Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.2 Gateway Medical Ctr Attch 4-12 \"l1"b1$~ ORDINANCE NO. XX - 07 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE DUBLIN GATEWAY MEDICAL CENTER BUILDING 3 HOSPITAL AND GARAGE PROJECT LOCATED AT 4084 AND 4100 DUBLIN BOULEVARD APN 986-0016-021 & 986-0016-022 P A 06-026 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. RECITALS A. The Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage project (the "Project") is located within the boundaries of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan ("Specific Plan") in an area designated Campus Office on the General Plan Land Use Element Map and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Land Use Map with an allowance for General Commercial land uses pursuant to Planned Development Zoning. ' B. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Sections 15162 and 15164 provide that an addendum to a previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) may be prepared when a project requires a minor technical change to an EIR and there are no new significant environmental effects and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. - C. A public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement was held before the Planning Commission on April 24, 2007 and May 8, 2007, for which public notice was given as provided by law. D. The Planning Commission has made its recommendation to the City Council for approval of the Development Agreement. F. A public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement was held before the City Council on May 15,2007 and June 5, 2007 for which public notice was given as provided by law. G. The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission who considered the item at the April 24, 2007 and May 8, 2007 meetings, 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. 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, (e) the Eastern Dublin EIR, (d) the 1996 Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Santa Rita Property, (e) the CEQA Addendum (f) the Agenda Statement, and on the basis of the specific conclusions set forth below, the City Council finds and determines that: Page 1 of3 Attachment 4 l2"6 ~ lSt 1. The Project is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified and contained in the City's General Plan and in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan in that: (a) the General Plan and Specific Plan land use designations for the Project site are Campus Office with an allowance for General Commercial land uses pursuant to Planned Development Zoning and the proposed Project is a project consistent with those land uses; (b) the Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the fiscal policies of the General Plan and Specific Plan with respect to provision of infrastructure and public services; (c) the Project is consistent with the Stage 1 and 2 Planned Development Zoning Development Plan adopted for the Koll Dublin Corporate Center in 1998 by the City Council, as amended for the Project and approved by the City Council; and (d) the Triad Dublin Gateway L.P. Development Agreement includes provisions relating to vesting of development rights, and similar provisions set forth in the Specific Plan. 2. The Triad Dublin Gateway L.P. Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use districts in which the real property is located in that the Project approvals include Planned Development Rezone and amended Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review. 3. The Triad Dublin Gateway L.P. Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use policies in that the Project will implement land use guidelines set forth in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the General Plan which have planned for campus office and general commercial uses at this location. 4. The Triad Dublin Gateway L.P. Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare in that the Project will proceed in accordance with all the programs and policies of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. 5. The Triad Dublin Gateway L.P. Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values in that the Project will be consistent with the General Plan and with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Section 3. APPROVAL The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A and authorizes the Mayor to execute it. Section 4. RECORDATION Within ten (10) days after the Development Agreement is fully executed by all parties, the City Clerk shall submit the Agreement to the County Recorder for recordation. Section 5. EFFECTIVE DATE AND POSTING OF ORDINANCE This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. 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. Page 2 of3 12- ~dQ (fog PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this 5th day of June 2007 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk G:\PA#\2006\06-026 Dublin Gateway Bldg 3 Mod\Public Hearing Documents\CC\CC Ord DA_done.doc Page 3 of3 RECORDING REQUESTED BY: CITY OF DUBLIN When Recorded Mail To: City Clerk City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Fee waived per GC 27383 l~Dool~j Space above this line for Recorder's use DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLI N AND TRiAD DUBLIN GATEWAY, L.P. FOR THE DUBLIN GATEWAY MEDICAL CENTER PROJECT (HOSPITAL ALTERNATIVE) Exhibit A \olDbl~~ THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered in the City of Dublin on this 15th day of May, 2007, by and between the City of Dublin, a Municipal Corporation (hereafter "City"), and Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P., a California limited partnership (hereafter "Developer"), pursuant to the authority of SS 65864 et seq. of the California Government Code and Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter 8.56. RECITALS A. California Government Code SS 65864 et seq. and Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code (hereafter "Chapter 8.56") authorize the City to enter into an agreement for the development of real property with any person having a legal or equitable interest in such property in order to establish certain development rights in such property; and B. Developer owns fee title to four separate legal parcels of real property consisting of approximately 7.139 acres located in the City of Dublin, County of Alameda, State of California. These four parcels are sometimes referred to individually herein as Parcel 1, Parcel 2, Parcel 3 and Parcel 4, respectively. The property subject to this Agreement consists of Parcel 3 and Parcel 4, the size of which is 3.13 total acres and which is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property"). Parcel 1, Parcel 2, Parcel 3 and Parcel 4 are sometimes each individually referred to herein as a "Parcel" and collectively as the "Parcels"; and C. On February 28,2005, the City granted a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map for Tract 8524 for Dublin Gateway Medical Center (Community Development Director Resolution No. 05-01) and on January 25, 2005, the City granted a Conditional Use Permit (Planning Commission Resolution No.05-06) and Site Development Review (Planning Commission Resolution No.05-06) for the development of the Parcels (these approvals are hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Original Approvals"). Under these Original Approvals, the original plan was to develop the Parcels in two phases, with Phase I consisting of two medical/professional office buildings totaling approximately 120,000 square feet, and Phase II consisting of a third approximately 58,000 square-foot medical/professional office building of three stories and a 427-space, 4-level parking structure. Building 1 on Parcel 1 is approximately 65,295 square feet, Building 2 on Parcel 2 is approximately 57,786 square feet and Building 3 on Parcel 3 is approximately 58,000 square feet. Phase I and Phase II of the project, as configured under the Original Approvals, are depicted on the Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit C. The plan proposed by the Original Approvals is commonly referred to as the "Dublin Gateway Medical Center"; and D. Developer has completed construction of Phase I contemplated under the Original Approvals. Developer now desires to provide for an alternate Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement Page 2 of 16 for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project June 5, 2007 CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC \3l~ I$Z Phase II development plan, which will provide the Developer with the flexibility to develop either the original Phase II plan, as described in Recital C (the "Original Plan") or the alternate Phase II development plan (the "Alternate Plan"). The Alternate Plan consists of a six-story, approximately 168,000 square-foot, 100- bed hospital building and a five-level parking structure, of which one level will be located below-ground. The Site Plan for the Alternate Plan, which also depicts Phase I of the Project, is attached hereto as Exhibit D. Developer has applied for, and City has approved or is processing various land use approvals in connection with the Alternate Plan, including a Conditional Use Permit (City Council Resolution No. _), a Site Development Review (City Council Resolution No._), and an amended Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan (Planning Commission Resolution No._), (collectively, together with any approvals or permits now or hereafter issued with respect to the Project, the "Alternate Approvals"). Any reference in the remainder of this Agreement to the "Project" or to the "Hospital" shall mean the development contemplated in the Alternate Plan that was approved by the Alternate Approvals. In addition, any reference in this Agreement to the Project shall mean and include the Property, and any reference in this Agreement to the Property shall mean and include the Project; and E. City desires the timely, efficient, orderly and proper development of the Project; and F. The Property is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment area. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan requires Developer to enter into this development agreement for the development of the Project contemplated in the Alternate Approvals, and City has agreed to extend the term of the Agreement beyond the standard five-year term that the City offers for development agreements required by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan in exchange for the Developer's making a community benefit payment to the City, as set forth in Exhibit B. A previous development agreement satisfies the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan's development agreement requirement as to the Original Approvals. The City Council has found that, among other things, this Agreement, which applies to the Alternate Approvals, is consistent with the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and has been reviewed and evaluated in accordance with Chapter 8.56; and G. The Project is located in the Dublin General Plan Eastern Extended Planning Area and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, for which a Program EIR was certified pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (SCH No. 91-103064, Resolution 53-93); the City also approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH No. 1996082092) for the Santa Rita Specific Plan Amendment, of which the Project is a part (collectively, "CEQA Compliance Documentation"). The City prepared an Initial Study for the Project to determine Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 2 of 16 June 5, 2007 J~~~ {~S whether supplemental environmental impacts would occur as a result of the project beyond or different from those already addressed in the CEQA Compliance Documentation, and concluded that it did not. Thus, an Addendum has been prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 (City Council Resolution No._). H. City and Developer have reached agreement, and desire to express herein a development agreement that will facilitate development of the Alternate Plan subject to conditions set forth herein; and I. On ,2007, the City Council of the City of Dublin adopted Ordinance No. _ -_approving this Agreement. The Ordinance took effect on , 2007 ("the Approval Date"). NOW, THEREFORE, with reference to the foregoing recitals and in consideration of the mutual promises, obligations and covenants contained herein, City and Developer agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Description of Property. The Property that is the subject of this Agreement is described in Exhibit A attached hereto. 2. Interest of Developer. The Developer has a legal or equitable interest in the Property in that it owns or holds a right to purchase the Property. 3. Relationship of City and Developer. It is understood that this Agreement is a contract that has been negotiated and voluntarily entered into by City and Developer, and that the Developer is not an agent of City. The City and Developer hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them. Nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making the City and Developer joint venturers or partners. 4. Effective Date and Term. 4.1. Effective Date. The effective date of this Agreement shall be the date ("the Effective Date") upon which this Agreement is signed by the City. Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 3 of 16 June 5, 2007 l~Ll~lS~ 4.2. Term. The "Term" of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and extend ten (10) years thereafter, unless said Term is otherwise terminated or modified by circumstances set forth in this Agreement. 5. Use of the Property. 5.1. Rioht to Develop. Developer shall have the vested right to develop and use the Project on the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Alternate 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 and conditions of development applicable to the Property, shall be those set forth in this Agreement, the Alternate Approvals and any amendments to this Agreement or the Alternate Approvals. 5.3. Additional Conditions. Provisions for the following ("Additional Conditions") are set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 5.3.1. Subsequent Discretionary Approvals. Conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions. (These conditions do not affect Developer's responsibility to obtain all other land use approvals required by the ordinances of the City of Dublin to be obtained from other regulatory agencies.) Currently, no future discretionary approvals (beyond the Alternate Approvals) are needed from City to develop the Project. None 5.3.2. Mitioation Conditions. Additional or modified conditions agreed upon by the parties in order to eliminate or mitigate adverse environmental impacts of the Project or otherwise relating to development of the Project. See Exhibit B 5.3.3. Phasino, Timino. 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. Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 4 of 16 June 5, 2007 '~6 'b \"& See Exhibit B 5.3.4. FinancinQ Plan. Financial plans which identify necessary capital improvements such as streets and utilities and sources of funding. See Exhibit B 5.3.5. Fees. Dedications. Terms relating to payment of fees or dedication of property. See Exhibit B 5.3.6. Reimbursement. Terms relating to subsequent reimbursement over time for financing of necessary public facilities. See Exh i bit B 5.3.7. Miscellaneous. Miscellaneous terms. See Exhibit B 6. Applicable Rules. Requlations and Official Policies. 6.1. Rules re Permitted Uses. For the Term of this Agreement, the City's ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted uses of the Property, governing density and intensity of use of the Property and the maximum height, bulk and size of proposed buildings shall be those in force and effect on the effective date of this Agreement. 6.2. Rules re Desiqn and Construction. Unless otherwise expressly provided in paragraph 5 of this Agreement, the ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the Project shall be those in force and effect at the time of the applicable discretionary approval, whether the date of that approval is prior to or after the effective date of this Agreement. Currently, no future discretionary approvals (beyond the Alternate Approvals) are needed from City to develop the Project. Ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to public improvements to be constructed by Developer shall be those in force and effect at the time of the applicable discretionary approval, whether that date of approval is prior to or after the date of this Agreement. 6.3. Uniform Codes Applicable. Unless expressly provided in paragraph 5 of this Agreement, the Project shall be constructed in accordance Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 5 of 16 June 5, 2007 \~~OOl~& with the provisions of the Uniform Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical and Fire Codes and Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, relating to Building Standards, in effect at the time of approval of the appropriate building, grading, or other construction permits for the Project. 7. Subsequently Enacted Rules and ReQulations. 7.1. New Rules and ReQulations. 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 Agreement and which are not in conflict with those applicable to the Property as set forth in this Agreement if: (a) the application of such new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies would not prevent, impose a substantial financial burden on, or materially delay development of the Property as contemplated by this Agreement and the Alternate Approvals, and (b) if such ordinances, resolutions, 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 Aoolicable. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in the event an ordinance, resolution or other measure is enacted, whether by action of City, by initiative, referendum, or otherwise, that imposes a building moratorium, a limit on the rate of development or a voter- approval requirement which affects the Project on all or any part of the Property, such ordinance, resolution or other measure shall not apply to the Project, the Property, this Agreement or the Alternate Approvals, unless the building moratorium is imposed as part of a declaration of a local emergency or state of emergency as defined in Government Code S 8558. 8. Subsequently Enacted or Revised Fees, Assessments and Taxes. 8.1. Fees, Exactions. Dedications. City and Developer agree that the fees payable and exactions required in connection with the development of the Project for purposes of mitigating environmental and other impacts of the Project, providing infrastructure for the Project and complying with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan shall be those set forth in the Alternate Approvals and in this Agreement (including Exhibit B). The City shall not impose or require payment of any other fees, dedications of land, or construction of any public improvement or Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 6 of 16 June 5, 2007 l~lDb li'~ facilities, shall not increase or accelerate existing fees, dedications of land or construction of public improvements, or impose other exactions in connection with the Alternate Approvals or any subsequent discretionary approval for the Property, except as set forth in the Alternate Approvals and this Agreement (including Exhibit B, subparagraph 5.3.5). 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 only; and (3) the application of such fees would not prevent, impose a substantial financial burden on, or materially delay development in accordance with this Agreement. Developer has no vested right against such revised application, processing and inspection fees, but Developer does not waive its right to challenge the legality of any such application, processing and/or inspection fees under the controlling law then in place. 8.3. New Taxes. Any subsequently enacted city-wide taxes shall apply to the Project provided that: (1) the application of such taxes to the Property is prospective; and (2) the application of such taxes would not prevent, impose a substantial financial burden on, or materially delay development in accordance with this Agreement. Developer has no vested right against such new taxes, but Developer does not waive its right to challenge the legality of any such taxes under the controlling law then in place. 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, City may, only after providing reasonable notice to Developer (30 days minimum) of the assessment, fee or charge, 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 effective date of this Agreement prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement or require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by the City, the parties shall meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 7 of 16 June 5, 2007 t~~Ub l ~g modify this Agreement to comply with such federal or state law or regulation. Any such amendment or suspension of the Agreement shall be approved by the City Council in accordance with Chapter 8.56. 9.2. Amendment by Mutual Consent. 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 subparagraph 9.2, any amendments to this Agreement which do not relate to (a) the Term of the Agreement as provided in subparagraph 4.2; (b) the permitted uses of the Property as provided in subparagraph 5.2; (c) provisions for "significant" reservation or dedication of land as provided in Exhibit B; (d) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent discretionary actions; (e) the density or intensity of use of the Project; (f) the maximum height or size of proposed buildings; or (g) monetary contributions by Developer as provided in this Agreement, shall not, except to the extent otherwise required by law, require notice or public hearing before either the Planning Commission or the City Council before the parties may execute an amendment hereto. City's Public Works Director shall determine whether a reservation or dedication is "significant" . 9.4. Cancellation by Mutual Consent. 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 subparagraph 5.3 and Exhibit B of this Agreement prior to the date of cancellation shall be retained by City. 10. Term of Alternate Approvals. . Notwithstanding Dublin Municipal Code section 8.96.020.D, the term of all of the Alternate Approvals shall be extended to and until the end of the Term of this Agreement. 11. Annual Review. 11.1. Review Date. The annual review date for this Agreement shall be between July 15 and August 15, 2008 and each July 15 to August 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 Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 8 of 16 June 5, 2007 1 :I1't t ~ ~ 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 Agreement. The burden of proof by substantial evidence of compliance is upon the Developer. 11.3. Staff Reports. To the extent practical, City shall deposit in the mail and fax to Developer a copy of all staff reports, and related exhibits concerning contract performance at least five (5) days prior to any annual review. 11.4. Costs. 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. 12.1. Other Remedies Available. Upon the occurrence of an event of default, the parties may pursue all other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in City's regulations governing development agreements, expressly including the remedy of specific performance of this Agreement. 12.2. Notice and Cure. Upon the occurrence of an event of default by either 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 within such thirty (30) day period and diligently pursues such cure to completion. Failure to give notice shall not constitute a waiver of any default. 12.3. No Damaqes Aqainst City. In no event shall damages be awarded against City upon an event of default or upon termination of this Agreement. 13. Estoppel Certificate. Either party may, at any time, and from time to time, request written notice from the other party requesting such party to certify in writing that, (a) this Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the parties, (b) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments, and (c) to the knowledge of the certifying party the requesting party is not in default in the performance of its Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 9 of 16 June 5, 2007 I LfD Db r~3 obligations under this Agreement, or if in default, to describe therein the nature and amount of any such defaults. A party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate within thirty (30) days following the receipt thereof, or such longer period as may reasonably be agreed to by the parties. City Manager of City shall be authorized to execute any certificate requested by Developer. Should the party receiving the request not execute and return such certificate within the applicable period, this shall not be deemed to be a default, provided that such party shall be deemed to have certified that the statements in clauses (a) through (c) of this paragraph are true, and any party may rely on such deemed certification. 14. Mortqaqee Protection: Certain Riqhts of Cure. 14.1. Mortqaqee 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 of trust or mortgage ("Mortgage"). Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach hereof shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, but all the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and effective against any person or entity, including any deed of trust beneficiary or mortgagee ("Mortgagee") who acquires title to the Property, or any portion thereof, by foreclosure, trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise. 14.2. Mortqaqee Not Obliqated. Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraph 14.1 above, no Mortgagee shall have any obligation or duty under this Agreement, before or after foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, to construct or complete the construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction or completion, or to pay, perform or provide any fee, dedication, improvements or other exaction or imposition; provided, however, that a Mortgagee shall not be entitled to devote the Property to any uses or to construct any improvements thereon other than those uses or improvements provided for or authorized by the Alternate Approvals or by this Agreement. 14.3. Notice of Default to Mortqaqee and Extension of Riqht to Cure. If City receives notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given Developer hereunder and specifying the address for service thereof, then City shall deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with service thereon to Developer, any notice given to Developer with respect to any claim by City that Developer has committed an event of default. Each Mortgagee shall have the right during the same period available to Developer to cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy, the event of default claimed set forth in the City's notice. City, through its City Manager, may extend the thirty-day cure period Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 10 of 16 June 5, 2007 ltfl~ (~! provided in subparagraph 12.2 for not more than an additional sixty (60) days upon request of Developer or a Mortgagee. 15. Severability. The unenforceability, invalidity or illegality of any provisions, covenant, condition or Term of this Agreement shall not render the other provisions unenforceable, invalid or illegal. 16. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If City or Developer initiates any action at law or in equity to enforce or interpret the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and costs in addition to any other relief to which it may otherwise be entitled. If any person or entity not a party to this Agreement initiates an action at law or in equity to challenge the validity of any provision of this Agreement or the Alternate Approvals, the parties shall cooperate in defending such action. Developer shall bear its own costs of defense as a real party in interest in any such action, and shall reimburse City for all reasonable court costs and attorneys' fees expended by City in defense of any such action or other proceeding. 17. Transfers and Assiqnments. 17.1 Developer's Riqht to Assiqn. All of Developer's rights, interests and obligations hereunder may be transferred, sold or assigned in conjunction with the transfer, sale, or assignment of the Property subject hereto, or any portion thereof, at any time during the Term of this Agreement, provided that no transfer, sale or assignment of Developer's rights, interests and obligations hereunder shall occur without the prior written notice to City and approval by the City Manager of City, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. The City Manager shall consider and decide the matter within ten (10) working days after Developer's notice is given to City and receipt by City Manager of all necessary documents, certifications and other information required by City Manager to decide the matter. In considering the request, the City Manager shall base the decision upon the proposed assignee's reputation, experience, financial resources and access to credit and capability to successfully carry out the development of the Property to completion. The City Manager's approval shall be for the purposes of: (a) providing notice to City; (b) assuring that all obligations of Developer are fully allocated as between Developer and the proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee; and (c) assuring City that the proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee is capable of performing Developer's obligations hereunder not withheld by Developer pursuant to Paragraph 17.3. Notwithstanding the foregoing, provided notice is given as Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 11 of 16 June 5, 2007 l L.f- 2. Db l~~ specified in Paragraph 23, no City approval shall be required for any transfer, sale, or assignment of this Agreement to: (1) any entity which either (i) is an affiliate or subsidiary of Developer or (ii) results from the merger of Developer or its parent or is the purchaser of all, or substantially all, of the assets of Developer or its parent; (2) any Mortgagee; or (3) any transferee of a Mortgagee. 17.2 Release Upon Transfer. Upon the transfer, sale, or assignment of all of Developer's rights, interests and obligations hereunder pursuant to Paragraph 17.1 of this Agreement, Developer shall be released from the obligations under this Agreement, with respect to the Property transferred, sold, or assigned, arising subsequent to the date of City Manager approval of such transfer, sale, or assignment; provided, however, that if any transferee, purchaser, or assignee approved by the City Manager expressly assumes all of the rights, interests and obligations of Developer under this Agreement, Developer shall be released with respect to all such rights, interests and assumed obligations. In any event, the transferee, purchaser, or assignee shall be subject to all the provisions hereof and shall provide all necessary documents, certifications and other necessary information prior to City Manager approval. 17.3 Developer's Riqht to Retain Specified Riqhts or Obliqations. Notwithstanding Paragraphs 17.1 and 17.2 and Paragraph 18, Developer may withhold from a sale, transfer or assignment of this Agreement certain rights, interests and/or obligations which Developer shall retain, provided that Developer specifies such rights, interests and/or obligations in a written document to be appended to this Agreement and recorded with the Alameda County Recorder prior to the sale, transfer or assignment of the Property. Developer's purchaser, transferee or assignee shall then have no interest or obligations for such rights, interests and obligations and this Agreement shall remain applicable to Developer with respect to such retained rights, interests and/or obligations. 18. Aqreement Runs with the Land. All of the provisions, rights, terms, covenants, and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assignees, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Property, or any portion thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes 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 Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 12 of 16 June 5, 2007 \ 4?>db l1~ a burden upon such properties, (b) runs with such properties, and (c) is binding upon each party and each successive owner during its ownership of such properties or any portion thereof, and shall be a benefit to and a burden upon each party and its property hereunder and each other person succeeding to an interest in such properties. Developer may assign its benefits and burdens under this Agreement, subject to the provisions set forth above in paragraph 16 of this Agreement. 19. Bankruptcy. The obligations of this Agreement shall not be dischargeable in bankruptcy. 20. Indemnification. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, and its elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs) and liability for any personal injury or property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or inactions by the Developer, or any actions or inactions of Developer's contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in 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 shall cooperate with Developer, shall appear in such action and shall not unreasonably withhold approval of a settlement otherwise acceptable to Developer. 21. Insurance. 21.1. Public Liability and Property DamaQe Insurance. During construction of the Project, 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). 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. During construction, Developer shall maintain Worker's Compensation insurance for all persons employed by Developer for work at the Project site. Developer shall require each contractor Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 13 of 16 June 5, 2007 I '11..( "b l ~ Z and subcontractor similarly to provide Worker's Compensation insurance for its respective employees. Developer shall indemnify the City for any damage resulting from Developer's failure to maintain any such insurance. 21.3. Evidence of Insurance. Prior to City Council approval of this Agreement, Developer shall furnish City satisfactory evidence of the insurance required in subparagraphs 20.1 and 20.2 and evidence that the carrier is required to give the City at least fifteen days prior written notice of the cancellation or reduction in coverage of a policy. The insurance shall extend to the City, its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees and representatives and to Developer performing work on the Project. 22. Sewer and 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. 23. Notices. 23.1. 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 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 FAX No. (925) 833-6651 Notices required to be given to Developer shall be addressed as follows: Joseph D. Carroll Triad Partners, Inc. 8001 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 1000 Irvine, CA 92618 FAX No. (949) 679-4242 A party may change address by giving notice in writing to the other party and thereafter all notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. Notices shall be deemed given and received upon personal delivery, or if mailed, upon the expiration of 48 hours after being deposited in the United States Mail. Notices may also be given by overnight courier which shall be deemed given the Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 14 of 16 June 5, 2007 146 ~\t. following day or by facsimile transmission which shall be deemed given upon verification of receipt. 24. Recitals. The foregoing Recitals are true and correct and are made a part hereof. 25. Aqreement is Entire Understandinq. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the parties. 26. Exhibits. The following documents are referred to in this Agreement and are attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full: Exhibit A Legal Description of Property Exhibit B Additional Conditions Exhibit C Site Plan of Phase I and II Under the Original Approvals Exhibit D Site Plan of Phase I and II Under the Alternate Approvals 27. Counterparts. This Agreement is executed in two (2) duplicate originals, each of which is deemed to be an original. 28. Recordation. City shall record a copy of this Agreement 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 first above written. CITY OF DUBLIN: By: Date: Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC Page 15 of 16 June 5, 2007 Janet Lockhart, Mayor ATTEST: By: Date: Fawn Holman, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Elizabeth H. Silver, City Attorney TRIAD DUBLIN GATEWAY, L.P., a California limited partnership By: Triad Partners, Inc., a California corporation, General Partner By: Joseph D. Carroll, President By: Richard T. Needham, Senior Vice President (NOTARIZATION ATTACHED) Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project CLEAN_DA Dublin Gateway Medical Center_041007.DOC \4~ "biit Page 16 of 16 June 5, 2007 Exhibit A Legal Description of the Property Parcels 3 and 4, as shown on Parcel Map 8524, filed November 23, 2005, in book 286 of Parcel Maps, pages 38-41 in the Office of the Recorder of Alameda County. Assessor Parcel Numbers 986-0016-021 and 986-0016-022, respectively. Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement For the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project-EXHIBIT A I '-l1 tfbl t, 14~"bl~( EXHIBIT B Additional Conditions The following Additional Conditions are hereby imposed pursuant to paragraph 5.3 of this Agreement. Subparaaraph 5.3.1 -- SubseQuent Discretionary Approvals None. Subparaaraph 5.3.2 -- Mitiaation Conditions Subsection a. Infrastructure SeQuencina Proaram The Infrastructure Sequencing Program for the Project is set forth below. (i) Roads: The project-specific roadway improvements (and offers of dedication) identified in Resolution No. 07-_ of the City Council of the City of Dublin approving Site Development Review (hereafter "SDR Resolution") shall be completed by Developer to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director at the times and in the manner specified in the SDR Resolution unless otherwise provided below. All such roadway improvements shall be constructed to the satisfaction and requirements of City's Public Works Director. (ii) Sewer. All sanitary sewer improvements to serve the project site (or any recorded phase of the Project) shall be completed in accordance with DSRSD requirements. (iii) Water. An all weather roadway and an approved hydrant and water supply system shall be available and in service at the site in accordance with the tentative map conditions of approval to the satisfaction and requirements of the City's fire department. All potable water system components to serve the project site shall be completed in accordance with the DSRSD requirements. Recycled water lines shall be installed in accordance with the SDR Resolution. (iv) Storm Drainaae. Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement For the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project-EXHIBIT B ) '-tq Db \t ~ (A) The storm drainage systems off-site, as well as on- site drainage systems for the areas to be occupied, shall be improved consistent with the Drainage Plan and conditions of approval and 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. Pursuant to Alameda County's National Pollution Discharge Elimination Permit (NPDES) No. CAS0029831 with the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, all grading, construction, and development activities within the City of Dublin must comply with the provisions of the Clean Water Act. Proper erosion control measures must be installed at development sites within the City during construction, and all activities shall adhere to Best Management Practices. (v) Other Utilities (e.a. aas. electricity, cable televisions. telephone) Construction shall be completed by phase 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. Notwithstanding the foregoing, City's Public Works Director may, in his or her sole discretion and upon receipt of documentation in a form satisfactory to the Public Works Director that assures completion, allow Developer to defer completion of discrete portions of any public improvements for the Project if the Public Works Director determines that to do so would not jeopardize the public health, safety or welfare. Subparaaraph 5.3.3 -- Phasina. Timina This Agreement contains no requirements that Developer must initiate or complete development of the Project within any period of time set by City. It is the intention of this provision that Developer be able to develop the Property in accordance with its own time schedules and the Alternate Approvals. Subparaaraph 5.3.4 -- Financina Plan Developer will install all improvements necessary for the Project at its own cost (subject to credits for any improvements which qualify for credits as provided in subparagraph 5.3.6 below). Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement For the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project-EXHIBIT B \57) Db It-t 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. Developer will enter into an "Area Wide Facilities Agreement" with the Dublin San Ramon Services District to pay for the cost of extending such services to the Project. Such services shall be provided as set forth in subparagraph 5.3.2(a)(ii) and (iii) above. Subparaaraph 5.3.5 -- Fees, Dedications Subsection a. Traffic Impact Fees. Developer shall pay the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee ("TIF") established by Resolution No. 111-04, including any future amendments to such fee. Developer will pay such fees, in cash or credits: 1) no later than the time of issuance of grading/sitework permits for the hospital building and in the amount of the impact fee in effect at time of grading/sitework permit for the hospital building; and 2) no later than the time of issuance of building permits for the parking structure and in the amount of the impact fee in effect at time of building permit issuance for the parking structure. Developer further agrees that it will pay eleven percent (11 %) of the "Section 1/Category 1" portion of the TI F in cash. Developer also agrees that it will pay twenty-five percent (25%) of the "Section 2/Category 2" portion of the TIF in cash. If City amends its TIF fee and as a result the City's outstanding balance due on loans is less than 25% of total Section 2/Category 2 improvements, the Developer shall pay such reduced percentage of the "Section 2/Category 2" portion of the TIF in cash. Subsection b. Traffic Impact Fee to Reimburse Pleasanton for Freewav Interchanaes. Developer shall pay the Eastern Dublin 1-580 Interchange Fee established by City of Dublin Resolution No. 11-96 as amended by Resolution No. 155-98 and by any subsequent resolution which revises such Fee. Developer will pay such fee: 1) no later than the time of issuance of grading/sitework permits for the hospital building and in the amount of the impact fee in effect at time of grading/sitework permit for the hospital building; and 2) no later than the time of issuance of building permits for the parking structure and in the amount of the impact fee in effect at time of building permit issuance for the parking structure. Subsection c. Public Facilities Fees. Developer shall pay a Public Facilities Fee established by City of Dublin Resolution No. 214-02, including any future amendments to such fee. Developer will pay such fees: 1) no later than the time of issuance of grading/sitework Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement For the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project-EXHIBIT B 151~ l$~ permits for the hospital building and in the amount of the fee in effect at time of grading/sitework permit for the hospital building; and 2) no later than the time of issuance of building permits for the parking structure and in the amount of the fee in effect at time of building permit issuance for the parking structure. Subsection d. Noise Mitiaation Fee. Developer shall pay a Noise Mitigation Fee established by City of Dublin Resolution No. 33-96, including any future amendments to such fee. Developer will pay such fees: 1) no later than the time of issuance of grading/sitework permits for the hospital building and in the amount of the fee in effect at time of grading/sitework permit for the hospital building; and 2) no later than the time of issuance of building permits for the parking structure and in the amount of the fee in effect at time of building permit issuance for the parking structure. Subsection e. School Impact Fees. School impact fees shall be paid by Developer in accordance with Government Code section 53080 and the agreement between Developer's predecessor in interest and the Dublin Unified School District regarding payment of mitigation fees. Subsection f. Fire Impact Fees. Developer shall pay a fire facilities fee established by City of Dublin Resolution No. 12-03 including any future amendments to such fee. Developer will pay such fees: 1) no later than the time of issuance of grading/sitework permits for the hospital building and in the amount of the impact fee in effect at time of grading/sitework permit for the hospital building; and 2) no later than the time of issuance of building permits for the parking structure and in the amount of the impact fee in effect at time of building permit issuance for the parking structure. Subsection g. Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee. Developer shall pay the Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee in the amount and at the times set forth in City of Dublin Resolution No. 89-98 or any subsequent resolution which revises such fee. Developer will pay such fees: 1) no later than the time of issuance of grading/sitework permits for the hospital building and in the amount of the fee in effect at time of grading/sitework permit for the hospital building; and 2) no later than the time of issuance of building permits for the parking structure and in the amount of the fee in effect at time of building permit issuance for the parking structure. Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement For the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project-EXHIBIT B ISl'b l~t Subparaaraph 5.3.6 -- Credit Subsection a. Traffic Impact Fee Improvements -- Credit City shall provide a credit to Developer for those improvements described in the resolution establishing the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee if such improvements are constructed by the Developer in their ultimate location. All aspects of the credit shall be covered by City's Administrative Guidelines for Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fees (Resolution No. 23-99 ("TIF Guidelines")). Subsection b. Traffic Impact Fee Riaht-of-Way Dedications -- Credit City shall provide a credit to Developer for any TIF area right-of-way to be dedicated by Developer to City which is required for improvements which are described in the resolution establishing the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee. All aspects of the credits shall be governed by the TIF Guidelines. Subparaaraph 5.3.7 - Miscellaneous Subsection a. Community Benefit Payment. Developer, as a means of ensuring compliance with Section 10.4 and Policy 10-1 of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, has offered to pay to City a community benefit payment in the amount of two million ninety-three thousand eight-hundred and seventy-two dollars ($2,093,872.00) (the "Community Benefit Payment"). The EIR prepared for the Eastern Dublin EIR assumed that project- generated revenues, including property tax revenues, would be sufficient to pay for city services necessary to serve new development and determined that no mitigations were necessary. The Community Benefit Payment is designed to mitigate the potential impact of the loss of property tax that may result if the owner or operator of the Hospital were to apply for a property tax exemption and the Hospital were to be taken off the property tax rolls. Therefore, in addition to any other fees and payments due and payable, Developer hereby agrees to, at the time of the issuance of a grading permit to facilitate the construction of the Hospital under the Alternate Plan, make the Community Benefit Payment, which shall be non-refundable. If Developer fails to make the Community Benefit Payment as set forth in this subsection, then Developer agrees that the City may withhold the issuance of such grading permit. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer shall not be required to make the Community Benefit Payment at the time of the issuance of a grading permit to facilitate the construction of the Hospital under the Alternate Plan, if Developer provides evidence satisfactory to the City Manager that the owner of the Property, when the Hospital commences operation, will not be eligible for a welfare exemption under Revenue and Taxation Code section 214. However, if during the Term of this Agreement the Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement For the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project-EXHIBIT B \?~ 'b lf1i Property becomes exempt from taxation under Revenue and Taxation Code section 214, then Developer shall be obligated to make the Community Benefit Payment. Developer, on behalf of itself and its approved successors and assigns, acknowledges that failure to pay the Community Benefit Payment as required by this subsection shall constitute grounds for revocation of the Hospital Conditional Use Permit referenced in Recital D. Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement For the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project-EXHIBIT B ...... . .._-....._-*~ \' \i t ]' "\ t '" ";,, ~" . ' t , V < ..<< 1[', 1 llj I r~." .",."'.,'.".,."'."t",::-,.m,.._........,....',.""'"".",............... JJ['~ i.. .1 I ., . T" ',',' "; 111111111111111 r'llrrr'rrrlll , / JJ EXHIBIT C Site Plan of Phase I and II Under the Original Approvals 'i<' ,f""" mill ',~, ,'" "'m~ ,',""",,, =','.' =~=v~, m. ............ .W,o. ~, . .-...- ..... ="...."....~. .- I DUBUN GATEWAY MEDiCAl CENTER ~__1II1l1 Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement For the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project-EXHIBIT C )$ *"b 11 t: :'Nj ',' ',:," ~~~: j r q; I~ .... EXHIBIT D Site Plan of Phase I and Phase II Under the Alternate Approvals DUBLIN BOULEVARD .. .... ~... ... ') Dublin/Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P. Development Agreement For the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Project-EXHIBIT D t 5S'a:o t ~~ t:::l C3 Q:: ~ ~ t;!i tI) ~ \5lP ~ \~- Amended by Resolution 04-55 by the Planning Commission on August 24. 2004 (P A 03-064) Amended by Resolution 05-06 by the Planning Commission on January 25. 2005 (P A 04-046) Amended by Ordinance by the City Council on . 2007 (P A 06-026) EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN General Provisions This is a Development Plan pursuant to Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance for the Koll Corporate Center project, located on the south side of Dublin Boulevard, east of Tassajara Creek, West of Tassajara Road, and north of Interstate 580 (APN 986-0001-001- 10, portion). 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 Tentative Map and Site Development Review plans, the Landscape Plans, other plans, exhibits, and vmtten statements contained in the document dated recei'/ed October 30, 1998, labeled Exhibit fo. 1 to the Resolution approving this Deyelopment Plan (City Council Rcsotution .\'0. 98 ), and on file in the Planning Department. The Planned De'/elopment District allows the flexibility needed to encourage innovative de'/elopment v/hile ensuring that the goals, policies and action programs of the General Plan, Eastern Doolin Specific Plan, and provisions of Section 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinanee are satisfied. This Development Plan was subsequently amended by Plannim! Commission Resolution 04-55 for the Ulferts Center project on Aug:ust 24. 2004. The amendments included the removal of the hotel desig:nation on Lots 1 and 2 and allowed for the development of retail commercial uses on the entire property. This Development Plan was subsequently amended for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center project on January 25. 2005. The amendment allowed for massag:e establishments in conjunction with physical therapy to be a permitted use. rather than conditional use. consistent with the reg:ulations set forth in the Dublin Zoning: Ordinance. This Development Plan was subsequently amended for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building: 3 Hospital and Garag:e project on rINSERT DATE1. 2007. The amendments allowed for am alternative development project on a portion of Lot 7 of Map 7064 otherwise known as Lots 3 & 4 of Map 8524: an increase in square footag:e on Lot 7 of Map 7064: revisions to the site plan and landscape plan: and. revisions to the development reg:ulations. This Development Plan is also represented by the following: . Tentative Map 7064 and Site Development Review plans, Landscape plans, and other plans, exhibits, and written statements contained in the document dated received October 30, 1998, labeled Exhibit A-I to the Ordinance approving this Development Plan (City lof8 Attachment 5 '51Jb'~~ Amended by Resolution 04-55 by the Planning Commission on August 24. 2004 (P A 03-064) Amended by Resolution 05-06 by the Planning Commission on January 25. 2005 (P A 04-046) Amended by Ordinance by the City Council on . 2007 (P A 06-026) Council Ordinance No. 22-98), on file in the Planning Division. . Site Development Review plans, Landscape plans, and other plans, exhibits and written statements relating to the proiect approved as part of Planning Commission Resolution 04-55 for the Ulferts Center (P A 03-064), on file in the Planning Division. . Tentative Map 8524 and Site Development Review plans, Landscape plans, and other plans, exhibits and written statements relating to the proiect approved as part of Planning Commission Resolution 05-06 for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center (P A 04-046), on file in the Planning Division. . Site Development Review plans, Landscape plans, and other plans, exhibits and written statements relating to the proiect approved as part of Ordinance rINSERT ORDINANCE NO.1 for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage (PA 06- 026), on file in the Planning Division. This Planned Development Zoning District, as amended, allows the flexibility needed to encourage innovative development while ensuring that the goals, volicies, and action programs of the General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and provisions of Section 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance are satisfied. 1. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted for this "PD / C-2 / C-O" (planned Development/General Commercial/Campus Office) Zoning District site.': a) Banks & Financial Services; b) Contractor's Office; c) Copying & Blueprinting; d) Eating & Drinking Establishments; e) Health Services/Clinics; f) Laboratory; g) Professional! Administrative Offices; h) Parking Lot/Garage - Commercial; i) Retail- General; j) Retail- Neighborhood; k) Retail- Service; I) Day Care of 14 or fewer children; m) School- trade school, college, university; n) Similar and related uses as determined by the Director of Community Development; and, 0) Massage Establishments, in coni unction with physical therapy. Amended bv PC Reso. 05-06 (01/25/05) *See "**NOTE" on PaJ!e 5 reJ!ardinJ! uses on Lot 3 of Map 8524. 2of8 liS 2. Conditional Uses.~ a) AutomobileN ehicle Brokerage, Rental; b) Building Materials Sales; c) Mini-Storage; d) Storage of petroleum products for on-site use; e) Warehousing and distribution; f) Community Facility; g) Massage Establishments, in conjunction with a gymnasiumlhealth club, physical therapy; Amended bv PC Reso. 05-06 (01/25/05) h) Day Care Center - 15+ children; i) Outdoor Mobile Vendor; j) Outdoor Seating; k) Temporary Outdoor Sale not related to on-site established business (sidewalk sale); I) Caretaker Residence; m) HospitallMedical Center; n) Animal Sales and Services; 0) Auction Yard; p) AutomobileN ehicle Sales and Service; q) Bed and Breakfast inn; r) Car Wash/Detailing; s) Community Care Facility - Large; t) Dance Floor; u) Drive-in/Drive-through business; v) HotellMotel; w) Plant Nursery; x) Recreational Facility/Indoor; y) Recreational Facility/Outdoor; z) Retail- outdoor storage; aa) Service Station; bb) Shopping Center; and, cc) Similar and related uses as determined by the Director of Community Development. *See "**NOTE" on PaJ!e 5 reJ!ardinJ! uses on Lot 3 of MaD 8524. 3. 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 3of8 ~~t uses designated in this PD District Rezone. 4. Site Plan & Architecture. See attached site and eleyation plans contained in Exhibit }.. 1, Deyelopment Plan. This Deyelopment Plan applies to the approximately 37 aer6 site sho':m on this plan on the south side of Dublin Boulevard, west side of Tassajara Road. This Development Plan applies to the approximately 37-acre site generally located south of Dublin Boulevard. north of Interstate 580. west of Tassaiara Road and east of John Monego Court. Any modifications to the project, or development on the future hotel/retail site (Phase 3), shall be substantially consistent with these plans and of equal or superior materials and design quality. Development on the future hotel/retail site (Phase 3) requires approval of Site Development Review by the City of Dublin. The development of the future hotel/retail site (Phase 3) was modified bv PlanninJ! Commission Resolution 04-55 for the Ulferts Center. The following site plans and elevations are hereby incorporated by reference: Amended bv Ord. {INSERT ORDINANCE NO.1 (INSERT DATE) . Ordinance 22-98 for the Koll Dublin Corporate Center. Exhibit A-I (PA 98-047). . Planning Commission Resolution 04-55 for the Ulferts Center (P A 03-064). . Planning Commission Resolution 05-06 for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center (PA 04-046). . Ordinance rINSERT ORDINANCE NO.1 and Planning Commission Resolution [INSERT RESOLUTION NO.] for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage (P A 06-026). 5. Density. The maximum square footage of the proposed development for the parcels covered under this Development Plan (as shown on the applicable site plan~) is as follows: Lot 1, Traet 7064 (Future retail site): 1.6 acres 7,000 square feet building area* Lot 1 & 3. Tract 7064 (Retail site): 1.6 acres & 2.6 acres. respectively 50530 square feet building area* Amended bv PC Reso. 04-55 (AuJ!ust 24.2004) Lot 2, Tract 7064 (Future Retail site): 1.6 acres 7,000 square feet building area* Lot 3, Tract 7064 (Future hotel site): 2.6 acres 85,000 square feet building area* Lot 4, Tract 7064 (4-story office building): 5.53 acres 139,285 square feet building area 40f8 {(oOOb lt~ Amended by Resolution 04-55 by the Planning Commission on August 24, 2004 (P A 03-064) Amended by Resolution 05-06 by the Planning Commission on January 25, 2005 (P A 04-046) Amended by Ordinance by the City Council on , 2007 (P A 06-026) Lot 5, Tract 7064 (4-story office building): 6.67 acres 139,285 square feet building area Lot 6, Tract 7064 (4-story office building): 6.42 acres 139,285 square feet building area Lot 7, Tract 7064, (6 story office building): 7.11 acres 178,849 square feet building area Lot 7 of Tract 7064 has been further divided as follows: Amended hv CDD Reso. 05-01 (Fehruarv 28. 2005) Amended hv PC Reso. 05-06 (Januarv 25. 2005) Amended hv Ord. [lNSERT ORD. NO. AND DATEl Lot 1. Map 8524 (3-story office building) 3.000 acres 62.300 square feet building area Lot 2. Map 8524 C3-story office building) 1. 009 acres 57.700 square feet building area Lot 3. Map 8524 (3-story office building) 1.545 acres 58.000 square feet building area OR 168.000 square feet building area** Lot 4. Map 8524 1.585 acres 4-level parking garage OR 5-level parking garage** Total Building Area: 178.000 square feet OR 292.000 square feet** Lot 8, (Park & Ride facility): 1. 74 acres No building area (parking only) *NOTE: Densities for Lots 1, 2, and 3 may be combined and re-allocated among these three lots in any manner within this portion of the project site, but must be used for General Commercial/Retail uses and a hotel, unless an amendment to this Planned Development is approved. An amendment to the Planned Development was approved hv Planninf! Commission Resolution 04-55 on AUf!ust 24. 2004. This amendment removed the hotel desif!nation from Lots 1 and 3 and allowed for the development of retail commercial uses instead. **NOTE: This Development Plan allows for the development of either: 1) a 3-story. 58.000 square foot medical office building on Lot 3 of Map 8524 and 4-level above ground parking garage on Lot 4 of Map 8524 OR 2) a 6-story. 168.000 square foot. 100- bed hospital on Lot 3 of Map 8524 and 5-level parking garage on Lot 4 of Map 8524 with 50f8 \~l~ li'i Amended by Resolution 04-55 by the Planning Commission on August 24,2004 (PA 03-064) Amended by Resolution 05-06 by the Planning Commission on January 25,2005 (PA 04-046) Amended by Ordinance by the City Council on , 2007 (P A 06-026) one level below ground and 4-levels above ground. At no time shall the 6-story hospital building on Lot 3 of Map 8524 be utilized for any other use than a hospital without an amendment to this Development Plan. 6. Phasing Plan. The Corporate Center will be developed in three phases. The First phase will include the three, four-story office buildings, Park & Ride lot, perimeter landscaping, on-site entrance roads, and associated site work. The Second phase will be the signature, six-story office building at the corner of Dublin Boulevard and Tassajara Road (Amended bv Planninl! Commission Resolution 05-06 on Januarv 25. 2005). The Third phase will include the Hotel/Retail parcel, which will likely be sold to a separate hotel developer (Amended bv Planninl! Commission Resolution 04-55 on AU1!Ust 24. 2004). Third phase uses could be constructed after the first phase when a critical mass of on-site customer support is created. Any hotel/retail uses proposed for the vacant parcel (Lots 1, 2, and 3) must be consistent with the standards established by this Development Plan, and will require approval of a Site Development Review by the City of Dublin Planning Commission (Amended bv Planninl! Commission Resolution 04-55 on AUl!ust 24. 2004). 7. Landscaping Plan. De'/elopment Plan. reference: Refer to attached landscaping plans included in Exhibit .Ai.. 1, The' following landscaping plans are hereby incorporated by . Ordinance 22-98 for the Koll Dublin Corporate Center. Exhibit A-I (P A 98-047). . Pinewave Design and Engineering. 3 sheets. dated received by the Planning Division on August 17. 2004 for the Ulferts Center CPA 03-064). Amended bv PC Reso. 04-55 (Aul!ust 24.2004) . Ware Malcomb. 3 sheets. dated received by the Planning Division on January 11. 2005 for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center CPA 04-046). Amended bv PC Reso. 05-06 (01/25/05) . Ware Malcomb and Ridge Landscape Architects. dated received by the Planning Division on February 26. 2007 for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage CPA 06-026). Amended bv Ord. (Date) 8. Development Standards. Refer to attached Dovelopment Rogulations included in Exhibit A 1, De'lelopment Plan. The development regulations for the prolect are hereby incorporated by reference: . Ordinance 22-98 for the Koll Dublin Corporate Center. Exhibit A-I CPA 98-047). 60f8 l to 2.ot> \~ tg Amended by Resolution 04-55 by the Planning Commission on August 24.2004 (PA 03-064) Amended by Resolution 05-06 by the Planning Commission on January 25. 2005 (P A 04-046) Amended by Ordinance by the City Council on . 2007 (P A 06-026) . Pinewave Design and Engineering dated received by the Planning Division on August 17, 2004 for the Ulferts Center (P A 03-064). Amended hv PC Reso. 04- 55 (Auf!ust 24, 2004) . Ware Malcomb, dated received by the Planning Division on January 1 L 2005 for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center (P A 04-046). Amended hv PC Reso. 05-06 (01/25/05) . Ware Malcomb, dated received by the Planning Division on February 26, 2007 for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage (P A 06- 026). Amended hv Ord. - (Date) The development of Lots 3 and 4 of Parcel Map 8524 (formerly a portion of Lot 7 of Tract Map 7064) shall be permitted to have: . A 3-story, 58,000 square foot medical office building (Lot 3) and 4-level above ground parking garage (Lot 4) approved as part of Planning Commission Resolution 05-06. OR . A 6-storv. 168,000 square foot. 100-bed hospital building (Lot 3) and 5-level parking garage (Lot 4) with one level below ground and 4 levels above ground approved as part of Ordinance - and Planning Commission Resolution - . The 5-level parking garage approved in coni unction with the 6-story hospital building may also be constructed with the 3-story medical office building so long as one level of parking remains underground and only 4-levels of parking above ground. NOTE: Any increase in the maximum square footage on Lot 3 of Map 8524. including the addition of a basement for equipment or any other use, shall require an amendment to this Development Plan and shall be subiect to review by the Planning Commission with a recommendation to City Council. 9. General Provisions. A) The project applicant/developer shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Dublin prior to Final Map approval, which shall contain, but not be limited to, provisions for financing and timing of on and off-site infrastructure, payment of traffic, noise and public facilities impact fees, ownership and maintenance of creek and open space areas, and other provisions deemed necessary by the City to find the project consistent with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. B) The project applicant/developer shall be required to pay a Public Facilities Fee in the amounts and at the times set forth in City of Dublin Resolution No. 32-96, adopted 70f8 Amended bv Resolution 04-55 by tire Planning Connnission on August 24. 2004 (P 1 ~~ ~ IS 'i> Amended by Resolution 05-06 by the Planning Commission on January 25. 2005 (P A 04-046) Amended by Ordinance by the City Council on . 2007 (P A 06-026) by the City Council on March 26, 1996, or in the amounts and at the times set forth in any resolution revising the amount ofthe Public Facilities Fee. 8of8 P A 06-013 \ <o<<4Df) l~t RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 22 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE ALCOST A SHELL SERVICE STATION RECONSTRUCTIONjEXP ANSION AT 8999 SAN RAMON ROAD (APN 941-0164-001-07 and 941-0164-003-02941-0164-003-02, 01) P A 06-013 8.2 PUBLIC HEARING: P A 06-026 - Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage - Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review, and Development Agreement (Legislative and Adjudicatory Actions). . Chair Schaub asked for the Staff Report. Ms. Marnie Nuccio, Associate Planner, discussed the specifics of the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Chair Schaub asked for the definition of GFRC. Ms. Nuccio stated that GFRC is the acronym for Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete. Chair Schaub asked about the height of the parking garage. Ms. Nuccio explained that there would be 4 levels above ground and 1 level below ground and would be similar in height to the existing medical office building. Chair Schaub asked if the noise study completed for the project only covers the current project plans and project description and does not incorporate future equipment that may be installed at the site, and Ms. Nuccio said yes. Cm. Biddle asked about the ambulance access route, and Ms. Nuccio pointed it out on the diagram. Vice Chair Wehrenberg asked if significant changes to the project would come before the Planning Commission after the project is approved by the City Council. Ms. Nuccio explained that the City Council would review and be the final decision making body for significant changes to the project. Chair Schaub and Vice Chair Wehrenberg expressed concerns about making a decision on the project when the project is not at build-out and significant changes to the project could occur in the future. Ms. Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager, stated that ('lom1tris..~"if.w", 42 ZOD? Attachment 6 significant changes to the project could be brought before the Planning corrum1s~~ 'h l1>i recommendation to the City Council. Chair Schaub opened the public hearing. Mr. Rick Needham, with Triad Partners, spoke in favor of the project on behalf of the Applicant. Chair Schaub asked if it is possible to decrease the height of the office building by one story by adding an underground floor. Mr. Needham explained that there is currently a sub grade level that houses equipment. Mr. Jim Terry, with Ware Malcolmb, spoke in favor of the project on behalf of the Applicant. He stated that the 7th story is used to cover the mechanical equipment. Cm. Biddle stated that because this is a hospital, he does not have a problem with the height of the building. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that she does not have a problem with the height of the building, but is concerned about the potential future height of the building based on future tenants and uses of the building. She stated that she would like the project to be brought before the Planning Commission if the height of the building increases. Cm. Tomlinson stated that the design of the building gives the perception of a 6-story building. He stated that he is happy with the building architecture. Cm. Biddle stated that he likes the idea of adding an underground level to the building. Ms. Nuccio explained that adding an underground level would increase the square footage and require further review and analysis of the project, as a basement is not a part of the current proposal by the Applicant. Cm. Tomlinson discussed architectural options to soften the corner element of the building. The Planning Commission agreed that the corner element of the building should be softened. The Planning Commissioners agreed that the architecture of the parking garage should be consistent with the architecture of the existing medical office buildings. They discussed various features that could be added to the parking garage that would make it more consistent with the architecture of the existing medical office buildings. Mr. Needham stated that the development team would certainly discuss any modifications with Staff. Cm. Biddle and Vice Chair Wehrenberg expressed concerns about the parking capacity. Cm. Biddle stated that he would like Staff to verify the adequacy of the parking capacity. Chair Schaub stated that he would like the parking structure to be re-addressed and brought back to the Planning Commission. Chair Schaub and Cm. Tomlinson expressed concerns about the functionality of the loading dock and truck circulation on the site. They expressed concerns about safety and traffic ('omnn:m(l1l 43 20i)7 congestion in the area. Ms. Nuccio stated that the Public Works Department rev~~~d ~~ ~6 project plans and did not have any concerns with the loading dock or truck circulation. Vice Chair Wehrenberg expressed concern about the trash bins located along Dublin Boulevard near the emergency parking area. Chair Schaub and Cm. Tomlinson suggested that the trash bins be moved to an internal location on the site and away from the emergency parking area. Mr. Needham stated that he would consider another location for the trash bins. Vice Chair Wehrenberg asked about the potential use of helicopters on the site. Mr., Needham stated that helicopter pads were not included in the project description. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that she is concerned about the potential occurrence of ambulances, generators, and oxygen tanks. Ms. Wilson stated that the CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) analysis reviewed the potential noise and activity of the project and found that it would not be a significant effect to the environment. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that mechanical equipment on the site could be a visual and audible distraction to the site. She asked if sound control elements could be incorporated around noisy equipment. Ms. Nuccio stated that the Conditions of Approval discuss equipment screening on the site and that Staff would look into requesting sound control elements to attenuate noisy equipment on the site. Ms. Nuccio pointed out that there is a sound wall that separates the nearest residential homes from Dublin Boulevard. Cm. Tomlinson commented that the shape of the building may serve as a noise barrier to residents and direct noise to 1-580. Cm. Biddle asked about the public notification process for the project, and Ms. Nuccio explained the process. Cm. King expressed concerns about the truck circulation and loading dock area on the site. The Planning Commission and the Applicants discussed options for making the area more functional. Staff stated that they would work with the Applicant on the various options. Ms. Jennifer Kim, resident, had several concerns about the project regarding noise, traffic, and parking. The Planning Commission and Staff addressed each of Ms. Kim's concerns. Hearing no further comments, Chair Schaub closed the public hearing. Chair Schaub recapped the items the Planning Commission would like the Applicant to address: . Soften the corner element on the Dublin Boulevard/ Glynnis Rose corner of the medical office building. . Make the loading dock more functional for trucks to maneuver. . Move the trash bins to a more internal area of the site. . Make the architecture of the parking garage consistent with the architecture of the existing medical office buildings. . Review landscaping adjacent to the parking garage 44 24, 200? 1~1~ l~~ The Planning Commissioners stated that they still have concerns regarding parking capad1y and would like a parking analysis to be completed. The Planning Commissioners stated that they would like significant changes to the project to be brought before the Planning Commission. They further stated that they would like potential generator locations to be internalized within the site and away from the street. Ms. Wilson stated that Staff's recommendation to the Planning Commission, based on the number of significant concerns raised by the Planning Commission, is to have the Staff address the concerns with the Applicant and continue the application to a future Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Needham asked the Planning Commission if he could speak. The Planning Commission voted to re-open the public hearing. Mr. Needham reviewed the Planning Commission's concerns and requested that the Planning Commission approve the project and allow the Applicant to work with Staff on the necessary modifications. Hearing no further comments, Chair Schaub closed the public hearing. On a Motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. King, and by a vote of 5-0-0, the Planning Commission unanimously decided to continue the item to the May 8, 2007 Planning Commission meeting. NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NONE OTHER BUSINESS 10.1 Brief INFORMATION ONL Y reports from the Planning Commission and/or Staff, including Committee Reports and Reports by the Planning Commission related to meetings attended at City Expense (AB 1234). Ms. Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager, reminded the Planning Commission about the upcoming Geological Hazard Assessment District (GHAD) seminar. Cm. Tomlinson informed the Planning Commission that he plans to inquire about getting a sound wall installed along the sport's field near City Hall due to the noise from the freeway. Chair Schaub asked about the status of the blacked-out windows of the video store on Dublin Boulevards. Ms. Wilson stated that Staff continues to work with owner. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, /4~~ Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: ( '01f111f?};.',"l1{1r, 45 2{JO~ \ toi"b lt~ AGENDA STATEMENT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: May 8, 2007 SUBJECT: ATTACHMENTS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING: P A 06-026 Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage - Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and Development Agreement (Adjudicatory and Legislative Actions) Report Prepared by Mamie R. Nuccio, Associate Planer I) Resolution recommending City Council adoption of a CEQA Addendum for an amendment to the Stage I and 2 Development Plan for Planned Development Zoning District (PA 98-047) and for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage Project, with draft City Council Resolution and draft Addendum attached as Exhibit A. 2) Resolution recommending City Council adoption of a Planned Development Rezone and Stage I and 2 Development Plan for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage Project, with draft City Council Ordinance and draft Stage I and 2 Development Plan attached as Exhibit A. 3) Resolution referring decision making authority and recommending City Council approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage Project, with draft City Council Resolution and proposed Project Plans attached as Exhibit A. 4) Resolution recommending City Council adoption of a Development Agreement for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage Project, with draft City Council Ordinance and draft Development Agreement attached as Exhibit A. 5) Proposed amended Stage I and 2 Development Plan in draft form with amended text shown in strike-through and underline. 6) Draft April 24, 2007 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 7) April 24, 2007 Planning Commission Agenda Statement, without attachments. COPIES TO: Applicant/Property Owner File Mahendar Chima, Public Works Department Jim Tong Marty Iterbitzen Dave Chadbourne ITEM NO. Page I of8 G:\P A#\2006\06-026 Dublin Gateway Bldg 3 Mod\Public Hearing Documents\PC\PCSR 05-08-07.doc Attachment 7 l toptao I~~ RECOMMENDATION: 1) Receive Staff presentation; 2) Open the public hearing; 3) Take testimony from the Applicant and the public; 4) Close public hearing and deliberate; 5) Adopt Resolution (Attachment 1) recommending City Council approval of a CEQA Addendum; 6) Adopt Resolution (Attachment 2) recommending City Council adoption of a Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan; 7) Adopt Resolution (Attachment 3) referring decision making authority and recommending City Council approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Site DevelopmeiIt Review; and 8) Adopt Resolution (Attachment 4) recommending City Council adoption of a Development Agreement. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Dublin Gateway Medical Center is an existing 120,000 square foot medical office complex located on approximately 7.14 acres of land at the southwest comer of Dublin Boulevard and Tassajara Road. The medical office complex was approved by the Planning Commission in 2005 for approximately 178,000 square feet of medical offices and related uses as follows: · 62,300 square foot LifestylelWellness Center . 57,700 square foot medical office building . 58,000 square foot medical office building . 4-level parking garage The medical office complex was approved to be constructed in two Phases as follows: . Phase One: o 62,300 square foot LifestylelWellness Center o 57,700 square foot medical office building . Phase Two: o Phase Two(a): 4-level parking garage o Phase Two(b): 58,000 square foot medical office building Construction of Phase One was completed in January 2007; an alternative development project for Phase Two is the subject ofthis staff report. Phase Two Alternative Development Project Phase Two of the Dublin Gateway Medical Center project was approved in 2005 by the Planning Commission (Resolution 05-06) for the construction of a 3-story, 58,000 square foot medical office building and a 4-level parking garage on 3.13.:!: acres of land (the "Original Approval"). In 2006, the Applicant/Developer, Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P., submitted a request for an alternative development project; the alternative project proposes the development of a 6-story, 168,000 square foot, 100-bed hospital and a 5-level parking garage with 1 level below ground and 4 levels above ground on the same 3.13.:!: acres ofland. Approval of the alternative project (the "Project") would not supersede the Original 20f8 \"lO"b l~$ Approval but would give the Developer the option to construct either project depending upon market conditions. A detailed description and full analysis of the Project, including environmental review, is included in Attachment 7 (the April 24, 2007 Planning Commission Agenda Statement). The focus of this report is the analysis related to the issues identified by the Planning Commission at the April 24, 2007 hearing. April 24, 2007 Planning Commission Meeting At the April 24, 2007 Planning Commission meeting, Staff presented the alternative Project known as the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage. The Planning Commission expressed concerns regarding the Project and directed Staff to work with the Applicant to address the following items (see Attachment 6): . Reduce the massing of the building at Dublin Boulevard and Glynnis Rose Drive by notching the comer of the building. . Revise the loading dock area to facilitate truck turning movements which would not interfere with vehicular traffic on Glynnis Rose Drive. . Relocate the trash enclosures to an internal location on the site. . Include architectural elements on all four sides of the parking garage and revise the vegetative screen on the south elevation. . Identify operational equipment such as generators and oxygen tanks and how the location and screening of these items will be addressed. . Provide additional information on staffing levels (i.e. shift changes, staffing plan) and parking requirements. ANALYSIS: Reduce the Massing of the Building The Applicant has revised the Project plans to include a "notch" in the building where the north and west elevations meet at the comer of Dublin Boulevard and Glynnis Rose Drive. The "notch" extends from the 5th floor up to the roof line and incorporates aluminum fins and an aluminum clad parapet consistent with the south elevation. The area created above the 4th floor by the incorporation of the "notch" is not proposed to be used as outdoor space due to the location of patient rooms on either side of the "notch" on the 5th and 6th floors. The "notch" is recessed approximately 10-feet, 8-inches on the Dublin Boulevard elevation and 5-feet on the Glynnis Rose Drive elevation (Sheet A2.5, Exhibit A to Attachment 3). Revise the loading dock area The Applicant has revised the loading dock area to allow for delivery trucks traveling northbound on Glynnis Rose Drive to exit the roadway by maneuvering to the right and pulling into the loading dock area in a straight forward movement. Once off of Glynnis Rose Drive, the delivery truck can then back up into the loading bay to make deliveries. The previous turning movement required that delivery trucks, traveling northbound, pass the loading dock driveway and back into the dock at an angle. The new turning movement will enable delivery trucks to pull off of the street before backing up into the dock thus reducing potential conflicts with other vehicles traveling northbound on Glynnis Rose Drive towards Dublin Boulevard. A truck turning template has been incorporated into the Project plans demonstrating the new truck turning movement (Truck Dock Area, Exhibit A to Attachment 3). The Public Works Department has reviewed the new truck turning movements as well as the increased width of the loading dock driveway and finds that the revised circulation pattern and layout of the loading dock area will 30f8 11L~ \~$ facilitate easier truck turning movements for delivery truck operators and a safer environment for vehicular traffic traveling on Glynnis Rose Drive. As discussed at the April 24, 2007 Planning Commission meeting, the Applicant currently does not have a tenant for the Project and therefore has to make certain assumptions based on their research and the professional advice received from their hospital consultant relating to the potential number of deliveries utilizing the loading dock area. The Applicant estimates that there will be approximately 10-12 truck deliveries per week to service the Project. Based on these estimates, the Applicant believes that one loading dock is sufficient to meet the needs for the Project. Additionally, the re-design of the loading dock area allows for a delivery truck to be in the loading bay while a second delivery truck pulls off of Glynnis Rose Drive into the northern portion of the loading dock area; the second delivery truck can wait in this area, without obstructing the first truck from exiting the loading bay, and then safely back into the loading bay once the first truck has exited the loading dock area. While it is not anticipated that multiple deliveries would be occurring at the same time, the new configuration with a "loading dock waiting area" could accommodate two delivery trucks. Additionally, the Project has been conditioned (Condition of Approval No. 18, Exhibit A to Attachment 3) such that if the loading dock activities become a nuisance, a delivery schedule and loading dock operations plan (the "Plan") is required to be submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan would set forth the delivery schedule for the loading dock operations that the operators of the Project would be required to comply with. Failure to comply with the Plan could result in revocation of the Conditional Use Permit. In an effort to screen the "loading dock waiting area" the Applicant proposes to provide a low 3-foot wall around the north and west sides of the waiting area; the wall would be screened by a landscaped berm (Truck Dock Area, Exhibit A to Attachment 3). Additional tress and shrubs would be provided around the berm consistent with the landscape palette for Dublin Boulevard and Glynnis Rose Drive. Relocate the Trash Enclosures As a part of the construction of Phase One of the Dublin Gateway Medical Center, a trash enclosure was constructed, and currently exists, along Dublin Boulevard; the enclosure holds two waste receptacles. The Project proposes to provide an additional trash enclosure that could accommodate two additional waste receptacles; this trash enclosure was proposed to be constructed directly adjacent to the existing trash enclosure along Dublin Boulevard. The Applicant proposes to relocate both the existing trash enclosure that serves Phase One and the proposed trash enclosure for Phase Two to the northeast side of the parking garage. The trash enclosure would be landscaped on three sides to screen it from an adjacent walkway to the east and parking spaces to the west (Trash Enclosure, Exhibit A to Attachment 3). In response to the Planning Commission's concern that one additional trash enclosure may not be sufficient to serve the Project, Condition of Approval No. 26 (Exhibit A to Attachment 3) has been revised to include language that requires frequent trash pick-ups to ensure the timely removing of waste from the property. Include Architectural Elements and Additional Landscaping for the Parking Garage The elevations of the parking garage have been revised to include the following: 1) Green tinted glass in the stairwells; 2) A cornice feature and aluminum fins on all four elevations; 3) Aluminum clad canopies above the vehicular entrances; and 4) A darker color scheme for the elevator tower. 40f8 lllD{) \f~ Previously the stair towers included a decorative metal screen in the openings of the stairwells; the new stair towers have replaced the metal screen with green tinted glass consistent with the Phase One medical office buildings and the proposed hospital building. The glass element has been incorporated on the north, east and west elevations (Parking Structure Elevations, Exhibit A to Attachment 3). To address the Planning Commissions concerns that the parking garage needed more architectural elements consistent with the proposed hospital building, the Applicant has introduced a cornice feature on all four elevations. This cornice feature is visually supported by aluminum fins which tie into the vertical columns which are placed between decorative metal screens (Parking Structure Elevations, Exhibit A to Attachment 3). By introducing the aluminum fins and reducing the height of the vertical columns, the perceived massing of the parking garage has been reduced. The Applicant has introduced aluminum clad canopies above the two vehicular entrances to the parking garage (Parking Structure Elevations, Exhibit A to Attachment 3). These canopies are consistent with the Phase One medical office buildings which have aluminum clad canopies over two pedestrian entrances to the building; the proposed hospital building would also have an aluminum clad canopy over the main pedestrian entrance. The elevator tower is proposed to have a darker color scheme than the body of the parking garage to differentiate this element from the remainder of the structure. The outer wall of the tower is broken up with a variety of horizontal and vertical score lines. Previously, the north and east elevations of the parking garage were proposed to be screened with Coast Redwood and the south and west elevations with London Plane. London Plane is an approved "street" tree within the Koll Dublin Corporate Center and currently lines both the Koll Center Drive and Glynnis Rose Drive vehicular entrances to the project site. The Applicant has revised the plans to incorporate Coast Redwood on all four elevations while retaining some London Planes along Koll Center Drive and Glynnis Rose Drive to maintain consistency with existing "street" trees (Sheet L1.I, Exhibit A to Attachment 3). Coast Redwood will provide a more attractive and effective landscape screen for the outer walls of the parking garage with their dense columnar shape; London Planes on the other hand have a wider canopy spread making it more practical as a shade tree. Incorporating additional architectural elements into the parking garage has created a unified design with the proposed hospital building and replacing some of the street trees with a dense, evergreen tree will provide a better vegetative screen for the outer walls of the parking garage. It should be noted that, if the Original approval is constructed (the 58,000 square foot medical office building and the 4-level parking garage), the aforementioned architectural elements and landscape revisions would not be incorporated into the parking garage since the design of that garage was previously approved under Planning Commission Resolution 05-06 in January 2005, unless the Applicant agreed to make such revisions. Lastly, the Development Plan gives the Developer the option to construct the 5-level parking garage in conjunction with the development of the 58,000 square foot medical office building should they decide that the additional parking may be beneficial to the project; if the Developer elects to exercise this option, the aforementioned architectural elements and landscape revisions would be incorporated into the parking garage. Identify Operational Equipment As noted above, the Applicant currently does not have a tenant for the Project and therefore has to make certain assumptions based on their research and the professional advice received from their hospital consultant. While the Applicant recognizes the potential need for electrical, mechanical and plumbing 50f8 l1~"b l.g-Z equipment which is not currently shown on the site plan, they are unable to determine, at this time, what the specific needs will be for the Project. Therefore, the Project has been conditioned accordingly (Condition of Approval No. 23, Exhibit A to Attachment 3) which requires proper screening of all electrical, mechanical and plumbing equipment as well as tanks. The condition of approval includes a provision that requires the Applicant to return to the Planning Commission for review and approval of equipment that is not underground, roof mounted and appropriately screened, or located within the building. At the April 24, 2007 Planning Commission meeting, the Applicant noted that future equipment needs may be accommodated by adding a basement to the building. Staff has determined that the addition of a basement would increase the overall square footage of the building, regardless of what the basement is used for, and therefore would require, 1) additional environmental review; 2) an amendment to the Development Plan for the Planned Development Zoning District in which the Project is located; 3) an amendment to the Conditional Use permit for the Hospital; and, 4) an amendment to the Site Development Review for modifications to the site layout. Such amendments would be required to be brought before the Planning Commission for recommendation to the City Council. Provide Additional Information on Staffin~ and Parking The tenant for the Project is currently unknown therefore the Applicant has estimated staffing levels based on comparable hospitals. The Project proposes to have a total of 450 employees and 75 doctors; the Applicant estimates there will be 150 employees and 25 doctors on the largest shift. It is unknown at this time what the actual staffing levels will be or when the shift changes would occur. The Applicant has been working with a hospital consultant to estimate the staffing levels for the proposed 100-bed hospital and feels comfortable that the estimates are an accurate representation of what is likely to occur. The City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 8.76, Off Street Parking and Loading Regulations, sets forth the parking requirements for a hospital use as follows: . 1 space for every 3 beds · 1 space for every 3 employees on the largest shift . 1 space for every doctor As discussed in the April 24, 2007 Planning Commission Agenda Statement (Page 7 of Attachment 7), the Project proposes to provide 100 beds, 150 employees on the largest shift and 25 doctors on the largest shift for a total parking requirement of 108 spaces. Combined with the 492 parking spaces required for the Phase One medical office buildings, a grand total of 600 parking spaces are required for both Phase One and Phase Two; all parking spaces, both surface and structured, would be shared between the two phases. The Project proposes to provide 684 parking spaces (512 spaces in the parking garage and 172 surface spaces), 84 spaces (or 14%) more than what is required. This additional parking is anticipated to reduce any potential peak parking demands that may occur during shift changes. To address the Planning Commission's concerns that there may not be adequate parking for the Project, Staff consulted a variety of sources (surrounding Tri-Valley cities, the American Planning Association's Parking Standards publication and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Standards) to obtain parking standards for hospital uses. Based on this research, Staff found that there is not one typical parking standard for a hospital but rather a variety of standards. In particular, Staff contacted the City of Pleasanton and the City of San Ramon since both of these communities currently have hospitals operating within their jurisdiction. San Ramon Regional Medical Center, located in San Ramon, has 187 patient beds and ValleyCare, located in P1easanton, has 137e 60f8 \14-D(j~~ patient beds. Both communities have a lower parking standard than Dublin resulting in fewer required parking spaces. To better understand actual parking operations, Staff conducted a site visit to ValleyCare in Pleasanton and spoke with a representative of Valley Care. The site visit was conducted at 10:00am on a Wednesday morning and revealed that the parking spaces closest to the entrances to the medical office buildings and hospital were largely full while parking further from the entrances was available. In speaking with a representative of ValleyCare, Staff learned that two issues the facility faces with respect to parking are physicians who park in the patient parking areas closer to the entrances to the building and BART patrons who park at the facility and walk to the nearby BART shuttle stop. The perception that ValleyCare does not have sufficient parking may be attributed largely to these two factors. With respect to Dublin Gateway, the vast majority of parking will be contained in the parking garage which means that physicians, employees, patients and visitors will all be walking relatively the same distance to the entrance of the hospital building. Based on the research conducted and the number of parking spaces proposed to be provided, which exceeds the number of spaces required by the Dublin Zoning Ordinance by 14%, it appears that there would be sufficient parking for the Project. CONCLUSION: The Project has been revised to address the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission at the April 24, 2007 public hearing. The Applicant has revised the architecture of the proposed hospital building to include a "notch" in the building at the comer of Dublin Boulevard and Glynnis Rose Drive. The loading dock area has also been revised to allow delivery trucks to access the site in a forward moving direction thus reducing potential conflicts between delivery trucks and other vehicular traffic along Glynnis Rose Drive. The elevations of the parking garage have also been revised to include the following architectural elements: a cornice, aluminum fins, aluminum clad canopies and colored glass. The exterior of the parking garage is also proposed to be better screened by introducing Coast Redwood trees along the south and west elevations. The trash enclosures which were previously located adjacent to Dublin Boulevard have been relocated to the north side of the parking garage and will be screened with landscaping on three sides. Lastly, the conditions of approval have been revised to address loading dock activities, waste removal and the placement of electrical, mechanical and plumbing equipment. Furthermore, the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan has been amended to include language requiring Planning Commission and City Council review if additional square footage is added to the Project (i.e. a basement) and/or equipment or uses are not consistent with this approval. The Project is consistent with the Dublin General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (see Pages 12-14 of Attachment 7) and represents an appropriate project for the site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1) Receive Staff presentation; 2) Open the public hearing; 3) Take testimony from the Applicant and the public; 4) Close public hearing and deliberate; 5) Adopt Resolution (Attachment 1) recommending City Council adoption of a CEQA Addendum; 6) Adopt Resolution (Attachment 2) recommending City Council adoption ofa Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan; 7) Adopt Resolution (Attachment 3) recommending City Council approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review; 8) Adopt Resolution (Attachment 4) recommending City Council adoption of a Development Agreement. 70f8 \ 15rtJ If>ct GENERAL INFORMATION: APPLICANT! PROPERTY OWNER: Joseph D. Carroll, Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P., 8001 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 10000, Irvine, CA 92618 LOCATION: 4084 and 4100 Dublin Boulevard ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER(S): 986-0016-021 and 986-0016-022 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: Campus Office SPECIFIC PLAN! LAND USE DESIGNATION: Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, Campus Office ZONING: PD, Planned Development (PA 98-047) SURROUNDING USES: Location Zoning General Plan Land Use Current Use of Property Site PD Campus Office Medical Office Planned Development North PD General Commercial Retail Commercial Planned Development South PD Campus Office Professional Office Planned Development East PD General Commercial Vacant Planned Development West PD Campus Office Retail Commercial Planned Development 80f8 DRAFT DRAFT C01 ~ * on CALL TO ORDERlROLL CALL A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 8, 2007, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Schaub called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Present: Chair Schaub, Vice Chair Wehrenberg, Commissioners Biddle, King, and Tomlinson; Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager; Marnie Nuccio, Associate Planer; and Rhonda Franklin, Recording Secretary. Absent: None ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA - NONE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS The April 24, 2007 minutes were approved as submitted. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - NONE CONSENT CALENDAR - NONE WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS 8.1 Continuation of P A 06-026 Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage - Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and Development Agreement (Adjudicatory and Legislative Actions). Chair Schaub stated that the Planning Commission is being asked to approve an application for a hospital, but is being provided project plans that title the project as a Medical Office Building. Chair Schaub asked for the Staff Report. Ms. Marnie Nuccio, Associate Planner, presented the specifics of the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Chair Schaub asked if any parking spaces were removed as a result of the relocation of the trash enclosures, and Ms. Nuccio stated that no parking spaces were removed. Chair Schaub pointed out that the excess of 84 parking stalls includes 17 motorcycle stalls. ('omrmssi"n 47 8, 2001' ?l~ murt-8 DRAFT DRAFT Chair Schaub sought clarification on the two construction options that would be granted to the Applicant should the project be approved. Ms. Nuccio explained that the Applicant could either construct a 3-story, 58,000 square foot medical office building with a 4-level parking garage; or a 6-story, 100-bed hospital building with a 5-level parking garage. Chair Schaub sought clarification that a project approval would only allow a 6-story hospital building to be built, and not a 6-story medical office building, even though the plans indicate that the 6-story building is a medical office building. Ms. Nuccio explained that although the project plans label the building as a medical office building, all of the approval documentation, including the Development Plan, specifies that if the 6-story building is constructed, it can only be used as a hospital building. If the Developer decides to not use the 6-story building as a hospital building, the Developer would have to apply for a Planned Development Rezone and amend the Development Plan accordingly. Chair Schaub sought clarification that if the hospital building is constructed, would the project return to the Planning Commission with applications for the necessary amenities required for a hospital. He pointed out that the Planning Commission would have the authority to approve or deny the application at that time. Ms. Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager, explained that if the Applicant could install the amenities within the existing design of the building, the application may not need to return to the Planning Commission for review. Vice Chair Wehrenberg asked if the requirement of a Central Utility Plan would require the project to return to the Planning Commission for review. Ms. Wilson explained that the construction of a Central Utility Plan in a separate building is not a part of the Applicant's Planned Development Plan before the City at this time; therefore, an amended project could be subject to additional City review. Cm. Biddle asked about the review process of the State of California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD). He expressed concern that the 100-bed configuration of the building could change based on OSHPD's review process. Ms. Nuccio explained that if the number of beds increases, the project would have to return to the City for review because all of the analysis on the project was based on a maximum of 100 beds. Chair Schaub stated that if there were less beds and more office use, there would be parking issues. Ms. Nuccio explained that the entire building must be used for hospital functions. She further stated that if portions of the hospital were converted for other uses, the project would have to return to the City for reVIew. Cm. Tomlinson asked about the anticipated size of trucks that would be trafficking the loading zone. Ms. Nuccio explained that the Applicant anticipates that the vast majority of deliveries would be made by bobtail trucks, with occasional semi trucks. She further explained that the loading zone was designed to accommodate semi trucks. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that she would like to add to the Initial Study that if generators or other noise generating sources are used, the project be brought back to the City for additional review. Ms. Nuccio explained that because generators are not part of the current application, the potential noise impact of generators was not analyzed as part of the Environmental Review. p[annmg Commissirm 48 8, 200? DRAFT DRAFT She further explained that if the Applicant identifies the need for generators on the site plan, Staff would conduct a noise analysis and, if necessary, require the Applicant to attenuate impacts accordingly. If the Applicant can not attenuate impacts accordingly, then Staff would conduct additional environmental review and the project would return to the Planning Commission. Vice Chair Wehrenberg added that she would like to add the potential use of helicopters to the Initial Study as well. Cm. King expressed concern about whether the correct direction for trucks entering the loading zone would be obvious. Ms. Nuccio stated that signage can be installed at the entrance of the loading zone to guide the drivers. Cm. Tomlinson pointed out that most deliveries would probably be from the same companies, thus the drivers would gain familiarity with the navigation of the loading zone. Chair Schaub pointed out that the entrance to the loading zone is in the area of the egress for the Ulferts Shopping Center. He stated that to reduce the load on Glynnis Rose Drive, signage could easily be added to the Ulferts parking lot to direct consumers to exit in a different direction. Chair Schaub opened the public hearing. Mr. Rick Needham, with Triad Partners, spoke if favor of the project on behalf of the Applicant. Chair Schaub asked for Planning Commission feedback on the architectural changes to the building. The Planning Commissioners stated that they are pleased with the improvements. Chair asked for Planning Commission feedback on the changes to the loading zone. Cm. Biddle asked for clarification on truck routes into the loading zone. Staff explained that from Dublin Boulevard, trucks should take Tassajara Road, to Koll Center Drive, to Glynnis Rose Drive to the loading zone. From the 1-580 Tassajara ramps, trucks should take Koll Center Drive to Glynnis Rose Drive to the loading zone. Vice Chair Wehrenberg asked if signage for truck traffic would be addressed. Ms. Wilson explained that signage for truck traffic would be addressed as part of the Master Sign Program. Cm. King expressed concern about whether there would be enough space for forward movement in order for trucks to back out appropriately. Mr. Jim Terry, with Ware Malcolmb Architects, stated that the turning radius for the loading zone was designed for larger trucks; however, smaller trucks would most often frequent the loading zone. Mr. Needham stated that the larger trucks would typically arrive at the loading zone in the early morning. . Chair Schaub asked about the quantity of truck deliveries per week. Ms. Cynthia Lee, Health Care Consultant, spoke in favor of the project on behalf of the Applicant. She stated that she contacted several comparable institutions to get an estimate of the number of deliveries per week. She stated that it is anticipated that 10-12 deliveries would be made per week. Vice Chair Wehrenberg asked if this number included food deliveries, and Ms. Lee said yes. Chair Schaub stated that without a cafeteria in the building, finished foods would also need to be delivered. Ms. Lee clarified that it is anticipated that the building would have a cafeteria, and thus would not need finished food deliveries. 49 ~1,rfay 8, 20tJ/ DRAFT DRAFT Vice Chair Wehrenberg pointed out that the project plans for the hospital are missing key elements such as an operating room, cafeteria, and pharmacy. She asked if the project plans would change based on the needs of the tenant. Mr. Joseph Carroll, Applicant, spoke in favor of the project. He explained that the Development Team, knowing that the tenants would come at a later date, created project plans that depicted the most important factors of the project such as the bed count, circulation, the emergency department, and the loading zone. He stated that the Development Team did not want to propose project plans to the Planning Commission that would ultimately change based on the specific needs of a tenant. Mr. Carroll reiterated that the loading zone was sized for an 18-wheel semi truck; although bobtail trucks would frequent the loading zone 90% of the time. Cm. Biddle pointed out that a positive feature of the loading zone is that the area is large enough to accommodate two trucks. Cm. King asked about the view of the loading zone from Glynnis Rose Drive, and Mr. Carroll stated that it would look like the sides of building. Ms. Nuccio added that the loading zone was designed to accommodate two trucks. She also stated that the Conditions of Approval (COAs) were revised to include that should any activities related to the loading zone become a problem, the Applicant would be required to provide a plan that outlines loading zone activities subject to approval by the City. Chair Schaub stated that this loading zone is significant because it is located near a busy street; whereas most loading zones are not. Vice Chair Wehrenberg confirmed that the Applicant would locate a tenant before going too far with the project, and Mr. Carroll said yes. Vice Chair Wehrenberg pointed out that the loading zone would generate a lot of trash and that medical waste would need to be addressed as well. Chair Schaub asked for Planning Commission feedback on the changes to the trash enclosures. The Planning Commissioners stated that it is a big improvement. Cm. Biddle pointed out that, if necessary, it would be easy to enlarge the trash enclosures in this location. Cm. Biddle asked how hazardous waste would be handled. Ms. Lee stated that hazardous waste is typically disposed of in locked containers near the loading zone and is handled separately from regular trash. Chair Schaub asked for Planning Commission feedback on the changes to the parking structure. The Planning Commissioners stated that they are happy with the changes. Cm. Biddle expressed concern with the disparity of parking spaces allotted to the medical offices as opposed to the hospital. Mr. Carroll explained that the shared parking arrangement would provide for adequate parking. Vice Chair Wehrenberg pointed out that afternoon shift changes could potentially strain parking availability. Mr. Carroll stated that the demand for parking generally tails off in the afternoon. Vice Chair Wehrenberg asked about the potential to modify the parking based on the needs of future tenants. Mr. Carroll stated that it is anticipated that the current parking q>[anni7liJ ('ommFswn <R.qfu&l1' 50 8, 200? DRAFT DRAFT would handle the needs of future tenants. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that in regard to the motorcycle spaces, there would probably be little demand for motorcycle parking at a hospital. Vice Chair Wehrenberg asked if they have had to display signage to distinguish employee parking from patient parking. Mr. Carroll stated that they designate parking spaces for employees and patients. Vice Chair Wehrenberg expressed concerned about parking overflowing into the Ulferts Shopping Center. Cm. Tomlinson stated that he is comfortable with the number of parking spaces at the project. He stated that his concern is that patrons from the shopping center might overflow into the project's parking areas. Vice Chair Wehrenberg asked if the Applicant would be allowed to add another level to the parking garage if parking spaces were eliminated due to the placement of mechanical equipment. Ms. Nuccio stated that in such a case, the Applicant would need to apply for an amendment to the Site Development Review. Cm. Biddle asked if the parking structure would be built before the hospital. Mr. Carroll stated that it is required that the parking structure be built before the hospital. Cm. King stated that he is concerned about the idea that the form of the building is following the function, instead of function following form. He asked if it is typical for a building shell to be constructed before tenants are identified. He further stated that he is concerned the future tenants might want to change the building to suit their needs. Mr. Carroll explained that the room plan was the critical factor in ensuring that the building would be compatible with the needs of potential tenants. Chair Schaub asked Mr. Carroll if he has built a hospital before, and Mr. Carroll said no. Vice Chair Wehrenberg expressed concerns that the OSHPD review process may require architectural changes to the building. Mr. Carroll stated that he does not think this will be the case; however, if changes are necessary, they would revisit the plans. Cm. Biddle expressed concern that double-occupancy rooms would be more desirable to future tenants instead of single occupancy rooms. Mr. Carroll stated that he believes that single occupancy rooms are more desirable. Vice Chair Wehrenberg added that patient satisfaction is higher in single occupancy rooms. Cm. Biddle expressed concern with whether various medical specialties would be able to function in the 100-bed configuration of the building. He questioned whether the facility could accommodate amenities such as food service operations, pharmacy, operating room, morgue, etc. Mr. Needham explained that the Development Team modeled and tested three specific design plans for the building and all of the design plans were functional. Mr. Carroll explained that the Development Team has worked with consultants in the hospital field that have advised them that the current design is functional and would work with various tenants. Cm. Biddle asked about the process of finding a tenant. Mr. Carroll stated the he is currently talking with potential tenants. Cm. Biddle asked about the timeframe for completing the building, and Mr. Carroll stated that it could take 3-5 years. 51 Ii, ?OtJI' DRAFT DRAFT Vice Chair Wehrenberg suggested that the Applicant submit plans to the City before submitting them to OSHPD to help alleviate potential issues. Mr. Carroll stated that he would work with the City during the design development. Chair Schaub asked about the Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CCRs). Ms. Nuccio explained that the CCRs are in place to govern the relationship between the 4 parcels on the site. Mr. Gary Sloan, San Ramon Medical Center Chief Executive Officer, expressed concern about the impacts a new hospital could have on existing hospitals, as well as police and fire protection services, within the Tri-Valley. Mr. Sloan stated that the Planning Commission did not have enough information regarding the project to make an informed decision. He stated that the Planning Commission should know who the tenant will be before making a decision on the project. Cm. Biddle asked about the differences in hospital types and the associated impacts on parking, traffic, etc. Mr. Sloan gave several examples of various hospitals and their associated impacts. Chair Schaub closed the public hearing. Cm. Tomlinson stated that the project is worthy of support. He stated that the Applicant was responsive to the Planning Commission's concerns and recommendations. He further stated that he is satisfied with the amount of parking at the project, as well as Staff's research on parking at comparable facilities. He stated that the neighboring buildings are adequately parked per the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. He stated that the Conditions of Approval are appropriate and sufficient for the project and that it is the responsibility of the Applicant to find a tenant that can function within the approved project. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that the project is lacking the infrastructure needed to support a potential tenant. She asked if the project would return to the Planning Commission if the parking was impacted by future changes. Ms. Wilson explained that the Site Development Review (SDR) Findings are based on the current design of the site, including surface parking and access; therefore, if the site design changes, amended plans would have to be resubmitted and reviewed by the City. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that COA No. 18 should also require that loading dock activities be reviewed when a tenant is identified and prior to any plan submittals. Ms. Wilson suggested that the additional language be included as a part of COA No. 22. Vice Chair Wehrenberg expressed concern about screening oxygen tanks and stated that the potential use of oxygen tanks should be identified as early as possible. Chair Schaub added that the potential use of generators should also be identified as early as possible. Ms. Wilson suggested that those concerns be addressed in COA No. 22. She further stated that the addition of an oxygen tank and/ or generator to the plans could trigger additional review from the City. Vice Chair Wehrenberg suggested that the Fire Department COAs include a review of the hazardous materials plans. She pointed out that the City will own the building once OSHPD 52 'May fi ::UO/ DRAFT DRAFT finals the building. Ms. Wilson suggested that the additional language be included as a part of COA No. 22. Vice Chair Wehrenberg suggested that the tenant be required to provide a staffing plan to confirm that the parking is adequate. Ms. Wilson stated that the condition can be added to the COAs. Chair Schaub reiterated that this project has a lot of open-ended issues. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that she does not feel that 3 acres is conducive for a hospitals site, including the parking garage. Vice Chair Wehrenberg suggested that a condition be added that requires any plans for helicopters and associated facilities be submitted to the City. Ms. Wilson stated that under CEQA, plans for a helicopter and associated facilities would have to be reviewed and analyzed. She stated that the application for the project indicates that there will not be a helicopter or associated facilities for the project. Cm. Biddle asked if the tenant would have to submit plans to the City each time plans are submitted to OSHPD. Ms. Nuccio explained that the requirement is currently in the COAs. Cm. Biddle stated that in general, he likes the concept of having a hospital in the City and he likes the architecture of the building. He stated he feels a little more comfortable with the project. Vice Chair Wehrenberg asked if the COAs could be attached to the tenant's lease agreement. Ms. Wilson stated that such a request could be asked of the Applicant. Ms. Wilson pointed out that there are multiple points in the process where Staff would notify the tenant of the COAs for the project. Cm. Tomlinson also pointed out that COA No. 15 seems to be a broad lever in which to ensure the project remains consistent with the COAs. Mr. Carroll stated that he would comply with the Planning Commission's request to attach the COAs to future tenants' lease agreement. Cm. King stated that he likes the design of the project. Chair Schaub stated that he likes the project. He stated that it is important to get the project finished they way the project is approved. He pointed out that COA No. 15 establishes that the project is subject to annual review. He stated that he does not want the project to be put in jeopardy because of significant infrastructure problems. The Planning Commission complemented Staff on the work done on this project. The Planning Commission also thanked the Development Team members for their work on the project. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that the project plans should be labeled Hospital and not Medical Office Building. Commission 53 8, 200? DRAFT DRAFT Ms. Wilson confirmed that the Applicant, Mr. Carroll, concurs with the amendments to the COAs. On a motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. Tomlinson, with a suggestion to amend the Resolution of the City Council Approving a Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review to amend Condition of Approval No. 22 to include: "The Applicant shall also submit a hazardous materials plan and a typical schedule of loading dock activities including types of deliveries, number of deliveries, and types of vehicles."; and with a suggestion to add Condition of Approval No. 22A to read: "Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the parking garage, the Applicant shall provide the City with a written statement identifying the hospital tenant and the specific staffing levels with respect to the number of doctors and employees on the largest shift. If the numbers of doctors or employees on the largest shift increases, a parking analysis shall be conducted to ensure that adequate parking will be provided in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance. If additional parking is needed, the Applicant shall apply for an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review and such application shall be reviewed and approved prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for the parking garage."; and with a suggestion to add Condition of Approval No. 26A to read: "The Developer shall provide a copy of the approved Conditions of Approval to all future tenants.", and by a vote of 5-0-0, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 23 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A CEQA ADDENDUM FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE STAGE 1 AND STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT (PA 98-047) AND FORA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE DUBLIN GATEWAY MEDICAL CENTER BUILDING 3 HOSPITAL AND GARAGE PROJECT LOCATED AT 4100 AND 4084 DUBLIN BOULEVARD APN 986-0016-021 & 986-0016-022 P A 06-026 RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 24 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONE AND STAGE 1 AND 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DUBLIN GATEWAY MEDICAL CENTER BUILDING 3 HOSPITAL AND GARAGE PROJECT LOCATED AT 4084 AND 4100 DUBLIN BOULEVARD APN 986-0016-021 & 986-0016-022 P A 06-026 Commission 54 8,2007 DRAFT DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 25 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN REFERRING DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY AND RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROV AL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE DUBLIN GATEWAY MEDICAL CENTER BUILDING 3 HOSPTIAL AND GARAGE PROJECT LOCATED AT 4084 AND 4100 DUBLIN BOULEVARD APN 986-0016-021 & 986-0016-022 P A 06-026 RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 26 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROV AL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE DUBLIN GATEWAY MEDICAL CENTER BUILDING 3 HOSPITAL AND GARAGE PROJECT LOCATED AT 4084 AND 4100 DUBLIN BOULEVARD APN 986-0016-021 & 986-0016-022 P A 06-026 NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NONE OTHER BUSINESS Cm. Tomlinson informed the Planning Commission and Staff that he would be on vacation during the August 14,2007 Planning Commission meeting. Cm. King stated that if the Planning Commission is going to discuss projects that impact Dublin Boulevard, he would like to know the City's position with regard to regional transportation planning. Ms. Wilson stated that she would research the issue. 10.1 Brief INFORMATION ONLY reports from the Planning Commission and/or Staff, including Committee Reports and Reports by the Planning Commission related to meetings attended at City Expense (AB 1234). The Planning Commission did not have any items to report. 55 8, 2007 DRAFT ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: Planning Manager Comrmssion 56 DRAFT 8, ZOO? \f1"b'ii RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 23 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A CEQA ADDENDUM FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE STAGE 1 AND STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT (P A 98-047) AND FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE DUBLIN GATEWAY MEDICAL CENTER BUILDING 3 HOSPITAL AND GARAGE PROJECT LOCATED AT 4100 AND 4084 DUBLIN BOULEVARD APN 986-0016-021 & 986-0016-022 P A 06-026 WHEREAS, Phase Two of the Dublin Gateway Medical Center was approved by Planning Commission Resolution 05-06 for construction of a 3-story, 58,000 square foot medical office building and a 4-level parking garage on 3.13:!: acres of land, located at 4100 and 4084 Dublin Boulevard (the "Original Approval"); and WHEREAS, the Dublin Gateway Medical Center is also a portion of the Dublin Corporate Center (formerly the Koll Dublin Corporate Center), within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area and Planned Development Zoning District (P A 98-047); and WHEREAS, the Applicant, Joseph D. Carroll on behalf of Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P., has requested approval of a Planned Development Rezone, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and Development Agreement to construct a 6-story, 168,000 square foot, 100-bed hospital and a 5-level parking garage (the "Project") on the same 3.13:!: acres ofland, located at 4100 and 4084 Dublin Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the Project would provide the Applicant with the option of constructing the Original Approval or the Project as Phase Two of the Dublin Gateway Medical Center for the life of the Original Approval and the Project entitlements; and WHEREAS, the Project requires approval of a Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan to allow for the following: 1) an increase in square footage on Lot 7 of Tract 7064 for the Dublin Corporate Center (PA 98-047); 2) revisions to the site plan approved under PA 98-047; 3) revisions to the landscape plan approved under PA 98-047; and, 4) revisions to the development regulations approved under PA 98-047; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the original Development Plan for Planned Development Zoning District, PA 98-047 (Exhibits A-I and A-2 of Ordinance 22-98 incorporate herein by reference), the Project requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment and operation of a Hospital/Medical Center; and WHEREAS, the Project requires approval of Site Development Review for the development of the 6-story hospital building and 5-level parking garage; and WHEREAS, any approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review is contingent upon City Council approval of the Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan; and Attachment 9 '1'8 ff{) (~$ WHEREAS, on May 8, 2007 the Planning Commission will consider the Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, the Conditional Use Permit and the Site Development Review; and WHEREAS, a complete application has been submitted and is available and on file in the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has submitted project plans and exterior elevations dated received May 3, 2007, for the required approvals; and WHEREAS, the Project is within the General Plan Eastern Extended Planning Area and within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area for which a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan (the "Eastern Dublin EIR") pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by City Council Resolution 51-93 and the Addenda dated May 4, 1993 and August 22, 1994 (SCH No. 91103064). The certified EIR, resolution and addenda are incorporated herein by reference. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified significant unavoidable impacts from development of the eastern Dublin area some of which would apply to the Project; and WHEREAS, the Project area is located within a portion of the Santa Rita Property for which the City Council previously approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration by Resolution 123-96 on October 15, 1996 (both incorporated herein by reference); and WHEREAS, the City Council previously approved a General Plan/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment for Dublin Ranch West by Resolution 42-05 and certified a related Supplemental EIR on March 15,2005 (both incorporated herein by reference); and WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted Ordinance 22-98 on December 15, 1998 approving a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for the Koll Dublin Corporate Center and finding the project within the scope of the Eastern Dublin EIR (incorporated herein by reference); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study has been prepared for the Project and a determination has been made that the proposed Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. The Project has been found to be within the scope ofthe Program EIR for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan (the "Eastern Dublin EIR") (SCH No. 91103064); the Santa Rita Property Mitigated Negative Declaration (the "Santa Rita Property MND") (SCH No. 96082092); and, the cumulative traffic analysis of the Dublin Ranch West Environmental Impact Report (the "Dublin Ranch West EIR") (~CH No. 2004112094). Together, the Eastern Dublin EIR, Santa Rita Property MND, and the cumulative traffic analysis of the Dublin Ranch West EIR, adequately describe the total Project for the purpose ofCEQA. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, an Addendum has been prepared to reflect project changes from the prior CEQA analyses. The Addendum and related Initial Study dated January 2007 are attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on said application on April 24, 2007 and on May 8,2007; and WHERAS, on April 24, 2007 the Planning Commission considered the Addendum, Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and Development Agreement and voted to continue the public hearing to May 8, 2007, directing Staff and the Applicant to address the following: 1) reduce the massing of the building at Dublin Boulevard and Glynnis Rose Drive by notching the corner of the building; 2) revise the loading dock area to facilitate truck turning movements which would not interfere with vehicular traffic on Glynnis Rose Drive; 3) relocate 20f3 \ 1~ t1b t8~ the trash enclosures to an internal location on the site; 4) include architectural elements on all four sides of the parking garage and revise the vegetative screen on the south elevation; 5) identify operational equipment such as generators and oxygen tanks and how the location and screening of these items will be addressed; and, 6) provide additional information on staffing levels (i.e. shift changes, staffing plan) and parking requirell1ents; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings were given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission recommend City Council adoption of a CEQA Addendum; 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 Planning Commission of the City of Dublin does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding said proposed Addendum: 1. The Dublin Planning Commission reviewed and considered the Addendum prior to considering the Proj ect. 2. The Initial Study/Addendum determined that the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment beyond those identified in prior CEQA reviews. There is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment beyond those identified in prior CEQA reviews. 3. The Addendum has been completed in compliance with CEQA, CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines. 4. The Addendum is complete and adequate and reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis as to the environmental effects of the proposed Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin does hereby recommend that the City Council adopt a CEQA Addendum, attached as Exhibit A, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage Project. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of May 2007 by the following vote: AYES: Chair Schaub, Vice Chair Wehrenberg, Commissioners Biddle, King, Tomlinson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: Planning Manager G:\PA#\2006\06-026 Dublin Gateway B1dg 3 Mod\Public Hearing Documents\Enviro\Final Documents\PC Reso Addendum_done.doc 30f3 \ '6D "b \fS't RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 24 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONE AND STAGE 1 AND 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DUBLIN GATEWAY MEDICAL CENTER BUILDING 3 HOSPITAL AND GARAGE PROJECT LOCATED AT 4084 AND 4100 DUBLIN BOULEVARD APN 986-0016-021 & 986-0016-022 P A 06-026 WHEREAS, Phase Two of the Dublin Gateway Medical Center was approved by Planning Commission Resolution 05-06 for construction of a 3-story, 58,000 square foot medical office building and a 4-level parking garage on 3.13=!:: acres of land, located at 4084 and 4100 Dublin Boulevard (the "Original Approval"); and WHEREAS, the Dublin Gateway Medical Center is also a portion of the Dublin Corporate Center (formerly the Koll Dublin Corporate Center), within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area and Planned Development Zoning District (P A 98-047); and WHEREAS, the Applicant, Joseph D. Carroll on behalf of Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P., has requested approval of a Planned Development Rezone, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and Development Agreement to construct a 6-story, 168,000 square foot, 100-bed hospital and a 5-level parking garage (the "Project") on the same 3.13=!:: acres ofland, located at 4084 and 4100 Dublin Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the Project would provide the Applicant with the option of constructing the Original Approval or the Project as Phase Two of the Dublin Gateway Medical Center for the life of the Original Approval and the Proj ect entitlements; and WHEREAS, the Project requires approval of a Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan to allow for the following: 1) an increase in square footage on Lot 7 of Tract 7064 for the Dublin Corporate Center (P A 98-047); 2) revisions to the site plan approved under P A 98-047; 3) revisions to the landscape plan approved under P A 98-047; and, 4) revisions to the development regulations approved under PA 98-047; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the original Development Plan for Planned Development Zoning District, PA 98-047 (Exhibits A-I and A-2 of Ordinance 22-98 incorporated herein by reference), the Project requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment and operation of a Hospital/Medical Center; and WHEREAS, the Project requires approval of Site Development Review for the development of the 6-story hospital building and 5-level parking garage; and WHEREAS, any approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review is contingent upon City Council approval of the Planned Development Rezone; and WHEREAS, a complete application has been submitted and is available and on file in the Community Development Department; and Attachment 10 \<6l'b t~' WHEREAS, the Applicant has submitted project plans and exterior elevations dated received May 3, 2007, for the required approvals; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study has been prepared for the Project and a determination has been made that the proposed Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. The project has been found to be within the scope of the Program EIR for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan (the "Eastern Dublin EIR") (SCH No. 91103064); the Santa Rita Property Mitigated Negative Declaration (the "Santa Rita Property MND") (SCH No. 96082092); and, the Dublin Ranch West Environmental Impact Report (the "Dublin Ranch West EIR") (SCH No. 2004112094). Together, the Eastern Dublin EIR, Santa Rita Property MND, and the Dublin Ranch West EIR, adequately describe the total Project for the purpose ofCEQA. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and 15164 an Addendum has been prepared; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold public hearings on said application on April 24, 2007 and May 8, 2007; and WHERAS, on April 24, 2007 the Planning Commission considered the Addendum, Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and Development Agreement and voted to continue the public hearing to May 8, 2007, directing Staff and the Applicant to address the following: 1) reduce the massing of the building at Dublin Boulevard and Glynnis Rose Drive by notching the corner of the building; 2) revise the loading dock area to facilitate truck turning movements which would not interfere with vehicular traffic on Glynnis Rose Drive; 3) relocate the trash enclosures to an internal location on the site; 4) include architectural elements on all four sides of the parking garage and revise the vegetative screen on the south elevation; 5) identify operational equipment such as generators and oxygen tanks and how the location and screening of these items will be addressed; and, 6) provide additional information on staffing levels (i.e. shift changes, staffing plan) and parking requirements; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings were given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of a Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan; 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 Planning Commission of the City of Dublin does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding said proposed Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan. Pursuant to Section 8.12.050 ofthe Dublin Municipal Code, the Planning Commission finds: 1. The proposed amendment would be harmonious and compatible with existing and potential development in surrounding areas. The Project, as conditioned, includes amendments to the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan for Planned Development Zoning District (P A 98-047) to allow for the development of a 6-story hospital building and 5-level parking garage; the proposed amendments are harmonious and compatible with surrounding properties in that, 1) development of the site pursuant to the Project approval will result in an orderly, attractive and harmonious development project that is compatible with surrounding properties by creating logical vehicular and pedestrian linkages to adjacent properties and by using building colors and materials which are consistent with surrounding buildings creating a cohesive, unified development within the Dublin Corporate Center. 2of3 l~2~\~g 2. The subject site is physically suitable for the type, intensity of the zoning district being proposed. The Project site is currently developed with surface parking and landscaping and is generally flat in topography. The site is suitable for the proposed Project and the Project is within the allowable floor area ratio for the Dublin Corporate Center. 3. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity or be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. The Project, as conditioned, will not have an adverse effect on persons or the public in that, 1) the Project would not generate excessive noise, illumination, unsightliness, odor, smoke or other objectionable influences; and, 2) conditions of approval have been applied to the Project to ensure compliance with all Federal, State and Local regulations governing the Project. 4. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Dublin General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The Project is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area and has a General Plan and Specific Plan land use designation of Campus Office; this land use designation also allows for the establishment of General Commercial uses per the Planned Development Zoning process. The Campus Office land use designation provides for attractive, campus-like settings for office and other non-retail commercial uses that do not generate nuisances related to emissions, noise, odors, or outdoor storage and operations. The Project is a campus-like setting for a health care facility which includes existing medical office uses; the proposed hospital building will not generate nuisances related to emissions, noise, odors, or outdoor storage and operations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin does hereby recommend that the City Council adopt an Ordinance approving a Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, attached as Exhibit A, for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage project. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of May 2007 by the following vote: AYES: Chair Schaub, Vice Chair Wehrenberg, Commissioners Biddle, King, Tomlinson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: Planning Manager G:\PA#\2006\06-026 Dublin Gateway B1dg 3 Mod\Public Hearing Documents\PC\PC Reso PD Rezone_done.doc 30f3 \~~"b I~~ RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 25 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN REFERRING DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY AND RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE DUBLIN GATEWAY MEDICAL CENTER BUILDING 3 HOSPTIAL AND GARAGE PROJECT LOCATED AT 4084 AND 4100 DUBLIN BOULEVARD APN 986-0016-021 & 986-0016-022 P A 06-026 WHEREAS, Phase Two of the Dublin Gateway Medical Center was approved by Planning Commission Resolution 05-06 for construction of a 3-story, 58,000 square foot medical office building and a 4-level parking garage on 3.13! acres of land, located at 4084 and 4100 Dublin Boulevard (the "Original Approval"); and WHEREAS, the Dublin Gateway Medical Center is also a portion of the Dublin Corporate Center (formerly the Koll Dublin Corporate Center), within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area and Planned Development Zoning District (P A 98-047); and WHEREAS, the Applicant, Joseph D. Carroll on behalf of Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P., has requested approval of a Planned Development Rezone, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and Development Agreement to construct a 6-story, 168,000 square foot, 100-bed hospital and a 5-level parking garage (the "Project") on the same 3.13! acres ofland, located at 4084 and 4100 Dublin Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the Project would provide the Applicant with the option of constructing the Original Approval or the Project as Phase Two of the Dublin Gateway Medical Center for the life of the Original Approval and the Proj ect entitlements; and WHEREAS, the Project requires approval of a Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan to allow for the following: 1) an increase in square footage on Lot 7 of Tract 7064 for the Dublin Corporate Center (P A 98-047); 2) revisions to the site plan approved under P A 98-047; 3) revisions to the landscape plan approved under P A 98-047; and, 4) revisions to the development regulations approved under PA 98-047; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the original Development Plan for Planned Development Zoning District, PA 98-047 (Exhibits A-I and A-2 of Ordinance 22-98 incorporated herein by reference), the Project requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment and operation of a Hospital/Medical Center; and WHEREAS, Section 8.100.160.G of the Dublin Municipal Code requires a finding that the Project is consistent with applicable specific plans for approval of a Conditional Use Permit; and WHEREAS, one goal of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (the "Specific Plan") is that new development pays for needed services [See Specific Plan, section 10.4; Policy 10-1.]. The Specific Plan anticipates that revenues to pay for public services will come from property taxes, among other revenues (section 10.2), and the Specific Plan indicates that the monies from the Specific Plan area are anticipated Attachment 11 \-8'i'b \tg to be enough by 2014. A fiscal study was done for the Specific Plan that shows revenues and expenses, based on the assumption that property tax revenues are received from all properties; and WHEREAS, property tax revenues were a significant component of the anticipated revenues needed to pay for public services when the City adopted the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (Eastern Dublin EIR, Chapter 3.12 [concluding that property tax revenue was the primary form of new revenues]) and Impact 3.12/A found that project-generated revenues would be sufficient to cover project-generated costs after shortfalls in the early years assuming at least 25 percent share of property taxes. No mitigation was therefore required; and WHEREAS, in order to find the Project consistent with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, the Conditional Use Permit is conditioned on the payment of funds to mitigate the loss of property tax revenues if the hospital is owned and operated as a non-profit hospital and receives an exemption from property tax pursuant to state law; and WHEREAS, the Project requires approval of Site Development Review for the development of the 6-story hospital building and 5-level parking garage; and WHEREAS, any approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review is contingent upon City Council approval of the Planned Development Rezone; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.96.020.C.3 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the Planning Commission may transfer original hearing jurisdiction to the City Council at its discretion because of policy implications, unique or unusual circumstances ofthe magnitude of the Project; and WHEREAS, a complete application has been submitted and is available and on file in the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has submitted project plans and exterior elevations dated received May 3,2007, for the required approvals; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study has been prepared for the Project and a determination has been made that the proposed Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. The Project has been found to be within the scope of the Program EIR for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan (the "Eastern Dublin EIR") (SCH No. 91103064); the Santa Rita Property Mitigated Negative Declaration (the "Santa Rita Property MND") (SCH No. 96082092); and, the Dublin Ranch West Environmental Impact Report (the "Dublin Ranch West EIR") (SCH No. 2004112094). Together, the Eastern Dublin EIR, Santa Rita Property MND, and the Dublin Ranch West EIR, adequately describe the total Project for the purpose of CEQA. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 an Addendum has been prepared; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold public hearings on said application on April 24, 2007 and May 8, 2007; and WHERAS, on April 24, 2007 the Planning Commission considered the Addendum, Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and Development Agreement and voted to continue the public hearing to May 8, 2007, directing Staff and the Applicant to address the following: 1) reduce the massing of the building at Dublin Boulevard and Glynnis Rose Drive by notching the corner of the building; 2) revise the loading dock area to facilitate truck turning movements which would not interfere with vehicular traffic on Glynnis Rose Drive; 3) relocate the trash enclosures to an internal location on the site; 4) include architectural elements 20f3 \~6Ub 1~6 on all four sides of the parking garage and revise the vegetative screen on the south elevation; 5) identify operational equipment such as generators and oxygen tanks and how the location and screening of these items will be addressed; and, 6) provide additional information on staffing levels (i.e. shift changes, staffing plan) and parking requirements; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings were given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission refer their decision making authority to the City Council; 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 Dublin Planning Commission does refer their decision making authority for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage Project Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review to the City Council pursuant to Chapter 8.96.020.C.3 ofthe Zoning Ordinance and also recommends City Council approval of said Project. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of May 2007 by the following vote: AYES: Chair Schaub, Vice Chair Wehrenberg, Commissioners Biddle, King, Tomlinson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: Planning Manager G:\PA#\2006\06-026 Dublin Gateway B1dg 3 Mod\Public Hearing Documents\PC\PCReso Refer CUP SDR_done.doc 30f3 l~{.,~1S RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 26 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE DUBLIN GATEWAY MEDICAL CENTER BUILDING 3 HOSPITAL AND GARAGE PROJECT LOCATED AT 4084 AND 4100 DUBLIN BOULEVARD APN 986-0016-021 & 986-0016-022 P A 06-026 WHEREAS, Phase Two of the Dublin Gateway Medical Center was approved by Planning Commission Resolution 05-06 for construction of a 3-story, 58,000 square foot medical office building and a 4-level parking garage on 3.13::t acres of land, located at 4084 and 4100 Dublin Boulevard (the "Original Approval"); and WHEREAS, the Dublin Gateway Medical Center is also a portion of the Dublin Corporate Center (formerly the Koll Dublin Corporate Center), within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area and Planned Development Zoning District (P A 98-047); and WHEREAS, the Applicant, Joseph D. Carroll on behalf of Triad Dublin Gateway, L.P., has requested approval of a Planned Development Rezone, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and Development Agreement to construct a 6-story, 168,000 square foot, 100-bed hospital and a 5-level parking garage (the "Project") on the same 3.13::t acres ofland, located at 4084 and 4100 Dublin Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the Project would provide the Applicant with the option of constructing the Original Approval or the Project as Phase Two of the Dublin Gateway Medical Center for the life of the Original Approval and the Project entitlements; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the implementing measures of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, the Project requires approval of a Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, on April 24, 2007 and May 8, 2007 the Planning Commission did consider the Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, a complete application has been submitted and IS available and on file III the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has submitted project plans and exterior elevations dated received May 3, 2007, for the required approvals; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study has been prepared for the Project and a determination has been made that the proposed Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. The Project has been found to be within the scope ofthe Program EIR for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan (the "Eastern Dublin EIR") (SCH No. 91103064); the Santa Rita Property Mitigated Negative Declaration (the "Santa Rita Property MND") (SCH No. 96082092); and, the Dublin Ranch West Environmental Impact Report (the "Dublin Ranch West EIR") i ATTACHMENT l~ , 1~1Ob It( (SCH No. 2004112094). Together, the Eastern Dublin EIR, Santa Rita Property MND, and the Dublin Ranch West EIR, adequately describe the total Project for the purpose of CEQA. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 an Addendum has been prepared; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold public hearings on said application on April 24, 2007 and May 8,2007; and WHERAS, on April 24, 2007 the Planning Commission considered the Addendum, Planned Development Rezone and Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and Development Agreement and voted to continue the public hearing to May 8, 2007, directing Staff and the Applicant to address the following: 1) reduce the massing of the building at Dublin Boulevard and Glynnis Rose Drive by notching the corner of the building; 2) revise the loading dock area to facilitate truck turning movements which would not interfere with vehicular traffic on Glynnis Rose Drive; 3) relocate the trash enclosures to an internal location on the site; 4) include architectural elements on all four sides of the parking garage and revise the vegetative screen on the south elevation; 5) identify operational equipment such as generators and oxygen tanks and how the location and screening of these items will be addressed; and, 6) provide additional information on staffing levels (i.e. shift changes, staffing plan) and parking requirements; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings were given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the Development Agreement; 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 Planning Commission of the City of Dublin does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding said proposed Development Agreement: 1. Approval of the Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan in that, 1) the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designations for the Project site is Campus Office with a provision for General Commercial uses through the Planned Development Zoning process and that the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage project is consistent with these designations; 2) the Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the fiscal policies of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan in relation to the provision of infrastructure and public services; 3) the Development Agreement sets forth the rules the Developer and the City will be governed by during the development process which is required by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 2. Approval of 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, 1) as noted above, the Project is consistent with the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designations of Campus Office; and 2) the Project is consistent with the Development Plan for the Planned Development Zoning district in which it is located which 2of3 ~, \ 'b~Ob lt~ allows for the establishment of a hospital as a conditional use and the establishment of a parking garage as a permitted use. 3. Approval of the Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare and good land use practice in that, the Project will implement the land use guidelines set forth in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan as proposed. 4. Approval of the Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare in that, the Project will proceed in accordance with the Development Agreement and all conditions of approval for the Project. 5. Approval of 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 City of Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin does hereby recommend that the City Council adopt an Ordinance approving a Development Agreement, attached as Exhibit A, for the Dublin Gateway Medical Center Building 3 Hospital and Garage project. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of May 2007 by the following vote: AYES: Chair Schaub, Vice Chair Wehrenberg, Commissioners Biddle, King, Tomlinson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: Planning Manager G:\PA#\2006\06-026 Dublin Gateway B1dg 3 Mod\Public Hearing Documents\PC\PC Reso DA_done.doc 3of3