Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.3 Attach4 Draft EIR (2) · Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites; · Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access road, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites; · Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent pUblic streets; · Hydroseed or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas; · Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.); · Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph; · Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways; · Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITGATION The proposed project would have a significant and unmitigatable cumulative impact on regional air quality, 4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES This section describes the potential impacts of the proposed project on biological resources, including regulatory requirements and, plant and wildlife resources. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project site background Previous studies and documentation for the Dublin Transit Center project site and adjacent properties include the following: Inventory of Special-Status Plants and Wildlife Species at Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Jones & Stokes 1995); BART Dublin/PIeasanton Extension, Preliminary lurisdictional Determination: Maps I and lA (Reynolds, 1994); Preliminary Wetland Assessment: Iron Horse Trail Extension, Alameda County, California (Harding Lawson Associates, 2000); Iron Horse Trial Extension California red-legged frog and California tiger salamander site assessment (H.T. Harvey & Associates, 2000); and Santa Rita Property Aerial Photo (Brian Kangas Foulk,1998). The proposed Dublin Transit Center lies at the southern end of the study area covered in the 1995 Jones and Stokes species inventory report. The surveys conducted for the 1995 report found no special-status plants; however, five special-status wildlife species were documented in the Camp Parks study area during the 1995 surveys and potential habitat for six special-status wildlife species was found on the Parks Reserve Forces Training Area. None of those special- Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 54 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin status wildlife species found were located on the Dublin Transit Center project site however (Jones & Stokes 1995). In 1995, BART was issued a Nationwide permit from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers to fill 2.8 acres of wetlands on the Dublin Transit Center project site. The wetland/water features that were permitted to be filled were shown on the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination: Maps 1, lA (Reynolds, 1994). These wetlands were filled in 1997, with some additional grading in 1998. These impacts were mitigated by BART through the creation of new wetlands on the adjacent Army property to the north. Most of the project site has been a construction site almost continuously since 1995, and most of the site has been disced twice a year since 1997 (Stuart Cook, pers. comm.). Since 1995, BART constructed the Iron Horse Parkway, DeMarcus Boulevard, and the Dublin BART parking lot. Alameda County made drainage improvements on the remaining portion of the site. The road and parking improvements were constructed approximately a foot above existing grade. This work was completed in 1997 (Stuart Cook, pers. comm.). Site conditions following these activity are documented on the 1998 Santa Rita Property Aerial Photo (Kangas Foulk,1998). In April and July of 2000, H.T. Harvey & Associates staff produced two reports: Iron Horse Trial Extension California red-legged frog and California tiger salamander site assessment and Iron Horse Trial Extension California red-legged frog protocol-level survey (H.T. Harvey & Associates, 2000). These reports identify three pools along the Iron Horse Trail Extension project, which could potentially support foraging and dispersing habitat for California red-legged frogs. Only one of the pools is located within the Dublin Transit Center project site. One of the off-site pools located on the southwest end of the trail and west of the BART station parking lot could provide breeding habitat for California tiger salamanders, however no upland estivation habitat for California tiger salamanders occurs at or near this site. Methods Prior to conducting a survey of biological resources on the Dublin Transit Center property, the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CDFG 2000) and the California Native Plant Society Electronic Inventory (CNPS 2000) were consulted to identify sensitive habitats and special-status species known to occur in the vicinity of the City of Dublin. LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) conducted a reconnaissance-level survey of biological resources on the Dublin Transit Center site on NoVember 29, 2000. LSA wildlife biologist Hope Kingma and botanist Rebecca Sherry walked transects in a random pattern over the entire site. The purpose of the field survey was to 1) identify Plant and wildlife species present; 2) identify sensitive habitats; 3) identify special-status species and/or habitats that could support special-status species; and 4) identify potentially jurisdictional wetland and watercourse features. No species-specific surveys or formal wetland delineation were completed at this time. All sensitive habitats and special-status species observed were recorded in field notes and mapped on a site diagram at a 1 inch = 250 feet Dublin TranSit Center PA 00-013 Page 55 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin -- scale (Exhibit 9). Lists of plant and animal species observed are presented in · Tables 8a and 8b. Regulatory Context The project site is located within the general geographic range of several sensitive plant communities and special-statUs plant and wildlife species, (Rana including federally protected species such as the California red-legged frog aurora draytonii), the large-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinkia grandiflora), and Contra Costa goldfields (Lasthenia conjugens). Biological resources on the site may fall under agency jurisdictions and be subject to regulations, as described below. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ~dan _ered S ecies Act -The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has jurisdiction over species that are formally listed as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act. The Endangered Species Act protects listed wildlife species from harm or "take." The term "take" is broadly defined as to "harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct." An activity is defined as a "take" even if it is unintentional or accidental. Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act and its applicable regulations restrict certain activities with respect to endangered and threatened plants. However, these restrictions are less stringent than those applicable to fish and wildlife species. The provisions prohibit the removal of, malicious damage to, or destruction of any listed plant species "from areas under federal jurisdiction." Listed plants may not be cut, dug up, damaged or destroyed, or removed from any other area (including private lands) in knowing violation of a state law or regulation. An endangered plant or wildlife species is one that is considered in danger of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion of its range. A threatened species is one that is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future. The Fish and Wildlife Service also maintains a list of species proposed for listing. Proposed species are those species for which a proposed rule to list as endangered or threatened has been published in the Federal Register. In addition to endangered, threatened, and proposed species, the Service maintains a list of candidate species. Candidate (formerly category 1 candidate) species are those species for which the Service has on file sufficient information to support issuance of a proposed listing rule. Any activities that could result in take of a federally listed species will require an Section 10 take permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service before allowing take activities to commence. Should another federal agency, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) under the Clean Water Act, acting as the lead agency be involved with permitting the project, Section 7 of the Endangered Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 56 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Species Act requires the federal lead agency to consult with the Service before permitting any activities that may take listed species. Migratory Bird Treaty Act - The Migratory Bird Treaty Act provides for protection for migratory bird species, birds in danger of extinction, and their active nests (including their eggs and young). Habitat features (e.g., trees, shrubs, burrows, and man-made structures (power poles)) along proposed routes provide suitable nesting sites for migratory birds. Contractors/civilians are required to obtain.a depredation permit from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to disturb nesting migratory birds. California Department of Fish and Game California Endangered Species Act - The California Department of Fish and Game has jurisdiction over threatened or endangered species that are formally listed by the State under the California Endangered Species Act. The California Endangered Species Act is similar to the federal Endangered Species Act both in process and substance; it is intended to provide additional protection to threatened and endangered species in California. The California Endangered Species Act does not supersede the federal Act, but operates in conjunction with it. Species may be listed as threatened or endangered under both acts (in which case the provisions of both state and federal laws would apply) or under only one act. Under Fish and Game Code 2050 -2068, the California Endangered Species Act policy is to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance any threatened or endangered species and its habitat (including acquiring lands fOr habitat). Compliance with the California Endangered Species Act is required because the project area is within habitats historically or currently occupied by state-listed species. If project field assessments indicate that there is a likelihood of "take" of these species, consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game is required to be in compliance with Fish and Game Code 2050 and 2091. The California endangered species laws prohibit the take of any plant listed as threatened, endangered, or rare. In California an activity on private lands (such as development) will violate Section 9 of the federal Endangered Species Act if a plant species, listed under both state and federal endangered species laws, is intentionally removed, damaged, or destroyed. The Department of Fish and Game maintains informal lists of species of special concern. These species are broadly defined as plants and wildlife that are of concern to the Department because of population declines and restricted distributions, and/or they are associated with habitats that are declining in California. These species are inventoried in the California Natural Diversity Data Base. Streambed Alteration Agreement - The California Department of Fish and Game requires that a proponent of a project notify the Department if project activities would substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 57 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake designated as suCh by the Department under Fish and Game Code Section 1600, a streambed alteration agreement could be required from the Department to conduct steam line construction activities (pouring concrete in augured holes and installing pipe supports) adjacent to and in creeks, channels, sloughs crossed by the linear elements of the project. If project activities are likely to affect areas under California Department of Fish and Game jurisdiction, a streambed alteration agreement is required. California Native Plant Society The California Native Plant Society has developed lists of plants of special concern in California (Skinner and Pavlik 1994). A List IA plant is a species, subspecies, or variety that is considered to be extinct. A List lB plant is considered rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. A List 2 plant is considered rare, threatened, or endangered in California but is more common elsewhere. A List 3 plant is a species for which the California Native Plant Society lacks necessary information to determine if it should be assigned to a list or not. A List 4 plant has a limited distribution in California. All of the plant species on List I and List 2 meet the requirements of Section 1901, Chapter 10 (Native Plant Protection Act) or Sections 2062 and 2067 (California Endangered Species Act) of the California Department of Fish and Game Code, and are eligible for state listing. Therefore, List 1 and 2 species should be considered under CEQA. Some List 3 plant' species also meet the requirements of these portions of the Fish and Game Code and are eligible for state listing. Very few List 4 plants are eligible for listing but may be locally important and their listing status could be elevated if conditions change. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act - The Clean Water Act addresses water pollution through permitting to control and eventually eliminate water pollution. The Clean Water Act establishes regulations and permitting requirements regarding construction activities that affect storm water, dredge and fill material operations, and water quality standards. This regulatory program requires that discharges to surface waters be controlled under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permitting requirements. The permitting requirements apply to sources of water runoff, industrial and public facilities. Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for regulating the discharge of fill material into waters of the United States. Jurisdiction falls within the San Francisco District of the Corps. Waters of the United States and their lateral limits are defined in 33 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 328.3 (a). The term "waters" includes wetlands and non- wetland bodies of water that meet specific criteria as defined in the Code of Federal Regulation (CFR). The definition of "waters of the U.S." includes "...intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams).., the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce..." and tribUtaries of water defined as "waters of the United States." Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 58 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Areas that meet the definition of "waters of the U.S." or the definition of wetlands would be under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction. Wetlands that are not adjacent to waters of the United States are termed "isolated wetlands" and may be subject to Corps jurisdiction. In addition, under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act if project activities affect waters of the U.S.", a water quality certification waiver is also required from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. In general, a Corps permit must be obtained before placing fill in wetlands or ~ other waters of the U.S. The type of permit depends on the amount of acreage and the purpose of the proposed fill and is subject to discretion from the Corps. There are two categories of Corps permits: individual and nationwide (general) permits. Where specified activities would have minimal adverse impacts, nationwide permits may be used. Eligibility for a nationwide permit simplifies the permit review process. Nationwide permits cover construction and fill of .-- waters of the U.S. for a variety of routine activities such as minor road crossings, utility line crossings, streambank protection, recreational facilities and outfall structures. To qualify for a nationwide permit, a project must demonstrate that it has no more than a minimal adverse effect on the aquatic ecosystem. The San Francisco District of the Corps typically interprets this condition to mean that there will be no net loss of either habitat acreage or habitat value. This usually results in the need to provide mitigation for the fill of any creek or wetland which will occur. An individual permit is required where a nationwide is not applicable. The consideration of an individual permit includes, but is not limited to, factors such as significant acreage of wetlands or waters of the U.S., areas of high biological or unique value, or length of watercourse affected. To clearly demonstrate compliance With the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 404(b)(1) guidelines 'and applicant must clearly demonstrate that the proposed discharge in unavoidable and is the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative that will achieve the overall Project purpose. The guidelines also establish a regulatory presumption that there is a practicable alternative that would have less impact on the aquatic ecosystem. If this presumption is not rebutted, a permit may not be issued. The 1990 Memorandum of Agreement between the EPA and Corps concerning the Determination of Mitigation under the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines summarizes the hierarchal approach to assessing mitigation under the guidelines. The first priority is to avoid impacts, second to minimize and third is to provide compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts. Regional Water Quality Control Board Pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, projects that apply for a Corps ~.~ permit for discharge of dredge or fill material, and projects that qualify for a Nationwide Permit, must obtain water quality certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) that the project will uphold state water "- quality Standards. Alternatively, the RWQCB may elect to notify an applicant Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 59 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -~ City of Dublin that the State may issue Waste Discharge Charge Requirements in lieu of a Section 401 certification for a project. Existing conditions The 91-acre site covers roughly seven city blocks, bordered On the southwest by the Iron Horse Trail, on the south by Interstate 580 (I-580), and on the east by Arnold Drive (under construction). Dublin Boulevard forms the northern boundary for about two-thirds of the site, between the Iron Horse trail and the Iron Horse Parkway. A triangular-shaped parcel lies to the north of Dublin Boulevard at the northwest corner of Arnold Road. Existing streets divide the site into four parcels, which are different than proposed building Sites identified on Exhibit 4 (see Exhibit 9). Parcel 1 is the triangular piece of land between the Iron Horse Trail and DeMarcus Boulevard. Parcel 2 is the rectangle between DeMarcus Boulevard and the Iron Horse Parkway. Parcel 3 is the rectangular parcel to the north of Dublin Boulevard Parcel 4 is the rectangle between the Iron Horse Parkway and Arnold Road. Currently, approximately 29 acres of the site are in use or paved for a utility substation, a BART parking lot, public streets, and a traction station. An easement for a fiber optic cable and a high-pressure petroleum pipeline lies immediately adjacent to the northeast side of the Iron Horse Trail. The remainder of the site has been either disced or graded recently. As a result, the site has a flat topography that gently slopes to the south and west. An artificial berm was recently constructed between the BART parking lot and the open land in Parcel 1. The north side of this berm has been spread with fill material for a distance of approximately forty feet to the north and storm drains are evenly spaced along the north side of the berm. Piles of soil have been placed near the corner of Altamirano Road and the Iron Horse Parkway in Parcel 4. Parcel 3 is currently being used as a construction staging area, holding mounds of soil, pipes, and a construction trailer. The soil on the site is a very dark brown Clear Lake clay composed of fine textured alluvium from sedimentary rock (SCS 1966). Clear Lake clays have slow runoff, moderately good drainage, high water holding capacity, little erosion, and are very permeable. Historically, the site was drained and used for irrigated pasture or grain farming (SCS 1966). Without drainage, the water table can reach to within 5 feet of the surface in this soil type (SCS 1966). Vegetation Vegetation on the site consists primarily of weedy annual species. The site visit was conducted at the beginning of the growing season and many plants were still in the seedling stage. Because the land had recently been disced and/or graded, much of last year's vegetation had been turned under or was unidentifiable. Consequently, it was difficult to identify many of the plants to species. Typical plants on the flat portions of the site include tumbleweed (Salsola tragus), mustard (Brassica sp.), vetch (Vicia sp.), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), common knotweed (Polygonum arenastrum.), lupine (Lupinus sp.), bristly ox-tongue (Picris echioides), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola), yellow star Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 60 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), common mallow (Malva negIecta), horseweed (Conyza canadensis), ruby sand spurrey (Spergularia rubra), hyssop loosestrife (Lythrum hyssopifoIium), Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum), and the recently introduced exotic weed skunkwort (Dittrichia graveolens). At the northwestern corner of the site is a deep pool that supported water plantain (Alisma plantago-aquatica) and panicled willow herb (Epilobium brachycarpum). A planted date palm tree (Phoenix canariensis) grows on the edge of this basin. This and other moist areas on the site additionally support alkali heath (Frankenia saIina), swamp timothy (Crypsis schoenoides), rabbitsfoot grass (PoIypogon monspeIiensis), and cocklebur (Xanthium stromarium). Potential jurisdictional features The Alameda County Surplus Property Authority recently received an updated verification from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers verifying that no jurisdictional waters of the U.S. are present on the project site (letter dated June 5, 2001, Corps File # 25892S, see Appendix 8.7) A number of areas exist that may provide habitat for sensitive plants and animals and may be affected by on-site construction. These features include ditches previously documented on the maps 1 and lA of the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (Reynolds, 1994). These features are also noted on Exhibit 9. Shallow, 30'foot wide swales/ditches occur on either side of the Iron Horse Trail that borders the western edge of the project area, The bottom of the northeast ditch is dominated by salt grass (Distichlis spicata)and also supports bristly ox-tongue, prickly lettuce, and common mallow. The southwest ditch also contains large patches of creeping wild rye (Leymus triticoides) and a small patch of arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis). The uplands were dominated by the species listed above for the flat portions of the site, and additionally included wild oats (Avena fatua) and coyote bush (Baccharis pilularis). The large drainage channel along the northern edge of Parcel 3 (Exhibit 9) was constructed in uplands in 1997 as part of Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Zone 7's drainage system (Stuart Cook, pers. comm.). The deep channel 'contains a concrete V-ditch at the bottom, and would likely not qualify as a jurisdictional feature. Red willows (Salix laevigata) and a large patch of cattails (Typha latifolia) and red-root cyperus (Cyperus erthrorhizos) grow near the southern end of the channel, where the channel ends at a 2,000+ foot box culvert which flows under Dublin Boulevard. The uplands on either side of the drainage channel were seeded with blue wild rye (EIymus gIuacus), Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), and rose clover (TrifoIium hirtum). White sweet clover (Melilotus aIba) was also common on the banks. Wildlife Wildlife species present on the project site are those species adapted to annual grasslands and ruderal uplands. Most of these species are known as urban- adapted species that are commensal with humans and tolerant of human disturbance. Wildlife species observed, or evidence of their presence observed (i.e., droppings, burrows, and tracks) on the project site were birds and mammals. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 61 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Birds observed in the disturbed, ruderal portions of the project site, or flying over the project site, include ring-billed gull (Larus delawarensis), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), rock dove (Columba tivia), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), and western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta). Mammals in this community include Botta's pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), gopher mounds were observed throughout the project site, and California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi). Ground squirrel burrows were observed in the rubble and fill piles located on Parcel 4, between Iron HOrse Parkway and Arnold Road. The off-site drainage features, including the flood control channel along the northern portion of the site, and the drainage swales along the Iron Horse Trail, support wildlife species adapted to seasonal aquatic habitats, or species associated with wetland and riparian vegetation. Pacific tree frogs (Hyla regilla) were heard chorusing in the wetter sections of the drainages. Birds observed in the willows include American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis) and western scrub-jay (Aphelocoma californica). Dense patches of cattail support red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus). Black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) (scat) use these drainage features as movement corridors and foraging areas. Special Status Species Special-status species are defined as follows: · Species that are listed, or designated as candidates for listing, as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act; · Species that are listed, or designated as candidates for listing as rare threatened, or endangered under the California Endangered Species Act; · Plant species on List lA, List lB, and List 2 in the California Native Plant Society's Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2000); · Wildlife species listed by the California Department of Fish & Game as species of special concern or fully protected species; · Species that meet the definition of rare or endangered under the California Environmental Quality Act. (Under Section 15380 of CEQA, a species not included on any formal list A shall nevertheless be considered rare or endangered if the species can be shown to meet the criteria@ for listing); · Species considered to be of special concern by local agencies. Plants The site was surveyed for eight special-status plant species in 1994 by Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc (Jones & Stokes 1995). No special-status plant species were found at that time. Since that time, several new species have become listed and the listing status has changed for other plant species. A 1999 survey by H.T. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 62 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Harvey & Associates, on the Pao Yeh Lin property, about one mile away off of TaSsajara Road, focused on 21 species, including CNPS List 3 and List 4 plants. They presumed the existence of tw© special status plant species in the area - Congdon's Spikeweed (Hemizonia parryi ssp. congdonii) and San Joaquin spearscale (AtripIex joaquiniana). A survey for ten spring-blooming species with the potential to occur on site was conducted by Davis' Environmental Consulting on April 5, 2001 (Davis Environmental Consulting 200la). No special- status plant species were found on that date. Surveys for late summer and fall- blooming plants have not yet been conducted. A search of the California Natural Diversity Data Base and. the CNPS Electronic Inventory for grassland and freshwater wetland plants that could occur in the nine quadrangle area around the City of Dublin revealed 18 special-status plant species known from the region surrounding Dublin (Table 8a). The search excluded species strictly confined to scrub, chaparral, forests, or woodlands, and serpentine or rocky soils, as these habitat types do not occur on the Dublin Transit Center site. One of these special-status plants, Congdon's spikeweed (Hemizona parryi ssp. congdonii), was observed during the November 2000 site visit (discussed below). No other special-status plants were observed during this site visit. However, the site inspection was not conducted during the blooming period for most of these plant species. In addition to Congdon's spikeweed, observed during the reconnaissance survey, the site is suitable habitat for four other plant species, all of which are listed in Table 8a. Although repeated disking degrades the habitat for these plants, it is unknown what level of disturbance these plants can tolerate. The site is also suitable for ten other species that could occur on site, however, these species are unlikely to occur because they do not tolerate high disturbance or because the site is outside of the typical range of the plant. Three of the plants in Table 8a prefer drier or sandy soils and so are not expected to occur on site at all. The single special-status species found on site and the four other species most likely to be found on the Dublin site are discussed in more detail below. Spikeweeds and tarplants tolerate disturbance well, and so are more likely than other species to found on site. Because the alkaline-tolerant plants salt grass and alkali heath occur on the site, the soil may be mildly alkaline or saline. Therefore, special,status plants of alkaline soils may possibly be found on the site. Congdon's Spikeweed. Hemizonia parryi ssp. congdonii, a CNPS List lB plant, was found on the southeast side of the comer of the Iron Horse Parkway and Dublin Boulevard and along Altamirano Road in Parcel 4 (Figure 1). A copy of the CNDDB field survey form is in Appendix A. The full extent of this population was not discernable because the site had recently been disked. Congdon's spikeweed thrives on disturbance. By the early summer, a survey should be able to determine the size and physical extent of the population. Dublin is near the center of distribution for this plant. Preston (1999) reports that this species occurs in large numbers on the south end of Camp Parks RFTA from Dougherty Road to Hacienda Drive. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 63 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Brittlescale. Atriplex depressa, a CNPS lB plant, is an annual herb of alkaline habitats. It typically grows with saltgrass, alkali heath, Italian ryegrass, and other Atriplex species. It is known to occur in the Livermore-Altamont area. San Joaquin Spearscale. Atriplex joaquiniana, also on the CNPS lB List, is an another annual herb that prefers alkaline habitats. This plant also tolerates some disturbance. It is known from populations in the Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon area. Big Tarplant. Blepharizonia plumosa ssp. plumosa, another CNPS lB plant, has been found near Byron, Walnut Creek, and the Altamont Pass, as well as just south of the Briones Valley. Although big tarplant usually prefers relatively dry slopes, it has potential to be present on site. Plants of the genus Blepharizonia were found during the April 2001 survey of the Dublin Transit Center site (Davis Environmental Consulting 2001a). Because they were not blooming, they could not be identified to species and subspecies. Doveweed, (Eremocarpus setigerus), often found in association with big tarplant, was also found on that visit (Davis Environmental Consulting 2001a). The Dublin Transit Center site is only marginal habitat for nine other special- status species. They are discussed briefly below. · Alkaline Milk-vetch. Astragalus tener var. tener, CNPS List lB, can tolerate mild disturbance. It is known to occur in the vicinity of Hayward. However, it was not found during the April 2001 survey (Davis Environmental Consulting 2001a). · The large-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinkia grandiflora) is known from only three natural occurrences on undisturbed native grassland, two near Livermore and one near Los Vaqueros Reservoir. It was not found during the April 2001 survey (Davis Environmental Consulting 2001a). · Big-scale balsamroot (Balsamorhiza macrolepis var. macrolepis)is more likely found on rocky land with other native plants such as Helianthella. It was not found during the April 2001 survey (Davis Environmental Consulting 200la). · Palmate-bracted Bird's Beak (Cordylanthus palmatus), a federally and state listed endangered plant, typically grows in alkaline clay wetlands with saltgrass and alkali heath. Though these conditions are found on the Dublin Transit Center site, the degree of disturbance makes it unlikely that palmate-bracted bird's beak occurs here. The nearest knOwn location of palmate-bracted bird's beak is in the Springtown wetlands, north of Livermore. It was not found during the April 2001 survey (Davis Environmental Consulting 200la). · Recurved larkspur (Delphinium recurvatum) is found in degraded sites, but the nearest populations are on the other side of the Altamont Pass. It Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 64 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin was not found during the April 2001 survey (Davis Environmental _ Consulting 2001a). · The diamond-petaled California poppy (Eschscholzia rhombipetala) was _ thought to be extinct until it was discovered growing on Site 300 of the Livermore National Laboratory in 1997. It was not found-during the April 2001 survey (Davis Environmental Consulting 2001a). · Although the Santa Cruz tarplant (Holocarpha macrodenia) likes disturbance, its known historical range lies closer to the coast than the City -- of Dublin. · Contra Costa Goldfields. Lasthenia conjugens is Federally and State Listed as endangered. The species is found in wet areas in the spring and can -- tolerate mild disturbance. In Alameda County, it has been found near Newark and Fremont. It is often considered a vernal pool plant, though it is not limited to that habitat. The presence of coyote thistle on site indicated that suitable habitat for Contra Costa goldfields is present on the Dublin Transfer Center site. However, it was not found on the April 2001 _ survey (Davis Environmental Consulting 2001a). · The hairless popcorn flower (Plagiobothrys gIaber) and the caper-fruited tropidocarpum (Tropidocarpum capparideum) are believed to be extinct in California and are not likely to found in a disturbed area. They were not found during the April 2001 survey (Davis Environmental Consulting 200la). To determine whether any of the remaining special-status plant species from Table 8a are present on the property, an additional rare plant survey following U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game guidelines needs to be conducted during the peak blooming periods of each species. Additional surveys for the four other species most likely to occur on the. site would be required to determine presence or absence of these species onsite. Animals Information derived from the California Natural Diversity Data Base lists 29 special-status wildlife species that occur in the region or within the project vicinity. None of these species was observed during the November 2000 site inspection. Nineteen of the wildlife species reported in the Natural Diversity Data Base occur in salt and freshwater marshes, salt ponds, coastal habitats, coastal and central valley streams and creeks, chaparral, wooded habitats, vernal pools, or freshwater ponds. None of these habitats types occur onsite, therefore the species dependent on these habitats would not occur. The wetland features, including the drainages and depressions, on the project site do not provide vernal pool habitat values, due to the recent grading and disturbance. The flood control channel along the northem edge of the project site appears to convey a significant volume of water during winter rain events, and would not provide habitat for vernal pools species, such as California tiger salamanders. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 65 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Species that were determined to be unlikely to occur on the project site due to the absence of suitable habitat include monarch butterfly (Danaus pIexippus), vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi), California linderiella (Linderiella occidentaIis), steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus), California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boyIii), western pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata), Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus), sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus), Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii), western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus), salt-marsh common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa), California black rail (LateraIlus jamaicensis coturnicuIus), California clapper rail (RaIIus longirostris obsoletus), California least tern (Sterna antillarum browni), bank swallow (Riparia riparia), salt marsh harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris raviventris), and salt marsh wandering shrew (Sorex vagrans halicoetes). Table 8b summarizes those special-status wildlife species that potentially occur on the project site. The scientific names and state and federal status are provided. Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. conducted standardized survey procedures for special-status species on the entire parks Reserve Forces Training Area. The proposed Dublin Transit Center site was included as a small portion of that larger study area. Surveys were conducted for curve-footed hygrotus diving beetle (Hygrotus curvipes), San Francisco forktail damselfly (Ischnura gemina), vernal pool fairy shrimp, California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, western pond turtle, San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens), and several bat species (Jones & Stokes 1995). Special-status species observed on the Parks Reserve Forces Training Area include California red- legged frogs, western pond turtle, burrowing owl, ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis), and tricolored blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus). None of special-status species observed during the 1995 surveys were found on the Dublin Transit Center project site itself. In April 2000, H.T. Harvey & Associates staff conducted a site assessment of the Iron Horse Trial Extension for California red-legged frog and California tiger salamander, and in July of 2000, a protocol-level survey was conducted for California red-legged frog (H.T. Harvey & Associates, 2000). One of the pools off- site located on the southwest end of the trail and west of the BART station parking lot could provide breeding habitat for California tiger salamanders, however, no upland estivation habitat for California tiger salamanders occurs at or near this site. Species that are known' to occur in the Dublin/Pleasanton/San Ramon region for which suitable habitat occurs on the proposed project site are listed below as well as a brief description of their habitat requirements and likelihood of occurrence onsite. California Red-legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii). The California red-legged frog is listed as a federally threatened species. It is a California species of special concern. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 66 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin _ This species is found in marshes, streams, lakes, reservoirs, ponds, and other permanent or seasonal sources of water. It is chiefly a pond frog that inhabits humid woodlands, grasslands, and stream sides. It is generally found in or near water, but disperses after rains and may appear in damp meadows far from water. The breeding period is from January through April, depending on locality ~ (Stebbins 1985). Jones & Stokes Associates biologists observed California red-legged frogs in two drainages north of the project site on the Parks Reserved Training Area (Jones & - Stokes 1995). Other observational records for California red-legged frogs within five miles of the site include Chabot Canal, located south and west of the project site. The closest frog observation was in Chabot Canal approximately 2 miles ,-- upstream (H.T. Harvey & Associates, 2000). H.T. Harvey & Associates identified three pools located along the Iron Horse Trail Extension project that could potentially support foraging and dispersing habitat for California red-legged frogs (H.T. Harvey & Associates, 2000). One of the pools is located within the Dublin Transit Center project site. The large drainage features that border the project site, as shown in Figure 1, could potentially support dispersing California red-legged frogs, or could provide - potential foraging, cover, and hydration habitat for California red-legged frog. No breeding habitat for this species occurs onsite. ~-- Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). The golden eagle is a California species of concern, This species has no federal status. However, the golden eagle is protected under the federal Bald Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Act. The golden eagle occurs throughout much of California, particularly in hilly _ regions dominated by grassland and oak savannah. The golden eagle is a large, wide ranging predator of open grassland and savanna habitats in hilly country. Golden eagles nest on cliff faces and in large trees. Nests are large structures that are used for many years, by the same pair and often subsequently by other eagles (Palmer 1988). The breeding territories of the golden eagle can range from 20 to 60 square miles (Mallette and Gould 1976). The species feeds primarily on medium _ sized mammals. No golden eagles were observed on the project site and no large trees that could c- support nests typical of golden eagles occur on the site. There are records of golden eagles nesting on the northeast side of San Antonio Reservoir (south southeast of Pleasanton), and at the southwest end of Walpert Ridge, 2.5 miles -- southeast of California State UniVersity Hayward (CDFG 2000). Golden eagles may nest in the project vicinity and include the project site as part of their foraging range. Ferruginous Hawk (Buteo regalis). The ferruginous hawk is a California species of special concern. It has no federal status. The ferruginous hawk does not nest in Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 67 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin California (Mallett and Gould 1976). However, the Department of Fish and Game has concerns about the loss of ferruginous hawk winter foraging habitat. In California, ferruginous hawks winter in the arid plains and open rangeland along the western edge of the Central Valley, in open valleys in the inner Coast Ranges, and in the deserts of southern California. The species is not known to breed in California. The species primarily feeds on small to medium-sized mammals (Mallette and Gould 1976). Ferruginous hawks were not observed on the project site. However, ferruginous hawks have been observed on the Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Jones & Stokes 1995). The open grassland on and adjacent to the site provides suitable foraging habitat for ferruginous hawks. However, because of the limited California ground squirrel population on the project site, the hawks primary prey species, ferruginous hawks may not forage regularly on the project site. Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia). The burrowing owl is a California species of special concern. It has no federal status. The burrowing owl occurs in open grasslands, agricultural, and urban areas that support populations of California ground squirrels. The burrowing owl nests in ground squirrel burrows and feeds on insects and small mammals (Mallette and Gould 1976). Burrowing owls were not observed on the project site, however, several burrowing owls were observed on the Parks Reserved Forces Training Area less than 0.5 miles from the Dublin Transit Center site (Jones & Stokes 1995). The presence of California ground squirrel burrows on the project site, specifically in the rubble and fill piles located on the parcel between Iron Horse Parkway and Arnold Road, provide potential burrows for burrowing owls on the project site that could be used by both wintering and breeding birds. Additionally, the grasslands onsite could provide foraging habitat for this species. Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus). The northern harrier is a California species of special concern. It has no federal status. The Department of Fish and Game has concerns about the decline of northern harrier nesting habitat. Northern harriers breed in fresh and saltwater emergent wetlands, and grasslands, in the Central Valley, and coastal valleys, from Oregon, southward. Nests are located on the ground in areas of tall dense grasses or shrubs, usually near marsh edges. They nest from April to September (Zeiner et al., 1990). No northern harriers were observed foraging on the project site. Because of the extent of disturbance to the site, they are not likely to nest onsite. However, northern harriers wintering, or nesting, in the general area could include the project site as part of their foraging range. White-tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus). The white tailed kite has no state or federal status, however, it is listed as a fully protected species in the state Fish and Game Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 68 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Code. White-tailed kites are year-round residents, and nest and roost in large _ groves of dense, broad-leafed trees, located near suitable foraging habitat (Zeiner et al., 1990). They forage for small rodents in grassland and other open habitats. No trees or shrubs onsite could provide nesting habitat for white-tailed kites. _ The open grassland provides suitable foraging habitat for white-tailed kites that could nest in the project vicinity. Tricolored Blackbird .(Agelaius tricolor). The tricolored blackbird is a California species of special concern. It has no federal status. .-- Tricolored blackbirds are highly colonial and nomadic and. are largely endemic to the lowlands of California. Breeding is highly synchronized, with most pairs in a colony initiating nesting within a few days of each other. The synchronization -- and colonial breeding may have evolved as an adaptation to a rapidly changing environment where the locations of secure nesting habitat and food supplies were likely to change each year (Beedy et al., 1991). They prefer to nest in -- freshwater marshes with dense growths of emergent vegetation, but will nest in upland locations that support dense stands of herbaceous vegetation, especially plant species that are armed with thorns or spines (Beedy et al., 1991). They nest ~- from mid-April through mid-July. They will travel up to four miles to forage (Zeiner et al., 1990). - Tricolored blackbirds were not observed on the project site. There is no breeding habitat on the site for this species and tricolored blackbirds are not expected to nest on the project site. Tricolored blackbirds were observed on the Parks -- Reserve Forces Training Area, north of the project site (Jones & Stokes 1995). Additional records of nesting tricolored blackbird are known from the Niles, Livermore, and Dublin. The project site could potentially provide suitable '- foraging habitat for tricolored blackbirds that may nest in the vicinity of the site. -- California Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris actia). The California horned lark is a California species of Special concern. The California horned lark is found in coastal regions from San Diego to Sonoma County and in the central San Joaquin Valley to the Sierra Nevada foothills. It nests and forages in grasslands, bald hills, and alkali flats. They have _ recently been observed breeding in the Tassajara Valley, north of the site. ~' San Joaquin Kit Fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica). The San Joaquin kit fox is a ,- federally endangered and state threatened species. The San Joaquin kit fox lives in grasslands that typically have scattered shrubby -- vegetation. They typically need loose-textured soil for building their dens. The highly disturbed condition of the site, its urban location, and limited prey base makes it unlikely that kit foxes occur on this site or use it even occasionally. This -- species was not found on the Parks Reserve Forces Training Area during surveys conducted by Jones & Stokes (1995). Additional surveys in the Dougherty Valley, which included the northern portion of Camp Parks, conducted during the 1990s, Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 69 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 --, City of Dublin also did not demonstrate the presence of this species in the vicinity of the site (WESCO 1991a, 1991b; LSA 1994). STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The determination of significance of impacts to biological resources involves an evaluation of the context in which the potential impact may occur and the intensity and extent of the impact's effect. Project effects on biological resources would be considered significant if they resulted in any of the following: · a substantial effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. · a substantial effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. · asubstantial effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. · substantial interference with movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridor, or impede4 use of native wildlife nursery sites. · conflicts with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. · conflicts with the provisions of any adopted Habitat ConserVation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potential impacts of the proposed project include those to potentially jurisdictional wetlands and special-status plant and wildlife species. The mitigation measures proposed in this EIR would reduce impacts to all these resources to less-than-significant levels. Impact 4.3-1 (impacts to Condon's spikeweed): Loss of a population of Congdon's spikeweed (CNPS List lB) and pOtential loss of populations of four other special- status plant species (significant). Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 70 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin A population of Congdon's spikeweed was observed within the project area during the November 2000 survey. The size of this population could not be determined due to the timing of the survey. In order to quantify the size of this population and to identify other rare plants that may occur onsite, rare plant surveys should be conducted on each parcel (or development phase) prior to ground disturbing activities. Rare plant surveys should be appropriately-timed during the growing season and conducted according to resource agency protocols (conducting surveys during the growing season may necessitate initiation of surveys months before construction activities are scheduled). The four special-status plant species with the greatest potential to occur on the property are all late-blooming species. One additional survey late season surveys is recommended (in August) to ascertain whether any of these species are actually present on the site. The locations of special-status plant populations that are detected should be mapped and a report detailing the findings of the surveys should be forwarded to the City. Impact 4.3-2 (California red-legged frogs): The development of the proposed project could adversely affect California red-legged frogs and/or their habitat (significant). The pool in the northwest corner of Parcel 1, and the off-site drainage features bordering the project site provide potential foraging, cover, and hydration habitat for California red-legged frog. No breeding habitat for red'legged frogs occurs onsite. Red-legged frogs were not observed onsite during the reconnaissance survey, and the likelihood of this species occurring onsite is low. A formal assessment of the potential red-legged frog habitats on the site has been completed (Davis Environmental Consulting 200lb). However, California red- legged frogs have been reported to occur within 2 miles of proposed transit center site (Jones and Stokes, 1995 and H.T. Harvey and Associates, 2000; Zentner and Zentner 2000) and could occur in the Parcel 1 pool or in the drainage features. Impact 4.3-3 (Burrowing Owls): The proposed project could result in the loss of potential nesting and associated foraging habitat for burrowing owls in the project vicinity (significant). Burrowing owls were not observed within the project area, however, a species- specific survey was not conducted during the November 2000 reconnaissance. Burrowing owls have been observed on the Parks Reserve Forces Training Area in the past within 0.5,miles of the Transit Center site (Jones and Stokes, 1995) and are known to occur in the open grasslands in the vicinity (LSA personal observations). Suitable burrowing, nesting, and foraging habitat occurs onsite and this species could use the project area as breeding or wintering habitat in the future. The loss of potential nesting and associated foraging habitat would be a significant impact. Impact 4.3-4 (wildlife migratory corridors): The proposed project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species (less-than-significant and no mitigation is required). Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 71 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Impact 4.3-5 (raptors): Northern harrier, white-tailed kite, ferruginous hawk, and golden eagle are not expected to nest on the project site. However, it is likely that these, and other raptors, forage here for prey on an occasional basis. Because of the presence of large areas of existing open space in the project vicinity, potential impacts to foraging raptors would be less than significant (less-than-significant and no mitigation is required). MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation Measure 4.3-1 (Condon's spikeweed): The following mitigation measures would mitigate the loss of a population of Congdon's spikeweed (CNPS List lB) and potential loss of four other special-status plant species and their habitat. a) If avoidance of Congdon's spikeweed is not feasible, a long-term off-site mitigation program should be created. The program should include identification of appropriate area(s), including shallow bowls or depressions designed with an appropriate hydrological regime for Congdon's spikeweed to be sown with seed collected from the Dublin Transit Center site. Seed for Congdon's spikeweed should be collected from the transit center site prior to initiation of construction activitieS. b) The details of the off-site mitigation program should be developed in conjunction with the Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for this EIR. The plan will be submitted to the City of Dublin for their approval prior to the-first entitlement for the first specific development project within the Transit Center. c) If other special-status species are found on the site, the Mitigation and Monitoring Plan should include measures to avoid, preserve or mitigate for these plants. Measures to protect and preserve the plant populations may include collection of seeds during the appropriate developmental stage of the plant, descriptions of sowing techniques appropriate to the life cycle of the plant, development of a maintenance and monitoring plan (i.e., provide the environmental conditions necessary for the survival of the new population including periodic disturbance if necessary), identification of funding sources to provide for the implementation of the plan, and management and maintenance of the mitigation area. Mitigation Measure 4.3-2(California red-legged frogs): The following steps shall be taken to reduce impacts to California red-legged frogs to a less-than-significant level. a) In order to determine if red-legged frogs occur on or adjacent to the Transit Center project area, a preconstruction survey for red-legged frogs shall be conducted prior to initiation of construction activities on adjacent development sites (Sites A and F). The survey will include all drainage Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 72 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin channels and potential hydration, foraging, or cover habitat on or immediately adjacent to the Transit Center (e.g., pool in the northwest corner of Site A drainage channel along Iron Horse Trail, and flood control channel along northern boundary of Site F. The survey will be conducted according to current USFWS survey protocols by a qualified biologist. Results of the survey will be reported to the City of Dublin. b) If red-legged frogs are found on or adjacent to the Transit Center project area, the project, proponent will consult with the USFWS to determine a) the appropriate course of action to avoid or mitigate impacts to red-legged frogs and their habitat, and b) any necessary permits that must be obtained. All mitigation measures and permits will be obtained prior to initiation of construction activities. Mitigation Measure 4.3-3 (Burrowing Owl): The following measures will reduce potential impacts to burrowing owls to a less-than-significant level. a) No more than 30 days prior to initiation of grading or construction activities, a qualified biologist will conduct a protocol-level, preconstruction survey for burrowing owls. Surveys should be conducted during the periods one hour before to two hours after sunrise and/or two hours before to one hour after sunset. Surveys should be conducted without regard to season, as the site provides both potential breeding and wintering habitat for burrowing owls. A preconstruction surveys should be conducted for each phase or parcel to be developed. If more than 30 days passes between the completion of the survey and the initiation of grading or construction activities, the preconstruction survey should be conducted again. b) If burrowing owls are found on a development site within the Transit Center, the project proponent will notify the City of Dublin. A qualified biologist will establish an exclusion zone around each occupied burrow in which no construction-related activity will occur until the burrows are confirmed to be unoccupied. The exclusion zone will be 160 feet (50 meters) in diameter during the non-breeding season (September 1 through January 31) and 250 feet in diameter (75 meters) during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31). The appropriate avoidance (if during the breeding season) or passive (if outside the breeding season) relocation methods in accordance with established policies, following consultation with the City of Dublin. SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant impacts would remain after the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 73 Draft Environmental impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Table 8a. Special-Status Plant Species Potentially Occurring on Transit Center Site Species and Common Name Legal Statusa Form and Habitat Blooming Period Potential for Occurrence Amsinckia grandiflora Annual wildflower. Cismontane Woodland and Habitat present but disturbance Large-flowered fiddleneck FE/CE/1B valley and foothill grassland April - May reduces likelihood of occurrence. Not [bund in April survey. Astragalus tenet var. tenet Annual wildflower. Alkaline playas, clayey valley Alkali milk vetch --/--/lB · and foothill grasslands, and vernal pools. March - June Habitat present. Not found in April survey. Atr~lex cordulata i Annual herb. Chenopod scrub, sandy, alkaline Heartscale --/--/lB I meadows and valley and foothill grassland. May - October Habitat not on site. Atriplex depressa Annual herb. Alkaline clay in ehenopd scrub, Brittlescale --/--/lB meadows, playas, valley and foothill grassland and May - October Habitat present. vernal pools. Atriplexjoaquiniana Annual herb. Chenopod scrub, alkaline meadows, San Joaquin spearscale --/--/lB playas, and valley and foothill grassland. April - October Habitat present. Balsamorhiza macrolepis var. macrolepis Perennial wildflower. Chaparral, cismontane Marginal habitat present Big-scale balsamroot --/--/lB woodland, and valley and foothill grassland, March -'June Disturbance reduces likelihood of sometimes on serpentine, occurrence. Not found in April survc~t. Blepharizonia plumosa ssp. plumoasa Big tarplant --/--/lB Annual wildflower. Valley and foothill grassland. July - October Habitat present. Cordylanthuspalmatus Annual wildflower. Chenopod scrub, alkaline valley Paimate-braeted bird's beak FE/CE/1B and foothill grasslands. May - October Habitat present. Delphinium reeur~atum Annual wildflower. Alkaline soils in ehenopod Recurved larkspur --/--/lB scrub, eicsmontane woodland, and valley and March - May Habitat present but disturbance foothill grassland, reduces likelihood of occurrence. Not found in April survey. Eriogonum truncatum Annual wildflower. Dry clayey or sandy chaparral, Mt. Diablo buckwheat -d-/lA coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland. April - November Habitat not on site. Eschscholzia rhombipetala Annual wildflower. Alkaline clay in valley and Habitat present but disturbance Diamond-petaled California poppy --/-41A foothill grasslands. March - April reduces likelihood of occurrence. Not fbund in April surv%v. Fritillaria liliacea Perennial wildflower. Clay in coastal prairie, coastal Poor habitat present. Disturbance Fragrant fritillary -4--lIB scrub, and valley and foothill grassland. February - April reduces likelihood of occurrence. Not found in April survey. Hemizonia parryi ssp. congdonii Annual herb. Alkaline valley and foothill grasslands. Congdon's spikeweed --/--/lB Thrives with disturbance. June - November Plant is present. Holocarpa macradenia Annual herb. Coastal clayey or sandy prairie, scrub, Santa Cruz tarplant PT/CE/lB and valley and foothill grassland. Thrives on June - October Habitat present bat outside of disturbance, historic range. £asthenia conjugens Annual wildflower. Mesic cismontane woodland, Contra Costa goldfields FE/--/1B alkaline playas, valley and foothill grasslands, and March - June : Habitat present. vemal pools, Not lbtmd in April survey. Plagiobothrys glaber Annual wildflower. Alkaline meadows and coastal Habitat present. Disturbance Hairless popcorn flower --l--/IA salt marshes and swamps. Mamh - May i reduces likelihood of occurrence. Not tkmnd in April survey. Triflium arnoenurn Annual wildflower. Valley and foothill grassland, ! Poor habitat present. Disturbance Showy Indian clover FE/--/IB sometimes on serpentine. April - June reduces likelihood of occurrence. Not tbund in April survey. Tropidocarpum capparideum Annual wildflower~ Alkaline hills in valley and Caper-fruited tropidocarpum --/--/IA foothill grassland. March - April Habitat present. Not found in April survey. ' Legal Status: (Federal/State/CNPS) FE = Federally listed as endangered. FT = Federally listed as threatened. PT = proposed for listing as Federally threatened. CE = State of California listed as endangered. CT = State of California listed as threatened. CR = State of California listed as rare. Califomia Native Plant Society Listings: List lA = Plants presumed extinct in California; List lB =: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in Califomia and elsewhere. San Joaquin kit fox FE / ST Grasslands, open woodlands, and Site is highly disturbed, low quality Vulpes macrotis mutica alkaline sink valley floor foraging habitat presem Quads Searched: Niles, Dublin, Livermore, Hayward, Newark, Las Trampas Ridge, Diablo, Tassajara, and La Costa Valley. * Legal Status FE = Federally listed as Endangered. FT = Federally listed as Threatened. ST = State-listed as Threatened CSC = California Special Concern Species CFP = California Fully Protected Species -- = No status. 06/30/01 Dub T/C:T/C Table 8b Table 8b - Special-Status Animal Species Potentially Occurring on the Dublin Transit Center Site Species Legal Status* Habitat Potential / Occurrence in Project (Federal/State) Area · AMPHIBIANS California red-legged frog FT/CSC Perennial and seasonal ponds, Potential habitat occurs in the Rana aurora draytonii creeks, seeps, adjacent riparian drainages onsite, Red-legged frogs corridors and grasslands known from within 2.3 miles of site. BIRDS Golden eagle --/CSC (wintering Grassland and oak savanna Potential foraging habitat present Aquila chrysaetos and nesting) Cliffs and large trees for nesting Fermginous hawk -- / CSC Arid plains and open grassland Potential foraging habitat present Buteo regalis Burrowing owl --/CSC Open, dry, and nearly level Potential burrows exist in the rubble Athene cunicularia (burrow sites) grassland and fill piles on site. Burrowing owls observed less than 0.5 miles from site during 1995 surveys. Northem harrier --/CSC (nesting) Marsh and grassland Foraging habitat present Circus cyaneus Ground nesting White-tailed kite --/CFP (nesting) Grassland Foraging habitat present Elanus leucurus Trees and shrub habitat for nesting Tricolored blackbird --/CSC (nesting) Wetlands, grasslands, agricultural Potential foraging habitat present Agelaius tricolor fields Freshwater marshes for breeding California horned lark -- / CSC Grasslands, bald hills, and alkali Potential foraging habitat present Erernophila alpestris actia flats MAMMALS 06/30/01 Dub T/C:T/C Table 8b Central Pkwy. Flood Control Channe ~ .. "~ ,~ Parcel 2 ~ .~,~ ~ ~ '~ .... -' Parcel 4 ~i~ Scarlett Ct. ~ Interstate 580 / Dublin-Pleasanton BART Station SOURCE: LSA, 01/30/01. Exhibit 9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ~ Congdon's Spikeweed ~ Ditch, Drainage, Swale ~ Shallow Pool ~ Site Boundary CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN TRANSIT CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ,. 4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES This section of the EIR addresses potential impacts- to historical, archeological cultural resources. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING (This section is based on an analysis of cultural resources conducted by Miley Holman, Holman Associates, December, 2000). -- Previous Surveys The Northwest Information Center (file no. 00-929) contains no recorded archaeological sites, either historic or prehistoric in nature, inside the project -- area. The nearest archaeological sites were recorded in the 1970's and 1980's to the south of 1-580, within the Hacienda Business Park. Sites: Ala-413 and 467 were two prehistoric sites recorded and excavated by Holman & Associates; a third -- historic site, the Abijah Baker house site, was also excavated by Holman & Associates in the 1980s; no report for this work has been produced to date. -- There have been four archaeological field inspections done in the immediate area, one of which covered part of the proposed Transit Center, one of which apparently also covered an undetermined portion of the project area, and a third which may have covered the entire area. In 1986, Rogers, Rogers and Hylkema surveyed a 400-acre portion of Camp Parks for a new cemetery area; _ unfortunately their report contains no map of the area covered by them. In the Rogers report a 1981 report by Roop and Flyrm is cited which covered the entire Camp Parks area, but which apparently did not cover the Transit Center project _ area, according to the maps on file at the Northwest Information Center. In that report, Roop and Flyrm recorded four historic sites and 26 prehistoric sites to the north of the proposed Transit Center project area in the foothills. Research done _ for other projects in the past 15 years has demonstrated that perhaps none of the prehistoric site locations mentioned in this report should have been recorded in the first place. Work by Holman and others has failed to find traces of the _ prehistoric artifacts noted by Roop and Flynn in many of the areas inspected by them. -- In 1989 Suzarme Baker completed an archaeological field and archival study which covered: the 35 acre parcel then slated for construction of the BART parking lot and associated streets. The area was inspected by Baker, who also -- noted that the area had been previously surveyed in 1981 by Roop and Flyrm with negative findings. While Baker noted that survey conditions were less than perfect, she did report on the discovery of several north-south running -- depressions containing burned metal, glass, bone and ash. At the time of her field inspection (1989) the area contained only a single metal shed, apparently associated with Camp Parks, along with standing fire hydrants which marked -- former street locations. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 77 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin _ Baker dismissed the potential significance of the deposits seen by her, based upon their age, which at the time of her survey she determined were less than 50 years in age. "Camp Parks, as discussed above in the historical section of this report, was constructed in the early 1940s during the World War II era. It is -- consequently less than 50 years of age. It is also considered to be of less importance than other similar bases. The artifactual materials in this location are less than 50 years of age, have been widely dispersed, and -- there is no structural integrity. For all these reasons, therefore, these materials cannot be considered eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (King 1987). Because the materials in this area are not over -- 50 years of age, they have not been recorded as an archaeological site. (Baker and Shoup pp.27).' -- It should be noted that 11 years have passed since the Baker and Shoup report, making the materials noted by them (and by Holman during the most recent field inspection) potentially over 50 years in age, and thus potentially significant -- both under current CEQA guidelines and federal law. Finally a portion of the old Southern Pacific right of way adjacent to the property -- (the proposed Iron Horse Trail alignment) was surveyed by Alison Macdougall in 1994 .with negative results. Historic Development In addition to the archival research undertaken at the Northwest Information Center, Dr. Richard Ambro of Holman & Associates conducted research at the Map Library located at U.C. Berkeley to chart the histOric development of the Transit Center in the 20th century. The earliest map consulted (1906) revealed no evidence of occupation, suggesting that the general area was open, being used either to graze cattle or for agriculture -' (U.S.G.S. 1906). There was a nearby late 19th century/early 20th century homesite immediately outside and some 400 feet/122 meters northwest of the northwest corner of the project area, connected by a north-south trending road to the old -- Livermore-Hayward Road (now 1-580). The U.S.G.S. maps of the following two decades were reprints of the 1906 maps and offer no new information. -- The U.S.G.S. Survey map of 1940 reveals that by that date the old (off project) homesite had been removed, and that the northwest trending Southern Pacific railroad line had been constructed, the alignment of which now forms the western border of the Transit Center property. The only structures present on this map are one in the extreme southeast corner and the other in the extreme southwest comer of the current project area. Their use or affiliation are uncertain. The map of 1947 reveals no changes inside the Transit Center. By 1953, the U.S.G.S. map shows the area of Camp Parks had been heavily built up into a _ gridwork of streets and buildings, and that a railroad spur had been built along Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 78 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 ,-- City of Dublin the northern boundary of the project area, with a smaller spur cutting southwest _ across the narrow portion of the northwest comer of the current project area. The project parcel was otherwise devoid of structures, as the buildings previously cited in the southern corners of the project parcel were gone. By 1953 _ Camp Parks had been labeled "Parks Air Force Base" and six tanks set in two rows were located in the extreme northwest comer of the project area (Site A) (U.S.G.S.1961). The reVised maps of 1968 and 1970 show no additional changes to -- the project area. An air photo of the area in 1970 reveals that the tanks had apparently been removed leaving a pad (noted by Baker in 1989). Of interest is evidence of a disturbed area in the center of the project area_that might have -- been a dump served by several dirt roads crossing the parcel. The age of this dump, presumably serving Camp Parks, is uncertain. -- The map evidence suggests that the age of the buildings (now all removed) from the Transit Center must post date World War II. The dump however, noted by Baker and Shoup from their field investigation, and apparently visible on maps -- by 1953, may in fact be more than 50 years old. A visual inspection of the project area was conducted by Holman & Associates -- staff during the last week of November, 2000. With the exception of the parking lot and the small triangle of land north of Dublin Boulevard the entire Transit Center property was inspected by walking 20 meter transects throughout to -- inspect it for evidence of either historic or prehistoric cultural resources. Based on field and records search, it is evident that the entire project area has been altered historically in one form or another. A portion of the project area (mostly along Dublin Boulevard has been filled several feet with imported fill and construction debris. Throughout the remainder of the project area which was devoid of grass covering at the time of the field inspection, the soils consisted of a brown to black clay soil containing large amounts of gravels and _ evidence of construction debris throughout. It appears that in the process of leveling the former military buildings in the vicinity the debris from the demolition and removal of the streets was incorporated into the native soils. In the approximate center of Site D near Highway 580 is an area of darker than surrounding soils which contains visible amounts of historic debris. At the time -- of the field inspection this area had been staked off, marking the perimeter of the darker soils for most of its aerial extent. The stakes were marked "JRA anomaly." Debris, including several 1950s vintage ketchup bottles, were piled next to one of -- the stakes. An inquiry with Mr. Stuart Cook of the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority revealed that the stakes marked an area which had been the subject of magnetometer sweeps to locate buried heating ducts for removal. Since the Holman site inspection, intensive geophysical surveys have been conducted throughout Sites D and E to determine the presence of subsurface · -- utilities and other metal obstructions. These surveys noted several anomalies, including the darker soil area noted above. In January, 2001, 22 trenches were excavated across the Sites, in which various buried objects, including pieces of Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 79 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 ~- City of Dublin pipe, metal roofing, barbed wire, scrap metal, cable, reinforced concrete rubble and steel rebar were found. STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE · A significant environmental impact would result to cultural resources if the proposed project were to disrupt or adversely affect a prehistoric or historic -- archeological site or a property of historic or cultural significance to a community or ethnic or social group or a paleontological site except as part of a scientific study. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS -- No evidence of prehistoric cultural resources was seen within the Transit Center project area. Historic debris, mostly in the form of debris from demolished buildings, is seen throughout the project area. Historic artifacts noted included a -- cache of ketchup bottles (50 years or less in age) and other implements which are undatable, such as a steel file and other pieces of metal debris. Porcelain and glass fragments are seen throughout the area. The Transit Center property contains abundant artifactual material. The dumps noted by Baker and Shoup and which appear on the 1950s topograPhic maps apparently no longer are discrete entities. Dumping and grading of the property over the years has effectively masked the exact location of any dump deposits. -- While Baker and Shoup dismissed historical artifactual materials noted by them based upon their relative age (less than 50 years) and based upon their findings _ that Camp Parks was considered an unimportant military facility based upon federal environmental guidelines, the passage of time (11 years) may have changed that view. As of 2000 the historical material may be potentially _ significant under CEQA guidelines, being over 50 years in age. Likewise the military base, which has played an active role in wars beginning with World II and continuing through the Gulf War, may be considered potentially significant. _ Any concentrations of historical archaeological material which might aid in an historical appreciation of the base through time would also be considered potentially significant. However, given the amount of disturbance to the Project -- Area over the years and lack of discrete historical deposits found during the extensive geophysical inVestigations, it is unlikely that such discrete deposits exist. There is also still some potential that the Transit Center may contain buried prehistoric archaeological materials similar to those found to the south of 1-580 -- inside the Hacienda Business Park. Prehistoric materials could potentially have been obscured either by historic activities on the property, or by the flood-born silts which cover the shorelines of the former Willow Marsh which existed in .-- the general area of the Hacienda Business Park. Aboriginal habitation sites ~ situated on the edges of the marsh and its tributaries were buried under silts beginning approximately 2300 years ago. Two archaeological sites, Ala-413 and -- 394, situated along the Arroyo Mocho south of Highway 580, were discovered in Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 80 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 ~-- City of Dublin the 1970s under as much as 10 feet of silt. A combination of ground subsidence, _ erosion from the nearby hills and flooding episodes conspired to bury these village locations which were not re-occupied by the ancestors of the Ohlone nation until some time after 300 A.D. However, while there is some potential for prehistoric and historic materials within the Transit Center, numerous trenches dug for utilities over the last six -- years in the Transit Center streets, along Arnold and Altimirano Roads and along Dublin Boulevard have not encountered any such materials, nor have onsite seismic fault investigations or trenching to locate old utility lines. _ Impact 4.4-1 (historical, archeological and Native American resources): Although no significant historical, archeological or Native American artifacts were -- encountered within the project area, construction of the proposed Transit Center could disturb unidentified and unrecorded historical artifacts, including but not limited to artifacts remaining from previous military uses on the site, as well as -- archeological and/or Native American resources (potentially significant). MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation Measure 4.4-1 (historical, archeological and Native American resources): If, during construction of individual development projects within the ~-- Transit Center, archeological, discrete historical or Native American artifacts are encountered, work on the project shall cease until compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 is demonstrated. Project work may be resumed in compliance with any applicable resource protection plan. If human remains are encountered, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately. SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION _ All cultural impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level. 4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES This section of the DEIR addresses soil conditions, existing topographic and geologic features, potential impacts related to site grading and the potential for - seismic-related hazards. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The following background information is based on soils and geologic information contained in a report entitled Geology and Soils Information to -- Address Items on the Project CEQA Checklist for the Dublin Transit Center, Dublin, California prepared by Kleinfelder (December 4, 2000) and the Surface Fault Rupture Hazards Study Camp Parks Dublin, California prepared by -- Kleinfelder (October 12, 1999). Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 81 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin -- Regional geologic and seismic conditions The project site is centrally located within the Amador Valley, which lies within the Coast Ranges Geomorphic Province of Northern California. Geologic and _ geomorphic structure within this province is controlled by the San Andreas fault. The San Andreas fault is a right-lateral strike-slip fault, which extends from the Gulf of California, in Mexico, to Cape Mendocino, off the coast of -- Humboldt County in northern California, forming a portion of the boundary between two independent tectonic plates on the surface of the earth. This fault, together with the Pacific plate, and Greenville-Marsh Creek, Hayward, Calaveras ,-- and Pleasanton faults are referred to as the San Andreas fault system. The northwest trend of the faults within the system is responsible for the strong northwest structural orientation of geologic and geomorphic features in the San -- Francisco Bay Area. The bedrock in the northern portion of this province and east of the San -- Andreas fault is presumed to be the Franciscan Complex, a diverse group of igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic rocks of Upper Jurassic to Cretaceous age (65 to 140 million years old). These rocks are part of a northwest-trending belt of -- materials, which lies along the eastern side of the San Andreas fault system, located about 37 miles southwest of the project site. Sedimentary rocks of the Great Valley Sequence, also Jurassic to Cretaceous in age, have been thrust over -- the Franciscan Complex rocks and are common within the region. These rocks are unconformably overlain by Tertiary age (two to 65 million years) marine and continental sedimentary and volcanic rocks. All of these rocks have been subjected to episodes of significant folding and faulting during the Neogene (about the last 25 million years). In the Amador Valley, bedrock units are _ overlain by a thick sequence of poorly consolidated Late Tertiary Pleistocene (between 500,000 and 2 million years old) continental sediments including the Livermore Gravels formation. Late Pleistocene and Holocene (less than about _ 11,000 years) alluvium, consisting of unconsolidated sand, silt, clay and some gravel exists as a thin veneer over the Pleistocene deposits or bedrock in the Amador Valley. Local geology The Amador and Livermore Valleys lie in an alluvial filled basin, known as the -- Livermore Block, Within the Diablo Range. The basin is separated from the coast range to the west by the Calaveras fault zone. The basin was formed by down- warping and faulting of the Livermore Syncline and is filled with the Pliocene -- and Pleistocene age Semi-consolidated, continental sediments of the Livermore Gravels formation and older Tertiary rocks deposited in a shallow water, near shore, marine environment. These sediments are overlain by relatively -- undeformed Quaternery Alluvium composed of unconsolidated gravels, sands, silts and Clays. Near surface deposits in the project vicinity consist of fine-grained floodplain (fine grained silty sand with interbedded silt and clay) and basinal -- (silty clays with abundant organic material and interbedded fine sands) deposits. The project site is relatively fiat, with a very gentle slope to the south. About 17 -- acres of the 91-acre site contain a BART parking lot. The remaining 76 acres are Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 82 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin undeveloped, except for Dublin Boulevard and streets accessing the BART _ station. Incised stream channels are not present and vegetation consists of grassy areas and scattered brush. Field investigations undertaken by Kleinfelder recorded the subsurface conditions at two trencheS excavated at the project site. _ The natural soil profile is a relatively uniform sequence of fine-grained Holocene alluvial deposits showing three different periods of sediment deposition followed by soil formation during an extended period of non- - deposition. Artificial fill is present at varying depths on site and the top three to five feet of native soil is a modern soil consisting of generally stiff, prismatic expansive silty clay with a dark brown color from organic material. Below the -- modern soil are several distinct stratigraphic units of fine-grained alluvial sediment consisting of clayey silt, silty clay and clayey sand. Blocky (prismatic) structure with shrink-swell shear polishing is common, particularly in the more -- clay rich strata. Zones of caliche deposition within fractures are common, particularly in the lower (older) strata. Ancient burrows, which have been filled in with soil from the above units, are common in the less clay rich strata. No evidence of tectonic shears offset soil horizons, or offset stratigraphic units was observed within the two trenches. No areas of concentrated mineralization -- or indications of vertical groundwater barrier features were observed. Groundwater was encountered in both trenches, at seven feet in one trench, and at seven to nine feet in the other trench. Surface fault rupture The project site is located within the State of California designated Earthquake Fault Zone for the Pleasanton fault. This status would trigger additional geotechnical studies prior to any development within an identified fault zone. _ The existence of the fault was first reported in 1963. Within the limits of Camp Parks, which previously included the project site, the Pleasanton fault was detailed as two parallel fault traces striking about 23 degrees west of north _ (N23W). In 1974, the California Department of Mines and Geology (CDMG) zoned the Pleasanton fault from the south side of the Amador Valley, through Camp Parks and north to the southern end of the Dougherty Hills. In 1981, _ several consultant investigations concluded that fault related features exist north of Camp Parks in the Dougherty Hills. Exploration trenches across the inferred Pleasanton fault traces south of 1-580 found no fault-related features in the -- alluvial sediments exposed. Following these investigations, CDMG recommended the portion of the Pleasanton fault south of 1-580 be removed from the Earthquake Fault Zone Map, since evidence to support Holocene age -- faulting was very weak. CDMG also recommended that portions of the Pleasanton fault north of Camp Parks in the Diablo Quadrangle be removed from the Earthquake Fault Zone Maps. In 1982, the Earthquake Fault Zone Maps -- for the Dublin Quadrangle were revised to reflect these recommendations. The portion of the Pleasanton fault within Camp Parks remained zoned largely because no studies had been performed on the federal lands. A surface fault rupture hazards study prepared in 1991 for the BART station, located southwest of the project sited, revealed no evidence of fault traces. The -- studY indicated the subsurface soils in the trenches dated back to the Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 83 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin Holocene/Pleistocene epoch boundary (about 10,000 years) and concluded the Pleasanton fault, if it exists below the BART station site, had not ruptured the ground surface during the Holocene age. The study further concluded the requirements of the Alquist-Priolo Act had been satisfied and no building setback ,-- would be required. The Surface Fault Rupture Hazards Study (Kleinfelder 1999) prepared on the _ project site concluded that no substantial evidence for the existence of the inferred Pleasanton fault traces in the study area was found within the entire Holocene age soil profile. The conclusion was based on the lack of any fault _ induced disruption to sediment and soil development units exposed in the trenches excavated for this study and for the BART study. The Kleinfelder study concluded the requirements of the Alquist-Priolo Act had been satisfied, and that _ the risk of surface fault rupture occurrence at the project site is very low and that no building setback zones are required for the proposed development of the site. Exhibit 10 shows the area examined for earthquake fault traces as part of the -- Kleinfelder study. Seismic hazards -- The project site and the entire city of Dublin lie within a seismically active area. According to the United States Geological Survey, there is a 70 percent probability the Bay Area will experience a major earthquake (M6.7 or greater) during the -- next 30 years. Faults considered to be major contributors to this probability include the Calaveras, Hayward and Greenville faults, located about 1.5 miles southwest, eight miles southwest and eight miles northeast of the site, -- respectively. Soils -- The site and adjacent areas are underlain by Holocene to Late Pleistocene age fine-grained alluvium. Several geotechnical studies for development projects in the project vicinity found underlying soils to be generally cohesive and/or dense -- and not subject to liquefaction. However, a few discontinuous and thin lenses of clean fine sand, considered susceptible to liquefaction, have been encountered, particularly adjacent to Tassajara Creek, about one mile east of the site. ' Consequently it is anticipated that a few confined layers of potentially liquafiable material may exist beneath the site. The potential for lateral Spreading at the site _ is considered less than significant due to the relatively fiat site and absence of incised creek channels. _ Land subsidence in the Amador Valley area occurred in the past as a result of groundwater withdrawal. Ground water withdrawal practices in the area are now managed to minimize subsidence. Other types of land subsidence or collapse are -- rare and the potential for land subsidence or collapse at the project site are not considered significant. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 84 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin ,, ~ [CAMP ~ PARKS] t ~ ~ BATC Trenches ~ ~ ~ (1991)~ ~ ~ ~ .~~ Scarl~ Ct, ' ..... , Interstate 580 (1991  Owens Dr. SOURCE: Kleinfelde~ Inc., 10/11/99. Exhibit 10 EARTHQUAKE FAULT ZONE AND FIELD EXPLORATION ..... Alquist-Priolo Zone Boundary aa ~ ,- Inferred Fault Trace ~ Study Trench ~ Investigation Area ~ Site Boundary CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN TRANSIT CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT The naturally occurring near surface soils at the site and in the project vicinity commonly consist of moderately to highly plastic clay. These clay soils typically exhibit a moderate to high expansion potential. STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following standards of significance are used to assess potential environmental impacts related to geological, landform and topographic issues of the proposed project: · Exposure of people and property to the risk of substantial harm from geological hazards and/or soil or seismic conditions; · Presence of an Earthquake Safety Zone (formerly Alquist-Priolo Seismic Study Zone), an active fault or an area characterized by surface rupture that could be related to fault activity; ° Significant increases over present levels of soil erosion. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Should the project be approved and implemented, the following environmental impacts are anticipated: site grading and excavation, seismic risk, liquefaction and expansive soils. These impacts would be applicable to all developments proposed in the project area. Potential soil erosion impacts are discussed in SeCtion 4.7 (Hydrology and Water Quality). Impact 4.5-1 (site grading and excavation): Approval of the proposed project would cause increased amounts of site grading and excavation for construction as the project is built out. Grading operations would proceed based on grading and excavation plans approved by the City of Dublin for individual development projects within the proposed Transit Center (less-than-significant impact). As noted in the Environmental Setting section, the Bay Area is one of the most seismically active areas in the world. Approval and construction of the proposed Transit Center would expose people and improvements within the future development to seismic risk. Impact 4.5-2 (seismic hazard): During a major earthquake on a segment of one of the nearby faults, moderate to strong ground shaking can be expected to occur at the project site. Strong shaking during an earthquake could result in ground failure such as that associated with soil liquefaction and differential compaction (significant). The preliminary geotechnical report notes the presence of potentially expansive soils within the project area. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 86 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Impact 4.5-3 (expansive soils): The presence of moderately to highly plastic clay occurring near surface soils in the project area_exhibit a moderate to high expansion potential. The potential for shrink-swell of expansive soils can result in damage to buildings with improperly designed foundations (potentially significant). MITIGATION MEASURES The following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce potential seismic hazards to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure 4.5-2 (seismic hazard): Site specific geotechnical investigations shall be required for each individual development proposed within the Transit Center project area. Design and construction of structures shall be in accordance with the seismic design requirements of the Uniform Building Code (UBC), which includes construction standards near fault factors. The site-specific geotechnical investigation shOuld further investigate the presence of potentially liquifiable material at the site. Conventional design and engineering techniques should be able to mitigate for minor settlements. The following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce potential expansive soils impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure 4.5-3 (expansive soils): For each building, as well as public streets and other pavement areas constructed in the project area, the required site specific geotechnical investigation shall address expansive soils and provide appropriate engineering and construction techniques to reduce potential damage to buildings and pavement surfaces. SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION All impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. 4.6 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES This section of the EIR addresses potential soil, groundwater and structural -- contamination. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING A hazardous materials assessment was prepared by Treadwell & Rollo, Inc. (2000) to identify the potential presence of hazardous substances currently or historically used within the project area that could have an adverse environmental impact on future use of the area. The results of this analysis are summarized below. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 87 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 ~, City of Dublin The 91-acre project area partially developed ~vvith the East Dublin-Pleasanton BART station parking lots, including a PG&E substation and telecommunication tower. North and east of the BART station parking lotx is vacant land. In their site reconnaissance, Treadwell & Rollo identified soil stockpiles, pipes and wood debris and two fire hydrants located on vacant portions of the project area, as well as an underground petroleum pipeline and fiber optic cable located adjacent to the project area, within the former Southern Pacific railroad (SPRR) right-of- way. The former SPRR right-of-way is planned as an extension of the Iron Horse Trail. Exhibit 11, contained in Section 4.9 of the EIR, Land Use, shows these site features. With the exception of the petroleum pipeline located adjacent to the western portion of the project area, no visual evidence of asbestos-containing materials, other hazardous materials, or petroleum hydrocarbons was observed. -- West of the proposed project is an area occupied by light indUstrial facilities and similar uses. There is a City of Dublin corporation yard at the end of Scarlett Court, next to the BART station, and along Scarlett Court there is a lumberyard -- and several auto dealerships. On Scarlett Place, there is a truck rental business and collectible car dealership showroom. On the portion of Dublin Boulevard between Scarlett Place and the SPRR right-of-way, there are two auto body shops. South of the project area is 1-580, the south parking lot for the BART station and Hacienda Business Park. To the west of the project area, extending to Hacienda Boulevard, is a vacant land, portions of which are being used as staging areas by contractors working on projects in the vicinity. North of the site is the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area. - Site history ~, Treadwell & Rollo reviewed selected historical aerial photographs for the years 1957, 1959, 1963, 1966, 1969, 1971, 1973, 1976, 1988, 1992, .1994, 1996 and 1999, as well as United States Geological Survey (USGS) maps for the years 1904, 1949, 1960, _ 1968, 1973, and 1980. The maps and photographs were reviewed for evidence of activities that would suggest the potential presence of hazardous substances within the project area and vicinity. In addition, historical information regarding ~_, the Camp Parks military installation was obtained from various websites, the History Center at Camp Parks and conversations with and pertinent documents ' obtained from the civilian environmental staff at Camp Parks. Based on the review of historic aerial photographs and USGS maps, the project ' area has historically remained relatively undeveloped and existed largely as open :-~ space. The only exception was a series of liquid propane gas tanks and a generator building located in the northwest portion of the project area (on Site A) and since removed. A 1945 Navy map indicated the presence of a salvage yard in the ~ southernmost pOrtion of the property (on Site D-2), however, no corroborating evidence was found to confirm this area was actually used for this purpose. Construction activities began in the mid- 1990s with the construction of the -- BART station and parking lot and have continued to the present day. : Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 88 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -~ City of Dublin Public records A review of government records determined the project site is not listed on any of the government databases searched. Within a 1/8-mile of the project area, no _ sites have documented releases of hazardous materials or petroleum hydrocarbons. One site, an auto dealership, within 1/8 to 1/4 mile of the project '~ area -had a documented release. Within a 1/4 to 1/2 mile radius of the project .-~- area six sites have documented releases. Nine sites with documented releases were identified within a 1/2 mile to one-mile radius of the project area. -~ Several studies have previously been prepared for portions the project area to evaluate potential hazardous materials. In 1990, Environmental Science Associates prepared the Environmental Baseline StudY: 47-Acre Parcel at Parks ,~ Reserve Forces Training Area, Dublin, California. The 47-acre parcel constitutes the western portion of the project area (Sites A, B, C and the Dublin Boulevard right-of-Way). Surface soil samples were collected, with one set of samples -~ analyzed for asbestos and the other set of samples analyzed for metals, pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). In addition, samples suspected of asbestos containing materials were taken from onsite debris piles, onsite structures and a -- burned-out off-site structure. Four soil borings were drilled, three onsite and one off-site; and two of these borings were completed as monitoring wells. Groundwater samples were collected from the wells and grab samples were - collected from the borings. The groundwater sample from the off-site .,. monitoring well was analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbons and the onsite groundwater sample was analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Laboratory analyses did not detect the presence of any petroleum hydrocarbons, VOCs or semi-volatile organics in any of the surface or subsurface soil or ,~. groundwater samples. Asbestos was found in the debris piles, building materials and off-site in the insulation of a tank and the remains of a burned-out building. ~ Subsequent studies noted the removal of the asbestos containing materials from _, the project area. In 1994, Woodward Clyde Federal Services prepared the 40-Acre Parcel Preliminary Assessment Screening, Parks Reserve Forces Training Area, Dublin, California. The 40-acre parcel constitutes the eastern portion of the project area (Sites D-l, D-2, E-I, E-2 and F). This report concluded that there is no indication that hazardous substances were used/or stored within this area. " In 1998, Erler & Kalinowski, Inc. prepared the Results of Soil and Groundwater ~.~, Investigations and Screening Human Health Risk Assessment for Properties Located at Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California. Groundwater grab samples were collected from a 10-acre area located in the -- southeast corner of the Transit Center project area (Site D-2). VOCs, specifically tetrachloroethylene (PCE) and trichloroethylene (TCE) were detected in grOundwater samples, however, the screening human risk assessment indicated ~ current levels of these constituents do not pose a significant human health risk. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 89 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The proposed project would be considered to result in a significant impact if it would directly or indirectly contribute to a potential public health hazard or involve the use, production or disposal of materials which pose a hazard to people or animal or plant populations in the project area. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Hazardous materials Evidence of hazardous materials storage (e.g. drums) and disposal (e.g. soil discoloration) within the project area was not observed during a December 2000 review of the historical aerial photographs and USGS maps and site reconnaissance. Soil and groundwater samples collected during two prior investigations found no petroleum hydrocarbons or semi-volatile organics in the project area. Asbestos containing materials previously located at the western portion (Site A) have been removed. PCE and TCE were detected in groundwater samples in Site D-2, but the levels were determined to not pose a significant human health risk. The presence of these hazardous substances at such tow levels would not result in significant adverse impacts to human health. However, given the past ownership of the project area by the military and the apparent dumping of debris by the military on portions of the area, as noted in the Cultural Resources section of this EIR, there is still the potential that currently unknown environmental hazards could be found within the project area as the result of more thorough site investigation for individual projects. Impact 4.6-1 (hazardous materials): Individual project site-specific hazardous material investigations may locate hazardous material or polluted groundwater resulting from past military uses (potentially significant). Risk o/ upset Another potential impact would be a risk of fire and explosion to proposed high- density residential dwelling units on Sites A or C should the existing petroleum pipeline within the Iron Horse Trail is damaged as a result of construction within the proposed Transit Center or the Iron Horse Trail. Should the pipeline be damaged or broken, residents of the dwellings could be subject to fire, explosion and/or risk of contamination. Impact 4.6-2 (risk of upset): Future residential dwellings constructed near the proposed Iron HOrse Trail could be subject to fire, explosion and/or contamination should the petroleum pipeline be broken or damaged (potentially significant). MITIGATION MEASURES The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts from hazardous materials to a less than significant level. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 90 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Mitigation 4.6-1 (hazardous materials): Phase I and, if required, Phase II level environmental investigations shall be performed for each individual development project within the proposed Transit Center prior to any grading or construction activity. Individual developers shall be responsible for performing any necessary cleanup, as recommended in the environmental investigations and as required by regulatory authorities (tess-than-significant after mitigation). Mitigation 4.6-2 (risk of upset): a) During construction of residential developments on Sites A and C, the adjacent Iron Horse Trail right-of-way locations shall be flagged to prevent heavy equipment from crossing over the petroleum pipeline and fiber optic cable. Construction materials and equipment shall not be stored on top of the right-of-way -- b) Future residential development within the proposed Transit Center shall ~ maintain a minimum setback of 50 feet from the petroleum pipeline to the nearest habitable residential structure within the proposed Transit -- Center. IMPACTS AFTER MITIGATION Less than significant 4.7 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES This section of the EIR address potential impacts related to flooding, increased stormwater runoff and water quality. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project area description The proposed Dublin Transit Center is located in the northerly portion of the Amador Valley within the City of Dublin. The Valley is a broad alluvial fan that drains southerly and westerly through Niles Canyon to the San Francisco Bay. The project area is bounded on the north by Dublin Boulevard and Camp Parks, on the east by Arnold Road, on the south by 1-580, and on the west by the old Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, which is a planned extension of the Iron Horse Trail. The 91-acre project area currently drains to two facilities under 1-580; one in the easterly portion of the project (Site D-2) and one to the west of the project area. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 91 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 ~-- City of Dublin Approximately seventeen acres of the westerly portion of the project area have been developed as surface parking to accommodate the recently constructed Dublin/Pleasanton Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Station. The BART Station work also included improvements to onsite drainage and the drainage channel west of the site, known as Line G-5. These improvements included underground storm drain construction easterly across project area (between Sites A and B) then north to Dublin Boulevard under Iron Horse Parkway to a earthen trapazoidal channel that follows the northern boundary of Site F to Arnold Road. The project area grade is approximately elevation 340 near Dublin Boulevard and falls to the southwest at approximately one-half of one percent. Existing drainage fOr the westerly 46 acres (Sites A, B and C) drains to Line G-5. The easterly 45 acres drainage sheet flows to a 6 foot x 4-foot box culvert on Site D-2 at 1-580. Rainfall The region's climate is characterized as Mediterranean, with wet winters and dry summers. In the vicinity of the project area, mean annual rainfall equals approximately 18 inches, with at least 80% of this total occurring during the October through March rainy season. Peak rainfall intensity for a 20 minute duration, 10 year recurrence interval rainstorm equals 1.05 inches per hour, while for a 24 hour duration, 100 year recurrence interval rainstorm the intensity equals 0.15 inches per hour. This is based on hydrologic criteria published by the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (ACFC & WCD). StormWater runoff is that portion of rainfall that is not absorbed into the ground, taken up by plants, or lost through evaporation. Coarse-grained, permeable soils and heavy vegetative cover reduce runoff, while steep slopes, fine-grained soils, and impervious surfaces (buildings and pavement) increase runoff. The duration, frequency, and total amount of rainfall also affect the volume of runoff; frequent and/or heavy rains saturate the soil and reduce infiltration, causing the percentage of rain that runs off the land to increase with the severity of a storm. The soils within the project area can be characterized as having low to moderate permeability with medium to slow runoff potential. The westerly half of the project area has 26 acres of developed area covered by buildings and paved streets, parking/driveway areas. The easterly half of the area is currently undeveloped and covered by grassy areas and scattered brush. Based on the soils, development, vegetation conditions and on the topographic features described above, it is estimated the west half of the project area and areas tributary to line G-5 at this location have an existing impervious area of approximately 46% of the Westerly portion of the project area. Regional drainage The project-area drainage is collected by Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (ACFC & WCD), Zone 7 flood protection network Line G-5 to the west of the site and a California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) box culvert under 1-580 to the south of the project-area. Line G-5 and the Caltrans box culvert drain to ACFC&WCD Line G-2, which drains to Chabot Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 92 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Channel and then to Arroyo Mocho in the City of Pleasanton. The drainage ultimately enters San Francisco Bay through Coyote Hills Slough near the City of Fremont. The drainage system south of 1-580 is owned and maintained by ACFC&WCD. Line G-5 is maintained by BART from 1-580 to Iron Horse Trail Upstream of the Iron Horse Trail aligru~ent, the drainage system will be owned and maintained by the City of Dublin. The County of Alameda is developing the approximately 700 acre Santa Rita property to the east of the Transit Center project area as part of the approved Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. As a part of the engineering for their development, the County contracted with Brian Kangas Foulk (BKF) to prepare a Master Drainage Plan. This report, entitled Santa Rita Drainage Master Plan, was most recently revised in May of 1999. The westerly portion of this Master Plan of Drainage includes the Transit Center project area and the extension of Line G-5. These facilities have been constructed, and Line G-5 extends easterly through the Transit Center site, then northerly to Dublin Boulevard, approximately 1,100 feet west of Arnold Road, At Dublin Boulevard, Line G-5 accepts flows from an open channel that runs diagonally northeast to Arnold Road approximately 800 feet north of Dublin Boulevard. The drainage flows are split at this location. Line G-5 receives 350 cubic feet per second (cfs) and 260 cfs flow south in a storm drain along Arnold Road to 1-580, where it joins three 54-inch diameter storm drain pipes. These storm flows drain into Line G-2 just south of 1-580. The easterly 45 drains to a 6-f°ot x 4-foot box culvert under 1-580. This box culvert drains to Line G-2 south of 1-580. The existing 6 foot x 4 foot RCB has adequate capacity to convey the storm flows from this area. Flooding The 100-year storm flow is currently contained within the channel. The City of Dublin is currently processing a letter of Map Revision (LOMR) through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the channel in the area of this project due to the constructed drainage facility improvements. Preliminary information received from the City of Dublin indicates that the project area will not be inundated by 100-year storm flows spilling out from the channel. The City indicated that the project site is located in Zone "X,' Areas inundated by 500-year flood events. Water quality No sources of existing contamination on site have been identified that would affect offsite surface or groundwaters. Because of the flat topography, existing surface parking lot and street pavement on the westerly portion and vegetative cover on the easterly portion, there is a minimal potential for soil erosion on the existing site. Water quality in California is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), which controls the discharge of pollutants to water bodies from point and non-point sources. In the San Francisco Bay area, this program is administered by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Federal Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 93 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin regulations issued in November 1990 expanded the authority of the RWQCB to include permitting of stormwater discharges from municipal storm sewer systems, industrial processes, and construction sites that disturb areas larger than five acres. The City of Dublin is a co-permit-tee of the Alameda County Clean Water Program, which is a coordinated effort by local governments in Alameda County to improve water quality in San Francisco Bay. In 1994, the RWQCB issued a set of recommendations for New and Redevelopment Controls for Storm Water Programs. These recommendations include policies that define watershed protection goals, set forth minimum non- point source pollutant control requirements for site planning, construction and post-construction activities, and establish criteria for ongoing reporting of water quality constriction activities. Watershed protection goals are based on policies identified in the San Francisco Bay Basin Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), and the entire program relies on the implementation of Best Management Practices to limit pollutant contact with stormwater runoff at its source and to remove pollutants before they are discharged into receiving waters, The California Stormwater Quality Task Force has published a series of Best Management Practices handbooks for use in the design of source control; and treatment programs to achieve the water quality objectives identified by the Basin Plan for the beneficial uses of surface waters, groundwaters, wetland and marshes. For inland surface waters around the Bay, beneficial uses are primarily limited to wildlife habitat, and the Basin Plan's related water quality objectives specify that the presence or concentration of listed constituents shall not cause a nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. A partial list of these constituents includes floating material, suspended material, settleable material, oil and grease, biostimulatory substances, sediment, pH, dissolved oxygen, bacteria, and toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms. STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following standards of significance are used to assess potential environmental impacts related to hydrology and water quality issues of the proposed project: · Exposure of people and structures to new or increased flooding hazards; Loss of flood carrying capacities within downstream storm drain facilities and receiving waters; · Decline in local surface or groundwater quality as a result of project development, including impacts from future occupants of the project as well as construction,related impacts; · Decline in the quantity of available groundwater; · Loss of existing riparian or sensitive wetland habitat. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 94 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Stormwater runoff Should the project be approved and implemented, the following environmental impacts are anticipated: increased surface runoff, soil erosion and potential degradation of water quality from non-point source pollution. On the westerly portion of the site, the development will create approximately 11 acres of new impervious area. On the easterly portion of the site, the development will create 36 acres of new impervious area. This would result in an overall increase in the total rate and volume of stormwater runoff, and will cause a slight increase in peak flows within Line G-5 during major storms and high flows. This increase would be insignificant during major storms and high flows in Line G-5. As a condition of project approval, the project developer will be required to install a drainage splitter structure upstream of the proposed project near the intersection of Gleason Road and Arnold Road. ACFC&WCD (Frank Codd, August 1999) has estimated the 100-year storm flows in Line G-5 to be 360 cfs upstream of Dublin Boulevard and 445 cfs at Iron Horse Trail. The City of Dublin requested BKF to prepare a storm runoff study for the existing development condition and the proposed developed condition for that portion of the Transit Center drainage tributary to Line G-5. The BKF study shows 140 cfs tributary to Line G-5 under existing conditions and 141 cfs tributary under the proposed development conditions. The minimal increase in storm flows may be attributed to the channel flow timing and the relatively small area remaining to be developed. The channel timing is probably the most significant factor since the peak flows from the project area itself are already downstream in the channel by the time the Overall peak channel flows arrive at the site boundary. The development of the Transit Center does not significantly increase the storm flow in Line G-5. '- Impact 4.7-1 (increased stormwater runoff): Development of the Transit Center ,,_ would introduce new impervious surfaces (primarily buildings, driveways, parking structures, roads and hardscape elements) onto the now vacant portions of the site, increasing stormwater runoff (less-than-significant). Flooding The project area is located outside of any 100-year flood plain, which would be considered a significant impact Impact 4.7-2 (flooding): The project would be located within a 500-year flood ~ hazard area (Zone X), which would not result in damage to improvements during a 100-year storm. A portion of the project site is included in the 100-year flood hazard area as mapped by FEMA, however, due to the installation of storm -- drain facilities in the area, potential flood damage to buildings would be unlikely (less-than-significant). Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 95 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 :~ City of Dublin Surface water quality Impacts are also anticipated with regard to soil erosion and surface water quality. Project development would occur over time as the Transit Center area builds out. During project construction, existing pavement and vegetation will be removed from development sites and the potential for soil erosion will be at its greatest. Upon completion and occupancy of a project, potential water quality contaminants may be produced from typical activities. Typical activities that may produce contaminants are: landscape chemical application, landscape trimmings, automobile use, automobile fluid spillage, and other similar activities. Impact 4.7-3 (non-point source pollution): The quality of stormwater runoff from the project site would be expected to decline resulting from an increase in the production of non-point source urban pollutants. In commercial areas, this includes debris, landscaping fertilizers and pesticides, and heavy metals, oil and gas residues, tire fragments and debris normally deposited by vehicular traffic. Stormwater runoff from developed areas on the site would carry non-point source pollutants into surface waters within the City and ACFC&WCD drainage channels, where they would cause a cumulative degradation of water quality in San Francisco Bay (significant). Soil erosion Following the completion of construction, it is likely that the threat of onsite erosion would be substantially reduced, because virtually all disturbed areas would be stabilized underneath buildings, pavement, and landscaping. Construction sites, if properly protected during project construction, should not experience significant soils losses. Impact 4.7-4 (soil erosion): During construction, short-term increases of soil erosion could result as the project area is stripped of the limited natural vegetation and exposure to wind and water erosion (significant). MITIGATION MEASURES The following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce non-point source pollution to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure 4.7-1 (water quality): Development projects within the proposed Transit Center are subject to the City of Dublin's NPDES general construction permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. The terms of this permit require that project development not cause any increase of sedimentation, turbidity, or hazardous materials concentrations within downstream receiving waters. It is expected that implementation of the erosion control plan outlined below under Mitigation Measure 4.7-2 would satisfy all NPDES erosion and sedimentation requirements, but additional provisions are needed for the proper handling and disposal of fuels and hazardous construction materials. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 96 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Long term prevention of non-point source pollution would be accomplished through a combination of source controls and post discharge treatment. Source control programs would be implemented by the applicant and/or the City. These programs include public education to discourage the disposal of contaminants into streets or storm drain systems and to limit the use of non-biodegradable fertilizers or pesticides. Source controls would also include a storm drain inlet cleaning and maintenance program on all project streets, particularly at the onset of the rainy season, to reduce the build-up of urban pollutants and debris that are normally washed into the storm drain system. Various source controls have been utilized to control pollutants and prevent them from entering storm drain systems. Detention ponds and biofilters require the use of large areas of land to remove pollutants. The construction of these types of storm drain systems may not be feasible within the Transit Center project, due to the high intensity of development being proposed. Fossil filters are a system of contaminant absorbing through apparatus installed in storm drain inlets. These filters incorporate EPA approved absorbents to collect hydrocarbons and other petroleum-based contaminants while permitting the undisturbed passage of water. It is recommended that project sponsors implement a fossil filtration runoff system to clean the site's stormwater runoff before it is discharged into Line G-5 or the 1-580 box culverb Where practical, landscape areas within individual developments shoUld incorporate the use of grassy swales to provide biofiltration for roof and pavement runoff prior to discharge into City storm drains. It has been demonstrated that these measures, when properly designed and implemented, can improve_the quality of stormwater runoff from urban sites, particularly when a site generates high volumes of auto and truck traffic. Further design and implementation recommendations are included in the Municipal Handbook of Best Management Practices. Mitigation Measure 4.7-2 (water quality): Each individual development project within the Transit Center shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that incorporates Best Management Practices (BMPs) for construction and post-construction conditions. The SWPPP shall be prepared to Regional Water Quality Control Board standards in effect at the time SDR permits are requested. The SWPPP shall include, but is not limited to incorporation of grassy swales into landscaped areas, use of fossil filters, covering of solid waste and recycling areas and similar features. The following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce potential soil erosion to a less than significant level Mitigation Measure 4.7-3 (soil erosion): The project sponsors shall prepare an erosion and sedimentation control plan for implementation throughout project construction. The plan should be prepared in accordance with City of Dublin and Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 97 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin RWQCB design standards. It is recommended that this plan, at a minimum, include the following provisions: · Existing vegetated areas should be left undisturbed until construction of improvements on each portion of the development site is actually ready to commence; · All disturbed areas should be immediately revegetated or otherwise protected from both wind and water erosion upon the completion of grading activities; · StOm~water runoff should be collected into stable drainage channels, from small drainage basins, to prevent the buildup of large, potentially erosive stormwater flows; · Specific measures to control erosion from stockpiled earth and exposed soil; · Runoff should be directed away from all areas disturbed by construction; Sediment ponds or siltation basins should be used to trap eroded soils before runoff is discharged into on-site or offsite drainage culverts and channels. · To the extent possible, prOject sponsors should schedule major site development work involving excavation and earth moving for construction during the dry season. SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION All impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. 4.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Issues addressed in this section include potential impacts to existing land uses within the project area, to land uses surrounding the project area and consistency o£ the proposed project with regulatory plans and programs. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING On-site land use On-site land uses are described in Section 4.1 (Aesthetics) and Section 4.7 (HazardOus Materials). Surrounding land use Surrounding uses includes the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Facility (Camp Parks) to the north of the project area. Camp Parks, established as a U. S. Navy Base in 1943, contains approximately 2,700 acres of land and. is one of the five U.S. Army reserve training centers in the nation. In fiscal year 2000, Camp Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 98 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Parks hosted over 44,000 personnel on site, with more than 164,600 man-days of training. The facility includes medical and academic training ranges and classrooms (including small arms firing ranges) in the northerly portion of the facility (some of which is located in Contra Costa County), a headquarters and administration area approximately 1 mile north of 1-580, troop and family housing areas, a maintenance area, an area devoted to warehousing and supply and an outdoor recreation area.. In fiscal year 2000, approximately 700 military and civilian employees were stationed at Camp Parks. Approximately 1,650 reservists visit the facility on a monthly basis. According to Camp Parks representatives, activities at Carnp Parks are anticipated to increase in the coming years as more emphasis is placed on reserve forces by the armed forces. Several other government facilities are located within the larger Camp Parks area. This includes a large warehouse structure in the southwesterly portion of the base that is used by the National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA) and a minimum security federal corrections institution located on the easterly border of Camp Parks, north of 8th Street. The portion of Camp Parks located immediately north of the proposed Transit Center, north of Dublin Boulevard, is currently largely vacant for several hundred yards to the north. Just north of the Transit Center Site F is an area currently used for storage of military vehicles., The Camp Parks Master Plan designates the area immediately north of Dublin Boulevard for a combination of maintenance/ support/storage, communicate facilities and training/ranges (areas). These land uses are shown on Exhibit 11. The main entry gate to the facility was recently relocated from Dougherty Road to the north side of Dublin Boulevard at the intersection of DeMarcus Boulevard, directly across from the proposed Transit Center. According to Camp Parks representatives, existing east and west gates may be closed in the future for security purposes, leaving the gate on Dublin Boulevard as the only access point. Land directly to the east of the Transit Center project area, on the east side of Arnold Road, is presently vacant. However, this area is planned to be developed in accordance with the existing Eastern Dublin Specific Plan for campus office uses. Headquarters facilities for Sybase and Commerce One are either under construction or have been approved for construction. Cisco Systems has7 an application with the City of Dublin to allow construction of up to 862,000 square feet of campus office uses. Properties directly west of the project area have been developed with a variety of light industrial and service commercial uses, including auto dealerships, equipment rental, and lumber yards. Land south of the project area and south of the 1-580 freeway, are within the jurisdiction of the City of Pleasanton and include the 800 acre Hacienda Business Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 99 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Park, containing a mix of retail, residential and related uses, as well as additional BART surface parking. Regulatory framework Land use and development within the project area is subject to the requirements of the Dublin General Plan and the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, which has been adopted as the primary implementation tool for the General Plan. Properties south of the project site and within the City of Pleasanton is subject to the regulatory requirements of the City of Pleasanton General Plan and Pleasanton Zoning Ordinance. The project proponent has requested that the Transit Center area be included within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, which provides more specific land use policies for a 3,300 acre area immediately east of the proposed Transit Center. Each of the Dublin land use documents are described below. Dublin General Plan: The Dublin City Council adopted the Dublin General Plan in 1985, with several amendments approved since then. The General Plan contains the long-term vision of the community in terms of development policy, including but not limited to location of various land uses, density and intensity of land use types, location and widths of roads, community appearance standards, health and safety considerations and similar requirements. The Transit Center project area is located within the Extended Planning Area of the General Plan, an area generally located east of the Iron Horse Trail alignment, where General Plan goals and policies have been formulated in conjunction with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, which is described below. The General Plan for the Eastern Extended Planning Area designates the project area and the Camp Parks facility to the north as "Public Lands," reflecting the County and BART ownership of the Transit Center and ownership of land to the north by the federal government. Guiding policies contained in the Schools, Public Lands and Utilities Element of the Land Use and Circulation Element of the General Plan include: · Guiding Policy A: Maintain communication with military administrators and congressional representatives to urge that Camp Parks Military Reservation be developed and operated as a good neighbor to Dublin. · Guiding Policy B: Require strict adherence to the land use provisions of the City-County Annexation Agreement for the Santa Rita Property owned by the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority. · Implementing Policy D: Negotiate reservation of an alignment for Dublin Boulevard extension across Camp Parks Military Reservation and Santa Rita land. Consult with the Federal and County governments concerning Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 100 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin appropriate uses and development standards between Dublin Boulevard extension and 1-580. Exhibit 12 depicts the existing General Plan land use designations for the project area and surrounding properties, including properties south of the site governed by the Pleasanton General Plan. .-- City of Pleasanton General Plan: The Pleasanton Plan, Pleasanton's General Plan, was adopted on August 6, 1996 and designates properties south of 1-580 into two General Plan land use categories. The open flood control and drainage channel -- immediately south of the freeway is designated for "Public Health and Safety," while lands south of the drainage channel are designated for "Business Park (Office/Commercial and Office)" uses. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan was adopted by the City of Dublin in 1994 for the purpose of directing long-term land use, circulation, infrastructure, ~- community facilities, urban design and environmental protection for 3,302 acres of land located east of the central portion of Dublin and north of the 1-580 freeway. At full build-out, the Eastern Dublin planning area would allow a range -- of residential, commercial office, employment and open space uses. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan is currently composed of ten smaller planning '- subareas based on geographic location. These include Tassajara Gateway, Town Center/Commercial, Town Center/Residential, Fallon Gateway, Fallon Village Center, Tassajara Village Center, Foothill Residential. Industrial Park, County '-- Center and Hacienda Gateway. Dublin Zoning Ordinance: Dublin's zoning ordinance currently designates the proposed Transit Center area as "A-Agricultural," which is intended to preserve and protect agricultural and open space lands. Permitted land uses in the Agricultural District include animal keeping, single family residences, farm buildings and related uses. .._ The Camp Parks facility to the north is also zoned Agricultural. Properties t© the west are zoned M-1 "Light Industrial Properties east of the proposed Transit Center, within the existing Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, are zoned "Planned ,-- Development PD-Campus Office" and "Planned Development-Business Park (Exhibit 13) depicts existing zoning designations for the project area and surrounding properties, including properties south of the site governed by the -- Pleasanton Zoning Ordinance). Pleasanton Zoning Ordinance: The City of Pleasanton has zoned properties south -- of the project site as PUD-IC/O (Industrial/Commercial and Office), which allows mixed use, planned developments with a range of retail, commercial, office, research and development and similar land uses. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 101 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE '-- The following criteria are used in this EIR to define instances of a significant land use impact: · if a proposed project would conflict with adopted land use plans, policies or regulations adopted to avoid or mitigate environmental effects · if a proposed project would conflict with a Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan; or · if a proposed project disrupts or divides the physical arrangement of an established community. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potential impacts include impacts to on-site land uses, impacts to adjacent or nearby off-site land uses and consistency with appropriate regulatory plans. -- On-site land use impacts Approval and construction of the proposed Transit Center project would convert a largelY vacant and underdeveloped site to more intense urban uses, including -- office, residential and commercial land uses. To minimize potential disruption and impacts to the existing Eastern Dublin - BART station, the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority and the BART District have entered into an agreement regarding construction of the proposed BART parking garage over the existing traction station and sequencing of - construction to not disrupt parking for BART patrons. However, it is likely that planned improvement to on-site roads, construction of other transportation improvements, utility excavations and other similar construction activities .-- could temporarily disrupt some access routes to the BART station on a short- term basis. '-- The proposed Transit Center is being planned as phased development project. As noted in the Project Description, prior to the approval of individual _ development projects within the Center, project-specific Stage 2 Planned . Development rezonings, Site Development Reviews, and environmental reviews consistent with this Program EIR and in accordance with CEQA will be -- required by the City of Dublin. Through this project-specific review, the City of Dublin and other affected agencies can ensure, through normal planning review procedures, that no impacts would occur with regard to long-term operational -- impacts of the proposed Transit Center. There are no residential dwellings or other communities on the site that would _ be disrupted should the proposed project be approved and constructed. The project applicant has indicated at an electrical generator, previously .- described, is proposed to be located in the project area, near the intersection of Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 102 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 --, City of Dublin Arnold Road and the 1-580 freeway. Since this area is planned for campus office development and a campus office development has been recently approved by the City of Dublin immediately to the east of this site, there would be no impact on either on-site or adjacent land uses. Impact 4.8-1 (existing on-site land uses): Implementation of the project would convert the site from undeveloped and underdeveloped uses (vacant land and ~ surface parking lots) to more intensive urban uses. Generally, no long-term impacts would result from this conversion, but there could be potential on-site short-term land use impacts with regard to disruption of BART station .-- operations during construction of the proposed Transit Center. However, these potential short,term impacts can be addressed on an individual basis at the time specific development projects are submitted to and reviewed by the City of --- Dublin (less-than'significant short-term impact; no long-term land use impacts). Surrounding land use -- Property north of the project area is within Camp Parks RFTA. The existing Camp Parks Master Plan designates the area immediately north of Dublin Boulevard and adjacent to the Transit Center site for a mix of maintenance/ -- support/storage, communication facilities and training/ranges land uses. Proposed office, residential and retail land uses within the Transit Center would be compatible with Planned land uses within the Camp Parks area. The proposed Transit Center would also be consistent the light industrial and service commercial uses to the west, planned and approved campus office -- developments to the east and office developments to the south, within the City of Pleasanton. Impact 4.8-2 (surrounding land use impacts): The type and intensity of land uses proposed within the Transit Center would be generally consistent with surrounding land uses, including of maintenance/support/storage, communicate facilities and training/ranges to the north within Camp Parks, light industrial and service commercial uses to the west across the planned Iron Horse Trail, planned and approved campus office uses to the east within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and offices to the south in the Hacienda BUsiness within the City of Pleasanton (less-than-significant impacts and no mitigation required). Regulatory framework -- The proposed project would not be consistent with the current Dublin General Plan designation of "Public Land" nor the Zoning Designation of "Agricultural." However, as part of the project and as described in the Project Description section -- of the EIR, an application has been filed with the City of Dublin to delete the "Public Land" General Plan designation and add the project site to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan with designations of "Campus Office," "High Density -- Residential" and "Public-Semi-Public." See Appendix 8.3 for proposed modifications to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan text. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 103 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin The proposed General Plan land use designations would be consistent with the following Dublin General Plan goals and policies as identified on the following table: _ Table 9. Eastern Extended Planning Area General Plan Land Use Consistency General Plan Policy I Consistency Discussion -- 2.1.4: Residential Land Use Guiding Policy A: Encourage the Consistent. The proposed Transit Center development of balanced mixed use represents a balanced mix of residential, -- community in the Eastern Extended commercial and office uses, planned as Planning Area, that is well-integrated an integrated unit. with both natural and urban systems and .~ provides a safe, comfortable and attractive environment for living and working. -- Implementing Policy B: For the western Consistent. The project proponent has half of the extended planning area, the requested the Transit Center area be Eastern Dublin Specific Plan sets forth included in the Eastern Dublin Specific more detailed policy direction, Plan as a new subarea. : infrastructure requirements and -- development guidelines [for residential development]. A Specific Plan(s) will be ~, required for the remainder of the _ extended planning area to provide a similar direction for its ultimate development ..- Implementing Policy C: Approval of Consistent. Based on information and residential development in the Extended analysis contained in this EIR, adequate Planning Area will require a community services and utilities are ~ determination that utilities and public available to support the amount of services will be provided at urban planned land uses. standards without financial burden to - existing residents. Timing of development will not result in premature termination of agricultural -- uses, new development will be self- supporting from a fiscal standpoint, and that each proposed project is consistent '-' with all General and Specific Plan policies 2.2.4: Commercial and Industrial Land Use Guiding Policy A: Encourage the full Consistent. The proposed Transit Center : development of a full range of includes a mix of retail commercial and _ commercial and employment-generating employment uses. It is anticipated that uses in the Eastern Extended Planning employment opportunities will serve Area that will meet the needs of the City both local and area-wide residents. ~_ i and surrounding area. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 104 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 ~-- City of Dublin Guiding Policy B: Require developers to Consistent. An amendment has been remain within the amount and requested to the Eastern Dublin Specific distribution of commercial and Plan. Future entitlements (Stage 2 PD employment-generating uses depicted in rezoning, SDRs and subdivision maps) _ the General Plan Land Use Map, to will be reviewed by the City of Dublin to maintain a reasonable balance between ensure that all future projects are jobs and houses, consistent with the amended Specific _ Plan. Guiding Policy C: All non-residential Generally Consistent. Although the development must be consistent with proposed height of several buildings --- the policies and guidelines in applicable within the proposed Transit Center Specific Plans. would be higher than generally allowed by the Specific Plan (6 stories), a number --' of taller buildings would be consistent with the overall-intent to provide a transit-oriented, mixed use project near -- the BART station. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment and associated Planned Development zoning standards -- would allow taller buildings near transit- oriented projects. The property owner has also filed a request to the City of Dublin to include the Transit Center site into the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. If approved, the Transit Center area would be designated as the eleventh planning subarea within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Applicable land use policies contained in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan are set forth in Table 10, below. Table 10. Eastern Extended Planning Area General Plan Land Use Consistency - Specific Plan Goal/Policy I Consistency Discussion Residential Land Use Goal: To establish an attractive and vital Consistent. The proposed project would - community that provides a balanced and include a mix of employment, fully integrated range of residential, residential, commercial and other uses commercial, employment, recreational that would provide an environment for - and social opportunities recreational and social opportunities. Policy 4-2: Encourage higher density Consistent. A major component of the residential development within proposed project would include up to -- convenient walking distance of shopping 1,500 high density dwelling units that areas, employment centers, transit would be sited near the existing BART _ stations/stops and other community station, a major bus hub and a major facilities employment center. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 105 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin Policy 4-5:Concentrate residential Consistent: The Transit Center is located _ development in the less on flat, vacant land adjacent to 1-580 that environmentally constrained portions of is relatively less constrained than steeper the plan area and encourage cluster portions of the Specific Plan area. development as a method of reducing or avoiding impacts to constrained or environmentally sensitive areas. - Policy 4-6: Encourage innovative Consistent: Proposed high-density approaches to site planning, unit design housing would offer housing and construction to create housing opportunities for non-traditional ~ products for all segments of the households, including single-parent community, including single-parent families, the elderly, empty nesters and families, the elderly, extended nuclear non-auto households. - families, first-time buyers, empty nesters and non-auto households. Policy 4-7: Encourage the development of Consistent: The residential portion of the -- affordable housing throughout eastern proposed project will be required to Dublin to avoid the concentration of comply with all City affordable housing such housing in any one area. requirements, and the applicant has -- indicated that affordable housing will be incorporated into the project. _ Policy 4-8: Ensure that projects developed Consistent: The residential portion of the in the plan area provide affordable proposed project will be required to housing in accordance with the City's comply with all City affordable housing _ Housing Element, the Inclusionary requirements, and the applicant has Housing Ordinance, the Density Bonus indicated these will be met through the Ordinance and the Rental Availability provision of on-site affordable housing. _ Ordinance. Policy 4-9: Affordable units in Eastern Consistent: The residential portion of the Dublin shall include both ownership and proposed project will be required to -- rental units and a mix of single and comply with all City affordable housing multi-family, requirements, and the applicant has indicated these will be met through the - provision of on-site affordable housing. Commercial Land Use Goal: To create a well-defined hierarchy Consistent: The proposed Transit Center -- of neighborhood, community and project would contain up to 70,000 square regional commercial areas that serves feet of ancillary ground-floor retail uses the shopping, entertainment and service that will be centrally located to serve - needs of Dublin. local residents, BART patrons and local employees. _ Policy 4-13: Encourage the development Consistent: The proposed Transit Center of neighborhood-serving retail and project would contain up to 70,000 square service uses in the Village Centers in feet of ancillary ground-floor retail uses _ order to reduce daily vehicle trips and that will be centrally located to serve contribute to the identity and character of local residents, BART patrons and local the outlying residential areas, employees. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 106 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin Policy 4-15: Concentrate pedestrian- Consistent. The intent of the proposed oriented commercial uses along the Transit Center is to promote a transit spine and at key transit transfer pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use facility points directly adjacent to the existing East Dublin BART station. Policy 4-21: Encourage high-intensity Consistent. High density housing and office and other employment-generating employment uses are being proposed as uses near the future BART station and at part of the Transit Center project. Up to freeway interchanges where the 10-story office buildings are proposed development can take advantage of adjacent to the existing BART statiOn to convenient access and the high visibility provide an identifiable entry into the will make a distinctive, high quality project and East Dublin. statement at these-important entry points into eastern Dublin. Policy 4-22: Encourage the creation of Consistent: The proposal includes a mix more vital working environments that of land uses to encourage a pedestrian- integrate different land uses into a friendly environment conducive to compatible whole whose active life does after-hours activities. not terminate at the end of business hours. Policy 4-23: Require all employment- Consistent. Non-auto transit modes related development to provide would be actively encouraged through convenient and attractive pedestrian, street design, building orientation and bicycle and transit-friendly facilities to urban design within the project. encourage alternate modes of commuting to and from work. The application also includes a request to rezone the site from "Agricultural" to a combination of "Planned Development (PD)-Campus Office," "Planned Development (PD)-High Density Residential" and "Planned Development (PD)- Public and Semi-Public." The project proponent submitted proposed Stage 1 Planned Development regulations, as part of the Transit Center application. Consistent with other development projects within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and as allowed by Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, the applicant is required to prepare individual zoning and development standards as part of the Planned Development rezoning process for each project to implement the general intent expressed in the Specific Plan. Proposed Stage 1 regulations include permitted land uses, building height, building types, urban design features, parking and circulation, open space and public facilities. (See Appendix 8.3 for proposed Stage 1 rezoning information). Prior to final approval of individual development projects, Stage 2 Planned Development (PD) rezonings must be filed with the City to provide more specific zoning and development standards. Site Development Review (SDR) applications must also be filed with the City to include specific site plans, building elevations and architectural design, landscaping, signs and site lighting. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 107 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin Impact 4.8-3 (regulatory. impacts): Approval and implementation of the General Plan and Specific Plan amendments, together with the proposed Stage 1 rezoning, would render the proposed project generally consistent with the goals and policies of the Dublin General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (less-than-significant impact and no mitigation required). MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 108 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin Central Pkwy. r · ,1 ':~ ii~ ~:: [CAMP PARKS] I!I!i !Vacant · F odd Control Channe ~ · ... ~ ~, ~ Dublin Bivd, ~ X X X "' ~'~, .. . ~ Vacant X X X X ~~ co.~t..,~=. Vacant so, s~oc~p,.~ ~ ~o/. '~ MIs~llaneous ~:: -eo~ ~ PG&E Vent Pi~s con.fuSion ~bris ~ ~ ~ %~."~: Parking ' ~ ....................... ~ ~ ~ = '~~- ~U[ , , ~ Fire Hydrant ~ I Vacant -~°z~~ ~- -~ x, XX ~ncrete ~ ~ ~ ~- -~ ~; v~ Foundation '~'o~~ ~. .~ ~' : 0 Debris :~ Intemtate 580 / Dublin-Pleasanton BART Station Ha,i~nda Bu~in~ ~ark Hacienda Business Park Parking ~ Lot / ow..~ ~r. SOURCE: Treadwetl & Rollo, 1~06/00 Exhibit 1 1 EXISTING LAND USE NOTE: Features not to scale. ~i -'Si'to Boundary CITY OF DUBLIN ~ DUBLIN TRANSIT CENTER i 0 240 480 ~o 980 fe~ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ~ J I I [ I / Central Pkwy. Public Lands [CAMP PARKS] Dublin Blvd. Dublin Blvd. Public Lands Business Park / Industrial Scarlett Ct. Interstate 580 / Dublin-Pleasanton BART Station Public Health and Business Park SOURCES: Dublin General Plan, October 1995 P/easanton General Plan, August 1996 Exhibit 12 EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS ~i~?~ Site Boundary ENVIRONMENTALCITY OF DUBLIN IMPACT REPORT DUBLIN TRANSIT CENTER o 240 Central Pkwy. [CAMP PARKS] Dublin Blvd. Dublin Blvd. Scarlett Ct, Interstate 580 / Dublin-Pleasanton BART Station PUD-I/C-O (Planned Unit Development - Industrial/Commercial & Offices) Owens Dr. SOURCES: Zoning Map of the City of Dublin, August 1993 P/easanton Zoning Districts, February 1999 Exhibit 13 EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATIONS City of Dubl/n: A Agricultural M-I Light Industrial PD Planned Development ~'~ ~ ~ ~ Site Boundary CITY OF DUBLIN j~ DUBLIN TRANSIT CENTER i o ~o 480 7~0 98Ofeet ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ,. I I ~ I I 4.9 NOISE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES This sections addresses potential noise impacts of the project, including short- term construction noise, permanent noise and helicopter overflights from .-- Camps Parks. (This section is based orr an analysis of the existing and future Transit Center ~ acoustical environment conducted by Charles Salter Associates, September, 1999). ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Existing noise levels Major noise sources affecting the project area include vehicular traffic on nearby -- 1-580 and on Dublin Boulevard. Distant jets7 BART trains-and general aviation flyovers also contribute to the existing noise environment. -' To quantify the existing noise environment, two continuous 46-hour noise measurements were made within the Transit Center project area. In addition, twenty, one 5-minute short-term measurements and two 15-minute short-term -- measurements were performed. Due to the presence of the elevated freeway to the south and the proposed 4-5 story high-density residential development, short-term measurements were made at 5, 15,24 and 30 feet above grade to quantify the change in noise level with elevation. A summary of existing noise measurements is found in Table 11. Table 11. Noise Measurements -- A-Weighted Sound Levels (dB) m Site Location Date/Time L (max) (~) L (eq) (s) DNL m ~ 75-feet north of BART passenger 15 to 17 July, 1999, 1 pick-up lane, 225-feet east of west 46 hours .... 76 property line on parking island on __ lil~ht pole. 15-feet above ~rade 60-feet south of Dublin Blvd. 15 to 17 July, 1999 2 Centerline, 42,feet west of Iron Horse 46 hours .... 70 _ Parkway centerline on light pole. 15- feet above ~rade 75-feet north o£ BART passenger 15 July 99 _ 3 pick-up lane, 225-feet east of west 5 minutes 71 68 74* property line on parking island on 11:35-11:40 a.m. light pole. 5-feet above ~;rade Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 112 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin 75-feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 4 pick-up lane, 225-feet east of west 5 minutes 75 71 78* property line on parking island 11:35-11:40 a.m. adjacent to light pole. 5-feet above grade. 225-feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 5 pick-up lane, 225-feet east of west 5 minutes 66 63 70* property line on parking island 11:45-11:50 A.M. adjacent to light pole. 5 feet above grade 225-feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 6 pick-u lane, 225-feet east of west 5 minutes 71 67 73* property line on parking island on 11:45-11:50 a.m. light pole. 24-feet above grade. 300-feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 7 pick-up lane, 225-feet east of west 5 minutes 66 63 67* property line on parking island 11:45-11:50 a.m. adjacent to light pole. 5-feet above grade. 300-feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 8 pick-up lane, 225-feet east of west 5 minutes 71 67 70* property line on parking island on 11:45-11:50 a.m. light pole. 24deet above grade 300-feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 67 60 67* 9 pick-up lane, 400-feet east of west 5 minutes property line on parking island on 12:05-12:10 p.m. light pole. 24-feet above grade 300-feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 10 pick-up lane, 400deet east of west 5 minutes 70 63 70* property line on NW comer of 12:05-12:10 p.m. parking lot on light pole. 24-feet above grade 11 75-feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 70* pick-up lane at west property line. 5- 5 minutes 67 54 feet above grade 12:50-12:55 p.m. 12 75-feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 pick-up lane at west property line. 5 minutes 72 70 76* 24deet above grade 12:50-12:55 l~.m. 13 225-feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 pick-up lane, 50-feet east of west 5 minutes 74 64 71' property line. 5-feet above grade 12:50-12:55 iv.m. 14 225-feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 pick-up lane, 50-feet east of west 5 minutes 75 66 73* property line. 24-feet above grade 12:50-12:55 l~.m. 15 300-Feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 pick-up lane at west property line. 5- 5 minutes 66 61 67* feet above grade 13:15-13:20 p.m. 16 300-Feet north of BART passenger 15 July 1999 pick-up lane at west property line. 5- 5 minutes 72 70 69* feet above grade 13:15-13:20 p.m. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 113 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin __ feet west of Iron Horse Parkway. 5- 15 minutes 75 63 64** feet above grade 17:45-18:00 lv.m. Source: Charles Salter Associates Notes: 1. A-weighting: A standard frequency weighting commonly employed to measure the loudness or noisiness of sounds. A-weighting filters a microphone signal in a manner that corresponds better to the human ear. A-weighting is required by the U.S. EPA, Calif. Dept. of Aeronautics, Caltrans and other agencies. 2. L (max): The maximum instantaneous measured sound level. 3. L(eq): The equivalent steady-state A-weighted sound level that, in a stated period of time, would ~ contain the same acoustic energy as the time-varying sound level during the same period. 4. Day-Nigh Noise Level (DNL): A descriptor established by the U.S. EPA to describe the average, 24-hour A-weighted noise level with a penalty applied to noise occurring during nighttime hours, -- intended to account for greater sensitivity of people during normal sleeping hours. *Comparison of short-term noise measurement with 46-hour measurement at Site 1. **Comparison of short-term measurement with 46-hour measurement at Site 2. Tl~e existing DNL at 5-feet above grade ranges from 67 dB at the northern portion of the project area (Site 17) to 74 dB at the southern portion of the area (Site 3). The noise level increases by 2 to 6 dB at an elevation of 24-feet above grade. This variation is from acoustical shielding of traffic noise by the BART station and variations in exposure to traffic noise caused by the elevated 1-580. Future noise levels Future p.m. peak hour traffic volumes on 1-580 will increase from 12,900 vehicles in 197 to 18,632 in the year 2025. This corresponds to a 2 dB irrcrease in the future DNL. The p.m. peak hour traffic volumes on Dublin Boulevard are expected to increase from 1,218 (1997) to 2,293 in the year 2025. This increase corresponds to 3 dB increase in future DNL at the northern portion of the project area. · Exhibit 14 shows anticipated future noise contours within the project area in the year 2025. STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The Noise Element of the City of Dublin General Plan contains policies for noise, based on compatibility of a specified land use based on the noise exposure level. Noise compatibility standards are shown in Table 12. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 114 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Central Pkwy. · .~i~ ~ii~::: ~ ' ~i  Dublin Blvd. ~ ~ Int~mt~to 580 [ Du~lin-~,a~anton B~T Station SOURCE: Char/es M Salter Associates, Inc. -Exhibit 14 FUTURE NOISE CONTOURS (Year 2025) ~70~ =DNL(dBA) Note: Noise contoum show 1st floor (ground level) Add 2 dB for 2nd floor Add 3 dB for 3rd and 4th floom N ~ Site Boundary CI~ OF DUBLIN ~ DUBLIN TRANSIT CENTER[ o ~o ~o ~ ~ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ~ P Table 12. Land Use Compatibility Standards (DNL dBA) Land Use Normally Conditionally Normally Clearly .__ Category Acceptable Acceptable Unacceptable Unacceptable Residential 60 or less 60-70 70-75 Over 75 Lodging (60 60-70 70-80 Over 80 NA -- units or less) Schools, 60-70 70-80 Over 80 NA churches, -- nursing homes (60 units or less) -- Neighborhood 60 or less 60-65 65-70 Over 70 parks Offices, retail 70 or less 70-75 75-80 Over 80 commercial Industrial 70 or less 70-75 Over 75 N A Normally acceptable means that noise compatibihty is acceptable, based on the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal, conventional -- construction, without any special insulation requirements. Conditionally acceptable means new construction should only be undertaken after a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements is made and needed -- noise reduction features included in project design. Normally unacceptable means new construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new development or construction does proceed, a - detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and incorporated into design. Clearly unacceptable means that new construction or development should -- not be undertaken. The California Noise Insulation Standard (Title 24, Part II, Calif. Code of -- Regulations), requires that new multi-family housing, lodging facilities exposed to a DNL in excess of 60 dB have an acoustical study prepared to show how interior noise levels will be controlled to DNL 45 dB. This requirement is ' consistent with City of Dublin General Plan policies. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The future noise level within the Transit Center project area will range from a _ DNL of 68 to 76 dB (see Exhibit 14), Noise levels are expected to be 3 dB higher at third and fourth floor elevations due to increased noise exposure from freeway traffic. Construction noise Should the project be approved, increases in noise during construction can be _ expected, although these will be of a short-term nature. Typical noise generated Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 116 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin by construction activities include earthmoving, truck traffic, back-up bells, air compressors, hammering and other mechanical equipment normally used -- during construction. Construction of higher rise office buildings may also necessitate pile driving. Short-term noise impacts will be the greatest for those _ residences planned to be located closest to the campus office portion of the project and, depending upon specific operations undertaken by project developers and contractors, could reach significant levels at times. Impact 4.9-1 (construction noise impacts): Future residents of the Transit Center could be subject to short-term but potentially significant noise due to -- construction of other buildings and improvements within the Transit Center (significant). -- Permanent noise impacts For the residential portions of the site, DNL is expected to range from approximately 68 to 75 dB. These noise levels are considered "conditionally -- acceptable" to "normally unacceptable." This means that new residential development nearest to Dublin Boulevard and-I-580 would be subject to potentially significant noise levels. Noise impacts would generally be greater at -- upper floors, due to the elevated nature of the freeway. However, the proposed development plan for the Transit Center has been designed to locate land uses sensitive to noise impacts, residential units and the Village Green, away from -- the 1580 freeway and BART tracks and to shield sensitive uses with taller office buildings to assist in minimizing permanent noise impacts. -- The acoustical report indicates that noise levels for the campus office component of the proposed project would also be "conditionally acceptable" to "normally unacceptable." According to the project applicant, the proposed electrical generator facility _ would be located within an enclosed building equipped with baffles to further reduce noise to surrounding areas Estimated exterior noise levels adjacent to generator building would be 50 dBA, with an estimated 40 dBA at the property _ line of the project area, at Arnold Road. It is anticipated that existing high noise from the adjacent 1-580 freeway and BART operations would "mask" any additional noise to be generated by the proposed generator. Impact 4.9-2a (permanent noise impacts for residential uses): Residential dwellings proposed to be constructed near Dublin Boulevard or7 the 1-580 freeway -- and the existing BART line woUld be exposed to future noise levels considered "conditionally acceptable" or ~ "normally unacceptable." Employees within campus office buildings, depending on their location, may also be subject to -- conditionally acceptable to normally unacceptable levels of noise (significant). Based on discussions with Camp Parks RFTA staff, helicopters are used within -- Camp Parks as part of on-going operations of the facility. An Environmental Noise Management Plan was recently prepared by the U.S. Army (December 2000) to assess noise impacts of Camp Parks operations on surrounding -- properties. The Management Plan identifies properties within 1000 feet of the Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 117 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin boundary of the facility, including the Transit Center as being within a _ "helicopter noise impact" area. Helicopter training occurs approximately 100 days per year, however, helicopter use could dramatically increase during times of heightened armed forces activity. The area south of Camp Parks is proposed for _ High Density Residential land use. Based on a review of the Environmental Noise Management Plan by the acoustic ~_ consulting firm of Charles Salter Associates, it was determined that helicopter flights, combined with traffic noise from adjacent roadways could result in a noise level of 65 dB (DNL) within residential areas proposed for the Transit -- Center development, which is considered "conditionally acceptable" for residential development. Although future Transit Center residents could be impacted by increased levels of noise from helicopter overflights. However, -- substantial evidence does not exist that noise related to helicopter activities would be significant. The Environmental Noise Management Plan recommends that residents near Camp Parks be notified of helicopter activities. Impact 4.9-3 (helicopter overflight noise): Residential dwellings proposed to be constructed within the Transit Center near Dublin Boulevard south of Camp -- Parks RFTA would be subject to helicopter overflights from Camp Parks (less- than-significant although mitigation is recommended). -- MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation Measure 4.9-1 (construction noise impacts): Individual project -- developers shall submit a Construction Noise Management Plan that identifies measures to be taken to minimize construction noise on surrounding developed properties, particularly residential developments. Noise Management Plan shall -- be approved by the City of Dublin Community Development and Public Works departments prior to issuance of grading permits and shall contain, at a _ minimum, a listing of hours of construction operations, use of mufflers on construction equipment, limitation on on-site speed limits, identification of haul routes to minimize travel through residential areas and identification of a noise _ monitor. Specific noise management measures shall be included in appropriate contractor specifications. _ Mitigation Measure 4.9-2a (permanent noise impacts for residential uses): For all residential uses within the Transit Center, site-specific acoustic reports shall be prepared by qualified acoustical consultants for individual residential projects at -- the time Site Development Review applications are filed with the City of Dublin. The acoustic reports shall include detailed identification of noise exposure levels on the individual project site and a listing of specific measures to reduce both -- interior and exterior noise levels to normally acceptable levels, including but not limited to glazing and ventilation systems, construction of noise barriers and use of buildings to shield noise. Mitigation Measure 4.9-2b. (permanent noise impacts to non-residential uses) For commercial projects where noise levels on a majority of the Site is projected -- to be Normally Unacceptable (greater than 75 dB DNL), the individual developer Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 118 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin shall submit to the City of Dublin, at the time Site Development Review _ applications are filed, a site-specific acoustic report prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant. The acoustic reports shall include detailed identification of noise exposure levels on the individual project site and a listing of specific _ measures to reduce both interior and exterior noise levels to normally acceptable levels, including but not limited to glazing and ventilation systems, construction of noise barriers and use of buildings to shield noise. Mitigation Measure 4.9-2c (permanent noise impacts to non-residential uses): For commercial projects in areas where noise levels are projected to be -- Conditionally Acceptable or Normally Acceptable (ie, 75 db DNL or less) on a majority of the Site, the individual developer shall submit evidence to the City of Dublin, at the time of Site Development Review applications are filed, that -- noise reduction features are included in the building design to ensure acceptable interior noise levels. Mitigation Measure 4.9-3 (helicopter overflight noise): Future residents of dwelling units within the Transit Center shall be provided with advance notification of the potential for -helicopter overflights from Camp Parks. The precise language of the notification shall be approved by the City of Dublin Community Development Director. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION All noise-related impacts would be reduced to less-than-significant levels. 4.10 POPULATION AND HOUSING ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES This section addresses demographic changes that could be anticipated should the proposed project be approved and constructed, including increases of local -- housing and employment within the community and region and impacts to the regional jobs-housing balance. -- ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING PoPulation Regional The Association of Bay Area Governments, the Council of Governments -- organization responsible for preparing and tracking population and demographic changes within the 9 county Bay Area region anticipates that the Bay Area will continue to grow at a rapid rate. Factors contributing to this growth include a -- favorable climate, recreational activities, top universities and career opportunitieS. Over the next 20 years, the population is expected to increase to _ more than 8 million persons, a 16% increase over the current (2001) population. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 119 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin Population increases are expected to be primarily due to increases in births and longer life expectancies rather than significant in-migration. Table 13 depicts anticipated 20-year growth in the Bay Area. Table 13. Regional Total Population & Household Projection -- 1990 (1) 2000 (2) 2010 (2) 2020 (2) Population 6,023,777 6,930,600 7,631,400 8,026,900 Households 2,245,865 2,438,060 2,656,650 2,839,630 Source: (1) US-Census -- (2) ABAG Projections 2000 Dublin, Tri-Valley and Alameda County -- Alameda County's growth is expected to reach a level of 1.46 million over the . next 20 years, making it the second-most populous county in the ABAG region behind Santa Clara County. ABAG notes that the Dublin and Tri-Valley area is ~ anticipated to experience the highest growth rates in Alameda County over the next 20 years, with the City of Dublin anticipated to have the highest percent-age change in population growth over this period (131%), primarily due to the ' availability of developable land and the proximity of transportation corridors. Table 14 summarizes subregional population projections. Table 14. Local and Subregional Total Population and Household (HH) Projection 1990 (1) 2000 (2) 2010 (3) 2020 (3) Pop. HHs Pop. HHs Pop. HHs Pop. HHs -- Dublin 23,229 7,100 32,519 9,230 50,500 15,510 66,600 21,290 Tri- -- Valley (Dublin, Pleasan- 130,503 48,380 176,900 59,630 225,200 76,350 225,400 88970 -- ton Liver- more) Alameda 1,276,702 479,518 1,462,700 514,620 1,615,900 552,090 1,671,700 578,830 County Sources: (1) US Census, (2) State Department of Finance, (3)ABAG Projections 2000 Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 120 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Housing Affordability and Regional Housing Needs The State of California has determined that each local agency must be responsible for providing their respective fair share of housing for very low (below 50% of median County income), low (between 50 and 80% of median County income) , moderate (80-120% of median County income) and above moderate (120+% of median County income) households. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is responsible for disaggregating region-wide fair share housing goals among member agencies. Housing goals are established for five years periods. Identification of appropriate housing sites and implementation strategies to assist in the achievement of these targets is to be carried out through Housing Elements of the General Plan for each community. For the City of Dublin, ABAG has established the following housing goals that are to be met for the period from 1999 to 2006: Very Low (796 dwellings), Low (531), Moderate (1,441 dwellings), and Above Moderate 2,668 dwellings). The City's existing Housing Element was adopted in 1991 and is planned to be updated in the near future to accommodate fair share housing targets. The City of Dublin's Zoning Ordinance currently contains provisions to require the construction of affordable dwellings as part of each residential development project approved by the City. Alternatively, project developers may choose to make a contribution to the City for the purpose of providing affordable housing. Employment Regional The 9-county region is projected to experience appreciable job growth over the next 20 years, adding nearly a million jobs. Approximately 50% will be in the services sector, the manufacturing and wholesale sector is expected to add 19% of the job growth, retail sales will add 11%, with the remaining 19% to include a variety of professional and other jobs. Table 15. Regional Employed Residents 1990 2000 2010 2020 Bay Area 3,151,993 3,538,000 4,017,500 4,438,300 Source: ABAG Projections 2000 Dublin, Tri-Valley and Alameda County The Tri-Valley area is experiencing rapid employment growth, fueled by strong demand for high technology goods and services and rising land and housing prices in other portions of the Bay Area. Alameda County is expected to second only to Santa Clara County in the number of new jobs to be generated over the next 20-year period. Overall, between 2000 and 2020, Alameda County will gain almost 43,000 jobs. Dublin Transit Center PA 00,013 Page 121 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Table 16 summarizes projected job growth for Dublin, the Tri-Valley area and Alameda County over the next 20 years. Table 16. Local and Subregional Employed ReSidents' 1990 2000 2010 2020 Dublin 11,030 13,600 23,100 34,300 Tri-Valley ( Dub lin, 73,385 91,600 118,400 145,200 Pleasanton, Livermore) Alameda 648,461 694,600 781,500 871,900 County ABAG Projections 2000 Jobs-housing balance According to ABAG, inadequate housing production linked with strong employment demand in certain geographic areas of the Bay Area is one of the most persistent problems facing, the Bay Area. The on-going jobs-housing imbalance has direct implications on the quality of life for Bay Area residents, including forcing employees to commute long distances to their jobs, declining air quality, and loss of community for cities that provide homes for commuters. An-indirect effect of the jobs-housing imbalance is the trend for Bay Area commuters to live in the San Joaquin Valley and commute across the Altamont Pass to work. While the Altamont Commuter Express provides an alternative mode of transit for some of these commuters, most rely on automobiles. Table 17 summarizes the existing jobs-housing balance in Dublin. It indicates that a jobs to housing imbalance currently exists in Dublin, with more jobs available in the community in relation to employed residents. This imbalance may be at least part/ally due to the number of major employment and commercial projects coming on line as part of the development of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. As more residential development is anticipated to occur as the Plan Area is built-out in more outlying areas of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, the current imbalance between jobs and employed residents is anticipated to trend back towards more balance. Table 17. Existing and Projected Jobs-Housing Balance Dublin 1990 2000 2010 2020 Households 6834 9,230 15,510 21,290 Jobs 12,870 27,050 39,130 49,370 Employed Residents 11,030 13,600 23,100 34,300 Jobs Housing Ratio 1:1.16 1:1.98 1:1.69 1:1.43 Source: ABAG Projections 2000 Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 122 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE A population and housing impact would be considered significant if a proposed project would induce substantial population growth, either directly or indirectly. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Housing Approval and construction of the proposed Dublin Transit Center would add a maximum of 1,500 high density dwelling units to the Dublin housing stock. Based on the proposed location, density and housing type of the proposed dwellings, the new dwelling units would be targeted to households desiring an more urban living experience, near a major transportation hub and in close proximity to a range of employment and shopping opportunities. Construction of the high density housing units is a key component of the mixed-use development complex proposed by the applicant. If constructed, the number of dwellings units within Dublin would be increased by 1,500 dwellings and an estimated 3000 residents, based on a standard of 2.0 -- persons per high-density_dwelling unit per the Dublin General Plan. The number of proposed dwellings would be considered generally consistent with regional population projections prepared by ABAG. Impact 4.10-1 (Housing): Construction of the residential portion of the Transit Center would add 1,500 dwelling units and approximately 3000 residents to the City of Dublin. Construction of the dwellings would be consistent with regional population projections and would also be a key component to the success of the proposed mixed-use transit-oriented center (beneficial impact). Although prices or rental rates of the proposed dwelling units have not been established, given the proposed density and applicant commitment to meeting City affordable housing requirements within the residential area, approval of the Transit Center would also contribute to meeting the City's fair share allocation of affordable housing units (beneficial impact). Employment The predominant land use type proposed in the Transit Center is office, which is generally considered the most employment-intense type of use. A relatively .~ small amount of ancillary retail commercial uses are also proposed. Based on standard employment ratios set forth in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, there could be a maximum of 7,832 permanent employees within the project area at _ full buildout of the Transit Center. Refer to Table 18 below. Based on preliminary information provided by the project applicant, the type of jobs to be provided are anticipated to be relatively well paying, high-technology type jobs. In addition to permanent employment, construction of buildings and other improvements associated with the Transit Center would create a number of -- short-term construction jobs. Given that the precise phasing and scheduling for Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 123 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin constructing the Transit Center is unknown, the number and duration of construction jobs is not known. Table 18. Transit Center Employment Projections Land Use Designation Sq. Ft. Sq. Est. Jobs Ft./Employee Commercial 70,000 500 140 Campus Office 2,000,000 260 7692 Total 7,832 Source: Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR, Table 3.2-6 Impact 4.10-2 (employment): The project site would generate approximately 7,832 jobs at full built out of the Transit Center, plus an unknown number of short- term construction jobs. This amount of employment growth has been generally accounted for in ABAG's regional employment projections. Since this amount of emplOyment growth is being planned as part of a mixed use, transit-oriented project which can draw on the entire Bay Area region, a less-than-significant impact is expected (less-than-significant). Jobs-Housing Balance Impact 4.10-3 (jobs-housing balance): Although the proposed project would contribute to the ABAG-projected jobs-housing imbalance in Dublin and eastern Alameda County, proposed employment growth would be sited near a major transit hub and would also contain a significant housing component to assist in reducing the transportation impacts associated-with a major employment center (less-than-significant). MITIGATION MEASURES None required. -- 4.11 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES The following section includes an evaluation of key intersections in the study area, points of congestion, transit service, plarmed circulation improvements, overall parking characteristics, and City transportation and parking policies. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Existing Street Network The proposed Dublin Transit Center would be located in the southern part of Dublin, adjacent to the 1-580 freeway. Streets that provide, or are planned to provide, access into and around the project study area include Dougherty Road, Hopyard Road, Dublin Boulevard, Scarlett Drive, DeMarcus Boulevard, Iron Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 124 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Horse Parkway, Arnold Road, Hacienda Drive, Central Parkway, Gleason Drive, Tassajara Road, Pimlico Drive, Santa Rita Road, Digital Drive-(future), Campus Drive (future), and Altamirano Road (future). Due to the rapid growth and development of the surrounding area, many of the study intersections and streets are currently under construction. This includes intersection improvements, street extensions, and street widening. For these reasons, the following descriptions of existing roadways and intersections are subject to change. A brief description of each roadway follows: Dougherty Road. Dougherty Road extends in a north-south direction west of the project area. A major arterial street, Dougherty Road has four travel lanes north of Dublin Boulevard. South of Dublin Boulevard, the roadway widens to six travel lanes as it passes over 1-580. A full-access interchange for eastbound/westbound traffic is located at Dougherty/I-580. In the study area, Dougherty Road provides access primarily to commercial-retail areas. North of Dublin Boulevard, the roadway provides access to residential areas as it approaches Amador Valley Boulevard. Dougherty Road is designated as a Metropolitan Transportation System (MTS) roadway by the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (ACCMA) Congestion Management Program (CMP). Hopyard Road. Hopyard Road extends south from Dougherty Road on the south side of 1-580. A six-lane roadway, Hopyard Road provides access to commercial and office development in the City of Pleasanton. Hopyard Road is designated as an MTS roadway in the ACCMA's CMP. Dublin Boulevard. Dublin Boulevard is in various stages of improvement and widening between Scarlett Drive and Hacienda Drive in the project study area. Currently, the roadway has two travel lanes open to traffic in this segment. However, with ongoing widening the roadway will provide six travel lanes in each direction by Summer, 2001. In addition, new or upgraded signals are also being installed at the DeMarCus Boulevard, Iron Horse Parkway and Arnold Road intersections. An east-west roadway, Dublin Boulevard provides access to commercial, office and residential areas. Between Hacienda Drive and Tassajara Road, Dublin Boulevard has been completely improved~ with three travel lanes in each direction and raised landscaped medians. Dublin Boulevard is designated as an MTS roadway in the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency's CMP. Scarlett Drive. Scarlett Drive is located west of the project area. Extending south from Dublin Boulevard, Scarlett Drive has two travel lanes and provides access to automobile dealerships as well as light-industrial areas between Dublin Boulevard and 1-580. DeMarcus Boulevard. DeMarcus Boulevard extends in a southerly direction from Dublin Boulevard through the project area_and provides direct access to the East Dublin BART Station and parking areas. It currently consists of a four-lane roadway with raised landscaped medians. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 125 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin The directional flow of traffic to the BART station is generally inbound via DeMarcus Boulevard and outbound on Iron Horse Parkway to the east. Iron Horse Parkway. Iron Horse Parkway extends in a southerly direction from Dublin Boulevard through the project area_and provides access to the East Dublin BART Station. Similar to DeMarcus Boulevard, Iron Horse Parkway has four travel lanes with raised landscaped medians. Iron Horse Parkway primarily provides access to BART parking lots. Through- vehicle access to the BART station entrance is prohibited from Iron Horse Parkway. All vehicles must access the BART surface parking lots or turn- around via a traffic Circle. Arnold Road, Arnold Road extends in a northerly direction from Dublin Boulevard. A wide, two-lane roadway, Arnold Road provides access to existing and planned office and high-tech businesses on the east side of the roadway. Currently, Arnold Road does not extend south of Dublin Boulevard as an improved roadway. The recently approved Commerce One project will extend Arnold Road south from Dublin Boulevard to the 1-580 frontage Hacienda Drive. Hacienda Drive is a north-south arterial street extending from Gleason Drive to south of the 1-580 freeway. South of 1-58-, Hacienda Drive has six travel lanes. North of 1-580, the roadway has four travel lanes to Dublin Boulevard and then three travel lanes continuing north to Gleason Drive. Hacienda Drive provides access to retail, office and residential areas east of the project area. Central Parkway. Central Parkway extends between Arnold Road and Tassajara Road, parallel to Dublin Boulevard. A two-lane roadway, the street is closed to through-traffic at the Tassajara Creek overcrossing due to ongoing construction of adjacent residential development. With raised landscaped medians, Central Parkway provides access to residential development in the study area. Gleason Drive. Gleason Drive is an east-west roadway that extends between Arnold Road and Tassajara Road. This roadway has four travel lanes with raised landscaped medians and provides access to commercial and office development north of the project site. Tassajara Road. Tassajara Road extends north from 1-580. A two-lane roadway, Tassajara Road primarily provides access to residential areas east of the project site. It is noted that Tassajara Road is currently being widened to provide four travel lanes between 1-580 to north of Gleason Drive. Tassajara Road is designated as an MTS roadway in the ACCMA's CMP. Pimlico Drive. Pimlico Drive extends east from Santa Rita Road opposite the 1-580 eastbound off-ramp. A two lane roadway, Pimlico Drive provides access to commercial-retail areas in the City of Pleasanton. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 126 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Santa Rita Road. Santa Rita Road is a six-lane roadway that extends south from 1-580. Opposite Tassajara Road, Santa Rita Road has raised landscaped medians and provides access to residential and office development in the City of Pleasanton. Santa Rita Road is designated as an MTS roadway in the ACCMA's CMP. Digital Drive (future roadway). Digital Drive would provide direct access to the Dublin Transit Center. This roadway is planned to be constructed south of Dublin Boulevard between Hacienda Drive and an extension of Arnold Road as a six-lane divided roadway as part of the recently approved Commerce One project. As part of the proposed Transit Center, Digital Drive would be extended east to Iron Horse Parkway decreasing in width to four and then three travel lanes. Campus Drive (future roadway). Campus Drive would extend south from -- Dublin Boulevard into the project area. Located between Iron Horse Parkway and Arnold Road, Campus Drive would provide access to office development as a two to four-lane road. AItamirano Drive (future roadway). Altamirano Drive would extend between Arnold Road and the proposed BART parking structure as a two- lane frontage road paralleling 1-580. Altamirano Road would also intersect Campus Drive before continuing west towards the parking structure. ~ Regional access On a regional basis, major access to the project area would be provided by 1-580. This is an eight to ten lane east-west freeway that provides access to the adjoining "- cities of Pleasanton and Livermore. Regionally, the freeway provides access east to Tracy and west to Hayward and Oakland. Nearby 1-580 full-access interchanges are located at Dougherty Road/Hopyard Road, Hacienda Drive, and Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road in the project study area. ~. Interstate 680 (I-680) is a six-lane, north-south freeway that provides access north through Contra Costa County to south of Santa Clara County. On a regional basis, 1-680 provides access to San Jose to the south and 1-80 (Cordelia) to the north. _ Nearby interchanges are located at Alcosta Boulevard, 1-580, and Stoneridge Drive. Both freeways are designated as MTS routes in the ACCMA's CMP. _ Existing transit service Bus Service -- The Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority, or "Wheels" provides the primary bus transit service through the Dublin and Tri-Valley area. Wheels routes that currently serve the project study area include lA, lB, 3, 4, 10, 10A, 12x, -- ACE. These bus routes provide access to both west and east Dublin as well as numerous outlying areas. Wheels bus routes are described in more detail below: Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 127 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin Wheels Route lA and lB: This route serves the project study area both north, south, and east of the proposed Transit Center. From the Dublin BART station, route IA accesses Dublin Boulevard east to Hacienda Drive. The route then extends north to Gleason Drive and Broder Boulevard before returning south to Dublin Boulevard. From Dublin Boulevard the route uses Tassajara Road, Santa Rita Road, and Rosewood Drive until returning to the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. Route lB travels in the opposite direction on the same streets. Headways are every 30 minutes during the weekdays. There is no operation on weekends. Current monthly ridership averages 3,098 passengers. Wheels Route 3: This route serves the Dublin Boulevard corridor as well as areas to the north in Dublin. In the study area, route 3 accesses the Dublin BART station, Dublin Boulevard, and Dougherty Road before continuing on to Wildwood Road, Stagecoach Road, Alcosta Boulevard, Davona Drive, Village Parkway, Amador Valley Boulevard, Regional Street, and back to Dublin Boulevard. During peak weekday service, headways are every hour. There is no operation on weekends. Current monthly ridership averages 2,852 passengers. wheels Route 4: This route serves the Dublin Boulevard corridor and areas west of San Ramon Road before extending south into Pleasanton. In the study area, route 4 accesses the Dublin BART Station and then follows Dublin Boulevard west' all the way to Silvergate Drive. From there, the route accesses Peppertree Road, Shannon Avenue, and San Ramon Road before extending to Pleasanton and back to the BART station (via Owens Drive). During peak weekday service hours, headways are every 30 minutes. There is no operation on weekends. Current monthly ridership averages 3,809 passengers. Wheels Route 10: This route serves the Dublin Boulevard corridor before extending south into Pleasanton. In the study area, route 10 accesses the Dublin BART Station and Dublin Boulevard in a westerly direction before turning south on San Ramon Road. During peak weekday service, headways are every 15 minutes. On Saturdays and Sundays, headways are every 30 minutes. On Sundays route 10A serves the Santa Rita Jail. From the Dublin BART station, route 10A accesses Dublin Boulevard, Arnold Road, and Broder Boulevard to the jail. Current monthly ridership averages 90,869 passengers. Wheels Route 12X: This route provides service to/from the City of Livermore to the East Dublin BART Station. Route 12X serves the BART Station from Livermore via 1-580, Tassajara Road, and Dublin Boulevard Monday through Saturday. Headways are every half hour. On Saturday service, headways are every 40 minutes to 1 hour. There is no Sunday service. Current monthly ridership averages 17,539 passengers. Ace/Santa Rita/BART Shuttle: The ACE (Altamont Commuter Express) route serves the project study area from the Dublin BART station via Dublin Boulevard, Arnold Road, Broder Boulevard, Gleason Drive, and Tassajara Road before traveling south into Pleasanton. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 128 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Ail Wheels routes listed above connect with the Dublin BART station. In addition to Wheels bus routes, the Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (CCCTA) or "County Connection" routes 121, 259, and 970 serve the Dublin BART station. These County Connection routes serve areas to the north in Contra Costa County. BART System The East Dublin BART Station north parking lots are accessed via DeMarcus Boulevard and Iron Horse Parkway from Dublin Boulevard. From DeMarcus Boulevard, through-vehicle access is provided to the BART station and related parking areas with vehicles continuing in an outbound direction on Iron Horse Parkway. Private vehicles cannot travel under the freeway at the BART station to access the southerly BART parking lots in Pleasanton, although buses are permitted to use this route.~ During the AM and PM commute periods, BART headways are every 15 minutes. Currently, peak ridership at the Dublin BART station occurs during the AM and PM peak hours. Specifically, during the AM peak hour of 7:30-8:30 AM 1,388 riders access the BART system (1,063 entries, 325 exits). During the PM peak hour of 5:30-6:30 PM there are 1,266 riders at the station (399 entries, 867 exits). Based on conversations with BART staff, there is currently excess ridership capacity on the BART system at the East Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. Existing traffic flow conditions A potential impact of the proposed Dublin Transit Center is the amount of traffic increase that would occur on the surrounding street network. The following sections describe the project study intersections, Level-of-Service concepts, and existing intersection capacity on the surrounding street network. Exhibit 15a shows existing AM peak hour traffic near the proposed Transit Center and Exhibit 15b shows existing PM peak hour traffic. Critical Intersections Intersection operation is usually considered the key factor in determining the traffic handling capacity of a local roadway system. Based on discussions with City of Dublin Engineering staff, the following 20 intersections were selected for evaluation of operational characteristics: Key Project Study Area Intersections: Intersection Control · Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive (future) Signal (assumed) · Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard Signal · Dougherty Road/I-580 Westbound off-ramp Signal · Hopyard Road/I-580 Eastbound off-ramp Signal · Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive Stop-sign (Scarlett Dr.) · Dublin Boulevard/DeMarcus Boulevard Signal · Dublin Boulevard/Iron Horse Parkway Signal · Dublin Boulevard/Arnold Road Stop-sign (Arnold Rd.) · Arnold Road/Central Parkway (future) Signal (assumed) · Hacienda Drive/Gleason Drive Stop-sign (Hacienda Dr.) Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 129 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin · Hacienda Drive/Central Parkway Signal · Hacienda Drive/Dublin Boulevard Signal · Hacienda Drive/Digital Drive (future) Signal (assumed) · Hacienda Drive/I-580 Westbound off-ramp Signal · Hacienda Drive/I-580 Eastbound off-ramp Signal · Tassajara Road/Gleason Drive Stop-sign (Gleason Dr.) · Tassajara Road/Central Parkway Stop-sign (Central Parkway) · Tassajara ROad/Dublin Boulevard Signal · Tassajara Road/I-580 Westbound off-ramp Signal · Tassajara Road/I-580 Eastbound off-ramp/Pimlico Signal Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 130 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin .. ; ....... , ,--o ~+~'1"' o ~1~_ 211 0 -- ~ * ¥1'~ ~7~ I..~ * ¥ ~ ~t~_ 290 +J ~oo= /0 '~,1 '~F~ ._ ,: I ,~..~..°.......I / 46 ~1 1~8 Po I - ~ ~ ~[~$~ ~t~:: ~ DUBLIN BLVD.. ~ ~ ~ 737 ll.,l SOURCE: Omni-Means Exhibit 15a EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR CITY OF DUBLIN ~ TRAFFIC VOLUMES DUBLIN TRANSIT CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ~. I F, 33~I~ 99~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~ I~ ~.0 I~ + ~]~3:~1 I..~ + ~ I I-"-~"~ /:m~l~ + ~1 / 0 +l o~a I .... i / 79~1. +~I ~ /7~ +1 ~ I ~ ~ BLVD. ~ ~ I+o ~ o h31 + " 0+1 625 ~/ ~ ~ ", ~ ~ DUaLIN BL~. ~ ~ ~ 5~ 68$ + ~ SOURCE: Omni-Means ~ Exhibit 15b EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR CITY OF DUBLIN ~ TRAFFIC VOLUMES DUBLIN TRANSIT CENTER ,.__ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Intersection Levels of Service Methodology In order to measure and describe the operational status of local roadway networks, traffic engineers and planners commonly use a grading system called Level-of Service (LOS). The LOS grading system typically invOlves a rating scale from LOS A, indicating relatively free-flowing conditions with minimal delays (zero to five seconds) at intersections, to LOS E, representing unstable flow conditions with traffic volumes at or near intersection design capacity. Intersections operating at LOS E or F will have major peak hour delays for vehicles crossing the intersection (40-60 seconds), resulting in long peak hour queues extending back on all intersection approaches. At signalized intersections, LOS is determined by calculating the volumes of conflicting vehicle turning movements during a one-hour period and dividing that total by the intersection's design capacity to accommodate such turning movements. The resulting calculation yields a volume/capacity (v/c) ratio that indicates the Level of Service rating. Intersection LOS computations have been made for project study area intersections_following the accepted City of Dublin practice; peak hour LOS has been calculated using the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) methodology for signalized intersections. This methodology uses a variation of the Transportation Research Board's "Circular 212 Planning Method" with operational capacities. It is acknowledged that the City of Dublin is in Alameda County. However, the City has consistently used the CCTA methodology to be compatible with other surrounding cities (Pleasanton and San Ramon). For unsignalized intersections, peak hour LOS has been calculated using the Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual--Special Report 209, 3rd Edition, Chapter 10, Unsignalized Intersections (Part A), 1998. Vehicle delays at unsignalized intersections represent the delays experienced by the stop-sign controlled minor street traffic. Existing Intersection Levels-of-Service Both AM (7:00-9:00) and PM (4:00-6:00) peak period turning movement counts were either obtained from other recent transportation analyses in the study area or counted by Omni-Means Engineers and Planners. From these counts, existing peak hour intersection turning movement counts have been identified. Existing AM and PM peak hour intersection LOS results are presented in Table 19. As shown, the 15 signalized project study intersections are operating at LOS D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours. At the Dougherty/Dublin intersection, the calculated LOS is D (0.81) during the PM peak hour. This intersection experiences heavy northbound and eastbound traffic volumes coming to/from 1-580. Three of the five currently unsignalized intersections are operating at LOS E-F during the PM peak hour. SPecifically, the Dublin/Scarlett, Dublin/Arnold, and Tassajara/Gleason locations are operating at LOS F, E, and E respectively for the minor street outbound left-turn movements. These three locations have been assumed to be signalized under the existing plus approved Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 133 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin plus pending scenario because future approved but currently unbuilt projects are required to signalize these intersections. Table 19. Existing Intersections Level of Service (LOS), AM and PM Peak Hours1 Intersection LOS,V/C LOS-V/C AM PM 1. Dougherty/Scarlett 2 ...... 2. Dougherty/Dublin B 0.65 D 0.81 3. Dougherty/I-580 WB off A 0.58 A 0.52 4. Hopyard/I-580 EB off A 0.56 B 0.62 5. Dublin/Scarlett C 20.4 F 50+ 6. Dublin/DeMarcus A 0.55 B 0.64 7. Dublin/Iron Horse A 0.29 B 0.61 8. Dublin/Arnold C 18.1 E 39.5 9. Arnold/Central2 ...... 10. Hacienda/Gleason B 10.7 A 9.8 11. Hacienda/Central A 0.27 A 0.38 12. Hacienda/Dublin A 0.37 A 0.42 13. Hacienda/Digital Dr. - ..... 14. Hacienda/I-580WB off A 0.27 A 0.15 15. Hacienda/I-580 EB off A 0.50 A 0.33 16. Tassajara/Gleason C 24.9 E 44.2 17. Tassajara/Central2 ...... 18. Tassajara/Dublin A 0.42 B 0.69 19. Tassajara/I-580 WB off A 0.30 A 0.35 20. Tassajara/I-580 EB A 0.60 B 0.70 off/pimlico Notes: (1) Signalized intersection LOS is based on Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) methodology. LOS for unsignalized intersections is based on the 1998 Highway Capacity Manual and represents average vehicle delay in seconds for stop-sign controlled minor street traffic. (2) The Dougherty/Scarlett, Arnold/Central, and Hacienda/Digital intersections currently do not exist. Central Parkway is currently closed off between Tassajara Road and Tassajara Creek. These intersections will be analyzed in future base scenarios with approved and pending development and/or Year 2025 cumulative development. Source: Omni-Means Interim Roadway and Intersection Circulation Improvements Local roadway and intersection conditions in the project study area are in a state of change due to ongoing roadway construction. This is evidenced by current widening of Dublin Boulevard between DeMarcus Boulevard and Hacienda Drive and the widening of Tassajara Road between the 1-580 westbound off-ramp to beyond Gleason Drive. In addition, signals are being installed at the Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 134 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Dublin/Arnold and Tassajara/Gleason intersections. For these reasons, the description of existing traffic flow conditions is dynamic. All approved and pending roadway and intersection improvements will be described in detail in Section B: Future Base Conditions. Other current local and regional roadway and intersection circulation improvements have been based on discussions with City Engineering staff as well as the City's Transportation Element of the General Plan. Circulation improvements can be categorized as short-term (within two years) or long-term improvements and are as follows: Short, Term Circulation Improvements:' · 1-680/I-580 Interchange: As part of the overall interchange improvements, the new northbound 1-680 on-ramp from Village Parkway (south of Dublin Boulevard) and southbound off-ramp from 1-680 to Amador Plaza Road were recently completed and opened to traffic. · Dublin Boulevard Widening: Dublin Boulevard has currently been widened to three travel lanes in each direction between San Ramon Road and Village Parkway. Widening the roadway to six lanes between Village Parkway and Sierra Court is scheduled to begin in 2001. Long-Term Circulation Improvements: · Dublin Boulevard Widening: Dublin Boulevard would be widened to three travel lanes in each direction between Sierra Court and Dougherty Road. · 1-680/I-580 Interchange: As part of the overall interchange improvements, a new southbound 1-680 on-ramp from Amador Plaza Road/St. Patrick Way (south of Dublin Boulevard) and a southbound "flyover connector" from 1-680 to 1-580 are under construction. Vehicle Parking The Transit Center site currently has approximately 1,Z~30 on-site, surface parking spaces which serve the Eastern Dublin-Pleasanton BART station. The main parking area is located immediately north of the station and the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority recently completed a second and interim parking lot northwest of the station. Currently, parking lots are full during weekdays and BART patrons typically park on streets adjacent to the station. The City of Dublin's transportation goals, policies, and programs can be found in Section 5 of the Circulation and Scenic Highways Element of the General Plan While the majority of these goals and policies would apply to the proposed Dublin Transit Center, some of the key goals and policies have been highlighted below: Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 135 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin Additional Design Criteria A. Reserve right,of-way and construct improvements necessary to allow streets to accommodate projected vehicular traffic with least friction. B. For streets defined as Routes of Regional Significance in the Tri-Valley Transportation Council's Tri-ValIey Transportation Plan~Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance (hereinafter referred to as "the TVTC Action Plan"), the City of Dublin is required to make a "good faith effort" to maintain LOS D (v/c < 0.91) on arterial segments and at intersections. If this Transportation Service Objective (TSO) is violated, the City can implement transportation improvements or other measures to improve LOS, If such improvements are not possible or are not sufficient, the City may refer the problem to the TVTC for joint resolution. In the event the TVTC cannot resolve the violation to the mutual satisfaction of all members, Dublin may modify the LOS standard, but only if other jurisdictions are not physically impacted. C. The Routes of Regional Significance within the project study area are as follows: Dublin Boulevard, Dougherty Road, Tassajara Road, Hopyard Road, Santa Rita Road and 1-580. D. For streets that are not defined as Routes of Regional Significance in the TVTC Action Plan, strive to phase development and road improvements so that the operating LOS for intersections in Dublin shall not be worse than LOS D. E. Use the TVTC Action Plan as a guideline for making transportation policy decisions. Freeway Access: A. Improve freeWay access. Transit: A. Support downtown West Dublin BART station. B. Support improved local transit as essential to a quality urban environment, particularly for residents who do not drive. Southern Pacific Railroad Transportation Corridor: A. Support preservation along the Southern Pacific right-of-way between East Dublin BART station and Dougherty Road and along the east side of Dougherty Road from the Southern Pacific right-of-way to the northern City limit as a potential transportation corridor. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 136 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin B. Consider potential recreational use in conjunction with transportation use. Bikeways: A. Provide safe bikeways along arterials. Truck Routes: A. Designate and accommodate truck routes to minimize noise nuisance on -- 'residential arterial streets. Scenic Highways: A. Incorporate County-designated scenic routes, and the proposed Fallon Road extension in the General Plan as adopted City-designated scenic routes, and work to enhance a positive image of Dublin as seen by through travelers. ,-- Financing Improvements: A. Continue the City's program of requiring developers to contribute fees - and/or improvements to help fund off-site improvements related to their projects. For the City's other goals, guiding policies, and implementation policies regarding transportation, please refer to the Circulation and Scenic Highway element. The City of Dublin's Off-Street Parking and Loading regulations can be found in _ Chapter 8.76 of the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Off-street parking ~ requirements range from one space per 50 to one space per 1,000 square feet for commercial and industrial type uses. Some of the general off-street parking requirements that may apply to the Dublin Transit Center project include the following: · Multiple Use Projects. Where a project contains more than one use type (and typically multiple tenant spaces) such as offices, restaurants, and retail sales, the amount of parking to be provided shah be the total of that required by Section 8.76.080, Parking Requirements by Use Type, for each use type, except as otherwise provided by Section 8.76.050 (rounding to higher space). · New Buildings or Development Project Without Known Tenants. If the ~-- type of tenants that will occupy a non residential building is not known at the time of the development entitlement or building permit approval, the amount of parking to be provided shall be the minimum number of -- parking spaces required by Section 8.76.080 for a mix of use types typical of Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 137 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 ,-- City of Dublin comparable buildings or development projects in that zoning district as determined by the Director of Community Development. The intent of this section is to ensure sufficient parking by anticipating a typical use type mix which is appropriate to the design and nature of the building or development project. · Off-Street Parking and Loading Plan Required. All uses which require a building permit, site development review or conditional use permit shall be accompanied by an Off-Street Parking and Loading Plan (which may be included in the Site Plan for those permits) unless waived by the Director. The contents of the Off-Street Parking and Loading Plan shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The Off-Street Parking and Loading Plan may be incorporated into the Site Plan for the Site Development Review or Conditional Use Permit. No building permit, site development review or conditional use permit will be approved unless its Off-Street and Loading Plan complies with the ordinance. Future base traffic conditions This section describes the anticipated future operation (Year 2005) of the study intersections under approved and pending conditions. These conditions represent existing traffic plus anticipated traffic generated by approved and pending projects (reasonably foreseeable development in the area). Future base traffic conditions do not include traffic volumes generated by the proposed Dublin Transit Center. In addition, future base traffic conditions assume currently planned roadway modifications would be in place, funded by either the City of Dublin Capital Improvement Program (CIP) or bonded by individual project developers. Future base circulation improvements Current and planned roadway and intersection improvements for the project study area include the following: Roadways Dublin Boulevard Widening: Dublin Boulevard is currently being widened to six travel lanes between Scarlett Drive and Hacienda Drive. The roadway is also planned to be widened to six lanes between Dougherty Road and Scarlett Drive. Tassajara Road Widening: Tassajara Road is currently being widened to four travel lanes between 1-580 and north of Gleason Drive. Ultimately, Tassajara Road will be eight lanes between I'580 and Central Parkway, and six lanes north of Central Parkway per the City's Transportation Element. Central Parkway Extension: Central Parkway is currently being extended between Arnold Road and Hacienda Drive. In the interim, Central Parkway would have two through lanes. Ultimately, this street would consist of four through lanes. Central Parkway is currently closed to through traffic at Tassajara Creek. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 138 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Arnold Road Extension: Arnold Road would be extended in a southerly direction from Dublin Boulevard to just north of 1-580. The roadway width will vary from four travel lanes to two travel lanes depending on the segment. Digital Drive. Digital Drive would be a new east-west street constructed parallel to Dublin Boulevard and 1-580. The Digital Drive roadway segment between the southerly extension of Arnold Road and Hacienda Drive would be constructed as part of approved and pending development. Intersections Dublin/DeMarcus: The northbound approach of DeMarcus Boulevard would be reduced in width to include one (1) left-turn lane and one (1) right-turn lane. Dublin~Iron Horse: The northbound approach of Iron Horse Parkway would be reduced in width to include one (1) left-turn lane and one (1) right-turn lane. Hacienda/Central: The northbound approach of Hacienda Drive would be improved in the interim to include one (1) left-turn lane, two (2) through lanes, and one right,turn lane (two left-turn lanes are currently in place but not being used). The eastbound and westbound Central Parkway approaches would each have one (1) left-turn lane, one (1) through lane, and one (1) right-turn lane for the interim condition. Ultimately, these approaches would be improved to include an additional through lane. Hacienda/Dublin: The northbound approach of Hacienda Drive would be improved in the interim to include three (3) left-turn lanes, two (2) through lanes, and one (1) right-turn lane. The westbound approach of Dublin Boulevard would be improved to include two (2) left-turn lanes, two (2) through lanes, and one (1) right-turn lane. (The additional through-lane is in place but not being used). Ultimately, these two approaches would be widened to include an additional northbound and westbound through lane. Hacienda~I-580 Eastbound off-ramp: The eastbound off-ramp approach would be improved to include two (2) left-turn lanes and two (2) right- turn lanes. Tassajara/I-580 Westbound off-ramp: The westbound off-ramp approach would be improved to include two (2) left-turn lanes and two (2) right- turn lanes. Tassajara/I-580 Eastbound off-ramp/Pimlico: The eastbound off-ramp approach would be widened and re-striped to include two (2) left-turn lanes, one (1) through lane, and a free right-turn lane. The westbound Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 139 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Pimlico Drive approach would be improved to include two (2) left-turn lanes and two (2) right-turn lanes. The northbound Santa Rita Road approach would be improved to include four (4) lanes, with the two left most lanes leading to the overpass, the second right most lane leading to the overpass or 1-580 eastbound on-ramp, and the right most lane leading to Pimlico Drive or the 1-580 eastbound on-ramp. Approved and pending projects Based on discussions with City Transportation staff, the following projects were assumed for the future base conditions. Approved projects are developments that are under construction, built but not fully occupied, or unbuilt but have final development approval. Pending projects would be developments that are currently proposed or are in the approval process at the time of this study. Approved projects: · Hacienda Crossings (Opus): 469,000 square foot retail center (partially occupied) · Villas at Santa Rita Property, Sites 11A and 11B (Summerhill and Jefferson Residential Development): 368 apartments and 341 single family homes · Casterson: 106 single family homes · Creekside Business Park III (Opus): 590,000 square feet office development · General Motors: 75,660 square feet of new automobiles and service · Dublin Ranch Phase I Residential Development: 847 single family homes · Tassajara Meadows Residential Development: 96 single family homes · Emerald Glen Residential Development: 143 single family homes and 152 townhomes · Koll Dublin Corporate Center: 590,000 square feet of office space, 100,000 square feet of hotel and 7,000 square feet of retail · Yarra Yarra Residential Development: 251 single family homes · Dublin Ranch Area G Development: 1,426 apartments and 230,000 square feet of commercial development · Dublin Ranch Area A Residential Development: 562 single family homes and 18 hole golf course · Emerald Glen Village Apartments Development: 390 apartments and 132,235 square feet of commercial development · Sybase Dublin Headquarters: 420,000 square feet of office space · Marriott Hotel Project: 214 hotel rooms · Commerce One Office Project: 760,000 square feet office of space · Downtown Dublin Specific Plans: Multiple use project with commercial, residential, and transit uses (please see referenced document below). In addition to specific approved projects in the City of Dublin, City of Pleasanton approved development was also Considered. Based on the City of Pleasanton travel demand forecasting model, approved projects are expected to generate 9,661 AM peak hour trips and 10,584 PM peak hour trips. AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes from the above projects in Dublin and Pleasanton were taken from a recent traffic study conducted by TJKM Transportation Consultants. For a complete description of the approved project location and trip generation, please Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 140 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin refer to TJKM Transportation Consultant's Final: A Traffic Study for the Proposed Marriott Hotel, City of Dublin, October 25, 2000. Pending projects · Silveria Residential Project: 214 single family homes · Cisco Systems Office Project: 862,000 square feet office of space The re-location of the Camp Parks main gate would also occur within the next five years. Ba§ed on discussions with Camp Parks staff, it is anticipated that a new roadway/gate connection will occur at the Dublin/DeMarcus intersection to form the north leg of the intersection (the roadway is currently under construction). Various military activities related to the facility are expected to be most concentrated on the weekends when reservists report for training duties. Summer weekends would be most active with possible convoys coming to/from the Camp Parks area. With weekend Camp Parks activity expected to generate the most intense traffic volumes, existing and future base peak hour weekday volumes would experience lesser increases in traffic volumes related to the re-location of the Camp Parks main gate. However, peak period vehicle counts were conducted at the existing Camp Parks main gates at Dougherty Road to quantify weekday traffic that would transfer to the Dublin/DeMarcus intersection. Peak hour volumes related to Camp Parks have been added to the Dublin/DeMarcus intersection to account for increased traffic volumes at this location. Approved and pending project trips were added to existing AM and PM intersection volumes to create a future base Year 2005 scenario. Exhibit 16a shows AM peak hour traffic associated with existing, approved and pending projects. Exhibit 16b shows PM peak hour traffic under the same conditions. Intersection Level of Service--future base conditions With future base traffic added to existing volumes, AM and PM intersection LOS have been re-calculated and are shown in Table 20. With future base volumes, calculated intersection LOS contain the planned circulation improvements for roadWays and intersections in the study area listed under future base circulation improvements~. With these circulation improvements, one study intersection would still experience significant congestion during the AM and PM peak hours with the planned improvements in place. In response, the following roadway and circulation improvements are recommended to_accommodate existing, approved, and pending traffic volumes, without the proposed Transit Center project: · Dougherty/Dublin: Northbound Dougherty Road would need to be widened to provide three (3) left-tum lanes, two (2) through lanes, one (1) shared through/right-turn lane, and one (1) right-turn lane. The southbound Dougherty Road approach would need to be widened to Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 141 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin ~ *- 673 ~- 690 + 871 740 + \~' 17 ~ ~ ~-216 ~- 116 ~ + ~j~ 30 / ~ 1575+1 ~m I 70 t~ ~517I ~+~55967~ + ~ 293 ~ I *-~.~t~-25J / ~1~ + ~1 1818 SOURCE: Omni-Means Exhibit 16a EXISTING, APPROVED, AND PENDING AM PEAK HOUR CITY OF DUBLIN ~ TRAFFIC VOLUMES DUBLIN TRANSIT CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT \~ 12 _~ ~. +-- 50 ~ 28 .~ ~ ~,.1+" 4 1627 13~ +1 r- ~ 1378 .+.[ ~ ~<~ i 122 'i,I ~ ~ ~1~ '~' o ~- 33 '~/ ~ -~1 ~-<o I -+1 ~ 1426 . - ~ -+i I ~ +--t-~-°--. ~Lo~_ 725 I I..~_..+_...~.~[~.._1 t 155 lO3-~1~ + ~{ 749 +l ~ ~ ~ I / ,,..~ ~- 550 / 20 +/oo~ 1210 ~-c0o '-'"' I ~ +--~-~1_+-_'~_. ' ...... I '/52 '~ * '".'., I cEm~ PKWY....-' ...... -"TF-~]~T~'I /~4,.~t +~' ... .~=~i o+,.~..,I.j~ ~ 1230+1 SOURCE: Omni-Means Exhibit 16b EXISTING, APPROVED, AND PENDING PM PEAK HOUR CITY OF DUBLIN 4 TRAFFIC VOLUMES DUBLIN TRANSIT CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ~,, 'provide two (2) left-turn lanes, three (3) through lanes, and one (1) right- turn lane. The westbound Dublin Boulevard approach should be widened to provide three (3) left-turn lanes, two (2) through lanes, and one (1) right-turn lane. The eastbound Dublin Boulevard approach would need to _ widened to provide one (1) left-turn lane, two (2) through lanes, and two . (2) right-turn lanes. With these measures, intersection LOS Would improve from LOS E (0.94) to LOS C (0.73) during the AM peak hour. -- During the PM peak hour, LOS would improve from LOS F (1.03) to LOS D (0.85). These improvements are called for in the City of Dublin Circulation Element and will be funded by the City's TIF fee program. Table 20. Existing Plus Future Base (FB) Intersection Level of Service (LOS), AM and PM Peak Hours~ Intersection Existing Existing + Future Base LOS-VIC LOS-V/C LOS-VIC LOS-V/C AM PM AM PM 1. Dougherty/Scarlett 2 ............ -- 2. Dougherty/Dublin B 0.65 D 0.81 E 0.97 F 1.03 C 0.73 D 0.85 3. Dougherty/I-580 WB A 0.58 A 0.52 B 0.68 A 0.60 -- off 4. Hopyard/I-580 EB off A 0.56 B 0.62 A 0.57 B 0.64 5. Dublin/Scarlett C 20.4 F 50+ A 0.36 A 0.43 6. Dublin/DeMarcus A 0.55 B 0.64 A 0.50 A 0.51 7. Dublin/Iron Horse A 0.29 B 0.61 A 0.32 A 0.41 _ 8. Dublin/Arnold C 18.1 E 39.5 A 0.42 B 0.66 9. Arnold/Central2 ...... A 0.22 A 0.38 10. Hacienda/Gleason B 10.7 A 9.8 A 0.25 A 0.15 -- 11. Hacienda/Central A 0.27 A 0.38 C 0.71 C 0.79 12. Hacienda/Dublin A 0.37 A 0.42 A 0.60 C 0.73 _ 13. Hacienda/Digital Dr. - .... A 0.40 A 0.57 14. Hacienda/I-580WB A 0.27 A 0.15 D 0.89 A 0.49 off _ 15. Hacienda/I-580 EB A 0.50 A 0.33 D 0.89 B 0.66 off 16. Tassajara/Gleason C 24.9 E 44.2 A 0.59 B 0.64 ~ 17. Tassajara/Central2 ...... A 0.51 B 0.62 18. Tassajara/Dublin A 0.42 B 0.69 A 0.54 B 0.66 19. Tassajara/I-580 WB A 0.30 A 0.35 A 0.49 A 0.60 off 20. Tassajara/I-580 EB A 0.60 B 0.70 B 0.66 D 0.87 ,_ off/Pimlico Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 144 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Notes: (1)Signalized intersection LOS is based on Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) methodology. LOS for unsignalized intersections is based on 1998 Highway Capacity Manual and represents average delay in seconds for stop-sign controlled minor street traffic. (2) Due to planned roadway improvements, some study intersections' LOS will improve from existing conditions. This is particularly true along Dublin Boulevard where the roadway would be widened from two to six travel lanes between Dougherty Road and Hacienda Drive. (3) The Dougherty/Scarlett intersection is not expected to exist under existing plus future base conditions. This intersection will be analyzed in future base scenarios with Year 2025 cumulative development. (4) Italicized type represents future mitigated intersection conditions Source: Omni-Means STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Alameda County Congestion Management Agency The Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (ACCMA) has established significance criteria guidelines for proposed projects within the County that have the potential to impact the CMP roadway network. Specifically, the County has identified a specific Congestion Management Plan (CMP) system of freeways and roadways that must conform to the agency's LOS standards. These roadWays, identified as Metropolitan Transportation System (MTS) routes are designated as "key routes" and include highways and principal arterials. For arterials, the following criteria must be met: · Must carry 30,000 vehicles per day for at least one mile; · Must be a four lane (or more) roadway; · Must be a major cross-town connector; · Must connect at both ends to another CMP route. As stated in the Setting Section, in the project study area these MTS routes have been identified as 1-580, Dublin Boulevard, Dougherty Road, Tassajara Road, Hopyard Road and Santa Rita Road. The County's LOS standard is E, except where F was the level of service originally measured, in which case the standard shall be F. In addition t© LOS roadway standards, CMA guidelines also specify that any -- proposed project generating 100 PM peak hour trips over existing conditions must conduct a traffic analysis of the project using the Countywide Transportation Demand Model for the base years 2005 and 2020. However, the -- guidelines also allow for other transportation models/projections to be used for this process. For this process to occur, transportation volume projections used for the proposed Dublin Transit Center and Year 2025 must be compared to the --~ CountyWide Transportation Model to ensure that the more conservative of the two traffic projections are used for CEQA purposes. Discussions with Alameda CMA staff indicate that the Tri-Valley Transportation Model is appropriate to use '- Year 2025 analyses for this project. City of Dublin Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 145 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 ~- City of Dublin Based on the City of Dublin's General Plan circulation element, the following .-- criteria would apply to City roadways and intersections: · For streets defined as RoUtes of Regional Significance (see below) in the ~_ Tri-Valley Transportation Council's Tri-Valley Transportation Plan~Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance (referred to as "the TVTC Action Plan"), the City of Dublin is required to make a "good faith -- effort" to maintain LOS D (v/c < 0.91) on arterial segments and intersections. If this Transportation Service Objective (TSO) is violated, the City can implement transportation improvements or other measures -- to improve LOS. If such improvements are not possible or are not sufficient, the City may refer the problem to the TVTC for joint resolution. In the event that the TVTC cannot resolve the violation to the mutual -- satisfaction of all members, Dublin may modify the LOS standard, but only if other jurisdictions are not physically impacted. -- · The Routes of Regional Significance within the City of Dublin are as follows: Dublin Boulevard, Dougherty Road, Tassajara Road, and San Ramon Road; · For streets that are not defined as Routes of Regional Significance in the TVTC Action Plan, strive to phase development and road improvements -- so that the operating LOS for intersections in Dublin shall not be worse than LOS D. -- Roadways are defined as Routes of Regional Significance if: _ · They connect to two or more "regions" of the county; · They connect across county boundaries; · They serve significant amounts of through-traffic; _ · They provide access to a regional highway or transit facility (e.g. a BART station or freeway interchange). _ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Project trip generation _ Daily and peak hour trip generation for the proposed Dublin Transit Center has been based on three different sources: 1) The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) research on office, residential, and retail development, 2) -- discussions with Dublin Transportation and Alameda County staff, and 3) peak ' period counts conducted at the existing Dublin BART station. For proposed office development, a 15 percent discount was applied to trip generation rates to ~ account for residential/employment interaction and increased use of transit due to the proximity to the East Dublin-Pleasanton BART Station. Residential development trips were also discounted by 25 percent due to the proximity to the -- East Dublin BART Station. Retail uses have been described as "ancillary" to the office development and are intended to serve the internal office populations. Project trip generation rates_are included on Table 3 of the traffic report (see Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 146 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 ~- City of Dublin appendix). As calculated, the proposed Dublin Transit Center would generate 29,252 daily trips with 4,155 AM peak hour trips and 3,970 PM peak hour trips. Proposed project trip distribution Peak hour vehicle distribution for the Transit Center has been based on previous studies conducted for proposed projects in the vicinity. For office uses and the BART parking structure, vehicle distribution is estimated as follows: Hacienda Drive to/from the south: 55% Hacienda Drive to/from the north: 3% _ Dublin Boulevard to/from the east: 10% Dublin Boulevard to/from the west: 30% Arnold Drive to/from the north: 2% -- Total: 100% For residential land use, peak hour vehicle distribution is estimated as follows: Hacienda Drive to/from the south: 45% Hacienda Drive to/from the north: 3% -- Dublin Boulevard to/from the east: 10% Dublin Boulevard to/from the west: 40% Arnold Drive to/from the north: 2% -- Total: 100% As stated previously, the retail component of the proposed project would be - considered "ancillary" uses to the proposed office space. For this reason, retail uses are provided to primarily serve the needs of the adjacent office workers, residents and BART patrons and are not expected to generate external vehicle - trips. The proposed BART parking structure would not add any additional parking -- spaces to the existing East Dublin BART station. Currently, there are approximately 1,700 existing permanent and interim surface parking lot spaces for the BART station in the City of Dublin. These surface spaces would be largely replaced by the proposed 1,680 permanent space BART parking structure, with a small number of surface spaces remaining. Therefore, proposed BART trips are _ merely existing vehicle trips that have been re-distributed based on the proposed street network serving the BART parking structure and the proposed Dublin Transit Center. Proposed BART parking structure vehicle trips would not result _ in additional traffic volumes on the surrounding street network. Based on the expected vehicle distributions, AM and PM peak hour project trips have been added to existing plus future base (2005) conditions. Impact on external project intersections -- With proposed Dublin Transit Center traffic added to existing plus future base traffic volumes (2005), study intersection LOS have been re-calculated and are shown in Table 21. Peak hour AM traffic volumes for existing plus pending plus - approved plus the proposed project are shown on Exhibit 17a. Exhibit 17b shows Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 147 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 -- City of Dublin PM peak hour volumes under the same conditions. With proposed project traffic, two of the study intersections would be operating at unacceptable levels of service during the AM or PM peak hour. These include the Dougherty/Dublin and Hacienda/I-580 Westbound off-ramp intersections. Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 148 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 City of Dublin Table 21. Future Base (FB) Intersections Plus Project _ Level of Service (LOS), AM and PM Peak Hours~ Intersection Existing + Future Base Existing + Future Base + -- Project LOS-V/C LOS-V/C LOS-V/C LOS-V/C AM PM AM PM -- 1. Dougherty/Scarlett 2 B 0.63 C 0.78 2. Dougherty/Dublin C 0.73 D 0.85 E 0.97 E 0.99 C O. 74 D 0.86 3. Dougherty/I-580 WB B 0.68 A 0.60 B 0.69 B 0.61 off ramp _ 4. Hopyard/I-580 EB off A 0.57 B 0.64 B 0.63 B 0.68 5. Dublin/Scarlett A 0.36 A 0.43 A 0.54 A 0.59 B0.63 A 0.59 -- 6. Dublin/DeMarcus A 0.50 A 0.51 A 0.60 B 0.66 7. Dublin/Iron Horse A 0.32 A 0.41 A 0.51 C 0.74 8. Dublin/Arnold A 0.42 B 0.66 A 0.52 C 0.75 -- 9. Arnold/Central2 A 0.22 A 0.38 A 0.24 A 0.39 10. Hacienda/Gleason A 0.25 A 0.15 A 0.29 A 0.18 _ 11. Hacienda/Central C 0.71 C 0.79 C 0.77 D 0.81 12. Hacienda/Dublin A 0.60 C 0.73 B 0.67 C 0.80 13. Hacienda/Digital Dr. A 0.40 A 0.57 C 0.74 D 0.88 -- 14. Hacienda/I-580WB D 0.89 A 0.49 F 1.17 B 0.61 off ramp D 0.89 A 0.57 15. Hacienda/I-580 EB D 0.89 B 0.66 D 0.90 C 0.73 -- off ramp 16. Tassajara/Gleason A 0.59 B 0.64 B 0.63 B 0.70 _ 17. Tassajara/Central2 A 0.51 B 0.62 A 0.53 B 0.64 18. Tassajara/Dublin A 0.54 B 0.66 A 0.57 B 0.68 19. Tassajara/I-580 WB A 0.49 A 0.60 A 0.50 B 0.61 -- off ramp 20. Tassajara/I-580 EB B 0.66 D 0.87 B 0.66 D 0.87 off/Pimlico ~- Notes: . (1)Signalized intersection LOS is based on Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) methodology. LOS for unsignalized intersections is based on 1998 Highway Capacity Manual -- and represents average delay in seconds for stop-sign controlled minor street traffic. (2) Due to planned roadway improvements, some study intersections' LOS will improve from existing conditions. This is particularly true along Dublin Boulevard where the roadway would be -- widened from two to six travel lanes between Dougherty Road and Hacienda Drive. (3) The Dougherty/Scarlett intersection is not expected to exist under existing plus future base conditions. This intersection will be analyzed in future base scenarios with Year 2025 -- cumulative development. (4) Italicized type represents future improved intersection conditions by others Source: Omni-Means Dublin Transit Center PA 00-013 Page 149 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2001 ~ City of Dublin ~ ~ ~ 125 ~- 305 ~-- 15~ ~ 223157~ + ~ ~ 170 ~ ~ 327 ~ ~-- I~~ 0 I 0 ~l~-n ~9 ~ ~ ~ ~2o~ - ~=~' ' ~ I "-~'~-~'~'~ ' j3~ ~1 m ~ ~ j ~ ~ J~ 231 I . I ~ ~w. ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~1~ + ~ I I ' I I ~ * / I '", ~ .... 4 I c~.tr~ .~...- ...... .~Tf~_~F.I " "' ~ ~I~ ' ~""""" "~"'~ ........... ~ ~ *~** .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ) ~ ~ ~ I112.t -~ I 1818 ~ SOURCE: Omn/-Means Exhibit 17a EXISTING, APPROVED, AND PROJECT ~ I"I=.NUII~IU, CITY OF DUBLIN ~ AM PEAK HOUR DUBLIN TRANSIT CENTER i TRAFFIC VOLUMES ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ~,+ 2768i ~;~ ~- 2484 ~- 1739 +1057 ~- 84 -- 33~1 m~ 147'~ 3 ~ 40-~ ~ 36 ~! ~I~'f' 0 - I~+~1,-lO~1 I.~+~1[ - I-~%-~t*' + ~1 / :03 -fl~ + / 0 '~'! ,~-u3~o I 1834+1 e--e I o~ 1545 '+~ ~mo I 625-~J ~ 0 +1 ~o.~-~ I 1728 -~ ] ~ ~' 650 ~°I g ~ 784--4' + ~ 230+ m~ ~ ,~ .] ,~ 245 -~; ~ 310 ~ ~<~ r-- SOURCE: Omni-Means Exhibit 17b EXISTING, APPROVED, AND PROJECT CITY OF DUBLIN ~ PM PEAK HOUR DUBLIN TRANSIT CENTER i TRAFFIC VOLUMES ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ~ .,