Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Item 6.4 IKEA Master Sign Program
CITY CLERK File # ~-~~-~- ~[0 AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MARCH 16, 2004 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: PA 02-034 IKEA Retail Complex Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, PD - Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans, Development Agreement, Site Development Review, and Master Sign Program. Report prepared by: Andy Byde, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution Certifying a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report including the exhibits: Exhibit A: Mitigation Findings, Exhibit B: Findings Regarding Alternatives, Exhibit C: Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Exhibit D: Mitigation Monitoring Program; 2. Draft Planned Development rezoning Ordinance with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans; 3. Resolution Recommending the City Council Approve a Site Development Review for IKEA; 4. Resolution Recommending the City Council Approve a Master Sign Program for IKEA; 5. Draft Ordinance adopting a Development Agreement for the IKEA Project (with a Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and IKEA Property attached as Exhibit A); 6. IKEA Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (DSEIR, under separate cover and available at the City of Dublin); 7. IKEA Project Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report containing responses to comments (FSEIR); 8. IKEA Project Plan Binder (under separate cover and available at the City of Dublin); 9. July 15, 2003, adopted City Council Minutes; 10. Fiscal Impact Analysis, prepared by Economic and Planning Systems; 11. Market Evaluation, Prepared by Economic and Planning Systems; and 12. Draft Minutes from the February 24, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Hear Staff Presentation; Open Public Hearing; COPIES TO: Applicant Project File ACSPA GSPA#~2002\02-034 IKEA\City Council\cc staff report 3-5-04.doc ITEM NO. FINANCIAL IMPACT: DESCRIPTION: 3. Hear Applicant's Presentation; 4. Question Staff, Applicant and the Public; 5. Close Public Hearing; 6. Deliberate; 7. Adopt Resolution (Attachment 1) certifying the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report; 8. Waive the reading and introduce Ordinance (Attachment 2) approving a Planned Development (PD) Rezoning with related Stage I and Stage 2 Development Plans and continue the Public Hearing to the April 6, 2004, City Council Meeting; 9. Adopt Resolution (Attachment 3) approving a Site Development Review for the IKEA project; 10. Adopt Resolution (Attachment 4) approving a Master Sign Program for IKEA; and 11. Waive the reading and introduce Ordinance (Attachment 5) approving a Development Agreement for the IKEA Project and continue the Public Hearing to the April 6, 2004, City Council Meeting. A fiscal impact study was conducted for the project and concluded that the IKEA project would result in a net annual fiscal surplus to the City of nearly $680,000, please see the fiscal impact section below for more detail. Background: The 27 acre subject property is located west of Hacienda Drive and is currently designated Campus Office by the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The current land use designation allows various forms of office development with a floor area ratio (F.A.R.) range of 0.25 to 0.80. The F.A.R. range contained within the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan would allow an office development between 400,000 and 800,000 square feet in size. In February of 2001, the City Council approved an office project known as Commerce One on the subject property. Commerce One consisted of a Planned Development Stage 1 and 2, Site Development Review and Development Agreement. The approval by the City Council allowed the development of four, six story office buildings, a five level parking garage, and a dining and fitness center, totaling 780,000 square feet of floor area (0.65 F.A.R.). Commerce One is a business-to-business electronic commerce software firm that proposed to utilize this facility as their headquarters. Up to 3,000 employees could have been located at this facility. The facility was proposed to be built in two or three phases. In August 2001, Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (ACSPA), the owner of the property, informed the City that they were no longer in contract with Commerce One for purchase of the Site. In May of 2002, the City received a letter from the representatives of IKEA requesting the City consider an IKEA store and related development for the site. On June 4, 2002, the City Council approved initiation of a General Plan Amendment Study for the subject property. Specifically, the General Plan Amendment Study was authorized to evaluate converting the site from a Campus Office land use designation to a General Commercial designation, to allow a 317,000 square foot IKEA Furniture Store on 14.5 acres and 137,000 square feet of additional retail space on the balance of the site. Additionally, the City Council directed Staff to evaluate the fiscal impacts as part of 2 090 l'Z the project including projected revenues and the costs of providing services (conclusions of the fiscal analysis are in the General Plan/Specific Plan Section below and included is the Fiscal Impact Analysis as Attachment 10). During the processing of the Project, IKEA representatives have stated that Blake Hunt Ventures is under contract with IKEA to purchase the balance of the 27-acm~site Md develop the 137,000 square feet of additional retail space (if the project is approved), although IKEA is acting as the applicant until the project is approved. The IKEA project application states that 13 acre remainder portion of the site will be developed as a "Lifestyle Center," which is a specialty retail center with small and medium sized tenants organized like a modified city block with a main street through the center of the project (more discussion and analysis of the Lifestyle Center is included below in the Planned Development Rezoning Section). In July of 2003, Staff went before the City Council for direction to determine if the level of information provided in the Stage 1 and 2 Planned Development in relation to the Lifestyle Center (due to the lack of a complete SDR at this time) would be adequate for the City Council to render a decision for entire project. The City Council stated that the Stage 1 and 2 Planned Development would be adequate for a decision, yet requested some additional architectural details and potential tenant names, if feasible, for the center (see Attachment 9, City Council Minutes- page 491 and 492). Architectural details, above those required for the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, are included in Attachment 8, IKEA Entitlement binder, in Section VIII, Sheet called "The Village at Hacienda", elevations. To date, due to still incomplete negotiations between the Applicant/Developer and potential tenants, the Applicant has been unable to publicly disclose potential tenants. Planning Commission Meeting: On February 24, 2004, Staff presented the proposed project to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission voted 3 ayes, 1 no, and 1 absent to recommend the City Council certify the SEIR. A :.: subsequent motion was made to recommend the City Council approve the amendments to the General · ~ Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (GPA/SPA) for the project, however the motion failed with 2 ayes, 2 noes, and 1 absent. Without an approval recommendation on the GPA/SPA, none of .the remaining items could be recommended for approval because the applications would be inconsistent with the existing General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. A motion was made that addressed the rest of the actions in a single motion that recommend denial of the Planned Development Rezoning with related stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans, Site Development Review and Master Sign Program for the IKEA project, and Development Agreement for the IKEA project; and to forward the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting to the Council. The motion to deny passed with 3 ayes, 1 abstention, and 1 absent. The Planning Commission minutes from the February 24, 2004, meeting are included as Attachment 12. ANALYSIS: The Applicant, IKEA, is proposing an approximately 317,000 square foot IKEA home furnishing retail facility and an approximately 137,000 square foot retail center on a 27-acre site. The IKEA facility is proposed to be located on the westerly pOrtion of the site and the retail center is proposed to be located on the easterly portion of the site. The site is bounded to the south by 1-580, to the west by Arnold Road, to the north the future Martinelli Way, and to the east, Hacienda Drive. Additionally, IKEA is requesting approval of various wall signage as well as a 99-foot tall pylon sign. The proposed pro_[ect includes the following actions: The Applicant/Developer has applied to the City for a number of planning actions and approvals necessary for constructing the IKEA Home Furnishings Store and obtain general approvals for the retail center portion of the site. Analyses of these planning actions are included below. These actions collectively comprise PA 02-034 and include: · Certification of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR); · An Amendment to the General Plan reflecting the requested land use modification from Campus Office to General Commercial; · An Amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan reflecting the reqUested land use modification from Campus Office to General Commercial; · A Planned Development Rezone/Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan to establish zoning uses and development standards for the entire Site; · A Site Development Review (SDR) requesting approval of the site layout of the IKEA portion of the site and the architecture of the IKEA building; · A Master Sign Program (MSP) requesting approval of directional signage, flags, and wall signs for the IKEA portion of the Project and a 99-foot tall freestanding sign to serve both the IKEA and the . retail center sites; and Development Agreement (DA) that would vest the laws applicable to the project for a five year time frame (a DA is required by the policies of the Specific Plan). · Overall Pro/ect Location and Project Description: The Project Site is bordered on the east by Hacienda Drive, on the north by the future 6-lane roadway to be known as Martinelli Way, on the west by the future extension of Arnold Road, and on the south by Interstate 580. The site is across the street (Hacienda Drive) from the existing "Hacienda Crossings" (see ....vicinity .map below), which consists of approximately 400,000+ square feet of retail development. . Located to. the west, is the Transit Center, which is anticipated to include approximately 1,500 high, ..... density residential units and approximately 2 million square feet of campus office ranging in height from 8 to 10 stories. Additionally, ground floors of both the residential and campus office developments within the Transit Center are approved to include ancillary retail. Vicinity Map The Alameda County Surplus Property Authority currently owns the Project Site. The Applicant and the County have stated that they are currently in contract to have IKEA purchase the entire 27.54-acre Project Site from the County. IKEA, if approved, would construct Martinelli Way (with 6-lanes and a median) from Hacienda Drive to Arnold Road; construct Arnold Road from Dublin Blvd. to the southern boundary of the Site, and construct a 317,000 square foot IKEA store and associated improvements. IKEA has stated that it is in contract with Blake Hunt Ventures to have it purchase approximately half of the entire Project Site (the 13.20 eastern acres) for its 137,000 square foot Lifestyle Center. The Site is currently vacant except~ for a small Zone 7 Water turnout structure located at the southwest comer of the site and a DSRSD water fluoridization structure located immediately adjacent to the turnout. In the mid to late 1990's the County removed numerous buildings from this site. The site is generally flat with localized high areas and stockpile areas resulting from the site-clearance and clean-up activities. Photographs of the existing site are include in Attachment 8, in Section VII, Site Photographs. Environmental Review: The City prepared an Initial Study for the Project to determine if any subsequent environmental review was required beyond the 1993 EIR for the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The Initial Study concluded that much of the impact analysis in the 1993 EIR continues to apply to the Project. However, the Initial Study concluded that additional environmental review was required under CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163 based primarily on newly identified sensitive biological species, increased regional traffic and related air quality effects. A Draft Supplemental EIR (DSEIR, see Attachment 6) was prepared and circulated to the public for the required 45 days. The comment period was open from November 19, 2003 to January 2, 2004. The City received 5 comment letters during the public review and comment period and one letter, from the State of California Department of Transportation, after the close of the comment Period. Responses have been prepared to all of the comments received by the City. The comments and associated responses together constituted the Final SEIR (see Attachment 7). The following environmental issues were analyzed in the DSEIR: Air Quality: The 1993 EIR identified cumulative air quality impacts as a significant unavoidable impact of development in Eastern Dublin. The DSEIR examined changes in travel and commute patterns since the 1993 EIR, as well as increased traffic generation. The DSEIR identifies significant unavoidable air quality impacts regarding ozone precursors. Biology: The 1993 EIR identified numerous sensitive habitats and protected species with the potential to occur in Eastern Dublin, and identified the cumulative loss of sensitive habitat as a significant unavoidable impact of development in Eastern Dublin. The DSEIR identified new sensitive species listed since the earlier EIR, however after a thorough site survey performed by LSA and Associates, no federal or state listed species were found on the Site. No additional mitigation measures were required because the DSEIR concluded the project would not have any supplemental biological impacts. · Traffic and Circulation: In order t° analyze the traffic impacts from the proposed Project, the City contracted with Fehr and Peers, Transportation Consultants, to complete a traffic model analysis including cumulative (year 2025) growth of the entire region (A complete copy the Fehr and Peers report is found in Attachment 6, Appendix 8.7; and the Transportation and Circulation discussion is found in Section 4.3 .of Attachment 6). The Project site is currently designated for Campus Office uses in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, which uses were assumed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The traffic analysis examined how the current proposal to change the land use designations to General Commercial and develop the Project would change the traffic analysis and assumptions in the prior EIR. At build out (2025), it was found that the IKEA project would generate fewer trips during the weekday AM peak hour, as compared to the existing Campus Office designation, and, hence, would improve traffic conditions on the adjacent street system during this time period. During the weekday PM peak hour, the IKEA project and the existing Campus Office designation would generate similar levels of traffic; however, the trip distribution and assignment characteristics would differ due to differences in land uses. As a result, the IKEA project would have mixed incremental impacts during the PM peak hour by increasing the volume to capacity (V/C) ratio at some locations and decreasing this ratio at other locations. For example, the percentage assignments of total project trips to individual routes and int. ersection movements in the study area would differ between the existing Campus Office designation and the proposed IKEA project. In general, the traffic study shows that the IKEA project and the Campus Office designation would have similar impacts on the adjacent street system during the weekday PM peak hour. Additionally, the DSEIR concluded that increased regional traffic beyond that anticipated in the 1993 EIR would result in potentially significant impacts on several intersections and road segments. Mitigation measures in the DSEIR proposed improvements to reduce these impacts to less than significant except at Cumulative Buildout for 2025 for various 1-580 :and 1-680 freeway segments, already operating below the acceptable level of service D (see page 67 of the DSEIR and Table 4.3.12 of Attachment 6). As a result of the Project the traffic analysis anticipates that the traffic on, these freeway segments, will increase by a range of 0.8% to 1.2% during the AM peak .and a range of 0.2% to 2.8% during the PM peak (see page 78, Table 4.3.12, of Attachment 6). Otherwise the traffic analysis concluded that the traffic generated from the Project would either be equal to or less than the traffic impacts anticipated by the existing Campus Office land use designation. In addition to the traffic analysis completed by Fehr and Peers for the Project, Fehr and Peers completed a "fatal flaw analysis" for the City on September 30, 2003. The fatal flaw analysis modeled actual traffic conditions on a Saturday, to determine if Vehicles entering and exiting the Project would exceed the length of mm pockets or result in other traffic operation problems. The intersections studied include Hacienda/Dublin; HaciendafMartinelli; 'Martinelli/Amold; Arnold/Project Entry; and the east and west bound 1-580 off-ramps. The analysis concluded that adequate mm pockets length existed and no operational problems to the intersections surrounding the Project would be encountered. Environmental Analysis Conclusion: The DSEIR thoroughly and comprehensively assessed the potential for the Project to cause or contribute to significant impacts beyond those identified in the 1993 EIR? Where new potentially significant impacts were identified, appropriate mitigation measures were also proposed to reduce or avoid the impacts. These impacts will be addressed in mitigation findings upon City Council approval of the Project. Overall the project has very similar impacts to the previously approved Commerce One project. General Plan~Eastern Dublin Specific Plan: As previously mentioned, the proje~i Will 3eq6ire ~ amendment t° both the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The proposed amendment would change the land use designation from Campus Office to General Commercial. A comprehensive fiscal impact study for the entire Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area was conducted and concluded, at the time the plan was approved, that the plan would not be a financial drain to the existing City. Additionally, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan contains goals and policies (see Chapter 10.4 of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan), which require new development to pay for infrastructure and required services. Fiscal Impact Anal?sis: In order to determine that the Project was consistent with these policies, the City contracted with Economic & Planning Systems to compare the potential economic benefits of the proposed IKEA project to those of the approved (but not built) 780,000 square foot Commerce One office project. The study determined that, while both projects would be fiscally positive, the proposed IKEA retail development' would result in a significantly higher net fiscal surplus than the office alternative (See Attachment 10). The fiscal impact analysis compared the fiscal performance (municipal revenues minus municipal service costs) of both projects. The analysis determined that sales taxes would be the primary revenue contributor from the retail development, and that both projects would generate significant revenues from property taxes. The exiSting 1993 tax sharing agreement with the County of Alameda, stipulates the County receives 35% of the newly generated sales taxes from any site within "Santa Rita Property Area". After considering municipal service costs, the study concluded that the IKEA project would result in a net annual fiscal surplus of $680,000, while the office, project would result in a net annual fiscal surplus of $13,000. The study also found that, over the first 10 years, the IKEA project would generate $7,500,000 (in today's dollars) in net revenues to the City of Dublin, while the office project would generate $276,000 (in today's dollars) to the City. Additionally, the study also concluded that due to the market decline in the regional office market, a potential office project on the Site could not be expected in the near term and the EPS market analysis concluded that an office project would not be completed prior to 2013 (see page 10 of Attachment 10). Based upon this conclusion, Staff finds that the proposed project is consistent with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan policies regarding fiscal neutrality. General Plan Amendment Procedure: Pursuant to. State Law, the City Council may only amend the General Plan land use element a maximum of four times a year. In order to preserve the maximum allowable amendments for future City Council actions (subject to City Council approval of both projects), Staff has grouped the Dublin Ranch Area F North Project General Plan Amendment along with the IKEA Project General Plan amendment. The resolution for the General Plan amendment for both projects is included as a subsequent item on tonight's agenda. To accomplish simultaneous General Plan amendment approval, both items must be acted on by the City Council at the same time. The Resolutions and Ordinances attached will not be effective unless the subsequent item on tonight's agenda is approved. Planned Development rezoning with Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan: IKEA: The Applicant has proposed the site to be rezoned from Planned Development for an office project to a Planned Development that would accommodate the Project. The 14.3-acre western half of the Project Site, will contain a 317,000 square foot IKEA store, at-grade parking for approximately 1,126 vehicles (570 under the building and 556 outside), and associated landscaping, circulation, and infrastructure improvements (see Attachment 8, sheets: Al.l, Al.la, Al.lb and Al.2; more discussion about the IKEA building will be included in the SDR section below). Lifestyle Center: The 13.20-acre eastern portion of the Project Site is proposed for approximately 137,000 square feet of a "lifestyle" retail center. According to the Applicant the Lifestyle Center would contain mix of up-scale retailers, restaurants and related services. Approximately 15% of the space is anticipated to be food- related use (20,000 square feet) with two or three full-service restaurants. The site plan contains nine buildings that are oriented in a "main street" fashion, encouraging a pedestrian friendly atmosphere. Enhanced landscape and hardscape treatments, including large specimen trees, manicured elements and colored/textured paving, will be utilized. Parking will be provided along the main streets with larger parking fields strategically located behind buildings and adjacent to restaurant uses. A total of approximately 704 parking spaces are provided for the Lifestyle Center. The buildings are typically one-story although some two-story space (approximately 10% of the total) may be provided. In order to complement the massing of the IKEA building some~ accent features may extend higher than a typical one-story building. Buildings will generally be 100-150' deep and could be a combination of stucco, masonry, stone, metal and wood. Access will be via a main entry on Martinelli Way and a secondary entry on the internal street separating the IKEA development from the Lifestyle Center. Tenant spaces will range in size from 1,000 to 26,000 square feet with a majority in the 4,000 to 12,000 square feet range. Hours are anticipated to be 10am-9pm daily with restaurants closing later. Planned Development Requirements: Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance establishes the intent, purpose and requirements of the Planned Development District. A Development Plan is required pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, which establishes the following regulations for use of the subject property: permitted and conditionally permitted uses (see page 3 of Exhibit A to Attachment 2); development regulations, including setbacks, F.A.R.s, height limits, and parking requirement (see page 5 and 6 of Exhibit A to Attachment 2); architectural standards and design guidelines (see page 6-11 of Exhibit A to Attachment 2); site plan of the Project (see section VII, sheet Al.0 of Attachment 8) and other requirements which regulate the improvement and maintenance of the property. The Zoning Ordinance also requires the adoption of both Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans, prior to development. The applicant is requesting Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans for both IKEA, as well as the Lifestyle Center portion of the Site. The Planned Development Ordinance (Exhibit A to Attachment 2) contains requirements that ensure the two components of the Project (IKEA and the Lifestyle Center) will be developed as cohesive and complementary projects. Although the 'project consists of two distinct developments, Staff has worked with the Applicant/Developer to ensure that the two projects will be integrated and complementary to one another (see the Planned Development Ordinance, Exhibit A to Attachment 2). The Applicant/Developer has stated that the Project will be developed in two phases. Development of IKEA will occur first, followed by the development of the Lifestyle Center. Prior to development of the Lifestyle Center, the developer of the Lifestyle Center will be required to submit for Site Development Review (SDR), pursuant to the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. (IKEA is requesting an SDR approval at present for its portion of the Project, as discussed in detail below.) The SDR will be used to evaluate and approx, e the final architecture and site layout. Staff will utilize the Planned Development Ordinance for guiding review of the SDR, including the following regulations and contained within the Planned Development Ordinance: preliminary architecture, site layout, allowable uses, development regulations, and architectural standards and design guidelines. The Planning Commission will be decision.maker for the Lifestyle Center SDR. It is anticipated that the SDR for the Lifestyle Center will be submitted to the City within the next few months. Site Development Review: IKEA Concept: IKEA has submitted for SDR for the IKEA portion of the ProjeCt, which consists of the westerly 14.3 acres of the 27-acre site. According to the Applicant, IKEA stores include a prototypical design concept, utilizing simple rectilinear forms and a distinctive store entrance. The exterior colors are blue and yellow, to match the colors of the flag of Sweden, the home of IKEA's original store. Inside the store, customers first visit a series of showrooms organized around an internal pathway. The customers complete order forms as they circulate through the store, and then pick up the ordered merchandise when they have finished shopping. All furniture inventories are warehoused on site either in self-service warehouse areas or in full-service warehouses. According to the Applicant, the store would employ approximately 400 employees. Site Plan: Vehicular access in to the site will be provided from Martinelli Way and Arnold Road (see section VII, sheet Al. 1 of Attachment 8). At the main vehicle access, approximately the mid-point between Hacienda and Arnold on Martinelli, visitors will enter the Project Site, continue along stacking lanes, then make a choice of turning left to the Lifestyle Center or continuing straight and be guided to parking for the IKEA store. Once parked, IKEA visitors will walk to the main store entry lobby at grade toward the east side of the store then travel by stairs or elevator up to the main lobby store. Visitors who made purchases requiring convenience loading would return to their vehicles and move them to customer loading spaces at grade on either side of the main entry. After loading, the customers could leave the site at the two egress' points along Arnold Road or one egress point on Martinelli Way. Truck loading and trash pickup will be segregated from customer traffic and Will be located on the western side of the IKEA sit. e, on the opposite side of the store from the main customer entry. Parking: Based on the parking standards contained within the Zoning Ordinance, a total of 815 spaces are required to accommodate the IKEA component of the project, and 590 spaces are needed to accommodate the Lifestyle center. The parking requirements of the Zoning Ordinance are as follows: .... , 1;staii'P~r 400Square feet of retail (furniture/large appliance) · 1 stall per 100 square feet of restaurant · 1 stall per 1000 square feet of warehouse · 1 stall per 300 square feet of office (greater than 7,500 square feet) · 1 stall per 300 square feet of retail (general, neighborhood) IKEA Required Parking per use type Use Retail (furniture) Warehouse Office/Admin Restaurant SqFt Parkingpersq. ~. RequkedParking 172,000 400 430 105,000 1,000 105 20,000 300 80 20,000 100 200. Total 31~000 - 815 Lifestyle Center Required Parking per use type Use Sq.F earking sq. PeqoredPark (gered) ll7,000 3O0 390 Restatra~ 20,000 100 200 Total 137, 090 590 The Applicant is proposing 1,126 parking spaces for the IKEA portion of the project and 704 parking spaces for the Lifestyle Center. The proposed parking for both the IKEA and the Lifestyle Center significantly exceed the parking required by the Zoning Ordinance. Landscaping: Staff utilized the support of Paul Niemuth and Associates for the review of the landscape design. Paul Niemuth is a licensed landscape architect, who consults to the City on a regular basis for review of design and construction of landscape and hardscape components. The landscape concept includes flowering ground cover, turf and accent trees along Martinelli Way and the main drive aisle frontage of the site. At the main drive aisle, trees are located in tree wells with grates immediately adjacent to the drive aisle. A grassy drainage swale will be located between the drive aisle and the parking lot, to clean the flow of storm water from non-point pollutants. Smaller trees and shrubs will be provided at the perimeter of the parking areas and southern portion of the site (see Attachment 8, Section VII, sheet LI.1). IKEA Building: Staff utilized the support of Larry Cannon of the Cannon Design Group for the review of the architecture and overall site layout. Larry Cannon is a licensed architect, who regularly consults to the City for the review of commercial architecture 'and site design. The IKEA Store will contain retail, warehouse, restaurant, specialty foods shop, and office uses, with an ancillary childcare area for shoppers. The ground floor, underneath the building will be used for parking. Elevators and an escalator will be used to get patrons from the ground floor to the first sto3e level. The first store level will contain an entrance and a full-height warehouse; the showroom is located on a second level. The building envelope will include space for approximately 172,000 sq. ft. of retail area, 105,000 sq. ft. of warehousing area, 20,000 sq. ft. of administrative area, and 20,000 sq. ft. of cafe and restaurant area (see Attachment 8, Section VII, sheet Al. 1). ~ The rectilinear store building will be approximately 588 feet in length, 415 feet in width, with a roof height of 50 feet and a maximum height (at the highest parapet) of 70 feet. A loading dock on the west side of the building is approximately 460 feet in length and 69 feet in depth, and the exterior canopy along the east side of the building is approximately 424 feet in length and 37 feet in depth at its widest dimension. The first floor of the building will be elevated approximately 14 feet above exterior grade. This will allow the store to be develOped without the need for an adjacent parking structure and will maximize the number of parking spaces near to the store entry. The exterior cladding will be insulated metal panels finished in blue, highlighted with yellow accent elements at the entry (a color and material board will be available for review at the City Council meeting). An entry element will identify the pedestrian entrance to the store and a pedestrian connection will be clearly established between IKEA and the Lifestyle Center. The IKEA building plane is broken up with the use of the 70 foot tall entry element and the all glass stair towers on the south and north elevation (similar to the stair towers of the Peoplesoft building in Pleasanton). The IKEA building has used transparent and translucent glass extensively along the front elevation, which provides for visual interest for such a large building. Additionally, this proposed IKEA building is different than the recently constructed IKEA buildings in Covina and East Palo Alto, in that the other two buildings are wrapped with a parking structure, whereas this building utilizes either under store or surface parking. The design approach results in a more minimalist style, with a significant amount daylight penetrating under building. 10~)t2~ Hours of Operation: The IKEA store is proposed to operate seven days per week except for approximately three holidays per year. Hours are expected to be 10 a.m. to 9 p.m. on Mondays through Saturdays and 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Sundays. According to the Applicant, Saturday will typically be the peak user day of the week. On Saturdays, peak visitor activity would typically occur during the hours of 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. On weekdays, peak visitor activity would typically occur during the hour of 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. and again in the early evening hours of 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. Grand Opening: A recommended condition of approVal (see Attachment 3, condition 65) would require'IKEA to plan and execute an operations action plan for the Grand Opening of the IKEA store, in consultation with Police Services. The operation action plan would fund additional Police Services Staff for the use of traffic and crowd control. The Plan would also include dates and times of scheduled events and a plan for the temporary off-site parking of employee automobiles. Master Sign Program: The Applicant/Developer is proposing a Master Sign Program to regulate the signage for the IKEA portion of the Project, including the proposed directional, walls, flags and the pylon signage (see Attachment 8, Section VII, sheet G1.0a-G2.4). The IKEA portion of the Project includes specific directional signage to guide the patrons through the site. One freestanding signs stating "Welcome to IKEA" including hours of operation and measuring 9'-2" high by 6'-7" wide is located along the entry drive (see Attachment 8, Section' VII, sheet G1.0a). Two freestanding signs stating "thank you for visiting" with the same dimensions are located at two exits. Three sets of eight 'IKEA' flags (see Attachment 8, Section VII, sheet G1.0a for location and Sheet G2.3 for description), measuring 18 feet high by 6 feet wide on poles of 40 feet high, are proposed to be located on three comers of the building. pylon Sign: ' · The APplicant/DevelOper is proposing a 99-foot tall freestanding pylon sign (see Attachment 8, Section VII, sheet G1.0a for location and Sheet G2.4 for description). The pylon sign would be located within a landscaped median at the terminus of the entry drive. The Applicant/Developer has stated the desire for motorists on westbound 1-580 to see the 'IKEA' portion of the sign prior to the exit at Hacienda (see Attachment 8, section VI, View 5 for illustration). In order for the 'IKEA' portion of the sign of to be seen at this location, the bottom of the letters, desired to be seen, would have to be a minimum of 50 feet high, due to the Hacienda over crossing. The current height of the bottom of the IKEA letters is 88 feet high. To provide for comparisons for overall height of other pylon signs within the City, Staff included the chart below: Sign: Height: Year Approved: Hacienda 75 feet 1997 Crossings AutoNation 75 feet 1997 (now Shamrock Ford) Buick GMC 55 feet 2002 IKEA 99 feet Proposed The proposed pylon sign appears higher than is required to achieve the objective of the IKEA sign visibility. A lower sign, more in keeping with the height of the Hacienda Crossings pylon sign (75') or of the IKEA entry element (70') may be more appropriate. The pylon sign is proposed to have six panels, one individualized for IKEA and 5 standardized tenant panels for potential tenants'within the Lifestyle Center. A recommended condition of project approval would require that the color of the copy of tenant panels, excluding the IKEA panel, be limited to the use of white and the use of logos on the tenant panels to be subject to the review and approval of Director of Community Development (condition 1 of Attachment 4). Development Agreement: The proposed Development Agreement betWeen the City of Dublin and IKEA Property Inc is attached as Exhibit A of Attachment 5 to this Staff Report. Policies within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan require that the Applicant/Developer enter into Development Agreement. The Development Agreement negotiated by Staff includes the standard items found in similar five-year agreements previously approved by the City Council. However, one item in the proposed agreement that is dissimilar to "standard" agreements would allow the SDR and Master Sign Program for the IKEA portion of the project only (this provision would not apply to the Lifestyle Center) to be valid for the life of the five-year Development Agreement. Under the current requirements of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 8.96.020(D)), construction or progress towards construction within one-year (plus a addition to a six-month extension) of approval would be required to maintain the validity of SDR or Master Sign Program. This proposed provision in the Development Agreement would supersede the Zoning Ordinance and would maintain the validity of the SDR and Master Sign Program for a period of five years. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: open Public Hearing, hear Applicant's presentation; question Staff, Applicant and the Public; close Public Hearing; deliberate; and adopt a resolution (Attachment 1) certifying the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report; waive the reading and introduce an ordinance (Attachment 2) approving a Planned Development (PD) rezoning with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans and continue the Public Hearing until the April 6, 2004, City Council Meeting; adopt a resolution (Attachment 3) approving a Site Development Review for the IKEA project; adopt a resolution (Attachment 4) approving a Master Sign Program for IKEA; and waive the reading and introduce Ordinance (Attachment 5) approving a Development Agreement for the IKEA Project and continue the Public Hearing until the April 6, 2004 City Council Meeting. ~2 Q>12~ RESOLUTION NO. xx-04 OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN CERTIFYING A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ADOPTING MITIGATION FINDINGS, FINDINGS REGARDING 3~LTERNATIVES, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE IKEA PROJECT PA 02-034 WHEREAS, IKEA Property, Inc. submitted applications for an IKEA store, a retail center and related improvements on a 27.54 acre site north of 1-580, between Arnold Road and Hacienda Boulevard. The project proposes an approximately 317,000 square foot IKEA store on the westerly portion of the site, and an' approximately 137,000 square foot retail center on the easterly portion of the site. The development includes applications to amend the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan from Campus Office to. General Commercial; to rezone the site to PD2planned Development and adopt related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans; to approve a Site Development Review and Master Sign Program for the IKEA store; to approve a vesting tentative parcel map; and to approve a development agreement for the IKEA store. The applications are collectively known as the "Project"; and WHEREAS, the Project site is relatively flat and is vacant except for minor utility structures; and WHEREAS, the project site i-s in Eastern Dublin for which the City adopted the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan to provide a comprehensive planning framework for future development of the area. In connection with this approval, the City certified a program EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15168 (SCH: 91103064, Resolution 51-93, and Addendum dated August 22, 1994, hereafter "Eastern Dublin EIR" or "program EIR") that is available for review in the Planning Department and is incorporated herein by reference. The program EIR was integral to the planning process and examined the direct and indirect effects, cumulative impacts, broad policy alternatives, and areawide mitigation measures for developing Eastern Dublin; and WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified potentially significant environmental impacts and related mitigation measures, which the City adopted together with mitigation findings and a Mitigation Monitoring Program (Resolution 53-93), which mitigation measures and monitoring program continue to apply to development in Eastern Dublin including the IKEA Project; and GSPA#~2002\02-034 IKEA\City Council\CC reso certify SEItLDOC ATTACHMENT 1 WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin EIR also identified potentially significant . environmental impacts that could not be avoided by mitigation and for which the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations in compliance with CEQA. Pursuant to a recent court decision, the City Council must weigh the unavoidable impacts disclosed in the Eastern Dublin EIR that are applicable to the IKEA project against its benefits through a new Statement of Overriding Considerations; and WHEREAS, the City prepared an Initial Study for the IKEA Project consistent with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163 and determined that a supplement to the Eastern Dublin EIR was required in order to analyze substantial changes in circumstances and new information that could result in new or potentially more significant impacts than identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation dated September 22, 2003 was circulated with the Initial Study to public agencies and interested parties for consultation on the scope of the supplemental EIR; and WHEREAS, based on the Initial Study and responses to the Notice of Preparation, the City prepared a Draft Supplemental EIR dated November 2003 (SCH No. 2033092076) which reflected the independent judgment of the City as to the potential environmental effects of the Project. The Draft Supplemental EIR was circulated for the required 45 day public review period, from November 19, 2003 to January 2, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Draft Supplemental EIR identified significant Supplemental Air Quality and Traffic impacts, most of which can be substantially reduced through mitigation measures; therefore, approval of the project must include mitigation findings as set forth in attached Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, some of the Supplemental impacts cannot be lessened to a level of less than significant; therefore, approval of the project must include findings regarding alternatives as set forth in attached Exhibit B, and must include a Statement of Overriding Considerations as set forth in attached Exhibit C; and WHEREAS, the City received five comment letters on the project during the public review period and one letter after the public review period. The City prepared a Final Supplemental EIR dated January 2004 containing written responses to ail comments received during the public review period, and to the comment letter received after the public review period, which responses provide the City's good faith, reasoned analysis of the environmental issues raised by the comments; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the project on February 24, 2004 at which time they reviewed and considered the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs, and all reports, recommendations and testimony before them. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council certify the Supplemental EIR (Resolution 04-10, incorporated herein by reference); and 2 WHEREAS, the City CoUncil considered the Planning commission minUtes and recommendation, a staff report, the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs, and all written and oral testimony at a dUly noticed public hearing on March 16, 2004 at which time all interested parties had the oppommity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs reflect the City's independent judgment and analysis on the potential for environmental impacts and constitute the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the IKEA Project; and WHEREAS, the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs are separately boUnd documents, incorporated herein by reference, and are available for review in the City planning department, file PA 02-034. The custodian of the documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings for the IKEA project is the City of Dublin Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA 94568, Atto: Andy Byde; and WHEREAS, a MitigatiOn and Monitoring Program, as required by CEQA, is contained in attached Exhibit D. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the foregoing recitals are tree and correct and made a part of this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council certifies the following. A. The Supplemental EIR for the IKEA project has been Completed in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dubtin Environmental Guidelines. Bi The Supplemental EIR for the IKEA project and the Eastern Dublin EIR were presented to and reviewed by the City Council prior tO taking action on the IKEA project. C. The Supplemental EIR reflects the City' s independent judgment and analysis as to the potential environmental effects of the IKEA project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council adopts the mitigation findings set forth in Exhibit A, the findings regarding alternatives set forth in Exhibit B, the Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth in Exhibit C, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program set forth in Exhibit D, which exhibits A, B, C and D are incorporated herein by reference PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 16th day of March, 2004 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: 3 ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk 4 EXHIBIT A to ATTACHMENT 1 FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15091 and 15163(e), the City Council hereby makes the following findings with respect to the potential for significant supplemental environmental impacts from the IKEA project and means for mitigating those impacts. Many of the impacts and mitigation measures in the following findings are summarized rather than set forth in full. The text of the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs (SEIRs) should be consulted for a complete description of the impacts and mitigations, Findings pursuant to section 21081 (c) relating to Project alternatives are made in Exhibit B, Supplemental impact AQ-I: Construction activities would have the potential to cause nuisance related to the emission of dust and PM10. SM-AQ-1. In addition to Mitigation Measure MM3.11/1.0 in the Eastern Dublin EIR, require construction contractors to water or cover construction materials; to sweeP daily all paved access roads, parking and staging areas; to install sandbags or other erosion control measures. (DSEIR p. 32). Finding., Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding. The additional construction controls will ensure that dust and silt are prevented from blowing or running offsite. Supplemental Impacts AQ-2, AQ-3; Project Emission increase that would exceed the BAAQMD significance thresholds for ozone precursors on project and cumulative levels. SM-AQ-2. In addition to Mitigation Measure MM 3.11f5.0-11.0 in the Eastern Dublin EIR, require a Transportation Demand"Management program with specified measures to provide transit and other facilities for alternatives to automobile use. (DSEIR p. 32). Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the ProjecL However, even with these changes, the impact will not be avoided or substantially lessened. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Oonsiderations must be adopted upon approval of the Project. Rationale for Finding. The Eastern Dublin mitigations and the supplemental mitigation will reduce the emissions generated by the project, but not by the 30% necessary to be below BAAQMD thresholds. Supplemental Impact TRA-2: Cumulative impacts at study area intersections. SM-TRA-2. Developer shall pay its proportionate share of installing a southbound-to-westbound right-turn lane at the Dublin Boulevard/Arnold Road intersection. (DSEIR p. 66). Finding, Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect identified in the EIR. Rationale for Finding. The added right turn lane will provide additional capacity for area traffic; a fair share payment of fees reflects the project's contribution to the need for the additional capacity. Supplemental Impact TRA-3: CumulatiVe increase of Project related traffic on adjacent freeways. 1 Mitigation. No feasible supplemental mitigation measures are identified in the DSEIR. (DSEIR p. 67). Finding. The identified impact will not be avoided or substantially lessened. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon approval of the Project. Rationale for Findinq. Mitigation measures for roadway and freeway improvements were adopted with the Eastern Dublin EIR. The IKEA project is required to implement alt applicable mitigations from the prior approvals, including fair share payments for cumulative impacts and regional freeway improvements as further described in the DSEIR. No supplemental measures are available to further reduce these cumulative impacts, therefore the supplemental impact remains significant and unavoidable. G:\PA~2002\02-034 IKEA~City Council\ikea.cc. mitfindings,030404.doc EXHIBIT B TO ATTACHMENT 1 FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES The Eastern Dublin EIR identified four alternatives;. No Project, Reduced Planning Area, Reduced Land Use Intensities and No Development. The City Council found the No Project, Reduced Land Use Intensities and No Development alternatives infeasible and then approved a modification of the Reduced Planning Area alternative. The Supplemental EIR identified two new alternatives, the Red uced Intensity and the Mixed Use Development Alternatives. The Supplemental EIR also updated the analysis of the No Project and No Development alternatives that were in the Eastern Dublin E R. These findings are for the Reduced Intensity and Mixed Use Development Alternatives and the No Project and No Development alternatives as revised by the Supplemental EIR. A complete discussion of these alternatives is set forth in Section 5.0 of the Draft Supplemental EIR. The City Council hereby concludes that the Supplemental EIR sets'forth a reasonable range of alternatives to the IKEA project so as to foster informed public participation and informed decision making. The City Council finds that the alternatives identified and described in the Supplemental EIR were considered and further finds them to be infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations set forth below pursuant to CEQA section 21081(c). NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE. DSEIR Section 5.3, pp. 84-85. Finding: Infeasible. This alternative assumes the IKEA project would not be built on the site; instead, any futUre development would be purSuant to the existing Campus Office land use designations. Under this alternative, development of the Project site would be similar in terms of land uses and densities, but with office development instead of retail. As described in the DSEIR, this alternative would not avoid the Project's unavoidable air quality or traffic impacts. Furthermore, this alternative is not feasible because there is a current market supply of office space that far exceeds market demand for office space, and will continue to do so for well into the foreseeable future. It is not anticipated that office development would be viable for this site for ten years or more. The Property owners within major business parks such as Hacienda Business Park are actively converting office space uses to non-office uses because of the lack of demand for office space. NO DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE. DSEIR Section 5.4, pp. 85-86. Finding: Infeasible. This alternative assumes no development of the Project site; the site would remain vacant. All of the Project's significant unavoidable impacts would be avoided; however, this alternative would not meet the Project objectives of providing a retail destination on a site accessible by local and regional roadways and by transit facilities. This alternative also does not meet the City's objeCtives as reflected in its long-range planning for the East Dublin area generally and this site in particular. The General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan have systematically planned for development of this site at urban intensities. In addition, the No DevelOpment Alternative fails to provide needed employment opportunities and retail shopping opportunities as set forth in the General Plan Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. REDUCED INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE. DSEIR Section 5.5, pp. 86-87. Finding: Infeasible. This alternative reduces the commercial floor area ratio (FAR) to 0.25, near the minimum of the intensity range for the General Commercial land use designations. This alternative would be approximately one-third less square-footage than the Project, but would occupy the same area and the same development footprint as the Project. Project and cumulative ozone precursor emissions for this alternative would likely be below BAAQMD thresholds. The Project's significant unavoidable freeway impacts would be reduced but not avoided with this 1 alternative. This alternative will not provide the same job opportunities or create the same revenue for the City as the Project. It also would not provide the potential development density consistent with the nearby transit oriented development. In addition, development at the reduced intensity would fail to provide the range of restaurant and retail opportunities that would be complementary to the nearby Hacienda Crossings development. Accordingly, this alternative fails to satisfy the Project's objectives, including but not limited to developing a destination retail experience that complements the nearby Hacienda Crossings retail center and other retailers in the area. MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE. DSEIR Section 5.4[sic], pp. 87-88. Findinq: infeasible. This alternative analyzes a mixed-use development project that would include high-density apartment units, approximately 600,000 of office uses, and approximately 21,000 square feet of commercial uses. Project and cumulative ozone precursor emissions would likely be below BAAQMD thresholds for this alternative. The Project's significant unavoidable freeway impacts would be reduced but not avoided, with this alternative. The residential Component of this alternative could result in noise and other impacts and is not consistent with the non- residential uses planned for the site in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The residential and office uses also do not further the Project's objectives, including, but not limited to developing a destination retail experience that complements the nearby Hacienda Crossings retail center and other retailers in the area and adding to the range of retail and restaurant opportunities in the City. G:~PAf¢,~002~02-034 IKEA\City Council~ikea. cc.altsfindings.030404.doc EXHIBIT C TO ATTACHMENT 1 · STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 1. General' Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the City Council of the City of Dublin adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for those impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR as significant and unavoidable. (Resolution 53-93, May 10, 1993.) The City Council carefully considered each impact in its decision to approve urbanization of Eastem Dublin through approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and ,Specific Plan project. The City Council is currently considering the IKEA project north of Hwy. 1-580, west of Hacienda Crossings. The project proposes to change the land use designations from Campus Office to General Commercial, to develop an IKEA store on the westerly portion of the Site, and to proVide for future development of "lifestyle" retail center on the easterly portion of the site. The City Prepared a Supplemental EIR for the IKEA project which identified supplemental impacts that cOuld be mitigated to less than significant. The Supplemental EIP, also identified supplemental Air Quality and Traffic impacts that could not be mitigated to less than significant. The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with the original land use approvals for urbanization of Eastern Dublin. Pursuant to a recent court decision, the City Council must adopt new overriding considerations for the previously identified unavoidableimpacts that apply to the IKEA project.1 The City Council must also adopt overriding considerations for the supplemental impacts identified in the Supplemental EIR as significant and unavoidable. The City Council belieVes that many of the Unavoidable environmental effects identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the Supplemental EIR will be substantially lessened by mitigation measures adopted with the original Eastern Dublin approvals and by the environmental protection measures adopted through the IKEA approvals, and the related Conditions of Approval, to be implemented with the development of the project. Even with mitigation, the City Council recognizes that the implementation of the project carries with it unavoidable adverse environmental effects as identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the IKEA Supplemental EIR. The City Council specifically finds that t© the extent that the identified'adverse or potentially adverse impacts for the IKEA ProjeCt haVe not been mitigated to acceptable levels, there are specific economic, social, environmental, land use, and other considerations that support approval of the project. 2. Unavoidable Significant AdVerse Impacts from the Eastern Dublin EIR. The following unavoidable significant environmental impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR for future development of Eastern Dublin apply to the IKEA project. Land Use Impact 3.'I/F. Cumulative Loss of Agricultural and Open Space Lands; Visual Impacts 3.8/B; and, Alteration of Rural/Open Space Character. Although considerable development has occurred throughout the project area, the site is presently undeveloped land, and has some minimal open space character. Future development of the IKEA site will contribute to the cumulative loss of open space land. Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.3/B, 3.3/E. 1-580 Freeway, Cumulative Freeway Impacts: The Traffic Study prepared for the IKEA project and the Dublin.Transit Center EIR Update cumulatiVe impacts to the t-580 and 1-680 freeways from development in Eastern Dublin. While city street and interchange impacts can be mitigated through planned improvements, transportation demand management, the 1-580 Smart Corddor program and other similar measures, mainline freeway impacts continue to be identified as unavoidable, as anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Future development on the IKEA site will incrementally contribute to the unavoidable freeway impacts. Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.3/I, 3.3/M. Santa Rita Road/I-580 Ramps, Cumulative Dublin Boulevard Impacts: The IKEA Project will be required to implement all applicable adopted traffic mitigation measures, including 1 ,,...public officials must.still go on the record and explain .specifically why they are approving the later project despite its significant unavoidable impacts." (emphasis original.) Communities for a Better Environment v. California Resources Agency 103 Cai.App. 4th 98, (2002). 1 contributions to the City's TIF program; however even With mitigation these impacts continue to be identified as unavoidable, as anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Community Services and Facilities Impact 3.4/S, Consumption of Non-Renewable Natural Resources and Sewer, Water; and Storm Drainage Impact 3.5/F, H, U. Increases in Energy Usage Through Increased Water Treatment, Disposal and Operation of Water Distribution System: Future development of the IKEA project will contribute to increased energy consumption, Soils, Geology, and Seismicity Impact 3. 6lB. Earthquake Ground Shaking, Pdmary Effects: Even with seismic design, future development of the IKEA project could be subject to damage from large ~arthquakes, much like the rest of the Eastern Dublin planning area. Air Quality Impacts 3.11lA, B, C, and E. Future development of the IKEA project will contribute to cumulative dust deposition, construction equipment emissions, mobile and stationary source emissions. 3. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts from the IKEA Supplemental EIR. The following unavoidable significant supplemental environmental impacts were identified in the Supplemental EIR for the IKEA project. Supplemental Impacts AQ-2, AQ-3. Project emission increase that would exceed the BAAQMD significance thresholds for ozone precursors on' project and cumulative levels. Even with implementation of the previously adopted mitigation measures and the additional mitigation measures in the Supplemental EIR, project and cumulative precursor emissions will exceed BAAQMD thresholds. Supplemental Impact TRA-3. Cumulative increase of Project related traffic on adjacent freeways. Even with implementation of the previously adopted' mitigation measures, including fair share contribution to regional traffic improvements, the project will contribute to significant and unavoidable cumulative freeway impacts. 4.' Overriding conSiderations. The City Council previously balanced the benefits of the Eastem Dublin project. ..... approvals against the significant and potentially significant adverse impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The City Council now balances those unavoidable impacts that apply to future development on the IKEA site as well as the supplemental unavoidable impacts identified in the Supplemental EIR, against its benefits, and hereby determines that such unavoidable impacts are outweighed by the benefits of the IKEA project as further set forth below. The project will further the urbanization of Eastern Dublin as planned through the comprehensive framework established in the odginal Eastern Dublin approvals. The development of an IKEA store and "lifestyle" retail center will complement the existing range of retail opportunities in Eastern Dublin. These uses will provide a source of attractive, well priced home furnishings, pedestrian-oriented retail center, and restaurant opportunities that will help establish Dublin as a center for destination shopping. The Project will provide new shopping and restaurant opportunities not yet available in this part of Dublin, within a short distance of existing retail opportunities, thus leading to an increase of shoppers for all businesses in the area. Additionally, the Project will be within walking distance of transit facilities and the higher density residential development existing and planned nearby. The Project will further the General Plan objective of providing a broad range of non-residential uses, including retail commercial, in Eastern Dublin. The project is consistent with Guiding Policy 2.2.4, which encourages "development of a full range of commercial and employment-generating uses in the Eastern Extended Planning Area that will meet the needs of the City and the surrounding Tri-Valley area." This Project provides a much needed retail center convenient to existing and planned future residential uses. The project furthers the East Dublin Specific Plan goal to provide for a balanced mixed use community by establishing "an attractive and vital community that provides a balanced and fully integrated range of residential, commercial, employment, recreational, and social opportunities." (Section 4.3.2~ p. 32). The project also furthers the Specific Plan goal for cOmmercial land use, to serve "the shopping, entertainment and service needs of Dublin and the surrounding area." (Section 4.5, p. 36). The IKEA project helps the City achieve these goals by providing a varietY of commercial, employment and social opportUnities in a retail setting. The project also meets Policy 4-12 to "concentrate regionally odented commercial uses south of Dublin Boulevard and near freeway interchanges where convenient vehicular access will limit traffic impacts on the rest of eastern Dublin." The proximity of the Project site to the Highway 1-580 and Hacienda Drive interchange is consistent with the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan goals and policies and facilitates efficient transportation. The Project will provide a "destination retail" experience on a visually prominent site accessible from major regional transit and traffic corridors. The site will be developed in a landscaped and "pedestrian-friendly" fashion, with restaurants and related leisure services to heighten the shopping experience. The combination of the IKEA store with the "lifestyle" retail center will offer a shopping experience complementary to the nearby Hacienda Crossings retail center and add to the range of retail and restaurant opportunities available to the shopper in Dublin. The Project will provide significant fiscal contributions to the City. There will be a strong property tax income stream from the high value developments on the IKEA and retail center sites. Both retail operations will generate substantial sales tax revenue to the City that would not occur with office uses. G:\PA#\2002\02-034 IKEA\City Council~ikea.cc.soc.030404.doc ~ o ORDINANCE NO. 04- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO ~RE~ ZONE. PROP~ERT~.~N.~. ................. APPROVING A RELATED STAGE I AND 2 DEVELQPMENT P. LANFQgTItE !KEA . AND HACIENDA LIFESTYLE CENTER PRO_JECT PA 02-034 The Dublin City Council does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Findings A. Pursuant to Section 8.32.070 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows. 1. The IKEA and the Hacienda Lifestyle Center (together "Market Place at Hacienda") PD- Planned Development zoning meets the purpose and intent of Chapter 8.32 in that it provides a comprehensive development plan that creates a desirable use of land that is sensitive to surrounding land uses by virtue of the layout and design of the site plan, and uses creative design and a mix of complementary uses to establish the project as a focal point for the area. 2. Development of the Market Place at Hacienda under the PD-Plarmed Development zoning wilt be harmonious and compatible with ex/sting and future development in the surrounding area in that the retail use of the site would utilize the close proximity ofi-580 freeway. The land uses and site plan provide effective transitions to the surrounding development of campus office, retail and the 1-580 freeway. B. Pursuant to Sections 8.120.050.A and B of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows. 1. The proposed PD-Planned Development zoning for the Market Place at Hacienda will be harmonious and compatible with existing and potential development in the surrounding area in that the retail use of the site would utilize the close proximity ofi-580 freeway. The land uses and site plan provide effective transitions to the surrounding development including adjacent campus office buildings, 1-580 freeway, and retail uses. 2. The Site is a relatively fiat, infill site, with existing infrastructure (including roads, sewer, storm drain, potable and recycled water, natural gas, and electricity) located immediately adjacent to the site with no major or unusual physical or topographic constraints and thus is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the proposed PD-Planned Development district. 3. The proposed PD-Planned Development zoning will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare in that the project will comply with all applicable development regulations and standards and will implement all adopted mitigation measures. 4. The PD-plarmed Development zoning is cons}stent with the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan in that the project inclUdes companion amendments to both plans which amendments were approved by the City Council in Resolution XX-04 on March 16, 2004, and ATTACHMENT which amendments proposed the land useg and. development plans reflected in the proposed PD- Planned Development district. .' . C. Pursuant to the .California Environmental QUality Act, the 'CitY Council certified a Supplemental EIR for the Pr°ject in Res61UtiOn ~'04 Oh MarCh 16, 2004, and', also' adopted mitigation and alternatives findings, a Statement of Overriding COnsiderations Md a mitigation monitoring plan, as required to support approval of the project, including approval of the PD-Planning Development zoning. SECTION 2: Pursuant to Chapter 8.32, Title 8 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code the City of Dublin Zoning Map is amended to rezone the property described below to a Planned Development Zoning District: 27.54 acres generally loc'ated south of-the furore roadway know as Martinelli Way, east of Arnold Road, north of 1-580, and west of Hacienda Drive. (APNs: 986-0005-040). ("the Property"). A map of the rezoning area is shown below: J ~ MART!~IELI:.I wAY, Vicinity ~ap SECTION 3. The regulations for the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the pr°perty are set forth in the following Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan for the Project area, which is hereby approved. Any amendments to the Stage 1 and 2 DevelOpment Plan shall be in accordance, with section 832:080 of the Dublin Municipal Code or its successors. Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan for Market Place at Hacienda This is a Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan pursuant to Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. This Development Plan meets all the requirements for a Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan and is adopted as part of the PD-Planned Development rezoning for the Market Place at Hacienda, PA 02~034. The Stage:l and 2 DeVetopmenttPlan consists of the 'items and plans identified below, many of which are contained in a separatelybound document titled IKEA Entitlement, dated January, 2004 ("Stage 1 and 2 DP booklet"), Which is incorporated herein by reference. The Stage 1 and 2 DP booklet is on file in the Dublin Planning Department under file no. PA 02-034. The PD-Plarmed Development District and this Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan provide flexibility to encourage innovative development while ensuring that the goals, policies, and action programs of the General Plan, Eastern 'Dublin Specific Plan, and provisions of Chapter 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance are satisfied. 0 Statement of Approved Uses. The Project will provide a variety of commercial land uses. Area A will contain the IKEA store and Area B the Hacienda Lifestyle Center (see map below for description of the two Areas). MARTrNELLI ,;'AY (IKEA) AREA A PHASE I .j (OPUS) AREA B PHASE II The permitted and conditionally permitted uses for Area A, IKEA, will be as follows: Permitted Uses: Home Furnishings Store Restaurant Clothing/Fashion Store. Office Supply Store. Home Appliance/Electronics Store. Home Improvement Store. Gifts/Specialty Store. Jewelry and Cosmetic Store. Book Store. Sporting Goods Store. Uses similar to the foregoing that sell goods based on price and quality. Secure children's play area (customer serving, limited duration) Conditional Uses: Community, Religious and Charitable Institutional Facilities. Public Facilities and Uses. Veterinary Office. Recycling Center. Hotel. Outdoor Food Vendors (by Zoning Administrator). b. The permitted and conditionally permitted uses for Areas B, Hacienda Lifestyle Center, will ............ be as follows: Permitted Uses: Home Furnishings Store Clothing/Fashion Store. Office Supply Store. Home Appliance/Electronics Store~ Gifts/Specialty Store. JeWelry and Cosmetic Store. Book Store. Sporting Goods Store. Uses similar to the foregoing that sell goods based on price and quality. Office and service establishments including, but not limited to, the following: Bank/Savings and Loan. Real Estate/Title Office. Travel Agent. Legal. Accounting. Medical and Dental. Optometrist. Architect. Employment Agency. Hair/Beauty Salon. Cleaner and Dryer. Formal Wear/Rental. Other Administrative and Professional Office. Technology Access Center. Video Rentals. Commercial School. Eating, drinking and entertainment establishments including, but not limited to, the following with limited outdoor seating ~' Restaurant (full2'service, sit-down) 2 Restaurant (convenience: coffee shop, delicatessen, bakery, ice cream shop, sandwich shop) 2 Wine or Liquor Bar with On-Sale Liquor License. Micro-Brewery. Specialty Food. Conditional Uses: Community, Religious and Charitable Institutional Facilities. Public Facilities and Uses. Veterinary Office. Animal Sales and Service. Recycling Center. Hotel. Massage establishment (primary or accessory) Outdoor food vendors (by Zoning Administrator). Permanent outdoor retail sales not assOciated with an existing business. Home Improvement Store. ' Dance Floor t Subject to Site Development Review Waiver approval by Community Development Director, if not specifically approved through the Site Development Review for the project. 2 Under the proposed tenant mix, restaurant uses would account for 20,000 square feet of floor area. Prior to approving a tenant improvement / City business license for additional restaurant floor area within Hacienda Lifestyle Center, the applicant shall provide evidence to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director that parking available at the center is adequate to support additional restaurant uses. 4 Dublin Zoning Ordinance Applicable RequirementS: Except as specifically modified by the provisions of this PD District Rezone/Development Plan, all applicable general requirements and procedures of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance shall be applied to the land uses designated in this PD District Rezone. Stage 1 and 2 Site Plan. See Stage 1 and DP booklet, section VII., sheet A1.0. Site Area, Proposed Densities/Development Regulations. Minimum Lot Size IKEA (Area A) Lifestyle Retail (Area B) 8 Acres 25,000 square feet Maximum Site Coverage IKEA (Area A) Lifestyle Retail (Area B) 55% 35% Maxtmum Floor Area Ratio IKEA (Area A) Lifestyle Retail (Area B) Maximum Building Area IKEA (Area A) Lifestyle Retail (Area B) Minimum Building- Property Line / Access Easement Setback Parking Spaces Require& IKEA (Area A) Lifestyle Retail (Area B) Minimum Parking- Property Line Setback 34.6% Blended 46% 23% 454,000 square feet 317,000 square feet 137,000 square feet 20' at 1-580, Hacienda Drive and Arnold Road. 0' on Martinelli Way. 10' at property line on main entry road (Area A / B common property line). 1,405 Spaces 815 Spaces 590 Spaces 5' from property line at public streets and 10' at property line on main entry road '(Area A / B common property line). 5' at Cal Trans right of way Parking Stall Dimenslons Standards Parking Stall Dimensions Standards, below building structure (Area A) MaximuTM Building Heights: IKEA (Area A) Lifestyle Retail (Area B) To be per Chapter 8.76 Off-Street Parking And Loading Regulations of the Dublin Municipal Code, unless otherwise noted below. 10' X 18' spaces with 24' drive aisle 50'-6" to top of roof. 54'-0" to top of typical parapet. 70'-0" to top of entry parapet. Two-story buildings, to top of roof: 50' One-story buildings, to top of roof: 35' Signage IKEA (Area A) Lifestyle Retail (Area B) Pursuant to an approved Master Sign Program Pursuant to an. approved Master Sign Program 4. Architectural Standards. Area A Area A .will have a modernist design with a European influence. IKEA's stores conform to a standardized design concept with the exterior design of each IKEA store based upon simple rectangular forms with a distinctive store entrance feature. The exterior colors are blue and yellow, to match the colors of the flag of Sweden, the home of IKEA's founder and original store. The simple form of the IKEA building is enhanced by the juxtaposition of protruding planes, material textures, and colors. The building's entry is highlighted by square yellow metal panels forming a 70' high angled wall. The mair/building penetrates through this entry feature and forms a glass wall. This entry is contrasted by the main building featuring vertically-oriented, blue, textured, metal panels with ribbon windows. The ribbon windows are similar to windows found on office buildings as well. The building is raised on columns and parking is located on grade level below the building and therefore, no parking garage is necessary. Additional parking is located on the site around the building as well. This design complements the adjacent center with its colors and simple form. Area B An overall'architectural theme will be established for the entire Hacienda Lifestyle Center. The site development plan shall integrate the' uses, structures, parking and site circulation to create an integrated retail experience, rather than a variety of independent buildings. The architecture for all of the buildings in Area B will incorporate complementary design elements using similar building materials, design concepts, landscaping and site amenities, in order to provide harmonious buildings which blend with each other and the surrounding uses, while offering the opportunity for corporate identity architecture. The overall effect intended for the Project is to provide an integrated lifestyle shopping and dining experience. Through architectural design, a signature statement can be created to define Area B and make it visually unique to other projects in the vicinity. The architectural design elements will coordinate with vehicular and pedestrian signature elements, as well as landscaping and open space signature features. The front and side facades of buildings will be designed to provide visual interest to pedestrians and motorists. Front and side building facades shall include sufficient articulation to prevent long, horizontal elements and uninterrupted wails. Street facing facades which are the back of the building will also have architectural interest to provide signage and identification. The design of windows, reveals, parapets and other architectural features should promote a visually stimulating and coherent architectural theme. Long stretches of windows shall be broken up by perpendicular elements. Individualized storefronts of different color and style may be utilized, where appropriate. Distinctive materials will be used in the design of entry areas to highlight the entry experience. Rooftop mechanical equipment will be screened from view. Truck dock areas will be designed as a pan of the overall architectural design, such that the view of these areas shall be screened from street views or otherwise architecturally treated to resemble the side or .from of the same building. Storage trash and service facilities will be architecturally integrated with the main building design. In order to ensure uniformity throughout the design phase the following specific design guidelines for Area B are included: Intent of Design Guidelines The intent Of the Design Guidelines are to regulate site development and to promote flexibility using site planning criteria specifically for The Hacienda Lifestyle Center, a ."lifestyle" retail center. These regulations are intended to encourage innovative site and design solutions that will accommodate a mix of retail, restaurant and service uses. The site development plan shall integrate the uses, structures, parking and site circulation to create an integrated retail experience, rather than a variety of independent buildings. The architecture for all of the buildings on sire shall incorporate consistent, and recurring design elements using similar building materials, design concepts, landscaping and site amenities, in order to provide harmonious and complementary buildings which blend with each other and the surrounding uses, while offering the oppommity for corporate identity architecture. The overall effect intended for the project is to provide an integrated lifestyle shopping and dining experience. The development is bordered on the south by Highway 580; on the west by the IKEA project; and on the north and east by Martinelli Way and Hacienda Boulevard respectively. Site access is via Martinelli Way and the common entry road, IKEA Way. Area B Design Guidelines A. Site Development Review: Site development for the Hacienda Lifestyle Center shall be guided by the following Design Guidelines and applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Dublin. The Site Development Review Application for this site, shall address the requirements set forth in the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance and shall provide additional explanatory text and graphics addressing the following topics: (1) Statement of the site development concept which defines an attractive and harmonious development theme for site planning, architecture and landscape architecture; (2) Site development plan, including calculations of percent coverage by type of use; 7 Bo (3) Pedestrian Circulation: An on-site pedestrian circulation plan shall be prepared and submitted at the time of Site Development Review. This plan will include pedestrian and vehicular links to the IKEA project to the private walkways between and around buildings. Connections between buildings and'walkways encircling buildings, which limit or eliminate the need to cross any vehicular drive shall be emphasized. In instances where pedestrians and motorized vehicles intersect, a change in pavement material or treatments shall be. utilized; (4) Architectural plans, sections and elevations; (5) Circulation Plan, for automobiles, parking, motorcycles~ trucks, truck loading spaces, pedestrians and bicycles, including cUrb radii and truck maneuvering templates; (6) Landscape Master Plan, including a description of all landscape materials, such as plants, furniture and fencing; their arrangement and a maintenance program; and a calculation of percent coverage by type of landscaped area; (7) Grading and Utility Plans; (8) Lighting' Master Plan, including a description of the location and types of fixtures; (9) Master Sign Plan, including the specifications for each type of sign. (10) A Development Schedule showing date of commencement, annual accomplishments, completion of construction and occupancy dates. Site Design: Site design is to establish the character, form and aesthetic featUres that contribute to the creation of a development that is in harmony internally and with its setting and is in conformance with standard conditions of approval and policies of the City of Dublin where applicable._ (1) Front and side yard setbacks shall be fully landscaped; (2) Major access points shall be oriented to attractive features of buildings or open:space; (3) SignatUre Statement: Each site individually shall incorporate a signature statement which visually identifies this property. (See ('Open Space, Landscaping; Circulation and Architectural Design" below); (4) The site shall be designed to institute State Regional Water Quality Control Board Best Management Practices for storm drainage. All parts of the site, including building pads, parking, loading, access driveways and maneuvering areas shall be graded and well- drained and shall be maintained at all times. Drainage outlets shall include a sign reading "No Dumping/Flows into the Bay"; (5) Trash/Recycling Enclosures: Each building shall provide adequate and accessible interior or exterior enclosures for trash and recycling facilities. Exterior facilities shall be enclosed by a solid wall and opaque gate six feet in height (minimum) and shall not be located near any pedestrian access points or outdoor usable open space areas; Open Space and Landscaping: Open space shall include landscaping in entries, plazas/courtyards, parking areas, front and side yard setbacks and. other similar uses. Up to two (2) feet of boundary landscaping (front bumper overhang) may be counted as "parking area landscaping". (1) A common landscape theme and common palette of landscape materials shall be used throughout The Hacienda Lifestyle Center; (2) All landscaped areas shall be continuously maintained; (3) (4) (5) (6) Landscape design and maintenance should respond to prevailing water conservation policies and be compatible with recycled water. The plant materials shall be well suited to the climate of the region and shall require minimum water; Plazas/Courtyard Areas: Landscaped areas shall be provided to create comfortable and usable outdoor areas that integrate hardscape and softscape. Planting, special paving and other landscaping materials should be selected to maximize enjoyment of the outdoor area, given climatic considerations. These courtyard/plaza areas shall be oriented toward focal points and shall allow for passive uses, such as eating areas. The scale of these areas shall be pedestrian-friendly and attractive to encourage use; Pedestrian Walkways: Walkwavs internal to the site shall be distinguished with special paving. All walkways shall be a minimum of five (5) feet in width. Adjacent to parking areas, minimum of 4' clear distance shall be maintained for walkways between the car overhang and the edge of the walkway. (See "Pedestrian Circulation" above); Parking Areas: These standards regulate the provision parking spaces for the automobiles of tenants of the premises and for their clients, customers, employees and callers. They are required to remain accessible for these purposes continuously. The minimum number and dimension of parking stalls shall be governed by the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Parking on the utility easement area at the south property line shall include landscape strips; a. The.landscaped strips shall be: (i) at least 5 feet wide between the parking area and the north, west and south property }ine. (ii) at least 15 feet between the parking area and other building walls except in areas designated for truck docking, maneuvering and parking. (iii)at least 10 feet between the parking area and other building walls except in areas designated for track docking, maneuvering and parking. (iv)At entries, sidewalks shall be incorporated into the landscaped strip. A minimum of 4 feet clear width shall be maintained for any sidewalk. b. A minimum of one (1) parking lot tree shall be planted for every twenty (20) parking spaces. Trees shall be distributed throughout the parking areas, shall be of a variety that offers a substantial shade canopy when mature and shall be a minimum 15-gallon size when planted. Tree planters shall have standard six-inch curbs on all sides and shall have good surface drainage. Trees shall be planted as part of the construction process for the parking area. Rectangular tree wells shall be used between the rows of parking. The design standards established in the Dublin Zoning Ordinance shall be utilized unless herein superseded. c. The parking area shall contain landscaped islands with a minimum dimension of five feet by five feet, excluding curb. Landscaped islands or .adjacent trees in planting strips shall be located for every twenty (20) parking spaces in a single row. d. Signature Statement: In conjunction with the site design and architectural design of the project, a Landscape / Open Space Statement shall be incorporated. Visual identity for The Hacienda Lifestyle Center as a unique property shall be created. Unique landscape elements are to be incorporated with the site's overall signature element. D. Circulation: pedestrians in a safe, efficient and logical manner. (1) Entryways: Attractive entryways shall be provided to for vehicles and pedestrians; (2) Access and on-site circulation should allow the movement of 'vehicles, bicycles and Entries should be oriented toward internal or external open space, landscape or architectural features; (3) Access drives shall be located to orient visitors to the building entries, wherever feasible; (4) Access drives shall be designed with adjacent lots to provide Sufficient' automobile stacking during peak periods of use; (5) Access drives shall have minimum curb of 20 feet; (6) Distinctive landscape materials and focal elements shall be used at each major entry; (7) A pedestrian walkway shall link the public sidewalk on each frontage with on-site pedestrian circulation routes; (8) Driveways: Veh/cular circulation routes within the site should provide efficient means of moving goods or passengers while avoiding long, unbroken drives or aisles in parking areas to discourage speeding and through-traffic; and (9) Signature Statement: Vehicular circulation can encompass both landscape and paving alternatives to create an identity unique to a particular site. Items such as embellished pavement, roundabout, etc., which serve to channel and direct traffic, shall be utilized; Architectural Design: An overall architectural theme is to be established for the entire site. Through architectural design, a signature statement can be created to defme The Hacienda Lifestyle Center and make it visually unique to other projects in the vicinity. Utilizing architectural building materials and'. ' architectural design techniques, The Hacienda Lifestyle Center will project a statement to define this site. The architectural design elements shall coordinate with vehicular and pedestrian signature elements, as well as landscaping and open space signature features. (1) The front and side facades of buildings shall be designed to provide visual interest to pedestrians and motorists. Front and side building facades shall include sufficient articulation to prevent long, horizontal elements and uninterrupted walls. Street facing facades which also incorporate service uses for the building will have architectural interest and be of a size sufficient to provide space for signage and identification; (2) The design of windows, reveals, parapets and other architectural features should promote a visually stimulating and coherent architectural theme. Long stretches of windows shall be broken up by perpendicular elements. Tenants will be permitted to modify individual storefronts pending review and approval by the landlord; (3) Entries: Distinctive materials shall be used in the design of entry areas to highlight these areas. (4) (5) Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from view; Truck docking areas shall be designed as a part of the overall architectural design for a principal building, such that the view of these areas shall be screened to the maximum extent feasible from street views or otherwise architecturally treated to resemble the side or front of the same building; Fo (6) Storage facilities: Storage facilities shall be architecturally integrated with the main building design; and (7) Outdoor S~orage: OUtdoor storage of materials, is specifically prohibited. Lighting and Street'FUrniture: Lighting shall conform to the City of Dublin standards. Both light standards and street furniture shall establish an architectural style which mirrors and complements the building architecture. (1) Pedestrian walkways, entry areas, courtyards and plazas should be lighted to provide a sense of personal safety for pedestrians and to minimize shadows; (2) Interior private streets, driveways and parking areas shall be lighted with fixtures of a consistent character and quality; and (3) All lighting shall be shielded in a manner that prevents visibility of the light source and that minimizes glare and light spillover beyond the perimeter of the development. Signage: A clear, hierarchically organized system of signage shall be provided to orient users to various destinations. All signs are to conform to the City of Dublin standards and are to be a uniform style throughout the site while allowing specific tenant identity, although the restaurants may use signs that promote its identity. The signage elements shall complement the site architectural theme. Utilities: Pad-mounted transformers, water mains and other utilities shall be located and screened to minimize visibility. No structures other then fencing, asphalt paving for parking and landscaping shall be located within any portion of the public utility easement unless authorized subject to an encroachment permit. Potential Materials: (1) Colored concrete walks; paver accents: (2) Concrete seat-walls / Landscape planters; (3) Glazed file, stone, metal or wood accents (4) Plaster / CMU building enclosures; (5) Canopies of canvas, steel space frames, or other structural elements; (6) Combination of flat and sloped roofs, mansards and raised parapets; (7) Ironwork accents and trellis; and or (8) Mixed colored storefronts of varying colors and heights. 5. Phasing Plan. The Project will be constructed in two phases. The IKEA , Area A site will be developed first and with development of the Area B site following about a year later. AREA A AREA B PHASE I PHASE II I I o e 11. Master Neighborhood Landscaping Plan/Preliminary Landscape Plan. See Stage I and 2 DP.booklet, Section VII, SheetsA1.0, A1.0b, LI.1, L1.2, and Offsite CalTrans Planting Plan. General Plan and Specific Plan Consistency. The' Market Place at Hacienda project includes a General Plan amendment which modifies General Plan maps and text for the project. The project also includes an amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to modify the land use designation. The project PD-zoning and this Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan shall not be effective until the above general plan amendments and specific plan amendment are approved and effective. Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. The project contains only commercial uses. The Inclusionary Zoning Regulations do not regulate non-residential projects. Aerial Photo. See Stage 1 and 2 DP booklet, Section III, Page 7 Applicable Requirements of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Except as specifically provided in this Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, the use, development, improvement and maintenance of the Property shall be governed by the provisions of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance pursuant to section 8.32.060.C. Statement of compatibility with Stage 1 Development Plan. The Stage 2 portion of this Development Plan is consistent with the Stage 1 portion of this Development Plan. SECTION 4. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days from and after its passage and after the effective date the IKEA Project General Plan amendment. 12 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the- City Council of the City of Dublin, on this 64 day of April 2004, by ~'~ thc following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk GSPAgk2002\02-034 IKEA\City Council\pd ord.doc 13 RESOLUTION NO. -04 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR PA 02-034 IKEA PROPERTY INC. WHEREAS, IKEA Property, Inc. submitted applications for an IKEA store, a retail center and related improvements on a 27.54 acre site north of 1-580, between Arnold Road and Hacienda Boulevard. The project proposes an approximately 317,000 square foot IKEA store on the westerly portion of the site, and an approximately 137,000 square foot retail center on the easterly portion of the site. The development includes applications to amend the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan from Campus Office to General Commercial; to rezone the site to PD-Planned Development and adopt related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans; to approve a Site Development Review for the IKEA store; and to approve a vesting tentative parcel map and development agreement. The applications are collectively known as the "Project"; and WHEREAS, a completed application for Site Development Review is available and on file in the Dublin Planning Department; and WHEREAS, the City prepared and circulated a Draft Supplemental EIR analyzing the potential environmental effects oft he Project. The City prepared a Final Supplemental EIR comprised of written responses to all comments received on the Draft Supplemental EIR. On February 24, 2004, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 04-10 recommending that the City Council certify the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs as the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR)for the Project, which resolution is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, at a' noticed public hearing on February 24, 2004, the Planning Commission considered the Staff report, all written and oral testimony submitted to them and based thereon, did not recommend adoption of the proposed amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, which resolutions are incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, a City Council Staff report dated March 16, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the SEIR and the Project, including the Site Development Review; and WHEREAS, at a noticed public hearing on March 16, 2004, the City Council considered the Staff report, the SEIR, the Planning Commission recommendations, and alt written and oral testimony submitted at the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on March 16, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution __-04, incorporated herein by reference, certifying the SEIR as adequate and complete pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, and adopting mitigation and alternatives findings as well as a Statement of' Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring Program as required, for approval of the Project; and WHEREAS, a Development Plan has been submitted to the City as required by section 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hold a public hearing on said application on March 16, 2004 and took public testimony on said matter; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use their independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendatiOns and testimony hereinabove set forth (collectively, "Evidence"). I~.-~,.~,~-- m i.----_ ~) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, BASED ON THE EVIDENCE, the Dublin City Council does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding said proposed Site Development Review: Approval of this application (PA 02-034) as conditioned is consistent with the purpose and intent of Section 8.104 (Site Development Review) of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. The approval of this application, as conditioned, will comply with the policies of the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (both as amended by the Project), and the Planned Development Rezoning and Development Plan for tl~ ,project which allows for commercial development at this location. The approval of this application, as conditioned, will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare as the development is consistent, as conditioned with all laws and ordinances of the City of Dublin. The proposed site development, including site layout, vehicular access, circulation and parking, setbacks, height, walls, public safety and similar elements, as conditioned, has been designed to provide a desirable environment for the development. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the approved development. Impacts to view have been addressed and the project has been found to be consistent with the Eastern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies and Standards document. Impacts to existing slopes and topographic features have been addressed as the subject property is essentially flat. The project has been designed with architectural considerations, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings have been incorporated into the project and as Conditions of Approval in order to ensure compatibility of this development with the development's design concept and character of surrounding uses. Landscape considerations, including the location, type, size and coverage of plant materials and similar elements combined with Conditions of Approval have been established to ensure visual relief and an attractive public environment. The approval of this application, as conditioned, is in conformance with regional transportation plans and requires the Applicant/Developer to either construct or pay for the project's fair share of transportation improvements. The approval of the Site Development Review is consistent with the Dublin General Plan and the as amended Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The Supplemental EIR, and related Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program approved by the City Council by Resolution 04- are adequate and sufficient to satisfy CEQA, CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin's environmental guidelines with respect to the Planning Commission's action on the Project as set forth herein, and hereby incorporates by reference said documents. NOW, TI-IEREFORE BE IT FURTI-IER RESOLVED THAT THE City of Dubtin City Council hereby approves the Site Development Review Application for PA 02-034 to consm~ct a 317,000 square foot retail building on APN 986-0005-040 as generally depicted by materials labeled "Exhibit A", stamped "approved" and on file in the City of Dublin Planning Department. This recommendation shall conform generally to the Site Plan prepared by Ware Malcomb dated December 19, 2003, received by the Department of Community Development, unless modified herein by the Conditions of Approval contained below and shall be subject to the Conditions of Approval contained below. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Unless otherwise stated, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to final occupancy., of any building and shall be subiect to Planning Department review and approval. The followin~ codes represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitorin~ compliance with the Conditions of Approval: [PL] Planning, [B] Building, [PO] Police, [PW1 Public Works, [ADM] Administration/City Attorney, [FIN] Finance, [PCS] Parks and Community Services, IF] Alameda County Fire Dept., IDSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District, [CO] Alameda County. Flood Control and water Conservation District Zone 7. Final Landscape Plan. Applicant/Developer shall submit £mal landscape plans (for all on and off- site areas), conforming to the requirements of Section 8.72.030 of the Zoning Ordinance (unless otherwise required by this Resolution), which shall be subject to the review and approval by the Director of Community Development and the Director of Public Works. The landscape plans shall include the following information: hardscape details, striping details, quantity, size, spacing and species of landscape elements, and light standards. All above ground utilities shall be screened. Additionally, the landscape plans shall include a unified design for the "Main Access in Path" including unified light standards, plant and tree species, and hardscape treatments. Landscape Maintenance. All landscape, irrigation, and hardscape areas on the ske (including paths, roads, sidewalks, etc.) shall be properly maintained at all times. Any modification to the landscaping of the site, including the removal trees, shall require prior review and written from the Community Development Director. Standard Plant Material, Irrigation System and Maintenance Agreement: Applicant/Developer shall sign and submit a signed copy of the Ci~ o£Dublin Standard Plant Material, Irrigation System and Maintenance Agreement prior to the occupancy of any units. PL Issuance of Building Permit PL On-Going PL Occupancy Bicycle Parking. Bicycle parking shall be provided near the building entries at a ratio of 1 rack per 40 vehicle parking spaces. Bicycle racks shall be designed to accommodate a minimum of four bicycles per rack, and so that each bicycle can be secured to the rack. The location of the bicycle racks shall not encroach into any adjacent/adjoining sidewalks in a manner that would reduce the unencumbered width of the sidewalk to less than 4' in accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. PL Occupancy General Plan and Specific Plan. Applicant/Developer shall pay for the mapping work and PL printing of'the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan to reflect the General Plan and Occupancy Plan amendment approval. Parking Spaces. All parking spaces shall be double-striped with 4-inch wide stripes set 'PL )art. Building Maintenance. The building and associated signage shall be properly maintained at all PL times. On-Going Exposed Stair. The finish and design of the exposed stair on the north, south and west elevation shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development. P1 Issuance of Building Permits . Concrete Wail. The finish of the concrete wall of the loading dock shown on the East Elevation shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development PL Issuance of Building Permits i0. ~ Glazing APpliCati°n2 The Use of 0Pa~Uegl~ing Shall be limited and the application of opaque PL { and translucent/transparent glazing shall be subject to review and approVal by the DireCtor of [ Issuance of ~ Community Development~ [Building ~ [Permits 15. 19. Mechanical Equipment. All ducts, meters, transformers, air conditioning equipment and other mechanical equipment that is on-site or roof mounted shall be screened from view. A screening plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community DevelOpment Director and Building Official prior to approval of Building Permit. Said screening plan shall show that all ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment and other mechanical and utility equipment shall be effectively screened from view with materials architecturally compatible with the materials of the ' structure. Signs. All signs shall be well maintairied in an attractiwe mannerl Any indirect light fixtures Used to illuminate any signage shall be glare-shielded. Wall-mounted signs shall be placed flat against the building wall. If signs change, all moUnting holes shall be repaired and walls repainted prior to mounting the new signs Monument Signs. Design of monumeiit si~s 'shall b~ appr6~ed by'ih~ Direct0r'of C6mmunity Development to assure compatibility with design elements :of the project and by the Director of Public Works to assure unobstructed traffic visibility' Temporary Promotional Signs. The Use of any Temporary Promotional Signs (i,e., banners, pennants, flags, balloons, searchlights and similar advertising devises) for special advertising and or promotional use shall first require a separate Zoning Clearance approval and shall comply with · ' established in Sign Regulations, Chapter 8.84 of the Zoning Ordinance. Development Agreement/Expiration. The approval ofthis project shall be predicated upon and pursuant to the terms set forth in the Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and IKEA Property Inc· In the event of conflict between the terms of the Development Agreement and the Conditions of Approval contained herein, the terms of the Development Agreement shall )revail. The Development Agreement must be effective prior to issuance of building permits Revocation. The SDR will be revOcable for cause in accordance with Section 8,96.020.I of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the termsor conditions of this apprOval. shall be subject to Citation. Effective Date. SDR approvals shall not become effective until the certification of the IKEA .~ Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and the approval of the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendments and the Planned Development Rezone has become effective. Required Permits. Applicant/Devei0per Shali 30mp'i~ With the~ City 0f Dublin Zoning Ordinance and obtain all necessary permits required by other agencies (Alameda County Flood Control District Zone 7, California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, State Water Quality Control Board, Etc.) and shall submit copies of the permits to the Department of Public Works. Term. Approval of the Site Development RevieTM shall be valid for One year from apProval bY the Planning Commission. If construction has not commenced by that time, this approval shall be null and void. The approval period for Site Development Review may be extended six (6) additional Imonths by the Director of Community DevelOpment uP°n determination that the Conditions of Approval remain adequate to assure that the above stated findings of approval will Continue to be met. (Applicant/Developer must submit a written request for the extension prior to the expiration date of the Site Development Review.) The term of the Site Development Review approval shall be as Stated, unless'otherwise provided for in the Development Agreeement between the City of Dublin and IKEA Property Inc. Refuse Collection Areas. The refuse collection areas within the project shall be reviewed by the refuse collection service provider to ensure that adequate space is,provided to accommodate collection ofre~use from this facility. All trash enclosure areas shall be constructed with roof coverage and concrete pads and subject to review and approval by the Director of Community DeVelopment. A ten-foot concrete pad shall be provided outside any trash enclosure area. PL Issuance of Building Permits PL On-Going PL, PW Completion of Improvements PL, B Issuance of Building Permits PL On-going PC ¸. On going PL Issuance of Grading Permits Various Various times, but no later than Issuance of Building Permits PL On-going PW, PL Approval of Improvement Plans 4 21. Solid Waste/Recycling. Applicant/Developer shall cOmply with the City's solid waste Bldg. management and recycling requirements. On-going 22. Refuse Collection. The refuse collection service provider shall be consulted to ensure that PL adequate space is provided to accommodate collection and sorting of petrucible solid waste as well Occupancy as source-separated recyclab!e materials generated by the project. 23. Rodenticides and Herbicides. The use of rodenticides and herbicides within the project area shall PL be performed in cooperation with and under the supervision of the Alameda County Department of Issuance of AgricultUre and will be restricted, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, Grading Permit to reduce potential impacts to wildlife. 24. Archaeological Materials. If, during construction, archaeological materials are encountered, PL construction within 100 feet of these materials, shall be halted until a professional Archaeologist On-going who is certified by the Society of California Archaeology (SCA) or the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitigation measures, if they are deemed necessary 25. Kit Foxes. Should any Kit Foxes be discovered on the site, either during the Preconstruction PL, PW Survey or during project construction, the Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for complying Issuance of with the Kit Fox Protection Plan. Grading Permit 26. Housing and Employment Monitoring System. Prior to opening for business, each business shall FEN provide a list to the City of the number, type and salary level of employees for the business in Occupancy order for the City to implement the required housing and employment monitoring system required by the Easter Dublin Specific Plan, provided, however, the City shall keep such information confidential and may not be disclosed without the prior written consent of Applicant/Developerl 27. Preconstruction Survey. Applicant/Developer shall cOmply with all Eastern Dublin Specific Plan PL, PW EIR mitigation measures for mitigating potentially significant plant and animal species impacts. Issuance of Within 60 days prior to any habitat modification, Applicant/Developer shall submit a Grading Permit preconstruction survey, prepared by a biologist (to be approved and hired by the City prior to commencement of the survey.) Said survey shall examine whether any sensitiVe species exist on or .adjacent to the site and, if any exist, shall include recommended protection plans, including any modifications to site design, for those sensitive species that may be discovered as a resultofthe survey. Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for the Cost of the survey and staff review of the survey. The significance of any discoveries and adequacy of recommended protection measures shall be subject to the discretion of the Director of Community Development. Said protection plans and measures shall occur at least 21 days prior to anticipated habitat modification. Any updated surveys and/or studies that may be completed subsequently shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development 28 Hold HarmleSs/Indemnification - Applicant/Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold PL, ADM harmless the City of Dublin and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or Throu~ proceeding against the City of Dublin or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, completion of or annul an approval of the City of Dublin or its advisory agency, appeal board, Planning Improvements Commission, City Council, Director of COmmunity Development, Zoning Administrator, Planning and Occupancy Manager or any other department, committee, or agency of the City to the extent such actions are ofthe Building brought within the time period required by Government Code Section 66499.37 or other applicable law; provided, however, that the Applicant/Developer's duty to so defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be subject to the City's promptly notifying the Applicant/Developer of any said claim, action, or proceeding and the City's full cooperation in the defense of such actions or proceedings. 29. Public Art. Any public art placed in the project shall conform with the requirements of the City of PL, PCS Dublin Public Art Policy. On-going 30. Parking Of Delivery Trucks. Parking of delivery trucks shall be limited to the express purpose PL of loading and unloading. On-going 31. Parking Of Company Owned Vehicles. The parking of company owned vehicles with corporate PL identity (trucks with signs) between a building and a public street and along a public street shall On-going not occur, expect for the express purpose of loading and unloading. · 32. Parking OfRecreati0~ v~hi~l~'i~e'parki~ 6'fR~'~atli~n~[VehitleS'tgemighr, as defined by PL .-.. the Zoning Ordinance, shall be prohibited. On-going '3. Public Facilities Fee. Applicant/Developer shall pay a Public Facilities Fee in the amounts and at PCS the times set forth in the Development Agreement. Issuance of Building Permits 34. Fire Conditions. Developer shall comply with all conditions of the Alameda CoUnty Fire F DePartment (ACFD), including: Issuance of a. Final location of fire hydrants shall be approved by the Alameda County Fire Building Department in ac. cordance with current standards. Minimum fire fl°w design shall be for Permits 1500 gallons per minute with 20-psi residual flowing from a single hydrant. Raised blue reflectorized traffic markers shall be epoxied to the center of the paved street opposite each hydrant. A drawing of the approved locations shall be submitted for future reference. b. Fire lanes shall be identified in the plan and approved by the ACFD prior to installation. c. Emergency Vehicle Access roadways shall be designed and installed to support the imposed loads of fire equipment. The minimum standard shall be H20 design. Design shall be approved by ACFD prior to installation. d. Gates or barricades designed for emergency vehicle access shall meet the standards of the ACFD and the City of Dublin. e. Prior to the delivery of any combustible material storage on the site, fire hydrants, water supply, and roadways shall be installed and sufficient water storage and pressure shall be available to the site. f. Approved roadway shall be first lift of asphalt. '-'~ g. Plans may be subj.ect to revision following review. 35. Projected Timeline. APplicant/Devel0t~e~shall Sub~i~ ~fdjec~t~d ~iiiiei~e for project completion PO to the Dublin police Services Department, to allow estimation of staffing requirements and Issuance of assignments Building Permits 36. NOn-Residential Securityl APPliCant/Developer Shall complY With all aPPlicable City of Diibiin PO 'Non-Residential Security Requirements. Occupancy of Any Building 37. Clear of Graffiti. The developer and/or property owner and/or tenant shall keep the site clear of PL graffiti vandalism on a regular and continuous basis. Graffiti resistant paint for the Structures and On-going film for windows 'or glass should be used. 38. Wells. Any water wells, cathodic protection wells or' exploratory borings shoTM on the map that Zone 7 are known to exist, are proposed or are located during field operations without a documented intent Issuance of of future use, filed with Zone 7, are to be destroyed prior to any demolition or construction activity Grading Perm/ts in accordance with a well destruction permit obtained from ZOne 7 and the Alameda County Department of Environmental Services or are to be maintained in accordance with applicable groundwater protection ordinances. Other wells encountered prior to or during Construction are to be treated similarly. 39. Salt Mitigation. Recycled water projects must meet any applicable salt mitigation requirements of Zone 7 Zone 7 Issuance of Grading Permits 40. Requirements and Fees. Applicant/Developer shall comply with all Alameda County Flood Zone 7, PW -'-, Control and Water Conservation District-Zone 7 Flood Control requirements and applicable fees. Issuance of Building Permits 41. Construction by Applicant/Developer. All onsite potable and recycled water and wastewater DSRSD pipelines and facilities shall be constructed by the Applicant/Developer in accordance with all Completion of DSRSD master plans, standards, specifications and requirements. Improvements 42. DSRSD Water Facilities. Water facilities must be connected to the DSRSD or other approved DSRSD water system, and must be installed at the expense of Applicant/Developer in accordance with Acceptance o£ District Standards and Specifications. All material and workmanship for water mains and Improvements appurtenances thereto must conform with all of the requirements of the officially adoPted Water Code of the District and shall be Subject to field inspection by the District. Applicant/Developer shall comply with all conditions of Parcel Map No. 8261 and Parcel Map No. 7714. 43. General Requirements. Prior to issuance of any building permit, complete improvement plans DSRSD shall be submitted to DSRSD that conform to the requirements of the DSRSD Code, the DSRSD Issuance of "Standard Procedures, Specifications and Drawings for Design and Installation of Water and Building Wastewater Facilities." all applicable DSRSD Master Plans and all DSRSD policies. Permits 44. Water Mains. All mains shall be sized to provide sufficient capacity to each development project's DSRSD demand. Layout and sizing of mains shall be in conformance with DSRSD utility master planning. Approval of Improvement Plans 45. Sewers. Sewers shall be designed to operate by gravity flow to DSRSD's existing sanitary sewer DSRSD system. Pumping of sewage is discouraged and may only be allowed under extreme circumstances Approval of following a case-by-case review with DSRSD staff. Any pumping station will require specific Improvement review and approval by DSRSD of preliminary design reports, design criteria and final plans and Plans specification. DSRSD reserves the right to require payment of present worth 20-year maintenance costs as well as other condition within a separate agreement with the applicant for any project that reqUi~s a pumping' stafiofi 46. Domestic And Fire Protection Waterline Systems. Domestic and fire protection waterline DSRSD systems for tracts or commercial developments shall be designed to be looped or interconnected to Approval of avoid dead end sections in accordance with requirements of the DSRDS Standard Specifications Improvement and sound engineering practices. Plans 47. Water And Sewer Lines. DSRSD policy requires public water and sewer lines to be located in DSRSD public streets rather than in off-street locations to the fullest extent possible. If unavoidable, then Issuance of public sewer or water easements must be established over the alignment of each public sewer or Building water tine in an off-street or private street location to provide access for future maintenance and/or Permits and al1 replacement DSRSD requirements 48. Easement Dedications. The locations and widths of all proposed easement dedications for water DSRSD and sewer lines shall be submitted to and approved by DSRSD and shall be by separate instrument Prior to irrevocably offered to DSRSD or by offer of dedication on the Final Map. Issuance of Grading Permit 49. Fees. Ali Utility connections fees, plan check fees, inspection fees permit fees and fees associated DSRSD with a wastewater discharge permit shall be paid to' DSRSD in accordance with the rates and Prior to scheduled established in the DSRSD Code. Issuance of Building Permit. 50. Improvement Plans. All improvement plans for DSRSD facilities shall be signed by the District I DSRSD Engineer. Each drawing of improvement plans shall contain a signature block for the District Prior to engineer indicating approval of the sanitary sewer or water facilities shown, prior to the approval Issuance of by the District Engineer, the applicant shall pay all required DSRSD fees, provide an engineer's Building Permit estimate of construction costs for water and sewer systems, a performance bond, a one-year maintenance bond, and comprehensive general liability insurance policy in the amounts and forms that are acceptable to DSRSD. The applicant shall allow at least 15 working days for final improvement drawing review by DSRSD before signature by the District Eggineer. 51. Construction Permit. No sewer or waterline construction shall be permitted unleSs the proper DSRSD utility construction permit has been issued by DSRSD. Issuance of Building Permit [52. I Hold Harmless. The apphcant shall hold DSRSD, ltS Board olD,rectors, commtss~ons, I t(~ ~ employees, and agents of DSRSD harmless and indemnify and defend the same from any t On-going ( ;, [ litigation, claims, or fines resulting from the construction and completion of the project. .,3. Recycled Water. The project is located ~vithin the District Recycled Water Use Zone (Ord. 280), ' DSRSD which calls for installation of recycled water irrigation systems to allow for future use of recycled Approval of water for approved landscaped irrigation demands. Recycled water will be available in the future, Improvement as described in the DSRSD Eastern Dublin Facilities Plan Update, June 1997. Compliance with Plans Ord. 280, as may be-amended or superseded, is required, the District Engineer must approve any exemption thereto, in conformance with Ordinance 280. 54. 55. 57. Irrigation Facilities. All irrigation facilitie~ shall be Subject to review by the District for compliance with District and Department of Health Services requirements for recycled water irrigation design. Irrigation plans shall not be approved by the City until review and approval thereof by the City is confirmed. Fire Flows. The applicant shall coordinate with the District and Alameda County Fire Department on required fire flows. The present interim water system is capable if providing a maximum of 3,500 gallons per minute. The applicant shall hold the District harmless over the use of interim. water system for fire protection. Improvement Plans. Complete improvement plans shall be submitted to DSRSD that conform to the requirements of the Dublin San Ramon Services District Code, the DSRSD "Standard Procedures, Specifications and Drawings for Design and Installation of Water and Wastewater Facilitieg", all applicable DSRSD MaSter Plans and all DSRSD policies. Domestic And Fire Protection. Domestic and fire protection waterline systems for Tracts or Commertial Developments shall be designed to be looped or interconnected to avoid dead end sections in accordance with requirements of the DSRSD Standard Specifications and sound engineering practice. 59. 60. ~mprovement Public Water And Sewer Lines Locations. DSRSD policy requires public water and sewer lines to be located in public streets rather than in off-street locations to the fullest extent possible. If unavoidable, then public sewer or water easements must be established over the alignment of each public sewer or water line in an off-street or private street location to provide access.for future maintenance and/or replacement. DSRSD Approval of Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans DSRSD Approval of Improvement Plans DSRSD Approval of Improvement Plans DSRSD Approval of Improvement Plans DSRSD Approval of Improvement Plans Theft Prevention. Applicant/Developer shall work with the Dublin Police on an ongoing basis to establish an effective theft prevention and security program. Applicant/Developer shall submit a security plan for the site for review and approval by the Dublin Police. Final Lighting Plan. Applicant/Developer shall submit a final lighting plan (intlUding~ photometrics) to the Community Development Department and the Dublin Police Services for review and approval. At a minimum, the plan shall include 1.0-foot candle lighting levels at all doors, 1.0 foot candle lights at ground level in parking lot areas and 5.0-foot candle lighting underneath the parking and lighting fixtures that are a vandal-resistant type. PO Plan Submitted Prior to Occupancy of any Building Prior to Issuance of Building Permits/Lightin g Installed prio[ to Occupancy of any Building Improvement Plans. All improvement plans shall contain a signature block for the District DSRSD Engineer indicating approval of the sanitary sewer or water facilities shown. Prior to approval by Approval of the District Engineer, the applicant shall pay all required DSRSD fees, and provide an engineer's Improvement · Plans estimate of construction cost~ for the sewer and water systems, a performance bond, a one-year maintenance bond, and comprehensive general liability insurance policy in the amounts and forms that are acceptable to DSRSD. The applicant shall allow at least 15 working days for final i drawing review by DSRSD before signature by the District Engineer· Sewer Line Or Waterline Construction. No sewer lin~ qr wate~rl~e~ 90nstmcti0P shall be ..... DSKSD permitted unless the proper utility construction permit has been issued by DSRSD. A construction permit wilt only be issued after all of the required items have been satiated. PL, PO, B, PW Employee Exit Doors. Employee eXit doors shall be equipped with 180-degree viewers if there is not a burglary resistant window panel in the front door from Which to scan the exterior 67.I 69. 70. 71. Security Plan. Applicant/Developer shall submit a security plan for the site. The plan shall include information regarding alarm systems (type and location), inventory control measures, key control measures, employee safety and security training programs. Additionally the security plan shall include adequate lighting and visibility levels within the garage area and measures to reduce Joints. The Security Plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Chief of Police. Operations Action Plan and Funding for Grand Opening. Dublin PoliCe Services, in consultation with IKEA, will plan and execute an Operations Action Plan for the Grand Opening of the IKEA store. The Operation Action Plan will include additional Police Services Staff for the use of traffic and crowd control. The Applicant/Developer will provide funding for the additional Police Staff necessary to execute the Operations Action Plan. The Operations Action Plan shall also include, at a minimum, specific dates and times of scheduled events and a plan for the temporary off-site parking of employee automobiles. A meeting between IKEA management, representatives from City of Dublin shall occur approximately 2 weeks prior to grand opening events to coordinate response procedures, communication and traffic control contingency plans. Business Site Emergency Response Card. Building tenants shall complete a "Business Site EmergencY Response Card" and deliver to the Police Department. Security Provisions. Dublin Police Services requires the developer to build in accordance with all Commercial Security Requirements pursUant to Chapter 7.32.220 of the Dublin Municipal Code to include: a. Applicant/Developer shall comply with all applicable City of Dublin Non Residential Security Ordinance Requirements. b. Create temporary advisory signage for traffic flow, subject to subject to review and approval by the Director of Public Works. Building Codes and Ordinances. All project construction shall conform to all building codes and ordinances in effect at the time of building permit. Retaining Walls. All retaining walls over 30 inches in height and in a walkway shall be provided with guardrails. All retaining walls over 24 inches with a surcharge or 36 inches without a surcharge shall obtain permits and inspections from Building Division. Building Permits. To apply for building permits, Applicant/Developer shall submit eight (8) sets of construction plans to the Building Division for plan check. Each set of plans shall have attached an annotated copy' of these Conditions of Approval. The notations shall clearly indicate how all Conditions of Approval will or have been complied with. Construction plans will not be accepted without the annotated resolutions attached to each set of plans. Applicant/Developer will be responsible for obtaining the approvals of all participation non-City agencies prior to the issuance of building permits. Construction Drawings. Construction plans shall be fully dimensioned (including building elevations) accurately drawn (depicting all existing and proposed conditions on site), and prepared and. signed by a California licensed Architect or Engineer. A complete exiting plan shall be included in the construction drawings. All structural calculations shall be prepared and signed by a California licensed Architect or Engineer. The site plan, landscape plan and details shall be consistent with each other. Addressing. Address will be required on designated doors leading to the exterior of the building, as directed by the Building Official. Addresses shall be illuminated and be able to be' seen from the street, 5 inches in height minimum. PO Plan submitted prior to Occupancy of any Building PO Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permit PO Prior to Occupancy PO Plan submitted prior to Occupancy PO Prior to Issuance of Building Permit and On-going B Through Completion B Through Completion B Issuance of Building Permits B Prior to Issuance of Building Permits B Prior to Occupancy 73.] Air Conditioning Units. Air cond~tmnmg umts and ventilation clucts shall t)e screenea ri'om I ,~ [ public view with materials cOmpatible to the main building. Units shall be permanently installed [ Prior to f' on concrete pads or other non-movable materials to approved by the Building Official and Director ~ Occupancy [ of Community Development. Temporary Fencing. Temporary Construction fencing shall be installed along perimeter of ail B work.under construction. Engineer Observation. The Engineer' of record Shall be retained to prOx/ide observation services for all components of the lateral and vertical design of the building, including nailing, holddowns, straps, shear, roof diaphragm and structural frame of building. A written report shall be submitted to the City Inspector prior to scheduling the final frame inspection. Alternate Materials or Methods Request. The alternate materials or methods of construction and or design request shall be review and accepted by the City of Dublin prior to building permit application submittal. The complete approved alternate materials or methods package shall be reprinted into the construction plans. No changes shall be permitted to any item within the alternate materials or methods request without prior approval of the City of Dublin's Building and Fire Prevention Divisions. Any changes without the City of Dublin's prior approval shall void the alternate materials or methods request. Exiting System, No exits shall discharge int° 'the S-3 garage a~e~/2' Exits shall not be open to the S-3 garage at any point. 60- Foot No Build Covenant. Pursuant to Dublin Municipal Code §7.32.130, the owner shall file with the Building Official a Covenant and Agreement Regarding Maintenance of Yards for an Oversized Building binding such owner, his heirs, and assignees, to set aside a 60-foot required yard as unobstructed space having no improvements. After execution by the owner and Building Official, such covenant shall be recorded in the Alameda County Recorder's Office, and shall continue in effect so long as an oversized- building remains or unless otherwise released by ~ of the Buildin Through Completion B Prior to Occupancy B Prior to Building Permit Application and through Completion B Prior to Building Permit Issuance B Prior to Building Permit Issuance Driveways, The driveways Shall be i minimum 20 wide With no parking on each Side, Construction Type. Show the building constructiOn type, allowable area, and occupancy classifications. Exit Analysis. Provide a detailed exit analysis for the building. Hydrants. The hydrants are shown in drive aisles in two locations. The hydrants shall be a minimum of 40 feet from the building. Provide information from DSRSD on the fire flow available at the site. Codes. The project shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Codes as Set forth in the Development Agreement. F Prior to Issuance of Building Permit F Prior to Issuance of Building Permit F Prior to Issuance of Building Permit F Prior to Issuance of Building Permit F Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 10 84. Improvement Agreement and Security. The Alameda County Surplus Property Authority PW, PL (ACSPA) previously entered into a Tract Developer Agreement with the City to c°nstruct Prior to Martinelli Way (formerly Digital Drive) from Hacienda Drive to Arnold Road and Arnold Road Issuance of from Dublin Boulevard to future Altamirano Avenue pursuant to City Council Resolutions 74-02 Building permit and 121-03. The right-of-way for said roads was previously dedicated on Parcel Map 7714 (Book 260 of Parcel Maps at Pages 30-33). The improvements governed by the agreement are necessary to serve the IKEA/Opus sites, although the street configurations have changed to reflect changes to the current site layout and right-of-way configuration. Said agreement must be amended to reflect these changes. The Applicant/Developer shall process an amendment to the Agreement prior to or concurrent with building permit issuance to guarantee the required improvements. Supplemental or replacement Improvement Security may also be required to be posted to guarantee the faithful performance of the required improvements and the payment for labor and materials. Such Security, if required, shall be in the form of cash, a certified or cashier's check, a letter of credit, or surety bonds executed by the APplicant/Developer and by a corporate surety authorized to do business in Califomia. The amount of the Security guaranteeing faithful performance shall be 100% of the estimated cost of the Work per the new street configuration. The amount of the Security guaranteeing the payment for labor and materials shall be 100% of the estimated cost of the work per the new street configuration. The Applicant/Developer shall provide an estimate of these costs for approval by the City Engineer with the first submittal of the final map and improvement plans for checking. The City will release the Security posted with the original Agreement at the time the Applicant/Developer posts replacement Security. Alternatively, the Appl!cant/Developer may post supplemental Security such that the original Security plus the supplemental Security total the current estimated cost of the work. 85. Release of Security. When all improvements governed by the Improvement Agreement are PW complete t° the satisfaction of the' City Engineer, the City Council will consider accepting the Acceptance of improvements and releasing the Security. Prior to the Council's acceptance, the Improvements Applicant/Developer shall furnish the following to the City: A Maintenance Bond or other replacement security in an amount equal to 25% of the estimated cost of the work to guarantee against defects for a one-year period. As-Built or Record Drawings printed on Mylar of ail Improvement Plans and maps associated with the project. A Declaration or Report by the project Geotechnical Engineer confirming that all geotechnical and grading work'associated with the project has be.en performed in accordance with the Engineer's recommendations. Payment of any outstanding City fees or other debts. Any other information deemed reasonably necessary by the City Engineer. 11 86. Potential Future IKEA Exit Driveway Conversion on Arnold Road. Applicant/Devel0P6r has PL proposed a two-lane, one-way, exit-only driveway from the IKEA parking lot onto Arnold Road PW -'x ("the Proposed Driveway, see Exhibk A"). Future traffic conditions on the surrounding public streets may necessitate the conversion of the Driveway to a two-lane, two-way, entrance-exit Prior to driveway ("the Converted Driveway see Exhibit B"). Applicant/Developer may on an interim Building Permit Issuance and basis install and operate the Proposed Driveway and, provided Applicant/Developer complies with on-going as the terms of this condition, may defer construction of the Converted Driveway. If it chooses to stated in the text install the Proposed Driveway rather than the Converted Driveway, Applicant/Developer shall, of the condition prior to issuance of the first building permit, enter into a Deferred Improvement Agreement that guarantees the completion of the Converted Driveway consistent with the following terms: · 1. Subsequent to IKEA being open for business, the City will coordinate the traffic signal at Martinelli Way/Project main driveway with the traffic signal at Hacienda Drive/Martinelli Way on Saturdays, using an optimal background cycle length, to synchronize the westbound left-turn movement from Martinelli Way onto the Project main driveway with the northbound left-turn movement from Hacienda Drive onto Martinelli Way. 2. IKEA will at IKEA's expense, convert the Proposed Driveway into the Converted Driveway if the City Engineer determines that either one of the following triggering criteria ("the Triggering Criteria") and the City determines that the completion of the Converted Driveway will improve the overall traffic circulation on the public street, while also considering measures to maintain the efficiency oflKEA's on-site circulation. The " Triggering Criteria are as folloWs: ~, a. The CCTA LOS at the intersection of Martinelli Way/Project main driveway exceeds level of service "D" (i.e., the V/C ratio exceeds 0.90). b. The actual size of vehicle queues, observed on three separate Saturdays, for the left-turn movement from Martinell[Way onto the Project main driveway exceeds the available storage capacity of the designated left-mm lanes for this movement during 25 percent or more of the serviced background traffic signal cycles during the Saturday peak hour. The City Engineer's determination of whether the Triggering Criteria are met shall be made (a) no earlier than six months after both of the following events'shall have occurred (i) the IKEA store has opened for business to the general public and (ii) the Lifestyle Center is 90% occupied and (b) no later than 18 months after both of the preceding events I have occurred ('`the Study Period"). IKEA shall be relieved of any and all obligations imposed by the Deferred Improvement Agreement, including the posting of a bond or other financial guarantee upon the expiration of the Study Period. 3. The City Engineer's determination that the Triggering Criteria have been met shall be based on the following. The City shall notify IKEA in writing that it believes then-existing traffic conditions might be improved by the conversion of the Proposed Driveway to the Converted Driveway ("the Notice"). The City shall, at IKEA's expense, retain a traffic- engineering consultant to investigate the existing traffic conditions and determine whether the Triggering Criteria have been met ("the Traffic Study"). If IKEA shall fail to provide a deposit to the City for the estimated costs of the Traffic Study within 30 days of the City mailing the Notice, the Triggering Criteria shall be automatically deemed to have been met. The traffic-engineering consultant shall, at the City's direction, make the following field studies of actual traffic conditions on Martinelli Way, Hacienda Drive and Arnold Road and on the IKEA site during the Saturday peak period. The field studies shall be --. coordinated with IKEA according to the Study Period defined above and shall in no event ~ be conducted during IKEA's periodic high volume periods, such as sales events or catalogue drops. 12 a. Ingress/egress patterns to/from the projedt site. b. On-site circulation efficiency and patterns within the IKEA project. c. Overall traffic Conditions at the intersection of Martinelli Way/Project main driveway. d. Queuing conditions on westbound Martinelli Way as a result of the left-turn movement from Martinelli Way onto the Project main driveway. e. Impact to traffic flow on Hacienda Drive as a result of queuing conditions on westbound Martinelli Way between Hacienda Drive and the Project main driveway. f. Other conditions which might be mutually agreed upon by both the City and IKEA at the time this study is to be performed.. The traffic-engineering consultant shall specifically perform the following tasks: i. Collect turning movement counts at the intersections of Hacienda Drive/Martinelli Way, Martinelli Way/Project main driveway and Martinelli Way/Arnold Road, and determine the Saturday peak hour. ii. Calculate the Level of Service (LOS) at the Martinelli Way/ProjeCt main driveway intersection during the Saturday peak hour, based on the intersection LOS methodology outlined in Technical Procedures (Contra Costa Transportation Authority [CCTA], 1997). iii. Conduct field observations and record the actual size of vehicle queues in the designated westbound left-turn lanes from Martinelli Way onto the Project main driveway during the Saturday peak hour. 4. The Converted Driveway shall be completed within six months of the date of the City informing IKEA of the City Engineer's determination that the Triggering Criteria have been met as provided in Section 2 above. In the event IKEA fails to construct the converted driveway subsequent to the City informing IKEA of such decision and within the aforementioned timeframe, the City will have the right, at its sole discretion, to facilitate the improvements on the IKEA property, and IKEA shall grant the City permission to make such impr6'~ements. 5. The Applicant/Developer shall provide secUrity to guarantee the faithful performance of the required improvements and the payment for labor and materials. Security shall be in the form 'of cash, a certified or cashier's check, a letter of credit, or surety bonds executed by the Applicant/Developer and by a corporate surety authorized to do business in California. The amount of the security shall be based on the estimated cost of the improvements (which amount shall be included in the improvement agreement) and shall be based on the completion of the following improvements: a. Striping and minor paving necessary on the IKEA site to convert the Proposed driveway to the Converted Driveway. b. Removal of the continuous median on Arnold Road and construction of an approximately 230-foot long southbound left-turn pocket. c. Install a traffic signal on Arnold Road at the mid-block IKEA drivewaY to accommodate the two-way traffic movements. d. Miscellaneous landscaping and hardscape improvements as necessaw to tie the work into existing conditions. e. The required work shall not include changes to the IKEA building. 13 ' 6. Three months after the converted'dmveway ~s constructed, IKEA may, 'at xts own cosT, rare ~, a traffic-engineering consultant to observe the post-conversion conditions. Should the ~ observed post-conversion conditions not be an improvement over the base conditions and such conversion is significantly detrimental to IKEA!s on-site circulation, IKEA may request that the City consider converting the Converted Driveway back to the Proposed Driveway or implementing other traffic improvement measures, at IKEA's expense. The City, at its sole discretion, shall determine if this is appropriate based upon the evidence that such action will improve IKEA's on-site circulation without adversely impacting traffic circulation on the surrounding public streets. 87. Improvement and Grading Plans. All improvement and grading plans submitted to the Public PW Works Department' for review/approval shall be prepared in accordance with the approved Prior to VestingTentative Map, these Conditions of Approval, and the City of Dublin Municipal Code issuance of including Chapter 7.16 (Grading Ordinance). When submitting plans for review/approval, the Grading Applicant/Developer shall also fill-out and submit a City of Dublin Improvement Plan Review Sitework Permit Checklist (three 8-1/2" x 11" pages). Said checklist includes necessary design criteria and other pertinent information to assure that plans are submitted in accordance with established City standards. The plans shall also reference the current City of Dublin Standard Plans (booklet), and shall include applicable City of Dublin Improvement Plan General Notes (three 8-1/2" x 11" pages). For on-site improvements, the Applicant/Developer shall adhere to the City's On-site Checklist (eight 8-1/2" x 11" pages). All of these reference documents are available from the . Public Works Department (call telephone 925-833~6630 for more information). 88. Grading/Sitework Permit. All improvement work must be performed per a Grading/Sitework PW Permit issued by the Public Works Department. Said permit will be based on the final set of civil ~ Prior to ~.~,, plans to be approved once all of the plan check comments have been resolved. Please refer to the issuance of ~ handout titled Grading/Site Improvement Permit Application Instructions and attached application Grading/ Sitework Permit (three 8-1/2" x 11" pages) for more information. The Applicant/Developer must.fill in and return the applicant information contained on pages 2 and 3. The current cost of the permit is $10.00. 89. Storm Drainage Study/Required Improvements. Applicant/Developer shall prepare a Storm PW Drainage Study for the properties and roads to be developed/constructed with the project. The Prior to Study, including a hydrology map and hydraulic calculations, shall supplement the Santa Rim issuance of Drainage Master Plan prepared for the larger surrounding watershed by BKF Engineers in May Grading/ Sitework Permit 1999. According to zone 7, this property drains to Zone 7's Line G 2-1, a tributary to Chabot Canal. Since the project will substantially increase the imperviousness of the site, the Study must demonstrate that design flows do not adversely impact existing hydraulics downstream of the project. The Study is therefore subject to review and approval by both the City of Dublin and Zone 7. All storm drain improvements and mitigation measures identified in the Study and/or specified by the City Engineer shall become requirements of this project. To accommodate potential overland flow, the parking lot grading and on-site storm drain system within the Storm Drain Easement (SDE) area originally granted on Parcel Map 7233, and proposed to be vacated as part of this development, shall be .designed to accept overland runoff from the storm system within Hacienda Drive. 14 90. Water QualiW/Best Management Practices, Pursuant to the Alameda Countywide National PW Pollution Discharges Elimination Permit (NPDES) No. CAS0029831 with the California Regional Prior to Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the applicant shall design and operate the site in a issuance of manner consiStent with the Start at the Source publication, and according to Best Management Grading/ Practices to minimize storm water pollution. In addition to the biofiltration swales proposed along Sitework Permit the perimeter of the site and the in-line filtration devices, all trash dumpsters and compactors which and on-going are not sealed shall have roofs to prevent contaminants from washing into the storm drain system. The applicant shall also file a Notice of Intent with the RWQCB and shall prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, and shall implement and maintain an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan between October 1 st and April 15th during construction, or as otherwise required by the City Engineer. 91. Storm Water Treatment Measures Maintenance Agreement. Applicant/Developer shall enter PW into an agreement with the City of Dublin that guarantees the property owner's perpetual Prior to maintenance obligation for all storm water treatment measures installed as part of the project. Said acceptance of [. agreement is required pursuant to Provision C.3.e.ii of RWQCB Order R2-2003-002 ! for the improvements reissuance of the Alameda Countywide NPDES municipal storm water permit. Said permit by City Council requires the City to provide verification and assurance that all treatment devices will be properly operated and maintained. 15 ~. ~~i~e ~hii-~g~m~iPr0g~/c~o-i~u~'~i0~n Impact Reduction Plan. rlor to .~ I Applicant/Developer shall conform to the following Construction Noise Management acceptance of ~ I P~ogram/Construction Impact Reduction Plan. The following measures shall be taken to reduce [ nuprovements construction impacts: by City Council a. Off-site truck traffic shall be routed as directly as practical to and from the freeway (t- 580) to the job site. Primary route shall be from 1-580 to Hacienda Drive. An Oversized Load Permit shall be obtained from the City prior to hauling of any oversized loads on City streets. b. The construction site shall be watered at regular intervals during al! grading activities. The frequency of watering should increase if wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Watering should include all excavated and graded areas and material to be transported off-site. Use recycled or other non-potable water resources where feasible. c. Construction equipment shall not be left idling while not in use. d. Construction equipment shall be fitted with noise muffling devices. e. Mud and dust carried onto street surfaces by construction vehicles shall be cleaned-up on a daily basis. f. Excavation haul trucks shall use tarpaulins or other effective covers, g. Upon completion of construction, measures shall be taken to reduce wind erosion. Replanting and repaving should be completed as soon as possible. h. After grading is completed, fugitive dust on exposed soil surfaces shall be controlled using the following methods: 1. Inactive portions of the construction site shall be seeded and watered until grass grOwth is evident. 2. All portions of the site shall be sufficiently watered to prevent dust. 3. On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph. ~ 4. Use of petroleum-based palliatives shall meet the road oil requirements of the Air Quality District. Non-petroleum based tachifiers may be required by th.e City Engineer. i. The Department of Public Works shall handle all dust complaints. The City Engineer may require the services of an air quality consultant to advise the City on the severity of the dust problem and additional ways to mitigate impact on residents, including temporarily halth~g project construction. Dust concerns in adjoining communities as well as the City of Dublin shall be addressed. Control measures shall be related to wind conditions. Air quality monitoring of PM-I 0 and PM-2.5 levels shall be provided as required by the City Engineer. j. Construction interference with regional non-project traffic shall be minimized by: 1. Scheduling receipt of construction materials to non-peak travel periods. 2. Routing construction traffic through areas of least impact senSitivity. 3. Routing construction traffic to minimize construction interference with regional non-project traffic movement. 4. Limiting lane closures and detours to off-peak travel periods. 5. Providing ride-share incentives for contractor and subcontractor. personnel. ' k. Emissions control of on-site equipment shall be minimized through a routine mandatory program of Iow-emissions tune-ups. · 93. Geotechnical Report and Recommendations. The Applicant/Developer shall incorporate the PW recommendations of the Geotechnical Investigations prepared by TreadweI1 & Rollo for the project Prior to dated 6/25/03 (IKEA site) and 6/27/04 (Lifestyle Center site) or as may be amended by subsequent issuance of f-'~. report, and additional mitigation measures required by the City Engineer, into the project design. Grading Sitework Permit The Geotechnical Engineer shall certify that the project design conforms to the report and during recommendations prior to issuance of a Grading/Sitework Permit. All report recommendations construction · shall be followed during the course of grading and construction. 16 94. Traffic Study and Required Roadway Improvements. The Applicant/Developer shall construct PW all necessary on-site and off-site traffic mitigation/roadway improvements as discussed in Final Improvements Report: IKEA Retail Center Transportation Study prepared by Fehr & Peers Transportation to be guaranteed Consultants dated August 2003. Said mitigations include: prior to issuance of Grading a. Conslzucting Martinelli Way between Hacienda Drive and Arnold Road. Sitework Permit; Fees to b. Modification of the existing traffic signal at the Hacienda Drive/Martinelli be paid prior to Way/Hacienda Crossings intersection to accommodate the western Martinelli Way issuance of extension. Building c. Designing Martinelli Way to accommodate the triple northbound to westbound left Permit(s) · mm lanes from Hacienda Drive. d. Constru6ting two left mm lanes on Martinelli Way at the private street main entrance. e. Installation of a new traffic signal at the Martinelli Way/IKEA/Opus private street main entrance. f. Constructing a secondary site access right-mm out only driveway on Martinelli Way east of Arnold Road. g. Constructing.the Arnold Road extension south from Dublin Boulevard to the future Altamirano Avenue intersection. h. Modification of the existing traffic signal at the Arnold Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection to accommodate the southern Arnold Road extension. i. Installation of a new traffic signal at the Martinelli Way/Arnold Road intersection. j. Entering into a Deferred Improvement Agreement with the City that establishes the criteria and thresholds for conversion of the exit-only driveway to an entrance/exit driveway controlled by a new traffic signal at the Arnold Road/western IKEA entrance driveway (mid-way between Martinelli Way and Altamirano Avenue), as provided in Condition 86 above. 17 95. Traffic-related Fee Advances orPro-Rat~'Share C6stsi~'ApPii6ant/Devel°per shall advance Prior to fees Or contribute pro-rata share of costs for traffic impacts as follows: issuance of ~ a. Contribution of the project's pro-rata share of the costs, payable at Building Permit Building issuance, associated with widening the Southbound Am01d Road approach at Permit(s) or as Dublin Boulevard to include one left-mm lane, one through lane, and one right- required by the turn lane. Said pro-rata share will be calculated as follows:. Project Average Daily DA Trips (ADT) divided by the Pending and Buildout Project ADT for Eastern Dublin which equates to 2.61% (5,518/211,226), multiplied by the estimated project cost of $253,000 which results in a pro-ram share of $6,609.29. This contribution amount is subject to inflationary increases based on the ENR Construction Cost Index (20 City Average) if not paid this fiscal year. This requirement will be null' and void if the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee is updated prior to issuance of Building Permits for the IKEA and/or Opus projects because the fee update accounts for these costs. b. The applicant shall advance to the City, at the time and in the manner set forth ~in the Development Agreement, monies for acquisition of right-of-way for needed for the improvements planned for the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road and for construction of such improvements. c. Contribution of the project's pro-rata share of the costs, payable at Building Permit issuance, associated with adding a shared right/left mm lane on the 1-580 eastbound off-ramp at Hacienda Drive as identified in the East Dublin Properties EIR. Said pro-rata share will be calculated as follows: Project Average DailY Trips (ADT) divided by the Pending and Buildout Project ADT for Eastern Dublin which equates to 2.61% (5,518/211,226), multiplied by the estimated project cost of $1,435,000 which results in a pro-rata share of $37~487.48. This contribution amount is subject t,o inflationary increases based on the ENR Construction Cost ~, Index (20 City Average) if not paid°this fiscal year. This requirement will be null and void if the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee is updated prior to issuance of ' Building Permits for the IKEA and/or Opus projects because the fee update ~.. ,--~:'....I . accounts for these costs. 96. Traffic Signal Interconnect and Close CirCuit.TeleVision Monitoring. The Martinelli Way and PW Arnold Road improvements shall include extending the current fiber-optic traffic signal Prior to interconnect system from Dublin Boulevard to the traffic signals at Martinelli/Arnold, issuance of Martinelli/Project main driveway, Martinelli/Hacienda, Arnold/IKEA driveway, and Grading Arnold/Altamirano for central communications with these signals. In addition, the signal design Sitework Permit for each intersection shall include insmlling and activating a closed circuit television (CCTV) camera for the City's remote monitoring and management of traffic flow on the street system around the project site. 97. Arnold Road Future Traffic Signal Conduits. Applicant/Developer shall design and install all PW necessary underground conduits and splice boxes at the Arnold Road driveway into IKEA and at Prior to the Arnold Road at future Altamirano Avenue intersection to facilitate the future construction of a issuance of traffic signal at these intersections. Said traffic signals will be warranted either when the adjacent Grading Sitework Permit property to the west develops in the future, when the BART parking garage is constructed, or pursuant to condition #86. 18 98. Martinelli Way and Arnold Road Improvements. Applicant/Developer shall construct PW Martinelli Way (formerly Digital Drive) and Arnold Road in. a configuration that is generally Prior to consistent, except as modified by these Conditions, with the approved plans titled Street issuance of Improvement Plans associated with Parcel Map 7714 for Portions of Arnold Road and Digital ' Grading/ Drive prepared for Commerce One Property by Brian Kangas Foulk (30 sheets), and per City Sitework Permit Standards applicable at the time of permit issuance. All street improvements, sidewalks and access ramps, street lights and circuitry, street signs, and other public infrastructure shall be located in the public right-of-way. Decorative paving or concrete banding shall be used to designate the boundary between the public right-of-way and private property at all flush driveways. Parking shall be prohibited on both portions of Martinelli Drive and Arnold Road constructed by the project. 99. Streetscape Design Standards. The streetseape design for Martinelli Way and Arnold Road shall PW be in accordance with the Streetscape Master Plan adopted as Ordinance No. 21-02 on 11/19/02 for Prior to the Dublin Transit Center Project, PA 00-103. A copy of said Master Plan is available for issuance of reference from the Community Development Department, ph 925-833-6610. Grading Sitework Permit 100 Stop Controls. In addition to the locations shown on the exhibks, stop control devices shall be PW provided as follows: Prior to Issuance of a. On southbound Arnold Road at future Altamirano Avenue. Grading b. On both westbound exits from IKEA on Arnold Road. Sitework Permit c. At the northbound exit from the truck ramp at Arnold Road. d. At the right-mm only exit driveway on Martinelli Way. 101 Vehicle Code Enforcement on Private Property. The Applicant/Developer shall support the City PW in adopting an Ordinance pursuant to California Vehicle Code (CVC) §21107.6-8 for the Prior to t enforcement of the CVC along the private street main entrance (Parcel A) and parking drive aisles, acceptance of Upon the effective date of the Ordinance, all CVC provisions will be enforceable on the private improvements street including speeds, traffic control devices, and other driving regulations. Although the CVC by City Council does not allow general enforcement of traffic regulations within the entire parking field, it does specifically allow enforcement of sections pertaining to unsafe speed, exhibitionist speed, reckless driving, and off-road vehicles. Appropriate signs shall be posted within the property that indicate the area is subject to public traffic regulations and control. 102.No Parking on Private Street. No Parking will be allowed on both sides of the private street PW (Parcel A). This parking restriction shall be indicated with either red-painted curbs or with R26F On-going "No Stopping - Fire Lane" signs installed on both sides at a spacing not to exceed 200'. Parking shall also be restricted along designated drive aisles to assure unobstructed access through the site. 1031Delivery Truck Access Signs. Signs shall be posted directing all tractor-trailer delive~ trucks to PW access the site via the drive aisle that extends east from the south end of Arnold Road. Delivery Prior to trucks shall be prohibited from using the Private street (Parcel A) to access the site. issuance of Occupancy ' Permit 104 Traffic Calming Devices. The Applicant/Developer shall install "speed tables" for all mid-aisle PW pedestrian crossings in the parking lot by using an enhanced paving material within the crossing, Prior to and .by slightly elevating the crossing above the surrounding paving with ramps on each end. In issuance of lieu of speed tables within the under-building parking area, rumble strips may be used. Occupancy Permit 19 105 Streetlights. StreetlightS~ for City streets.construCted by ~i~ ¢~3~ ~o~ii be th~ ~ approveo i PW Transit Center fixtures located in the public right-of-way. Either City approved Transit Center Prior to ~ fixtures or approved decorative lights may be used on private streets. All decorative street lights acceptance of shall be maintained by the property owner or by an Owner's Association. A street lighting plan improvements which demonstrates compliance with this condition shall be submitted prior to recordation of the by City Council Final Map and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. Applicant/Developer shall also fumish to City one spare street light to be delivered to the City' s Corporation Yard. Applicant/Developer shall not contest the City's efforts to annex the project into the Dublin Ranch Street Light Maintenance Assessment District 1999-1, and shall provide all necessary documentation reqUired by the City to complete the annexation process.. The Applicant/Developer shall comply with any City requirements necessary to conform to Proposition 218 regulations. 106~ Landscape Maintenance. Applicant/Developer sh, all install and perpetually maintain all street PW trees and other plant materials installed along the property street frontages except as provided in Prior to Condition No. '114. The irrigation system(s) to serve these landscaped areas shall be connected to acceptance of the Applicant/Developer's private on-site irrigation system. Landscaping to be installed by the improvements Applicant/Developer within the median islands on Martinelli Way and Arnold Road will be by City Council maintained by the City of Dublin after City-approved installation. A separate water service and irrigation system shall be installed to serve these medians. 107 Landscaping at Intersections. Landscaping at intersections shall be such that sight distance is not PW obstructed for drivers. Except for trees, landscaping shall not be higher than 30 inches above the Prior to issuance of curb in these areas. Occupancy Permit 108 Joint Utility Trenches/Undergrounding/Utility Plans, Applicant/Developer shall construct all PW joint utility trenches (including electric, telecommunications, cable TV, and gas) in accordance Prior to ~, with standards enforced by the appropriate utility agency..To the maximum extent practical, all acceptance of ~ vaults, electric transformers, cable TV boxes, blow-off'valves and other utility features shall be improvements placed underground and located behind the prgposed sidewalk within the public service easement, by City Council unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Conduit shall be underthe public sidewalk within the right of way to allow for street tree planting. Utility plans showing the location of all proposed utilities shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to installation. 1091 Street Name Sign Content, Street name signs shall display the name of the street together with a PW City standard shamrock logo. Posts shall be galvanized steel pipe, break away posts. Prior to acceptance of improvements by City Council 110 Construction Hours Standard construction and grading hours shall be limited to weekdays PW (Monday through Friday) and non-City holidays between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. The Prior to Applicant/Developer may request reasonable modifications to such determined days and hours, acceptance of taking into account the seasons, impacts on neighboring properties, and other appropriate factors, improvements by submitting a request form to the City Engineer/Public Works Director. For work on Saturdays, by City Council said request shall be submitted no later than 5:00 pm the prior Wednesday. Overtime inspection rates will apply for all after-hours, Saturday, and/or holiday work. 111 Damage/Repairs. The APPlicant/Developer shall be responsible for the repair of any damaged PW pavement, curb & gutter, sidewalk3 or other public street facility resulting from construction Prior to activities associated with the development of the project to the reasonable satisfaction of the City acceptance of improvements Engineer. by City Council 20 112 Occi/p~n~y permit Reqairements. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the physical PW condition of the project site shall meet minimum health and safety standards including, but not Prior to limited to the following: issuance of Occupancy Permit a. The streets and walkways providing access to each building shall be complete, as determined by the City Engineer, to allow for safe, unobstructed pedestrian and vehicle access to and from the site. b. All traffic control devices, on streets providing access to the site shall be in place and fully functional. c. All street name signs and address numbers for streets providing access to the buildings shall be in place and visible. d. Lighting for the streets and site shall be adequate for safety and security. All streetlights on streets providing access to the buildings shall be energized and functioning. Exterior lighting shall be provided for building entrances/exits and pedestrian walkways. Security lighting shall be provided as required by Dublin Police. e. All construction equipment, materials, or on-going work shall be separated from the public I by use Of fencing, barricades, caution ribbon, or other means approved by the City Engineer. f. Ail fire hydrants shall be operable and easily accessible to City and ACFD personnel. g. Ail site features designed to serve the disabled (i.e. H/C parking stalls, accessible walkways, signage) shall be installed and fully functional. l 13 City Entrance Sign. The Applicant/Developer shall construct a City of Dublin entrance sign PW within the Hacienda Drive median just north of the !-580 interchange, as shown on the attachments Prior to to the 3/03/98 City Council Agenda Statement, item 7.1 available from the City Clerk's Office. acceptance of improvements '-'. '~ by City Council 114. Landscaping 1-580 Freeway Right-of-Way. The Applicant/Developer shall design, install, and PW maintain'landscaping within 1-580 freeway right-of-way along the frontage of the site. A separate Prior to irrigation system shall be installed to serve this area. Said landscaping is allowed pursuant to the acceptance of City's agreement with Caltrans titled Agreement for Maintenance of Landscaping on State improvements Highways in the City of Dublin and dated 11/24/99, provided an EncrOachment Permit is obtained by City Council from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in advance of the installation work. The property owners shall also enter into a site-specific maintenance agreement with the City that delegates the landscape maintenance obligation to the property owner until 1/01/19. After 1/01/19, the maintenance obligation will revert back to Caltrans unless the original agreement is extended 115 ltazardons Waste. According to a letter the City received from Alameda County Health Care PW Services Agency (ACHCSA) dated 1/31/03, incinerator debris has been discovered immediately Prior to west of the intersection of Hacienda Drive at Martinelli Way. Apparently a thin layer of waste ~ssuance of remains in the soil in the Martinelli Way right-of-way. Because of elevated lead levels in the - Grading waste, precautions should be observed by anyone excavating in the area. Alameda County Health Sitework Permit shall pre-approve any subsurface work. The applicant shall speak with Karen Moroz at ph. 510- 567-6757 for more information. I 16.Environmental Site Assessment. According to the environmental assessment report prepared by PW LFR Levine-Fricke dated 7/31/03, "weathered diesel was discovered in the vicinity of the former Prior to fuel depot". The report recommends that a closure letter be obtained from ACHCSA after all issuance of necessary remediation work has been completed. A copy of the closure.letter shall be submitted to Grading the City. Sitework Permit 21 117 Undergrounding Existing Electric Transmission Line. The existing 12 KV overhead electrical PW transmission line that extends along the south side of the site shall be placed underground as part of Prior to ~: the project. The applicant shall coordinate this work with PG&E and any other affected utility acceptance of improvements providers, by City Council 118 Vehicle Parking. Applicant/Developer shall construct on-site paved parking areas and spaces PW according to the zoning requirements of the use. All spaces shall be identified using double white Prior to 4" stripes according to Figure 76-3 and §8.76.070(A)17 of the Dublin Municipal Cod& Any issuance of compact-size spaces shall have the word "COMPACT" stenciled on the pavement within each Occupancy Permit space, t2',-wide concrete step-out curbs shall be constructed at each parking space where one or both sides abuts a landscaped area or planter. 119 Clarifications to Conditions of Approval. In the event that there needs to be clarification to the PW Conditions of Approval, the Director of Community Development and the Public Works Director Prior to have the authority to clarify the intent of these Conditions of Approval to the Developer without issuance of going to a public hearing. The Director of Community Development and the Public Works Director Occupancy also have the authority to make minor modifications to these conditions without going to a public Permit or acceptance of hearing in order for the Developer to fulfill needed improvements or mitigations resulting from improvements impacts to this project, by City Council 120 Abandonment of Wells. Any water well, cathodic protection well, or exploratory boring on the PW project property must be properly abandoned, backfilled, or maintained in accordance with Prior to applicable groundwater protection ordinances: For additional information contact Alameda County issuance of Grading/ FloOd Control, Zone 7. Sitework Permit 121 Fees. The Applicant/Developer shall pay all applicable fees in effect at the time of building permit PW issuance including, but not limited to, Planning fees, Building fees, Dublin San Ramon Services Prior to final District fees, Public Facilities fees, Dublin Unified School District School Impact fees, Public map approval or ~ Works Traffic Impact fees, Alameda County Fire Services fees; Noise Mitigation fees, issuance of building ;Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu fees; Alameda County Flood and Water Conservation District (Zone permits, as 7) Drainage and Water Connection fees; and any other fees as noted in the Development applicable Agreement. 122. Geographic Information System. Applicant/Developer shall provide the Public Works PW Department a digital vectoriZed file on floppy disk or CD of the improvement plans and map for Prior to ~1 the project after the Final Map has been recorded. Digital raster copies are not acceptable. The acceptance of digital vectorized files shall be in AutoCAD 14 or higher drawing format or ESRI Shapefile improvements format. Drawing units shall be decimal with the precision of the Final Map. All objects and entities by City Council in layers shall be colored by layer and named in English. All submitted draWings shall use the Global Coordinate System of USA, California, NAD 83 California State Plane, Zone III, and U.S. foot. Said submittal shall be acceptable to the City's GIS Coordinator. 123 Public Improvements. All public improvements constructed by Developer and to be dedicated to PW City are hereby identified as "pUblic works" under Labor Code section 1771. Accordingly, Prior to Developer. in constructing such improvements, shall comply with the Prevailing Wage Law (Labor acceptance of · improvements Code, sects. 1720 and following), by City Council 22 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 16th day of March, 2004, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk G:~AgX2002\02-034 IKEA\City Council\CC SDR Reso 34-04.doc 23 ! ! I I I I I I i I RESOLUTION NO. -04 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING PA 02-034, IKEA MASTER SIGN PROGRAM WHEREAS, IKEA Property, Inc. submitted applications for a Master Sign Program for the proposed a retail center and related improvements on a 27.54 acre site north of 1-580, between Arnold Road and Hacienda Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the proposed Master Sign program would include a 99-foot high freestanding sign located on the southern portion of the property; and WHEREAS, a complete application for a Master Sign Program is available and on file in the Department of Community Development; and WHEREAS, Staff recommended in the Staff report that the freestanding pylon sign be lowered to have a maximum height of 75 feet above grade; and WHEREAS, the City prepared and circulated a Draft Supplemental EIR analyzing the potential environmental effects of the Project. The City prepared a Final Supplemental EIR comprised of written responses to all comments received on the Draft Supplemental EIR. On February 24, 2004, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 04-10 recommending that the City Council certify the Draft and Final ff" Supplemental EIRs as the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Project, which resolution is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution -04, incorporated herein by reference, certifying the SEIR as adequate and complete pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, and adopting mitigation and alternatives findings as well as a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring Program as required for approval of the Project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on said application on February 24, 2004 for this project; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hold a public hearing on said application on March 16, 2004 for this project; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WltEREAS, the City Council did hear and use their independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding said proposed IKEA Master Sign Program. The Master Sign Program, as conditioned, contributes to an effective and attractive identification of the IKEA furnishings store and the shopping center as a whole by providing clear, legible and succinct signage that will identify and direct automobile and pedestrian traffic to the site. ATTACHMENT 4 The design quality of the site, will be superior to the quality that would.result under the regulations and standards of Section 8.84.40 "Sign Development Regulations"; 8.84.050, Signs Subject To Permits, 8.84.110, "Regulations for Wall Signs and Projecting SignS"; and 8.84.120, Freestanding Sign General Regulations". The MSP allows the use of more than one freestanding sign for the site. All of the proposed signs have been.desi~ ~}~b:e..~°mpatibie ·With the' style and character of the improvements on the site and they are well r~iat~d,'~o'each other,· ' All proposed signage is visible, legible, does not cause glare or disrupt the flow to pedestrian or vehicular traffic and conforms with the Design Criteria in section 8.84.060, of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed freestanding signs and pylon relates to the layout of the IKEA furnishings store and the shopping center as a whole. mo The approval of the Master Sign Program is consistent with the intent of Section 8.104 "Site Development Review (SDR). The amendment, as conditioned, compliments and improves the site's development design by providing a comprehensive sign program that incorporates the architectural style and design of the proposed building. Additionally, all signage will promote safe traffic circulation within the site. The approval of the IKEA Master Sign Program, as conditioned, complies With the General Plan and the general requirements established in the Zoning Ordinance because it establishes a comprehensive, well-designed signage program for the development. The approval of the IKEA Master Sign Program, as conditioned, will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare because it promotes a sign program that will provide effective and attractive identification for the site. The proposed amendment to the IKEA Master Sign Program conSidered site layout, vehicular access, circulation, parking, setbacks, height, walls, public safety and similar elements to ensure that the MSP design assists in the provision of a desirable environment for the center. Architectural considerations, including the character, Scale and quality of the design~ the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials and colors, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting, and similar elements have been incorporated into the Amendment where appropriate, in order to insure the compatibility of the freestanding signs with the site design concept and the character of adjacent buildings and uses. Landscape considerations including the requirement for planters for the freestanding signs that are sufficient width, length and height to protect the base of the sign from damage due to vehicular traffic have been required to insure visual relief and an attractive environment for the public. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby approve the IKEA Master Sign Program for PA 02-034, subject to the lowering of the freestanding pylon sign (Sign 2 as shown on sheet G2.4 of Exhibit C) to a maximum of 75 feet above finished grade. Additionally, the two lower tenant panels of the freestanding pylon sign (Sign 2 as shown on sheet G2.4 of Exhibit C) shall be eliminated. This approval shall take effect after the effective date the IKEA Project General Plan amendment. Except as modified herein, this approval shall be generally depicted on the plans prepared by Arrow Sign and Ware Malcolmb, labeled Exhibit C, stamped approved and on file with the Dublin Planning Department and subject to the following conditions of approval: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Unless stated otherwise, all ConditionS of Approval shall be complied with Prior to the issuance 'of building permits or establishment of use, and shah be subject to Department of Community 2 Development review and approval. The following codes represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitoring compliance of the conditions of approval. [PL] Planning, [BI Building, [PO] Police, [PW] Public Works, [FI Alameda County Fire Department, [DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District, [CO] Alameda County Department of Environmental Health. GENERAL SIGN REQUIREMENTS: Signs approved under this Master Sign Program shall generally conform to the following conditions, dimensions, restrictions and notations made and indicated on the plans labeled Exhibit C and the Dublin Zoning Regulations. The letter area for Sign 2 on Sheet G2.4 of Exhibit C (hereinafter, Pylon Sign), shall be limited to 45% of the panel area. The color of the copy of tenant panels, excluding the IKEA panel, shall be limited to the use of White Arcylite #015-2 (and as described on Sign Specifications on sheet G2.4 of Exhibit C). The use of logos on the tenant panels shall be su~ect to the review and approval of Director of Community Development. 2. No additional tenant panels shall be allowed on the Pylon Sign. The final design of the of the lower two tenant panels on the Pylon Sign shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development, the review shall include maximum percentage of sign area, maximum letter height, minimum margin and overall conformance with the design concept Pylon Sign. The use and design of the Dublin Logo on the Pylon Sign, shall be subject to the discretion of the Director of Community Development. The material selection of the vertical column veneer, shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development. 6. The use of lighting for' the Pylon Sign shall be designed in such a way to ensure that no light spillage occurs onto any public right-of-way. The final design of Sign 1, G2.2, shown on sheet G1.0a placed on the entry feature and circled in red on Exhibit C, shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development. 8. The placement of all signs within the landscaped areas, shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development for compliance with the approved landscape plan. [PL] 9. The design, colors, sign copy, and illumination of the signs shall be as shown and indicated on the . in Exhibit C. [PL] 10. All signs shall be maintained in a well-kept manner and remain in proper working order at ali times. All signs and sign components designed to illuminate shall remain operational. [PL] 11. The appticantJdeveloper shall install any special safety lighting or other design requirements as required or recorranended by Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission. 12. Wall-mounted signs shall be placed flat and directly against the building Wall. If signs change, all mounting holes from previous tenant signs shall be repaired and walls repainted prior to mounting 3 the new signs, subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development. If t~e use ceases to operate for (90) ninety days, the signs shall be removed and mounting holes and walls shall be repaired and repainted. [PL] 13. The use of any Temporary Promotional Signs (i.e., banners, pennants, flags, balloons, searchlights and similar advertising devises) for special advertising, grand Opening and or promotional use shall first require a separate Zoning Clearance approval and shall comply with the provisions established in Sign Regulations, Chapter 8.84 of the Zoning Ordinance. [PL] 14. This Master Sign Program/Sign Site Development Review approval shall be revocable for cause in accordance with ChapTer 8.84.220 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. [PL] 15. Building permits for installation of the signs shall be secured and construction of the signs commenced within 12 months of the effective date of approval of this Master Sign Program or said approval shall be void. [B, PL] 16. Any new or proposed wall signs or additional freestanding signs for the shall first be subject to review by the Community Development Department and shall conform to this Master Sign Program. Said signage shall comply with the sign regulation provisions of Chapter 8.84.040, 8.84.060, 8.84.110 and 8.84.120, of the Zoning Ordinance. All signage shall comply with the provisions established in this Master Sign Program approval. Modifications to the adopted Master Sign Program and or to the specific conditions stated, may be considered by the Zoning Administrator upon application for a Sign Site Development Review pursuant to Chapter 8.104 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. [PL] 17. The use of any A-Frame, portable or sandwich board signs on or off the site is prohibited. [PL, PW] 18. Any vehicles with signage shall conform to the requirements of the Sign Regulations. [PL, PW,~ PO] PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 16th day of March, 2004, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk G:~A#~2002\02-034 IKEA\City Council~cc MSP Reso 3-4-04.doc 4 ORDINANCE NO. xx-04 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR P~ 02-034 IKEA PROJECT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section i. R~CITALS Bo Do IKEA Property, Inc. submitted applications for an IKEA store, a retail center and related improvements on a 27.54 acre site north of 1-580, between Arnold Road and Hacienda Boulevard. The project proposes an approximately 317,000 square foot IKEA store on the westerly portion of the site, and an approximately 137,000 square foot retail center on the easterly portion of the site. The development includes applications to amend the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan from Campus Office to General Commercial; to rezone the site to PD-Planned Development and adopt related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans; to approve a Site Development Review for the IKEA store; and to approve a vesting tentative parcel map and development agreement. The applications are collectively known as the "Prqiect"; and II. The City prepared and circulated a Draft Supplemental EIR analyzing the potential environmental effects of the Project. The City prepared a Final Supplemental EIR comprised of written responses to all comments received on the Draft Supplemental EIR. On February 24, 2004, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 04-10 recommending that the City Council certify the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs as the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for. the Project, which resolution is incorporated herein by reference. On March 24, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution -04, incorporated herein by reference, certifying the SEIR as adequate and complete pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. and adopting mitigation and alternatives findings as well as a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring Program as required for approval of the Project. The text of the Development Agreement is attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. The Development Agreement is required as an implementing measure of the Eastem Dublin Specific Plan and is authorized by Government Code section 65865 and Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code. A public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement was held before the Planning Commission on February 24, 2004, for which public notice was given as provided by law. A public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement was held before the City Council on March 16, 2004 and April 6, 2004, for which public notice was given as provided by law. The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission who considered the item at the February 24, 2004, meeting, including the Planning Commission's reasons for its denial, the Agenda Statement, all comments received in writing and all testimony received at the public hearing. ATTACHMENT Section 2. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS Therefore, on the basis of (a) the foregoing Recitals which are incorporated herein, (b) the City of Dublin's General Plan, (c) the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment, (d) the Specific Plan, (e) the EIR and SEIR, (f) the Agenda Statement, and on the basis of the specific conclusions set forth below, the City Council finds and determines that: I. Said Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan in that, a) the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan land use designation for the subject ske is proposed to be Planned Development and that the IKEA Project is consistent with that designation; b) the projects are consistent with the fiscal policies in relation to provision of infrastructure and public services of the City's Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan; c) the Agreement sets forth the rules the Developer and City will be governed by during the development process which is required by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; and the Mitigation Monitoring Program of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. 2. The Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use districts in which the real property is located in that the project approvals include General Plan and Specific Plan Amendment, a Planned Development Rezoning including related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, Master Sign Program, and Vesting Tentative Map. 3. The Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use policies will implement land use guidelines set forth in the Specific Plan and the General Plan, as amended, which have planned for the uses at this location. 4. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare in that the project will proceed in accordance with all the programs and policies of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. 5. The Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values in that the project will be consistent with the General Plan and with the Specific Plan. Section 3. APPROVAL The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreements (Exhibit A) and authorizes the Mayor to sign. Section 4. RECORDATION Within ten (10) days after the Development Agreements are fully executed by all parties, the City Clerk shall submit the Agreement to the County Recorder for recordation. Section 5. EFFECTIVE DATE AND POSTING OF ORDINANCE This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage and after the effective date the IKEA Project General Plan amendment. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause the Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this 6th day of April 2004, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk G:~PA#L2002\02-034 IKEA\City Coun¢ilXDA ORD 34-04.doc City of Dublin When Recorded Mail To: City Clerk City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 9456~8 Space above this line for Recorder's Use DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND IKEA PROPERTY, INC FOR THE IKEA PROJECT Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 681457.2 Page 1 of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT is made and entered in t. he City of Dublin on this day of ., 2004, by and between the CITY OF DUBLIN, a Municipal Corporation (hereafter "CITY") and IKEA Property, Inc., a corporation (hereafter "DEVELOPER") pursuant to the authority of §§65864 et seq. of the California Government Code and Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter 8.56. CITY and DEVELOPER are, from time-to-time, individually referred to in this Agreement as a "Party," and are collectively referred to as Parties. RECITALS A. California Government Code §§65864 et seq. ("Development Agreement Statute") and Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code (hereafter "Chapter 8.56") authorize the CITY to enter into a Development Agreement for the development of real property with any person having a legal or equitable interest in such property in order to establish certain development rights in such property. B. DEVELOPER desires to develop and holds an equitable interest in, in that it haS the right to purchase, certain real property consisting of approximately 27.54 acres of land, located in the City of Dublin, County of Alameda, State of California, which is more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and which real property is hereafter called the "Property." The Alameda County Surplus Property Authority presently is the fee owner of the Property. C. The City Council adopted the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan by Resolution No. 53-93 which Plan is applicable to the Property. The Eastem Dublin Specific Plan requires DEVELOPER to enter into a development agreement. E. DEVELOPER proposes the development of the Property as a retail center on two separate lots consisting of an approximately 317,000 square foot IKEA home furnishings store (to be constructed on the "IKEA Parcel") and an adjacent "Lifestyle Retail Center" with a total of approximately 137,000 square feet of building area (to be constructed on the "Retail Center Parcel") (collectively the "Project"). F. DEVELOPER anticipates that, upon receiving all entitlements and fee title to the Property, it will transfer title to the Retail Center Parcel to Opus West Corporation, which intends to develop the Retail Center Parcel. G. DEVELOPER has applied for, and CITY has approved or is processing, various land use approvals in connection with the development of the Project, including, without limitation, a General Plan Amendment (Resolution No. ~), a Specific Plan Amendment (Resolution No. ~.), Planned Development District rezoning (including Stage 1 and 2 D.evelopment Plan) (Ordinance No. ), a Site Development Review approval that would apply to the IKEA Parcel only (ResolutiOn No. ) ("IKEA SDR"), a Master Sign Program (Resolution No. __), and vesting tentative map (with multiple final maps). All such approvals collectively, together with any Development Agreement Between City of Dublin Page2 of 16 : · and IKEA Property, Inc. DRAFT: 03104/2004 681457.2 approvals .or permits now or hereafter issued with respect to the Project are referred to as the "Project Approvals." H. Development of the Property by DEVELOPER may be subjeot to certain future discretionary approvals, which, if granted, but excepting any site development review approval with respect to the Retail Center Parcel, shall automatically become part of the Project Approvals as each such approval becomes effective.. the Project. CITY desires the timely, efficient, orderly and proper development of J. The City Council has found that, among other things, this Development Agreement is consistent with its General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and has been reviewed and evaluated in accordance with the Development Agreement Statute and Chapter 8.56. K. CITY and DEVELOPER have reached agreement and desire to express herein a Development Agreement that will facilitate development of the Project subject to conditions set forth herein. L. The Project is in the Dublin General Plan Eastern Extended Planning Area and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, for which a Program EIR was certified pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (SCH No. 91-103064, Resolution 53-93), The City prepared an Initial Study for the IKEA project to determine whether supplemental environmental impacts would occur as a result of the project beyond or different from those already addressed in the Program EIR. Based on the Initial Study and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162, the City prepared a Supplemental EIR to address project changes and new information since certification of the Program EIR. Supplemental impacts and mitigation measures were identified, the Supplemental EIR was certified and CEQA findings and a statement of overriding considerations were adopted by the City Council on ,2004; and M. On , the City Council of the City of Dublin adopted Ordinance No. approving this DeveLopment Agreement ("the Approving Ordinance"). The Approving Ordinance will take effect on ("the Approval Date"). NOW, THEREFORE, with reference to the foregoing recitals and in consideration of the mutual promises, obligations and covenants herein contained, CITY and DEVELOPER agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Description of Property. {tc \11 "1~ Description of Property. } Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 681457.2 Page 3 of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 The Property which is the subject of this Development Agreement is described in Exhibit A attached hereto ("Property"). 2. Interest of Developer.{tc \11 "2. Interest of Developer.} The DEVELOPER has a legal or equitable interest in the Property. 3. Relationship of CITY and DEVELOPER.{tc \11 "3. CITY, COUNTY and DEVELOPER.} Relationship of It is understood that this Agreement is a contract that has been negotiated and voluntarily entered into by :CITY and DEVELOPER and that the DEVELOPER is not an agent of CITY. The CITY and DEVELOPER hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making the CITY and DEVELOPER joint venturers or partners. 4. Effective Date and Term.{tc \11 "4. Effective Date and Term.} 4.1 Effective Date.{tc \12 "4.1 Effective Date.} The effective date of this Agreement shall be the date ("the Effective Date") upon which a grant deed conveying the Property from COUNTY to DEVELOPER is recorded in the Official Records of Alameda County. If a grant deed conveying the Property from COUNTY to DEVELOPER is not recorded within 12 months of the Approval Date, this Agreement shall automatically terminate without any further action of the Parties. 4.2 Term.{tc \12 "4.2 Term.} The "Term" of this Development Agreement shall commence on the Approval Date and extend five (5) years thereafter, Unless said Term is otherwise terminated or modified by circumstances set forth in this Agreement. 5. Use of the Property.{tc \11 "5. Use of the Property.} 5.1 Right to Develop{tc \12 "5.1 Right to Develop}. DEVELOPER shall have the vested right to develop the Project on the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Project Approvals (as and when issued), and any amendments to any of them as shall, from time to time, be approved pursuant to this Agreement. 5.2 Permitted Uses{tc \12 "5.2 Permitted Uses}. The permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height, bulk and size of proposed buildings, provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and location and maintenance of on-site and off-site improvements, location of public utilities (operated by CITY) and other terms and conditions of development applicable to the Property, shall be those set forth in this Agreement, the Project Approvals and any amendments to this Agreement or the Project Approvals. Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 681457.2 Page 4 of 16 DRAFT: 03104/2004 5.3 Additional ConditionS{tc \!2 "5.3 Additional Conditions}. Provisions for the following ("Additional Conditions") are set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 5.3.1 Subsequent Discretionary Approvals. Conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions. (These conditions do not affect DEVELOPER's responsibility to obtain all other land use approvals required by the ordinances of the City of Dublin and any permits required by regulatory agencies.) See Exhibit B. 5,3.2 Mitigation Conditions. Additional or modified conditions agreed upon by the parties in order to eliminate or mitigate adverse environmental impaCts of the PrOject or otherwise relating to development of the Project. 'See Exhibit B 5.3.3 Phasin_q, Timinq. Provisions that the Project be constructed in specified phases, that construction shall commence within a specified time; and that the Project or any phase thereof be completed within a specified time. See Exhibit B 5.3.4 Financing Plan. Financial plans which identify necessary capital improvements such as streets and utilities and sources of funding. See Exhibit B 5.3.5 Fees, Dedications. Terms relating to payment of fees or dedication of property. See Exhibit B 5.3.6 Reimbursement. Terms relating to subsequent reimbursement over time for financing of necessary public facilities. See Exhibit B 5.3.7 Miscellaneous. Miscellaneous terms. See Exhibit B Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 681457.2 Page 5 of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 Applicable Rules, Regulations and Official Policies{tc \11 "61 Applicable Rules, Regulations and Official Policies}. 6.1 Rules re Permitted Uses{tc \12 "6.1 Rules re Permitted Uses}. For the term of this Agreement, the City's ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted' uses of the Property, governing density and intensity of use of the Property and the maximum height, bulk and size of proposed buildings shall be those in force and effect on the effective date of this Agreement. 6.2 Rules re Design and Construction{tc \12 "6.2 Rules re Design and Construction}. Unless otherwise expressly provided in Paragraph 5 of this Agreement or in Chapter 7.28 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing design, imProvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to Project construction (but not use) shall be those in force and effect at the time the DEVELOPER submits its application for the relevant building, grading, or other construction permits to CITY. In the event of a conflict between such ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies and the Project Approvals, the Project Approvals shall prevail. For construction of public infrastructure, the ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing design, improvement and construction standards and Specifications applicable to Project shall be those in force and effect at the time of execution of an improvement agreement between CITY and DEVELOPER pursuant to Chapter 9.16 of the Dublin Municipal Code. 6.3 Building Standards Codes Applicable{tc \12 "6.3 Uniform Codes Applicable}. Unless expressly provided in Paragraph 5 of this Agreement or in Chapter 7.28 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the Project shall be constructed in accordance with the provisions of the Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical and Fire Codes and Title 24 of the California COde of Regulations, relating to Building Standards, in effect at the time the DEVELOPER submits its application for the relevant building, grading, or other c°nstruction permits for the Project to CITY. 7. Subsequently Enacted Rules and Regulations{tc \11 "7. Subsequently Enacted Rules and Regulations}. 7.1 New Rules and Regulations{tc \12 "7.1 New Rules and Reaulations}. During the term of this Agreement, the CITY may apply new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies of the CITY to the Property which were not in force and effect on the Approval Date and which are not in conflict with those applicable to the Property as set forth in this Agreement and the Project Approvals if: (a) the application of such new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies would not prevent, impose a substantial Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 681457.2 page6 of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 financial burden on, or materially delay development of the Property as otherwise contemplated by the Project ApproVals and (b) if such ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies .have general (City,wide) applicability. 7.2 ApproVal of Application{tc \12 "7.2 Approval of Application}. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent the cITY from denYing or conditionally approving any subsequent land use permit or authorization for the Project on the basis of such new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and policies except that such subsequent actions shall be subject to any conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements expressly set forth herein. 7.3 Moratorium Not Applicable{tc \12 "7.3 Moratorium Not Applicable}. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in the event an ordinance, resolution or other measure is enacted, whether by action of CITY, by initiative, referendum, or otherwise, that imposes a building moratorium which affects the Project on all or any part of the Property, CITY agrees that such ordinance, resolution or other measure shall not apply to the Project, the Property, this Agreement or the Project Approvals unless the building moratorium is imposed as part of a declaration of a local emergency or state of emergency as defined in Government Code §8558. 7.4 Rights Under Vestinq Tentative Map. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, this Agreement shall not supercede any rights DEVELOPER may obtain pursuant to CITY's approval of the vesting tentative -map for the Project. Subsequently Enacted or ReviSed Fees, Assessments and Taxes{tc \11 "8. Subsequently Enacted or Revised Fees, Assessments and Taxes}. 8.1 Fees, Exactions, Dedications{tc \12 "8.1 Fees, Exactions, Dedications}. CITY and DEVELOPER agree that the fees 'payable and exactions required in connection with the development of the Project Approvals for purpoSes of mitigating environmental and other impacts of the Project, providing infrastructure for the Project and complying with the Specific Plan shall be those set forth in the Project Approvals and in this Agreement (including Exhibit B). The CITY shall not impose or require payment of any other fees, dedications of land, or construction of any public improvement or facilities, shall not increase or accelerate existing fees, dedications of land or construction of public improvements, in connection with any subsequent discretionary approval for the Property, except as set forth in the Project Approvals and this Agreement (including Exhibit B, sUbparagraph 5.3.5). 8.2 Revised Application Fees{tc \12 "812 Revised Application Fees}. Any existing application, processing and inspectiOn fees that are revised during the term of this Agreement shall apply to the Project provided that (1) such fees have general applicability; (2) the application of.such fees to the Property is prosPective; and Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 681457.2 Page 7 of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 (3) the applicatiOn of such fees would not prevent development in accordance with this Agreement. By so agreeing, DEVELOPER does not waive its rights to challenge the legality of any such application, processing and/or inspection fees. 8.3 New Taxes{tc \12"8.3 New Taxes}. Any subsequently enacted city-wide taxes shall apply to the Project provided that: (1) the application of such taxes to the Property is prospective; and (2) the application of such taxes would not prevent development in accordance with this Agreement. By so agreeing. DEVELOPER does not waive its rights to challenge the legality of any such taxes. 8.4 Assessments{tc \12 "8.4 Assessments}. Nothing herein shall be construed to relieve the Property from assessments levied against it by CITY pursuant to any statutory procedure for the assessment of property to pay for infrastructure and/or services which benefit the Property. 8.5 Vote on Future Assessments and Fees{tc \12 "8.5 Vote on Future Assessments and Fees}. In the event that any assessment, fee or charge which is applicable to the Property is subject to Article XIIID of the Constitution and DEVELOPER does not return its ballot, DEVELOPER agrees, on behalf of itself and its successors, that CITY may count DEVELOPER's ballot as affirmatively voting in favor of such assessment, fee or charge. 9. Amendment or Cancellation{tc \11 "9. Amendment or Cancellation}. 9.1 Modification Because of Conflict with State or Federal Laws{tc \12 "9.1 Modification Because of Conflict with State or Federal Laws}. In the event that state or federal laws or regulations enacted after the effective date of this Agreement prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement or require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by the CITY, the parties shall meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this Agreement to comply with such federal or state law or regulation. Any such amendment or suspension of the Agreement shall be approved by the City Council in accordance with Chapter 8.56. 9.2 Amendment by Mutual Consent{tc \12 "9.2 Amendment by Mutual Consent}. This Agreement may be amended in writing from time to time by mutual consent of the parties hereto and in accordance with the procedures of State law and Chapter 8.56. 9.3 Insubstantial Amendments{tc \12 "9.3 Insubstantial Amendments}. Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding section 9.2, any amendments to this Agreement which do not relate to (a) the term of the Agreement as provided in section 4.2; (b) the permitted uses of the Property as provided in section 5.2; (c) provisions for "significant" reservation or dedication of land as provided in Exhibit B; (d) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent discretionary actions; (e) the density or intensity of use of the Project; (f) the maximum Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 681457.2 Page 8 of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 height or size of proposed buildings; or (g) monetary contributions by DEVELOPER as provided in this Agreement, shall not, except to the extent otherwise required by law, require notice or public hearing before either the Planning Commission or the City Council before the parties may execute an amendment hereto. CITY's Public Works Director shall determine whether a reservation or dedication is "significant". 9.4 Cancellation by Mutual Consent{tc \12 "9.5 Cancellation by Mutual Consent}. Except as otherwise permitted herein, this Agreement'may be canceled in whole or in part only by the mutual consent of the parties or their successors in interest, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 8.56. Any fees paid pursuant to Paragraph 5.3 and Exhibit B of this Agreement prior to the date of cancellation shall be retained by CITY. 10. Term of Project Approvals{tc \11 "10. Term of Proiect Approvals}. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66452.6(a), the term of the parcel map described in Recital G above shall automatically be extended for the term of this Agreement. The term of any other Project Approval shall be extended only if so provided in Exhibit B. 11. Annual RevieW{tc "11. Annual Review"}.. 11.1 Review Date{tc "11.1 Review Date "\1 2}. The annual review date for this Agreement shall be between July 15 and August 15, 2005 and each July 15 to August 15 thereafter:'" 11.2 Initiation of Review{tc "11.2 Initiation of Review" \1 2}. The CITY's Community Development Director shall initiate the annual review, as required under Section 8.56.140 of Chapter 8.56, by giving to DEVELOPER thirty (30) days' written notice that the CITY intends to undertake such review. DEVELOPER shall provide evidence to the Community Development Director prior to the hearing on the annual review, as and when reasonably determined necessary by the Community Development Director, to demonstrate good faith compliance with the provisions of the Development Agreement. The burden of proof by substantial evidence of compliance is upon the DEVELOPER. 11.3 Staff Reports{tc "11.3 Staff Reports "\1 2}. To the extent practical, CITY shall deposit in the mail and fax to DEVELOPER a copy of all staff reports, and related exhibits concerning contract performance at least five (5) days prior to any annual review. .,- 11.4 CostS{tc "11.4' Costs "\1 2}. Costs reasonably incurred by CITY in connection with the annual review shall be paid by DEVELOPER in accordance with the City's schedule of fees in effect at the time of review. 12. Default{tc \!1 "12. Default}. DeveLopment Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 68145'7.2 Page 9 of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 ~..: 12.1 Other Remedies Available{to \12 "12.1 Other Remedies Available}. Upon the occurrence of an event of default, the parties may pursue all other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in CITY's regulations governing development agreements, expressly including the remedy of specific performance of this Agreement. 12.2 Notice and Cure{tc \12 "12.2 Notice and Cure}. Upon the occurrence of an event of default by any party, the nondefaulting party shall serve written notice of such default upon the defaulting party. If the default is not cured by the defaulting party within twenty (20) days after service of such notice of default, the nondefaulting party may then commence any legal or equitable action to enforce its rights under this Agreement; proVided, however, that if the default cannot be cured .within such thirty (30) day period, the nondefaulting party shall refrain from any such legal or equitable action so long as the defaulting party begins to cure such default within such thirty (30) day period and diligently pursues such cure to completion. Failure to give notice shall not constitute a.waiver of any default. 12,3 No Damages Against CITY{tc \12 "12.3 No Damages Against CITY}. In no event shall damages be awarded against CITY upon an event of default or upon termination of this Agreement. 13. Estoppel Certificate{tc \11 "13. Estoppel Certificate}. Any partY may, at any time, and from time to time, request written notice from the other party requesting such party to certify in writing that, (a) this Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the parties, (b) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments, and (o) to the knowledge of the certifying party the requesting party is not in default in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, or if in default, to describe therein the nature and amount of any such defaults. A party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate within thirty (30) days following the receipt thereof, or such longer period as may reasonably be agreed to by the parties. City Manager of CITY shall be authorized to execute any certificate requested by DEVELOPER. Should the party receiving the request not execute and return such certificate within the applicable period, this shall not be deemed to be a default, provided that such party shall be deemed to have certified that the statements in clauses (a) through (c) of this section are true, and any party may rely on such deemed certification. 14. Mortgagee Protection; Certain Rights of Cure{tc \11 "14. Mortgagee Protection; Certain Rights of Cure}. 14.1 Mortgagee Protection{tc \12 "14.1 Mortgagee Protection}. This Agreement shall be superior and senior to any lien placed upon the Property, or any portion thereof after the date of recording this Agreement, including the Development Agreement Between City of Dublin Page 10 of 16 and IKEA Property, Inc. DRAFT: 03/04/2004 681457.2 lien for any deed of trust or mortgage ("Mortgage"). Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach hereof shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, but all the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and effective against any person or entity, including any deed of trust beneficiary or mortgagee ("Mortgagee") who acquires title to the Property, or any portion thereof, by foreclosure, trustee's sate, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise. 14.2 Mortgagee Not Obliqated{tc \12 "14.2 Mort~a.oee Not Obligated],; Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 14.1 above, no Mortgagee shall have any obligation or duty under this Agreement, before or after foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, to construct or complete the construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction or completion, or to pay, perform or provide any fee, dedication, improvements or other exaction or imposition; provided, however, that a Mortgagee shall not be entitled to devote the Property to any uses or to construct any improvements thereon other than those uses or improvements provided for or authorized by the Project Approvals or by this Agreement. 14.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee and Extension of Riqht to Cure{tc \12 "14.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee and Extension of Right'to Cure}. If CITY receives notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given DEVELOPER hereunder and specifying the address for service thereof, then CITY shall deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with service thereon to DEVELOPER, any notice given to DEVELOPER.with respect to any claim by CITY that DEVELOPER has committed an event of default. Each Mortgagee shall have the right during the same period available to DEVELOPER to cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy, the event of default claimed Set forth in the CITY's notice. CITY, through its City Manager, may extend the thirty-day cure period provided in section 12.2 for not more than an additional sixty (60) days upon request of DEVELOPER or a Mortgagee. 15. Severability{tc \11 "15. Severability}. The unenforceability, invalidity or illegality of any provisions, covenant, condition or term of this Agreement shall not render the other provisions unenforceable, invalid or illegal. 16. Attorneys' Fees and Costs{tc \11 "16. Attorneys' Fees and Costs}. If CITY or DEVELOPER initiates any action at law or in equity to enforce or interpret the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and costs in addition t° any other relief to which it may otherwise be entitled. If any person or entity not a party to this Agreement initiates an action at law or in equity to challenge the validity of any provision of this Agreement or the Project Approvals, the parties shall cooperate and appear in defending such action. DEVELOPER shall bear its own costs of defense as a real Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 681457.2 Page 11 of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 party in interest in any such action, and DEVELOPER shall reimburse CITY for all reasonable court costs and attorneys' fees expended by CITY in defense of any such action or other proceeding. 17. Transfers'and Assi.qnments{tc \11 "17. Transfers and Assignments}. I7.1 DEVELOPER's Ri,qht to Assi,qn{tc \12 "17.1 DEVELOPER=s Right to Assign}. All of DEVELOPER'S rights, interests and obligations hereunder may be transferred, sold or assigned in conjunction with the transfer, sale, or assignment of the Property subject hereto, or any portion thereof, at any time during the term of this Agreement, provided that no transfer, sale or assignment of DEVELOPER's-rights, interests and obligations hereunder shall occur without the prior written notice to CITY and approval by the City Manager, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. The City Manager shall consider and decide the matter within 10 working days after DEVELOPER's notice provided and receipt by City Manager of all necessary documents, certifications and other information required by City Manager to decide the matter. In considering the request, the City Manager shall base the decision upon' the proposed assignee's reputation, experience, financial resources and access to credit and capability to successfully carry out the development of the Property to completion. The City Manager's approval shall be for the purposes of: a) providing notice to CITY; b) assuring that all obligations of DEVELOPER are' allocated as between DEVELOPER and the proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee; and c) assuring CITY that the proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee is capable of performing the DEVELOPER's obligations hereunder not withheld by DEVELOPER pursuant to.section 17.3..Notwithstanding the foregoing, provided notice is given as specified in Section 23, no CITY approval shall be required for any transfer, sale, or assignment of this Agreement to: 1) any entity which is an affiliate or subsidiary of DEVELOPER; 2) any Mortgagee; 3) any transferee of a Mortgagee; or 4) Opus West Corporation, or its affiliates ("Opus West"), in conjunction with the sale of that portion of the Property .. described as the Retail Center Parcel from DEVELOPER to Opus West, provided that DEVELOPER has, at the time of the transfer, complied with all obligations of this Agreement or provided evidence' satisfactory to the City Manager demonstrating that the remaining obligations have been allocated between DEVELOPER and Opus West. 17.2 Release Upon Transfer{tc\12 "17.2 Release Upo.n. Transfer}. Upon the transfer, sale, or assignment of all of DEVELOPER's rights, interests and obligations hereunder pursuant to section 17.1 of this Agreement, DEVELOPER shall be released from the obligations under this Agreement, with respect to the Property transferred, sold, or assigned, arising subsequent to the date of City Manager approval of such transfer, sale, or assignment; provided, however, that if any transferee, purchaser, :or assignee approved by the City Manager expressly assumes all of the rights, interests and obligations of DEVELOPER under this Agreement, DEVELOPER shall be released with respect to all such rights, interests and assumed obligations. In any event, the transferee, purchaser, or assignee shall be subject to all Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 681'457.2 Page 12 Of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 the provisions hereof and shall provide all necessary documents, certifications and other necessary information prior to City Manager approval. 17.3 Developer's Right to Retain Specified Riclhts or Obligations{tc \12 "17.3Developer's Riqht to Retain Specified Riqhts or Obli.qations}. Notwithstanding sections 17.1 and 17.2 and section 18, DEVELOPER may withhold from a sale, transfer or assignment of this Agreement certain rights, interests and/or obligations which DEVELOPER shall retain, provided that DEVELOPER specifies such rights, interests and/or obligations in a written document to be appended to this Agreement and recorded with the Alameda County Recorder prior to the sale, transfer or assignment of the Property. DEVELOPER's purchaser, transferee or assignee shall then have no interest or obligations for such rights, interests and obligations and this Agreement shall remain applicable to DEVELOPER with respect to such retained rights, interests and/or obligations. 18. the Land}. Agreement Runs with the Land{tc \11 "18. Agreement Runs with All of the provisions, rights, terms, covenants, and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assignees, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Property, or any portion thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitude and shall constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable laws, including, but not limited to, Section 1468 of the Civil Code of'the State of California. Each covenant to do, or refrain from doing, some act on the Property hereunder, or with respect to any owned property, (a) is for the benefit of such properties and is a burden upon such properties, (b) runs with such properties, and (c) is binding upon each party and each successive owner during its ownershiP of such properties or any portion thereof, and shall be a benefit to and a burden upon each party and its property hereunder and each other person succeeding to an interest in such properties. 19. Bankruptcy{tc \11 "19. Bankruptcy}. The obligations of this Agreement shall not be dischargeable in bankruptcy. 20. Indemnification{tc\11 "20. Indemnification}. DEVELOPER agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, and its elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs) .and liability for any personal injury or property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or inactions by the DEVELOPER, or any actions or inactions of DEVELOPER's contractors, subcontractors, agents, or-employees in Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 681457.2 Page 13 of 16 DRAFT: 03/0412004 connection with 'the construction, improvement, operation, or maintenance of the Project, provided that DEVELOPER shall have no indemnification obligation with respect to negligence or wrongful conduct of CITY, its contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees or with respect to the maintenance, use or condition of any improvement after the time it has been dedicated to and accepted by the CITY or another public entity (except as provided in an improvement agreement or maintenance bond). If CITY is named as a party to any legal action, CITY will cooperate with DEVELOPER, will appear in such action and will not unreasonably withhold approval of a settlement otherwise acceptable to DEVELOPER. If CITY is named as a party to any legal action, CITY will cooperate with DEVELOPER, will appear in such action and will not unreasonably withhold approval of a settlement otherwise acceptable to DEVELOPER. 21. insurance{tc \11 "21. Insurance}. 21.1 Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance{tc \12 "21.1 Public Liability and Property Dama,qe Insurance}. At all times that DEVELOPER is constructing any improvements that will become public improvements, DEVELOPER shall maintain in effect a policy of comprehensive general liability insurance with a per-occurrence combined single limit of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) and a deductible of not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) per claim. The policy so maintained by DEVELOPER shall name the CITY as an additional insured and shall include either a severability of interest clause or cross-liability endorsement. 21.2 Workers Compensation lnsurance{tc \12 "21.2 Workers Compensation Insurance}. At all times that DEVELOPER is constructing any improvements that will become public improvements, DEVELOPER shall maintain Worker's Compensation insurance for all persons employed by DEVELOPER for work at the Project site. DEVELOPER shall require each contractor and subcontractor similarly to provide Worker's Compensation insurance for its respective employees. DEVELOPER agrees to indemnify the City for any damage resulting from DEVELOPER's failure to maintain any such insurance. 21.3 Evidence of Insurance{tc \12 "21.3 Evidence of Insurance}. Prior to commencement of construction of any improvements which will become public improvements, DEVELOPER shall furnish CITY satisfactory evidence of the insurance required in Sections 21.1 and 21.2 and evidence that the carrier is required to give the CITY at least fifteen days prior written notice of the cancellation or reduction in coverage of a policy. The insurance shall extend to the CITY, its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees and rePresentatives and to DEVELOPER performing work on the Project. 22. Sewer and WateH'tc \11 "22. Sewer and Water}. DEVELOPER acknowledges that it must Obtain water and sewer Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 681457.2 Page 14 of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 permits from the Dublin San Ramon Services District ("DSRSD") which is another public agency not within the control of CITY. 23. Notices{tc\11 "23. Notices}. Ali notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing=. Notices required to be given to CITY shall be addressed as follows: City Manager City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 follows: Notice required to be given to DEVELOPER shall be addressed as IKEA Property, Inc. 496 W. Germanton Pike Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462 Attention: President With copies to: Doug Greenholz IKEA Property, Inc. 3350 Brunell Drive Oakland, CA 94602 Michael P. Durkee Allen Matkins 333 Bush Street, 17th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 A party may change address by giving notice in writing to the other party and thereafter all notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. Notices shall be deemed given and received upon personal delivery, or if mailed, upon the expiration of 48 hours after being deposited in the United States Mail. Notices may also be given by overnight courier which shall be deemed given the following day or by facsimile transmission which shall be deemed given upon verification of receipt. 24. Recitals. The foregoing Recitals are true and correct and are made a part hereof. 25. Agreement is Entire Understandin.q{tc \11 "25. Agreement is Entire 0nderstanding}. Development Agreement Between .City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. 68'i457.2 Page 15 of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 of the parties. 26. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement Exhibits{tc \11 "26. Exhibits}. The following documents are referred to in this Agreement and are attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full: Exhibit A Legal Description of Property Exhibit B Additional Conditions 27. Counterparts{tc \11 "27. Counterparts}. This Agreement is executed in three (3) duplicate originals, each of which is deemed to be an original. 28. Recordation{tc \11 "28. Recordation}. CITY shall record a copy of this Agreement within ten days of DEVELOPER Providing CITY notice that a grant deed conveying the Property from COUNTY to DEVELOPER is recorded in the Official Records of Alameda County. [EXECUTION PAGE FOLLOWS] Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, l.nc. 681457.2 Page 16 of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 IN WITNESS'WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date and year first above written. CITY OF DUBLIN: By: Date: Mayor Attest: By: Date: City Clerk Approved as to Form: City Attorney IKEA PROPERTY, INC., a Corporation Its: Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, InC. 681457,2 Page 17 of 16 DRAFT: 03/04/2004 Exhibit A Property Description All that certain real property situated in the City of Dublin, County of Alameda, State of California, described as follows: Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 7714 recorded on August 1, 2001, in Book 260 of Parcel Maps at Pages 30 through 33, Recorder's Series No. 2001277299, Alameda County records. 680710.2 680710.2 Exhibit B Additional Conditions The following Additional Conditions are hereby imposed pursuant to Paragraph 5.3 above. Subparagraph 5,3,1 -- Subsequent Discretionary Approvals Development of the Lifestyle Retail Center on the Retail Center Parcel will require site development review approval. SUbpara,clraph 5.3,2 -- Mitigation Conditions Subsection a, · Infrastructure Set~uencin.q Program The Infrastructure Sequencing Program for the Project is set forth below. (i) Roads: The project-specific roadway improvements (and offers of dedication) identified in ReSolution No.__ approving Site Development Review ("the SDR Resolution") shall be completed by DEVELOPER to the satisfaction and requirements of the Public Works Director at the times and in the manner specified in the SDR Resolution unless otherwise provided below. --Condition No. 94 [Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road Intersection Improvements] Condition No. 94 (in .relevant part) reads as follows: Traffic Study and Required Roadway Improvements, The Applicant/Developer shall construct all necessary on-site and off- site traffic mitigation/roadway improvements as discussed in Final Report: IKEA Retail Center Transportation Study prepared by Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants dated August 2003. Said mitigations include: ·.. The applicant shall advance to the City, at the time and in the manner set forth in the De[ielopment Agreement, monies for acquisition of fight-of-way for needed for the improvements planned for the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road and for construction of such improvements. DEVELOPER shall proVide cITY with DEVELOPER's fair Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. -- EXHIBIT.B 680710.2 page 1 DRAFT: 02/18/2004 share, as determined by CITY on the basis of the Project's trips, for the costs of design and construction of Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road Intersection Improvements by a payment to CITY in cash in the amount of the Project's fair share of the deficiency, if any, between funds available to CITY for CIP Project # 96852 [Dougherty Road/Dublin Blvd. InterSection] and the cost of such project. Such payment shall be made within 30 days of written notice from the Public Works Director, which notice will be given following bid opening. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 4 of this Agreement, those portions of Condition 94 associated with the Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection improvements and the provisions of this subsection shall survive termination of this Agreement. (ii) Sewer All sanitary sewer improvements to serve the project site (or any recorded phase of the Project) shall be completed in accordance with DSRSD requirements. (iii) Water An all-weather roadway and an approved hydrant and water supply system shall be available and in service at the site in accordance with the SDR conditions of approval to the satisfaction and requirements of the CITY's fire department. All potable water system components to serve the project site (or any recorded phase of the Project) shall be completed in accordance with DSRSD requirements. Recycled water lines shall be installed in accordance with the SDR conditions of approval. ('iv) Storm Drainaqe Prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for any building which is part of the Project, the storm drainage systems off site, as well as on site drainage systems to the areas to be occupied, shall be improved to the satisfaction and requirements of the Dublin Public Works Department applying CITY's and Zone 7 (Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Zone 7) standards and policies which are applicable given the VTM. 'Pursuant to Alameda County's National Pollution Discharges Elimination Permit (NPDES) No. CAS0029831 with the California Regional Water Quality Control E~oard, all grading, construction, and development activities within the City of Dublin must comply with the provisions of the Clean Water Act. Proper erosion control measures must be installed at development Development Ag reement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. -- EXHIBIT B 680710.2 Page 2 DRAFT: 02/18/2004 sites within the City during construction, and all activities shall adhere to Best Management Practices. (v) Other Utilities (e.g. gas, electricity, cable televisions, telephone) Construction of other utilities shall be complete by phase prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for any building within that specific phase of development. Subsection b. Miscellaneous (i) Completion May be Deferred. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY's Public Works Director may, in his or her sole discretion and upon receipt of documentation in a form satisfactory to the Public Works Director that assures completion, allow DEVELOPER to defer completion of discrete portions of any of the public improvements required for the Project until after issuance of Certificate of OCcupancy for the first building for the Project if the Public Works Director determines that to do so would not jeopardize the public health, safety or welfare. Subpara~ra~)h 5.3.3 -- Phasing, Timing This Agreement contains no requirements that DEVELOPER must initiate or complete development of the Project within any period of time set by CITY. It is the intention of this provision that DEVELOPER be able to develop the Property in accordance with its own time schedules and the Project Approvals. Subpara_~raDh 5.3.4 -- Financin.q Plan DEVELOPER will install all improvements necessary for the Project at its own cost (subject to credits for any improvements that qualify for credits as provided in Subparagraph 5.3.6 below), unless otherwise required by this Agreement. Other infrastructure necessary to provide sewer, potable water, and recycled water services to the Project will be made available by the Dublin San Ramon Services District. The present owner of the Property, the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, has entered into an "Area Wide Facilities Agreement" with the Dublin San Ramon Services District to pay for the cost of extending such services to the Project. Such services shall be provided as set forth in Subparagraph 5.3.2(a)(ii) and (iii) above. Subparagraph 5.3.5 -- Fees, Dedications Subsection a. Traffic Impact Fees. Development Agreement BetWeen. City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. m EXHIBI'T B 680710.2 Page 3 DRAFT: 02/18/2004 Developer shall pay the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee ("TIF") established by Resolution No. 225-99, including any future amendments to such fee. Developer Will pay such fees no later than the time of issuance of building permits and in the amount of the impact fee in effect at time of building permit issuance. Developer further agrees that it will pay a minimum of three percent (3%) of the "Section.l/Category 1" portion of the TIF in cash. Developer also agrees that it will pay 12.4% of the "Section 2/CategorY 2" portion of the TIF in cash. If City amends its TIF fee and as a result the City's outstanding balance due on loans is less than 12.4% of total Section 2/Category 2 improvements, the Developer shall pay such reduced percentage of the "Section 2/Category 2" portion of the TIF in cash. Subsection b. Traffic Impact Fee to Reimburse Pieasanton for Freeway Interchanges, DEVELOPER shall pay a Eastern Dublin 1-580 Interchange Fee in the amounts and at the times set'forth in City of Dublin Resolution No. 155-98, or in the amounts and at the times set forth in any resolution revising the amount of the Eastern Dublin 1-580 Interchange Fee. Subsection c. Public Facilities Fees. DEVELOPER shall pay a Public Facilities Fee established by City of Dublin Resolution No, 214-02, including any future amendments to such fee. DEVELOPER will pay such fees no later than the time of issuance of building permits and in the then-current amount of the fee. Subsection d. Noise Mitigation Fee. DEVELOPER shall pay a Noise Mitigation Fee established by City of Dublin Resolution No. 33-96, including any future amendments to such fee. DEVELOPER will pay .such fees no later than the time of issuance of building permits and in the amount of the fee in effect at time of building permit issuance. Subsection e. School Impact Fees. School impact fees shall be paid by DEVELOPER in accordance with Government Code section 53080 and the existing agreement between DEVELOPER's predecessor in interest and the Dublin Unified School District. Subsection f, Fire impact Fees. DEVELOPER shall pay a fire facilities fee established by City of Dublin Resolution No. 12-03 including any future amendments to such fee. DEVELOPER will Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA property, Inc. -- EXHIBIT B 680710.2 Page 4 DRAFT: 02/18/2004 pay such-fees no later than the time of issuance .Of building permits and in the amount of t~e fee in effect at time of building permit issuance. Subsection .cl. Tri,Valley Transportation Development Fee. DEVELOPER shall pay the Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee in the amount and at the times set forth in City of Dublin Resolution No. 89-98 or any subsequent resolution which revises such fee. DEVELOPER will pay such fees no later than the time of issuance of building permits and in the amount of the impact fee in effect at time of building permit issuance. Subparagraph 5.3.6 -- Credit Subsection a. Traffic Impact Fee Improvements Credit CITY shall provide a credit to DEVELOPER for those improvements described in the resolution establishing the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee if such improvements are constructed by the DEVELOPER in their ultimate location pursuant this Agreement. All aspects of credits shall be governed by CI'TY's Administrative Guidelines regarding credits (Resolution No. 23-99). Subsection b. Traffic Impact Fee Right-of-Way Dedications Credit CITY shall provide a credit to DEVELOPER for any TIF area right-of-way dedicated by DEVELOPER to CITY which is required for improvements which are described in the resolution establishing the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee. All aspects of credits shall be governed by CITY's Administrative Guidelines regarding credits (Resolution No. 23-99). Subparagraph 5.3.7 -- Miscellaneous Subsection a. Landscaping Maintenance Along Streets and Creek CITY has formed a landscape maintenance district known as the "Landscape Maintenance Assessment District No. 97-1 (Santa Rita Area)" pursuant to a petition from the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority ("COUNTY"), DEVELOPER's predecessor in intereSt, and imposed an assessment againSt the Property to pay for street and creek landscape maintenance, in addition, on September 24, 1996, COUNTY recorded a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ('.'CC&Rs") which covers the Property, whereby COUNTY, on behalf of itself and its successors (including DEVELOPER), has covenanted to pay a "Deed Assessment" to CITY for maintenance of street and creek landscaping. DEVELOPER acknowledges the existence of the. landscape maintenance district and CC&Rs and hereby covenants to pay a Deed Assessment, pursuant to the terms of the assessment district and CC&Rs. Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. -- EXHIBIT B 680710.2 page 5' DRAFT: 02/18/2004 Subsection b. Term of Proiect Approvals Pursuant to paragraph 10 of this Agreement, the term of the IKEA SDR (defined in Recital G) and the Master Sign Program shall automatically be extended for the term of this Agreement. Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and IKEA Property, Inc. -- EXHIBIT B 680710.2 Page 6 DRAFT: 02/18/2004 IKEA .Project Final Supplemental 'Environmental Impact Report SCH# 2003092076' Lead Agency: City of Dublin Prepared By: Jerry Haag, Urban Planner February' 2004 ATTACHMENT Table of Contents Introduction .......................................... ........................ 2 Clarifications and Modifications to the DSEIR ....................................... 2 Summary of DSEIR Comment Letters ................................................... 3 Annotated Comment Letters and Responses ....................... ~ ................ 4 Appendix A ..................................................................................... '. .... 22 Introduction A Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (DSEIR) dated November 2003 was prepared for this Project and distributed for public review in November 2003 . through January 2004. The proposed Project involves the approval of an IKEA retail center in the City of Dublin as well as related amendments to the General Plan and Eastern DUblin Spedfic Plan, a PD-Planned Development rezoning and related Stage 1 and Stage 2 PD Development Plans, Site Development Review (SDR), a Tentative and Parcel Maps and a Development Agreement. A full description of the proposed Project is contained in the DSEIR document. Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and implementing CEQA Guidelines, after compIetion of the Draft EIR, lead agencies are required to consult with and obtain comments from public agencies and organizations having jurisdiction by law over elements of the Project and to provide the general public with an opportunity to comment on the Draft Supplemental EIR~ Lead agendes are also required to respond to substantive comments on environmental issues raised during the EIR review period. As the lead agency for this Project, the City of Dublin held a 45-day public review period between November 19, 2003 and January 2, 2004. This Final ErR document (FEIR) contains all public comments received during the 45- day public review process regarding the DSEIR and the Ctty s responses to thos comments. Induddd within the document is an annotated copy of the comment letter, identifying specific comments, follov~ed by a response to that comment. The FEIR also contains clarifications and minor corrections to information presented in the DEIR as well as revisions to the proposed Project. Clarifications and Modification'~ to the DEIR The following Clarificati°ns and ~°difica~0n~''t° ~ DSEiR ~e in~o~o~ated by reference into the DSEIR document. 1. Page 4: Section 6 of the DSEIR is actually "Required CEQA Discussion" rather' than References as noted on this page. 2. Page 60: The reference to Table 5 in the traffic study (appended to the DSEIR) should be changed to Table 6 of the traffic study. 3. Page 64: The Hadenda Drive/I-580 Eastbound ramp improvement is antidpated to be funded by local developers on a pro-rata share. 4. As requested by the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency, the discussion text in the Mitigation Measure column corresponding to Supplemental Impact TRA-3 on page 1-3 of the DSEIR is hereby amended to read as follows: "FulI mitigation not feasible. Project will be required to pay for its proportionate share of impacts to 1-580 and 1-680, by payment of Tri-Valley Transportation Development (TVTD) Fees to construct planned freeway improvements, including HOV 1aries, auxiliary lanes, and interchange improvements. The Project will be required to pay its proportionate share IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 page2 City of Dublin February 2004 toward public transportation improvements to help reduce traffic on the freeways and other roadways in the Tri-Valley area, by payment of the TVTD Dee to fund the West Publin/Pleasanton BART Station Project." Summary of DSEIR Comment Letters Comment letters were received by the City of Dublin during the 45-day public comment period on the DEIR from the following agencies, organizations and other interested parties. Date Commenter Federal Agencies None State Agencies 2.1 State of California, Office of Plarm/ng 1/5/04 and Research 2.2* State of California, Department of 1/08/04 Transportation Local Agencies 3.1 Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) 3.2 Alameda County Congestion 12/23/03 Management Agency 3.3 Alameda County Flood Control and 12/30/03 Water Conservation District Zone 7 3.4 12/30/03 City of Livermore Interested Persons/Organizations 4.1 Michael Durkee 12 / 30 / 03 *Although this letter was received after the close of the 45-day comment period, it has been responded to in this FEIR. IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 Page 3 City of Dubiin February 2004 Annotated Comment Letters and Responses IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 Page ~ ¢~Sru~rY 2004 City of Dublin Arnold SchWarzenegger Governor STATE OF CALIFORNIA · Governor's Office o¢ Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit ~anuary 9, 2004 Andy Byde City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 D~,IBLIN PLANNING Letter 2.1 Subject: IKEAfRStail Center Development Project (PA 02-034) SCH#: 2003092076 Dear Andy Byde: The enclosed comment (s) on your Draft EIR was (were) received by the State Clearinghouse after the end of the state review period, wh/ch closed on January 2, 2004. We are f0rwardmg these comments to you because they provide'information or raise issues that should be addressed in your final environmental document. The Califorma Environmental Quality Act does not require Lead Agencies to respond to late comments. However, we encourage you to incorporate these addidonaI conm~ents rote your final em/ironmental document and to consider them prior to taking final action on the proposed project. Please contact the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions concerning the env/ronmental review process. If you h~ve a question regard/ng the above-named project, please refer to the ten-digit Stare Clear/nghouse number (2003092076) when contacting this office. smcerety, Senior Planner, State Clearinghouse Enclosures cc: Resources Agency ~ECEIVED 1 zoO4 PLANNF'J4°°N~ TEN~ STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAlVIENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812-3044 !"~UBUN, (916)445-06i3 FAX(9!6)325-3018 www.opr.ca, gov 01;08/04 · 14: 50 F_,~_5,1028§5§13 SYSTEM®IONAL PLANNING ~ STATE CLEARINGHO .~lgPARTMlgNT OF TRANSPORTATION 11 1 GRAND AVENUE p. O. BOX 23660 oAKLAND, CA 94623-0660 pPtObFE (510) 286.5505 FAX (510) 286-5513 TTY (800) 735-2929 Letter 2.2 January 8, 2004 Mr. Andy Byde' City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 ALAS80780 ALA-580-1 $.82 · SCH2003 092076 Dear Mr.' Byde: DUBLIN IKEA ~ DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Department) ha the envizonmental review process for the Dublin IKEA Project. The following comments are based on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (DSEm). Mitigation Miugau for impacts to ' 1. Contrary to the D'SEI2~'s assertion that," ' ' 'on these freeway segments is not feasible si.nee freeway improvements are not under the City of Dublin's jurisdiction", as lead agency the City of Dublin is responsible for all project mitigation, inctudfing roadway improvements on state highwayg. Mitigation should be identified for any roadway mainline section or intersection with insufficient capacity to maintain an acceptable Level of Service (LOS) with the addition of project-related and/or cumulative traffic. The project's fair share' contribution, fmaucing, scheduling, implementatio;a responsibilities and lead agency men/toting.should also be 'fully discussed for all proposed rrdtigafion measures. Where additional roadway improvements are not feasible, dowascaJmg the project, and phasing project components so that adequate rrfitigation coincides with each development phase shoutd be explored. See the Transportation-related Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Guidelmes (per Assembly Bill 1807) enclosure that requires lead agencies to submit transportation-related mitigation monitoring'information to tke Department, Page 67. 2.2.1 "Ealtra.s i~hprOve.~ ,nobility aerobe Cdlifornia" 01/08/04 14:50 FAX 510£8§§S13 Mr, A~dy Byd~ January B, 2004 Pag~ 2 SYSTE~®IONAL PLANNING ~ STATE CLEARING~O ~002 ProjecT-related significant and unavoidable eumuia~ive impacts to freeway operations, i.e., the project's contribution to LOS degradation should be clearly identified on Tables 4.3.12, 13. 2.2.2 Trip Generation 1. Since the Dublin IKEA wil] draw customers from the densely populated South Bay Area, including San Jose, and locations to the east SUCh as Tracy,' Stockton and Sa~ramenzo as well as serving the immediate area; unless supporting documentation showing a strong basis for assuming lhat Dublin IKEA will generate 25 percent fewer weekday trips than the Emeryville store can be provided, project mp generati°E es~mates_ should be adjusted upward to more realistically reflect total prOject trips. The absence of an IKEA store' in the fast- growing region between Sacramento and Tracy strongly suggests that demand from th.is area will be channeled to the Dublin store. Page 60. 2.2.3 2. How welt does actual.trip generation from the Bmeryville IKEA Store correlate t° trip generati°n esth-nates provided during that project's environmental review? Pass-by Rate Assumptions Since furniture shopping usually involves transporting bulky items home from the store, as well as COnsiderable lead time for plarming that typically.precedes suet purchases, 'and given the paucity of data for pass-by rates applicable to furniture stores, pass-by rates for this land use are likely negligible. Further, the Depa_mnent does not accept pass-by rates in excess of 15 percent without prior consultation and sufficient data to support thc estimated decrease in project trip generation. See the Department's "Guide for the P~eparation of Traf~c Impact Studies" at the wcbSite link below. The Guide should be reviewed prior to initiating any traffic analysis affecting state facilities. http ://www. d ct. c a. ~,ov/hq/traffop s/devel or) s erv/operati on al svs~ems/reports/d s ~id~.o 2.2.4 2.2.5 Trip Distribution ProjeCt trip distribution should be revised to show the vast majority of project trips accessing the 'project site -from Interstate 580 (I-580), For the majority of IICEA ' customers, .I:580 is tko faster and' more efficient route for trips from all directions as few southbo,und or'northbound Inter'tare 680 (I-680) customers wilt prefer travelling the slower local streets such as Dublin Boulevard or Las Posilas Boulevard with their numerous controlled intersections and conflicting traffic movements. '~There is no feasible alternative to the site for westbound and eastbound 1-580. customers, page 61. 2.2.6 Level of Service 1. Intersection counts for the existing peak hour traffic volumes and ramp .2.2.7 intersecti°n LOS do no~ appear to reflec~ curren{ condit/ons. If traffic count data "Call~'a~'~' JlJ I~?'Ol'~X m 0 ~1 ~1~ ty aero.*.r Catfa n~ia" O 170'8/04 14:50 F~ 5102865513 SYSTE~®IONAL PLANNING -~ STATE CLEARING,tO l~-. Andy Byde was obtained.prior 'to ramp metering installation on eastbound 1-580, current counts should be obtained and the data applied to an updated analysis of' the intersections. Exhibit' 14, Page 81 and Table 4.3.1, PageT0· Downstream effects o~ LOS F on 1-580 should be discussed. For example, since the 1'580 .segments .between 1-680 and Dougherty Road and Tassajara Road to Fallon Road both operate at LOS F, clarify how the segments between these can operate more efficiently at LOS D and LOs E as shown in Table 4.3.13. Page79- Clarif3r how the project's contribution of 16,100 Average Daily Trips (ADT), 460 .AM peak'hom' trips (PHT). 880 PM PHT and. 2,510 Saturday PHT decreases the volume to capacity ratio in some areas. Page 65. [~003 2.2.8 2.2.9 of 1. Of the ten design alternatives for the I-SgO High-Occupancy Vehicle Laue (HOV) 2.2.10 project currently'under consideration, variation 2.2 represents the worst-ease fight-of-way (ROW) impact to the IKEA project. The remaining nine alternatives are not expected to impact the project. The HOV project may impact the proposed IKEA project a maximum distance of 12.378 meters, from the existing state ROW to the proposed new state KOW. The' enclosed plan shows .the approximate area of 2,772.square meters of potential impact to the IKEA project. Final HOV project design has not been determined. See enclosed graphic, estimates and descriptions. 2. Work that encroaches omo the ROW requires an encroachment permit that is 2.2.11 issued by 'the Department. To apply, a completed encroachment .permit. application, environmental documentation, and five (5) sets of plans, clearly indicating State ROW, must be SUbmitted to the address below. Traffic-related mitigation measures wil] be incorporfited into the construction plans during the encroachment permit process. See the following website link for more 'information: http ://www.dot. ca. gov/hq/traffops/devel°pserv/permits/ Scan Nozzari, District Office Chief Office of Permits California DOT, District 4 P.O-'Box 2.3660 Oaktand, CA 94623-0660 mobility acro~'s California" 0/./08/04 14:51 FAX 5102865513 SYSTEM®IONAL PLANNING -~ STATE CLEARINGltO Mr. A~dy Byd~ January g, 1004 Page 4 Please forward a copy of'the revised environment~l document, staff report and the City's transportation impact fee policy to thc address below as soon as they are available. pan'icia Maurice, Associate Transportation Pl_~nucr Office of Transit and Community Planning, Mail Station 1 OD Califm'rfia DOT, District 4 1 t 1 Grand Avenue Oakland, CA 94612-3717 Please feel free re ed or email Patricia Manrice of my staff ar (510) 622-1644 or patricia mam-ice@doz.ca.~ov with any questions regarding this tetter. Sincerely, T~ABLE ' District Branch Chief IGR/CBQA Endo sure c: Ms. Terry Roberts, Srme Cl~ar/nghouse [~004 mobility acro~s Ct~l~fornit~" "~ DISTRICT 705t Dublin Bo'o. ievard Dublin, calh-o{'-a.ia 94568 F~,.X: 925 829 i 180 December 9, 2003 City of Dublin - Community Development Department Attn: Andy Byde, Senior Planner 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 SUBJECT: Comments Letter 3.1 OEO 1 g ~003 · PA 02-34, IKEA Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Dear Mr. Byde: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above subject document. The Dublin San Ramon Services District has the following comments: 1. Page 6, Section 3.1 - DSRSD operates a fluoridation facility at the southwest comer of 3.1.1 the site. 2'. Exhibit 4 - The aerial photograph has Dublin Bird labeled as Martenelli Way. ,3.1.2 Thank you for consideration, in this matter. please contact me at (925) 875-2242. If you have any questions regarding these comments SVD:mb cc: Dave Requa David Behrens File: DP-02-281,205-02. Chron (,....,;ON~m,~, I~ON 'ViAi'qAGEMENT AGENOV '1333 BROADWAY. SUITE 220 o OAKLAND CA 94612 ,- PHONE:, 1510) 836-2560 '. FAX: r51 O) 836-21 85 E-MAIL: rnail@accrn~¢a.gov · WEB SITE: accma.ca..gov December 23, 2003 Andy Byde Sen/or Plarmer Planning Department City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Letter 3.2 REOEIVr!'_¢ DEC g 6 Z0O3 DUBLIN PLANNING SUBJECT: Corrmcents on the Drat~ Supplemental EIR for tile [K. EA.and Dublin Retail Center Projects .in the City of Dublin Dear Mr; Byde: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the-City of Dublin's Draft Supplemental E1R (DS'EIR) for the 14.34 acre rKEA project and 13.2 acre Dublin Retail Center project. The project would allow approval and construction of an IKEA retail store totaling 317,000 square feet including retail sales, restaurant, warehouse and 1,130 site parking spaces, and would include the 'Dubt~, Retail Center, consisting of up to I37,000 square feet ofretai.'I space, and related uses on 13.2 acres of land w/th 665 on- site parking spaces. The project requ/res an Amendment to the Eastern Dul~tin General Plan and Specific Plan, Stage 1 & 2 rezoning and Development Plans, Site Development Review for the IKEA store, subdivision maps and a Development Agreement. The project is located immediately north of the 1-580 Freeway, west of Hacienda Boulevard, east of Arnold Road and south of future Marffnelli Drive. The ACCMA has reviewed the DSEIR and respectful2y submits the following comments. These comments are .consistent with the comments we made in response to the NOP for the P,23EIR on April 18, .2003-' .and to the GPA f0r IKEA Project on October 22, 2003. Where possible, RDEIR page numbers are referenced. Page 67, First Paragraph: In the £rrst sentence, reference to ACCMA standards for the. LOS mon/tor/ng program should be deleted. LOS Monitoring Element of ~e Congestion Management Program (CMP) is applicable only for monitoring existing conditions. Th/s project is subject to the requirements of the Land Use Analysis Program of the CMP and for that element the Alameda County CMA does not have a policy for demrmin/ng a tlsreshotd of significance. Professional judgment should be appli ed to 'determine the signit~cance of projeCt impacts. · Page 68, Table 4.3.10 - CMA Trip Generation Assessment: In order' to Calculate the net trips generated by the IKEA Project, trip generation estimated for. the Campus 3.2.1 3.2.2 Mr. Andy Byde December 23, 2003 Page 2 Office proje¢~ was deducted from the IKEA Center' trips generation estimation. This could be done only if the Peak Hours used for both priests are the same. Page 57, 2nd paragraph of the report states that peak hours determined for the IKEA project were 7:30 - 8:30 AM and 5:00 - 6:00 PM. Ple~ase confirm whether the Campus Office project also used the above peak' hours in its trip generation estimation. Page 76, Table 4.3.8 PM Peak Hour Conditions: This page is missing from the 3.2.3 report. This table is essential for understanding the Buildout PM .Peak Hour Operations. Please incorporate it in the report. Page 78 - Tables 4.3.12 & 4.3.13 -Year 2025 Mainline Freeway Operations: Tables 3.2.4 4.3:12 & 4.3.13 sho,w that the freeway capacity us ed in the D SEIR was 2300 pc/h/In. The adopted 200 t CMP of the CMA uses Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 1985 wherein freeway capacity is 2000 pc/h/In. Therefore., .these tables should be revised using the HCM t985 Standards for freeway capacity as required by the 2001 CMP. Table 6, Appendix 8.7 - Traffic Impact Analysis: The analysis assumes the same percentage of pass-by'traffic for both IKEA Store and the shopping center. Since the tKEA Store generally is more of. a trip destination than the shopping center, the percentage of pass-by traffic assumed appears to be high. Therefore, please provide supporting documentation for the pass-by traffic assumption for the IKEA Store. In this regard, please compare the trip generation estimation including the pass-by traffic assumption used in the Trak-fie Impact Analysis prepared for IKEA, EmerYVilte along with the actual traffic coUnts collected from [KEA~Emeryville for this DSEtR. Responses to the following comments communicated through our letter of October 22, 2003 have not been incorporated in the DSEIK Please incorporate them. - Potential impacts of the project on CMP transit levels of service must be analyzed. 3.2.6 (See 2001 CI¢IP, Chapter 4)2 Transit service standards are t5-30"minute'headways for bus service and 3.75-15 minute headways for BART during peak hours. The analysis should address the issue of transit funding as a mitigation measure in the context of the cMA's policies as discussed above. - The Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station, which appears to be approximatetyone-quarter 3.2.7 mile from the proposed project site, is the site of an approved Transit Village with proposed high density transit-oriented development, and .has .been the recipient of funding for a parking structure to support the transit village. The Alameda County CMA.is developing a policy' to encourage transit-oriented development. How will the design and location Of the 454,000 .square feet. of retail, warehouse and related ttses for Ikea and the Dublin Retail Center and the t,795 parking spaces on the 27.54 acre site encourage transit and pedestrian use in the project area? Mr. Andy Byde December 23, 2003 Pa~e .3 The enviro.nmentaI document should provide information on how alt of the mitigation measures .on the MTS will be funded. Regard/rig Supplemental Impact TRA-3,. mitigation measures identified, in page 67 of the DSEIR, to contribute the proportionate share towards regional freeway improvements should be incorporated in the summary on Page t-3. Once again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on this DSEIR. Please do nor hesitate to contact me at 510/836-2560 ext. 24 if you reqmre any additional irC'ormation. 3.2.8 Sincerely, Saravana Suthanthira Associate Transportation Planner CC: Chron file: CMP - Environmental Review Opinions - Responses - 2003 ALAMEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 5~97 PA~KSIDE DRtVE ,~ PL~ASANTON, CAL FORNIA 94588-5127 ~¢ r~ONE {B251 484-2600 ~,,',x i925) 482-39'~ December 30, 2003 Mr. i~dy BYde, Senior Planner Community Development Department City of Dublin 1'00 Civic Plaza Dublin, California 94568 Letter 3.3 Draft SuPPlemental EIR 0DSEIR) IKEA Project (PA 02-034) Dear Mr. Byde: Zone 7 has reviewed th~s CEQA document in the context of our mission to provide wholesale treated water, non-potable water for agriculture and irrigated turf, flood protection, and groundwater and stream management.in the Livermore-Amador Valley. We do nor have any cerements to the Draft SEIR at this time. However, enclosed for your reference are copies of two previous Zone 7 comment letters (the first regarding the Initial Study and Notice of Preparation to the Draft SEIR, and ttie second regarding a devetopmen~ review, dated October 23, 2003, and August 26, 2003, respectively). These corranents need to still be addressexi. 'We appreciate the opportunity ~o comment on this document. Please feel free to contact me at (925) 484-2600, ext. 400, jhoren@zoneTwater, com, or Jack Fong at ext. 245, jfong@zone7water, com, if yon have any'questions or commems. Sincerely,. Jim Heron principal Bn=~ineer Advance Planning JPH:JF:jr Enclosures CC: Ed Curan'Sngs, Zone 7 John Mahoney, Zone 7 Y.i<2. Chm~ Zone 7 Jack F0ng, Zone 7 p :.~ dv~ ldCE O_AR ~rr~-~-r~a~P roj ~-Dmf~EIR 3.3.1 ALAMEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSF_RVATiON PARKS, IDB DRIVE PLEASANT©N CAL]FORI',JIA D4588-512T 0cm~er_;, 2003 ~'HONg (B25. /,84,26Q0 ;A× f.q25) ,4.62-3914. _M_r. Amdy Byde, Semor Planner Conmmunity Development D~nz Cie'of Dub~ Dub~ CA 94568 ~fi~ Study ~d Notice of~m~don ~OP) for ~ ~ E~ ~:~e~ C~t:r D~v~]opmm:z ~oj ~:t ~A 02-034) Dear ~/=. Byte: Zone ? has rmviewed the referenced CBQA documenzs in the contexl of our.resporsibilities to proxdd¢ wholesale treated wac:r, non-potable warm-for a.D-iculture ~d.in-igat~ mr% flood protection, and =m-om:dwater m~d .~rean: mmn~gem~nt in the LJ.vmnnorm-Aznador Valley. ,~iso, enclosed ..for your r~f~renoe ~s our urev~ous revim~ le~r datmd Aunt 26, 2003 for ~c~a P~v~topn:~t ~A 02-03~).. ~ co~=n~ ~ ~ follows: Hycirolo=%, and Water QusHty, Pm-m.~aph gm.' page 35. Tae second para. apb states .that development p.mj ects tha~ result h,~ soil distv~b ance of at ]e~ five acres of lined are required to subnzit a Notice of Intent to tb.s Sram Water P,.osources Control Board. ?leas~ be ad~ds~d thc% ~ ofMmrch 10, 2003, t%~ size Cm-eshotd for aN?DES O~eral Consa-~ction lP~n~:_it is reduced from five acres to ode acre of dist-~n'bed hmcL Hydro]o~:~v and Water Quality, Para~'aP- h 84 paLse 36. lVfitigation for fne cre,~tion of amy new imp~'m-vious areas.within the Lh,ermore-Amactor Vali%, is addressed throuf_h ~e collection of Special Drainage Area (SDA) 7-1 ch-25nage fees. Zen: ?'s se~ndard rnitig~on practice 5s 'co coil=cZ an SDA 7-1 fee on tony new' buff ~dings, improvements (including but not iimitM'co paving), or sUnctur:s ~o b~ constructed that substantially increase the impendonsmess of the land surface. The proposcd project vdli be com'-coting to'an existing Zons 7 flood oon~ol f~iH~ ~ O 2-1), a ~buZ~ to ~ot C~. Hy&~c c~cutaffo~ for th~ propos~ ~in'ag~ ;5~t~m sho~d b~ pro~ddsd to Zons ? to ~ ~at dssi~ flows do not adv~sty imam, act s~:g hy~a~cs do~~ of~e proj~t 3.3.2 3.3.3 October 23, 2003 Page 2 3. Hydrology and VCater Quality, '?azagraph 8f, page 37. The Project Des~pSork page 4, states that recycled water serv/ces would be provided by .' 3.3.4 DSRSD in accorrt~nce with DSRSD's Eastern Dublin Faci//t/es/~mster Plan, when and where available to reduce the need for potable water. The referenoedpara~m'aph does not address the potent/al salt loading kapacts over our main groundwater bas4~, Zone 7 considers alt applied water (ra~t~water is an exception), inclading both potable water and rccycted .water, to contribute salt loading to the groundwater b~.rk and use o£recycled water r~uires mt/gat[on of the asset/trod knpacm. The Crrouadwater Dem~nera~_zaSon Project is the recommendedproj eot to accomplish Zone 7's Salt Manageznen~ Program's goal o£non-degradation o£our main groumctwaler bas/2 from the long-term buildup of salts. Zone7 exp~ts To con\olete the 5rot phase' of th/s proj eot in 2006. We request that the City support the Groundwater Demmeralizafion ?roj eot in the Draft E!R as the approphate rnitigat/on for the proposed project. Othenvi~e, we request that the lead agency address the m/figmSon o£any salt loading/.mpac*,s of the proj eot staoutd .Zone 7' s future Groundwater. Dern/aemtqradon'Proj eot not be tenon-acted and placed imm operation. We appreciate the opporturnW zo comment on th/s dobument. Please feel free to oonta~t me at (~.25) 484-2600, exl. 400~ jh.o:~en~Z°ncTwater, com, or JackFong at ext. 245, jfong~,zone7water, com:/!' you have any quos'dons Or cornrnc~ns. "' S/ncerely, 3'522 I-torch Principal En=mhneer Adv~,nce P1 ~nrdng Dave Re,mm, DSR. SD Ed Cummings, Zone 7 3ohm Ma_honey, Zone 7 foe Sero, Zone 7 Mona Olmsted, Zone 7 jack Fong, Zone 7 J;qN-02-2004 16:38 FROM:CITY OF DUBLIN 9850~36628 i2/~0/280~ 1~.:~ ZONE ? tO~T~K DISTRICT TO:510 5486123 ALAMEDA.COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER OONSERVATION DIgTRIOT, j, ,,, }¢~. AudyByd~ Se~orPimmer , comm~m/~ Dcv~toprnen~ D~pm~zm~on,~ City of Dubliu 1 o0 Civi~ D~ Dear Mr, Bydc: 3.3.5 3,3.6 DEC-;Z~B-21FdI~B 0&:44PM T~_)9~ 4SE 39i4 iD)CiTY r~' DUBLIN JAN-OB-B884 1G: 38 FROM: CITY OF DUBLIN 9858336608 12/38x2883 14:38 Z~ ? WAT~ DI~ICT o 8~28 T0:510 $4851E~ DgC=Iopmemt, that mcrea~.impcr~i0us ~a ~ ~j~t ~ $~:~ ~~(SDA) 7-1 ~5~on for ~pr~ ofv~g ~w ~ ~t m~).~d bu~_!~, ~,~wa~ ~c. (upon ~Hc~on for ~l~g ~t). ~ ~c n~.~i~g Zo=~ 7 floo~ cobol ~2~=~ ~ ~z lom~m. Shofld ~u ha'e: ~y flood ~n~l ~latcd q,~oaajpls~e'con~ ~a~on Borch~ at ,x~sion 402. F~ ~ ~~ at ~ toq~o~ p!~e ref~ m ~uo 7'P.~ N~. 00-093D. YJ~KzCB.~r ~: Cl~ytcm. Bomhc~ Zcmo 7~ Flood 480 · . 3.3.7 3.3.8 DEC-ZO-2883 01:44PM TEL)9~_~ 46~ 3914 I0)CITY OF OUE~_IN PAGE:086 F ADWIINISTRATIO N ~ 2849" BUILD ING 1052 S. Livcrmore Avanue Livermore. CA 94550-4899 Ph: (925) 960-4000 Fax (925) 960~058 . TDD (925) MAYO~ 1 COgN~IL Ph' 960-~010 · F~x: 9604025 C~Y MAN~G~ ~: 960-4040 · Fax: 960~045 Phc 960~150 · Fax: 960~180 RISK MAnAGemENT Ph: 960-4170 · Fax: CITY CLERK Ph: 9604200 · Fax: 960~205 Ph: 960~0 * Fax: ~ngine~ring ~iv~ian Ph' 960-45D0 · Fax: 960~505 Ph: 960~380 * F~: 96D~149 P~nn~g Di~n Ph: 96D~50 · Fax: 960~59 ~CE D~PAR~ENT PH: 960~300 · Fax: F~ D EP~ E~ 4550 E~t ~v~nue 'LIB~RY 1000 S. Liwmor* Avenue Ph: 373-5500 · Fax: Ph: 9~0~00 · Fax: 9604105 PONCE DEPARTNI ~ Phc 371r~900 , Fax: 371~95~ TDD . PUBLIC SER~CES 3500 Rober~on Pa~k Pk: 960-8000 , Fax: 960-8005 Airport Division Pb 373-5280 · Fax: 373-5042 Go~ Course ~iviMon 909 Clubhouse Driv= ?h: 373-5239 * Fa~' 373-5203 ~a~renanee Di~sion 3500 Robanson Park ?h: 960-8020 , Fax' 980-8025 ~arer Resources Div~on 101 W. Jack London Bird, 960-8}00, Fax:960-S]05 'CJTY OF L 5 &/ ORE December 30, 2003 Andy Byde, .Senior Plarmer City of Dublin - Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 · Letter 3.4 RE: tKEA Development Project Draft Supplemental EIR Dear Mr. BYde: Thank you for the opportunity to review.the Draft Supplemental Er/vironmenml Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed IKEA Development Project. The project includes a General Plan/Specific'Plan Amendment to provide for the development of a 317,000 square foot IICEA building and a 137,000 square foot retail center located west of Hacienda Boulevard and eaSt of Arnold Drive in Dublin. :- The Draft Supplemental EIK acknowledges the significant and unavoidable cumulative impact of the project on regional roadwaya including .I-580. The Easte-m Dublin EIR included mitigation measures, such as developments' contribution of its proportionate · share towards roadway improvements and TSM programs to address,' but not fully mitigate, the cumulative transportation impact of the East Dublin Specific Plan, which m¢tudes the project site. tn addition m these mitigation measures, the proposed project should be required to knplement ramp metering of the westbound. 1-580 on-ramps at Hacienda Drive. We encourage the City of Dublin to implement ramp metering at ali · freeway interchanges within the City of Dublin to help increase traffic flow on the freeways. Lfyou have any questions regarding this mat~er, please contact Susan Frost, Senior Planner at (925) 9604d62 Sincerely, Susan Frost Senior PNnner Marc Robert~, Community Development Director Bric Brown, Planning Manager Bob Vinn, Senior Transportation Engineer Allen Matkins Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LI.? attorneys at Mw 333 Bush Street 17th Floor San Francisco California 94~.04-2806 telephone. 415 837 :L5;I. 5 facsimile, 455 837 ~.5~6 www.alienmatkins,com writer. Michael Patrick Durkee t. 415 273 7455 file number. 1409~005ISF603~28.01 e, mdurkee@altenma~ms,com December 30, 2003 VIA FAX (925. 833.6628) Andy Byde Senior Planner City of Dublin P.O. Box 2340, 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Letter 4.1 Re: Comments Regarding IKEA Project Draft Supplemental Impact Report . Dear Mr. Byde: On behalf of our client, IKEA, the Project Sponsor, thank you for this opportunity to comment on the Draft Supplemental EIR ("DSEIR"). We appreciate the excellent job City Staff and the EIR Consultant have done on the DSEIR, and we believe that it, in conjunction with the original EIR it supplements, adequately addresses the potential direct and indirect impacts of the Project. Our comments follow, each desig'nated with a number (and letter where appropriate) for ease of reference when responding. 1. First, it is important to note that neither the Commerce One development proposal (approved earlier for this site) nor any other office development proposal would be viable on this site for 10 years or more. The simple fact is that the current market supply of office space far exceeds the market demand for office space, and will continue to do so for well into the foreseeable future~ This is a scenario prevalent in the greater Bay Area,, not just the Th-Valley reg/on. In fact, property owners within major Business Parks such as Hacienda Business Park 'are actively converting office space uses to non-office uses because of this market glut and "softness" for office space. In other words, office development of this site is simply not a Viable optionI at this time or some time to come. 2. Second, as set forth 'in the SEIR, we wish to point out that the:,Project Would not increase sig-nificant impacts over those anticipated from development of the Commerce One project .and area development, and in some cases the Project would actually lessen the impacts anticipated from such office development. San Francisco Century City Los Angeles Orange County San Diego Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LLP attorneys at law Andy Byde Senior Planner December 30, 2003 Page 2 a. Traffic impacts in the weekday "AM Peak Hour" would be similar for both the IKEA and Commerce One projects, but the IKEA Project would improve operations at 2 of the'l 8 key intersections studied over the Commerce One project. Weekend traffic impacts of the IKEA Project are greater than the Commerce One project, but nonetheless, intersection operations still would remain "acceptable" under City of Dublin criteria at all times under the IKEA Project. Overall AM and PM peak hour trips would decrease with the IKEA Project compared to the Commerce One project, while cumulative intersection and freeway segment conditions would be similar under both scenarios, with IKEA contributing less peak hour traffic than Commerce One to these conditions. Impacts to biological resources and construction-related air quality .impacts would be identical for both the IKEA Project and the Commerce One proposal, because the same area would be equally disturbed for the two projects. c. 'While both the EA Project and Commerce One project would contribute similarly to regional ozone levels, the IKEA Project would have potentially improved roadside · carbon monoxide concentrations compared with the COmmerce One project, and the IKEA Project would not result in any exceedance of carbon monoxide standards (whereas the Commerce One project would). 3. Th/rd and finally, we wish to underscore that the Project implements the City's vision for the fiscal health and devetopmem of this area (as reflected in its General Plan, Eastern Dubhn Specific Plan and related land use regulations), and that the benefits of the Project far outweigh its impacts. In addition to furthering the objectives identified in Section 3.4 of the DSEIR, the Project promotes the City's goals and policies in the following manner: a. The proposed development of an IKEA Store and Lifestyle Retail Center will complement the existing range of retail opportunities in Eastern Dublin. These uses will provide a source of attractive, well priced home furnishings, pedestrian-oriented retail center, and restaurant opportunities that wilt help establish Dublin as a center for destination shopping. The Project will provide new shopping and restaurant opportunities not yet available in this part of Dublin, within a short distance of existing retail opportunities, thus leading to an increase of shoppers for all businesses in the area. Additionally, the Project will be within walking d/stance from the higher density residential development existing and planned nearby. Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LLP attorneys at law Andy Byde Senior Planner December 30, 2003 Page 3 b. The Project will further the General Plan objective for the Eastern Dublin Planning Area of providing a broad range of non-residential uses, including retail commercial. The General Plan's Guiding Policy for the Eastern Dublin Planning Area is to "encourage development of a full range of commercial and employment generating uses that will meet the needs of the City and the surrounding Tri-Valley are, as." This Project provides a much...n, ceded retail center for existing and planned future residents within the approved distribution of commercial land. c. The primary 'Land Use Goal of the East Dublin Specific Plan is to "establish an attractive and vital community that provides a balanced and fully integrated range of residential, commercial, employment, recreational, and social opportunities." Another Land Use Goal is to serve "the shopping, entertainment and service needs of Dublin and the surrounding area." This Project helps the City achieve these goals by providing a variety of commercial, employment and social opportunities in a retail setting. A Policy supporting this Goal is tO "concentrate regionally oriented commercial uses south of Dublin Boulevard and near freeway interchanges where convenient vehicular access will limit traffic impacts on the rest of eastern Dublin." The proximity of theProject site to the Highway 580 and Hacienda Drive interchange is consistent with these goals and policies and facilitates efficient transportation. The Project will provide a "destination retail" experience on a visually prominent site accessible ~from major regional traffic corridors. The site will be developed in a landscaped and "pedestrian-friendly" fashion - - with restaurants and related leisure services - - to heighten the shopping experience and further enhance the concept of "spending the day out shopping." The combination of the [K.EA store with the Lifestyle Retail Center'will offer a shopping experience complementary to the nearby Hacienda Crossings retail center and add to the range of retail and restaurant opportunities available to the shopper in Dublin. d. The Project will provide sig-nificant fiscal contributions to the City. There will be a strong property tax income stream from the high value developments on the IKEA and Lifestyle Retail Center sites. Further, and more importantly, both retail efforts will generate substantial sales tax revenue to the City - - which would not be realized if the site is developed with an office use - - while creating no greater impact on traffic, biology, air, or municipal services (such as police and fire) than that presented by an office use such as Commerce One. Alien Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LL? Andy Byde Senior Planner December 30, 2003 Page 4 Again, thank you for this opportunity to comment. MPD/mpd cc: Doug Greenholz, IKEA Randy Ackerman, Opus West Annotated Comment Letters and Responses IKEA Final EIR PA02-034 City of Dublin .......................................... Page 4 February 2004 Comment 2.1: The commenter notes that no state agendes have submitted comments on the DSEIR. The DSEIR public comment period closed on January 2, 2004. Response: Comment acknowledged. No further response required. Letter 2.2: State of CaIifornia, Department of Transportation (Caltrans) This comment letter was received well after the close of the public comment period. Although CEQA does not require a written response, the City is including the following in the interest of providing the decisionmakers and the public with information on the issues raised in the letter. comment 2.2.1: Mitigation should be identified for any roadway mainline section or intersection with insufficient capacity to maintain an acceptable LOS with the addition of project-related and/or cumulative traffic. The project's fair share contribution, finandng, scheduling, implementation responsibilities and lead agency monitoring should be fully discussed for all proposed mitigation measures. Where additional roadway improvements are not feasible, downscaling the project should be explored. The commenter refers to the Transportation-Related Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Guidelines (per Assembly Bill 1807) that requires lead agendes to submit mitigation monitoring information to Caltrans. Response: Pursuant to the discussion offered on page 67 of the DSEIR regarding project requirements to address the project cumulative impact on adjacent freeways, the project will be required to pay for its proportionate share of cumulative impacts to 1-580 and 1-680, by payment of Th-Valley Transportation Development (TVTD) Fees to construct planned freeway improvements, including HOV lanes, auxiliary lanes, and interchange improvements. The project will be required to pay its proportionate share toward public transportation improvements to help reduce traffic on the freeways and other roadways in the Tri-Valley area, by payment of the TVTD Fee to fund the West Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station project. In addition, as explained in the DSEIR on pages 55 and 56, the City of Dublin has fee programs in place that require developers in Eastern Dublin to pay for transportation improvements, including those regional improvements identified in the 1993 Eastern Dublin EIR as mitigation measures. Similar to other development projects in Eastern Dublin, the proposed project will contribute a proportionate share to the construction of improvements and mitigation measures along the 1-580 corridor. Such freeway-related improvements and mitigation measures include: i'KEA Final EIR PA 02-034 Ci~ of :~Ublin Page 5 February 2004 Construction of approximately 8.2 miles of PIOV lanes on 1-580 from Tassajara Road to Vasco Road. After addition of these HOV lanes, this segment of 1-580 will have a total of four mixed lanes and One HOV lane in each direction. $8.0 million in TvTD Fee funds, to which the proposed project will contribute a proportionate share, has been allocated to this improvement. The Project Study Report has been completed and approved by Caltrans. Several design alternatives are currently under consideration for this improvement. The proposed HOV lanes will help provide relief to traffic congestion on 1-580. Construction of auxiliary lanes on 1-580 between Tassajara Road and Airway Boulevard, and east of Airway Boulevard, as part of Mitigation Measures 3.3/3.0 and 3.3/5.0 of the Eastern Dublin EIR, respectively. The proposed project will contribute a proportionate share to the construction of these auxiliarY lanes by paying a r~gional fee, which the City of Dublin has implemented through the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (see Fee Programs discussion on pages 55 and 56 of the DSEIR). Auxiliary lanes in the vidnity of the project site (i.e., between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road) were recently constructed as part of the Santa Rita Road/Tassajara Road interchange improvement project, which was sponsored and administered by the City of Dublin. The proposed auxiliary lanes are not intended to increase mainline freeway capacity per se, but will mitigate operational problems caused by merging and diverging vehicles at the interchanges, thereby reducing traffic congestion on 1-580. The planned six-lane Dublin Boulevard extension to connect existing Dublin Boulevard with North Canyons Parkway in Livermore will carry substantial volumes of 1-580 corridor traffic, providing relief to the freeway itself. The Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee, to which the proposed project will contribute a proportionate share, will fund this extension. The tables referenced in the comment are included in the DSEIR's cumulative buildout analysis for year 2025 beginning on page 63. Cumulative freeway conditions are discussed beginning at page 66. The DSEIR analysis and conclusions are consistent with the Eastern Dublin EIR conclusions that even with roadway and highway improvements, cumulative freeway impacts will be significant and unavoidable. (Resolution 53-93). As noted in the DSEIR, "the proposed IKEA Project is expected to generate similar levels of freeway- related traffic as compared to the previous forecasts in the Eastern Dublin EIR." (p. 66). Further, adding the Project traffic to Year 2025 volumes would not change the levels of service for AM or PM peak hours (p. 67). Thus, future cumulative traffic impacts for the freeways will be significant and unavoidable with or without the Project. Downsizing the project as suggested in the comment would not be expected to substantially reduce, let alone avoid, Year 2025 cumulative freeway impacts. Similarly, phasing the Project would not affect the DSEIR conclusions since the impact is identified for cumulative buildout in 2025. Through the Eastern Dublin EIR and the DSEIR, IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 City of Dublin Page 6 February 2004 the City has discussed feasible mitigations for reducing the identified freeway impacts of the Project. No further analysis is required. The CiV nOtes that because freeway impacts continue to be significant and unavoidable, a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be required for any Project approval. The commenter also directs the City to Caltrans' Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Guidelines, pursuant to Assembly Bill 1807. This bill is contained in CEQA section 21081.7 and requires that transportation information that results from specified project mitigation monitoring programs be submitted to the regional transportation agency and to Caltrans. Any Project approval will require the City to adopt a mitigation monitoring program; transportation information resulting from the program will be submitted as appropriate under the statute. · Comment 2.2.2: The project contribution to LOS degradation should be clearly identified on Tables 4.3.12 and 4.3.13. Response: As shown on Tables 4.3.12 and 4.3.13 of the DSEIR, the proposed project would not degrade freeway LOS as compared to cumulative conditions under the approved Campus Office designation. The incremental changes to the V/C ratios on the study segments were derived from Tables 4.3.12 and 4.3.13 and are listed below: Year 2025 Mainline Freeway Impacts, IKEA Project Incremental V/C Contribution ~A Project IncrementS' Loca'tS.on ¥~C.:Contr~b~tion A1vIpeak : ,PM Pe~- How Hour 1-580, 1-680 to Dougherty Road Eastbound -0.013 +0.032 Westbound +0.014 +0.005 1-580, Dougherty Road to Hacienda Drive .... Eastbound -0.010 +0.019 Westbound +0.012 +0.002 1-580, Hacienda Drive to Tassaiara Road Eastbound 0.00 -0.015 Westbound -0.026 +0.001 !-580, Tassaiara Road to Fallon Road Eastbound +0.001 -0.018 Westbound -0.024 +0.002 IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 City of Dublin Page 7 February 2004 1-680, 1-580 to Alcosta Boulevard Northbound +0.008 +0.003 Southbound -0.010 +0.0i7 'I-680, 1-580 to Stoneridge Drive NorthbOund -0.008 +0.021 Southbound +0.010 +0.003 Comment 2.2.3: The commenter states that the IKEA store in Dublin would draw customers from the South Bay, including San Jose, and from locations to the east such as Tracy, Stockton and Sacramento, and that the assumption that Dublin IKEA would generate 25% fewer weekday trips than the Emeryvilte store should be adjusted upward to reflect the market demand potentials. The commenter requests that a comparison be made between the actual trip generation from Emeryville IKEA and trip generation estimates considered during the environmental review of that pro)ect. Response: Please see Comment 3.2.5 for a discussion of the trip generation methodology used in the DSEIR. Designed to achieve a worst case analysis, the DSEIR assumes 75% of the actual Emeryville trips during the AM and PM peak hours even though sales pro1 ections suggest an approximately 61% figure would be more appropriate. Furthermore, the Emeryville figures were generated before the recent opening of the East Palo Alto store. As such, they represent traffic when the Emeryville store was the only store in the Bay Area, and do not reflect traffic that has likely since been redirected to the new store. Trip distribution assumptions, shown on Figure 6 of the traffic analysis contained in the SDEIR Appendix, indicates hat nearly one half (46%) of the anticipated patronage of the proposed IKEA facility would originate either in the South Bay/San Jose area or from the Central Valley. The remaining visitors would originate either locally, within the Tri-Valley area (14%), or would travel to and from the north on 1-680 (30%) or would travel to and from the proposed site from the west using 1-580 (10%). Therefore, a significant number of anticipated store visitors have been assumed from either the San Jose Area or the Central Valley. Comment 2.2.4: How well does actual trip generation from the Emeryville IKEA store correlate to trip generation estimates provided during that project's environmental review? Response: The City of Dublin does not have the Emeryville environmental review documents or traffic projections prepared before the store was approved and opened. However, this information is not relevant to the tKEA Final EIR PA02-034 City of Dublin Page 8 February 2004 current Project traffic analysis since the analysis is based on actnal traffic figures from the Emeryville store, not from proiections. Comment 2.2.5: The pass-by trip rates for a store such as IKEA are likely negligible. Caltrans does not accept pass-by trip rates in excess of 15% without prior consultation with the Department. The commenter r,,efers to the Department's "GUid~tf6f the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies for review by Project spons0fs pfi0r to initiating traffic analyses affecting state fad]tries. Response: The City acknowledges that the referenced Guide recommends consultation for pass-by trips over 15%; however the DSEIR discussion establishes that this figure is not likely to be an accurate reflection of the expected pass-by occurrences for the Project. The traffic analysis presented in the DSEIR included an evaluation of pass-by rates for the Project and the authors of the DSEIR believe .that the rates stated in the document are appropriate. Please see a detailed discussion of this topic under Response 3.2.5. The City's traffic engineer has reviewed both the DSEIR analysis and traffic report, as well as this comment from Caltrans. Based on the analyses and in his professional judgment, the pass-by rates in the DSEIR are appropriate and reflect the different Project peak hours and pass-by characteristics for weekends and weekdays, as discussed in Response 3.2.5. Furthermore, the 34% pass-by trip rate used for the project analysis is consistent with the ITE recommended practice for trip generation as outlined in ITE Trip Generation Handbook (October 1998). The commenter's pass-by figure does not appear to reflect either the documented traffic patterns of other IKEA stores or the most current ITE recommendation. Pursuant to CEQA, the City's analysis provides a more accurate estimate of the Project's traffic generation and patterns than the commenter's figure, and thus a more accurate identification of potential impacts and mitigation measures. Comment 2.2.6: Project trip distribution should be revised to show the majority of project trips accessing the project from 1-580. Response: Figures 7A and 713 (Proposed Project Trip Assignment) of the traffic study in Appendix 8.7 (Traffic Impact Analysis) of the DSEtR provide information regarding project trip assignment. As can be derived from these Figures, 86% of total project traffic was assigned to access the project via 1- 580, based on the project trip distribution listed on page 61 of the DSEIR, including 76% of total project traffic using 1-580 and accessing the sitevia .the Hacienda Drive interchange which is immediately adjacent to the project site. Based on the above trip assignment percentages, the DSEIR did assign the majority of project trips to 1-580 to access the project site, and no revisions to the project trip distribution are required or necessary. The traffic impact conclusions and mitigation measures set forth, in the DSEIR remain the same. IKEA Final EIR. PA 02-034 Page 9 City of Dublin February 2004 · comment 2.2.7: T~e intersection traffic counts used in the DSEIR do not reflect traffic conditions with the CUrrent ramp metering in place on eastbound 1-580. Traffic data and interseCtion analysis should be updated to reflect ramp-metering conditions. Res~onsg: As indicated on page 57 of the DSEIR, weekday AM and PM turning movement counts ~vere collected at the study intersections in February 2003, and the traffic analysis Was begun immediately thereafter. At that time, the target date for implementing ramp metering on eastbound 1-580 (i.e., at the Dougherty Road/HOpyard Road, Hacienda Drive and Tassaiara Road/Santa Rite Road interchanges) was unknown. As a result, it ~vas not possible to postpone or delay traffic studies indefinitely in the area in anticipation of ramp metering activation at an undetermined future date. Nonetheless, in an effort to recognize the potential for ramp metering effects without delaying the pr°ieCt indefinitely, the traffic analysis in the DSEIR did take into consideration the effects of implementing ramp metering on eastbound 1-580 during the ~veekday PM peak period, based on engineering judgment and knowledge of the study area. For example, as indicated on page 64 of the DSEIR, the traffic analysis assigned freeway-bound trips to the closest proximity interchanges, ~vhile overall background traffic was re- distributed more evenly among the interchanges to simulate anticipated ramp metering effects on traffic patterns in the study area. R~ me~Hn~ Was Iater actiVated on ~une 30, 2003 and traffic patterns in the area were expected to change gradually over the summer months in reaction to ramp metering. Under Pre-ramp metering ("before") conditions, approximately 50% of the trips bound to eastbound 1-580 from the Dublin side of the freeway used the Tassajara Road/Santa Rite Road interchange to bypass freeway congestion in this direction, as indicated on Exhibit !& of the DSEIR. City of Dublin staff conducted Post-ramp metering ("after" condition) field observations in September and October 2003 and confirmed that traffic patterns in the study area had changed in a manner consistent with the trip modeling assump.tions that xvere used in the analysis to simulate the effects of ramp metering. For example, the "after" condition traffic flow on 1-580 appeared to have improved during the PM peak period, and trips have shifted more evenly among the three interchanges in the study area to access eastbound 1-580 during this period. Therefore, ramp-metering conditions were reflected adequately in the intersection LOS analysis and no updated traffic data or additional analysis is required. The traffic impact conclusions and mitigation measures set forth in the DSEIR remain the same. Comment 2.2.8: DisCUss the downstream effects of LOS F on 1-580; for example, clarify how certain 1-580 se~ents will operate at LOs 1~ while other segments will operate at LOS D and E as shown in Table 4~3.13. IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 Page 10 City of Dublin February 2004 Response: The LoS analysis reported on Table 4.3.13 of the DSEIR is based on the volume-to-capacity ratio for freeway segments in the vicinity of the project during the PM peak hour under year 2025 traffic conditions. The year 2025 traffic volumes were based on the Tri-Valley Transportation Model (TVTM). The PM peak hour LOS on 1-580 is projected to be F on the eastbound segments from 1-680 to Dougherty Road and from Tassajara Road to Fallon Road in year 2025. The table shows that the intermediate segments of eastbound 1-580 between Dougherty Road and Tassajara Road would operate at LOS D ore at Buildout with or without the Project. The more efficient LOS projected for these ifitermediate segments can be explained as follows: (!) The intermediate segments have higher throughput capacity in the eastbound direction than the outer segments, as the intermediate segments consist of 5 to 6 eastbound lanes compared to 4 lanes for the outer segments. (2) Eastbound traffic volumes during the PM peak hour are projected to be lower on the intermediate segments based on the TVTM model because the model predicts that a portion of freeway traffic would exit the freeway at the Dougherty Road/I-Iopyard Road interchange and use Dublin Boulevard, Stoneridge Drive and other parallel surface streets as alternate cut-through routes to bypass freeway congestion. Some of this cut-through traffic would re-enter the freeway at the Fallon Road/E1 Charro Road interchange with the anticipated extensions of Dublin Boulevard and Stoneridge Drive to Fallon Road. Comment 2.2.9: cI fy how the proposed project would cause the V/C ratio to decrease at some locations. Response: The Project site is currently designated for Campus Office uses in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, which uses were assumed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The DSEIR examines how the current proposal to change the land use designations to General Commercial and develop the IKEA project would change the traffic analysis and assumptions in the prior EIR. As explained on page 65 of the DSEIR, the Il<lEA project would generate fewer trips during the weekday A1Vi peak hour as compared to the existing Campus Office designation. During the weekday PM peak hour, the IKEA project and the existing .Campus Office designation would generate similar levels of traffic; however, the trip distribution and assignment characteristics differ dueto differences in land uses. As a result, the IKEA project would have mixed incremental impacts during the PM peak hour by increasing the V/C ratio at some locations and decreasing this ratio at other locations. For example, as explained on page 61 of the DSEIR, the re~onal trip distribution for the propOsed project was derived from primary trade areas established by IKEA property, Inc. and consisted of 75% of the trips accessing IKF'A Final EIR PA 02-034 Page 11 City of Dublin February 2004 the project site from the west (via 1-580 and 1-680), 11% accessing the site from the east (via 1-580), and 14% of the trips oripnating within the Tri-Valley area using surface streets. In contrast, the trip distribution for office trips based on previous traffic studies conducted for office developments in the area, such as Commerce One, Transit Center and Sybase, indicates that 33% of the trips would access the office site from the west (via 1-580 and 1-680), 25% would access the site from the east (via 1-580), and 42% of the trips would use surface streets within the Tri-Vallev area. As a result of these differences in trip distribution characteristics, the percentage assignments of total project trips to individual routes and intersection movements in the study area differ between the existing Campus Office designation a_nd the proposed IKEA prolect. Comment 2.2.10: Ten designs are presently being considered by Caltrans for the wi~dening of 1-580, one of which (variation 2.2) would zmpact approximately 2,772 square meters of the Project property to increase the future right-of-way of the 1-580 freeway. Response: The City acknowledges the comments and supports the cor~struction of additional capadty for 1-580, however neither the City nor the Project applicant has any control over the ultimate fight of way design adc{pted by Caltrans for the 1-580 HOV lane. Moreover, as noted by the commentator, only one of the 10 design alternatives would effect the property and that is the "worse-case" right of way scenario. In the event that Caltrans determines that it needs to condemn any portion of the Project property, it will have the legal authority to do so and will be required to proceed in the manner proscribed by law. Comment 2.2.11: Work that encroaches on the ROW requires an encroachment permit fr0m ~aitrans. iTraffiC~elated ~tigation measures will be incorporated into the construction plans during th~ permit process. Response: Comment regarding the need for encroachment permits for work in the ROW is acknowledged. If and when an encroachment permit is needed, the Project applicant will submit an application for this permit. Letter 3.1: Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) · Comment 3.1.1: DSRSD operates a fluoridation fadlity at the southwest corner of the site. Response: Comment acknowledged. This is a statement of fact, not a comment on an environmental topic, therefore no further response is necessary. IKEA Final EIR City of Dublin PA 02-034 Page 12 February 2004 Comment 3.1.2: The aerial photograph (Exhibit 4) has Dublin Boulevard labeled as Martinelli Way. Response: Comment acknowledged. Exhibit 4 is hereby corrected b_y reference to note that the east-west roadway on the north side of the site is nmmed Marfinelli Way. Dublin Boulevard is located to the north of Martinetli Way. Letter · 3.2: Alameda County Congestion Management Agency Comment 3.2.1: In the first sentence on page 67 the reference to ACCMA standards for the LOS monitoring program should be deleted. The monitoring standards are used by the ACCMA for existing conditions. The ACCMA does not have a policy for determining a threshold of significance. Professional judgment should be applied to determine the significance of project impacts. Response: It is acknowledged that ACCMA does not have a policy for determining a threshold of significance. However,_th_e_ACC,..l~. standards, established for the purpose of monitoring existing LO5 concnnons are mso appropriate for assessing the project's potential traffic impacts, and are used in this EIR as standards of significance based on the City of Dublin's professional judgment. Comment 3.2.2: Table 4.3.10, on page 68, the trip generation estimate for the previous campus office project was deducted from the proposed IKEA center trip generation. This could be done only if the peak hours for the uses were the same. Page 57 of the DSEIR notes that the peak hours for the IKEA Project: were determined to be 7:30-8:30 am and 5:00 -6:00 pm. Please confirm whether the campus office project also used the same peak hours for determining trip generation. Response: It appears that the commenter misinterpreted the above AM and PM peak hours as being the peak hours for the IKEA project. Intersection turning movement counts were collected in the study area during the AM and PM peak periods. The peak hours of 7:30 to 8:30 AM and 5:00 to 6:00 PM represent the highest traffic volume hours during the peak p_eriod traffic counts, as explained on pages 56 and 57 of the DSEIR under the section entitled "Existing Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations", including the explanation offered in the 2=a paragraph on page 57. For the purpose of analyzing Project traffic impacts, it is common practice to use the weekday. AM and PM peak hours of adjacent street traffic, determined by the intersection turning movement counts, as the appropriate hours for peak hour trip generation from the proposed Project. As such, it IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 City of Dublin Page 13 February 2004 was assumed that the peak hour trip generation for the IKEA and Campus Office proiects would occur during the peak hours of 7:30 to 8:30 A/Vi and 5:00 to 6:00 PM, which represents the worst-case scenario for analysis of pro)ect traffic impacts on adiacent streets. Conunent 3.2.3: Page 76, Table 4.3.8, PM Peak Hour Conditions, is missing. Response: This table is included in the Final EIR in Appendix A. However, the same information contained in Table 4.3.8 is also available in Table 8B of the traffic study listed in Appendix 8.7 (T~a~c ~pact ~alYsis) of the DS]ERR which was drculated for a 45-day period. Comment 3.2.4: Pages 78-79, Tables 4.3.12 and 4.3.13, Year 2025 Mainline Freeway Operations, show that freeway capacity used in the DSEIR was 2300 pc/h/ln. The 2001 CMP uses the Highway capacity manual standard of 2000 pc/h/ln. These tables should therefore be revised using the HCM standards as required by the CMP. Response: The 2,300 pc/h/In freeway capacity used in the DSEIR is based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 standards for basic freeway segments. According to HCM 2000, Chapter 23, Exhibit 23-2 (LOS Criteria for Basic Freeway Segments), the maximum service flow rate for freeways ranges from 2,250 to 2,400 pc/h/in, depending on the estimated free flow speed. Based on the physical characteristics of the 1-580 and 1-680 freeway segments that were analyzed in the DSEIR, the free flow speed for these freeway segments was estimated at 60 mph. According to HCM 2000, the maximum service flow rate corresponding to this free flow speed is 2,300 pc/h/in. The City of Dublin respects ACCMA's decision to use HCM 1985 standards for the 2001 CMP. However, the HCM has undergone periodic updates since 1985 based on new research studies and updated traffic analysis methodologies, tn the recent EIRs for the Dublin Transit Center and East Dublin Property Owners (EDPO) developments, a freeway capacity of 2,300 pc/h/in was used for the above freeway segments and was accepted by Caltrans. Moreover, in order to be consistent with previous ERR studies in Dublin, The DSEIR used the same capacity of 2,300 pc/h/in based on the latest, nationally accepted HCM standards for basic freeway segment analysis. Therefore, no additional analysis is required and the traffic impact conclusions and mitigation measures set forth in the DSEIR remain the same. Comment 3.2.5: Table 6 in Appendix 8.7 assumes the same percentage of pass-by traffic for both the IKEA center and the shopping center. Since the IKEA store is generally more of a trip generation than the shopping center, IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 City of Dublin Page 14 February 2004 the percentage of pass-by trips appears to be high. Please provide supporting documentation for the pass-by trips. Also, please compare trip generation estimations including pass-by traffic assumptions used in the traffic analysis for the IKEA facility in Emeryville along with the actual traffic counts collected from the Emeryville IKEA. Response: Trip generation assumptions for the IKEA store, shopping center and restaurant are discussed in detail in the "Trip Generation" section on pages 20 and 21 of the traffic study listed in Appendix 8.7 (Traffic Impact Analysis) of the DSEIR. Trip generation and pass-by trip assumptions are also explained on Tables 5 and 6 of the traffic study. The commenter's assertion that the IKEA store is more of a primary trip destination than the shopping center is only true during weekends. For example, the pass-by trip percentage for the IKEA store on Saturday was assumed to be zero, compared to 26% for the shopping center, as shown on Table 6 of the traffic study in Appendix 8.7 of the DSEIR. However, during the weekday PM peak hour, the IKEA store pass-by trip percentage is expected to be comparable to that for the shopping center [i.e., about 345 based on ITE Trip Generation Handbook (October 1998) and knowledge of the Project area]. This is due to their combined location and the dose proximity of the Project site to both DubJJn Boulevard and 1-580, which carry significant volumes of local and regional pass-through traffic during the PM peak commute period. The IKEA store and the shopping center are expected to attract an equal percentage of about 34% pass-by trips from Dublin Boulevard and 1-580 during this period. Some of these trips could be attracted simultaneously to both the IKEA store and the shopping center due to their combined location. The City also notes that the DSEIR analysis took a conservative approach to estimating trip generation for the IKEA store. For example, during the PM peak hour, it was assumed that IKEA Dublin would generate 75% of actual trips generated by IKEA Emeryville, even though IKEA Dublin is expected to generate about 61% of the Sales at IKEA Emeryvilte. Moreover, the actual trip counts for IKEA Emeryvilte were collected when this store was the ordy IKEA store in the Bay area. IKEA Emeryville sales and trip generation are expected to drop with the recent opening of IKEA East Palo Alto and the possibte opening of IKEA Dublin in the near future. The conservative trip generation assumptions used in the DSEtR were developed for the purpose of analyzing the "worst-case scenario" traffic impacts on the adjacent roadway system from the IKEA store. In sum, trip generation estimates for the IKEA store were calculated based on extensive empirical data, knowledge of the Proiect area, application of professional judgment, and use of conservative assumptions. As such, no additional analysis of trip generation estimates for the Emeryvitle IKEA store is required or necessary. Pass-by and destination assumptions in the analyses reflect the different traffic patterns for weekend and PM weekday traffic. IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 page 15 February 2004 City of Dublin Comment 3.2.6: Please discuss ~e P~tential impacts of the Project on CHiv transit levels of service. Transit service standards are 15-30 minute headways for bus service and 3.75-15 minutes for BART during peak hours. The analysis should discuss funding of transit as a mitigation in the context of CMA policies discussed above. Response: Information provided by BART officials indicates that the AM peak load factor at the Eastern Dublin,/ Pleasanton BART station was 1.25 as of mid- December 2003 (source: personal communication, Janice Lee, BART, 1/9/04), which is consistent with BART standards for acceptable operations. This load factor allows each rider a seat with room for standees. The maximum load factor is considered 1.35 during peak hour periods. The anticipated peak hour use of BART by IKEA patrons is considered very low, since the great majority of BART patrons purchase furniture and other large items, which are not transportable on BART. Therefore, impacts to the BART are considered less- than-significant. In regard to Bus service, local and Tri-valley bus service is provided by WHEELS. According to the WHEELS staff, the IKEA site is Served by Route 12, a trunk line that provides service from the Eastern Dublin/Pleasanton BART station to Livermore, north and south of the 1-580 freeway, the ACE station and returns to the BART station. Ridership on Route 12 is considered "moderate" by WHEELS staff (source: Cyrus Sheik, route planner 1/7/04). The Project site is also served by Route 1, a local route, that provides bus service from the Eastern Dublin / Pleasanton BART station, the Alameda County East County Government Center, Rose Pavilion in Pleasanton and back to the BART station. According to WHEELS'staff, ridership on Route 1 is considered "low." Overall, given the moderate to low ridership, approval and implementation of the proposed Project would have a less-than-significant impact on the WHEELS bus system. The City of Dublin has conditioned the proposed Pro] ect to provide a bus stop on Martinelli Way, so future bus ridership to the IKEA center could be facilitated. Comment 3.2.7: The Dublin/Pleasanton BART station, which appears to be approximately one-quarter mile from the Project site is the site of the Dublin Transit Center and has been the recipient of funding for a parking structure to support a transit village. The Alameda County CMA is developing a policy to encourage transit-oriented development. How wiI1 the design and location of the IKEA facility, other supporting retail and parking encourage transit and pedestrian use in the Project area? Response: Although the proposed Project may not be viewed as a transit- oriented type Project, the City of Dublin complies with the proposed CMA _holicy of encouraging transit oriented development through the approval of e Dublin Transit Center in late 2002, which ihcludes up to 1500 high density Dage 16 IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 City of Dublin February 2004 housing units, 2.0 million square feet of office space and 70,000 square feet of retail commercial in immediate proximity to BART and transit hub facilities. The Dublin Transit Center also includes a multi-story parking garage to accommodate BART users and Transit Center users. The City of Dublin also adopted the Western Dublin BART Specific Plan to encourage a mix of high-density housing, office, retail, lodging and other pedestrian-oriented uses adjacent to this planned BART station. This Specific Plan would comply with the proposed C/vIA policy as well. Comment 3.2.8: The environmental document should provide information on how the mitigation measures on the 1ViTS will be funded. Regarding Supplemental Impact TRA-3, mitigation measures identified in the DSEIR regarding funding of regional freeway improvements should be incorporated in the summary on page 1-3. Response: Supplemental lVftigation SM-TRA-2 is the only traffic mitigation measure identified in the DSEIR. This mitigation measure involves installing geometric improvements on the southbound approach of the Dublin Boulevard / Arnold Road intersection (Dublin Boulevard is on the A/iTS). Project developers are required to contribute their proportionate share toward funding this improvement. Pages 64 and 65 of the DSEIR provide information regarding the funding of future roadway improvements planned within the studv area. As requested by the commenter, the text in the 1VStigation Measure column corresponding to Supplemental Impact TRA-3 on page 1-3 of the DSEIR is hereby amended to read as follows: "Full mitigation not feasible. Project will be required to pay for its proportionate share of impacts to 1-580 and 1-680, by payment of Tri-Valley Transportation Development (TVTD) Fees to construct Planned freeway improvements, including HOV lanes, auxiliary lanes, and interchange improvements. The Project will be required to pay its proportionate share toward public transportation improvements to help reduce traffic on the freeways and other roadways in the Tri-Valley area, by payment of the TV/Z) Fee to fund the West Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station Project." Letter 3.3: Zone 7 Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 7) Comment 3.3.1: Zone 7 has no comments on the DSEIR at this time, although Zone 7 believes that earlier comments submitted to the City of Dublin responding to the Notice of Preparation needs to be addressed. IKEA Final E1R PA 02-034 Page 17 City of DUblin February 2004 Response: Comment acknowledged that Zone 7 has no comments on the environmental document. Please see responses to other NOP comments be]ow. Comment 3.3.2: The Initial Study notes that disturbance of land of at least 5 acres are required to submit a Notice of Intent to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). As of March 10, 2003 the threshold of Size has been reduced to one acre. Response: Comment acknowledged. Since the proposed Proiect would disturb approximately 27 acres of land, a Notice of Intent will be required to be filed with the SWRCB. Comment 3.3.3: Mitigation for the creation of new impervious surfaces would be provided through the collection of Spedal Drainage Area 7,1 drainage fees. Fees are collected by Zone 7 for new buildings, paving and other impervious surfaces. Response: Comment acknowledged. Payment of drainage fees have been made a condition of Project approval by the City of Dublin. Comment 3.3.4: The Project Description for the proposed Project does not address potential salt loading impacts on Zone 7's main groundwater basin. All applied water in the basin, except for rainwater, contributes to salt loading in the groundwater basin and use of recycled water requires mitigation for this impact. Zone 7 recommends implementation of the Groundwater Dermneralization Project to minimize salt loading impacts. City support of the Groundwater Demineralization Project is requested. Response: Salt loading in the mann basin is a regional issue that is being addressed by both DERWA (for recycled water in Dublin and San Ramon) and by Zone 7 (for South Bay Aqueduct water being imported for irrigation in Livermore, Dublin and Pteasanton). DERWA is working in cooperation with Alameda County Water District (ACWD) to reduce salt loading in ACWID basins in Fremont. The City of Dublin supports the actions of Zone 7 to address salt loading impacts on the main groundwater basCn. Comment 3.3.5: Zone 7 requests that an existing 16-inch water line be shown on Project plans as a Zone 7 water tine. Two other details are shown on Proiect plans that may be tn error, including a manhole and branch pipeline which are not shown on Zone 7 facility maps and a proposed direct connection between IKEA water lines and the 16-inch Zone 7 water line. IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 Page 18 City of Dublin February 2004 Direct connections with Zone 7 facilities for new development Projects are not permitted. Response: Identified engineering design and drafting errors have been referred to the City of Dublin Engineering Department and to the developer's civil engineer to be corrected prior to approval of the infrastructure plans by the City of Dublin. Comment 3.3.6: Zone 7 requests that water valves and other appurtenances located within the limits of construction must be clearly located prior to construction. An encroachment permit must be obtained when working near Zone 7 facilities. Response: Comment acknowledged. Although this is not an environmental comment, the need to identify Zone 7 facilities on all construction plans and the requirement to obtain an encroachment permit has been communicated to the Project developer for implementation. Comment 3.3.7:Zone 7 records indicate that no water wells or monitoring wells are located on the Project site. If these are found, they shouid be reported to Zone 7. Future wells or soil borings are only alIowed with permits issued by Zone 7. Response: Comment acknowledged. The City of Dublin or project contractor(s) wilI report any water wells to Zone 7 staff and will obtain permits for new wells or soil borings. Comment 3.3.8: Developments that increase impervious surfaces are subject to special drainage fees, which are collected by the governing agency. There are no Zone 7 flood control facilities on the Project site. Response: Comment acknowledged. Zone 7 will be collected by the City of Dublin from the project developer as a condition of project approval and forwarded to Zone 7. Letter 3.4: City of Livennore Comment: The DSEIR acknowledges significant and unavoidable impacts on regional roads, including 1-580. The Eastern Dublin EIR includes traffic and transportation mitigation measures to partially mitigate such impacts. The City of Livermore requests that the City of Dublin require a ramp metering system on the westbound 1-580 ramp at Hacienda. Ramp metering systems are also encouraged for all other 1-580 ramps within Dublin. IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 Page 19 City of Dublin February 2004 Response: The issue of implementing ramp metering at all freeway interchanges along the 1-580 corridor within the Tri-Valley area is a regional issue that requires a cooperative effort among the cities of Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton to manage traffic flow in this corridor more effidently and equitably. These three dries, as well as other outlying jurisdictions to the east, including San Joaquin County communities, all share the responsibility of contributing trips to 1-580. In Year 2025, traffic flow on westbound 1-580 is pro}ected to operate at level of service E or F from Hacienda Drive to I-.680 during the AA/i and PM peak hours, as shown on Tables 4.3.12 and 4.3.13 of the DSEIR. Based on recent field observations, traffic backups on westbound 1-580 tend t© occur during the peak hours ~rom Hadenda Drive to the 1-680 interchange primarily because of the bottleneck created by the weaving segment between Dougherty Road and 1-680, whereby mainline traffic is forced to slow down considerably due to a conflict between vehicles diverging from mainline to reach the connector ramps to 1-680 and vehicles merging the opposite way to ioin the mainline freeway after entering westbound 1-580 from Dougherty Road/Hopyard Road. It may seem logical to meter the Hadenda Drive westbound on-ramps at this time to help reduce traffic congestion on westbound 1-580. However, if the City of Dublin did implement ramp met?ring at a single location s,u.ch as Hacienda Drive, a portion of the traffic thatwould otherwise use tins interchange to access the freeway would now shift to downtown Dublin to access the freeway via the Dougherty Road and San Ramon Road interchanges in order to avoid traffic backups caused by the meters at the Hadenda Drive interchange. This, in turn, would result in unacceptable increases in traffic volumes at downtown intersections, which are highly congested during the commute peak periods. Moreover, by shifting trips to the Dougherty Road/Hopyard Road westbound on-ramps, the severity of the (bottleneck) weaving segment, described above, would likely intensify and overall traffic conditions on westbound 1-580 could worsen during the peak periods. Caltrans and the dties of Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton should work cooperatively on a ramp metering plan for the 1-580 corridor that can be implemented in all three dties, while allowing any negative impacts from ramp metering on the adjoining surface streets and intersections to be distributed equitably among all three dries. The plan should ensure that vehicle qUeues and delays from metered ramps do not impose a disproportionate or excessive burden on any particular community or group of trip-makers. Based on the above, ramp metering of westbound 1-580 on-ramps at a single location such as Hadenda Drive (i.e., without consideration to implementation of a multi-jurisdictional, corridor-wide ramp metering approach) could have adverse impacts on traffic conditions in downtown IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 City of Dublin Page 20 February 2004 Dublin and on the freeway, and is not required as a mitigation measure of the proposed project. Letter 4.1: Michael Durkee (Allen Matkins Leek Gamble & Mallory) Comment: Comments are provided in the letter regarding a comparison of the proposed IKEA Project with the previous Commerce One project on the sa_me site, that the proposed IKEA Project would not result in a significant traffic increase over the Commerce One project and that the proposed IKEA Project assists in implementing the City's vision for fiscal health and development of the area as reflected in the Eastern Dublin General Plan, Eastern Dublin Spedfic Plan and similar documents. Response: Comments acknowledged. The commenter provides opinions regarding the merits of the proposed Project and not environmental issues. No further response is therefore required. IKEA Final EIR PA 02-034 Page 21 City of Dublin February 2004 Appendix A Table 4.3.8 IKEA Final EIR City of Dublin PA O2-O34 Page 22 February 2004 ATTACHMENT 8 DISTRIBUTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER & AVAILABLE AT THE CITY OF DUBLIN ATTACHMENT Cm. Sbranti discussed the possibility that maybe the makeup of the City Council in San . Ramon could change and the new City Council in December could possibly look at the budget again. Is this an option worth entertaining? Ms. Blaschka stated this option was presented and will be discussed by the Board. advised that she is not the one making the call. The cities have to come to some agreement insofar as what makes.sense. She Cm. Sbranti asked how many years the TVCVB operated without San Ramon. Mr. Ambrose stated he 'thought they had been in about 4 years. It origina~y started out as the Pleasanton Convention & Visitors.Bureau ~. ~.~8-. ................. On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. Zika, and by unanimous vote, the Council approved and authorized.the City Manager to execute the agreement. UPDATE ON GENERAL PLAN AMEND~ (GPA) STUDY FOR PROPOSED II~A FURNITURE STORE ON UNDEVELOPED ZT,4.r. AG..~RE..,.F~CE[.[Q.,,C,A~.D......i AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD AND HACIENDA DRIVE 9:07 p.m2 8.2 (420 Senior Planner Andy Byde presented the Staff Report, which updated the City Council on the progress of the GPA Study for the proposed IKEA Furniture Store. Staff requested direction as to the adequacy of the level'of information for the proposed retail center. Staff has been evaluating the project and is nearly complete with the fiscal study and traffic study. Additionally, Staff is evaluating the site plan and the architecture of. the proposed IKEA ~~_~r_~..._~presentatives from IKEA have stated they will submit the following discretionary permits: General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezoning- Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Sile Development Review and a Parcel Map. IKEA representatives have.stated, that a. complete application should be submitted by the end of July, with anticipation that the project should be ready to bring before the Planning Commission and City Council by late fall, pending the completi°n of the environmental review process. Opus West will be develop~g the retail space as a "Iffestyle'center', and is approximately 8 months to one year behind II(EA. VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING July 15, 2003 PAGE 487 ATTAC r E T q Cm. Zika stated he was under the impression that we wantecl.thi.,s ..a. ,l!, a!.. pnc .e :. . .~ assurance do we have~that.this ~.,be developed in a timely manner? Mr. Bvde replied at this point, there would not be.'any assurances beyond what's contained in the DA. Cm. Zika stated we!ye ,~g...b..m,e~.,......before, so unless them is something in writing and some commitment, he cannot support this as we have no leverage. Mr. Ambrose discussed difficulties invo!yed when.Hagie.n, da Crossings developed. Design decisions were made before..tenants were.id~,n~.:,ed.., WhiCh resul_ ted.,'m...plenty of friction. The hard part is it is difficult for the deye.!.pper to say when tenants am available. The City's control is typically spelled out in the terms of the. DA, ......... Cm. Zika stated he felt we could end up with IKEA and n0~ing else~ Mr. Ambrose stated, it is.. dependent upon how we construct the DA. Mr. Byde advised that.the. ~u..rr.e. nt_si.t..e, plan they are reviewing for IKEA, ali indications thus far is they have every market desire .to ..re...c~up some costs and sell the retail portion. Cm. Oravetz asked when the traffic study will be ready. Mr. Byde stated it has been an exhaustive study. It should be released within the next month. D~ug Greenholz, representing IKEA, stated they have been working very hard with mfr_ over the last year as well as.with OPUS to bring a project forward by July. They are applying for Stage I and 2. for the 2_7 acre~,........~., ~ey started this process over a year ago and were encouraged by the reception' they got from City officials and listened to desire to have' ottter users on.the .s~..9..t,b~r,..t.~n just IKEA. They hope to bring developments that will compliment HaCien...da Cros. sings as well as IKEA. It is more. theide, a of higher scale boutique type tenants. TheY'have spoken with a numberof d.e.¥.e.!ppers and they straight forward, but OPUS needs to herd..c...a:~s., and ~hey have to go mrougn a mot difficult process. IK~._w. o.,u,.!d.._b.e Purchasing the .entire'Z7 acres but would be building on about 15 acres and have strong motivation to sell .the rema~g property az soon as possible'as they will be cartsdn$ this on their books. They are very eager to kick this process off and.an..fl.'..cipate being before the City Council in late fall. . VOLIJMlg 22 REGULAR MEETING July 15, 2003 PAGE 488 Cm. Oravetz asked how long the East Polo Alto store -took.... Mr, Greenhotz advi~ .t...~..~t..t..hey started mid July of last year and are scheduled to .open in August. · Randy Ackerman, with OPUS, thanked the City for allowing them to talk about their project. They started working with Doug and are very excited about this project. This will build on what has happened in Dublin and will kick it up to the next level project. They have hired BCB Architects ~o.d0 some design for them. Drawings were distributed and displayed. Wh° are the tenants going to be has been asked. They are talk/rig to tenants that he felt the' City will be excited about. It takes longer for them to do their thing because they will be working with multiple tenants and to put ali the leases together. They know what they're doing in this respect. He is confident that as they move through the process, they anticipate they will be able to provide further informatiOn.regarding the Site Development Review process in less time and they hope to have their portion built by summer of gO05. · Vm. McCormick asked.if ~hey have selected.a landscape architect yet, and stated she .. hopes they will look at public art. Mr. Ackerman stated they have not, but public art is so noted. Cm. Oravetz stated he really likes Walnut Creek and asked if they are going to model this after Walnut Creek?... Mr. Ackerman replied Walnut Creek is lucky as there is a plaza system there already. 'Part of the Challenge here will be to create that element. Here we have constraints of freeway, Hacienda, etc. However, once you come into the site, you will have IKEA on site. TheY will have 2 or $ restauran, sites_which ~!be..~. draw tq. the center: ..~ Mayor Ix>ckhart pointed out they Will be close to the pedestrian center. Are there any opportunities for parking other than just flat paved parking? It is appealing to not have a sea of cars around you. Mr. Ackerman explained that they have tried to.create quads o£ parking and they know they need to deal with tkis.for Iand~aping. He stated the site plan displayed is very basic. Mayor Lockhart discussed the difficulties. ~t~. ~he parking situation at Hacienda Crossings. There are no sidewalks and.no .safe fe~ling for pedestrians. VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING July 15, 2003 PAGE 489 Mr.'Ambrose advised that the City Council will get the SDK for IKEA and a siteplan as well as some written standards and guidelines, 15ut you won't see the actuai elevations for the retail center. Cm. gbranfi commented he thought when they get the IKEA proposal, the detail of the other center will be pretty much like what was shoWn tonight. Mr. Ambrose clarified they won't see the architecture of the tmildi~gs. Cm. Zika asked how c.rifi~..a_l...~.~..~t..!..hgt you get off Digital Drive onto this street? Also, with regard to the' lifestyle center, there won't be things like cleaners, beauty salons, etc.? Cm. Sbranti asked what is your threshold for what is accepted? Mr. Ackerman stated, th.e...~.n....a.._n~..~l_!....~... ~?~_~e_..Z....~.a..~.l,.!~.ery, Ann Taylor Loft, Williams Sonoma, Pottery Barn. These are the types of ten0.nts that will pay to be here. Restaurants will be sit down succ~s..sful type operations. They have told architect to design a theme, but tenant identity must fit within the theme. 'This is a .challenge. Mayor Loclchart asked ff they could provide'a better exampie or picture of landscaping and how it interfaces with the roads around it and the businesses next to it, where sidewalks would be, and how th~'Street;'w°uld' la~'c~ii~?"' sh~' ~t~ieathe c°uncil 'n~eds to have a basic understanding of how things relate to each other them, where they will put public art, how people will get from point a to point b. Mr. Ackerman stated they just want to make sure they are in the same place and work with Doug and refine and move forwar& Mayor Lockhart stated they want to know how it works together, both sites. Interfacing of the two projects and how this works with surrounding businesses are important. Cm. Sbranti asked if in late fall, when the IKEA project comes forward, will you be able to identify 5 or 6 tenants? Mr. Ackerman stated they hope to be able to do this. They are doing letters of intent anCl hope to then enter into leases. Cm. Sbranti stated he felt this is an. important component: The better idea the City has, it helps the City COuncil to unders~nd. CITY COUI~IC~ ~gS VOLIJ1VIE 22 REGULAR MEET..125!...G ............. July 15, 2003 PAGE 490 Vrn. McCOrmick stated she is interested in seeing the architectural design style. This wOuld be good for the City COuncil.to see tkiS, .............. Mr. Byde stated as part of the stage g, there will be more detail. The whole theme thing will be presented~ materials used, etc'. Vm. McCormick stated she was. concerned that they haven't even seen or approved the project, and here they are talking about trees, sidewalks, etc. Cm. Sbranti stated he sees this lifestyle center as being a destination in itself, and asked if the traffic study takes this into consideration? Mr. Byde replied it does and it evaluates all the openings and fixed points, restaurant versus retail space, etc. Cm. Sbranfi asked if the lifestyle center is a component of the project. If the State Legislature changes some of their tax assumptions, there may be components we have to re ~examine as part of the fiscal analysis. Mr. Ambrose stated the iss.u.e.~ the ~le~ 9R ..~.. e game may or may not change. We have to move forward. Cm. Sbranti stated he would tike to see some ldnd of analysis at the time this project comes before the City Council. Mr. Ambrose stated ali Califo...rnia cities are in the same boat. Do We stop business because of the State? The concern of OPUS is as they move through this process and more and mom of what they want to see'is. Pr~sented and then they start to critique their project very finely before it is a SDR package, could IKEA get delayed based on their project? Mayor Lockhart stated the concern is to mOve both forward and t0m....~k~....s.~..~!~..a~I oa the same page with regard to what's going to go o~t ttiaf site. This is valuable land and a great location and both sites can develop and.be something we are all proud'of. Mr. Greenholz stated this is why they wanted to have a Stage I and 2, but without the fine detail level of a SDR. The City Council clarified tha~t...it wants mo..re detail, but not to the level of a SDI~ "CITY co'~~ ~~TES ...................:'" '"':" ':" ""' ' ::"": '"' VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING July 15, 2003 PAGE 491 /---. Cm. Zika stated he wants assurance that it. ~..be....deye!0ped within a reasonable amount of time. To the extent feasible, the Council requested that they identify some of the tenants. FINANCIAL REQUEST FROM AMERICA SUH'OgTING AMEmCANS (ASA) COMMITTEE FOR ASSISTANCE WITH AIRFARE FOR.MEMBE..RS..~.0F .... THE CITY'S ADOFI~D MILITARY UNIT TO PARTICIPATE IN T~.... E ..... 10:01 p.m. 8.5 (150-85) Assistant City Manager Jord Pattillo presented the Staff Report and advised that at the July 1, £005 City Council meeting, ASA Committee Representative Sue [lores asked that the Council agendize for future consideration., a request to provide additional financial assistance to help with airfare for 2 - 4 representatives from the City's adopted military unit, Delta Company of the 2nd Battalion of the 502~a. Infan!ry, to participate in the Welcome Home Parade and BBQ on August 1 ~ in Livermore. ASA is requesting to purchase 4 airline tickets. Ms. Pattillo advised that if the Council approves this request, a Budget Change would be necessary to allocate funds to the' City Council's Community Promotion account from the General Fund Unallocated Reserves. Sue Flores stated a lot of the details are being refined. They met with Liverrnore and Pleasanton representatives yesterday. Part of the problem is~ most of our unit is in Iraq right now. One soldier was wounded ~c!,.i~.ba.ck~..~. F,o..~..,~pbell, and he would be riding in the parade and take Part in the ceremony. There will be an air flyover and a £ 1 gun salute. Nashville is the cl6sest.a'nl~ort to Fort Campbell, KY. Our representatives would be flying in on August 15th. Hacienda Bus'mess.Park has. expressed a desire to help with funding in a general way. Operation MOM is a non-profit group and anything that Dublin raises will be segregated and go into our Own account. She.stated the Mayor is helping to .work on room reservations, Mayor Locknmrt asked how soon we will know how many are coming? Ms. Flore~ replied fight now, we know one, and we may have a couple of the wives come as representatives. . CITY COUNCIL MINU I VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING 'July 15, 2003 PAGE 492 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: From: Subiect: Date: Chris Foss and Andy Byde Walter Kieser and Christine McMillan Fiscal Analysis of Proposed Dublin IKEA; EPS #12078 November 18, 2003 This Technical Memorandum evaluate s the compara~fve fiscal effects of two development scenarios for a 27-acre site in Eastern Dublin. The subject property, situated along Hacienda Drive between 1-580 and Dublin Boulevard, was originally designated for Office development when the Eas%ern Dublin Specific Plan ,vas adopted. Subsequently a 780,000~square foot office developmenf'was proposed by Commerce One. This project was placed on hold in 2001 following a series of setbacks in the high technology industry. More recently, the IKEA Corporation has proposed developing a 317,000-square foot IKEA store, as wee as 137,000 square feet of additional "outparcel" retail buildings. This fiscal analysis compares the fiscal performance (munidpal revenues minus municipal service costs) of the proposed retail development with the office development that was originally envisioned. The findings presented in this Memorandum are influenced by a range of data and assumptions, including those provided by the City' of Dublin, the IKEA Corporation, and through independent analysis by tine consultant. When presented wi&, a range of plausible values for a given assumption, the conservative alternative was selected. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS I. Development o/the subject property is expected to result in a net fisca[ surplus under either the office or retai~ development scenarios. Table t provides a summary of the fiscal analysis. While both proj. ects would be fiscally posi~ve, the propose d retail development can be expected to result in a si~fficantty higher net fiscal surplus than the office alternative, if developed as proposed. BERKEL~/'Y SACRAMENTO 2501 Ninth St.,Suite 200 Pho*a~.: 510-841-9190 ~ Phone: 916-649-8010 B--rke!ey, CA 947!0-25!5 Fa::: ~10.oo41.929oo ~_.,~J~,~' F~_::: 916-649-2070 DENVER Phone: 3133-623-3557 Chris Foss and Andy Byde City vf bubtin October31,2003 Page General Fund revenues as~odated with the proposed IKEA project are expected to total $I.$ million annually at bulldout while General Fund costs are expected to approach $553,000 annually. Pursuant to the 1993 tax sharing a~eement with Alameda County, 'the City's revenue from the development would be reduced by roughly $558,000, resulting in a net annual fiscal surplus of $680,000. Development of the 780,000-square foot office project originally proposed for the subject property could be expected to generate approximately $555,000 in General Fund revenues, $486,000 in annual costs, and $56,000 in coun~ mx sharing obligation. The net result is an estimated annual fiscal surplus of $13.000. The office market in the Dublinz~Pleasanton submarket will need to regain its strength before an office project of the ma~itude ori~mLnally proposed by Commerce One would be built. This means that it could be many years before any of the municipal revenues or costs would be realized. 2. Sates tax woutd be the primary revenue con~'ibutor from the retail development. Sales taxes ~mposed on retail sales would generate an estimated 51.5 million annually, 85 percent of the retail development's annual contribution to the City's General Fund (see Table 1). As projected, the sales tax generated by the development would represent rough]y 12 percent of the City's es~irnated sales tax for fiscal year 2002-2003. Although General Fund revenues from the off~ce development would come primarily f-rom property tax, about 29 percent of the General Fund revenue contributed by the office development would be {-rom sad es tax, assuming typical "point of sa]e" business ac~vi~ies occur in the office proiect ~s proiected, the office akernat~ve would produce about 1 percent ($160,000) of the estimated sales tax received by the City in fiscal year 2002-2003. This sales revenue would come f-rom a combinal~on of point-of-sale transactions in the offices, employees shopping in nearby facilities, and the on-site cafeteria. 3. Property taxes would be a significant revenue stream for the City under either alte~ative, Development of the proposed IK~A project cml be expected to generate around $2~7,000 in property tax revenues, w~ch accounts for 14 percent of ail General Fund revenues expected from the project (see. Table 1). However, the City's tax sharing ag-reement v~th Alameda County provides for property tax reductions that will absorb ali of the property tax revenues generated by the IKEA project. The originally propos ed office development would generate roughly S323,000 in armua! property tax revenues to the City at bu~ldout This represents 58 percent of total revenues associated with the office project aker~a~ve.. A porfion of this revenue stream will be diverted to the County's Genera] Fund through the tax sharing agreement H: \ 12078dub \ Report \ October2803 \ Fi~caldoc Chris Foss and Andy Byde City of Dublin Pa~e 3 4. The 27-acre site is part ora larger project area that is subject to a tax sharing agreement between the City of Dublin and the County of Alam'eda. · According to a Tax Sharing Agreement entered into by the City of Dublin and' Alameda County the County is entitled to a "property tax reduction" from the City equal to 35 percent of all retail sales taxes' generated on the properi-y.~ The proposed .IKEA project would result ir~ a "property tax reduction" of approximately $538,000. Tl~e proposed office development would likely result in a much smaller reduction of roughly $56,000. 5. Municipal service costs'associated with either the retail or the office development would be dominated by costs for providing police protection and fire protectio~z. Over 90 percent Of the total General Fund expenditures under either scenario are expected to be associated wi~in the PublicSafety expenditures, as shown in Table 1. The proposed IKEA projectcan be expected to result in Public Safety expendi~o_res totaling $564,000 and total General Fund expenditures of $58.3,000. The office development would require approximately $445,000 in Public Safety exPendi~zres and $486,000 in total General Fund expenditures. FISCAL ANALYSIS DATA AND ASSUMpTIoNS To evaluate the types and magnitude of ea ch projecfs fiscal impact, a number of assumptions were necessary to translate, the respective project descriptions (see Table 2) into estimates of employees, tax revenues, and municipal service costs to the City of Dublin. The City's FiScal Yew 2002-2003 budget, interviews with City staff, and independent research contributed to this effort. Demographic data that were required in the analysis are presented"in Tabte 3. For each cost and revenue item, the most appropriate forecasting methodolog7 was iden tiffed and applied to the project description, as' summarized below and illustrated in Table 4: Daytime Population2. Cost grad revenue items that are assumed to increase or decrease in relation to the number of people (residents and employees) citywide are estimated using a value per capita. First, the number of people that are expected to have an impact on the City's revenues and expenditures is calculated. Both residents and employees impact the City's budget, though the amount of the impact differs. Consistent with the City's methods used in other fiscal studies, the dayt-ime population is defined as the residential population plus 24 percent of employment. This calculation accounts for the relative service burden 'that residents Versus : Exceptions to tZ~is requirement exist, as are explained later in this Memorandum. 2 A review of the per capita model assumptions made by MuniFinanciat indicates that MuniFinm~cial assumes that the employee service population causes different impacts on the City for revenues and expenditures. The weight of the service population for revenues is 30% and for costs is 17%. As per a conversation with a Principal at MurdFinancial, Bob Spencer, the average of these two weights (2~ percent) has been used for both revenues and expenditures in this model, as. described above and detailed in the accompanying tables. H: \ I2078dub \ Report \ October280$ \ Fiscaldoc Chris Foss and Andy Byde City of DubZin Page 4 employees place upon the City. Second, the proportion of each budget item that is likely to increase or decrease (the variable portion) in relation to the size of the daytime population is estimated. Only the variable portion of the budget item is used to calculate the value per capita. Third, the dtywide variable value per person was applied to the estimated daytime popula~5on of each proiect? Road Miles. Most of the Transportation Department budget is most appropriately linked to the crc ation and maintenance of roads. EPS estimated the cost of these budget items per one mile of road (road miles). Case Study. A "case smd?' approach is used to calculate budget items for wkich none of the above approaches is deemed appropriate, such as sales and property taxes. These are described further in the following s ection. Not Affected. Some budget items were not estimated because City revenues and expenditures will not be affected by new development assodated with these project alternatives. Budget items, such as the Motor Vehicle Tax, that are linked solely to residential population were not estimated because neither alternative will directly increase the number of City residents. REVENUE ANALYSIS The following discussion outlines the analysis that was undertaken for each of the development scenarios, the results of which are incorporated into Tabte &. Sales Tax, Property Tax, Transient Occupancy Tgx, and DeveloPment Impact l~ees are the revenues for which a case stud}, was completed. They are discussed below in the order of most sig-rfificant budget impacts from the IKEA retail proposal. In addition, there are t~ro case stud/es that explain the anticipated Department of Public Safety expenditures. SALES TAX REVE'NLrE Either proposal can be expected to generate sales tax revenues for the City of Dublin through a combination of point-of-sale transactions and increased retail expenditures outside of the study area by new employees of the project. The retail development, anchored by IKE7~, is expected to generate over S1.5 million in sales tax revenue wh/le the office development can be expected to create about $160,000 in sales tax revenue (see Table 5). Because neither the retail nor office development will produce new Dublin residents, the daytime popular/on in terms of the potential projects is half of the proiected employment: H: \ ]207$dub \ Report \ October2803 \ Fiscal.doc Chris Foss and Andy Byde Ci~ o/ Dubtin October 3i, 2003 Page 5 IKEA Retail Development At buildout, the retail development has the voteni~al to provide a significant annual revenue si-ream for the City's General Fund. With a total of 454,000 square feet in ~he retail development. 319,368 square feet of which contribute to taxable sales (see Table 2), the proposed development can be expected to generate $154 million in taxable sales .proiect stabilization annually (see Table 5). As shown in Table 2, the project description assumes retail sales per square foot of $550 for the IKEA store, $620 for the IKEA restaurant, $350 for the out-parcel retail space, and $500 for the o~t-parcel restaurants. These assumptions are based on a comprehensive review of comparable retail tenants in similar market areas, as well as information provided by IIKEA Corvoration. The weighted average of sales per square foot for'the retail and restaurant space was used in the calcuiations in Table 5. IKEA's weighted average of sales per square foot is estimated to be $557, and the weighted average of .the out-parcel sales per square foot is $380. In addition to the sales generated on site, a small amount of taxable sales ($78,500) can be expected from new employees of the development who shop in the surrounding are a. Together, both sources of retail sales can be expected to yield annual sales tax revenues for the City of $t.5 million. Office Development The proposed office development would provide only modes t sales tax revenue to the City. Total sales tax revenue generated by the office development can be expected to reach approximateiy $160,000 (see Table 5). Most transactions conducted in an office setting would not generate sales tax. but there are instances of point of sate transactions which create taxable expenditures in an office environment. As shown in Table 2, it is assumed that the office development witt generate $15 per square foot of taxable sales, tn addition, the cafeteria will produce approximately $400 per square foot. _As vc~fh the retai] analysis, the weighted average of these sales per square foot assumptions was used to calculate the estimated taxable expenditures. The weighted average sal es per square foot for fl~e office development is $17.52. Office employees can also be expected to generate retail sales in the area surrounding the office development. New taxable expenditures in the City of Dublin.are estimated at $2.6 million. These calculatiorts suggest annual sales tax revenue for the City of $160,000 at proiect buildout. H: \ 22075dub \ Report \ Octab~r2803 \ Fi~caLdoc Chris Foss and Andy Byde City o~ DubZin October 3I, 2003 'Page 6 PROPERTY TAX REVENUE Both proposals ~411 generate a significant amount of properl'y tax for the CiV. The Property Tax Revenue is derived from the improved value of each development. The improved value of the retail proposal was assumed to closely approximate the cost of construction. As shown in Table 6, this method results in an annual property mx revenue to the City of approximately $247,000. The value of the office development was more appropriately estimated by looking at the anticipated rent levels. The resulting estimate of property tax collected by the City is $323,000 (see Table 7). IKEA Retail-Development .It is assumed that the improved value of the property is equal to the sum of the purchase price of the land and construction costs (including both the buildings and parking The calculations and cost assump~ons are presented in Table& The IKEA Corporation has stated that they ani-icipate purchasing the land for around S29.9 million. Estimates provided by IKEA indicate that construction of the Dublin store would cost $110 per square foot. In addition to the construction of the building, it has been assumed that IKEA wig spend 52,500 per parking space. Using these assumed values for the 317,000 square.feet and 1,000 parki~}g spaces in the project, the total construction cost (improved value) of the building and p arking lot totals S36.million. Construction costs of the. outparcels are comprised of the cost of constructing the shell ($180 per square foot), improwng the interior ($70 per square foot), and developing the parking lot (52,500 per parking space). As a result, the improved value of the outparcets is estimated to be $35 million. The total development cost of the retail proposal is approximately S101 million. Witha property tax allocation rate of t.06 percent and a tax allocation factor of 22.87 percent? the City can expect to receive approximately $247,000 annually from property taxes on this development. Office Develop ment Table 7 outlines the calculations for estimating the property tax collected by the Ci~ ~rom the office alternative. T~e value of the office development was determined using conservative lease, vacancy, and capitalization rates. Based on a review of the lease rates for Class A office space in Dublin and the surrounding area, i't has been assumed that the development would command annual lease rates of approximately $27 per square foot and require operating expenditures of $8.50 per square foot. The net operating income per occupied square foot ($18.50) was reduced to 516.65 in order to account for an assumed 10 percent vacancy rate. The result is an estimated net operating income of 512.6 million. A 9.5 percent capitalization rate produces an eslirnated value for the project of $133 million. The property tax allocation rate (1,06 percent) and the tax allocation factor (22.87 percent) are the same for both tl~e ~ Tree unusual tax allocation factor is stipulated in the Tax Sharing Ag-reernent with the County. H: \ I2078dub \ Revort \ Octot~er2 $O$ \ FiscaLgoc Chds Foss and Andy Cit~ October 3L 2003 P~ge 7 retail and office proposals. Based on these calculations, the City can expect to receive $323,000 in properi7 tax revenue from .the proposed office development on an annual basis. TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUE In local markets that are not heavily influenced by leisure tourism, hotel demand is generally expressed as a function of both the residential and. office markets in the local area. In fact, hotel market specialists assign an estimating factor for each resident and office worker in an area to forecast future hoiet demand. These esiJznating factors vary {rom one source to the next, but~ for the purpose of this analysis, it is assumed that ea ch office emplo yet will generate demand for 2.35 hotel room nights per year. The number of office employees projected for each proposal was determined based on the number of square feet allo~ed to each employee in a typical office setting. A widely accepfed industry average, which was used for both the retail and office alternatives, is 350 square feet per employee. The project description shown in Table 2 allocates the total building square feet among retail, restaurant, office, and warehouse uses. Of the IKEA store's total building space, 6.5 percent has been allotted to office uses; no distinct office space is designated for outparcets since traditional retail does not warrant this us e. Applying the as suzned square footage per employee to ~he estimated amount of office space in each propos al yields 59 office employees {or the retail alternative and 1,950 employees for the office alternative. As shown in Table 8, the IKEA project can be expected to generate approximamly $1,000 annually in Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenues, while the office development would likely generate an estimated $31,000 in TOT revenue. DEVELOPMENT IiVIPACT FEES tn addition to the annual revenues discussed above, the City can expect one-time revenues in the form of Development Impact Fees {rom each developmen~ in the year before it opens. The City of Dublin provides an explanation for calculating the approximate value of development impact fees based on the anticipated square footage and development value of the proposed project. Applying these allocaiSon amounts to the project description (see Table 2) yields estimates for the one-time revenues. As shown in Table 9, the retail alternative would produce an estimated $9.4 million in 'fees, while the office development could be expected to generate .approximately $5.8 million. These fees are designed to recover the costs associated with new development and for this reason are not considered in the net fiscat impact of either development on the City. H: \ ~ 2078du b \ Report \ October2$O$ \ FiscaLdoc Chris Foss and Andy Byde C~t'y o/ Dubtin October 31, 2003 Page $ EXPENDITURES PUBLIC SAFETY EXPENDITURES As seen in Table 4, only the Police and Fire Departments should an~cipate a significant increase in expenditures due to either development. The increased Fire and Police Department expenditures wilI result from an increase in the number of call s for service due to the new development (see Tables 10 and 11). The proposed IKEA development is expected to result in 5564;000 in annual Public Safety expenditures (see Table !) and the Office development would produce an es timated. $445,000. Fire Department Expenditures The cost Der call of service was determined using the fiscal year 2002-2003 Fire Depar[t-r.~nt Budget and the total calls for service in 2002 (see Table 10). While it is recognized that the Fire Depa_rrrnent has some overhead that wilt not be aH ected by new development, it was not possible to esiimate this amount. Therefore. the cost per cai1 of service is based on the total Fire Department budget. The cost for the Fire Department to respond to each call averaged approximately $2,700. In order to determine the level of service required by the IKEA retail development, Hacienda Crossings, an approximately 500,I)00-square foot retail center located near the propos ed development, was us ed as a comparable locat/on at the suggestion of the City. Hacienda Crossings generated about 76 calls for-service, or 0.17 calls per 1,000 square ' feet of development. This ratio was used for both the retail and office alternatives because h/stor~c fire data were not available for a comparable office si te in Dublin. in addition, experience in other cities indicates that~office and retail generate calls for service from Fire Departments at approximately the same rate. With 454,000 square feet of retail, the proposed IICEA development would generate 77 calls for service annually, which results in an estimated cost to the Fire Department of ~210,000. The significantly larger office development (780,000 square feet) wilt generate proportionately more calls for serv/ce and therefore have a larger impact on the Fire Department's annual budget. The office development is expected to generate 133 calls per year, with an estimated total cost of $363,000. Police Department Expenditures The method for estimating the police costs associated with each project uses the same underlying principles that generated the estimate for the costs to the Fire Department. However, .the rat-lo of calls for service to square feet of development is adjusted to account for the differences in remiI mad office development (see Table 11). The rapid turnover in visitors to retail development, the layout of the stores, and the wide range of people patronizing retail establishments are ail factors that increase the likelihood that poi/ce will be called. Because an office development has relatively little turnover throughout the work d ay and most of the people on the premises are known, there is generally less need for police serv/ce at office developments relative to retail development, H: \ 12078dub \ Report \ October2g03 \ F-iscal.doc Chris Foss and Andy Byde City of Dubtin October 31, 2003 Page 9 The fiscal year 2002-2003 Police Department budget was used as a star~ing place for this anaiysis~ As with the Fire Department, the full budget was used because it was not possible to 'determine an estimate of the overhead associated with the Police DeparlTnent. With 52,708 calls for service in 2002, the average cost per call was $149. Again, I-Iacienda Crossings was used as a proxy for the retail development; in 2002, Hacienda Crossings had 3,082 calls for police service. Movie theaters a_nd hotels generally have higher crime rates than retail and restaurant uses. Because Hacienda Crossings has a hotel and a movie theater, the calls for service was reduced by 25 percent. Excluding the hotel and movie theater from Hacienda Crossings yields approximately 440,000 square feet of retail and restaurant uses. There were an estimated 5.24 calls for police service per 1,000 square feet of retail space at Hacienda Crossings in 2002. ,&pptying this ratio to the ~54;000~square foot IKEA scenario produces an estimated 2,380 calls for service or an increase in Police Department costs associated with the II<lEA retail development of $354,000. A review of comparable cities indicates that each t,000 square feet Of retail generates between 7 and 8 times more calls for service than each 1,000 square feet of office space. Therefore the ra~io was reduced to 0.70 calls for service per 1,000 square feet of office space. Applying this ra~io to the 780,000-office development generates approximately 546 calls for police service annually. The total .impact on the police budget associated 'with the proposed office development would be about $81,000. COUNTY TAX SHARING AGREEMENT tn 1993, the City Of Dublin and County of Alameda entered into an .Agreement to snare in the revenue si-ream resulting from development in East Dublin. qT~e Agreement pertains to five properties, each of which has a distinct methodoiog-y for calculating how revenue will be shared between the City and County. The site evaluated as part of this analysis is part of the "Santa Rita Property," a 61S-acre area that was originally owned by the Surplus Proper~ Authori~ of Alameda County (Auth ority). According to the Agreement the City of Dublin receives a lower proportion (22.87 'percent) of total sales taxes generated within the Santa Fdta property than it otherwise wo~ld. Throughout mos t of Dublin, the City receives 25.4 percent of sales tax revenues. The Agreement provides for a P~operty Tax Reduction that is (in most cases) equal to 35 percent of the sales tax revenue generated within the Santa Rita property. In the event that the Pro?erl? Tax Reduction would exceed total property tax revenues received by the City for the Santa ltita property, the difference is carried over to future years. The proposed II<tEA development is expected to generate approximately $1.5 million in sales tax revenue, which would result in a Property Tax Reduction of about $538,000 (see Table 12). T"nis Reduction amount ex ceeds the total property tax revenues of $255,000 that are anticipated from the proposed project. However, it is assumed that existing development elsewhere within the Santa Pdta property area generates sufficient bt: \ 22075dub \ Report \ Oct~bJr2$O3 \Fiscal.doc Chris Foss and Andy Byde City of Dublin' October 2003 Page 2 0 property tax revenues to warrant the full Property Tax Reduction defined in the Agreement. Consequently, Table 12 shows a negative value of $283,000 as the net property tax revenue expected {rom the propos ed IKEA proje ct. The office alte rnative is expected to generate about $160,000 in sales tax revenue, resulting in a Property Tax R eduction of about $56,000. The net property tax revenue that the Cii~, will collect is expected to be $267.,000 from the office project. NET FISCAL BALANCE A summary of the General Fund revenues and expenditures associated w~th buildout of each project alternative is presented in Table 1. Although both projects will result in a net fiscal surplus, the proposed IKEA project would generate significantly more revenue than the office alternative. At project buildout, the proposed tKEA project would result in a net fiscal balmnce of $688,000. The office development, on the other hand, would result in a net ~iscaI balance of roughly $13 The fiscal impacts assodated with the office development would not be realized as quickly as those assodated with the proposed IKEA project due to the lack of any current market demand for the office use. Table 13 provides a time series comparison of the l-wo development scenarios. The IKEA development proposal is assumed to be built in two phases, in the first year, assumed to be 2005, iIKEA would open, and in the =.. following year the outparc els would be comp leted. By these assumptions, buitdout is assumed in 2006, which is when the City can expect to experience the full benefit of the proposed development as discussed throughout ffri s memorandum. Due to a market decline in the regional office market, office development cannot be expected to occur in the near term. Once cons~'uction begins, development is assumed to occur irt four equally sized phases. Phase I is assumed to come online in 2007 with addii-ional phases opening in 2009, 2011, and 2013. Therefore, the full budget impacts discussed fl~roughout this memorandum will be delayed until after comvletion in 2013. Taking into consideration the long-term fiscal impacts of both development s ceaarios highlights the fiscal differences in the proposals. The iKEA development is projected to create a $9~ rrrillion surplus (57.5 million in today's dollars) between 2004 and 2013. The office dev~topmen± is projected to create a $336,000 surplus ($276,000 in today's dollars) during that same period (2004-2013). H: \ %2078dub \ Revort \ October2$O3 \ Fiscal.doc Table 2 Project Descriptions and Model Assumptions Fiscal impact Analysis Item Retail Develo oment Office IKEA Outparcets Total/Average Development Site Size (Acres) (1) Retail Sauare Feet Sales Der Seuare Foot at Buildout (2) Restaurant Square Feet Sales per Scuare Foot at Buiidout Office Sc uare Feet Sales per Square Foot at Buildout Warehouse/Accessory Buildings Souare Feet Sales oar Square Foot at Buitd out 14.4 13.1 27'.5 27.5 162,863 109,600 272,463 N/A $550 $350 $450 N/A 19.50527 ,400 46,905 5.000 $620 $500 $560 $400 20,755 0 20,755 760,000 $0 $0 $0 $15 113.877 0 113,877 15.000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Building Square Feet 317;000 Square Feet Generatin9 Taxable Expenditures 182,368 Composite .Sales per Square Foot (3) $557 5sti mated Pop uiafion Generation Square Feet per Employee (Retail) 800 Square Feet per Employee (Office) 350 Square Feet Der Employee (Restaurant) N/A Sauare Feet per Emptoyee (Accessory Building) 1.000 Vacancy Rate 0% Employees 380 Da.vtime Population (4) 91 137.000 454.000 780,D00 137.000 319,368 765 000 $380 $466 $17.52 350 575 N/A N/A 350 350 250 250 250 N/A 1,000 1,000 5% 2.5% 10% 4OO 780 1.990 96 187 478 (1) The City estimateo the size of the parcel at 27.44 acres. IKEA provided the above break down which totais 27.5 acres, (2) BPS estimate based on typical large format "Big Box" store performance. (3) The "Com:)osite Sales oar Square Feet" is catcuiated by takin~ the weighted average of the sales per square foot for all space that generates sates, (4'¢ "Daytime F~eoutation'' is totat residential Booulation plus 24% total employment. Because neither scenane involves residedtiel development, the daytime population for the ~ropoaed projects is half of total employment, Sources: IKEA Corooration, City of Dublin Economic Development Department, ABAG Projections 2002, and Economic & Planning Systerrrs. inc. Economic & Plannin[T Systems, inc. 'i0/31/2003 H://~2078/da~aA'i2078fi$ca14.xls Table 4 Fiscal Evaluation of IKEA Retail Proposal Budget Surnrnary and Estimating Factors Item 2002-03 General Fund Percent Variabte Costs (1) Allocation Method (2) Amount per Estimated Budge._~t impact (4) Allocation IKF-A Retail Office Method (3) Development Development GENERAL FUND REVENUES Prope~ Tax Sales & Use Tax Real Property Transfer Tax MoTor Vehicle Tax Transient Occupancy Tax Use of Money & Property Charges for Service Franchise Fees Business License Fee Other Licenses & Permits Fines and Forfeitures Other Revenue (6) Subtotal General Fund Revenues Subtotal Less. Sales & Use Tax Development Impact Fee Revenues (7) GENERAL FUND E~PENDITURES General Government Administration Ct'6/Council City,, Manager/Clerk Central Services Legal Services Administrative Services (9) Buitding Management insurance Elections Subtotal Government Administration Public Safety Police Services Crossing Guaros Animal Control Traffic Signal & Street Lighting Disaster Preearer~ness Fire Subtotal Public Safety Transportation ~ubiic WorKs Administration Street Maintenance Street Sweepmg Street Tree Maintenance Street Landscape Maintenance Subtotal Transportation Health & Welfare Waste Management Child Care Social Services Housing Programs Subtotal Health & Welfare 59,892.843 $12.702.000 $415.000 $1,937,000 $858,000 $1.373,538 $4 752,535 $1,493.900 $117.000 $1,505,404 $114.000 $879.533 See Table 6 aha Table 7 See Table 5 100% Property Transfem 100% Resident PoDuJation See Table 8 0% No[ tm~actee Not Impacted 100% Daytime Population 100% Per Business Not Estimated 100% Daytime Pooulation Not Estimated $36,040,753 $212.932 $739.518 $319_600 $659.076 $1.038.223 $731,567 $386.665 '$20.940 $4,108,521 $7.876,674 $71.462 $181.437 $0 $60,959 S5 108,279 $13,298,811 $616,63! $10,427 $132.100 $70,337 ,$507.726 $1,337,221 '$8,242 $15,000 $6,000 $39,759 $69.00I $247,000 $323.000 $1,537,000 $160.000 $0 $0 $54.37 $0 $0 $1.000 $31.000 $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $37.84 $14.756 $37.646 $50.00 $500 $400 $2.89 $1.126 $2.873 $1,801,382 $854,919 $264.382 $394.919 $9.428,000 $5,751,000 ~ 0% Daytime Population $0.54 $210 $537 t0% Daytime Populatior $1.87 $730 $1.864 10% Daytime Population $0.81 $316 $805 10% Daytime Population $1.67 $651 $1.66t 10% Daytime Population $2.63 $1.025 22.616 10% Daytime Population $1.85 $723 $1.844 10% Daytime Population $0.98 $382 $974 10% Daytime Population $0.05 $21 $53 $4.058 $I 0,383 See Table ~, 1 10% Resident Pooulation 10% Dayume Pooulation 0%- Not Estimated 10% Daytime Population See Table 10 $354.000 $81.000 $2.01 $0 $0 $0.46 $179 $457 $0.00 $0 $0 $0.15 $60 $154 $210.000 $363,000 $564.239 $444.811 10% Daytime Population $1.56 $609 $1,554 100% Per Road Miie $135 $62 $62 100% Per Road Mite $1.716 $779 $779 100% Per Road Mite $913 $415 $415 100% Per Road Mite $6,594 $2,995 $2,995 $4,860 $5,805 50% Daytime Popuiation 10% Daytime Population Not Estimated Not Estimated $0.10 $0.04 $41 $104 $15 $38 $56 $142 Economic & Planning Sy$terns, tnc. ~0/3~/2003 H:lY~2078~deta~iscalrn°d4~¢2978fi~ca14~d~ Table 4 Fiscal Evaluatiot~ of IKEA Retail Proposal Budget Summary and Estimating Factors Item -2002-03 General Fund Percent Variable Costs (1) Allocation IVfethod (2) Amount per Estimated Budge~t impact (4) Allocation IKEA Retail Office Method (3) Development Development Culture & Leisure Lil2rary Services $496.219 Cultural Activities $137,153 Heri;age Center $90.771 Dubfin Cemetery $37.418 Park Maintenance $!,263.230 Community Cable TV $7'0,906 ParKs & Community Services $2,421.062 Par~s &Facilities Management $223,360 Subtotal Culture'& Leisure $4,740,119 Community Develooment Community Development (10) Engineering Economic Deveioprnent Subtotal Community Development Bubtotal Expenditures 10% Daytime Population $1.28 10% Daytime Poputatior, $0.35 Not Estimated Not Estimated 10% Daytime Pe~)uiat~on $3.20 Not Estimated I 0% Daytime Pooulation $6.13 10% Daytime Population $0.57 $490 $1.250 $135 $346 $1.248 $3,183 $2.391 $6.101 $22t $583 $4,485 $11,443 $3,574.889 10% Daytime Population $9.05 $3,531 $9.009 $ I, 852 477 10% Da,vtime Population $4.69 $1.830 $4.668- $265.875 Not Estimated $5,713,241 $5.361 $13.677 $29.266,9!¢, .S§83.059 .~.86, 031 (1) Percentage of costs m cu0get that inorease/decreaee as service population increases/decreases. (2) Some items ware not estimated because they were not exeected to be imoacted by either oeveloomem alternative. ¢31 "Amount 3er Allocation Method"= ("Percent Vadabte terms of Residential Population, Daytime,Pcoulation, or Road Mite-~. (4) "Estimated Bu0get tmDac~' ='"Amount oar Allocation Method" (5) It ~s eesumed that there will be no oroeer[y transfers for either developmem scenario. (6) "Other Revenue" includes "Other Revenues" and "thtergovemmental Revenues" line items from the City Budget. (7} The revenue from Devetopmer~t Impact Fees is onty collected once. In this analysis it is assumed that coliectior~ wilt occur the year before the commercial development is open for business, (8) The budget includes a "Non-Depadmental"' line item under General Government Administration in the amount of $350,000. This amount includes $150,000 "Contingent Reserve" and $200,000 "Computers for our Schools Proiect," Neither cf these amounts will be impacted By the proposed office or rata[! projects, and this line item has not been included. For this reason, the Expenditures subtotal shown will be $;~50,000 tess than the total printed in the "Preiiminary Budget and Financial Pian, Fiscal Year (9) "A~ministrative Services" accounts for the Finance and IT Departments, (ID) "Community Development" includes the Planning Department and the Building & Safety Department. (11) Subtotal Expenditures is $350,000 tess than the ednted "Total Operating Expenditures" of $29.616,914. See Footnote (8) for the explanation. Sources: City of Dublin "Preliminary Budget and Financial Plan Fiscal Year 2002-2003" and Economic & Planning Systems, lnc, F_conomic & Planning System~, lnc. f0/3'I/2003 ~:~t'~2078~data~scalmed4'~f2078fi~cet4.xl~ 0 O. ~= CD CD Table 6 Fiscal Evaluation of IKEA Retail PropOsal Property Tax ~'aicu'fation for the IKEA Retail Development (20035) Cost Number Item per Unit Unit of Units Total Construction Cost Estimates for IKEA Cost per Square Foot of Building (1) Cost per Parking Space (2) Total improvement Value Construction Cost Estimates for Outparcefs . Cost per Square Foot of Building Cost per Square Foot of Tenant Improvement Cost per Parking Space Total Improvement Value Total Land Costs Total Development Costs Assessment Rates Property Tax Allocation Rate (3) Tax Allocation Factor (4) Property Tax Assessment Property Tax Collected by City (5) $1~10 Square Foot $2,500 Parking Space $180 Square Foot $70 Square Foot $2,500 Parking Space $1,087,273 Acre 317,000 70O 137,000 137,000 480 27.5 $34,870,000 $1,750,000 $36,620,000 $24,660,000 $9,590,000 $1,200,000 $35,45O.OO0 $29,900,000 $101,970,000 1.06% 22.8-~% $1,080';780 $247,000 ~'1; Industry standard cos;s inctuding podium, s~el[, and interior improvements. I2t Approximately 500 spaces witI ae located under building podium; the cost for constructing these spaces is inctuded in the building costs ($110 Der sc~uare foot), (3) Property Tax'Assessment rate orovided by the County of Alameda Tax Assessor's Office. (4) -['he Tax Allocation Factor for this property is set ~)y the County Tax Sharing Agreement. (5) C. aiculations rounded to the nearest hundred thousand. Due to rounding, some calculations may not sum. Sources: County of Afameda Tax Assessor's Office County Tax Shadng AG reement IKEA Corporation, and Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems. mc. '10/3172005 H.,W12078dub~ciata~lf2078fi$ca14.xl~ Table 7 Fiscal Evaluation of IKEA Retail Proposal Property Tax CaiculaiJon for the Office Development (20035) item Amount Office Development Assumptions Annual _ease Rate (Per SF of Class A Office) Operating Costs (Per SF of Class A Office) Net Operating income Der Occupied Sauare Foot Vacancy Rate Net Operating Income per Building Square Foot Office Square Feet (1) Net Operating income Capitalization Rate Estimated Value of Land and improvements Assessment Rates Property Tax Assessment Rate (2) Tax Allocation Factor (3) Progerty 'Fax Assessment Property Tax Collected by City (4) $27.00 $18.50 10.00% $16.65 760,000 2,654,00.0 9.50% $133,200,000 1.06% 22.87% $1,41:1.787 $323,000 (1) The assessed value of the oft'ice development is calculated using the capitalization rate of the property rather than the construction value Because the rents collected from an office development are more reflective of the property's va~ue than me cost of developing the property, Lease revenue will be generated from the office space, not the accessory buildings. 3eoending on the arrangement with the restaurant, there might t~e additional revenue from this source: regardless, it will be a relatively minor contribution to the operating revenue and is not factored into these catcu[ations due to the uncertainty, Therefore, only the office scuare footage (760.000} ~s used to calculate the property's value. See Table 2:, (2) Property Tax Assessmef~t rate provided by the County of Atame~- Tax Assessor's Office. (3) The Tax Allocation Factor for this property is set by the County Tax Sharing Agreement. {4) Calculations rounded to the nearest hundred thousand, Due to rounding, some calculations may not sum. Sources: County of Alameda Tax Assessor's Office, County Tax Sharing Agreement, City. of Dubtin. and Economic & Planning Systems, mc, Economic & Planning Sysmms. inc. 10/3'1/'2003 H:\t12078dul~dafa~2078fJsca14.xl$ Table 8 Fiscal Evaluation of IKEA Retail Proposal Transient Occupancy Tax (20035) Item Assumptions IKEA Retail Office Development Development Office Square Feet Vacancy Rate Square Feet Der Office Employee 350 SF Employees that Generate Hotel Stays (I) Occupied Room Nights per Year 2.35 Average Cost of Room $85 Transient Occupancy 'Tax Rate 8% Total TOT Revenue for Development (2) 20,755 760,000 0% 10% 59 1,950 per Employee 139 4,583 per Night $11.815 ,$389,555 SI,D00 $31,000 (I) It is assumed that office employees wilt generate hotel stays in Dubtin due to mee[ings with out-of-town Businesses. It is further assumed that business conducted in the other 17pes of seace envisioned for both alternatives wilt not generate stays at hotels: (2) Calculations rounded to the nearest hundred thousand. Due ta rounding, some calcuistions may not sum. Source: Economic & Planning Systems, lnc, Economic & Planning System~, mc. '10/3'~/2003 H:t~";2078[daf:atlO333fi$catmod4V12078fisca14.xl~ Table 9 Fiscal Evaluation of IKEA Retail Proposal Summary of impact Fee Revenues (20035) IKEA Retail Development Office Development impact Fees Fee Total Fee Total Public Facilities Fee Traffic impact Fee Noise Mitigation Fee Fire. DeveloDment Fees Total City Fees (3) $1,486 Der 1,000 SF $674,644 $2,886 per 1.000 SF See below (1) $8,694,447 'See below (I) $24 per 1,000 SF $10.896 $7 per 1,000 SF See betow (2) $46;440 See below (2) $9,426~000 $2,251 ,O8O $3,340.722 $5,46O $153.92O $5,751,000 (1) Includes Traffic impact Fee, Pleasanton interchange Fee, and Regional Traffic Fee. (2) includes a range of fees. including the Fire imoact Fee snd Fire Processing Fees. (3) Calculations rounded to the nearest hundred thousand, Due to rounding, some calcu'tations may not sum, Sources: City of Dubtin, Planning Division Code Enforcement "Permit Fee Schedule," and Economic & PJanning Systems Economic & PJanning Sysrems. Inc. 10/3172003 H:[t'¢2078~data~'lO333fiscatm°d4Y12078fisca14'xl$ Table 10 Fiscal Evaluation of IKEA Retail Proposal Fire Department Servi~'e and Cost Estimates (20035) Item Amount IKEA Retail O~ice Development Development · Annual Fire Department Budget (FY.02-03) Total Calls for Service (2002), (1) Average Cost per Call for Service ($2003) $5,108,279 1,872 $2.729 Square Feet of Retail/Restaurants at Hacienda Crossings'(2) 440'.879 Average Annual Calls for Service at Hacienda Crossings (3) 76 Average Annual Calls for Service per 1,000 Souare Feet 0.I7 Total Building Square Feet Projected Calls for Service at Proposed Develop)merit (4) Project Cost Estimate (5) 454.000 780 D00 77 133 $210,000 $;363,000 (1) The most recent count of calls for service is the 20'02 count; orovided in corresoondence with the Fire Depadment. (2) Assumes Amerisuites Hotel.comcnses 75.121 SF of total 516.000 SF development estimate arovided Dy Economic Development. (3) City of Dublin Economic Deveiooment Decartment. The average fire calls for service in 2001 and 2002 at Hacienda Crossings. (4) For the IKEA devetoDmen[, projecte(: calls for service were estimatea based on its orc~ortionate share of square feet in re~ation to the Hacienda Crossings ceve~ooment. For the office development, the estimated calls for service were based on its prooorticnate share of sc uare feet in relation to IKEA project, This method was'used because limited historical fire data was available for office developments in Dubiin, and experience with other' cities indicates a similar ratio of service calls per development square foot for qoth office and retail developments, (5) Calculations rounded to the nearest hundred thousand, Due to rounding, some calculations may not sum. Sources: City of Dubiin "Preliminary Budget and Financial Pian Fiscal Year 2002-2003," City of Dubtin .Fire Services Department, City cf Dublin Economic Development Department, and Economic & Planning Systems, thC, Economic &Plann/ng Sys¢ern$, inc. ~0/3~/2003 H:~2078~data~fiscatrnod41f2078fi$ca14,xls Table 11 Fiscal Evaluation of IKEA Retail Proposa'[ Police Department Service and Cost Estimates (20035) Item Citywide IKEA Retail Office Totals Development Development Annual Police Department Budget (FY 02-03) Total calls for service (2002) Average cost per call for service ($2003) Calls for service at Hacienda Crossings Development (1) Proportion of Service Calls Originating from Theatre/Hotel Estimateo Calts for Service Originating from Retail/Restaurants Souare Feet of Retail/Restaurants at Hacienda Crossings (2) Estimated Calls for Service per 1,000 SF Retail Estimated Calls for Service per 1000 SF Office (3) Total Building Sauare Feet Estimated Annual Calis for Service Generated by Project Project Cost Estimate (4) $7,836,674 52,708 $t49 3.082 25% 2,312 440,879 5.24 0.70 454,000 780,000 2.379 546 $354,000 $8t,000 (1) The police department Dreoares reports based on statistical areas of the city, which are sucareas of the city determined by the Doiice department. The Hacienda Crossings statistical area was recommencec as a comparable site. (2) Assumes Amedsuites Hotel comprises 75.I21 SF of total 516,000 SF development estimate orovided by Economic Deveiooment, ('3) A review of comparable cities indicates that each 1.DO0 square feet of retail generates Between 7 eno 8, times more calls for service than each 1 .O00 souare feet of office soace. (~4) Calculations rounded to the nearest hundred thousand. Due to rounding, some calculations may not sum, Sources: City of Dublin "Preliminary Budget and Financial Plan Fiscal Year 2002-2003," City of Dubiin Police Services Deoartment, City of Dublin Economic Devetcoment Department ant Economic & Planning Systems, /nc, Economic & Planning Systems, inc. fO/31/2OO3 H:t[~2078~datat'lO333fiscalrnod41f2078fiscat4.xls Tabte 12 Fiscal Evaluation of IKEA Retail Proposal County Tax Sharing Ag reagent (20035) Item IKEA Retail Office Development Development Sales Tax Revenue Property Tax Revenue Property Tax Reduction (1) Net Property Tax Revenue Collected by City (2) $1,537,000 $160,000 $247,000 $323,000 ($538,000) ($56,000) ($291,000) $267,000 (1) The Property Tax Reduction is oefined as 35% of the Se~es Tax Revenue. (2) A negative vaiue indicates that the Prooerty Tax Reduction exceeds anticipated property tax revenue. It is asaumed that property values in other Santa Rite developments will be sufficient to ~over this deficit. Sources: County Tax Sharing Agreement and Economic & Planning System~. Economic & Planning S.vs~erns, Inc. '~0/3172003 H://'1207B~da¢a~f2078'~sca13112078fisca14.xl$ Eaouomie &; Use ~o~i~, TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: From: Subject: Date: Chris Foss Walter Kieser and Christine McMiltan Market Evaluation. of tKEA Retail Proposal; EPS #12078 November 18, 2003 This Technical Memorandum provides a market analysis for the proposed IKEA store in Eastern Dublin. TNs market analysis explores market potential for the IKEA store and related retail development in the context of overall retail demand and supply in Dublin. The market analysis provides a technical basis of a concurrent fiscal analysis of the iKEA project; specifically it provides a basis of assumptions regarding retail sales taxes. The analysis also explores how proposed retail uses on the IKEA site will interplay with existing retail uses and expected increases m retail shopping demand. As a part of this market analysis the current and projected (through 2020) market conditions in Dublin and the surrounding Tfi-Vatley Area were evaluated. The trade area for retail goods in Dublin was determined by a review of retail expenditure r>atterns in the Bay Area and the rtl-Valley sub-re,on. As will be desto'Abed further, the size of the trade area deoends upon the type of retail being sold. Consumers are typically willing ro drive tong distances to find the best deal for expensive items ~,at are purchased relatively infrequently; such as automobiles and appliances (commonly referred'to as "comparison goods" ). For less costly items that are purchased with higher frequency, commonly referred to as 'converdence goods" such as groceries, consumers typically shop within a few miles of their home3 Other considerations for defining a retail trade area include accessibility, commuting patterns, and the scale and mix of retail stores. For the purpose of this analysis, two trade areas were used. For convenience-oriented retail, the frade area definition is restricted to the City of Dublin and the surrounding Subregional Study Area, as defined by ABAG. It is assumed that shoppers in surrounding communities have ample convenience shopping opportunities nearby. For comparison-goods shopping, the trade are a was defined as the ABAG defined Subre~onal Stud}, Areas Dublin. Castro Valley, Danville, Pleasanton, Livermore, and See Appendix A for a more detailed description of compahson and convenience goods. BERKELEY SACRAMENTO 2501 Ninth St, Suite 200 Phone: 510-841-9190 ~ Phone: 916-649-g010 ............. 4, ,~- .... Fax; 3}O-g4~-?g0g - -'~,~ ...... ~'~~~' ' www.epsys,com DENVER Phone: 303-623-35 $7 Fa-x: 305-623-9fi49 Chris Fo~s and Andy Byde City of Dubtin November 18,Page 20032 San Ramon. These communities encompass the majoritT' of the area in which households of both Dublin and the surrounding cities will conduct the majority of their comparison good shopping. Clearly some shoppers from other areas (e.g., 5an joaquin County) shop for these goods in Dub lin; however, residents of the trade area also shop beyond the trade area offsetting at least a portion of these ad&itional sales. Dublin has become a mg-nificant hub of retail shopping including stores that provide converfience goods to local residents and a range of comparison goods to re~onat shoppers. The City's strate~c location at the intersection of twvo heavily traveled Interstate highways, its ample supply of available retail sites, accessibility by a large number of house holds and businesses in the immediate trade area, and supportive vlanning and development policies have all contributed to this success. A typical measure of a city's retail concentration is "sales tax receipts per capita." A comparison of this number with the State-wide average reflects the net expenditures being attracted to the community (the retail quotienl). Dublin's current retail quotient is 3.6 (see Table 1), indicating both a concentration of supply and strong overall retail performance. The automobile sector is particularly strong in Dublin, which has become a re,oriel center for automobile sales and service. In addition to the downtown commercial area surrounding the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and San Ramon Valley Boulevard, a large concentration of retail.has emerged in the rapidly developing eastern Dublin area exemplified by the Hacienda.Crossing shopping center. These shopping areas contain a good representation of "national credit" retailers. The IKEA store and related retail uses will further strengthen Dublin's position as a regional retail hub. Although the IKEA will likely attract demand from areas beyond (particularly to the east in San joaquin County) it is assumed that the defined trade area wilt account for the large majority of shoppers visiting the tKEA site. Shoppers in areas to the north and west of the trade area have access to other IKEA stores (in Emeryville and East Palo Alto). CONCLUSIONS Dublin has evolved into a very dominant regional retail area within its immediate ~rade area and beyond. Table 1 shows Dublin's retail sales performance by retail category as compared to other cities in its immediate trade area. The comparison goods retail quotient (Dublin sales per capita/State average sales per capita) is 4.4, indicating that Dublin is a si~maificant attraction for shoppers from within the trade area and beyond. The convenience goods results show similar strength, with a quotient oi 1.6 indicating that even in more localized converdence goods Dublin is capturing a large portion local sales and is apparently attracting shoppers from beyond the City's boundary. Table 2 shows retail sales in each of the cities included in the trade area compared to their respect/ye population share. Note that while Dublin accounts for 10 percent of the trade area population it garners 24 percent of the area's retail sales. H: \ 120?Sdub \ Report \ October280$ \ Market.d~c Chris Foss and Andy Byde Ci~d of Dublin November 18, 2003 Page 3 proposed UCEA store will add to the existing concentration of housing and building related goods in Dublin, Dublin presently has a.concentration of retailers providing hous.ing and building related goods, reflec~--~g its position as a regional center. As shown in Table 2, Dublin captures 39 percent of the trade area's retail sales of home ~_mishings and appliances. With only 10 percent of the population, this indicates a 'substantial inflow of.customers from outside of Dublin. The 317,000 square foot IKEA store would significantly add to Dublin's concentration of household goods and · barnish~ngs stores and undoubtedly increase the influx of sales from within the trade area and from areas beyond the ~ade area, particularly in the rapidly growing San Joaquin County. Dublin's retail market is projected to remain strong as household demand throughout the region increases with population growth. Table 3 shows the trade area analysis for comparison goods. The existing pattern of the trade area being a net attractor of sales from the surrounding area is likely to continue. Coupled with an anticipated increase of.more than 40,000 households between 2000 and 2020 (see Append_ix B, Table B-l), it is likely that, at a minimum, the trade area will be able to support an additional 2 million square feet of retail space for comparison goods. Dublin, because of its central location in the trade area and the availability of well-located retail sites, is in a good position to provide this retail space. 4. The.anticipated growth in demand for convenience retail suggests opportunities for small scaIe and mixed use development within the City by 2020. Table 4 shows the ~analysis of Dublin's convenience retail space. Demand for convenience-oriented retail is expected to increase by at 1east 269,000 square feet with the expected addition of hearty 10,000 households within Dublin's Subreg-ionat Study Area between 2000 and 2020. Additional demand for convenience retail that has not been captured in this analysis can be expected from regiona2 shoppers wh©, when visiting Dublin, make purchases at Dublin's convenience retail stores thus augTnenting local demand. The high convenience retail quotient (1.6, as seen in Table 1) implies that this behavioral pattern already exists, and it is logical to assume that it will cOntinue. The antdcipated grown in demand for convenience retail suggests an opportunity for the City to 'locate and expand convenience retail in areas currently desig-nated for smaller scale retail use in the City and to consider various mixed use configurations. H: \ 12078dub \ Revort \ October2803 \ Market.doc Chris .Foss and Andy B yde City of Dublin November 18, 2003 Page 4 Retailers attracted to the IKEA "out. parcels" are likely to include a mixture of convenience and comparison establishrnen ts. It is likely that spedalty household goods and furnishings, eating gz drinldng places, and general merchandisers could be among those attracted to the out-parcel retail space. Near the IKEA store in Emeryville a full range of such retailers are evident, as shown in Table 5. Specialty household goods stores represent 12 of 49 stores near IICEA in Emeryville, implying that such retailers may find it benefidal to locate near mn II<EA. Table 6 vrov~des a listing of retail stores in Dublin, sorted by location and indicating their respective retail sector. While Dublin is weE-served in terms of retail, several stores likely to locate near an IKEA are not represented in Dublin. Many of these retailers do, however, maintain locations nearby. It is possible that an existing retailer within the i-rade area would relocate to the site in order to take advantage of the allure of IKEA stores, the site's convenient location, and other factors. The proposed IKEA store would create direct competitio?~ .for'several existing furniture stores in DubIin. IKEA would directly compete with a number of value-oriented household goods and furnishings retailers. Table 7 provides a listing of retailers who would compete directly with'IKEA including 4-Day Furniture, Ail-American Furniture, Jennifer Convertibles, 'Classic Furnii-u_re, burnish Again, and Lifestyles. It is difficult to put a precise estimate on the level of this competition. While the Fresence of IKEA may negatively affect the sales volume at existing furniture stores, tKEA can be expected to have a positive impact on stores that sell items complimentary to those which Ii<EA sells, such as mattresses, home goods, and appliances. As shown on Table 7 there are at least six stores in Dublin in this category, including Mattress Direct, Mattress Discounters, and ~allpapers To Go. J-f; \ 12078dub \ Revor~\ Oc tob~r2805 \ Market.doc i Tabte 7 Market Evaluation. of IKEA Retail Proposal Stor~s impacted by IKEA in the Ctty of Dublin Level of Competition Store Shopping Center Direct Competition 4-Day Furniture Alt-American Furniture Jennifer Convertibles Classic Furniture Furnish Again Lifestyles Dublin Retail Center San Ramon Village Enea Plaza None None Pak 'n Save Center Comoiimentary Mattress Direct Mattress Discounters Wallpapers. To Go Expo Design Center Pier 1 tin,efts Bed, Bath, & Beyond Dubtin Crossroads Center Enea Plaza Enea Plaza Dublin Place Shopping Center Hacienda Crossings Hacienda Crossings Sources: Shopping Center Directory (2003) and Economic & Ptanning Sys[ems, mc. Economic & Planning Sy$tem~. inc. 1073~72003 H:~2078dub~Data~Data3.~J$ ~ R~I .F. smte Public Finance ~nd Use Poh~ TECHNICAL APPENDICES TECHNICAL APPENDICES The Technical Appendices include tables that provide calculations, data, and further explanation that support the conclusions of the market analysis. Appendix A provides a more detailed expIanation of the difference between comparison and convenience goods. Table'B-1 presents the population and household growth projected by ABAG through 2020. The growth in the number o£households will generate the significant additional retail demand seen in Tables 3 and 4. Table B-2 presents the median household income for each community in the trade area, as web as the two counties in which these communities reside. The data is from the 2000 census, with numbers inflated to be consistent with the most recent year of retail sales tax data (2001). Ali fiom.~res are.in 2001 dollars. The weighted average of the median household incomes for the trade area was used to demrmine the aggregate income for the trade area, as seen in Table B-3. Table B-3 provides the assumptions used in the calculation of additional convenience and comparison retail that Dublin and the trade area are likely to support by 2020 (see Tables 3 and 4). The Annual Consumer Expenditure Data, produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, is the basis for calculating the amount spent by residents of the trade area (see Table B-4). The assumed taxable sales per square foot of retail space and the median household income for'Dublin and the trade area are shown in 2001 dollars. The population in 2000 and 2020 is used to calculate the agg-regate income for Dublin and the trade area in these years. Populationgrowth in the area is understood to be the primary driver of the increase in retail demand. Constant 2001 dollars are used throughout the model, so inflation rates have not been applied to income or taxable sales per square foot of retail space. Table B-4 provides a breakdown of the spending patterns of the average' Bay Area resident. The proportion of total income that the average Bay Area resident spent on each retail category was derived for use in Tables B-5 through B-8. Table B-5 estimates the aggTz, egate retail expenditures in the City of Dublin by applying the proportions found in Table B-4 to the estimated aggregate income, found in Table Table B-6 repeats the analysis in Table B-5 for projected expenditures by retail catego~~. It is.assumed that spending patterns remain the same, so the proportions calculated in Table B4 are applied to Dubliffs projected aggregate income in 2020, which can be found in Table B-3. H: \ 12078dub \ Report \ October2$03 \ Market.doc Table B-7 repeats the analysis in Table B-5 for the trade area in 2001. It is assumed that spending pal~erns in the trade area mirror those in the Bay Area. The proportions calculated in Table B-4 aze applied to the trade area's 2001 ag~egate income, found in Table B-S, Table B-8 repea~s the a~atysis m Table B-7 for the trade area in 2020. It is assumed that spending patterns remain the same; the propo~ons calculated in Table B~ are applied to the tTade area's projected aggregate income, found in.Table B-3. Table B-9 vrovides general location criteria for selected major retailers. This data demonstrdtes the relative importance of various criteria that are considered m retmil decision making. Table B-10 provides general location criteria for selected major restaurants. This data demonstrates the rela~ive importance of various criteria that are considered in retail decision making. 2 H: \ 12075dub \R.~pwr~\ Octob~280$ \7Mark:t.doc APPE~krDIX ,A APPENDIX A: COMPARISON AND COI<WEI ENCE GOODS Retail goods can generally be categorized into two broad categories: comparison goods and convenience goods. Convenience goods are those that are bought &equently or out of necessity, and require minimum effort in selection and purchase; this category includes grocery purchases as well as ~obacco, newspapers, gas, and restaurants. Convenience-oriented retailers are typically located in neighborhood shopping centers, where they rely on nearby residents for market support (those living within a one- to two-mite radius or a ten-minute drive). The overall success of convenience-Oriented retailers depends On access to maior arterials, project config~.tration and visibility, tenanting (quality of the anchor) and a suffident populationbase. Comparison goods are typically purchased less often than convenience .goods, require some comparison by the customer, and are therefore stocked in a wide range of sizes, styles, colors, etc. This category includes apparel, home furnishings & appliances, building materials, automObiles, and other retail.stores to which consumers are willing to travel greater distances. These retailers typically depend upon residents and employees within a larger trade.area of five to ten miles for support, as well as location criteria such 'as freeway visibility. H: \ I2078dub \ R~a~'t \ October2,~03 \MarketAp~Y~tioc APPENDIX B Tabte B.2 Market E_yaluafion of IKEA Retail Proposal Median Household income for Trade Area Median Jurisdiction HH Income Trade Area Dublin $85,000 Castro Valley $71,000 Danvitle $126,000 Pteasanton $100,000 Livermore $83,000 San Ramon $106.000 Trade Area Weighted Average $93,700 Regional Context Alameda County $62,000 Cor~tra Costa County $70,000 Source: 2000 Census, inflated [o 20015 Economic &.Pianning Sy.~tem.% Inc. ~0/3']/2003 H:t¢2078dub~DatatData3.~:ls Table B-3 Ma rket Evaluation of IKEA'Retail Proposal Assum pfions Item Value Source .Annual Consumer Expenditure Data (20015) Average Annual Expenditures in Bay Area Average income of Participants in Survey $56,112 $70,237 Taxable Sates per Square Foot by Retail Category (20015) Apparel Stores General Merchandise Stores Food Stores F_ating & Drinking Places Housing and Building Related Retail Stores Service Stations Other Retail Stores $28O $260 $210 $250 $200 $2 4OO $240 IViedian Household income (20015) City of Dublin (1) Trade Ares (2) $85,000 $93.700 Households (2000) City of Dublin (1) Trade Area (2) 9.335 113,334 Aggregate Household income (20015) City of Dublin (1) Trade Area (2) $793.475,000 $10,619,395,800 Projected Households (2020) City of Dubiin (1) Trade Area (2) 19.260 153,550 2020 Projected Aggregate Household income (20015) City of Dublin (t) Trade Area (2) $1.,637,100,000 $14,387,635,000 BLS Consumer Exoenditure Survey (2000-2001) "Doltars & Cents of Shopping Centers: 2000" Urban Land institute, inflated to 2001 $ 2000 Census, inflated to 2001 $ ABAG 2002 Projections Calculation (3) ABAG 2002 Projections Calculation (3) (1) Tr~e City of Dublin is used to calculate the suppiy and demand for convenience goods. (2) The Trade Area is Dublin, Castro Valley, Danville, San Ramon, Pieasanton, Livermore Subregional Study Areas. The Trade Area is used to calculate the supply and demand of comparison goods. (3) Aggregate household incomes were calculated by multiplying the 2001 Median Household Income by the household estimate for the appropriate year. Note: t~ecause 200'rdol~ars are used consistently through this analysis, neither the median househo[d income nor the estimated taxable sales per square foot has been increased between 2001 and 2020. Without considering inflation, it is assumed that these figures would not increase. Econarnic & Planning Systems, Inc. 10731/2003 Table Market Evaluation of IKEA Retail Proposal Household Spending Patterns in Bay Area (20015) Retail Category Average Annual Expenditures (1) % of income (2) % Annual Retail Expenditu res (2) Expenditure Survey Participant income before Taxes (1) Average Annuat Expenditures in Bay Area (1) Annual Expenditures as % of Income Retail 'Exoenditures Apparel Genera! Merchandise Personal Care Products Reading Tobacco Miscellaneous Food and Beverage Food at -Iome Food away from Home Alcohoiic Beverages Housing & Building ReJated ~tferchandise Housekeeping Supplies Household Furnishings and E(~uipmem Automobiles Vehicle Purchases Gasotine an(~ motor oil Other Non. Retail Expenditures Housing Shelter Utilities. fuels, and aublic services Household Ooerations Other Transportation Health Care and insurance Health Care insurance Education Cash Contributions $70,237 $56,112 8O% $23,070 $2,081 $2,102 $612 $266 $224 $1.000 $7.710 $3.902 $3.064 $744 $3.069 $575 $2,494 $5,725 $4.206 $1.519 $2,383 532.347 $17,808 $13.795 $2,548 $I.465 $3,766 $8.201 $2,170 $6.031 $1,086 $I,486 33% 3.0% 3.0% 0.9% 0.4% 0.3% 1.4% I 't,0% 5.6% 4.4% 1.1% 4.4% 0.8% 3.6% 8.2% 6.0% 2.2% 3.4% 46.~% 25.4% 19.6% 3.6% 2.1% 5.4% 11.7% 3.1% 8.6% 1.5% 2.1% 9% 9% 3% 1% I% 4% 33% 17% 13% 3% 13% 2% 11% 25% 18% 7% 10% (1) The BLS Consumer Exoenditure Survey anaiyzes spending uatterns of consumers tt~roughout the U.S and orovides detail i~ased on reD,on of the country. The survey reeorts tatat amount spent ~er retail category as shown in this table. (2} EPS calculation Sources: U.S. BLS Consumer Expenditures Survey (2000-2001), Census 2OOD and Economic & Planning Systems, inc. Econom~c& Planning Syslems, lnc. ~0/3~/20~3 H:~f2078dub~Daf;a~Dete3.~t$ Table B-5 Market Evaluation of IKEA Retail Proposal Current Estimated Aggregate Retail Expenditures in Dubiin (20015) Retail Category (1) % of income (2) Aggregate Retail Expenditures Aggregate Household income in Dubiin (3) $793,475,00'0 Apparel 3% General Merchandise 3% Personal Care Products I% Reading 0.38% Tobacco 0.32% Miscellaneous 1% Food & Beverage I1% Food Stores (4) 6% Eating Places 4% Drinking Places 1% Housing & Building Related IVierchandise Housekeeping ,Supplies Household Furnishings and E(~uipment $23,512,000 $23,747,000 $6,9t4,000 $3,005.000 $2,531,000 '$11,297,000 $87,101,000 $44.081.000 $34,614,000 $8,405.000 4% S34,671,000 I% $6,496,000 4% $28,175,000 Automobiles 8% $64,676,000 Auto Deaters 6% $47.516. O00 Service Stations 2% $17.160,000 Other 3% $26,921,000 Total Retail Expenditures by Dubtin Residents $260,628,000 (1) Retail category names adiusted from BLS Consumer Expenditure Survey to correspond with BeE categor~ standards. (2) Because the BLS does not provide data soecific m Dublin. it is assumed that. in aggregate. Dublin residents make retail exoenditures following the same generat pattern as residents of the larger Bay Area. (3) See Table B-3. (4) Only 35% of this amount is taxable. Therefore, $15.428.350 is usee in Table 4 to calculate supportable souare feet of retail space for food stores. Note: Values may not sum exactly due to rounding. Sources: U.S. BLS Consumer Expenditures Survey (2000-2001), Census 2000, and Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, inc. '~0/31/2003 Ta bio B-6 IVlarket Evaluation of IKEA Retail Proposal 2020 Projection of Estimated Aggregate Retail Expenditures in Dublin (20015) Retail Category (I) % of Income Aggregate Retail (2) Expenditures Aggregate Household Income ~n Dublin (3) $1.637.100,000 Apparel 3% General IVlerchandise 3% Persona] Care Products I% Reading 0.38% Tobacco 0.32% Miscellaneous ! % Food & Beverage 11% Food Stores (4) 6% Eating Places 4% Drinking Places 1% Housing & Building Related Merchandise Housekee ~)ing Supplies Household Furnishings and Equipment $48,510~000 $48,994,000 $14.265,000 $6.200.000 $5.221.000 $23.308 000 $179,706,000 $90,949.000 $7!,416.000 $17.341.000 4% $71,533,000 1% $13,402,000 4% $58.131.000 Automobiles 8% $t33,440,000 Auto Dealers 6% $98,034,000 Service Stations 2% $35.405.000 Other ........ 3% $55.544,000 Total Retail Expenditures by Dublin Residents $537,727,000 (I) RetaiI category names adjusted from BLS Consumer Expenditure Survey [o correspond with BOE category s~anoaras. (2) Because the BLS does not orovide date soecific to Dublin. if. is assumed that, in aggregate, Dublin residents make retait exoenditures following the same general pattern as residents of the larger Bay Area. (3) See Table (4) Only 35% of this amount is taxabie. Therefore ~;31,832,150 is used in Table 4 to calculate supportable square feet of retait space for food stores. Note: Vatues may not sum exactly due to rounding. Sources: U.S. BLS Consumer Expenditures Survey '.2000-2001), Census 2000, and Economic & Planning Systems, inc. Econorn/c& Planning Systern~, Jnc, 10/3~/2003 H:~2078dub~Data~Data3.xJs ~ Tabte B-7 Market Evaluation of IKEA Retail. Proposal Current Estimated Aggregate Retail Expenditures in Trade Area (20015) Retail Category (1) % of income Aggregate Retail (2) Expenditures Aggregate Household income in Trade Area (3) 0,619,395,800 Apparet 3% $3t4,672,000 General Nierchandise 3% $317,809,000 Personal Care Products 1% $92,531,000 Reading 0.38% $40,218,000 Tobacco 0.32% $33.867,000 Miscellaneous 1% $151,194,000 Food & Beverage 1 I% $1,165,704,000 Food Stores 6% $589 958,000 Eating Places 4% $463,258.000 Drinking Pta ces 1% $112,488,000 Housing & Building Related Merchandise Housekeeping Supplies Household Furnishings and EauiDment 4% $464,014,000 1% $86,936,000 4% $377,077.000 Automobiles 8% $865,584,000 Auto Dealers 6% $635.921,000 Service Stations 2% $229.663.000 Other 3% $360,295,000 Total Retail Expenditures in Trade Area $3,488,078,000 (1) Retail category names adjusted from BLS Consumer Exoenditure Survey ~o correspond with BOE category standards. (2) Because the BLS does not provide da[a specific to the Trade area, it is assumed that, in aggregate, residents of the Traoe area make retail ex~)enditures following the same general pattern as residents of the larger Bay Aree ,(3) See Table Note: Values may not sum exactly due to rounding. Sources: U.S. BLS Consumer Expenditures Survey (2000-2001), Census 2000, and Economic & Planning Systems, tnc. Economic & Planning System~ Inc. 'I0/3'I/2003 H:t~2078dub~Data~Daf;a3.x~.s Table Market Evaluation of IKEA Retail Proposal 2020 Projection of Estima-ted Aggregate Retail Expenditures in Trade Area (20015) Retail Category (1) % of Income (2) Aggregate Retaif Expenditures Aggregate Household Income in Trade Area (3) $14.387.635,000 Apparel 3% General Merchandise 3% Pomona Care Produ~s 1% Reading 0.38% Tobacco 0.32% Miscellaneous 1% Food & Beverage 1 I% FooC Stores 6% Eating Places 4% Ddnking Places 1% Housing & Buiiding Related Merchandise Housekeeping Suppiies Household Furnishings and Ec]uiDment Automobiles Auto Dealers Service Stations $426,332,000 $430,582,000 $125,365.000 $54,489,000 $45,885,000 $204.844.000 $1,579,348,000 5799.302,000 $627,642,000 $152,404,000 4% $628,667,000 1% $117,785,000 4% $510 881.000 8% $1,172,732,000 6% $861.574,000 2% $311,158,000 Other 3% $488,143,000 Total Retail Expenditures in Trade Area $4.725.804,000 (1) Retail category, names adjusted from BLS Consumer Expenditure Survey to corresDono with BCE category stanoaros. (2) Because the BLS doss not provide data specific to the Trade area it cs assumeo that. in aggregate residents of the Trace area make retail ex~endituras following the same general pattern as residents of the ~arger Bay Ares. (3) See Table 5-3. Note: Values may n.o= sum exactty due to rounding. Sources: U.S. BLS Consumer E. xoenditures Survey (2000-200I), Census 2000. aha Economic & Planning Systems, lnc. Economic & Planning Systems, /nc. 10/3'I/2003 H:Y~2078dub[Data~Data$...~ts ~ E E E g g E g E E ~ n~ =E ~ o g g ~ ~ g .~- .-- Mr. 'Peabody suggested for the Planning Commission to take the time to read the documents prepared by Staff. He recommended continuing the item until after the IKEA hearing to allow Staff time to prepare the additional traffic irfformation requested by the Planning Commission. Cm. Fasulkey continued the item as suggested by Mr. Peabody. He directed Staff to compile the additional information requested regarding the traffic study. 8.3 PA 02-34 IKEA Retail Complex - Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, General Plan/Specific Plan Amendment, PD - Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans, Development Agreement and Site Development Review. The proposed project is located on an approximately 27.54 acre site. The westerly portion of the site would include an approximately 317,000 square foot IKEA home furnishing facility and the easterly portion of the site would include, an approximately 138,000 square foot retail center Cm. Fasulkey asked for the staff report. Andv Byde, Senior Planner, presented the staff report and a PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Byde explained that the Applicant, IKEA, is proposing an approximately 317,000 square foot IKEA home furnishing retail facility and an approximately 137,000 square foot retail center on a 27- acre. site. The IKEA facility is proposed to be located on the westerly portion of the site and the retail center is proposed to be located on the easterly portion of the site. The site is bounded to the south by 1-580, to the west by Arnold Road, to the north the future Martinelli Way, and to the east, Hacienda Drive. Additionally, IKEA is requesting approval of various wall signage as well as a 99-foot tall pylon sign. The proposed project includes the following actions: The Applicant/Developer has applied to the City for a number of planning actions and approvals necessary for constructing the IKEA Home Furnishings Store and obtain general approvals for the retail center portion of the site. Analyses of these planning actions are included below. These actions collectively comprise PA 02-034 and include: · Certification of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR); · An Amendment to the General Plan reflecting the requested land use modification from Campus Office to General Commercial; · An Amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan reflecting the requested land use modification from Campus Office to General Commercial; · A Planned Development Rezone/Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan to establish zoning and development standards for the entire Site; · A Site Development Review (SDR) requesting approval of the site layout of the IKEA portion of the site and the architecture of the IKEA building; · A Master Sign Program (MSP) requesting approval of directional signage, flags, and wall signs for the IKEA portion of the Project and a 99-foot tall freestanding sign to serve both the IKEA and the retail center'sites; and Development Agreement (DA) that would vest the laws applicable to the project for a five year time frame (a DA is required by the policies of the Specific Plan). ~c~=nir~q Commi.~sion 30 ATTACHMENT Planning Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission refer its hearing jurisdiction on the Master Sign Program and the Site Development Review to the City Council, pursuant to Section 8.96.020.C.3 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Staff requests that the Planning Commission transfer original hearing jurisdiction on this project to the City Council due to the requirement that the General Plan, Specific Plan amendments and the Planned Development Rezoning be approved by the City Council. Any comments or requested changes that the Planning Cormnission has to either the Conditions of Approval and or any of the proposed signage will be brought to the City Council. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: open Public Hearing, hear Applicant's presentation; question Staff, Applicant and the Public; close Public Hearing; deliberate; and adopt a resolution recommending the City Council certify the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report; adopt a resolution recommending the City Council approve amendments to the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; adopt a resolution recommending the City Council approve a Planned Development (PD) rezoning with related Stage I and Stage 2 Development Plans; adopt a resolution recommending the City Council approve a Site Development Review for the IKEA portion of the Project; adopt a resolution recommending the City Council approve a Master Sign Program for IKEA; and adopt a resolution recommending the City Council adopt a Development Agreement for the IKEA project. Cm. Fasulkey opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak. Doug Greertholz, Applicant presented a PowerPoint for the project. He. introduced the project team and explained the origins of IKEA and vision of the store. He stated that there are more than 192 stores worldwide in 31 countries. Dublin will be the third Bay Area store and planned to open in 2005. IKEA would be an added benefit to the community. He provided the Planning Commission with an extensive overview of the project and proposed signage for the site. He thanked them for their consideration of the project. Randy Ackerman, Opus West, stated they have developed many projects in Dublin such as Hacienda Crossings, Emerald Point Office development, and Creekside Business Park. He discussed traffic circulation, parking, signage and the proposed tenants for the Lifestyle Center for the site. Mr. Greenholz discussed the economic and job benefits for Dublin. He reiterated that IKEA is an overall benefit for the area. Cm. King asked if there were any other sites looked at in Dublin. Mr. Greenholz stated they looked at two other sites but felt this was the best site due to the infrastructure already in ptace and the surrounding retail. Cm. King asked° the distance between this piece of property and BART station. Mr. Byde responded .$7 miles. the United States is .25 mile. He explained that generally the acceptable walking distance for Cm. Nassar asked Mr. Greenholz about concerns with the height of the sign. Mr. Greenholz stated that, due to the combined sign with the adjacent retail, there is not sufficient room below the IKEA panel to allow visibility for the tenants in the Lifes .tyle Center. Cm. Nassar asked about the height of the IKEA section. Mr. Byde responded the bottom of the letters are approximately 88 feet. Cm. Machtmes asked the applicants why the City should change the General Plan designation. Mr. Greenholz stated IKEA would compliment the surrounding retail. Part of the reason they are looking at this site is because' it was available due to Commerce One falling out of their contract with Alameda County because office space is no Ionger viable. The studies that the City produced through Economic Planning Systems concluded that office would not be built for another 10 years. The benefits to the City are enormous - economically and part of the attractiveness is the location of the BART station. Cm. Machtmes asked if there is any data from the Emeryville store that tracks customers using BART. Mr. Greenholz said they do not track customers using BART. Mr. Ackerman stated there is also a bus stop going to be built on Martinelli Dr. Cm. MachLmes said there isn't any reason to expect to maximize the location next to BART. It is not reasonable to expect customers will take BART to a furniture store. Mr. Greenholz stated it does happen worldwide where customers come on mass transi$. They shop and have the product shipped to their home. It is a big focus for IKEA to be close to public transit. Cm. Machtmes stated that one of the projected uses that maximizes the transit center orientation is high density residential. How will IKEA compliment the existing high density residential located 600' to the west. Mr. Greenholz stated IKEA has done a lot of screening along the back of the building. They have been working closely with Staff on landscaping and creating a buffer between IKEA and the mixed use along Arnold Road. Cm. Machtmes asked if it is the plan to buffer those two sites rather than incorporate them. 32 2004 Mr. Greenholz stated there is also verv easy pedestrian access to and through the site coming from BART and the transit center. Cm. Machtmes stated he could not read the sign displayed on the PowerPoint slide and asked how will the 99 foot sign signal the driver of the location. Mr. Greenholz stated, based on a study conducted, the logo and the colors of the sign would be visible from the exit point at Hacienda Drive. Due to the size of the slide, it does not show that. Cm. Machtmes stated because it is a destination retail, wouldn't folks already know it's there. Mr. Greenholz stated they would love to propose a larger sign so it is readable from farther away. Cm. Machtmes asked how the architecture is referred to having a European influence with such a Iarge building. Mr. Greenholz responded IKEA warehouses on site, which requires a large building. The building is a prototypical building for IKEA. Cm. Nassar asked how many of the employees will be from the Tri-Valley area. Mr. Greenholz stated they would recruit locally from the area. Ted Wilcox, Dublin resident made a comment about traffic and bypassing the 580 by driving down Dublin Boulevard to get to the 680. Cm. Fasulkey asked if .there were any further questions of Staff; hearing none he closed the public hearing.. Cm. King stated that on page 5 of the agenda statement is unclear. He asked for clarification on the following text: the DSEIR concluded that increased regional traffic beyond that anticipated in the 1993 EIR would result in potentially significant impacts on several intersections and road segments. Mitigation measures in the DSEIR proposed improvements to reduce these impacts to less than significant except at cumulative buiIdout for 2025for various 1-580 and 1-680 freeway segments, already operating below the acceptable [eveI of service D. As a result of the Project, the traffic analysis anticipates that the traffic on these freeway segments, will increase by an average of approximately 1% He stated that appears that there are already below the acceptable level of service and this will make it worse. Mr. Byde stated that there are segments on that freeway that operate below acceptable levels of service as a result of de'CTelopment in San Joaquin County. Those levels are not resulting in Dublin but resulting from Livermore and east of Livermore. Cm. King asked if the reasOn that there vcere no measures proposed to reduce the impaCts was because they would be minimal. Mr. Byde said the reason is that there are no feaSible mitigations. The 0nlY potential rrdtigation would be to extend BART to San Joaquin County or additional lanes to the 1-580. Cm. King said this project would increase traffic on those freeways segments by an average of 1%. He has concerns with the additional traffic on the 1-580 and the potential for rear-ending the vehicles in front of him. He asked the range. Mr. Byde said .5 % fo approximately 2%. Mr. Kuzbari stated that during the a.m. peak hour, the campus office development would generate a lot more trips than a commercial development for that parcel. He stated the project will be required to contribute to Tri Valley Transportation Fees to help fund regional improvement projects that has been planned. For example, there are plans to improve some of the 1-580 interchanges. Cm. King asked why the original General Plan designation was office for that site. Mr. Byde ktated that when the specific plan was done, the Transit Center was not part of the specific plan area. That portion was added in 2001. · Cm. King asked why. Mr. Peabody explained because that area was originally part of Camp Parks and were subsequently transferred to Alameda County Surplus Property Authority. The plans were developed to maximize development around the Transit Station. Cm. Machtmes asked how does the City or Staff know that the project will be built as shown and in a timely manner. Mr. Byde stated given the current market dynamics additional retailers in the market that are not here have a desire to be in Dublin. Cm. M~chtmes asked is there a reason to think that this project is right for this designation and will the City end up with the same situation in the future to accommodate a Wal-Mart type use. Mr. Byde stated based on the discussions with Alameda County and plans and improvements set forth and the residential development occurring, there is no way a big box retail like Wal- Mart could afford to pay for the land value. Any future projects that come in are subject to the plans in place and the Commission and Council's approval of a particular project. Cm. Fasulkey wanted on the record was his concern with the height of the sign and would like to see it stay at 75 feet. Cm. Nassar asked if the Master Sign Program is being requested to be referred to the City Council. Mr. Peabody responded yes. Cm. Machtmes stated he does not agree with .37 miles being greater than what people are willing to walk. He feels it -would be a terrible misuse of a piece of property that is closely related to the BART Station. Cm. King agreed with Cm. Machtmes. It is not consistent with the theory of the original pian in relation to the BART station. It is also going to make the traffic on the freeway worse. It is a beautiful proposal but not for this location. Cm. Nassar stated that he is in favor of the project. Cm. Fasulkey asked Cm. King where is there a better location for the project. Cm. King stated something similar to the Costco location in San Ramon that is not right off the freeway. Cm. Fasulkey asked Mr. Peabody for some direction. Mr. Peabody stated that there are four Planning Commissioners, which will require 3 votes in favor. What is being heard is a 2 to 2 vote. Ms. Faubion suggested that the i~ems be sent to the City Council without a recommendation from the Planning Commission. There was much discussion on whether to approve or deny the IKEA project. From the Planning Commission discussion, it was clear there were not enough votes to send a positive recommendation to the City Council because a positive recommendation requires 3 votes. The Planning Comission was okay recommending certification of the SEIR though, so that was the first motion. Motion #1 - On motion by Cm. King, seconded by Cm. Nassar, with a 3-1-1 vote with Cm. Machtmes voting no and Cm. Jennings absent the Planning Commission approved RESoLuTioN NO. 04-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A suPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE IKEA PROJECT PA 02-034 The Planning Commission asked if they should consider each motion separately. Mr. peab6dy suggested that the Planning CommisSi°n just deny ali the rest of the items rather than going through them one by one. Some of the Planning Commissioners indicated they didn't want to recOmmend denial of the project. It was suggested that the Planning Commission act separately on the GPA/SPA item, then they could recommend denial on the rest of the items because of inconsistency with the General Plan. Cm. King then asked whether this was a way of not denying on the merits; answer was yes, it would not be denying on the merits. Motion #2 - On motion by Cm. Nassar, seconded by Cm. Fasulkey, by a 2-2-1 vote with Cm. King and Machtmes opposed, with Cm. Jermings absent, the motion failed recommending that theCity Council approve the amendments to the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Without an approval recommendation on the GPA/SPA, none of the remaining actions couId be recommended for approval because they would be inconsistent with the existing general plan and specific plan. The Planning Commission addressed the rest of the actions in a single motion. Motion #3: On motion by the Planning Commissioner's by a 3-0-1-1 vote with Cm. Jennings absent and Cm. Nassar abstaining to recommend denial of the Plarmed Development Rezoning with related Stage I and Stage 2 Development Plans, of the Site Development Review for the IKEA project, of the Master Sign Program, and of the Development Agreement for the IKEA project, and to forward the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting to the City Council. 8.2 PA 02-003 Legacy Partners/AMB Properties - West DubIin Transit Village Continued Cm. Fasulkey re-opened the public hearing for item 8.2 Ms. Harbin presented to the Commission the Legacy Partners Transit Village Project (PA 02- 033) Summary of Sources of Traffic Data to address their traffic concerns. Ray Kuzbari presented a section of the Omni Means Traffic Study for the proiect and addressed the traffic issues the Planning Commission had concern with. Cm. Fasulkey dosed the public hearing and asked for a motion. On motion by Cm. Nassar, seconded by Cm. Machtmes by a vote of 3-1-1 with Cm. King abstaining and Cm. Jennings absent the Planning Commission approved I I Janet Harbin From: Sent: To: Subject: Pierce Macdonald 'Wednesday, March 03, 2004 3:17 PM Janet Harbin North Livermore EIR Hi, Janet, Here are my thoughts on the North Livermore intensive Agriculture EIR: Water SuDI~I¥ Water Supply assumption includes expansion of South Bay Aquaduct, according to page 1-4 of the DEIR. Officials from Zone 7 have stated that'the deadline for inclusion of an expansion of the aquaduct for agricultural purposes has passed, and this water supply is no longer an option. Population and Traffic Unit counts for the Initial Study and the DEIR use different assumptions: 1 .) The Initial Study uses a total 303 primary residences to evaluate vehicle trips and public services such as schools, police, and fire protection. 2.) The DEIR uses assumption of 408 residences including second dwelling units and agricultural caretake units. There are no additional environmental reviews of the traffic impacts or population impacts of the project with this change. Incomplete Information Pages 23 to 33 of the Initial Study have titles, "Figure 1" to "Figure 6," but these pages areblank. Mitigation Monitoring The mitigations related to air pollution, groundwater quality and biological resources rely heavily on monitoring over time. Who will monitor the implementation of the mitigations over the 11,000 acres of land included in the Project? Janet, do you think any of these issues should be explored in detail in a letter to the County? Melissa did not have any comments to add. Thank you, Pierce Macdonald, Associate Planner City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 (925) 833-6610