HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 21-18 Adopting the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration for Zeiss RESOLUTION NO. 21 — 18
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
ADOPTING A SUPPLEMENTAL MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE
ZEISS INNOVATION CENTER PROJECT PLPA 2017-00025 (APN 986-0014-010-00)
WHEREAS, the Applicant, Carl Zeiss, Inc. submitted a Planning Application for the Zeiss
Innovation Center project, which consists of a 433,090 square foot research and development
campus comprised of two buildings, a parking structure, and associated site, frontage, and landscape
improvements. Requested land use approvals include a Planned Development Rezone with a Stage
1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, a Site Development Review Permit for Phase 1 (208,650 square
foot building), and a Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration. These planning and implementing
actions are collectively known as the "Zeiss Innovation Center project" or the "Project"; and
WHEREAS, the project Site is located at the northeast corner of Dublin Boulevard and Arnold
Road within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area (APN 986-0014-010-00); and
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State
guidelines and City environmental regulations, require that certain projects be reviewed for
environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the project is located in the General Plan Eastern Extended Planning Area and
the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, for which the City Council certified a Program Environmental
Impact Report by Resolution 51-93 ("Eastern Dublin EIR" or "EDEIR", SCH 91103064) on May 10,
1993, which resolution is incorporated herein by reference. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified
significant impacts from development of the Eastern Dublin area, some of which could not be
mitigated to less than significant. Upon approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan, the City Council adopted mitigations, a mitigation monitoring program and a Statement
of Overriding Considerations (Resolution 53-93, incorporated herein by reference); and
WHEREAS, in 2001, the City prepared a modified Initial Study to evaluate whether additional
environmental review than in the Eastern Dublin EIR was needed for a proposed Cisco development
project. Based on the Initial Study, the City prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration dated June
2001 (SCH 1991103064). The City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND),
Statement of Overriding considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the change in the
General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan designation and zoning on the project site to Campus
Office on April 15, 2003 (Resolution No. 65-03, incorporated herein by reference); and
WHEREAS, the City prepared a modified Initial Study to determine whether supplemental
environmental review was required for the proposed Zeiss Innovation Center project under CEQA
standards. The Initial Study examined whether there were substantial changes to the proposed
development, substantial changes in circumstances, or new information, any of which would result in
new or more severe significant impacts than analyzed in the prior Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco MND
or whether any other standards for supplemental environmental review were met; and
WHEREAS, upon completion of the Initial Study it was determined that there were new
potentially significant impacts associated with the project related to biological resources; therefore, a
Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared to analyze those biological impacts; and
Reso No. 21-18, Adopted 3/6/2018, Item No. 6.1 Page 1 of 3
WHEREAS, the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study was circulated for
public review from December 13, 2017 to January 30, 2018; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin received four comment letters during the public review period;
and
WHEREAS, on February 13, 2018, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public
hearing on the project, including the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration, at which time all
interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated February 13, 2018, and incorporated herein by reference,
described and analyzed the project and related Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
Planning Commission and recommended adoption of the Supplemental Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approval of the project; and
WHEREAS, on February 13, 2018, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 18-02
(incorporated herein by reference) recommending that the City Council adopt the Supplemental
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project; and
WHEREAS, on March 6, 2018 the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the
project and Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration, at which time all interested parties had the
opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated March 6, 2018 and incorporated herein by reference
described and analyzed the project and related Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
City Council and recommended adoption of the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approval of the project; and
WHEREAS, on March 6, 2018 the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the
project and the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration, at which time all interested parties had
the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration, as
well as the prior Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco Mitigated Negative Declaration and all above-
referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony before taking any action on the project.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and
made a part of this Resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin finds the following:
A. The Dublin City Council has reviewed and considered the Supplemental Mitigated Negative
Declaration including comments received during the public review period, prior to taking action
on the Project.
B. The Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately describes the environmental
impacts of the Project. On the basis of the whole record before it, the City Council finds that
there is no substantial evidence that the Project as approved with mitigation will have a
significant effect on the environment.
C. The Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with
CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin Environmental Regulations.
Reso No. 21-18, Adopted 3/6/2018. Item No. 6.1 Page 2 of 3
D. The Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration is complete and adequate and reflects the
City's independent judgement and analysis as to the environmental effects of the Project.
E. Following adoption of this Resolution, City staff is authorized and directed to file with the
County of Alameda a Notice of Determination pursuant to CEQA.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that based on the above findings, the Dublin City Council
adopts the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration (attached as Exhibit A) and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (attached as Exhibit B) for the project and the mitigation
measures in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are imposed as conditions of approval
for the project.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of March 2018, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Goel, Gupta and Hernandez, and Mayor Haubert
NOES:
ABSENT:
9 �
ABSTAIN: '
Y✓
� ay or
ATTEST: C
City Clerk
Reso No. 21-18, Adopted 3/6/2018, Item No. 6.1 Page 3 of 3
Zeiss Innovation Center
Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study
December 8, 2017
Planning Application Number: PLPA-2017-00025
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center Supplemental MND
| Page 1
3/21/2018
BN 31503672v2
Zeiss Innovation Center
Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration
PLPA-2017-00025
December 8, 2017
On May 10, 1993, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No . 51-93, certifying an
Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan
(Eastern Dublin EIR, SCH #91103064). The certified EIR consisted of a Draft EIR and Responses
to Comments bound volumes, as well as an Addendum to the Eastern Dublin EIR dated May 4,
1993, assessing a reduced development project alternative. The City Council adopted
Resolution No. 53-93 approving a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan for the reduced
area alternative on May 10, 1993. On August 22, 1994, the City Council adopted a second
Addendum updating wastewater disposal plans for Eastern Dublin. The Eastern Dublin EIR
evaluated the potential environmental effects of urbanizing Eastern Dublin over a 20 to 30 year
period. Since certification of the EIR, many implementing projects have been proposed, relying
to various degrees on the certified EIR.
As part of the certification of the Eastern Dublin 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.
The certified EIR contains mitigation measures that would be applied to any development
within the project area, including the proposed project . Specific mitigation measures are noted
in the Initial Study for the proposed project.
The project site was also the subject of a previous Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
(IS/MND) for the proposed Cisco Systems project in 2003. Cisco withdrew their application
prior to entitlement; however, the property owner (Alameda County Surplus Property
Authority) decided to move forward with the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
amendments for the project site. In 2003, the City Council amended the General Plan and EDSP
from High Density Residential to Campus Office and adopted the Cisco IS/MND. The IS/MND
assumed 430,090 square feet of office and Research and Development (R&D) space to
accommodate 3,000 employees. The Cisco IS/MND was adopted by the City Council in April
2003.
This Supplemental MND has been prepared for the project pursuant to the rules for
supplemental environmental review under Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA
Guidelines Section 15162, as described below.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center Supplemental MND
| Page 2
3/21/2018
BN 31503672v2
Project Description
Carl Zeiss, Inc. (ZEISS) has applied for a Planned Development Zoning with a related Stage 1 and
Stage 2 Development Plan and a Site Development Review (SDR) Permit for the Zeiss Innovation
Center (the proposed project). Figures illustrating the proposed project are shown at the end
of this Initial Study and are referenced therein.
The proposed project would be developed in two phases. Phase 1 would consist of a three-
story, 208,650 gross square feet (GSF) Research and Development (R&D) building with an entry
plaza and 663 surface parking spaces. Phase 2 would consist of an additional five-story,
224,440 GSF R&D building with 167 surface parking spaces, and a five story, 1,229-space
parking garage.
At build-out, the proposed project would include two low-to-mid-rise (three-story and five-
story) R&D buildings totaling 433,090 GSF and used for research, development and testing, light
assembly and dry laboratories, and supporting office spaces. Other internal uses would include
conference rooms, an employee cafeteria, and a demonstration center/showroom on the
ground floor. Parking would include one parking garage with 1,229 spaces and 167 surface
parking spaces, for a total of 1,396 spaces. Other miscellaneous exterior features would include
a utilities enclosure, trash/ recycling enclosure, nitrogen pad enclosure, bike storage enclosure,
loading areas and landscaping.
Seasonal wetlands are located on 1.03 acres of the project site and occur as nine separate
topographic depressions where seasonal inundation and/or saturation occur during the rainy
season. Vegetation within the seasonal wetlands is sparse, and dominated by a mixture of
predominantly non-native grasses and forbs, all of which are adapted to high levels of
disturbance. Implementation of the proposed project would result in permanent impacts to
0.45 acres of seasonal wetlands and preserve the remaining 0.58 acres. In addition to the
seasonal wetlands, two locally rare plant species were identified, namely; Congdon’s tarplant
and California dock.
The project site would accommodate approximately 1,500 employees at build out. To help
reduce drive-alone trips, the Applicant has agreed to implement a Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Program with a goal of reducing travel trip by 20% from the estimated
average daily trips as identified in the Traffic Consistency Analysis (Kimley-Horn, December
2017). Trip reduction measures to be considered may include the following:
Provide complementary BART and bus passes and provide guaranteed ride home
services for emergencies.
Provide dedicated on-campus parking (5% of supply) for high occupancy vehicles
(HOVs).
Provide staggered working hours.
Provide additional bike racks and lockers on-campus, including shower facilities.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center Supplemental MND
| Page 3
3/21/2018
BN 31503672v2
Conduct educational outreach and marketing to promote the use of non-automotive
options for commuting by having an on -site TDM kiosk and TDM coordinator.
The proposed project is consistent with the current General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan Land Use Designation of Campus Office.
Prior CEQA Analyses and Determinations
As summarized above and discussed in more detail in the attached Initial Study, the project site
has been planned for urbanization since the Eastern Dublin EIR approval in 1993 (and
subsequent addenda in May 1993 and August 1994).
The project site was also the subject of a previous IS/MND for the proposed Cisco Systems
project in 2003. Cisco withdrew their application prior to entitlement; however, the property
owner (Alameda County Surplus Property Authority) decided to move forward with the General
Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (ESDP) amendments for the project site. In 2003, the City
Council amended the General Plan and EDSP from High Density Residential to Campus Office
and adopted the Cisco IS/MND which assumed 430,090 square feet of office and R&D space to
accommodate 3,000 employees.
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified various environmental impacts, and mitigations were adopted
upon approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan . For identified
impacts that could not be mitigated to insignificance, the City Council adopted a Statement of
Overriding Considerations. All previously adopted mitigation measures for development of
Eastern Dublin identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco Systems IS/MND that are
applicable to the project and project site continue to apply to the currently proposed project as
further discussed in the attached IS/Supplemental MND.
Current CEQA Analysis and Determination that a Supplemental Mitigated
Negative Declaration is appropriate for this Project.
The City of Dublin has determined that a Supplemental MND is the appropriate CEQA review
for the project. The proposed project is consistent with the general plan land use designation
for the project site (commonly referred to as Site 15A) and is similar in size to the 430,090-
square foot research and development project analyzed in the Cisco Systems IS/MND. Through
the IS/Supplemental MND for the proposed project, the City has determined that a
Supplemental MND is required.
Because the Cisco Systems IS/MND was prepared in 2001, updates to biological resources,
cultural (historic) resources and transportation/traffic are included in this IS/Supplemental
MND to confirm previous findings. It was concluded that biological resources are the only
environmental issue where a potential new significant impact could occur. This new significant
impact has been analyzed and mitigation proposed as described in the IS/Supplemental MND.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center Supplemental MND
| Page 4
3/21/2018
BN 31503672v2
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 identifies the conditions requiring subsequent environmental
review. After a review of these conditions, the City has determined that a Supplemental MND
is required for this project. This is based on the following analysis:
a) Are there substantial changes to the project involving new or more severe significant
impacts?
There are no substantial changes to the project analyzed in the Cisco Systems IS/MND and
Eastern Dublin EIR. As demonstrated in the Initial Study, the proposed land uses on the
project site is not a substantial change from the Cisco Systems IS/MND analysis and would
not result in additional significant impacts, and no additional or different mitigation
measures are required.
b) Are there substantial changes in the conditions which the project is undertaken
involving new or more severe significant impacts?
The only substantial changes in the conditions assumed in the Cisco Systems IS/MND and
Eastern Dublin EIR relates to biological resources located on the project site. The prior
CEQA documents did not identify any biological resources on the site. Recent surveys (2017)
of the site have identified wetlands and certain protected plant species as located on the
site. The proposed project may cause significant impacts on these resources. Therefore, a
Supplemental MND has been prepared to analyze these impacts and include mitigation
measures to reduce these impacts to less than significant. This is documented in the
attached Initial Study/Supplemental MND.
c) Is there new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could
not have been known at the time of the previous EIR that shows the project would
have a significant effect not addressed in the previous EIR; or previous effects are
more severe; or, previously infeasible mitigation measures are now feasible but the
Applicant declined to adopt them; or mitigation measures considerably different from
those in the previous EIR would substantially reduce significant effects but the
Applicant declines to adopt them?
As documented in the attached IS/Supplemental MND, there is no new information showing
a new or more severe significant effect beyond those identified in the prior CEQA
documents except for biological resources (as discussed above). Cultural Resources were
further analyzed based on the Section 106 Report prepared by the Applicant, as required for
their federal permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers for the proposed fill of wetlands.
However, this additional information does not identify any new or significant impact of the
project on cultural resources. A traffic consistency analysis also was prepared for the
project. The traffic analysis does not identify any new or significant impact of the project on
transportation. All previously adopted mitigations continue to apply to the project. The
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center Supplemental MND
| Page 5
3/21/2018
BN 31503672v2
CEQA documents adequately describe the impacts and mitigations associated with the
proposed development on the project site for all areas except biological resources.
d) Should a subsequent or supplemental EIR or negative declaration be prepared?
A Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration is required because of new impacts and
mitigation measures for biological resources. Other than biological resources, there are no
new or substantially more severe significant impacts of the project beyond those identified
in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco Systems IS/MND, as documented in the attached
IS/Supplemental MND.
Conclusion
This Supplemental MND is prepared pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21166 and
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 based on the attached IS/Supplemental MND. The City further
determines that the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco Systems IS/MND adequately address the
potential environmental impacts for the project site, except for biological resources, as
documented in the attached IS/Supplemental MND.
This Supplemental MND will be circulated for public review for 30 days in accordance with
CEQA requirements.
The IS/Supplemental MND, Eastern Dublin EIR, Cisco Systems IS/MND and all resolutions cited
above are incorporated herein by reference and are available for public review during normal
business hours in the Community Development Department, Dublin City Hall, 100 Civic Plaza,
Dublin CA.
BN 31503672v2
Zeiss Innovation Center
Initial Study/
Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 8, 2017
Planning Application Number: PLPA-2017-00025
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page i
Table of Contents
Background & Project Description 1
Environmental Checklist 8
Determination 11
Explanation of Environmental Checklist Responses 12
Appendices
A Biological Resources Assessment Report (WRA, 2017)
B Delineation of Potential Jurisdictional Wetlands Under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (WRA, 2017)
C Rare Plant Survey Report (WRA 2017)
D Historical Resources Survey of APN 986-0014-010 (TRA 2017)
E Carl Zeiss Innovation Center Traffic Consistency Analysis (Kimley-Horn &
Associates, 2017)
List of Figures
Figure 1: Project Vicinity and Location
Figure 2a: Site Plan – Phase 1
Figure 2b: Site Plan – Phase 2
Figure 3: Preliminary Landscape Plan – Phase 1
Figure 4: Existing Wetlands
Figure 5: Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan – Phase 1
Figure 6: Preliminary Utility Plan – Phase 1
Figure 7: Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan – Phase 1
Figure 8: Conceptual Renderings
Note: All figures are included at the end of the document.
List of Tables
Table 1. City of Dublin Land Use/Noise Compatibility Standards (decibels)
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 1
Zeiss Innovation Center
Initial Study/Supplemental Mitigated Negative
Declaration
Background & Project Description
Project Title
Zeiss Innovation Center
Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Dublin
Community Development Department
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Contact Person and Phone Number
Martha Battaglia
Associate Planner
Phone: 925-452-2152
martha.battaglia@dublin.ca.gov
Project Location & Setting
The project site is in eastern Dublin, on the northeast corner of Dublin Boulevard and Arnold
Road in the City of Dublin, CA, and encompasses 11.36 net acres of land (APN: 9860014-010-
00). See Figure 1: Project Vicinity and Location. The project site is currently vacant, relatively
flat and contains native and introduced species of grass. There are six existing trees at the
southwest corner of the Central Parkway and Park Place intersection. One of these trees is
located off-site and five are located within the project boundary. Seasonal wetlands are located
on 1.03 acres of the project site and occur as nine separate topographic depressions where
seasonal inundation and/or saturation occur during the rainy season. Vegetation within the
seasonal wetlands is sparse, and dominated by a mixture of predominantly non-native grasses
and forbs.
The project site is bordered by Central Parkway to the north, Park Place to the east, Dublin
Boulevard to the south, and Arnold Road to the west . The project site is commonly referred to
as Site 15A.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 2
Property north of Site 15A has been developed with an office complex (Microdental); the
property east of the project site was developed as the Sybase Corporate Headquarters
complex, then as the SAP regional office, and is currently unoccupied. Property south of the
project site is developed with commercial uses. Properties west of the project site are
undergoing development as residential uses (Boulevard).
Project Applicant’s Name and Address
Carl Zeiss, Inc.
Site 15A (Northeast corner of Dublin Boulevard/Arnold Road)
APN: 986-0014-010-00
Dublin, CA 94568
General Plan Designation
Campus Office
Specific Plan Designation
Campus Office
Zoning
PD – Planned Development- Campus Office
Project Context
The project site is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, which was the subject of
an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan (SCH # 91103064), certified by the City Council in Resolution No. 51-93 and
Addenda dated May 4, 1993 and August 22, 1994. This document is referred to in this Initial
Study as the "Eastern Dublin EIR."
The project site was also the subject of a previous Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
(IS/MND) for the proposed Cisco Systems prepared in 2001. Cisco withdrew their application
prior to entitlement; however, the property owner (Alameda County Surplus Property
Authority) decided to move forward with the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
amendments for the project site. In 2003, the City Council amended the General Plan and EDSP
from High Density Residential to Campus Office and adopted the Cisco IS/MND. The IS/MND
assumed 430,090 square feet of office and Research and Development (R&D) space to
accommodate 3,000 employees. Cisco IS/MND was adopted by the City Council in April 2003.
The project site is currently zoned “PD- Planned Development” as shown on the Dublin Zoning
Map (as amended through December 9, 2014). The land use is “Campus Office” as shown on
the Dublin General Plan – Land Use (as amended through October 6, 2015).
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 3
Subsequent Technical Studies
Because this Initial Study “tiers” off the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, it relies on the
technical studies and analysis presented in those prior CEQA documents. Supporting that
analysis, three additional technical studies were completed in support of the current (Zeiss)
project application. These are summarized below.
Biological Resources
Subsequent to the certification of the Cisco IS/MND, and as part of on-site analysis associated
with the current Zeiss development application, nine seasonal wetlands (totaling 1.03 acres)
were identified. As a result, the project site was surveyed for biological resources by WRA, Inc.
in April 2017. In addition to the seasonal wetlands, two locally rare plant species were
identified, namely; Congdon’s tarplant and California dock. The results of WRA’s analysis were
documented in a Biological Resources Assessment Report (2017), Delineation of Potential
Jurisdictional Wetlands Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (WRA 2017) and Rare Plant
Survey Report (WRA 2017), and are included as an appendix to this IS/Supplemental MND.
Cultural Resources
As part of the regulatory federal permit application for the project, an historic survey of the
project site was conducted by Tom Origer & Associates. The results of the survey and archival
research did not identify any historic resources. Tom Origer & Associates’ analysis is
documented in a Historical Resources Survey of APN 986-0014-010, and is included as an
appendix to this IS/Supplemental MND.
Traffic Consistency Analysis
Kimley-Horn & Associates prepared a Traffic Consistency Analysis in 2017 to evaluate the
proposed project’s conformance with the traffic impacts analyzed in the Cisco Systems IS/MND
and Eastern Dublin EIR. The Traffic Consistency Analysis concluded that the proposed project
would generate less traffic than previously analyzed and no new impacts, since the proposed
project would accommodate 1,500 employees, as compared to the estimated 3,000 employees
analyzed for the Cisco project. The Traffic Consistency Analysis is included as an appendix to
this IS/Supplemental MND.
Project Description
Carl Zeiss, Inc. (ZEISS) has applied for a Planned Development Zoning with a related Stage 1 and
Stage 2 Development Plan and a Site Development Review (SDR) Permit for the Zeiss Innovation
Center (the proposed project). Figures illustrating the proposed project are shown at the end
of this IS/Supplemental MND.
ZEISS is an internationally leading technology enterprise operating in the optics and
optoelectronics industries. The ZEISS Group develops, produces and distributes measuring
technology, microscopes, medical technology, eyeglass lenses, camera and cine lenses,
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 4
binoculars and semiconductor manufacturing equipment. The new ZEISS Innovation Center in
Dublin would bring together scientists and researchers as well as operations from multiple
business groups under one roof . Research and development groups for: 1) Ophthalmic
Diagnostics of Medical Technology, 2) ZEISS 3D X-ray microscopes (XRM) research and
industry, 3) Semiconductor & Electronics process control systems and 4) Corporate
Innovation & Research; would be brought together in the new center. For the Medical
Technology Business Group, the Zeiss Innovation Center would also serve as the
headquarters for its U.S. subsidiary which represents all ZEISS Medical Technology in the U.S.
Building Program
The proposed project would be developed in two phases. Phase 1 would consist of a three-
story, 208,650 gross square feet (GSF) R&D building (approximately 62 feet in height to roof),
with an entry plaza and 663 surface parking spaces (see Figure 2a: Site Plan – Phase 1). Phase 2
would consist of an additional five-story, 224,440 GSF R&D building (approximately 82 feet in
height to roof and 97 feet to the top of the screen), and a five story, 1,229-space parking garage
(see Figure 2b: Site Plan – Phase 2).
At build-out, the proposed project would include two low-to-mid-rise (three-story and five-
story) R&D buildings totaling 433,090 GSF and would be used for research, development and
testing, light assembly and dry laboratories, and supporting of fice spaces. Other internal uses
would include conference rooms, an employee cafeteria, and a demonstration center/
showroom on the ground floor. At build-out parking would include one parking garage with
1,229 spaces and 167 surface parking spaces, for a total of 1,396 spaces. Other miscellaneous
exterior features would include a utilities enclosure, trash/recycling enclosure, nitrogen pad
enclosure, bike storage enclosure, loading areas and landscaping.
The proposed project is consistent with the current General Plan Land Use Designation of
Campus Office.
Landscaping
As shown in Figure 3: Preliminary Landscape Plan – Phase 1, the primary landscape features are
located on the north side of the Phase 1 building. This would include the avoided and
enhanced seasonal wetland (W6) and a surrounding buffer planted with wetland and native
plants. An impervious pathway would also be constructed within the buffer surrounding the
seasonal wetland. West of the seasonal wetland is a 20-foot wide pedestrian boardwalk,
landscaped garden, and permanent water feature. South of the Phase 1 building, landscaping
would include shrubs surrounding a landscaped bio-retention basin. Shrubs and trees would
also be planted around the perimeter of the project site.
The project site currently contains nine seasonal wetlands that compromise approximately 1.03
acres as shown in Figure 4: Existing Wetlands. Implementation of the proposed project would
result in permanent impacts to 0.45 acres of seasonal wetlands. The proposed project would
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 5
avoid and enhance the largest 0.58-acre seasonal wetland (W6) by planting native wetland
vegetation, and preserving an upland buffer around its perimeter.
Site Access & Circulation
For both phases of development, primary access to the project site would be via Park Place, just
south of Central Parkway.
A second service entrance would be from an easement through a drive aisle in an existing
parking lot accessed from Park Place, just north of Dublin Boulevard. This access point would
be limited to service deliveries and emergency vehicles.
The project site would accommodate approximately 1,500 employees at build out. To help
reduce drive-alone trips, the Applicant has included as part of the project a Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) Program with a goal of reducing travel trip by 20% from the
estimated average daily trips as identified in the Traffic Consistency Analysis (Kimley-Horn,
December 2017). Trip reduction measures to be included to reach the 20% reduction will be
chosen from the following:
Provide complementary BART and bus passes and provide guaranteed ride home
services for emergencies.
Provide dedicated on-campus parking (5% of supply) for high occupancy vehicles
(HOVs).
Provide staggered working hours.
Provide additional bike racks and lockers on-campus, including shower facilities.
Conduct educational outreach and marketing to promote the use of non-automotive
options for commuting by having an on -site TDM kiosk and TDM coordinator.
The project Applicant also has committed to providing a shuttle service to and from the East
Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. This shuttle would access the project site via Park Place, just
south of Central Parkway. Shuttles would pick-up and drop-off in the parking lot.
Infrastructure and Utilities
Detailed engineering design has been completed for Phase 1 and conceptually only for Phase 2.
Subsequent Phase 2 building plan level review and approvals would include detailed
engineering design.
Grading
The project site is essentially flat, sloping slightly downward from the northeast to the
southwest. Earthwork would include minimal grading and contouring to accommodate
drainage and elevation requirements. Grading would result in elevations contours changing
from 354 feet (above mean sea level) in the northeast corner, to 345 feet fronting Dublin
Boulevard (nine-foot grade change in elevation). The project would require the cut of 9,500
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 6
cubic yards of soil, and the import of 9,000 cubic yards of soil; for a net export of 500 cubic
yards. See Figure 5: Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan – Phase 1.
Water
Existing domestic water mains available for connection adjacent to the project site include a
12” main in Dublin Boulevard, a 14” main on Central Parkway, and a 16” main on Arnold Road.
As part of the proposed project, a new domestic water service lateral would be constructed
from Arnold Road to the Phase 1 R&D building. Phase 2 would tie into these existing on-site
extensions.
The proposed project would utilize an existing 24” recycled water main on Dublin Boulevard
and a 6” service line stubbed onto the property from Dublin Boulevard. The project would use
recycled water for landscape irrigation.
Sewer
There is an existing 36” sewer on Dublin Boulevard, and a 15” sewer on Arnold Road that
enlarges to 27” at a manhole located midblock with Central Parkway. A new proposed sanitary
sewer lateral would connect with the existing 27” sewer main on Arnold Road. See Figure 6:
Preliminary Utility Plan – Phase 1.
Stormwater
The project site is currently almost entirely pervious. Because the project would be creating or
replacing greater than 10,000 square feet of impervious area, it is considered a Regulated
Project, and would be required comply with Provisions C.3 (New Development &
Redevelopment) of the State Water Resources Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
Because the project would create or replace more than one acre of impervious surface, it would
also be required to incorporate hydromodification management measures.
Per the Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan (BKF, 2017), construction of the proposed
project would create 352,306 square feet of impervious surface area. Total bio-retention area
required to meet Alameda County C.3 requirements (4% of effective impervious area) is 14,663
square feet. The project is providing 12,461 square feet of bio-retention area. The Alameda
County C.3 Technical Guidance Manual allows bio-retention areas to be sized using a
combination flow and volume method. Providing ponding height allows for some reductions to
the overall footprint area of the bio-retention planter.
Impervious surfaces include building rooftops, roadways, surface parking lots, and the Phase 2
parking garage. As shown in Figure 7 Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan – Phase 1,
most of the stormwater run-off would gravity flow via underground collector pipes to the
southwest corner of the project site, where it would then be pumped into an 11,709 square
foot primary bio-retention basin and be treated. During heavy storm events, flows that exceed
the design treatment flow would bypass this primary bio-retention basin and be directed to an
adjacent existing 36” storm drain pipe located in the Dublin Boulevard right-of-way.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 7
The initial sizing of this basin is based on a minimum of four percent of the contributing
impervious area and has been adequately sized to accommodate the impervious drainage
requirements necessary for the construction of Phase 2 as well.
To assist in maintaining and enhancing the overall environmental quality features of seasonal
wetland (W6), a separate drainage management system would be constructed. Rooftop
drainage from 18,500 square feet of northwest corner of the Phase 1 building would be
directed to 752 square feet secondary biorentention basin that would be incorporated as a
landscape feature in the adjacent garden. Drainage from this portion of the rooftop would be
treated and gravity flow into the adjacent wetland.
Both biofiltration basins have been conceptually designed to be constructed with 18-inces of
sandy loam soil over 12-inches of drain rock. Like the primary biofiltration basin, excess
stormwater during heavy storm events would drain from two inlets constructed on the east
side of wetland, and be discharged into the City’s storm drain system on Dublin Boulevard.
Project Approvals
PD-Planned Development Zoning and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans
The Applicant has proposed a PD-Planned Development zoning for Site 15A. Existing zoning for
Site 15A is Planned Development-Campus Office. The proposed PD-Planned Development
would include a Development Plan that would establish standards and regulations governing
the future use, development, improvement and maintenance of the project site, in accordance
with Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
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 proposed project. Details of the development plan are described above.
Site Development Review Permit
Approval of a Site Development Review Permit is also required as part of the entitlement
process for the project, pursuant to Chapter 8.104 of the Du blin Zoning Ordinance. The
purpose of Site Development Review is to promote orderly, attractive and harmonious
development within the City and to ensure compliance with all applicable development
regulations of the Zoning Ordinance.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 8
Environmental Checklist
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected by the Project
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.
☐ Aesthetics ☐ Agricultural Resources ☐ Air Quality
☒ Biological Resources ☐ Cultural Resources ☐ Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
☐ Geology / Soils ☐ Hazards & Hazardous
Materials ☐ Hydrology / Water
Quality
☐ Land Use / Planning ☐ Mineral Resources ☐ Noise
☐ Population / Housing ☐ Public Services ☐ Recreation
☐ Transportation / Traffic ☐ Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ Utilities / Service
Systems
☐ Mandatory Findings of Significance
Instructions
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No New Impact" answers that
are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the
parentheses following each question (see Source List, attached). A "No New 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 New Impact" answer should be explained
where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the
project would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-
specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, 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. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur,
then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially
significant, less-than-significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially
Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that any effect may
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 9
be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when
the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: applies
where incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentiall y
Significant Impact” 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.
5. Earlier Analysis 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. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a discussion should
identify the following on attached sheets:
a. Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available
for review.
b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document
pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-
specific conditions for the project.
d. A “No New Impact” finding means that there would be no new or substantially
more severe significant impacts to the impact area beyond what has been
analyzed in Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards
for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required for the impact area.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to
information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances).
Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate,
include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources
used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats;
however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist
that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
o the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question;
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 10
and
o the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than
significance
10. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the
project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section
21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun?
Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments,
lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review,
identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and
reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process .
(See Public Resources Code section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available
from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per
Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources
Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation .
Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions
specific to confidentiality.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 11
Determination
Based on 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.
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 revisions in the
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a potentially significant or a potentially
significant unless mitigated impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2)
has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on
attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze
only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that a Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration is required due to changed
circumstances and new impacts to biological resources (wetlands and certain protected
plant species). For all other environmental impact areas, although the proposed project
could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant
effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION
pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that
earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project, no further environmental review is required.
X
CITY OF DUBLIN
_________________________________ _____________________________
Martha Battaglia, Associate Planner Date
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 12
Explanation of Environmental Checklist Responses
Aesthetics
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ☒
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not
limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
☒
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the project site and its surroundings? ☒
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
☒
Environmental Setting
The project site is vacant and consists of generally flat land with a distinct but gentle slope from
north to south, towards the I-580 freeway. The Eastern Dublin EIR classifies the project site as
"valley grasslands," which are located on the areas near I-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 as identified in the General Plan or EDSP.
The nearest scenic corridor to the project site is the I-580 freeway, which is located
approximately a third of a mile south of the project site.
Regulatory Framework
Dublin General Plan
The project site is included in the Eastern Dublin Planning Area. Implementing Policy C.2 of the
General Plan states that "proposed site grading and means of access will not disfigure
ridgelands." Further, Implementing Policy C. 5 requires development projects to be consistent
with all applicable General Plan and Specific Plan policies."
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 13
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
The City of Dublin adopted the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) in 1993 to guide the future
development of approximately 7,200 acres of land in the eastern Dublin area. The Specific Plan
includes several policies and programs dealing with visual resources, including but not limited
to protection of ridgelines and ridgelands, scenic corridors, and hillside development .
Goal: To establish a visually distinctive community which preserves the character of the
natural landscape by protecting key visual elements and maintaining views from major
travel corridors and public spaces.
Policy 6-28: Preserve the natural open beauty of the hills and other important visual
resources, such as creeks and major stands of vegetation .
Policy 6-30: Structures built near designated scenic corridors shall be located so that views
of the back- drop ridge (identified in Figure 6.3 as “Visually Sensitive Ridgelands - no
development”) are generally maintained when viewed from the scenic corridors .
Policy 6-31: High quality design and visual character will be required for all development
visible from designated scenic corridors.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains several mitigation measures to reduce anticipated visual
resource impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include:
Mitigation Measure 3.8/1.0 reduced project impacts related to standardized tract
development (IM 3.8/A) to a less-than-significant level. This mitigation requires future
developers to establish visually distinct communities which preserves the character of
the natural landscape by protecting key visual elements and maintaining views from
major travel corridors.
Mitigation Measure 3.8/2.0 reduced the impact of converting the rural and open space
character of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan area (IM 3.8/B) but not to a
less-than-significant level. The mitigation measure requires implementation of the land
use plan that emphasizes retention of predominant natural features. Even with
adherence to this measure, IM 3.8/B would remain significant and unavoidable on both
a project and cumulative level.
Mitigation Measure 3.8/3.0 would reduce the impact of obscuring distinctive natural
features of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan area (IM 3.8IC) but not to a
less-than-significant level. The mitigation measure requires implementation of the land
use plan that emphasizes retention of predominant natural features.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 14
IM 3.8/F analyzed alteration of the visual character of the Eastern Dublin flatlands. No
mitigation measures were identified and the impact was identified as significant and
unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures 3.8/7.0 and 7/1 reduced impacts on scenic vistas (IM 3.8/1) to a
less-than-significant level. These mitigation measures require protection of designated
open space areas and directs the City to conduct a visual survey of the EDSP area to
identify and map viewsheds.
Cisco Systems IS/MND
The Cisco Systems IS/MND contains one mitigation measure to reduce anticipated visual
impacts. This includes:
Mitigation Measure 1 would reduce potential glare impacts. The mitigation measure
requires pole-mounted street lights to 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 would be required to be directed downward, and all
exterior glass panels shall be of non-glare manufacture.
The proposed project would be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures related to
aesthetics set forth in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco Systems IS/MND.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Scenic vistas, views
No New Impact. Approval and construction of the proposed project would convert an existing
vacant site to an urban use. This potential impact was addressed in the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan (EDSP EIR (Impact 3.8C, Obscuring Natural Features and Impact 3.8F, Alterat ion 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 was
adopted for this impact. The impacts of the proposed project with respect to scenic vistas are
within the scope of the impacts associated with the project covered by the Eastern Dublin EIR.
The proposed project would not change the urban scale of development anticipated in the
Eastern Dublin EIR for this project site.
With adherence to previous mitigation measures, there would be no new or substantially more
severe significant impacts to scenic vistas beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin
EIR and Cisco IS/MND and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
(b) Scenic resources
No New Impact. The project site is not located adjacent to the I-580 freeway, which is a state-
designated scenic highway, nor is it located adjacent or near other local scenic routes, includin g
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 15
Tassajara Road or Fallon Road and is therefore not within a scenic corridor. No impacts are
anticipated since the project site is not located near an identified scenic corridor. This is
consistent with the determination in the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to scenic resources
beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environme ntal review is
required for this impact area.
(c) Substantially degrade the visual character of the project site or surrounding area
No New Impact. The proposed project would consist of three buildings. During Phase 1, one 3-
story R&D building would be constructed with a height of approximately 62 feet to the roof. As
part of Phase 2, a second five-story R&D building that is approximately 82 feet in height to roof
and 97 feet to the top of the screen, and a separate five-story parking structure with a building
height of approximately 60 feet would be constructed. Perspective views of the proposed
project are shown in Figure 8: Conceptual Renderings.
These proposed land uses, and their building height and scale, are consistent with those lan d
uses in the surrounding area. For example, the former Sybase office building complex (east and
adjacent to the project site) consists of two six-story buildings. Additionally, four- to five-story
office buildings are located directly north or the project site (across Central Parkway). These
buildings are consistent in use, visual character, scale, mass and height, as compared to the
proposed project.
Additionally, this impact was addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and in an associated
Statement of Overriding Considerations. The proposed project would not change the urban
scale of development anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR for this project site, therefore no
additional discussion or analysis is necessary. The impacts of the proposed project with respect
to degradation of existing visual character and quality are within the scope of impacts
associated with the project covered by the Eastern Dublin EIR.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to visual character of
the project site or surrounding area beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR
and Cisco IS/MND and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore,
no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
(d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
No New Impact. 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. Mitigation Measure 1 from the Cisco Systems IS/MND was included to
reduce spillover of lighting impacts to a level of less-than-significant.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 16
Similarly, glass may be used 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. Consistent with the Cisco Systems IS/MND, the project would be required to
comply with Mitigation Measure 1.
With adherence to previous mitigation measures, there would be no new or substantially more
severe significant impacts to light and glare beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern
Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
Agricultural and Forestry Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model
to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use?
☒
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
☒
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which,
due to their location or nature, could result in conversion
of Farmland to non-agricultural use?
☒
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 17
Environmental Setting
The Eastern Dublin EIR notes that the project site is an "approximate urbanized area" and is
therefore not prime farmland.
Based on information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Figure 3.1-C), no portion of the
project site is encumbered with a Williamson Act Land Conservation Agreement contract.
Regulatory Framework
There are no ordinances, regulations, or standards applicable to the proposed project for this
section.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified several potential impacts related to agricultural resources .
Impact IM 3.1/C stated that discontinuation of agricultural uses would be an insignificant
impact due to on-going urbanization trends in Dublin and the Tri-Valley area. Impact 3.1/D
identified a loss of lands of Farmlands of Local Importance with approval and implementation
of the General Plan and Specific Plan. This was also noted as an insignificant impact. Impact
3.1/F stated that buildout of Specific Plan land uses would have a significant and unavoidable
impact on cumulative loss of agricultural and open space lands . Finally, Impact IM 3.1/E noted
indirect impacts related to non-renewal of Williamson Act contracts. This impact was also
identified as an insignificant impact.
Cisco IS/MND
There are no applicable mitigation measures from the Cisco IS/MND.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a-c) Convert farmland or conflict with zoning
No New Impact. The project site was previously used for governmental purposes and is not
identified as prime farmlands in the Eastern Dublin EIR. No impacts are therefore anticipated
regarding prime farmland or loss of agricultural production .
This is consistent with the determination in the Cisco Systems IS/MND. There would be no new
or substantially more severe significant impacts to farmland or zoning beyond what has been
analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, no other CEQA standards for
supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this
impact area.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 18
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
Air Quality
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impacts
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations .
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? ☒
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
☒
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)?
☒
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
☒
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
☒
Environmental Setting
Dublin is in the Tri-Valley Air Basin. Within the basin, state and federal standards for nitrogen
dioxide, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and lead are met. Standards for other airborne
pollutants, including ozone and suspended particulate matter (PM-10) are not met in at least a
portion of the basin.
Regulatory Framework
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
The agency for air pollution control for the basin is the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD). The BAAQMD is responsible for controlling emissions primarily from
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 19
stationary sources and maintaining air quality monitoring stations throughout the basin.
BAAQMD, in coordination with Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of
Bay Area Governments, is also responsible for developing, updating, and implementing the Bay
Area Clean Air Plan for the basin. A Clean Air Plan is a plan prepared and implemented by an air
pollution district for a county or region designated as nonattainment of the national and/or
California Ambient Air Quality Standards. The term non-attainment area is used to refer to an
air basin where one or more ambient air quality standards are exceeded . The Clean Air Plan,
once submitted to and approved by the Air Resources Board, becomes an integral part of the
State Implementation Plan.
A State Implementation Plan is a federal requirement; each state prepares one to describe
existing air quality conditions and measures that would be followed to attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standards.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains several mitigation measures to reduce anticipated air quality
impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project . These include:
Mitigation Measure 3.11 / 1.0 reduced impacts related to emission of construction
generated dust to a less-than-significant level by requiring construction projects to
water graded areas in the late morning and end of the day, cleanup mud and dust onto
adjacent streets daily, covering of haul trucks, avoiding unnecessary idling of
construction equipment, revegetating graded areas and similar measures.
Mitigation Measures 3.11 / 2.0-4.0 reduced project and cumulative impacts related to
vehicle emission from construction equipment (IM 3.11IB) but not to a less-than-
significant level. These mitigations require emission control from on-site equipment,
completion of a construction impact reduction plan and others. Even with adherence to
these mitigations, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures 3.11/5.0-11.0 reduced mobile source emission from Reactive
Organic Gases (ROG) and Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) (IM 3.11/C) but not to a less-than-
significant level. These measures require coordination of growth with transportation
plans and other measures, many of which are at a policy (not a project) level. Even with
adherence to adopted mitigations, IM 3.11/C remained significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures 3.11/12.0-13.0 reduced project and cumulative impacts related to
stationary source emissions (IM 3.11/E) but not to a less-than- significant level. The two
adopted mitigations require reduction of stationary source emissions to the extent
feasible by use of energy conservation techniques and recycling of solid waste material.
Even with adherence to the two measures, stationary source emissions remained
significant and unavoidable.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 20
Cisco IS/MND
There are no applicable mitigation measures from the Cisco IS/MND. The proposed project
would be required to adhere to applicable air quality mitigation measures contained in the
previous CEQA documents prepared for the project site.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Consistent with air quality plans
No New Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with the Clean Air Plan adopted by
the BAAQMD, since the proposed amount of development has been included in Dublin's
planned growth as part of General Plan/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, which is the basis of the
Clean Air Plan.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to air quality plans
beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required for this impact area.
(b) Violate air quality standards
No New Impact. 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
3.111A and B). With adherence to Mitigation Measure 3.11/1.0, Mitigation Measure 3.11/2.0
contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Bay Area Air Quality Management District
requirements, short-term project-level air quality impacts would be less-than-significant. These
mitigation measures minimize the creation of fugitive dust during grading and construction
activities and mandate that construction equipment be kept in proper running order .
With adherence to these mitigation measures and regulatory requirements, project-level
impacts would be less-than-significant, and no additional analysis is required. The Eastern
Dublin EIR concluded that potential cumulative 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 cumulative impacts related to mobile source emissions of ROG
and NOx, 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). The air
quality impacts of the proposed project are within the scope of the project impacts covered by
the Cisco MND and the Eastern Dublin EIR, for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations
was adopted for long-term, cumulative impacts.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 21
With adherence to previous mitigation measures and applicable regulatory requirements, there
would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to air quality standards
beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required for this impact area.
(c) Cumulatively considerable air pollutants
No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR identifies Mobile Source Emissions and Stationary
Source Emissions related to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan as significant
irreversible impacts. Generally, such impacts are based on vehicular emission from future
traffic within the sub-region as well as from stationary sources. The air quality impacts of the
proposed project are within the scope of the project impacts covered by the Cisco IS/MND and
Eastern Dublin EIR, for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for long -
term impacts.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to air pollutants
beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmen tal review
is required for this impact area.
(d, e) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations or create objectionable odors
No New Impact. There are no sensitive receptors (e.g. residential, schools, churches, hospitals)
proposed or surrounding the project site. Therefore, no impact would occur to sensitive
receptors.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to pollutant
concentrations or creation of objectionable odors beyond what has been analyzed in the
Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review
are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 22
Biological Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impacts
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
☒
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
☒
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
☒
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?
☒
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
☒
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
☒
Environmental Setting
Wetlands and Other Waters
As shown in Figure 4: Existing Wetlands, seasonal wetlands are located on 1.03 acres of the
project site and occur as nine separate topographic depressions where seasonal inundation
and/or saturation occur during the rainy season. Vegetation within the seasonal wetlands is
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 23
sparse, and dominated by a mixture of predominantly non-native grasses and forbs, all of which
are adapted to high levels of disturbance.
Special Status Species
Special-status Plant Species
Based on field surveys conducted by WRA, Inc. in April 2017, two locally rare plant species:
Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii) and California dock (Rumex
californicus), were observed on the project site. Ten square feet of California dock was
identified on the northwestern edge of the largest seasonal wetland. Congdon’s tarplant was
observed sporadically throughout the project site.
Special-status Wildlife Species
Based on field surveys conducted by WRA, Inc. in April 2017, two special-status wildlife species,
Western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) and Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) have
been observed or have the potential to occur in the project area.
Regulatory Framework
Federal and California Endangered Species Acts
The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) of 1973 prohibits federal agencies from authorizing,
permitting, or funding any action that would jeopardize the continued exi stence of a plant or
animal species listed or a candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the ESA . If a
federal agency is involved with a proposed action or project that may adversely affect a listed
plant or animal, that agency must enter into consultation with the United States Fish and
Wildlife Services (USFWS) under Section 7(a)(2) of the FESA. Individuals, corporations, and
state or local agencies with proposed actions or projects that do not require authorizing,
permitting, or funding from a federal agency but that may result in the "take" of listed species
or candidate species are required to apply to the USFWS for a Section 10(a) incidental take
permit.
The State of California enacted similar laws to the FESA, the California Native Plant Protection
Act (NPPA) in 1977 and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) in 1984. The CESA
expanded upon the original NPPA and enhanced legal protection for plants, but the NPPA
remains part of the California Fish and Wildlife Code. To align with the FESA, CESA created the
categories of "threatened" and "endangered" species. The State converted all animal species
listed as "rare" under the FESA into the CESA as threatened species, but did not do so for rare
plants. Thus, these laws provide the legal framework for protection of California-listed rare,
threatened, and endangered plant and animal species. The California Department of Wildlife
(CDFW) implements NPPA and CESA, and its Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch maintain
the California Natural Diversity Database, a computerized inventory of information on the
general location and status of California's rarest plants, animals, and natural communities.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 24
During the CEQA review process, CDFW is given the opportunity to comment on the pot ential
of the proposed project to affect listed plants and animals .
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) implements international treaties between the United
States and other nations devised to protect migratory birds, their parts, eggs, and nests from
activities such as hunting, pursuing, capturing, killing, selling, and shipping, unless expressly
authorized in the regulations or by permit. The USFWS administers the MBTA. The State of
California has incorporated the protection of birds of prey in Sections 3800, 3513, and 3503.5 of
the Fish and Game Code (FGC).
All raptors and their nests are protected from take or disturbance under the MBTA (16 United
States Code [USC], section 703, et seq.) and California statute (FGC section 3503.5). The golden
eagle and bald eagle are also afforded additional protection under the Eagle Protection Act,
amended in 1973 (16 USC, section 669, et seq.).
Waters of the United States
The United States Army Corp of Engineers regulates “Waters of the United States” under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Waters of the U.S. are defined in the Code of
Federal Regulations as waters susceptible to use in commerce, including interstate waters and
wetlands, all other waters (intrastate waterbodies, including wetlands), and their tributaries (33
CFR 328.3). Potential wetland areas, according to the three criteria used to deline ate wetlands
as defined in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory
1987), are identified by the presence of (1) hydrophytic vegetation, (2) hydric soils, and (3)
wetland hydrology.
Areas that are inundated at a sufficient depth and for a sufficient duration to exclude growth of
hydrophytic vegetation are subject to Section 404 jurisdiction as “other waters” and are often
characterized by an ordinary high water mark, and herein referred to as non -wetland waters.
Non-wetland waters, for example, generally include lakes, rivers, and streams. The placement
of fill material into Waters of the U.S. generally requires an individual or nationwide permit
from the Corps under Section 404 of the CWA.
Waters of the State
The term “Waters of the State” is defined by the Porter-Cologne Act as “any surface water or
groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state.” The RWQCB protects
all waters in its regulatory scope and has special responsibility for wetlands, r iparian areas, and
headwaters. These waterbodies have high resource value, are vulnerable to filling, and are not
systematically protected by other programs. RWQCB jurisdiction includes wetlands and waters
that may not be regulated by the Corps under Section 404.
Waters of the State are regulated by the RWQCB under the State Water Quality Certification
Program which regulates discharges of fill and dredged material under Section 401 of the CWA
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 25
and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Projects that require a Corps permit or fall
under other federal jurisdiction and have the potential to impact Waters of the State are
required to comply with the terms of the Water Quality Certification determination. If a
proposed project does not require a federal permit but does involve dredge or fill activities that
may result in a discharge to Waters of the State, the RWQCB has the option to regulate the
dredge and fill activities under its state authority in the form of Waste Discharge Requirements.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains several mitigation measures to reduce anticipated impacts to
biological resources from the General Plan and EDSP project . These include:
Mitigation Measures 3.7/1.0-4.0 reduced impacts related to direct habitat loss (IM
3.7IA) to a less-than-significant level. These mitigations require minimization of direct
habitat loss due to development, preparation of vegetation management and
enhancement plans for open space areas and development of a revegetation plan for
disturbed areas that remain undeveloped.
Mitigation Measure 3.7/5.0 reduced indirect impacts related to vegetation removal
(IM3.7/B) to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure 3.7/5.0 requires
revegetation of graded or disturbed areas as quickly as possible and with native species.
Mitigation Measures 3.7/6.0-17.0 reduced impacts related to loss or degradation of
botanically sensitive habitats (IM 3.7/C) but not to a less -than-significant level. These
measures require a wide range of steps to be taken by future developers to minimize
impacts to sensitive habitat areas, including preserving natural stream corridors,
incorporating natural greenbelts and open space into development projects,
preparation of individual wetland delineations, preparation of individual erosion and
sedimentation plans and similar actions.
Mitigation Measures 3.7/20.0-22.0 reduced impacts related to the red-legged frog,
California tiger salamander, western pond turtle and tri-colored blackbird (IM 3.7/F-I) to
a less-than-significant level. These measures require preconstruction surveys for the
species and protection of impacted habitat areas.
Mitigation Measures 3.7/20.0 and 27.0 reduced impacts related to burrowing owl and
American badger (IM 3.7/M, N) to a less-than-significant level. This measure mandates
preconstruction surveys and a minimum buffer of 300 feet around burrowing o wl
nesting sites and American badger breeding sites during the breeding season.
Mitigation Measure 3.7/28.0 reduced impacts related to special status invertebrates (IM
3.7/S) to a less-than-significant level. This measure requires follow-on special surveys
for these species during appropriate times of the year.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 26
Cisco IS/MND
There are no applicable mitigation measures from the Cisco IS/MND.
The proposed project would be required to adhere to applicable biological resource mitigation
measures contained in the previous CEQA documents prepared for the project site, except as
modified below.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Substantial adverse effect on candidate, sensitive, or special status species
Special Status Wildlife Species – Mammals
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. As determined in the project site
survey conducted on April 12, 2017 by WRA, Inc., the project area is not currently inhabited by
Western burrowing owls. Due to a moderate potential of the species to inhabit ground squirrel
burrows, the project area has the continued potential to support this species. Implementation
of the proposed project could result in the displacement of burrowing owls during construction
activities, and once completed could result in the removal of suitable burrowing owl habitat.
Permanent loss of occupied burrows and habitats would be considered potentially significant.
This potential impact was previously identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and a mitigation
measure was included in the EIR. That mitigation measure is being updated as part of this
IS/Supplemental MND as MM BIO-1. Implementation of MM Bio-1 would reduce this
potentially significant impact to the Western burrowing owl to a less-than-significant level and
replaces the mitigation measure in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
MM BIO-1 Burrowing Owl Survey and Impact Assessment
Prior to obtaining the first site grading, building or other permit for development activities
involving ground disturbance, the project Applicant shall prepare the documentation
acceptable to the Community Development Department that demonstrates compliance with
the following:
Conduct a Burrowing Owl Survey and Impact Assessment
Prior to the first ground-disturbing activities, the project Applicant shall retain a qualified
biologist to conduct two pre-construction surveys for the Western burrowing owl for the
project site.
The first survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to ground -disturbing activities
and the second survey shall be conducted within 48 hours of initial ground disturbance. The
surveys shall be conducted in accordance with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW) Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. If the surveys determine owls are present,
then the measures set forth in this mitigation shall be followed.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 27
Implement Avoidance Measures
If direct impacts to owls can be avoided, prior to the first ground-disturbing activities, the
project Applicant shall implement the following avoidance or mitigation measures during all
phases of construction to reduce or eliminate potential impacts to California burrowing owls.
Avoid disturbing occupied burrows during the nesting period, from February 1 through
August 31.
Avoid impacting burrows occupied during the non-breeding season by migratory or non-
migratory resident burrowing owls.
Avoid direct destruction of burrows through chaining (dragging a heavy chain over an
area to remove shrubs), disking, cultivation, and urban, industrial, or agricultural
development.
Develop and implement a worker awareness program to increase the on-site worker’s
recognition of and commitment to burrowing owl protection.
Place visible markers near burrows to ensure that equipment and other machinery do
not collapse burrows.
Do not fumigate, use treated bait or other means of poisoning nuisance animals in areas
where burrowing owls are known or suspected to occur (e.g., sites observed with
nesting owls, designated use areas).
Conduct Burrow Exclusion
If avoidance of burrowing owl or their burrows is not po ssible, prior to the first ground-
disturbing activities, the project Applicant, in consultation with the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife, shall prepare a Burrowing Owl Relocation Plan as indicated and following the
CDFW 2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. Monitoring of the excluded owls shall
be carried out as per the California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012 Staff Report.
Prepare and Implement a Mitigation Plan
If avoidance of burrowing owl or their burrows is not possible and project activities may result
in impacts to nesting, occupied, and satellite burrows and/or burrowing owl habitat, the project
Applicant shall consult with the CDFW to develop a detailed mitigation plan that shall include
replacement of impacted habitat, number of burrows, and burrowing owl at a ratio approved
by CDFW. The mitigation plan shall be based on the requirements set forth in Appendix A of
the CDFW 2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and the plan shall be reviewed and
accepted by CDFW and the City prior to the first ground-disturbing activities.
Special-Status Plant Species
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Based on a project site survey
conducted by WRA, Inc., two locally rare species were observed in the project area: Congdon’s
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 28
tarplant and California dock. The potential loss of Congdon’s tarplant and California dock within
the project area would be considered a potentially significant impact .
Congdon’s tarplant populations were observed throughout the project site, occurring in
seasonal wetlands and mesic areas. California dock were also observed on-site and may be
disturbed. Disturbance or removal of wetland habitat could potentially result in the loss of this
special status species, which would be considered a potentially significant impact.
Implementation of MM BIO-2 would reduce this potentially significant impact to Congdon’s
Tarplant and California dock to a less-than-significant level.
MM BIO-2 Collect Congdon’s Tarplant and California Dock Seed Stock
Prior to obtaining the first grading or building permit for development activities involving
subsurface disturbance, the project Applicant shall prepare the documentation acceptable to
the Community Development Department that demonstrates compliance with the following:
Conduct Rare Plant Surveys
The project Applicant shall retain a qualified botanist to conduct rare plant surveys within the
construction zone for Congdon’s tarplant or other species with potential habitat within the
project area during the appropriate time of year in accordance with agency protocols. Impacts
to special-status plant species shall be avoided to the maximum extent feasible and habitat that
supports special-status plant species shall be preserved. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted
at the proper time of year when rare or endangered species are both “evident” and identifiable.
Field surveys shall be scheduled to coincide with known blooming periods, and/or during
periods of physiological development that are necessary to identify the plant species of
concern. If no special-status plant species are found, then the proposed project would not have
any impacts to the species and no additional mitigation measures are necessary.
Where surveys determine that special-status plant species are present within or adjacent to the
proposed project site, direct and indirect impacts of the project on the species (e.g., Congdon’s
tarplant and/or California Dock Seed Stock) shall be avoided where feasible through the
establishment of activity exclusion zones, where no ground-disturbing activities shall take place,
including construction of new facilities, construction staging, or other temporary work areas.
Activity exclusion zones for special-status plant species shall be established in accordance with
regulatory agency standards prior to construction activities around each occupied habitat site,
the boundaries of which shall be clearly marked with standard orange plastic construction
exclusion fencing or its equivalent.
Where avoidance of impacts to Congdon’s tarplant and California dock is not feasible, seed or
plant propagules shall be collected from these species. Under the direction of the qualified
botanist, seed or plant propagules shall be harvested from at least 50 percent of plants within
areas of impact.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 29
The project Applicant shall follow the mitigation guidelines as established in the East Alameda
County Conservation Strategy (EACCS; 2010), including:
An adequate floristic survey of the site shall have been completed within the preceding
3 years (under normal rainfall conditions), and spatially explicit data on the extent of the
focal plant population shall be available.
To mitigate impacts on a plant population, a parcel where the focal plant species occurs
may be acquired through fee title purchase or conservation easement (PLA‐2).
An assessment of the plant population on both the impact site and the proposed
mitigation site shall be conducted by a qualified botanist. The mitigation population
shall be equivalent in terms of population size and vigor than the population affected at
the project site.
As identified in table 3-12 of the EACCS, mitigation for focal plant species within the
Livermore Valley Mitigation Area is 5:1 and refers to the size of the population that is
affected or protected.
The qualified botanist shall demonstrate that the harvested seeds have been planted and are
surviving at a rate pursuant to the EACCS. The Applicant will submit an annual monitoring
report to the City of Dublin, which details monitoring methods and maintenance for successful
establishment, and reporting protocols. The plan shall be developed in consultation with the
City of Dublin prior to the start of local construction activities. Contingency measures should be
included in the plan if it appears the success criterion will not be met after three years.
Monitoring reports shall include photo-documentation, planting specifications, a site layout
map, descriptions of materials used, and justification for any deviations from the monitor ing
plan.
Nesting Birds
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project includes
construction activities that may affect nesting birds including ground disturbance activities
which would require grading and vegetation removal. Loggerhead shrike is a special-status bird
known to nest in the project area. Trees, fresh emergent wetland vegetation and grassland
could provide potentially suitable habitat for this species, which is protected under the MBTA
and the California Fish and Wildlife Code. Project activities that may affect nesting birds include
vegetation removal and ground disturbance activities which would require grading, and
vegetation removal. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project could result in the loss
of active nests, which would be considered a potentially significant impact on special-status
bird species and birds protected under the MBTA.
This potential impact was previously identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and a mitigation
measure was included in the EIR. That mitigation measure is being updated as part of this
IS/Supplemental MND as MM BIO-3. Implementation of MM BIO-3 would reduce this
potentially significant impact to nesting birds to a less-than-significant level and replaces the
mitigation measure in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 30
MM BIO-3 Protect Birds Covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Prior to obtaining the first site, building or other permit for development activities relevant to
the timing identified below, the project Applicant shall prepare the documentation acceptable
to the Community Development Department that demonstrates compliance with the following:
Pre-construction Breeding Bird Surveys
No more than 14 days prior to initial ground disturbance and vegetation removal during the
nesting season (February 1 to August 31), the project Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist
to perform pre-construction breeding bird surveys. If any nests are found, they shall be flagged
and protected with a suitable buffer. Buffer distance would vary based on species and
conditions at the project site, but is usually at least 50 feet, and up to 250 feet for raptors.
Note that this mitigation measure does not apply to ground disturbance and vegetation
removal activities that occur outside of the nesting season (September 1 to January 31).
With adherence to these new mitigation measures, the project’s direct impacts to sensitive or
special-status species would reduce impacts to less-than-significant. For other impacts not
addressed specifically above, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to biological resources beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and
Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no
further environmental review is required for those other impact areas.
(b, c) Substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat , natural community, or wetlands
Potential Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Based on site surveys by WRA in April
2017, 1.03 acres of seasonal wetlands were identified. Implementation of the proposed project
would result in permanent impacts to 0.45 acres of seasonal wetlands and preserve the
remaining 0.58 acres. Since fill of wetlands and “other waters of the U.S.” are prohibited
without first obtaining permits and approvals from the federal and state agencies, fill of
wetlands waters of the State would result in a potentially significant impact.
Implementation of MM BIO-4 would reduce this potentially significant impact to wetlands to a
less-than-significant level.
MM BIO-4 Wetland Mitigation Plan
Prior to obtaining the first site grading or building permit for development activities involving
ground disturbance, the project Applicant shall prepare the documentation acceptable to the
Community Development Department that demonstrates compliance with the following:
The project Applicant shall obtain all required resource agency permits and shall prepare and
obtain resource agency approval of a wetland mitigation plan that ensures no-net-loss of
wetland and waters habitat.
The wetland mitigation plan shall include measures for avoidance, minimization, and
compensation for wetland impacts. Avoidance and minimization measures may include the
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 31
designation of buffers around wetland features to be avoided, or project design measures.
Compensation measures shall include the preservation and/or creation of wetland or waters,
which may include buying credits at a mitigation bank approved by regulatory agencies . The
final mitigation ratios (the amount of wetlands and waters created or preserved compared to
the amount impacted) shall be determined by the applicable resource agency(s). The wetland
mitigation and monitoring plan shall include the following:
a) Descriptions of the wetland types, and their expected functions and values;
b) Performance standards and monitoring protocol to ensure the success of the
mitigation wetlands over a period to be determined by the resource agencies;
c) Engineering plans showing the location, size and configuration of wetlands to be
created or restored;
d) An implementation schedule showing that construction or preservation of mitiga tion
areas shall commence prior to or concurrently with the initiation of construction;
and
e) A description of legal protection measures for the preserved wetlands (i.e.,
dedication of fee title, conservation easement, and/or an endowment held by an
approved conservation organization, government agency or mitigation bank).
(d) Interfere or impede the movement of migratory fish or wildlife
No New Impact. 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
project site that could be used as a wildlife migration corridor. Therefore, no impacts are
anticipated regarding movement of fish or wildlife species.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to migratory fish and
wildlife beyond what has been analyzed in Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required for this impact area..
(e, f) Conflict with local policies or ordinance include tree preservation or any adopted habitat
conservation or natural community conservation plans
No New Impact. There are six existing ornamental street trees at the southwest corner of the
Central Parkway and Park Place intersection. One of these trees is located off -site and five are
located within the project boundary. The one tree located off-site may need to be removed to
accommodate a proposed sidewalk – details of which would be shown on the on-site / off-site
improvement plan submittal. All the trees are relatively small (< 8-inch truck diameter) and
would not be considered significant and in need of protection per the Dublin Municipal Code
Chapter 7.56.090 – Tree Protection, which requires protection of certain species of trees which
have a twenty-four (24) inch or greater diameter.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 32
The project site is not located within the boundaries of any Habitat Conservation Plans, but it is
located within the Eastern Alameda County Conservation Strategy (EACCS) boundaries. The
City adopted the EACCS as guidance for public infrastructure/capital improvement projects and
uses the document to provide input on managing biological resources and conservation
priorities during public project level planning and environmental permitting. For privately
sponsored development projects such as the project, proponents are encouraged to consult the
EACCS for guidance, but compliance with the document is not mandatory.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to tree preservation,
adopted habitat conservation or natural community conservation plans beyond what has been
analyzed in Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for
supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this
impact area.
Source(s)
CA Department of Fish and Wildlife, Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation, March 7, 2012.
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
WRA, Inc. Biological Resources Assessment for the Zeiss Graphite Development Project, 2017.
WRA, Inc. Delineation of Potential Jurisdictional Wetlands Under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act for the Zeiss Graphite Development Project, 2017.
Cultural Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.5?
☒
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5? ☒
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 33
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature? ☒
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries? ☒
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
Specific Plan area, several which were located near the former Santa Rita Rehabilitation Center .
None of these sites have been recorded on the project site.
Regulatory Framework
City of Dublin General Plan
The City of Dublin General Plan establishes the following guiding policy associated with cultural
resources that is relevant to the proposed project:
Guiding Policy 7.7.1.A.2: Follow State regulations as set forth in Public Resources Code
Section 21083.2 regarding discovery of archaeological sites, and Historical Resources, as
defined in Section 5020.1 of the Public Resources Code.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains several mitigation measures to reduce anticipated impacts to
cultural resources from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include:
Mitigation Measures 3.9/5.0-6.0 reduced impacts related to the disruption or
destruction of unidentified prehistoric resources (IM 3.9B) to a less-than- significant
level. These measures required that grading or construction activity be stopped if
historic resources were discovered, until the significance of the find could be
ascertained.
Mitigation Measures 3.9/7.0-12.0 reduced impacts related to disruption or destruction
of identified historic resources to a less than-significant level (Impact 3.9IC). These
measures would include preparing site-specific archival research for individual
resources, encourage adaptive reuse of historic resources, recordation of historic sites
on local state and federal registers, as appropriate and development of preservation
programs for significant resources.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 34
Mitigation Measures 3.9/5.0 and 6.0 reduced impacts related to disruption or
destruction of unidentified historic resources to a less-than-significant level (Impact
3.9/D). These measures would include preparing site-specific archival research.
Cisco IS/MND
The Cisco Systems IS/MND identifies one mitigation measure to reduce anticipated impacts to
cultural resources. This includes:
Mitigation Measure 2 would address 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. Should any prehistoric
material be discovered, work shall be halted in the immediate vicinity of the project site
until a qualified archeologist inspects the discovery, and, if necessary, implements plans
for further evaluative testing and/or retrieval of endangered materials.
The proposed project would be required to adhere to applicable cultural mitigation measure
contained in the previous CEQA documents prepared for the project site.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Historic resources
No New Impact. As part of the federal regulatory permit application, a historic survey of the
project site was conducted by Tom Origer & Associates. The results of the survey and archival
research did not identify any historic resources. Tom Origer & Associates analysis is
documented in a Historical Resources Survey of APN 986-0014-010, and is included as an
appendix to this Initial Study.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to historic resources
beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required for this impact area.
(b, c) Archaeological or paleontological resources
No New Impact. The project 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
paleontological resources. This would be a potentially significant impact. If such resources are
encountered, Mitigation Measure 2 from the Cisco Systems IS/MND would reduce any potential
impacts to archeological or paleontological impacts to a less-than-significant level.
With adherence to previous Mitigation Measure 2, there would be no new or substantially
more severe significant impacts to archaeological or paleontological resources beyond what has
been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 35
supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this
impact area.
(d) Human remains
No New Impact. A remote possibility exists that human resources could be uncovered on the
project site during construction activities. This would be a potentially significant impact. If such
resources are encountered, Mitigation Measure 2 from the Cisco Systems IS/MND and
applicable regulatory requirements would reduce any potential impacts to human remains
impacts to a less-than-significant level.
With adherence to previous Mitigation Measure 2 and applicable regulatory requirements,
there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to human remains
beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required for this impact area.
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
Tom Origer & Associates. Historical Resources Survey of APN 986-0014-010, 2017.
Geology and Soils
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
6. 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:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault?
☒
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ☒
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including ☒
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 36
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides? ☒
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ☒
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
☒
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
☒
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
☒
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 project site is a part of the San Francisco Bay area, one of the most seismically active
regions in the 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. Per the report prepared by Lowney Associates for the Cisco Systems
IS/MND, the project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone as
identified by the State of California.
A surface fault rupture study was prepared in the area in 1999 and referenced in the Cisco
Systems IS/MND. No evidence of fault-related disruption to the project site soils was identified
in this analysis. Based on this and other recent geotechnical information considered by Lowney
Associates, a fault rupture on the project site is not anticipated.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 37
Site Soils
The project site is underlain by stiff to very stiff and sandy clay to the maximum depth explored
(80 feet below ground surface). Near surface soils are highly expansive. Test pits dug as part of
the Cisco Systems IS/MND geotechnical investigation found scattered fill material, primarily
gravelly clay, as well as abandoned utility lines and below-grade structures. Groundwater was
encountered at depths of 9 to 20 feet from ground surface, although this may vary due to
rainfall and other factors.
Landform and Topography
The project site is part of a broad north-south trending plain known as the Livermore-Amador
Valley. The project site is relatively flat.
Drainage
Existing drainage on the project site is generally sheet flow in a north to south direction.
Regulatory Framework
International Building Code
The International Building Code (IBC) is the national model building code providing
standardized requirements for construction. The IBC replaced earlier regional building codes
(including the Uniform Building Code) in 2000 and established consistent construction
guidelines for the nation. In 2006, the IBC was incorporated into the 2007 California Building
Code, and currently applies to all structures being constructed in California. The national model
codes are therefore incorporated into the building codes of local municipalities, such as the
California Building Code discussed below. The California Building Code includes building design
and construction criteria that take into consideration the State’s seismic conditions.
California Building Code
The California Building Code (also known as the “California Building Standards Code” or CBC) is
promulgated under the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24 (Parts 1 through 12) and is
administered by the California Building Standards Commission. Local agencies must ensure the
development complies with the guidelines contained beyond the CBC. Cities and counties can
adopt additional building standards beyond the CBC. CBC Part 2, named in the California
Building Code is based upon the 2012 International Building Code with necessary California
amendments, and Part 11, named the California Green Building Standards Co de, and is also
called the CalGreen Code.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains several mitigation measures to reduce anticipated impacts
related to Soils, Geology and Seismicity from the General Plan and EDSP project . These include:
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 38
Mitigation Measure 3.6/1.0 reduced impacts related to primary effects of earthquake
ground shaking (IM 3.6/B) but not to a less-than-significant level. This mitigation
measure requires that future structure and infrastructure facilities be designed to
applicable local and state building codes.
Mitigation Measures 3.6/2.0-7.0 reduced impacts related to the secondary effects of
earthquake ground shaking (IM 3.9/C) to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation
measures mandate building setbacks from landslides, stabilization of unstable land
forms, removal and reconstruction of unstable soils, use of engineered retaining
structures, use of appropriately designed and engineered fill, and design of structures to
account of potential soil failure.
Mitigation Measures 3.6/14.0-16.0 reduced impacts related to expansive soils (IM
3.6/H) to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation measures require formulation of site-
specific designs to overcome expansive soils, reducing the amount of moisture in the
soil and by appropriate foundation and pavement design.
Mitigation Measures 3.6/17.0-19.0 reduced impacts related to natural slope stability (IM
3.6/I) to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation measures mandate formulation of use
of site-specific designs based on follow-up geotechnical reviews of individual
developments, limiting the location of improvements on downslopes of unstable soils,
removal/ reconstruction of potentially unstable slope areas and installation of surface
and subsurface slope drainage improvements.
Mitigation Measures 3.6/20.0-26.0 reduced impacts related to cut and fill slope stability
(IM 3.6/J) to a less-than-significant level. These measures include developing grading
plans for hillside areas that minimize grading and associate cuts and fills, ensuring that
grading plans comply with appropriate building codes, utilizing keys and benches as part
of grading to ensure slope stability and minimizing use of unreinforced fill slopes,
appropriate compaction of fill areas and on-going maintenance of slope drainage areas.
Mitigation Measure 3.6/27.0 reduced the impact related to short-term construction-
related erosion and sedimentation (IM 3.6/K) to a less-than-significant level. This
measure includes limiting timing of construction to avoid the rainy season and
implementing several other specific erosion control measures.
Mitigation Measure 3.6/28.0 reduced the impact related to long -term erosion and
sedimentation (IM 3.6/L) to a less-than-significant level. This measure includes
installation of erosion control facilities into individual development projects, including
sediment catch basins, creek bank stabilization, revegetation of graded areas and similar
measures.
Cisco IS/MND
There are no applicable mitigation measures from the Cisco IS/MND.
The proposed project would be required to adhere to applicable geology and soils mitigation
measures contained in the previous CEQA documents prepared for the project site.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 39
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Seismic hazards
No New Impact. The project site is subject to ground shaking caused by regional faults
identified above. Under moderate to severe seismic events which are probable in the Bay Area
over the next few decades, buildings, utilities and other improvements constructed on the
project site would be subject to damage caused by ground shaking.
Since the project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone, the potential
for ground rupture is anticipated to be minimal. Adherence to MM 3.6/1.0 through 7.0
contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR would ensure that new structures built on the project site
would comply with generally recognized seismic safety standards so that ground shaking
impacts would be less-than- significant.
As part of the project, the project site is proposed to be graded 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 EIR to reduce potential geotechnical impacts to a level of less-than-significant.
These mitigation measures require the preparation of site-specific soils and geotechnical
reports and adherence to Uniform Building Code and other City requirements for grading. The
proposed project would be required to be comply with the mitigation measures described in
the Eastern Dublin EIR.
With adherence to previous mitigation measures and regulatory requirements, there would be
no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to seismic hazards beyond what has
been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for
supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review i s required for this
impact area.
(b) Erosion/topsoil loss
No New Impact. Impacts 3.6/K and L of the Eastern Dublin EIR note that an impact of
constructing all the land uses identified in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/
would be an increase of erosion and sedimentation caused by grading activities. Related
Mitigation Measures 3.6/27.0 and 3.6/28.0 require that project Applicants prepare and
implement interim erosion plans as part of grading permits. The proposed project would be
required to be comply with the mitigation measures described in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
With adherence to previous mitigation measures, there would be no new or substantially more
severe significant impacts to erosion/topsoil loss beyond what has been analyzed in Eastern
Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 40
(c-d) Soil stability
No New Impact. Pursuant to Mitigation Measure 3.6/A of the Eastern Dublin EIR, the Cisco
project Applicant’s geotechnical consultant (Lowney Associates) prepared a geotechnical
analysis of the project site. Based on the Lowney Associates report, the project site could
support a similar type of building (multi-story office/R&D) as is proposed. Expansive soils were
encountered on the project site, and therefore the recommendations made by the geologist to
include special grading techniques and building foundation designs would continue to be
required.
With adherence to geotechnical recommendations by Lowney Associates as required under
Mitigation Measure 3.6/A, potential lateral spreading and related soil hazards impacts to
proposed structures would be less-than-significant. There would be no new or substantially
more severe significant impacts to soil stability beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern
Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
(e) Soil capability to support waste water disposal, including septic
No New Impact. The proposed development would be connected to a sanitary sewer system
within streets adjacent to the project site. Therefore, no impact is anticipated regarding septic
tanks. This is consistent with the determination in the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to waste water disposal
beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required for this impact area.
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
Lowney Associates. Geotechnical Feasibility Study, Cisco Systems Site 9, Dublin, CA, December
2000.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 41
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
☒
b) Conflict with applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
☒
Environmental Setting
The topic of the project's contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change was not
analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR in 1993 or Cisco Systems IS/MND in 2001. Since the Eastern
Dublin EIR and Cisco Systems IS/MND have been approved, the determination of whether
greenhouse gasses and climate change needs to be analyzed for this proposed project is
governed by the law on supplemental or subsequent EIRs (Public Resources Code section 21166
and CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15162 and 15163).
Greenhouse gas emissions and climate change is not required to be analyzed under th e CEQA
standards for supplemental or subsequent EIRs unless it constitutes "new information of
substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the
previous EIR was certified as complete” (CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15162 (a)(3)).
The issue of climate change and greenhouse gasses was widely known prior to the approval of
the prior CEQA documents for this project in 1993 and 2003. The United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change was established in 1992. The regulation of greenhouse gas
emissions to reduce climate change impacts was extensively debated and analyzed throughout
the early 1990s. The studies and analyses of this issue resulted in the adoption of the Kyoto
Protocol in 1997. In the early and mid-2000s, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change
were extensively discussed and analyzed in California. In 2000, SB 1771 established the
California Climate Action Registry for the recordation of greenhouse gas emissions to provide
information about potential environmental impacts.
Therefore, the impact of greenhouse gases on climate change was known at the time of the
certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR in May 1993 and the Cisco Systems IS/MND in 2003.
Under CEQA standards, it is not new information that requires analysis in a supplemental EIR or
Negative Declaration. No supplemental environmental analysis of the project's impacts on this
issue is required under CEQA.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 42
Regulatory Framework
See above for applicable regulatory setting.
Previous CEQA Documents
There are no applicable mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR or Cisco Systems
IS/MND.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a, b) Generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions or conflict with GHG plans or regulations
As discussed above, no additional environmental analysis is required under CEQA Section 21166
and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163 .
Source(s)
None.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
8. 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?
☒
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
☒
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within
¼ mile of an existing or proposed school?
☒
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
☒
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
☒
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 43
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
☒
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
☒
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?
☒
Environmental Setting
The project site is vacant and currently contains no structures. It was previously used as a
federal government installation, which may have involved the use or storage of potentially
hazardous material. A Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was prepared for the Cisco
project to assess the existence of hazardous materials from past uses of the property. The
results of the ESA are discussed below.
Regulatory Framework
City of Dublin General Plan
The City of Dublin General Plan establishes the following guiding and implementing policies
associated with hazards and hazardous materials that are relevant to the proposed project:
Guiding Policy 8.3.4.A.1: Maintain and enhance the ability to regulate the use,
transport, and storage of hazardous materials and to quickly identify substances and
take appropriate action during emergencies.
Guiding Policy 8.3.4.A.2: Minimize the risk of exposure to hazardous materials from
contaminated sites.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
Hazards and hazardous materials were not analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 44
Cisco IS/MND
The Cisco IS/MND identifies one mitigation measure to reduce anticipated impacts to hazards
and hazardous materials. This includes:
Mitigation Measure 3 would address removal of asbestos wrapped piping. The
mitigation measure requires all asbestos wrapped piping be remove d and deposited off
Site 15A prior to the issuance of a building permit. Heavy petroleum hydrocarbons
would also be required to be removed to the extent required by the appropriate
regulatory agencies.
The proposed project would be required to adhere to applicable hazard and hazardous
materials mitigation measures contained in the previous CEQA documents prepared for the
project site.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a-c) Exposure to hazardous materials, upset/accident, near school
No New Impacts.
Existing Hazards
The ESA indicated that project site was part of an Army Base and Naval Hospital during World
War II. All of the buildings and related structures were demolished between the late 1940s and
early 1950s. Facilities included barracks and two former diesel or gasoline fueling stations. The
underground tanks and piping have been removed . However, some heavy petroleum
hydrocarbons were discovered near one of the former fueling stations during the ESA
investigation. In addition, approximately 1,200 feet of metal pipe wrapped with tar paper
containing small amounts of asbestos were also discovered . Mitigation Measure 3 would
reduce potential health hazard impacts to a less-than-significant level.
A plume of groundwater with concentrations of perchloroethylene (PCE) and other solvents
was also detected beneath portions of Site 15A. The source of the PCE and solvent
contamination is believed to be a former laundry facility which existed on Site 15B during the
1940s. A Health Risk Assessment prepared by Lowney Associates for the Cisco Systems
IS/MND, dated November 2000 concluded that the PCE contaminated groundwater does not
pose an unacceptable risk to future office, maintenance or construction workers as levels of
contaminants are within the acceptable risk range established by the EPA National Contingency
Plan.
Operational Hazards
Apart of standard hazardous materials (e.g. cleaning supplies) that are used in commercial and
office uses, limited quantities of nitrogen would be stored and used on site to clean equipment
(e.g. dust removal). Although nitrogen is non-toxic, when released into an enclosed space it can
displace oxygen, and therefore presents an asphyxiation hazard .
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 45
A report with supporting floor plans would be provided as part of the project’s building permit
to identify the maximum quantities of hazardous materials and t heir methods of protection in
accordance with the California Building Code (CBC), Section 414.1.3.
Furthermore, the use of any hazardous materials would be regulated by federal, state and local
agencies, including the Alameda County Fire Department. Other minor quantities of potentially
hazardous materials would also be kept on the project site, including normal and customary
amounts of lawn chemicals, solvents and similar items used for building and grounds
maintenance. With adherence to applicable federal, state and local transport and use
requirements, creation of a potentially hazardous condition would be less-than-significant.
With adherence to Mitigation Measure 3 and existing regulations, there would be no new or
substantially more severe significant impacts from exposure to hazardous materials beyond
what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required for this impact area.
(d) Listed as a hazardous materials site
No New Impact. As described in the Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) that was
prepared for the Cisco project to assess the existence of hazardous materials from past uses of
the property, the project site is not listed as a hazardous materials site.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to the project site
listed as a hazardous materials site beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR
and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore,
no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
(e-f) Proximity to a public or private airport
No New Impact. The project 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. This is consistent with the determination in the Cisco Systems
IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to airports beyond
what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required for this impact area.
(g) Impair implementation of an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan
No New Impact. Adequate emergency access has been provided via proposed driveways on
adjoining streets. Due to the provision of adequate access, there would be no impact regarding
emergency evacuation plans. This is consistent with the determination in the Cisco Systems
IS/MND.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 46
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR
and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore,
no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
(h) Expose people or structures to wildland fires
No New Impact. The project site is currently a 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 the surrounding area pursuant to the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan would include adding new water lines for firefighting purposes as
well as new fire stations and personnel. No impacts are therefore anticipated. This is
consistent with the determination in the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to people or structures
due to wildland fires beyond what has been analyzed in Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND,
and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
Lowney Associates. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Soil and Ground Water Quality
Evaluation for the Cisco Project, November 2000.
Lowney Associates. Health Risk Assessment for the Cisco Systems Project, November 2000.
Hydrology and Water Quality
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements? ☒
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
☒
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 47
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
the local ground water table level (for example, the
production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop
to a level which would not support existing land uses or
planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
project site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site.
☒
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
project site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site.
☒
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
☒
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ☒
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood-hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
☒
h) Place within a 100-year flood-hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows? ☒
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
☒
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ☒
Environmental Setting
The project site is generally flat and contains no riparian features. Seasonal wetlands are
located on 1.03 acres of the project site and occur as nine separate topographic depressions
where seasonal inundation and/or saturation occur during the rainy season. The Project
impacts on wetlands are addressed in the Biological Resources section.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 48
The project site is located within the Tassajara Creek watershed, which drains the eastern
portion of Dublin. Site drainage is by sheet flow to the south, towards the I-580 freeway.
Stormwater from the Eastern Dublin area generally flows to the south, under the I-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 City requires stormwater discharges to comply with San Francisco Bay Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB) permit requirements and establishes non-point source
pollution control measures as required by federal and state law. Stormwater pollution
prevention measures for new development projects, such as swales, retention ponds, erosion,
and sediment control, are incorporated in the planning, design, construction, and operation of
projects with the potential to create pollutants in stormwater runoff .
The Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program (CWP) provides guidance to cities with respect
to establishing programs to implement RWQCB requirements. The City of Dublin participates in
the CWP and adheres to the regionally established guidelines. New development requirements
are intended to include mechanisms into project proposals that prevent pollutants such as soil,
petroleum products, pesticides, litter and construction materials from entering the storm drain
system. The Zeiss Innovation Center provides 12,461 square feet of bio-retention to meet
water quality requirements. In addition, the new development requirements mandate flow
control measures to prevent an increase in the erosion potential of the receiving stream over
the pre-project (existing) condition. The flow control requirements are imposed on commercial,
industrial, and residential developments that create one acre or more of impervious surfaces.
According to information contained in the Soils, Geology and Seismicity chapter of the Eastern
Dublin EIR, no portion of the project site contains historic landslides or mudflows (See Figure
3.6-C). The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area per the current FIRM
(Flood Insurance Rate Map) Flood Map for the East Dublin area .
Regulatory Framework
City of Dublin General Plan
The City of Dublin General Plan establishes the following guiding and implementing policies
associated with hydrology and water quality that are relevant to the proposed project:
Guiding Policy 7.3.1.A.1: Maintain natural hydrologic systems.
Implementing Policy 7.3.1.B.1: Enforce the requirements of the Municipal Regional Permit
for stormwater issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board or
any subsequent permit as well as Chapter 7 (Public Works) and Chapter 9 (Subdivisions) of
the Dublin Municipal Code for maintenance of water quality and protection of stream
courses.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 49
Implementing Policy 7.3.1.B.2: Review development proposals to ensure site design that
minimizes soil erosion and volume and velocity of surface runoff.
Guiding Policy 12.3.5.A.1: Protect the quality and quantity of surface water and
groundwater resources that serve the community.
Implementing Policy 12.3.5.B.6: Maximize the runoff directed to permeable areas or to
stormwater storage by appropriate site design and grading, using appropriate detention
and/or retention structures, and orienting runoff toward permeable surfaces designed to
manage water flow.
Implementing Policy 12.3.5.B.7: Review development plans to minimize impervious
surfaces and generally maximize infiltration of rainwater in soils, where appropriate. Strive
to maximize permeable areas to allow more percolation of runoff into the ground through
such means as bio-retention areas, green strips, planter strips, decomposed granite, porous
pavers, swales, and other water permeable surfaces. Require planter strips between the
street and the sidewalk within the community, wherever practical and feasible.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Pursuant to Section 402 of the CWA and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act,
municipal stormwater discharges in the City of Dublin are regulated under the San Francisco
Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems
NPDES Permit (MRP), Order No. Order No. R2-2015-0049, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008,
adopted November 19, 2015. The MRP is overseen by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Provision C.3 (New Development & Redevelopment) of the
MRP addresses post-construction stormwater management requirements for new
development and redevelopment projects that meet certain impervious surface area
thresholds. Provision C.3 requires the incorporation of site design, source control, and low
impact development stormwater treatment measures in development projects to minimize the
discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff and prevent non-stormwater discharges.
MRP Provision C.3.g pertains to hydromodification management. This MRP provision requires
that stormwater discharges not cause an increase in the erosion potential of the receiving
stream over the existing condition. Increases in runoff flow and volume must be managed so
that post-project runoff does not exceed estimated pre-project rates and durations, where such
increased flow and/or volume is likely to cause increased potential for erosion of creek beds
and banks, silt pollutant generation, or other adverse impacts on beneficial uses due to
increased erosive force. Projects that create or replace one acre or more of impervious surface
area and are located within sensitive areas identified in t he Hydromodification Management
Susceptibility Map, developed by the Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program and approved
by the RWQCB, are required to incorporate hydromodification management controls into
project design. Projects within the Community Plan area drain primarily to earthen channels
and therefore must meet the hydromodification management requirements if they create
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 50
and/or replace one acre or more of impervious surface and increase impervious surface area
over pre-project conditions. This project would have to implement hydromodification
management requirements and is planning to install flow control devices.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains several mitigation measures to reduce anticipated impacts
related to hydrology and storm drainage from the General Plan and EDSP project. These
include:
Mitigation Measures 3.5/44.0-48.0 reduced impacts related potential flooding (IM
3.5/Y) to a less-than-significant level. These mitigation measures require new storm
drainage facilities as part of new development, requires developers to prepare storm
drain plans for individual development projects and requires new flood control facilities
to alleviate downstream flooding potential.
Mitigation Measures 3.5/49.0-50.0 reduced impacts related to loss of groundwater
recharge area. These mitigation measures require adherence to management practices
to protect and enhance water quality and directs the City to support on -going
groundwater recharge efforts in the Central Basin.
Mitigation Measures 3.5/51.0 to 55.0 reduced impacts related to non-point source
pollution (IM 3.5/AA) to a less-than-significant level. These mitigation measures
mandate that specific water quality investigations be submitted as part of development
projects and that the City should develop community-based programs to educate
residents and businesses to reduce non-point source pollution. These mitigation
measures also require all development to meet the requirements of the City's Best
Management Practices, the City's NPDES permit and the County's Urban Runoff Ocean
Water Program to mitigate stormwater pollution.
Cisco Systems IS/MND
The Cisco Systems IS/MND contains one mitigation measure to reduce anticipated impacts
related to hydrology and storm drainage:
Mitigation Measure 5 would require the project Applicant prepare a Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The mitigation measure requires the SWPPP to list
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, use of biofilters (i.e. grassy swales) 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 the City of Dublin
Public Works Department prior to issuance of grading permits.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 51
Specific development projects containing five acres or more are also required to obtain
a Notice of lntent from the State Water Resources Control Board prior to
commencement of grading.
The proposed project would be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures related to
hydrology and water quality set forth in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco Systems IS/MND.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a, f) Violate water quality or waste discharge requirements, degrade water quality
No New Impact. Construction of improvements anticipated as part of the proposed project
would necessitate grading and overcovering of the soil to construct building pads, utility
connections and similar features. Proposed grading could contribute to increased soil erosion
into creeks and other bodies of water, off the project site. This could be a potentially significant
impact. Mitigation Measure 5, proposed in the Cisco Systems IS/MND, would ensure that
potential water quality impacts are reduced to a less-than-significant level. The project would
be required to comply with this mitigation measure. Compliance with provision C.3 and C.3g of
the National Pollution Disposal Elimination System (NPDES) Permit would also minimize impacts
from stormwater runoff.
With adherence to Mitigation Measure 5 and applicable regulatory measures, there would be
no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to water quality or waste discharge
requirements beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and
no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
(b) Substantially deplete or interfere with groundwater supplies
No New Impact. 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 Measure
3.5/49.0 adopted as part of the EIR, which requires the project to adhere to applicable City
policies and ordinances regarding water quality and to comply with the NPDES permit.
With adherence to previous Mitigation Measure 3.5/49.0 and applicable regulatory
requirements, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to
groundwater supplies beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco
IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
(c) Substantially alter existing drainage patterns re: erosion/siltation
No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin 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 project site
and filling surface drainage swales with underground pipes and culverts to accommodate storm
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 52
water runoff. However, the overall direction of stormwater flow in a southwesterly direction
would not significantly change.
According to the hydrological information prepared for the proposed project, the quantity and
rate of stormwater flow projected is consistent with the City's master drainage plan for Eastern
Dublin and complies with all regulatory requirements.
The proposed project would not change the urban scale of development anticipated in the
Cisco Systems IS/MND for this project site. Consistent with the determination in the Cisco
Systems IS/MND, including compliance with regulatory requirements, impacts would be less
than significant.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to existing drainage
patterns regarding erosion/siltation beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR
and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review ar e met. Therefore,
no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
(d) Substantially alter existing drainage patterns re: flooding
No New Impact. Construction of the project would not significantly change drainage patterns
within the project site area. Existing surface drainage flows would be slightly altered due to
anticipated site grading. As shown in Figure 7: Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan –
Phase 1, the storm drain improvements would be constructed to connect with existing drainage
improvements within the Eastern Dublin area. In addition, the project site lies above the 100-
year flood elevation so no significant site flooding is anticipated.
The proposed project would not change the urban scale of development anticipated in the
Cisco Systems IS/MND for this project site. The Cisco Systems IS/MND determined that impacts
to drainage patterns related to flooding would be considered less than significant with
compliance with regulatory requirements.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to existing drainage
patterns regarding flooding beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco
IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
(e) Runoff exceed drainage capacity, or add pollution
No New Impact. Construction of on-site improvements is anticipated to lead to greater
quantities of stormwater runoff. Per the Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan (BKF,
2017), construction of the proposed project would create 352,306 square feet of impervious
surface area. Total bio-retention required to meet Alameda County C.3 requirements (4% of
effective impervious area) is 14,663 square feet. The project is providing 12,461 square feet of
bio-retention. The Alameda County C.3 Technical Guidance Manual allows bio -retention areas
to be sized using a combination flow and volume method. Providing ponding height allows for
some reductions to the overall footprint area of the bio-retention planter.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 53
The Dublin Public Works Department determined that the amount of stormwater runoff
anticipated to be generated from the project site for the project site would be consistent with
the approved Master Drainage Plan for the Eastern Dublin area and the stormwater plan
complies with all regulatory requirements.
The proposed project would not change the urban scale of development anticipated in the
Cisco Systems IS/MND for this project site. Consistent with the determination in the Cisco
Systems IS/MND, impacts would be less-than-significant.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to stormwater
drainage capacity beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND,
and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
(g) Housing flood hazard
No New Impact. The proposed project does not include a housing component, so there would
be no impacts placing housing within a 100-year flood plain. This is consistent with the
determination in the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to flood hazard beyond
what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required for this impact area.
(h-i) 100-year flood hazard, dam/levee failure
No New Impact. The proposed project is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area
nor within an area considered vulnerable to a dam or levee failure . The Cisco project was
designed to be consistent with the Eastern Dublin Master Drainage Plan and comply with
all regulatory requirements, and the proposed project would not change the urban scale of
development anticipated in the Cisco Systems IS/MND for this project site, and there would be
no impacts regarding redirection of flood flows.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts from flood hazard,
dam/levee failure beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND,
and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
(j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow
No New Impact. The project site is not located near a major body of water that could result in
a seiche. The risk of potential mudflow is considered low since no historic landslides or
mudflows have been identified on the project site (see Figure 3.6-c of the Eastern Dublin EIR).
There would be no impact with implementation of the proposed project .
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 54
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts from seiche, tsunami,
or mudflow beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and
no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no fur ther
environmental review is required for this impact area.
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
BKF Engineers. Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan, 2017.
Land Use and Planning
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? ☒
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
☒
c) Conflict with any applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or
Natural Community Conservation Plan? ☒
Environmental Setting
The project site is presently regulated by the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The
General Plan and Specific Plan designates Site 15A for Campus Office. Surrounding uses include
a combination of developed and undeveloped properties within the Eastern Dublin Planning
area.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 55
Regulatory Framework
City of Dublin General Plan
The City of Dublin General Plan serves as a guide for the day-to-day physical development
decisions that shape the social, economic, and environmental character of the City’s Planning
Area. The General Plan’s policies are legally binding for new development and land use
activities that occur within the Dublin City limits, which currently total 14.62 square miles. The
City of Dublin General Plan is organized as follows:
Land Use and Circulation Section: The Land Use and Circulation section includes the Land
Use Element; Parks and Open Space Element; Schools, Public Lands, and Utilities Element;
and, Circulation and Scenic Highways Element. The Schools, Public Lands, and Utilities
Element is an optional Element.
Housing Section: The Housing section includes the Housing Element, which is a separately
bound document.
Environmental Resources Management Section: The Environmental Resources
Management section includes the Conservation Element; Seismic Safety and Safety
Element; Noise Element; Water Resources Element; and Energy Conservation Element. The
Water Resources and Energy Conservation Elements are optional Elements.
Community Design and Sustainability Section: The Community Design and Sustainability
section includes the Community Design and Sustainability Element, which is an optional
Element.
Economic Development Section: The Economic Development section includes the
Economic Development Element, which is an optional Element.
Campus Office Land Use Designation
The General Plan designates the project site “Campus Office.” The General Plan establishes a
Floor Area Ratio range of 0.25 to 0.80 and an employment density range of 220 to 490 square
feet per employee. This designation is intended to provide an attractive, campus-like setting
for office and other non-retail commercial uses that do not generate nuisances related to
emissions, noise, odors, or glare. Allowed uses include but are not limited to professional and
administrative offices, administrative headquarters, research and development, business and
commercial services, limited light manufacturing, and assembly and distribution activities.
Ancillary uses that provide services to businesses and employees in the Campus Office area are
permitted. These uses include restaurants, gas stations, convenience shopping, copying
services, branch banks, and other such services.
Previous CEQA Documents
There are no applicable mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR or Cisco Systems
IS/MND.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 56
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Physically divide an established community
No New Impact. The project is vacant, located in an area planned for and developing with
similar land uses to the project. Therefore, there would be no disruption of any established
community and no impact would occur. This is consistent with the determination in the Cisco
Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to an established
community beyond those analyzed in Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required for this impact area.
(b) Conflict with general plan
No New Impact. The proposed project would be consistent with environmental goals and
policies contained in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. No impacts would
result regarding consistency with applicable land use plans and policies. This is consistent with
the determination in the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to conflicts with the
City of Dublin General Plan beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco
IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
(c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation
plan
No New Impact. No such plan has been adopted within the General Plan and Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan. There would therefore be no impact to a habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan for the proposed project. This is consistent with the
determination in the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to applicable habitat
conservation plan(s) or natural community conservation plan(s) beyond what has been
analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for
supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this
impact area.
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 57
Mineral Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
11. 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?
☒
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?
☒
Environmental Setting
The project site contains no known mineral resources.
Regulatory Framework
There are no ordinances, regulations, or standards applicable to the proposed project for this
section.
Previous CEQA Documents
There are no applicable mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR or Cisco Systems
IS/MND.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a-b) Loss of known or identified mineral resource
No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR does not indicate that significant deposits of minerals
exist on the project site, so no impacts would occur. This is consistent with the determination
in the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts beyond those analyzed
in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental
review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 58
Noise
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
12. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other
agencies?
☒
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? ☒
c) Substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
☒
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
☒
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 in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
☒
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
☒
Environmental Setting
Major sources of noise on and adjacent to the project site include distant noise generated by
vehicles passing the Eastern Dublin planning area on I-580, traffic sources on Dublin Boulevard
and from aircraft flyovers.
Regulatory Framework
City of Dublin General Plan
The Noise Element of the City of Dublin General Plan establishes residential, commercial, and
industrial land use compatibility standards for noise measured at the property line of the
receiving land use. The land use compatibility noise criteria provide the basis for decisions on
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 59
location of land uses in relation to noise sources and for determining noise mitigation
requirements.
The Noise Element of the Dublin General Plan identifies "normally acceptable" noise levels for
non-residential uses as 70 dBA or less. Noise levels over 75 dBA CNEL are considered normally
unacceptable for new development of these types of land uses.
Table 1. City of Dublin Land Use/Noise Compatibility Standards (decibels)
Land Use
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential 60 or less 60 – 70 70 – 75 75+
Lodging Facilities 60 or less 61 – 80 71 – 80 Over 80
Schools,
churches, nursing
homes
60 or less 61 – 70 71 – 80 Over 80
Neighborhood
parks 60 or less 61 – 65 66 – 70 Over 70
Office / Retail 70 or less 71 – 75 76 – 80 Over 80
Industrial 70 or less 71 – 75 Over 75 --
Source: Dublin General Plan Noise Element, Table 9-1, 2012
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains one mitigation measure to reduce anticipated noise impacts
from the General Plan and EDSP project:
Mitigation Measures 3.10/4.0 and 5.0 reduced impacts related to construction noise (IM
10/E) to a less-than-significant level. These mitigation measures require developers to
submit construction noise management plans and to limit hours of construction
operations and similar items.
Cisco IS/MND
There are no applicable mitigation measures from the Cisco IS/MND.
The proposed project would be required to adhere to the applicable noise mitigation measure
contained in the previous CEQA documents prepared for the project site.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 60
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Exposure to or generation of noise exceeding standards
No New Impact. Operation of the proposed project would be subject to the General Plan noise
standard of 70 dBA or less. Residential uses are subject to more stringent noise standards.
However, the proposed project does not include any residential uses . With adherence to the
General Plan noise standards, operational impacts of the project related to increases in
permanent noise levels would be less than significant . This is consistent with the determination
in the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to exposure to or
generation of noise exceeding standards beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin
EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
(b) Exposure to ground borne vibration or ground borne noise
No New Impact. Construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in long-
term increases in groundborne vibration, since office uses would not generate groundborne
vibration or noise. Therefore, this impact would be considered less-than-significant. This is
consistent with the determination in the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to ground borne
vibration or ground borne noise beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and
Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no
further environmental review is required for this impact area.
(c) Permanently increasing ambient noise levels
No New Impact. Impact 3.10/B identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR identified future exposure
of housing within the Planning Area to future roadway noise as significant and unavoidable .
Future traffic generated by the proposed project would contribute to this condition . However,
the impacts of the proposed project with respect to increases in permanent noise levels are
within the scope of the impacts associated with the project covered by the Eastern Dublin EIR
and analyzed in the Cisco System IS/MND. The type and intensity of development proposed as
part of the proposed project, and the noise generated and associated impacts on residential
uses have been identified and analyzed in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR; no new impacts
would occur. This is consistent with the determination in the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts from permanently
increased ambient noise levels beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and
Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. There fore, no
further environmental review is required for this impact area.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 61
(d) Substantial temporary noise increase
No New Impact. 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 Applicants to prepare
construction noise management plans to minimize noise to existing and future housing as well
as adhere to construction hour limitations. Therefore, short-term construction noise impacts
would be considered less-than-significant. This is consistent with the determination in the
Cisco Systems IS/MND.
With adherence to required mitigation measures, there would be no new or substantially more
severe significant impacts from a substantial temporary noise increase beyond what has been
analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for
supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this
impact area.
(e, f) Excessive noise level near a public or private airport
No New Impact. The project site would not be affected by Livermore Municipal Airport
because the airport is located approximately two miles southeasterly of the project site. The
project site lies outside the airport referral area. No impacts are therefore anticipated. This is
consistent with the determination in the Cisco Systems IS/MND .
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to public or private
airports beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no
other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental
review is required for this impact area.
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
Population and Housing
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
☒
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 62
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
☒
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ☒
Environmental Setting
From a population of approximately 14,350 in 1982, the City of Dublin has grown to a resident
population of 53,836 (per the California Department of Finance, 2016). The City is projected to
have a total population of 76,000 at build out.
Regulatory Framework
There are no ordinances, regulations, or standards applicable to the proposed project for this
section.
Previous CEQA Documents
There are no applicable mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR or Cisco Systems
IS/MND.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Population growth
No New Impact. The proposed project is consistent with the type and scale of development
anticipated in the approved General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The potential to
increase substantial population growth would be considered less -than-significant since the
proposed project does not include any residential units and the office/commercial square
footage is consistent with the densities allowed under the General Plan and Specific Plan. This
is consistent with the determination in the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to population growth
beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required for this impact area.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 63
(b-c) Housing and resident displacement
No New Impact. The project site is vacant. Implementation of the proposed project would
therefore displace neither housing units or people. No impacts are therefore anticipated to
population displacement. This is consistent with the determination in the Cisco Systems
IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to residential
displacement beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and
no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
Source(s)
City of Dublin Web site. Accessed June 7, 2017. Available at
http://www.ci.dublin.ca.us/238/Community-and-Economic-Profile
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
Public Services
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or need for new or physical altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which cou ld cause significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of
the public services:
a) Fire protection? ☒
b) Police protection? ☒
c) Schools? ☒
d) Parks? ☒
e) Other public facilities? ☒
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 64
Environmental Setting
Fire Protection
Fire protection services are provided by the Alameda County Fire Department, which contracts
with the City of Dublin for fire suppression and emergency response, and includes three
specialized response teams including a Hazardous Materials Unit, an Urban Search and Rescue
Unit, and a Water Rescue Unit. The Dublin Fire Prevention Bureau provides plan review and
inspections of new construction to ensure compliance with City codes and regulations.
Police Protection
Police and security protection is provided by Alameda County Sheriff Department, which
contracts to the City of Dublin for patrol services, criminal investigations, and crime prevention.
Dispatch services and some data processing functions are handled at Sheriff Office facilities in
Oakland and San Leandro.
Schools
The Dublin Unified School District provides primary and secondary educational services to the
City of Dublin.
Parks
The Parks and Community Services Department develops and implements parks related
programs for the City of Dublin.
Libraries
The Alameda County Library Service provides library services for the City of Dublin.
Maintenance
Maintenance of streets, roads and other governmental facilities are the responsibility of the
City of Dublin Public Works Department.
Regulatory Framework
Ordinances, regulations, or standards applicable to the proposed project for this section are
discussed in the below analysis.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
Applicable mitigation measures contained in Eastern Dublin EIR addressing fire and police
protection include:
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 65
Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 1.0: Provide additional personnel and facilities and revise beats
as necessary to establish and maintain City standards for police protection service in
Eastern Dublin.
Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 2.0: Coordinate with the City Police Department regarding the
timing of annexation and proposed development, so that the Department can
adequately plan for the necessary expansion of services to the area.
Mitigation Measure 3.4/3.0: Incorporate into the requirements of project approval
Police Department recommendations on project design that affect traffic safety and
crime prevention.
Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 4.0: Incorporate into the requirements of project approval
Police Department recommendations on project design that affect traffic safety and
crime prevention.
Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 5.0: As a part of the development approval process in Eastern
Dublin, the City shall require the Police Department to review and respond to the
planned development with respect to: a) Project design layout relating to visibility,
security and safety, b) Project circulation system and access issues, c) Project
implications for emergency response times. Prior to final approval of non-residential
development and improvement plans, the City Police Department shall review the
proposed use, layout, design, and other project features for police surveillance/access,
security devices, such as alarms and lighting, visibility, and any other police issues or
concerns.
Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 6.0: Time the construction of new facilities to coincide with
new service demand to avoid periods of reduced service efficiency. The first station
would be sited and begin construction concurrent with initial development in the
planning area.
Mitigation Measure 3.4/7.0: Establish appropriate funding mechanisms to cover up -
front costs of capital fire improvements.
Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 8.0: Coordinate with Dougherty Regional Fire Authority (DRFA)
to identify and acquire specific sites for new fire stations. The westernmost site in the
Specific Plan area must be acquired prior to the approval of the first development plans
in Eastern Dublin. Timing for acquisition of the subsequent sites will be determined by
DRFA.
Mitigation Measure 3.4/9.0: Incorporate Fire Department recommendations on project
design relating to access, water pressure, fire safety and prevention into the
requirements of development approval.
Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 10.0: Ensure, as a requirement of project approval, that an
assessment district, homeowners association or other mechanism is in place that will
provide regular long-term maintenance of the urban/ open space interface.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 66
Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 11.0: Integrate fire trails and fire breaks into the open space
trail system. Meet fire district standards for access roads in these areas while
minimizing environmental impacts.
Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 12.0: The City shall work with the Fire Department and
qualified biologists to prepare a wildfire management plan for the project area.
Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 13.0: The City shall consult with the DFRA to determine the
number, location and timing of any additional fire station(s) needed to serve the GPA
Increment area at such time when the GPA Increment area is proposed for annexation.
Cisco IS/MND
There are no applicable mitigation measures from the Cisco IS/MND.
The proposed project will be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures contained in
the previous CEQA documents prepared for the project site.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Fire
No New Impact. Construction of the proposed project would increase demand for fire and
emergency services by increasing the amount of permanent daytime population on the project
site. This impact from development on the proposed project site was 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.
Mitigation Measures 3.4/6.0-13.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR address
increased demand for fire and emergency services based on new development envisioned in
the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. 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. The proposed project is required to comply
with applicable programs and standards implementing previously adopted mitigation measures .
With such compliance and normal City fire protection requirements, impacts related to fire
protection would be less-than-significant. This determination is consistent with the Cisco
Systems IS/MND.
With adherence to previous mitigation measures and regulatory requirements, there would be
no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to fire services beyond what has been
analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for
supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this
impact area.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 67
(b) Police
No New Impact. Incremental increases in the demand for police service could be expected
should the project be approved and constructed. This increase in calls for service would be off-
set through adherence to City of Dublin safety requirements from Dublin Police Services,
including the Non-Residential Security Ordinance. The project Applicant would also be required
to adhere to applicable Mitigation Measures 3.4/1.0-5.0 set forth in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
These measures address 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 City regulatory requirements,
impacts related to police protection would be less-than-significant. This determination is
consistent with the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
With adherence to previous mitigation measures and applicable regulatory requirements, there
would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to police services beyond
what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required for this impact area.
(c) Schools
No New Impact. The proposed project involves the development of an office complex . Since
this is a non-residential land use, limited and less-than-significant impacts are anticipated on
local schools. Consistent with the Cisco Systems IS/MND, the project Applicant would be
required to pay fees required under State law 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. Payment of school impact fees is considered full
mitigation of impacts under CEQA. Impacts to schools would therefore be less than significant.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to schools beyond
what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required for this impact area.
(d, e) Parks and other facilities
No New Impact. Approval and construction of the project would incrementally increase the
long-term maintenance demand for roads, parks, and other public facilities. However, such
additional maintenance demands would be offset by additional City fees and property tax
revenues accruing to the City of Dublin and therefore impacts would be less than significant.
This determination is consistent with the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
With compliance with regulatory requirements (including payment of fees), there would be no
new or substantially more severe significant impacts to parks and other facilities beyond what
has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 68
for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for
this impact area.
Source(s)
City of Dublin. 2017. Fire Services and Prevention. Accessed June 7, 2017. Available at
http://dublinca.gov/22/Fire-Services-Prevention.
City of Dublin. 2017. Police Services. Accessed June 7, 2017. Available at
http://www.ci.dublin.ca.us/91/Police-Services.
City of Dublin. 2017. Schools. Accessed June 7, 2017. Available at
http://www.dublin.ca.gov/401/Schools.
City of Dublin. 2017. Parks and Community Services. Accessed June 7, 2017. Available at
http://www.dublin.ca.gov/90/Parks-Community-Services.
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
Recreation
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
15. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
☒
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction
or expansion of recreational facilities which might have
an adverse physical effect on the environment?
☒
Environmental Setting
The project site is currently vacant and contains no parks or other recreational amenities.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 69
Regulatory Framework
Ordinances, regulations, or standards applicable to the proposed project for this section are
discussed in the below analysis.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains one applicable mitigation measure to reduce anticipated
recreation impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. Th is includes:
Mitigation Measure 3.4/31.0: Calculate and assess in-lieu park fees based on the City's
parkland dedication ordinance. Credit towards parkland dedication requirements will
only be given for level or gently sloping areas suitable for active recreation use.
Cisco IS/MND
There are no additional mitigation measures from the Cisco IS/MND.
The proposed project would be required to adhere to applicable recreation mitigation
measures contained in the previous CEQA documents prepared for the project site.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Increase the use of existing recreation facilities causing deterioration
No New Impact. The proposed project would not result in new residences being constructed
within the Eastern Dublin area. Therefore, there would be a less-than-significant impact to
neighborhood or regional park facilities due to limited use by employees. This determination is
consistent with the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts beyond those analyzed
in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental
review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area .
(b) Propose or require new facilities that cause physical effect
No New Impact. The proposed project does not include residential development . There would
be a less than significant impact on City park or recreational facilities due to limited use by
employees. The proposed project does include on-site recreational facilities for use by
employees. Therefore, no impact would result due to construction of new neighborhood or
regional park facilities caused by the proposed project. This determination is consistent with
the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts that would require new
park facilities beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 70
no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
Transportation/Traffic
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass
transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but not
limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways,
pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
☒
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management
program, including, but not limited to level of service
standards and travel demand measures, or other
standards established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
☒
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?
☒
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(for example, sharp curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (for example, farm equipment)?
☒
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ☒
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities,
or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such
facilities?
☒
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 71
Environmental Setting
Existing Transportation Network
The project site is served by several regional freeways and sub-regional arterial and collector
roadways, including:
Interstate 580
Interstate 580 (I-580) is part of the interstate freeway system and extends in an east-west
direction, from San Rafael in the west to Tracy in the east. I-580 forms the southern city
boundary with four to five lanes in each direction. A high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane
exists in the eastbound direction from Hacienda Drive to the base of the Altamont Pass to
the east of Livermore. Interchanges near the project site include Dougherty/Hopyard
Road, Hacienda Drive, Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road and Fallon Road/El Charro Road.
Dougherty Road
Dougherty Road is a north-south principal arterial roadway and a designated route of
regional significance. The roadway continues south of I-580 into Pleasanton as Hopyard
Road and connects to Crow Canyon Road in San Ramon to the north. Dougherty Road is
generally a four- to six-lane facility, with additional capacity at intersections to
accommodate high volumes of turning vehicles to and from I-580.
Dublin Boulevard
Dublin Boulevard is a major east-west arterial roadway in the City of Dublin. It is generally
a four- to six-lane facility with a landscaped median. Dublin Boulevard is a designated
route of regional significance.
Hacienda Drive
Hacienda Drive is an arterial designed to provide access to 1-580, and extends from West
Las Positas Boulevard in Pleasanton to Gleason Drive in Dublin. From West Las Positas
Road to Dublin Boulevard, Hacienda Drive is a designated principal arterial roadway that
generally provides three travel lanes in each direction with additional capacity at
intersections to accommodate high volumes of turning vehicles. North of Dublin
Boulevard, Hacienda Drive is a designated minor arterial with two to four travel lanes in
each direction, with a landscaped median.
Arnold Road
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.
Arnold Road / Dublin Boulevard is currently being re-designed to include a southbound
right-turn lane. This improvement, which is anticipated to be constructed within the next
two years, is not included in the analysis.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 72
Gleason Drive
Gleason Drive is an east-west minor arterial roadway approximately half a mile north of
Dublin Boulevard that connects Arnold Road in the west to Fallon Road in the east. It
generally provides two travel lanes in each direction.
Regulatory Framework
Alameda County Transportation Commission
The Alameda County Transportation Commission (CTC) does not have adopted thresholds of
significance for Congestion Management Plan (CMP) land use analysis purposes . Past analyses
within the City of Dublin have used the following criteria to assess roadway segment impacts:
For a roadway segment of the Alameda CTC Congestion Management Program (CMP)
Network, the project would cause (a) the LOS to degrade from LOS E or better to LOS F or
(b) the volume-to-capacity ratio to increase 0.02 or more for a roadway segment that would
operate at LOS F without the project.
Complete Streets Policy
The City of Dublin is committed to creating and maintaining safe, comfortable, and convenient
travel along and across roadways that serve all categories of users including bicyclists,
emergency responders, motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians, persons with
disabilities, seniors, and users/operators of public transportation.
Complete Streets Principals adopted by the Dublin City Council by Resolution No. 199-12 on
December 4, 2013 includes the following:
1. Complete Streets Serving All Users and Modes
2. Context Sensitivity
3. Complete Streets Routinely Addressed by All Departments
4. All Projects and Phases
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR contains mitigation measures to reduce anticipated traffic impacts from
the General Plan and EDSP project. These measures generally include construction of new
roadways, widening of existing roadways and improvements to local freeway facilities to
accommodate anticipated increases in the number of vehicles associated with the build out of
the Eastern Dublin area.
With the exceptions noted below, the EIR found that all traffic and transportation impacts could
be reduced to less-than-significant levels with adherence to mitigation measures identified in
the EIR. Several impacts could not be reduced to a level of insignificance even with mitigations.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 73
These include: impacts to the I-580 freeway between I-680 and Hacienda Drive (IM 3.3/B),
impacts to the I-580 Freeway between Tassajara Road and Airway Boulevard (IM 3.3/ C),
cumulative freeway impacts (IM 3.3/E), impacts to Santa Rita Road and T-580 Eastbound ramps
(IM 3.3/I), and cumulative impacts to Tassajara Road (IM 3.3/N).
Cisco IS/MND
The Cisco IS/MND contains the following mitigation measures to reduce anticipated traff ic
impacts. Their status is indicated in italics.
Mitigation Measure 6: The project Applicant shall construct the following traffic and
transportation improvements near the project:
o Dublin/Arnold intersection: a separate right -turn lane for the southbound Arnold
Road approach.
o Hacienda/Dublin intersection: restripe the northbound Hacienda Drive approach
to include a third left-turn lane. (Completed)
o Right-turn lanes to all project driveways (Completed)
o Cisco Systems Access/The Boulevard improvements, to include: Eastbound
approach: 1 left-turn lane; Westbound approach: 1 right-turn lane; Southbound
approach: 1 left-turn lane, 1 through/right-turn lane. (Completed)
Mitigation Measure 7: Commerce One (Sybase project) is responsible for constructing
the following traffic and transportation improvements near the Cisco project site. These
improvements are also necessary for Cisco to gain access to their site. If these
improvements are not constructed by Commerce One, Cisco shall be responsible for
constructing the following traffic and transportation improvements:
o Arnold Road/The Boulevard improvements, to include Eastbound approach: 1
left-turn lane, 1 through lane, 1 through/right-turn lane; Westbound approach:2
left-turn lanes, 2 through lanes, 1 right-turn lane; Northbound approach: 1 left-
turn lane, 1 through lane, 1 through/right-turn lane, and 1 right turn lane;
Southbound approach: 1 left-turn lane, 1 through lane, 1 through/right-turn
lane. (Completed)
o The Boulevard/Hacienda Drive improvements, to include: Eastbound approach: 1
left-turn lane, 1 through/right-turn lane, 2 right-turn lanes; Westbound
approach: 2 left-turn lanes, 1 through/right-turn lane; Northbound approach: 3
left-turn lanes, 3 through lanes; 1 right-turn lane; Southbound approach:2 left-
turn lanes, 3 through lanes, 1 shared through/right-turn lane. (Completed)
o Roadway segment improvements on Arnold Road between Dublin Boulevard and
The Boulevard (future): Four (4) travel lanes [two in each direction]; The
Boulevard between Arnold Road and Commerce One Mid-Block Access (future):
Six (6) travel lanes [three in the westbound direction and three in the eastbound
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 74
direction]; The Boulevard between Commerce One Mid-Block Access and
Hacienda Drive (future): Six (6) travel lanes [three in each direction]. (Completed)
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a-b) Conflict with applicable transportation plans standards, including congestion
management plans
No New Impact. The Carl Zeiss Innovation Center Traffic Consistency Analysis (TCA, Kimley
Horn, 2017) evaluated the proposed project’s conformance with the traffic impacts analyzed
for the project site in the Cisco Systems IS/MND and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area (see
Appendix D: Carl Zeiss Innovation Center Traffic Consistency Analysis). It concluded that the
proposed project would generate less traffic compared to the project that was analyzed in the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and Cisco Systems IS/MND. This is due in large part to the fact that
the proposed project would accommodate 1,500 employees, as compared to the estimated
3,000 employees analyzed for the Cisco project. The project also includes a TDM program
which will result in a 20% reduction in project vehicle trip generation.
Mitigation Measures 6 and 7 in the Cisco IS/MND identified several roadway improvements. All
of these improvements have been constructed except for constructing a new a separate right-
turn lane for the southbound Arnold Road approach at the Dublin/Arnold intersection. The
Boulevard project, located west of the project site, would be constructing the separate right-
turn lane for the southbound Arnold Road approach at the Dublin/Arnold intersection. It is
anticipated that this improvement would be constructed in 2018 in advance of the completion
of Phase 1 of the Zeiss Innovation Center.
According to the Traffic Consistency Analysis (TCA), all study intersections would continue to
operate at acceptable level of service (LOS) D or better during Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the
proposed project, for all scenarios analyzed, including cumulative conditions.
Parking
Chapter 8.76 (Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations) of the City’s Zoning Ordinance
complies with Title 24 of the California Code of Regul ations (City Municipal Code 8.76.060-D),
which is designed to comply with the requirements of the Americans with Disability Act.
According to the TCA, the proposed parking supply for Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project
exceeds the City’s parking requirements. The project is consistent with Chapter 8.76 of the
Zoning Ordinance and no new or substantially more severe significant parking impacts would
occur with construction of the project
Driveways
The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan did not evaluate the project driveways on Park Place (formerly
Sybase Drive); therefore, a separate analysis was performed for the Park Place driveways:
located at Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway. Both intersections would operate at an
acceptable condition with the addition of the project traffic and no additional improvements
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 75
are required. No new or substantially more severe impacts would occur with respect to project
driveways.
Cumulative Impacts
The Eastern Dublin EIR analyzed cumulative traffic from potential development in the Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan area. The City of Dublin has adopted a Traffic Impact Fee program which
requires developers to contribute their 'fair-share' of sub-regional traffic improvements
required for new development within the Eastern Dublin area. The project is within the scope
and level of development and impacts assumed within the Specific Plan and analyzed in the
Eastern Dublin EIR for the project site and area and is required to participate in the Eastern
Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Program.
With adherence to previous Mitigation Measures 6 and 7 and required payment of traffic
impact fees, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to
applicable transportation plans standards beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin
EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area .
(c) Change in air traffic patterns
No New Impact. The project would have no impact on air traffic patterns, since it involves
office development and is located outside of the Livermore Airport general referral area . This
determination is consistent with the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to air traffic patterns
beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required for this impact area.
(d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
No New Impact. Approval of the proposed project would add new driveways, sidewalks and
other vehicular and pedestrian travel ways where none currently exist. Increases in safety
incidents may occur due to the volume of vehicles and pedestrians using nearby roads and
other circulation features. The proposed on-site circulation and access for the project has been
designed to adequately and safely distribute projected traffic flows per recommendations of
the TCA as deemed appropriate by the City Engineer. The City's Site Development Review
Permit application ensures that the proposed development meets all City standards relating to
safety hazards, design features, on-site circulation and access, and therefore no impacts are
anticipated.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts due to a mobility
design feature beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and
no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 76
(e) Result in inadequate emergency access
No New Impact. The current need for emergency access is low, since there are no current
residents or visitors on the project site. Construction of the proposed office complex on the
project 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 the new development.
For both phases of development, access to the project site would be via two driveways: one full
access driveway at Central Parkway/Park Place and one delivery and emergency vehicle only
access driveway at Dublin Boulevard/Park Place. Park Place continues through an existing
parking lot south of the primary entrance to the project site . Only deliveries and emergency
vehicles would use the Dublin Boulevard/Park Place intersection and gain access to the project
site via an easement.
Since the proposed site development plan indicates that driveways meeting City design
requirements would be provided, potential impacts relating to inadequate emergency access
would be less-than-significant. This determination is consistent with the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to emergency access
beyond what has been analyzed in Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required for this impact area.
(f) Conflict with adopted alternative transportation plans
No New Impact. The project includes on-site bicycle parking, a bus pick-up/drop-off for an
employee bus shuttle, and pedestrian connections between proposed buildings and nearby
streets.
The project proposes to implement/construct the following items consistent with the City’s
Complete Streets Policy:
1. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant parking spaces
2. ADA compliant sidewalks and curb ramps
3. Emergency Vehicle Access to the project site
Therefore, there would be no impacts to pedestrian or bicycle access or alternative
transportation plans, and impacts are less-than-significant.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to adopted alternative
transportation plans beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco
IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 77
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Complete Streets Principals adopted by the City Council of the City of Dublin
Resolution No. 199-12, December 4,2013.
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
Kimley-Horn and Associates. Carl Zeiss Innovation Center Traffic Consistency Analysis, 2017.
Tribal Cultural Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site,
feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical
resources as defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
☒
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c)
of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
☒
Environmental Setting
The topic of tribal cultural resources was not analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR or Cisco
Systems IS/MND. Since certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR in 1993 and follow -up CEQA
documents, CEQA has added this topic as a new section to the Appendix G Checklist in 2016 per
Assembly Bill 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes 2014). The purpose of AB 52 is to include tribal cultural
resources early in the CEQA process to ensure that local and Tribal governments, public
agencies, and project proponents would have information available, ear ly in the project
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 78
planning process, to identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources.
Cultural resources were analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR or Cisco Systems IS/MND.
Regulatory Framework
Per AB 52, to help determine whether a project may have such an effect, the Public Resources
Code requires a lead agency to consult with any California Native American tribe that requests
consultation and is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed
project. That consultation must take place prior to the release of a Negative Declaration,
Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report for a project. If a lead agency
determines that a project may cause a substantial adverse change to trib al cultural resources,
the lead agency must consider measures to mitigate that impact.
Previous CEQA Documents
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
Specific Plan area, several which were located near the former Santa Rita Rehabilitation Center.
None of these sites have been recorded on the project site.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources
No New Impact. As part of the regulatory permit application assembled by WRA for the project
Applicant, a historic survey of the project site was conducted by Tom Origer & Associates . The
results of the survey and archival research did not identify any historic resources. Tom Origer &
Associates’ analysis is documented in a Historical Resources Survey of APN 986-0014-010, and is
included as an appendix to this Initial Study.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to historic resources
beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required for this impact area.
(b) Significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1
No New Impact. The City contacted the tribal representative of the Ione Band of Miwok
Indians (Ltr. from M Battaglia to R. Yonemura, dated 10/13/17). No response was received.
There are no known significant Tribal Cultural Resources on the project site . If Native American
artifacts are encountered during construction, work on the project shall cease until compl iance
with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 is demonstrated. Work on the project may commence
under the guidance of an approved resource protection plan. The County Coroner is to be
contacted if human remains are uncovered as required by State law.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 79
With adherence to required regulatory requirements, there would be no new or substantially
more severe significant impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources beyond what has been analyzed in
the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supp lemental
review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area
Source(s)
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
Personal correspondence, Ltr. from M Battaglia, Associate Planner, City of Dublin to R.
Yonemura, Chairman, Ione Band of Miwok Indians, dated 10/13/17 .
Tom Origer & Associates. Historical Resources Survey of APN 986-0014-010, 2017.
Utilities and Service Systems
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? ☒
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction or which could cause
significant environmental effects?
☒
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? (V.4)
☒
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
☒
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
☒
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 80
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
New
Impact
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity
to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal
needs?
☒
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste? ☒
Environmental Setting
The project site is served by the following service providers:
Sewage treatment
Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) provides wastewater collection and treatment
service to the City of Dublin. DSRSD owns and operates the Regional Wastewater Treatment
Facility in Pleasanton.
Water supply and distribution
DSRSD obtains its water supply from Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District, Zone 7. DSRSD also currently treats and distributes recycled water to water customers
in its service area.
Storm drainage
The City of Dublin Public Works Department oversees municipal storm drainage within the
Dublin City limits.
Solid Waste
Amador Valley Industries provides solid waste and recycling collection services on a contractual
basis to commercial and residential customers in the City of Dublin.
Regulatory Framework
There are no ordinances, regulations, or standards applicable to the proposed project for this
section.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 81
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
Regarding water resources, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified overdraft of groundwater
resources (Impact 3.5/P) as a potentially significant impact. Adherence to Mitigation Measures
3.5/24.0 and 25.0 would reduce this impact to a level of insignificant . These measures require
the City of Dublin to coordinate with DSRSD to develop recycled water resources and otherwise
carefully use water resources and that all new development in the Eastern Dublin project area
connect to the DSRSD water system. Impact 3.5/Q identified an increase in water demand as a
potentially significant impact, but this impact could be mitigated to an insignificant level based
on implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.5/26.0 -31.0. These mitigation measures require
implementation of water conservation measures in individual development projects and
construction of new system-wide water improvements which are funded by development
impact fees.
Another related impact identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR is the need for additional water
treatment plant capacity (Impact 3.5/R). This impact was identified as being reduced to a level
of insignificance through the implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.5/32.0-33.0, which
requires improvement to the Zone 7 water system, to be funded by individual development
impact fees.
Impact 3.5/S (lack of a water distribution system) was identified as a potentially significant
impact in the Eastern Dublin EIR, but this impact has been reduced to an insignificant level
through adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.5/4.34.0-38.0. These mitigations require
upgrades to the project area water system and provision of a "will serve" letter prior to
issuance of a grading permit. Impact 3.5/T identified a potentially significant impact related to
inducement of substantial growth and concentration of population in the project area. The
Eastern Dublin EIR found that this was a significant and unavoidable impact .
Regarding sewer service, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified Impact 3.5/B (lack of a wastewater
collection system) as a potentially significant impact that could be mitigated through adherence
to Mitigation Measures 3.5/1.0-5.0. These measures require DSRSD to prepare an area-wide
wastewater collection system master plan, requires all new development to be connected to
DSRSD's public sewer system, discourages on-site wastewater treatment, requires a "will-serve"
letter from DSRSD and requires that all sewer facilities be constructed to DSRSD engineering
standards. Impact 3.5 noted an impact regarding extension of a sewer trunk line with capacity
to serve new development, but could be reduced to an insignificant level since the proposed
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan sewer system has been sized to accommodate increased sewer
demand from the proposed Specific Plan project . Impact 3.5/G found that lack of wastewater
disposal capacity as a significant impact. An upgraded wastewater disposal facility has been
constructed by the Livermore Amador Valley Water Management Agency and is operational .
Impact 3.5/E identified lack of wastewater treatment plant capacity as a potentially significant
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 82
impact, which could be reduced to an insignificant level through adherence to Mitigation
Measures 3.5/7.1, 8.0 and 9.0. No additional analysis is needed.
Cisco IS/MND
There are no additional mitigation measures from the Cisco IS/MND.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Wastewater treatment requirements
No New Impact. The addition of wastewater flows from the proposed project would not cause
the plant to exceed local, state, and federal water quality standards. The proposed project
would not change the urban scale of development anticipated . Mitigation Measures 3.5/1.0
through 22.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR deals with wastewater treatment collection,
treatment and disposal. With these adopted mitigation measures, potential wastewater
impacts of the proposed project would be less-than-significant. This determination is
consistent with the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
With adherence to previous mitigation measures, there would be no new or substantially more
severe significant impacts to wastewater treatment beyond what has been analyzed in in the
Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review
are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
(b) Require construction of new facilities
No New Impact. Existing water and sewer lines would need to be extended into the project
site from the west. Such extensions have been planned as part of the General Plan and Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan and have been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The project would be
required to conform to adopted Mitigation Measures 2.5/24.0 through 43.0 in the Eastern
Dublin EIR, as applicable, regarding water service. A less-than-significant impacts would
therefore result. This determination is consistent with the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
With adherence to previous mitigation measures, there would be no new or substantially more
severe significant impacts to wastewater facilities beyond what has been analyzed in the
Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review
are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area .
(c) Stormwater drainage
No New Impact. As shown in Figure 7: Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan – Phase 1,
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 acceptable and
overall drainage from the project site would be accommodated by existing or planned local and
regional drainage facilities. The proposed project would not change the urban scale of
development anticipated in the Cisco Systems IS/MND for this project site. The project would
also be required to adhere to Mitigation Measures 3.5/44.0 through 52.0 contained in the
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 83
Eastern Dublin EIR, as applicable, regarding drainage. A less-than-significant impact would
therefore result. This determination is consistent with the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
With adherence to previous mitigation measures and regulatory requirements, there would be
no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to stormwater drainage facilities
beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required for this impact area.
(d) Sufficient water supply
No New Impact. Approval of the proposed project would result in an increased demand for
water for domestic and irrigation purposes, similar to water use projections previously
analyzed, as identified in the Cisco IS/MND. Water use for the proposed project would also be
within the projections contained in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and
analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The increased water demand could be accommodated by
DSRSD and Zone 7 facilities and long-term supplies. Recycled water would be supplied to the
project site for irrigation by DSRSD. The project Applicant would be required to provide any
local extensions and connections to nearby facilities.
The Eastern Dublin EIR determined that a less-than-significant impact would therefore result.
This determination is consistent with the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to water supply beyond
what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required for this impact area.
(e) Sufficient wastewater capacity
No New Impact. Approval of the proposed project would result in an increased demand for
wastewater treatment. Presently, the project site is vacant and there is no demand for
wastewater treatment services. DSRSD indicated for the Cisco project that the local
wastewater treatment plant had adequate capacity to serve the project. The proposed project
would not change the urban scale of development anticipated in the Cisco Systems IS/MND for
this project site, and impacts for the proposed project would be consistent with the
determination in the Cisco IS/MND of a less-than-significant impact.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to wastewater capacity
beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required for this impact area.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 84
(f) Adequate landfill
No New Impact. Approval of the proposed project would incrementally increase generation of
solid waste. Over the long term, the amount of solid waste reaching the 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 as it
is consistent with overall buildout projections. Furthermore, the project would be required to
adhere to Mitigation Measures 3.4/37.0 through 40.0, as applicable, contained in the Eastern
Dublin EIR regarding solid waste disposal. Less-than-significant impacts are therefore
anticipated regarding solid waste disposal. This determination is consistent with the Cisco
Systems IS/MND.
With adherence to previous mitigation measures, there would be no new or substantially more
severe significant impacts to landfill capacity beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern
Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area .
(g) Compliance with solid waste statutes and regulations
No New impact. The City of Dublin and the solid waste hauler would ensure that developers of
individual projects constructed under the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan would
adhere to federal, state and local solid waste regulations. Less-than-significant impacts are
therefore anticipated regarding compliance with statutes and regulations. This determination
is consistent with the Cisco Systems IS/MND.
There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to solid waste statutes
and regulations beyond what has been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco IS/MND,
and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
Source(s)
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. 2017. “Solid Waste Information
System.” Website: http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/Default.htm.
Accessed June 7, 2017.
City of Dublin. Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan, 1993.
City of Dublin. Initial Study for Cisco Systems, Inc., 2001.
Dublin San Ramon Services District. 2017. “Fact Sheet.” Website: http://www.dsrsd.com
/home/showdocument?id=811. Accessed June 7, 2017.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 85
Mandatory Findings of Significance
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No New Impact
18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Does the project:
a) Have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below self -
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
☒
b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of the
past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future
projects.)
☒
c) Have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
☒
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or e ndangered plant or
animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
No New Impact. As discussed and analyzed in this document, the proposed project would not
degrade the quality of the environment. Additionally, for the reasons discussed in Biological
Resources, the proposed project, with mitigation, would not substantially reduce the habitat of
a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self -sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal. Further, for the reasons identified in Cultural
Resources, the project site does not contain any significant cultural resources, and no impacts
to such resources would occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Page 86
result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as
previously analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco Systems IS/MND, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required for this impact area.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
No New Impact. The proposed project has the potential to result in incremental environmental
impacts that are part of a series of approvals that were anticipated under the Eastern Dublin
EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR considered the project’s cumulatively considerable impacts where
effects had the potential to degrade the quality of the environment as a result of build-out of
the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The implementation of the proposed project, with mitigation,
would not result in any new cumulative impacts or increase the severity of a previously
identified significant cumulative impact as previously analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and
Cisco Systems IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area ..
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
No New Impact. The proposed project would not create adverse environmental effects that
would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The
proposed project would allow for the conversion an existing vacant site to an urban use,
specifically the construction of two low to mid-rise (3-story and 5-story) R&D buildings, a
parking structure, surface parking, and related improvements, including landscaping. None of
these uses or activities would result in any substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly, as discussed throughout this document . Therefore, implementation of the
proposed project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously
identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Cisco Systems
IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
City of Dublin ZEISS Innovation Center IS/Supplemental MND
| Appendices
Appendices
The following appendices are available from the City Dublin upon request:
A Biological Resources Assessment Report (WRA, 2017)
B Delineation of Potential Jurisdictional Wetlands Under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (WRA, 2017)
C Rare Plant Survey Report (WRA 2017)
D Historical Resources Survey of APN 986-0014-010 (TRA 2017)
E Carl Zeiss Innovation Center Traffic Consistency Analysis (Kimley-Horn &
Associates, 2017)
Zeiss Innovation Center Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Date February 2018
Project Name Zeiss Innovation Center
PLPA-2017-00025
Project Location The project site is located at the northeast corner of
Dublin Boulevard/Arnold Road (APN 986-0014-010-00) in
the City of Dublin, CA in Alameda County.
Project Applicant Dr. Matthias Ismael
Carl Zeiss, Inc.
5160 Hacienda Drive
Dublin, CA 94568
State Clearinghouse Number 1991103064
Contact Martha Battaglia
Associate Planner
City of Dublin
Community Development Department
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Phone: 925-833-6610
martha.battaglia@dublin.ca.gov
EXHIBIT B
City of Dublin
Zeiss Innovation Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 2
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that all public agencies establish
monitoring and/or reporting procedures for mitigation measures (MMs) ado pted as part of the
project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant project impacts.
The MMRP identifies the following for each MM:
Timing. In each case, a timeframe for performance of the mitigation measure, or review of
evidence that mitigation has taken place, is provided. The measures are designed to ensure
that impact-related components of Project implementation do not proceed without
establishing that the mitigation is implemented or assured. All activities are subject to the
approval of all required permits from local, State, and federal agencies with permitting
authority over the specific activity.
Responsible Party or Designated Representative. In each case, unless otherwise indicated,
the Applicant is the Responsible Party for implementing the mitigation. The City or a
Designated Representative will also monitor the performance and implementation of the
mitigation measures. To guarantee that the mitigation measure will not be inadvertently
overlooked, a supervising public official acting as the Designated Representative is the official
who grants the permit or authorization called for in the performance. Where more than one
official is identified, permits or authorization from all officials shall be required.
The numbering system corresponds with the numbering system used in the Zeiss Innovation
Center Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study and the Cisco Systems
Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study. The last column of the MMRP table will be
used by the parties responsible for documenting when implementation of the MM has
been completed. The ongoing documentation and monitoring of mitigation compliance will be
completed by the City of Dublin. The completed MMRP will be kept on file at the City of Dublin
Community Development Department.
Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measures. By reference, included in this MMRP are the
mitigation measures established in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR (SCH# 91103064) that
are applicable to the project.
Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
Aesthetics, Light & Glare
Cisco Systems MND Mitigation Measure:
MM1. The pole-mounted street lights installed 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, and all
exterior glass panels shall be of non-glare
manufacture.
Notes on construction
plans; site inspection
Prior to the first
grading, building or
other permit for
development
activities
City of Dublin
Biological Resources (Zeiss Innovation Center)
MM BIO-1. Prior to the first site grading, building, or
other permit for development activities involving
ground disturbance, the project Applicant shall prepare
the documentation acceptable to the Community
Development Department that demonstrates
compliance with the following:
a) Retain a qualified biologist to conduct two pre-
construction surveys for the Western burrowing
owl for the project site. The first survey shall be
conducted no more than 14 days prior to ground-
disturbing activities and the second completed
within 48 hours of ground disturbance. The surveys
shall be conducted in accordance with the
California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW)
Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. If the
Submittal of
documentation; notes on
construction plans; site
inspection
Prior to the first
ground-disturbing
activities; during
construction
City of Dublin
City of Dublin
Zeiss Innovation Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 4
Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
surveys determine owls are present, then the
measures set forth in this mitigation shall be
followed.
b) If direct impacts to owls can be avoided, prior to
the first ground-disturbing activities, the project
Applicant shall implement the following avoidance
or mitigation measures during all phases of
construction to reduce or eliminate potential
impacts to California burrowing owls.
a. Avoid disturbing occupied burrows
during the nesting period, from
February 1 through August 31;
b. Avoid impacting burrows occupied
during the non-breeding season by
migratory or non-migratory resident
burrowing owls;
c. Avoid direct destruction of burrows
through chaining (dragging a heavy
chain over the area to remove shrubs),
disking, cultivation, and urban,
industrial or agricultural development;
d. Develop and implement a worker
awareness program to increase the on-
site worker’s recognition of and
commitment to burrowing owl
protection;
e. Place visible markers near burrows to
ensure that equipment and other
machinery do not collapse burrows; and
f. Do not fumigate, use treated bait or
City of Dublin
Zeiss Innovation Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 5
Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
other means of poisoning nuisance
animals in areas where burrowing owls
are known or suspected to occur (e.g.
sites observed with nesting owls,
designated use areas).
c) If avoidance of burrowing owl or their burrows is
not possible, prior to the first ground-disturbing
activities, the project Applicant, in consultation
with the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife, shall prepare a Burrowing Owl Relocation
Plan as indicated and following the CDFW 2012
Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation.
Monitoring of the excluded owls shall be
implemented as per the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife 2012 Staff Report.
d) If avoidance of burrowing owl or their burrows is
not possible and project activities may result in
impacts to nesting, occupied, and satellite burrows
and/or burrowing owl habitat, the project
Applicant shall consult with the CDFW to develop a
detailed mitigation plan that shall include
replacement of impacted habitat, number of
burrows, and burrowing owl at a ratio approved by
CDFW. The mitigation plan shall be based on the
requirements set forth in Appendix A of the CDFW
2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation
and the plan shall be reviewed and accepted by
CDFW and the City prior to the first ground-
disturbing activities.
City of Dublin
Zeiss Innovation Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 6
Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
MM Bio-2. Prior to obtaining the first grading or building
permit for development activities involving ground
disturbance, the project Applicant shall prepare the
documentation acceptable to the Community
Development Department that demonstrates
compliance with the following:
a) Retain a qualified botanist to conduct rare plant
surveys within the construction zone for
Congdon’s tarplant or other species with
potential habitat within the project area during
the appropriate time of year in accordance with
agency protocols. Impacts to special-status plant
species shall be avoided to the maximum extent
feasible and habitat that supports special-status
plant species shall be preserved. Rare plant
surveys shall be conducted at the proper time of
year when rare or endangered species are both
“evident” and identifiable. Field surveys shall be
scheduled to coincide with known blooming
periods, and/or during periods of physiological
development that are necessary to identify the
plant species of concern. If no special-status
plant species are found, then the proposed
project would not have any impacts to the
species and no additional mitigation measures
are necessary.
b) Where surveys determine that special-status
plant species are present within or adjacent to
the proposed project site, direct and indirect
impacts of the project on the species (e.g.
Submittal of
documentation; notes on
construction plans; site
inspection
Prior to the first
grading, building or
other permit for
development
activities; during
construction;
Report to be
submitted annually
for 3 years following
completion of project
(if applicable)
City of Dublin
City of Dublin
Zeiss Innovation Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 7
Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
Congdon’s tarplant and/or California Dock Seed
Stock) shall be avoided where feasible through
the establishment of activity exclusion zones,
where no ground-disturbing activities shall take
place, including construction of new facilities,
construction staging, or other temporary work
areas. Activity exclusion zones for special-status
plant species shall be established in accordance
with regulatory agency standards prior to
construction activities around each occupied
habitat site, the boundaries of which shall be
clearly marked with standard orange plastic
construction exclusion fencing or its equivalent.
c) Where avoidance of impacts to Congdon’s
tarplant and California dock is not feasible, seed
or plant propagules shall be collected from
these species. Under direction of the qualified
botanist, seed or plant propagules shall be
harvested from at least 50% of plants within the
area of impact.
d) The project Applicant shall follow the mitigation
guidelines as established in the East Alameda
County Conservation Strategy (EACCS; 2010),
including:
a. An adequate floristic survey of the site
shall have been completed within the
preceding 3 years (under normal rainfall
and conditions), and spatially explicit
data on the extent of the focal plant
population shall be available.
City of Dublin
Zeiss Innovation Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 8
Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
b. To mitigate impacts on a plant
population, a parcel where the focal
plant species occurs may be acquired
through fee title purchase or
conservation easement (PLA-2).
c. An assessment of the plant population
on both the impact site and the
proposed mitigation site shall be
conducted by a qualified botanist. The
mitigation population shall be
equivalent in terms of population size
and vigor than the population affected
at the project site.
d. As identified in Table 3-12 of the EACCS,
mitigation for focal plant species within
the Livermore Valley Mitigation Area is
5:1 and refers to the size of the
population that is affected or protected.
e) The qualified botanist shall demonstrate that
the harvested seeds have been planted and are
surviving at a rate pursuant to EACCS. The
Applicant will submit an annual monitoring
report to the City of Dublin, which details
monitoring methods and maintenance for
successful establishment, and reporting
protocols. The plan shall be developed in
consultation with the City of Dublin prior to the
start of construction activities. Contingency
measures should be included in the plan if it
appears the success criterion will not be met
City of Dublin
Zeiss Innovation Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 9
Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
after three years. Monitoring reports shall
include photo-documentation, planting
specifications, a site layout map, descriptions of
materials used, and justification for any
deviations from the monitoring plan.
MM BIO-3. Prior to the first grading, building, or other
permit for development activities, the project Applicant
shall prepare the documentation acceptable to the
Community Development Department that
demonstrates compliance with the following:
a) No more than 14 days prior to initial ground
disturbance and vegetation removal during
nesting season (February 1 – August 31), the
project Applicant shall retain a qualified
biologist to perform pre-construction breeding
bird surveys. If any nests are found, they shall
be flagged and protected with a suitable buffer.
Buffer distances would vary based on species
and conditions at the project site, but is usually
at least 50 feet, and up to 250 feet for raptors.
This mitigation measure does not apply to
ground disturbance and vegetation removal
activities that occur outside of the nesting
season (September 1 – January 31).
Submittal of
documentation; notes on
construction plans
Prior to first grading
building, or other
permit for
development
activities
City of Dublin
MM BIO-4. Prior to the first site grading or building
permit for development activities involving ground
disturbance, the project Applicant shall prepare the
documentation acceptable to the Community
Development Department that demonstrates
Submittal of
documentation; notes on
construction plans
Prior to first site
grading or building
permit
City of Dublin
City of Dublin
Zeiss Innovation Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 10
Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
compliance with the following:
a) Project Applicant shall obtain all required
resource agency permits and shall prepare and
obtain resource agency approval of a wetland
mitigation plan that ensures no-net loss of
wetland and water habitats.
b) The wetland mitigation plan shall include
measures for avoidance, minimization, and
compensation for wetland impacts. Avoidance
and minimization measures may include the
designation of buffers around wetland features
to be avoided, or project design measures.
Compensation measures shall include the
preservation and/or creation of wetland or
waters, which may include buying credits at a
mitigation bank approved by regulatory
agencies. The final mitigation ratios (the amount
of wetlands and waters created or preserved
compared to the amount impacted) shall be
determined by the applicable resource
agency(s). The wetland and mitigation
monitoring plan shall include the following:
a. Descriptions of wetland types, and their
expected functions and values;
b. Performance standards and monitoring
protocol to ensure the success of the
mitigation wetlands over a period to be
determined by the resource agencies;
c. Engineering plans showing the location,
size and configuration of wetlands to be
City of Dublin
Zeiss Innovation Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 11
Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
created or restored;
d. An implementation schedule showing
that construction or preservation of
mitigation areas shall commence prior
to or concurrently with initiation of
construction; and
e. A description of legal protection
measures for the preserved wetlands
(i.e. dedication of fee title, conservation
easement and/or an endowment held
by an approved conservation
organization, government agency or
mitigation bank).
Cultural Resources
Cisco Systems MND Mitigation Measure:
MM2. In the event that any prehistoric material is
discovered, work shall be halted in the immediate
vicinity of the project site until a qualified archeologist
inspects the discovery, and, if necessary, implements
plans for further evaluation testing and/or retrieval of
endangered materials.
Site Inspection During construction City of Dublin
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Cisco Systems MND Mitigation Measure:
MM3. Prior to the first grading, building, or other permit
for development activities, the Applicant shall remove
all asbestos wrapped piping from the site. Heavy
Submittal of
documentation; notes on
construction plans
Prior to first site
grading or building
permit
City of Dublin
City of Dublin
Zeiss Innovation Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 12
Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
petroleum hydrocarbons shall be removed from the site
to the extent required by the appropriate regulatory
agencies.
Hydrology & Water Quality
Cisco Systems MND Mitigation Measure:
MM5. The project Applicant shall prepare a Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall
include a list of the 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, use of biofilters (i.e. grassy swales) and other
measures. The SWPPP shall conform to standards
adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board
and the City of Dublin and shall be approved by the City
of Dublin Public Works Department prior to issuance of
grading permits.
Submittal of
documentation; notes on
construction plans
Prior to issuance of
grading permit.
City of Dublin
Transportation/Traffic
Cisco Systems MND Mitigation Measure:
MM6. The project Applicant shall construct the
following traffic and transportation improvements near
the project:
a) Dublin/Arnold intersection: A separate right-
turn lane for the southbound Arnold Road
approach. (The Boulevard project’s obligation,
see Dublin Crossings MMRP)
N/A N/A N/A
City of Dublin
Zeiss Innovation Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 13
Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
b) Hacienda/Dublin intersection: Restripe the
northbound Hacienda Drive approach to include
a third left-turn lane. (Completed)
c) Right-turn lanes to all project driveways.
(Completed)
d) Cisco Systems Access/The Boulevard
improvements, to include: Eastbound approach:
1 left-turn lane; Westbound approach: 1 right-
turn lane; Southbound approach: 1 left-turn
lane, 1 through/right-turn lane. (Completed)
Cisco Systems MND Mitigation Measure:
MM7. Commerce One (Sybase project) is responsible for
constructing the following traffic and transportation
improvements near the Cisco project site. These
improvements are also necessary for Cisco to gain
access to their site. If these improvements are not
constructed by Commerce One, Cisco shall be
responsible for constructing the following traffic and
transportation improvements:
a) Arnold Road/The Boulevard Improvements, to
include Eastbound approach: 1 left-turn lane, 1
through lane, 1 through/right-turn lane;
Westbound approach:2 left-turn lanes, 2
through lanes, 1 right-turn lane; Northbound
approach: 1 left-turn lane, 1 through lane, 1
through/right-turn lane, and 1 right turn lane;
Southbound approach: 1 left-turn lane, 1
through lane, 1 through/right-turn lane.
(Completed)
N/A N/A N/A
City of Dublin
Zeiss Innovation Center: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 14
Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of Completion
Date Initial
b) The Boulevard/Hacienda Drive improvements to
include: Eastbound approach: 1 left-turn lane, 1
through/right-turn lane, 2 right-turn lanes;
Westbound approach: 2 left-turn lanes, 1
through/right-turn lane; Northbound
approach:3 left-turn lanes, 3 through lanes; 1
right-turn lane; Southbound approach:2 left-
turn lanes, 3 through lanes, 1 shared
through/right-turn lane. (Completed)
c) Roadway segment improvements on Arnold
Road between Dublin Boulevard and the
Boulevard (future): Four (4) travel lanes [two in
each direction]; The Boulevard between Arnold
Road and Commerce One Mid-Block Access
(future): Six (6) travel lanes [three in the
westbound direction and three in the eastbound
direction]; The Boulevard between Commerce
One Mid-Block Access and Hacienda Drive
(future): Six (6) travel lanes [three in each
direction]. (Completed)