HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.4 Sybase GPA DA PD Rezon CITY. CLERK
AGENDA STATEMENT 0420-30
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2000 0600-60
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC HEARING: PA 99-062 Sybase Corporate Headquarters
Complex, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Planned
Development Rezone/Development Plan and Development Agreement and
PA 99-010 Corrie Center Phase II Office Development General Plan
Amendment
(Report Prepared by: Jerry Haag, Consulting Planner)
ATTACHMENTS:
ATTACHMENT
(by reference)
5.
6.
7.
8.
RECOMMENDATION~~21~
4.
5.
6.
7.
City Council Resolution approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Mitigation Monitoring Plan
City Council Draft Resolution approving Amendments to the General
Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan with the following Exhibits
included:
· Exhibit A-1 EDSP/GP Land Use Table - Alameda County
Surplus Property Authority Property
· Exhibit A-2 EDSP/GP Land Use Map - Alameda County
Surplus Property Authority Property
City Council Ordinance adopting a Planned Development (PD)
Rezone/Development Plan
· Exhibit A-1 Written Development Plan
· Exhibit A-2 Development Plans
City Council Ordinance adopting a Development Agreement
Development Agreement document
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration/Response to Comments
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Exhibit showing relationship between SPA/GPA and Sybase project
9. Planning Commission Sybase Project Staff Report dated May 9, 2000,
incorporated herein by reference*
10. City Council Corrie Center Staff Report dated March 7, 2000,
incorporated herein by reference*
* Not attached, but available at the Planning Department, City Hall
o
Hear Staff Presentation
Open Public Hearing
Hear Applicant's Presentation
Question Staff, Applicant and the Public
Close Public Hearing
Deliberate
Adopt (Attachment 1) City Council Resolution approving a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Sybase
Project
Adopt (Attachment 2) City Council Resolution approving an
Amendment to the General Plan for the Corrie Center and Sybase
projects and adopting an Amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan for the Sybase Project
COPIES TO: The Applicant/Property Owner
PA File
ITEM NO.
10.
11.
Waive reading and introduce Ordinance (Attachment 3) amending the
Dublin Zoning Ordinance to approve a Planned Development (PD)
Rezone/Development Plan (with Development Plan attached as
Exhibits A-1 and A-2)
Waive reading and introduce Ordinance (Attachment 4) approving a
Development Agreement
Schedule the second reading of both Ordinances for June 20, 2000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This application includes an amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan for the Sybase
Corporate Headquarters project, an Amendment to the General Plan for the Corrie Center Phase II Office
Development, a Planned Development (PD) Rezone/Development Plan and a Development Agreement
for the Sybase Corporate Headquarters facility.
Under State Law, the City can only make four changes to each element of the General Plan during any
calendar year. However, each change may include multiple amendments. To date, the City has received
four requests to amend the land use element of the General Plan which includes the following projects:
Dublin Ranch, (Areas F, G and H) Greenbriar Homes, Sybase Development and the Corrie Center project.
Two General Plan Amendments have already been approved in 2000, and the City proposes to group
subsequent amendment requests in order to preserve the right to make a fourth change to the Plan later in
the year. Therefore, this public hearing involves consideration of both the Corrie Center and Sybase
applications. A resolution to approve the General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan for
the Sybase and Corde Center projects is included as Attachment 2.
ANALYSIS
This Sybase application includes an amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan for the
proposed Sybase project, This encompasses a 34.6-acre site located on the block bounded by Dublin
Boulevard to the south, Hacienda Drive to the east, Central Parkway to the north and Arnold Road to the
west. The proposed amendment would involve changing the land use designation for the easterly 19 gross
acres of the site from "High Density Residential" to "Campus Office." Applications have also been filed
for a Planned Development (PD) Rezone/Stage 1 & 2 Development Plan, and a Development Agreement.
If approved, these various applications would allow for the development of the Sybase corporate
headquarters complex on the site totaling 420,000 square feet of gross floor. Sybase is a high technology
firm currently located in Emeryville. City approval of the project would allow for consolidation of Sybase
operations in one central site with adequate parking and on-site amenities.
On May 9, 2000, the Planning Commission took action to approve a Site Development Review (SDR)
permit and Tentative Parcel Map for the Sybase project, subject to City Council approval of the SPA/GPA
and PD rezoning.
A General Plan Amendment request for the proposed Corrie Center development project is also included
as explained below. The remainder of this staff report deals only with the proposed Sybase project.
General Plan Amendments:
Sybase General Plan~Specific Plan Analysis:
The proposed Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment requested by the property owner,
the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, would change the land use designation for the easterly
portion of Santa Rita Site 15 from "High Density Residential" to "Campus Office." If approved, this
action would allow the Sybase project to be constructed, The number of residential dwellings originally
planned for the entire 34.6 gross acre Site 15 would be reduced to 821 dwellings on the westerly 15.6
acres portion of the block; the remaining dwelling units (390) will be transferred to Site 3.
Attachment 8 is an exhibit showing the relationship between the proposed Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan/General Plan Amendment with the proposed development area for the Sybase project.
The following table compares the existing land use designations for the Santa Rita site with proposed
changes.
Table 1. Existing and Proposed Specific Plan/General Plan Land Uses-Alameda County Surplus
Property Authority Property
Site Name Acres Existing DU's/Sq. Ft. Proposed DU's/Sq.
(gross) Specific Plan Specific Plan Ft.
1 Tassajara Meadows 14.8 Med. Res 148 d.u. no change --
2 Emerald Glen Park 56.3 Park --- no change --
3 Village Center 21.9 Neigh. Comm. 286,189 no change +347 d.u.
4 Toll Emerald Glen 33.9 Med. Res. 339 du no change --
5a G.M. 17 GC 185,130 no change --
5b Koll 35.1 CO/GC 552,449 no change --
6 AutoNation 28.9 GC 264,366 no change --
7 Hacienda Crossing 56.8 GC 530,536 no change --
8 Calif. Creekside 35.7 Med. Res. 277 du no change --
9 Villas 16.2 MH Res. 324 du no change --
10 School 11 School -- no change --
1 la JPI 18.5 Med. High Res. 335 du no change --
1 lb Summer Glen 69.2 L/M Res. 328 du no change --
12 Pub/Semi-Pub. 88.5 public 963,765 no change --
13 Creekside Business 29.7 Ind/Office 478,681 no change --
Park
14 Emerald Pointe 35.3 Ind/Office 568,937 no change --
1Sa Unentitled 15.6 High Den. Res. 821 du High Den. Res. --
(ne
w)
15b (Proposed Sybase site) 19 High Den. Res. -- Campus Office
(19 ac) 420,000
Campus
16 Unentitled 53 CO 1,962,378 Office 1,542,378
(no change
Tota 5,792,481 5,792,481
Is 2,962 d.u. 2,962 d.u.
In sum, the proposed Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment would not increase the
amount of either residential or non-residential development potential within the Santa Rita; it would
instead transfer already approved development potential within a relatively small radius. Traffic impacts
of this proposed relocation have been reviewed in a recent traffic study and no significant traffic impacts
have been identified.
Corrie Center General Plan Antendment Analysis:
The project site is located within Dublin's downtown area at the southeast intersection of Dublin
Boulevard and San Ramon Road. The site area consists of approximately 4.5 acres and is currently
developed with a three-story L-shaped office building (70,790 square feet), surface parking and
landscaped areas. The proposed four-story office building (46, 110 square feet) and parking structure
would be located to the rear of the existing building and would be connected to it via a one-story glass
enclosed foyer. The property is surrounded by commercial development including Coco's restaurant to the
north, the Monarch Hotel to the south and Earl Anthony's bowl to the east and is bounded by San Ramon
Road and the 1-580 off-ramp to the west and southwest.
The existing General Plan land use designation for the project site is "Retail/Office". The project site is
located within "Zone 2: General Commercial" of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan and the proposed
project complies with this designation.
The proposed project meets the intent of the Retail/Office designation of the General Plan, which allows
business, and office uses. However, the project currently conflicts with the maximum floor area ratio
requirement of the General Plan, which is .5. The project site plans indicate a site coverage of.59.
The General Plan Amendment proposes to increase the maximum floor area ratio for the Retail/Office
land use to .6. Retail/Office designated property within the city exists within the downtown area and on
the west side of San Ramon Road. The Dublin General Plan contains policies, which encourage the
intensification of the downtown area through the development of mixed use, pedestrian-orientated
development.
City policy requires all developers to finance the cost of a traffic study to evaluate traffic and circulation
impacts of a proposed project. This will ensure that any traffic impacts generated by a project will be
adequately identified and mitigated to eliminate impacts to city roadways. The City Site Development
Review process will ensure that the site has adequate parking, landscaping and access to accommodate the
proposed building floor area.
The increase in the maximum floor area ratio for the Retail/Office land use category is appropriate, as it is
consistent with General Plan policies which encourage the intensification of downtown retail and office
uses. This FAR is also appropriate for Retail/Office areas located on the edge of the downtown area as city
policy requires projects to be reviewed on an individual basis to ensure that the density of the proposed
development will be compatible with the site, traffic patterns and surrounding uses.
This application was considered by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on February 22, 2000
and was recommended for approval to the City Council. At a Public Hearing on March 7, 2000, the City
Council indicated its intent to approve the General Plan Amendment at a later Public Hearing for the
reasons stated under "project description" above.
The City Council at the March 7, 2000 Public Hearing adopted a Resolution approving a Negative
Declaration for the Corrie Center project because the project will not have a significant effect on the
environment.
Sybase Planned Development Rezone
The Dublin Zoning Ordinance establishes the intent, purpose and requirements of the Planned
Development District and requires that a Development Plan be adopted to establish regulations for the
use, development, improvement and maintenance of the property within the requested Planned
Development Zoning District.
A Development Plan has been prepared for the Sybase complex depicting development concept and
addressing the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed Development Plan is attached and
consists of: Exhibit A-1, the Planned Development provisions (including permitted and conditional uses
and development regulations) and Exhibit A-2, the applicants proposed site, architectural, landscape and
other plans. The approval of this Development Plan will complete the two-stage PD zoning process, in
accordance with the City's Zoning Ordinance.
Permitted uses and Development Regulations: The proposed uses and setbacks outlined in the
Development Plan are consistent with the City's Zoning Ordinance. The Development Plan also specifies
purpose and intent of the Plan, maximum site density, landscaping provisions and similar development
requirements.
Site Plan: The proposed site plan indicates that the two main office buildings would be located on the
southeast portion of the lot, at oblique angles to the two main intersecting streets. Building A would be
furthest to the west and Building B would be sited closest to Hacienda Drive. An open plaza would be
created on the southeast corner of the site near the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive,
which is discussed below. Surface parking would be arrayed around the building complex to the north and
east. Parking, loading and service activities would occur to the rear of the buildings so that a major focal
point would be created on this corner.
4
Each building would contain six stories and a maximum of 210,000 gross square feet. The total amount of
gross square footage would therefore be 420,000. Each building is proposed to have a height of 85 feet to
the top of the sixth floor, although a metal screen would be located on the top of the buildings to block
views of mechanical equipment, elevator shafts and similar equipment. The top of the elevator machine
rooms on each of the buildings would be approximately 100 feet above the finished grade. The two
buildings would be linked with a pedeStrian bridge at the second floor
Proposed Floor Area Ratio for the complex would be 0.67. Site coverage (building footprint) would be
11%.
Architecture: Two almost-identical buildings would be constructed, each six stories and 100 feet in height
(to the top of mechanical equipment). Building design would reflect a "high tech" theme, with use of
precast concrete panels as a base and extensive use of windows in aluminum frames with accent metal
panels. Stylized metal and glass canopies would be provided to emphasize the main entries. Roof-
mounted equipment would be screened behind metal panels. Concrete panels would be two shades of gray
and the window glass would be colored blue to slightly blue-green.
Landscaping: Project landscaping would include placement of an urban park/plaza on the southeast
comer of the site as well as perimeter landscaping around the site, landscaping within the parking lot and
additional landscaping around the buildings. The plaza would encompass an area of approximately 1.4
acres and would feature an outdoor seating and eating area for Sybase employees, a fountain, plantings of
specimen oak trees and other canopy trees. The ground plane would consist of a mix of turf and decorative
hardscape elements. A low berm and hedge treatment is proposed along the two adjoining streets to
highlight the plaza. An opportunity site is provided on the comer of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda
Drive for placement of a future public artwork, which is not included in this application.
Parking andAccess: Three driveways into the site would be provided, one each on Dublin Boulevard,
Central Parkway and Hacienda Drive. Traffic signals would be constructed at the intersections of project
driveways and Central Parkway and Hacienda Drive. The intersection of the project drive and Dublin
Boulevard would be limited to right-in and right-out turning movements.
A total of 1,191 surface parking spaces would be provided, which would include compact and
handicapped parking stalls as well as parking spaces for motorcycles. The Dublin Zoning Ordinance
requires one parking space per 350 square feet of gross floor area. For the Sybase project, a total of 1,200
spaces would be needed. Therefore, the project would lack 9 spaces. To ensure that a parking problem
would not be created, the Mitigated Negative Declaration contains a mitigation measure (Measure 8) that
would require the project developer to prepare a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to
reduce the number of single occupant vehicles using the site. The TDM Plan must be in place at the time
as Certificate of Occupancy is issued.
Pedestrian paths have been planned through the site to allow safe crossing of the parking lot.
OTHER APPROVALS
The Planning Commission at a public hearing on May 9, 2000 adopted a Resolution approving the Site
Development Review and Tentative Parcel Map (subject to City Council approval of the Specific
Plan/General Plan Amendment and Planned Development Rezoning).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed General Plan/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment and Planned
Development/Rezoning/Development Plan, and Development Agreement are within the Dublin General
Plan Eastern Extended Planning Area and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, which was the subject of an
Environmental Impact Report, certified by the City of Dublin in 1993 (EIR Addenda were approved on
May 4, 1993 and August 22, 1994). The General Plan/Specific Plan is a Program EIR, which anticipated
several subsequent actions, related to future development in Eastern Dublin. The EIR identified a number
of impacts from implementation of the General Plan/Specific Plan that were not able to be mitigated.
Upon certification of the EIR, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for several
impacts, some of which relate to this project. The City also adopted a Mitigation Monitoring Program,
5
which included measures intended to reduce from development in eastern Dublin. These measures apply
to project approvals and actions at various stages of the development process and will be applied to the
project as applicable. The timing of these mitigation measures is indicated in the City's EIR mitigation
monitoring matrix (City Council Resolution No. 53-93).
An Initial Study was prepared for the Sybase project to determine if additional impacts would occur as a
result of this project. The Initial Study identified several environmental issues, which caused the issuance
of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. A 30-day public review period commenced March 23 and ended
April 24, 2000. A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared because the project, as mitigated,
will not have a significant effect on the environment. Responses to comment letters are included in the
agenda packet as Attachment 6. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan has been prepared as required by CEQA as
Attachment 7.
As a result of the review of the certified EIR and addenda, and the preparation of the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, it has been determined that with the. implementation of Mitigation
Measures previously adopted for the Program EIR and with site-specific Mitigation Measures contained
in the Initial Study, potential site-specific impacts of the project would be reduced to a level of
insignificance and the proposed Sybase project will not have a significant effect on the environment.
CONCLUSIONS
The project, as conditioned including the Planned Development Rezone / Development Plan is consistent
with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan as amended and the Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council open the Public Hearing, deliberate and adopt the following
resolutions:
1. Adopt City Council Resolution (Attachment 1) approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Adopt City Council Resolution (Attachment 2) approving an Amendment to the General Plan
for the Corrie Center and Sybase projects and adopting an amendment to the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan for the Sybase project.
o
Waive reading and introduce the Ordinance (Attachment 3) amending the Dublin Zoning
Ordinance to approve a Planned Development (PD) Rezone/Development Plan Stage 1 and 2
with Development Plan attached as Exhibits A-1 and A-2.
Waive reading and introduce the Ordinance (Attachment 4) approving the Development
Agreement.
5. Schedule the second reading of both Ordinances for the June 20, 2000 City Council meeting.
6
RESOLUTION NO. 00-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND A MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR
PA 99-062, SYBASE CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS FACILITY
WHEREAS, Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (ACSPA) has submitted a request to the
City of Dublin to amend the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan and applications have also been
filed with the City of Dublin to approve a PD- Planned Development Rezone and a Stage 1/Stage 2
Development Plan for the easterly 14.5 acres of the project site for the proposed Sybase Corporate
Headquarters Project and a Development Agreement, and
WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment application would:
a)
redesignate 19 gross acres (14.5 net acres) of Block 15 of the Alameda County Surplus
Property Authority from "High Density Residential" to "Campus Office" to allow
development of up to 420,000 square feet of gross floor area;
b)
reduce the amount of potential office development on Site 16 of the Alameda County Surplus
Property Authority by 420,000 square feet.
c) relocate 390 residential dwellings formerly assigned to Site 15 to Site 3; and
WHEREAS, a Program Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan/General Plan (SCH 911036040 and certified by the City Council on May 10, 1993, by Resolution
No. 51-93, and two Addenda dated May 4, 1993 and August 22, 1994 have been prepared and adopted by
the City Council and are herein incorporated by reference; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and implementing
Guidelines, an Initial Study has been prepared to assess the impacts of the proposed project. Based on the
Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and recommended for adoption to the
City Council. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is herein incorporated by reference. The Initial Study is
on file in the Dublin Planning Department. The project, with mitigation measures incorporated into the
project, will not have a significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and all other applications associated with the Sybase Headquarters Project, including the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, PD-Planned Development Rezoning, Site
Development Review, Tentative Tract Map and Development Agreement on May 9, 2000; and
WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared for this project as
required by the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and considered
all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth.
WHEREAS, the City Council did hold a public hearing on the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan/General Plan Amendment request on June 6, 2000; and
ATTACHMENT 1
WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as reqUired by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use their independent judgment and considered all said
reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Dublin does
hereby find that proper environmental documentation has been prepared on the proposed Sybase project in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has been reviewed and considered prior to
action on this project.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of
Dublin hereby approves a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program for the Sybase Headquarters Facility Complex.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2000.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
2
RESOLUTION NO. 00-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
FOR PA 99-010, CORRIE CENTER PHASE II OFFICE DEVELOPMENT TO INCREASE THE
FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR RETAIL/OFFICE AND
AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND EASTERN SPECIFIC PLAN FOR
PA 99-062, SYBASE CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS FACILITY
WHEREAS, Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (ACSPA), on behalf of the developer of
the Sybase Corporate Headquarters Facility has submitted a request to the City of Dublin, PA 99-062, to
amend the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan to:
redesignate 19 gross acres (14.5 net acres) of Block 15 of the Alameda County Surplus
Property Authority from "High Density Residential" to "Campus Office" to allow
development of up to 420,000 square feet of gross floor area;
b)
reduce the amount of potential office development on Site 16 of the Alameda County Surplus
Property Authority by 420,000 square feet.
c) relocate 390 residential dwellings formerly assigned to Site 15 to Site 3; and
WHEREAS, the extent of proposed amended land uses within the Alameda County Surplus
Property Authority is shown on the attached table (Exhibit A-l) and map (Exhibit A-2); and
WHEREAS, the Campus Office land use category permits corporate, business and research and
development office uses; and
WHEREAS, a complete application for this project is on file with the Dublin Planning Department,
and
WHEREAS, Sid Corrie of the Corrie Development Corporation (applicant/property owner) has
requested approval of a General Plan Amendment to allow an increase in the maximum Floor Area Ratio
from 0.50 to 0.60 for the "Retail/Office" land use category; and
WHEREAS, a completed application for Corrie Development Corporation's requested General Plan
Amendment is available and on file in the Dublin Planning Department; and
WHEREAS, a Program Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan/General Plan (SCH 911036040) and certified by the City Council on May 10, 1993~ by Resolution
No. 51-93, and two Addenda dated May 4, 1993 and August 2.2, 1994 have been prepared and adopted by
the City Council and are herein incorporated by reference; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and implementing
Guidelines, an Initial Study has been prepared to assess the impacts of the proposed Sybase project. Based
on the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and recommended for adoption
to the City Council. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is herein incorporated by reference. The Initial
Study is on file in the Dublin Planning Department. The project, with mitigation measures incorporated
into the project, will not have a significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and implementing
Guidelines, an Initial Study has been prepared to assess the proposed Corrie Center project. Based on the
ATTACHMENT 2
Initial Study, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and is on file with the Dublin Planning
Department. The Initial Study/Negative Declaration was circulated for a 20-day public review period
between February 1 through February 21, 2000 and was approved by the City Council on March 7, 2000.
The project as proposed will not have a significant impact on the environment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on the Sybase application (PA 99-
062) regarding Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment request on May 9, 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on the Corrie Center application
(PA 99-010)regarding the Dublin General Plan on March 7, 2000; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearings were given in all respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and considered
all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Dublin
Commission does hereby find that:
A. Proper environmental documentation has been prepared on the proposed Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan and General Plan Amendment in accord with the California Environmental Quality Act and have
been reviewed and considered prior to the City Council's action.
B. The proposed Amendment to the General Plan for the Corrie Center Project is in the public
interest and is consistent with the goals, policies, general provisions and purpose of the Dublin General
Plan which contains policies which encourage the intensification of the Dublin Downtown Area through
the development of mixed use pedestrian oriented development.
C. The proposed Amendment to the General Plan for the Corrie Center Project is appropriate for the
"Retail/Office" land use category because City policies require that a traffic study be prepared for all new
development projects to evaluate the project's impacts to a level of insignificance; the City Site
Development Review process will ensure that the proposed project has adequate parking, access and will
be compatible with surrounding land uses, thereby ensuring that the density of future development will
not overburden public services and would thereby complement surrounding development
D. The proposed Amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan for the Sybase
Project to allow "Campus Office" development provides adequate parking and site access and is
compatible with surrounding land uses and will not overburden public services.
E. The proposed change of land use designation for both the Corrie Center site and the Sybase site is
consistent with all other goals, policies and implementing programs set forth in the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan and the City of Dublin General Plan.
F. The proposed Amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan are in the public
interest and will not have a substantial adverse effect on health or safety or be substantially detrimental to
the public welfare or be injurious to property or public improvement.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of
Dublin hereby approve an Amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan for the Sybase
Corporate Headquarters Facility (PA 99-062) as follows:
redesignate 19 gross acres (14.5 net acres) of Site 15, bounded by Dublin Boulevard, Hacienda
Drive, Central Parkway and Arnold Drive (APN 986-0014-006), of the Alameda County
Surplus Property Authority from "High Density Residential" to "Campus Office" to allow
development of up to 420,000 gross square feet of gross floor area;
b)
reduce the amount of potential office development on Site 16 of the Alameda County Surplus
Property Authority by 420,000 gross square feet.
c)
relocate 390 residential dwellings formerly assigned to Site 15 of the Alameda County
Surplus Property Authority to Site 3 of the same ownership.
as indicated on the attached Exhibits A-1 and A-2.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of
Dublin hereby approves an Amendment to the General Plan for the Corrie Center to increase the floor area
to 0.60 for "Retail/Office" land use category for PA 99-010, Corrie Center Phase II Office Project, as
follows: "Section 1.8.1 Land Use Classification, Commercial/Industrial, Retail/Office, FAR shall be
changed to FAR: .25 to .60."
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2000.
AYES:
NOES:
AB SENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
MAYOR
City Clerk
3
ORDINANCE NO. - 00 ~7 ~/ /~..ff
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO REZONE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF HACIENDA DRIVE AND DUBLIN BOULEVARD (APN 986-0014-
006) TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT AND ADOPTING A
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PA 99-062
WHEREAS, the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (Property Owner) has requested
approval of a Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment to change a portion of the land use designation
for Site 15 from "High Density Residential" to "Campus Office," a Planned Development
Rezone/Development Plan and Site Development Review to allow the construction of two six-story
office buildings containing a total of 420,00 square feet surface parking and retailed improvements on
14.5 acres of land currently at the northwest comer of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive (APN
986-0014-006) within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has submitted a complete application for a Planned Development
Rezone, including a Development Plan as required by Chapter 8.32 of Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal
Code which meets the requirements of said Chapter; and
WHEREAS, the site will be rezoned from Planned Development for "High Density Residential" to
Planned Development for "Campus Office"; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and implementing
Guidelines, an Initial Study has been prepared to assess the impacts of the proposed project. Based on the
Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and recommended for adoption to the
City Council. The Initial Study is on file in the Dublin Planning Department. The project, with mitigation
measures incorporated into the project, will not have a significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a properly noticed public hearing on said
applications on May 9, 2000, and did adopt Resolutions recommending that the City Council approve the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, related Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment and
Planned Development Rezoning and Development Plan for PA 99-062; and
WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on June 6, 2000; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the City Council approve the
application; and
WHEREAS, on June 6, 2000 the City Council adopted a Negative Declaration and approved a
Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment for the project; and
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2000 the City Council approved an Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General
Plan Amendment for the project.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.32.070 and 8.120.050 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City
Council makes the following findings:
The Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 & 2 are consistent with the general provisions,
intent and purpose of the General Plan (as amended), in that the project would result in
development with the land uses allowed by said designation and will contribute towards
implementation of the General Plan; and
ATTACHMENT 3
The Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 & 2 is consistent with the general provisions and
purpose of the PD Zoning District of the Zoning ordinance. The Planned Development Rezone
will be appropriate for the subject property in terms of setting forth the purpose, applicable
provisions of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, range of permitted and conditional uses and
Development Standards, which will be compatible with existing High Density and Campus
Office land use designations. In the immediate vicinity; and
Co
The Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 & 2 is consistent with the general provisions, intent
and purpose of the PD Zoning District of the Zoning Ordinance in that it contains all
information required by Section 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance and accomplishes the objectives
of Section 8.32.010, A through H, of the Zoning Ordinance; and
The Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 & 2 will not have a substantial adverse effect on
health, safety or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or
public improvement, as all applicable regulations will be met; and
The Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 & 2 will not overburden public services or facilities
as all agencies must commit to the availability of public services prior to the issuance of any
building permit, as required by City laws and regulations; and
The Planned Development Stage 1 & 2 will be consistent with the policies of Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan/General Plan; and
Go
The Planned Development Stage 1 & 2 will create an attractive, efficient and safe environment
through development standards contained in the Development Plan; and
Ho
The Planned Development Stage 1 & 2 will benefit the public necessity, convenience and
general welfare; and
The Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 & 2 will be compatible with and enhance the
general development of the area because it will be developed pursuant to a comprehensive
Development Plan.
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use their independent judgment and considered the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Dublin City Council does ordain as follows:
Section 1:
Pursuant to Chapter 8.32, Title 8 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code the City of Dublin Zoning
Map is amended to rezone the following property ("the Property") to a Planned Development Zoning
District:
Approximately 14.5 acres of land generally located at the northwest comer of Hacienda Drive
and Dublin Boulevard; more specifically described as Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 986-0014-
006.
2
A map of the rezoning area is shown below:
'VICINITY MAP
r GLEASON DRIVE
CENTRAL
_J
!
SITEj
58O
z
DUBLIN
BOULEVARD
FREEWAY
T
SECTION 2.
The regulations of the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the Property are set
forth in the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans (Exhibits A1 and A-2, hereto) which are hereby approved.
Any amendments to the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans shall be in accordance with section 8.32.080 of
the Dublin Municipal Code or its successors.
SECTION 3.
Except as provided in the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans, the use, development, improvement
and maintenance of the Property shall be governed by the provisions of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
SECTION 4.
This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thir{y (30) days from and after the date of its
passage. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3)
public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State
of California.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this
2000, by the following votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
__th day of
Mayor
City Clerk
/?
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
This is a Development Plan pursuant to Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance for
the Sybase Corporate Headquarters project, located on the northwest corner of Dublin
Boulevard and Hacienda Drive; (APN 986-0014-006). This Development Plan meets all of
the requirements for Stage 1 and Stage 2 review of the project.
This Development Plan is also represented by the Site, Landscape, Architectural (floor and
elevations) Plans and Tentative Parcel Map, sheets dated received March 17, 2000, labeled
Exhibit A-2 to the Ordinance approving this Development Plan (City Council Ordinance
No. O0 - ), and on file in the Planning Department. The Planned Development District
allows the flexibility needed to encourage innovative development while ensuring that the
goals, policies, and action programs of the General Plan, Downtown Dublin Specific Plan,
and provisions of Section 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance are satisfied.
1. Permitted Use. The following uses are permitted within this PD-Planned Development
District.
mo
B.
C.
D.
Corporate, professional, technical and administrative offices.
Research and Development laboratories and offices.
Storage and sale of material produced on the site, limited to 25% of floor area.
Accessory and incidental amenity Uses to offices, including but not limited to
employee cafeterias, employee fitness centers, day care centers, employee training
facilities.
Temporary construction trailers and ancillary construction facilities
Conditional Uses. The following uses are conditionally permitted within this PD-
Planned Development District.
e
J
Uo
Light manufacturing and processing that produces no noxious odors, hazardous
materials or excessive noise.
Broadcasting stations or studios, excluding sending and receiving towers.
Cellular and wireless communication facilities, minor.
Community, religious and charitable institutional facilities (excluding business
offices).
In-patient and out-patient health facilities, licensed by the State Department of
Health Services.
Public facilities and uses (excluding offices).
Retail commercial establishments to serve site users.
Eating and drinking establishments (excluding employee-serving facilities).
Dublin Zoning Ordinance-Applicable Requirements: Except as specifically modified
by the provisions of this PD District Rezone/Development Plan, all applicable general
requirements and procedures of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance shall be applied to the land
uses designated in this PD District Rezone.
Site Plan & Architecture: See attached site and elevation plans contained in Exhibit A-
2, Development Plan. This Development Plan applies to an approximately 14.5 acre site
shown on this plan on the northwest comer of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard in
the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area. Any modifications to the project shall be
substantially consistent with these plans and of equal or superior materials and design
quality.
EXHIBIT A-1 of ATTACHMENT 3
Density: The maximum square footage of the proposed development under this
Development Plan (as shown on the site plan) is as follows: 14.5 acres, 420,000 square
feet total building area in two buildings of approximately 210,000 square feet each.
Phasing Plan. The project will be constructed in one phase.
Landscaping Plan. Refer to attached landscaping plan included in Exhibit A-2,
Development Plan, Sheets SL 1-3.
Development Standards
Lot Size: One acre.
Front, Rear, and Side Yard Setbacks:
mo
Along Dublin Blvd.: 30 feet
Along Hacienda Drive: 25 feet
Along Central Pkwy: 30 feet
Between buildings: 40 feet (bridges may be constructed between
buildings)
Building Height: Six stories or 100 feet.
Floor Area Ratio: The FAR within this district shall not exceed 0.67.
Landscaping and Open Space requirements:
A minimum of 20% of the gross site area shall be provided in
landscaped/hardscaped open space. Open space shall include landscaping
in entries, plazas/courtyards, parking areas, front and side yard setbacks
and other similar areas, wherein 8% shall be in parking areas.
b. Landscaped planter strips shall be:
(1)
At least 20 feet wide between parking lots and the curb line along a
public right-of-way. This may be reduced for turn lanes, bus turn
outs and similar encroachments.
(2) At least 10 feet wide along interior property lines.
(3)
At least 10 feet wide between parking areas and building walls,
loading and unloading areas and truck parking areas.
(4)
Landscaping planter strips between parking areas and property
lines adjacent to a public right-of-way shall include a berm at lease
three feet in height or with a slope not to exceed a ratio of 2:l to
substantially screen the view of parked vehicles from the street.
The berm shall be designed and located to allow for adequate
visibility for motorists exiting the site. Alternatively, parked
vehicles may be screened from adjoining streets with low-growing
evergreen hedges.
G:\pa99010\devplan
e
10.
(5)
At entries, sidewalks shall be incorporated into the landscaped
planter strip. A minimum of 4 feet clear width shall be maintained
for all sidewalks.
(6)
Where a landscaped planter strip is adjacent to building window
walls or pedestrian rights-of-way, landscaping shall be provided
that screens views of automobiles. In this location, the use of a
berm is desirable
A minimum of one parking lot tree shall be planted for an average of
every four parking spaces. Trees shall be distributed throughout the
parking areas, shall be of a variety that offers a substantial shade canopy
when mature and shall be a minimum 15-gallon size when planted. Tree
planters shall have a standard 6-inch curb on all sides and shall have good
surface drainage. Trees shall be planted as part of the construction phase
of the parking lot. Diagonal tree well squares used between rows of
parking shall measure a minimum of 4.5 feet by 4.5 feet for each outside
edge, or 6 feet on both diagonals.
d. Parking areas shall contain landscaped islands with a
minimum dimension of 5 feet by 5 feet, excluding curb.
e.
Compliance with related Planning Approvals: The Applicant/Developer shall comply
with all the related Site Development Review conditions of approval for PA 99-062.
Signs: Compliance with Master Sign Plan, as approved by City of Dublin Community
Development Director
Lighting: Compliance with Master Lighting Plan, as approved by City of Dublin
Community Development Director and Police Services
G:\pa99010\devplan
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF DUBLIN,
WILCOX DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (PA 99-062), and
ALAMEDA COUNTY SURPLUS PROPERTY AUTHORITY
FOR THE SYBASE CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS FACILITY PROJECT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: RECITALS
A. The proposed Sybase Corporate Headquarters project (PA 99-062) is located within the
boundaries of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan ("Specific Plan") in an area which is designated on the
General Plan Land Use Element and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Land Use Map as High Density
Residential. An application has been filed to change the eastern 19-acres of Site 15 of the Santa Rita
Properties to "Campus Office" (CO).
B. This project is within the scope ofthe Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan, for
which a Program EIR was certified (SCH 91103064). A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been
prepared for the Sybase Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment. That Mitigated Negative Declaration
together with the Program EIR adequately describes the total project for the purposes of CEQA. The
analysis indicated that no new effects could occur and no new mitigation measures are required for the
Sybase Headquarters project that were not addressed in the FEIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Further, that analysis found that the project is in conformity with the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan/General Plan.
C. Implementing actions of the Specific Plan, including Chapter 11 thereof, require that all
projects within the Specific Plan area enter into development agreements with the City.
D. Wilcox Development Services has filed an application requesting approval of a
development agreement for the Sybase Corporate Headquarters project.
E. A Development Agreement between the City of Dublin, Wilcox Development Services and
the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority has been presented to the City Council, a copy of which
is attached to the staff report as Attachment 5.
F. A public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement was held before the Planning
Commission on May 9, 2000, for which public notice was given as provided by law.
Go
Agreement.
The Planning Commission has made its recommendation for approval of the Development
H. A public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement was held before the City
Council on June 6, 2000, for which public notice was given as provided by law.
J. The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission at the
June 6, 2000 meeting, including the Planning Commission's reasons for its recommendation, the Agenda
Statement, all comments received in writing and all testimony received at the public hearing.
ATTACHMENT 4
Section 2
FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS
Therefore, on the basis of (a) the foregoing Recitals which are incorporated herein, (b) the City of
Dublin's General Plan, (c) the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, (d) the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan, (e) the EIR, (f) the Agenda Statement, and on the basis of specific conclusions set forth below, the
City Council finds and determines that:
1. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general plan uses
and programs specified and contained in the Cityrs General Plan, as amended by the Eastern Dublin
General Plan Amendment, and in the Specific Plan in that (a) the General Plan and Specific Plan land use
for the site is currently High Density Residential, but a request has been submitted to the City of Dublin to
change the land use designation to Campus Office (CO) to allow development of the Sybase Corporate
Headquarters Facility complex. The proposed project is consistent with the amended land use designation
of Campus Office, (b) the project is consistent with the fiscal policies of the General Plan and Specific
Plan with respect to provision of infrastructure and public services, and (c) the Development Agreement
includes provisions relating to financing, construction and maintenance of public, facilities and similar
provisions set forth in the Specific Plan.
2. The Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations
prescribed for, the land use district in which the real property is located in that project approvals include
an Amendment to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan, a Planned Development Rezoning/Stage
1 & 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, and Parcel Map adopted specifically for the Sybase
project.
3. The Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare
and good land use policies in that the Sybase project will implement land use guidelines set forth in the
Specific Plan and General Plan.
4. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general
welfare in that the project will proceed in accordance with all the program and policies of the Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan.
5. The Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property
or the preservation of property values in that the project will be consistent with the General Plan and
Specific Plan, as amended.
Section 3: APPROVAL
The City Council hereby approved the Development Agreement (Attachment 5 to the Staff
Report) and authorizes the Mayor to sign it.
Section 4: RECORDATION
Within ten (10) days after the Development Agreement is executed by the Mayor, the City Clerk
shall submit the Agreement to the County Recorder for recordation.
Section 5: EFFECTIVE DATE AND POSTING OF ORDINANCE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its
passage. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause the Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3)
public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State
of California.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of Dublin, on this
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
day of __
,2000.
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
City of Dublin
When Recorded Mail To:
City Clerk
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Space above this line for Recorder's Use
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE
CITY OF DUBLIN
AND
WSD - DUBLIN, LLC
AND
THE SD-R_PLUS PROPERTY AUTHORITY
OF THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
FOR THE SYBASE PROJECT
ATTACHMENT
TABLE OF.CONTENTS
o
Description of ProperW. ................................................... 2
Interest of'Develor~er ...................................................... 2
Relationship of CITY. COUNTY and DEVELOPER ............................ 2
Effective Date and Term .................................................... 3
4.1 Effective Date ..................................................... 3
4.2 Term ............................................................ 3
4.3 Termination Upon Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy ............. 3
Use of the Pror~ertw ....................................................... 3
5.1 R_iaht to Develop .................................................. 3
5.2 Permitted Uses ...................................................... 3
5.3 Additional Conditions .............................................. 3
Applicable Rules. Re~onlations and Official Policies .................... :- ......... 4
6.1 Rules re Permitted Uses ............................................. 4
6.2 Rules re Desima and Construction ..................................... 4
6.3 Uniform Codes Armticable .......................................... 5
Subseouenttv Enacted Rules and Re~o-ulations .................................. 5
7.1 New Rules and Re_o-alations ................................... - .......5
7.2 Armroval of A~r~lication ............................................ 5
7.3 Moratorium Not Ar~r~licable .......................................... 5
Subseouentlv Enacted or Revised Fees. Assessments and Taxes ................... 5
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
Fees. Exactions. Dedications ............................. .' ........... 5
Revised Armlication Fees ........................................... 6
New Taxes ........................................................ 6
Assessments ...................................................... 6
Vote on Future Assessments and Fees .................................. 6
Amendment or Cancellation ............................................... 6
9.1 Modification Because of Conflict with State or Federal Laws ............... 6
9.2 Amendment by Mutual Consent ...................................... 6
9.3 Insubstantial Amendments ........................................... 6
'9.4 Amendment of Proiect Ar)provals ..................................... 7
9.5 Cancellation bv Mutual Consent ...................................... 7
Dub [in/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Table of Contents - Page i of iii
May 15, 2000
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
1.5.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Term of Proiect Approvals ................................................. 7
Annual Review .......................................................... 7
11.1 Review Date ...................................................... 7
11.2 Initiation of Review ................................................. 7
11.3 Staff Reports ..................................................... 8
11.4 Costs .... ~ ....................................................... 8
Default ................................................................ 8
12.1 Other Remedies Available ........................................... 8
12.2 Notice and Cure ................................................... 8
12.3 No Damages Against CITY ...................... - .................... 8
Estor~r~el Certificate ...................................................... 8
Mortc~agee Protection: Certain Rights of Cure .................................. 9
14.1 Mortgagee Protection ................. ,.~... ........................... 9
14.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated ........................................... 9
14.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee and Extension of Right to Cure ............. 9
Severabilitv '- 9
Attorneys' Fees and Costs ................................................. 9
Transfers and Assignments ............................................... 10
17.1 DEVELOPER's Right to Assign ..................................... t 0
17.2 Release Ur~on Transfer ................................. ' 10
17.3 Developer's Riuht to Retain Sr~ecified Rights or Obligations ............... 10
A~eement Runs with the Land ............................................ 11
Bankruotcv ' . .......... 11
Indemnification ........................................................ 11
Insurance .. .............................. -: ............................. 12
21.1 Public Liability and Prooertv Dama~oe Insurance ........................ 12
21.2 Workers Comr~ensation Insurance .................................... 12
21.3 Evidence of Insurance .............................................. 12
Sewer and Water ....................................................... 12
Notices ............................................................... 13
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Table of Contents - Page ii of iii
May 15, 2000
25.
26.
27.
28.
Aareement is Entire Understanding, ......................................... 14
Exhibits .............................................................. 14
Counterparts ........................................................... I4
Recordation ........................................................... t4
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Table of Contents- Page iii of iii
May 15, 2000
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT is made and entered in the City of Dublin
on this __ day of ,2000, by and between the CITY OF DUBLIN, a Municipal Corporation
(hereafter "CITY"), WDS - Dublin, LLC, a limited liability company (hereafter "DEVELOPER")
and the Surplus Property Authority of Alameda County, a public corporation (hereafter
"COUNTY") pursuant to the authority of §§ 65864 et seq. of the California Government Code
and Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter 8.56.
RECITALS
A. California Government Code §§ 65864 et seq. and Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin
Municipal Code (hereafter "Chapter 8.56") authorize the CITY to enter into an A~eement :[or the
development of real property with any person having a legal or equitable interest in such
property in order to establish certain development rights in such property; and
B. The City Council adopted the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan by Resoluti on
No. 53-93 which Plan is applicable to the Property; and
C. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan requires DEVELOPER to enter into a
development a~eement; and
D. DEVELOPER desires to develop and holds legal interest in certain real
property consisting of approximately 14.5 acres of land, located in the City of Dublin, County of
Alameda, State of California, which is more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference, and which real property is hereafter called the
"Property"; and
E. DEVELOPER acquire& or will acquire, its interest in the Propert? from
COUNTY pursuant to a purchase and sale a~._m-eement which allocates rights and obligations as
between COUNTY and DEVELOPER. COUNTY is a party to this A~eement because
COUNTY will dedicate certain land, construct certain improvements and receive certain credits;
F. DEVELOPER proposes the development, of the Property for a corporate
center, including two office buildings (the "Project"); and
G. DEVELOPER has applied for, and CITY has approved or is processing,
various land use approvals in connection v, dth the development of the Project, including a general
plan amendment (Resolution No. __), a Specific Plan Amendment (Resolution No. __), PD
District rezoning (including Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan) (Ordinance No. __), parcel map
(Planning Commission Resolution No. 00-23) and Site Development Review (Resolution No.
00-23), (collectively, together with any approvals or permits now or hereafter issued with respect
to the Project, the "Project Approvals"); and
H. Development of the Property by DEVELOPER may be subject to certain
future discretionary approvals, which, if ~tn-anted, shall automatically become part of the Project
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Page I of 15
May 15, 2000
Approvals as each such approval becomes effective; and
Project; and
CITY desires the timely, efficient, orderly and proper development of said
J. The City Council has found that, among other things, this Development
Agreement is consistent with its General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and has been
reviewed and evaluated in accordance w/th Chapter 8.56; and
K. CITY, COUNTY. and DEVELOPER have reached agreement and desire to
express herein a Development Agreement that will facilitate development of the Project subject
to conditions set forth herein; and
L. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the City has
- found, pursuant toCEQA Guidelines section 15182, that the Project is within the scope of the
Fir~al Environmental. Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan which was certified by the Council by Resolution No. 51-93 and the Addenda
dated May 4, 1993, and August 22, .1994 (the "EIR") and found that the Mitigated Negative
Declaration prepared for the Proje.ct is adequate for this Agreement; and
No.
M. On .... 2000, the City Counc!l of the City of Dublin adopted Ordinance
approving this Development Agreement. The ordinance took effect on.. . , 2000.
NOW, THEREFORE, with reference to the foregoing recitals and in consideration of
the mutual promises, obligations and covenants herein contained, CITY, COUNTY and
DEVELOPER agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. Descrir~tion of Pror)errv.
The Property which is the subject of this Development Agreement is
described in Exhibit A attached hereto ("Property").
o
Interest of Developer..
The DEVELOPER has a legal or equitable interest in the Property.
3. Relationshi~ of CITY. COUNTY and DEVELOPER.
It is understood that this Agreement is a contract that has been negotiated and
voluntarily entered_into by CITY, coUNTy and DEVELOPER ..a,nd that ~neither the
DEVELOPER nor COUNTY is an agent of CITY. The CITY, COUNTY and DEVELOPER
hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement ~ Sybase Project
Page 2 of 15
May 15, 2000
agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be
construed .as making the CITY, COUNTY and DEVELOPER joint venturers or parmers.
4. Effective Date and Term.
4.1 Effective Date. The effective date of this Agreement shall be the
date upon which this Agreement is signed by CITY.
4.2 Term. The term of this Development Agreement shall commence
on the Effective Date and extend five (5) years thereafter, unless said term is otherwise
terminated or modified by circumstances set forth in this Agreement.
4.3 Termination Upon Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. Upon
issuance of the final certificate of Occupancy for the Project, this Development Agreement shall
terminate with respect to DEVELOPER only. The agreement shall continue in effect with
respect to the COUNTY until terminated pursuant to Section 4.2.
5. Use of the Pror)ertw.
5.1 Right to Develop. DEVELOPER shall have the vested right to
develop the Project on the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this
Agreement, the Project Approvals (as and when issued), and any amendments to any of them as
shall, from time to time, be approved pursuant to this Agreement.
5.2 Permitted Uses. The permitted uses of the Property, the density
and intensity of use, the maximum height, bulk and size of proposed buildings, provisions for
reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and location and maintenance of on-site and
off-site improvements, location of public utilities (operated by CITY) and other'terms arid
conditions of development applicable to the Property, shall be those set forth in this Agreement,
the Project Approvals and any amendments to this Agreement or the Project ApProvals.
5.3 Additional Conditions. Provisions for the following ("Additional
Conditions") are set forth in Exh/bit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
5.3.1 Subseouent Discretionary Ar)r)rovals. Conditions, terms, restrictions, and
requirements for subsequent discretionary actions. (Th. ese condition's do not affect
DEVELOPERts responsibility to obtain all other land use approvals required by the ordinances
of the City of Dublin and any permits required by regulatory agencies.)
Not Applicable
5.3.2 Mitigation Conditions. Additional or modified
Conditions a~eed upon by the parties in order to eliminate or mitigate
adverse environmental impacts of the Project or otherwise relating to
development of the Project.
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authoriw
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Page 3 of 15
May 15, 2000
See Exhibit B
5.3.3 Phasing, Timing. Provisions that the Project be
constructed in specified phases, that construction shall commence within a
specified time, and that the Project or any phase thereof be completed within
a specified time.
See Exhibit B
5.3.4 Financin~ Plan. Financial plans which identify
necessary capital improvements such as streets and utilities and sources of
funding. .
See Exhibit B
5.3.5 Fees. Dedications.
or dedication of property.
See Exhibit B
Terms relating to payment of fees
5.3.6' Reimbursement. Terms relating to subsequent
reimbursement over time for financing of necessary public facilities.
See Exhibit B
5.3.7
Miscellaneous. Miscellaneous terms.
See Exhibit B
6. A~mlicable Rules. RemJtations and Official Policies.
6.1 Rules re Permitted Uses. For the term of this Agreement, the
Ci¢"s ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted
uses of the Property, goverrfing.density and intensity of use of the Property and the maximum
height, bulk and size of proposed buildings shall be those in force and effect on the effective date
of this Agreement.
6.2 Rules re Desima and Construction. Unless otherwise expressly
provided in Paragraph 5 of this Agreement, the ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and
ofr~icial policies governing desig-n, improvement and construction standards and specifications
applicable to the Project shall be those in force and effect at the time of the applicable
discretionary Project Approval. In the event of a conflict between such ordinances, resolutions,
rules, re?21ations and official policies and the Project Approvals, the Project Approvals shall
prevail.
Ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing
design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to public
-improvements to be constructed b~ Developer shall be those in force and effect at the time of the
applicable permit approval for the public improvement.
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Page 4 of 15
May 15, 2000
6.3 Uniform Codes Applicable. Unless expressly provided in
Paragraph 5 ofth/s Agreement, the Project shall be constructed in accordance w/th the provisions
of the Uniform Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical and Fire Codes and Title 24 of the
California Code of Regulations, relating t°. Building Standards, in effect at the time of approval
of the appropriate building, grading, or other construction permits for the Project.
7. Subsequently Enacted Rules and Reeulations.
7.1 New Rules and Reeulations. During the term of this Agreement,
the CITY may apply new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official
policies of the CITY to the Property which were not in force and effect on the effective date of
this A~eement and which are not in conflict with those applicable to the Property as set forth in
this A~eement and the Project Approvals if: (a) the application of such new or modified
ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies would not prevent, impose a
substantial £mancial burden on, or materially delay development of the Property as contemplated
by this Agreement and the Project Approvals and (b) if such ordinancei, resolutibns,.rules,
regulations or official policies have general applicability.
7.2 Approval of Application. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent
the CITY from denying or conditionally approving any subsequent land use permit or
authorization for the Project on the basis of such new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules,
regulations and policies except~ that such subsequent actions shall be subject to any conditions,
terms, restrictions, and requirements expressly set forth herein.
7.3 Moratorium Not Applicable. Notwithstanding anything to the
contrary contained herein, in the event an ordinande, resolution or other measure is enacted,
whether by action of CITY, by initiative, referendum, or otherwise, that imposes a build_trig
moratorium which affects the Project on all or any part of the Property, CITY a~ees that such
ordinance, resolution or other measure shall not apply to the Project, the Property, this
Agreement or the Project Approvals unless the building moratorium is imposed as part of a
declaration cfa local emergency or state of emergency as defined in Government Code § 8558.
8. Subseouentlv Enacted or Revised Fees. Assessments and Taxes.
8.1 Fees. Exactions. Dedications. CITY and DEVELOPER a~ee that
the fees payable and exactions required in connection with the development of the Project
Approvals for purposes of mitigating environmental and other impacts of the Project, providing
infrastructure for the Project and complying with the Specific Plan shall be those set forth in the
Project Approvals and in this A~eement (including Exhibit B). The CITY shall not impose or
require payment of any other fees, dedications of land, or construction of any public
improvement or facilities, shall not increase or accelerate existing fees, dedications of land or
construction 0fpublic improvements, in connection with any subsequent discretionary approval
for the Property, except as set forth in the project Approvals and this A~eement (including
Exhibit B, . subparagraph 5.3.5).
Dublin/WSD-DnblJn LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Page 5 of 15
May 15, 2000
8.2 Revised Application Fees. Any existing application, processing
and inspection fees that are revised during the term of this Agreement shall apply to the Project
provided that (1) such fees have general applicability; (2) the application of such fees to the
Property is prospective; and (3) the application of such fees would not prevent development in
accordance with this Agreement. By so agreeing, DEVELOPER does not waive its rights to
challenge the legality of any such application, processing and/or inspection fees.
8.3 New Taxes. Any subsequently enacted city-wide taxes shall apply
to the Project provided that: (I) the application of such taxes to the Property is prospective; and
(2) the application of such taxes would not prevent development in accordance with this
Agreement. By so a~eeing. DEVELOPER does not waive its rights to challenge the legality of
any such taxes.
8.4 Assessments. Nothing herein shall be construed to relieve the
Property from assessments levied .against it by CITY pursuant to any statutory procedure for the
assessment of property to pay for infrastructure and/or services which benefit the Property.
8.5 Vote on Future Assessments and Fees'. In the event that any
assessment, fee or charge which is applicable to the Property is subject to Article XIIID of the
Constitution and DEVELOPER does not return its ballot, DEVELOPER a~ees, on Behalf of
itself and its successors, that CITY may count DEVELOPER's ballot as affirmatively 'voting in
favor of such assessment, fee 'or charge.
9. Amendment or Cancellation.
9.1 Modification Because of Conflict with State or Federal Laws. In
the"event that state or federal laws or regulations enacted after the eft%ctive date 0fthis
Ageement prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement or
require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by the CITY, the parties shall meet and
confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this A~eement to comply with such
federal or state law or regulation. Any such amendment or suspension of the Agreement shall be
approved by the City Council in accordance with Chapter 8.56.
9.2 Amendment bv Mutual Consent. This Agreement may be
amended in writing from time to time by mutual consent of the parties hereto and in accordance
with the procedures of State law and Chapter 8.56.
9.3 Insubstantial Amendments. Notwithstanding the provisions of the
preceding section 9.2, any amendments to this Agreement which do not relate to (a)the term of
the A~eement as provided in section 4.2; (b) the permitted uses of the Property as provided in
secti on 5.2; (c) provisions for_ "siguificant" reservation or dedication of land as provided in
Exhibit B; (d) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent discretionary
actions; (e) the density or intensity of use of the Project; (f) the maximum height or size of
Dublin/WSD-Dubtin LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Page 6 of 15
May 15, 2000
proposed buildings; or (g) monetary contributions by DEVELOPER as provided in this
A~eement, shall not, eXCept to the extent otherwise required by.law, require notice or public
hearing before either the PI~nning Commission or the City Council before the parties may
execute an amendment hereto. 'CITY's Public Works Director shall determine whether a
reservation or dedication is "significant".
9.4 Amendment of Project Approvals. Any amendment of Project
Approvals relating to: (a) the permitted use of the Property; (b) provision for reservation or
dedication of land; (c) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent
discretionary actions; (d) the density or intensity of use of the Project; (e) the maximum height or
size of proposed buildings; (f) mone .ta:ry contributions by the DEVELOPER; or (g) public
improvements to be constructed by DEVELOPER shall require an amendment of this
Agreement. Such amendment shall be limited to those provisions of this Agreement which are
implicated by the amendment of the Project Approval. Any other amendment of the Project
Approval.s, or any of them, shall n~)t require amendment of this A~eement unless the amendment
of the Project Approval(s) relates specifically to some provision of this Agreement.
9.5 Cancellation by Mutual Consent. Except as otherwise permitted
herein, this Agreement may be canceled in whole or in part only by the mutual consent of the
parties or their successors in interest, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 8.56. Any
fees paid pursuant to Paragraph 5.3 and Exhibit B of this Agreement prior to the dat~: of
cancellation shall be retained by CITY. -
10. Term of Project Approvals.
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66452.6(a), the renu of the
parcel map described in Recital G above shall automatically be extended for the term of this -
A~eement. The term of any other Project Approval shall be extended only if so p~;ovid~d in
Exhibit B.
1 t. Annual Review.
I 1.1 Review Date. The annual review date for this Agreement shall be
August 15, 2001 and each Aug'ust 15 thereafter.
11.2 Initiation of Review. The CITY's Community Development
Director shall initiate the annual review, as required under Section 8.56.140 of Chapter 8.56, by
giving to DEVELOPER thirty (30) days' written notice that the CITY intends to undertake such
review. DEVELOPER shall provide evidence to the Community Development Director prior to
the hearing on the annual review, as and when reasonably determined-necessary by the
Community Development Director, to demonstrate good faith compliance with the provisions of
the Development Agreement. The burden of proof by substantial evidence of compliance is
upon the DEVELOPER.
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Page 7 of 15
May 15, 2000
11.3 StaffReDorts. To the extent practical, CITY shall deposit in the
mail and fax to DEVELOPER a copy of all staffreports; and related exhibits concerning contract
performance at least five (5) days prior to any annual review.
11.4 Costs. Costs reasonably incurred by CITY in connection with the
annual review shall be paid by DEVELOPER in accordance with the City's schedule of fees in
effect at the time of review.
12. Default.
12..I Other Remedies Available. Upon the occurrence of an event of
default, the parties may pursue all other remedies at law or in equity which are not othe~se
provided for in this Agreement or in City's regulations governing development agreements,
expressly including the remedy of specific performance of this Agreement.
12.2 Notice and Cure. Upon the occurrence of an event of default by
any party, the nondefaulting party shall serve written notice of such default upon the defaulting
party. If the default is not cured by the defaulting party within thirty (30) days after service of
such notice of default, the nondefaulting party may then commence any legal or equitable action
to enforce its rights under this Agreement; provided, however, that if the default cannot be cured
within such thirty (30) day period, the nondefaulting party shall refrain from any such legal or
equitable action so long as the defaulting party begins to cure such default with.in such thirty (30)
da>, period and diligently pursues su~ch cure to completion. Failure to give notice shall not
constitute a waiver of any default.. An event of default by COUNTY or DEVELOPER shall not
be deemed a default by the other party.
12.3 No Damaees Aeainst CITY. In'no event shall damages be
awarded against CITY upon an event of default or upon termination of this Agreement.
13. Estor)oel Certificate.
Any l~arty may, at any time, and from time to time, request written notice
from the other party requesting such party to certify in writing that, (a) this Agreement is in full-
force and effect and a binding obligation of the parties, (~) this A~eement has not been amended
or modified either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments, and (c) to
the 'knowledge of the certifying party the requesting party is not in default in the performance of
its obligatiohs under this Agreement, or if in default, to describe therein the nature and amount of
any such defaults. A party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate
v~Sthin thirty (30) days following the receipt thereof, or such longer period as may reasonably be
agreed to by the parties. City Manager of City shall be authorized to execute any certificate
requested by DEVELOPER or COUNTY. Should the party receiving the request not execute
and return such certificate within the applicable period, this shall not be deemed to be a default,
provided that such party shall be deemed to have certified that the statements in clauses (a)
through (c) of this section are tree, and any party may rely on such deemed certification.
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authori _ty
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Page 8 of 15
May 15, 2000
14. Mortgagee Protection: Certain Rights of Cure.
14.1 Mortgagee ProtectiOn. This Agreement shall be superior and
senior to any lien placed upon the Property, or any portion thereof after the date of recording this
Agreement, including the lien for any deed ofh'ust or mortgage ("Mortgage"). Notwithstanding
the foregoing, no breach hereof shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any
Mortgage made in good faith and for value, but all the terms and conditions contained in this
A~eement shall be binding upon and effective against any person or entity, including any deed
of trust beneficiary or mortgagee ("Mortgagee") who acquires title to the Property, or any portion
thereof, by foreclosure, tmstee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise.
14.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated. Notwithstanding the provisions of
Section 14.1 above, no Mortgagee shall have any obligation or duty under this Agreement,
before or after foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, to construct or complete the
construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction of irriProvements, or to
guarantee such construction or completion, or to pay, perform or provide any fee, d~dication,
improvements or other exaction or imposition; provided, hoRever, that a Mortgagee shall not be
entitled to devote the Property to any uses or to construct any improvements thereon other than
those' uses or improvements provided for or authorized by the Project Approvals or by this
A~eement.
14.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee and Extension of Right to Cure. If
CITY receives notice from a Mortgagee requestifig a copy of any notice of default given
DE\rELOPER hereunder and specifying the address for service thereof, then CITY shall deliver
to such Mortgagee, concurrently with service thereon to DEVELOPER, any notice given to
DEVELOPER with respect to any claim by CITY that DEVELOPER has committed an event of
default. Each Mortgagee shall have the right during the same period available to DEVELOPER
m cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy, the event of default claimed set forth in the
CITY's notice. CITY, through, it~ City Manager, may extend the thirty-day cure period provided
in section 12.2 for not more than an additional sixty (60) days upon request r)fDEVELOPER or
a Mortgagee.
15. SeverabiliW.
The unenforceability, invalidity or illegality of any provisions, covenant,
- condition or term of this A~eement shall not render the other provisions unenforceable, invalid
or illegal.
16. Attorneys' Fees and Costs.
If CITY, COUNTY or DEVELOPER initiates any action at law or in equity
to enforce or interpret the terms and conditions of this A~eement, the prevailingparty shall be
entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and costs in addition to aq.y other relief to which it
may otherwise be entitled. If any person or entity not a party to this Agreement initiates an
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority
Devetopm ent Agreement ~ Sybase Project
Page 9 of 15
May 15, 2000
action at law or in equity to challenge the validity of any provision of this Agreement or the
Project Approvals, the parties shall cooperate and appear in defending such action.
DEVELOPER and COUNTY shall jointly bear their own costs of defense as a real party in
interest in any such action, and DEVELOPER and COLrNTY shall reimburse CITY on an equal
basis for all reasonable court costs and attorneys' fees expended by CITY in defense of any such
action or other proceeding unless the action is based on an obligation of either COUNTY or
DEVELOPER in which case that party shall be wholly obligated to reimburse CITY.
17. Transfers and Assimunents.
17.1 DEVELOPER's Right to Assian. Ail of DEVELOPER'S fights,
interests and obligations hereunder may be transferred, sold or assigned in conjunction with the
transfer, sale, or assig-nrnent of all of the Property subject hereto at any time during the term of
this A~eement, provided that no Wansfer, sale or assignment of DEVELOPER's rights, interests
and obligations hereunder shall occur without the prior ,aa-it-ten notice to CITY and approval by
the City Manager, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. The City
Manager shall consider and decide the matter within 10 working days after DEVELOPER's
notice provided and receipt by City Manager of all necessary documents, certifications and other
information required by City Manager to decide the matter. The City Manager's approval shall
be for the purposes of: a) providing notice to CITY; b) assuring that all obligations of
DE v'ELOPER are allocated as between DEVELOPER and the proposed purchaser, transferee or
assiguee; and c) assuring CITY that the proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee is capable of
performing the DEVELOPER's obligations hereunder not withheld by DEVELOPER pursuant
to section 17.3. Notwithstanding the foregoing, provided notice is given as specified in Section
23, no CITY approval shall be required for any transfer, sale, or assignrnent of this A~eement
to: 1) Sybase Inc.; 2).any entity which is an affiliate or subsidiary of DEVELOPER; 3) any
Mortgagee; or 4) any transferee of a Mortgagee.
17.2 Release U~)on Transfer. Upon the transfer, sale, or assignment of
all of DEVELOPER's rights, interests and obligations hereunder pursuant to section 17.1 of this
A~eement, DEVELOPER shall be released from the obligations under this Agreement, with
respec~ to the Property. transferred, sold, or assigned, arising subsequent to the date of City
Manager approval of such transfer, sale, or assignment; provided, however, that if any transferee,
purchaser, or asSignee approved by the City Manager expressly assumes all of the rights,
interests and obligations of DEVELOPER under this Agreement, DEVELOPER shall be released
with respect to all such rights, interests and assumed obligations. In any event, the transferee,
purchaser, or assig-nee shall be subject to ail the provisions hereof and shalI provide all necessary
documents, certifications and other necessary information prior to City Manager approval.
17.3 Develor)er's Right to Retain Sr)ecified Ri~,hts or Obligations.
Notwithstanding sections 17.1 and 17.2 and section 18, DEVELOPER may withhold from a sale,
transfer or assigrument of this A~eernent certain rights, interests and/or obligations which
DEVELOPER shall retain, provided that DEVELOPER specifies such rights, interests and/or
obligations in a written document to be appended to this Agreement and recorded with the
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Page 10 of 15
May 15. 2000
Alameda County Recorder prior to the sale, transfer or assignment of the Property.
DEVELOPER's purchaser, transferee or assignee shall then have no interest or obligations for
such rights, interests and obligations and this Agreement shall remain applicable to
DEVELOPER with respect to such retained rights, interests and/or obligations.
18. Aereement Runs with the Land.
All of the provisions, rights, terms, covenants, and obligations contained in
this Ageement shall be binding upon the parties and their respective heirs, successors and
assignees, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Property, or any portion
thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All of
the provisions of this A~eement shall be enforceable as equitable servitude and shall constitute
covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable laws, including, but not limited to,
Section 1468 of the Civil Code of the State of California. Each covenant to do, or refrain from
doing, some act on the Property hereUnder, or with respect to any owned property, (a) is for the
benefit of such properties and is a burden upon such properties, Co) runs with such properties, and
(c) is binding upon each party and each successive owner during its ownership of such properties
or any portion thereof, and shall be a benefit to and a burden upon ea..ch party and its property
hereunder and each other person succeeding to an interest in such properties.
19. Bankruptcy. '-
The obligations of this A~eement shall notbe dischargeable in bankruptcy.
20. Indemrfification. '
DEVELOPER agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, and-its
elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, and
representatives from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs) and liability for any
personal injury or property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any
actions or inactions by the DEVELOPER, or any actions or inactions of DEVELOPER's
contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in connection with the construction,
improvement, operation, or maintenance of the Project, provided that DEVELOPER shall have
no indemnification obligation with respect to negligence or wrongful conduct of CITY, its
contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees or with respect to the maintenance, use or
condition of any improvement after the time it-has been dedicated to and accepted by the CITY
or another public entity (except as provided in an improvement agreement or maintenance bond).
If CITY is named as a party to any legal action, CITY will cooperate with DEVELOPER, will
appear in such action and will not unreasonably withhold approval of a settlement otherwise'
acceptable to DEVELOPER. If CITY is named as a party to any legal action, CITY will
cooperate with DEVELOPER, will appear in such action and will not unreasonably withhold
approval of a settlement otherwise acceptable to DEVELOPER.
COUNTY agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, and its elected and
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Page 11 of 15
May 15, 2000
appoimed councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from
any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs) and liability for any personal injury or
property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or inactions by
the COUNTY, or any actions or inactions of COUNTY's contractors, subcontractors, agents, or
employees in cormection with the construction, improvement, operation, or maintenance of the
Project, provided that COUNTY shall have no indemnification obligation with respect to
negligence or wrongful conduct of CITY, its contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees or
with respect to the maintenance, use or condition of any improvement after the time it has been
dedicated to and accepted by the CITY or another public entity (except as provided in an
improvement agreement or maintenance bond). If CITY is named as a party to any legal action,
CITY will cooperate with COUNTY, will appear in such action and will not unreasonably
withhold approval of a settlement otherwise acceptable to COUNTY.
21. Insurance.
21.1 Public LiabiliW and Property Damage Insurance. Af all times that
DEVELOPER is constructing any improvements that will become public improvements,
DEVELOPER shall maintain in effect a policy of comprehensive general liability insurance with
a per-occurrence combined single limit of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) and a
deductible of not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) per claim. The policy so
maintained by DEVELOPER shall name the CITY as an additional insured and shall include
either a severability of interest clause or cross-liability endorsement.
21.2 Workers Compensation Insurance. At all times that DEVELOPER
is constructing any improvements that will. become public improvements, DEVELOPER shall
maintain Workegs Compensation insurance for all persons employed by DEVELOPER for work
at the Project site. DEVELOPER shall require each contractor and subcontractor similarly to
provide Worker's Compensation insurance for its respective employees. DEVELOPER ~grees
indemnify the City for any damage resulting from DEVELOPER's failure to maintain any such
insta-ance.
21.3 Evidence of Insurance. Prior to commencement of construction of
any improvements which will become public improvements, DEVELOPER shall furnish CITY
satisfactory evidence of the insurance required in Sections 21.1 and 21.2 and evidence that the
carrier is required to give the CITY at least fifteen days prior wa'itten notice of the cancellation or
reduction in coverage of a policy. The insurance shall extend to the CITY, its elective and
appointive boards, commissions, offifi~rs, agents, employees and representatives and to
DEVELOPER performing work on the Project.
22. Sewer and Water.
DEVELOPER acknowledges that it must obtain water and sewer permits
from the Dublin San Ramon Services District ("DSRSD") which is another public agency not
within the control of CITY.
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority.
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Page 12 of 15
May I5, 2000
23. Notices.
All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing.
Notices required to be given to CITY shall be addressed as follows:
City Manager
City of Dublin
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
Notices required to be given to COUNTY shall be addressed as follows:
and
Patrick Cashman
Project Director
Surplus Property Authority of Alameda County
225 W. Winton Avenue, Room 131
Hayward, CA 94544
Adolph Martinelli
Director of Planning
County of Alameda
399 Elmhurst Street
Hayward, CA 94544
Notice required to be given to DEVELOPER shall be addressed as follows:
W-DS - Dublin, LLC
c/o Wilcox Development Services
14001 Dallas Parkway, Suite I 111
Dallas, TX 75240
Atto: Todd K. Ashbrook, Sr. Vice President
with a copy to:
McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen
1333 N. California Boulevard, Suite 210
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Attention: Michael L. Greene
A parry may change address by giving notice in writing to the other party and thereafter all
notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. Notices shall be deemed given
and received upon personal delivery, or if mailed, upon the expiration of 48 hoUrS i~er being ....
deposited in the United States Mail. Notices may also be given by overnight coUrier which shall
Dubtin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Pagel3ofl5
May 15, 2000
be d~med given the following day or by facsimile transmission which shall be deemed given
upon verification of receipt.
24. Recitals.
25.
The foregoing Recitals are tree and correct and are made a part-hereof.
Azreement is Entire Understanding.
parties.
This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and a=m-eement of the
26. Exhibits.
The following documents are referred to in this Ag-reement and are attached
hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full: -
Exhibit A Legal Description of Property
Exhibit B Additional Conditions
27. Countervarts.
This Ag-reement is executed in three (3) duplicate originals, each of which is
deemed to be an original. . ........
-2-8. "Recordation.
CITY shall record a copy of this A~eement within ten days following
execution by all parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed as of the date and year frrst above wfitten~
CITY OF DUBLIN:
Mayor
Date:
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Page 14 of 15
Ma), 15, 2000
Attest:
By:
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Date:
City. Attorney
SURPLUS PROPERTY AUTHORITY
OF ALAMEDA COUNTY:
Adolph Martinelli
Its Manager
Approved as to Form:
Date:
Attorney for Surplus Property
Authority of the County of Alameda
~rDS - Dublin, LLC, a California limited liability company
Todd K. Ashbrook
Seni or Vice President
J :\WPD\MNRS W~ t 14\14 9LZ~gree~syb ase_d ev-agr_5 04 .wpd
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC/Surplus Author/ty
Development Agreement - Sybase Project
Page 15 of 15
May 15, 2000
EXHIBIT B
Additional Conditions
The following Additional Conditions are hereby imposed pursuant to Paragraph 5.3 above.
SubparagTaph 5.3.1 - Subsequent Discretionary Approvals
None.
Subp.aragraph 5.3.2 -- Mitigation Conditions
Subsection a. Infrastructure Sequencing Program
The Infrastructure Sequencing Pro,am for the Project is set forth bel ow.
(i)' Roads:
The project-specific roadway improvements (and offers of dedication) described
below and those identified in Resolution No.00-23 of the Planning Commission Approving the
Parcel Map shall be completed by DEVELOPER to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director
at the times and in the manner specified in Resolution'No. 00-23 unless otherwise pr6vided
below. All Such roadway improvements shall be constructed to the satisfaction and requirements
of CITY's Public Works Director.
The obligations of Condition Nos. 57, 59 and 66 of Resolution No. 00-23 and any
other conditions of such 'resolution which are to be completed "as specified by the Director of
Public Works" or "when determined necessary by the Public Works Director" ("Tl~e Def.erred-
Conditions") shall be of no force or effect until DEVELOPER records a final map or'building
permit (whichever comes first) for the Project. Once effective, such obligations shall survive
termination of this Agreement.
COUNTY shall provide CITY with security for COUNTY's fair share as determined
by CITY for the costs of design and construction of The Deferred Conditions as follows:
Condition 66 [Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road Intersection
Improvement]
A payment to CITY in cash in the amoum of the deficiency, if
any, between funds available to CITY for CIP Project #9689
[Dougherty Road/Dublin Blvd. Intersection] and the cost of such
project, such payment to be made within 30 days of written notice
from the Public Works D~rector to be given following bid
operfing;
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC./Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project - Exhibit B
Page 1 of 6
May 5.2000
· Condition 57 [1-580 Eastbound Offramp at Santa Rita/Tassajara
Road Exit.
A payment to CITY in cash in the mount of the deficiency, if
any, between funds available to CITY to construct the
improvements at the eastbound offramp at Santa
Rita/Tassajara Road exit (one exclusive through lane and 2
left-mm lanes; modification to signal to provide protected left-
mm phasing on east and west legs) and the cost of such
project, such payment to be made within 30 days of written
notice from the Public Works Director to be given following
bid °Pening;
Condition 59 [Additional Left-Tm Lane at Westbound
Approach on Pirnlico Drive.]
A payment to CITY in cash in the mount of the deficiency, if
any, between funds available to CITY to construct the
improvements at the westbound approach to 1-580 on Pimlico
Drive (second left-turn lane) and the cost of such project, such
payment to be made within 30 days of written notice from the
· Public Works Director to be ~ven following bid opening;
(ii) Sewer
All sanitary sewer improvements to serve the project site (or any recorded phase
of the Project) shall be completed in accordance with the tentative subdivision map and DSRSD
requirements.
(iii) Water
An all weather roadway and an approved hydrant and water supply system shall
be available and in service at the site in accordance with the tentative subdivision map to the
satisfaction and requirements of the CITY's fire department.
All potable water system components so serve the project site (or any recorded
phase of the Project) shall be completed in accordance wifla the tentative subdivision map and
DSRSD requirements.
Recycled water lines shall be installedin accordance with the tentative
subdivision map.
Dublifi/WSD-Dublin LLC./Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project - Exhibit B
Page 2 of 6
May 5, 2000
(iv) Storm Drainage'
Prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for any building which is
part of the Project, the storm drainage systems offsite, as well as on site drainage systems to the
areas to be occupied, shall be improved to the satisfaction and requirements of the Dublin Public
Works Department applying CITY's and Zone 7 (Alameda County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District, Zone 7) standards and policies which are in force and effect at the time of
issuance of the permit for the proposed improvements and shall be consistent with the Drainage
Plan. The site shall also be protected from storm flow from off site and shall have erosion
control measures in place to protect doWnStream facilities and properties from erosion and
-unclean storm water consiStent with the Drainage Plan. As used herein, "Drainage Plan" shall
refer to CITY's master drainage plan.
(¥) Other Utilities (e.g. gas. electricity, cable, televisions, telephone)
Construction of othe; utilities shall be' 9omplete'by phased prior to issuance of
the first Certificate of Occupancy for any building within that specific phase of occupancy.
Subsection b. Miscellaneous
(i) cOmPletiOn May be Deferred.-
: : N°~tandiilg'th~ f0r~gOing, CITY's Public Works Director may,/n his or her
sole discretion and upon receipt of documentation in a form satisfactory to the Public Works
Directo~ that'a~SU~es ~ompleti~}~llo~ DEVELOPER Or COUNTY to defer completion of
discrete portions of any of the public 'impi0X;ementS required for the Project until after issnar~ce
of Certificate of Occupancy for the firSt building for the Project if the Public Works Dire_ctor -
determines that to do so would not jeopardize the public health, safety or welfare~
Subparagraph 5.3.3 -- Phasing. Timin?
With the exception of the road. improvements described in Subpara~aph 5.3.2(a)(i),
th_is Agreement contains no requirements that DEVELOPER must initiate or complete
development of the Project within any period of time set by-CITY. 'It is the intention of this
provision that DEVELOPER be able to develop the Property in accordance with its own time
schedules and the Project Approvals.
Subparagraph 5.3.4 - Financing Plan
DEVELOPER will install all street improvements necessary for the Project at its own
cost (subject to credits for certain improvements as provided in Subparagraph 5.3.6 below).
Other infrastructure necessary to provide sewer, potable water, and recycled water
services to the Project will be made available by the Dublin San Ramon Services District.
Dublin/WSD-Du blin LLC./Surplus Authority
Development Agreement - Sybase Project - Exhibit B
Page 3 of 6
May 5, 2000
COUNTY has entered into an "Area Wide Facilities Agreement" with the Dublin San Kamon
Services District to pay for the cost of extending such services to the Project. Su~h services shall
be provided as set forth in Subparagraph 5.3.2(a)(ii) and (iii) .aboye.~ .....
Subparagraph 5~3.5 ' Fees, Dedications ..
Subsection a. Traffic Impact Fees.
DEVELOPER shall pay all traffic impact fees applicable to the Project which are in
effect at the time of issuance of any building permit for the Project in the amounts and at the
times set forth in the implementing resolution. Such fees include the Traffic Impact Fee for
Eastern Dublin established by Resolution No. 225-99, including any future amendments to such
fee.
DEVELOPER, COUNTY and CITY acknowledge that COUNTY is entitled to
certain credits Ct 99'1 Credits") again~ payment of the Traffic Impact Fee for Eastern Dublin by
separate agreements previously entered into between COUNTY and CITY in 1991 (as such
agreements have been amended). COUNTY is also entitled ~)~ certain other credits ("Prior
Agreement Credits") agains~ payment of the Traffic Impact Fee fOr Eastern Dublin by other~
development agreements entered into between COUNTY and CITY~:: COUNTY agrees that,
notwithstanding its entitlement to such 199t Credits, its 1991 Credits cannot be applied aga/nst
payment of the "Section 2" portion of the Traf-fic Impact Fee for Eastern Dublin for the Project.
DEVELOPER (and.its assignee) wilt, rather, pay the ,Section 2" portion of the fee in cash.
.-~.- ~-~-~ .
COUNTY. further agrees.that it (and its .assignee) will use the .1991 credits and/or
Prior Agreement Credits agaln~ at least one-half(½) of the "Section 1" portion of the Traffic
Impact Fee for Eastern Dublin for the Project provided that it has sufficient Such credits. CITY
shall determine which of the 1991 Credits and/or Prior Agreement Credits shall be used-pursuant
to this para~aph. ..~
Notwithstanding anything herein ~o the contrary, DEVELOPER further agrees that it
(and its assignee) will p.ay at least seven percent (7%) of the "Section i" portion of the Traffic
Impact Fee for Eastern Dublin in cash.
Subsection b. Traffic Impact Fee to Reimburse Pleasanton for Freeway
Interchanges.
DEVELOPER shall pay a Eastern Dublin 1-580 Interchange Fee in the
amounts and at the times set forth in City of Dublin Resolution No. 155-98, or in the mounts
and at the times set forth in any resolution revising the amount of the Eastern Dublin 1-580
Interchange Fee.
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC./Surplus Authority
Development Agreement-~Sybase Project- Exhibit B
Page 4 of 6
May 5, 2000
Subs-6cti0n c. Public FaciIifies Fees.. - --
DEVELOPER shall pay a Public Facilities Fee in the amounts and at the times set
forth in City of DubIin Resolution No. I95-99, or in the amounts and at the times set forth in any
resolution revising the amount o£the Public Facilities Fee.
Subsection d.' Noise lV[iti.oation Fee.
DEVELOPER shall pay a Noise Mitigation Fee in the amounts and at the times set
forth in City of DubIin Resolution No. 33-96; or in the amounts and at the times set forth in any
resolution revising the'amount °fthe Noise Mitigation Fee.
Subsection e. School Impact Fees.
School impact fees shall be paid by DEVELOpER-in accordance with Government
Code section 53080 and the exhs~g agreement between COUNTY and thc Dublin Unified
School District
Subsection f. Fire Impact Fees... -~-
DEVELOPER' shall pay a fire facilities £ee. in~e mounts and at thefimes set forth in
City o£ Dublin Resolution No: 37-97 or in the amounts and at the times set.forth in any
resolution revising the' mount 0f such fee-? ~(~£--:'.:?..
Subsection g. Tri-VaIlev Transportation Development Fee.
-- DEVELOPER shall pay the Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee in the
amount and at the times set forth in City of Dublin Resolution No. 89-98, or in the amounts and
at the times set forth in any resolution revising the amount of such fee~ COUNTY a~ees-that its
1991 Credits and Prior A~eement Credits cannot be applied against payment of this fee.
Subparag~'ar~h 5.3.6 - Credit
Subsection a. Traffic Impact Fee Improvements Credit
CITY shall provide a credit to COUNTY for the those improvements described in the
resolution establishing the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee if such improvements are
constructed by the DEVELOPER in their ultimate location pursuant tiffs Agreement. All aspects
of credits shall be governed by CITY's Administrative Guidelines regarding credits (Resolution
No. 23-99).
Subsection b. Traffic Impact Fee Right-of-Way Dedications Credit
CITY shall pro-v/de a credit to COUNTY for any_ TIF area right-of-way dedicated by
COUNrI~ to CITY which is required for improvements which are described in the resolution
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC.ISurplus Authority
Development A=m-eement - Sybase Project - Exhibit B
Page 5 of 6
Ma5, 5, 2000
establishing the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee. Ail aspe~..ts_9~?.[~:d_i~.sh~l be goye .reed by
CITY's Administrative Guidelines regarding credits (Resolution No. 23-99).
In the event that credits referred to in Subsections (a) to (b) o£this Subparagraph 5'.3.6
are in excess of the mount o£ credits which can be applied ag_ainst the traffic impact fee payable
pursuant to Subsection (a) of Subparagraph 5.3.5 (i.e., one-half of the "Section 1" portion of the
Traffic Impact Fee for Eastern Dublin, less 7% ofthe"Section 1, portion), COUNTY shall be
entitled to "bank" Such'Credits (referred to as "Excess Credits") and may use them as provided in
CITY's Administrative Guidelines for Credits and Reimbursements (Resolution No. 23-99).
Subl)ara~m'aph 5.3.7 - Miscellaneous
Subsection a. Landscaping Maintenance Along Streets and Creek
CITY has formed a landscape maintenance district known as the "Landscape
Maimenance Assessment District No. 97-1 (Santa Rim Area)~' p ..u~__...,u~u. t..to a pefifi'.gn fr?m
COUNTY, and imposed an assessment against the Property to pay for' street and creek Iandscape
mainte~fi~~ Iff-addition, on September 24; 1996, COUNTY recorded a Declaration of
Covenants, Cofldifior~s' arid RestrictiOns which covers the Propert~,'wherebyCQUN~Y.., on
behalf of itself arid its successors (including DEVELOPER); has covenanted, t0 pay a yDeed
Assessment" to CITY for maintefianee of street and creek landscaping.
EI~IS.-rja
J:\WPD%MNP~WM14\149~Agree~-yba~e ex-b 504.wpd
Dublin/WSD-Dublin LLC./Surplus Authority
Development A~eement - Sybase Project - Exhibit B
Page 6 of 6
May 5, 2000
~ /.%5
Mitigated
Initial Study/
Negative Declaration
Project
Sybase Complex
File
PA// 99-062
Lead Agency:
City of Dublin
March 2000
ATTACHMENT
Table of Contents
Introduction ........................................................................................ 2
Applicants/Contact Persons ..................................................................... 2
Project Location and Context ................................................................... .2
Project Description ............................................................................... 3
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .................................................. 15
Determination (to be completed by Lead Agency): .......................................... 15
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .......................................................... 16
Earlier Analyses ................................................................................... 26
Attachment to Initial Study ...................................................................... 28
Discussion of Checklist .......................................................................... 28
I. Aesthetics ....................................................................... 28
II. Agricultural Resources .......................................................... 29
III. Air Quality ....................................................................... 29
IV. Biological Resources ........................................................... 30
V. Cultural Resources .............................................................. 31
V. Geology and Soils .............................................................. 31
VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................ 33
VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................. 34
IX. Land Use and Planning ......................................................... 36
X, Mineral Resources .............................................................. 37
XI. Noise .............................................................................. 37
XII. Population and Housing ........................................................ 38
XIII. Public Services ...................................................... : .......... 39
XIV. Recreation ........................................................................ 40
XV. Transportation/Traffic .......................................................... 4 !
X¥I. Utilities and Service Systems ....................................... .......... 45
XV. Mandatory Findings of Significance ......................................... 46
Initial Study Preparer ............................................................................. 47
Agencies and Organizations Consulted ........................................................ 47
References ......................................................................................... 47
City of Dublin
Environmental Checklist/
Initial Study
Introduction
This Initial Study has been prepared in accord with the provisions of the California
]Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and assesses the potential environmental impacts of
implementing the proposed project described below. The Initial Study consists of a completed
environmental checklist and a brief explanation of the environmental topics addressed in the
checklist.
Applicants/Contact Persons
RMW Architects
160 Pine Street
San Francisco CA 94111
Attn: David McAdams
(415) 781 9800
Wilcox Development Services
14001 Dallas Pkwy., Suite 1111
Dallas TX 75240
Attn: Terry Lowery
(972) 759 7878
Project Location and Context
The project site is located on the northwest corner of Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard. The
site encompasses approximately 19 (gross) acres and 14.49 (net) acres of land which is currently
vacant. The major feature on thc site include several large mounds of excavated material which
has been placed on the site from construction of nearby projects
Exhibit 1 depicts the location of the project area in context of the larger City of Dublin and
Exhibit 2 shows the detailed site location.
The project site is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan area. This
Specific Plan/General Plan was adopted by the City of Dublin in 1994 for the purpose of
directing long-term land use, circulation, infrastructure and environmental protection for 3,302
acres of land located east of the central portion of Dublin and north of the 1-580 freeway. At full
build-out, the Eastern Dublin planning area would allow a range of residential, commercial
office, employment and open space uses.
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 2
March 2000
Property north of the project site has been recently developed with an office complex; property
to the east contains multi-family residential uses; properties south and west of the project site are
vacant.
Project Description
The proposed project includes a number of related land use applications to allow the
development of a corporate headquarters facility for Sybase, a major computer software
developer. At full build-out, the campus would include two mid-rise office buildings, parking for
approximately 1,200 vehicles and landscaping. The total amount of construction on the site
would include a maximum of 420,000 square feet, which would largely be office space, but
which would also include conference rooms, an employee cafeteria, employee fitness center and
an approximately 30,000 square foot data center.
A maximum of 3,570 employees would be located on the site at full build out.
The two buildings would be constructed in one phase. It is anticipated that site improvements
would be completed by early summer 2001.
Development of the Sybase headquarters facility will require the approval of the following
related application: Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, PD-Planned Development rezoning,
Site Development Review (SDR), a Development Agreement and a Parcel Map.
Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment
The existing Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan designates the site bounded by Central
Parkway to the north, Hacienda Drive to the east, Dublin Boulevard to the south and Arnold
Drive to the west (34.6 total acres) for High Density Residential permitting an average of 1,211
dwellings to be constructed. The proposed Sybase project would not be consistent with this land
use classification.
The property owner, the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority, has filed an application to
amend the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan to redesignate a pOrtion of the block,
consisting of the 19-acre (gross)/14.49-acre (net) project site, from High Density Residential to
Campus Office. The property tothe south, identified as Site 16, would also be amended to delete
420,000 gross square feet of development from this site, which is the amount of development
represented in the Sybase site. The Campus Office land use designation on Site 15 would
accommodate the proposed Sybase project. The number of high density residential dwellings
planned for the entire 34.6 gross acre site would be reduced to 864 dwellings on 15.6 gross acres
of land. The remaining number of residential units (347) would not be constructed. Exhibit 3
shows the proposed Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment.
Table 1 shows the existing and proposed acres and land uses before and after the Specific
Plan/General Plan Amendment. The site numbers on the table correspond with the sites depicted
on Exhibit 3.
/3.5
City of Dublin Page 3
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000
PA #99-062
Table 1. Existing and Proposed Specific Plan/General Plan Land Uses-Alameda County
Surplus Property Authority Property
Site Name Acres Existing DU's/ Proposed DU's/
(gross) Specific Plan Sq. Ft. Specific Sq. Ft.
Plan
1 Tassajara 14.8 Med. Res 148,000 no change --
Meadows
2 Emerald Glen 56.3 Park --- no change --
Park
3 Village Center 21.9 Neigh. 286,189 no change --
Comm.
4 Toll Emerald 33.9 Med. Res. 339 du no change --
Glen
5a G.M. 17 GC 185,130 no change --
5b Koll 35.1 CO/GC 553,421 no change --
6 AutoNation 28.9 GC 264,366 no change --
7 Hacienda 56.8 GC 530.536 no change --
Crossing
8 Calif. Creekside 35.7 Med. Res. 277 du no change --
9 Villas 16.2 MH Res. 324 du no change --
10 School 11 School -- no change --
1 la JPI 18.5 Med. High 335 du no change :-
Res.
11 b Summer Glen 69.2 L/M Res. 328 du no change --
12 Pub/Semi-Pub. 88.5 public 963,765 no change --
13 Creekside 29.7 Ind/Office 478,681 no change --
Business Park
14 Emerald Pointe 35.3 ind/Office 568,937 no change --
Unentitled High Den. 1,211 du Campus
15a (Proposed 34.6 Res. Office 420,000
Sybase) (19 ac)
High High Den.
15b ...................... Den. Res. 864 du
Res. (15.6 ac)
16 Unentitled 53 CO 1,962,378 no change 1,542,378
PD-Planned Development Rezoning and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans
The applicant has also proposed a PD-Planned Development rezoning for the site. Existing
zoning is Planned Development-High Density Residential. Proposed Zoning is PD-Planned
Development-Campus Office. The proposed PD-Planned Development will include a District
Planned Development Plan that will establish standards and regulations governing the future use,
development, improvement and maintenance of the site, in accord with Chapter 8.32 of the
Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 4
March 2000
As part of the PD-Planned Development zoning application, a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development
Plan has been prepared for City approval describing in detail the proposed development program
for the Sybase project. Details of the development plan are as follows:
Site Plan: The proposed site plan (Exhibit 4) indicates that the two main office buildings
would be located on the southeast portion of the lot, at oblique angles to the two main
intersecting streets. An open plaza would be created on the southeast coruer of the site
near the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive, which will be discussed
below. Parking would be arrayed around the building complex to the north and east.
Each office building would contain six stories and a maximum of 210,000 gross square
feet. Building frontages would be oriented toward adjoining streets, although primary
access to the buildings would be from parking lots closest to the buildings. The two
buildings would be linked with a pedestrian bridge at the second floor. A shipping
receiving dock would be located between the buildings and screened from view from
surrounding streets with a wall and 1.andscaping.
Access, Parking, Loading and Circulation: Three driveways into the site would be
provided, one each on Dublin Boulevard, Central Parkway and Hacienda Drive. A total
of 1.200 surface parking spaces would be provided, which would include compact and
handicapped parking stalls as well as parking spaces for motorcycles. This number
complies with City of Dublin off-street parking standards. Each building would have a
truck loading area, to be screened from adjacent streets by a fence and landscaping. A bus
shelter would also be constructed on the northwest comer of Dublin Boulevard and
Hacienda Drive to serve this and other nearby uses. Bicycle racks would also be provided
on the site.
Architectural Design: Two almost-identical buildings would be constructed, each six
stories and 95 feet in height. Exhibit 6 shows exterior building elevations. Building
design would reflect a "high tech" theme, with use of precast concrete panels as a base
and extensive use of windows in aluminum frames with accent metal panels. Stylized
metal and glass canopies would be provided to emphasize the main entries. Roof-
mounted equipment would be screened behind metal panels. The buildings would be
linked by a pedestrian bridge to match the design of the main buildings. Business
identification signs would be located on the outside wall of the two buildings (one sign
per building). Precast concrete panels would be two shades of gray and the window glass
would be colored blue to slightly blue-green. Exhibits 5a and 5b show proposed building
elevations.
Development of the project would also include construction of site lighting (including
parking lot landscaping, walkway lighting and lighting near each building) and
identification signs. A Master Sign Plan would need to be prepared for separate action by
the City of Dublin.
Landscaping: Project landscaping would include construction of a major urban park/plaza
on the southeast coruer of the site as well as perimeter landscaping around the site,
landscaping within the parking lot and additional landscaping around the buildings. The
main landscape feature would encompass approximately 1.4 acres of land and would
include a mix of decorative hardscape and landscaping. Landscape elements would
City of Dublin Page 5
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000
PA #99-062
consist of turf, trees and other decorative landscaping, including seating elements.
Maintenance of on-site landscaping would be by the property owner or future building
tenant.
Grading and Utilities: As part of project development, the site would be cleared and
graded to accommodate the proposed buildings, parking lots, pedestrian walkways and
related improvements and to assure appropriate site drainage. It is estimated that cut and
fill would balance on the site, meaning that no earthern material would need to be
imported to or exported from the site. Underground utilities, including sewer, water,
reclaimed water, storm drain lines, natural gas, telephone, fiber optic and electrical,
would be extended to the site from adjoining streets. Adjacent streets have been
constructed or are under construction to full width per the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan/General Plan.
Site Development Review (SDR)
An application has .also been filed for a Site Development Review (SDR) permit, pursuant to
Chapter 8. t04 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. The purpose of SDR review is to promote
orderly, attractive and harmonious development within the community and to ensure compliance
with all applicable development regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance.
Development Agreement
A Development Agreement has been proposed between the City of Dublin, the existing property
owner and the project developer. The Development Agreement would vest (or "lock in") City
development approvals related to the project for a specified period of time.
Parcel Map
The applicant has also requested approval of a parcel map to subdivide the block formed by
Central Boulevard, Hacienda Avenue, Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Drive into two separate
parcels of record. Exhibit 6 shows the Tentative Parcel Map. After approval of the Tentative
Parcel Map, a final Parcel Map would be prepared, approved by the City and recorded.
City of Dublin Page 6
nitial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000
PA #99-062
San
San
Francisc(
Pacific
Ocean
0 ~ 10 Miles
t m ~ . !
M(
Y
Dublin Site
EXhibit 1-Regional
Sybase Project (PA
City of Dublin
Context
99-062)
VICINITY
N.T.S.
MAP
CITY LIMIT
Exhibit 2-Site Location
Sybase Project (PA 99-062)
City of Dublin
. DUBLIN
ProJect Site 1~.~0~
DUBLIn' 'B~
1-580
m~V^~ANTON
Sffl LAND U~! Sill lAND
lA ~ ~ ~ MALL ~ ~
~PA~
CINIBI
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
I&B
/
12 I
I-~80
ll~ lhdll
12'7,110 Sl.~l.
Proposed Change from "High Density Residential" to
"High Density Residential" and "Campus Office"
Exhibit 3-Proposed Specific Plan/General
Sybase Project (PA 99-062)
City of Dublin
Plan Amendment
... #,x 17
1. Project description:
Proposed development of a 420,000 square foot
headquarters office complex on 14.49 net acres of land, to
include a Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment within
the Hacienda Gateway portion of the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan/General Plan, a PD-Planned Development
Rezoning, an SDR Plan, a Development Agreement and a
Parcel Map.
2. Lead agency:
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin CA 94588.
3. Contact person:
Jerry Haag/Eddie Peabody Jr., Dublin Planning Department
(925) 833 6610
4. Project location:
Northwest corner of Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive
5. Project sponsor:
Wilcox Development Services
5420 LBJ Freeway Suite 40
Dallas TX 75240
6. General Plan designations:
High Density Residential
7. Zoning:
PD-High Density Residential
8. Other public agency required approvals:
Tentative and Final Parcel Map (City of Dublin)
Grading and Building permits (City of Dublin)
Master Sign Plan (City of Dublin)
Sewer and water connections (DSRSD)
Encroachment permits (City of Dublin)
Notice of Intent (State Water Resources Control Board)
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 14
March 2000
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "potentially significant impact" as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages. ·
X Aesthetics - Agricultural X Air Quality
Resources
- Biological Resources X Cultural Resources X Geology/Soils
Hazards and Hydrology/Water X Land Use/Planning
X Hazardous Materials X Quality
- Mineral Resources X Noise Population/Housing
X Public Services - Recreation X Transportation
Circulation
X Utilities/Service - Mandatory Findings
Systems of Significance
Determination (to be completed by Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
__ I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a
Negative Declaration will be prepared.
X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A Negative Declaration will be prepared.
__ I find that although the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment,
but at least one effect 1) has been adequately~ analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier
analysis as described on the attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated." An Environmental Impact Report is required, but
must only analyze the effects that remain to be addressed.
__ I find that although ~the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a)
haVe been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have
been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation
measures thakaxe imposed on the proposed project.
Signature: ~c'~ P / ~~~'"~ Date:3[7~[~
Printed Name:u',j~n~ ~ ~ For: ~_ ~ ~0~
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 15
March 2000
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
1)
A brief explanation is required for all answers except "no impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parenthesis
following each question. A "no impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "no impact" answer should
be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general factors (e.g. the
project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific
screening analysis).
2)
All answers must take account of'the whole action, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3)
"Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect
is s~gnificant. If there are one or more "potentially significant impact" entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
4)
"Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" implies
elsewhere the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "potentially
significant effect" to a "less than significant impact." The lead agency must describe the
mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant
level.
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 16
March 2000.
?32-5
Environmental Impacts (Note: Source of determination listed in parenthesis. See listing of
sources used to determine each potential impact at the end of the checklist)
Note: A full discussion of each item is found
following the checklist.
I. Aesthetics. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic
vista? (Source: 2)
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including but not limited to trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway? (Source: 2)
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings? (Source: 2, 6)
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area? (Source: 2, 6)
II. Agricultural Resources
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or
Farmland of Statewide Importance, as
showing on the maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to a non-agricultural use? (Source:
2)
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture
use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Source:
2)
c) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
farmland to a non-agricultural use? (Source:
2)
III. Air Quality (Where available, the
significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management district
may be relied on to make the following
determinations). Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan? (Source: 2 )
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation? (Source: 2)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99~062
Page 17
March 2000
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors? (Source:2)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations? (2)
e) Create objectionable odors? (Source:2)
IV. Biological Resources. Would the project
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game
or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
(Source:2)
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies or regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Source:
2)
c) Have a substantial adverse impact on
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including but not limited to marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption or other
means?
(Source:2)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites? (Source: 2)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as tree
protection ordinances? (Source: 2)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 18
March 2000
f) Conflict with the provision of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan or other
approved local, regional or state habitat
conservation plan? (Source: 2)
V. Cultural Resources. WouM the project
a) Cause a substantial adverse impact in the
significance of a historical resource as
defined in Sec. 15064.5? (Source:2)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archeological resource
pursuant to Sec. 15064.5 (Source: 4)
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or unique geologic
feature? (Source: 2)
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of a formal cemetery?
(Source: 2)
VI. Geology and Soils. Would the project
a/ Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving:
(Source:3)
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist or based on other known evidence
of a known fault
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? (Source 2,3)
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project and potentially result in
on- and off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse (Source:
2.3)
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 13-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property? (Source: 3)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation ,
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x 1
X
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 19
March 2000
e) Have soils capable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal of waste?
(Source: 3)
VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would
the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport,
use or disposal of hazardous materials
(Source: 2, 7)
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous into the environment?
(Source:2, 7 )
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school? (Source: 2, 7)
d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites complied
pursuant to Government Code Sec. 65902.5
and, as a result, would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment?
(Source: 2.7)
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such plan has not been
adopted, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? (Source: 2, 7)
f) For a project within the vicinity of private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? (Source: 2, 7)
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with the adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
(Source: 2, 7)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant, Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 20
March 2000
h) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires, including where wildlands
are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
(Source: 2, 7)
IX. Hydrology and Water Quality. WouM the
project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements? (Source: 2)
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge sUch that there would be a net
deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g. the
production rate of existing nearby wells
would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses
for which permits have been granted?
(Source: 2)
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the aeration of the course of a stream or
river, in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site? (Source: 7)
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or areas, including through
the alteration of a course or stream or river,
or substantially increase the rate or am6unt
of surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or off-site? (Source: 2,
7)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff? (Source: 2, 7)
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
quality? (2)
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard
area as mapped on a Flood Hazard Boundary
or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood
delineation map? (7)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of Dublin
Initial StUdy/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 21
March 2000
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which impede or redirect .flood
flows? (7)
i) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury, and death involving
flooding, including flooding as a result of
the failure of a levee or dam? (7)
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow?
IX. Land Use and Planning. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
(Source: 1.2)
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including but
not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal plan, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect? (Source:
1, 6)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan? (1, 2, 7)
X. Mineral Resources. Would the project
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the region and the residents of the state?
(Source: 2)
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general Plan, specific
plan or other land use plan? (Source: 2)
XI. Noise. Would the proposal result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in
the general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of ..other agencies?
(Source: 2)
b) Exposure of persons or to generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or
groundbome noise levels? (Source: 2)
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above
existing levels without the project? (Source:
2)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 22
March 2000
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase
in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels without the project? (Source: 2)
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working n the
project area to excessive noise levels ?
(Source: 2, 6)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
mrstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels? (Source: 2, 6)
XII. Population and Housing. WouM the project
a) Induce substantial population growth in an
area, either directly or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)? (Source: 2)
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? (10)
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the replacement of housing
elsewhere? (Source: 10)
XIII. Public Services. Would the proposal:
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service rations, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services? (2, 7)
Fire protectiOn?
Police protection
Schools
Parks
Other public facilities
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 23
March 2000
XIV. Recreation:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood or regional facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated
(Source: 7)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
(Source: 7)
XV. Transportation and Traffic. Would the
project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is
substantial in relation to the existing traffic
load and capacity of the street system (i.e.
result in a substantial increase in either the
number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads or congestion at
intersections)? (4)
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a
level of service standard established by the
County Congestion Management Agency for
designated roads or highways?(4)
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels
or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks? (2, 4)
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses, such as
farm equipment?(4)
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (4)
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (7)
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or
programs supporting alternative transportation
(such as bus turnouts and bicycle facilities) (7)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 24
March 2000
XVI. Utilities and Service Systems. WouM the
project
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board? (2)
b) Require or result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects? (2, 7)
c) Require or result in the construction of new
storm water drainage facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
effects? (7)
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project from existing water
entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed? (2)
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may
serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the providers existing
commitments? (2)
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs? (2)
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes
and regulations related to solid waste? (2)
XVI. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number of or restrict the range of
a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 25
March 2000
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current prOjects and the
effects of probable future projects).
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact . With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
Sources used to determine potential environmental impacts
2.
3
4
6.
7.
8.
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan (1994)
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan EIR (1994)
Geotechnical Investigation of the Sybase Property, Kleinfelder (February 2000)
Project Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TJKM Associates (March 2000)
Site Visit
Discussion with City of Dublin staff or affected special districts
Other source
XVII. Earlier Analyses
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Reference Section 15063 (c)(3)(d).
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
Portions of the environmental setting, project impacts and mitigation measures for this
Initial Study refer to environmental information contained in the 1994 Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan/General Plan Environmental Impact Report. (SCH 91103064). This
document .is referred to in this Initial Study as the "Eastern Dublin EIR." Copies of this
document is available for public review at the City of Dublin Planning Department, 100
Civic Plaza, Dublin CA, during normal business hours.
As part of the certification of the EIR, the Dublin City Council adopted a Statement of
Overriding Considerations for the following impacts: cumulative traffic, extension of
certain community facilities (natural gas, electric and telephone service), regional air
quality, noise and visual.
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 26
March 2000
The certified EIR contains a large number of mitigation measures that will be applied to
any development within the project area.. Specific mitigation measures are noted in the
text of the following Initial Study.
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-O62
Page 27
March 2000
Attachment to Initial Study
Discussion of Checklist
Legend
PS: Potentially Significant
LS/M: Less Than Significant After Mitigation
LS: Less Than Significant Impact
NI: No Impact
I. Aesthetics
Environmental Setting
The project site is vacant and consists of generally flat land with a distinct bur gentle slope from
north to south, tOwards the 1-580 freeway. The Eastern Dublin EIR classifies the project site as
"valley grasslands,' which are located on the areas near 1-580 in the south and southwest portion
of Eastern Dublin. None of the major visual features identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR
(hillsides and ridges or watercourses) exist on the project site.
The project site is not located within a scenic corridor, which is adjacent to the 1-580 freeway.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista? LS. Approval and construction of the
proposed project would convert an existing vacant site to an urban use specifically the
construction of two 6-story offices, accessory buildings, parking and landscaping. This
potential impact was addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Impact 3.8C, Obscuring Natural
Features and Impact 3.8F, Alteration of Visual Character of Flatlands) and it was
determined that no mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant
level. Therefore, the EIR concluded this impact would be a potentially significant
irreversible change and a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been approved for
this ~mpact, therefore no additional discussion or analysis is necessary.
b)
Substantially damage scenic resources, including s~tate scenic highway? NI. The project
site is located approximately one-half mile north of the 1-580 freeway, which is a state-
designated scenic highway, nor is it located adjacent or near other local scenic routes,
including Tassajara Road, Doolan Road, or Collier Canyon Road. and is therefore not
within a scenic corridor. No impacts are therefore anticipated since the site is not located
near an identified scenic corridor.
c)
Substantially degrade existing visual character or the quality of the site? LS. This impact
was addressed in a Statement of Overriding Considerations in the 1994 Eastern Dublin
EIR. Therefore, this impact has been reduced to a less-than-significant level so no further
analysis is required.
d)
Create light or glare? LS/M. Construction of the proposed project would increase the
amount of light and glare due to new street lighting, parking lot lighting and building
security lighting. In some instances, the additional lighting could result in negative
aesthetic impacts through the "spill over" of unwanted lighting onto adjacent properties,
streets and other areas that are not intended to be lighted. The following mitigation is
City of Dublin Page 28
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000
PA #99-062
therefore recommended to reduce spillover of lighting impacts to a level of less-than-
significant. Similarly, extensive use of glass is proposed as one of the primary exterior
materials for the two buildings. Depending on the type of glass used, potential glare could
result onto adjacent sites and nearby roadways. Mitigation Measure 1 would also reduce
potential glare impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure 1: Pole-mounted street lights shall be equipped with cut-off
lenses and oriented down toward interior streets to minimize unwanted light and
glare spill over. Building security lighting and other lights shall be directed
downward. All exterior glass panels shall be of non-glare manufacture.
II. Agricultural Resources
Environmental Setting
The Eastern Dublin EIR notes that the site is an "approximate urbanized area" and is therefore
not prime farmland.
Based on information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Figure 3. l-C), no portion of the site
is encumbered with a Williamson Act Land Conservation Agreement contract.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a-c) Convert Prime Farmland, conflict with agricultural zoning or convert prime farmland to a
non-agricultural.use? NI. The site was previously used'for governmental purposes and is
not identified as prime farmlands in the Eastern Dublin EIR. No impacts are therefore
anticipated with regard to prime farmland or loss of agricultural production.
III. Air Quality
Environmental Setting
Dublin is located in the Tri-Valley Air Basin. Within the Basin, state and federal standards for
nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and lead are met. Standards for other airborne pollutants,
including ozone, carbon monoxide and suspended particulate matter (PM-10) are not met in at
least a portion of the Basin.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) WouM the project conflict or obstruct implementation of an air quality plan ? LS. The
proposed project would not conflict with the local Clean Air Plan adopted by the Bay Area
Air Quality Management District, since the proposed amount of non-residential
development have been included in Dublin's planned growth as part of Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan/General Plan. Therefore, such impacts would be less-than-significant.
b)
Would the project violate any air quality standards? LS. Short-term construction impacts
related to implementation of the project, including grading and excavation, could result in
exceedances of air quality standards established by the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District (Eastern Dublin EIR, Impacts 3.11/A and B). Adherence to Mitigation Measure
3.11/1.0 and Mitigation Measure 3.11/2.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR will reduce
short-term air quality impacts to a less-than-significant level. These mitigation measures
minimize the creation of fugitive dust during grading and construction activities and also
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 29
March 2000
mandate that construction equipment be kept in proper running order. The Eastern Dublin
EIR concludes that potential air ~quality impacts related to construction equipment could not
be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations
was adopted for this impact.
Similarly, potential air quality impacts related to mobile source emissions of Reactive
Organic Gasses and Nitrogen Oxide, both precursor indicators of smog, and stationary
source emissions were found to exceed regional air quality standards even with mitigation
measures, and were included in the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Eastern
Dublin EIR Impacts 3.11/C and E). Since a Statement of Overriding Concerns was adopted
for the previous EIR, such impacts would be considered less-than-significant for the
purposes of this Initial Study.
c)
Would the project result in cumulatively considerable air pollutants? LS. The Eastern
Dublin EIR identifies Mobile Source Emissions and Stationary Source Emissions as
significant irreversible impacts. Generally such impacts are based on vehicular emission
from future traffic within the sub-region as well as stationary.sources. A Statement of
Overriding Considerations was adopted for long-term impacts, therefore, no additional
discussion or analysis is necessary.
d,e) Expose sensitive receptors to significant pollutant concentrations or create objectionable
odors ? NI. Proposed land uses include campus offices, which are not considered as
sensitive receptors. Therefore, no impact is anticipated with regard to potential impacts to
sensitive receptors.
IV. Biological Resources
Environmental Setting
The Eastern Dublin EIR indicates the biological character of the Sybase site is "ruderal field,"
which is defined a broad category of plant life closely related to man and consisting of native and
alien elements which occupy disturbed habitats. Plant species typically consist of weeds, thistles,
mustards and grasses. Plant diversity is considered low even though plant cover may be high.
The Eastern Dublin EIR identifies no known wetlands on the site nor the presence of rare,
threatened or endangered animal plant or animal species.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species? NI.
Based on information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, no candidate, sensitive or
special-status species exist on the site, so there would be no impact.
Have a substantial adverse impact on riparian habitat or federally protected wetlands ?
NI. Based on information contained n the Eastern Dublin EIR, there are no wetlands or
riparian features on or adjacent to the project site. There would therefore be no impacts to
wetlands or riparian habitats.
d)
Interfere with movement of native fish or wildlife species? NI. The project site is
substantially surrounded by urban development and was previously developed for
governmental uses. There are no stream courses on or near the site that could be used as a
City of Dublin Page 30
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000
PA #99-062
wildlife migration corridor. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated with regard to movement
of fish or wildlife species.
Conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources or any adopted
Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans ? NI. No trees are
present on the site, and there are no impacts with regard to local tree preservation
ordinances or policies. The site is not located within the boundaries of any Habitat
Conservation Plans.
V. Cultural Resources
Environmental Setting
The Eastern Dublin-area was surveyed in 1988 as part of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and
associated EIR. Several potentially significant archeological resources were identified in the
project area, a number of which were located near the former Santa Rita Rehabilitation Center.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Cause substantial adverse change to significant historic resources? NI. The site is vacant
and contains no historically significant resources. There would therefore be no impacts to
historical resources.
b, c)
Cause a substantial adverse impact or destruction to archeological Or paleontological
resources? LS/M. The site is located near the former Santa Rita Rehabilitation Center site
and development of the project could have an impact on subsurface archeological and/or
palenotological resources. This would be a potentially significant impact. In the event that
such resources are encountered, the following mitigation measure is recommended to
reduce any potential impacts to archeological or paleontological impacts to a level of less-
than-significance.
Mitigation Measure 4: The possibility that undetected prehistoric archeological
resources might exist on the property must be recognized and a contingency plan
shall be developed in conformity with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 to handle
discoveries during project construction. In the event any prehistoric material is
discovered, work shall be halted in the immediate vicinity of the site until a
qualified archeologist inspects the discovery, and, if necessary, implements plans
for further evaluative testing and/or retrieval of endangered materials.
d)
Disturb any human resources? LS/M. A remote possibility exists that human resources
could be uncovered on the site during construction activities. Adherence to Mitigation
Measure 4 would reduce such impacts to a level of less-than-significance.
V. Geology and Soils
[Note: Information for this section of the Initial Study is based on a geotechnical investigation of
the site for the proposed project, prepared by Kleinfelder Associates, February 2000. A copy of
this report can be reviewed at the Dublin Planning Department.]
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 31
March 2000
Environmental Setting
This section of the Initial Study addresses seismic safety issues, topography and landform,
drainage and erosion and potential impacts to localized soil types.
Seismic
The Sybase site is a part of the San Francisco Bay area, one of the most seismically active
regions in nation. The Eastern Dublin EIR notes the presence of several nearby significant faults,
including the Calaveras Fault, Greenville Fault, Hayward Fault, and San Andreas Fault. The
likelihood of a major seismic event on one or more of these faults within the near future is
believed to be high. The project site is not part of a Special Studies Zone for faults as identified
by the State of California, however, previous geotechnical investigations of the area show
inferred faults north of the site (identified as the "Mocho Fault").
The Mocho Fault.was mapped by the California Division of Mines and Geology in 1974 and was
later evaluated as part of the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. As part of this evaluation it
was concluded that the existence of the Mocho Fault was questionable and geomorphic features
could be caused by differential erosion.
A second thrust fault system has been inferred in the Coast Ranges of the Bay Area that may be
seisimically active. A belt of faults and folds has been mapped in sedimentary rocks south of
Mount Diablo, including one identified as the "leading edge-blind thrust, Mount Diablo
Domain." Further investigation of this inferred fault by Berlogar Geologic Consultants has
concluded that the risk of ground rupture from this inferred fault is low within the project area.
Site Soils
The site is underlain by poorly consolidated, non-marine deposit sedimentary rocks of the
Tassajara Formation. Rocks consist of interbedded claystones, siltstone and occasional
conglomerates. Bedrock is overlain by alluvial deposits of irregularly stratified, poorly
consolidated deposits of clay, silt, sand and gravel derived mainly from erosion from nearby hills
and deposition by ancient stream channels within the Amador Valley.
Landform and Topography
The site is part of a broad north-south trending plain known as the Livermore-Amador Valley.
The site is relatively flat with the exception of a 30-foot wide, 6- to 7-foot high fill stockpile
along the eastern end of the site parallel with Hacienda Drive. This material is believed this pile
was placed on the site from grading operations on nearby sites. Existing elevations on the site
range from 344 feet above sea level on the western portion of the site to 358 feet at the top of the
stockpile on the eastern edge of the site.
Drainage
Existing drainage on the site is generally sheet flow in a north to south direction.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse impacts, including loss, injury
or death related to ground rupture, seismic ground shaking, ground failure, or landslides?
LS. The site is subject to ground shaking caused by a number of regional faults identified
above. Under moderate to severe seismic events which are probable in the Bay Area over
the next 30 years, buildings, utilities and other improvements constructed on the site would
be subject to damage caused by ground shaking.
City of Dublin Page 32
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters · March 2000
PA #99-062
b)
c-d)
e)
Since the Sybase site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Safety Zone, the
potential for ground rupture is anticipated to be minimal. Adherence to Mitigation
Measures MM 3.6/1.0 through 8.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR will ensure that
new structures built on the site will comply with generally recognized seismic safety
standards so that ground shaking impacts would be reduced to a level of less-than-
significant.
As part of the project, the site is proposed to be graded to remove the existing stockpile of
stored material, to accommodate building pads, roads, parking areas and other development
areas. Grading would also occur to improve and control site drainage. Mitigation Measures
3.6/17.0-26.0 have been adopted as part of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR to reduce
potential impacts to slopes to a level of less-than-significant. These mitigation measures
require the preparation of site-specific soils and geotechnical reports, minimizing grading
on steep slopes and adherence to Uniform Building Code and other City requirements for
grading.
Is the site subject to substantial erosion and/or the loss of topsoil? LS. The Eastern Dublin
EIR notes that an impact of constructing all of the land uses identified in the Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan would be an increase of erosion and sedimentation
caused by grading activities. Mitigation Measures 3.6/27.0 and 3.6/28.0 requires that
specific project developers prepare and implement interim erosion plans as part of grading
impacts. With adherence to these mitigation measures, potential erosion impacts will be
reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Is the site located on soil that is unstable or expansive or result in potential lateral
spreading, liquefaction, landslide or collapse? LS. Based on the Kleinfelder Geotechnical
Report, the site can support the type of project envisioned by the applicant. The report also
contains several specific soils-related and construction techniques that must be followed to
assure compliance with the Uniform Building Code and other safety requirements
Adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.6/14.0 through 16.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin
EIR will also serve to reduce potential lateral spreading and related soil hazards impacts to
proposed structures.
Have soils incapable of supporting on-site septic tanks if sewers are not available? NI. The
project developer has indicated that each dwelling would be connected to a sanitary sewer
provided by Dublin San Ramon Services District. Therefore, no impact is anticipated with
regard to septic tanks.
VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Environmental Setting
The site is vacant and currently contains no structures Previous use of the site was for a federal
government installation, which may have involves the use or storage of potentially hazardous
material. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan was amended in 1996 to add Policy 11-
1, which requires that prior to issuance of building permits for sites in the Eastern Dublin area
site-specific Phase One (and if necessary Phase Two) environmental site assessments shall be
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 33
March 2000
made available to the City of Dublin Community Development Director with appropriate
documentation that all recommended remediation actions have been completed.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a-c) Create a significant hazard through transport of hazardous materials or release or
emission of hazardous materials? LS. The proposed use of the site would include an office
complex for a high-technology firm. Only minor and less-than-significant quantities of
potentially hazardous materials would be associated with such uses. Materials would
include normal and customary such as lawn chemicals, solvents and similar items used for
building and grounds maintenance.
d)
Is the site listed as a hazardous materials site? LS. The project developer is in the process
of obtaining necessary environmental hazards site assessments required by Policy 11-1 of
the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan. With adherence to the requirements of this
policy, there would be less-than-significant impacts regarding hazardous materials.
e,f)
Is the site located within an airport land use plan of a public airport or private airstrip?
NI. The site is located northwesterly of the Livermore Municipal Airport but outside of any
safety or referral zone for this airport. No impacts are therefore anticipated regarding
airport safety issues.
g)
Interference with an emergency evacuation plan? NI. Adequate emergency access has been
provided via proposed driveways on all three adjoining streets. Due to the provision of
adequate access, there would be no impact with regard to emergency evacuation plans.
h)
Expose people and structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? NI. The project site is
currently vacant field and is subject to grassland fires during the dry portions of the year.
However, the long-term plan for the area is for urbanization. Development of the project
site and surrounding area would include adding new water lines for firefighting purposes as
well as new fire stations and personnel. No impacts are therefore anticipated.
VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality
Environmental Setting
The project site is generally fiat and contains no wetlands or riparian features. Site drainage is by
sheet flow to the south, towards the 1-580 freeway.
The City of'Dublin has completed a master drainage and hydrology study for the Eastern Dublin
area. The Plan calls for the construction of both local and regional drainage improvements to
accommodate increased levels of stormwater runoff caused by adding increased quantities of
impervious surfaces on the site, including buildings, parking lots, driveways and sidewalks.
Stormwater from the Eastern Dublin area generally flows to the south, under the 1-580 freeway
and into regional drainage facilities maintained by Alameda County Zone 7. The ultimate
disposal of stormwater runoff is Alameda Creek that drains into San Francisco Bay. The
drainage master plan also requires developers of individual projects to pay fees based on square
footage of development to assist in funding both new facilities and upgrading of existing
drainage facilities.
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 34
March 2000
According to information contained in the Soils, Geology and Seismicity chapter of the Eastern
Dublin EIR, no portion of the site contains historic landslides or mudflows (See Figure 3.6-C).
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? LS/M. Construction
of improvements anticipated as part of the Sybase project would necessitate grading and
overcovering of the soil in order to construct building pads, utility connections and similar
features. The amount of grading is not known at this time, however, proposed grading is
anticipated to increase the possibility of soil erosion into creeks and other bodies of water,
on and off the project site. This could be a potentially significant impact. Mitigation
Measure 5 will ensure that potential water quality impacts are reduced to a less-than-
significant level.
Mitigation Measure 5: The project developer shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP), listing Best Management Practices to reduce
construction and post-construction activities to a less than significant level.
Measures may include, but shall not be limited to revegetation of graded areas, silt
fencing and other measures. The SWPPP shall conform to standards adopted by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board and City of Dublin and shall be approved by
both agencies (as applicable) prior to issuance of grading permits.
b)
c)
Specific development projects containing five acres or more are also required to
obtain a Notice of Intent from the State Water Resources Control Board prior to
commencement of grading.
Substantially deplete groundwater recharge areas or lowering of water table? LS.
Although the currently vacant site would be converted to an urban use, this impact has been
addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Impact 3.5/Z) and Mitigation Measures 3.5/49.0 and
50.0 adopted as part of the EIR, so groundwater impacts would be reduced to a less -than-
significant level and no further analysis is required.
Substantially alter drainage patterns, including streambed courses such that substantial
siltation or erosion would occur? LS. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR acknowledges
that implementation of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan would change existing natural
drainage patterns on individual sites. In this instance, proposed changes would include
grading and re-contouring much of the site and filling surface drainage swales with
underground pipes and culverts to accommodate storm water runoff. The overall direction
of stormwater flow in a southwesterly direction will not significantly change however.
Based on preliminary hydrological information prepared by the applicant's engineer, the
quantity and rate of stormwater flow from the site is consistent with the City's master
drainage plan for Eastern Dublin so that potential impacts would be less-than-significant.
d)
Substantially alter drainage patterns or result in flooding, either on or off the project site?
LS. Approval of the proposed Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment and construction of
the office development not would significantly change drainage patterns within the site
area. Existing surface drainage flows would be slightly altered due to anticipated site
grading. Drainage would be routed through newly constructed underground pipes, culverts
and similar facilities. A preliminary drainage plan has been submitted by the applicant,
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 35
March 2000
e)
g)
h, i)
J)
indicating that storm drain improvements would be constructed to connect with existing
and planned drainage improvements within the Eastem Dublin area. This would be
considered a less-than-significant impact. Similarly, the site lies above the lO0-year flood
elevation.
Create stormwater runoff that wouM exceed the capacity of drainage systems or add
substantial amounts of polluted runoff?. LS. Construction of on-site improvements is
anticipated to lead to greater quantities of storm water runoff. According to the Dublin
Public Works Department, the amount of stormwater runoff anticipated to be generated
from the site would be consistent with the approved Master Drainage Plan for the Eastern
Dublin area, so there would be less-than-significant impacts related to increases in
stormwater runoff.
Substantially degrade water quality? LS/M. Refer to the analysis and mitigation measure
under "a," above.
Place housing within a lO0-year flood hazard area as mapped by a Flood Insurance Rate
Map? NI. The proposed project does not include a housing component, so there would be
no impacts with regard to placing housing within a 100-year flood plain:
Place within a lO0-year flood hazard boundary structures that impeded or redirect flood
flow, including dam failures? NI. The proposed project would not place housing within a
100-year flood hazard area, since the project includes proposed office construction. Since
the project would be consistent with the Eastern Dublin Master Drainage Plan, there would
be less-than-significant impacts regarding redirection of flood flows.
Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflows? NI. The site is not located near a
major body of water that could result in a seiche, although seasonal wetlands have been
identified on the site. The risk of potential mudflow is considered low since no historic
landslides or mudflows have been identified on the site (see Figure 3.6-c of the Eastern
Dublin EIR).
IX. Land Use and Planning
Environmental Setting
The project site is site is presently regulated by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan. A
portion of the proposed project would include amending this Plan to relocate some of the
residential dwelling units planned for this site to adjoining areas so that the proposed office
complex could be constructed.
Refer to the Project Description for a discussion of both the requirements of the existing Specific
Plan/General Plan and proposed amendments to the Plan.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Physically divide an established community? NI. The project is vacant and has been
planned for residential uses since the original adoption of the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan/General Plan in 1994. Therefore there would be no disruption of any established
community.
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 36
March 2000
b)
c)
Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation? LS. The proposed project
would be consistent with goals and policies contained in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/
General Plan. The extent of the proposed amendment includes relocating residential units
from a portion of the project site to nearby areas within the Tassajara Gateway sub-area of
the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan to allow for campus office development. At
the same time, the 420,000 square feet that is proposed to be allocated to the Sybase project
would be deleted from an adjacent area, so that there would be no net gain of development
area. Less-than-significant impacts are therefore anticipated with regard to land use
planning compatibility
Conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? NI. No
such plan has been adopted within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan area.
There would therefore be no impact to a habitat conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan for the proposed project.
X. Mineral Resources
Environmental Setting
The site contains no known mineral resources.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a, b) Result in the loss of availability of regionally or locally significant mineral resources? NI.
The Eastern Dublin EIR does not indicate that significant deposits of minerals exist on the
site, so no impacts would occur.
XI. Noise
Environmental Setting
Major sources of noise on and adjacent to the project site include distant noise generated by
vehicles passing Eastern Dublin planning area on 1-580, traffic sources on Tassajara Road and
from aircraft flyovers.
Based on Figure 3.10 B contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, all or a portions of the project site
would be subject to significant long-term noise exposure, defined as 60 decibels CNEL for
exterior noise for residential land uses.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) WouM the project expose persons or generation of noise levels in excess of standards
established by the General Plan or other applicable standard: LS. Construction of the
proposed development project would result in incremental increases in long-term noise
related to additional vehicular traffic related to the project. Since the proposed project does
not include a residential component, there would be less-than-significant impacts related to
increases in permanent noise levels.
b)
Exposure of people to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? LS.
Approval of the Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment and implementation of the
construction project would not result in long-term increases in groundborne vibration, since
City of Dublin Page 37
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000
PA #99-062
c)
d)
e,f)
office uses would be constructed. Therefore, this impact would be considered less-than-
significant.
Substantial increases in permanent in ambient noise levels? LS. The Eastern Dublin EIR
identified permanent noise impacts related to vehicular traffic increases as a unavoidable
and unmitigatable impact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for this
impact by the City. Although a Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment has been requested
as part of the project, the overall type of the project would not significantly change, only a
reconfiguration of land uses. Since a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted
for this impact, no further analysis is required on this topic.
Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity'
above levels without the project? LS. Construction of the proposed office complex would
increase short-term noise levels during the construction period for the project. Mitigation
Measures 3.10/4.0 and 5.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR would require individual
project builders to prepare construction noise management plans to minimize noise as well
as adhere to construction hour limitations. Therefore, short-term construction noise impacts
would be considered less-than-significant.
For a project located within an airport land use plan, would the project expose people to
excessive noise levels? NI. The project site would not be affected by Livermore Municipal
Airport due to the fact that the airport is located approximately two miles southeasterly of
the project. No impacts are therefore anticipated.
XII. Population and Housing
Environmental Setting
Recent information regarding population and housing in Dublin has been published in
Projections '98, published by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). According to
ABAG, Dublin's population (including the sphere of influence) was 26,300 in 1995 and is
projected to be 33,300 in 2000. By way of comparison, the State Department of Finance has
determined that Dublin's population was 28,707 as of January 1, 1999.
The adopted Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan anticipates an ultimate population of
12,458 dwelling units in the Eastern Dublin planning area at full buildout of all land uses within
the planning area. The Specific Plan/General Plan also calls for a maximum of 9,737,000 square
feet of commercial, office and industrial uses at full buildout of the Plan.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly? LS.
Approval of the proposed Amendment is substantially consistent with the existing,
approved Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan. The proposed amendment to the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan would reconfigure office and residential land
uses to be more responsive to market demand. The potential to increase substantial
population growth would be considered a less-than-significant impact.
b,c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing units or people? NI.
The site is vacant. Implementation of the proposed project would therefore displace neither
City of Dublin Page 38
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000
PA #99-062
housing units or people. No impacts are therefore anticipated in regard to population
displacement.
XIlI. Public Services
Environmental Setting
Fire Protection. Fire protection services are handled by the Alameda County Fire
Department, which contracts with the City of Dublin for fire suppression, fire
prevention, education, inspection services and hazardous material control to the
community.
Police Protection: Police and security protection is provided by Alameda County
Sheriff Department, which contracts to the City of Dublin for 24-hour security
patrols throughout the community in addition to crime prevention, crime
suppression and traffic safety.
Schools. The Dublin Unified School District (DUSD) provides educational services
to the City of Dublin.
Maintenance. Maintenance of streets, roads and other governmental facilities are the
responsibility of the City of Dublin Public Works Department.
· Solid Waste Service: Livermore Dublin Disposal Company.
Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Fire protection? LS. Construction of the proposed project would increase demand for fire
and emergency services by increasing the amount of permanent daytime population on the
site. This impact was previously addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Features which
would be incorporated into the project as part of existing City ordinances and development
requirements and to assist in reducing impacts would include installation of on-site fire
protection measures such as fire sprinklers, installation of new fire hydrants and meeting
minimum fire flow requirements contained in the Uniform Building Code and Uniform
Fire Code.
The project developer must also adhere to Mitigation Measures 3.4/6.0-13.0 contained in
the Eastern Dublin EIR. These mitigation measures relate to funding new fire facilities in
eastern Dublin, ensuring adequate water supplies and pressure for fire suppression, and
minimizing wildland fire hazards. With adherence to previouslY adopted mitigation
measures and normal City requirements, impacts related to fire protection would be
reduced to a less-than-significant level.
b)
Police protection? LS. Incremental increases in the demand for police service could be
expected should the project be approved and future developments constructed. Impacts
would generally include increases in commercial and auto burglary and theft. This increase
in calls for service would be off-set through adherence to City of Dublin safety
requirements from the Police Department, including the non-residential security ordinance.
As a condition'of project approval, the Dublin Police Department has requested the
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 39
March 2000
c)
d)
e)
developer to prepare a Master Security Plan for the development to ensure that private on-
site security programs are consistent with City Police Department operations.
The project developer would also be required to adhere to Mitigation Measures 3.4/1.0-5.0
set forth in Eastern Dublin EIR. These measures deal with establishing funding
mechanisms for additional police personnel and facilities and require the inclusion of
security provisions into individual development projects. With adherence to previously
adopted mitigation measures and normal City requirements, including preparation of a
Master Security Plan, impacts related to police protection would be reduced to a less-than-
significant level.
Schools? LS. The proposed project involves the development of an office complex. Since
this is a non-residential land use, minor and less-than-significant impacts are anticipated
with regard to impacts to local schools. The project developer will be required to pay
necessary per square foot fees to the Dublin Unified School District to off-set any indirect
impacts that could result from secondary inducement of future employees moving into the
District to work within the office complex.
Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? LS. Approval of the project and
construction of the follow-on development project would incrementally increase the long-
term maintenance demand for roads and other public facilities. However, such additional
maintenance demands will be offset by additional City fees and property tax revenues
accruing to the City of Dublin. Less-than-significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are needed.
Solid waste generation ? LS. Approval of the project and construction of the office complex
would incrementally increase generation of solid waste. The Eastern Dublin EIR requires
adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.4/37.0-40.0. These measures require the preparation of
a solid waste management plan and assurances that adequate solid waste landfill capacity
exists prior to approval of individual development projects.
XIV. Recreation
Environmental Setting
The project site is currently vacant and contains no parks or other recreational amenities.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks? NI. The
proposed General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan Amendment would not result in new
residences being constructed within the Eastern Dublin area Therefore, no impact would
result to neighborhood or regional park facilities.
b)
Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of recreational
facilities? NI. The proposed project does not include residential development, so there
would be no impact on recreational facilities or require the construction of new recreational
facilities.
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-O62
Page 40
March 2000
XV. Transportation/Traffic
[This section is based on a traffic analysis for the project prepared by TJKM Associates,
Transportation Consultants, March, 2000. The full text of the traffic analysis is on file in the City
of Dublin Public Works Department.]
Environmental Setting
Existing Transportation Network
The project site is served by a number of regional freeways and sub-regional arterial and
collector roadways, including:
Interstate 580, an eight-lane east-west freeway that connects Dublin with local cities such
as Livermore and Tracy to the east and Oakland, San Francisco and other cities to the
west. In the vicinity of the project. Interstate 580 carries between 169,000 and 187,000
vehicles per day. Interchanges near the project site include Dougherty/Hopyard Road,
Hacienda Drive, Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road and Fallon Road/E1 Charro Road.
Dougherty Road is a two-lane rural road with its northern section located in Contra Costa
County. Dougherty Road has four lanes between the Alameda County/Contra Costa
County border and Dublin Boulevard and six lanes between Dublin Boulevard and 1-580.
South of 1-580, it continues with six lanes as Hopyard Road in Pleasanton. Average Daily
Traffic is approximately 43,500 south of Dublin Boulevard.
Dublin Boulevard is a major east-west arterial roadway in the City of Dublin. It contains
four lanes largely fronted by retail and commercial uses west of Dougherty Road.
Between Dougherty Road and Tassajara Road, Dublin Boulevard is a two-lane road with
an exception between Hacienda Drive and Tassajara Creek, where it is a four lane road.
Average Daily Traffic varies from approximately 29,300 vehicles east of San Ramon
Road to 5,300 vehicles west of Tassajara Road.
Hacienda Drive is an arterial designed to provide access to 1-580. It contains six lanes
south of 1-580 and four lanes north of 1-580, extending as far noah as Dublin Boulevard.
As part of the Santa Rita Business Center, Hacienda Drive has been extended northward
to Gleason Drive as a three-lane roadway. Between 1-580 and Dublin. the existing vehicle
count is approximately 11,300.
Arnold Road is a north-south two-lane road parallel to and west of Hacienda Drive. It
currently connects Gleason Drive and existing Dublin Boulevard (future Central
Parkway). This road is being extended southward to Dublin Boulevard (ultimate
alignment) The existing average daily traffic flow on Arnold Drive is approximately
3,500 vehicles per day.
Gleason Drive is an east-west two-lane road parallel to and north of Dublin Boulevard. It
serves the Santa Rita Rehabilitation Center, Federal Correctional Institute and existing
developments along Gleason Drive. Gleason Drive connects Tassajara Road with Arnold
Road and carries between 5,100 vehicles per day (west of Tassajara Road) to
approximately 1,000 vehicles per day (west of Hacienda Drive). Portions of Gleason
Drive are being widened to four lanes.
City of Dublin Page 41
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000
PA #99-062
Tassajara Road is a two-lane rural road connecting Santa Rita Road at 1-580 to the south
and continues north to the Town of Danville. North of Contra Costa County line, it is
named Cameo Tassajara and is used primarily for local traffic in the Tassajara Valley,
with some through traffic. The average dally traffic volume on Tassajara Road is
approximately 16,800 vehicles south of Dublin Boulevard, 9,900 vehicles per day
between Dublin Boulevard and Gleason Drive and 7,500 vehicles per day north of
Gleason Drive. This road is currently being widened to four lanes from 1-580 to North
Dublin Ranch Boulevard.
Santa Rita Road is a six-lane divided urban arterial roadway from the 1-580 interchange
south to Valley Boulevard. It serves the east side of Pleasanton', including the Hacienda
Business Park and provides access to downtown Pleasanton.
Existing Intersection Operations
The traffic analysis prepared by TJKM found that existing intersections near the project site
currently operate at acceptable levels of service, defined by the City of Dublin as Level of
Service "D" or better. This analysis included counts of existing traffic at major intersections near
the proposed project as well as intersections throughout the Eastern Dublin area.
Future Baseline Conditions
To implement the transportation and circulation aspects of the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan/General Plan, the City of Dublin has undertaken a comprehensive program of transportation
improvements in the community. The purpose of this program is to accommodate anticipated
traffic from the Eastern Dublin area. Overall, the program includes upgrades to 1-580 freeway
intersections, construction of new roads and improvements to existing roads. The program is
primarily funded by fees levied on new development in eastern Dublin.
A summary of major components of the Transportation Improvement Program adopted by the
City is as follows. A full description of improvements is contained in the traffic analysis.
· Hacienda Drive extension
· Tassajara Road widening
· Dublin Boulevard widening
· Central Parkway extension
Future Baseline Intersection Operations
The traffic impact analysis for this proposed project also analyzed the future baseline intersection
operations with existing traffic, traffic from approved but not yet built or occupied development
and traffic from other pending developments in the area. The traffic analysis included various
mitigation measures which would be the responsibility of these other developments and which
would be consxstent with the City's Traffic Improvement Program, described above. With this
future development in the eastern Dublin area and appropriate traffic improvements, the traffic
analysis found that the operation of all study intersections could be maintained at LOS "D" or
better.
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 42
March 2000
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial to existing traffic load and street capacity?
LS/M. The traffic analysis, which analyzed the impacts of the Specific Plan/General Plan
amendment and development of the Sybase office development, concludes that
implementation of the proposed project would have a potentially significant impact with
regard to anticipated traffic at project entrance driveways and other nearby intersections.
Signal warrants for the intersection of Central Parkway/Hibernia Drive would be met to
require the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection. The intersections of Arnold
Road/Central Parkway and Hacienda Drive/Gleason Drive will require signalization to
maintain safe traffic flow at these intersections due to increased peak hour turning volumes
generated by the proposed project. Proposed project entrance intersections on Dublin
Boulevard and on Central Parkway will require signalization to allow for safe left turn
movements to and from the site.
However with the mitigation measure listed below, impacts to local streets and nearby
intersections would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with regard to traffic and
transportation.
With the traffic improvements being installed in the Eastern Dublin area and mitigation
measures associated with future approved and pending developments, all study
intersections near the Sybase site would operate at satisfactory LOS "D" or better
conditions.
Mitigation Measure 6: The project developer shall install traffic signals at the
following intersections:
Central Parkway/Hibernia Drive
Arnold Road/Central Parkway
Hacienda Drive/Gleason Drive
Dublin Boulevard/project entrance.
Central Parkway/project entrance
b)
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a LOS standard established by the County
CMA for designated roads)? NI. Based on the information contained in the TJKM traffic
analysis, all nearby intersections can be mitigated to Level of Service D or better, which
exceeds the minimum Level of Service E established by the Alameda County Congestion
Management Agency. Impacts to CMA-designated facilities would therefore be less-than:
significant.
c)
Change in a change of air traffic patterns? NI. The proposed project would have no impact
on air traffic patterns, since it involves office development.
d)
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use? LS/M.
Approval of the proposed Amendment and future construction under the auspices of the
amended Specific Plan/General Plan would add new driveways, sidewalks and other
vehicular and pedestrian travel ways where none currently exist. Increases in safety
incidents would therefore occur due to the volume of vehicles and pedestrians using nearby
roads and other circulation features. The TJKM traffic analysis identified potential on-site
traffic and circulation issues which, unless modified, would be potentially significant. The
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 43
March 2000
e)
g)
following mitigation is therefore proposed to reduced on-site traffic safety issues to'a less-
than-significant level:
Mitigation Measure 7: The following on-site transportation design changes Shall
be incorporated into the project:
The site plan should be redesigned to provide a clear distance of 30 feet
between street intersections and internal intersections or parking stalls on
the site
The site plan should provide a minimum clear distance of 30 feet between
any internal intersections and parking stall son the site.
Islands or planters within parking areas shall be a minimum of 30 feet in
length
"Stop" signs should be installed at the Hacienda Drive and Dublin
Boulevard access points for vehicles exiting the site at these locations.
Result in inadequate emergency access? LS. The current need for emergency access is low,
since there are no current residents or visitors on the site. Construction of the proposed
office complex on the site would increase the need for emergency services and evacuation
in the event of an emergency. If adequate access is not provided, .excessive lengths of time
would be needed for emergency vehicles to serve new development. Since the proposed
site development plan indicates that driveways meeting City design requirements would be
provided to Central Parkway, Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive, potential impacts
relating to inadequate emergency access would be less-than-significant.
Inadequate parking capacity? LS/M. Parking for the proposed office complex would not
comply with the minimum number of on-site parking spaces required by City's parking
ordinance. Although bus stops are planned near the site to facilitate non-vehicular
transportation modes there could still be a potentially significant impact with regard to
accommodating future site workers and visitors. The following mitigation measure is
therefore proposed to reduce potential parking impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure 8: Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the project
developer shall prepare and have approved by the Director of Community
Development a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan designed to
reduce the number of single occupancy vehicles using the project site. The TDM
Plan shall include the following types of items:
Designation, through signing and striping, of preferential parking near
buildings for carpoolers;
Use of a shuttle bus service to and from nearby BART stations;
Appointment of a rideshare coordinator who shall promote use of alternative
transit modes;
Use of flex time and telecommuting to reduce peak parking demand.
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? NI. The proposed Sybase development
would include on-site bicycle parking as 'well as connections between proposed buildings
and nearby streets. No impacts to pedestrian or bicycle access is therefore anticipated.
City of Dublin Page 44
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters March 2000
PA #99-062
XVI. Utilities and Service Systems
Environmental Setting
The project site is served by the following service providers:
Sewage treatment and local water supply: Dublin San Ramon Services District and
Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Zone 7.
Regional water supply and distribution: Alameda County Flood Control and Water
Conservation Di strict, Zone 7.
Storm drainage: City of Dublin/Alameda County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District, Zone 7.
Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB ? NI. The regional wastewater
treatment plant is currently operating in compliance with local, state and federal water
quality standards. The addition of wastewater flows from the project would not cause the
plant to exceed such standards. Mitigation measures 3.5/1.0 through 22.0 contained in the
eastern Dublin EIR deal with wastewater treatment collection, treatment and disposal.
Adherence to these mitigation measures will reduce potential wastewater impacts of the
project to a level of less-than-significance.
b)
Require new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities ?
LS. Existing water and sewer lines would need to be extended into the site from the west
Such extensions have been planned as part of the East Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan
and have been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Less-than-significant impacts would
therefore result. The project developer will also be required to conform with Mitigation
Measures 2.5/24.0 through 43.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR regarding water
service.
c)
Require new storm drainage facilities? LS. The project developer has indicated that new
on-site drainage facilities would be constructed as part of project construction. The City's
Public Works Department has indicated that the proposed drainage system is generally
acceptable and overall drainage from the site would be accommodated by existing or
planned local and regional drainage facilities, A less-than-significant impacts would
therefore result. The project developer will also be required to adhere to Mitigation
Measures 3.5/44.0 through 52.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR regarding drainage.
d)
Are sufficient water supplies available? LS. Approval of the proposed project and
implementation of new office space under the auspices of the Specific Plan/General Plan
Amendment would result in an increased demand for water for domestic and irrigation
purposes. This amount of increased water demand could be accommodated by DSRSD and
Zone 7 facilities and long-term supplies. Recycled water would be supplied to the site for
irrigation by DSRSD. The project developer would be required to provide any local
extensions and connections to nearby facilities. This conclusion is based on information
contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Less-than-significant impacts would therefore result.
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 45
March 2000
e)
e,f)
g)
Adequate wastewater capacity to serve the proposed project? LS. Approval of the proposed
Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment and construction of new offices space would
increase'the demand for wastewater treatment over present conditions. Presently, the site is
vacant and there is no demand for wastewater treatment service. Based on information
contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, DSRSD has indicated that the local wastewater
treatment plant has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project. Less-than-significant
impacts are therefore anticipated with regard to wastewater treatment.
Solid waste disposal? LS. Construction of proposed office uses under the auspices of an
approved Specific Plan Amendment/General Plan Amendment would incrementally
increase generation of solid waste. Over the long term, the amount of solid waste reaching
landfill would decrease as statewide regulations mandating increased recycling take effect.
Information contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR indicates that the solid waste hauler can
accommodate this project. Less-than-significant impacts are therefore anticipated with
regard to solid waste disposal. The project developer must also adhere to Mitigation
Measures 3.4/37.0 through 40.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR regarding solid waste
disposal.
Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste ? NI.
The City of Dublin and the solid waste hauler would ensure that developers of individual
projects constructed under the auspices of an amended Specific Plan and General Plan
would adhere to federal, state and local solid waste regulations.
XV. Mandatory Findings of Significance
a)
Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality .of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the
number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No. The
preceding analysis indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse
impact on overall environmental quality, including biological resources or cultural
resources with the implementation of mitigation measures recommended in the Initial
Study.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). No, although incremental
increases in certain areas can be expected as a result of constructing this project, including
additional traffic, air emissions, light and glare, short term noise emissions, the project site
lies within an area with an approved specific plan.
c)
Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly? No. No such impacts have been discovered in
the course of preparing this Initial Study.
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 46
March 2000
Initial Study Preparer
Jerry Haag, Urban Planner
Agencies and Organizations Consulted
The following agencies and organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial Study:
City of Dublin
Eddie Peabody Jr., AICP, Community Development Director
Kevin Van Katwyk, Senior Civil Engineer
Ray Kuzbari, Traffic Engineer
Kathleen "Kit" Faubion, Assistant City Attorney
Rose Macian, Dublin Police Department
Ed Laudini. Alameda County Fire Department
Dublin San Ramon Services District
Bruce Webb
References
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan Environmental Impact Report, Wallace
Roberts and Todd, 1994.
Geotechnical Investigation Report, Proposed Sybase Corporate Headquarters,
Kleinfelder, 2000
Traffic Study for the Proposed Sybase Headquarters, TJKM Associates, 2000.
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 47
March 2000
City of Dublin
Initial Study/Sybase Headquarters
PA #99-062
Page 48
March 2000
Sybase Corporate Headquarters
PA 99-062
Response to Mitigated Negative
Declaration Comments
May 2000
Introduction
This report compiles all letters received by the City of Dublin during the 30-day Mitigated
Negative Declaration public review period and includes responses to each of the
comments.
Summary of Comment Letters
Comment letters were received by the City of Dublin from the following agencies and
organizations.
· Comment Letter 1: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San
Francisco Bay Region
· Comment Letter 2: California Department of Transportation
Responses to Comments
This is a summary of each of the comments and the response of the City of Dublin. Each
letter has been reviewed and divided into smaller comments as noted by annotations in
the margin in each of the letters. Each comment is then summarized and responded to
below. The full text of each letter with annotations follows this section. Since many of
the comments relate to potential biological impacts of the projects, a master response
has been formulated for this topic.
Letter
1: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region
Comment 1.1: Mitigation Measure 5, p. 35, The Board does not believe the
language of the mitigation measure does not appear to be adequate to ensure
that expected stormwater runoff impacts can be mitigated to a less than
significant level. The project site plan, as contained in the Initial Study, does not
appear to provide stormwater quality design measures or treatment controls.
Approval of the project, as designed, would place the City of Dublin in violation
of its NPDES municipal stormwater permit.
Response: Based upon receipt of the Board's comment letter, the applicant has redesigned
the grading and landscaping plan components of the Sybase project to include the
following BMPs.
1)
Biofiltration swales have been added where possible along the perimeter of the
parking lot, resulting in approximately 45% of the parking lot to be served by
biofilters.
City of Dublin
Sybase Corporate Headquarters
Response to Comments
Page 2
June 2000
2)
Fossil filters with small sediment traps would be used in locations where it is not
possible to use biofiItration swales due to grade restrictions and the need to meet
City parking requirements. A regular maintenance program for filters and traps
will be included in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for the project.
3) A large landscaped area is proposed to be located south of the building complex,
which would reduce the amount of impervious surface being created on the site.
4) The project developer intended to use drip irrigation systems to the fullest extent
possible to minimize erosion from traditional sprinkler heads
Comment 1.2: The statement included in Mitigation Measure 5 dealing with the
developer's responsibility to comply with the Statewide NPDES General Permit
for Discharge should be reworded. The following working is recommended.
"Specific development projects of 5 acres or more, or less than five acres if the
activity is part of a larger common plan of development, must obtain coverage of
their project under the Statewide NPDES General Permit for Dischargers of
Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity (permit). This coverage must
be obtained by filing a Notice f Intent (NOI) with the appropriate annual permit
fee (4250 for the City of Dublin) with the State Water Resources Control Board
prior to commencement of grading and subsequently complying with the terms
and conditions of the permit. The proposed project is five acres or larger and
therefore the project proponent must obtain coverage for it under the permit
prior to beginning grading."
Response: The revised wording suggested by the Board staff is hereby incorporated by
reference into the Sybase Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Letter 2: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
· Comment 2.1: Please forward a copy of the traffic impact analysis prepared by
TJKM Associates to Caltrans.
Response: A copy of the traffic impact analysis will be forwarded as requeSted.
City of Dublin
Sybase Corporate Headquarters
Response to Comments
Page 3
June 2000
Comment Letters
City of Dublin
Sybase Corporate Headquarters
Response to Comments
Page 4
June 2000
~'TATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION AND HOIJSING AGEN(;:Y
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P O BOX 2366O
OAKLAND, CA 946230660
Tet: (510) 286-4444
Fmc (510) 286-5513
TDD [510) 286-4454
April 13, 2000
Mr. Jerry Haag
Planning Department
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Mr. Haag:
APE 17 ZOO0
S'I TE CLEARINGHOUSE
Sybase Corporate Headquarters, PA ~99-062 - Mitigated Negative Declaration
ALA-580-18.82
File #ALA580626
Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environmental
review process for the above-referenced project. We have reviewed~ the Mitigated Negative Declaration
for the Sybase Corporate Headquarters, and have the following comments to offer.
At Caltrans we are primarily concerned with impacts to the State Highway system, specifically Interstate
580 (1-580) in your community. The Environmental Checklist points to the possibility that the project will
generate substantial additional vehicular movement. To adequately review this project's impacts, and to
verify the conclusions reached in the Initial Study, we would like to request a copy of the traffic analysis
by TJKM Associates that would include trip generation rates, distribution percentages, and assignment
volumes-.-.. Information in the traffic analysis should be shown on traffic diagrams that depict accurate
circulation Patterns and represent both local streets and all State ramps and intersections. AM and PM
pekk hour volumes and Average Daily Traffic (Al)T) for weekdays and weekends would also be
important, for both existing and projected traffic conditions.
Please forward a copy of the traffic analysis to:
Paul Svedersky
Office of Transportation Planning B
Caltrans, District 4
P.O. Box 23660
Oakland, CA 94623-0660
Should you require further information or have any questions regarding this letter, please call Paul
,)
Svedersk-y of my staff at (510) 62_-16,9.
Sincerely,
HARRY Y. YAHATA
District Director
District Branch Chief
IGR/CEQA
c: Katie Shulte, State Clearinghouse
'~rmston H. Hickox
ge~reta~3'jbr
vironmental
Protection
California R-"gional Water Quality Control Board
San Francisco Bay Region
Interact Address: http://www.swrcb.ea.gov
1515 Clay S~'eet, Suite 1400, Oakland, California 94612
Phone (510) 622-2300 · FAX {510) 622-2460
Il&
Date:
File Nos. 1538.09, 2198.09 (KILL)
Mr. Jerry Haag
City of Dubtin
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
Re: PA #99-062, Sybase Corporate Headquarters, CiD, of Dublin, Alameda Count3.', Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
SCtt #1991103064
Dear Mr. Haag:
The Board has recently received the above-referenced draft CEQA document for the Sybase
Corpo~te Headqum--ters projecf: Thank you for the oppormmry to review it.
As described in the documcmt, the project would construct a maximum of 420,000 square feet of
office space, approximately 1,200 spaces of parking, and associated inirasmmmre, landscaping, and other
uses on a 19 acre site. The project's landscaping would include a 'main landscape feature' of
approximately 1.4 acres in size (p.5). The site is located at the northwest corner of Hacienda Drive and
Dublin Boulevard. Some previous CEQA review of this site ',,,'as completed in 1994, as a part of the
adoption by the City of Dublin of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and G~eral Plan. The Eastern Dublin
Plan area includes th/s site, and is comprised of 3.302 acres of land east of the central portion of Dubtin
and north of Interstate 580.
[z~s proposed, the project wit1 have Pmenfiaiiy significant impacts to water quality and beneficial
uses of waters of the State. These imeacts will result from increases in re%an nmoffpollutants and
changes in storm water runoffvolume and timing associated with constructing the project and associated
imp~mMous surface on a pres~ntly madeveloped site: The Negative Declaration includes a mitigation
measure to address these pot~ntialty si_m~ificant impacts (/Vfifigafion Measure 5, p.35). Mitigation
Measure 5 states:
The project developer shall pre-pare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plar~ (SV, rPPP), tisring
Best Management Practices to reduce construction and post-construction actixfities to a less than
si_maificant level. Measures m%, include, but shall not be limited to revegetation of ~aded areas,
sik fencing and oth~ measures. The SW-PPP shall conform m standards adopted by the Re~onal
Water Quality Control Board and City of Dablin and shall be approved by both agencies (as
applicable) prior to issuance of_arading pe~ts.
California Environmental Protection Agency
Gm3' Daxis
Goveraor
Re¢,cJed Paper :
Mr. Jerry Haag
p.2
Sybase Corporate HeadquartersNegafive Declaration
SCH 1991103064
Specific development projects containing five acres or more are also required to obtain a Notice
of Intent from the State Water Resources Control Board prior to commencement of~ading.
The general language of the mitigation measure does not appear adequate to ensure mitigation of the
expzcted impacts, in particular because the measure does not provide additional guidance adequate to
assist the City or project proponent with complying with this m/tigar/on measure, and no other appropr/are
~m~idance relevant to this measure has been provided in the Negative Declaration.
Based on the projedt description and proposed si~e plan (p.l 0) inr. lud~.d -in ~,e Ncgafi";e
D~larafion, it appears that tlae project design will not adequately mitigate the project's .impacts to warer
quality, as it appears that no storm water quality design measures or treatment controls have bec-n included
in it. Further, it appears that approval of the project design, as it is presently proposed, will place the City
of Dublin in violation of its NPDES municipal storm water permit.
The City of Dublin is permi.tted under and complies with N'PDES permit CAS0029831, the
municinal storm water poma-fit and associated Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP), as a part of
approving and conditioning new and redevelopment projects. As of February 19, 1998, the SV~r/vlZP
includes the following requ/rc-~ments:
Agencies will require public and private development projects to include site ptmrming
and design techniques to prevent and n~inimize impacts to water quality. These may
include the following:
a. Minimize land disturbance.
b. Minimize impervious surfaces (e.g., roadway width), especially directly connected
impervious areas (DCi~.).
c. Use of clustering.
d. Preservation of' quality open space.
e. Maintain (and/or restore, if possible) r/parian areas and wetlands as project
amtm.ifies, establishing vegetation buffer zones to reduce runoff into waterways.
Each agency will require public and private, developmeni projects to include permanent
stormwater quality controls, as appropriate, if sufficient site planning measures are not
implemented or feasible.
As I have discussed in my annual review meetin~ with City staff over the last two years, no later
than February 19, 1998, the City should have be~ and should now be requiring both design measures and
permanent treatment controls in new and redevelopment projects, including the subject project.
At a minimum, to assist the City and project proponent with ensuring the project's comr~I/ance
with Mitigation Measure 5, and to assist the ~City with complying with its NPDES storm warer perm/t, we
California Environmental Protection Agency
Paper
Mr. Jerry Haag
p.3
Sybase Corporate Headquarters Negative Declaration
SCH 1991103064
recommend that the above performance standard be ,a~tten into the Negative Declaration as a part of
Mitigation Measure 5, br oth~-u-wise explicitly referenced as a part of that mitigation measure.
Add!tiona/Iy, the m/figation measure should require the project proponent to include in its SW'PPP a
description of operation and maintenance measures for its proposed post-construction storm wmer
management practices and of how that operation and maintenance will be funded. Ideally, the mitigation
measure would state the specific design measures and treatment controls that are proposed to be
incorporated into the project. As a note, as Board staff have discussed with City staff, the use of storm
drain inlet filters (e.g., Fossil Filters) as the sole means of meeting the above performance standard is not
acceptable, because it does not reflect the language in the performance standard, and because of the
limited ability of such ISiXers to remove flue range of pollutants fom~d in 'ai:t, zm,'-m'ao:,,~'~~ Wen r~'pical
operating conditions.
The Alameda Countywide Clean Water Pro,am has developed =m.fidance for recommended or
required treatment controls for new and redevelopment projects in general and especially for certa/n types
of projects (e.g., gas stations). The Re~onal Board has provided genera/g-a/dance in the Ap~l I994 Staff
Recommendations for New DeveIopment, and has also endorsed BASMAA's Start at the Source.
Additional guidance includes the BASM~_ £MP Fact Sheets, US EPA's Low Imioact Desigw
Develqvrnent Srratefes handbooks, and a variety ofplanning and des/Da iiterarure.
The project will result in changes to the volume and timing of storm water runoff from the s/re.
Such changes may resuk in increases in bed and bank instability, the loss 0fripar/an vegetation and
habitat, threats to existing structures, and changes in erosion and sedimentation in the creeks and arroyos
downstream of the project site. Additionally, such changes may contribute to impacts that cumulatively
cause such problcmas, as may be seen, for example, along portions of the .~u'royo de la La~mma, m which
this project drafl,-q. A(ifigafion for these impacts has not be~ infiluded in the Negative Declaration,
although it references a drainage plan for the Specific Plan area that was previously prepared and wk/ch
may address these potent/a//mr)acts.
The statement in Mitigation Measure 5 regarding compliance with the Statewide NPDES General
Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associate with Construction Activity should be reworded to make
clearer the project proponent's responsibilities. We would suggest the following wording:
Specific development projects 0ffive acres or more, or less than five acres if the actixfity is part
of a larger common plan of development, must obtain coverage of their project under the
Statewide NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associate with Consu'uction
Acfixfty (porn-mit). This coverage may be it)mined by filing a Notice of tntenl (NOI') and
appropriate annual p~mit fee ($250 in the City of Dublin) with the State Water Resources
Control Board (S~rRCB) prior to commencem~-nt of D-ading, and subsequ~tly compt55ng with
the terms and conditions of the permit. An NOI and copy of the permit are available at the
SWRCB's web page, ~n,vw.swrcb.ca. gov. The proposed project is five acres or larger, and
California Environmental Protection Agency
Mr. Jen3, Haag
p.4
Sybase Corporate Headquarters Negative Declaration
SCH 1991103064
therefore the project proponent must obtain coverage for it under the permit pr/or to be~nning
_marling.
To assist permittees to comply with the permit, the Board.and the San Francisco Estuary Project
have available several documents and videos, as described in the enclosed brochure.
l/'you have any questions, please contact me via email to k_hlr~.rb2.s'a~rcb.ca.~oy, or at (510) 622-
2380.
Sincerely,
Keith H. Lichten
Water Resource Control Eng/neer
Enclosure':' "Construct/on Site Planning and Management Resources" brochure
cc: Mr. Sa/ed A_m/nian
City of Dubtm
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA, 94568
Date BoWyer, RWQCB
California t~nvironmental Protection Agency
Re~.cled Paper
Sybase Headquarters Facility (PA 99-062)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
May 2000
Mitigation Measure
Implementing
Responsibility
Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Schedule
Mitigation Measure 1: Pole-mounted street
lights shall be equipped with cut-off lenses
and oriented down toward interior streets
to minimize unwanted light and glare spill
over. Building security lighting and other
lights shall be directed downward. All
exterior glass panels shall be of non-glare
manufacture.
Mitigation Measure 2 Not used.
Mitigation Measure 3: Not used
Dublin Public
Works
Department;
Dublin Plmming
Department
Dublin Public
Works
Department;
Dublin Planning
Department
Street
improvement
drawings (for
street lights);
plan checks for
individual
buildings prior
to issuance of
building permits
(building
lighting)
ATTACHMENT 7
Mitigation Measure
Implementing
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Verification
Mitigation Measure 4: The possibility that
undetected prehistoric archeological
resources might exist on the property must
be recognized and a contingency plan shall
be developed in conformity with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.5 to handle
discoveries during project construction. In
the event any prehistoric material is
discovered, work shall be halted in the
immediate vicinity of the site until a.
qualified archeologist inspects the
discovery, and, if necessary, implements
plans for further evaluative testing and/or
retrieval of endangered materials.
Project
developer
Dublin Planning
Department
During project
construction
Sybase Corporate Headquarters Facility
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 2
Mitigation Measure
Implementing
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Verification
Mitigation Measure 5: The project
developer shall prepare a Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), listing
Best Management Practices to reduce
construction and post-construction
activities to a less than significant level.
Measures may include, but shall not be
limited to revegetation of graded areas, silt
fencing and other measures. The SWPPP
shall conform to standards adopted by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board and
City of Dublin and shall be approved by
both agencies (as applicable) prior to
issuance of grading permits.
Mitigation Measure 6: The project
developer shall install traffic signals at the
following intersections:
· Central Parkway/Hibernia Drive
· Arnold Road/Central Parkway
· Hacienda Drive/Gleason Drive
° Dublin Boulevard/project entrance.
· Central Parkway/project entrance
Project
developer
Project
developer
Dublin Public
Works
Department
City of Dublin
Public Works
Department
Prior to issuance
of grading
permits
Prior to
occupancy of
first building
Sybase Corporate Headquarters Facility
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 3
Mitigation Measure
Implementing
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Mitigation Measure 7: The following on-
site transportation design changes shall be
incorporated into the project:
· The site plan should be redesigned to
provide a clear distance of 30 feet
between street intersections and
internal intersections or parking
stalls on the site
° The site plan should provide a
minimum clear distance of 30 feet
between any internal intersections
and parking stall son the site.
· Islands or planters within parking
areas shall be a minimum of 30 feet
in length
· "Stop" signs should be installed at
the Hacienda Drive and Dublin
Boulevard access points for vehicles
exiting the site at these locations.
Project
developer
City of Dublin
Public Works
and Planning
Departments
Prior to
approval of SDR
Sybase Corporate Headquarters Facility
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Verification
Page 4
Mitigation Measure
Implementing
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Verification
Mitigation Measure 8: Prior to issuance of
a Certificate of Occupancy, the project
developer shall prepare and have approved
by the Director of Community
Development a Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Plan designed to
reduce the number of single occupancy
vehicles using the project site. The TDM
Plan shall include the following types of
items:
Project
developer
City of Dublin
Planning
Department
Prior to
occupancy of
first building
Designation, through signing and
striping, of preferential parking near
buildings for carpoolers;
Use of a shuttle bus service to and
from nearby BART stations;
Appointment of a rideshare
coordinator who shall promote use
of alternative transit modes;
Use of flex time and telecommuting
to reduce peak parking demand.
Sybase Corporate Headquarters Facility
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 5
13
INDUSTRIAL/OFFICE
'24.6 AC.
14
INDUSTRIAL/OFFICE
Proposed SP/GPA area
12
· PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC
78.4 Ac.
11B
LOW/MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
~, ',.,. 63.0 AC.
2
q ~ -- --~"~ PARK
11A Il I J so.3 ^c.
MEDiUM/MEDiUM I I 10 I I
ELEMENTARY I J
HIGH DENSITY J J SCHOOL
RESIDENTIAL
14.7Ac. II Io.o^c. II
15.6 Ac,
9 8 4
CAMPUS MEDIUM HIGH MEDIUM HIGH-LOW MEDIUM DENSITY
OFFICE DENSITY DENSITY RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL
} 9.0 Ac. RESIDENIIAL 29.6 Ac. 31,3 Ac.
12.0 Ac.
NOTES
· All areas are in gross acres
3
GENERAL
16.9 AC.
D. LIB. LIN ,
'roposed S~'~a~e development area : --
-q i ......
J CAMPUS OFFICE GENERAL COMMERCIAL Il ' I J ~ ,~
47.7Ac. I 52.2Ac G I~ ~ ~ II , 5B
1/ .I COMMERCIAL I~ / ~: .I 34 3 AC
A -
TTACHME~ :~ ~ ~ PROPOSED
ALAMEDA COUNTY SURPLUS PROPERTY AUmOBIW
Planned Development Rezone/SDR area ~ ~,, DUBLIN, CAUFOaN~A