Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Item 6.1 Hall of Justice SDR
OF Ill 4 �Ir 111 1'3 � =�, 82 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL February 4, 2014 Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers CITY CLERK File #410 -30 Christopher L. Foss, Acting City Manager J Alameda County East County Hall of Justice — Site Development Review (PLPA- 2013- 00074) Prepared by Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The original East County Hall of Justice ( ECHOJ) Site Development Review approval was granted by the City Council in November 2004 and a revised design was approved in 2009. Since that time, Alameda County has reassessed their needs for the facility, the availability of funding for construction, and has redesigned the project. The County has requested approval of a Site Development Review Permit for a revised ECHOJ complex of 196,219 square feet that includes 13 courtrooms and associated office and support facilities. Overall, the project site and building forms remain generally the same with the larger (courtroom) portion of the building located on the northern portion of the site and the shorter (office) portion of the building located on the southern portion of the site near Gleason Road. This item was continued from the January 21, 2014 City Council meeting. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. The costs associated with processing Alameda County East County Hall of Justice project are borne by the Applicant. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the public hearing, deliberate and adopt Resolution approving Site Development Review to construct a 196,219 square foot building comprised of courtrooms, offices, and associated facilities on 20.4 acres located on the north side of Gleason Drive between Madigan and Arnold Drives, and approving the associated Agreement between the City of Dublin and the County of Alameda regarding the enforcement of Conditions of Approval for the East County Hall of Justice. Submitted By Director of Community Development Reviewed By Acting Assistant City Manager Page 1 of 8 ITEM NO. 6.1 DESCRIPTION: In July 2003, Alameda County submitted a proposal to the City of Dublin for Site Development Review (SDR) approval of a proposed new courthouse. The East County Hall of Justice was proposed as a 208,408 square foot building comprised of courtrooms, offices, and associated facilities. The project area is 21.77 acres and is located on the north side of Gleason Drive between Madigan and Arnold, where the East County Government Center has been planned for some time. A Vicinity Map is shown below: ALAMEDA COUNTY SANTA RITA JAIL BRODER BLVD. t {'' DUBLIN BLVD. u n y I Alameda regarding the enforcement of Conditions of Justice (ECHOJ). Under the 1993 Annexation Agreement, between the City of Dublin and the County of Alameda, the City has retained the right to perform design review of any projects proposed on the County Governmental property. Therefore, although this project is not subject to the normal development standards or land use controls that would be applicable to a private project, the project is subject to the City of Dublin Site Development Review approval. On November 16, 2004, the City Council approved Resolution 220 -04, approving the SDR application. Resolution 220 -04 also approved a subsequent agreement between the City of Dublin and the County of Approval for the East County Hall of The County did not immediately proceed with the construction of the facility, and requested from the City two extensions to the SDR approval. The first extension was granted by the City Council in May 2006 and the second in November 2007. In early 2009, County Staff informed City Staff that revisions to the original building designs were underway, and the County submitted a revised design for the City Council's consideration. On December 15, 2009, the City Council approved Resolution 187 -09, approving a SDR application to construct a slightly smaller courthouse facility with changes to the architectural design. The project plans approved in 2009 are included as Attachment 1. The County did not immediately proceed with the construction of the revised facility, and requested from the City two extensions to the second SDR approval. The first extension was granted by the City Council in November 2011 and the second in May 2013. The current SDR approval is valid until June 14, 2015. The Alameda County General Services Administration, in coordination with all of the agencies involved in the development of the project, which includes the Superior Court of California and Page 2 of 8 the State of California Administrative Office of the Courts, has continued to reassess their needs and budget for the ECHOJ project. To this end, the County solicited proposals from design - build teams who could take the SDR plan set that had been approved in 2009 and put together a cost - conscious proposal to construct the facility. Through the review of the qualified design -build proposals, it became clear that modifications would need to be made to the approved 2009 design to work within the County's project budget. Using the 2009 SDR project approvals as their guide, the County's selected design -build team, headed by firms Hensel - Phelps and Fentress, put together a concept design for the East County Hall of Justice that they would take through full design development, construction drawings, permitting, and construction. In order for the County to proceed with awarding the bid for the team to take the next step in the process — preparing the full design package — the City's SDR review and approval needed to be complete to ensure that the design -build contract was awarded to a team with a conceptual design that the City found satisfactory. This process is different than a typical SDR review and approval in that neither Staff nor the City Council have a full SDR plan set (with details on all the building elevations) to consider. However, the project and process is already quite different than a typical development. Unlike most sites, the development of the property is governed by a separate "Annexation Agreement" between the City and County that was approved in 1993. Under this agreement, the City has the right to perform design review on any projects proposed on the County Governmental property (of which this site is a part). Beyond SDR review, though, the project is not subject to the City's typical development standards or land use controls that would be applicable to a private project. The City does not issue any permits related to the construction of the ECHOJ except for any work done within the public street right -of -way. The conceptual designs, included as Exhibit B -1 to Attachment 2, are less detailed than the City typically requires during the SDR approval process. Recognizing that refinements and changes can take place through the design -build process, one of the concerns that Staff raised with the County is having assurance that what is ultimately built on the site looks substantially similar to the conceptual design. The County provided Staff with six examples of design -build projects that the Hensel - Phelps /Fentress team has recently completed (Attachment 3). Each example depicts the conceptual design for the building next to a photograph of the end product. In each case, the design -build team delivered a finished project that was substantially similar to the initial concept, which provides some reassurance that the ECHOJ complex, when complete, should look substantially similar to the designs depicted in Exhibit B -1 to Attachment 2. Because of the unique nature of the City /County relationship as it pertains to this property, because the design -build team has provided examples of how they have brought other public projects to a successful conclusion, and because the City is eager to assist the County in ensuring that the East County Hall of Justice can be constructed to serve the community, Staff is able to recommend approval of the ECHOJ SDR based on the concepts presented. ANALYSIS: The East County Hall of Justice includes 13 courtrooms and their support agencies, including court administration and jury services, a cafeteria, family and children's services, district attorney, and public defender, among others. The building is designed to accommodate approximately 380 employees and will be open weekdays from 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Several nights a week, night court may be held, which would extend the operating hours until 9:00 p.m. Other night meetings and public functions may occasionally be held at the building. Page 3 of 8 In summary, the project plans have been revised from the previous approvals in the following manner: __7L 00.4 ECHOJ (approved) OJ (approved) 2014 ECHOJ a .... Building Size 208,408 square feet 196,219 square feet 196,219 square feet Building components 13 courtrooms with 13 courtrooms with 13 courtrooms with associated offices and associated offices, associated offices, support services support services, and support services, and landscape courtyard area landscaped courtyard off cafeteria area off cafeteria Building Materials Primarily pre -cast Primarily glass curtain Primarily glass curtain concrete and glass wall system combined wall system combined with architectural metal with architectural metal panels and features panels and features Building Height 90 feet, 3 inches 90 feet, 6 inches 90 feet, 6 inches Courtroom wing: 5 Courtroom wing: 5 Courtroom wing: 5 stories (4 stories above- stories (4 stories above- stories (4 stories above - grade) grade) grade) Office wing: 3 stories (2 Office wing: 2 stories (1 Office wing: 2 stories (1 above -grade at building above -grade at building above -grade at building entrance) entrance) entrance) Green Building Aiming to achieve LEED Committing to LEED Committing to LEED certification Silver certification at a Silver certification at a minimum minimum Site plan Approx. 22 acres with Unchanged except for 20.4 acre site. three access points off configuration of building Configuration and Gleason Drive. Building footprint building footprint situated at the western unchanged except for end of the site. shifting the building 10 feet south Parking 850 parking spaces 865 parking spaces 818 parking spaces. Landscape plan Focus on pedestrian- Unchanged. Original Original landscape friendly environment, landscape plan remains. concept remains. water - conserving plant species, integrated water detention on site, and extensive tree plantings. Site Plan (Pape 5 of Exhibit 8 -1 to Attachment 2) The proposed building is at least 290 feet from Gleason Drive and sited on the northwestern most portion of the site - the furthest distance possible from the residential neighborhood. There is substantial landscaping that will buffer the building from the businesses and residences on the south side of Gleason Drive, and there is a 45' wide bioswale and landscaped area that separates the parking lot from Gleason Drive. There are three public entrances to the facility, all off Gleason Drive. The main entrance is aligned with Hacienda Drive, so those visiting the site will drive through the Hacienda /Gleason intersection and directly into the courthouse parking lot. This will be the main point of access for most visitors. There are two other driveways, one at the eastern -most portion of the site and one at the western -most portion, both of which are right turn in, right turn out driveways. Page 4 of 8 A majority of the earthen berm at the northern edge of the site will be retained when the site is developed. The berm will be removed at the rear of the ECHOJ facility in order to allow access from Broder Boulevard directly to the building. However, this will be behind the 5 -story building and the removal of this portion of the berm should not be visible from Gleason Road or Hacienda Drive. Off Hacienda and Gleason, the main entrance drive leads vehicles directly onto the site and provides access into the three main parking areas as well as the disabled parking area closest to the building entrance. The parking lots contain a total of 818 parking spaces, including the required disabled accessible parking spaces. The City does not have a parking requirement for courthouse facilities, but Section 8.76 of the Zoning Ordinance (Off Street Parking and Loading) states that for uses not specifically listed in the Ordinance, the Director of Community Development shall determine the parking requirement based upon the requirements for comparable uses and upon the particular characteristics of the use. In this case, using a similar parking requirement for an office complex, a 196,219 square foot building would require 1 space per 350 square feet, or 561 total spaces. As designed, this project has 257 parking spaces in excess of that requirement, which should minimize concerns about the potential for courthouse parking in adjacent neighborhoods or at adjacent businesses. For pedestrians arriving to the site via foot, bicycle, or public transit, a series of sidewalks and walkways on site take people from the street to the building entrance. The site is designed so that all pedestrian travel routes lead safely to the entry plaza in front of the building, and the disabled parking has been located as close as possible to the main entrance. Building Architecture (Pages 1 -3 of Exhibit B -1 to Attachment 2) The revised building architecture was prepared with the goal of creating a building that not only reflects the dignity and honor appropriate to a courthouse facility, but also presents a notable, yet compatible, addition to the suburban fabric of the City of Dublin. The massing and architecture is centered on creating a transparent silhouette, integrating a sleek, modern glass wall and a visible interior on the south - facing elevation that responds to the surrounding topography. Careful attention was given to the pedestrian experience when approaching the building. The northern (courtroom) building is four stories in height (above grade) and overlooks the lower two story height of the southern (office) building. The horizontal massing of the courthouse has been intentionally designed to accommodate a perception of lower scale to lessen the visual impact to the adjacent low -rise. This was aided, from a massing point of view, by stepping the two story office wing in front of the taller four story courtroom building. The entrance pavilion /plaza serves as the primary pedestrian orientation element where people will enter the plaza from the east. The building lobby and screening area are situated in the single story entry element directly in front of the vertical tower entry, which are in turn connected to both the Courts wing to the north and the County Office wing to the south. The County is designing the building with a number of "green" features and will be pursuing LEED (Silver) certification for the project. The County will be designing the project looking to maximize energy savings from mechanical and electrical systems, minimize storm water runoff, and minimize water consumption. The project will utilize sustainable building materials and will size the conduit pathways inside the building to accommodate the installation of a future solar photovoltaic system for the Court building. Page 5 of 8 Building Materials and Colors The building will be constructed with a glass curtain wall system combined with two colors of architectural metal panels with two surface treatments, and cast -in -place sandblasted concrete with neutral light brown tones. The colors proposed for the building are subtle earth tones and will be complimentary to the residences, offices, and business park buildings in the vicinity. Site Landscaping (Pages 6 -7 of Exhibit B -1 to Attachment 2) Since Alameda County is pursuing Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver certification for the building and site, great attention has been given to site landscaping, on -site water retention through bioswales and using permeable surfaces for parking areas. The landscape palette chosen for the site includes a wide range of native plants, trees, and grasses, and will provide an interesting compliment to the building. In order to accommodate the water retention facilities planned for the site, there are substantial landscape buffers around the perimeter of the site and in the parking areas, which will eventually grow to screen much of the site and provide a noise and visual buffer. At the entrance to the building, there is a public plaza and sitting area that will serve building users as well as the public at large. The public plaza will be located adjacent to the drop off area for vehicles delivering people to the site. The plaza hardscape and landscape areas will provide an attractive welcome area to the main entrance of the building. Site Security In addition to the three (3) entrance drives onto the site from Gleason Drive, there is also a secured entrance off Broder Drive on the north side of the site where detainees will enter and exit the site and the building. Behind the secured area is also where the judicial parking area is located. All detainees will arrive at the site via bus at the Broder Drive entrance, enter a secured garage area (sallyport), and exit the vehicle. The detainees will be brought inside the building and the bus will exit the secured sallyport into the secured parking area, and then the bus will leave the site. Once inside the building, detainees travel through separate corridors than the public or the judiciary, and there are holding cells on site for short -term detention. Visitors, jurors and employees coming to the courthouse will enter the building via the main entrance and pass through the security area at this location. CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN, EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN, AND ZONING ORDINANCE The project, as proposed and as conditioned, is consistent with the purpose and intent of Chapter 8.104 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Site Development Review). The project, as conditioned, is consistent with the policies and land use designations of the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and is consistent with the Planned Development Zoning for the site. The project, as proposed and as conditioned, will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare. In addition, the approved site development, including site layout, structures, vehicular access, circulation and parking, setbacks, height, walls, public safety and similar elements, have been designed to provide a desirable environment for the development. Page 6 of 8 The Applicant has given careful attention to design the project to be physically compatible with the site and to ensure that impacts to views and topographic features have been addressed to the greatest degree possible. Additionally, consideration of the architectural compatibility of the building with the surrounding residential and commercial uses have been addressed and mitigated while still maintaining the operational requirements of the court facility. The character, scale and quality of the design, building materials and colors, exterior lighting, and similar elements have been designed to ensure compatibility of this development with the character of adjacent buildings, neighborhoods, and uses. CITY OF DUBLIN /ALAMEDA COUNTY AGREEMENT: Because of the unique nature of this project, where the City of Dublin has Site Development Review authority but will not be issuing subsequent building permits, an alternative method of ensuring the Applicant's compliance with the Conditions of Approval for the project had to be developed. The City Attorney, in cooperation with the County Counsel, drafted an agreement regarding the enforcement of Conditions of Approval for the ECHOJ project. The Agreement is attached as Exhibit A to Attachment 2 and the Conditions of Approval for the project are contained within the Agreement (Exhibit A -1 to Attachment 2). Subsequent to the City Council's approval of the Agreement and the Conditions of Approval contained therein, the Agreement will be acted on by the County Board of Supervisors and signed by the County. The City's Site Development Review approval will become effective only after the Agreement is executed by both parties. This application has been reviewed by the applicable City departments and outside agencies, and their comments have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The County of Alameda prepared a joint Environmental Impact Report and Environmental Impact Statement (EIR /EIS), dated April 2003, to determine the potential environmental impacts occurring as a result of the proposed project. The EIR /EIS identified mitigation measures to address the environmental impacts identified and the Final EIR /EIS and accompanying mitigation measures were adopted by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors on May 6, 2003. When the project was redesigned in 2009, the County prepared an Addendum to describe the changes to the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). On November 30, 2009, the City Council adopted a Resolution certifying that the City Council reviewed and considered the CEQA Addendum before the project was approved (Resolution 186 -09). Since the 2014 project description remains as described in the 2009 CEQA Addendum, no additional environmental review is required. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS /PUBLIC OUTREACH: A public notice was sent to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the parcel, which is actually much larger than the boundaries of the 20.4 acre project site. A public notice was also published in the Valley Times and also posted at several locations throughout the City ATTACHMENTS: 1. Previously- approved SDR Project Plans, dated November 23, 2009 Page 7 of 8 2. Resolution approving Site Development Review to construct a 196,219 square foot building comprised of courtrooms, offices, and associated facilities on 20.4 acres located on the north side of Gleason Drive between Madigan and Arnold Drives, and approving the associated Agreement between the City of Dublin and the County of Alameda regarding the enforcement of Conditions of Approval for the East County Hall of Justice, with the Agreement included as Exhibit A, the Conditions of Approval included as Exhibit A -1, and the Project Plans included as Exhibit A -2 3. Hensel - Phelps /Fentress project examples Page 8 of 8 w Q }¢ Mor- ¢_¢ V V z° z° r �¢ z aQ J J In Q U LL Q U LL i m > O LL O O} LL O Q z z J = OV D OV 0 J w Q w O l7 � w D N z D O V Q W {1 � +w .y- { �Y•4 S r w o Ln o Z N Q N d = LU co L G W V,J w p Z Z a V$ y� 'Wq• J4F �� •� �' �' ■ ♦� � 1.11 .� � " - yr ,J ,. ..c :ate �Y� -M• , ': Y• 6 :.m rJ"�c a ��, Y g` _aj jb py.�• - y'"YL _ ,a `ts T r �.►ir NI �i �� •t r d= T �r • x, `T� yr. � � 311 '�'• s .{ tih n p �h; ; � - �• d ' ` �' .v ` '+ Lori(- �: dD slpues 'Dul u61sa0 V9d SjDally»V PlaqlneD q jell nW SjDally»V OW)I x LLI z 0 v 0 0 0 0 m 0 LLI z w N v LLI 0 V03WV1V JO AlNf107 VINHOJI1V7 j018f10780183df1S 600Z'£Z HISMAON i1S NVld- M31AIH iNIM013AIG IiIS V7'NI19f10 V(I3WV1V j0 AlNnOD N0liVHiSINIWOV S371Ai13S WHINT) iDiisf1f JO 11VH AlNnoDisV3 I )jjrf - �•;-�- key` -.} Q ', , . - j- f: III > Y, ARNOLD RD. s ni7 - MADIGAN DRIVE w 1 _ Q cc _ 1 V Z 1 z Q _ z HACIENDA DRIVE 1 1cc o I to u 1 Ip p 1 IQ 2 Q 1 IJ L J� > Y, ARNOLD RD. s Z o (D `I 1 v [V 1 I w 1 _ Q cc w Z Z o (D `I 1 v [V _e w mVN SjDaj!__,eq jell e, _ V(IIVVVIV AiNnoD VINHOJIIVD s anoD m+e m,v a m VVVIV JO AiNnOD mma,m* SIDIAHIS mm, mmamIAIH meOAI(l IiIS swam iDiisnr � jo � g G & f � \ ( O• � d o i FIMR | pi d j ( k ( w§ <o /I 4 � \\ _ j\ k= /k \ \\ * { /7 z\)\ \\ §\ *) - 2 /\ § /£ \) \\ 7@ 0 \f y\\ m \} \\ < 2 Q _& a \/\ �\ �t / \E \�}\ ® Qj �\ /� \{ ) \ \� E �\ / ` \2a °\ \�° ` \ °° °aE :k { (k \§ Qj b§ ®7j /\ $�E !�` /§s 2: 2 fy 2a )a! (M 7 0 � \ \ 5 Q ) E % /} / \ \ \ ) E — \� \ \ \ QJ > �� /k/ c U') }) /\ \ \± ( \/k /�\ /\ q :0 \\ J « \ ui \ j t - e » u ® ® E / ® @ >, ® w @ 7- E \ \ [ \ / O »±z: \ ®E gel f -L' / �� U E \\ \)2 3 -0 CL ±-r- Eau ®��+ 2!» 23 w_ : %6j �! « U ` =-0m E! m ®le-a atE = *- 2 \c 5Q» =g2 -0 =e O c )&E <� at *\§ /£ w =_ Se!zz:__> r& \3G = Qt 2/& 2® � 7)z !s ! -_ /[ ! > =2] CL /i4x !� !; <) <jQ <§ ±E /22 5\sy /&/ 7t /2/ \ j : 2 u . . . . . y � jo � g G & f � \ ( O• � d o i FIMR | pi d j ( k ( w§ <o /I 4 sipues H03WHlH JO AlNnoD HIN8OjIIVD jO 18noD 8O183dnS 600V£Z 838W3AON 13S NHld - M31A381N3WdOl3A30 3115 'Dul u61sa(l H9d VD 'NI18f10 S;Da;ly»y playlneD q jallnW S;Da;ly»y OW)l H03WHlH JO AlNnO7 NOIlH81SINIWOH S371A83S 1tl83N39 37115fr JO IIVH AlNnoDisH3 z Q J d W d Q U N z Q J J J Q W M X11 .g S3Da3Iy»tlPla4lneD djalhW z CW G W Q J z W z Q J d W d Q U N z Q J sipues H03WHlH JO AlNnoD VINHOjIlH7 jO iHnoD 8O183dnS 600V£Z HISMAON 13S NHld - M31A381N3WdOl3A30 IiIS 'w1 u61sa0 H9d VD 'Niisn(i S;Da;ly»y OW)l H03WHlH JO AlNnO7 NOliVHiSINIWOH S371AHIS WHIN39 iDiis r JO llHH AlNno:)isvi sipues 'Dul u61sa0 H9d SjDally»y PlaqlneD q jell nW SjDally»tl OW)j H03WH1H JO AlNnoD VINHOJI1H7 j018f10780183dnS 600V£Z HISMAON i1S NHld- M31A381NIM013A30311S H03WH1H j0 AlNnOD NOliVHiSINIWOH S371Ai13S WHIN39 3711snr JO 11HH AlNnoDisvi y h ��a wwuz°za�oa� �.��� ua�zo Noxc�aw wix a� o €terms °anz xo uwW3�J��} - a9z� ooQ as w=G � Z ° F 55M N-8- ? ;�awp ? 1411aa -6% a21 wx'g ow 'IW2 i5 b 0 z wN�y gw � 5? zuw ° yimo5go w�m� k o19w W wzwm oz� ia�3 oo �wwaY mwx� °Gwo m2ir c�FamFo G zaz w'3 -.0 -H _o °za w r �i� u >��5=5an �r m- W tlw0 r�F[F° U'¢ ?OV'3rEm IL w °ow ;o - "� w 3�a� MHEI M awa�33a�r °z o$sg °wxwp�S ooh 3� =w° U gHZio awxum°zc�m LL wr�g iz ° > °�� �wm �UUI €uGa3�40� iug� g _pro °z wu 3zi _ 33 D °ix� I.E. a3 aow aa° 'o�3r z''"'�33 ZQ °z�� o °or�� ioo�° �u °zz�?w�LL wa Wqj¢ g2.0 �wi J HIM �ua$aW HID 3a'ao °'a ���1 3_ �> €>°m €�.5 O z W W J r z o v s� s a ui V It 1 ui 0 ri% U JU a LLUr 129 o J �h [o °wxw - onb ° o� 7 u! i Z.z u w > Lu 5 a ¢ t�! UJ w r � Uz w m CIS w x \/ 0 0 E X az r W N W W LU id 21 �� Q w5C5 N 0 0 z s � z_Z �x g°dn y � a x o a vF W 00 O ai3 asya UO Z 0 of 6 i CD YpapZ i,U m m wN w ¢� w ua Z W ZQ 3j � H W O U U Q d (? ZY N u MEN E m� � S a of S nK w° oo`- �✓wi� G ay LU Kvi LL4 � GU d� Z �a w pry w tJ ® U n z w 0 W J N J Q W CQC IC V z 'a a a z a N 0 z x _N Z 7 LL LLI '.n ,(0 V Z_ F x (7 J w >a o p �w o S o rc gg Oo u - 7�m .p m w - m - o m � � m s� s a ui V It 1 ui 0 ri% � o � E X az r W N W W LU id 21 �� Q w5C5 N 0 0 z s � z_Z �x g°dn y � a x o a vF W 00 O ai3 asya UO Z 0 of 6 i CD YpapZ i,U m m wN w ¢� w ua Z W ZQ 3j � H W O U U Q d (? ZY N u MEN E m� � S a of S nK w° oo`- �✓wi� G ay LU Kvi LL4 � GU d� Z �a w pry w tJ ® U n z w 0 W J N J Q W CQC IC V z 'a a a z a N 0 z x _N Z 7 LL LLI '.n ,(0 V Z_ F x (7 J w >a o p �w o S o rc gg Oo u - 7�m .p m w - m - o m � � � a V 0 w V ° 3 � o � a a r m 129 o o� 7 sipues HO3WHlH JO AlNnoD VINHOjIlH7 jO iHnoD 8O183dnS 600V£Z HISMAON ilS NHld - M31A381N3WdOl3A3O 311S 'Dul u61sa0 H9d VD 'Niisn(i S;Da;ly»y plaqlneDd jallnW S;Da;ly»y OW)l HO3WHlH JO AlNnO7 NOliVHiSINIWOH S371AHIS WHIN39 iDiis r JO llHH AlNnoDisvi 'Ln V z z LL Lu N Lu a- u Ln n z Q J S a, W J U F— o_ W U W Q O Z ¢ 2 U) a D S U� ¢ a °a 0 m Y U 9 W Y 00 1 Z O H W J W W w W 0 W > o J c W' m x J 0 2 H 0 ¢ 0 ED F 2 C7 2 H- D J O CO F 0 NJ J _ a � v J CO 7 a 10 sipues H03WHlH JO AlNnoD HIN80jIlH7 j018noD 80183dnS 6002 �£Z HISMAON ilS NHld - M31A381N3WdOl3A30 3115 'w1 u61sa0 H9d VD 'Niisn(i S;Da;iy»y OW)l H03WHlH JO AlNnOD NOIlH81SINIWOH S371A83S 1H83N39 iDiis r JO llHHAlNno:)isvi c r� 000 -0OO- 00_0 0 , O 0 O T _0 0 0 0 - a 0 , a 0 � Oz 0 0_ ., .. (D 0 O Z Q J d N N W W z Q N W LU d W N l r 0 , VJ a (1) 0 0. 0 0 0 � 0,I O 0 0 0000 z 0 n El I� to l 't,• �» . r sipues V03WVlV JO AlNnoD VINHOjllV7 jO iHno7 HOIH]dnS 600V£Z HISMAON ilS NVld- M31AIH lN3WdOl3A30 IiIS 'Dul u6isa0 VN V7 'Niisn(i S;Da;ly»V plaqlneDd jallnW S;Da;ly»V OW)l V03WVlV JO AlNnO7 NOliVHiSINIW0V S371AHIS WHIN39 iDiis r JO llVH AlNnoDisV3 M z O Q W J W N >W N sipues V03WVlV JO AlNnoD VINHOjllV7 jO iHno7 HOIH]dnS 600V£Z HISMAON ilS NVld- M31A3i11N3WdOl3h30 IiIS 'Dul u6isa0 VN V7 'Niisn(i S;Da;ly»V plaqlneDd jallnW S;Da;ly»V OW)l V03WVlV JO AlNnO7 NOliVHiSINIW0V S371AHIS WHIN39 iDiis r JO llVH AlNnoDisV3 sipues H03WHlH JO AlNnoD VINHOjIlH7 jO iHnoD 8O183dnS 600V£Z HISMAON ilS NHld - M31A381N3WdOl3A30 IiIS 'Dul u61sa0 H9d VD 'Niisn(i S;Da;ly»y plaqlneDd jallnW S;Da;ly»y OW)l H03WHlH JO AlNnO7 NOliVHiSINIWOH S371AHIS WHIN39 iDiis r JO llHH AlNnoDisvi sipues 'w1 u61sa(I H9d SjDally»y PlaqlneD q jell nW SjDally»tl OW)j z O Q W J W N Q W 0 z S°L H03WHIH JO AlNnoD VINHOjIIH7 jO iHnoD 8O183dnS 600V£Z HISMAON 13S NHld - MIIAIH iN3WdOIIA30 IiIS H03WHIH JO AlNnO7 NOliVHiSINIWOH SIDIAHIS WHIN39 3711snr JO IIHH AlNnoDisvi sipues H03WHlH JO AlNnoD VINHOjIlH7 jO iHnoD 8O183dnS 600V£Z HISMAON ilS NHld - M31A381N3WdOl3A30 IiIS 'Dul u61sa0 H9d VD 'Niisn(i S;Da;ly»y plaqlneDd jallnW S;Da;ly»y OW)l H03WHlH JO AlNnO7 NOliVHiSINIWOH S371AHIS WHIN39 iDiis r JO llHH AlNnoDisvi sipues H03WHlH JO AlNnoD VINHOjIlH7 jO iHnoD 8O183dnS 600V£Z HISMAON ilS NHld - M31A381N3WdOl3A30 IiIS 'Dul u61sa0 H9d VD 'Niisn(i S;Da;ly»y plaqlneDd jallnW S;Da;ly»y OW)l H03WHlH JO AlNnO7 NOliVHiSINIWOH S371AHIS WHIN39 iDiis r JO llHH AlNnoDisvi ry m io u o zo sipues H03WHlH JO AlNnoD VINHOjIlH7 jO iHnoD 8O183dnS 600V£Z HISMAON ilS NHld - M31A381N3WdOl3A30 IiIS 'Dul u61sa0 H9d VD 'Niisn(i S;Da;ly»y plaqlneDd jallnW S;Da;ly»y OW)l H03WHlH JO AlNnO7 NOliVHiSINIWOH S371AHIS WHIN39 iDiis r JO llHH AlNnoDisvi ry m io u o zo sipues H03WHlH JO AlNnoD VINHOjIlH7 jO iHnoD 8O183dnS 600V£Z HISMAON ilS NHld - M31A381N3WdOl3A30 IiIS 'Dul u61sa0 H9d VD 'Niisn(i S;Da;ly»y plaqlneDd jallnW S;Da;ly»y OW)l H03WHlH JO AlNnO7 NOliVHiSINIWOH S371AHIS WHIN39 iDiis r JO llHH AlNnoDisvi U � w N L � J H L � w � ~ U i w � H � 1 I z L ¢ ¢ � Q H C RESOLUTION NO. xx -14 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** RESOLUTION APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A 196,219 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING COMPRISED OF COURTROOMS, OFFICES, AND ASSOCIATED FACILITIES ON 20.4 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF GLEASON DRIVE BETWEEN MADIGAN AND ARNOLD DRIVES, AND APPROVING THE ASSOCIATED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA REGARDING THE ENFORCEMENT OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE EAST COUNTY HALL OF JUSTICE (PLPA- 2013- 00074) WHEREAS, Jim Kachick, on behalf of the Alameda County General Services Agency, has requested approval of a Site Development Review Amendment to construct a 196,219 square foot building comprised of courtrooms, offices, and associated facilities on 20.4 acres located on the north side of Gleason Drive between Madigan and Arnold Drives; and WHEREAS, the previous Site Development Review application was reviewed and approved by the Dublin City Council on December 15, 2009 (Resolution 187 -09); and WHEREAS, the County has submitted and received approval for two extensions to the Site Development Review approval, with the final extension to the approval expiring on June 14,2015-and WHEREAS, the Applicant has submitted plans for a new Site Development Review application, dated December 7, 2012 and prepared by Hensel - Phelps, stamped approved, and on file in the Planning Department (hereinafter referred to as the "Project Plans "). Included in these plans is the color and material board dated December 13, 2013, and other plans, text, and diagrams relating to this Site Development Review, and WHEREAS, the County of Alameda prepared a joint Environmental Impact Report and Environmental Impact Statement (EIR /EIS), dated April 2003, to determine the potential environmental impacts occurring as a result of the proposed project. The EIR /EIS identified mitigation measures to address the environmental impacts identified and the Final EIR /EIS and accompanying mitigation measures were adopted the Alameda County Board of Supervisors on May 6, 2003; and WHEREAS, when the project was redesigned in 2009, the County prepared an Addendum to describe the changes to the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). On November 30, 2009, the City Council adopted a Resolution certifying that the City Council reviewed and considered the CEQA Addendum before the project was approved (Resolution 186 -09). Since the 2014 project description remains as described in the 2009 CEQA Addendum, no additional environmental review is required; and WHEREAS, the proposed project is consistent with the Dublin General Plan, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, the Planned Development Zoning District in which it is located, and represents an appropriate project for the site; and WHEREAS, the project application has been reviewed by the applicable City departments and outside agencies, and their comments have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for the project; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the Site Development Review Amendment application on February 4, 2014; and WHEREAS, proper notice of the public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted to the City Council recommending that the application be approved; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth and used their independent judgment to make a decision. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby find that: A. The approval of this application, as conditioned, is consistent with the purposes of the Site Development Review Chapter, with the General Plan, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and the Planned Development Zoning for the site. The project is in compliance with the purpose of the Site Development Review Chapter, the Planned Development Zoning District standards, and the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designations for the property. B. The approval of this application, as conditioned, is consistent with the provisions of Title 8, Zoning Ordinance. The project, with the implementation of the conditions of approval, meets the stated purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. C. The design of the project is appropriate to the City, the vicinity, surrounding properties and the lot in which the project is proposed. The project has been designed to respect the neighborhood and to minimize adverse impacts to surrounding properties. D. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the approved development. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the proposed use because the berm will be retained to screen Santa Rita Jail and the onsite grading will be balanced to provide an appropriate area for the building site. E. Impacts to existing slopes and topographic features are addressed. Impacts to existing slopes and topographic features are addressed through appropriate grading of the site, retention of those sensitive features, and through the mitigation measures adopted in the Final EIR /EIS and the Addendum. F. Architectural considerations including the character, scale and quality of the design, site layout, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, screening of unsightly uses, lighting, building materials and colors and similar elements result in a project that is harmonious with its surroundings and compatible with other development in the vicinity. The building architecture has been designed to be complimentary to the other buildings in the vicinity while providing the facilities necessary for a regional courthouse. G. Landscape considerations, including the location, type, size, color, texture and coverage of plant materials, and similar elements have been incorporated into the project to ensure visual relief, adequate screening and an attractive environment for the public. The site has been designed to incorporate native plant materials as well as to minimize stormwater runoff and to utilize sustainable practices. H. The site has been adequately designed to ensure proper circulation for bicyclists, pedestrians and automobiles. The project plans include a circulation diagram that illustrates the ability to move safely throughout the site for bicyclists, pedestrians, and automobiles. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby approve, subject to compliance with the Conditions of Approval, a Site Development Review permit to construct a 196,219 square foot building comprised of courtrooms, offices, and associated facilities on 20.4 acres located on the north side of Gleason Drive between Madigan and Arnold Drives, and approving the associated Agreement between the City of Dublin and the County of Alameda regarding the enforcement of Conditions of Approval for the East County Hall of Justice, with the Agreement included as Exhibit A, the Conditions of Approval included as Exhibit A -1, and the Project Plans included as Exhibit A -2; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the approval of this Site Development Review Amendment supersedes the two previous Site Development Review approvals for the East County Hall of Justice (City Council Resolution 220 -04 dated November 16, 2004 and City Council Resolution 187 -09 dated December 15, 2009); and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council approves and authorizes the Mayor to execute the Agreement (Exhibit A to this Resolution) between the City of Dublin and the County of Alameda regarding the enforcement of Conditions of Approval for the East County Hall of Justice, with the Conditions of Approval attached as Exhibit A -1 to the Agreement. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4t" day of February 2014. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk G: \PA# \2002 \02 -030 Alameda Co Court House \CC Reso SDR and Agmt.doc Exhibit A AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA REGARDING THE ENFORCEMENT OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE EAST COUNTY HALL OF JUSTICE PROJECT This agreement ( "the Agreement ") is entered into this 4t" day of February 2014 by and between the City of Dublin, a municipal corporation ( "the City "), and the County of Alameda, a political subdivision of the State of California ( "the County "). The City and the County are referred to collectively as "the Parties." RECITALS 1. The Parties are parties to that certain agreement entitled "Agreement Between County of Alameda, Surplus Property Authority and City of Dublin Regarding Transfer of Property Tax Revenues Upon Annexation, Provision of Services and Other Matters," dated May 4, 1993 ( "the Annexation Agreement "). 2. The Annexation Agreement provides that with respect to the County Governmental Property (as defined) any county governmental uses proposed for the property shall be subject to site development review in accordance with the City's zoning ordinance. 3. In the Annexation Agreement, the parties also agreed "in concept that infrastructure shall be constructed as necessitated by development and to accommodate reasonably projected development and that the costs of such infrastructure should be borne by the properties benefiting therefrom in proportion to the benefit received." 4. In 2004, the County proposed to construct an East County Hall of Justice Project on the County Governmental Property. ( "the 2004 Project "). Pursuant to the Annexation Agreement, the County has applied to the City for Site Development Review approval for the 2004 Project. On November 16, 2004, the City Council approved Resolution 220 -04 approving the Site Development Review for the 2004 Project and the associated agreement between the City and County regarding enforcement of conditions of approval ( "2004 Agreement "). The 2004 Agreement was extended by two amendments in May 2006 and November 2007, respectively. 5. In 2009, the County proposed an alternative design to construct the East County Hall of Justice Project on the County Governmental Property. ( "the 2009 Project "). Pursuant to the Annexation Agreement, the County applied to the City for Site Development Review approval for the 2009 Project. On December 15, 2009, the City Council approved Resolution 187 -09 approving the Site Development Review for the 2009 Project and the associated agreement between the City and County regarding enforcement of conditions of approval ( "2009 Agreement "). The 2009 Agreement was extended by two amendments in November 2011 and May 2013, respectively. 6. In November 2013, the County informed the City that it planned to revise the 2009 Project. Pursuant to the Annexation Agreement, the County applied to the City for Site ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 1 of 4 Development Review (SDR) for a revised East County Hall of Justice Project on the County Governmental Property ( "the 2014 Project "). The SDR for the Project was approved by the City Council on February 4, 2014 subject to certain conditions. The Project is the subject of this Agreement. 7. The City during the processing of the SDR determined that certain conditions of approval should be imposed upon the 2014 Project, including obligations to pay the City's development impact fees, which fund infrastructure that serves the County Governmental Property and other property in the City. The City believes that the Annexation Agreement authorizes the imposition of such conditions on the County. 8. The County believes that many of the conditions that the City desires to impose on the 2014 Project, including some of the development fees, are neither authorized by the Annexation Agreement nor otherwise by law. 9. In order to expedite the processing of the 2014 Project and to avoid further disputes, the County has agreed, for purposes of the 2014 Project only, to subject itself to certain conditions of approval (attached as Exhibit A -1 to this Agreement and incorporated herein by this reference) ( "the Conditions "), which conditions include the payment of all or a portion of certain City development impact fees for infrastructure, and the City is willing to agree to impose only the Conditions, provided that a reasonable means of enforcing the Conditions against the County is available to the City. 10. The City typically enforces conditions of approval by refusing to issue further approvals, such as building permits and occupancy, until the conditions are satisfied, but the City does not have further approvals on this project. 11. To ensure that the City has adequate remedies to enforce the Conditions, the Parties desire to set forth their agreement that the Conditions may be enforced by specific performance. NOW, THEREFORE, with reference to the foregoing recitals and in consideration of the mutual promises, obligations and covenants herein contained, the City and the County agree as follows: AGREEMENT Section 1. County Subject to the Conditions. Without in any way consenting to the City's interpretation of the Annexation Agreement, the County agrees to be subject to the Conditions. Section 2. Conditions May Be Enforced by Specific Performance. The Parties agree that, should the County refuse to comply with the Conditions, the City would not have adequate remedies at law and that the City's remedy for such a breach is to bring a lawsuit to enforce the Conditions and seek an order of specific performance. Section 3. Miscellaneous. a. Incorporation of Recitals and Introductory Paragraph. The Recitals contained in this Agreement, and the introductory paragraph preceding the Recitals, are hereby ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 2 of 4 incorporated into this Agreement as if fully set forth herein b. Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement, or the application of any term or provision of this Agreement to a particular situation, is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining terms and provisions of this Agreement, or the application of this Agreement to other situations, shall continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by mutual consent of the Parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any material provision of this Agreement, or the application of such provision to a particular situation, is held to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, either the City or the County may (in their sole and absolute discretion) terminate this Agreement by providing written notice of such termination to the other party. C. Construction. This Agreement has been reviewed and revised by legal counsel for both the City and the County, and no presumption or rule that ambiguities shall be construed against the drafting party shall apply to the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. d. California Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. e. Attorneys' Fees. In any legal action or other proceeding brought by either party to enforce or interpret a provision of this Agreement, including an action brought by the City to enforce the Conditions, the prevailing party is entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and any other costs incurred in that proceeding in addition to any other relief to which it is entitled. f. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing. Such notices shall be given to the Parties at their addresses set forth below: If to the City, to: Christopher L. Foss Acting City Manager City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94569 Telephone: (925) 833 -6650 Facsimile: (925) 833 -6651 If to the County, to: Aki Nakao Director, General Services Agency County of Alameda 1401 Lakeside Drive, 10th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (415) 733 -9404 Facsimile: (415) 394 -9000 A party may change its address by giving notice in writing to the other party and thereafter all notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. Notices shall be deemed given and received upon personal delivery, or if mailed, upon the expiration of forty -eight (48) hours after being deposited in the United States Mail. Notices may also be given by overnight courier which shall be deemed given the following day or by facsimile transmission which shall be deemed given upon verification of receipt. ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 3 of 4 g. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts and counterpart signature pages may be assembled to form a single original document. h. Entire Agreement, Exhibits. This Agreement consists of 4 pages and two exhibits which constitute in full, the final and exclusive understanding and agreement of the Parties and supersedes all negotiations or previous agreements of the Parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter of this Agreement. The Parties specifically acknowledge that the "Agreement Between The City of Dublin and The County of Alameda regarding the Enforcement of Conditions of Approval for The East County Hall of Justice, dated November 16, 2004" and the "Agreement Between The City of Dublin and The County of Alameda regarding the Enforcement of Conditions of Approval for The East County Hall of Justice, dated December 15, 2009" are superseded by this Agreement. The exhibits to this Agreement consist of the following: (a) Conditions of Approval of Site Development Review for the East County Hall of Justice Project; and (b) Project Plans dated December 7, 2012. i. Waivers. All waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by the appropriate authorities of the City and the County. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. CITY OF DUBLIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to Form: City Attorney COUNTY OF ALAMEDA Chair of the Board of Supervisors Approved as to Form: County Counsel in Deputy County Counsel ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 4 of 4 Exhibit A -1 to the Agreement between the City of Dublin and the County of Alameda regarding the enforcement of Conditions of Approval for the East County Hall of Justice FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL for PLPA- 2013 -00074 East County Hall of Justice (Including the Public Works Standard Conditions of Approval): Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public. General Conditions 1. Approval. This Site Development Review approval for the East County Hall of Justice establishes the detailed design concepts and regulations for the project. Development pursuant to this Site Development Review shall generally conform to the Concept Project Designs dated December 7, 2012, prepared by Hensel - Phelps /Fentress, stamped approved, and on file in the Planning Department (hereinafter referred to as the "Project Plans "). Also considered part of the Concept Project Designs is the Color and Materials Board dated December 13, 2013, submitted by Hensel - Phelps /Fentress, and other plans, text, and diagrams relating to this Site Development Review, unless modified by the Conditions of Approval contained herein. No other modifications shall be made to the Project Plans without subsequent review and approval. This approval shall not become effective until the City and County have both signed and entered into a written agreement regarding the enforcement of these conditions. This Site Development Review approval supersedes the previous two Site Development Review approvals (City Council Resolution 220 -04 dated November 16, 2004 and City Council Resolution 187 -09 dated December 15, 2009). Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Ongoing 2. Term. Approval of the Site Development Review shall be valid for twenty -four (24) months from the date approved by the City Council. If construction, or demonstrated progress toward commencing such construction, has not commenced by that time, this approval shall be null and void. If an additional extension is desired, the County can make the request to be considered by the City Council. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Ongoing 3. Revocation. The Site Development Review approval will be revocable for cause in accordance with the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions of this approval shall be subject to citation. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Ongoing 4. Required Permits. The Applicant/Developer shall obtain all necessary permits required by other agencies (Alameda County Flood Control District Zone 7, Dublin San Ramon Services District, California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, State Water Quality Control Board, etc.) as needed and shall submit copies of the permits to the Director of Public Works. Responsible Agency: All agencies When required: Ongoing 5. Fees. The Applicant/Developer shall pay the following fees prior to the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public: Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 1 of 14 a. Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) at the current rate, based on 5,941 daily trips with a 27% reduction given for locally - generated trips, resulting in daily trips of 4,337. The County will receive credit for any TIF improvements constructed as required by these Condition of Approval. The County may pay the fee by using Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (ACSPA) section I TIF credits [for payment of the Section I portion of the fee], through a reduction in the ACSPA's Section II loan to the TIF program [for payment of the Section II portion of the fee], and /or cash for either the Section I and /or Section II portion of the fee. b. Pleasanton Interchange Fee for Eastern Dublin at the current rate, based on 5,941 daily trips. c. Tri Valley Transportation Development (TVTD /TVTC) Fee at the current rate, based on a building size of 196,219 square feet. d. City of Dublin Fire Facilities Fee at the current rate, based on a building size of 196,219 square feet. Pursuant to the resolutions imposing the foregoing fees, the fees are increased for inflation annually each year on July 1. Consistent with the City's practice with projects subject to building permits, the fees listed above may be paid no earlier that at the commencement of construction of the building. The fees must be paid no later than the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public. The fee paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment. Responsible Agency: All agencies When required: Prior to the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public. 6. Compliance with EIR/EIS Mitigation Measures. The project is required to comply with all mitigations measures as detailed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Impact Report (EIS /EIR) for the Juvenile Justice Facility and East County Hall of Justice (dated April 2003) as adopted by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors on May 6, 2003 and as revised by the Addendum approved by the County Board of Supervisors on December 8, 2009. As shown below, certain mitigation measures which require a fair share contribution towards traffic improvements will be met through payment of EDTIF fees. The City finds that certain mitigation measures are infeasible due to inconsistency with the City's Capital Improvement Program as specified below: MM 9.1.5a: Fair share contribution to Scarlett Improvement to be funded through payment Drive extension of EDTIF fee. MM 9.1.5b: Fair share contribution to Improvement inconsistent with the City's Tassajara /Dublin intersection Capital Improvement Program for roadway improvements MM 17.3.5a and 17.3.6a: Fair share contribution Improvement to be funded through payment to Dougherty /Dublin of EDTIF fee. MM 17.3.5a and 17.3.6a: Fair share contribution Improvement to be funded through payment to Hacienda /1580 WB OR of EDTIF fee. MM 17.3.5a and 17.3.6a: Fair share contribution Improvement inconsistent with the City's to Tassajara /Central Capital Improvement Program for roadway improvements MM 17.3.5a and 17.3.6a: Fair share contribution Improvement inconsistent with the City's to Tassajara /Dublin Capital Improvement Program for roadway improvements Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 2 of 14 MM 17.3.5a and 17.3.6a: Fair share contribution Improvement inconsistent with the City's to Santa Rita /1580 EB/ Pimlico OR Capital Improvement Program for roadway improvements MM 17.3.5a and 17.3.6a: Fair share contribution Improvement inconsistent with the City's to Hopyard /1580 EB OR Capital Improvement Program for roadway improvements MM 17.3.5b and 17.3.6b: Fair share Improvement inconsistent with the City's contribution C to Tassajara /Gleason Capital Improvement Program for roadway improvements MM 17.3.5b and 17.3.6b: Fair share Improvement to be funded through payment contribution to Hacienda /1580 EB OR of EDTIF fee. MM 17.3.5b and 17.3.6b: Fair share Improvement to be funded through payment contribution to Hacienda /Dublin of EDTIF fee. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Through construction and ongoing 7. Compliance with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan General Plan Amendment EIR. As required by the Site Development Review findings, the East County Hall of Justice project shall be in compliance with the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and therefore must also be in compliance with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan General Plan Amendment EIR and the associated Mitigation Monitoring Program. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Through construction and ongoing 8. Photovoltaic conduit installed. To ensure that the buildings are "PV /Solar Ready," the Project Applicant will size the conduit pathways inside the buildings to accommodate installation for potential future PV systems. Responsible Agency: Planning /Building When required: Through construction and ongoing 9. Review of Design /Build drawings. The Concept Project Designs are understood to be conceptual only, and the County is pursuing a design -build approach to the development of the project. In order for the City to ensure that the design -build plans are in compliance with the City's Site Development Review approval, once they are developed, the design development documents and construction documents shall be submitted to the City for review and comment by the Community Development Director or his /her designee. The plans shall be submitted for review prior to issuance of a building permit through Alameda County and prior to start of construction. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Prior to issuance of a building permit through Alameda County and prior to start of construction 10. Changes to Project Plans. A minor physical change to the Concept Project Designs such as a minor modification to the approved building design, site or building details (such as color or materials), can be considered by the Community Development Director or his /her designee as a Site Development Review Waiver. Any amendment to the approved plans which is not considered by the Community Development Director to be a minor physical change shall be reviewed per Section 8.104.090 (Amendment) of the Dublin Municipal Code, which would include full review and approval by the decision - making body of the original application, in this case the City Council. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Prior to the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 3 of 14 11. Site Development Review Waiver for "Green Enhancements ". The City supports the County's efforts to achieve a LEED Silver certification for the project. Should the Applicant desire to makes changes to the Concept Project Designs to incorporate sustainable practices, such as the installation of solar photovoltaic facilities, wind micro - turbines, the installation of a green roof, or other "green" efforts, said changes to the Project Plans can be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or his /her designee as a Site Development Review Waiver. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Through construction and ongoing 12. Site Lighting. The Applicant shall shield the parking lot and site lighting to ensure that the light is concentrated and focused on site and does not impact neighboring businesses or residents. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Through construction and ongoing 13. Wind screen details. A natural wind break of mixed tree heights is shown on the plans on the west side of the outdoor courtyard. During the design /build phase of the Project, the Applicant could study the wind conditions and consider appropriate solutions to divert the wind and provide a more comfortable courtyard seating area off the cafeteria. The design of any wind screen structures will be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or his /her designee prior to installation. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Through construction and ongoing 14. Perimeter fencing details. In the design /build phase of the Project, the Applicant will study the overall perimeter site security fencing approach, and consulting with Alameda County Sheriff's staff to develop a comprehensive security plan. The design of perimeter fencing will be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or his /her designee prior to installation. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Through construction and ongoing 15. Building and site signage. It is anticipated that low, monument -style signage will be installed at the three main driveway entrances off Gleason Road. Additionally, building signage will be installed at the main building entrance on the single- story, east - facing portion of the building leading to the security area. No building signage is permitted on the south - facing elevation of the courthouse building. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Through construction and ongoing 16. Roof equipment. There shall be complete screening (with materials to match the buildings) of all roof top elements such as mechanical penthouses and equipment from pedestrian and occupants' view. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Ongoing City of Dublin Public Works Department 17. Final design and construction shall conform to the Concept Project Designs dated December 7, 2012, stamped approved, and on file in the Planning Department (hereinafter referred to as the "Project Plans "). Responsible Agency: Planning and Public Works When required: Ongoing 18. The Applicant/Developer shall construct the following traffic improvements prior to the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public: Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 4 of 14 a. Modify Gleason Drive (project- specific improvement) The existing median island on Gleason Drive (just west of Hacienda Drive) shall be modified to provide an eastbound left -turn pocket lane into the site at the Hacienda Drive intersection. The left -turn pocket lane shall be 200' long, 12' wide, and shall have a 90' transition taper. Improvements shall include modifications as needed to the existing roadway striping and signing, as well as modifications to the existing median landscaping, irrigation systems, street lighting, and other facilities, as determined by the City Engineer. Modify the northbound approach of Hacienda Drive (project- specific improvement) The northbound approach of Hacienda Drive at the Gleason Drive intersection shall be widened to provide the following lane configurations: - 275' long, 11' wide left -turn pocket lane, plus 90' transition taper - Two thru lanes, 11' wide each - 4' wide bicycle lane - 275' long, 12' wide right -turn lane, plus existing transition taper Alternatively, the northbound approach of Hacienda Drive at the Gleason Drive intersection could be widened to provide the following lane configurations if the proposed inbound project driveway, opposite Hacienda Drive, is shifted easterly by a distance of approximately 12 to 15 feet: - 12' wide trap left -turn lane - 12' wide thru lane - 12' wide shared thru /right -turn lane - 5' wide bicycle lane Improvements shall include modifications as needed to the existing roadway striping and signing. The raised median island on Hacienda Drive (just south of Gleason Drive) shall be modified to accommodate the above improvements, including modifications to the existing landscaping, irrigation systems, street lighting, and other facilities, as determined by the City Engineer. b. Modify Gleason /Hacienda traffic signal (project- specific improvement) The existing traffic signal at the Gleason Drive /Hacienda Drive intersection shall be modified, as needed, to accommodate the new fourth leg of the intersection, the new eastbound left - turn lane, and the additional lanes at the northbound Hacienda Drive approach. Responsible Agency: Public Works When required: Prior to establishment of the use and the building opening to the public 19. The Applicant/Developer shall submit final Improvement Plans, prepared by a licensed civil engineer, for all work within the public right -of -way or easements, for review and approval by the Director of Public Works. The improvement plan package shall include additional plan sets as necessary for traffic signals, landscaping, joint trench, or other improvements as needed, prepared by the appropriate licensed design professional. Responsible Agency: Public Works When required: Prior to start of construction of the improvements in the right of way and prior to the building opening to the public. 20. Pursuant to Section 7.16.620 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the Applicant/Developer shall enter into an Improvement Agreement with the City to guarantee completion of the required improvements. The agreement and security shall be provided prior to issuance of an encroachment permit for work in the public right -of -way, and prior to start of any work in the public right -of -way. The Agreement will require an improvement security to be posted by the Applicant/ Developer's contractor to guarantee the faithful performance of the permitted work and the payment for labor and materials. Such security shall be in the form of cash, a certified Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 5 of 14 or cashier's check, a letter of credit, or surety bonds executed by the Applicant/Developer and by a corporate surety authorized to do business in California. The amount of the Security guaranteeing faithful performance shall be 100% of the estimated cost of the work. The amount of the Security guaranteeing the payment for labor and materials shall be 100% of the estimated cost of the work, and all work completed in the public right of way shall be subject to the payment of prevailing wages. The Applicant/Developer shall provide an estimate of these costs with the submittal of the Improvement Plans. In lieu of submitting a separate bond for the work in the public right -of -way, the contractor may name the City of Dublin as being covered under a security provided to the Applicant/ Developer, provided the scope and cost of the work in the public right -of -way are clearly defined and conform to the approved cost estimate for the work. Responsible Agency: Public Works When required: Prior to start of construction of the improvements in the right of way and prior to the building opening to the public. 21. The Applicant/Developer shall obtain an encroachment permit for all work within the public right - of -way or easements, prior to the start of construction. All work within the public right -of -way shall be subject to inspection by the Department of Public Works. Responsible Agency: Public Works When required: Prior to start of construction of the improvements in the right of way and prior to the building opening to the public. 22. The Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for the cost of all plan review, permit, and inspection costs incurred by the Department of Public Works for work within the public- right -of- way or easements. Responsible Agency: Public Works When required: Ongoing 23. A 6' wide concrete sidewalk shall be installed along the Gleason Drive frontage of the project. The sidewalk shall be extended easterly along the Gleason Drive frontage to connect with the existing sidewalk near Madigan Avenue and shall be extended westerly to the terminus of the project site. The new sidewalk shall be separated from the curb and have a 6' wide parkway strip in between. The addition of a 6' wide landscaping /parkway strip will cut into the slope of the proposed berm and will require an adjustment of the slope from 4:1 to 3:1. Alternatively, the Applicant/Developer could consider a meandering sidewalk, and use the meanders to adjust the sidewalk elevation and take up part of the grade difference along the berm. One of these alternatives shall be reflected in the final improvement plans that are subject to review and approval by the Director of Public Works, prior to the start of construction. Responsible Agency: Public Works When required: Prior to start of construction of the improvements in the right of way and prior to the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public. 24. A public access easement shall be dedicated for any portion of the sidewalk outside of the public right of way. Responsible Agency: Public Works When required: Prior to the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public 25. The final design of the westbound bus stop on Gleason Drive shall be approved by the Livermore - Amador Valley Transit Authority. The location of the bus stop may be modified by LAVTA, subject to approval of the Director of Public Works, and shall contain a bus shelter, trash receptacle, and appropriate lighting. Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 6 of 14 Responsible Agency: Public Works When required: Prior to start of construction of the improvements in the right of way and prior to the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public 26. ADA- compliant ramps shall be provided at the three driveway entrances on Gleason Drive and all interior intersections. Responsible Agency: Public Works When required: Prior to the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public 27. A traffic signal easement shall be dedicated to the City over the new southbound approach to the Gleason Drive /Hacienda Drive intersection, of adequate size, as determined by the City Engineer, to include all signal poles, conduit, pullboxes, detector loops, and other improvements. Responsible Agency: Public Works When required: Prior to establishment of the use and the building opening to the public Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) The following conditions shall be complied with prior to establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public to the satisfaction of Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD), unless another timeframe is specified in the condition: 28. The following conditions shall be complied with prior to establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public to the satisfaction of Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD), unless another timeframe is specified in the condition. Complete improvement plans shall be submitted to DSRSD that conform to the requirements of the Dublin San Ramon Services District Code, the DSRSD "Standard Procedures, Specifications and Drawings for Design and Installation of Water and Wastewater Facilities ", all applicable DSRSD Master Plans and all DSRSD policies. 29. All mains shall be sized to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate future flow demands in addition to each development project's demand. Layout and sizing of mains shall be in conformance with DSRSD utility master planning. 30. Sewers shall be designed to operate by gravity flow to DSRSD's existing sanitary sewer system. Pumping of sewage is discouraged and may only be allowed under extreme circumstances following a case by case review with DSRSD staff. Any pumping station will require specific review and approval by DSRSD of preliminary design reports, design criteria, and final plans and specifications. The DSRSD reserves the right to require payment of present worth 20 year maintenance costs as well as other conditions within a separate agreement with the applicant for any project that requires a pumping station. 31. Domestic and fire protection waterline systems shall be designed to be looped or interconnected to avoid dead end sections in accordance with requirements of the DSRSD Standard Specifications and sound engineering practice. 32. DSRSD policy requires public water and sewer lines to be located in public streets rather than in off - street locations to the fullest extent possible. If unavoidable, then public sewer or water easements must be established over the alignment of each public sewer or water line in an off - street or private street location to provide access for future maintenance and /or replacement. 33. Prior to issuance of a Construction Permit by the Dublin San Ramon Services District or the commencement of construction, the locations and widths of all proposed easement dedications for water and sewer lines shall be submitted to and approved by DSRSD. Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 7 of 14 34. All easement dedications for DSRSD facilities shall be by separate instrument irrevocably offered to DSRSD or by offer of dedication. 35. Prior to issuance of a Construction Permit by the Dublin San Ramon Services District or the commencement of construction, all utility connection fees including DSRSD and Zone 7, plan checking fees, inspection fees, connection fees, and fees associated with a wastewater discharge permit shall be paid to DSRSD in accordance with the rates and schedules established in the DSRSD Code. 36. Prior to issuance of a Construction Permit by the Dublin San Ramon Services District or the commencement of construction, all improvement plans for DSRSD facilities shall be signed by the District Engineer. Each drawing of improvement plans shall contain a signature block for the District Engineer indicating approval of the sanitary sewer or water facilities shown. Prior to approval by the District Engineer, the applicant shall pay all required DSRSD fees, and provide an engineer's estimate of construction costs for the sewer and water systems, a performance bond, a one -year maintenance bond, and a comprehensive general liability insurance policy in the amounts and forms that are acceptable to DSRSD. The applicant shall allow at least 15 working days for final improvement drawing review by DSRSD before signature by the District Engineer. 37. No sewer line or waterline construction shall be permitted unless the proper utility construction permit has been issued by DSRSD. A construction permit will only be issued after all DSRSD fees have been paid. 38. The applicant shall hold DSRSD, its Board of Directors, commissions, employees, and agents of DSRSD harmless and indemnify and defend the same from any litigation, claims, or fines resulting from the construction and completion of the project. 39. Improvement plans shall include recycled water improvements as required by DSRSD. Services for landscape irrigation shall connect to recycled water mains. Applicant must obtain a copy of the DSRSD Recycled Water Use Guidelines and conform to the requirements therein. 40. The proposed on -site fire line shall be dedicated to DSRSD by a Grant of Easement for operation & maintenance. 41. If any trash enclosures are to be connected to the sanitary sewer, they must have a grease and sand trap and the areas must be covered to prevent the entry of rainwater. 42. On -site sewer pipes shall have a 10 -foot separation from the fire line. It is currently at 8 '/2 feet separation between sewer pipes and fire water pipes. 43. Back flow prevention devices are not required on the recycled water system. Please remove the back flow preventer that is downstream from the recycled water irrigation meter. 44. The project is located within the District Recycled Water Use Zone (Ord. 280), which calls for installation of recycled water irrigation systems to allow for the future use of recycled water for approved landscape irrigation demands. Recycled water will be available; as described in the DSRSD Water Master Plan Update, September 2000. Unless specifically exempted by the District Engineer, compliance with Ordinance 280, as may be amended or superseded, is required. Applicant must submit landscape irrigation plans to DSRSD. All irrigation facilities shall be in compliance with District's "Recycled Water Use Guidelines" and Dept. of Health Services requirements for recycled water irrigation design. 45. The sewer line at the northwest corner of the building shall not cut across the fire water line. Relocate the manhole to the north and divert the sewer from the trash enclosure area away from the water line. 46. Plans shall show profile views for the fire water line. Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 8 of 14 Fire Prevention 47. Prior to the start of construction, plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval. These submittals shall include the following: building construction plans; exit plan; fire flow calculation from California Fire Code Appendix III -A as well as available fire flow (this info can be obtained from DSRSD); standpipe installation plans; fire sprinkler installation plans; fire alarm installation plans. No work shall start on project until such time as the Fire Department has approved the plans. All access roads and fire hydrants shall be in place and operational prior to the start of vertical construction. Responsible Agency: Fire When required: Prior to the start of construction Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 7) 48. Zone 7 records indicate there are no water wells or monitoring wells located within the project boundaries. If any wells are found within the project limits, they should be reported to Zone 7. All unused or abandoned wells must be properly destroyed. Any new planned well, soil boring, or well destruction must be permitted by Zone 7 before starting the work. There are no fees for Zone 7 drilling permits. Responsible Agency: Zone 7 When required: Ongoing 49. The Applicant/Developer shall comply with all ACFC &WCD (Zone 7) requirements and applicable fees, unless otherwise approved by Zone 7 and /or the Director of Public Works. Responsible Agency: Zone 7 When required: Ongoing 50. Improvements creating new impervious areas within the Livermore - Amador Valley are subject to the assessment of the Development Impact Fee for Flood Protection and Storm Water Drainage. Fees are dependent on whether post - project impervious area exceeds pre - project impervious area and /or whether fees have previously been paid. Responsible Agency: Zone 7 When required: Prior to construction Dublin Police Services The following conditions shall be complied with prior to the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public and maintained on an ongoing basis to the satisfaction of Dublin Police Services: 51. The Applicant/Developer shall comply with all applicable City of Dublin Non Residential Security Ordinance requirements. 52. Employee exit doors shall be equipped with 180 - degree viewers if there is not a burglary resistant window panel in the door from which to scan the exterior. 53. Exterior lighting is required over all doors. The applicant shall submit a final lighting plan for approval by the Dublin Police. Lighting of all exterior areas shall be designed to maximize surveillance and reduce conflicts with building design, mature landscaping, and to minimize glare. 54. Security lighting shall be provided in parking lot areas at 1.0 candle lights at ground level. Lighting fixtures shall be of a vandal resistant type. 55. Landscaping features and outdoor amenities shall be designed to reduce their attractiveness to skateboarders and vandals. 56. Exterior landscaping shall be kept at a minimal height and fullness giving patrol officers and the general public surveillance capabilities of the area. Shrubs and ground cover shall not directly Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 9 of 14 cover windows and doorways. River rock used near parking lots or commercial buildings shall be permanently affixed. 57. All entrances to the parking areas shall be posted with appropriate signs per Sec. 22658(a) of the California Vehicle Code, to assist in removing vehicles at the property owner's /manager's request. 58. The Applicant/Developer shall keep the site clear of graffiti vandalism on a regular and continuous basis at all times. 59. The perimeter of the site shall be fenced during construction, and security lighting and patrols shall be employed as necessary. The Applicant/Developer shall provide after hours call -out information to Police Services on an "Emergency Response Form." All information shall be kept current and up to date. Landscaping 60. Ensure that the ground cover material on the northernmost 120 feet of the median between the main entrance and exit drive close to the ground and does not achieve height over 30 inches. A low -lying cover will ensure that visibility is not obstructed. Installing hardscape (i.e. river rock or other decorative paving) in this area would also be acceptable and would guarantee that landscape does not grow to a height to compromise traffic safety. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Prior to the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public 61. The adopted Emerald Park Streetscape Design Guidelines for the current and former Alameda County Surplus Property Authority land (of which this parcel is a part) include design items that have not yet been integrated into the Project Landscape Plans. The Streetscape plans show a separated sidewalk along Gleason Drive and the Cinnamomum camphora (Camphor Tree) as the approved street tree. The Applicant/Developer will need to revise the Project Plans to show a separated sidewalk along the entirety of the Gleason Drive frontage. In the Emerald Park Streetscape Design Guidelines, a 13' wide parkway strip is shown. However, Staff is willing to accept a smaller 6' parkway strip between the street and the 6' wide sidewalk in the interests of retaining as much of the adjacent berm and bio -swale as possible. In this strip, the approved street tree Cinnamomum camphora (Camphor Tree) shall be planted along with the appropriate groundcover. These modifications to the Project Plans shall be made before an encroachment permit can be issued. Responsible Agency: Planning When required: Prior to the issuance of an encroachment permit and prior to the establishment of use and the building opening to serve the public 62. The Landscape Plans must be reviewed and approved by DSRSD, as some of the plant material illustrated may not be suited for irrigation with reclaimed water. DSRSD review and approval must be completed prior to installation of the plants. Responsible Agency: DSRSD When required: Prior to installation of the plant material Public Works Standard Conditions of Approval. The City of Dublin Public Works Department is the Responsible Agency for all of the following conditions. GENERAL: 63. The Developer shall comply with the City of Dublin Zoning and Grading Ordinances, the City of Dublin Public Works Standards and Policies, and all building and fire codes and ordinances in effect at the time of construction. All public improvements constructed by Applicant/Developer Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 10 of 14 and to be dedicated to the City are hereby identified as "public works" under Labor Code section 1771. Accordingly, Developer, in constructing such improvements, shall comply with the Prevailing Wage Law (Labor Code. Sects. 1720 and following). 64. The Applicant/Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Dublin and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Dublin or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Dublin or its advisory agency, appeal board, Planning Commission, City Council, Community Development Director, Zoning Administrator, or any other department, committee, or agency of the City to the extent such actions are brought within the time period required by Government Code Section 66499.37 or other applicable law; provided, however, that the Applicant/Developer's duty to so defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be subject to the City's promptly notifying the Applicant/Developer of any said claim, action, or proceeding and the City's full cooperation in the defense of such actions or proceedings. 65. Review and inspection of improvements by the Public Works Department shall be limited to improvements located within the public right -of -way or easements dedicated to the City of Dublin. The following standard conditions of approval shall apply only to those improvements located within the public right -of -way or easements. The Public Works Department shall be not have jurisdiction over design and construction of improvements located within County property. The County shall be responsible for ensuring that all improvements on County property are constructed in conformance with the approved Site Development Review and in conformance with any applicable codes, ordinances, or laws. In the event of conflict between these standard conditions and the project specific conditions of approval, the project specific conditions shall apply. SUBMITTALS: 66. All submittals of plans shall comply with the requirements of the "City of Dublin Public Works Department Improvement Plan Submittal Requirements ", and the "City of Dublin Improvement Plan Review Check List ". 67. The Applicant/Developer will be responsible for submittals and reviews to obtain the approvals of all participating non -City agencies. The Alameda County Fire Department and the Dublin San Ramon Services District shall approve and sign the Improvement Plans. 68. Applicant/Developer shall submit a Geotechnical Report, which includes street pavement sections. 69. Applicant/Developer shall provide the Public Works Department a digital vectorized file of the "master" files for the project when the final site plan has been approved. Digital raster copies are not acceptable. The digital vectorized files shall be in AutoCAD 14 or higher drawing format. Drawing units shall be decimal with the precision of the Final Map. All objects and entities in layers shall be colored by layer and named in English. All submitted drawings shall use the Global Coordinate System of USA, California, NAD 83 California State Plane, Zone III, and U.S. foot. GRADING PLANS: 70. The Grading Plan shall be in conformance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report and the approved Site Development Review. A detailed Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted prior to start of construction. On -site grading and erosion control plans will not be submitted to the Public Works Department for review, except as needed to ensure conformance with improvements in the public right -of -way or easements. IMPROVEMENTS 71. The public improvements shall be constructed generally as shown on the Project Plans dated November xx, 2009. However, the approval of the Site Development Review is not an approval Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 11 of 14 of the specific design of the drainage, sanitary sewer, water, traffic circulation, and street improvements. 72. All public improvements shall conform to the City of Dublin Standard Plans and design requirements and as approved by the City Engineer. 73. The Applicant/Developer shall install all traffic signs and pavement marking as required by the City Engineer. 74. Applicant/Developer shall construct all potable and recycled water and sanitary sewer facilities required to serve the project in accordance with DSRSD master plans, standards, specifications and requirements. 75. Fire hydrant locations shall be approved by the Alameda County Fire Department. A raised reflector blue traffic marker shall be installed in the street opposite each hydrant. 76. Street light standards and luminaries shall be designed and installed per approval of the City Engineer. The maximum voltage drop for streetlights is 5 %. 77. Two empty 3" conduits with pull ropes, to accommodate future extension of the traffic interconnect system and for School District uses, shall be installed along any project arterial street frontage. The extent of this work to be determined by the City Engineer. 78. Street trees, of at least a 24" box size, shall be planted along the street frontages. The varieties and locations of the trees to be approved by the Community Development Director and City Engineer. 79. Applicant/Developer shall construct gas, electric, cable TV and communication improvements as necessary to serve the project and the future adjacent parcels as approved by the City Engineer and the various Public Utility agencies. 80. All electrical, gas, telephone, and Cable TV utilities, shall be underground in accordance with the City policies and ordinances. All utilities shall be located and provided within public utility easements and sized to meet utility company standards. 81. All utility vaults, boxes and structures, unless specifically approved otherwise by the City Engineer, shall be underground and placed in landscape areas and screened from public view. All utility vaults, boxes and structures shall be shown on landscape plans and approved by the City Engineer and Community Development Director prior to construction. CONSTRUCTION: 82. The Erosion Control Plan shall be implemented between October 15th and April 15th unless otherwise allowed in writing by the City Engineer. The Applicant/Developer will be responsible for maintaining erosion and sediment control measures for one year following completion of construction. The County shall be responsible for maintaining adequate erosion control measures within the County property, although these measures will not be subject to inspection by the Public Works Department. 83. If archaeological materials are encountered during construction, construction within 100 feet of these materials shall be halted until a professional Archaeologist who is certified by the Society of California Archaeology (SCA) or the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitigation measures. 84. Construction activities, including the maintenance and warming of equipment, shall be limited to Monday through Friday, and non -City holidays, between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. except as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The City Engineer will consider requests for work outside of these hours on a case -by -case basis (but shall not be approved for work on Sundays) and advance notice must be provided to nearby residential properties in compliance Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 12 of 14 with standard City policy. Approval of the request will be consistent with standard City policy and will not be unreasonably withheld. 85. Applicant/Developer shall prepare a Construction Noise Management Plan, to be approved by the City Engineer and Community Development Director, that identifies measures to be taken to minimize construction noise on surrounding developed properties. The Plan shall include hours of construction operation, use of mufflers on construction equipment, speed limit for construction traffic, haul routes and identify a noise monitor. Specific noise management measures shall be included in the project plans and specifications. 86. Applicant/Developer shall prepare a plan for construction traffic interface with public traffic on any existing public street. Construction traffic and parking may be subject to specific requirements by the City Engineer. 87. The Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for controlling any rodent, mosquito, or other pest problem due to construction activities. 88. The Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for watering or other dust - palliative measures to control dust as conditions warrant or as directed by the City Engineer. WATER QUALITY: 89. The Applicant shall provide to the City the final grading and improvement plan showing conformance to Section C.3 of the latest stormwater permit issued to the City by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. The plans shall show how the various portions of the site are treated, illustrate the connection points of the bio swales to the storm drainage system, and illustrate the means of treating roof runoff. The Applicant shall provide copies of the plans showing post- construction stormwater measures and shall execute a post - construction maintenance agreement with the City to ensure long term maintenance and functionality of the system. 90. Prior to any clearing or grading, the Applicant/Developer shall provide the City evidence that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been sent to the California State Water Resources Control Board per the requirements of the NPDES. A copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be provided to the Public Works Department and be kept at the construction site. 91. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) for the operation and maintenance of the project shall identify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriate to the project construction activities. The SWPPP shall include the erosion control measures in accordance with the regulations outlined in the most current version of the ABAG Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook or State Construction Best Management Practices Handbook. 92. The Applicant/Developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors implement all storm water pollution prevention measures in the SWPPP. 93. The Public Works Department will be responsible for reviewing the SWPPP and erosion control measures for any work located within the public right -of -way or easements. The County shall be responsible for maintaining on -site measures in conformance with applicable State and Federal laws regarding nonpoint stormwater quality. Exhibit A -1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin /Alameda County Agreement Page 13 of 14 Exhibit A-1 to the Agreement between the City of Dublin and the County of Alameda regarding the enforcement of Conditions of Approval for the East County Hall of Justice This page left blank intentionally Exhibit A-1 to the ECHOJ City of Dublin/Alameda County Agreement Page 14 of 14 OD M LL 0 r w (D 1 w (J �z azz Ow U) ()� w C) CO D LL 0 J J Q D 0 U Cl) n J W �u f� z w z Q J Q U) O a_ O 0.. W W Z IL m 1�. 9 in O V Q O 4W J Q N N ti w w m w 0 w a a 0 LL 4' U Z m Q r� I w r z LL w .j LU J� i> 101 U o a s� a o � z 0 a 0 z Q g �z tr LLo o U 8� 0 O LL O U 'r. , �i ;OP1 7-- TIM-' i ! II l JJi f i co M LL '0 m a LAI 6 d u W9 zB 11 ui _U L~ U U) c � z pM J © a Q Q O w � v O a Z a 0 w z U) o J I� Z L) fn 11 z < m I.! i m W a_ i� w n 0 (D wz Lil 0 t + Z ! 0w LAI 6 d u W9 zB 11 ui _U L~ U U) c � z pM J © a Q Q O w � v O a Z a 0 w z U) o J I� Z L) fn 11 z < m I.! i m O O U J Q U o. a O O Z) O U J U E I co (f) LL O uJ O 1 m m O _I (Y` O d ul J 11� I 4, C> Q_ 9 m m O J O Q LI..I I LA �Ei 8U �o �o am f< o �u z U o Z l� O a Q m i d u O� a a C) LU o U to LL �- Z v U) a z Q m W o I �G¢ KIP fi CY, A, *- A, r ) M) CO co LL 0 LO w (D T- l f)L ui cna- < Ow W¢ W. 05 z v W II TO D m5 zo y z ZM al ul LL 0 < < LU (n m 0 :2� LU C) ❑ Z 0 W < 0 w cc 0 W a- z < uj Y 7 m `s lll 9 ¢ F— .2 z 3� I ou m Lj- O co w d hs O mR 'i z [till w U a co ') z LU LL ON N Q ¢ � co T U) o W U a_ Q O w a J U v! A Z D m¢ w IL Q U Oo Zv 52 0 3 n l �J4 � �g lift Ih if W J A �x 1 _ cf qi S 3� I ou m Lj- O co w d hs O mR 'i z [till w U a co ') z LU LL ON N Q ¢ � co T U) o W U a_ Q O w a J U v! A Z D m¢ w IL Q U Oo Zv INNNI w G! | , � 9 ■ ; � ) § | | | |§ | m � | | | ( ) .a� |' | / U- 0 / R � | � | 0 z & O w 2 \ m w \) /F- �\ n |§ HI U g e o U) $ A ') z \ I.L 7 O ƒ / � O a � � w ± Z / ]. u >- b @ :D a < � / ) I & � § I m| �� �� � L _ — — _ —IJ L Z, jzl,y _ _ _ _ _ _ I 00 7. J— ili 1 rIr• i i— I — I I I '•` Q I , � I I T r ! [ i1 1 [•' 4 - J �[- : H' r E, x "!� E` f 1r lit ie•llf. �s `- 1 l ED iL��- _ f YfJ�- .� 4.- �e• i�� j'� "r�.�•' •ir r�� 'Y i• �; il� FI _ t.. f• eye,` -.-"`, w 09 �n Y� ca Fxu U o N Z O N Q m In � o w o o Q w z 0 U (0 ° LL < J I I' a. 0 Y �C� - Z (L U r a LU UJ N 09 �n Y� ca Fxu U o N Z O N Q m In � o w o o Q w z 0 U (0 ° LL < J I I' a. 0 Y �C� _Tat 1 m LL O rn !!.I 0 rl it 7. (WA ` z � U N J N J 99 m9 fn z� am $n W _U p W U a U) 0 O 0 z 4 LL ip N Q d Lu U) m } O U d � 0 D d @ Q w D U U) LL _ d I° 2 v v/ Q Z m L p G0, © 1 1 m LL O rn !!.I 0 rl it 7. (WA ` z � U N J N J 99 m9 fn z� am $n W _U p W U a U) 0 O 0 z 4 LL ip N Q d Lu U) m } O U d � 0 D d @ Q w D U U) LL _ d I° 2 v v/ Q Z m L p G0, OD M LL 0 d W r ! �o g2 o �J 5 gS Lli co A CA [e LLI 0. w r ' ! 1 U 1 , M gLU CL U c) J LU 'Il w mw J 4I 1 t;t t- - - - . OD 0 LL 0 ui HIM, LU 0) D 0 T- EL W 9 99 0 w (D Z lL < LU O w CL 0 w 0 (L W U) LL CL < -M r -. r9 r)— (za�� 'r i r fib co m L O W Q d Q o$ Llim9 i� z�§ u U Z w O [� Z Q O J ❑ J � Q m >- O w CL w � o a e O w o 0 a U vJ d Z co w o .E) w O z n m U r� z a� Lo � b L n _l c3 F Efaf 5 j 1 C f ,rr I i� 1 1f co M U- 0 m w 0 a w D 0 0 U 4z 11J LL- 0w o¢ J° L E� t/1 y su Td u 8q .s kz Za :m 11 w U o LU U) 0 � o _-) z pN n J ~ Q w V) m a U 0 0 a a O w o J I' U CL Z ca w 7O I 0 F'E`D co co U- 0 IT W 0 Qm li C/) LU LL 0 < w >0 Ltj - d 0 0 LLI :D a- < = 2 (D LLJ ir 0 LL n- Z w 0 Z m z D 0 Ltj w > w �s L t T� J� I Ir 1 1 _ 1 1 r I� �C 1 00 (Y) LL 0 r LlJ C7 R Full C) z v D m z n 0 U Z 5LLI co aco j w U y w s H 2' W w uu m� fo rt'2 IG O I� Iii r U o � w n :D a LL � z ON � n Q w O U LU a 0 O u! o U Q .DIMM Q m r I r � ri r , f i 1 ! f I 1ti � 1 1 1r r I it - -- - - � r u - Yf / - i _JA 00 m LL O co EL °u oo fe YZ O Q� EH _U : � Q U1 u7 0 � O ..7 Z L O ❑ N _j J r Q < w � m O U 0 0 a Z a :D = a w 0 Lil 0 U U) o LL J a z m [U o (D z Q J M F �f Z m D v za U 0.o 0.;_ Q n O/ N LL (•�j 4 w � m s g � O �t p ew r �6 w � w K I q > H i� O C xa sa xJ a< OD m M o� F m K N H W w x i rn 0 w Na a 9 T N i �� rn ra �w ❑ rs an _n W o � Fa � x u re ra as C xa sa xJ a< x< m M o� F K N I w x i rn I y N J i w F T N i �� rn ra ❑ rs an _n I I i I to � rt � x u re ra as �- — _— _ —_ - -- .— ___ —_I_ ands 'O a ] U f I r V Fri 4 Y w K - - - - - - - - - - - - y W - - - - - - - - - - C xa sa xJ a< x< m M o� F I i rn I i i rn ra R� rs an _n I I i I � rt x u re ra as — - —._ — — _— _ —_ - -- .— ___ —_I_ ands 'O a ] U f I r Fri 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Z _O (, IJ.I J 7J 7 f- 4� LLJ L7 Z ❑ J Cb u Z� 05 II Li Z J J 7 L a n a z y� J :> u T �9 LLI U Z 0 Z a LL 0 N J N Q Q w O U f� 0 d _ < 0 WZ � r ti CO O LL V 4 J f— x v/ CL Z J m 1.1...1 0 m �� i 0 w U Q)Q U � U U O U > 4-j U) O rn E r J U C ) � U m L t o a) U Q ra -rj 2 U 6 � >_ p T •� rLu— � Z L �2��( Q) 0 L- .5; U) u m te a+ Q N U C L L a+ O LU w U o .� zi O L U t 6'E z o 2 E n c� u E a U O E CL a� U E 0 � ° o � a� x � L #) ra > 0 • � w•�cn o c�U) Z)� Q� N E N m � - - E N o= LO LO N o — Elmo N C U j, � 2 ro U r-, U � amu')u')u')�cn L a-J a-J a-J a-J a-J a-J \ d U U U U U U 4-J N N N N N N Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Z CL d d d d d d d Ln 0 N N Y V m r-I r. `I . Ali 5� i+y -F �i a-J U Q) O Q) a-J _Q) Cl E O U ro O Cl 0 ro 0 ro D Cl U O U Ln 0 N N Y V m r -__Now. r U Q) 0 Q) a-J _Q) Cl E 0 U ro Ln 0 Cl 0 ro .b.0 0 0 ro Cl U 0 Cr ca O ==I ca N N r N1■ �kh =ice PIPE Ma �ti �+ up �n �s mw am -mm Us ILI 4-J U �o _Q) Q E O U co Q O co b.0 .N O ro D CL U O U Cr ca O ca N N r i i U Q) O Q) a--+ _Q) Cl E O U ro N Cl 0 +J co 0 .N Q) 0 ro D Cl U 0 �-In .: I rV Ul) C 0 L 0 4-J ro .N 0 C: b.0 Q) ro D 4-J CL Q) U C: 0 U U N M 11 U Q) O Q) a-J _Q) Cl E O U FA "I AW 41OF I r CAS 49JI � ? . i i go/ V N P �, U Q) O Q) a-J _Q) Cl E O U U L!1 f U Q) 0 _0 Q) a-J _Q) Cl E 0 U ro N 0 Cl 0 ro .N 0 ro D Cl U 0 U A N �O ca O c- c L- a ca � U W) •Ul Q) .O Cp _0 Q) �+ a-J _v Cl c E O O U U