The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 6.1 The Green Mixed Use attch 14-17 EXHIBIT B FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines section 15091, the City Council hereby makes these findings with respect to the potential for significant environmental impacts from adoption and implementation of The Green Mixed Use Project PLPA-2013-00013 ("Project") and the means for mitigating those impacts. For the purpose of these findings, the term "SEIR" means the Draft and Final SEIR documents collectively, unless otherwise specified. These findings do not attempt to describe the full analysis of each environmental impact contained in the SEIR. Instead, the findings provide a summary description of each impact, describe the applicable mitigation measures identified in the SEIR and adopted by the City, and state the findings on the significance of each impact after imposition of the adopted mitigation measures. A full explanation of these environmental findings and conclusions can be found in the SEIR, and these findings hereby incorporate by reference the discussion and analysis in those documents supporting the SEIR's determinations regarding mitigation measures and the Project's impacts and mitigation measures designed to address those impacts. The facts supporting these findings are found in the record as a whole for the Project. In making these findings, the City ratifies, adopts, and incorporates into these findings the analysis and explanation in the SEIR, and ratifies, adopts, and incorporates into these findings the determinations and conclusions of the SEIR relating to environmental impacts and mitigation measures, except to the extent that any such determinations and conclusions are specifically and expressly modified by these findings. The Project also is subject to applicable mitigation measures in the certified Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR (SCH: 91103064, Resolution No. 51-93, and Addendum dated August 22, 1994, hereinafter "EDSP EIR") and the certified Supplemental EIR for the IKEA project (SCH #2003092076, Resolution No. 44-04), hereinafter "IKEA SEIR"), as described in the Initial Study and SEIR. The City already made findings relating to those impacts and mitigation measures as part of its certification of the EDSP EIR and approval of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan in Resolution No. 51-93, and certification of the IKEA EIR and approval of the related General Plan and Specific Plan Amendment in Resolution No. 44-04. Therefore, findings relating to these already-adopted mitigation measures are not made in these findings. SUPPLEMENTAL IMPACTS ON TRAFFIC Supplemental Impact TR-1: The Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road (#8) intersection would degrade from LOS D to LOS E with the addition of Project trips during the AM peak hour under Existing conditions. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: 1 SM-TR-1. The following measures shall be required to improve the level of service at Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road (#8) intersection to within acceptable standard: a) Add a 75-foot long southbound right turn lane with a 100-foot long taper area; b) Convert the southbound shared through-right lane to through lane; c) Optimize traffic signal split time. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: With the supplemental mitigation measure, the operations would improve to acceptable levels of service, LOS D in the AM peak hour and LOS B in the PM peak hour. Therefore, after applying the mitigation measure, the impact would be less than significant. Supplemental Impact TR-2: The Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road intersection would operate at LOS E without the proposed Project during the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative conditions and implementation of the proposed Project would add 50 or more trips to the intersection. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-2. The Eastern Dublin EIR MM 3.3/2.0 requires non-residential projects with 50 or more employees to participate in the Transportation Systems Management (TSM) program. As an alternative mitigation measure, the Project shall prepare a transportation demand management (TDM) plan to encompass both commercial and residential uses as part of the project. The project developer shall work with the City to develop the key elements of the TDM plan,which shall be approved by the City prior to the issuance of the first building permit. The TDM plan should include, but not be limited to, the following elements: a) Appoint Transportation Coordinator to oversee the TDM program developed for the project including program development,information distribution and program implementation. b) Promote and distribute hard copy information quarterly to all employees and residents regarding 511, Ridematch, Guaranteed Ride Home Program,Wheels/LAVTA, Altamont Corridor Express (ACE), BART, shuttles to regional transit, and any car share programs. c) Distribute information quarterly regarding above by email blast to all employees and residents. d) Co-sponsor subarea transportation fair once a year with "The Village" property to the north and/or other developments in the East Dublin area. Invite Wheels, 511.org, and at least two other commute alternative service providers to attend and distribute commute alternative information. e) Provide bicycle parking facilities for 20 percent of commercial car spaces or a number approved by the City beyond the City's bicycle rack requirement. 0 Provide secured bicycle parking (lockers or cages) for employees. g) Join City Car Share as a"Biz Prime" member and pay for membership of a minimum of five percent employees. 2 h) Implement a BART subsidy program that would provide BART tickets at no cost or subsidized rate to all employees. i) Implement a Commuter Tax Benefit Program or equivalent. Under Section 132(F) of federal tax code, an employer can offer its employees up to $245 per month for qualified transit, vanpool or parking costs. or, an employer may offer $20 per month for bicycling costs. Full information is available at: http://rideshare.511.org/rewards/tax_benefits.aspx j) Provide preferential parking for carpools and vanpools as part of off-street parking requirements. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Even though such TDM measures collectively have the potential to reduce traffic volumes and thereby improve the intersection delay levels,it is not guaranteed that these measures would reduce the impacts to less than significant. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Impact TR-3: The Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive (#10) intersection would degrade from LOS D to LOS E with the addition of Project trips during the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative conditions. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-3. Implement SM-TR-2. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Even though such TDM measures collectively have the potential to reduce traffic volumes and thereby improve the intersection delay levels,it is not guaranteed that these measures would reduce the impacts to less than significant. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. 3 Supplemental Impact TR-4: The Dublin Boulevard and Tassajara Road intersection would operate at LOS E without the proposed Project during the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative conditions and implementation of the proposed Project would add 50 or more trips to the intersection. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-4. The following measures would be required to improve the level of service to within acceptable standard: a) Add an eastbound through lane to provide two left-turn lanes, three through lanes and two right-turn lane on the eastbound approach on Dublin Boulevard; and b) Provide a corresponding receiving lane on the east leg that extends from Tassajara Road to Brannigan Street. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: Upon implementation of the above supplemental measure, the operation would improve to LOS D. The required mitigation measure for this impact is identified in the City's Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) program as part of the widening of Dublin Boulevard to six through lanes at this location. The Project shall make a fair share contribution toward these improvements. The TIF fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of the first building permit. With payment of fair share fee for implementation of improvement, the Project impact would be less than significant. Supplemental Impact TR-5: The Dublin Boulevard and Scarlett Drive (#5) intersection would operate at LOS E without the proposed Project during the AM peak hour under Long-Term Cumulative conditions and the proposed Project would further degrade the operations to LOS F and add 50 or more trips to the intersection. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-S. At the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Scarlett Drive, there is a significant impact from the Dublin Crossing project according to the Dublin Crossing Specific Plan (DCSP)-DEIR. In the DSCP-DEIR, the recommended measure to mitigate the impacts at the intersection of Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard due to the high rate of pedestrians/bicyclists crossing at Dublin Boulevard is a grade separated crossing. The grade separated crossing would eliminate the need for at-grade pedestrian actuations at the traffic signal,which would allow more green time to be allocated to through traffic on Dublin Boulevard. Although the Dublin Crossings project has not been environmentally cleared, nor has engineering or right of way analysis been completed with regards to the feasibility of this improvement, the City is aggressively pursuing this project to improve pedestrian and bicycle 4 mobility along the Iron Horse Trail. The City also plans to include a grade separated crossing at this location in its update to the TIF program to secure project funding. Because the separated bridge has not yet been environmentally cleared, and to ensure that the impacts are adequately mitigated, the Applicant/Developer is required to provide a fair-share contribution for the alternative mitigation of removing the crosswalk on the east leg of the Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard intersection. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: With the construction of the grade separation structure as planned, the impact will be less than significant. However,in the event that the grade separation is not constructed by 2035, the removal of the crosswalk on the east leg of the Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard intersection will also result in a less than significant impact. The Project is required to make a fair share contribution to the construction of this improvement. The project's fair share contribution shall be paid prior to the issuance of the first building permit. Supplemental Impact TR-6: The Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road (#8) intersection would degrade from LOS D to LOS E with the addition of Project trips during the AM peak hour under Long-Term Cumulative conditions. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-6. The following measures would be required to improve the level of service to within acceptable standard: a) Modify the traffic signal phasing to provide a protected/ permitted overlap phase for the southbound right-turn movement and prohibit conflicting eastbound U-turn movement; and b) Optimize traffic signal split time. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: Upon implementation of the above mitigation measure, the operations would improve to LOS D. Because the impact is caused by cumulative land use growth in the region, the Project developer shall make a fair share contribution toward these improvements. The fair share contribution shall be paid prior to the issuance of the first building permit. With payment of a fair share fee for implementation of the measure, the Project's impact will be less than significant. Supplemental Impact TR-7: The southbound left-turn queue at the Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road intersection would exceed turn pocket capacity without the 5 proposed Project during the PM peak hour and the proposed Project would lengthen the queue by 25 feet or more under Short-Term Cumulative conditions. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-7. Optimization of the traffic signal phase time would reduce the 95th percentile queue length for the southbound left turn to 371 feet during the PM peak hour. While the queue length would still exceed the turn pocket storage, the project traffic would lengthen the queue by less than 25 feet. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: Because the impact is caused by cumulative land use growth in the region, the Project developer shall make a fair share contribution toward the improvement. The fair share contribution shall be paid prior to the issuance of the first building permit. With payment of a fair share fee for implementation of the measure, the Project's impact will be less than significant. Supplemental Impact TR-8: The westbound left-turn queue at the Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive (#10) intersection would exceed turn pocket capacity without the proposed Project during the AM peak hour, and implementation of the proposed Project would lengthen the queue by 25 feet or more under Short-Term Cumulative conditions. Further, during the PM peak, the Project would cause the queue to extend beyond the turn pocket by 25 feet when it would be contained under No Project scenario. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-B. The traffic signal at this intersection shall be modified to provide additional green time for the westbound left-turn movement by reducing the green time for the eastbound through movement. This will reduce the queue length to 420 feet in the AM peak hour and 270 feet in the PM peak hour. While the queue lengths would still exceed turn pocket capacity, the project traffic would lengthen the queue by less than 25 feet in the AM peak hour and would cause the queue to extend beyond the turn pocket by less than 25 feet in the PM peak hour. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final SEIR. Rationale for Finding: Because the impact is caused by cumulative land use growth in the region, the Project developer shall make a fair share contribution toward the improvement. The fair share contribution shall be paid prior to the issuance of the first building permit. With 6 payment of a fair share fee for implementation of the measure, the Project's impact will be less than significant. Supplemental Impact TR-9: The southbound left-turn queue at the Scarlett Drive and Dougherty Road intersection would exceed turn pocket capacity without the proposed Project during the PM peak hour, and implementation of the proposed Project would lengthen the queue by 25 feet or more under Long-Term Cumulative conditions. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-9. The traffic signal phasing at this intersection shall be modified to provide additional green time for the southbound left-turn movement. This will reduce the queue length by 12 feet to 845 feet and to within acceptable threshold. Because the impact is caused by cumulative land use growth in the region, the project developer shall make a fair share contribution toward this improvement. The fair share contribution shall be paid prior to the issuance of the first building permit. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Rationale for Finding: Because the impact is caused by cumulative land use growth in the region, the project developer shall make a fair share contribution toward the improvement. The fair share contribution shall be paid prior to the issuance of the first building permit. With payment of a fair share fee for implementation of the measure, the Project's impact will be less than significant. Supplemental Impact TR-10: The Project would cause the Dublin Boulevard segment between Hacienda Drive and Hibernia Drive to degrade from LOS D to LOS E during the AM peak hour under Existing Conditions. The Project would only add 30 trips to this segment. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-10. Implement SM-TR-2. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. 7 Rationale for Finding: Even though such TDM measures collectively have the potential to reduce traffic volumes and thereby improve the intersection delay levels,it is not guaranteed that these measures would reduce the impacts to less than significant. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Impact TR-11: The Project would cause the northbound Hacienda Drive segment of Dublin Boulevard to Central Parkway to degrade from LOS D to LOS E. Project traffic would also cause the volume to capacity ratio of the northbound Hacienda Drive segment between I-580 westbound ramp to Hacienda Crossings to increase by 0.071. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-11. Implement SM-TR-2. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Even though such TDM measures collectively have the potential to reduce traffic volumes and thereby improve the intersection delay levels,it is not guaranteed that these measures would reduce the impacts to less than significant. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Impact TR-12: The Project would cause the volume to capacity ratio along the eastbound Dublin Boulevard segment between DeMarcus Boulevard and Iron Horse Parkway to increase by 0.03, where it would operate at LOS E in the PM peak hour under the Short-Term Cumulative No Project scenario. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-12. Implement SM-TR-2. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no 8 feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Even though such TDM measures collectively have the potential to reduce traffic volumes and thereby improve the intersection delay levels,it is not guaranteed that these measures would reduce the impacts to less than significant. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Impact TR-13: The Project would cause the volume to capacity ratio along the westbound Dublin Boulevard segment between Scarlett Drive and Dougherty Road to increase by 0.027, where it would operate at LOS E in the AM peak hour under the Short-Term Cumulative No Project scenario. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-13. Implement SM-TR-2. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Even though such TDM measures collectively have the potential to reduce traffic volumes and thereby improve the intersection delay levels,it is not guaranteed that these measures would reduce the impacts to less than significant. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Impact TR-14: The Project would cause the volume to capacity ratio along the northbound Hacienda Drive segment between I-580 westbound ramps and Hacienda Crossing to increase by 0.045, where it would operate at LOS E in the AM peak hour, and by 0.071, where it would operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour, under the Short-Term Cumulative No Project scenario. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-14. Implement SM-TR-2. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable 9 Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C. Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Even though such TDM measures collectively have the potential to reduce traffic volumes and thereby improve the intersection delay levels,it is not guaranteed that these measures would reduce the impacts to less than significant. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Impact TR-15: The Project would cause the northbound Tassajara Road segment between Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway to degrade from LOS D to LOS E during the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative conditions. While the project would only add 4 trips to this segment, this impact is considered to be significant. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-15. Implement SM-TR-2. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Even though such TDM measures collectively have the potential to reduce traffic volumes and thereby improve the intersection delay levels,it is not guaranteed that these measures would reduce the impacts to less than significant. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Impact TR-16: The Project would cause the volume to capacity ratios along the westbound Dublin Boulevard segments between Iron Horse Parkway and Camp Parks, where it would operate at LOS E, and between Camp Parks and Scarlett Drive, where it would operate at LOS F, in the AM peak hour under the Long-Term Cumulative No Project scenario to increase by 0.023. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: 10 SM-TR-16. Implement SM-TR-2 Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Even though such TDM measures collectively have the potential to reduce traffic volumes and thereby improve the intersection delay levels,it is not guaranteed that these measures would reduce the impacts to less than significant. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Impact TR-17: The Project would cause the volume to capacity ratio along the northbound Hacienda Drive segment between I-580 westbound ramps and Hacienda Crossing to increase by 0.02 during the PM peak hour, where it would operate at LOS F under the Long-Term Cumulative No Project scenario. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-17. Implement SM-TR-2. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Even though such TDM measures collectively have the potential to reduce traffic volumes and thereby improve the intersection delay levels,it is not guaranteed that these measures would reduce the impacts to less than significant. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Impact TR-18: The Project could conflict with adopted bicycle plans, guidelines, policies, or standards. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: 11 SM-TR-18. Prior to the issuance of any permit for the project, the Applicant shall prepared final Site Improvement Plans for both onsite and offsite improvements that are consistent with the Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative Tract Map plans,which have been determined to be consistent with applicable City guidelines,policies and standards,including but not limited to the City of Dublin General Plan Community Design & Sustainability Element, Chapter 8.76 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, and the Bikeway Master Plan, for review and approval by the City. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: The Project has been designed to comply with applicable City guidelines, policies and standards for bicycle use and plans. The City will review the final Site Improvement Plans to confirm consistency with these standards. The requirement for the Project to be consistent with these standards will result in a less than significant impact. Supplemental Impact TR-19: The Project could conflict with adopted policies,plans, or programs supporting pedestrians. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-19. Prior to the issuance of any permit for the project, the Applicant shall prepared final Site Improvement Plans for both onsite and offsite improvements that are consistent with the Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative Tract Map plans,which have been determined to be consistent with applicable City guidelines,policies and standards,including but not limited to the City of Dublin General Plan Community Design & Sustainability Element, Chapter 8.76 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, and the Bikeway Master Plan, for review and approval by the City. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: The Project has been designed to comply with applicable City guidelines, policies and standards for pedestrian use and plans. The City will review the final Site Improvement Plans to confirm consistency with these standards. The requirement for the Project to be consistent with these standards will result in a less than significant impact. Supplemental Impact TR-20: The project could conflict with adopted policies,plans, or programs supporting pedestrians, including the City's Complete Streets policies. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: 12 SM-TR-20. Prior to issuance of any permit for the project, the Project shall submit design plans that are consistent with the City's Complete Street Policy and design standards for review and approval by the City. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: The Project has been designed to comply with the City's Complete Street Policy. The City will review the final plans to confirm consistency with these standards. The requirement for the Project to be consistent with these standards will result in a less than significant impact. Supplemental Impact TR-21: The Project could include design features that would not be consistent with the City's engineering design standards or standards published by the ITE or Caltrans. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-21. Prior to issuance of any permit for the project, the project developer shall submit design plans that are consistent with the City's Complete Street Policy for review and approval by the City. All designs shall conform to City standards. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: The Project has been designed to comply with the City's design standards. The City will review the final plans to confirm consistency with these standards. The requirement for the Project to be consistent with these standards will result in a less than significant impact. Supplemental Impact TR-22: Project construction activities, such as the import of the fill material and delivery of materials, could result in impacts to vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian access in and around the Project area. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-TR-22. Before issuance of grading permits for the project, the project developer shall prepare a detailed Traffic Management Plan that will be subject to review and approval by the City of Dublin, LAVTA, and local emergency service providers,including the City of Dublin Fire Prevention Bureau and the City of Dublin Police Services Department. The plan shall ensure maintenance of acceptable operating conditions on local roadways and transit routes. At a minimum, the plan shall include: 13 a) The number of truck trips, time, and day of street closures b) Time of day of arrival and departure of trucks c) limitations on the size and type of trucks;provision of a staging area with a limitation on the number of trucks that can be waiting d) Provision of a truck circulation pattern e) Provision of a driveway access plan to maintain safe vehicular,pedestrian, and bicycle movements (e.g., steel plates, minimum distances of open trenches, and private vehicle pick up and drop off areas) 0 Safe and efficient access routes for emergency vehicles g) Efficient and convenient transit routes h) Manual traffic control when necessary i) Proper advance warning and posted signage concerning street closures j) Provisions for pedestrian safety and access. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: The Traffic Management Plan with the required elements will result in a less than significant impact on vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian access in and around the Project area. Supplemental Impact Park-1: Build-out of the proposed Project would require the dedication of 5 acres of local parkland on the Project site. The proposed Project provides no public park space. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-Park-1. Prior to approval of the first Final Subdivision Map for the project, the project developer(s) shall satisfy the requirement to provide parkland through the payment of in-lieu fees to the City of Dublin prior to issuance of building permits. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: The requirement to meet the 5-acre parkland standard through the Project developer's payment of in-lieu fees to the City prior to issuance of building permits will ensure that Project impacts are less than significant. Supplemental Impact BI0-1: The proposed Project would result in the fill of potentially jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and/or waters of the State. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: 14 SM-13I0-1. The applicant shall undertake the following prior to issuance of a grading plan for the site: a) A wetland delineation shall be completed for the site consistent with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers protocols. b) If jurisdictional wetlands are found on the site and if avoidance of these jurisdictional waters on the site is not feasible, suitable compensatory mitigation shall be provided based on the concept of no net loss of wetland habitat values or acreages. In such an eventuality, a wetland mitigation plan shall be developed and implemented that includes creation,restoration, and/or enhancement of off-site wetlands prior to project ground disturbance. Mitigation areas shall be established in perpetuity through dedication of a conservation easement (or similar mechanism) to an approved environmental organization and payment of an endowment for the long-term management of the site. If wetlands are determined to be jurisdictional under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the mitigation plan will be subject to the review and approval of the Corps and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). If the potential seasonal wetlands are non-jurisdictional under Section 404, the mitigation plan will be subject to the review and approval of the RWQCB. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the above supplemental mitigation measure will reduce this impact to a less than significant level, both on a project and cumulative level. The supplemental mitigation measure requires that if jurisdictional waters are identified on the site and cannot be avoided as part of the development, compensatory wetlands shall be secured so that no net loss of wetlands will occur. For impacted wetlands, the mitigation requires development of a wetland mitigation plan that meets specified standards for creation, restoration, and/or enhancement of off-site wetlands prior to Project ground disturbance Supplemental Impact BIO-2: Approval and construction of the proposed Project would impact Congdon's tarplant and other special-status plant species on the site. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-13I0-2. Focused surveys for special-status plants shall be conducted on the site consistent with the California Department of Fish &Wildlife's 2009 Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Populations and natural Communities. Plant surveys shall be conducted throughout the blooming period throughout the blooming period of those special- status for which suitable habitat is present. Two or three separate surveys may be required to cover the blooming period of plants listed in Appendix Ai of the Supplemental Biological Analysis (Appendix 8.7 of the DSEIR). If populations/stands of a special-status species are identified during the surveys and impacts cannot be avoided, compensatory mitigation shall be provided, such as the acquisition of off-site mitigation areas presently supporting the species in question,purchase of credits in a mitigation bank that is approved to sell credits for the affected 15 species, or payment of in-lieu fees to a public agency or conservation organization (e.g., a local land trust) for the preservation and management of existing populations. The location of mitigation sites shall be determined in consultation with and subject to approval of US Fish and Wildlife Service and/or California Department of Fish &Wildlife. In the case where special- status plants are neither federal- or state-listed, the lead agency shall approve the mitigation approach using the guidance provided by the Eastern Alameda County Conservation Strategy in consultation with the City's consulting biologist. Off-site compensatory shall be acquired at a minimum acreage ratio of 1:1 (acquired: impacted). For off-site mitigation options, measures shall be implemented (including contingency measures) providing for the long-term protection of these species. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the above supplemental mitigation measure will reduce this impact to a less than significant level, both on a project and cumulative level. If impacts cannot be avoided, the supplemental mitigation measure requires acquisition and preservation of suitable off-site habitats for impacted special-status plant species,in accordance with certain standards prior to site development Supplemental Impact 13I0-3: The proposed Project could impact the habitat for nesting or wintering burrowing owl by disturbing the existing ground surface. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-13I0-3. Preconstruction surveys shall be conducted for burrowing owls prior to grading or construction activities. These surveys should conform to the survey protocol established in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012b). The Conservation Strategy depicts the project site as being located in Conservation Zone 2,which supports 11 percent of the Conservation Strategy's study area's unprotected potential habitat for burrowing owl). Burrowing owls could nest or winter in the site's approximate 13 acres of ruderal/disturbed non-native grassland habitat and within the suitable grassland habitat adjacent to the site. The following measures are consistent with the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the California Department of Fish &Wildlife standards. a) No more than 14 days prior to any ground disturbing activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a take avoidance survey for burrowing owls. If no owls are found during this first survey, a final survey will be conducted within 48 hours prior to ground disturbance to confirm that burrowing owls are still absent. If ground disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 14 days after the initial take avoidance survey, the site shall be resurveyed (including the final survey within 48 hours of disturbance). All surveys shall be conducted in accordance with California Department of Fish &Wildlife guidelines. b) If burrowing owls are found on the site during the surveys, mitigation shall be implemented in accordance with applicable California Department of Fish &Wildlife standards. More specifically,if the surveys identify breeding or wintering burrowing owls on or adjacent to 16 the site, occupied burrows cannot be disturbed and shall be provided with protective buffers. Where avoidance is not feasible during the non-breeding season, a site-specific exclusion plan (i.e., a plan that considers the type and extent of the proposed activity, the duration and timing of the activity, the sensitivity and habituation of the owls, and the dissimilarity of the proposed activity with background activities) shall be implemented to encourage owls to move away from the work area prior to construction and to minimize the potential to affect the reproductive success of the owls. The exclusion plan shall be subject to California Fish &Wildlife approval and monitoring requirements. Compensatory mitigation could also be required by California Fish &Wildlife as part of the approval of an exclusion plan. Mitigation may include the permanent protection of habitat at a nearby off-site location acceptable to the California Department of Fish &Wildlife. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: Mitigation Measure 3.7/27.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR reduced impacts to burrowing owl to a less than significant level. This supplemental mitigation measure provides enhanced mitigation that is consistent with current California Department of Fish and Wildlife standards. The measure requires completion of a preconstruction survey for burrowing owl and,if found,implementation of an exclusion zone around nests and development of an exclusion plan with protective buffers and/or compensatory mitigation under California Department of Fish and Wildlife standards. With adherence to this mitigation measure, this impact will be less than significant. Supplemental Impact BIO-4: Construction of the proposed Project could impact breeding birds on the site. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-13I0-4. Vegetation removal and/or initial ground disturbance on the site shall occur during the non-breeding season from September 1 to January 31. If instead these actions will occur from February 1 to August 31, then a pre-construction breeding bird survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to construction. Any common bird active nests found shall be protected by a minimum 50-foot exclusion buffer. The buffer size may vary depending on bird species, the location of the nest, and other factors. If a breeding bird survey determines that a special-status species is located on the site, a larger buffer would be required, such as a 100-foot buffer for minor disturbances and a 250-foot buffer for major disturbances. In the case of special-status species, the size of buffers and other measures would be implemented based on any applicable CDFW guidance and standards. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. 17 Rationale for Finding: The mitigation will reduce impacts to breeding birds that may nest on or immediately adjacent to the site to a less than significant level by prohibiting Project construction during the nesting season. If this cannot be met, a preconstruction survey for nesting birds shall be completed and,if found, a protective buffer shall be established around identified nests. Supplemental Impact BIO-5: Construction of the proposed Project could impact special-status bats that could inhabit the site, specifically the removal of the existing building. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-BIO-S. The marketing building shall be removed from the premises during September or October. Pre-construction surveys of the marketing building for bats shall occur no more than 30 days before its removal. If bats are found, a qualified biologist shall develop an appropriate relocation plan consistent with US Fish &Wildlife, California Department of Fish &Wildlife and EACCS standards and policies. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: The mitigation will result in a less than significant impact because the marketing building shall be removed from the premises during September or October when the building is not likely to be inhabited by bats. Pre-construction surveys of the marketing building for bats shall occur no more than 30 days before its removal. If bats are found, a qualified biologist shall develop an appropriate relocation plan consistent with US Fish &Wildlife, California Department of Fish &Wildlife, and EACCS standards and policies. Supplemental Impact NOISE-1: Residential land uses proposed by the Project could be exposed to exterior noise levels exceeding 60 dBA CNEL and interior noise levels exceeding 45 dBA CNEL. Supplemental Mitigation Measure: SM-NOISE-1. Reduce exterior and interior noise levels in noise sensitive areas of the project to meet City standards. To meet City noise standards, the following mitigation shall be used: • Locate noise-sensitive outdoor use areas away from Interstate 580. Ensure that all residents have access to outdoor use areas that achieve exterior noise criteria (60 dBA CNEL for residential uses). • A suitable form of forced-air mechanical ventilation, as determined by the local building official, shall be provided for units throughout the site, so that windows can be kept closed at the occupant's discretion to control interior noise and achieve the interior noise standards. 18 • For the first row of buildings facing Interstate 580, the buildings shall be designed to have sealed windows and no balconies on elevations facing the freeway. • For residential uses, noise insulation features shall be designed to achieve the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. Sound rated windows and doors shall be provided to maintain interior noise levels at acceptable levels. Additional treatments may include, but are not limited to, sound rated wall construction, acoustical caulking,insulation, acoustical vents, etc. Large windows and doors should be oriented away from the I-580 where possible. Bedrooms should be located away from I-580. • The final specifications for noise insulation treatments shall be reviewed by a qualified acoustical consultant during final design of the project to ensure that exterior and interior noise levels on site achieve the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard for residential uses and hourly average noise levels to 45 dBA Leq for commercial uses. Results of the analysis,including the description of the necessary interior and exterior noise control treatments, shall be submitted to the City along with the building plans and shall approved by the City prior to issuance of a building permit. • The final design and location of project mechanical equipment shall be reviewed by a qualified acoustical consultant to confirm that operational noise levels would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL at exterior project residential uses and would not exceed 45 dBA CNEL inside these residences. If needed, the final design and location of mechanical equipment shall be modified to conform with noise parameters set forth in this analysis. • A truck delivery plan shall be submitted to the City for the commercial portion of the project site,which would include the proposed hours of allowable deliveries and the locations and routes of the delivery trucks on the project site. A qualified acoustical consultant shall review the delivery plan to ensure that interior and exterior noise levels on site achieve acceptable levels. The truck delivery plan and acoustical consultant report shall be subject to approval by the City prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any commercial building. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: Adherence to this mitigation measure will ensure that all uses on site comply with City noise standards. Therefore, the impact will be less than significant. Supplemental Impact SM-AQ-1: Construction activities, particularly during site preparation and grading, would temporarily generate fugitive dust in the form of PM10 and PM2.5 and exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and equipment. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-AQ-1. The project applicant shall adhere to the following dust control measures,which shall replace those included in EDSP EIR Mitigation Measure 3.11/1.0: a) All exposed surfaces (e.g.,parking areas, staging areas, soil piles,graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. 19 b) All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. c) All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. d) All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. e) All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. 0 Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. g) All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. h) Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: With implementation of the mitigation measures in compliance with current Air District standards, the impacts from construction activities will be reduced to less than significant. Supplemental Impact AQ-2 [Impact AQ-1 in Draft SEIR]: The Project operations would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the Project region is in non-attainment under applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standards due to emissions of NOX. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-AQ-2. The project applicant shall reduce future residential and employee trips through a Traffic Demand Management (TDM) program approved by the City and including, but not limited to, the following measures: a) Appoint Transportation Coordinator to oversee the TDM program developed for the project including program development,information distribution and program implementation. b) Promote and distribute hard copy information quarterly to all employees and residents regarding 511, Ridematch, Guaranteed Ride Home Program,Wheels/LAVTA, Altamont Corridor Express (ACE), BART, shuttles to regional transit, and any car share programs. 20 c) Distribute information quarterly regarding above by email blast to all employees and residents. d) Co-sponsor subarea transportation fair once a year with "The Village" property to the north and/or other developments in the East Dublin area. Invite Wheels, 511.org, and at least two other commute alternative service providers to attend and distribute commute alternative information. e) Provide bicycle parking facilities for 20 percent of commercial car spaces or a number approved by the City beyond the City's bicycle rack requirement. 0 Provide secured bicycle parking (lockers or cages) for employees. g) Join City Car Share as a"Biz Prime" member and pay for membership of a minimum of five percent employees. h) Implement a BART subsidy program that would provide BART tickets at no cost or subsidized rate to all employees. i) Implement a Commuter Tax Benefit Program or equivalent. Under Section 132(F) of federal tax code, an employer can offer its employees up to $245 per month for qualified transit, vanpool or parking costs. Or, an employer may offer $20 per month for bicycling costs. Full information is available at: http://rideshare.511.org/rewards/tax_benefits.aspx j) Provide preferential parking for carpools and vanpools as part of off-street parking requirements. k) Provide shading in the parking lot, to the maximum extent possible, to reduce evaporative ROG emissions. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Even with the TDM program in place,it is not certain that annual NOX emissions would be reduced below 10 tons per year because it is not possible to quantify possible emissions reductions with certainty. Therefore, even with the TDM program in place, operational NOX emissions could still exceed the established significance thresholds. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Project Impact AQ-2 (violation of air quality standards). The Project would result in a violation of regional air quality standards and would contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-AQ 2 Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable 21 Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C. Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Even with the TDM program in place, the exact amount of emissions reductions cannot be calculated with certainty. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Impact AQ-3: The Project would conflict with the regional Clean Air Plan. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-AQ-3. Implement SM-AQ-2. Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C, Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: As discussed above,implementation of the Project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the Project region is in non-attainment under applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standards; therefore, the Project is inconsistent with the Clean Air Plan because the Project would not support the Clean Air Plan's goal of attaining air quality standards. Even with the TDM program in place, the exact amount of emissions reductions cannot be calculated with certainty. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant and unavoidable, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Impact AQ-4: The Project would expose sensitive receptors to excess cancer risk and PM2.5 concentrations that are above health-based thresholds. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-AQ-3. The project shall include the following measures to minimize long-term toxic air contaminant JAC) exposure for new residences: a. Ensure that no residential buildings would have a full year of occupancy prior to 1/1/2017. 22 b. Design buildings and site to limit exposure from sources of TAC and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) emissions. The site layout shall locate windows and air intakes as far as possible from I-580 traffic lanes. Any modifications to the site design shall incorporate buffers between residences and the freeway. c. To the greatest degree possible,plant vegetation along the project site boundary with I- 580 that includes trees and shrubs that provide a dense vegetative barrier. d. Install air filtration in residential buildings at roof top level that have predicted cancer risks in excess of 10 in one million or PM2.5 concentrations above 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) as shown in Exhibit 4.7-4. The type of air filtration device shall be as set forth in subsection e below.. To ensure adequate health protection to sensitive receptors, a ventilation system shall meet the following minimal design standards (Department of Public Health, City and County of San Francisco, 2008): • At least one air exchange(s) per hour of fresh outside filtered air; • At least four air exchange(s) per hour recirculation; and • At least 0.25 air exchange(s) per hour in unfiltered infiltration. e. The type of MERV- rated filtration required to be installed as part of the ventilation system in the residential buildings shall be as follows: 1) MERV13 filtration shall be installed in a residential building partially or completed located in an area where the cancer risk is 10 per one million or greater but less than or equal to 22 per one million as shown in Exhibit 4.7-4 for unmitigated cancer risks. 2) MERV16 filtration shall be installed in a residential building partially or completed located in an area where the cancer risk is greater than 22 per one million and less than 50 per one million as shown in Exhibit 4.7-4 for unmitigated cancer risks. 3) MERV16 filtration and sealed,inoperable windows and no balconies on building elevations facing I-580 freeway (MERV 16 Plus) shall be installed in a residential building partially or completed located in an area where the cancer risk is a greater than or equal to 50 per one million and less than 62.5 per one million as shown in Exhibit 4.7-4 for unmitigated cancer risks. 4) In areas where the cancer risk is 62.5 per one million or greater,residential units shall not be built unless the developer includes specific mitigation measures that are approved by a qualified air quality consultant and the City that results in a reduction of the cancer risk to below 10 per one million. f. As part of implementing this measure, an ongoing maintenance plan for the buildings' heating,ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) air filtration system shall be required. Recognizing that emissions from air pollution sources are decreasing, the maintenance period shall last as long as significant excess cancer risk or annual PM2.5 exposures are predicted. Subsequent studies may be conducted by an air quality expert approved by the City to identify the ongoing need for the filtered ventilation systems as future information becomes available. g. Ensure that the lease agreement and other property documents (1) require cleaning, maintenance, and monitoring of the affected buildings for air flow leaks; (2) include assurance that new owners and tenants are provided information on the ventilation system; and (3) include provisions that fees associated with owning or leasing a unit(s) in the building include funds for cleaning, maintenance, monitoring, and replacements of the filters, as needed. h. Consider phasing developments located closest to I-580 to avoid significant excess cancer risks and required installation of filtered ventilation systems (described above). Note that new United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) engines standards combined 23 with California Air Resources Board (CARB) rules and regulations will reduce on-road emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM) and PM2.5 substantially, especially after 2014. i. Require that,prior to building occupancy, an authorized air pollutant consultant verify the installation of all necessary measures to reduce toxic air contaminant JAC) exposure as set forth in this mitigation measure. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: With the implementation of the mitigation measures, the health risk to future residents would be below the significance threshold. Therefore, the impact will be less than significant. Supplemental Impact AQ-5: The Project would generate greenhouse gas emissions, both directly and indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the environment and would conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-AQ-4. The final design of the project shall include all requirements of the City Climate Action Plan,including policies A.1.4 (Bicycle Parking Requirements),A.1.5 (Streetscape Master Plan),A.1.8 (General Plan Community Design and Sustainability Element),A.1.9 (Work with LAVTA to Improve Transit), A.2.1 (Green Building Ordinance),A.2.5 (LED Streetlight Specifications),A.3.1 (Construction and Demolition Debris Ordinance),A.3.6 (Commercial Recycling). In addition, the project proponent is encouraged to participate in subsidy programs such as Climate Action Plan polices A.2.4 (Reduced Solar Installation Permit Fee) and A.3.5 (Commercial Food Waste Collection Program), and non-subsidy programs such as policies A.3.7 (Multi-Family Recycling),A.3.8 (Curbside Recycling), and A.3.9 (Curbside Organics Collection). Implementation of these mitigation measure would reduce GHG emissions, but not below the significance thresholds. The project, as a whole, shall adopt a water use reduction goal of at least 20 percent. A water use reduction plan shall be developed by the project applicant that may include measures such as the installation of low-flow water fixtures in showers and sinks,low- flush toilets, and the use of water efficient landscaping. The project applicant shall implement a solid waste recycling program through recycling and composting strategies,which results in a project-wide solid waste diversion rate of at least 20 percent. Finally, the project shall exceed 2008 Title 24 Building Standards (which CalEEMOd is based on) by at least 20 percent in terms of energy-efficiency. The project shall implement the supplemental list of greenhouse gas reduction measures included as Attachment 6 to the Final SEIR. Resulting Significance: Less than significant (consistency with City Climate Action Plan); Significant and Unavoidable (GHG emissions levels) 24 Finding: Consistency with City Climate Action Plan—Implementation of the mitigation will ensure that the Project complies with the reduction measures under the City's Climate Action Plan and will result in a less than significant impact. Project GHG emissions — Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR, but not to a level of less than significant. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures and no feasible alternatives that avoid this significant effect, as further addressed in Exhibit C. Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Additional Mitigation Measures. Rationale for Finding: Compliance with City Climate Action Plan—Implementation of the mitigation will ensure that the Project complies with the applicable reduction measures under the City's Climate Action Plan and will result in a less than significant impact. Project GHG emissions —The Project emissions of greenhouse gases would exceed the BAAQMD significance thresholds, even with implementation of the identified mitigation measures. No additional feasible mitigation measures have been identified for the Project (see Exhibit C). The impact is significant, and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required in conjunction with approval of the Project. Supplemental Impact HAZ-1: The site has been remediated for commercial and other non-residential land uses. As a part of the site management terms that were approved when the remediation occurred in 2010, the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH) required that, if any residential or other similar land use is proposed at the Property, the ACDEH must be notified. ACDEH will then re- evaluate the case upon receipt of approved development/construction plans Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-HAZ-1. The Applicant/Developer shall notify ACDEH of the proposed project and the intent to utilize the site for residential uses so ACDEH can re-evaluate the case. If directed by ACDEH, a Phase II site investigation or site health risk assessment shall be completed for portions of the site anticipated for residential development and excavation prior to issuance of a grading and/or site improvement permit. The site investigation shall be coordinated with the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health. The investigation plan shall include a description of the work to be performed, the laboratory analytical methods to be uses and requirements for quality control. If additional remediation is necessary, a remediation plan shall be prepared and approved by the ACDEH. Grading or excavation of any identified contaminated residential area on the site shall not occur until ACDEH issues a closure letter authorizing residential uses on the site. The Applicant/Developer shall provide the City with documentation that the above actions have taken place. To protect the health and safety of construction workers, Health and Safety Plan that meets the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements shall be prepared and implemented if additional remediation is required. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant 25 Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: Adherence to the supplemental mitigation measure will reduce this impact to a less than significant level by requiring additional site testing and remediation,if required by regulatory agencies, before grading for residential uses are allowed. Supplemental Impact HAZ-2: If required, construction dewatering activities could release identified accumulations of residual hydrocarbons, solvents, and other contaminants into the environment, possibly exposing construction workers, and surrounding residents and visitors during construction. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: SM-HAZ-2. If construction dewatering is necessary, a construction dewatering plan shall be prepared and submitted with a dewatermg permit application. Reuse of groundwater as an on- site dust palliative or for soil compaction is acceptable if requisite testing and comparison to CAL-EPA screening thresholds indicate that the groundwater is suitable for reuse. If reuse is not possible, contaminated water shall be safely removed to an approved site. Groundwater removed during construction dewatering shall be treated to the extent required by the permit agency prior to discharge and the appropriate permit shall be obtained from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Dublin San Ramon Services District, or other agency with jurisdiction,if the water is to be discharged into a storm or sanitary sewer system. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: Adherence to the supplemental mitigation measure will reduce this impact to less than significant by requiring preparation and approval of necessary permits to safely dewater the site and appropriate treatment of dewatered material to be reused. Permits and approvals may be required from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board,Alameda County Health Department, State Water Resources Control Board discharge permits or potentially an air quality permit from the Bay Area Air Quality Control Board if Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) are found. Supplemental Impact HAZ-3: Demolition activities could release significant quantities of lead based paint and asbestos containing material and other contaminants into the environment, possibly exposing construction workers, and surrounding residents and visitors during construction. Supplemental Mitigation Measures: 26 SM-HAZ-3. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit for the existing on-site building, testing shall be performed by a qualified and licensed environmental professional to determine the present of significant quantities of lead based paint and asbestos containing material. If detected, such material shall be removed by a qualified contractor and disposed of in an approved disposal facility. Necessary permits shall be obtained from appropriate regulatory agencies prior to remediation. Resulting Significance: Less than Significant Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the SEIR. Rationale for Finding: Adherence to the supplemental mitigation measure will reduce this impact to a less than significant level by requiring the safe remediation of potentially hazardous materials that could be located in the existing building. 2321191.3 27 EXHIBIT C FINDINGS CONCERNING INFEASIBILITY OF ALTERNATIVES AND PROPOSED ADDITIONAL MITIGATION MEASURES CEQA provides that decisionmakers should not approve a project as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures that would substantially lessen the significant impacts of the project (CEQA Section 21002). The SEIR identified feasible mitigation measures that would reduce most of the potentially significant impacts to less than significant, as further set forth in the Exhibit B findings above. However, the following impacts in the SEIR remain significant after mitigation (i.e., significant and unavoidable) and no feasible mitigation or project alternative is identified to reduce impact to less than significant: (1) Supplemental Impact TR-2: The Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road intersection would operate at LOS E without the proposed project during the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative conditions. (2) Supplemental Impact TR-3: The Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive (410) intersection would degrade from LOS D to LOS E with the addition of project trips during the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative conditions. (3) Supplemental Impact TR-10: The project would cause the Dublin Boulevard segment between Hacienda Drive and Hibernia Drive to degrade from LOS D to LOS E during the AM peak hour under Existing conditions. (4) Supplemental Impact TR-1 l: The project would cause the northbound Hacienda Drive segment of Dublin Boulevard to Central Parkway to degrade from LOS D to LOS E. Project traffic would also cause the volume to capacity ratio of the northbound Hacienda Drive segment between I-580 westbound ramp to Hacienda Crossings to increase by 0.071. (5) Supplemental Impact TR-12: The project would cause the volume to capacity ratio along the eastbound Dublin Boulevard segment between DeMarcus Boulevard and Iron Horse Parkway to increase by 0.03 where it would operate at LOS E in the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative No Project scenario. (6) Supplemental Impact TR-13: The project would cause the volume to capacity ratio along the westbound Dublin Boulevard segment between Scarlett Drive and Dougherty Road to increase by 0.027 where it would operate at LOS E in the AM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative No Project scenario. (7) Supplemental Impact TR-14: The project would cause the volume to capacity ratio along the northbound Hacienda Drive segment between I-580 westbound ramps and Hacienda Crossing to increase by 0.045 where it would operate at LOS E in the AM peak hour and by 0.071 where it would operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative No Project scenario. (8) Supplemental Impact TR-15: The project would cause the northbound Tassajara Road segment between Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway to degrade from LOS D to LOS E during the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative conditions. While the project would only add 4 trips to this segment, this impact is considered to be significant. (9) Supplemental Impact TR-16: The project would cause the volume to capacity ratios along the westbound Dublin Boulevard segments between Iron Horse Parkway and Camp Parks where it would operate at LOS E and between Camp Parks and Scarlett Drive where it would operate at 1 LOS F in the AM peak hour under Long-Term Cumulative No Project scenario to increase by 0.023. (10) Supplemental Impact TR-17: The project would cause the volume to capacity ratio along the northbound Hacienda Drive segment between I-580 westbound ramps and Hacienda Crossing to increase by 0.02 during the PM peak hour where it would operate at LOS F under Long-Term Cumulative No Project scenario. (11) Supplemental Impact AQ-2 [Impact AQ-1 in Draft SEIR]: The project operations would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is non-attainment under applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standards due to emissions of NOX. (12) Supplemental Impact AQ-2 (violation of air quality standards). The project would result in a violation of regional air quality standard and would contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. (13) Supplemental Impact AQ-3: The project would conflict with the regional Clean Air Plan. (14) Supplemental Impact AQ-5: The project would generate greenhouse gas emissions, both directly and indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the environment and would conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. The EDSP EIR also identified certain impacts of the Eastern Dublin GPA/SP as significant and unavoidable. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified four alternatives: No Project, Reduced Planning Area, Reduced Land Use Intensities, and No Development. The City Council certified the Eastern Dublin EIR on May 10, 1993, under Resolution No. 51-93. The City Council found the No Project, Reduced Land Use Intensities, and No Development alternatives infeasible and then approved a modification of the Reduced Planning Area Alternative rather than the GPA/SP project as proposed (Resolution No. 53-93). This alternative was approved based on City Council findings that this alternative land use plan would reduce land use impacts, would not disrupt the Doolan Canyon community, would reduce growth-inducing impacts on agricultural lands, and would reduce traffic, infrastructure, and noise impacts of the originally proposed Eastern Dublin Project. Even under this alternative project, however, significant unavoidable impacts would remain. Therefore, upon approval of the Eastern Dublin GPA/SP, the City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution No. 53-93). Since findings on those significant and unavoidable impacts have already been made by the City Council as part of the certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR, they are not required to be made a part of the approval of the SEIR for the Project The IKEA SEIR analyzed amendments to the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to change the land use designation on the Project site from Campus Office to General Commercial, which would have allowed an IKEA furniture retail store and other commercial uses on the site. The IKEA SEIR evaluated the following impacts: Air Quality, Biological Resources, and Transportation and Circulation. On March 16, 2004, the City certified the IKEA SEIR and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the following impacts: excessive levels of ozone precursors above regulatory thresholds on a project and cumulative basis, excessive levels of carbon monoxide emissions above regulatory thresholds, and increase of project traffic on local freeways on a cumulative basis (City Council Resolution No. 44-04). Since findings on those significant and unavoidable impacts have already been made by the City 2 Council as part of the certification of the IKEA SEIR, they are not required to be made a part of the approval of the SEIR for the Project. Therefore, in compliance with CEQA, the following findings address whether there are any feasible alternatives or any additional feasible mitigation measures available that would reduce the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the SEIR for the Project to less than significant. FINDINGS CONCERNING ALTERNATIVES CEQA requires that an EIR "describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project..." (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a)). "If a project alternative will substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of a proposed project, the decisionmaker should not approve the proposed project unless it determines that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations,... make the project alternative infeasible." (CEQA Sections 21002 and 21081(a)(3), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3).) The City Council hereby makes these findings with respect to alternatives. The Project objectives are set forth in Section 3.5 of the Draft SEIR. Alternatives are identified and analyzed in Section 5.3 of the Draft SEIR and include the required No Project/No Development Alternative, a General Commercial Development Alternative, and a Campus Office Development Alternative. Each of the alternatives was assessed for each resource topic and compared to potential Project impacts. As further set forth below, the City Council has considered the alternatives identified and analyzed in Section 5.3 of the Draft SEIR and finds them to be infeasible for specific economic, social, or other considerations pursuant to CEQA Sections 21002 and 21081(a)(3), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3). For CEQA purposes, "feasible" means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, technological, and legal factors. (CEQA Section 21061.1, CEQA Guidelines Section 15364.) Alternative#1: No Project/No Development Alternative CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3) requires that a"No-Project" alternative be evaluated as part of an EIR, proceeding under one of two scenarios: the project area remaining in its current state or development of the project area under its current General Plan land use and zoning designations. This alternative assumes that the site would remain vacant as it presently exists and no development would occur. Existing General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designations would remain as they currently exist. By eliminating project construction and operation, the No Project Alternative would eliminate all the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project on traffic and air quality. The No Project Alternative would not create any new significant impacts. The No Project Alternative avoids the project's significant and unavoidable impacts; however, the City finds this alternative infeasible because it would be inconsistent with the Project's 3 objectives. The No Project Alternative is inconsistent with the most basic objectives of creating a community that is compatible in scale and design with the surrounding properties and land uses; development of a large vacant infill site in the City; construction of a mix of land uses that result in a fiscally positive impact on the City's financial and service systems; creation of new jobs and commercial services for the community; offering diverse types of residential units; creation of a transit-oriented, walkable urban neighborhood by providing housing with direct pedestrian and bicycle connections to retail and restaurant uses on-site, the Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station, the proposed grocery-anchored shopping center to the north, and the Hacienda Crossings retail center to the east, and the future Campus Office uses to the west. This alternative does not take advantage of the site's proximity to the BART station and the opportunities these facilities provide for alternative transportation choices and amenities. Under this alternative, the Project will remain vacant and undeveloped at this time. The undeveloped site is not compatible with the urban mixed-use character of development surrounding the site. Finding: The City Council considered the No Project Alternative and declines to adopt it because it is inconsistent with the Project objectives and is infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations described above, as supported by the administrative record for the Project. Alternative#2: General Commercial Development Alternative Alternative 42—The General Commercial Development Alternative would include development of the site under the existing Planned Development zoning. The existing PD zoning would provide for 270,000 square feet of retail space and 35,000 square feet of restaurant space on the Project site. This alternative would also include on-site parking, new driveways from adjoining roads, landscaping, and other improvements. Implementation of this alternative would not require amendments to the Dublin General Plan, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, or existing site zoning. This alternative assumes that the development standards and design guidelines in the Specific Plan would apply to future development. With the elimination of residential units, the General Commercial Development Alternative would eliminate the impacts caused by housing, such as Toxic Air Contaminant impacts on residents and impacts from hazardous materials and noise due to a residential use on the site. However, the increase of commercial development over that proposed by the Project would result in an increase in certain impacts. The significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project on transportation would still occur and, for some intersections, queues, and roadway segments, may be greater due to the increase in PM Peak Trips of this alternative as compared to the Project. The significant and unavoidable impacts on air quality of this alternative would also be greater than those of the Project because this Alternative would result in 11,814 daily trips, which is significantly greater than the 6,219 trips of the Project. This alternative is consistent with the Project's objectives to the extent that it provides for infill development on the vacant site, creation of new jobs and commercial services for the community, and fiscal benefits to the City. However, the alternative would not promote the objectives relating to mixed use, residential or transit-oriented uses. 4 Finding: The City Council considered the General Commercial Development Alternative and declines to adopt it because it will not avoid or substantially lessen the Project's significant unavoidable impacts and is infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations described above, as supported by the administrative record for the Project. Alternative#3: Campus Office Development Alternative Alternative 43 —Under this alternative, the site would be developed consistent with the existing Campus Office General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designation. This Alternative considers construction of up 218,000 square feet of administrative, business, and professional offices, consistent with nearby properties in the Eastern Dublin Planning Area. Development of this alternative would also include on-site surface parking lots, landscaping, signs, and similar improvements normally and customarily included in an office park development. No amendments to the General Plan or the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan would be required to implement this Alternative. With the elimination of residential units, the General Commercial Development Alternative would eliminate the impacts caused by housing, such as Toxic Air Contaminant impacts on residents and impacts from hazardous materials and noise due to a residential use on the site. However, the significant unavoidable impacts on traffic and air quality would largely be the same for this alternative as they are for the Project. The peak hour trip generation for this alternative is slightly less than the Project but will likely result in the same significant and unavoidable impacts. The daily trips from this Alternative (2,547 trips) will be less than the Project (6,219 trips). This reduction in trips will result in reduced emissions of pollutants. However, the reduction is unlikely to reduce the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project to less than significant. The impacts on water and sewer use by this alternative would be less than the Project This alternative is consistent with the Project's objectives to the extent that it provides for infill development on the vacant site, creation of new jobs for the community, and potential fiscal benefits to the City. However, the alternative would not promote the objectives of mixed use, residential, or transit-oriented uses. Finding: The City Council considered the General Commercial Development Alternative and declines to adopt it because it will not avoid or substantially lessen the Project's significant unavoidable impacts and is infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations described above, as supported by the administrative record for the Project. FINDINGS REGARDING INFEASIBILITY OF ADDITIONAL MITIGATION MEASURES In the Draft SEIR and comments on the Draft SEIR, additional mitigation measures and/or modifications to the measures recommended in the Draft SEIR are proposed to address the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project. The City carefully considered the proposed mitigations, and finds the proposed mitigations infeasible, not necessary to avoid identified 5 significant impacts of the Project, or otherwise rejected the suggested mitigation, as further described below. In considering specific recommendations on mitigation measures, the City is guided by CEQA's legal standard to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental effects to the extent feasible. The mitigation measures recommended in the SEIR represent the professional judgment and experience of the City's expert staff and environmental consultants. The City therefore believes that these recommendations should not be modified unless necessary to comply with CEQA legal standards. Thus, in considering commenters' suggested changes or additions to the mitigation measures, the City, in determining whether to accept such suggestions, either in whole or in part, has considered the following factors, among others: 1) whether the suggestion relates to a significant and unavoidable environmental effect of the Project, or instead relates to an effect that can already be mitigated to less than significant levels by mitigation measures identified in the SEIR; 2)whether the suggested mitigation represents a clear improvement, from an environmental standpoint, over the SEIR mitigation that a commenter seeks to replace; 3) whether the suggested mitigation is sufficiently clear as to be easily understood by those who will implement the mitigation as finally adopted; 4)whether the suggested language might be too inflexible to allow for pragmatic implementation; 5) whether the suggestions are "feasible" as defined under CEQA including being able to be accomplished in a successful manner in a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, technical, legal, social or other factors; and 6) whether the proposed mitigation is consistent with the Project objectives. Additional or Alternative Mitigation Measures for Impact TR-2. Two alternate or additional mitigation measures are: (1) implementation of additional vehicle lanes at Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road; and (2) construction of a bicycle or pedestrian overcrossing at this intersection. Finding: The construction of additional roadway lanes is infeasible because there is insufficient right-of-way to construct the improvements. All properties abutting this intersection are fully built out and purchase of additional right-of-way to accommodate additional lanes would encroach into parking lots on three corners and a City public art installation on the southeast corner of this intersection. The construction of a bicycle or pedestrian overcrossing is infeasible due to the extreme length of raised walkways needed to span these very wide arterial roadways and lack of sufficient right-of-way to provide for entrances and exits for such overcrossings. For these reasons, the measures are infeasible and the City declines to impose them. Additional or Alternative Mitigation Measure for Impact TR-3. An alternate or additional mitigation measure is to: a) convert an eastbound right-turn lane to a through lane to provide two left-turn lanes, four through lanes and one right-turn lane on the eastbound approach on Dublin Boulevard; b)provide a corresponding receiving lane on the east leg with a 360-foot long taper area; and c) optimize traffic signal split time. Finding: The construction of the proposed improvements is infeasible because it would require removal/modification of the curb extension at the southeast corner of the intersection and relocation of the existing bike lane to accommodate the additional receiving lane, which would adversely impact pedestrians by increasing the crossing distance and exposure to traffic and 6 bicyclists and adversely impact bicycle use of Dublin Boulevard. For these reasons, the measures are infeasible and the City declines to impose them. Additional or Alternative Mitigation Measures for Impact TR-10. The deterioration in level of service on Dublin Boulevard is caused by long delays at the larger intersections along Dublin Boulevard, such as Dougherty Road, Hacienda Drive, and Tassajara Road. Potential mitigation measures could include optimization of the traffic signals in the network, reduction of the number of turn and through lanes, or prohibition of pedestrian crossings to help improve the travel speed along Dublin Boulevard. Finding: The proposed mitigations are infeasible because of limited right-of-way availability and such measures would potentially result in secondary impacts related to pedestrian mobility and intersection level of service. For these reasons, the measures are infeasible and the City declines to impose them. Additional or Alternative Mitigation Measures for Impact TR-11. The deterioration in level of service is primarily due to the long cycle length required to facilitate pedestrian crossings of Hacienda Drive at the Dublin Boulevard intersection as well as the signal priority given to Dublin Boulevard; hence holding back traffic on Hacienda Drive. Potential mitigation could include optimization of the traffic signals in the network, reduction of the number of turn and through lanes, or prohibition of pedestrian crossings to help improve the travel speed on Hacienda Drive. Finding: The proposed mitigations are infeasible because of limited right-of-way availability and such measures would potentially result in secondary impacts related to pedestrian mobility and intersection level of service. For these reasons, the measures are infeasible and the City declines to impose them. Additional or Alternative Mitigation Measures for Impact TR-12. Potential mitigation could include optimization of the traffic signals in the network, reduction of the number of turn and through lanes, or prohibition of pedestrian crossings to help improve the travel speed along Dublin Boulevard. Finding: The proposed mitigations are infeasible because of limited right-of-way availability and such measures would potentially result in secondary impacts related to pedestrian mobility and intersection level of service. For these reasons, the measures are infeasible and the City declines to impose them. Additional or Alternative Mitigation Measures for Impact TR-13. The deterioration in level of service on Dublin Boulevard is caused by long delays at the larger intersections along Dublin Boulevard, such as Dougherty Road, Hacienda Drive, and Tassajara Road. Potential mitigation could include optimization of the traffic signals in the network, reduction of the number of turn and through lanes, or prohibition of pedestrian crossings to help improve the travel speed along Dublin Boulevard. 7 Finding: The proposed mitigations are infeasible because of limited right-of-way availability and such measures would potentially result in secondary impacts related to pedestrian mobility and intersection level of service. For these reasons, the measures are infeasible and the City declines to impose them. Additional or Alternative Mitigation Measures for Impact TR-14. The deterioration in level of service is primarily due to the long cycle length required to facilitate pedestrian crossings of Hacienda Drive at the Dublin Boulevard intersection as well as the signal priority given to Dublin Boulevard; hence, holding back traffic on Hacienda Drive. Potential mitigation could include optimization of the traffic signals in the network, reduction of the number of turn and through lanes, or prohibition pedestrian crossings to help improve the travel speed on Hacienda Drive. Finding: The proposed mitigations are infeasible because of limited right-of-way availability and such measures would potentially result in secondary impacts related to pedestrian mobility and intersection level of service. For these reasons, the measures are infeasible and the City declines to impose them. Additional or Alternative Mitigation Measures for Impact TR-15. Optimization of the traffic signals in the network, reduction of the number of turn and through lanes, or prohibition of pedestrian crossings may help improve the travel speed on Tassajara Road. Finding: The proposed mitigations are infeasible because of limited right-of-way availability and such measures would potentially result in secondary impacts related to pedestrian mobility and intersection level of service. For these reasons, the measures are infeasible and the City declines to impose them. Additional or Alternative Mitigation Measures for Impact TR-16. The deterioration in level of service on Dublin Boulevard is caused by long delays at the larger intersections along Dublin Boulevard. Potential mitigation could include optimization of the traffic signals in the network, reduction of the number of turn and through lanes, or prohibition of pedestrian crossings to help improve the travel speed along Dublin Boulevard. Finding: The proposed mitigations are infeasible because of limited right-of-way availability and such measures would potentially result in secondary impacts related to pedestrian mobility and intersection level of service. For these reasons, the measures are infeasible and the City declines to impose them. Additional or Alternative Mitigation Measures for Impact TR-17. The deterioration in level of service is primarily due to the long cycle length required to facilitate pedestrian crossings of Hacienda Drive at the Dublin Boulevard intersection as well as the signal priority given to Dublin Boulevard; hence, holding back traffic on Hacienda Drive. Potential mitigation could include optimization of the traffic signals in the network, reduction of the number of turn and through lanes, or prohibition of pedestrian crossings to help improve the travel speed on Hacienda Drive. 8 Finding: The proposed mitigations are infeasible because of limited right-of-way availability and such measures would potentially result in secondary impacts related to pedestrian mobility and intersection level of service. For these reasons, the measures are infeasible and the City declines to impose them. 2320900.2 9 EXHIBIT D STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS General. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the City Council of the City of Dublin previously adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the significant and unavoidable impacts of proposed development of the Project site as part of its certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR (Resolution 53-93, May 10, 1993) and the IKEA SEIR (Resolution No. 44-04, March 16, 2004). The City Council carefully considered each significant and unavoidable impact in its decision to approve urbanization of Eastern Dublin through approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan project and its approval of the IKEA project on the Project site. The City Council is currently considering The Green Mixed-Use Project PLPA-2013-00013 ("Project"). The City prepared a Supplemental EIR for the Project ("SEIR"), which identified supplemental Traffic and Air Quality impacts that were significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to a 2002 court decision, the City Council must adopt new overriding considerations for the previously identified unavoidable impacts in the Eastern Dublin EIR and IKEA SEIR that apply to the current Project.' The City Council must also adopt overriding considerations for the supplemental impacts identified in the SEIR as significant and unavoidable. The significant unavoidable impacts on air quality and traffic identified in the IKEA SEIR did not apply to the Project because the SEIR performed a completely new air quality and traffic analysis for the proposed Project. So, the air quality and traffic impacts in the SEIR supplant those identified in the IKEA SEIR. The City Council believes that many of the unavoidable environmental effects identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the SEIR will be substantially lessened by mitigation measures adopted with the original Eastern Dublin approvals and by the mitigation measures in the SEIR and other environmental protection measures adopted through the Project approvals, to be implemented with the development of the Project. Even with mitigation, the City Council recognizes that the implementation of the Project carries with it significant and unavoidable adverse environmental effects, as identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR that are applicable to the Project, and the SEIR. The City Council specifically finds that, to the extent that the identified adverse or potentially adverse impacts for the Project have not been mitigated to acceptable levels, there are specific economic, social, environmental, land use, and other considerations that support approval of the project. 1. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts from the Eastern Dublin EIR. The unavoidable significant environmental impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR for future development of Eastern Dublin that apply to the Project include, but are not limited to, the following: "...public officials must still go on the record and explain specifically why they are approving the later project despite its significant unavoidable impacts." (Emphasis original.)Communities for a Better Environment v. California Resources Agency 103 Cal.App.4th 98(2002). 1 Land Use Impact 3.1/F. Cumulative Loss of Agricultural and Open Space Lands; Visual Impacts 3.8/13; and Alteration of Rural/Open Space Character. Community Services and Facilities Impact 3.410. Increased solid waste production and impact on solid waste facilities. Community Services and Facilities Impact 3.41S. Consumption of Non-Renewable Natural Resources and Sewer, Water, and Storm Drainage Impact 3.5 1F, H, U. Increases in Energy Usage Through Increased Water Treatment, Disposal and Operation of Water Distribution System. Soils, Geology, and Seismicity Impact 3.61B. Earthquake Ground Shaking, Primary Effects. Biological Resources Impact 3.71A. Direct habitat loss. 2. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts from the Project SEIR. The following unavoidable significant supplemental environmental impacts were identified in the Project SEIR. (1) Supplemental Impact TR-2: The Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road intersection would operate at LOS E without the proposed project during the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative conditions. (2) Supplemental Impact TR-3: The Dublin Boulevard and Hacienda Drive (410) intersection would degrade from LOS D to LOS E with the addition of project trips during the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative conditions. (3) Supplemental Impact TR-10: The project would cause the Dublin Boulevard segment between Hacienda Drive and Hibernia Drive to degrade from LOS D to LOS E during the AM peak hour under Existing conditions. (4) Supplemental Impact TR-1 l: The project would cause the northbound Hacienda Drive segment of Dublin Boulevard to Central Parkway to degrade from LOS D to LOS E. Project traffic would also cause the volume to capacity ratio of the northbound Hacienda Drive segment between I-580 westbound ramp to Hacienda Crossings to increase by 0.071. (5) Supplemental Impact TR-12: The project would cause the volume to capacity ratio along the eastbound Dublin Boulevard segment between DeMarcus Boulevard and Iron Horse Parkway to increase by 0.03 where it would operate at LOS E in the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative No Project scenario. (6) Supplemental Impact TR-13: The project would cause the volume to capacity ratio along the westbound Dublin Boulevard segment between Scarlett Drive and Dougherty Road to increase by 0.027 where it would operate at LOS E in the AM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative No Project scenario. (7) Supplemental Impact TR-14: The project would cause the volume to capacity ratio along the northbound Hacienda Drive segment between I-580 westbound ramps and Hacienda Crossing to increase by 0.045 where it would operate at LOS E in the AM peak hour and by 0.071 where it would operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative No Project scenario. (8) Supplemental Impact TR-15: The project would cause the northbound Tassajara Road segment between Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway to degrade from LOS D to LOS E 2 during the PM peak hour under Short-Term Cumulative conditions. While the project would only add 4 trips to this segment, this impact is considered to be significant. (9) Supplemental Impact TR-16: The project would cause the volume to capacity ratios along the westbound Dublin Boulevard segments between Iron Horse Parkway and Camp Parks where it would operate at LOS E and between Camp Parks and Scarlett Drive where it would operate at LOS F in the AM peak hour under Long-Term Cumulative No Project scenario to increase by 0.023. (10) Supplemental Impact TR-17: The project would cause the volume to capacity ratio along the northbound Hacienda Drive segment between I-580 westbound ramps and Hacienda Crossing to increase by 0.02 during the PM peak hour where it would operate at LOS F under Long-Term Cumulative No Project scenario. (11) Supplemental Impact AQ-2 [Impact AQ-1 in Draft SEIR]: The project operations would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is non-attainment under applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standards due to emissions of NOX. (12) Supplemental Impact AQ-2 (violation of air quality standards). The project would result in a violation of regional air quality standard and would contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. (13) Supplemental Impact AQ-3: The project would conflict with the regional Clean Air Plan. (14) Supplemental Impact AQ-5: The project would generate greenhouse gas emissions, both directly and indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the environment and would conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. 3. Overriding Considerations. The City Council has carefully considered each significant and unavoidable Project impact in reaching its decision to approve the Project. Even with mitigation, the City Council recognizes that implementation of the Project carries with it unavoidable adverse environmental effects, as identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and SEIR. The City Council specifically finds that, to the extent that the identified significant adverse impacts for the Project have not been reduced to acceptable levels through feasible mitigation or alternatives, there are specific economic, social, land use, and other considerations that support approval of the Project as set forth below. Any one of these benefits is sufficient to justify approval of the Project. The substantial evidence supporting the various benefits can be found in the record as a whole. The Project will further the planned urbanization of Eastern Dublin, as established in the City General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan approvals. The Project will facilitate development of an infill area, fully served by public utilities, and convenient to major arterials, services, BART, and public transit. The Project will develop a large vacant infill property in an area that is mostly surrounded by urban development. The Project improves an undeveloped site with convenient freeway, street, bicycle, and pedestrian access and in the proximity of a large daytime employment center with adjacent offices and access to public transit. The residential development provides a diversity of types of units to meet different types of housing needs. The Project will provide commercial uses to accommodate the demands of the community and complement the adjacent commercial use. Development standards and design guidelines provide 3 measures for ensuring attractive, visually appealing development of the Project. The Project overall promotes economic growth, creates diverse new employment opportunities, and expands the City's tax base. Development of the Project site will also provide construction employment opportunities. The Project will provide a community benefit payment and other amenities as set forth in the Development Agreement. For all of the above reasons, the benefits of the Project outweigh its significant and unavoidable environmental impacts. 2320904.2 4 The Green Mixed Use Project Supplemental EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (The Green SEIR MMRP) Impact Supplemental Mitigation Measure Implementation and Monitoring Monitoring Schedule Responsibility/ Reporting Date/ Monitor's Initials TRA SM-TRA. The following measures shall be required to improve the level of service at Contribution for the full cost of City of Dublin Public Dublin Boulevard and Arnold Road (#8) intersection to within acceptable standard: the improvement shall be made Works Department a) Add a 75-foot long southbound right turn lane with a 100-foot long taper area; prior to issuance of first Building and Planning Division. b) Convert the southbound shared through-right lane to through lane; Permit. c) Optimize traffic signal split time. TR-2 SM-TR-2. The Eastern Dublin EIR MM 3.3/2.0 requires non-residential projects with Prior to issuance of the first City of Dublin Public 50 or more employees to participate in the Transportation Systems Management building permit. Works Department (TSM) program. As an alternative mitigation measure, the Project shall prepare a and Planning Division. transportation demand management(TDM) plan to encompass both commercial and residential uses as part of the project. The project developer shall work with the City to develop the key elements of the TDM plan, which shall be approved by the City prior to the issuance of the first building permit. The TDM plan should include, but not be limited to, the following elements: a) Appoint Transportation Coordinator to oversee the TDM program developed for the project including program development, information distribution and program implementation. b) Promote and distribute hard copy information quarterly to all employees and residents regarding 511, Ridematch, Guaranteed Ride Home Program, Wheels/LAVTA, Altamont Corridor Express (ACE), BART, shuttles to regional transit, and any car share programs. c) Distribute information quarterly regarding above by email blast to all employees and residents. d) Co-sponsor subarea transportation fair once a year with "The Village" property to the north and/or other developments in the East Dublin area. Invite Wheels, 511.org, and at least two other commute alternative service providers to attend and distribute commute alternative information. e) Provide bicycle parking facilities for 20 percent of commercial car spaces or a number approved by the City beyond the City's bicycle rack requirement. f) Provide secured bicycle parking (lockers or cages)for employees. g) Join City Car Share as a "Biz Prime" member and pay for membership of a minimum of five percent employees. h) Implement a BART subsidy program that would provide BART tickets at no cost or subsidized rate to all employees. i) Implement a Commuter Tax Benefit Program or equivalent. Under Section 132(F)of federal tax code, an employer can offer its employees up to $245 per month for qualified transit, vanpool or parking costs. Or, an employer may offer$20 The Green Mixed Use Project MMRP Page 1 City of Dublin September 2014 Impact Supplemental Mitigation Measure Implementation and Monitoring Monitoring Schedule Responsibility/ Reporting Date/ Monitor's Initials per month for bicycling costs. Full information is available at: http://rideshare.51 l.org/rewards/tax—benefits.aspx j) Provide preferential parking for carpools and vanpools as part of off-street parking requirements. TR-4 SM-TR-4. The following measures would be required to improve the level of service TIF Fees to cover the fair share City of Dublin Public at the Dublin Boulevard and Tassajara Road intersection to an acceptable standard: contribution of this improvement Works Department a) Add an eastbound through lane to provide two left-turn lanes, three through shall be paid prior to the and Planning Division. lanes and two right-turn lane on the eastbound approach on Dublin Boulevard; issuance of the first Building and Permit. b) Provide a corresponding receiving lane on the east leg that extends from Tassajara Road to Brannigan Street. TR-5 SM-TR-S.At the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Scarlett Drive, there is a Fair-share contribution for the City of Dublin Public significant impact from the Dublin Crossing project according to the Dublin Crossing alternative mitigation of Works Department Specific Plan (DCSP)-DEIR. In the DSCP-DEIR, the recommended measure to removing the crosswalk on the and Planning Division. mitigate the impacts at the intersection of Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard due to east leg of the Scarlett Drive the high rate of pedestrians/bicyclists crossing at Dublin Boulevard is a grade and Dublin Boulevard separated crossing. The grade separated crossing would eliminate the need for at- intersection shall be made prior grade pedestrian actuations at the traffic signal, which would allow more green time to issuance of first Building to be allocated to through traffic on Dublin Boulevard. Although the Dublin Crossings Permit. project has not been environmentally cleared, nor has engineering or right of way analysis been completed with regards to the feasibility of this improvement, the City is aggressively pursuing this project to improve pedestrian and bicycle mobility along the Iron Horse Trail. The City also plans to include a grade separated crossing at this location in its update to the TIF program to secure project funding. Because the separated bridge has not yet been environmentally cleared, and to ensure that the impacts are adequately mitigated, the Applicant/Developer is required to provide a fair-share contribution for the alternative mitigation of removing the crosswalk on the east leg of the Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard intersection. TR-6 SM-TR-6. The following measures would be required to improve the level of service Fair-share contribution for the City of Dublin Public to within acceptable standard: improvement shall be made Works Department a) Modify the traffic signal phasing to provide a protected/permitted overlap phase prior to issuance of first Building and Planning Division. for the southbound right-turn movement and prohibit conflicting eastbound U- Permit. turn movement; and b) Optimize traffic signal split time. TR-7 SM-TR-7. Optimization of the traffic signal phase time would reduce the 95 n Fair-share contribution for the City of Dublin Public percentile queue length for the southbound left turn to 371 feet during the PM peak improvement shall be made Works Department hour. While the queue length would still exceed the turn pocket storage, the project prior to issuance of first Building and Planning Division. traffic would lengthen the queue by less than 25 feet. Permit. TR-8 SM-TR-B. The traffic signal at this intersection shall be modified to provide additional Fair-share contribution for the City of Dublin Public The Green Mixed Use Project MMRP Page 2 City of Dublin September 2014 Impact Supplemental Mitigation Measure Implementation and Monitoring Monitoring Schedule Responsibility/ Reporting Date/ Monitor's Initials green time for the westbound left-turn movement by reducing the green time for the improvement shall be made Works Department eastbound through movement. This will reduce the queue length to 420 feet in the prior to issuance of first Building and Planning Division. AM peak hour and 270 feet in the PM peak hour.While the queue lengths would still Permit. exceed turn pocket capacity, the project traffic would lengthen the queue by less than 25 feet in the AM peak hour and would cause the queue to extend beyond the turn pocket by less than 25 feet in the PM peak hour. TR-9 SM-TR-9. The traffic signal phasing at this intersection shall be modified to provide Fair-share contribution for the City of Dublin Public additional green time for the southbound left-turn movement. This will reduce the improvement shall be made Works Department queue length by 12 feet to 845 feet and to within acceptable threshold. Also, because prior to issuance of first Building and Planning Division. the impact is caused by cumulative land use growth in the region, the project Permit. developer shall make a fair share contribution toward this improvement. The fair share contribution shall be paid prior to the issuance of the first building permit. TRA 8 SM-TR-18. Prior to the issuance of any permit for the project, the Applicant shall Prior to issuance of any permits City of Dublin Public prepared final Site Improvement Plans for both onsite and offsite improvements that for the project site (including site Works Department are consistent with the Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative Tract Map work, grading, building, and Planning Division. plans, which have been determined to be consistent with applicable City guidelines, encroachment, etc.) policies and standards, including but not limited to the City of Dublin General Plan Community Design & Sustainability Element, Chapter 8.76 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, and the Bikeway Master Plan, for review and approval by the City. TRA9 SM-TR-19. Prior to the issuance of any permit for the project, the Applicant shall Prior to issuance of any permits City of Dublin Public prepared final Site Improvement Plans for both onsite and offsite improvements that for the project site (including site Works Department are consistent with the Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative Tract Map work, grading, building, and Planning Division. plans, which have been determined to be consistent with applicable City guidelines, encroachment, etc.) policies and standards, including but not limited to the City of Dublin General Plan Community Design & Sustainability Element, Chapter 8.76 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, and the Bikeway Master Plan, for review and approval by the City. TR-20 SM-TR-20. Prior to issuance of any permit for the project, the Project shall submit Prior to issuance of any permits City of Dublin Public design plans that are consistent with the City's Complete Street Policy and design for the project site (including site Works Department standards for review and approval by the City. work, grading, building, and Planning Division. encroachment, etc.) TR-21 SM-TR-21. Prior to issuance of any permit for the project, the project developer shall Prior to issuance of any permits City of Dublin Public submit design plans that are consistent with the City's Complete Street Policy for for the project site (including site Works Department review and approval by the City. All designs shall conform to City standards. work, grading, building, and Planning Division. encroachment, etc.) TR-22 SM-TR-22. Before issuance of grading permits for the project, the project developer Prior to issuance of Grading City of Dublin Public shall prepare a detailed Traffic Management Plan that will be subject to review and Permit. Works Department approval by the City of Dublin, LAVTA, and local emergency service providers, and Planning Division. including the City of Dublin Fire Prevention Bureau and the City of Dublin Police Services Department. The plan shall ensure maintenance of acceptable operating The Green Mixed Use Project MMRP Page 3 City of Dublin September 2014 Impact Supplemental Mitigation Measure Implementation and Monitoring Monitoring Schedule Responsibility/ Reporting Date/ Monitor's Initials conditions on local roadways and transit routes. At a minimum, the plan shall include: a) The number of truck trips, time, and day of street closures b) Time of day of arrival and departure of trucks c) Limitations on the size and type of trucks; provision of a staging area with a limitation on the number of trucks that can be waiting d) Provision of a truck circulation pattern e) Provision of a driveway access plan to maintain safe vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle movements (e.g., steel plates, minimum distances of open trenches, and private vehicle pick up and drop off areas) f) Safe and efficient access routes for emergency vehicles g) Efficient and convenient transit routes h) Manual traffic control when necessary i) Proper advance warning and posted signage concerning street closures j) Provisions for pedestrian safety and access. Park-1 SM-Park-1. Prior to approval of the first Final Subdivision Map for the project, the Prior to approval of first Final City of Dublin Public project developer(s)shall satisfy the requirement to provide parkland through the Map on the project site. Works Department, payment of in-lieu fees to the City of Dublin prior to issuance of building permits. Parks and Community Facilities Dept.,and Planning Division. 1310-1 SM-1310-1. The applicant shall undertake the following prior to issuance of a grading Prior to issuance of Grading City of Dublin Public plan for the site: Permit or any site disturbance. Works Department a) A wetland delineation shall be completed for the site consistent with U.S. Army and Planning Division. Corps of Engineers protocols. b) If jurisdictional wetlands are found on the site and if avoidance of these jurisdictional waters on the site is not feasible, suitable compensatory mitigation shall be provided based on the concept of no net loss of wetland habitat values or acreages. In such an eventuality, a wetland mitigation plan shall be developed and implemented that includes creation, restoration, and/or enhancement of off- site wetlands prior to project ground disturbance. Mitigation areas shall be established in perpetuity through dedication of a conservation easement(or similar mechanism)to an approved environmental organization and payment of an endowment for the long-term management of the site. If wetlands are determined to be jurisdictional under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the mitigation plan will be subject to the review and approval of the Corps and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). If the potential seasonal wetlands are non-jurisdictional under Section 404, the mitigation plan will be subject to the review and approval of the RWQCB. 1310-2 SM-1310-2. Focused surveys for special-status plants shall be conducted on the site Prior to issuance of Grading City of Dublin Public consistent with the California Department of Fish &Wildlife's 2009 Protocols for Permit or any site disturbance. Works Department The Green Mixed Use Project MMRP Page 4 City of Dublin September 2014 Impact Supplemental Mitigation Measure Implementation and Monitoring Monitoring Schedule Responsibility/ Reporting Date/ Monitor's Initials Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Populations and natural and Planning Division. Communities. Plant surveys shall be conducted throughout the blooming period throughout the blooming period of those special-status for which suitable habitat is present. Two or three separate surveys may be required to cover the blooming period of plants listed in Appendix Ai of the Supplemental Biological Analysis (Appendix 8.7 of the DSEIR). If populations/stands of a special-status species are identified during the surveys and impacts cannot be avoided, compensatory mitigation shall be provided, such as the acquisition of off-site mitigation areas presently supporting the species in question, purchase of credits in a mitigation bank that is approved to sell credits for the affected species, or payment of in-lieu fees to a public agency or conservation organization (e.g.. a local land trust)for the preservation and management of existing populations. The location of mitigation sites shall be determined in consultation with and subject to approval of US Fish and Wildlife Service and/or California Department of Fish &Wildlife. In the case where special-status plants are neither federal-or state-listed, the lead agency shall approve the mitigation approach using the guidance provided by the Eastern Alameda County Conservation Strategy in consultation with the City's consulting biologist. Off-site compensatory shall be acquired at a minimum acreage ratio of 1:1 (acquired:impacted). For off-site mitigation options, measures shall be implemented (including contingency measures) providing for the long-term protection of these species. 1310-3 SM-1310-3. Preconstruction surveys shall be conducted for burrowing owls prior to Prior to issuance of Grading City of Dublin Public grading or construction activities. These surveys should conform to the survey Permit or any site disturbance. Works Department protocol established in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012b). and Planning Division. The Conservation Strategy depicts the project site as being located in Conservation Zone 2, which supports 11 percent of the Conservation Strategy's study area's unprotected potential habitat for burrowing owl). Burrowing owls could nest or winter in the site's approximate 13 acres of ruderal/disturbed non-native grassland habitat and within the suitable grassland habitat adjacent to the site. The following measures are consistent with the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the California Department of Fish &Wildlife standards. a) No more than 14 days prior to any ground disturbing activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a take avoidance survey for burrowing owls. If no owls are found during this first survey, a final survey will be conducted within 48 hours prior to ground disturbance to confirm that burrowing owls are still absent. If ground disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 14 days after the initial take avoidance survey, the site shall be resurveyed (including the final survey within 48 hours of disturbance). All surveys shall be conducted in accordance with California Department of Fish &Wildlife guidelines. The Green Mixed Use Project MMRP Page 5 City of Dublin September 2014 Impact Supplemental Mitigation Measure Implementation and Monitoring Monitoring Schedule Responsibility/ Reporting Date/ Monitor's Initials b) If burrowing owls are found on the site during the surveys, mitigation shall be implemented in accordance with applicable California Department of Fish & Wildlife standards. More specifically, if the surveys identify breeding or wintering burrowing owls on or adjacent to the site, occupied burrows cannot be disturbed and shall be provided with protective buffers. Where avoidance is not feasible during the non-breeding season, a site-specific exclusion plan (i.e., a plan that considers the type and extent of the proposed activity, the duration and timing of the activity, the sensitivity and habituation of the owls, and the dissimilarity of the proposed activity with background activities)shall be implemented to encourage owls to move away from the work area prior to construction and to minimize the potential to affect the reproductive success of the owls. The exclusion plan shall be subject to California Fish &Wildlife approval and monitoring requirements. Compensatory mitigation could also be required by California Fish &Wildlife as part of the approval of an exclusion plan. Mitigation may include the permanent protection of habitat at a nearby off-site location acceptable to the California Department of Fish &Wildlife. 1310-4 SM-1310-4. Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-BIO-4 (impacts to breeding birds). Prior to issuance of Grading City of Dublin Public Vegetation removal and/or initial ground disturbance on the site shall occur during the Permit or any site disturbance. Works Department non-breeding season from September 1 to January 31. If instead these actions will and Planning Division. occur from February 1 to August 31, then a pre-construction breeding bird survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to construction. Any common bird active nests found shall be protected by a minimum 50-foot exclusion buffer. The buffer size may vary depending on bird species, the location of the nest, and other factors. If a breeding bird survey determines that a special-status species is located on the site, a larger buffer would be required, such as a 100-foot buffer for minor disturbances and a 250-foot buffer for major disturbances. In the case of special- status species, the size of buffers and other measures would be implemented based on any applicable CDFW guidance and standards. 1310-5 SM-1310-5. The marketing building shall be removed from the premises during Prior to issuance of Grading City of Dublin Public September or October. Pre-construction surveys of the marketing building for bats Permit or any site disturbance. Works Department shall occur no more than 30 days before its removal. If bats are found, a qualified and Planning Division. biologist shall develop an appropriate relocation plan consistent with US Fish & Wildlife, California Department of Fish &Wildlife and EACCS standards and policies. NOISE- SM-NOISE-1. Reduce exterior and interior noise levels in noise sensitive areas of the Numbers 1-6: City of Dublin Building 1 project to meet City standards. To meet City noise standards, the following mitigation Prior to issuance of Building and Planning shall be used: Permits for any residential Divisions. 1. Locate noise-sensitive outdoor use areas away from Interstate 580. Ensure that building. all residents have access to outdoor use areas that achieve exterior noise criteria (60 dBA CNEL for residential uses). Number 7: Prior to issuance of The Green Mixed Use Project MMRP Page 6 City of Dublin September 2014 Impact Supplemental Mitigation Measure Implementation and Monitoring Monitoring Schedule Responsibility/ Reporting Date/ Monitor's Initials 2. A suitable form of forced-air mechanical ventilation, as determined by the local the Certificate of Occupancy (or building official, shall be provided for units throughout the site, so that windows finagling the permit and thereby can be kept closed at the occupant's discretion to control interior noise and granting occupancy)for any achieve the interior noise standards. commercial building. 3. For the first row of buildings facing Interstate 580, the buildings shall be designed to have sealed windows and no balconies on elevations facing the freeway. 4. For residential uses, noise insulation features shall be designed to achieve the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. Sound rated windows and doors shall be provided to maintain interior noise levels at acceptable levels. Additional treatments may include, but are not limited to, sound rated wall construction, acoustical caulking, insulation, acoustical vents, etc. Large windows and doors should be oriented away from the 1-580 where possible. Bedrooms should be located away from 1-580. 5. The final specifications for noise insulation treatments shall be reviewed by a qualified acoustical consultant during final design of the project to ensure that exterior and interior noise levels on site achieve the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard for residential uses and hourly average noise levels to 45 dBA Leq for commercial uses. Results of the analysis, including the description of the necessary interior and exterior noise control treatments, shall be submitted to the City along with the building plans and shall approved by the City prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. The final design and location of project mechanical equipment shall be reviewed by a qualified acoustical consultant to confirm that operational noise levels would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL at exterior project residential uses and would not exceed 45 dBA CNEL inside these residences. If needed, the final design and location of mechanical equipment shall be modified to conform with noise parameters set forth in this analysis. 7. A truck delivery plan shall be submitted to the City for the commercial portion of the project site, which would include the proposed hours of allowable deliveries and the locations and routes of the delivery trucks on the project site. A qualified acoustical consultant shall review the delivery plan to ensure that interior and exterior noise levels on site achieve acceptable levels. The truck delivery plan and acoustical consultant report shall be subject to approval by the City prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any commercial building. Air SM-AQ-1. The project applicant shall adhere to the following dust control measures, Prior to issuance of Grading City of Dublin Public Quality which shall replace those included in EDSP EIR Mitigation Measure 3.11/1.0: Permit or any site disturbance Works Department a) All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and ongoing. and Planning Division. and unpaved access roads)shall be watered two times per day. b) All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be The Green Mixed Use Project MMRP Page 7 City of Dublin September 2014 Impact Supplemental Mitigation Measure Implementation and Monitoring Monitoring Schedule Responsibility/ Reporting Date/ Monitor's Initials covered. c) All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. d) All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. e) All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. f) Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. g) All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. h) Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. AQ-1 SM-AQ-2. The project applicant shall reduce future residential and employee trips Prior to issuance of the first City of Dublin Public through a Traffic Demand Management (TDM) program approved by the City and building permit. Works Department including, but not limited to, the following measures: and Planning Division. a) Appoint Transportation Coordinator to oversee the TDM program developed for the project including program development, information distribution and program implementation. b) Promote and distribute hard copy information quarterly to all employees and residents regarding 511, Ridematch, Guaranteed Ride Home Program, Wheels/LAVTA, Altamont Corridor Express (ACE), BART, shuttles to regional transit, and any car share programs. c) Distribute information quarterly regarding above by email blast to all employees and residents. d) Co-sponsor subarea transportation fair once a year with "The Village" property to the north and/or other developments in the East Dublin area. Invite Wheels, 511.org, and at least two other commute alternative service providers to attend and distribute commute alternative information. e) Provide bicycle parking facilities for 20 percent of commercial car spaces or a The Green Mixed Use Project MMRP Page 8 City of Dublin September 2014 Impact Supplemental Mitigation Measure Implementation and Monitoring Monitoring Schedule Responsibility/ Reporting Date/ Monitor's Initials number approved by the City beyond the City's bicycle rack requirement. f) Provide secured bicycle parking (lockers or cages)for employees. g) Join City Car Share as a "Biz Prime" member and pay for membership of a minimum of five percent employees. h) Implement a BART subsidy program that would provide BART tickets at no cost or subsidized rate to all employees. i) Implement a Commuter Tax Benefit Program or equivalent. Under Section 132(F) of federal tax code, an employer can offer its employees up to $245 per month for qualified transit, vanpool or parking costs. Or, an employer may offer$20 per month for bicycling costs. Full information is available at: http://rideshare.51 l.org/rewards/tax—benefits.aspx j) Provide preferential parking for carpools and vanpools as part of off-street parking requirements. k) Provide shading in the parking lot, to the maximum extent possible, to reduce evaporative ROG emissions. AQ-4 SM-AQ-3. The project shall include the following measures to minimize long-term Prior to occupancy of any City of Dublin Building toxic air contaminant (TAC)exposure for new residences: residential building on the and Planning a. Ensure that no residential buildings would have a full year of occupancy prior to project site. Divisions. 1/1/2017. b. Design buildings and site to limit exposure from sources of TAC and fine particulate matter(PM2.5)emissions. The site layout shall locate windows and air intakes as far as possible from 1-580 traffic lanes. Any modifications to the site design shall incorporate buffers between residences and the freeway. c. To the greatest degree possible, plant vegetation along the project site boundary with 1-580 that includes trees and shrubs that provide a dense vegetative barrier. d. Install air filtration in residential buildings at roof top level that have predicted cancer risks in excess of 10 in one million or PM2.5 concentrations above 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter(lag/m3) as shown in Exhibit 4.7-4. The type of air filtration device shall be as set forth in subsection e below.. To ensure adequate health protection to sensitive receptors, a ventilation system shall meet the following minimal design standards (Department of Public Health, City and County of San Francisco, 2008): • At least one air exchange(s) per hour of fresh outside filtered air; • At least four air exchange(s) per hour recirculation; and • At least 0.25 air exchange(s) per hour in unfiltered infiltration. The Green Mixed Use Project MMRP Page 9 City of Dublin September 2014 Impact Supplemental Mitigation Measure Implementation and Monitoring Monitoring Schedule Responsibility/ Reporting Date/ Monitor's Initials e. The type of MERV- rated filtration required to be installed as part of the ventilation system in the residential buildings shall be as follows: 1) MERV13 filtration shall be installed in a residential building partially or completed located in an area where the cancer risk is 10 per one million or greater but less than or equal to 22 per one million as shown in Exhibit 4.7-4 for unmitigated cancer risks. 2) MERV16 filtration shall be installed in a residential building partially or completed located in an area where the cancer risk is greater than 22 per one million and less than 50 per one million as shown in Exhibit 4.7-4 for unmitigated cancer risks. 3) MERV16 filtration and sealed, inoperable windows and no balconies on building elevations facing 1-580 freeway (MERV 16 Plus)shall be installed in a residential building partially or completed located in an area where the cancer risk is a greater than or equal to 50 per one million and less than 62.5 per one million as shown in Exhibit 4.7-4 for unmitigated cancer risks. 4) In areas where the cancer risk is 62.5 per one million or greater, residential units shall not be built unless the developer includes specific mitigation measures that are approved by a qualified air quality consultant and the City that results in a reduction of the cancer risk to below 10 per one million. f. As part of implementing this measure, an ongoing maintenance plan for the buildings' heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) air filtration system shall be required. Recognizing that emissions from air pollution sources are decreasing, the maintenance period shall last as long as significant excess cancer risk or annual PM2.5 exposures are predicted. Subsequent studies may be conducted by an air quality expert approved by the City to identify the ongoing need for the filtered ventilation systems as future information becomes available. g. Ensure that the lease agreement and other property documents (1) require cleaning, maintenance, and monitoring of the affected buildings for air flow leaks; (2) include assurance that new owners and tenants are provided information on the ventilation system; and (3) include provisions that fees associated with owning or leasing a unit(s) in the building include funds for cleaning, maintenance, monitoring, and replacements of the filters, as needed. h. Consider phasing developments located closest to 1-580 to avoid significant excess cancer risks and required installation of filtered ventilation systems (described above). Note that new United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) engines standards combined with California Air Resources Board (CARB) rules and regulations will reduce on-road emissions of diesel The Green Mixed Use Project MMRP Page 10 City of Dublin September 2014 Impact Supplemental Mitigation Measure Implementation and Monitoring Monitoring Schedule Responsibility/ Reporting Date/ Monitor's Initials particulate matter(DPM)and PM2.5 substantially, especially after 2014. i. Require that, prior to building occupancy, an authorized air pollutant consultant verify the installation of all necessary measures to reduce toxic air contaminant JAC) exposure as set forth in this mitigation measure. AQ-5 SM-AQ-4. The final design of the project shall include all requirements of the City Prior to issuance of Building City of Dublin Building Climate Action Plan, including policies A.1.4 (Bicycle Parking Requirements), A.1.5 Permits. and Planning (Streetscape Master Plan), A.1.8 (General Plan Community Design and Sustainability Divisions. Element), A.1.9 (Work with LAVTA to Improve Transit),A.2.1 (Green Building Ordinance), A.2.5 (LED Streetlight Specifications), A.3.1 (Construction and Demolition Debris Ordinance), A.3.6 (Commercial Recycling). In addition, the project proponent is encouraged to participate in subsidy programs such as Climate Action Plan polices A.2.4 (Reduced Solar Installation Permit Fee) and A.3.5 (Commercial Food Waste Collection Program), and non-subsidy programs such as policies A.3.7 (Multi-Family Recycling), A.3.8 (Curbside Recycling), and A.3.9 (Curbside Organics Collection). Implementation of these mitigation measure would reduce GHG emissions, but not below the significance thresholds. The project, as a whole, shall adopt a water use reduction goal of at least 20 percent. A water use reduction plan shall be developed by the project applicant that may include measures such as the installation of low-flow water fixtures in showers and sinks, low-flush toilets, and the use of water efficient landscaping. The project applicant shall implement a solid waste recycling program through recycling and composting strategies, which results in a project-wide solid waste diversion rate of at least 20 percent. Finally, the project shall exceed 2008 Title 24 Building Standards (which CalEEMod is based on) by at least 20 percent in terms of energy-efficiency. The project shall implement the supplemental list of greenhouse gas reduction measures included as Attachment 6 to the Final SEIR. HAZA SM-HAZ-1. The Applicant/Developer shall notify ACDEH of the proposed project and Prior to issuance of Building City of Dublin Building the intent to utilize the site for residential uses so ACDEH can re-evaluate the case. If Permits for any residential and Planning directed by ACDEH, a Phase II site investigation or site health risk assessment shall building on the project site. Divisions. be completed for portions of the site anticipated for residential development and excavation prior to issuance of a grading and/or site improvement permit. The site investigation shall be coordinated with the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health. The investigation plan shall include a description of the work to be performed, the laboratory analytical methods to be uses and requirements for quality control. If additional remediation is necessary, a remediation plan shall be prepared and approved by the ACDEH. Grading or excavation of any identified contaminated residential area on the site shall not occur until ACDEH issues a closure letter authorizing residential uses on the site. The Applicant/Developer shall provide the City with documentation that the above actions have taken place. To The Green Mixed Use Project MMRP Page 11 City of Dublin September 2014 Impact Supplemental Mitigation Measure Implementation and Monitoring Monitoring Schedule Responsibility/ Reporting Date/ Monitor's Initials protect the health and safety of construction workers, Health and Safety Plan that meets the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements shall be prepared and implemented if additional remediation is required. HAZ-2 SM-HAZ-2. If construction dewatering is necessary, a construction dewatering plan Prior to issuance Grading City of Dublin Public shall be prepared and submitted with a dewatering permit application. Reuse of Permit. Works Department groundwater as an on-site dust palliative or for soil compaction is acceptable if and Planning requisite testing and comparison to CAL-EPA screening thresholds indicate that the Divisions. groundwater is suitable for reuse. If reuse is not possible, contaminated water shall be safely removed to an approved site. Groundwater removed during construction dewatering shall be treated to the extent required by the permit agency prior to discharge and the appropriate permit shall be obtained from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Dublin San Ramon Services District, or other agency with jurisdiction, if the water is to be discharged into a storm or sanitary sewer system. HAZ-3 SM-HAZ-3. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit for the existing on-site building, Prior to issuance of a Building City of Dublin Building testing shall be performed by a qualified and licensed environmental professional to Permits for demolition. and Planning determine the present of significant quantities of lead based paint and asbestos Divisions. containing material. If detected, such material shall be removed by a qualified contractor and disposed of in an approved disposal facility. Necessary permits shall be obtained from appropriate regulatory agencies prior to remediation. The Green Mixed Use Project MMRP Page 12 City of Dublin September 2014