Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 040-02 EDubProp SuppleEIR RESOLUTION NO. 40 - 02 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN 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 ~(SCIt 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 ~ ~nd WJl~&8~ based on the Initial Study and responses to the Notice of Preparation, the City prepared ~ Supplemental EIK followed and superseded by a Revised Draft Supplemental EIR dated January ~ 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 WItEREAS, the Revised Draf~ 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 WItEREAS, 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 EI1L 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 EIK 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 WllEREAS, 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 Draf~ 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, 2 the Revised Draft Supplemental EIR and the Revised Final Supplemental ElK 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 2nd day of April, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers McCormick, Oravetz, Sbranti and Zika and Mayor Lockhart NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ~/f?~,~.~ ~~__ ~/~ ~f~.~ K21GI4-2-O21roso-oir.do¢ (Itom 6.4) G:\PA~g2000\00-025\¢C Staff Report and Res0-March 02\Certification of SEIR-3-28-02.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. 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. Finding. 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 mitigation 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. 4 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'I 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 ispace 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-17. 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 southem 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 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 habitht 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-turn lane will provide sufficient capacity for this intersection to operate at an acceptable level of service. Supplemental Impact TRAFFIC 2: Unacceptable LOS at Hacienda Drive/I-580 westbound ramps. The intersection of Hacienda Drive/I-580 westbound ramps would operate at an unacceptable LOS F in the 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-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. 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 turn/through lane. Project developers also shall contribute to a traffic signal upgrade that includes a westbound right-mm 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 thc 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. Thc 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 thc 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 thc 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 thc 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 14 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. RDSEIRp. 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-AI. 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-tm 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 tum 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. RDSEIR 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. G:LPA#L2000\00-025\CC StaffReport and Reso-March 02X~Exhibit A mitigation.f'mdings.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 N° 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 altemative 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 altemative 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. RDSEIR 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 !. 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. [Jnavoidable 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 mitigati6n, 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 Altemative, 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 Altemative, 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 fight-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 Cumul,tive Buildout with Project Scenario, Freeway Segments on 1-580 and 1-680 in the Project Are,~. 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 Gity'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: a. Approximately 2,575 new jobs, as well as a substantial number of construction jobs. b. 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: a. 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. c. Increased opportunities for the City to contribute its fair share of regional housing. d. 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: a. 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. b. 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:XPA#X2000\00-025\CC Staff Report and Reso-March 02\exhibit C soc.mar28.doc 4 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-l: 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 m~d 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. ~ ~"~'~ D-~perties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation 1 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 Pror~ortlo~ Rfaoo 1 D~;olr~nn~,~n~ 191 .... ,4 ^ ...... u-- :ge ~ mexal 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: L 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 1 Development Plan and Annexation 3 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 5 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 drainageor limit impacts to bridge crossings (as opposed ..t° 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) withhn 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 Plmming 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 sensitiv6 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 1 Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures 6 City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule Project area submitted to tine City for discretionary review and during c6nstruction 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 1 Development Plan and Annexation 7 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' Proo6rti~.~ .qta~o '1 Dox,olc, r,m,~,',l- p! .... a a ....... .~ 't m4 ~ 8 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 Planning 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 1 Development Plan and Annexation 9 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 concurrent with 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 shall participate in an endangered species/special-status habitat education East Dublin P~c~nor~io~ ~o 1 r~,,,l~ ...... ~ m .... ,~ ^ ...... ~_ ~g' 't an exation 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 1 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 hnpacts 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 Provertie.~ .qtaeo 1 13o~,,,lop,,,~,,* pI~,~ av~ a ,mexa~^- Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures 12 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 Plarming Prior to East Dublin Proverties Stage ] ]-)ovolnnmonl- Plnn nr~l A,~ex~. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures 14 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 Planning 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 Planning 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-winterin birds, all burrows should be surve ed 30 East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures 16 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 Reporting 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 monitorh~g 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 enhanced 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 Proverties. Staee 1 Develoornont Plan ancl A ..... ~on Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures 18 City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 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-BIO-41: If construction is scheduled during summer, when Project Dublin Planning 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 19 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 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-n~n.: 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,BIO-45: Habitat for these bat species 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-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 Sta~e 1 Develonmont Plan anrt Mitigation Monitfring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures 20 City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 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-I: 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 1 Development Plan and Annexation 21 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 'Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring 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 Pirnlico Drive. the need 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-TRA~'I~'iC-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 ~ndividual 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 developers shall install a traffic signal Project City of Dublin When traffic at the Fallon Road/Pro'ect Road intersection at the time ~~ Public Work~s ~ East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures 22 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 1 Development Plan and Annexation 23 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 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 Sta~e 1 Develovment Plan and Anno~Hnn Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures 24 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 lane 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 the need 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 25 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental MeaSures City of Dublin EXHIBIT D 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-'IRAI~'I~'IC-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 im rovement based on traffic im act studies of the East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Supplemental Measures 26 City of Dublin EXHIBIT D Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule individual projects. SM-UTS-I: 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