributing Properties. The City Shall consider fair and appropriate ways of reimbursing the Developer some of the amounts Developer may be required to pay under this Section I from the owners of the Noncontributing Properties. To the extent permitted by law, the City shall require owners of the Noncontributing Properties seeking City approval of development entitlements for such property to pay to the City for payment to Developer a fair and proportionate share of the amounts that Developer is required to pay pursuant to this Section I.' All such payments received by the City from Noncontributing Properties shall be paid to the owners or successors in interest of the Braddock and Logan Property. Section II. Payment to City for Fallon Interchange Improvements A. Advance of Monies bY Developer. Developer agrees not oppose the City's imposition of conditions on future land-use approvals that require Developer to advance, prior to approval of final subdivision maps or, if no subdivision map is required for the development of a particular property, prior to approval of stage 2 development plans, monies for the construction of the Fallon Interchange Improvements. Such advances are required by the City's agreement with the Lin Family~ B. Use of Monies by City. City will use the monies paid by Developer pursuant to Section II of this Agreement, together with any interest earned thereon, for construction of the Fallon Interchange Improvements or to reimburse the Lin Family for their contributions. As used herein, "construction" shall include preliminary engineering, preparation of project study report, project report, plan specifications and estimates, engineering, environmental documentation and review, right-of-way acquisition (if necessary), permits, processing, utility relocation, construction, construction inspection, project management, and inspection. City shall be under no obligation to use the monies paid by Developer until such time that City has adequate monies to construct the Interchange Improvements. C. Credit Against TIF. City will provide a credit to Developer in the amount of Developer's payment of monies under this Section II, to be used by DeVeloper against payment of the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee ("TIF"). The use of credits (including limitations on the use of credits and payment of a portion of the TIF in cash) and manner of conversion of the credit to a right of reimbursement will be as determined in the development agreement between Developer and the City. The following provisions will be included in the development agreement, at a minimum: (a) the Developer shall pay an administrative fee of one-half of one percent or $1,000 whichever is greater; (b) the credit shall be granted at the time Developer makes payments of money pursuant to this agreement; and (c) the credit may be used only against the Category 1 TIF. Preannexation Agreement Between the City of Dublin and Braddock and Logan Group. II Page 5 of 10 March 27, 2002 D. Reimbursement From Noncontributing Properties. The City shall consider fair and appropriate ways of reimbursing the Developer some of the amounts Developer may be required to pay under this Section II from the owners of the Noncontributing Properties. To the extent permitted by law, the City shall require owners of the Noncontributing Properties seeking City aPproval of development entitlements for such property to pay to the City for payment to the Developer a fair and proportionate share of the amounts that Developer is required to pay pursuant to this Section I1. All such payments received by the City from Noncontributing Properties shall be paid to the owners or successors in interest of the Braddock and Logan Property. Section III. Payment of Funds for Construction of Eastern Dublin Fire Station A. Reimbursement fOr Construction of Eastern Dublin Fire Station. Developer agrees not oppose a requirement on future development approvals that requires the Developer to pay funds, prior to approval of final subdivision maps or, if no subdivision map is required to facilitate the development of a particular property, prior to approval of stage 2 development plans, in order to allow the City to reimburse the developer of Dublin Ranch Area A (DR Acquisitions, L.L.C.) for its advance of costs to construct and equip the new Eastern Dublin fire station (Fire Station 18). Because construction has not yet been completed, the costs of construction are currently unknown. The City anticipates that the amount of the. payment will be based on the Developer's proportionate share of the benefits from fire station construction. For instance, the payment may be based on percentage of acreage that a developer's property bears to the total acreage of the Eastern Dublin area. Thus, for illustrative purposes, if the Annexation Area were developed as a single project, it would be required to pay 34.1% of the costs of construction of the new Eastern Dublin fire station. B. Credit Against Fire Impact Fee. City will provide a credit to Developer in the amount of Developer's payment of monies under this Section III, to be used by Developer against payment of Fire Facilities Fee. The amount of the credit, once established, shall not be increased for inflation and shall not accrue interest. The credits may be used by Developer against payment of the Fire Facilities Fee for any project in Dublin or, with written notice to City, may be transferred by Developer to another developer of land in Dublin. If Developer has not been able to use the credits within ten years of the City's acceptance of Fire Station 18 Improvements, the remaining credits will convert to a right of reimbursement and shall terminate after ten years. Any reimbursement shall be from Fire Facilities Fees only, if available. Other aspects of the credit and right of reimbusement shall be consistent with the City's Traffic Impact Fee Guidelines. C. Effect on Noncontributing Properties. The City anticipates that the payment obligations anticipated to be imposed on Developer pursuant to this Section III will be imposed on the developers of the Noncontributing Properties at such time as they seek discretionary land use approvals from the City. Preannexation Agreement Between the City of Dublin and Braddock and Logan Group II Page 6 of 10 March 27, 2002 Section IV. Funding for Interim Location of Fallon Road A. Costs of Interim Location. Developer agrees to fund all costs of expanding Fallon Road to four lanes in the Interim Location. Developer's obligation under this Section IV is limited to the segment of Fallon Road from the future intersection with Dublin Boulevard on the south to the southern boundary of Dublin Ranch Area A on the north. Such costs shall include, but not be limited to, preliminary engineering, plan specifications and estimates, engineering, environmental documentation and review, right-of-way acquisition (if necessary), permits, processing, utility relocation, construction, construction inspection, project management, and inspection. Such costs shall also include, but not be limited to, costs incurred in demolishing the Interim Location. B. Security for Payment. At such time as requested by the City Manager, but no later than the first discretionary land use approval on the Braddock and Logan Interests, Developer will provide the City with security in an amount and form satisfactory to the City Manager to secure the payments to the City described in Section IV.A above. The security may consist of a letter of credit or similar instrument. Developers each agree that the City shall be under no obligation to continue processing any land use entitlement applications for Developers' property if security has not been provided, when requested. C. Reimbursement From Noncontributing Properties. The City shall consider fair and appropriate ways of reimbursing the Developer some of the amounts Developer may be required to pay under this Section IV from the owners of the Noncontributing Properties. To the extent permitted by law, the City shall require owners of the Noncontributing Properties seeking City approval of development entitlements for such property to pay to the City for payment to Developer a fair and proportionate share of the amounts that Developer is required to pay pursuant to this Section IV. All such payments received by the City from Noncontributing Properties shall be paid to the owners or successors in interest of the Braddock and Logan Property. Section V. Approval of Annexation This Agreement shall take effect when the City adopts a resolution of application to annex the Annexation Area, with or without conditions or, if the Developer files a petition to annex, upon adoption of an ordinance or resolution rezoning any portion of the property. Upon such action by the City, the City shall take reasonable steps to facilitate annexation of the Annexation Area in a timely manner. This Agreement shall become ineffective, however, if the annexation is not approved by LAFCO or the voters or does not become effective for any other reason. Preannexation Agreement Between the City of Dublin and Braddock and Logan Group II Page 7 of 10 March 27, 2002 Section VI. Additional Provisions A. Correctness of the Recitals. The Recitals set forth in this Agreement are true and correct and are a part hereof. B. Further Assurances. The Parties shall execute, acknowledge, and deliver such additional documents or instruments as may be necessary to carry out the intent of this Agreement, including but not limited to, those expressly referred to in this Agreement. C. Construction by California Law. This Agreement is entered into in the State of California and shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with its laws. D. Representation of Comprehension of Document. In entering into this Agreement, the Parties represent that they have relied upon the legal advice of their attorneys who are the attorneys of their choice. The Parties further represent that the terms of this Agreement have been completely read by and explained to them by their attorneys, and that they fully understand and voluntarily accept those terms. E. Authorship. Each Party and counsel for each Party has reviewed and revised this Agreement, and accordingly, the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting Party shall not be employed in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendment of it. F. Authority to Execute. Each of the persons executing this agreement on behalf of a legal entity represents and warrants that each has full power to enter into this Agreement on behalf of the entity and that the Agreement is binding on the entity. G. Entire Agreement; Amendment. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the Parties with regard to the matters set forth. There are no additional written or oral agreements or promises between the Parties concerning these matters which are not expressly set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by an agreement in writing executed in the same manner as this Agreement. H. Attorneys' Fees. In the event a Party to this Agreement is found in a court of law to have breached this Agreement, said Party shall pay the opposing Party's reasonable attorneys fees and costs incurred in litigating the breach of contract action. I. Approval of Project. By entering into this Agreement, City makes no commitment that it will approve the Project. J. Notices: All notices shall be by certified mail or hand delivered to the Parties as follows: Preannexation Agreement Between the City of Dublin and Braddock and Logan Group II Page 8 of 10 March 27, 2002 To the City: To the Developer: City Manager City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza P. O. Box 2340 Dublin, CA 94568 Braddock and Logan: Braddock and Logan Services, Inc. 4155 Blackhawk Plaza Circle, Suite 201 Danville, CA 94506 K. Recordation. This Agreement shall be recorded against the Property described in Exhibit B (the Braddock and Logan Property). L. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in as many coUnterparts as may be deemed necessary and convenient, and by the different parties hereto on separate counterparts, each of which, when so executed, shall be deemed an original, but all such counterparts shall constitute one and the same instrument. M. Exhibits. The following exhibits are appended to this agreement: 1. Exhibit A. 2. Exhibit B. 3. Exhibit C. Map of Annexation Area Property Description of Braddock and Logan Property Map of Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment Area [SIGNATURE BLOCKS ON NEXT PAGE] Preannexation Agreement Between the City of Dublin and Braddock and Logan Group II Page 9 of 10 March 27, 2002 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement the day and year first above written. CITY OF DUBLIN DEVELOPER Braddock and Logan Group II, L.P. A California Limited Partnership By: Braddock and Logan Services, Inc A California Corporation Janet Lockhart, Mayor Approved as to form: Its: General Partner Jeffery Lawrence, Vice President City Attorney Attest: City Clerk [NOTARIZATIONS ATTACHED] J:\wpd\Mnrsw\114\153V~,greement\annexation agreement (2nd alternate)_032702.doc Preannexation Agreement Between the City of Dublin and Braddock and Logan Group II Page 10 of 10 March 27, 2002 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California '~ ss. County of On Date personally appeared , before me, Name and Title of Officer (e.g., "Jane Doe, Notary Public") Name(s) of Signer(s) [] personally known to me [] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Place Notary Seal Above Signature of Notary Public OPTIONAL Though the information be/ow is not required by/aw, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: [] Individual [] Corporate Officer-- Title(s): [] Partner-- [] Limited [] General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: Signer Is Representing: Top of thumb here © 1999 National NotanJ Association · 9350 De Soto Ave., RO. Box 2402 · Chatsworth, CA 91313-2402 · www.nationalnotary, org Prod. No. 5907 Reorder: Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 Exhibit A East Dublin. Annexation Area 2 8 9 : 10 BA~)KA¥&SOmPS 1-580 C.n~y~n R. msd EXHIBIT ~EGAL DESCRIPTION REAL PROPERTY in the City of Pleasanton, Township of Murray, County of Alameda, State of California, described as follows: The northwest ¼ of Section .35, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian. Excepting that portion conveyed to County of Alameda by' deed recorded January 2, 1918 in Book 2630 of Deeds, Page 80, Alameda County Records. APN: 905-0002-003 EXHIBIT HR& FUTURE STUDY AREA AGRICUL. TUREi' 2.748.9 Acres I' I Acres (Crosby) General'Plan .Eastern E.~tended Planning Area LAND USE MAP L.e. gend COMMERCIAL ~ Nelg~cx~od Commercial G~ne~'al Coramatclal . ~of~ ~d~l Pa~ RE~ENTIAL ~ High De~y 25' ~ Me--High O~W 14-25 ~ac pUB~/GEM~UaL~/OPEN ~ ~ ~h H~ School ~ ~o~ Pa~ Nd~hbq~d Op~ Space ~?eam Corridor 6~COL~T~N .~---- C~lector S~eel D'US'Li'N ~ ':~C,~r'alC ~rc~a~r~ayb~pennit~edbyaP~annedDe~e~pmentZ~n~ngPr~r.~ess(~e~etext~a~c~mp~e?di$"c~sa~n~J--` · ~ ~ ~"~.' .., : . · ........ cram _ ' ed coRsistentwilhAPA[see textl~completeoscuss~on~ ~-?!;:.:.~ .;'~': ....... ' ~ l~a: Wa convert to Fulure :~:.':~'. 'iP. ~. .~ :. ' EXHIB' C_. RESOLUTION NO. XX-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN AUTHORIZING INITIATION OF APPLICATION FOR REORGANIZATION FOR PA 00-025, ANNEXATION NO. 13 WHEREAS, the City of Dublin desires to initiate proceedings pursuant to the Cortese-Knox- Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code, for a reorganization that would concurrently annex territory to the City of Dublin and the Dublin San Ramon Services District and detach territory from the Livermore Area Recreation and Park District; and WHEREAS, on May 10, 1993, the City Council certified a program Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Eastern Dublin GPA/SP Project and an addendum thereto, dated May 4, 1993 (SCH 91103064). On August 22, 1994, the City Council approved another addendum to update plans to provide sewer service. The May 10, 1993 program EIR, the May 4, 1993 addendum and the August 22, 1994 addendum are collectively referred to as the Eastern Dublin EIR; and WHEREAS, the Project is consistent with the type, location and density of land uses approved through the 1993 Eastern Dublin GPA/SP Project. All mitigation measures adopted for the GPA/SP Project continue to apply to implementing projects such as the current PD Prezone; and all applicable City development ordinances and standards apply to the Project except as otherwise approved through the Project prezoning and related Stage 1 Development Plan; and WHEREAS, upon approval of the Eastern Dublin GPA/SP Project, the City Council adopted mitigation findings, a statement of overriding considerations, and a mitigation monitoring program as set forth in Resolution 53-93, included in the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR referenced below; and WHEREAS, the City completed an Initial Study for the Project consistent with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163 and determined that a Supplement to the Eastern Dublin EIR ("Supplemental EIR") was required in order to analyze substantial changes in circumstances and new information since certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR. A Notice of Preparation dated May 25,2001, was circulated with the Initial Study to public agencies and interested parties for consultation on the scope of the Supplemental EIR; and WHEREAS, based on the Initial Study and responses to the Notice of Preparation, the City prepared a Draft Supplemental EIR, followed and superseded by a Revised Draft Supplemental EIR dated January 2002 and consisting of two bound volumes (SCH 2001052114). Volume 1' contains the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR text; Volume 2 contains appendices, including the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study; and Attachment 5 WHEREAS, the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR was circulated for the required 45 day public review period, from January 15, 2002 to March 1, 2002. Responses to comments on the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR were prepared and compiled in a Revised Final Supplemental EIR. The Revised Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs were certified by the City Council as the Supplemental EIR for the Project on April 2, 2002 in Resolution XX-02; and WHEREAS, the Planning Comrnission held a properly noticed public hearing on said applications on March 26, 2002, and adopted a Resolution recommending that the City Council approve a Planned Development Prezoning and Stage 1 Development Plan for PA 00-025; and WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on April 2, 2002 and April 16, 2002; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the City Council approve the applications and the City Council heard and considered the Revised Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs, all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth prior to taking action on the proposed project. WHEREAS, a Staff report,, dated April 2, 2002, and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR, the Revised Final SEIR containing responses to comments received during the public review period, and the Project for the City Council; and WHEREAS, notice of intent to adopt this resolution of application has been given, and this Council has conducted a public hearing based upon this notification; and WHEREAS, the principal reasons for the proposed reorganization are as follows: to provide the full range of municipal services to the territory; and assure orderly development consistent with the City of Dublin Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the following agencies would be affected by the proposed jurisdictional changes: Agency City of Dublin Dublin San Ramon Services District Livermore Area Recreation and Park District Nature of Change Annexation Annexation Detachment WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be reorganized is uninhabited, and a map and a description of the boundaries of the territory are attached as Exhibit A, Annexation to the City of Dublin and to Dublin San Ramon Services District, and Detachment from Livermore Area Parks and Recreation District. Exhibit A is incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, it is desired that the proposed reorganization be subject to the following terms and conditions: a. The effective date of the annexation shall be July 1, 2002; and WHEREAS, this proposal is consistent with the spheres of influence of the City of Dublin and DSRSD; and WHEREAS, this proposal is not consistent with the sphere of influence of the Livermore Area Park and Recreation District, which is coterminous with its boundaries; therefore, it is proposed that its sphere of influence by concurrently amended. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: This resolution of application is hereby adopted and approved and the Local Agency Formation Commission is hereby requested to take proceedings for the annexation of territory as authorized and in the manner provide in the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of April 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk GAPA#L2000\00-025\CC StaffReport and Reso-March 02\CC Reso lafco 3-26-02.doc VICZNZT7 ~ LIN g65-00~1-002 Ik. 9~.,445 I,T 1 ! I~ ,T475, N: 374 00C4AN WTTT ASS(X~TES 985-0007-001 ~ No. 86-,325121 FN. LON [NTER~ISE$, 985-0007-002-14 RE: 2658, IM: TITLE OU~ co. 985--0006--09 SERIES No. 98~_.~ 27 ~,v~c~ ~',~,~es ~ ~..,XHIBIT 'A' ~f~ ~30L~ V~Sr ~ PA 00-025 ~ DUBLIN PROPERTY O~ ~~ON ~ ~ ~ * ~ON ~ ~ ~ OF D~ ~,. BY ~CO R~0L~ON No. ON '~ S~LE: 1"=800' DATE: ~SR~. 2~1 ~12 ' ~. ~SION ~TE: ~CH, 2002 / / / / 905-0002-003 SERIES No. 99-065224 FIRST NdERtC~ Tm.E ~ CO. 985.-000Ht0 S[RIES No. 98-588140 ~N'T~P, STAT]~ 680 SEE DETAIL 'B' I~. 97-178224 COLE No, 99-246,156 ~:, .~ACt~ P,~'TNE~ I It. 1 £ M.0.K / l v~ 95-274,37'2 985-0006-004 SERIES No. 98-265414 · ,. ."' "~--.-qFl:' I'lP'TAIi *A' ---Ut~REO SCI~OOL ~ ~.~.._ .**... ........ . ..... ,90~1-~02-02 EXHIBIT "I' PAGE 1 OF 5 //~ 19149-0A 3/11/2002 F.C.I. DESCRIPTION OF PA 00-025 EASTERN DUBLIN PROPERTY OWNERS REORGANIZATION · ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN · ANNEXATION TO THE DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT · DETACHMENT FROM THE LIVERMORE AREA RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT BY LAFCO RESOLUTION No. ON BEING A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL AS CONVEYED IN THE DEED TO: "STATE OF CALIFORNIA" [FOR: CROAKROAD] AS RECORDED ON THE 7TM DAY OF JULY, 1967 IN REEL: 1995, IMAGE: 347 [HEREINAFFER CALLED "STATE DEED 1"]; AND ALL OF THOSE CERTAIN PARCELS AS CONVEYED IN THE DEEDS TO: "ROBERT CHEN, ET AL" AS RECORDED ON THE 30TM DAY OF JULY, 1998 IN SERIES No. 98-265414; "FIRST AMERICAN TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY" AS RECORDED ON THE 4TM DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1998 IN SERIES No. 98-388140; "FALLON ENTERPRISES, INC." AS RECORDED ON THE 21sT DAY OF JULY, 1970 IN REEL: 2658, IMAGE: 332; "BRADDOCK & LOGAN GROUP II, L.P." AS RECORDED ON THE 16TM DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1999 IN SERIES No. 99-065224; "FRANCIS P. CROAK" AS RECORDED ON THE 13TM DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1979 IN SERIES No. 79-229985; "THE ANDERSON SECOND FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP" AS RECORDED ON THE 14TM DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1991 IN SERIES No. 91-305170; "EBJ PARTNERS, L.P." AS RECORDED ON THE 26TM DAY OF JANUARY, 2001 IN SERIES No.,2001-029949; "PLEASANTON RANCH INVESTMENTS." AS RECORDED ON THE 30TM DAY OF JULY, 1973 IN REEL: ~3475, IMAGE: 374; "RIGHETTI PARTNERS, L.P. ' AS RECORDED ON THE 12TM DAY OF MARCH, 1992 IN SERIES No. 92-075343; "JAMES R. CAMPBELL and DIXIE M. CAMPBELL" AS RECORDED ON THE 29TM DAY OF MAY, 1980 IN SERIES No. 80-092552; "BRANAUGH 1991 TRUST." AS RECORDED ON THE 23Pa~ DAY OF OCTOBER, 1996 IN SERIES No. 96-269964; AND "STATE OF CALIFORNIA" [FOR: COLLIER CANYON ROAD] AS RECORDED ON THE 8TM DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1968 IN REEL: 2122, IMAGE: 473 [HEREINAb-TER CALLED "STATE DEED 2"]; ALL AS RECORDED IN ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS, CALIFORNIA; LYING AND BEING IN THE PLEASANTON AND MURRAY TOWNSHIPS, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF "ANNEXATION No. 10 TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN"; "ANNEXATION No. 94- 1 TO THE DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT"; AND "DETACHMENT No. 94-1 FROM THE L1VERMORE AREA RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT" AS FILED ON THE 18TM DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1995 IN BOOK 204 OF MAPS, AT PAGES 75, 76, 75A, 75B, 76A AND 76B, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS, CALIFORNIA, AND SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERN RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF CROAK ROAD, COMMON TO SAID NORTHERN RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE 580, AND SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE RADIUS POINT BEARS NORTH 5o00'22'' EAST; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERN LINE OF SAID "ANNEXATIONS / DETACHMENT" THE FOLLOWING FIFTY (50) COURSES: (1) ALONG THE SOUTHERN RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF CROAK ROAD IN A NORTHWESTERLY DIRECTION 702.39 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1020.00 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39°27'17'' TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE WHOSE RADIUS POINT BEARS SOUTH 44o27'39'' WEST; (2) THENCE 241.47 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 700.00 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19°45'52"; (3) THENCE NORTH 50o00'22'. EAST 48.92 FEET; (4) THENCE NORTH 39059'38" WEST 238.99 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; (5) THENCE 170.90 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 222.00 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 44°06'26"; (6) THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF CROAK ROAD ALONG THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF SAID RIGHT OF WAY NORTH 84o06'04" WEST 40 FEET MORE OR LESS TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF FALLON ROAD; (7) THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION AND EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF FALLON ROAD NORTH 2006'49" EAST, 188.00 FEET MORE OR LESS; (8) THENCE NORTH 87°53'11" WEST, 12.00 FEET; (9) THENCE NORTH 2°07'21" EAST, 1457.26 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; (10)THENCE 205.71 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 429.94 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27°24'48"; lllAeKAY & SOmPS CIVIL ENGINEERING* LAND PLANNINGe LAND SURVEYING 5142 Franldln Drive Suite B, Pleasanton0 CA. 94588-3355 (925] 225-0690 p:\legals \ 19149\Annex-all.doc ? II o EXHIBIT "I' "19149-0A PAGE 2 OF 5 3/11/2002 F.C.I. (Il)THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF FALLON ROAD NORTH 88°30'52'' WEST, 33.93 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE IN THE CENTERLINE OF FALLON ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE RECORD OF SURVEY No. 1005, FILED FEBRUARY 1, 1993 IN BOOK 16 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY, AT PAGE 37 (SERIES No. 93-032269), ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS, CALIFORNIA, WHOSE RADIUS POINT BEARS SOUTH 62°31'08" WEST; (12)THENCE NORTHERLY 72.58' FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE AND ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 399.94 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE, OF 10°23'54"; (13)THENCE NORTH 37°52'46'' WEST, 428.46 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; (14)THENCE 308.53 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 399.94 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 44°12'02"; (15)THENCE NORTH 6°19'16'' EAST, 1321.37 FEET [1321.27 FEET PER SAID "ANNEXATION/DETACHMENT"] TO A POINT OF CURVATURE OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE, FROM WHICH THE CENI~R BEARS SOUTH 83°40'20'' EAST; (16) THENCE 224.14 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 800.55 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°02'30"; (17) THENCE NORTH 22°2 I'46" EAST, 500.00 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; (IS)THENCE 176.40 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFr, HAVING A RADIUS OF 199.76 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 50°35'39"; (19)THENCE NORTH 28°13'53'' WEST, 24.09 FEET; (20)THENCE NORTH 33°45'20" WEST, 128.91 FEET; (21) THENCE NORTH 22°56'58'' WEST, 83.13 FEET; (22)THENCE NORTH 10041'42'' WEST, 61.76 FEET; (23)THENCE NORTH 03°58'13" WEST, 101.75 FEET; (24)THENCE NORTH 3°49'18" EAST, 159.00 FEET; (25)THENCE NORTH 30035'37" WEST, 55.23 FEET; (26)THENCE NORTH 38°49'42'' WEST, 90.60 FEET; (27) THENCE NORTH 27°21'32" WEST, 59.83 FEET; (28) THENCE NORTH 16o43'46'' WEST, 80.16 FEET; (29) THENCE NORTH 4o40' 18" WEST, 58.73 FEET; (30)THENCE NORTH 82o33'39'' WEST, 198.51 FEET; (31) THENCE'NORTH 15o45'22'' WEST, 294.24 FEET; (32)THENCE NORTH 13°36'21" EAST, 453.59 FEET; (33) THENCE SOUTH 89053'39'. EAST, 470.00 FEET; (34) THENCE NORTH 37°46'21" EAST 177.15 FEET; (35) THENCE NORTH 27 °21'21" EAST, 182.90 FEET; (36) THENCE NORTH 6°53'39'' WEST, 100.00 FEET; (37)THENCE NORTH 10°53'39'' WEST, 130.00 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE FROM WHICH POINT THE CENTER BEARS NORTH 22°06'21" EAST; (38)THENCE 153.59 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 160.00 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 55000'00" TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; (39)THENCE 26.76 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFr, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15°20'00'', TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; (40)THENCE 239.11 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 400.00 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 34°15'00'', TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE FROM WHICH POINT THE CENTER BEARS NORTH 83°58'39'' WEST; (41)THENCE 102.61 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 170.00 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 34°35'00"; (42) THENCE NORTH 28033'39' WEST, 200.00 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; (43)THENCE 164.15 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 165.00 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 57°00'00"; (44)THENCE NORTH 28°26'21" EAST, 217.82 FEET; (45)THENCE NORTH 14039'29'' WEST, 253.60 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE FROM WHICH POINT THE CENTER BEARS SOUTH 8°35'31'. EAST; mA :KAY& SOmpS CIVIL ENGINEERINGe LAND PLANNING · LAND SURVEYING ,5142 Franldln Ddve Suite B, Pleasanton, CA. 94588-$$§5 [92,5] 22,5-0690 p:\legals\ 19149\Annex-all.doc EXHIBIT "I" 19149-0A PAGE 3 OF $ 3/11/2002 F.C.I. (46)THENCE 103.66 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 180.00 FEET AND THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 32°59'45"; (47)THENCE NORTH 22053'39'' WEST, 218.39 FEET; (48) THENCE NORTH 0°06'21" EAST, 300.00 FEET; (49)THENCE NORTH 48°46'28'' EAST, 1910.79 FEET; (50)THENCE NORTH 0°09'11" WEST, 235.96 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHEAST CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND AS SHOWN ON SAID RECORD OF SURVEY No. 1005 CONVEYED TO CHANG SU-O-LIN PER BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT MAP APPROVED ON JANUARY 2, 1992 (BA91-25) ALAMEDA COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT, A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE OF WHICH WAS RECORDED NOVEMBER 19, 1992 (SERIES No. 92-376221) SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER SAID "ANNEXATION No. I0 TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN", "ANNEXATION No. 94-1 TO THE DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT", AND "DETACHMENT No. 94-1 FROM THE LIVERMORE AREA RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT"; (51)THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINE OF THAT TRACT OF LAND AS SHOWN ON SAID RECORD OF SURVEY No. 1005 CONVEYED TO FALLON ENTERPRISES, INC. (PER SERIES No. 92-376222) PER SAID BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT (BA91-25) SOUTH 89040'26.' EAST 1485.77 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID FALLON ENTERPRISES TRACT OF LAND AS SHOWN ON SAID RECORD OF SURVEY No. 1005, SAID POINT BEING THE ~A CORNER BETWEEN SECTIONS 27 AND 26, TOWNSHIP 2 SOL1TH, RANGE 1 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE & MERIDIAN; (52)THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY PROPERTY LINE OF SAID FALLON ENTERPRISES TRACT OF LAND AS SHOWN ON SAID RECORD OF SURVEY No. 1005 SOUTH 0°48'41" WEST 2642.66 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE & MERIDIAN, AS SHOWN ON RECORD OF SURVEY No. 1675 AS FILED ON THE 21sT DAY OF APRIL, 2000 IN BOOK 25 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY, AT PAGES 31 AND 32, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS, CALIFORNIA, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LANDS CONVEYED TO BRADDOCK & LOGAN GROUP II, L.P. (PER SERIES No. 99-065224); (53)THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINE OF THAT TRACT OF LAND AS SHOWN QN SAID RECORD OF SURVEY No. 1675 CONVEYED TO BRADDOCK & LOGAN GROUP II, L.P. AND THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 35, SOUTH 88044'02'' EAST [SOUTH 88043'28" EAST PER R.O.S. No. 1675] 2640.61 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID BRADDOCK & LOGAN GROUP II, L.P. TRACT OF LAND SAID POINT BEING THE NORTH % CORNER OF SAID SECTION 35; (54) THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY PROPERTY LINE OF SAID BRADDOCK & LOGAN TRACT OF LAND AND ALONG THE EASTERLY PROPERTY LINE OF THAT TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO CROAK (PER SERIES No. 79-229985) AS SHOWN ON SAID RECOPRD OF SURVEY No. 1675 SOUTH 0054'53.' WEST [SOUTH 0°55'27'' WEST PER R.O.S. No. 1675] 5288.33 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID CROAK TRACT OF LAND AND TO THE SOUTH IA CORNER OF SAID SECTION 35 BETWEEN TOWNSHIPS 2 SOUTH AND 3 SOUTH, RANGE 1 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE & MERIDIAN; (55)THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY PROPERTY LINE OF SAID CROAK TRACT OF LAND NORTH 89004'24'. WEST [NORTH 89003'50'. WEST PER R.O.S. No. 1675] 274.76 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO BRANAUGH (PER SERIES No. 96-269964); (56)THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY PROPERTY LINE OF SAID BRANAUGH TRACT OF LAND AND CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF SAID EASTERLY PROPERTY LINE SOUTH 0026'44" WEST 2858.49 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID "STATE DEED 2 "; (57)THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY PROPERTY LINE OF SAID "STATE DEED 2" NORTH 88°33'16.. WEST 757.14 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID "STATE DEED 2 "; (58)THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY PROPERTY LINE OF SAID "STATE DEED 2" NORTH 0°22'1 !" EAST 9.03 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ("PARCEL 3A" PER REEL: 2144, IMAGE: 114 AS RECORDED ON THE 14~t DAY OF MARCH, 1968) [HEREINAFTER CALLED: "STATEDEED 3"]; (59) THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINE OF SAID "STATE DEED 3" NORTH 84°41'01" WEST 74.08 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINE; (60)THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINE AND ALONG THE NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINE OF THAT TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ("PARCEL I" PER REEL: 2279, IMAGE: 110 AS RECORDED ON THE 24x~ DAY OF OCTOBER, 1968) [HEREINAFTER CALLED: "STATE DEED 4"] AND CONTINUING ALONG THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF SAID NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINE NORTH 88°33'15.. WEST 1544.70 mA :KAY & SoaI, s CIVIL ENGINEERINGe LAND PLANNING e L~ID SURVEYING 5142 Franldln Drtve Suffe B, Pleasanton, CA. 94588-3355 1925) 225-0690 p:\legals\ 19149\Annex-ail.doc PAGE 4 OF 5 3/11/2002 F.C.I. FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY PROPERTY LINE OF THAT TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO PLEASANTON RANCH INVESTMENTS (PER REEL: 3475, IMAGE: 374); (61)THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY PROPERTY LINE OF SAID PLEASANTON RANCH TRACT OF LAND SOUTH 0020'37" WEST 3.79 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PLEASANTON RANCH TRACT OF LAND; (62)THENCE ALONG THE soUTHERLY PROPERTY LINE OF SAID PLEASANTON RANCH TRACT OF LAND SOUTH 89059'37.' WEST 221.43 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PLEASANTON RANCH TRACT OF LAND; (63)THENCE IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION PERPENDICULARLY TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF CROAK ROAD SOUTH 1°26'50" WEST 8.34 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AS MEASURED 56.01 FEET IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION FROM THE NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINE OF SAID "STATE DEED I "; (64)THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AS MEASURED 56.01 FEET PERPENDICULARLY AND CONCENTRIC IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION FROM THE NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINE OF SAID "STATE DEED 1" THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES: (65) NORTH 88°33'10.' WEST 316.16 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT; (66) THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 5028.49 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3°33'15'', AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 311.93 FEET TO THE BEGINNING POINT OF A TANGENT LINE; (67) THENCE ALONG SAID TANGENT LINE NORTH 84°59'55" WEST 556.93 FEET TO SAID POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 1,119 ACRES, MORE OR LESS [TOTAL ANNEXATION AREA]. ALL OF: ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 905-0001-004-03, 905-0001-004-04, 905-0001-005-02, 905-0001-006-03, 905-0002- 001-01,905-0002-002, 905-0002-003, 985-0006-004, 985-0006-006-02, 985-0006-006-03, 985-0006-009, 985-0006-010, 985-0007- 002-14, UNASSIGNED (SOUTH OF APN #'s 905-0001-004-03 & 905-0001-004-04 - COLLIER CANYON ROAD), AND UNASSIGNED (SOUTH OF APN # 985-0006-004 - CROAK ROAD). END OF DESCRIPTION PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR No. 5859 (EXP. 12/31/2004) STATE OF CALIFORNIA P:\legals\ 19149\ Annex-all.doc mA :KAY& SomPs CML ENGINEERING* LAND PLANNING* LAND SURVEYING ,5142 Franldln Drive Suite B, Pleasanton, CA. 94588-3355 (925) 225-0690 EXHIBIT "I' PAGE 5 OF 5. 19149-0A 3/11/2002 F.C.I. REFERENCES TO THE EXISTING BOUNDARY LINE ARE PRIMARY CALLS. ANY BEARING OR DISTANCES REFERRED TO HEREIN SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ONLY SECONDARY. THE BOUNDARY OF THE TERRITORY IS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF PA 00-025 EASTERN DUBLIN PROPERTY OWNERS REORGANIZATION, ADOPTED BY LAFCO RESOLUTION No. , ON THE DAY OF ,2002; SAID MAP WAS CERTIFIED BY THE COUNTY SURVEYOR ON THE DAY OF , 2002. THIS DESCRIPTION CONFORMS TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ALAMEDA COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION. DONALD J. LABELLE - DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA BY: RUSSELL REID PENLAND JR. COUNTY SURVEYOR L.S. No. 5726, EXPIRES 12/31/2003) P: \legals \ I9149 \Annex-all.doc IRACKAY& SOml s CML ENGINEERING* LAND PLANNING* LAND SURVEYING 5142 Franldln Drive Suite B, Pleasanton, CA. 94588-3355 (925} 225-0690