Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.4 Sybase GPA DA PD Rezon CITY. CLERK AGENDA STATEMENT 0420-30 CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2000 0600-60 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: PA 99-062 Sybase Corporate Headquarters Complex, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezone/Development Plan and Development Agreement and PA 99-010 Corrie Center Phase II Office Development General Plan Amendment (Report Prepared by: Jerry Haag, Consulting Planner) ATTACHMENTS: ATTACHMENT (by reference) 5. 6. 7. 8. RECOMMENDATION~~21~ 4. 5. 6. 7. City Council Resolution approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan City Council Draft Resolution approving Amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan with the following Exhibits included: · Exhibit A-1 EDSP/GP Land Use Table - Alameda County Surplus Property Authority Property · Exhibit A-2 EDSP/GP Land Use Map - Alameda County Surplus Property Authority Property City Council Ordinance adopting a Planned Development (PD) Rezone/Development Plan · Exhibit A-1 Written Development Plan · Exhibit A-2 Development Plans City Council Ordinance adopting a Development Agreement Development Agreement document Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration/Response to Comments Mitigation Monitoring Plan Exhibit showing relationship between SPA/GPA and Sybase project 9. Planning Commission Sybase Project Staff Report dated May 9, 2000, incorporated herein by reference* 10. City Council Corrie Center Staff Report dated March 7, 2000, incorporated herein by reference* * Not attached, but available at the Planning Department, City Hall o Hear Staff Presentation Open Public Hearing Hear Applicant's Presentation Question Staff, Applicant and the Public Close Public Hearing Deliberate Adopt (Attachment 1) City Council Resolution approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Sybase Project Adopt (Attachment 2) City Council Resolution approving an Amendment to the General Plan for the Corrie Center and Sybase projects and adopting an Amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan for the Sybase Project COPIES TO: The Applicant/Property Owner PA File ITEM NO. 10. 11. Waive reading and introduce Ordinance (Attachment 3) amending the Dublin Zoning Ordinance to approve a Planned Development (PD) Rezone/Development Plan (with Development Plan attached as Exhibits A-1 and A-2) Waive reading and introduce Ordinance (Attachment 4) approving a Development Agreement Schedule the second reading of both Ordinances for June 20, 2000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This application includes an amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan for the Sybase Corporate Headquarters project, an Amendment to the General Plan for the Corrie Center Phase II Office Development, a Planned Development (PD) Rezone/Development Plan and a Development Agreement for the Sybase Corporate Headquarters facility. Under State Law, the City can only make four changes to each element of the General Plan during any calendar year. However, each change may include multiple amendments. To date, the City has received four requests to amend the land use element of the General Plan which includes the following projects: Dublin Ranch, (Areas F, G and H) Greenbriar Homes, Sybase Development and the Corrie Center project. Two General Plan Amendments have already been approved in 2000, and the City proposes to group subsequent amendment requests in order to preserve the right to make a fourth change to the Plan later in the year. Therefore, this public hearing involves consideration of both the Corrie Center and Sybase applications. A resolution to approve the General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan for the Sybase and Corde Center projects is included as Attachment 2. ANALYSIS This Sybase application includes an amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan for the proposed Sybase project, This encompasses a 34.6-acre site located on the block bounded by Dublin Boulevard to the south, Hacienda Drive to the east, Central Parkway to the north and Arnold Road to the west. The proposed amendment would involve changing the land use designation for the easterly 19 gross acres of the site from "High Density Residential" to "Campus Office." Applications have also been filed for a Planned Development (PD) Rezone/Stage 1 & 2 Development Plan, and a Development Agreement. If approved, these various applications would allow for the development of the Sybase corporate headquarters complex on the site totaling 420,000 square feet of gross floor. Sybase is a high technology firm currently located in Emeryville. City approval of the project would allow for consolidation of Sybase operations in one central site with adequate parking and on-site amenities. On May 9, 2000, the Planning Commission took action to approve a Site Development Review (SDR) permit and Tentative Parcel Map for the Sybase project, subject to City Council approval of the SPA/GPA and PD rezoning. A General Plan Amendment request for the proposed Corrie Center development project is also included as explained below. The remainder of this staff report deals only with the proposed Sybase project. General Plan Amendments: Sybase General Plan~Specific Plan Analysis: The proposed Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment requested by the property owner, the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, would change the land use designation for the easterly portion of Santa Rita Site 15 from "High Density Residential" to "Campus Office." If approved, this action would allow the Sybase project to be constructed, The number of residential dwellings originally planned for the entire 34.6 gross acre Site 15 would be reduced to 821 dwellings on the westerly 15.6 acres portion of the block; the remaining dwelling units (390) will be transferred to Site 3. Attachment 8 is an exhibit showing the relationship between the proposed Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment with the proposed development area for the Sybase project. The following table compares the existing land use designations for the Santa Rita site with proposed changes. Table 1. Existing and Proposed Specific Plan/General Plan Land Uses-Alameda County Surplus Property Authority Property Site Name Acres Existing DU's/Sq. Ft. Proposed DU's/Sq. (gross) Specific Plan Specific Plan Ft. 1 Tassajara Meadows 14.8 Med. Res 148 d.u. no change -- 2 Emerald Glen Park 56.3 Park --- no change -- 3 Village Center 21.9 Neigh. Comm. 286,189 no change +347 d.u. 4 Toll Emerald Glen 33.9 Med. Res. 339 du no change -- 5a G.M. 17 GC 185,130 no change -- 5b Koll 35.1 CO/GC 552,449 no change -- 6 AutoNation 28.9 GC 264,366 no change -- 7 Hacienda Crossing 56.8 GC 530,536 no change -- 8 Calif. Creekside 35.7 Med. Res. 277 du no change -- 9 Villas 16.2 MH Res. 324 du no change -- 10 School 11 School -- no change -- 1 la JPI 18.5 Med. High Res. 335 du no change -- 1 lb Summer Glen 69.2 L/M Res. 328 du no change -- 12 Pub/Semi-Pub. 88.5 public 963,765 no change -- 13 Creekside Business 29.7 Ind/Office 478,681 no change -- Park 14 Emerald Pointe 35.3 Ind/Office 568,937 no change -- 1Sa Unentitled 15.6 High Den. Res. 821 du High Den. Res. -- (ne w) 15b (Proposed Sybase site) 19 High Den. Res. -- Campus Office (19 ac) 420,000 Campus 16 Unentitled 53 CO 1,962,378 Office 1,542,378 (no change Tota 5,792,481 5,792,481 Is 2,962 d.u. 2,962 d.u. In sum, the proposed Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment would not increase the amount of either residential or non-residential development potential within the Santa Rita; it would instead transfer already approved development potential within a relatively small radius. Traffic impacts of this proposed relocation have been reviewed in a recent traffic study and no significant traffic impacts have been identified. Corrie Center General Plan Antendment Analysis: The project site is located within Dublin's downtown area at the southeast intersection of Dublin Boulevard and San Ramon Road. The site area consists of approximately 4.5 acres and is currently developed with a three-story L-shaped office building (70,790 square feet), surface parking and landscaped areas. The proposed four-story office building (46, 110 square feet) and parking structure would be located to the rear of the existing building and would be connected to it via a one-story glass enclosed foyer. The property is surrounded by commercial development including Coco's restaurant to the north, the Monarch Hotel to the south and Earl Anthony's bowl to the east and is bounded by San Ramon Road and the 1-580 off-ramp to the west and southwest. The existing General Plan land use designation for the project site is "Retail/Office". The project site is located within "Zone 2: General Commercial" of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan and the proposed project complies with this designation. The proposed project meets the intent of the Retail/Office designation of the General Plan, which allows business, and office uses. However, the project currently conflicts with the maximum floor area ratio requirement of the General Plan, which is .5. The project site plans indicate a site coverage of.59. The General Plan Amendment proposes to increase the maximum floor area ratio for the Retail/Office land use to .6. Retail/Office designated property within the city exists within the downtown area and on the west side of San Ramon Road. The Dublin General Plan contains policies, which encourage the intensification of the downtown area through the development of mixed use, pedestrian-orientated development. City policy requires all developers to finance the cost of a traffic study to evaluate traffic and circulation impacts of a proposed project. This will ensure that any traffic impacts generated by a project will be adequately identified and mitigated to eliminate impacts to city roadways. The City Site Development Review process will ensure that the site has adequate parking, landscaping and access to accommodate the proposed building floor area. The increase in the maximum floor area ratio for the Retail/Office land use category is appropriate, as it is consistent with General Plan policies which encourage the intensification of downtown retail and office uses. This FAR is also appropriate for Retail/Office areas located on the edge of the downtown area as city policy requires projects to be reviewed on an individual basis to ensure that the density of the proposed development will be compatible with the site, traffic patterns and surrounding uses. This application was considered by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on February 22, 2000 and was recommended for approval to the City Council. At a Public Hearing on March 7, 2000, the City Council indicated its intent to approve the General Plan Amendment at a later Public Hearing for the reasons stated under "project description" above. The City Council at the March 7, 2000 Public Hearing adopted a Resolution approving a Negative Declaration for the Corrie Center project because the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Sybase Planned Development Rezone The Dublin Zoning Ordinance establishes the intent, purpose and requirements of the Planned Development District and requires that a Development Plan be adopted to establish regulations for the use, development, improvement and maintenance of the property within the requested Planned Development Zoning District. A Development Plan has been prepared for the Sybase complex depicting development concept and addressing the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed Development Plan is attached and consists of: Exhibit A-1, the Planned Development provisions (including permitted and conditional uses and development regulations) and Exhibit A-2, the applicants proposed site, architectural, landscape and other plans. The approval of this Development Plan will complete the two-stage PD zoning process, in accordance with the City's Zoning Ordinance. Permitted uses and Development Regulations: The proposed uses and setbacks outlined in the Development Plan are consistent with the City's Zoning Ordinance. The Development Plan also specifies purpose and intent of the Plan, maximum site density, landscaping provisions and similar development requirements. Site Plan: The proposed site plan indicates that the two main office buildings would be located on the southeast portion of the lot, at oblique angles to the two main intersecting streets. Building A would be furthest to the west and Building B would be sited closest to Hacienda Drive. An open plaza would be created on the southeast corner of the site near the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive, which is discussed below. Surface parking would be arrayed around the building complex to the north and east. Parking, loading and service activities would occur to the rear of the buildings so that a major focal point would be created on this corner. 4 Each building would contain six stories and a maximum of 210,000 gross square feet. The total amount of gross square footage would therefore be 420,000. Each building is proposed to have a height of 85 feet to the top of the sixth floor, although a metal screen would be located on the top of the buildings to block views of mechanical equipment, elevator shafts and similar equipment. The top of the elevator machine rooms on each of the buildings would be approximately 100 feet above the finished grade. The two buildings would be linked with a pedeStrian bridge at the second floor Proposed Floor Area Ratio for the complex would be 0.67. Site coverage (building footprint) would be 11%. Architecture: Two almost-identical buildings would be constructed, each six stories and 100 feet in height (to the top of mechanical equipment). Building design would reflect a "high tech" theme, with use of precast concrete panels as a base and extensive use of windows in aluminum frames with accent metal panels. Stylized metal and glass canopies would be provided to emphasize the main entries. Roof- mounted equipment would be screened behind metal panels. Concrete panels would be two shades of gray and the window glass would be colored blue to slightly blue-green. Landscaping: Project landscaping would include placement of an urban park/plaza on the southeast comer of the site as well as perimeter landscaping around the site, landscaping within the parking lot and additional landscaping around the buildings. The plaza would encompass an area of approximately 1.4 acres and would feature an outdoor seating and eating area for Sybase employees, a fountain, plantings of specimen oak trees and other canopy trees. The ground plane would consist of a mix of turf and decorative hardscape elements. A low berm and hedge treatment is proposed along the two adjoining streets to highlight the plaza. An opportunity site is provided on the comer of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive for placement of a future public artwork, which is not included in this application. Parking andAccess: Three driveways into the site would be provided, one each on Dublin Boulevard, Central Parkway and Hacienda Drive. Traffic signals would be constructed at the intersections of project driveways and Central Parkway and Hacienda Drive. The intersection of the project drive and Dublin Boulevard would be limited to right-in and right-out turning movements. A total of 1,191 surface parking spaces would be provided, which would include compact and handicapped parking stalls as well as parking spaces for motorcycles. The Dublin Zoning Ordinance requires one parking space per 350 square feet of gross floor area. For the Sybase project, a total of 1,200 spaces would be needed. Therefore, the project would lack 9 spaces. To ensure that a parking problem would not be created, the Mitigated Negative Declaration contains a mitigation measure (Measure 8) that would require the project developer to prepare a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to reduce the number of single occupant vehicles using the site. The TDM Plan must be in place at the time as Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Pedestrian paths have been planned through the site to allow safe crossing of the parking lot. OTHER APPROVALS The Planning Commission at a public hearing on May 9, 2000 adopted a Resolution approving the Site Development Review and Tentative Parcel Map (subject to City Council approval of the Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment and Planned Development Rezoning). ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed General Plan/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment and Planned Development/Rezoning/Development Plan, and Development Agreement are within the Dublin General Plan Eastern Extended Planning Area and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, which was the subject of an Environmental Impact Report, certified by the City of Dublin in 1993 (EIR Addenda were approved on May 4, 1993 and August 22, 1994). The General Plan/Specific Plan is a Program EIR, which anticipated several subsequent actions, related to future development in Eastern Dublin. The EIR identified a number of impacts from implementation of the General Plan/Specific Plan that were not able to be mitigated. Upon certification of the EIR, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for several impacts, some of which relate to this project. The City also adopted a Mitigation Monitoring Program, 5 which included measures intended to reduce from development in eastern Dublin. These measures apply to project approvals and actions at various stages of the development process and will be applied to the project as applicable. The timing of these mitigation measures is indicated in the City's EIR mitigation monitoring matrix (City Council Resolution No. 53-93). An Initial Study was prepared for the Sybase project to determine if additional impacts would occur as a result of this project. The Initial Study identified several environmental issues, which caused the issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. A 30-day public review period commenced March 23 and ended April 24, 2000. A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared because the project, as mitigated, will not have a significant effect on the environment. Responses to comment letters are included in the agenda packet as Attachment 6. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan has been prepared as required by CEQA as Attachment 7. As a result of the review of the certified EIR and addenda, and the preparation of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, it has been determined that with the. implementation of Mitigation Measures previously adopted for the Program EIR and with site-specific Mitigation Measures contained in the Initial Study, potential site-specific impacts of the project would be reduced to a level of insignificance and the proposed Sybase project will not have a significant effect on the environment. CONCLUSIONS The project, as conditioned including the Planned Development Rezone / Development Plan is consistent with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan as amended and the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council open the Public Hearing, deliberate and adopt the following resolutions: 1. Adopt City Council Resolution (Attachment 1) approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration Adopt City Council Resolution (Attachment 2) approving an Amendment to the General Plan for the Corrie Center and Sybase projects and adopting an amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan for the Sybase project. o Waive reading and introduce the Ordinance (Attachment 3) amending the Dublin Zoning Ordinance to approve a Planned Development (PD) Rezone/Development Plan Stage 1 and 2 with Development Plan attached as Exhibits A-1 and A-2. Waive reading and introduce the Ordinance (Attachment 4) approving the Development Agreement. 5. Schedule the second reading of both Ordinances for the June 20, 2000 City Council meeting. 6 RESOLUTION NO. 00- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR PA 99-062, SYBASE CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS FACILITY WHEREAS, Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (ACSPA) has submitted a request to the City of Dublin to amend the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan and applications have also been filed with the City of Dublin to approve a PD- Planned Development Rezone and a Stage 1/Stage 2 Development Plan for the easterly 14.5 acres of the project site for the proposed Sybase Corporate Headquarters Project and a Development Agreement, and WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment application would: a) redesignate 19 gross acres (14.5 net acres) of Block 15 of the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority from "High Density Residential" to "Campus Office" to allow development of up to 420,000 square feet of gross floor area; b) reduce the amount of potential office development on Site 16 of the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority by 420,000 square feet. c) relocate 390 residential dwellings formerly assigned to Site 15 to Site 3; and WHEREAS, a Program Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan (SCH 911036040 and certified by the City Council on May 10, 1993, by Resolution No. 51-93, and two Addenda dated May 4, 1993 and August 22, 1994 have been prepared and adopted by the City Council and are herein incorporated by reference; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and implementing Guidelines, an Initial Study has been prepared to assess the impacts of the proposed project. Based on the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and recommended for adoption to the City Council. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is herein incorporated by reference. The Initial Study is on file in the Dublin Planning Department. The project, with mitigation measures incorporated into the project, will not have a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all other applications associated with the Sybase Headquarters Project, including the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, PD-Planned Development Rezoning, Site Development Review, Tentative Tract Map and Development Agreement on May 9, 2000; and WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared for this project as required by the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth. WHEREAS, the City Council did hold a public hearing on the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment request on June 6, 2000; and ATTACHMENT 1 WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as reqUired by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use their independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby find that proper environmental documentation has been prepared on the proposed Sybase project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has been reviewed and considered prior to action on this project. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Dublin hereby approves a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Sybase Headquarters Facility Complex. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2000. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk 2 RESOLUTION NO. 00- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR PA 99-010, CORRIE CENTER PHASE II OFFICE DEVELOPMENT TO INCREASE THE FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR RETAIL/OFFICE AND AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND EASTERN SPECIFIC PLAN FOR PA 99-062, SYBASE CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS FACILITY WHEREAS, Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (ACSPA), on behalf of the developer of the Sybase Corporate Headquarters Facility has submitted a request to the City of Dublin, PA 99-062, to amend the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan to: redesignate 19 gross acres (14.5 net acres) of Block 15 of the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority from "High Density Residential" to "Campus Office" to allow development of up to 420,000 square feet of gross floor area; b) reduce the amount of potential office development on Site 16 of the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority by 420,000 square feet. c) relocate 390 residential dwellings formerly assigned to Site 15 to Site 3; and WHEREAS, the extent of proposed amended land uses within the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority is shown on the attached table (Exhibit A-l) and map (Exhibit A-2); and WHEREAS, the Campus Office land use category permits corporate, business and research and development office uses; and WHEREAS, a complete application for this project is on file with the Dublin Planning Department, and WHEREAS, Sid Corrie of the Corrie Development Corporation (applicant/property owner) has requested approval of a General Plan Amendment to allow an increase in the maximum Floor Area Ratio from 0.50 to 0.60 for the "Retail/Office" land use category; and WHEREAS, a completed application for Corrie Development Corporation's requested General Plan Amendment is available and on file in the Dublin Planning Department; and WHEREAS, a Program Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan (SCH 911036040) and certified by the City Council on May 10, 1993~ by Resolution No. 51-93, and two Addenda dated May 4, 1993 and August 2.2, 1994 have been prepared and adopted by the City Council and are herein incorporated by reference; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and implementing Guidelines, an Initial Study has been prepared to assess the impacts of the proposed Sybase project. Based on the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and recommended for adoption to the City Council. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is herein incorporated by reference. The Initial Study is on file in the Dublin Planning Department. The project, with mitigation measures incorporated into the project, will not have a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and implementing Guidelines, an Initial Study has been prepared to assess the proposed Corrie Center project. Based on the ATTACHMENT 2 Initial Study, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and is on file with the Dublin Planning Department. The Initial Study/Negative Declaration was circulated for a 20-day public review period between February 1 through February 21, 2000 and was approved by the City Council on March 7, 2000. The project as proposed will not have a significant impact on the environment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on the Sybase application (PA 99- 062) regarding Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment request on May 9, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on the Corrie Center application (PA 99-010)regarding the Dublin General Plan on March 7, 2000; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearings were given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Dublin Commission does hereby find that: A. Proper environmental documentation has been prepared on the proposed Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment in accord with the California Environmental Quality Act and have been reviewed and considered prior to the City Council's action. B. The proposed Amendment to the General Plan for the Corrie Center Project is in the public interest and is consistent with the goals, policies, general provisions and purpose of the Dublin General Plan which contains policies which encourage the intensification of the Dublin Downtown Area through the development of mixed use pedestrian oriented development. C. The proposed Amendment to the General Plan for the Corrie Center Project is appropriate for the "Retail/Office" land use category because City policies require that a traffic study be prepared for all new development projects to evaluate the project's impacts to a level of insignificance; the City Site Development Review process will ensure that the proposed project has adequate parking, access and will be compatible with surrounding land uses, thereby ensuring that the density of future development will not overburden public services and would thereby complement surrounding development D. The proposed Amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan for the Sybase Project to allow "Campus Office" development provides adequate parking and site access and is compatible with surrounding land uses and will not overburden public services. E. The proposed change of land use designation for both the Corrie Center site and the Sybase site is consistent with all other goals, policies and implementing programs set forth in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the City of Dublin General Plan. F. The proposed Amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan are in the public interest and will not have a substantial adverse effect on health or safety or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or public improvement. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Dublin hereby approve an Amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan for the Sybase Corporate Headquarters Facility (PA 99-062) as follows: redesignate 19 gross acres (14.5 net acres) of Site 15, bounded by Dublin Boulevard, Hacienda Drive, Central Parkway and Arnold Drive (APN 986-0014-006), of the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority from "High Density Residential" to "Campus Office" to allow development of up to 420,000 gross square feet of gross floor area; b) reduce the amount of potential office development on Site 16 of the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority by 420,000 gross square feet. c) relocate 390 residential dwellings formerly assigned to Site 15 of the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority to Site 3 of the same ownership. as indicated on the attached Exhibits A-1 and A-2. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Dublin hereby approves an Amendment to the General Plan for the Corrie Center to increase the floor area to 0.60 for "Retail/Office" land use category for PA 99-010, Corrie Center Phase II Office Project, as follows: "Section 1.8.1 Land Use Classification, Commercial/Industrial, Retail/Office, FAR shall be changed to FAR: .25 to .60." PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2000. AYES: NOES: AB SENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: MAYOR City Clerk 3 ORDINANCE NO. - 00 ~7 ~/ /~..ff AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO REZONE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HACIENDA DRIVE AND DUBLIN BOULEVARD (APN 986-0014- 006) TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT AND ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PA 99-062 WHEREAS, the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (Property Owner) has requested approval of a Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment to change a portion of the land use designation for Site 15 from "High Density Residential" to "Campus Office," a Planned Development Rezone/Development Plan and Site Development Review to allow the construction of two six-story office buildings containing a total of 420,00 square feet surface parking and retailed improvements on 14.5 acres of land currently at the northwest comer of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive (APN 986-0014-006) within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has submitted a complete application for a Planned Development Rezone, including a Development Plan as required by Chapter 8.32 of Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code which meets the requirements of said Chapter; and WHEREAS, the site will be rezoned from Planned Development for "High Density Residential" to Planned Development for "Campus Office"; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and implementing Guidelines, an Initial Study has been prepared to assess the impacts of the proposed project. Based on the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and recommended for adoption to the City Council. The Initial Study is on file in the Dublin Planning Department. The project, with mitigation measures incorporated into the project, will not have a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a properly noticed public hearing on said applications on May 9, 2000, and did adopt Resolutions recommending that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration, related Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment and Planned Development Rezoning and Development Plan for PA 99-062; and WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on June 6, 2000; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the City Council approve the application; and WHEREAS, on June 6, 2000 the City Council adopted a Negative Declaration and approved a Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment for the project; and WHEREAS, on June 20, 2000 the City Council approved an Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment for the project. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.32.070 and 8.120.050 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council makes the following findings: The Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 & 2 are consistent with the general provisions, intent and purpose of the General Plan (as amended), in that the project would result in development with the land uses allowed by said designation and will contribute towards implementation of the General Plan; and ATTACHMENT 3 The Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 & 2 is consistent with the general provisions and purpose of the PD Zoning District of the Zoning ordinance. The Planned Development Rezone will be appropriate for the subject property in terms of setting forth the purpose, applicable provisions of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, range of permitted and conditional uses and Development Standards, which will be compatible with existing High Density and Campus Office land use designations. In the immediate vicinity; and Co The Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 & 2 is consistent with the general provisions, intent and purpose of the PD Zoning District of the Zoning Ordinance in that it contains all information required by Section 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance and accomplishes the objectives of Section 8.32.010, A through H, of the Zoning Ordinance; and The Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 & 2 will not have a substantial adverse effect on health, safety or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or public improvement, as all applicable regulations will be met; and The Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 & 2 will not overburden public services or facilities as all agencies must commit to the availability of public services prior to the issuance of any building permit, as required by City laws and regulations; and The Planned Development Stage 1 & 2 will be consistent with the policies of Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan; and Go The Planned Development Stage 1 & 2 will create an attractive, efficient and safe environment through development standards contained in the Development Plan; and Ho The Planned Development Stage 1 & 2 will benefit the public necessity, convenience and general welfare; and The Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 & 2 will be compatible with and enhance the general development of the area because it will be developed pursuant to a comprehensive Development Plan. WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use their independent judgment and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, the Dublin City Council does ordain as follows: Section 1: Pursuant to Chapter 8.32, Title 8 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code the City of Dublin Zoning Map is amended to rezone the following property ("the Property") to a Planned Development Zoning District: Approximately 14.5 acres of land generally located at the northwest comer of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard; more specifically described as Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 986-0014- 006. 2 A map of the rezoning area is shown below: 'VICINITY MAP r GLEASON DRIVE CENTRAL _J ! SITEj 58O z DUBLIN BOULEVARD FREEWAY T SECTION 2. The regulations of the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the Property are set forth in the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans (Exhibits A1 and A-2, hereto) which are hereby approved. Any amendments to the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans shall be in accordance with section 8.32.080 of the Dublin Municipal Code or its successors. SECTION 3. Except as provided in the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans, the use, development, improvement and maintenance of the Property shall be governed by the provisions of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thir{y (30) days from and after the date of its passage. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this 2000, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: __th day of Mayor City Clerk /? Approved as to form: City Attorney DEVELOPMENT PLAN This is a Development Plan pursuant to Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance for the Sybase Corporate Headquarters project, located on the northwest corner of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive; (APN 986-0014-006). This Development Plan meets all of the requirements for Stage 1 and Stage 2 review of the project. This Development Plan is also represented by the Site, Landscape, Architectural (floor and elevations) Plans and Tentative Parcel Map, sheets dated received March 17, 2000, labeled Exhibit A-2 to the Ordinance approving this Development Plan (City Council Ordinance No. O0 - ), and on file in the Planning Department. The Planned Development District allows the flexibility needed to encourage innovative development while ensuring that the goals, policies, and action programs of the General Plan, Downtown Dublin Specific Plan, and provisions of Section 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance are satisfied. 1. Permitted Use. The following uses are permitted within this PD-Planned Development District. mo B. C. D. Corporate, professional, technical and administrative offices. Research and Development laboratories and offices. Storage and sale of material produced on the site, limited to 25% of floor area. Accessory and incidental amenity Uses to offices, including but not limited to employee cafeterias, employee fitness centers, day care centers, employee training facilities. Temporary construction trailers and ancillary construction facilities Conditional Uses. The following uses are conditionally permitted within this PD- Planned Development District. e J Uo Light manufacturing and processing that produces no noxious odors, hazardous materials or excessive noise. Broadcasting stations or studios, excluding sending and receiving towers. Cellular and wireless communication facilities, minor. Community, religious and charitable institutional facilities (excluding business offices). In-patient and out-patient health facilities, licensed by the State Department of Health Services. Public facilities and uses (excluding offices). Retail commercial establishments to serve site users. Eating and drinking establishments (excluding employee-serving facilities). Dublin Zoning Ordinance-Applicable Requirements: Except as specifically modified by the provisions of this PD District Rezone/Development Plan, all applicable general requirements and procedures of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance shall be applied to the land uses designated in this PD District Rezone. Site Plan & Architecture: See attached site and elevation plans contained in Exhibit A- 2, Development Plan. This Development Plan applies to an approximately 14.5 acre site shown on this plan on the northwest comer of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area. Any modifications to the project shall be substantially consistent with these plans and of equal or superior materials and design quality. EXHIBIT A-1 of ATTACHMENT 3 Density: The maximum square footage of the proposed development under this Development Plan (as shown on the site plan) is as follows: 14.5 acres, 420,000 square feet total building area in two buildings of approximately 210,000 square feet each. Phasing Plan. The project will be constructed in one phase. Landscaping Plan. Refer to attached landscaping plan included in Exhibit A-2, Development Plan, Sheets SL 1-3. Development Standards Lot Size: One acre. Front, Rear, and Side Yard Setbacks: mo Along Dublin Blvd.: 30 feet Along Hacienda Drive: 25 feet Along Central Pkwy: 30 feet Between buildings: 40 feet (bridges may be constructed between buildings) Building Height: Six stories or 100 feet. Floor Area Ratio: The FAR within this district shall not exceed 0.67. Landscaping and Open Space requirements: A minimum of 20% of the gross site area shall be provided in landscaped/hardscaped open space. Open space shall include landscaping in entries, plazas/courtyards, parking areas, front and side yard setbacks and other similar areas, wherein 8% shall be in parking areas. b. Landscaped planter strips shall be: (1) At least 20 feet wide between parking lots and the curb line along a public right-of-way. This may be reduced for turn lanes, bus turn outs and similar encroachments. (2) At least 10 feet wide along interior property lines. (3) At least 10 feet wide between parking areas and building walls, loading and unloading areas and truck parking areas. (4) Landscaping planter strips between parking areas and property lines adjacent to a public right-of-way shall include a berm at lease three feet in height or with a slope not to exceed a ratio of 2:l to substantially screen the view of parked vehicles from the street. The berm shall be designed and located to allow for adequate visibility for motorists exiting the site. Alternatively, parked vehicles may be screened from adjoining streets with low-growing evergreen hedges. G:\pa99010\devplan e 10. (5) At entries, sidewalks shall be incorporated into the landscaped planter strip. A minimum of 4 feet clear width shall be maintained for all sidewalks. (6) Where a landscaped planter strip is adjacent to building window walls or pedestrian rights-of-way, landscaping shall be provided that screens views of automobiles. In this location, the use of a berm is desirable A minimum of one parking lot tree shall be planted for an average of every four parking spaces. Trees shall be distributed throughout the parking areas, shall be of a variety that offers a substantial shade canopy when mature and shall be a minimum 15-gallon size when planted. Tree planters shall have a standard 6-inch curb on all sides and shall have good surface drainage. Trees shall be planted as part of the construction phase of the parking lot. Diagonal tree well squares used between rows of parking shall measure a minimum of 4.5 feet by 4.5 feet for each outside edge, or 6 feet on both diagonals. d. Parking areas shall contain landscaped islands with a minimum dimension of 5 feet by 5 feet, excluding curb. e. Compliance with related Planning Approvals: The Applicant/Developer shall comply with all the related Site Development Review conditions of approval for PA 99-062. Signs: Compliance with Master Sign Plan, as approved by City of Dublin Community Development Director Lighting: Compliance with Master Lighting Plan, as approved by City of Dublin Community Development Director and Police Services G:\pa99010\devplan ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN, WILCOX DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (PA 99-062), and ALAMEDA COUNTY SURPLUS PROPERTY AUTHORITY FOR THE SYBASE CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS FACILITY PROJECT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: RECITALS A. The proposed Sybase Corporate Headquarters project (PA 99-062) is located within the boundaries of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan ("Specific Plan") in an area which is designated on the General Plan Land Use Element and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Land Use Map as High Density Residential. An application has been filed to change the eastern 19-acres of Site 15 of the Santa Rita Properties to "Campus Office" (CO). B. This project is within the scope ofthe Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan, for which a Program EIR was certified (SCH 91103064). A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the Sybase Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment. That Mitigated Negative Declaration together with the Program EIR adequately describes the total project for the purposes of CEQA. The analysis indicated that no new effects could occur and no new mitigation measures are required for the Sybase Headquarters project that were not addressed in the FEIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration. Further, that analysis found that the project is in conformity with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan. C. Implementing actions of the Specific Plan, including Chapter 11 thereof, require that all projects within the Specific Plan area enter into development agreements with the City. D. Wilcox Development Services has filed an application requesting approval of a development agreement for the Sybase Corporate Headquarters project. E. A Development Agreement between the City of Dublin, Wilcox Development Services and the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority has been presented to the City Council, a copy of which is attached to the staff report as Attachment 5. F. A public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement was held before the Planning Commission on May 9, 2000, for which public notice was given as provided by law. Go Agreement. The Planning Commission has made its recommendation for approval of the Development H. A public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement was held before the City Council on June 6, 2000, for which public notice was given as provided by law. J. The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission at the June 6, 2000 meeting, including the Planning Commission's reasons for its recommendation, the Agenda Statement, all comments received in writing and all testimony received at the public hearing. ATTACHMENT 4 Section 2 FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS Therefore, on the basis of (a) the foregoing Recitals which are incorporated herein, (b) the City of Dublin's General Plan, (c) the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, (d) the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, (e) the EIR, (f) the Agenda Statement, and on the basis of specific conclusions set forth below, the City Council finds and determines that: 1. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general plan uses and programs specified and contained in the Cityrs General Plan, as amended by the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment, and in the Specific Plan in that (a) the General Plan and Specific Plan land use for the site is currently High Density Residential, but a request has been submitted to the City of Dublin to change the land use designation to Campus Office (CO) to allow development of the Sybase Corporate Headquarters Facility complex. The proposed project is consistent with the amended land use designation of Campus Office, (b) the project is consistent with the fiscal policies of the General Plan and Specific Plan with respect to provision of infrastructure and public services, and (c) the Development Agreement includes provisions relating to financing, construction and maintenance of public, facilities and similar provisions set forth in the Specific Plan. 2. The Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the real property is located in that project approvals include an Amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan, a Planned Development Rezoning/Stage 1 & 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, and Parcel Map adopted specifically for the Sybase project. 3. The Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use policies in that the Sybase project will implement land use guidelines set forth in the Specific Plan and General Plan. 4. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare in that the project will proceed in accordance with all the program and policies of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. 5. The Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values in that the project will be consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plan, as amended. Section 3: APPROVAL The City Council hereby approved the Development Agreement (Attachment 5 to the Staff Report) and authorizes the Mayor to sign it. Section 4: RECORDATION Within ten (10) days after the Development Agreement is executed by the Mayor, the City Clerk shall submit the Agreement to the County Recorder for recordation. Section 5: EFFECTIVE DATE AND POSTING OF ORDINANCE This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause the Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of Dublin, on this AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: day of __ ,2000. ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk City of Dublin When Recorded Mail To: City Clerk City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Space above this line for Recorder's Use DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND WSD - DUBLIN, LLC AND THE SD-R_PLUS PROPERTY AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA FOR THE SYBASE PROJECT ATTACHMENT TABLE OF.CONTENTS o Description of ProperW. ................................................... 2 Interest of'Develor~er ...................................................... 2 Relationship of CITY. COUNTY and DEVELOPER ............................ 2 Effective Date and Term .................................................... 3 4.1 Effective Date ..................................................... 3 4.2 Term ............................................................ 3 4.3 Termination Upon Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy ............. 3 Use of the Pror~ertw ....................................................... 3 5.1 R_iaht to Develop .................................................. 3 5.2 Permitted Uses ...................................................... 3 5.3 Additional Conditions .............................................. 3 Applicable Rules. Re~onlations and Official Policies .................... :- ......... 4 6.1 Rules re Permitted Uses ............................................. 4 6.2 Rules re Desima and Construction ..................................... 4 6.3 Uniform Codes Armticable .......................................... 5 Subseouenttv Enacted Rules and Re~o-ulations .................................. 5 7.1 New Rules and Re_o-alations ................................... - .......5 7.2 Armroval of A~r~lication ............................................ 5 7.3 Moratorium Not Ar~r~licable .......................................... 5 Subseouentlv Enacted or Revised Fees. Assessments and Taxes ................... 5 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 Fees. Exactions. Dedications ............................. .' ........... 5 Revised Armlication Fees ........................................... 6 New Taxes ........................................................ 6 Assessments ...................................................... 6 Vote on Future Assessments and Fees .................................. 6 Amendment or Cancellation ............................................... 6 9.1 Modification Because of Conflict with State or Federal Laws ............... 6 9.2 Amendment by Mutual Consent ...................................... 6 9.3 Insubstantial Amendments ........................................... 6 '9.4 Amendment of Proiect Ar)provals ..................................... 7 9.5 Cancellation bv Mutual Consent ...................................... 7 Dub [in/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project Table of Contents - Page i of iii May 15, 2000 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 1.5. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Term of Proiect Approvals ................................................. 7 Annual Review .......................................................... 7 11.1 Review Date ...................................................... 7 11.2 Initiation of Review ................................................. 7 11.3 Staff Reports ..................................................... 8 11.4 Costs .... ~ ....................................................... 8 Default ................................................................ 8 12.1 Other Remedies Available ........................................... 8 12.2 Notice and Cure ................................................... 8 12.3 No Damages Against CITY ...................... - .................... 8 Estor~r~el Certificate ...................................................... 8 Mortc~agee Protection: Certain Rights of Cure .................................. 9 14.1 Mortgagee Protection ................. ,.~... ........................... 9 14.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated ........................................... 9 14.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee and Extension of Right to Cure ............. 9 Severabilitv '- 9 Attorneys' Fees and Costs ................................................. 9 Transfers and Assignments ............................................... 10 17.1 DEVELOPER's Right to Assign ..................................... t 0 17.2 Release Ur~on Transfer ................................. ' 10 17.3 Developer's Riuht to Retain Sr~ecified Rights or Obligations ............... 10 A~eement Runs with the Land ............................................ 11 Bankruotcv ' . .......... 11 Indemnification ........................................................ 11 Insurance .. .............................. -: ............................. 12 21.1 Public Liability and Prooertv Dama~oe Insurance ........................ 12 21.2 Workers Comr~ensation Insurance .................................... 12 21.3 Evidence of Insurance .............................................. 12 Sewer and Water ....................................................... 12 Notices ............................................................... 13 Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project Table of Contents - Page ii of iii May 15, 2000 25. 26. 27. 28. Aareement is Entire Understanding, ......................................... 14 Exhibits .............................................................. 14 Counterparts ........................................................... I4 Recordation ........................................................... t4 Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project Table of Contents- Page iii of iii May 15, 2000 THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT is made and entered in the City of Dublin on this __ day of ,2000, by and between the CITY OF DUBLIN, a Municipal Corporation (hereafter "CITY"), WDS - Dublin, LLC, a limited liability company (hereafter "DEVELOPER") and the Surplus Property Authority of Alameda County, a public corporation (hereafter "COUNTY") pursuant to the authority of §§ 65864 et seq. of the California Government Code and Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter 8.56. RECITALS A. California Government Code §§ 65864 et seq. and Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code (hereafter "Chapter 8.56") authorize the CITY to enter into an A~eement :[or the development of real property with any person having a legal or equitable interest in such property in order to establish certain development rights in such property; and B. The City Council adopted the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan by Resoluti on No. 53-93 which Plan is applicable to the Property; and C. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan requires DEVELOPER to enter into a development a~eement; and D. DEVELOPER desires to develop and holds legal interest in certain real property consisting of approximately 14.5 acres of land, located in the City of Dublin, County of Alameda, State of California, which is more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and which real property is hereafter called the "Property"; and E. DEVELOPER acquire& or will acquire, its interest in the Propert? from COUNTY pursuant to a purchase and sale a~._m-eement which allocates rights and obligations as between COUNTY and DEVELOPER. COUNTY is a party to this A~eement because COUNTY will dedicate certain land, construct certain improvements and receive certain credits; F. DEVELOPER proposes the development, of the Property for a corporate center, including two office buildings (the "Project"); and G. DEVELOPER has applied for, and CITY has approved or is processing, various land use approvals in connection v, dth the development of the Project, including a general plan amendment (Resolution No. __), a Specific Plan Amendment (Resolution No. __), PD District rezoning (including Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan) (Ordinance No. __), parcel map (Planning Commission Resolution No. 00-23) and Site Development Review (Resolution No. 00-23), (collectively, together with any approvals or permits now or hereafter issued with respect to the Project, the "Project Approvals"); and H. Development of the Property by DEVELOPER may be subject to certain future discretionary approvals, which, if ~tn-anted, shall automatically become part of the Project Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project Page I of 15 May 15, 2000 Approvals as each such approval becomes effective; and Project; and CITY desires the timely, efficient, orderly and proper development of said J. The City Council has found that, among other things, this Development Agreement is consistent with its General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and has been reviewed and evaluated in accordance w/th Chapter 8.56; and K. CITY, COUNTY. and DEVELOPER have reached agreement and desire to express herein a Development Agreement that will facilitate development of the Project subject to conditions set forth herein; and L. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the City has - found, pursuant toCEQA Guidelines section 15182, that the Project is within the scope of the Fir~al Environmental. Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan which was certified by the Council by Resolution No. 51-93 and the Addenda dated May 4, 1993, and August 22, .1994 (the "EIR") and found that the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Proje.ct is adequate for this Agreement; and No. M. On .... 2000, the City Counc!l of the City of Dublin adopted Ordinance approving this Development Agreement. The ordinance took effect on.. . , 2000. NOW, THEREFORE, with reference to the foregoing recitals and in consideration of the mutual promises, obligations and covenants herein contained, CITY, COUNTY and DEVELOPER agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Descrir~tion of Pror)errv. The Property which is the subject of this Development Agreement is described in Exhibit A attached hereto ("Property"). o Interest of Developer.. The DEVELOPER has a legal or equitable interest in the Property. 3. Relationshi~ of CITY. COUNTY and DEVELOPER. It is understood that this Agreement is a contract that has been negotiated and voluntarily entered_into by CITY, coUNTy and DEVELOPER ..a,nd that ~neither the DEVELOPER nor COUNTY is an agent of CITY. The CITY, COUNTY and DEVELOPER hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement ~ Sybase Project Page 2 of 15 May 15, 2000 agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed .as making the CITY, COUNTY and DEVELOPER joint venturers or parmers. 4. Effective Date and Term. 4.1 Effective Date. The effective date of this Agreement shall be the date upon which this Agreement is signed by CITY. 4.2 Term. The term of this Development Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and extend five (5) years thereafter, unless said term is otherwise terminated or modified by circumstances set forth in this Agreement. 4.3 Termination Upon Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. Upon issuance of the final certificate of Occupancy for the Project, this Development Agreement shall terminate with respect to DEVELOPER only. The agreement shall continue in effect with respect to the COUNTY until terminated pursuant to Section 4.2. 5. Use of the Pror)ertw. 5.1 Right to Develop. DEVELOPER shall have the vested right to develop the Project on the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Project Approvals (as and when issued), and any amendments to any of them as shall, from time to time, be approved pursuant to this Agreement. 5.2 Permitted Uses. The permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height, bulk and size of proposed buildings, provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and location and maintenance of on-site and off-site improvements, location of public utilities (operated by CITY) and other'terms arid conditions of development applicable to the Property, shall be those set forth in this Agreement, the Project Approvals and any amendments to this Agreement or the Project ApProvals. 5.3 Additional Conditions. Provisions for the following ("Additional Conditions") are set forth in Exh/bit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 5.3.1 Subseouent Discretionary Ar)r)rovals. Conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions. (Th. ese condition's do not affect DEVELOPERts responsibility to obtain all other land use approvals required by the ordinances of the City of Dublin and any permits required by regulatory agencies.) Not Applicable 5.3.2 Mitigation Conditions. Additional or modified Conditions a~eed upon by the parties in order to eliminate or mitigate adverse environmental impacts of the Project or otherwise relating to development of the Project. Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authoriw Development Agreement - Sybase Project Page 3 of 15 May 15, 2000 See Exhibit B 5.3.3 Phasing, Timing. Provisions that the Project be constructed in specified phases, that construction shall commence within a specified time, and that the Project or any phase thereof be completed within a specified time. See Exhibit B 5.3.4 Financin~ Plan. Financial plans which identify necessary capital improvements such as streets and utilities and sources of funding. . See Exhibit B 5.3.5 Fees. Dedications. or dedication of property. See Exhibit B Terms relating to payment of fees 5.3.6' Reimbursement. Terms relating to subsequent reimbursement over time for financing of necessary public facilities. See Exhibit B 5.3.7 Miscellaneous. Miscellaneous terms. See Exhibit B 6. A~mlicable Rules. RemJtations and Official Policies. 6.1 Rules re Permitted Uses. For the term of this Agreement, the Ci¢"s ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted uses of the Property, goverrfing.density and intensity of use of the Property and the maximum height, bulk and size of proposed buildings shall be those in force and effect on the effective date of this Agreement. 6.2 Rules re Desima and Construction. Unless otherwise expressly provided in Paragraph 5 of this Agreement, the ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and ofr~icial policies governing desig-n, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the Project shall be those in force and effect at the time of the applicable discretionary Project Approval. In the event of a conflict between such ordinances, resolutions, rules, re?21ations and official policies and the Project Approvals, the Project Approvals shall prevail. Ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to public -improvements to be constructed b~ Developer shall be those in force and effect at the time of the applicable permit approval for the public improvement. Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project Page 4 of 15 May 15, 2000 6.3 Uniform Codes Applicable. Unless expressly provided in Paragraph 5 ofth/s Agreement, the Project shall be constructed in accordance w/th the provisions of the Uniform Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical and Fire Codes and Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, relating t°. Building Standards, in effect at the time of approval of the appropriate building, grading, or other construction permits for the Project. 7. Subsequently Enacted Rules and Reeulations. 7.1 New Rules and Reeulations. During the term of this Agreement, the CITY may apply new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies of the CITY to the Property which were not in force and effect on the effective date of this A~eement and which are not in conflict with those applicable to the Property as set forth in this A~eement and the Project Approvals if: (a) the application of such new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies would not prevent, impose a substantial £mancial burden on, or materially delay development of the Property as contemplated by this Agreement and the Project Approvals and (b) if such ordinancei, resolutibns,.rules, regulations or official policies have general applicability. 7.2 Approval of Application. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent the CITY from denying or conditionally approving any subsequent land use permit or authorization for the Project on the basis of such new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and policies except~ that such subsequent actions shall be subject to any conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements expressly set forth herein. 7.3 Moratorium Not Applicable. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in the event an ordinande, resolution or other measure is enacted, whether by action of CITY, by initiative, referendum, or otherwise, that imposes a build_trig moratorium which affects the Project on all or any part of the Property, CITY a~ees that such ordinance, resolution or other measure shall not apply to the Project, the Property, this Agreement or the Project Approvals unless the building moratorium is imposed as part of a declaration cfa local emergency or state of emergency as defined in Government Code § 8558. 8. Subseouentlv Enacted or Revised Fees. Assessments and Taxes. 8.1 Fees. Exactions. Dedications. CITY and DEVELOPER a~ee that the fees payable and exactions required in connection with the development of the Project Approvals for purposes of mitigating environmental and other impacts of the Project, providing infrastructure for the Project and complying with the Specific Plan shall be those set forth in the Project Approvals and in this A~eement (including Exhibit B). The CITY shall not impose or require payment of any other fees, dedications of land, or construction of any public improvement or facilities, shall not increase or accelerate existing fees, dedications of land or construction 0fpublic improvements, in connection with any subsequent discretionary approval for the Property, except as set forth in the project Approvals and this A~eement (including Exhibit B, . subparagraph 5.3.5). Dublin/WSD-DnblJn LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project Page 5 of 15 May 15, 2000 8.2 Revised Application Fees. Any existing application, processing and inspection fees that are revised during the term of this Agreement shall apply to the Project provided that (1) such fees have general applicability; (2) the application of such fees to the Property is prospective; and (3) the application of such fees would not prevent development in accordance with this Agreement. By so agreeing, DEVELOPER does not waive its rights to challenge the legality of any such application, processing and/or inspection fees. 8.3 New Taxes. Any subsequently enacted city-wide taxes shall apply to the Project provided that: (I) the application of such taxes to the Property is prospective; and (2) the application of such taxes would not prevent development in accordance with this Agreement. By so a~eeing. DEVELOPER does not waive its rights to challenge the legality of any such taxes. 8.4 Assessments. Nothing herein shall be construed to relieve the Property from assessments levied .against it by CITY pursuant to any statutory procedure for the assessment of property to pay for infrastructure and/or services which benefit the Property. 8.5 Vote on Future Assessments and Fees'. In the event that any assessment, fee or charge which is applicable to the Property is subject to Article XIIID of the Constitution and DEVELOPER does not return its ballot, DEVELOPER a~ees, on Behalf of itself and its successors, that CITY may count DEVELOPER's ballot as affirmatively 'voting in favor of such assessment, fee 'or charge. 9. Amendment or Cancellation. 9.1 Modification Because of Conflict with State or Federal Laws. In the"event that state or federal laws or regulations enacted after the eft%ctive date 0fthis Ageement prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement or require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by the CITY, the parties shall meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this A~eement to comply with such federal or state law or regulation. Any such amendment or suspension of the Agreement shall be approved by the City Council in accordance with Chapter 8.56. 9.2 Amendment bv Mutual Consent. This Agreement may be amended in writing from time to time by mutual consent of the parties hereto and in accordance with the procedures of State law and Chapter 8.56. 9.3 Insubstantial Amendments. Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding section 9.2, any amendments to this Agreement which do not relate to (a)the term of the A~eement as provided in section 4.2; (b) the permitted uses of the Property as provided in secti on 5.2; (c) provisions for_ "siguificant" reservation or dedication of land as provided in Exhibit B; (d) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent discretionary actions; (e) the density or intensity of use of the Project; (f) the maximum height or size of Dublin/WSD-Dubtin LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project Page 6 of 15 May 15, 2000 proposed buildings; or (g) monetary contributions by DEVELOPER as provided in this A~eement, shall not, eXCept to the extent otherwise required by.law, require notice or public hearing before either the PI~nning Commission or the City Council before the parties may execute an amendment hereto. 'CITY's Public Works Director shall determine whether a reservation or dedication is "significant". 9.4 Amendment of Project Approvals. Any amendment of Project Approvals relating to: (a) the permitted use of the Property; (b) provision for reservation or dedication of land; (c) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent discretionary actions; (d) the density or intensity of use of the Project; (e) the maximum height or size of proposed buildings; (f) mone .ta:ry contributions by the DEVELOPER; or (g) public improvements to be constructed by DEVELOPER shall require an amendment of this Agreement. Such amendment shall be limited to those provisions of this Agreement which are implicated by the amendment of the Project Approval. Any other amendment of the Project Approval.s, or any of them, shall n~)t require amendment of this A~eement unless the amendment of the Project Approval(s) relates specifically to some provision of this Agreement. 9.5 Cancellation by Mutual Consent. Except as otherwise permitted herein, this Agreement may be canceled in whole or in part only by the mutual consent of the parties or their successors in interest, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 8.56. Any fees paid pursuant to Paragraph 5.3 and Exhibit B of this Agreement prior to the dat~: of cancellation shall be retained by CITY. - 10. Term of Project Approvals. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66452.6(a), the renu of the parcel map described in Recital G above shall automatically be extended for the term of this - A~eement. The term of any other Project Approval shall be extended only if so p~;ovid~d in Exhibit B. 1 t. Annual Review. I 1.1 Review Date. The annual review date for this Agreement shall be August 15, 2001 and each Aug'ust 15 thereafter. 11.2 Initiation of Review. The CITY's Community Development Director shall initiate the annual review, as required under Section 8.56.140 of Chapter 8.56, by giving to DEVELOPER thirty (30) days' written notice that the CITY intends to undertake such review. DEVELOPER shall provide evidence to the Community Development Director prior to the hearing on the annual review, as and when reasonably determined-necessary by the Community Development Director, to demonstrate good faith compliance with the provisions of the Development Agreement. The burden of proof by substantial evidence of compliance is upon the DEVELOPER. Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project Page 7 of 15 May 15, 2000 11.3 StaffReDorts. To the extent practical, CITY shall deposit in the mail and fax to DEVELOPER a copy of all staffreports; and related exhibits concerning contract performance at least five (5) days prior to any annual review. 11.4 Costs. Costs reasonably incurred by CITY in connection with the annual review shall be paid by DEVELOPER in accordance with the City's schedule of fees in effect at the time of review. 12. Default. 12..I Other Remedies Available. Upon the occurrence of an event of default, the parties may pursue all other remedies at law or in equity which are not othe~se provided for in this Agreement or in City's regulations governing development agreements, expressly including the remedy of specific performance of this Agreement. 12.2 Notice and Cure. Upon the occurrence of an event of default by any party, the nondefaulting party shall serve written notice of such default upon the defaulting party. If the default is not cured by the defaulting party within thirty (30) days after service of such notice of default, the nondefaulting party may then commence any legal or equitable action to enforce its rights under this Agreement; provided, however, that if the default cannot be cured within such thirty (30) day period, the nondefaulting party shall refrain from any such legal or equitable action so long as the defaulting party begins to cure such default with.in such thirty (30) da>, period and diligently pursues su~ch cure to completion. Failure to give notice shall not constitute a waiver of any default.. An event of default by COUNTY or DEVELOPER shall not be deemed a default by the other party. 12.3 No Damaees Aeainst CITY. In'no event shall damages be awarded against CITY upon an event of default or upon termination of this Agreement. 13. Estor)oel Certificate. Any l~arty may, at any time, and from time to time, request written notice from the other party requesting such party to certify in writing that, (a) this Agreement is in full- force and effect and a binding obligation of the parties, (~) this A~eement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments, and (c) to the 'knowledge of the certifying party the requesting party is not in default in the performance of its obligatiohs under this Agreement, or if in default, to describe therein the nature and amount of any such defaults. A party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate v~Sthin thirty (30) days following the receipt thereof, or such longer period as may reasonably be agreed to by the parties. City Manager of City shall be authorized to execute any certificate requested by DEVELOPER or COUNTY. Should the party receiving the request not execute and return such certificate within the applicable period, this shall not be deemed to be a default, provided that such party shall be deemed to have certified that the statements in clauses (a) through (c) of this section are tree, and any party may rely on such deemed certification. Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authori _ty Development Agreement - Sybase Project Page 8 of 15 May 15, 2000 14. Mortgagee Protection: Certain Rights of Cure. 14.1 Mortgagee ProtectiOn. This Agreement shall be superior and senior to any lien placed upon the Property, or any portion thereof after the date of recording this Agreement, including the lien for any deed ofh'ust or mortgage ("Mortgage"). Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach hereof shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, but all the terms and conditions contained in this A~eement shall be binding upon and effective against any person or entity, including any deed of trust beneficiary or mortgagee ("Mortgagee") who acquires title to the Property, or any portion thereof, by foreclosure, tmstee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise. 14.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 14.1 above, no Mortgagee shall have any obligation or duty under this Agreement, before or after foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, to construct or complete the construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction of irriProvements, or to guarantee such construction or completion, or to pay, perform or provide any fee, d~dication, improvements or other exaction or imposition; provided, hoRever, that a Mortgagee shall not be entitled to devote the Property to any uses or to construct any improvements thereon other than those' uses or improvements provided for or authorized by the Project Approvals or by this A~eement. 14.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee and Extension of Right to Cure. If CITY receives notice from a Mortgagee requestifig a copy of any notice of default given DE\rELOPER hereunder and specifying the address for service thereof, then CITY shall deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with service thereon to DEVELOPER, any notice given to DEVELOPER with respect to any claim by CITY that DEVELOPER has committed an event of default. Each Mortgagee shall have the right during the same period available to DEVELOPER m cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy, the event of default claimed set forth in the CITY's notice. CITY, through, it~ City Manager, may extend the thirty-day cure period provided in section 12.2 for not more than an additional sixty (60) days upon request r)fDEVELOPER or a Mortgagee. 15. SeverabiliW. The unenforceability, invalidity or illegality of any provisions, covenant, - condition or term of this A~eement shall not render the other provisions unenforceable, invalid or illegal. 16. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If CITY, COUNTY or DEVELOPER initiates any action at law or in equity to enforce or interpret the terms and conditions of this A~eement, the prevailingparty shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and costs in addition to aq.y other relief to which it may otherwise be entitled. If any person or entity not a party to this Agreement initiates an Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority Devetopm ent Agreement ~ Sybase Project Page 9 of 15 May 15, 2000 action at law or in equity to challenge the validity of any provision of this Agreement or the Project Approvals, the parties shall cooperate and appear in defending such action. DEVELOPER and COUNTY shall jointly bear their own costs of defense as a real party in interest in any such action, and DEVELOPER and COLrNTY shall reimburse CITY on an equal basis for all reasonable court costs and attorneys' fees expended by CITY in defense of any such action or other proceeding unless the action is based on an obligation of either COUNTY or DEVELOPER in which case that party shall be wholly obligated to reimburse CITY. 17. Transfers and Assimunents. 17.1 DEVELOPER's Right to Assian. Ail of DEVELOPER'S fights, interests and obligations hereunder may be transferred, sold or assigned in conjunction with the transfer, sale, or assig-nrnent of all of the Property subject hereto at any time during the term of this A~eement, provided that no Wansfer, sale or assignment of DEVELOPER's rights, interests and obligations hereunder shall occur without the prior ,aa-it-ten notice to CITY and approval by the City Manager, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. The City Manager shall consider and decide the matter within 10 working days after DEVELOPER's notice provided and receipt by City Manager of all necessary documents, certifications and other information required by City Manager to decide the matter. The City Manager's approval shall be for the purposes of: a) providing notice to CITY; b) assuring that all obligations of DE v'ELOPER are allocated as between DEVELOPER and the proposed purchaser, transferee or assiguee; and c) assuring CITY that the proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee is capable of performing the DEVELOPER's obligations hereunder not withheld by DEVELOPER pursuant to section 17.3. Notwithstanding the foregoing, provided notice is given as specified in Section 23, no CITY approval shall be required for any transfer, sale, or assignrnent of this A~eement to: 1) Sybase Inc.; 2).any entity which is an affiliate or subsidiary of DEVELOPER; 3) any Mortgagee; or 4) any transferee of a Mortgagee. 17.2 Release U~)on Transfer. Upon the transfer, sale, or assignment of all of DEVELOPER's rights, interests and obligations hereunder pursuant to section 17.1 of this A~eement, DEVELOPER shall be released from the obligations under this Agreement, with respec~ to the Property. transferred, sold, or assigned, arising subsequent to the date of City Manager approval of such transfer, sale, or assignment; provided, however, that if any transferee, purchaser, or asSignee approved by the City Manager expressly assumes all of the rights, interests and obligations of DEVELOPER under this Agreement, DEVELOPER shall be released with respect to all such rights, interests and assumed obligations. In any event, the transferee, purchaser, or assig-nee shall be subject to ail the provisions hereof and shalI provide all necessary documents, certifications and other necessary information prior to City Manager approval. 17.3 Develor)er's Right to Retain Sr)ecified Ri~,hts or Obligations. Notwithstanding sections 17.1 and 17.2 and section 18, DEVELOPER may withhold from a sale, transfer or assigrument of this A~eernent certain rights, interests and/or obligations which DEVELOPER shall retain, provided that DEVELOPER specifies such rights, interests and/or obligations in a written document to be appended to this Agreement and recorded with the Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project Page 10 of 15 May 15. 2000 Alameda County Recorder prior to the sale, transfer or assignment of the Property. DEVELOPER's purchaser, transferee or assignee shall then have no interest or obligations for such rights, interests and obligations and this Agreement shall remain applicable to DEVELOPER with respect to such retained rights, interests and/or obligations. 18. Aereement Runs with the Land. All of the provisions, rights, terms, covenants, and obligations contained in this Ageement shall be binding upon the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assignees, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Property, or any portion thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All of the provisions of this A~eement shall be enforceable as equitable servitude and shall constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable laws, including, but not limited to, Section 1468 of the Civil Code of the State of California. Each covenant to do, or refrain from doing, some act on the Property hereUnder, or with respect to any owned property, (a) is for the benefit of such properties and is a burden upon such properties, Co) runs with such properties, and (c) is binding upon each party and each successive owner during its ownership of such properties or any portion thereof, and shall be a benefit to and a burden upon ea..ch party and its property hereunder and each other person succeeding to an interest in such properties. 19. Bankruptcy. '- The obligations of this A~eement shall notbe dischargeable in bankruptcy. 20. Indemrfification. ' DEVELOPER agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, and-its elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs) and liability for any personal injury or property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or inactions by the DEVELOPER, or any actions or inactions of DEVELOPER's contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in connection with the construction, improvement, operation, or maintenance of the Project, provided that DEVELOPER shall have no indemnification obligation with respect to negligence or wrongful conduct of CITY, its contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees or with respect to the maintenance, use or condition of any improvement after the time it-has been dedicated to and accepted by the CITY or another public entity (except as provided in an improvement agreement or maintenance bond). If CITY is named as a party to any legal action, CITY will cooperate with DEVELOPER, will appear in such action and will not unreasonably withhold approval of a settlement otherwise' acceptable to DEVELOPER. If CITY is named as a party to any legal action, CITY will cooperate with DEVELOPER, will appear in such action and will not unreasonably withhold approval of a settlement otherwise acceptable to DEVELOPER. COUNTY agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, and its elected and Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project Page 11 of 15 May 15, 2000 appoimed councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs) and liability for any personal injury or property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or inactions by the COUNTY, or any actions or inactions of COUNTY's contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in cormection with the construction, improvement, operation, or maintenance of the Project, provided that COUNTY shall have no indemnification obligation with respect to negligence or wrongful conduct of CITY, its contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees or with respect to the maintenance, use or condition of any improvement after the time it has been dedicated to and accepted by the CITY or another public entity (except as provided in an improvement agreement or maintenance bond). If CITY is named as a party to any legal action, CITY will cooperate with COUNTY, will appear in such action and will not unreasonably withhold approval of a settlement otherwise acceptable to COUNTY. 21. Insurance. 21.1 Public LiabiliW and Property Damage Insurance. Af all times that DEVELOPER is constructing any improvements that will become public improvements, DEVELOPER shall maintain in effect a policy of comprehensive general liability insurance with a per-occurrence combined single limit of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) and a deductible of not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) per claim. The policy so maintained by DEVELOPER shall name the CITY as an additional insured and shall include either a severability of interest clause or cross-liability endorsement. 21.2 Workers Compensation Insurance. At all times that DEVELOPER is constructing any improvements that will. become public improvements, DEVELOPER shall maintain Workegs Compensation insurance for all persons employed by DEVELOPER for work at the Project site. DEVELOPER shall require each contractor and subcontractor similarly to provide Worker's Compensation insurance for its respective employees. DEVELOPER ~grees indemnify the City for any damage resulting from DEVELOPER's failure to maintain any such insta-ance. 21.3 Evidence of Insurance. Prior to commencement of construction of any improvements which will become public improvements, DEVELOPER shall furnish CITY satisfactory evidence of the insurance required in Sections 21.1 and 21.2 and evidence that the carrier is required to give the CITY at least fifteen days prior wa'itten notice of the cancellation or reduction in coverage of a policy. The insurance shall extend to the CITY, its elective and appointive boards, commissions, offifi~rs, agents, employees and representatives and to DEVELOPER performing work on the Project. 22. Sewer and Water. DEVELOPER acknowledges that it must obtain water and sewer permits from the Dublin San Ramon Services District ("DSRSD") which is another public agency not within the control of CITY. Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority. Development Agreement - Sybase Project Page 12 of 15 May I5, 2000 23. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing. Notices required to be given to CITY shall be addressed as follows: City Manager City of Dublin P.O. Box 2340 Dublin, CA 94568 Notices required to be given to COUNTY shall be addressed as follows: and Patrick Cashman Project Director Surplus Property Authority of Alameda County 225 W. Winton Avenue, Room 131 Hayward, CA 94544 Adolph Martinelli Director of Planning County of Alameda 399 Elmhurst Street Hayward, CA 94544 Notice required to be given to DEVELOPER shall be addressed as follows: W-DS - Dublin, LLC c/o Wilcox Development Services 14001 Dallas Parkway, Suite I 111 Dallas, TX 75240 Atto: Todd K. Ashbrook, Sr. Vice President with a copy to: McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen 1333 N. California Boulevard, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Attention: Michael L. Greene A parry may change address by giving notice in writing to the other party and thereafter all notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. Notices shall be deemed given and received upon personal delivery, or if mailed, upon the expiration of 48 hoUrS i~er being .... deposited in the United States Mail. Notices may also be given by overnight coUrier which shall Dubtin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project Pagel3ofl5 May 15, 2000 be d~med given the following day or by facsimile transmission which shall be deemed given upon verification of receipt. 24. Recitals. 25. The foregoing Recitals are tree and correct and are made a part-hereof. Azreement is Entire Understanding. parties. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and a=m-eement of the 26. Exhibits. The following documents are referred to in this Ag-reement and are attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full: - Exhibit A Legal Description of Property Exhibit B Additional Conditions 27. Countervarts. This Ag-reement is executed in three (3) duplicate originals, each of which is deemed to be an original. . ........ -2-8. "Recordation. CITY shall record a copy of this A~eement within ten days following execution by all parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date and year frrst above wfitten~ CITY OF DUBLIN: Mayor Date: Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project Page 14 of 15 Ma), 15, 2000 Attest: By: City Clerk Approved as to Form: Date: City. Attorney SURPLUS PROPERTY AUTHORITY OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: Adolph Martinelli Its Manager Approved as to Form: Date: Attorney for Surplus Property Authority of the County of Alameda ~rDS - Dublin, LLC, a California limited liability company Todd K. Ashbrook Seni or Vice President J :\WPD\MNRS W~ t 14\14 9LZ~gree~syb ase_d ev-agr_5 04 .wpd Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Author/ty Development Agreement - Sybase Project Page 15 of 15 May 15, 2000 EXHIBIT B Additional Conditions The following Additional Conditions are hereby imposed pursuant to Paragraph 5.3 above. SubparagTaph 5.3.1 - Subsequent Discretionary Approvals None. Subp.aragraph 5.3.2 -- Mitigation Conditions Subsection a. Infrastructure Sequencing Program The Infrastructure Sequencing Pro,am for the Project is set forth bel ow. (i)' Roads: The project-specific roadway improvements (and offers of dedication) described below and those identified in Resolution No.00-23 of the Planning Commission Approving the Parcel Map shall be completed by DEVELOPER to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director at the times and in the manner specified in Resolution'No. 00-23 unless otherwise pr6vided below. All Such roadway improvements shall be constructed to the satisfaction and requirements of CITY's Public Works Director. The obligations of Condition Nos. 57, 59 and 66 of Resolution No. 00-23 and any other conditions of such 'resolution which are to be completed "as specified by the Director of Public Works" or "when determined necessary by the Public Works Director" ("Tl~e Def.erred- Conditions") shall be of no force or effect until DEVELOPER records a final map or'building permit (whichever comes first) for the Project. Once effective, such obligations shall survive termination of this Agreement. COUNTY shall provide CITY with security for COUNTY's fair share as determined by CITY for the costs of design and construction of The Deferred Conditions as follows: Condition 66 [Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road Intersection Improvement] A payment to CITY in cash in the amoum of the deficiency, if any, between funds available to CITY for CIP Project #9689 [Dougherty Road/Dublin Blvd. Intersection] and the cost of such project, such payment to be made within 30 days of written notice from the Public Works D~rector to be given following bid operfing; Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC./Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project - Exhibit B Page 1 of 6 May 5.2000 · Condition 57 [1-580 Eastbound Offramp at Santa Rita/Tassajara Road Exit. A payment to CITY in cash in the mount of the deficiency, if any, between funds available to CITY to construct the improvements at the eastbound offramp at Santa Rita/Tassajara Road exit (one exclusive through lane and 2 left-mm lanes; modification to signal to provide protected left- mm phasing on east and west legs) and the cost of such project, such payment to be made within 30 days of written notice from the Public Works Director to be given following bid °Pening; Condition 59 [Additional Left-Tm Lane at Westbound Approach on Pirnlico Drive.] A payment to CITY in cash in the mount of the deficiency, if any, between funds available to CITY to construct the improvements at the westbound approach to 1-580 on Pimlico Drive (second left-turn lane) and the cost of such project, such payment to be made within 30 days of written notice from the · Public Works Director to be ~ven following bid opening; (ii) Sewer All sanitary sewer improvements to serve the project site (or any recorded phase of the Project) shall be completed in accordance with the tentative subdivision map and DSRSD requirements. (iii) Water An all weather roadway and an approved hydrant and water supply system shall be available and in service at the site in accordance with the tentative subdivision map to the satisfaction and requirements of the CITY's fire department. All potable water system components so serve the project site (or any recorded phase of the Project) shall be completed in accordance wifla the tentative subdivision map and DSRSD requirements. Recycled water lines shall be installedin accordance with the tentative subdivision map. Dublifi/WSD-Dublin LLC./Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project - Exhibit B Page 2 of 6 May 5, 2000 (iv) Storm Drainage' Prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for any building which is part of the Project, the storm drainage systems offsite, as well as on site drainage systems to the areas to be occupied, shall be improved to the satisfaction and requirements of the Dublin Public Works Department applying CITY's and Zone 7 (Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Zone 7) standards and policies which are in force and effect at the time of issuance of the permit for the proposed improvements and shall be consistent with the Drainage Plan. The site shall also be protected from storm flow from off site and shall have erosion control measures in place to protect doWnStream facilities and properties from erosion and -unclean storm water consiStent with the Drainage Plan. As used herein, "Drainage Plan" shall refer to CITY's master drainage plan. (¥) Other Utilities (e.g. gas. electricity, cable, televisions, telephone) Construction of othe; utilities shall be' 9omplete'by phased prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for any building within that specific phase of occupancy. Subsection b. Miscellaneous (i) cOmPletiOn May be Deferred.- : : N°~tandiilg'th~ f0r~gOing, CITY's Public Works Director may,/n his or her sole discretion and upon receipt of documentation in a form satisfactory to the Public Works Directo~ that'a~SU~es ~ompleti~}~llo~ DEVELOPER Or COUNTY to defer completion of discrete portions of any of the public 'impi0X;ementS required for the Project until after issnar~ce of Certificate of Occupancy for the firSt building for the Project if the Public Works Dire_ctor - determines that to do so would not jeopardize the public health, safety or welfare~ Subparagraph 5.3.3 -- Phasing. Timin? With the exception of the road. improvements described in Subpara~aph 5.3.2(a)(i), th_is Agreement contains no requirements that DEVELOPER must initiate or complete development of the Project within any period of time set by-CITY. 'It is the intention of this provision that DEVELOPER be able to develop the Property in accordance with its own time schedules and the Project Approvals. Subparagraph 5.3.4 - Financing Plan DEVELOPER will install all street improvements necessary for the Project at its own cost (subject to credits for certain improvements as provided in Subparagraph 5.3.6 below). Other infrastructure necessary to provide sewer, potable water, and recycled water services to the Project will be made available by the Dublin San Ramon Services District. Dublin/WSD-Du blin LLC./Surplus Authority Development Agreement - Sybase Project - Exhibit B Page 3 of 6 May 5, 2000 COUNTY has entered into an "Area Wide Facilities Agreement" with the Dublin San Kamon Services District to pay for the cost of extending such services to the Project. Su~h services shall be provided as set forth in Subparagraph 5.3.2(a)(ii) and (iii) .aboye.~ ..... Subparagraph 5~3.5 ' Fees, Dedications .. Subsection a. Traffic Impact Fees. DEVELOPER shall pay all traffic impact fees applicable to the Project which are in effect at the time of issuance of any building permit for the Project in the amounts and at the times set forth in the implementing resolution. Such fees include the Traffic Impact Fee for Eastern Dublin established by Resolution No. 225-99, including any future amendments to such fee. DEVELOPER, COUNTY and CITY acknowledge that COUNTY is entitled to certain credits Ct 99'1 Credits") again~ payment of the Traffic Impact Fee for Eastern Dublin by separate agreements previously entered into between COUNTY and CITY in 1991 (as such agreements have been amended). COUNTY is also entitled ~)~ certain other credits ("Prior Agreement Credits") agains~ payment of the Traffic Impact Fee fOr Eastern Dublin by other~ development agreements entered into between COUNTY and CITY~:: COUNTY agrees that, notwithstanding its entitlement to such 199t Credits, its 1991 Credits cannot be applied aga/nst payment of the "Section 2" portion of the Traf-fic Impact Fee for Eastern Dublin for the Project. DEVELOPER (and.its assignee) wilt, rather, pay the ,Section 2" portion of the fee in cash. .-~.- ~-~-~ . COUNTY. further agrees.that it (and its .assignee) will use the .1991 credits and/or Prior Agreement Credits agaln~ at least one-half(½) of the "Section 1" portion of the Traffic Impact Fee for Eastern Dublin for the Project provided that it has sufficient Such credits. CITY shall determine which of the 1991 Credits and/or Prior Agreement Credits shall be used-pursuant to this para~aph. ..~ Notwithstanding anything herein ~o the contrary, DEVELOPER further agrees that it (and its assignee) will p.ay at least seven percent (7%) of the "Section i" portion of the Traffic Impact Fee for Eastern Dublin in cash. Subsection b. Traffic Impact Fee to Reimburse Pleasanton for Freeway Interchanges. DEVELOPER shall pay a Eastern Dublin 1-580 Interchange Fee in the amounts and at the times set forth in City of Dublin Resolution No. 155-98, or in the mounts and at the times set forth in any resolution revising the amount of the Eastern Dublin 1-580 Interchange Fee. Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC./Surplus Authority Development Agreement-~Sybase Project- Exhibit B Page 4 of 6 May 5, 2000 Subs-6cti0n c. Public FaciIifies Fees.. - -- DEVELOPER shall pay a Public Facilities Fee in the amounts and at the times set forth in City of DubIin Resolution No. I95-99, or in the amounts and at the times set forth in any resolution revising the amount o£the Public Facilities Fee. Subsection d.' Noise lV[iti.oation Fee. DEVELOPER shall pay a Noise Mitigation Fee in the amounts and at the times set forth in City of DubIin Resolution No. 33-96; or in the amounts and at the times set forth in any resolution revising the'amount °fthe Noise Mitigation Fee. Subsection e. School Impact Fees. School impact fees shall be paid by DEVELOpER-in accordance with Government Code section 53080 and the exhs~g agreement between COUNTY and thc Dublin Unified School District Subsection f. Fire Impact Fees... -~- DEVELOPER' shall pay a fire facilities £ee. in~e mounts and at thefimes set forth in City o£ Dublin Resolution No: 37-97 or in the amounts and at the times set.forth in any resolution revising the' mount 0f such fee-? ~(~£--:'.:?.. Subsection g. Tri-VaIlev Transportation Development Fee. -- DEVELOPER shall pay the Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee in the amount and at the times set forth in City of Dublin Resolution No. 89-98, or in the amounts and at the times set forth in any resolution revising the amount of such fee~ COUNTY a~ees-that its 1991 Credits and Prior A~eement Credits cannot be applied against payment of this fee. Subparag~'ar~h 5.3.6 - Credit Subsection a. Traffic Impact Fee Improvements Credit CITY shall provide a credit to COUNTY for the those improvements described in the resolution establishing the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee if such improvements are constructed by the DEVELOPER in their ultimate location pursuant tiffs Agreement. All aspects of credits shall be governed by CITY's Administrative Guidelines regarding credits (Resolution No. 23-99). Subsection b. Traffic Impact Fee Right-of-Way Dedications Credit CITY shall pro-v/de a credit to COUNTY for any_ TIF area right-of-way dedicated by COUNrI~ to CITY which is required for improvements which are described in the resolution Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC.ISurplus Authority Development A=m-eement - Sybase Project - Exhibit B Page 5 of 6 Ma5, 5, 2000 establishing the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee. Ail aspe~..ts_9~?.[~:d_i~.sh~l be goye .reed by CITY's Administrative Guidelines regarding credits (Resolution No. 23-99). In the event that credits referred to in Subsections (a) to (b) o£this Subparagraph 5'.3.6 are in excess of the mount o£ credits which can be applied ag_ainst the traffic impact fee payable pursuant to Subsection (a) of Subparagraph 5.3.5 (i.e., one-half of the "Section 1" portion of the Traffic Impact Fee for Eastern Dublin, less 7% ofthe"Section 1, portion), COUNTY shall be entitled to "bank" Such'Credits (referred to as "Excess Credits") and may use them as provided in CITY's Administrative Guidelines for Credits and Reimbursements (Resolution No. 23-99). Subl)ara~m'aph 5.3.7 - Miscellaneous Subsection a. Landscaping Maintenance Along Streets and Creek CITY has formed a landscape maintenance district known as the "Landscape Maimenance Assessment District No. 97-1 (Santa Rim Area)~' p ..u~__...,u~u. t..to a pefifi'.gn fr?m COUNTY, and imposed an assessment against the Property to pay for' street and creek Iandscape mainte~fi~~ Iff-addition, on September 24; 1996, COUNTY recorded a Declaration of Covenants, Cofldifior~s' arid RestrictiOns which covers the Propert~,'wherebyCQUN~Y.., on behalf of itself arid its successors (including DEVELOPER); has covenanted, t0 pay a yDeed Assessment" to CITY for maintefianee of street and creek landscaping. EI~IS.-rja J:\WPD%MNP~WM14\149~Agree~-yba~e ex-b 504.wpd Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC./Surplus Authority Development A~eement - Sybase Project - Exhibit B Page 6 of 6 May 5, 2000 ~ /.%5 Mitigated Initial Study/ Negative Declaration Project Sybase Complex File PA// 99-062 Lead Agency: City of Dublin March 2000 ATTACHMENT Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................ 2 Applicants/Contact Persons ..................................................................... 2 Project Location and Context ................................................................... .2 Project Description ............................................................................... 3 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .................................................. 15 Determination (to be completed by Lead Agency): .......................................... 15 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .......................................................... 16 Earlier Analyses ................................................................................... 26 Attachment to Initial Study ...................................................................... 28 Discussion of Checklist .......................................................................... 28 I. Aesthetics ....................................................................... 28 II. Agricultural Resources .......................................................... 29 III. Air Quality ....................................................................... 29 IV. Biological Resources ........................................................... 30 V. Cultural Resources .............................................................. 31 V. Geology and Soils .............................................................. 31 VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................ 33 VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................. 34 IX. Land Use and Planning ......................................................... 36 X, Mineral Resources .............................................................. 37 XI. Noise .............................................................................. 37 XII. Population and Housing ........................................................ 38 XIII. Public Services ...................................................... : .......... 39 XIV. Recreation ........................................................................ 40 XV. Transportation/Traffic .......................................................... 4 ! X¥I. Utilities and Service Systems ....................................... .......... 45 XV. Mandatory Findings of Significance ......................................... 46 Initial Study Preparer ............................................................................. 47 Agencies and Organizations Consulted ........................................................ 47 References ......................................................................................... 47 City of Dublin Environmental Checklist/ Initial Study Introduction This Initial Study has been prepared in accord with the provisions of the California ]Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and assesses the potential environmental impacts of implementing the proposed project described below. The Initial Study consists of a completed environmental checklist and a brief explanation of the environmental topics addressed in the checklist. Applicants/Contact Persons RMW Architects 160 Pine Street San Francisco CA 94111 Attn: David McAdams (415) 781 9800 Wilcox Development Services 14001 Dallas Pkwy., Suite 1111 Dallas TX 75240 Attn: Terry Lowery (972) 759 7878 Project Location and Context The project site is located on the northwest corner of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard. The site encompasses approximately 19 (gross) acres and 14.49 (net) acres of land which is currently vacant. The major feature on thc site include several large mounds of excavated material which has been placed on the site from construction of nearby projects Exhibit 1 depicts the location of the project area in context of the larger City of Dublin and Exhibit 2 shows the detailed site location. The project site is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan area. This Specific Plan/General Plan was adopted by the City of Dublin in 1994 for the purpose of directing long-term land use, circulation, infrastructure and environmental protection for 3,302 acres of land located east of the central portion of Dublin and north of the 1-580 freeway. At full build-out, the Eastern Dublin planning area would allow a range of residential, commercial office, employment and open space uses. City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 2 March 2000 Property north of the project site has been recently developed with an office complex; property to the east contains multi-family residential uses; properties south and west of the project site are vacant. Project Description The proposed project includes a number of related land use applications to allow the development of a corporate headquarters facility for Sybase, a major computer software developer. At full build-out, the campus would include two mid-rise office buildings, parking for approximately 1,200 vehicles and landscaping. The total amount of construction on the site would include a maximum of 420,000 square feet, which would largely be office space, but which would also include conference rooms, an employee cafeteria, employee fitness center and an approximately 30,000 square foot data center. A maximum of 3,570 employees would be located on the site at full build out. The two buildings would be constructed in one phase. It is anticipated that site improvements would be completed by early summer 2001. Development of the Sybase headquarters facility will require the approval of the following related application: Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, PD-Planned Development rezoning, Site Development Review (SDR), a Development Agreement and a Parcel Map. Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment The existing Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan designates the site bounded by Central Parkway to the north, Hacienda Drive to the east, Dublin Boulevard to the south and Arnold Drive to the west (34.6 total acres) for High Density Residential permitting an average of 1,211 dwellings to be constructed. The proposed Sybase project would not be consistent with this land use classification. The property owner, the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, has filed an application to amend the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan to redesignate a pOrtion of the block, consisting of the 19-acre (gross)/14.49-acre (net) project site, from High Density Residential to Campus Office. The property tothe south, identified as Site 16, would also be amended to delete 420,000 gross square feet of development from this site, which is the amount of development represented in the Sybase site. The Campus Office land use designation on Site 15 would accommodate the proposed Sybase project. The number of high density residential dwellings planned for the entire 34.6 gross acre site would be reduced to 864 dwellings on 15.6 gross acres of land. The remaining number of residential units (347) would not be constructed. Exhibit 3 shows the proposed Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment. Table 1 shows the existing and proposed acres and land uses before and after the Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment. The site numbers on the table correspond with the sites depicted on Exhibit 3. /3.5 City of Dublin Page 3 Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000 PA #99-062 Table 1. Existing and Proposed Specific Plan/General Plan Land Uses-Alameda County Surplus Property Authority Property Site Name Acres Existing DU's/ Proposed DU's/ (gross) Specific Plan Sq. Ft. Specific Sq. Ft. Plan 1 Tassajara 14.8 Med. Res 148,000 no change -- Meadows 2 Emerald Glen 56.3 Park --- no change -- Park 3 Village Center 21.9 Neigh. 286,189 no change -- Comm. 4 Toll Emerald 33.9 Med. Res. 339 du no change -- Glen 5a G.M. 17 GC 185,130 no change -- 5b Koll 35.1 CO/GC 553,421 no change -- 6 AutoNation 28.9 GC 264,366 no change -- 7 Hacienda 56.8 GC 530.536 no change -- Crossing 8 Calif. Creekside 35.7 Med. Res. 277 du no change -- 9 Villas 16.2 MH Res. 324 du no change -- 10 School 11 School -- no change -- 1 la JPI 18.5 Med. High 335 du no change :- Res. 11 b Summer Glen 69.2 L/M Res. 328 du no change -- 12 Pub/Semi-Pub. 88.5 public 963,765 no change -- 13 Creekside 29.7 Ind/Office 478,681 no change -- Business Park 14 Emerald Pointe 35.3 ind/Office 568,937 no change -- Unentitled High Den. 1,211 du Campus 15a (Proposed 34.6 Res. Office 420,000 Sybase) (19 ac) High High Den. 15b ...................... Den. Res. 864 du Res. (15.6 ac) 16 Unentitled 53 CO 1,962,378 no change 1,542,378 PD-Planned Development Rezoning and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans The applicant has also proposed a PD-Planned Development rezoning for the site. Existing zoning is Planned Development-High Density Residential. Proposed Zoning is PD-Planned Development-Campus Office. The proposed PD-Planned Development will include a District Planned Development Plan that will establish standards and regulations governing the future use, development, improvement and maintenance of the site, in accord with Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 4 March 2000 As part of the PD-Planned Development zoning application, a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan has been prepared for City approval describing in detail the proposed development program for the Sybase project. Details of the development plan are as follows: Site Plan: The proposed site plan (Exhibit 4) indicates that the two main office buildings would be located on the southeast portion of the lot, at oblique angles to the two main intersecting streets. An open plaza would be created on the southeast coruer of the site near the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive, which will be discussed below. Parking would be arrayed around the building complex to the north and east. Each office building would contain six stories and a maximum of 210,000 gross square feet. Building frontages would be oriented toward adjoining streets, although primary access to the buildings would be from parking lots closest to the buildings. The two buildings would be linked with a pedestrian bridge at the second floor. A shipping receiving dock would be located between the buildings and screened from view from surrounding streets with a wall and 1.andscaping. Access, Parking, Loading and Circulation: Three driveways into the site would be provided, one each on Dublin Boulevard, Central Parkway and Hacienda Drive. A total of 1.200 surface parking spaces would be provided, which would include compact and handicapped parking stalls as well as parking spaces for motorcycles. This number complies with City of Dublin off-street parking standards. Each building would have a truck loading area, to be screened from adjacent streets by a fence and landscaping. A bus shelter would also be constructed on the northwest comer of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive to serve this and other nearby uses. Bicycle racks would also be provided on the site. Architectural Design: Two almost-identical buildings would be constructed, each six stories and 95 feet in height. Exhibit 6 shows exterior building elevations. Building design would reflect a "high tech" theme, with use of precast concrete panels as a base and extensive use of windows in aluminum frames with accent metal panels. Stylized metal and glass canopies would be provided to emphasize the main entries. Roof- mounted equipment would be screened behind metal panels. The buildings would be linked by a pedestrian bridge to match the design of the main buildings. Business identification signs would be located on the outside wall of the two buildings (one sign per building). Precast concrete panels would be two shades of gray and the window glass would be colored blue to slightly blue-green. Exhibits 5a and 5b show proposed building elevations. Development of the project would also include construction of site lighting (including parking lot landscaping, walkway lighting and lighting near each building) and identification signs. A Master Sign Plan would need to be prepared for separate action by the City of Dublin. Landscaping: Project landscaping would include construction of a major urban park/plaza on the southeast coruer of the site as well as perimeter landscaping around the site, landscaping within the parking lot and additional landscaping around the buildings. The main landscape feature would encompass approximately 1.4 acres of land and would include a mix of decorative hardscape and landscaping. Landscape elements would City of Dublin Page 5 Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000 PA #99-062 consist of turf, trees and other decorative landscaping, including seating elements. Maintenance of on-site landscaping would be by the property owner or future building tenant. Grading and Utilities: As part of project development, the site would be cleared and graded to accommodate the proposed buildings, parking lots, pedestrian walkways and related improvements and to assure appropriate site drainage. It is estimated that cut and fill would balance on the site, meaning that no earthern material would need to be imported to or exported from the site. Underground utilities, including sewer, water, reclaimed water, storm drain lines, natural gas, telephone, fiber optic and electrical, would be extended to the site from adjoining streets. Adjacent streets have been constructed or are under construction to full width per the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan. Site Development Review (SDR) An application has .also been filed for a Site Development Review (SDR) permit, pursuant to Chapter 8. t04 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. The purpose of SDR review is to promote orderly, attractive and harmonious development within the community and to ensure compliance with all applicable development regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. Development Agreement A Development Agreement has been proposed between the City of Dublin, the existing property owner and the project developer. The Development Agreement would vest (or "lock in") City development approvals related to the project for a specified period of time. Parcel Map The applicant has also requested approval of a parcel map to subdivide the block formed by Central Boulevard, Hacienda Avenue, Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Drive into two separate parcels of record. Exhibit 6 shows the Tentative Parcel Map. After approval of the Tentative Parcel Map, a final Parcel Map would be prepared, approved by the City and recorded. City of Dublin Page 6 nitial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000 PA #99-062 San San Francisc( Pacific Ocean 0 ~ 10 Miles t m ~ . ! M( Y Dublin Site EXhibit 1-Regional Sybase Project (PA City of Dublin Context 99-062) VICINITY N.T.S. MAP CITY LIMIT Exhibit 2-Site Location Sybase Project (PA 99-062) City of Dublin . DUBLIN ProJect Site 1~.~0~ DUBLIn' 'B~ 1-580 m~V^~ANTON Sffl LAND U~! Sill lAND lA ~ ~ ~ MALL ~ ~ ~PA~ CINIBI ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: I&B / 12 I I-~80 ll~ lhdll 12'7,110 Sl.~l. Proposed Change from "High Density Residential" to "High Density Residential" and "Campus Office" Exhibit 3-Proposed Specific Plan/General Sybase Project (PA 99-062) City of Dublin Plan Amendment ... #,x 17 1. Project description: Proposed development of a 420,000 square foot headquarters office complex on 14.49 net acres of land, to include a Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment within the Hacienda Gateway portion of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan, a PD-Planned Development Rezoning, an SDR Plan, a Development Agreement and a Parcel Map. 2. Lead agency: City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin CA 94588. 3. Contact person: Jerry Haag/Eddie Peabody Jr., Dublin Planning Department (925) 833 6610 4. Project location: Northwest corner of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive 5. Project sponsor: Wilcox Development Services 5420 LBJ Freeway Suite 40 Dallas TX 75240 6. General Plan designations: High Density Residential 7. Zoning: PD-High Density Residential 8. Other public agency required approvals: Tentative and Final Parcel Map (City of Dublin) Grading and Building permits (City of Dublin) Master Sign Plan (City of Dublin) Sewer and water connections (DSRSD) Encroachment permits (City of Dublin) Notice of Intent (State Water Resources Control Board) City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 14 March 2000 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "potentially significant impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. · X Aesthetics - Agricultural X Air Quality Resources - Biological Resources X Cultural Resources X Geology/Soils Hazards and Hydrology/Water X Land Use/Planning X Hazardous Materials X Quality - Mineral Resources X Noise Population/Housing X Public Services - Recreation X Transportation Circulation X Utilities/Service - Mandatory Findings Systems of Significance Determination (to be completed by Lead Agency): On the basis of this initial evaluation: __ I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Negative Declaration will be prepared. __ I find that although the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately~ analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier analysis as described on the attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An Environmental Impact Report is required, but must only analyze the effects that remain to be addressed. __ I find that although ~the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) haVe been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures thakaxe imposed on the proposed project. Signature: ~c'~ P / ~~~'"~ Date:3[7~[~ Printed Name:u',j~n~ ~ ~ For: ~_ ~ ~0~ City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 15 March 2000 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "no impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parenthesis following each question. A "no impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "no impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general factors (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of'the whole action, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is s~gnificant. If there are one or more "potentially significant impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" implies elsewhere the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "potentially significant effect" to a "less than significant impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 16 March 2000. ?32-5 Environmental Impacts (Note: Source of determination listed in parenthesis. See listing of sources used to determine each potential impact at the end of the checklist) Note: A full discussion of each item is found following the checklist. I. Aesthetics. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista? (Source: 2) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Source: 2) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Source: 2, 6) d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Source: 2, 6) II. Agricultural Resources Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as showing on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non-agricultural use? (Source: 2) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Source: 2) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use? (Source: 2) III. Air Quality (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district may be relied on to make the following determinations). Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Source: 2 ) b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (Source: 2) Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation X X X X X X X X X City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99~062 Page 17 March 2000 c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? (Source:2) d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (2) e) Create objectionable odors? (Source:2) IV. Biological Resources. Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Source:2) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Source: 2) c) Have a substantial adverse impact on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means? (Source:2) d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Source: 2) e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree protection ordinances? (Source: 2) Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation X X X X X X X X City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 18 March 2000 f) Conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? (Source: 2) V. Cultural Resources. WouM the project a) Cause a substantial adverse impact in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Sec. 15064.5? (Source:2) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to Sec. 15064.5 (Source: 4) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or unique geologic feature? (Source: 2) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of a formal cemetery? (Source: 2) VI. Geology and Soils. Would the project a/ Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: (Source:3) i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist or based on other known evidence of a known fault ii) Strong seismic ground shaking iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (Source 2,3) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- and off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse (Source: 2.3) d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 13-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (Source: 3) Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation , X X X X X X X X X X X x 1 X City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 19 March 2000 e) Have soils capable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste? (Source: 3) VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials (Source: 2, 7) b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous into the environment? (Source:2, 7 ) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Source: 2, 7) d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Sec. 65902.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Source: 2.7) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such plan has not been adopted, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (Source: 2, 7) f) For a project within the vicinity of private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (Source: 2, 7) g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with the adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Source: 2, 7) Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant, Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation X X X X X X X X City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 20 March 2000 h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (Source: 2, 7) IX. Hydrology and Water Quality. WouM the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Source: 2) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge sUch that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? (Source: 2) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the aeration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? (Source: 7) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or areas, including through the alteration of a course or stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or am6unt of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? (Source: 2, 7) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (Source: 2, 7) f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? (2) g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? (7) Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation X X X X X X X X City of Dublin Initial StUdy/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 21 March 2000 h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which impede or redirect .flood flows? (7) i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, and death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? (7) j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? IX. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? (Source: 1.2) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal plan, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Source: 1, 6) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (1, 2, 7) X. Mineral Resources. Would the project a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Source: 2) b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general Plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Source: 2) XI. Noise. Would the proposal result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of ..other agencies? (Source: 2) b) Exposure of persons or to generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundbome noise levels? (Source: 2) c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above existing levels without the project? (Source: 2) Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation X X X X X X X X X X X City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 22 March 2000 d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels without the project? (Source: 2) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working n the project area to excessive noise levels ? (Source: 2, 6) f) For a project within the vicinity of a private mrstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Source: 2, 6) XII. Population and Housing. WouM the project a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (Source: 2) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (10) c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the replacement of housing elsewhere? (Source: 10) XIII. Public Services. Would the proposal: a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service rations, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services? (2, 7) Fire protectiOn? Police protection Schools Parks Other public facilities Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation X X X X X X X X X X X X City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 23 March 2000 XIV. Recreation: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated (Source: 7) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Source: 7) XV. Transportation and Traffic. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads or congestion at intersections)? (4) b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the County Congestion Management Agency for designated roads or highways?(4) c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (2, 4) d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses, such as farm equipment?(4) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (4) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (7) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (such as bus turnouts and bicycle facilities) (7) Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation X X X X X X X X X City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 24 March 2000 XVI. Utilities and Service Systems. WouM the project a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (2) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (2, 7) c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (7) d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing water entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (2) e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments? (2) f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (2) g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (2) XVI. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation X X X X X X X X species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 25 March 2000 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current prOjects and the effects of probable future projects). c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact . With Impact Mitigation X X Sources used to determine potential environmental impacts 2. 3 4 6. 7. 8. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan (1994) Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan EIR (1994) Geotechnical Investigation of the Sybase Property, Kleinfelder (February 2000) Project Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TJKM Associates (March 2000) Site Visit Discussion with City of Dublin staff or affected special districts Other source XVII. Earlier Analyses Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Reference Section 15063 (c)(3)(d). a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. Portions of the environmental setting, project impacts and mitigation measures for this Initial Study refer to environmental information contained in the 1994 Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Environmental Impact Report. (SCH 91103064). This document .is referred to in this Initial Study as the "Eastern Dublin EIR." Copies of this document is available for public review at the City of Dublin Planning Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA, during normal business hours. As part of the certification of the EIR, the Dublin City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the following impacts: cumulative traffic, extension of certain community facilities (natural gas, electric and telephone service), regional air quality, noise and visual. City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 26 March 2000 The certified EIR contains a large number of mitigation measures that will be applied to any development within the project area.. Specific mitigation measures are noted in the text of the following Initial Study. City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-O62 Page 27 March 2000 Attachment to Initial Study Discussion of Checklist Legend PS: Potentially Significant LS/M: Less Than Significant After Mitigation LS: Less Than Significant Impact NI: No Impact I. Aesthetics Environmental Setting The project site is vacant and consists of generally flat land with a distinct bur gentle slope from north to south, tOwards the 1-580 freeway. The Eastern Dublin EIR classifies the project site as "valley grasslands,' which are located on the areas near 1-580 in the south and southwest portion of Eastern Dublin. None of the major visual features identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR (hillsides and ridges or watercourses) exist on the project site. The project site is not located within a scenic corridor, which is adjacent to the 1-580 freeway. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista? LS. Approval and construction of the proposed project would convert an existing vacant site to an urban use specifically the construction of two 6-story offices, accessory buildings, parking and landscaping. This potential impact was addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Impact 3.8C, Obscuring Natural Features and Impact 3.8F, Alteration of Visual Character of Flatlands) and it was determined that no mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the EIR concluded this impact would be a potentially significant irreversible change and a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been approved for this ~mpact, therefore no additional discussion or analysis is necessary. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including s~tate scenic highway? NI. The project site is located approximately one-half mile north of the 1-580 freeway, which is a state- designated scenic highway, nor is it located adjacent or near other local scenic routes, including Tassajara Road, Doolan Road, or Collier Canyon Road. and is therefore not within a scenic corridor. No impacts are therefore anticipated since the site is not located near an identified scenic corridor. c) Substantially degrade existing visual character or the quality of the site? LS. This impact was addressed in a Statement of Overriding Considerations in the 1994 Eastern Dublin EIR. Therefore, this impact has been reduced to a less-than-significant level so no further analysis is required. d) Create light or glare? LS/M. Construction of the proposed project would increase the amount of light and glare due to new street lighting, parking lot lighting and building security lighting. In some instances, the additional lighting could result in negative aesthetic impacts through the "spill over" of unwanted lighting onto adjacent properties, streets and other areas that are not intended to be lighted. The following mitigation is City of Dublin Page 28 Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000 PA #99-062 therefore recommended to reduce spillover of lighting impacts to a level of less-than- significant. Similarly, extensive use of glass is proposed as one of the primary exterior materials for the two buildings. Depending on the type of glass used, potential glare could result onto adjacent sites and nearby roadways. Mitigation Measure 1 would also reduce potential glare impacts to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure 1: Pole-mounted street lights shall be equipped with cut-off lenses and oriented down toward interior streets to minimize unwanted light and glare spill over. Building security lighting and other lights shall be directed downward. All exterior glass panels shall be of non-glare manufacture. II. Agricultural Resources Environmental Setting The Eastern Dublin EIR notes that the site is an "approximate urbanized area" and is therefore not prime farmland. Based on information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Figure 3. l-C), no portion of the site is encumbered with a Williamson Act Land Conservation Agreement contract. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a-c) Convert Prime Farmland, conflict with agricultural zoning or convert prime farmland to a non-agricultural.use? NI. The site was previously used'for governmental purposes and is not identified as prime farmlands in the Eastern Dublin EIR. No impacts are therefore anticipated with regard to prime farmland or loss of agricultural production. III. Air Quality Environmental Setting Dublin is located in the Tri-Valley Air Basin. Within the Basin, state and federal standards for nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and lead are met. Standards for other airborne pollutants, including ozone, carbon monoxide and suspended particulate matter (PM-10) are not met in at least a portion of the Basin. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) WouM the project conflict or obstruct implementation of an air quality plan ? LS. The proposed project would not conflict with the local Clean Air Plan adopted by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, since the proposed amount of non-residential development have been included in Dublin's planned growth as part of Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan. Therefore, such impacts would be less-than-significant. b) Would the project violate any air quality standards? LS. Short-term construction impacts related to implementation of the project, including grading and excavation, could result in exceedances of air quality standards established by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (Eastern Dublin EIR, Impacts 3.11/A and B). Adherence to Mitigation Measure 3.11/1.0 and Mitigation Measure 3.11/2.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR will reduce short-term air quality impacts to a less-than-significant level. These mitigation measures minimize the creation of fugitive dust during grading and construction activities and also City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 29 March 2000 mandate that construction equipment be kept in proper running order. The Eastern Dublin EIR concludes that potential air ~quality impacts related to construction equipment could not be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for this impact. Similarly, potential air quality impacts related to mobile source emissions of Reactive Organic Gasses and Nitrogen Oxide, both precursor indicators of smog, and stationary source emissions were found to exceed regional air quality standards even with mitigation measures, and were included in the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Eastern Dublin EIR Impacts 3.11/C and E). Since a Statement of Overriding Concerns was adopted for the previous EIR, such impacts would be considered less-than-significant for the purposes of this Initial Study. c) Would the project result in cumulatively considerable air pollutants? LS. The Eastern Dublin EIR identifies Mobile Source Emissions and Stationary Source Emissions as significant irreversible impacts. Generally such impacts are based on vehicular emission from future traffic within the sub-region as well as stationary.sources. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for long-term impacts, therefore, no additional discussion or analysis is necessary. d,e) Expose sensitive receptors to significant pollutant concentrations or create objectionable odors ? NI. Proposed land uses include campus offices, which are not considered as sensitive receptors. Therefore, no impact is anticipated with regard to potential impacts to sensitive receptors. IV. Biological Resources Environmental Setting The Eastern Dublin EIR indicates the biological character of the Sybase site is "ruderal field," which is defined a broad category of plant life closely related to man and consisting of native and alien elements which occupy disturbed habitats. Plant species typically consist of weeds, thistles, mustards and grasses. Plant diversity is considered low even though plant cover may be high. The Eastern Dublin EIR identifies no known wetlands on the site nor the presence of rare, threatened or endangered animal plant or animal species. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species? NI. Based on information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, no candidate, sensitive or special-status species exist on the site, so there would be no impact. Have a substantial adverse impact on riparian habitat or federally protected wetlands ? NI. Based on information contained n the Eastern Dublin EIR, there are no wetlands or riparian features on or adjacent to the project site. There would therefore be no impacts to wetlands or riparian habitats. d) Interfere with movement of native fish or wildlife species? NI. The project site is substantially surrounded by urban development and was previously developed for governmental uses. There are no stream courses on or near the site that could be used as a City of Dublin Page 30 Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000 PA #99-062 wildlife migration corridor. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated with regard to movement of fish or wildlife species. Conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources or any adopted Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans ? NI. No trees are present on the site, and there are no impacts with regard to local tree preservation ordinances or policies. The site is not located within the boundaries of any Habitat Conservation Plans. V. Cultural Resources Environmental Setting The Eastern Dublin-area was surveyed in 1988 as part of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and associated EIR. Several potentially significant archeological resources were identified in the project area, a number of which were located near the former Santa Rita Rehabilitation Center. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) Cause substantial adverse change to significant historic resources? NI. The site is vacant and contains no historically significant resources. There would therefore be no impacts to historical resources. b, c) Cause a substantial adverse impact or destruction to archeological Or paleontological resources? LS/M. The site is located near the former Santa Rita Rehabilitation Center site and development of the project could have an impact on subsurface archeological and/or palenotological resources. This would be a potentially significant impact. In the event that such resources are encountered, the following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce any potential impacts to archeological or paleontological impacts to a level of less- than-significance. Mitigation Measure 4: The possibility that undetected prehistoric archeological resources might exist on the property must be recognized and a contingency plan shall be developed in conformity with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 to handle discoveries during project construction. In the event any prehistoric material is discovered, work shall be halted in the immediate vicinity of the site until a qualified archeologist inspects the discovery, and, if necessary, implements plans for further evaluative testing and/or retrieval of endangered materials. d) Disturb any human resources? LS/M. A remote possibility exists that human resources could be uncovered on the site during construction activities. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4 would reduce such impacts to a level of less-than-significance. V. Geology and Soils [Note: Information for this section of the Initial Study is based on a geotechnical investigation of the site for the proposed project, prepared by Kleinfelder Associates, February 2000. A copy of this report can be reviewed at the Dublin Planning Department.] City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 31 March 2000 Environmental Setting This section of the Initial Study addresses seismic safety issues, topography and landform, drainage and erosion and potential impacts to localized soil types. Seismic The Sybase site is a part of the San Francisco Bay area, one of the most seismically active regions in nation. The Eastern Dublin EIR notes the presence of several nearby significant faults, including the Calaveras Fault, Greenville Fault, Hayward Fault, and San Andreas Fault. The likelihood of a major seismic event on one or more of these faults within the near future is believed to be high. The project site is not part of a Special Studies Zone for faults as identified by the State of California, however, previous geotechnical investigations of the area show inferred faults north of the site (identified as the "Mocho Fault"). The Mocho Fault.was mapped by the California Division of Mines and Geology in 1974 and was later evaluated as part of the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. As part of this evaluation it was concluded that the existence of the Mocho Fault was questionable and geomorphic features could be caused by differential erosion. A second thrust fault system has been inferred in the Coast Ranges of the Bay Area that may be seisimically active. A belt of faults and folds has been mapped in sedimentary rocks south of Mount Diablo, including one identified as the "leading edge-blind thrust, Mount Diablo Domain." Further investigation of this inferred fault by Berlogar Geologic Consultants has concluded that the risk of ground rupture from this inferred fault is low within the project area. Site Soils The site is underlain by poorly consolidated, non-marine deposit sedimentary rocks of the Tassajara Formation. Rocks consist of interbedded claystones, siltstone and occasional conglomerates. Bedrock is overlain by alluvial deposits of irregularly stratified, poorly consolidated deposits of clay, silt, sand and gravel derived mainly from erosion from nearby hills and deposition by ancient stream channels within the Amador Valley. Landform and Topography The site is part of a broad north-south trending plain known as the Livermore-Amador Valley. The site is relatively flat with the exception of a 30-foot wide, 6- to 7-foot high fill stockpile along the eastern end of the site parallel with Hacienda Drive. This material is believed this pile was placed on the site from grading operations on nearby sites. Existing elevations on the site range from 344 feet above sea level on the western portion of the site to 358 feet at the top of the stockpile on the eastern edge of the site. Drainage Existing drainage on the site is generally sheet flow in a north to south direction. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse impacts, including loss, injury or death related to ground rupture, seismic ground shaking, ground failure, or landslides? LS. The site is subject to ground shaking caused by a number of regional faults identified above. Under moderate to severe seismic events which are probable in the Bay Area over the next 30 years, buildings, utilities and other improvements constructed on the site would be subject to damage caused by ground shaking. City of Dublin Page 32 Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters · March 2000 PA #99-062 b) c-d) e) Since the Sybase site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Safety Zone, the potential for ground rupture is anticipated to be minimal. Adherence to Mitigation Measures MM 3.6/1.0 through 8.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR will ensure that new structures built on the site will comply with generally recognized seismic safety standards so that ground shaking impacts would be reduced to a level of less-than- significant. As part of the project, the site is proposed to be graded to remove the existing stockpile of stored material, to accommodate building pads, roads, parking areas and other development areas. Grading would also occur to improve and control site drainage. Mitigation Measures 3.6/17.0-26.0 have been adopted as part of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR to reduce potential impacts to slopes to a level of less-than-significant. These mitigation measures require the preparation of site-specific soils and geotechnical reports, minimizing grading on steep slopes and adherence to Uniform Building Code and other City requirements for grading. Is the site subject to substantial erosion and/or the loss of topsoil? LS. The Eastern Dublin EIR notes that an impact of constructing all of the land uses identified in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan would be an increase of erosion and sedimentation caused by grading activities. Mitigation Measures 3.6/27.0 and 3.6/28.0 requires that specific project developers prepare and implement interim erosion plans as part of grading impacts. With adherence to these mitigation measures, potential erosion impacts will be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Is the site located on soil that is unstable or expansive or result in potential lateral spreading, liquefaction, landslide or collapse? LS. Based on the Kleinfelder Geotechnical Report, the site can support the type of project envisioned by the applicant. The report also contains several specific soils-related and construction techniques that must be followed to assure compliance with the Uniform Building Code and other safety requirements Adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.6/14.0 through 16.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR will also serve to reduce potential lateral spreading and related soil hazards impacts to proposed structures. Have soils incapable of supporting on-site septic tanks if sewers are not available? NI. The project developer has indicated that each dwelling would be connected to a sanitary sewer provided by Dublin San Ramon Services District. Therefore, no impact is anticipated with regard to septic tanks. VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Environmental Setting The site is vacant and currently contains no structures Previous use of the site was for a federal government installation, which may have involves the use or storage of potentially hazardous material. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan was amended in 1996 to add Policy 11- 1, which requires that prior to issuance of building permits for sites in the Eastern Dublin area site-specific Phase One (and if necessary Phase Two) environmental site assessments shall be City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 33 March 2000 made available to the City of Dublin Community Development Director with appropriate documentation that all recommended remediation actions have been completed. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a-c) Create a significant hazard through transport of hazardous materials or release or emission of hazardous materials? LS. The proposed use of the site would include an office complex for a high-technology firm. Only minor and less-than-significant quantities of potentially hazardous materials would be associated with such uses. Materials would include normal and customary such as lawn chemicals, solvents and similar items used for building and grounds maintenance. d) Is the site listed as a hazardous materials site? LS. The project developer is in the process of obtaining necessary environmental hazards site assessments required by Policy 11-1 of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan. With adherence to the requirements of this policy, there would be less-than-significant impacts regarding hazardous materials. e,f) Is the site located within an airport land use plan of a public airport or private airstrip? NI. The site is located northwesterly of the Livermore Municipal Airport but outside of any safety or referral zone for this airport. No impacts are therefore anticipated regarding airport safety issues. g) Interference with an emergency evacuation plan? NI. Adequate emergency access has been provided via proposed driveways on all three adjoining streets. Due to the provision of adequate access, there would be no impact with regard to emergency evacuation plans. h) Expose people and structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? NI. The project site is currently vacant field and is subject to grassland fires during the dry portions of the year. However, the long-term plan for the area is for urbanization. Development of the project site and surrounding area would include adding new water lines for firefighting purposes as well as new fire stations and personnel. No impacts are therefore anticipated. VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality Environmental Setting The project site is generally fiat and contains no wetlands or riparian features. Site drainage is by sheet flow to the south, towards the 1-580 freeway. The City of'Dublin has completed a master drainage and hydrology study for the Eastern Dublin area. The Plan calls for the construction of both local and regional drainage improvements to accommodate increased levels of stormwater runoff caused by adding increased quantities of impervious surfaces on the site, including buildings, parking lots, driveways and sidewalks. Stormwater from the Eastern Dublin area generally flows to the south, under the 1-580 freeway and into regional drainage facilities maintained by Alameda County Zone 7. The ultimate disposal of stormwater runoff is Alameda Creek that drains into San Francisco Bay. The drainage master plan also requires developers of individual projects to pay fees based on square footage of development to assist in funding both new facilities and upgrading of existing drainage facilities. City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 34 March 2000 According to information contained in the Soils, Geology and Seismicity chapter of the Eastern Dublin EIR, no portion of the site contains historic landslides or mudflows (See Figure 3.6-C). Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? LS/M. Construction of improvements anticipated as part of the Sybase project would necessitate grading and overcovering of the soil in order to construct building pads, utility connections and similar features. The amount of grading is not known at this time, however, proposed grading is anticipated to increase the possibility of soil erosion into creeks and other bodies of water, on and off the project site. This could be a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure 5 will ensure that potential water quality impacts are reduced to a less-than- significant level. Mitigation Measure 5: The project developer shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), listing Best Management Practices to reduce construction and post-construction activities to a less than significant level. Measures may include, but shall not be limited to revegetation of graded areas, silt fencing and other measures. The SWPPP shall conform to standards adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board and City of Dublin and shall be approved by both agencies (as applicable) prior to issuance of grading permits. b) c) Specific development projects containing five acres or more are also required to obtain a Notice of Intent from the State Water Resources Control Board prior to commencement of grading. Substantially deplete groundwater recharge areas or lowering of water table? LS. Although the currently vacant site would be converted to an urban use, this impact has been addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Impact 3.5/Z) and Mitigation Measures 3.5/49.0 and 50.0 adopted as part of the EIR, so groundwater impacts would be reduced to a less -than- significant level and no further analysis is required. Substantially alter drainage patterns, including streambed courses such that substantial siltation or erosion would occur? LS. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR acknowledges that implementation of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan would change existing natural drainage patterns on individual sites. In this instance, proposed changes would include grading and re-contouring much of the site and filling surface drainage swales with underground pipes and culverts to accommodate storm water runoff. The overall direction of stormwater flow in a southwesterly direction will not significantly change however. Based on preliminary hydrological information prepared by the applicant's engineer, the quantity and rate of stormwater flow from the site is consistent with the City's master drainage plan for Eastern Dublin so that potential impacts would be less-than-significant. d) Substantially alter drainage patterns or result in flooding, either on or off the project site? LS. Approval of the proposed Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment and construction of the office development not would significantly change drainage patterns within the site area. Existing surface drainage flows would be slightly altered due to anticipated site grading. Drainage would be routed through newly constructed underground pipes, culverts and similar facilities. A preliminary drainage plan has been submitted by the applicant, City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 35 March 2000 e) g) h, i) J) indicating that storm drain improvements would be constructed to connect with existing and planned drainage improvements within the Eastem Dublin area. This would be considered a less-than-significant impact. Similarly, the site lies above the lO0-year flood elevation. Create stormwater runoff that wouM exceed the capacity of drainage systems or add substantial amounts of polluted runoff?. LS. Construction of on-site improvements is anticipated to lead to greater quantities of storm water runoff. According to the Dublin Public Works Department, the amount of stormwater runoff anticipated to be generated from the site would be consistent with the approved Master Drainage Plan for the Eastern Dublin area, so there would be less-than-significant impacts related to increases in stormwater runoff. Substantially degrade water quality? LS/M. Refer to the analysis and mitigation measure under "a," above. Place housing within a lO0-year flood hazard area as mapped by a Flood Insurance Rate Map? NI. The proposed project does not include a housing component, so there would be no impacts with regard to placing housing within a 100-year flood plain: Place within a lO0-year flood hazard boundary structures that impeded or redirect flood flow, including dam failures? NI. The proposed project would not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area, since the project includes proposed office construction. Since the project would be consistent with the Eastern Dublin Master Drainage Plan, there would be less-than-significant impacts regarding redirection of flood flows. Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflows? NI. The site is not located near a major body of water that could result in a seiche, although seasonal wetlands have been identified on the site. The risk of potential mudflow is considered low since no historic landslides or mudflows have been identified on the site (see Figure 3.6-c of the Eastern Dublin EIR). IX. Land Use and Planning Environmental Setting The project site is site is presently regulated by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan. A portion of the proposed project would include amending this Plan to relocate some of the residential dwelling units planned for this site to adjoining areas so that the proposed office complex could be constructed. Refer to the Project Description for a discussion of both the requirements of the existing Specific Plan/General Plan and proposed amendments to the Plan. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) Physically divide an established community? NI. The project is vacant and has been planned for residential uses since the original adoption of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan in 1994. Therefore there would be no disruption of any established community. City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 36 March 2000 b) c) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation? LS. The proposed project would be consistent with goals and policies contained in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/ General Plan. The extent of the proposed amendment includes relocating residential units from a portion of the project site to nearby areas within the Tassajara Gateway sub-area of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan to allow for campus office development. At the same time, the 420,000 square feet that is proposed to be allocated to the Sybase project would be deleted from an adjacent area, so that there would be no net gain of development area. Less-than-significant impacts are therefore anticipated with regard to land use planning compatibility Conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? NI. No such plan has been adopted within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan area. There would therefore be no impact to a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan for the proposed project. X. Mineral Resources Environmental Setting The site contains no known mineral resources. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a, b) Result in the loss of availability of regionally or locally significant mineral resources? NI. The Eastern Dublin EIR does not indicate that significant deposits of minerals exist on the site, so no impacts would occur. XI. Noise Environmental Setting Major sources of noise on and adjacent to the project site include distant noise generated by vehicles passing Eastern Dublin planning area on 1-580, traffic sources on Tassajara Road and from aircraft flyovers. Based on Figure 3.10 B contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, all or a portions of the project site would be subject to significant long-term noise exposure, defined as 60 decibels CNEL for exterior noise for residential land uses. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) WouM the project expose persons or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established by the General Plan or other applicable standard: LS. Construction of the proposed development project would result in incremental increases in long-term noise related to additional vehicular traffic related to the project. Since the proposed project does not include a residential component, there would be less-than-significant impacts related to increases in permanent noise levels. b) Exposure of people to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? LS. Approval of the Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment and implementation of the construction project would not result in long-term increases in groundborne vibration, since City of Dublin Page 37 Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000 PA #99-062 c) d) e,f) office uses would be constructed. Therefore, this impact would be considered less-than- significant. Substantial increases in permanent in ambient noise levels? LS. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified permanent noise impacts related to vehicular traffic increases as a unavoidable and unmitigatable impact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for this impact by the City. Although a Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment has been requested as part of the project, the overall type of the project would not significantly change, only a reconfiguration of land uses. Since a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for this impact, no further analysis is required on this topic. Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity' above levels without the project? LS. Construction of the proposed office complex would increase short-term noise levels during the construction period for the project. Mitigation Measures 3.10/4.0 and 5.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR would require individual project builders to prepare construction noise management plans to minimize noise as well as adhere to construction hour limitations. Therefore, short-term construction noise impacts would be considered less-than-significant. For a project located within an airport land use plan, would the project expose people to excessive noise levels? NI. The project site would not be affected by Livermore Municipal Airport due to the fact that the airport is located approximately two miles southeasterly of the project. No impacts are therefore anticipated. XII. Population and Housing Environmental Setting Recent information regarding population and housing in Dublin has been published in Projections '98, published by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). According to ABAG, Dublin's population (including the sphere of influence) was 26,300 in 1995 and is projected to be 33,300 in 2000. By way of comparison, the State Department of Finance has determined that Dublin's population was 28,707 as of January 1, 1999. The adopted Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan anticipates an ultimate population of 12,458 dwelling units in the Eastern Dublin planning area at full buildout of all land uses within the planning area. The Specific Plan/General Plan also calls for a maximum of 9,737,000 square feet of commercial, office and industrial uses at full buildout of the Plan. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly? LS. Approval of the proposed Amendment is substantially consistent with the existing, approved Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan. The proposed amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan would reconfigure office and residential land uses to be more responsive to market demand. The potential to increase substantial population growth would be considered a less-than-significant impact. b,c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing units or people? NI. The site is vacant. Implementation of the proposed project would therefore displace neither City of Dublin Page 38 Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000 PA #99-062 housing units or people. No impacts are therefore anticipated in regard to population displacement. XIlI. Public Services Environmental Setting Fire Protection. Fire protection services are handled by the Alameda County Fire Department, which contracts with the City of Dublin for fire suppression, fire prevention, education, inspection services and hazardous material control to the community. Police Protection: Police and security protection is provided by Alameda County Sheriff Department, which contracts to the City of Dublin for 24-hour security patrols throughout the community in addition to crime prevention, crime suppression and traffic safety. Schools. The Dublin Unified School District (DUSD) provides educational services to the City of Dublin. Maintenance. Maintenance of streets, roads and other governmental facilities are the responsibility of the City of Dublin Public Works Department. · Solid Waste Service: Livermore Dublin Disposal Company. Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) Fire protection? LS. Construction of the proposed project would increase demand for fire and emergency services by increasing the amount of permanent daytime population on the site. This impact was previously addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Features which would be incorporated into the project as part of existing City ordinances and development requirements and to assist in reducing impacts would include installation of on-site fire protection measures such as fire sprinklers, installation of new fire hydrants and meeting minimum fire flow requirements contained in the Uniform Building Code and Uniform Fire Code. The project developer must also adhere to Mitigation Measures 3.4/6.0-13.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR. These mitigation measures relate to funding new fire facilities in eastern Dublin, ensuring adequate water supplies and pressure for fire suppression, and minimizing wildland fire hazards. With adherence to previouslY adopted mitigation measures and normal City requirements, impacts related to fire protection would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. b) Police protection? LS. Incremental increases in the demand for police service could be expected should the project be approved and future developments constructed. Impacts would generally include increases in commercial and auto burglary and theft. This increase in calls for service would be off-set through adherence to City of Dublin safety requirements from the Police Department, including the non-residential security ordinance. As a condition'of project approval, the Dublin Police Department has requested the City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 39 March 2000 c) d) e) developer to prepare a Master Security Plan for the development to ensure that private on- site security programs are consistent with City Police Department operations. The project developer would also be required to adhere to Mitigation Measures 3.4/1.0-5.0 set forth in Eastern Dublin EIR. These measures deal with establishing funding mechanisms for additional police personnel and facilities and require the inclusion of security provisions into individual development projects. With adherence to previously adopted mitigation measures and normal City requirements, including preparation of a Master Security Plan, impacts related to police protection would be reduced to a less-than- significant level. Schools? LS. The proposed project involves the development of an office complex. Since this is a non-residential land use, minor and less-than-significant impacts are anticipated with regard to impacts to local schools. The project developer will be required to pay necessary per square foot fees to the Dublin Unified School District to off-set any indirect impacts that could result from secondary inducement of future employees moving into the District to work within the office complex. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? LS. Approval of the project and construction of the follow-on development project would incrementally increase the long- term maintenance demand for roads and other public facilities. However, such additional maintenance demands will be offset by additional City fees and property tax revenues accruing to the City of Dublin. Less-than-significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are needed. Solid waste generation ? LS. Approval of the project and construction of the office complex would incrementally increase generation of solid waste. The Eastern Dublin EIR requires adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.4/37.0-40.0. These measures require the preparation of a solid waste management plan and assurances that adequate solid waste landfill capacity exists prior to approval of individual development projects. XIV. Recreation Environmental Setting The project site is currently vacant and contains no parks or other recreational amenities. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks? NI. The proposed General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan Amendment would not result in new residences being constructed within the Eastern Dublin area Therefore, no impact would result to neighborhood or regional park facilities. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of recreational facilities? NI. The proposed project does not include residential development, so there would be no impact on recreational facilities or require the construction of new recreational facilities. City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-O62 Page 40 March 2000 XV. Transportation/Traffic [This section is based on a traffic analysis for the project prepared by TJKM Associates, Transportation Consultants, March, 2000. The full text of the traffic analysis is on file in the City of Dublin Public Works Department.] Environmental Setting Existing Transportation Network The project site is served by a number of regional freeways and sub-regional arterial and collector roadways, including: Interstate 580, an eight-lane east-west freeway that connects Dublin with local cities such as Livermore and Tracy to the east and Oakland, San Francisco and other cities to the west. In the vicinity of the project. Interstate 580 carries between 169,000 and 187,000 vehicles per day. Interchanges near the project site include Dougherty/Hopyard Road, Hacienda Drive, Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road and Fallon Road/E1 Charro Road. Dougherty Road is a two-lane rural road with its northern section located in Contra Costa County. Dougherty Road has four lanes between the Alameda County/Contra Costa County border and Dublin Boulevard and six lanes between Dublin Boulevard and 1-580. South of 1-580, it continues with six lanes as Hopyard Road in Pleasanton. Average Daily Traffic is approximately 43,500 south of Dublin Boulevard. Dublin Boulevard is a major east-west arterial roadway in the City of Dublin. It contains four lanes largely fronted by retail and commercial uses west of Dougherty Road. Between Dougherty Road and Tassajara Road, Dublin Boulevard is a two-lane road with an exception between Hacienda Drive and Tassajara Creek, where it is a four lane road. Average Daily Traffic varies from approximately 29,300 vehicles east of San Ramon Road to 5,300 vehicles west of Tassajara Road. Hacienda Drive is an arterial designed to provide access to 1-580. It contains six lanes south of 1-580 and four lanes north of 1-580, extending as far noah as Dublin Boulevard. As part of the Santa Rita Business Center, Hacienda Drive has been extended northward to Gleason Drive as a three-lane roadway. Between 1-580 and Dublin. the existing vehicle count is approximately 11,300. Arnold Road is a north-south two-lane road parallel to and west of Hacienda Drive. It currently connects Gleason Drive and existing Dublin Boulevard (future Central Parkway). This road is being extended southward to Dublin Boulevard (ultimate alignment) The existing average daily traffic flow on Arnold Drive is approximately 3,500 vehicles per day. Gleason Drive is an east-west two-lane road parallel to and north of Dublin Boulevard. It serves the Santa Rita Rehabilitation Center, Federal Correctional Institute and existing developments along Gleason Drive. Gleason Drive connects Tassajara Road with Arnold Road and carries between 5,100 vehicles per day (west of Tassajara Road) to approximately 1,000 vehicles per day (west of Hacienda Drive). Portions of Gleason Drive are being widened to four lanes. City of Dublin Page 41 Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000 PA #99-062 Tassajara Road is a two-lane rural road connecting Santa Rita Road at 1-580 to the south and continues north to the Town of Danville. North of Contra Costa County line, it is named Cameo Tassajara and is used primarily for local traffic in the Tassajara Valley, with some through traffic. The average dally traffic volume on Tassajara Road is approximately 16,800 vehicles south of Dublin Boulevard, 9,900 vehicles per day between Dublin Boulevard and Gleason Drive and 7,500 vehicles per day north of Gleason Drive. This road is currently being widened to four lanes from 1-580 to North Dublin Ranch Boulevard. Santa Rita Road is a six-lane divided urban arterial roadway from the 1-580 interchange south to Valley Boulevard. It serves the east side of Pleasanton', including the Hacienda Business Park and provides access to downtown Pleasanton. Existing Intersection Operations The traffic analysis prepared by TJKM found that existing intersections near the project site currently operate at acceptable levels of service, defined by the City of Dublin as Level of Service "D" or better. This analysis included counts of existing traffic at major intersections near the proposed project as well as intersections throughout the Eastern Dublin area. Future Baseline Conditions To implement the transportation and circulation aspects of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan, the City of Dublin has undertaken a comprehensive program of transportation improvements in the community. The purpose of this program is to accommodate anticipated traffic from the Eastern Dublin area. Overall, the program includes upgrades to 1-580 freeway intersections, construction of new roads and improvements to existing roads. The program is primarily funded by fees levied on new development in eastern Dublin. A summary of major components of the Transportation Improvement Program adopted by the City is as follows. A full description of improvements is contained in the traffic analysis. · Hacienda Drive extension · Tassajara Road widening · Dublin Boulevard widening · Central Parkway extension Future Baseline Intersection Operations The traffic impact analysis for this proposed project also analyzed the future baseline intersection operations with existing traffic, traffic from approved but not yet built or occupied development and traffic from other pending developments in the area. The traffic analysis included various mitigation measures which would be the responsibility of these other developments and which would be consxstent with the City's Traffic Improvement Program, described above. With this future development in the eastern Dublin area and appropriate traffic improvements, the traffic analysis found that the operation of all study intersections could be maintained at LOS "D" or better. City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 42 March 2000 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial to existing traffic load and street capacity? LS/M. The traffic analysis, which analyzed the impacts of the Specific Plan/General Plan amendment and development of the Sybase office development, concludes that implementation of the proposed project would have a potentially significant impact with regard to anticipated traffic at project entrance driveways and other nearby intersections. Signal warrants for the intersection of Central Parkway/Hibernia Drive would be met to require the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection. The intersections of Arnold Road/Central Parkway and Hacienda Drive/Gleason Drive will require signalization to maintain safe traffic flow at these intersections due to increased peak hour turning volumes generated by the proposed project. Proposed project entrance intersections on Dublin Boulevard and on Central Parkway will require signalization to allow for safe left turn movements to and from the site. However with the mitigation measure listed below, impacts to local streets and nearby intersections would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with regard to traffic and transportation. With the traffic improvements being installed in the Eastern Dublin area and mitigation measures associated with future approved and pending developments, all study intersections near the Sybase site would operate at satisfactory LOS "D" or better conditions. Mitigation Measure 6: The project developer shall install traffic signals at the following intersections: Central Parkway/Hibernia Drive Arnold Road/Central Parkway Hacienda Drive/Gleason Drive Dublin Boulevard/project entrance. Central Parkway/project entrance b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a LOS standard established by the County CMA for designated roads)? NI. Based on the information contained in the TJKM traffic analysis, all nearby intersections can be mitigated to Level of Service D or better, which exceeds the minimum Level of Service E established by the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency. Impacts to CMA-designated facilities would therefore be less-than: significant. c) Change in a change of air traffic patterns? NI. The proposed project would have no impact on air traffic patterns, since it involves office development. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use? LS/M. Approval of the proposed Amendment and future construction under the auspices of the amended Specific Plan/General Plan would add new driveways, sidewalks and other vehicular and pedestrian travel ways where none currently exist. Increases in safety incidents would therefore occur due to the volume of vehicles and pedestrians using nearby roads and other circulation features. The TJKM traffic analysis identified potential on-site traffic and circulation issues which, unless modified, would be potentially significant. The City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 43 March 2000 e) g) following mitigation is therefore proposed to reduced on-site traffic safety issues to'a less- than-significant level: Mitigation Measure 7: The following on-site transportation design changes Shall be incorporated into the project: The site plan should be redesigned to provide a clear distance of 30 feet between street intersections and internal intersections or parking stalls on the site The site plan should provide a minimum clear distance of 30 feet between any internal intersections and parking stall son the site. Islands or planters within parking areas shall be a minimum of 30 feet in length "Stop" signs should be installed at the Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard access points for vehicles exiting the site at these locations. Result in inadequate emergency access? LS. The current need for emergency access is low, since there are no current residents or visitors on the site. Construction of the proposed office complex on the site would increase the need for emergency services and evacuation in the event of an emergency. If adequate access is not provided, .excessive lengths of time would be needed for emergency vehicles to serve new development. Since the proposed site development plan indicates that driveways meeting City design requirements would be provided to Central Parkway, Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive, potential impacts relating to inadequate emergency access would be less-than-significant. Inadequate parking capacity? LS/M. Parking for the proposed office complex would not comply with the minimum number of on-site parking spaces required by City's parking ordinance. Although bus stops are planned near the site to facilitate non-vehicular transportation modes there could still be a potentially significant impact with regard to accommodating future site workers and visitors. The following mitigation measure is therefore proposed to reduce potential parking impacts to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure 8: Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the project developer shall prepare and have approved by the Director of Community Development a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan designed to reduce the number of single occupancy vehicles using the project site. The TDM Plan shall include the following types of items: Designation, through signing and striping, of preferential parking near buildings for carpoolers; Use of a shuttle bus service to and from nearby BART stations; Appointment of a rideshare coordinator who shall promote use of alternative transit modes; Use of flex time and telecommuting to reduce peak parking demand. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? NI. The proposed Sybase development would include on-site bicycle parking as 'well as connections between proposed buildings and nearby streets. No impacts to pedestrian or bicycle access is therefore anticipated. City of Dublin Page 44 Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000 PA #99-062 XVI. Utilities and Service Systems Environmental Setting The project site is served by the following service providers: Sewage treatment and local water supply: Dublin San Ramon Services District and Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Zone 7. Regional water supply and distribution: Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation Di strict, Zone 7. Storm drainage: City of Dublin/Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Zone 7. Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB ? NI. The regional wastewater treatment plant is currently operating in compliance with local, state and federal water quality standards. The addition of wastewater flows from the project would not cause the plant to exceed such standards. Mitigation measures 3.5/1.0 through 22.0 contained in the eastern Dublin EIR deal with wastewater treatment collection, treatment and disposal. Adherence to these mitigation measures will reduce potential wastewater impacts of the project to a level of less-than-significance. b) Require new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities ? LS. Existing water and sewer lines would need to be extended into the site from the west Such extensions have been planned as part of the East Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan and have been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Less-than-significant impacts would therefore result. The project developer will also be required to conform with Mitigation Measures 2.5/24.0 through 43.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR regarding water service. c) Require new storm drainage facilities? LS. The project developer has indicated that new on-site drainage facilities would be constructed as part of project construction. The City's Public Works Department has indicated that the proposed drainage system is generally acceptable and overall drainage from the site would be accommodated by existing or planned local and regional drainage facilities, A less-than-significant impacts would therefore result. The project developer will also be required to adhere to Mitigation Measures 3.5/44.0 through 52.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR regarding drainage. d) Are sufficient water supplies available? LS. Approval of the proposed project and implementation of new office space under the auspices of the Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment would result in an increased demand for water for domestic and irrigation purposes. This amount of increased water demand could be accommodated by DSRSD and Zone 7 facilities and long-term supplies. Recycled water would be supplied to the site for irrigation by DSRSD. The project developer would be required to provide any local extensions and connections to nearby facilities. This conclusion is based on information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Less-than-significant impacts would therefore result. City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 45 March 2000 e) e,f) g) Adequate wastewater capacity to serve the proposed project? LS. Approval of the proposed Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment and construction of new offices space would increase'the demand for wastewater treatment over present conditions. Presently, the site is vacant and there is no demand for wastewater treatment service. Based on information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, DSRSD has indicated that the local wastewater treatment plant has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project. Less-than-significant impacts are therefore anticipated with regard to wastewater treatment. Solid waste disposal? LS. Construction of proposed office uses under the auspices of an approved Specific Plan Amendment/General Plan Amendment would incrementally increase generation of solid waste. Over the long term, the amount of solid waste reaching landfill would decrease as statewide regulations mandating increased recycling take effect. Information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR indicates that the solid waste hauler can accommodate this project. Less-than-significant impacts are therefore anticipated with regard to solid waste disposal. The project developer must also adhere to Mitigation Measures 3.4/37.0 through 40.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR regarding solid waste disposal. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste ? NI. The City of Dublin and the solid waste hauler would ensure that developers of individual projects constructed under the auspices of an amended Specific Plan and General Plan would adhere to federal, state and local solid waste regulations. XV. Mandatory Findings of Significance a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality .of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No. The preceding analysis indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse impact on overall environmental quality, including biological resources or cultural resources with the implementation of mitigation measures recommended in the Initial Study. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). No, although incremental increases in certain areas can be expected as a result of constructing this project, including additional traffic, air emissions, light and glare, short term noise emissions, the project site lies within an area with an approved specific plan. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No. No such impacts have been discovered in the course of preparing this Initial Study. City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 46 March 2000 Initial Study Preparer Jerry Haag, Urban Planner Agencies and Organizations Consulted The following agencies and organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial Study: City of Dublin Eddie Peabody Jr., AICP, Community Development Director Kevin Van Katwyk, Senior Civil Engineer Ray Kuzbari, Traffic Engineer Kathleen "Kit" Faubion, Assistant City Attorney Rose Macian, Dublin Police Department Ed Laudini. Alameda County Fire Department Dublin San Ramon Services District Bruce Webb References Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Environmental Impact Report, Wallace Roberts and Todd, 1994. Geotechnical Investigation Report, Proposed Sybase Corporate Headquarters, Kleinfelder, 2000 Traffic Study for the Proposed Sybase Headquarters, TJKM Associates, 2000. City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 47 March 2000 City of Dublin Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters PA #99-062 Page 48 March 2000 Sybase Corporate Headquarters PA 99-062 Response to Mitigated Negative Declaration Comments May 2000 Introduction This report compiles all letters received by the City of Dublin during the 30-day Mitigated Negative Declaration public review period and includes responses to each of the comments. Summary of Comment Letters Comment letters were received by the City of Dublin from the following agencies and organizations. · Comment Letter 1: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region · Comment Letter 2: California Department of Transportation Responses to Comments This is a summary of each of the comments and the response of the City of Dublin. Each letter has been reviewed and divided into smaller comments as noted by annotations in the margin in each of the letters. Each comment is then summarized and responded to below. The full text of each letter with annotations follows this section. Since many of the comments relate to potential biological impacts of the projects, a master response has been formulated for this topic. Letter 1: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region Comment 1.1: Mitigation Measure 5, p. 35, The Board does not believe the language of the mitigation measure does not appear to be adequate to ensure that expected stormwater runoff impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level. The project site plan, as contained in the Initial Study, does not appear to provide stormwater quality design measures or treatment controls. Approval of the project, as designed, would place the City of Dublin in violation of its NPDES municipal stormwater permit. Response: Based upon receipt of the Board's comment letter, the applicant has redesigned the grading and landscaping plan components of the Sybase project to include the following BMPs. 1) Biofiltration swales have been added where possible along the perimeter of the parking lot, resulting in approximately 45% of the parking lot to be served by biofilters. City of Dublin Sybase Corporate Headquarters Response to Comments Page 2 June 2000 2) Fossil filters with small sediment traps would be used in locations where it is not possible to use biofiItration swales due to grade restrictions and the need to meet City parking requirements. A regular maintenance program for filters and traps will be included in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for the project. 3) A large landscaped area is proposed to be located south of the building complex, which would reduce the amount of impervious surface being created on the site. 4) The project developer intended to use drip irrigation systems to the fullest extent possible to minimize erosion from traditional sprinkler heads Comment 1.2: The statement included in Mitigation Measure 5 dealing with the developer's responsibility to comply with the Statewide NPDES General Permit for Discharge should be reworded. The following working is recommended. "Specific development projects of 5 acres or more, or less than five acres if the activity is part of a larger common plan of development, must obtain coverage of their project under the Statewide NPDES General Permit for Dischargers of Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity (permit). This coverage must be obtained by filing a Notice f Intent (NOI) with the appropriate annual permit fee (4250 for the City of Dublin) with the State Water Resources Control Board prior to commencement of grading and subsequently complying with the terms and conditions of the permit. The proposed project is five acres or larger and therefore the project proponent must obtain coverage for it under the permit prior to beginning grading." Response: The revised wording suggested by the Board staff is hereby incorporated by reference into the Sybase Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Letter 2: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) · Comment 2.1: Please forward a copy of the traffic impact analysis prepared by TJKM Associates to Caltrans. Response: A copy of the traffic impact analysis will be forwarded as requeSted. City of Dublin Sybase Corporate Headquarters Response to Comments Page 3 June 2000 Comment Letters City of Dublin Sybase Corporate Headquarters Response to Comments Page 4 June 2000 ~'TATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION AND HOIJSING AGEN(;:Y DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P O BOX 2366O OAKLAND, CA 946230660 Tet: (510) 286-4444 Fmc (510) 286-5513 TDD [510) 286-4454 April 13, 2000 Mr. Jerry Haag Planning Department City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Dear Mr. Haag: APE 17 ZOO0 S'I TE CLEARINGHOUSE Sybase Corporate Headquarters, PA ~99-062 - Mitigated Negative Declaration ALA-580-18.82 File #ALA580626 Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environmental review process for the above-referenced project. We have reviewed~ the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Sybase Corporate Headquarters, and have the following comments to offer. At Caltrans we are primarily concerned with impacts to the State Highway system, specifically Interstate 580 (1-580) in your community. The Environmental Checklist points to the possibility that the project will generate substantial additional vehicular movement. To adequately review this project's impacts, and to verify the conclusions reached in the Initial Study, we would like to request a copy of the traffic analysis by TJKM Associates that would include trip generation rates, distribution percentages, and assignment volumes-.-.. Information in the traffic analysis should be shown on traffic diagrams that depict accurate circulation Patterns and represent both local streets and all State ramps and intersections. AM and PM pekk hour volumes and Average Daily Traffic (Al)T) for weekdays and weekends would also be important, for both existing and projected traffic conditions. Please forward a copy of the traffic analysis to: Paul Svedersky Office of Transportation Planning B Caltrans, District 4 P.O. Box 23660 Oakland, CA 94623-0660 Should you require further information or have any questions regarding this letter, please call Paul ,) Svedersk-y of my staff at (510) 62_-16,9. Sincerely, HARRY Y. YAHATA District Director District Branch Chief IGR/CEQA c: Katie Shulte, State Clearinghouse '~rmston H. Hickox ge~reta~3'jbr vironmental Protection California R-"gional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region Interact Address: http://www.swrcb.ea.gov 1515 Clay S~'eet, Suite 1400, Oakland, California 94612 Phone (510) 622-2300 · FAX {510) 622-2460 Il& Date: File Nos. 1538.09, 2198.09 (KILL) Mr. Jerry Haag City of Dubtin P.O. Box 2340 Dublin, CA 94568 Re: PA #99-062, Sybase Corporate Headquarters, CiD, of Dublin, Alameda Count3.', Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCtt #1991103064 Dear Mr. Haag: The Board has recently received the above-referenced draft CEQA document for the Sybase Corpo~te Headqum--ters projecf: Thank you for the oppormmry to review it. As described in the documcmt, the project would construct a maximum of 420,000 square feet of office space, approximately 1,200 spaces of parking, and associated inirasmmmre, landscaping, and other uses on a 19 acre site. The project's landscaping would include a 'main landscape feature' of approximately 1.4 acres in size (p.5). The site is located at the northwest corner of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard. Some previous CEQA review of this site ',,,'as completed in 1994, as a part of the adoption by the City of Dublin of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and G~eral Plan. The Eastern Dublin Plan area includes th/s site, and is comprised of 3.302 acres of land east of the central portion of Dubtin and north of Interstate 580. [z~s proposed, the project wit1 have Pmenfiaiiy significant impacts to water quality and beneficial uses of waters of the State. These imeacts will result from increases in re%an nmoffpollutants and changes in storm water runoffvolume and timing associated with constructing the project and associated imp~mMous surface on a pres~ntly madeveloped site: The Negative Declaration includes a mitigation measure to address these pot~ntialty si_m~ificant impacts (/Vfifigafion Measure 5, p.35). Mitigation Measure 5 states: The project developer shall pre-pare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plar~ (SV, rPPP), tisring Best Management Practices to reduce construction and post-construction actixfities to a less than si_maificant level. Measures m%, include, but shall not be limited to revegetation of ~aded areas, sik fencing and oth~ measures. The SW-PPP shall conform m standards adopted by the Re~onal Water Quality Control Board and City of Dablin and shall be approved by both agencies (as applicable) prior to issuance of_arading pe~ts. California Environmental Protection Agency Gm3' Daxis Goveraor  Re¢,cJed Paper : Mr. Jerry Haag p.2 Sybase Corporate HeadquartersNegafive Declaration SCH 1991103064 Specific development projects containing five acres or more are also required to obtain a Notice of Intent from the State Water Resources Control Board prior to commencement of~ading. The general language of the mitigation measure does not appear adequate to ensure mitigation of the expzcted impacts, in particular because the measure does not provide additional guidance adequate to assist the City or project proponent with complying with this m/tigar/on measure, and no other appropr/are ~m~idance relevant to this measure has been provided in the Negative Declaration. Based on the projedt description and proposed si~e plan (p.l 0) inr. lud~.d -in ~,e Ncgafi";e D~larafion, it appears that tlae project design will not adequately mitigate the project's .impacts to warer quality, as it appears that no storm water quality design measures or treatment controls have bec-n included in it. Further, it appears that approval of the project design, as it is presently proposed, will place the City of Dublin in violation of its NPDES municipal storm water permit. The City of Dublin is permi.tted under and complies with N'PDES permit CAS0029831, the municinal storm water poma-fit and associated Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP), as a part of approving and conditioning new and redevelopment projects. As of February 19, 1998, the SV~r/vlZP includes the following requ/rc-~ments: Agencies will require public and private development projects to include site ptmrming and design techniques to prevent and n~inimize impacts to water quality. These may include the following: a. Minimize land disturbance. b. Minimize impervious surfaces (e.g., roadway width), especially directly connected impervious areas (DCi~.). c. Use of clustering. d. Preservation of' quality open space. e. Maintain (and/or restore, if possible) r/parian areas and wetlands as project amtm.ifies, establishing vegetation buffer zones to reduce runoff into waterways. Each agency will require public and private, developmeni projects to include permanent stormwater quality controls, as appropriate, if sufficient site planning measures are not implemented or feasible. As I have discussed in my annual review meetin~ with City staff over the last two years, no later than February 19, 1998, the City should have be~ and should now be requiring both design measures and permanent treatment controls in new and redevelopment projects, including the subject project. At a minimum, to assist the City and project proponent with ensuring the project's comr~I/ance with Mitigation Measure 5, and to assist the ~City with complying with its NPDES storm warer perm/t, we California Environmental Protection Agency Paper Mr. Jerry Haag p.3 Sybase Corporate Headquarters Negative Declaration SCH 1991103064 recommend that the above performance standard be ,a~tten into the Negative Declaration as a part of Mitigation Measure 5, br oth~-u-wise explicitly referenced as a part of that mitigation measure. Add!tiona/Iy, the m/figation measure should require the project proponent to include in its SW'PPP a description of operation and maintenance measures for its proposed post-construction storm wmer management practices and of how that operation and maintenance will be funded. Ideally, the mitigation measure would state the specific design measures and treatment controls that are proposed to be incorporated into the project. As a note, as Board staff have discussed with City staff, the use of storm drain inlet filters (e.g., Fossil Filters) as the sole means of meeting the above performance standard is not acceptable, because it does not reflect the language in the performance standard, and because of the limited ability of such ISiXers to remove flue range of pollutants fom~d in 'ai:t, zm,'-m'ao:,,~'~~ Wen r~'pical operating conditions. The Alameda Countywide Clean Water Pro,am has developed =m.fidance for recommended or required treatment controls for new and redevelopment projects in general and especially for certa/n types of projects (e.g., gas stations). The Re~onal Board has provided genera/g-a/dance in the Ap~l I994 Staff Recommendations for New DeveIopment, and has also endorsed BASMAA's Start at the Source. Additional guidance includes the BASM~_ £MP Fact Sheets, US EPA's Low Imioact Desigw Develqvrnent Srratefes handbooks, and a variety ofplanning and des/Da iiterarure. The project will result in changes to the volume and timing of storm water runoff from the s/re. Such changes may resuk in increases in bed and bank instability, the loss 0fripar/an vegetation and habitat, threats to existing structures, and changes in erosion and sedimentation in the creeks and arroyos downstream of the project site. Additionally, such changes may contribute to impacts that cumulatively cause such problcmas, as may be seen, for example, along portions of the .~u'royo de la La~mma, m which this project drafl,-q. A(ifigafion for these impacts has not be~ infiluded in the Negative Declaration, although it references a drainage plan for the Specific Plan area that was previously prepared and wk/ch may address these potent/a//mr)acts. The statement in Mitigation Measure 5 regarding compliance with the Statewide NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associate with Construction Activity should be reworded to make clearer the project proponent's responsibilities. We would suggest the following wording: Specific development projects 0ffive acres or more, or less than five acres if the actixfity is part of a larger common plan of development, must obtain coverage of their project under the Statewide NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associate with Consu'uction Acfixfty (porn-mit). This coverage may be it)mined by filing a Notice of tntenl (NOI') and appropriate annual p~mit fee ($250 in the City of Dublin) with the State Water Resources Control Board (S~rRCB) prior to commencem~-nt of D-ading, and subsequ~tly compt55ng with the terms and conditions of the permit. An NOI and copy of the permit are available at the SWRCB's web page, ~n,vw.swrcb.ca. gov. The proposed project is five acres or larger, and California Environmental Protection Agency Mr. Jen3, Haag p.4 Sybase Corporate Headquarters Negative Declaration SCH 1991103064 therefore the project proponent must obtain coverage for it under the permit pr/or to be~nning _marling. To assist permittees to comply with the permit, the Board.and the San Francisco Estuary Project have available several documents and videos, as described in the enclosed brochure. l/'you have any questions, please contact me via email to k_hlr~.rb2.s'a~rcb.ca.~oy, or at (510) 622- 2380. Sincerely, Keith H. Lichten Water Resource Control Eng/neer Enclosure':' "Construct/on Site Planning and Management Resources" brochure cc: Mr. Sa/ed A_m/nian City of Dubtm P.O. Box 2340 Dublin, CA, 94568 Date BoWyer, RWQCB California t~nvironmental Protection Agency Re~.cled Paper Sybase Headquarters Facility (PA 99-062) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program May 2000 Mitigation Measure Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Schedule Mitigation Measure 1: Pole-mounted street lights shall be equipped with cut-off lenses and oriented down toward interior streets to minimize unwanted light and glare spill over. Building security lighting and other lights shall be directed downward. All exterior glass panels shall be of non-glare manufacture. Mitigation Measure 2 Not used. Mitigation Measure 3: Not used Dublin Public Works Department; Dublin Plmming Department Dublin Public Works Department; Dublin Planning Department Street improvement drawings (for street lights); plan checks for individual buildings prior to issuance of building permits (building lighting) ATTACHMENT 7 Mitigation Measure Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule Verification Mitigation Measure 4: The possibility that undetected prehistoric archeological resources might exist on the property must be recognized and a contingency plan shall be developed in conformity with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 to handle discoveries during project construction. In the event any prehistoric material is discovered, work shall be halted in the immediate vicinity of the site until a. qualified archeologist inspects the discovery, and, if necessary, implements plans for further evaluative testing and/or retrieval of endangered materials. Project developer Dublin Planning Department During project construction Sybase Corporate Headquarters Facility Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Dublin Page 2 Mitigation Measure Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule Verification Mitigation Measure 5: The project developer shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), listing Best Management Practices to reduce construction and post-construction activities to a less than significant level. Measures may include, but shall not be limited to revegetation of graded areas, silt fencing and other measures. The SWPPP shall conform to standards adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board and City of Dublin and shall be approved by both agencies (as applicable) prior to issuance of grading permits. Mitigation Measure 6: The project developer shall install traffic signals at the following intersections: · Central Parkway/Hibernia Drive · Arnold Road/Central Parkway · Hacienda Drive/Gleason Drive ° Dublin Boulevard/project entrance. · Central Parkway/project entrance Project developer Project developer Dublin Public Works Department City of Dublin Public Works Department Prior to issuance of grading permits Prior to occupancy of first building Sybase Corporate Headquarters Facility Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Dublin Page 3 Mitigation Measure Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule Mitigation Measure 7: The following on- site transportation design changes shall be incorporated into the project: · The site plan should be redesigned to provide a clear distance of 30 feet between street intersections and internal intersections or parking stalls on the site ° The site plan should provide a minimum clear distance of 30 feet between any internal intersections and parking stall son the site. · Islands or planters within parking areas shall be a minimum of 30 feet in length · "Stop" signs should be installed at the Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard access points for vehicles exiting the site at these locations. Project developer City of Dublin Public Works and Planning Departments Prior to approval of SDR Sybase Corporate Headquarters Facility Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Dublin Verification Page 4 Mitigation Measure Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility Monitoring Schedule Verification Mitigation Measure 8: Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the project developer shall prepare and have approved by the Director of Community Development a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan designed to reduce the number of single occupancy vehicles using the project site. The TDM Plan shall include the following types of items: Project developer City of Dublin Planning Department Prior to occupancy of first building Designation, through signing and striping, of preferential parking near buildings for carpoolers; Use of a shuttle bus service to and from nearby BART stations; Appointment of a rideshare coordinator who shall promote use of alternative transit modes; Use of flex time and telecommuting to reduce peak parking demand. Sybase Corporate Headquarters Facility Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Dublin Page 5 13 INDUSTRIAL/OFFICE '24.6 AC. 14 INDUSTRIAL/OFFICE Proposed SP/GPA area 12 · PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC 78.4 Ac. 11B LOW/MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ~, ',.,. 63.0 AC. 2 q ~ -- --~"~ PARK 11A Il I J so.3 ^c. MEDiUM/MEDiUM I I 10 I I ELEMENTARY I J HIGH DENSITY J J SCHOOL RESIDENTIAL 14.7Ac. II Io.o^c. II 15.6 Ac, 9 8 4 CAMPUS MEDIUM HIGH MEDIUM HIGH-LOW MEDIUM DENSITY OFFICE DENSITY DENSITY RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL } 9.0 Ac. RESIDENIIAL 29.6 Ac. 31,3 Ac. 12.0 Ac. NOTES · All areas are in gross acres 3 GENERAL 16.9 AC. D. LIB. LIN , 'roposed S~'~a~e development area : -- -q i ...... J CAMPUS OFFICE GENERAL COMMERCIAL Il ' I J ~ ,~ 47.7Ac. I 52.2Ac G I~ ~ ~ II , 5B 1/ .I COMMERCIAL I~ / ~: .I 34 3 AC A - TTACHME~ :~ ~ ~ PROPOSED ALAMEDA COUNTY SURPLUS PROPERTY AUmOBIW Planned Development Rezone/SDR area ~ ~,, DUBLIN, CAUFOaN~A