Dublin City Council
September 17, 2024

attachments/alt_gw_sustainability_plan-4.pdf?1656015908 ) and is subject to all relevant sustainable groundwater management actions.

4. Flood Protection / Channel ownership - The proposed project is adjacent to Dublin Creek (Line T), which is not owned or maintained by Zone 7. Zone 7 owns and maintains the section of Line T, east of San Ramon Road, which is downstream of the project. Based on real property information, the parcel owner is responsible for the reach of Dublin Creek.

5. Flood Protection / Impervious areas - Developments creating new impervious areas within the Livermore-Amador Valley are subject to the assessment of the Development Impact Fee for Flood Protection and Storm Water Drainage. These fees are collected for Zone 7 by the local governing agency: 1) upon approval of final map for public improvements creating new impervious areas; and/or 2) upon issuance of a building or use permit required for site improvements creating new impervious areas.

Fees are dependent on whether post-project impervious area conditions are greater than pre-project conditions.

6. Water-wise Landscaping - Zone 7 encourages the use of sustainable, climateappropriate, and drought-tolerant plants, trees and grasses that thrive in the Tri-Valley area. Find more information at: http://www.trivalleywaterwise.com.

We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any questions on this letter, please feel free to contact me at (925) 454-5005 or via email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Elke Rank
cc: Ken Minn, file
526
This page intentionally left blank
527
Appendix C: Historical Resources
Evaluation
528
This page intentionally left blank
529
1 To:

Gaspare Annibale, Associate Planner, City of Dublin
From:

Heather Miller, MA, Architectural Historian, AECOM
Trina Meiser, MA, Historic Preservation Planner, AECOM
Stephanie Osby, Environmental Planner/Project Manager, AECOM Project Name:
11711 Dublin Boulevard Historical Resouce Evaluation
Date:

May 12, 2023
150 California Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94111
aecom.com
FINAL Technical Memorandum – 11711 Dublin Boulevard Historical Resource Evaluation
Introduction
AECOM Technical Services, Inc. (AECOM) holds an on-call master services agreement with the City of Dublin (City) for environmental analysis services, dated July 1, 2021. The City requested AECOM to prepare a historical resource evaluation of the Hexcel Corporation’s 1960s-constructed research and development facility at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The facility was previously recorded on Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms and evaluated for eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) in 2003, but at that time the property was less than 50 years old and not considered a potential historical resource under CEQA. Additionally, the 2003 historic evaluation (VerPlanck 2003) did not address the four eligibility criteria for either the NRHP or the CRHR, but merely concluded that the property lacked architectural or historical significance to be eligible.

This technical memo describes the current condition of the facility with recent photographs, provides a historical context of the use of the facility and physical development of the facility over time, and evaluates the facility for eligibility for listing in the CRHR as a potential historical resource for the purposes of CEQA.

Facility Description
The Hexcel Corporation’s R&D facility at 11711 Dublin Boulevard is sited at the south side of the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hansen Drive in Dublin. The 62,715-square foot facility is on an

8.81-acre, triangular-shaped parcel, Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN): 941-1560-009-01 (see Attachment - Location Map). The Contemporary/Brutalist style facility has a roughly L-shaped plan and was largely constructed in two phases dating to 1962 and 1967, with small additions and alterations in the mid-1980s.

The original 1962 portion of the facility is on the east half, has a roughly rectangular plan, and is constructed of tilt-up concrete panels in a north-south orientation (Photograph 1). The north end of the building rests on a concrete foundation and is one story tall. The exterior is clad with scored concrete, and the flat roof parapet is lined with a louvered metal equipment screen. Primary entry into this section is through a single, aluminum-framed glass door with a fixed transom above and full-height fixed windows. The door is accessed by a low concrete ramp and is protected by a wood-frame, flat roof porch shelter enclosed with vertically oriented, narrow wood slats. A privacy screen using the same vertically 530
2 oriented, narrow wood slats lines the west side of the east half of the facility and terminates near the secondary entry, which consists of a pair of glazed, metal double doors (Photograph 1 and Photograph 2). The privacy screen obscures two pairs of glass double doors and a pair of flush metal double doors.

Photograph 1: Northeast corner of building complex showing the 1962-constructed portion, facing southwest, December 16, 2022. Note this is the original 1962-constructed section of the complex.

Photograph 2: West side of original 1962-construction section of the complex and primary entry on far right, facing southeast, December 16, 2022.
531
3 A two-story building hyphen built in 1984 connects the 1962-constructed east half with the 1967- constructed west half (Photograph 2 and Photograph 3). The hyphen has a flat roof and is clad with scored concrete (Photograph 4). Entry is gained through a pair of glazed metal doors with a transom above. A similar entry onto a second-story balcony is located directly above. Fenestration in the building hyphen consists of full-height, fixed windows with black anodized frames.

The 1967-constructed portion of the facility abuts the west side of the two-story building hyphen. This single-story building section has a T-shaped plan and an east-west orientation (Photograph 3). The building is characterized by a flat roof with deep eaves and fascia that is supported by repeating narrow, concrete pylons with wood sheathing on all sides (Photograph 3 and Photograph 5). It includes fullheight, tinted fixed windows with black anodized frames. Primary entry into this section and the main entrance to the entire facility is through a pair of glass double doors with black anodized frames on the east end of the north-facing façade (Photograph 4).

Photograph 3: North side of building complex, with two-story building hyphen on left, facing southeast, December 16, 2022.

Photograph 4: Detail of north side of the building complex with two-story hyphen on left. Note the recessed window near the center of the frame faces an interior courtyard (see Photographs 15 and 16), facing south, December 16, 2022.
532
4 A secondary entry is through a pair of glass double doors with black anodized frames on the east end of the south side (Photograph 6).

Photograph 5: Overview of west and south sides of building complex, facing northeast, December 16, 2022.

Photograph 6: Detail of entry on south side, facing north, December 16, 2022.

Like the north side of the facility, a two-story building hyphen built in 1984 connects the 1962- constructed east half of the building and the 1967-constructed west half of the building. It also features 533
5 similar entry configurations on the first- and second stories (Photograph 7). East of the building hyphen is the south end of the 1962 portion of the facility that is accessed by a roll up door (Photograph 8).

Photograph 7: Detail of entrances in two-story building hyphen on south side, facing north. Note the window at the center of the frame faces an interior courtyard (see Photograph 16).

Photograph 8: Two-story office section (on left) and overhead entry door into laboratory section (on right) on south side, facing north, December 16, 2022.

A single-story chemical storage addition, constructed in 1985, is at the southeast corner of the facility.

The addition has a square plan, a flat roof, with scored panel lines in the concrete exterior (Error! Reference source not found.). Primary entry is gained through a pair of flush metal double doors on the 534
6 west side. A small, corrugated metal shed roof addition that was constructed between 1993 and 2002 is on the west side. Projecting boxed eaves are on the south and east sides above chain-link wall sections with integrated entry doors (Photograph 10). A single metal entry door is on the north end of the east side of the addition and protected by a cantilevered metal awning that is affixed to the addition and the 1962 portion of the facility (Photograph 11).

Photograph 9: Southeast corner of building complex, facing northeast, December 16, 2022. Note this section was added in 1985.

Photograph 10: Overview of south and east sides of building complex, facing northwest, December 16, 2022.
535
7 An overhead roll-up door is centrally located on the east side of the facility, and two glass double doors are in the north end of the south side, all located in the 1962 portion of the facility (Photograph 11 and Photograph 12).

Photograph 11: South end of the east side of building complex, facing northwest, December 16, 2022. Note most of this side consists of the original 1962-constructed section.

Photograph 12: North end of the east side of building complex, facing south December 16, 2022. Note most of this side consists of the original 1962-constructed section. 536
8 The facility contains three open-air courtyards. The east courtyard is in the 1962 portion of the facility. It is accessed from inside the building on the north and south ends through aluminum-frame glass double doors set into fixed window surrounds (Photograph 13 and Photograph 14). Ribbon windows line the entire length of the west side of the courtyard and three-quarters of the length of the east side. Two wood benches are sited on the north end of the courtyard. A variety of mature trees and shrubs are planted in the ground, including Bird of Paradise, Pygmy Palm, Foxtail Fern, Olive, Ivy, Japanese Aralia, and Oleander. Most of the courtyard is paved with concrete.

Photograph 13: Southern entry into the east courtyard, facing north, December 16, 2022.

Photograph 14: Northern entry into the east courtyard, facing northeast, December 16, 2022. 537
9 The central courtyard lines the west side of the two-story building hyphen. It was originally larger, but was encroached upon with the two-story building hyphen addition. This courtyard is visible from inside the building along two hallways that connect the 1967 building section to the 1984 building hyphen.

Access into the central courtyard is on the south end through an anodized metal-frame glass door set into fixed window surrounds (Photograph 15). Full-height fixed windows line the north side of the central courtyard (Photograph 16). Plantings consist of several varieties of ferns of shrubs. A concrete walkway and repeating narrow, concrete pylons with wood sheathing line the west side of the courtyard.

Photograph 15: Southern entry into central courtyard, facing north, December 16, 2022. 538
10 Photograph 16: Northern end of central courtyard, facing south, December 16, 2022.

The west courtyard is in the 1967 portion of the facility. It is accessed from inside the building on the north end through flush double doors set into fixed window surrounds (Photograph 17). Offices with fullheight, tinted fixed windows with black anodized frames and repeating narrow, concrete pylons with wood sheathing line the west and east sides of the courtyard (Photograph 18). A small water feature is sited near the center of the courtyard with a concrete pagoda. Plantings consist of several matures trees, a few shrubs, and two potted trees. Several rocks of various sizes have been placed adjacent to and north of the water feature. Dry-laid brick largely covers the courtyard floor with concrete around the perimeter.
539
11 Photograph 17: Northern entry into west courtyard, facing south, December 16, 2022.

Photograph 18: Overview of west courtyard, facing southwest, December 16, 2022. 540
12 Property Development
In October 1961, Royal Research Corporation (Royal Research), a scientific research and development enterprise, purchased 13 acres of undeveloped, agricultural-zoned land between Dublin Boulevard and Highway 50 from William T. and Alice K. Marsh. That same month Alameda County approved Royal Research’s request to rezone the property into a special industrial zone to build a new research and development facility. At the time, Dublin was a small agricultural community with one school and one church, but a new 9,500-home development called San Ramon Village was underway on the north side of town. Royal Research surveyed the entire county to select a site to build their facility and chose this property because of the somewhat remote location. The company was already leasing a small office across the street at 11824 Dublin Avenue and were relying on the budding labor pool of new San Ramon Village residents (Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 1994 July 1: Appendix A; Oakland Tribune 1960 September 4; Oakland Tribune 1961 October 27; Oakland Tribune 1960 August 7).

In 1962, Royal Research which manufactured enclosures for safe handling of radioactive and hazardous materials, commissioned construction of a 25,000-square-foot research and development facility on the subject property (Plate 1 and Plate 2). The building housed offices and small laboratory spaces with a central courtyard in the north end, and the main laboratory area in the taller south end. Construction of the facility totaled nearly $350,000 with an additional $350,000 for equipment and was completed by the end of the year (Stockton Daily Evening Record 1962 July 31; Daily Review 1962 August 22).

Plate 1: 1962 architectural rendering of the Royal Research Corporation building, which is the east half of the extant facility. Note the east courtyard is in the building section in the foreground (Source: Daily Review 1962 August 22).

Royal Research continued to occupy the facility until 1966 when it was sold to Hexcel Products, Inc. (Hexcel). Based in Berkeley, Hexcel was the largest developer and manufacturer of honeycomb, a structural material used in a number of applications, primarily associated with the aeronautics and aerospace industries. When looking to relocate from Berkeley, the executives at Hexcel sought a site somewhere between Carquinez Strait and Palo Alto, preferably near a college campus to draw from a technical labor pool for research and development, with the former Royal Research facility fitting its needs. Soon after the purchase, Hexcel announced a million-dollar, 20,000-square foot expansion of the research and development facility with a new administrative headquarters designed by San Francisco architecture firm Lackey, Knorr, Elliott & Associates. Hexcel closed their headquarters in Berkeley and relocated to Dublin and moved their manufacturing plants in Berkeley and Oakland to plants in Arizona, 541
13 Texas, and Maryland (Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 1994 July 1: Appendix A; Oakland Tribune 1966 May 18; Oakland Tribune 1967 November 12; San Francisco Examiner 1966 May 18; Contra Costa Times 1967 February 24).

Plate 2: 1965 photograph showing the original 1962-constructed building with the visible courtyard (now the east courtyard) (Source: UCSB 1965).

Hexcel’s new headquarters addition, completed in early 1967, housed the engineering, marketing, finance and general administrative staff. The original 1962 section was utilized as laboratory space for further research and development (Plate 3). Hexcel president William S. Powell understood that technical employees were in great demand and wanted to entice new hires, so the building design included fullheight tinted glass windows, courtyards, enclosed breezeways, and patios to provide outdoor views along with comfortable, carpeted workspaces, air conditioning, and taped music piped through an internal speaker system (Plate 4 and Plate 5) (Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26; Contra Costa Times 1967 February 24; Oakland Tribune 1967 November 12).

The Hexcel facility remained the same until the 1980s. In 1984 construction of a two-story hyphen connected the 1962 and 1967 buildings, resulting in a central courtyard. A small lab and chemical storage addition was constructed at the southeast corner of the facility the following year (Oakland Tribune 1984 May 16; Oakland Tribune 1984 July 11; Oakland Tribune 1985 November 13). 542
14 Plate 3: 1967 architectural rendering of the Hexcel addition with the 1962 building section on the far left.

The arrow on the left indicates the location of the central courtyard prior to enclosure and the arrow on the right indicates the location of the west courtyard (Source: Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26).

Plate 4: 1967 photograph with view of west courtyard from office along the east side. Note the border of the courtyard water feature on the far right and original Irish moss planted as ground cover (Source: Oakland Tribune 1967 November 12).
543
15 Plate 5: 1967 photograph of a patio area with privacy screens added at northwest corner of the 1962 building section during the 1967 facility expansion. Note the privacy screens and signage are no longer extant (Source: Oakland Tribune 1967 November 12).

Royal Research Corporation
Royal Research Corporation, originally called Dublin Industries, was founded in Berkeley in 1959 by former Lawrence Radiation Laboratory staff (now known as the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory).

The company focused on producing custom-made mechanical devices to handle radioactive materials.

General Electric served as their primary customer for handling material at the Vallecitos Atomic Laboratory in nearby Sunol. In 1960, the company expanded into research, hiring Dr. William W.T. Crane, who headed heavy elements processing at Lawrence Radiation Laboratory from 1948 to 1958. Crane would later become president of the company. Dublin Industries merged with the Pasadena-based Royal Industries in August 1960, which was an engineering firm. After the merger, Dublin Industries was renamed Royal Research Corporation, operating as a subsidiary to Royal Industries (Daily Review 1962 August 22; Los Angeles Times 1957 October 11).

The first major research contract obtained by Royal Research was to develop an isotopic power supply for the Atomic Energy Commission that resulted in the creation of thermo-electric generators for underwater seismic stations that could last several years. Within two years, Royal Research expanded research into vacuum devices to handle reactive materials, energy conversion, and microwave technology; 90 percent of their contracts were with the U.S. government (Daily Review 1962 August 22).

In June 1963, Royal Industries, Inc. sold Royal Research to General Technology Corporation which included use of the Dublin plant (subject facility). Royal Industries, Inc. retained ownership of the plant before selling the facility to Hexcel Products, Inc. in 1966 (Pasadena Independent 1963 June 5; Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 1994 July 1: Appendix A).
544
16 Hexcel Corporation
Hexcel Corporation can trace its formation to 1946 when two University of California alumni, Roger C.

Steele and Roscoe T. “Bud” Hughes decided to experiment with new construction material technologies developed during World War II, including plastics, in Hughes’ basement at his house in Berkeley. Steele’s experimentation led to the creation of structural honeycomb, which he demonstrated at a governmentsponsored plastics conference as the California Reinforced Plastics Company (Plate 6). This demonstration secured a research and development contract of his expandable honeycomb for use in military aircraft radar domes in 1948. That same year, the company hired chemist Ken Holland to oversee resin research and development. The company furthered their ties with the military in 1949 when they won a low-bid contract to develop honeycomb fuel cell support panels for B-36 bombers (Pederson, ed. 1999: 193; Oakland Tribune 1967 May 22; Hexcel.com 2023; Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26).

Plate 6: Photograph of Hexcel’s structural honeycomb material (Source: Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26).
545
17 In 1954, the company changed its name to Hexcel Products Inc. and continued creating honeycomb in a variety of materials including plastic, aluminum, fiberglass and paper, resulting in the highest strengthto-weight ratio material on the market with excellent energy absorption properties. Although the technology was initially used in aerospace, implementation of paper materials expanded use into commercial and residential building materials for use in interior partitions and mobile homes, and well as furniture manufacturing. By the end of the decade, Hexcel ran its headquarters out of Berkeley in a shared warehouse building at 2332 Fourth Street and had opened manufacturing plants in Berkeley, Oakland, and Havre de Grace in Maryland (Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26; Pederson, ed. 1999: 193; Oakland Tribune 1959 September 17; San Francisco Examiner 1962 July 2).

In the 1960s, Hexcel had several large contracts with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), military, and commercial aviation clients. In 1968 Hexcel acquired Coast Manufacturing and Supply Company in Livermore and diversified the company’s product range beyond structural honeycomb to include reinforced plastics, industrial glass fabrics, structural adhesives, industrial resin compounds, and diffusion bonded assemblies. This shift occurred as the Federal government began to divest large-scale pursuits and the public’s interest in government programs shifted following the moon landing and withdrawal from Vietnam in 1969. Using the new materials procured from the Coast acquisition, Hexcel designed and produced high-performance snow skis. These were the first commodity made for the direct retail market (Times Record News 1970 April 10; Hexcel.com 2023; Pederson, ed. 1999: 193-194).

Hexcel continued to diversify its portfolio in the 1970s with the acquisition of a graphite weaving company and a knee, hip, and shoulder joint replacement manufacturer. By the end of the decade only half of their sales were from honeycomb (Pederson, ed. 1999: 194).

An economic downturn and oil crisis at the end of the 1970s led to the sale of the ski and medical products and a returned focus on aviation and aerospace. The company secured a number of high value contracts, for example with NASA for components in the Columbia Space Shuttle, with Boeing, their largest customer accounting for 20 percent of total sales, and with the U. S. Air Force for its new B-2 bomber program that prompted construction of a new 160,000-square-foot manufacturing plant in Arizona. However, deregulation of the airline industry by President Ronald Reagan cut airline profits, leading to reductions of Hexcel’s Boeing and Airbus orders (Hexcel.com 2023; Oakland Tribune 1988 June 6).

The early 1990s were tumultuous for the company starting with a Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection filing in 1993. After layoffs and plant and asset sales, the company avoided bankruptcy. In 1996 Hexcel merged with two composites companies to improve vertical integration; the new combined firm had a total of 4,700 employees with 19 manufacturing plants in seven countries (Pederson, ed. 1999: 194-195).

Since the late 1990s, Hexcel continued to lead research and development in honeycomb, carbon fiber, and resin structural materials. The company has contracts with a number of aerospace companies including Airbus, Boeing, SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Lockheed Martin. In May 2021, a groundbreaking ceremony was held in West Valley City, Utah for the company’s new research and technology headquarters with plans to vacate the Dublin facility in 2023 (Hexcel.com 2023).

Hexcel and NASA
In 1958, NASA utilized Hexcel honeycomb in their first spacecraft, Pioneer 1. The satellite probe included eight square feet of fiberglass reinforced Hexcel honeycomb plastic that only weighed 15 ounces. At a press conference hosted by Hexcel president Roger C. Steele in October 1958, he lauded the company’s honeycomb “structural sandwich” construction as the “highest strength to weight ratio of any material known to man” and could be used “to build a space vehicle of extraordinary strength with an absolute minimum of weight” (Oakland Tribune 1958 October 23). The special fiberglass reinforced plastic honeycomb was developed for radio and electrical transmission properties, and the structural sandwich construction created a heat resistant barrier to protect the internal instrumentation. Although Pioneer 1 546
18 was meant to orbit the moon, a programming error resulted in the satellite only traveling 71,300 of the 222,000 miles, but did collect data of the extent of the Earth's radiation belts (Concord Transcript 1958 December 8).

Success of the structural integrity of Pioneer 1 led to more contracts between Hexcel and NASA. By the early 1960s, Hexcel developed cutting-edge materials for several space programs and missions including the Mariner Program satellites (1960-1975); Project Mercury spacecraft (1958-1961); Project Gemini spacecraft (1961-1966); and Apollo Program command and lunar module spacecraft (1960- 1972). Hexcel honeycomb protected John Glen as he became the first American to orbit the earth in February 1962 in Friendship 7, part of the Mercury program (Oakland Tribune 1962 September 23; Hexcel.com 2023; Contra Costa Times 1970 June 21).

Hexcel continued research and development for NASA through the 1960s and created several types of honeycomb for NASA spacecraft. The Apollo 8 capsule held three astronauts when it left Earth’s and orbited the Moon ten times in December 1968 and contained layers of honeycomb to create the lightweight but high-strength structural capsule shell. A cylindrical honeycomb called “tube-core” was installed under the
astronauts’ seats to help
absorb G-force energy
loads. A heatshield made of
stainless-steel honeycomb
and steel alloy sheets and an
internal reinforced plastic
honeycomb ablative heat
shield were placed on the
inside and outside of the
capsule (Contra Costa
Times 1968 December 4).

This same structural and
heat protection honeycomb
was used in subsequent
capsules in the Apollo
program, including Apollo 9
(Plate 7) and Apollo 11.

Hexcel also developed a
new honeycomb used on the
Apollo 11 lunar module
landing struts and footpads
for the first moon landing in
July 1969. This specific
honeycomb design crushed
and folded-in on itself to a
absorb the impact of the
landing and prevent
bouncing (Plate 8) (Contra
Costa Times 1967 March 26;
Contra Costa Times 1969
March 28; Times Record Plate 7: Drawing and description of Hexcel honeycomb for Apollo 9 (Source: Contra Costa Times 1969 March 28).
547
19 News 1970 April 10). After the moon landing, a
local newspaper interviewed proud Hexcel
employees at the headquarters in Dublin. While
the newspaper noted that 300,000 people from
20,000 companies were involved in some
capacity with the moon landing, Hexcel stood
out because they “developed the best material
NASA has found for use in spacecraft” (Argus
1969 July 24).

Hexcel continued its NASA relationship into the
1970s and development of the Space Shuttle
program. Hexcel honeycomb was used in the
nose cap, payload doors, and wings in the first
space shuttle Columbia that launched in April
1981. Columbia flew 28 missions during its 22
years in service (NASA.gov 2023; Hexcel.com
2023).

Hexcel also supplied $1 million worth of
materials for the Discovery Space Shuttle
launched in August 1984. Honeycomb was
used in the cargo bay doors, a new carbon
composite heat shield material that could be
used on several missions before needing to be
replaced and wove high-temperature resistant
ceramic fabric to line the flight crew’s cabin to
protect them from extreme heat upon earth reentry (Seguin Gazette Enterprise 1988 September 30; Hexcel.com 2023).

Lackey, Knorr & Elliott (1967 Hexcel
addition)
Hexcel commissioned the large headquarters
addition to the 1962 former Royal Research
facility in 1967 from architects Lackey, Knorr &
Elliott, based out of San Francisco. Donald R.

Knorr and Edward P. Elliott formed their first
partnership Knorr-Elliott & Associates in 1958.

The firm received awards of excellence from
Architectural Record for residential designs in
1958 and 1963; a citation for the Dux
Incorporated furniture company headquarters
and warehouse in South San Francisco in 1963;
a merit award for a dental plaza in Stanford in
1963; and an environmental award for the Koret
of California distribution plant in South San
Francisco in 1968 (Plate 9) (PCAD 2023b; AIA
1970: 516). In 1967, the partnership included
architect Lawrence Lackey, with the 1967
Hexcel addition appearing to be the only design
produced by the collaboration (Oakland Tribune
1967 November 12). Lackey was an urban
planner, architect, and landscape architect
Plate 8: Diagrams showing where Hexcel honeycomb
was utilized on the Apollo 11 lunar landing module
(Source: Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26).
548
20 based out of San Francisco, active between the late 1950s and 1970s. He was best known for the Master Plan he designed for the University of Fairbanks in Alaska in 1965 (PCAD 2023a; Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26).

Plate 9: Architectural rendering of the Knorr-Elliott & Associates design for Koret of California distribution center (Source: San Francisco Examiner 1966 June 26).

Contemporary and Brutalist Architecture
The original architect of the 1962-constructed portion of the facility was not discovered in the historic record. This portion of the building was constructed with tilt-up concrete panels, which was a construction technique developed in the 1920s. Its methods were subsequently refined, and by 1962, when this building was constructed, tilt-up construction was common (Collins 1951 October: 1335-135; Jansen 1952 September: 243-245).

The 1967-constructed portion of the facility was designed with a blend of Contemporary and Brutalist styles. The Contemporary style, popular between about 1940 and 1980, is characterized by strong roof forms including flat, gabled, shed, or butterfly roofs, typically with deep overhangs; large windows, often aluminum-framed; non-traditional exterior finishes including vertical wood siding, concrete block, stucco, flagstone, and mullion-free glass; angular massing; sun shades, screens, or shadow block accents; horizontally oriented commercial buildings; distinctive triangular, parabolic, or arched forms; “eyebrow” overhangs on commercial buildings, and integrated, stylized signage on commercial buildings (McAlester 2013: 628-632). The building also has elements of Brutalism, which was popular from the late 1950s to mid-1970s and commonly used for educational and civic buildings. Brutalism is characterized by unadorned rough concrete, heavy block shapes, large massing, flat roofs, and window voids in the larger concrete massing. This aesthetic emerged in post-war Europe and was derived from the French phrase “beton brut,” which means raw or rough concrete. However, the 1967-constructed portion of the facility does not have the rough concrete finish seen in most Brutalist buildings and instead employs a stucco finish concrete throughout the exterior (PAST Consultants, LLC. 2009 June: 85-86).

Historic Significance Criteria and Evaluation
Man in Space National Historic Landmark Theme Study
Congress passed Public Law 96-344 in 1980 which directed the Secretary of the Interior to produce a study that identified events and locations associated with the “Man in Space” theme to be brought into the National Park system and ways to present these significant locations, structures, and objects to the public. It also required evaluation of the resources identified with the Man in Space theme for recommendation as National Historic Landmarks (NHLs). The resulting study was first published in 1984 as “Man in Space: A National Historic Landmark Theme Study,” prepared by Dr. Harry A. Butowsky. In it, Butowsky identified 23 research and development facilities, testing facilities and stands, astronaut training facilities, tracking stations, mission control centers, a launch pad, and the Saturn 5 Space Vehicle 549
21 that he recommended as NHLs and prepared NRHP Nomination Forms for each resource (Butowsky 1984 May: passim). Butowsky acknowledges that undoubtedly contractor-owned facilities and sites played significant roles in the United States’s pursuit to the moon and subsequent space programs, however this document in its first phase does not identify or provide guidance about these properties.

The original report does however identify four significant themes for the Man in Space context which resources would be considered historically significant. They include: 1. Technical Foundations before 1958; 2. The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon; 3. The Exploration of the Planets and the Solar System; and 4. The Role of Scientific and Communications Satellites. These four subthemes provided a foundation for identification of significant properties. However, this early report lacks the details to clearly spell out what types of properties would or would not be significant under these subthemes for modern NRHP analysis.

A second phase of the report was published later in 1984 that identified another launch pad as well as three spacecrafts, which were not previously identified in the first report. The three spacecrafts, Mercury Friendship 7 (1962), Gemini 4 (1964), and the Apollo 11 Command Module (1969) were all located in the National Air and Space Museum at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. Butowsky declared the three spacecrafts as “nationally significant historic objects … it is important to recognize the national significance of the objects having internal integrity which have contributed critically to the success of the space program and, together, form an integral chapter in that program’s history” (Butowsky 1984 August:1-2). These spacecrafts represented a first, or breakthrough, for each program’s mission. While the first phase of the report stated that the second phase would examine the importance of contractors, it was not included. Butowsky did not specifically call out any private company, but he described the use of Hexcel fiberglass honeycomb in the description of the Apollo 11 Command Module. All three of these spacecrafts contain honeycomb developed by Hexcel for NASA (Butowsky 1984 August: passim).

California Register of Historical Resources Significance The criteria for listing historical resources in the CRHR are consistent with those developed for listing in the NRHP but have been modified for state use in order to include a range of historical resources which better reflect the history of California. An historical resource must be significant at the local, state, or national level under one or more of the following four criteria:

1. is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States;

2. is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history;

3. embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or

4. has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation.

CRHR 1
Under CRHR Criterion 1, the Hexcel facility at 11711 Dublin Boulevard is significant at the national level for its association with the Man in Space historic context under subtheme 2. The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon. Specifically, the research and development of materials by Hexcel were integral to the success of NASA’s Pioneer 1, Project Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo. The honeycomb technology and materials developed by Hexcel allowed NASA to build strong, heat-resistant, yet lightweight spacecrafts that could withstand the stressors of space and protect its human occupants. Use of Hexcel honeycomb in the three NHL significant objects, Mercury Friendship 7 Spacecraft (1962), Gemini 4 Spacecraft (1964), and the Apollo 11 Command Module (1969) are of fundamental importance to the United States and its success in the Space Race to the moon. Furthermore, Hexcel’s crushable honeycomb used on the landing struts and footpads of the Apollo 11 lunar module were the first objects to touch the moon in July 1969 and were pivotal to the success of the moon landing. 550
22 While the Hexcel honeycomb utilized in Friendship 7 and the Gemini 4 spacecrafts was developed at Hexcel’s first research and development lab in Berkeley, the Apollo 11 mission took place two years after Hexcel expanded the facility in Dublin into its research and development and administrative headquarters. This clear association with subtheme 2 demonstrates how Hexcel’s Dublin facility played a significant role at the national level for the successful moon landing in 1969.

Additional significance evaluation of Hexcel’s Dublin facility is required, because it is not the only example of Hexcel’s importance in The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon. Hexcel’s first research and development facility was located in a shared warehouse at 2332 Fourth Street in Berkeley that they occupied between 1957 and 1967 (Oakland Tribune 1957 June 23; Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26).

While this building is where Hexcel employees developed the first honeycomb used for NASA, the purpose-built research and development and administration headquarters built in Dublin is a better representation of the company’s significance as a leader in structural honeycomb technology.

Moreover, the building at 2332 Fourth Street in Berkeley appears to have undergone extensive remodeling new windows, doors, and scored concrete finish. As such, the building has lost integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling of the timeframe that Hexcel occupied the building. As discussed below, Hexcel’s Dublin facility retains sufficient integrity to the established period of significance and is therefore, a better representation of Hexcel’s significance under this criterion.

CRHR 2
Under CRHR Criterion 2, this facility is not associated with a significant individual. The facility has been utilized by countless research and development staff, and research did not reveal any individuals who made demonstrably important contributions to history at the local, state, or national level. While Roger C. Steele is credited with creating Hexcel’s first structural honeycomb, he developed it in the mid- to late 1940s in Roscoe Hughes’ basement in Berkeley, and the honeycomb used on Friendship 7 and the Gemini 4 were developed at the company’s facility in Berkeley. The house and the Berkeley laboratory have stronger associations with Steele’s technological successes rather than the Hexcel facility in Dublin, therefore, this facility is not eligible under this criterion.

CRHR 3
Under CRHR Criterion 3, this facility is not significant because it is not an important example of a type, period, or method of construction. The building is a combination of Contemporary and Brutalist styles.

The Contemporary style proliferated for commercial and residential buildings in the post-World War II era throughout the Bay Area, California, and the nation. The overall facility is a typical example of this style and is unremarkable. It also lacks the high artistic value or distinctive design or engineering that would merit listing in the CRHR.

Additionally, this facility does not represent the work of a master. There is no indication that the 1962- constructed portion of the facility is the work of a maser architect or would be considered a good example of a master architect’s portfolio if further research determined that it was designed by a master architect. The 1967-constructed portion of the facility was a singular design through a collaboration of Lawrence Lackey and Knorr-Elliott & Associates. There is no indication that Lawrence Lackey would be considered a master. Likewise, while the Knorr-Elliott & Associates partnership received awards, there is no indication that either Knorr or Elliott rise to the level of a master architect. Therefore, the facility is not eligible under this criterion.

CRHR 4
Criterion 4 is typically used to evaluate archaeological sites for their potential to yield data important to understanding the prehistory of the area or region. For built environment resources, under CRHR Criterion 4, this facility does not appear to have any likelihood of yielding important information about historic construction materials or technologies, and therefore, does not appear to be eligible under this criterion.
551
23 Integrity Analysis
Historical resources eligible for listing in the CRHR must meet one or more of the criteria of significance and retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. The resource must retain integrity to its period of significance to be considered eligible for listing. The period of significance of the Hexcel facility under subtheme 2: The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon is 1967 when the company expanded and relocated to the Dublin facility and 1969 when Apollo 11 landed on the moon.

Integrity is the authenticity of a historical resource's physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance. A resource that has lost its historic character or appearance may still have sufficient integrity for the CRHR if it maintains the potential to yield significant scientific or historical information or specific data. Historic integrity is made up of seven aspects:
location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.

The character-defining features of the Hexcel facility are: the interspatial connection between the 1962- constructed research and development laboratory building section on the east half and the 1967- constructed administration area on the west half; the repeating narrow, concrete pylons with wood sheathing and full-height, tinted fixed windows with black anodized frames on the administration building section; the lack of windows in the laboratory building section; and the east courtyard and west courtyards.

Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event took place. The location of this facility has remained the same; therefore, the integrity of location remains intact.

Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, and style of a property. The facility was altered from the original 1967 Hexcel design with the two-story building hyphen added in 1984 and the small chemical storage addition at the rear of the facility in 1985. These changes only slightly modified the form and plan of the original 1967-constructed facility.

Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. The immediate setting of the property continues to be a mixture of post-war residential and commercial construction.

Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern of configuration to form a historic property. None of the changes made to the facility changed the materials used in the 1962 or 1967 building sections. The materials used in the 1984 and 1985 additions were sympathetic in both material, texture, and color to the extant building sections.

Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. The additions made in 1984 and 1985 are complementary to the Hexcel design and do not diminish the integrity of workmanship of the 1962- or 1967-constructed portions of the facility.

Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. While the two-story building hyphen added in 1984 and the small chemical storage addition at the rear of the facility in 1985 have lightly affected integrity of design, the facility still conveys the feeling as a 1960sconstructed research and development facility.

Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. The facility is where research and development occurred to put a man on the moon between 1967 and 1969, and at the time of recordation, was still occupied by Hexcel. The facility retains integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, and feeling as a 552
24 1960s-constructed research and development facility, and therefore, retains a direct association with the Man in Space historic context under subtheme 2. The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon.

Historical Significance Conclusion
Based on the results of this historical resource evaluation, the Hexcel facility at 11711 Dublin Avenue is eligible for listing in the CRHR under Criterions 1 because it is significant at the national level for its association with the Man in Space historic context under subtheme 2. The Effort to Land a Man on the Moon and retains sufficient integrity to its period of significance (1967 and 1969). The property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code and is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA.

References
AIA Historical Directory of American Architects (AIA). 1970. “Knorr, Don Robert.” Available:
https://content.aia.org/sites/default/files/2018-09/Bowker_1970_K.pdf. Accessed January 2023.

Argus. 1969 July 24. “Honeybee Plays A Part In Apollo Moon Voyage.” 5.

Butowsky, Dr. Harry A. 1984 May. Man in Space: National Historic Landmark Theme Study. n.p. Available at: https://historicproperties.arc.nasa.gov/downloads/man_in_space_butowsky.pdf. Accessed January 2023.
________. 1984 August. Man in Space: National Historic Landmark Theme Study, Phase II. n.p. Available at: http://npshistory.com/publications/nhl/theme-studies/man-in-space-2.pdf. Accessed January 2023.

Collins, F. Thomas. 1951 October. “Tilt-up Construction in the Western United States,” Journal of the American Concrete Institute.

Concord Transcript. 1958 December 8. “Moon Rocket Fails, But Space Science Gains.” 1.

Contra Costa Times. 1967 February 24. “New Research Facility Set for SR Valley.” 1-2. ________. 1967 March 26. “Hexcel in Dublin – Honeycomb Goes to Work.” 30. ________. 1968 December 4. “Hexcel Honeycomb To Cushion Apollo 8.” 4C. ________. 1969 March 28. ”Honeycomb Cocoon” [caption]. 8. ________. 1970 June 21. “SR Valley Sets Pattern For County’s New Space-Age Industry.” 7.

Daily Review (Hayward, CA). 1962 August 22. “Dublin Research Firm – New Industry Plan $350,000 Plant.”

8. Hexcel.com. 2023. “History & Timeline.” Available at: https://www.hexcel.com/About/History-andTimeline. Accessed January 2023.

Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 1994 July 1. Results of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of the Hexcel Research and Development Facility, 11711 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California, Prepared for Hexcel Corporation.

Jansen, Franklin G. 1952 September. “Tilt-Up Construction,” CEC Bulletin, 6:9.

Los Angeles Times .1957 October 11. “Century Eng. Wil Change Name to Royal Industries.” Part Five,

McAlester, Virginia Savage. 2013. A Field Guide To American Houses. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf. 553
25 NASA.gov. 2023. “NASA Orbiter Fleet.” Available at:
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/shuttleoperations/orbiters/columbia_info.html.

Accessed January 2023.

Oakland Tribune. 1957 June 23. “Secretary” [classified advertisement]. 34. ________. 1958. October 23. “Berkeley Form Has Tole in First Moon Probe Vehicle.” 34. ________. 1959 September 17. “Notes on Bay Commerce.” 62. ________. 1960 August 7. “Two Eastbay Atomic Firms Merge, Plan for Expansion.” 26. ________. 1960 September 4. “San Ramon Village Grand Opening: Celebration Starts Today at Model City. 2-R.
________. 1961 October 27. “Supervisors OK Expansion in Dublin Area.” 11-E. ________. 1962 September 23. “Button Pusher: Canaveral Just Fires Cal Creations.” 43. ________. 1966 May 18. “$1 Million Headquarters For Hexcel in Dublin.” 46. ________. 1967 May 22. “News of Business, Industry.” 13. ________. 1967 November 12. “Courtyards and Patios Upgrade Environment.” 10-CM – 11-CM. ________. 1984 July 11. “Building Permits – Dublin.” 62. ________. 1984 May 16. “Building Permits – Dublin.” 64. ________. 1985 November 13. “Building Permits – Dublin.” 16. ________. 1988 June 6. “Hexcel.” B-3.

Pacific Coast Architecture Database (PCAD). 2023a. “Lawrence Lackey.” Available at:
https://pcad.lib.washington.edu/person/3022/. Accessed January 2023. ________. 2023b. “Knorr – Elliott and Associates, Architects (Partnership).” Available at:
https://pcad.lib.washington.edu/firm/1030/. Accessed January 2023.

Pasadena Independent. 1963 June 5. “Royal Industries Sells Subsidiary.” 19.

PAST Consultants, LLC. 2009 June. San Jose Modernism: Historic Context Statement, prepared for Preservation Action Council of San Jose.

Pederson, Jay P., Editor. 1999. International Directory of Company Histories, Volume 28. San Francisco, CA: St. James Press.

San Francisco Examiner. 1962 July 2. “Industrial Engineer” [classified advertisement]. 36. ________. 1966 June 26. “Big Koret Shipping Center.” 25. ________. 1966 May 18. “$1 Million Bay Unit for Hexcel.” 71.

Seguin Gazette-Enterprise (Seguin, Texas). 1988 September 30. “Discovery Carries Hexcel Products.” 1-

2. Stockton Daily Evening Record. 1962 July 31. “Work Starts on Bay Area Plant.” 4.

Times Record News (Wichita Falls, Texas). 1970 April 10. “Apollo 13 Flight Materials Produced In Graham Plant.” 5A.

University of Santa Barbara Library (UCSB). 1965 May 15. Flight ID CAS-65-130, Frame 9-190 [aerial photograph].

VerPlanck, Christopher. “Department of Parks and Recreation form: 11711 Dublin Boulevard.” P-01- 010656, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. 554
26 Attachment - Location Map
555
Appendix D: CalEEMod Output Sheets
556
This page intentionally left blank
557
Hexcel Redevelopment
Construction Emissions By Phase and SourcePhase Year Category ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Demolition 2023 Off-Road 0.067 0.6338 0.5317 1.06E-03 0 0.0296 0.0296 0 0.0278 0.0278 0 92.8197 92.8197 0.0216 0 93.3606 Demolition 2023 Fug Dust 0 0 0 0 0.0309 0 0.0309 4.67E-03 0 4.67E-03 0 0 0 0 0 0 Demolition 2023 Hauling 1.26E-03 0.08 0.0181 3.60E-04 0.0103 6.80E-04 0.011 2.84E-03 6.50E-04 3.49E-03 0 35.457 35.457 7.50E-04 5.60E-03 37.1452 Demolition 2023 Vendor 7.00E-05 2.84E-03 8.60E-04 1.00E-05 4.30E-04 2.00E-05 4.40E-04 1.20E-04 2.00E-05 1.40E-04 0 1.2574 1.2574 2.00E-05 1.90E-04 1.3139 Demolition 2023 Worker 1.27E-03 8.70E-04 0.0108 3.00E-05 3.85E-03 2.00E-05 3.87E-03 1.03E-03 2.00E-05 1.04E-03 0 3.0013 3.0013 9.00E-05 8.00E-05 3.0287 Site Prep-Grading 2023 Off-Road 0.017 0.1973 0.1097 3.20E-04 0 6.83E-03 6.83E-03 0 6.29E-03 6.29E-03 0 27.6882 27.6882 8.95E-03 0 27.9121 Site Prep-Grading 2023 Fug Dust 0 0 0 0 0.0114 0 0.0114 1.26E-03 0 1.26E-03 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site Prep-Grading 2023 Hauling 3.00E-05 1.64E-03 3.70E-04 1.00E-05 2.10E-04 1.00E-05 2.30E-04 6.00E-05 1.00E-05 7.00E-05 0 0.7284 0.7284 2.00E-05 1.20E-04 0.7631 Site Prep-Grading 2023 Vendor 2.00E-05 9.20E-04 2.80E-04 0 1.40E-04 1.00E-05 1.40E-04 4.00E-05 1.00E-05 5.00E-05 0 0.4062 0.4062 1.00E-05 6.00E-05 0.4245 Site Prep-Grading 2023 Worker 4.10E-04 2.80E-04 3.50E-03 1.00E-05 1.25E-03 1.00E-05 1.25E-03 3.30E-04 1.00E-05 3.40E-04 0 0.9696 0.9696 3.00E-05 3.00E-05 0.9785 Trenching 2024 Off-Road 3.40E-03 0.0299 0.0578 9.00E-05 0 1.42E-03 1.42E-03 0 1.31E-03 1.31E-03 0 7.6397 7.6397 2.47E-03 0 7.7015Trenching 2024 Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trenching 2024 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Trenching 2024 Worker 1.50E-04 1.00E-04 1.24E-03 0 4.70E-04 0 4.80E-04 1.30E-04 0 1.30E-04 0 0.3574 0.3574 1.00E-05 1.00E-05 0.3606 Bulding Construction-Exterior 2024 Off-Road 0.0822 0.7366 0.8868 1.60E-03 0 0.0325 0.0325 0 0.0313 0.0313 0 137.3069 137.3069 0.02 0 137.8069Bulding Construction-Exterior 2024 Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bulding Construction-Exterior 2024 Vendor 2.69E-03 0.1198 0.0354 5.40E-04 0.0179 7.30E-04 0.0187 5.19E-03 7.00E-04 5.88E-03 0 51.9666 51.9666 7.20E-04 7.79E-03 54.3048 Bulding Construction-Exterior 2024 Worker 0.0167 0.011 0.142 4.40E-04 0.0542 2.70E-04 0.0544 0.0144 2.50E-04 0.0147 0 40.7957 40.7957 1.14E-03 1.10E-03 41.1533 Paving 2024 Off-Road 0.0104 0.0979 0.1466 2.30E-04 0 4.69E-03 4.69E-03 0 4.33E-03 4.33E-03 0 19.6486 19.6486 6.21E-03 0 19.8037 Paving 2024 Paving 2.54E-03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Paving 2024 Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Paving 2024 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Paving 2024 Worker 5.40E-04 3.50E-04 4.58E-03 1.00E-05 1.75E-03 1.00E-05 1.76E-03 4.60E-04 1.00E-05 4.70E-04 0 1.3166 1.3166 4.00E-05 4.00E-05 1.3281 Building Interior - Arch Coating 2024 Off-Road 5.31E-03 0.0414 0.0675 1.10E-04 0 1.74E-03 1.74E-03 0 1.73E-03 1.73E-03 0 9.3932 9.3932 1.29E-03 0 9.4254Building Interior - Arch Coating 2024 Arch Coating 0.6917 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Building Interior - Arch Coating 2024 Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Building Interior - Arch Coating 2024 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Building Interior - Arch Coating 2024 Worker 7.00E-04 4.60E-04 5.93E-03 2.00E-05 2.26E-03 1.00E-05 2.27E-03 6.00E-04 1.00E-05 6.10E-04 0 1.7038 1.7038 5.00E-05 5.00E-05 1.7187 Annual Emissions Summary ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 2023 0.09 0.92 0.67531 0.0018 0.05848 0.04 0.09566 0.01035 0.03 0.04515 0 162.3278 162.3278 0.03147 0.00608 164.9266 2024 0.82 1.04 1.34785 0.00304 0.07658 0.04 0.11796 0.02078 0.04 0.06046 0 270.1285 270.1285 0.03193 0.00899 273.603 Total 0.90 1.96 2.02316 0.00484 0.13506 0.08 0.21362 0.03113 0.07 0.10561 0 432.4563 432.4563 0.0634 0.01507 438.5296 ROG NOx Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5
Average Daily Emissions (lbs) 6.92 14.98 0.60 0.57
Construction Start Date 9/1/2023
Construction End Date 8/30/2024
Construction Work Days 261
558
Hexcel Redevelopment
Operational Emissions SummaryProposed Project Emissions ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e CategoryArea 0.5707 3.00E-05 2.83E-03 0 0 1.00E-05 1.00E-05 0 1.00E-05 1.00E-05 0 5.52E-03 5.52E-03 1.00E-05 0 5.88E-03 Energy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111.9466 111.9466 0.0181 2.20E-03 113.0535 Mobile 0.1066 0.2351 1.3549 4.85E-03 0.5324 3.46E-03 0.5358 0.1422 3.23E-03 0.1455 0 448.1329 448.1329 0.0126 0.0199 454.3616Stationary 7.18E-03 0.0201 0.0183 3.00E-05 0 1.06E-03 1.06E-03 0 1.06E-03 1.06E-03 0 3.332 3.332 4.70E-04 0 3.3437Waste 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26.0945 0 26.0945 1.5421 0 64.648Water 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.887 14.6592 23.5463 0.9152 0.0218 52.9335 Total 0.68448 0.25523 1.37603 0.00488 0.5324 0.00453 0.53687 0.1422 0.0043 0.14657 34.9815 578.07622 613.05782 2.48848 0.0439 688.34618 Existing Emissions
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e CategoryArea 0.2898 2.00E-05 1.87E-03 0 0 1.00E-05 1.00E-05 0 1.00E-05 1.00E-05 0 3.64E-03 3.64E-03 1.00E-05 0 3.87E-03 Energy 9.12E-03 0.0829 0.0696 5.00E-04 0 6.30E-03 6.30E-03 0 6.30E-03 6.30E-03 0 140.4201 140.4201 9.85E-03 2.64E-03 141.4526Mobile 0.3079 0.3914 2.9138 6.27E-03 0.6425 4.70E-03 0.6472 0.1716 4.38E-03 0.176 0 579.0834 579.0834 0.0368 0.0299 588.9222 Waste 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9683 0 0.9683 0.0572 0 2.3988Water 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9.7838 15.4395 25.2233 1.0074 0.024 57.569Total 0.60682 0.47432 2.98527 0.00677 0.6425 0.01101 0.65351 0.1716 0.01069 0.18231 10.7521 734.94664 745.69874 1.11126 0.05654 790.34647 ROG NOx PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Proposed Project Annual Emissions (tons) 0.68 0.26 0.54 0.15 Existing Emissions (tons) 0.61 0.47 0.65 0.18
Net Emissions (tons) 0.08 -0.22 -0.12 -0.04
Average Daily Emissions (lbs) 0.60 -1.69 -0.90 -0.27
Working Days per Year 260
GHG Emissions Summary MT CO2eTotal Construction 439Amortized Construction 15 Area 0Energy 113
Mobile 454Stationary 3
Waste 65Water 53Total Annual Emissions 703
Existing Emission 790Net Emissions -87
tons/yr MT/yrtons/yr MT/yr
559
Hexcel Redevelopment Project
Alameda County, Annual
Project Characteristics - Land Use - Project specific land uses, square footages on 8.81-acre site.Construction Phase - Project specific construction scheduleOff-road Equipment - Project specific construction equipment.Off-road Equipment - Project specific construction equipment.Off-road Equipment - Project specific equipmentOff-road Equipment - Project specific construction equipment.1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 12.00 1000sqft 0.28 12,000.00 0General Office Building 6.00 1000sqft 0.14 6,000.00 0 General Light Industry 36.50 1000sqft 0.84 36,500.00 0
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 70.80 1000sqft 3.33 70,804.00 0 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 99.11 1000sqft 2.28 99,106.00 0 Parking Lot 84.52 1000sqft 1.94 84,515.00 0

1.2 Other Project CharacteristicsUrbanizationClimate Zone Urban5
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 63

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data1.0 Project CharacteristicsUtility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company Operational Year 2025
CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 560
Off-road Equipment - Project specific construction equipment.

Off-road Equipment - Project specific construction equipment.Trips and VMT - Vendor trips during demolition and grading to account for water truck trips. Demolition-related haul truck trips based on 20CY-trucks and 12,170 CY of demo debris. Grading haul trucks based on 200 CY material import, if needed.Demolition - Square footage of existing buildingGrading - Material cut/fill anticipated to balance.Vehicle Trips - Trip rate based on Final TIS for the project (W-Trans 2022).Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Implementation of BAAQMD BMPs.Fleet Mix - LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MCY, HHD, LHD1, and LHD2 left as default fleet percentages; added OBUS, UBUS, SBUS, MCY, and MH to MDV category to account for 20% max trucks.Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps - Energy Use - Project would comply with City of Dublin Code: DMC Chapter 7.94.100 for commercial buildings - no natural gas infrastructure.

Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 22.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 230.00 107.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 65.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 21.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 34.00 tblEnergyUse NT24E 3.36 5.56tblEnergyUse NT24E 4.80 5.12tblEnergyUse NT24E 1.38 1.45tblEnergyUse NT24NG 6.90 0.00tblEnergyUse NT24NG 1.01 0.00tblEnergyUse NT24NG 0.21 0.00tblEnergyUse T24E 1.08 6.70tblEnergyUse T24E 3.66 9.43tblEnergyUse T24E 0.21 0.58tblEnergyUse T24NG 17.67 0.00tblEnergyUse T24NG 18.14 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 561
tblEnergyUse T24NG 1.17 0.00
tblFleetMix MCY 0.02 0.00tblFleetMix MDV 0.11 0.14tblFleetMix MH 2.4230e-003 0.00tblFleetMix OBUS 7.9000e-004 0.00tblFleetMix SBUS 3.4300e-004 0.00tblFleetMix UBUS 5.6000e-004 0.00 tblGrading AcresOfGrading 36.75 20.00tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 7,000.00tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 6,800.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 70,800.00 70,804.00tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 99,110.00 99,106.00tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 84,520.00 84,515.00tblLandUse LotAcreage 1.63 3.33 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 2.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 3.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 4.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 6.00 7.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 7.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 7.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 562

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 7.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 7.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 7.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 7.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 7.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 7.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 7.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 7.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 0.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 6.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 7.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 285.00 1,217.00tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 1,725.00 25.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 2.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 2.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.99 13.53tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.21 0.00tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.74 0.00tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.00 13.53tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 0.70 0.00tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.74 0.00tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 4.96 13.53tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 9.74 0.00tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 1.74 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 563

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.0871 0.9176 0.6754 1.8100e003 0.0584 0.0371 0.0956 0.0104 0.0348 0.0451 0.0000 162.3278 162.3278 0.0315 6.0800e- 003 164.92652024 0.8163 1.0374 1.3478 3.0400e003 0.0766 0.0414 0.1179 0.0208 0.0396 0.0604 0.0000 270.1284 270.1284 0.0319 8.9800e- 003 273.6029 Maximum 0.8163 1.0374 1.3478 3.0400e003 0.0766 0.0414 0.1179 0.0208 0.0396 0.0604 0.0000 270.1284 270.1284 0.0319 8.9800e- 003 273.6029 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.0871 0.9176 0.6754 1.8100e003 0.0352 0.0371 0.0723 7.0900e- 003 0.0348 0.0419 0.0000 162.3277 162.3277 0.0315 6.0800e- 003 164.92632024 0.8163 1.0374 1.3478 3.0400e003 0.0766 0.0414 0.1179 0.0208 0.0396 0.0604 0.0000 270.1282 270.1282 0.0319 8.9800e- 003 273.6027 Maximum 0.8163 1.0374 1.3478 3.0400e003 0.0766 0.0414 0.1179 0.0208 0.0396 0.0604 0.0000 270.1282 270.1282 0.0319 8.9800e- 003 273.6027 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 564
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.22 0.00 10.89 10.47 0.00 3.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 9-1-2023 11-30-2023 0.7872 0.78722 12-1-2023 2-29-2024 0.4353 0.43533 3-1-2024 5-31-2024 0.5942 0.59424 6-1-2024 8-31-2024 1.0085 1.0085 Highest 1.0085 1.0085

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.5707 3.0000e005 2.8300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.5200e- 003 5.5200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.8800e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 111.9466 111.9466 0.0181 2.2000e003 113.0535 Mobile 0.1066 0.2351 1.3549 4.8500e003 0.5324 3.4600e- 003 0.5358 0.1422 3.2300e- 003 0.1455 0.0000 448.1329 448.1329 0.0126 0.0199 454.3616 Stationary 7.1800e003 0.0201 0.0183 3.0000e- 005 1.0600e- 003 1.0600e- 003 1.0600e- 003 1.0600e- 003 0.0000 3.3320 3.3320 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 3.3437 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 26.0945 0.0000 26.0945 1.5421 0.0000 64.6480 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.8870 14.6592 23.5463 0.9152 0.0218 52.9335 Total 0.6845 0.2552 1.3760 4.8800e003 0.5324 4.5300e- 003 0.5369 0.1422 4.3000e- 003 0.1465 34.9815 578.0762 613.0577 2.4884 0.0439 688.3461 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 565

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.5707 3.0000e005 2.8300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.5200e- 003 5.5200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.8800e- 003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 111.9466 111.9466 0.0181 2.2000e003 113.0535 Mobile 0.1066 0.2351 1.3549 4.8500e003 0.5324 3.4600e- 003 0.5358 0.1422 3.2300e- 003 0.1455 0.0000 448.1329 448.1329 0.0126 0.0199 454.3616 Stationary 7.1800e003 0.0201 0.0183 3.0000e- 005 1.0600e- 003 1.0600e- 003 1.0600e- 003 1.0600e- 003 0.0000 3.3320 3.3320 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 3.3437 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 26.0945 0.0000 26.0945 1.5421 0.0000 64.6480 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.8870 14.6592 23.5463 0.9152 0.0218 52.9335 Total 0.6845 0.2552 1.3760 4.8800e003 0.5324 4.5300e- 003 0.5369 0.1422 4.3000e- 003 0.1465 34.9815 578.0762 613.0577 2.4884 0.0439 688.3461 Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction DetailConstruction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2023 11/30/2023 5 652 Site Prep - Grading Grading 12/1/2023 12/29/2023 5 21 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 566
3 Trenching - Foundation Trenching 1/1/2024 2/1/2024 5 24 4 Building Construction Exterior Building Construction 2/1/2024 6/28/2024 5 1075 Paving Paving 7/1/2024 8/15/2024 5 346 Building Interior - Architectural Coating
Architectural Coating 8/1/2024 8/30/2024 5 22
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 2 7.00 81 0.73Demolition Excavators 1 7.00 158 0.38Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 7.00 247 0.40Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97 0.37Site Prep - Grading Excavators 1 7.00 158 0.38Site Prep - Grading Graders 4 7.00 187 0.41Site Prep - Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 0 0.00 247 0.40Site Prep - Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97 0.37Building Construction Exterior Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29Building Construction Exterior Forklifts 2 7.00 89 0.20Building Construction Exterior Generator Sets 3 7.00 84 0.74Building Construction Exterior Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37Building Construction Exterior Welders 1 7.00 46 0.45Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 7.00 9 0.56Paving Pavers 1 7.00 130 0.42Paving Paving Equipment 1 7.00 132 0.36 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 187,956; Non-Residential Outdoor: 62,652; Striped Parking Area: 11,017 (Architectural Coating – sqft)Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 20Acres of Paving: 4.22 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 567

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed AreaPaving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37Building Interior - Architectural Coating Aerial Lifts 2 7.00 63 0.31Building Interior - Architectural Coating Air Compressors 2 7.00 78 0.48Trenching - Foundation Excavators 1 7.00 158 0.38Trenching - Foundation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 2.00 1,217.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTSite Prep - Grading 6 15.00 2.00 25.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTBuilding Construction Exterior 8 128.00 51.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 5 13.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTBuilding Interior - Architectural Coating 4 26.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Trenching - Foundation
2 5.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 568

3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0309 0.0000 0.0309 4.6700e003 0.0000 4.6700e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0670 0.6338 0.5317 1.0600e003 0.0296 0.0296 0.0278 0.0278 0.0000 92.8197 92.8197 0.0216 0.0000 93.3606 Total 0.0670 0.6338 0.5317 1.0600e003 0.0309 0.0296 0.0604 4.6700e- 003 0.0278 0.0324 0.0000 92.8197 92.8197 0.0216 0.0000 93.3606 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.2600e003 0.0800 0.0181 3.6000e- 004 0.0103 6.8000e- 004 0.0110 2.8400e- 003 6.5000e- 004 3.4900e- 003 0.0000 35.4570 35.4570 7.5000e- 004 5.6000e- 003 37.1452 Vendor 7.0000e005 2.8400e- 003 8.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.3000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 4.4000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 1.2574 1.2574 2.0000e- 005 1.9000e- 004 1.3139Worker 1.2700e003 8.7000e- 004 0.0108 3.0000e- 005 3.8500e- 003 2.0000e- 005 3.8700e- 003 1.0300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.0400e- 003 0.0000 3.0013 3.0013 9.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 005 3.0287 Total 2.6000e003 0.0837 0.0298 4.0000e- 004 0.0146 7.2000e- 004 0.0153 3.9900e- 003 6.9000e- 004 4.6700e- 003 0.0000 39.7156 39.7156 8.6000e- 004 5.8700e- 003 41.4877 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 569

3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0139 0.0000 0.0139 2.1000e003 0.0000 2.1000e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0670 0.6338 0.5317 1.0600e003 0.0296 0.0296 0.0278 0.0278 0.0000 92.8196 92.8196 0.0216 0.0000 93.3605 Total 0.0670 0.6338 0.5317 1.0600e003 0.0139 0.0296 0.0434 2.1000e- 003 0.0278 0.0299 0.0000 92.8196 92.8196 0.0216 0.0000 93.3605 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.2600e003 0.0800 0.0181 3.6000e- 004 0.0103 6.8000e- 004 0.0110 2.8400e- 003 6.5000e- 004 3.4900e- 003 0.0000 35.4570 35.4570 7.5000e- 004 5.6000e- 003 37.1452 Vendor 7.0000e005 2.8400e- 003 8.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.3000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 4.4000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 1.2574 1.2574 2.0000e- 005 1.9000e- 004 1.3139Worker 1.2700e003 8.7000e- 004 0.0108 3.0000e- 005 3.8500e- 003 2.0000e- 005 3.8700e- 003 1.0300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.0400e- 003 0.0000 3.0013 3.0013 9.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 005 3.0287 Total 2.6000e003 0.0837 0.0298 4.0000e- 004 0.0146 7.2000e- 004 0.0153 3.9900e- 003 6.9000e- 004 4.6700e- 003 0.0000 39.7156 39.7156 8.6000e- 004 5.8700e- 003 41.4877 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 570

3.3 Site Prep - Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0114 0.0000 0.0114 1.2600e003 0.0000 1.2600e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0170 0.1973 0.1097 3.2000e004 6.8300e- 003 6.8300e- 003 6.2900e- 003 6.2900e- 003 0.0000 27.6882 27.6882 8.9500e- 003 0.0000 27.9121 Total 0.0170 0.1973 0.1097 3.2000e004 0.0114 6.8300e- 003 0.0182 1.2600e- 003 6.2900e- 003 7.5500e- 003 0.0000 27.6882 27.6882 8.9500e- 003 0.0000 27.9121 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 3.0000e005 1.6400e- 003 3.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.1000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7284 0.7284 2.0000e- 005 1.2000e- 004 0.7631 Vendor 2.0000e005 9.2000e- 004 2.8000e- 004 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.4000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.4062 0.4062 1.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.4245Worker 4.1000e004 2.8000e- 004 3.5000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.2500e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.2500e- 003 3.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.9696 0.9696 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 0.9785 Total 4.6000e004 2.8400e- 003 4.1500e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 003 3.0000e- 005 1.6200e- 003 4.3000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 4.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.1042 2.1042 6.0000e- 005 2.1000e- 004 2.1660 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 571

3.3 Site Prep - Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 5.1200e003 0.0000 5.1200e- 003 5.7000e- 004 0.0000 5.7000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0170 0.1973 0.1097 3.2000e004 6.8300e- 003 6.8300e- 003 6.2900e- 003 6.2900e- 003 0.0000 27.6882 27.6882 8.9500e- 003 0.0000 27.9121 Total 0.0170 0.1973 0.1097 3.2000e004 5.1200e- 003 6.8300e- 003 0.0120 5.7000e- 004 6.2900e- 003 6.8600e- 003 0.0000 27.6882 27.6882 8.9500e- 003 0.0000 27.9121 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 3.0000e005 1.6400e- 003 3.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.1000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7284 0.7284 2.0000e- 005 1.2000e- 004 0.7631 Vendor 2.0000e005 9.2000e- 004 2.8000e- 004 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.4000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.4062 0.4062 1.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.4245Worker 4.1000e004 2.8000e- 004 3.5000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.2500e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.2500e- 003 3.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.4000e- 004 0.0000 0.9696 0.9696 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 0.9785 Total 4.6000e004 2.8400e- 003 4.1500e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 003 3.0000e- 005 1.6200e- 003 4.3000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 4.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.1042 2.1042 6.0000e- 005 2.1000e- 004 2.1660 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 572

3.4 Trenching - Foundation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrOff-Road 3.4000e003 0.0299 0.0578 9.0000e- 005 1.4200e- 003 1.4200e- 003 1.3100e- 003 1.3100e- 003 0.0000 7.6397 7.6397 2.4700e- 003 0.0000 7.7015 Total 3.4000e003 0.0299 0.0578 9.0000e- 005 1.4200e- 003 1.4200e- 003 1.3100e- 003 1.3100e- 003 0.0000 7.6397 7.6397 2.4700e- 003 0.0000 7.7015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 1.5000e004 1.0000e- 004 1.2400e- 003 0.0000 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 4.8000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.3574 0.3574 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.3606 Total 1.5000e004 1.0000e- 004 1.2400e- 003 0.0000 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 4.8000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.3574 0.3574 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.3606 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 573

3.4 Trenching - Foundation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrOff-Road 3.4000e003 0.0299 0.0578 9.0000e- 005 1.4200e- 003 1.4200e- 003 1.3100e- 003 1.3100e- 003 0.0000 7.6397 7.6397 2.4700e- 003 0.0000 7.7015 Total 3.4000e003 0.0299 0.0578 9.0000e- 005 1.4200e- 003 1.4200e- 003 1.3100e- 003 1.3100e- 003 0.0000 7.6397 7.6397 2.4700e- 003 0.0000 7.7015 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 1.5000e004 1.0000e- 004 1.2400e- 003 0.0000 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 4.8000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.3574 0.3574 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.3606 Total 1.5000e004 1.0000e- 004 1.2400e- 003 0.0000 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 4.8000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.3574 0.3574 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.3606 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 574

3.5 Building Construction Exterior - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrOff-Road 0.0822 0.7366 0.8868 1.6000e003 0.0325 0.0325 0.0313 0.0313 0.0000 137.3069 137.3069 0.0200 0.0000 137.8069 Total 0.0822 0.7366 0.8868 1.6000e003 0.0325 0.0325 0.0313 0.0313 0.0000 137.3069 137.3069 0.0200 0.0000 137.8069 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 2.6900e003 0.1198 0.0354 5.4000e- 004 0.0179 7.3000e- 004 0.0187 5.1900e- 003 7.0000e- 004 5.8800e- 003 0.0000 51.9666 51.9666 7.2000e- 004 7.7900e- 003 54.3048Worker 0.0167 0.0110 0.1420 4.4000e004 0.0542 2.7000e- 004 0.0544 0.0144 2.5000e- 004 0.0147 0.0000 40.7957 40.7957 1.1400e- 003 1.1000e- 003 41.1533 Total 0.0194 0.1307 0.1774 9.8000e004 0.0721 1.0000e- 003 0.0731 0.0196 9.5000e- 004 0.0205 0.0000 92.7622 92.7622 1.8600e- 003 8.8900e- 003 95.4581 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 575

3.5 Building Construction Exterior - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrOff-Road 0.0822 0.7366 0.8868 1.6000e003 0.0325 0.0325 0.0313 0.0313 0.0000 137.3068 137.3068 0.0200 0.0000 137.8067 Total 0.0822 0.7366 0.8868 1.6000e003 0.0325 0.0325 0.0313 0.0313 0.0000 137.3068 137.3068 0.0200 0.0000 137.8067 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 2.6900e003 0.1198 0.0354 5.4000e- 004 0.0179 7.3000e- 004 0.0187 5.1900e- 003 7.0000e- 004 5.8800e- 003 0.0000 51.9666 51.9666 7.2000e- 004 7.7900e- 003 54.3048Worker 0.0167 0.0110 0.1420 4.4000e004 0.0542 2.7000e- 004 0.0544 0.0144 2.5000e- 004 0.0147 0.0000 40.7957 40.7957 1.1400e- 003 1.1000e- 003 41.1533 Total 0.0194 0.1307 0.1774 9.8000e004 0.0721 1.0000e- 003 0.0731 0.0196 9.5000e- 004 0.0205 0.0000 92.7622 92.7622 1.8600e- 003 8.8900e- 003 95.4581 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 576

3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrOff-Road 0.0104 0.0979 0.1466 2.3000e004 4.6900e- 003 4.6900e- 003 4.3300e- 003 4.3300e- 003 0.0000 19.6486 19.6486 6.2100e- 003 0.0000 19.8037 Paving 2.5400e003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0129 0.0979 0.1466 2.3000e004 4.6900e- 003 4.6900e- 003 4.3300e- 003 4.3300e- 003 0.0000 19.6486 19.6486 6.2100e- 003 0.0000 19.8037 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 5.4000e004 3.5000e- 004 4.5800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.7500e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.7600e- 003 4.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.3166 1.3166 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.3281 Total 5.4000e004 3.5000e- 004 4.5800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.7500e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.7600e- 003 4.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.3166 1.3166 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.3281 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 577

3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrOff-Road 0.0104 0.0979 0.1466 2.3000e004 4.6900e- 003 4.6900e- 003 4.3300e- 003 4.3300e- 003 0.0000 19.6486 19.6486 6.2100e- 003 0.0000 19.8037 Paving 2.5400e003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0129 0.0979 0.1466 2.3000e004 4.6900e- 003 4.6900e- 003 4.3300e- 003 4.3300e- 003 0.0000 19.6486 19.6486 6.2100e- 003 0.0000 19.8037 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 5.4000e004 3.5000e- 004 4.5800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.7500e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.7600e- 003 4.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.3166 1.3166 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.3281 Total 5.4000e004 3.5000e- 004 4.5800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.7500e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.7600e- 003 4.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.3166 1.3166 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.3281 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 578

3.7 Building Interior - Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.6917 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 5.3100e003 0.0414 0.0675 1.1000e- 004 1.7400e- 003 1.7400e- 003 1.7300e- 003 1.7300e- 003 0.0000 9.3932 9.3932 1.2900e- 003 0.0000 9.4254 Total 0.6970 0.0414 0.0675 1.1000e004 1.7400e- 003 1.7400e- 003 1.7300e- 003 1.7300e- 003 0.0000 9.3932 9.3932 1.2900e- 003 0.0000 9.4254 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 7.0000e004 4.6000e- 004 5.9300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.2600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 2.2700e- 003 6.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 6.1000e- 004 0.0000 1.7038 1.7038 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.7187 Total 7.0000e004 4.6000e- 004 5.9300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.2600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 2.2700e- 003 6.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 6.1000e- 004 0.0000 1.7038 1.7038 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.7187 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 579

3.7 Building Interior - Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.6917 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 5.3100e003 0.0414 0.0675 1.1000e- 004 1.7400e- 003 1.7400e- 003 1.7300e- 003 1.7300e- 003 0.0000 9.3932 9.3932 1.2900e- 003 0.0000 9.4254 Total 0.6970 0.0414 0.0675 1.1000e004 1.7400e- 003 1.7400e- 003 1.7300e- 003 1.7300e- 003 0.0000 9.3932 9.3932 1.2900e- 003 0.0000 9.4254 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 7.0000e004 4.6000e- 004 5.9300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.2600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 2.2700e- 003 6.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 6.1000e- 004 0.0000 1.7038 1.7038 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.7187 Total 7.0000e004 4.6000e- 004 5.9300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.2600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 2.2700e- 003 6.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 6.1000e- 004 0.0000 1.7038 1.7038 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.7187 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 580

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrMitigated 0.1066 0.2351 1.3549 4.8500e003 0.5324 3.4600e- 003 0.5358 0.1422 3.2300e- 003 0.1455 0.0000 448.1329 448.1329 0.0126 0.0199 454.3616 Unmitigated 0.1066 0.2351 1.3549 4.8500e003 0.5324 3.4600e- 003 0.5358 0.1422 3.2300e- 003 0.1455 0.0000 448.1329 448.1329 0.0126 0.0199 454.3616

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile4.2 Trip Summary Information4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
General Light Industry 494.00 494.00 494.00 1,442,239 1,442,239 General Office Building 0.00 0.00 0.00General Office Building 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 494.00 494.00 494.00 1,442,239 1,442,239
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by General Light Industry 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 28.00 13.00 92 5 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 581
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by General Office Building 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4General Office Building 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail

9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 0.00 41.00 92 5 3

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH General Light Industry 0.570753 0.056481 0.179220 0.140534 0.020784 0.005211 0.013984 0.013033 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 General Office Building 0.570753 0.056481 0.179220 0.111941 0.020784 0.005211 0.013984 0.013033 0.000790 0.000560 0.024477 0.000343 0.002423 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.570753 0.056481 0.179220 0.111941 0.020784 0.005211 0.013984 0.013033 0.000790 0.000560 0.024477 0.000343 0.002423 Parking Lot 0.570753 0.056481 0.179220 0.111941 0.020784 0.005211 0.013984 0.013033 0.000790 0.000560 0.024477 0.000343 0.002423 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail

0.570753 0.056481 0.179220 0.111941 0.020784 0.005211 0.013984 0.013033 0.000790 0.000560 0.024477 0.000343 0.002423

5.0 Energy Detail5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 582
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 111.9466 111.9466 0.0181 2.2000e003 113.0535 Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 111.9466 111.9466 0.0181 2.2000e003 113.0535 NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 583

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
General Light
Industry
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 General Office
Building
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 584

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
General Light
Industry
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 General Office
Building
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 585

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
General Light
Industry
556625 51.5010 8.3300e003 1.0100e- 003 52.0103
General Office
Building
108780 10.0647 1.6300e003 2.0000e- 004 10.1643
General Office
Building
217560 20.1295 3.2600e003 3.9000e- 004 20.3285
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 29580.2 2.7369 4.4000e004 5.0000e- 005 2.7639 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
297377 27.5144 4.4500e003 5.4000e- 004 27.7865
Total 111.9466 0.0181 2.1900e003 113.0535
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 586

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
General Light
Industry
556625 51.5010 8.3300e003 1.0100e- 003 52.0103
General Office
Building
108780 10.0647 1.6300e003 2.0000e- 004 10.1643
General Office
Building
217560 20.1295 3.2600e003 3.9000e- 004 20.3285
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 29580.2 2.7369 4.4000e004 5.0000e- 005 2.7639 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
297377 27.5144 4.4500e003 5.4000e- 004 27.7865
Total 111.9466 0.0181 2.1900e003 113.0535
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 587
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrMitigated 0.5707 3.0000e005 2.8300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.5200e- 003 5.5200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.8800e- 003 Unmitigated 0.5707 3.0000e005 2.8300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.5200e- 003 5.5200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.8800e- 003

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yrArchitectural
Coating

0.0692 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.5012 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.6000e004 3.0000e- 005 2.8300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.5200e- 003 5.5200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.8800e- 003 Total 0.5707 3.0000e005 2.8300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.5200e- 003 5.5200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.8800e- 003 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 588

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yrArchitectural
Coating

0.0692 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.5012 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.6000e004 3.0000e- 005 2.8300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.5200e- 003 5.5200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.8800e- 003 Total 0.5707 3.0000e005 2.8300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.5200e- 003 5.5200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.8800e- 003 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 589
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yrMitigated 23.5463 0.9152 0.0218 52.9335
Unmitigated 23.5463 0.9152 0.0218 52.9335

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
General Light
Industry

8.44063 /
0 6.9036 0.2757 6.5800e003 15.7566
General Office
Building

3.19921 /

1.9608

3.2516 0.1046 2.5100e003 6.6134
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail

16.3725 /
0 13.3911 0.5348 0.0128 30.5635
Total 23.5463 0.9152 0.0219 52.9335
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 590

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
General Light
Industry

8.44063 /
0 6.9036 0.2757 6.5800e003 15.7566
General Office
Building

3.19921 /

1.9608

3.2516 0.1046 2.5100e003 6.6134
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail

16.3725 /
0 13.3911 0.5348 0.0128 30.5635
Total 23.5463 0.9152 0.0219 52.9335
Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 591
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 26.0945 1.5421 0.0000 64.6480
Unmitigated 26.0945 1.5421 0.0000 64.6480
Category/Year8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
General Light
Industry

45.26 9.1874 0.5430 0.0000 22.7613
General Office
Building

16.74 3.3981 0.2008 0.0000 8.4186
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail

66.55 13.5091 0.7984 0.0000 33.4681
Total 26.0945 1.5421 0.0000 64.6480
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 592

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
General Light
Industry

45.26 9.1874 0.5430 0.0000 22.7613
General Office
Building

16.74 3.3981 0.2008 0.0000 8.4186
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail

66.55 13.5091 0.7984 0.0000 33.4681
Total 26.0945 1.5421 0.0000 64.6480
Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Fire Pump 1 1 50 175 0.73 Diesel
Boilers
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 34 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 593

11.0 Vegetation
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number

10.1 Stationary Sources
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Equipment Type tons/yr MT/yr
Fire Pump -
Diesel (175 - 300
HP)

7.1800e003 0.0201 0.0183 3.0000e- 005 1.0600e- 003 1.0600e- 003 1.0600e- 003 1.0600e- 003 0.0000 3.3320 3.3320 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 3.3437 Total 7.1800e003 0.0201 0.0183 3.0000e- 005 1.0600e- 003 1.0600e- 003 1.0600e- 003 1.0600e- 003 0.0000 3.3320 3.3320 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 3.3437 Unmitigated/Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 35 of 35 Date: 3/17/2023 10:58 AM Hexcel Redevelopment Project - Alameda County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 594
Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations
Alameda County, Annual
Project Characteristics - Existing operations run only (2023).Land Use - Based on existing land uses and 8.81-acre site.Construction Phase - Operations only run - construction phases as placeholders.Off-road Equipment - Operations only run.Off-road Equipment - Operations only run.Trips and VMT - Operations only run.Architectural Coating - Operations only run.Vehicle Trips - Trip rate based on Final TIS for project (W-Trans 2022).Energy Use - The building was built in two phases dating 1962 and 1967 - use of historical data.1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Research & Development 62.72 1000sqft 5.58 62,715.00 0
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 140.72 1000sqft 3.23 140,724.00 0

1.2 Other Project CharacteristicsUrbanizationClimate Zone Urban5
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 63

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data1.0 Project CharacteristicsUtility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company Operational Year 2023
CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 595

2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Exterior 31,358.00 0.00tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Interior 94,073.00 0.00tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Parking 8,443.00 0.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 1.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 1.00tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 4/25/2024 3/29/2024tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/28/2024 3/1/2024 tblLandUse LotAcreage 1.44 5.58
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 6.00 0.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 0.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 0.00tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 8.00 0.00 tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 16.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.90 11.08tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.11 11.08tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.26 11.08 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 596

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2024 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2024 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 597
Highest

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.2898 2.0000e005 1.8700e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.6400e- 003 3.6400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.8700e- 003 Energy 9.1200e003 0.0829 0.0696 5.0000e- 004 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 0.0000 140.4201 140.4201 9.8500e- 003 2.6400e- 003 141.4526 Mobile 0.3079 0.3914 2.9138 6.2700e003 0.6425 4.7000e- 003 0.6472 0.1716 4.3800e- 003 0.1760 0.0000 579.0834 579.0834 0.0368 0.0299 588.9222 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.9683 0.0000 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 9.7838 15.4395 25.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690 Total 0.6068 0.4743 2.9853 6.7700e003 0.6425 0.0110 0.6535 0.1716 0.0107 0.1823 10.7521 734.9466 745.6987 1.1113 0.0566 790.3465 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 598

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.2898 2.0000e005 1.8700e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.6400e- 003 3.6400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.8700e- 003 Energy 9.1200e003 0.0829 0.0696 5.0000e- 004 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 0.0000 140.4201 140.4201 9.8500e- 003 2.6400e- 003 141.4526 Mobile 0.3079 0.3914 2.9138 6.2700e003 0.6425 4.7000e- 003 0.6472 0.1716 4.3800e- 003 0.1760 0.0000 579.0834 579.0834 0.0368 0.0299 588.9222 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.9683 0.0000 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 9.7838 15.4395 25.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690 Total 0.6068 0.4743 2.9853 6.7700e003 0.6425 0.0110 0.6535 0.1716 0.0107 0.1823 10.7521 734.9466 745.6987 1.1113 0.0566 790.3465 Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction DetailConstruction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Paving Paving 3/1/2024 3/1/2024 5 12 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 3/29/2024 3/29/2024 5 1 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 599

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Architectural Coating Air Compressors 0 0.00 78 0.48Paving Pavers 0 0.00 130 0.42Paving Paving Equipment 0 0.00 132 0.36Paving Rollers 0 0.00 80 0.38Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Paving 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTArchitectural Coating 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTResidential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0Acres of Paving: 3.23 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 600

3.2 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrOff-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 601

3.2 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrOff-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 602

3.3 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 603

3.3 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 604

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrMitigated 0.3079 0.3914 2.9138 6.2700e003 0.6425 4.7000e- 003 0.6472 0.1716 4.3800e- 003 0.1760 0.0000 579.0834 579.0834 0.0368 0.0299 588.9222 Unmitigated 0.3079 0.3914 2.9138 6.2700e003 0.6425 4.7000e- 003 0.6472 0.1716 4.3800e- 003 0.1760 0.0000 579.0834 579.0834 0.0368 0.0299 588.9222

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile4.2 Trip Summary Information4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
Research & Development 695.00 695.00 695.00 1,741,842 1,741,842 Total 695.00 695.00 695.00 1,741,842 1,741,842
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Research & Development 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 82 15 3

4.4 Fleet Mix
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 605
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.569121 0.056513 0.180870 0.112593 0.021111 0.005121 0.013190 0.012692 0.000800 0.000580 0.024593 0.000331 0.002484 Research & Development 0.569121 0.056513 0.180870 0.112593 0.021111 0.005121 0.013190 0.012692 0.000800 0.000580 0.024593 0.000331 0.002484

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 50.1927 50.1927 8.1200e003 9.8000e- 004 50.6891 Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 50.1927 50.1927 8.1200e003 9.8000e- 004 50.6891 NaturalGas
Mitigated

9.1200e003 0.0829 0.0696 5.0000e- 004 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 0.0000 90.2273 90.2273 1.7300e- 003 1.6500e- 003 90.7635 NaturalGas Unmitigated

9.1200e003 0.0829 0.0696 5.0000e- 004 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 0.0000 90.2273 90.2273 1.7300e- 003 1.6500e- 003 90.7635

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: Y
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 606

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Research &
Development

1.6908e
+006

9.1200e003 0.0829 0.0696 5.0000e- 004 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 0.0000 90.2273 90.2273 1.7300e- 003 1.6500e- 003 90.7635 Total 9.1200e003 0.0829 0.0696 5.0000e- 004 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 0.0000 90.2273 90.2273 1.7300e- 003 1.6500e- 003 90.7635 Unmitigated
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Research &
Development

1.6908e
+006

9.1200e003 0.0829 0.0696 5.0000e- 004 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 0.0000 90.2273 90.2273 1.7300e- 003 1.6500e- 003 90.7635 Total 9.1200e003 0.0829 0.0696 5.0000e- 004 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 6.3000e- 003 0.0000 90.2273 90.2273 1.7300e- 003 1.6500e- 003 90.7635 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 607

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Research &
Development
542485 50.1927 8.1200e003 9.8000e- 004 50.6891
Total 50.1927 8.1200e003 9.8000e- 004 50.6891
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Research &
Development
542485 50.1927 8.1200e003 9.8000e- 004 50.6891
Total 50.1927 8.1200e003 9.8000e- 004 50.6891
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 608

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrMitigated 0.2898 2.0000e005 1.8700e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.6400e- 003 3.6400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.8700e- 003 Unmitigated 0.2898 2.0000e005 1.8700e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.6400e- 003 3.6400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.8700e- 003

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yrArchitectural
Coating

0.0356 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.2540 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.7000e004 2.0000e- 005 1.8700e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.6400e- 003 3.6400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.8700e- 003 Total 0.2898 2.0000e005 1.8700e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.6400e- 003 3.6400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.8700e- 003 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 609

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yrArchitectural
Coating

0.0356 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.2540 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.7000e004 2.0000e- 005 1.8700e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.6400e- 003 3.6400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.8700e- 003 Total 0.2898 2.0000e005 1.8700e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.6400e- 003 3.6400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.8700e- 003 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 610
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yrMitigated 25.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690
Unmitigated 25.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Research &
Development

30.839 / 0 25.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690
Total 25.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 611

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Research &
Development

30.839 / 0 25.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690
Total 25.2233 1.0074 0.0240 57.5690
Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste8.0 Waste Detail
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988
Unmitigated 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 612

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Research &
Development

4.77 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988
Total 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Other NonAsphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Research &
Development

4.77 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988
Total 0.9683 0.0572 0.0000 2.3988
Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 613

11.0 Vegetation
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 20 Date: 2/3/2023 3:13 PM Hexcel Redevelopment - Existing Operations - Alameda County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 614
Energy Consumption Summary
Source Energy Requirement Unit Annual Energy
Consumption (MMBtu)
Construction1 (amortized over project lifetime)
Diesel 1,278 Gallons/yr 176
Gasoline 201 Gallons/yr 25
Subtotal 202
Building Operations2
Electrical 1,209,922 KWh/yr 4,128
Natural Gas - kBTU/yr -
Subtotal 4,128
Operational Transportation3
Electricity 32,528 KWh/yr 111
Diesel 6,174 Gallons/yr 852
Gasoline 49,324 Gallons/yr 6,166
Subtotal 7,128
Total 11,458
Source Energy Requirement Unit Annual Energy
Consumption (MMBtu)
Building Operations1
Electrical 542,485 KWh/yr 1,851
Natural Gas 1,690,800 kBTU/yr 1,691
Subtotal 3,542
Operational Transportation2
Electricity 35,002 KWh/yr -
Diesel 7,876 Gallons/yr 1,087
Gasoline 60,858 Gallons/yr 7,607
Subtotal 8,694
Total 12,236
Net Energy Consumption Summary
Annual Energy
Consumption
(MMBtu)
Proposed Project - Existing Conditions (778)
Conversion Factors
Category Amount Units
Diesel (heat content) 0.138 MMBtu/gallon
Motor Gasoline 0.125 MMBtu/gallon
Natural Gas 0.1 MMBtu/therm
Btu per kWh 3,412 Btu/kWh
Gallons per Barrel 42 gallons/barrel
https://theclimateregistry.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/2022-Default-Emission-Factors-Final.pdf Proposed Project Energy Consumption Summary
Notes:

Totals may not add due to rounding.

Source: Modeled by AECOM in 2023

1. Construction estimates are based on conversion for CO2 emissions estimates from CalEEMod to fuel consumption for diesel and gasoline-powered vehicles using U.S. Energy Information Administration 2022 factors.

2. Building operation energy consumption is based on estimated electricity demand from CalEEMod. No natural gas infrastructure in compliance with City code.

3. Operational transportation fuel consumption reflects CalEEMod VMT estimate, which incorporates trip generation data provided by TIA for the Project.

Existing Energy Consumption Summary
Notes:

Totals may not add due to rounding.

Source: Modeled by AECOM in 2023

1. Building operation energy consumption is based on estimated electricity and natural gas demand from CalEEMod.

2. Operational transportation fuel consumption reflects CalEEMod VMT estimate, which incorporates trip generation data provided by TIA for existing conditions.
615
Construction Energy Summary
Source MT CO2
a
Fuel Type
Emission Factor
(lb CO2/gallon) b Gallons
Off-Road 294.50 Diesel 22.45 29,384
Hauling 36.19 Diesel 22.45 3,610
Vendor 53.63 Diesel 22.45 5,351
Worker 48.14 Gas 17.86 6,038
Total Demand Diesel 38,346
Gasoline 6,038
Sources:
a
Modeled by AECOM in 2023.
b
U.S. Energy Information Administration released October 5, 2022 (https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/co2_vol_mass.php) 616
Project Operational Transportation Energy Consumption
Source: EMFAC2021 (v1.0.2) Emissions InventoryRegion Type: CountyRegion: AlamedaCalendar Year: 2025Season: AnnualVehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 CategoriesUnits: miles/day for CVMT and EVMT, trips/day for Trips, kWh/day for Energy Consumption, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel ConsumptionRegion Calendar Year Vehicle Category Model Year Speed Fuel Population Total VMT % VMT EVMT Fuel Consumption Fuel Consumption / Mile Energy Consumption Energy Consumption / Mile Alameda 2025 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 546668.9721 19880452.29 87.11% 0 647.7239298 0.033 0 Alameda 2025 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 2039.963989 55387.87268 0.24% 0 1.286060647 0.023 0 Alameda 2025 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 47802.8263 2163781.86 9.48% 2163781.86 0 0.000 835398.3846 0.386 Alameda 2025 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Plug-in Hybrid 16264.37604 723669.533 3.17% 372439.3749 11.58789112 0.016 112487.7917 0.302Alameda 2025 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 50229.43705 1681495.67 99.33% 0 65.43336139 0.039 0 Alameda 2025 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 26.24074592 304.9619282 0.02% 0 0.012640983 0.041 0 Alameda 2025 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 160.9168358 6850.144103 0.40% 6850.144103 0 0.000 2644.720997 0.386Alameda 2025 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Plug-in Hybrid 82.97866268 4267.620687 0.25% 2415.775875 0.061175156 0.014 729.6363158 0.302Alameda 2025 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 253899.3877 9825879.725 97.95% 0 392.0663593 0.040 0 Alameda 2025 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 901.8112024 35889.68271 0.36% 0 1.080479483 0.030 0 Alameda 2025 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 1799.655866 63781.98114 0.64% 63781.98114 0 0.000 24625.10893 0.386Alameda 2025 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Plug-in Hybrid 2164.722049 105553.5289 1.05% 57403.55065 1.597242423 0.015 17337.5832 0.302 Alameda 2025 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 18847.97703 718081.1534 65.01% 0 73.03897794 0.102 0 Alameda 2025 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 9347.769632 375050.1539 33.95% 0 23.37728263 0.062 0 Alameda 2025 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 166.1321894 11462.56249 1.04% 11462.56249 0 0.000 7505.609178 0.655 Alameda 2025 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 2642.532308 96603.42272 36.51% 0 11.12292477 0.115 0 Alameda 2025 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 4066.470296 165207.4735 62.43% 0 12.26873987 0.074 0 Alameda 2025 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 42.68505741 2798.596435 1.06% 2798.596435 0 0.000 1805.109406 0.645Alameda 2025 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 136231.7095 5084190.809 96.18% 0 245.2316451 0.048 0 Alameda 2025 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1904.613628 72630.04717 1.37% 0 2.880070264 0.040 0 Alameda 2025 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 1914.807931 68041.68751 1.29% 68041.68751 0 0.000 26269.70716 0.386Alameda 2025 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Plug-in Hybrid 1284.474187 61042.80887 1.15% 32932.52287 0.943867907 0.015 9946.603454 0.302Alameda 2025 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1612.599975 84199.09574 12.05% 0 17.67484141 0.210 0 Alameda 2025 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 14347.80967 601174.9321 86.02% 0 70.85659815 0.118 0 Alameda 2025 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 114.3683345 5978.325429 0.86% 5978.325429 0 0.000 6537.593438 1.094Alameda 2025 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Natural Gas 158.2385165 7563.711613 1.08% 0 1.058974684 0.140 0 Alameda 2025 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 6.587036146 866.5446439 0.05% 0 0.228404961 0.264 0 Alameda 2025 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 14386.56788 1818729.408 95.47% 0 300.0761645 0.165 0 Alameda 2025 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 90.78791991 10234.56318 0.54% 10234.56318 0 0.000 18807.06117 1.838 Alameda 2025 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Natural Gas 1088.373943 75208.5745 3.95% 0 14.27179323 0.190 0 Proposed Project Fleet Mix LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD General Light Industry 0.570753 0.056481 0.17922 0.140534 0.020784 0.005211 0.013984 0.013033 Total Annual VMT: 1,442,239
VMT by Fleet Category Total Diesel Gasoline Plug In Hybrid Electricity Natural GasLDA 823162.24 1997.66125 717023.5511 26100.41718 78040.60646 0LDT1 81459.10 14.6740236 80909.46723 205.3474905 329.6122136 0 LDT2 258478.07 924.7930436 253189.9011 2719.867158 1643.51223 0MDV 202683.62 2784.938356 194949.0403 2340.635404 2609.001546 0 LHD1 29975.50 10177.78069 19486.65377 0 311.0609232 0
LHD2 7515.51 4692.265504 2743.755464 0 79.48646169 0MHD 20168.27 17347.80335 2429.691055 0 172.513537 218.2622306HHD 18796.70 17945.09774 8.550050524 0 100.9827167 742.0703784 Percent Fuel Type by Fleet Category Diesel Gasoline Plug In Hybrid Electricity Natural Gas TotalLDA 0.24% 87.11% 3.17% 9.48% 0 100.00% LDT1 0.02% 99.33% 0.25% 0.40% 0 100.00%
LDT2 0.36% 97.95% 1.05% 0.64% 0 100.00%
MDV 1.37% 96.18% 1.15% 1.29% 0 100.00%
LHD1 33.95% 65.01% 0.00% 1.04% 0 100.00%
LHD2 62.43% 36.51% 0.00% 1.06% 0 100.00%
MHD 86.02% 12.05% 0.00% 0.86% 1.08% 100.00%HHD 95.47% 0.05% 0.00% 0.54% 3.95% 100.00%Fuel Consumption (gallons for Diesel/Gas; kWh forElectricity) Diesel Gasoline Plug In Hybrid Electricity Natural GasLDA 46.38404394 23361.30515 417.937717 30130.11513 0LDT1 0.60825323 3148.493632 2.943599179 127.2575188 0LDT2 27.84142501 10102.63157 41.15719533 634.5313672 0MDV 110.4338832 9403.202135 36.19182473 1007.289929 0LHD1 634.3921025 1982.067442 0 203.68061 0LHD2 348.4599314 315.9161936 0 51.26918546 0MHD 2044.673298 510.0340294 0 188.6520533 30.55830107 HHD 2960.801138 2.253633405 0 185.5661152 140.8173878
*Note that natural gas consumption is negligible an not accounted for in summary tab. Plug-in Hybrid is summed with Gasoline in Summary Tab.Total Annual VMT is based on CalEEMod VMT estimate.Grey highlighted columns indicated calculations using EMFAC data, not data output from EMFAC. 617
Exisiting Operational Transportation Energy Consumption Source: EMFAC2021 (v1.0.2) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: County
Region: Alameda
Calendar Year: 2024
Season: Annual
Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories
Units: miles/day for CVMT and EVMT, trips/day for Trips, kWh/day for Energy Consumption, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel Consumption Region Calendar Year Vehicle Category Model Year Speed Fuel Population Total VMT % VMT Fuel Consumption Fuel Consumption / Mile EVMT Energy Consumption Energy Consumption / Mile Alameda 2024 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 550051.9063 19996646.21 88.12% 665.3099768 0.033 0 0 Alameda 2024 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 2215.138833 61148.19519 0.27% 1.433471985 0.023 0 0 Alameda 2024 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 44261.68471 1965044.893 8.66% 0 0.000 1965044.893 758669.5128 0.386 Alameda 2024 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Plug-in Hybrid 14910.86076 670426.3099 2.95% 10.98632777 0.016 337167.752 101834.7103 0.302 Alameda 2024 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 51647.46173 1731568.48 99.49% 68.55514321 0.040 0 0 Alameda 2024 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 28.93594781 345.6310163 0.02% 0.014338951 0.041 0 0 Alameda 2024 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 139.313723 5582.724901 0.32% 0 0.000 5582.724901 2155.392579 0.386 Alameda 2024 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Plug-in Hybrid 57.17489905 2971.762703 0.17% 0.043848781 0.015 1643.451264 496.3712644 0.302 Alameda 2024 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 250144.8178 9685168.656 98.26% 396.0221228 0.041 0 0 Alameda 2024 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 877.4560623 35171.51513 0.36% 1.081943418 0.031 0 0 Alameda 2024 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 1325.769916 47543.56893 0.48% 0 0.000 47543.56893 18355.74159 0.386 Alameda 2024 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Plug-in Hybrid 1787.793858 88602.88431 0.90% 1.374664862 0.016 47120.1193 14231.68043 0.302 Alameda 2024 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 18902.95342 716627.0752 65.94% 74.1467641 0.103 0 0 Alameda 2024 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 9144.826182 365640.0278 33.65% 22.91149684 0.063 0 0 Alameda 2024 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 59.85101767 4446.696098 0.41% 0 0.000 4446.696098 2910.818763 0.655 Alameda 2024 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 2669.253287 97703.8855 37.79% 11.40931526 0.117 0 0 Alameda 2024 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 3917.354251 159736.1991 61.79% 11.96367227 0.075 0 0 Alameda 2024 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 15.49131497 1090.487211 0.42% 0 0.000 1090.487211 703.0445145 0.645 Alameda 2024 MCY Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 26267.29331 152639.6215 100.00% 3.683839492 0.024 0 0 Alameda 2024 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 134110.7385 4980332.957 96.64% 246.5360188 0.050 0 0 Alameda 2024 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1883.691486 72884.43028 1.41% 2.941089993 0.040 0 0 Alameda 2024 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 1410.450867 50813.79984 0.99% 0 0.000 50813.79984 19618.32063 0.386 Alameda 2024 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Plug-in Hybrid 1037.246895 49646.00518 0.96% 0.79329932 0.016 25999.83624 7852.725465 0.302 Alameda 2024 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1646.77726 85631.5095 12.35% 18.18377586 0.212 0 0 Alameda 2024 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 14077.45799 598407.5165 86.31% 70.87480725 0.118 0 0 Alameda 2024 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 38.51310217 1999.764399 0.29% 0 0.000 1999.764399 2206.758803 1.104 Alameda 2024 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Natural Gas 147.7046907 7246.418492 1.05% 1.01640003 0.140 0 0 Alameda 2024 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 6.512104597 898.9199328 0.05% 0.238807262 0.266 0 0 Alameda 2024 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 14019.35976 1801241.053 95.76% 301.5126077 0.167 0 0 Alameda 2024 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 40.82471858 4380.548876 0.23% 0 0.000 4380.548876 8047.392164 1.837 Alameda 2024 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Natural Gas 1044.383087 74496.19506 3.96% 14.16389432 0.190 0 0 Alameda 2024 OBUS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 610.2133302 30444.73345 52.91% 6.34490564 0.208 0 0 Alameda 2024 OBUS Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 362.9257155 26876.32823 46.71% 3.791195691 0.141 0 0 Alameda 2024 OBUS Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 0.918937995 84.1685424 0.15% 0 0.000 84.1685424 93.24586655 1.108 Alameda 2024 OBUS Aggregate Aggregate Natural Gas 2.063348452 133.4816208 0.23% 0.017796965 0.133 0 0 Alameda 2024 UBUS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 255.0030274 20852.16865 19.59% 2.387867428 0.115 0 0 Alameda 2024 UBUS Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 674.8467919 74225.51 69.74% 9.248685839 0.125 0 0 Alameda 2024 UBUS Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 14.13091943 1244.382099 1.17% 0 0.000 1244.382099 2169.261776 1.743 Alameda 2024 UBUS Aggregate Aggregate Natural Gas 109.7868836 10105.91285 9.50% 1.451394811 0.144 0 0 Alameda 2024 SBUS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 83.54854543 4472.148206 30.36% 0.440740767 0.099 0 0 Alameda 2024 SBUS Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 403.785506 9573.360969 65.00% 1.180633639 0.123 0 0 Alameda 2024 SBUS Aggregate Aggregate Electricity 1.243873534 45.54353936 0.31% 0 0.000 45.54353936 47.97809614 1.053 Alameda 2024 SBUS Aggregate Aggregate Natural Gas 25.33404192 637.2541208 4.33% 0.11582887 0.182 0 0 Alameda 2024 MH Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1850.56126 17316.00577 70.74% 3.920280673 0.226 0 0 Alameda 2024 MH Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 701.5283416 7161.842144 29.26% 0.763301897 0.107 0 0 Grey highlighted columns indicated calculations using EMFAC data, not data output from EMFAC.

Land Use Subtype LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH General Light Industry 0.570753 0.056481 0.17922 0.111941 0.020784 0.005211 0.013984 0.013033 0.00079 0.00056 0.024477 0.000343 0.002423 Total Annual VMT: 1,741,842
VMT by Fleet Category Total Diesel Gasoline Plug-in Hybrid Electricity Natural Gas LDA 994161.55 2678.820465 876026.2659 29370.47796 86085.98272 0 LDT1 98380.98 19.53698989 97877.89373 167.9805779 315.566702 0 LDT2 312172.92 1113.946086 306746.9705 2806.21508 1505.791613 0 MDV 194983.54 2757.499812 188425.2526 1878.300337 1922.482524 0 LHDT1 36202.44 12180.8177 23873.49058 0 148.1358451 0
LHDT2 9076.74 5608.171304 3430.281489 0 38.2858683 0
MHDT 24357.92 21024.48076 3008.581901 0 70.25982625 254.5960436 HHDT 22701.43 21738.63822 10.84879515 0 52.86753099 899.0722425 OBUS 1376.06 642.7552772 728.0947353 0 2.012915393 3.192252135 UBUS 975.43 680.2901492 191.1138761 0 11.40498575 92.62250894 MCY 42635.07 0 42635.06663 0 0 0
SBUS 597.45 388.3421132 181.4120966 0 1.847467611 25.85012857 MH 4220.48 1234.848518 2985.634648 0 0 0
Percent Fuel Type by Fleet Category Diesel Gasoline Plug-in Hybrid Electricity Natural Gas LDA 0.27% 88.12% 2.95% 8.66% 0.00%
LDT1 0.02% 99.49% 0.17% 0.32% 0.00%
LDT2 0.36% 98.26% 0.90% 0.48% 0.00%
MDV 1.41% 96.64% 0.96% 0.99% 0.00%
LHDT1 33.65% 65.94% 0.00% 0.41% 0.00%
LHDT2 61.79% 37.79% 0.00% 0.42% 0.00%
MHDT 86.31% 12.35% 0.00% 0.29% 1.05%
HHDT 95.76% 0.05% 0.00% 0.23% 3.96%
OBUS 46.71% 52.91% 0.00% 0.15% 0.23%
UBUS 69.74% 19.59% 0.00% 1.17% 9.50%
MCY 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
SBUS 65.00% 30.36% 0.00% 0.31% 4.33%
MH 29.26% 70.74% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Fuel Consumption (gallons for Diesel/Gas;
kWh for Electricity) Diesel Gasoline Plug-in Hybrid Electricity Natural Gas LDA 62.79848615 29146.33827 481.2962927 33236.29439 0
LDT1 0.810517354 3875.118483 2.478577315 121.8347921 0
LDT2 34.267123 12542.74352 43.53814547 581.3598424 0
MDV 111.2728064 9327.410845 30.01358065 742.2369254 0
LHDT1 763.2664505 2470.102143 0 96.97010721 0
LHDT2 420.0320521 400.5691559 0 24.68315945 0
MHDT 2490.119158 638.8697252 0 77.53237838 35.71025143
HHDT 3638.865261 2.882093245 0 97.12156323 170.9397939
OBUS 90.66755759 151.7402805 0 2.230002264 0.425619629
UBUS 84.76586916 21.88523445 0 19.88167434 13.30229449
MCY 0 1028.964437 0 0 0
SBUS 47.89224641 17.87859053 0 1.946225082 4.698582687
MH 131.608907 675.9368163 0 0 0
*Note that natural gas consumption is negligible an not accounted for in summary tab. Plug-in Hybrid is summed with Gasoline in Summary Tab.

Total Annual VMT is based on CalEEMod VMT estimate.
618
This page intentionally left blank
619
Appendix E: Final Transportation Impact
Study
620
This page intentionally left blank
621
Balancing Functionality and Livability since 1995
w-trans.com

TRAFFIC ENGINEERING

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
December 12, 2022
Prepared for the City of Dublin
Submitted by
W-Trans
Final Transportation Impact Study for the
Hexcel Redevelopment Project
622
623
i
Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Transportation Setting............................................................................................................................................................. 4 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)................................................................................................................................................. 8 Capacity Analysis....................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Alternative Modes Analysis................................................................................................................................................. 14 Access and Circulation.......................................................................................................................................................... 20 Parking........................................................................................................................................................................................22 Conclusions and Recommendations............................................................................................................................... 23 Study Participants and References................................................................................................................................... 24 Figures

1. Site Plan......................................................................................................................................................................................... 3

2. Study Area and Existing Lane Configurations.................................................................................................................. 5

3. Existing, Existing plus Project, Future, and Future plus Project Traffic Volumes................................................10 Tables

1. Bicycle Facility Summary ......................................................................................................................................................... 6

2. Transit Routes.............................................................................................................................................................................. 7

3. Signalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria.............................................................................................................. 9

4. Existing and Existing with 8-Phase Operation Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service................................11

5. Future and Future with 8-Phase Operation Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service.....................................11

6. Trip Generation Summary.....................................................................................................................................................12

7. Trip Distribution Assumptions.............................................................................................................................................12

8. Existing and Existing plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service .......................................................13

9. Future and Future plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service ............................................................13

10. Parking Analysis Summary....................................................................................................................................................22 Plates

1. Existing Cross-Section of Dublin Boulevard between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive.............................15

2. Option A – Widen Dublin Boulevard to the South........................................................................................................15

3. Option B – Narrow the Median............................................................................................................................................16

4. Option C – Westbound Only Class I Multi-Use Path .....................................................................................................16

5. Option D – Westbound and Eastbound Class I Multi-Use Paths with Widened Eastbound Side..................17

6. Option E – Westbound and Eastbound Class I Multi-Use Path with Narrowed Median ..................................17

7. Option F – Class IV Separated Bikeway Option..............................................................................................................17

8. Existing Cross-Section of Dublin Boulevard between Donlon Way and Hansen Drive....................................18 624
ii
Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022

9. Option G – Westbound Only Class I Multi-Use Path .....................................................................................................18

10. Option H – Class I Multi-Use Path .......................................................................................................................................19

11. Option I – Class IV.....................................................................................................................................................................19 Appendices
A. Vehicle Miles Traveled Screening Map
B. Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive Peak Hour Volumes
C. Intersection Level of Service Calculations
D. Truck Turning Templates
625
1 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Executive Summary
The Hexcel Redevelopment Project is located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin. This project involves replacing the existing 62,715 square-foot research and development building with a new building that will consist of 18,000 square feet of office space, 36,500 square feet of light industrial space, and 70,804 square feet of warehousing space. The project is expected to generate an average net reduction of 201 trips per day and will generate an average increase of 1 a.m. and 2 p.m. peak hour trips. Because the project would effectively result in no change in trips on the network, it would result in no change to traffic operation.

This project is presumed to have a less-than-significant transportation impact on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) since the estimated VMT per employee is below the significance threshold of 12.9 miles per employee.

The Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection was evaluated to determine if acceptable operation would also be expected upon converting the Hansen Drive and driveway approaches to protected left-turn phasing. It was determined that the intersection would function acceptably under all volume scenarios evaluated.

Vehicles would access the project site via existing driveways on Dublin Boulevard. Sight distances at each driveway for both entering and exiting drivers is adequate, though landscaping should be kept trimmed to maintain adequate sight lines. Signage should be placed at the easterly driveway warning drivers of trucks not to use that driveway.

Pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities within the study area are adequate and would be improved upon completion of facilities identified in the City’s draft Bike and Pedestrian Plan. Various alternatives were developed to accommodate a Class I bike path, Class IV separated bike trail and/or sidewalk on both sides of Dublin Boulevard.

The proposed on-site circulation and access design are expected to comply with City design standards.

The proposed parking supply of 227 spaces meets the City’s parking requirement of 227 spaces and the proposed parking space sizes meet the City’s parking size requirements. 626
2 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Introduction
This report presents an analysis of the potential traffic impacts that would be associated with development of a mixed-use office, light industrial, and warehouse building which would replace an existing research and development building located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin. The traffic study was completed in accordance with the criteria established by the City of Dublin and is consistent with standard traffic engineering techniques.

Prelude
The purpose of a traffic impact study is to provide City of Dublin staff and policy makers with data that they can use to make an informed decision regarding the potential transportation impacts of a proposed project, and any associated improvements that would be required in order to mitigate these impacts to an acceptable level under CEQA, the City’s General Plan, or other policies. Impacts relative to access for pedestrians, bicyclists, and to transit are addressed in the context of the CEQA criteria. Consistent with SB 743, the project’s transportation impacts were analyzed using VMT. While no longer a part of the CEQA review process, vehicular traffic service levels at key intersections were evaluated for consistency with General Plan policies by determining the number of new trips that the proposed use would be expected to generate, distributing these trips to the surrounding street system based on anticipated travel patterns specific to the proposed project, then analyzing the effect the new traffic would be expected to have on the study intersections.

Project Profile
The proposed project would replace an existing research and development building with a new building consisting of office, light industrial, and warehouse uses. The proposed project site plan is shown in Figure 1. 627
Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project 628 Figure 1 – Site Plan
4 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Transportation Setting
Study Area and Periods
The study area of this project varies by topic. For pedestrian trips, it consists of all streets and pedestrian travel routes within a half-mile of the project site. For bicycle trips, it consists of all streets and bicycle travel routes within one mile of the project site. For the traffic operational analysis, it consists of the Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection. The driveway connections were evaluated for operational issues such as adequacy of sight distance and need for a left-turn lane. Additionally, the segments of Dublin Boulevard between SilvergateDrive and Donlon Way and between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive were assessed to determine the feasibility of installing Class I or IV bike lanes and a sidewalk on the south side of the street.

Operating conditions during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods were evaluated to capture the highest potential impacts for the proposed project as well as the highest volumes on the local transportation network. The morning peak hour occurs between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. and reflects conditions during the home to work or school commute, while the p.m. peak hour occurs between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. and typically reflects the highest level of congestion during the homeward bound commute.

Study Roadways and Intersection
Dublin Boulevard is a 7.5-mile-long east-west road with two 10-foot-wide lanes in each direction. The posted speed limit is 35 mph.

Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive is a four-way signalized intersection with protected left-turn phasing on both the eastbound and westbound approaches along Dublin Boulevard and split phased operation along the Hansen Drive. Marked crosswalks with pedestrian phasing exist along the north and east legs of the intersection. The southern leg is a driveway for the proposed project site. Existing lane configurations and controls of this intersection are shown in Figure 2.

Alternative Modes
Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities include sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian signal phases, curb ramps, curb extensions, and various streetscape amenities such as lighting, benches, etc. In the vicinity of the project site, sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian signals, and curb ramps provide connected access for pedestrians with the exception of a gap in the sidewalk network to the west of the project site. • Dublin Boulevard – Continuous sidewalks are provided on both sides of Dublin Boulevard east of Hansen Drive. To the west, however, sidewalks are not provided on the south side of Dublin Boulevard. There is a network of curb ramps, crosswalks with pedestrian phasing at signalized intersections, as well as overhead lighting. Dublin Boulevard provides access to both commercial and residential areas. • Hansen Drive – Hansen Drive is classified as a local street and it serves a residential neighborhood consisting primarily of single-family homes. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of Hansen Drive. Crosswalks are provided at Silvergate Drive, Amarillo Road, and Dublin Boulevard. Lighting is provided by overhead streetlights.
629
Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project 630 Figure 2 – Study Area and Existing Lane Configurations 6 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Bicycle Facilities
The Highway Design Manual, Caltrans, 2017, classifies bikeways into four categories:
• Class I Multi-Use Path – a completely separated right-of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows of motorized traffic minimized.
• Class II Bike Lane – a striped and signed lane for one-way bike travel on a street or highway. • Class III Bike Route – signing only for shared use with motor vehicles within the same travel lane on a street or highway.
• Class IV Bikeway – also known as a separated bikeway, a Class IV Bikeway is for the exclusive use of bicycles and includes a separation between the bikeway and the motor vehicle traffic lane. The separation may include, but is not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible physical barriers, or on-street parking.

In the project area, Class II bike lanes exist on Dublin Boulevard for about 0.55 miles west of San Ramon Road, as well as along the entirety of Silvergate Drive. Class III bike routes exist on Dublin Boulevard between San Ramon Road and Clark Avenue. Bicyclists ride in the roadway and/or on sidewalks along all other streets within the project study area.

Table 1 summarizes the existing and planned bicycle facilities in the project vicinity, as contained in the draft Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. This plan has recently been presented to the Dublin City Council but has not yet been approved.

Table 1 – Bicycle Facility Summary
Status
Facility
Class Length
(miles)
Begin Point End Point
Existing
Dublin Blvd I 0.3 Inspiration Dr (1000’ east) Silvergate Dr (750’ west) Dublin Blvd II 0.6 Silvergate Dr (750’ west) San Ramon Rd Silvergate Dr II 1.1 Dublin Blvd San Ramon Rd
San Ramon Rd II 1.5 Alcosta Blvd Dublin Blvd
Dublin Blvd III 0.9 San Ramon Rd Clark Ave
Planned
Dublin Blvd I/IV 4.4 Kelly Canyon Dr Scarlett Dr
Hansen Dr III 0.4 Silvergate Dr Dublin Blvd
Notes: * All or portions of these bikeways are located within the project site Source: Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (draft), 2022 Transit Facilities
The Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA) Tri-Valley Wheels Bus provides fixed route bus service in Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore. The closest stop is located approximately 0.3 miles from the project site at the Silvergate Drive/Betlen Drive intersection. This stop serves Wheels Bus Local Route 503 which primarily serves students at Dublin High School and Wells Middle School with seven stops in West Dublin.

The Wheels Bus Route 30R stop is located approximately 0.7 miles east of the project site and provides daily service to destinations between West Dublin/Pleasanton Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) and Livermore. 631
7 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
The West Dublin/Pleasanton BART station is located approximately one mile from the project site. The station is along the “blue line” that operates direct train service between the Daly City and Dublin/Pleasanton stations.

Connecting service to other BART lines is available via a transfer at the Bay Fair or other stations. Existing transit routes and their operation schedules are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 – Transit Routes
Transit Agency
Route
Distance to
Stop (mi)1
Service Connection
Days of Operation Time Frequency
Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority Tri-Valley Wheels Route #30R 0.7
Mon – Fri
Sat
Sun
5:52 a.m. – 9:52 p.m.
6:27 a.m. – 9:58 p.m.
6:19 a.m. – 9:50 p.m.
30 minutes
1 hour
1 hour
West Dublin BART
to Livermore
Route #503 EB 0.3 Mon, Tues, Thurs, Fri
Wed
7:54 a.m.
7:45 a.m. – 8:29 a.m. 44 minutes
Dublin &
Brigadoon to Wells
Middle School
Route #503 WB 0.3
Mon, Tues, Thurs
Wed
Fri
3:35 p.m. – 4:21 p.m.
2:32 p.m. – 3:22 p.m.
2:46 p.m. – 3:46 p.m.
46 minutes
50 minutes
1 hour
Wells Middle
School/Dublin
High School to
Dublin & Marshall
Canyon
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)
West Dublin/
Pleasanton 1.0
Mon – Fri
Sat
Sun
5:09 a.m. – 1:32 a.m.
5:47 a.m. – 1:32 a.m.
7:12 a.m. – 1:32 a.m.
15 minutes
30 minutes
30 minutes
Daly City to
Dublin/Pleasanton
Note: 1 Defined as the shortest walking distance between the project site and the nearest bus stop Source: wheelsbus.com; bart.gov
Two bicycles can be carried on all LAVTA Tri-Valley Wheels fixed-route buses. Bike rack space is on a first come, first served basis. On BART trains, bicycles are allowed except in the first car or any crowded car. During commute hours, bikes are not allowed in the first three cars of any train. Cyclists must yield to other passengers and yield priority seating to seniors and people with disabilities.

Paratransit Services
Wheels Dial-A-Ride provides paratransit services to eligible people with disabilities who live in Livermore, Pleasanton, or Dublin. Additionally, BART provides paratransit services through lift vans to people with disabilities who cannot ride BART trains. Paratransit services are provided by both through reservations only.

On-Demand Transportation Services
On-demand private vehicle services, such as Uber and Lyft, are available in the project area 24 hours a day. These private vehicle services can be used for trips both within the local area and to further destinations, including transit stops/stations and local airports.

For a limited amount of time, Tri-Valley Wheels is paying half of Uber and Lyft fares (up to $5) for rideshare trips that either start or end in Dublin, Pleasanton, or Livermore. 632
8 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
Guidance provided by both the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) in the publication Transportation Impacts (SB 743) CEQA Guidelines Update and Technical Advisory, 2018, and the City of Dublin’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (Dated July 15, 2021), was used to evaluate the proposed project’s potential vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Guidance provided in these documents recommends the use of screening thresholds to quickly identify when a project would be expected to result in a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. (See CEQA Guidelines, 15036I(3)(C), 15128, and Appendix G.) The criteria used by the City of Dublin states that projects located in areas where the baseline VMT for employees is 15 or more percent below the existing regional average per employee could be considered to be in a low-VMT area and therefore presumed to have a less-than-significant VMT impact.

According to the Alameda County Travel Demand Model, the existing countywide VMT per employee for the East Planning Area is 15.2 miles. Based on OPR guidance and the City’s TIA Guidelines, a project generating a VMT that is 15 percent or more below this value, or 12.9 miles per employee, would have a less-than-significant VMT impact.

The City of Dublin Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines publishes a screening map which shows that this project is located inside an area with a projected VMT per employee lower than 12.9 miles. Because this per employee VMT rate is below the significance threshold of 12.9 miles, the project would be considered to have a less-than-significant VMT impact. A copy of the screening map showing VMT estimates in Dublin is provided in Appendix A.

Finding – The proposed project would be expected to have a less-than-significant VMT transportation impact.

633
9 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Capacity Analysis
Intersection Level of Service Methodologies
Level of Service (LOS) is used to rank traffic operation on various types of facilities based on traffic volumes and roadway capacity using a series of letter designations ranging from A to F. Generally, Level of Service A represents free flow conditions and Level of Service F represents forced flow or breakdown conditions. A unit of measure that indicates a level of delay generally accompanies the LOS designation.

The study intersection was analyzed using methodologies published in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Transportation Research Board, 6th edition. This source contains methodologies for various types of intersection control, all of which are related to a measurement of delay in average number of seconds per vehicle.

The study intersection is currently controlled by a traffic signal and was evaluated using the signalized methodology from the HCM. This methodology is based on factors including traffic volumes, green time for each movement, phasing, whether the signals are coordinated or not, truck traffic, and pedestrian activity. Average stopped delay per vehicle in seconds is used as the basis for evaluation in this LOS methodology. For the purposes of this study, delays were calculated using signal timing obtained from the City of Dublin.

The ranges of delay associated with the various levels of service are indicated in Table 3.

Table 3 – Signalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria LOS A Delay of 0 to 10 seconds. Most vehicles arrive during the green phase, so do not stop at all.

LOS B Delay of 10 to 20 seconds. More vehicles stop than with LOS A, but many drivers still do not have to stop.

LOS C Delay of 20 to 35 seconds. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many still pass through without stopping.

LOS D Delay of 35 to 55 seconds. The influence of congestion is noticeable, and most vehicles have to stop.

LOS E Delay of 55 to 80 seconds. Most, if not all, vehicles must stop and drivers consider the delay excessive.

LOS F Delay of more than 80 seconds. Vehicles may wait through more than one cycle to clear the intersection.

Reference: Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2018 Existing Conditions
The Existing Conditions scenario provides an evaluation of current operation of the study intersection based on existing traffic volumes during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods. This condition does not include project-generated traffic volumes. Existing traffic volume data was collected on August 25, 2022, when local schools were in session.

Copies of the traffic count data sheets are provided in Appendix B. The study area and the existing lane configurations are shown in Figure 2. The existing traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3.

Upon request from City Staff, the Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection was assessed using existing signal phasing as well as an eight-phase operation with protected left turns on all four approaches to provide a comparison of the potential phasing schemes. Copies of the Level of Service calculations are provided in Appendix C.

Under existing conditions, the Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection is operating acceptably during both peaks. Using eight-phase signal operation, delay would increase during both peak hours though remain acceptable at LOS B. Under existing volumes there would be nominal changes to the Level of Service and delay 634
Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project Figure 3 – Existing, Existing plus Project, Future, and Future plus Project Traffic Volumes 71 (153)517(321)60 (36)
(1) 2
(448)583
(6) 5
1 E
71 (153)517(321)61 (36)
(1) 3
(448)583
(6) 5
1 E+P
87 (194)630(407)74 (46)
(2) 3
(568)710
(8) 7
1 F
87 (194)630(407)75 (46)
(2) 4
(568)710
(8) 7
1 F+P
635
11 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
due to changing from the existing operation to an eight-phase scheme with protected left turns on Hansen Drive and the project driveway. These results are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4 – Existing and Existing with 8-Phase Operation Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection Existing (Current Phasing) Existing (8-Phase Operation) AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS

1. Dublin Blvd/Hansen Dr 12.2 B 12.9 B 13.1 B 13.6 B
Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service Future Conditions
Roadway segment volumes for the horizon year of 2040 were obtained from the Alameda County Transportation Commission’s travel demand model. The average annual growth rates for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours were obtained by comparing the projected 2020 volumes to the projected 2040 volumes along Dublin Boulevard between Silvergate Drive and San Ramon Road. The a.m. peak hour volumes are projected to grow by approximately 1.21 percent per year while the p.m. peak hour volumes are projected to grow by approximately

1.48 percent per year. Future traffic counts were obtained by multiplying the existing traffic counts by the annual growth rate for 18 years until 2040.

Under the anticipated Future volumes, the Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection is expected to operate acceptably at LOS B during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours under current signal phasing and with eight phases.

These results are summarized in Table 5. The future traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3.

Table 5 – Future and Future with 8-Phase Operation Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection Current Phasing 8-Phase Operation
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS

1. Dublin Blvd/Hansen Dr 12.5 B 13.7 B 13.3 B 14.6 B
Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service Project Description
The proposed project consists of 18,000 square feet of office space, 36,500 square feet of light industrial space, and 70,804 square feet of warehousing space, along with 227 vehicle parking spaces and 12 long-term and shortterm bicycle parking spaces.

Trip Generation
The anticipated trip generation for the proposed project was estimated using standard rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in TripGenerationManual, 11th Edition, 2021 for“General Office Building” (ITE LU 710), “General Light Industrial” (ITE LU 110), and “Warehousing” (ITE LU 150). Because the site is currently occupied, “Research and Development Center” rates (ITE LU 760) were applied to estimate trips associated with the existing use.
636
12 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
The expected trip generation potential for the proposed project is indicated in Table 6, with deductions taken for trips made to and from the existing research and development building which will cease with the construction of the project. The proposed project is expected to generate an average of 494 trips per day, including 66 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 63 during the p.m. peak hour. After deductions for the existing land use are taken into account, the proposed project would result in a net reduction of 201 trips on a daily basis, with an increase of 1 net new trip during the morning peak hour and 2 net new trips during the evening peak hour; the net trips represent the increase or decrease in traffic associated with the project compared to existing volumes.

Table 6 – Trip Generation Summary
Land Use Units Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
(ksf) Rate Trips Rate Trips In Out Rate Trips In Out
Existing
Research & Dev -62.715 11.08 -695 1.03 -65 -53 -12 0.98 -61 -10 -51 Proposed
Offices 18.000 10.84 195 1.52 27 24 3 1.44 26 4 22
Light Industrial 36.500 4.87 178 0.74 27 24 3 0.65 24 3 21 Warehousing 70.804 1.71 121 0.17 12 9 3 0.18 13 4 9
Proposed Subtotal 494 66 57 9 63 11 52
Total (Proposed less Existing) -201 1 4 -3 2 1 1
Note: ksf = 1,000 square feet
Trip Distribution
The pattern used to allocate new project trips to the street network was based on 2020 projection data for inbound and outbound trips from Dublin Boulevard. This data was obtained from the Alameda County Countywide Travel Demand Model for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The applied distribution assumptions and resulting trips are shown in Table 7.

Table 7 – Trip Distribution Assumptions
Route Percent Daily AM Peak PM Peak
Dublin Boulevard (West) 48% -96 0 1
Dublin Boulevard (East) 52% -105 1 1
TOTAL 100% -201 1 2
Intersection Operation
Existing plus Project Conditions
Upon the addition of project-related traffic to the existing volumes, the study intersections would continue to operate acceptably using either the existing or eight-phase configuration. These results are summarized in Table

8. The Existing plus Project traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. 637
13 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Table 8 – Existing and Existing plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection Existing Conditions Existing plus Project Phasing AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS

1. Dublin Blvd/Hansen Dr
Existing Signal Phasing 12.2 B 12.9 B 12.1 B 13.0 B
Eight-Phase Operation 13.1 B 13.6 B 13.0 B 13.7 B
Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service It is noted that with the addition of project-related traffic volumes, average delay at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive slightly decreases during the a.m. peak hour. While this is counter-intuitive, this condition occurs when a project adds trips to movements that are currently underutilized or have delays that are below the intersection average, resulting in a better balance between approaches and lower overall average delay. The conclusion could incorrectly be drawn that the project improves operation based on this data alone; however, it is more appropriate to conclude that the project trips are expected to make use of excess capacity, so drivers will experience little, if any, change in conditions as a result of the project.

Finding – Under both the existing phasing and with eight phase operation, the study intersection is expected to continue operating acceptably at the same Levels of Service upon the addition of project-generated traffic as without it.

Future plus Project Conditions
The study intersection is expected to operate acceptably at LOS B using existing phasing and eight-phase operation with or without the addition of project-generated traffic to the anticipated Future volumes. The Future plus Project operating conditions are summarized in Table 9 and the volumes are shown in Figure 3.

Table 9 – Future and Future plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection Future Conditions Future plus Project Phasing AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS

1. Dublin Blvd/Hansen Dr
Existing Signal Phasing 12.5 B 13.7 B 12.4 B 13.8 B
Eight-Phase Operation 13.3 B 14.6 B 13.3 B 14.7 B
Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service It should be noted that with the addition of project-related traffic volumes, average delay at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive would decrease during the a.m. peak hour. As noted previously, this condition reflects use of excess capacity and should not be interpreted as meaning that the project improves operation.

Finding – The study intersection would continue operating acceptably and at the same acceptable Levels of Service with the addition of project-generated traffic to future conditions under both existing phasing and eightphase operation. 638
14 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Alternative Modes Analysis
Pedestrian Facilities
Given the proximity of nearby shopping centers, schools, residential and other commercial areas to the site, it is reasonable to assume that some project patrons and employees would want to walk, bicycle, and/or use transit to reach the project site. Sidewalks exist along the project frontage, and on both sides of Dublin Boulevard east of the project site. Although sidewalks do not exist on the south side of Dublin Boulevard west of the project site between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive, the site is accessible via the sidewalks to the north side of Dublin Boulevard and via the crosswalks at Hansen Drive/Dublin Boulevard.

Finding – Pedestrian facilities serving the project site are adequate since a network of facilities is present nearby and the project site is accessible using existing facilities.

Bicycle Facilities
Existing bicycle facilities, including Class II bike lanes and Class III bike routes on Dublin Boulevard together with shared use of minor streets, provide adequate access for bicyclists. The planned Class III route along Hansen Drive and Class I Multi-Use Path or Class IV Separated Bikeway along Dublin Boulevard would further improve bicycle facilities in the area.

Finding – Bicycle access to the site is adequate since the area is served by a network of bicycle facilities.

Bicycle Storage
The proposed project would provide 24 bicycle parking stalls on-site, with 12 short-term and 12 long-term stalls.

The required number of parking stalls is based on the City of Dublin Municipal Code 8.76.070; Development Standards, which states that bicycle parking requirements shall conform to the California Building Standards Code.

The California Green Building Standards Code states that the number of short-term and long-term bicycle parking stalls provided must be equal to or greater than five percent of the number of motorized vehicle parking spaces provided. The site plan shows that 227 motorized parking spaces would be provided. Therefore, a minimum of 11 short-term and long-term parking stalls are required.

Finding – The 24 bicycle storage spaces that would be provided are adequate and exceed the City’s bicycle parking requirements.

Transit Facilities
Development sites which are located within one-half mile (2,640 feet) of a transit stop are generally considered to be adequately served by transit. Existing transit routes were reviewed and determined to be adequate to accommodate project-generated transit trips. Existing stops are within an acceptable walking distance of the site and would be accessible via the existing sidewalk network in the study area.

If 20 percent of peak hour trips were made by transit, there would be 13 and 12 additional transit riders during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours respectively, spread out over multiple buses and times. As such, the volume of transit riders expected to be generated by the project is not anticipated to exceed the carrying capacity of the existing transit services near the project site.

Finding – The project site is adequately served by transit since existing transit stops are less than one-half mile away.
639
15 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Dublin Boulevard Alternative Mode Analysis
Sidewalks and Class I or IV bicycle facilities are proposed along Dublin Boulevard in the vicinity of the project site in the Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (Draft 2022). To further support the development of these proposed improvements, a feasibility study exploring options to expand the existing sidewalk network and construct a Class I multi-use path or Class IV separated bikeway along the section of Dublin Boulevard between Silvergate Drive and Donlon Way was initiated.

Sidewalk Feasibility Between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive The feasibility of adding a sidewalk along the south side of Dublin Boulevard between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive was assessed. Through the evaluation two options were identified which would provide a sidewalk within this area. Each option as well as the existing condition are described in detail below.

The public right of way along this segment of Dublin Boulevard is approximately 120 feet wide with varying curbto-curb width throughout the block. Class II bike lanes currently exist on both sides of the street and are separated from automobile travel lanes by 3-foot-wide buffers. A sidewalk also exists along the north side, adjacent to the westbound travel lanes on Dublin Boulevard. The median varies between four feet and 25 feet wide. The existing cross-section of Dublin Boulevard between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive is shown in Plate 1.

Plate 1 Existing Cross-Section of Dublin Boulevard between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive As illustrated in Option A, shown in Plate 2, Dublin Boulevard could be widened along the eastbound side by approximately seven feet to make way for a new sidewalk. This would, however, require the removal (and reconstruction) of the existing guard rail as well as the construction of a retaining wall within the undeveloped sloped area just south of Dublin Boulevard.

Plate 2 Option A – Widen Dublin Boulevard to the South
The existing median along Dublin Boulevard could be narrowed by approximately seven feet as shown as Option B in Plate 3. The travel lane and bike lane on the south side could be shifted laterally to the north which would 640
16 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
provide space for a new sidewalk along the southern edge of the roadway. The two westbound travel lanes approaching Silvergate Drive would also need to be merged into a single lane to accommodate the new sidewalk.

Plate 3 Option B – Narrow the Median
Class I or Class IV Installation Feasibility
The section of Dublin Boulevard between Silvergate Drive and Donlon Way was assessed to explore whether installing a Class I multi-use path or Class IV separated bikeway is feasible. The segments between Donlon Way and Hansen Drive and between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Way were examined separately since the curb-tocurb width and configurations vary between the two segments.

Between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive
The existing sidewalk on the north side of Dublin Boulevard could be reconstructed to merge the existing Class II bike lane and sidewalk to form a 12-foot-wide Class I multi-use path. The center median would be narrowed by two feet and the westbound travel lanes would be shifted to the south by two feet. The eastbound Class II bike lane would be maintained. This option, which is preferred by City Staff, is titled as Option C and is illustrated in Plate 4.

Plate 4 Option C – Westbound Only Class I Multi-Use Path As was suggested for Option C above, the sidewalk along the north side of Dublin Boulevard could be merged with the Class II bike lane to create a 12-foot-wide Class I multi-use path. The eastbound side could be widened by five feet into the undeveloped sloped area to create space for a 12-foot-wide multi-use path. This option requires the construction of retaining walls to support the widening of Dublin Boulevard. The center median would be narrowed by four feet to allow for 12-foot-wide multi-use paths and five-foot-wide landscaped areas serving as buffer space between the pathway and vehicle traveled way. The westbound travel lanes would be shifted southward by two feet and the eastbound travel lane would be shifted northward by four feet. This option is titled Option D and is illustrated in Plate 5.
641
17 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Plate 5 Option D – Westbound and Eastbound Class I Multi-Use Paths with Widened Eastbound Side As illustrated in Plate 6, Option E includes narrowing of the existing median along Dublin Boulevard by eleven feet and shifting the travel lane on the eastbound side north toward the center of the roadway. Combined with the removal of the Class II bike lake, this would provide room for a 12-foot-wide Class I multi-use path and a five-footwide buffer/landscaped area. On the westbound side, the bike lane and sidewalk would be reconstructed and combined to create a 12-foot-wide Class I multi-use path and a five-foot-wide buffer/landscaped area. To the east of the intersection with Silvergate Drive, the existing four-foot-wide median and left-turn lane would be realigned to the north and one of the westbound travel lanes eliminated. To the west of the intersection with Hansen Drive, the second eastbound travel lane would also be eliminated.

Plate 6 Option E – Westbound and Eastbound Class I Multi-Use Path with Narrowed Median As shown in Option F, the existing cross-section between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive would remain without reconstruction of its existing lanes. However, a raised element (such as bollards) would be added within the existing buffer spaces between the bike lanes and travel lanes on both directions. This option is illustrated in Plate

7. Plate 7 Option F – Class IV Separated Bikeway Option 642
18 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Between Donlon Way and Hansen Drive
The public right of way on Dublin Boulevard between Donlon Way and Hansen Drive is approximately 97 feet wide with a curb-to-curb width of around 78 feet. Class II bike lanes exist on both sides of the road with on-street parking permitted along the westbound side only and not allowed near Hansen Drive where a right turn lane is provided instead of parking. Along the eastbound side of the road is the Dublin Heritage Park, which includes a 5-foot-wide landscaped section which serves as a buffer between the curb and the sidewalk. The existing cross-section of Dublin Boulevard is shown in Plate 8.

Plate 8 Existing Cross-Section of Dublin Boulevard between Donlon Way and Hansen Drive As shown in Option G, the existing sidewalk along the north side could be reconstructed and merged with the bike lane to create a 12-foot-wide Class I multi-use path, though this would require eliminating the Class II bike lane. The five-foot planting strip on the south side would be removed and relocated to the north side and the sidewalk on the south side would be shortened by one foot. The center median and all lanes would be shifted six feet to the south. The potential layout for Dublin Boulevard under this option is shown in Plate 9.

Plate 9 Option G – Westbound Only Class I Multi-Use Path Option H includes the reconstruction of the existing sidewalks on both sides of Dublin Boulevard to create a 12- foot-wide Class I multi-use path in each direction in addition to five-foot-wide buffer/landscaped area on both sides as shown in Plate 10. Under this option, the existing Class II bike lanes would be eliminated in both directions and the center median would be narrowed by four feet. The westbound parking lane and travel lanes would be shifted to the south by two feet while the eastbound travel lanes would be shifted north by two feet. 643
19 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Plate 10 Option H – Class I Multi-Use Path
Option I would be comprised of removing the on-street parking along the westbound side of Dublin Boulevard, as well as the right-turn lane at the intersection with Hansen Drive to make way for 3.5-foot-wide buffers with a raised element between the existing bike lanes and drive lanes on both sides. The travel lanes and median would also be shifted to the north by 3.5 feet, while the westbound bike lane would be shifted to the north by 7 feet. The potential layout for Dublin Boulevard under this option is shown in Plate 11.

Plate 11 Option I – Class IV
Finding – Several options for the reconstruction of Dublin Boulevard have been identified which would provide either new Class I multi-use pathways or Class IV separated bikeways in the vicinity of the project site. 644
20 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Access and Circulation
Site Access
The site is currently accessible via two driveways along Dublin Boulevard. The western driveway is also the southern leg of the Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection. The eastern driveway is located approximately 180 feet east of the Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive intersection. The raised median along Dublin Boulevard prohibits left-turn egress from this driveway, though there is a left-turn pocket that accommodates left turns into the site. The primary driveway across from Hansen Drive also provides access to the adjacent land use to the west.

The project’s driveways and internal roadway network would be designed to meet current City standards and so can be expected to accommodate the access requirements for both emergency and passenger vehicles.

Sight Distance
At driveways, a substantially clear line of sight should be maintained between the driver of a vehicle waiting to enter the street and the driver of an approaching vehicle. The sight distances along Dublin Boulevard at the project driveways were evaluated based on sight distance criteria contained in the Highway Design Manual published by Caltrans. The recommended sight distances for driveway approaches are based on stopping sight distance and use the approach travel speed as the basis for determining the recommended sight distance. Based on the posted speed limit of 35 mph, the minimum stopping sight distance required is 250 feet; a review in the field shows that sight distances at the proposed project driveways on Dublin Boulevard each exceed 250 feet to the west and so are adequate. To maintain this sight distance, it is noted that any vegetation near the project’s driveways should be trimmed to an appropriate height of less than three feet and trees trimmed so that nothing hangs below a height of seven feet from the surface of the roadway.

For a motorist traveling westbound on Dublin Boulevard intending to turn left into either project driveway, the stopping sight distance looking west along Dublin Boulevard is also greater than 250 feet, providing adequate visibility to allow a following driver to observe and react to a vehicle that may slow before moving into the leftturn pocket before entering the driveway.

Finding – Adequate sight distance is available at the proposed project driveway locations to accommodate all turns entering and exiting the site.

Recommendations – To achieve a minimum sight distance of 250 feet at each driveway access point, it is recommended that vegetation along the project frontage be trimmed and maintained.

Oversized Vehicle Circulation
Large wheelbase vehicles would be able to access the site via the western driveway as illustrated in the vehicle turning template analysis provided in Appendix D. The design vehicle used for the turn analysis is based on the Review of Truck Characteristics as Factors in Roadway Design, Transportation Research Board, 2004, with the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) Interstate Semi-Trailer (WB-62) vehicle. The WB-62 vehicle has a minimum turning radius of 45 feet, a centerline turning radius of 41 feet, and a minimum inside radius of 7.9 feet. It is noted that the evaluation was limited to only movements between the project site and the east of the site since this represents the most likely direction of travel based on the City of Dublin Truck Route Map (January 2014). As demonstrated by the analysis, the western driveway can accommodate the WB-62 truck for all movements to and from the east. However, the analysis also shows that the WB-62 vehicle is unable to access the eastern driveway without striking fixed objects (such as utility poles and a fire hydrant) adjacent to the driveway. 645
21 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Finding – Trucks can feasibly access the site via the western driveway. The eastern driveway is not suitable for access by trucks.

Recommendation – Signage should be installed instructing drivers that trucks and other large vehicles are prohibited from accessing the eastern driveway.
646
22 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Parking
The project was analyzed to determine whether the proposed parking supply would be sufficient to accommodate the anticipated parking demand. The project site as proposed would provide a total of 227 standard parking spaces, shared by various proposed land uses.

The parking supply requirements are based on the City of Dublin Municipal Code, Section 8.76.080; Parking Requirements by Use Type. According to Section 8.76.040 G, if a project contains more than one use type, “the amount of parking to be provided shall be the total of that required by Section 8.76.080.” Based on application of the parking requirements for the various uses, the project would be required to provide 227 parking spaces.

Parking demand was estimated using standard rates published by ITE in Parking Generation, 5th Edition, 2019. The parking demand for the proposed project was estimated using the published standard rates for “General Office Building” (ITE LU 710), “General Light Industrial” (ITE LU 110), and “Warehousing” (ITE LU 150). According to the ITE estimates 95 parking spaces would be required to accommodate the expected peak demand.

The proposed parking supply of 227 spaces is anticipated to adequately accommodate the estimated peak parking demand of 95 spaces and meets the City Code requirement of 227 spaces. The expected demand and City code requirements are summarized in Table 10.

Table 10 – Parking Analysis Summary
Land Use Units
Supply
(spaces)
City Requirements ITE Parking Generation
(ksf) Rate Spaces
Required
Rate
(Per ksf1)
Est. Parking
Demand
Offices 12.000

6.000
227
1 per 0.25 ksf
1 per 0.3 ksf
30 35 2.39 43
Light Industrial 36.500 1 per 0.4 ksf 91 0.65 24
Warehousing 70.804 1 per 1 ksf 71 0.39 28
Total 227 227 95
1 ksf = 1,000 square feet
City parking space sizes are based on the Dublin Municipal Code, Section 8.76.080; Development Standards. The City requires that full-size spaces must be at least 9 feet by 20 feet and compact spaces must be 8 feet by 17 feet.

The length may be reduced by 2 feet if the vehicles parked in them will overhang landscaping or a sidewalk. A review of the site plan confirms that each of the off-street parking spaces on site would be compliant with these requirements.

The Uniform Building Code and the Federal Accessibility Guidelines requires that enough parking spaces for the disabled be provided. The site plan shows that out of 227 spaces available at the proposed project, there are nine stalls designated for disabled persons’ use. Based on requirements stipulated by the Federal Accessibility Guidelines, seven accessible stalls are required. Thus, the project complies with the Federal Accessibility Guidelines.

Finding – The proposed parking supply would satisfy the City of Dublin’s parking requirements and accommodate the anticipated parking demand. The nine accessible stalls proposed for the project is greater than the seven stalls required.
647
23 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Conclusions and Recommendations
Conclusions
• The proposed project would be expected to generate 201 fewer trips per day, with one additional trip during the a.m. peak hour and two additional trips in p.m. peak hour. • The existing pedestrian facilities serving the project site are adequate but would be improved upon installation of a sidewalk along the south side of Dublin Boulevard per the City’s Bike and Pedestrian Plan. • Existing bicycle facilities near the project site are adequate but would be improved upon completion of planned facilities.
• Transit facilities serving the project site are adequate. • The proposed project would be expected to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. • The study intersection at Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive currently operates acceptably and is expected to continue doing so under Future volumes and upon the addition of project-generated traffic. Further, acceptable operation is projected for all volume scenarios with the addition of protected left turns on the northbound and southbound approaches.
• Adequate sight distance is available at each of the project driveways. • Large trucks (WB-62) can access the project site at the western driveway but not at the eastern driveway. • Constructing a sidewalk along the south side of Dublin Boulevard between Hansen Drive and Silvergate Drive is feasible by either widening Dublin Boulevard to the south or by narrowing the existing median. • Installing a Class I Multi-Use path or Class IV Separated Bikeway along Dublin Boulevard between Donlon Way and Silvergate Drive is feasible. The option preferred by City staff would provide a Class I Multi-Use path on the north side of Dublin Boulevard.
• The proposed parking supply meets City requirements and the estimated parking demand. • The nine accessible stalls provided by the project would be more than the required minimum of seven stalls.

Recommendations
• Signage stating that trucks are prohibited from accessing the eastern driveway should be installed. 648
24 Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 12, 2022
Study Participants and References
Study Participants
Principal in Charge Mark E. Spencer, PE
Senior Traffic Engineer Kenny Jeong, PE
Assistant Engineer Valerie Haines, EIT
Graphics Cameron Wong
Editing/Formatting Hannah Yung-Boxdell
Quality Control Dalene J. Whitlock, PE, PTOE
References
Alameda Countywide Travel Demand Model, Alameda County Transportation Commission, 2014, https://www.alamedactc.org/planning/congestion-management/countywide-travel-demand-model/ Bay Area Rapid Transit, https://www.bart.gov/schedules
California Green Building Standards Code, California Building Standards Commission, 2010 Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (Draft), City of Dublin, 2022 Dublin Municipal Code, Code Publishing Company, 2022,
City of Dublin Truck Route Map, City of Dublin, 2014
Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2018 Highway Design Manual, 6th Edition, California Department of Transportation, 2017 Intersection Channelization Design Guide, National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report No. 279, Transportation Research Board, 1985
Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority, http://www.lavta.org/ Parking Generation, 5th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2019 Review of Truck Characteristics as Factors in Roadway Design, Transportation Research Board, 2004 Streetmix, https://streetmix.net
Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, Governor's Office of Planning and Research, 2018
Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, City of Dublin, 2021 Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2021 Wheels Bus, https://wheelsbus.com/routes-and-schedules/ DUB900-2
649
A
Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 2022
Appendix A
Vehicle Miles Traveled Screening Map
650
651
§¨¦680
§¨¦580

BRIGHTON DR
VOMAC
R
D

STAGECOAC
H
R
D

MADDEN WY

TAMARACK DR

DAVO NA DR
SI
VL E
R
GATE
DR
BANDON
DR

SIERRA LN
HANSEN
DR

ARNOLD R
D

CENTRAL PW

GLEASON DR
LOC
K
H
A
R
TST

YORK DR
KE
EGA
NST

N DUBLINRANCH
D
R

DUBLIN BL

DOUGHERTY RD POSITANO PW

VILLAGE PW
D
O
N
O
H
U
ED
R

SAN RAMON RD

SIERRA CT
FAL
LON RD

TASSAJARA RD

NORTHSIDE DR

AMADOR VALLEY BL

SCHAEFER RANCH RD

COLLIER CANYON RD
8TH ST
CR
OM
W
E
L
L
AV

BARNET B
L

CROAK RD

RANGE RD
FCI

CREEKSIDE DR

HORIZON PW

SCARLETT CT
PERSIM
MON
D
R
ALLEY
6TH ST
7TH ST
SEBI
L
LE
RD

SCARLETT DR

PALISADES DR
12TH ST

TOWER RD
SYRAH
D
R

HILLROSE DR

INSPIRATION CI
A
LB
R
O
O
K
D
R

EAGLE RD

BRODER BL

INSPIRAT
I
ON DR

CREEKVIEW DR
HI
LLTO
P
R
D

DUBLIN BL

STERLING RD
Civic Plaza
Emerald
Glen Park
Dougherty Hills
Open Space
Fallon
Sports
Park
Pleasanton
Livermore
Alameda
County
San Ramon
Contra
Costa
County
H:\22\22865 - Dublin Transp Planning Eng On-Call 2018\004 - SB 743 Implementation\gis\Fig9_VMT Per Employee TAZ_PA4.mxd Date: 10/15/2020 Legend
No VMT Generated<12.9 - Below Target VMT (Planning Area 4 Average - 15%)12.9 - 15.2 - Target VMT (Planning Area 4 - 15% to Planning Area 4 Average)> 15.2 - Above Planning Area 4 AveragePriority Development Area (PDA)Dublin City Limits Figure 9
Employment VMT (VMT per Employee)
Dublin, California
[ 0 1Mile
652
653
B
Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 2022
Appendix B
Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive Peak Hour Volumes
654
655
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1 0
5 0
4 1
3 4
18 8
Date: 08/25/2022
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 0.7% 0.83
TOTAL 0.6% 0.75
TH RT
WB 0.6% 0.83
NB 0.0% 0.50
Peak Hour: 7:45 AM 8:45 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.5% 0.67

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Driveway Hansen Dr
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
2 9 31 5 0 0
25 1 0 100 0
7:15 AM 0 1 47 0
7:00 AM 0 0 39 0 0 7 20 6 0 0 0 2 0
38 0 0 212 0
7:45 AM 0 1 164 1
11 0 0 0 1 0
122 0
7:30 AM 0 0 75 0 0 11 76
0 0 0 27 0 0
358 792
8:00 AM 0 1 220 0 5 11 163
1 30 116 5 0 0 0 3 0 37 0 0
0 5 140 22 0 0
39 0 4 461 1,153
8:15 AM 0 1 113 1
16 0 0 0 2 0
27 1 0 250 1,387
8:45 AM 0 4 82 0
28 0 0 0 0 0
318 1,349
8:30 AM 0 2 86 0 4 4 98
0 1 0 35 0 0
1 3 64 27 0 0 0 1 0 23 0 0 205 1,234
Count Total 0 10 826 2 13 80 708 251 2 4 2,026 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 5 583
120 0 0 0 10 0
3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 0
4 1,387 0
HV 0 0 3 0 0 0
2 10 50 517 71 0 0 0 6 0 138 1
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% - - - 0% - 1% 0% 0% 1%
1 0
7:15 AM 1 1 0 1 3 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
7:00 AM 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 4 0
0 7:30 AM 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0
8:15 AM 1 1 0 0 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
8:00 AM 2 2 0 1 5 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 2 0 1 0
0 8:30 AM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0
13 0
Peak Hour 3 4 0 1 8 0 0
Count Total 5 9 0 2 16 0 0 0 1 1 5 0
0 1 1 3 0 5 0
0 0
0 0
01 00
0 0
0 0
5 0
0 3
N
Hansen Dr
Dublin Blvd
Dublin Blvd
Driveway
Dublin Blvd
Hansen Dr
TEV: 1,387
PHF: 0.75
4 1
138
143
76 0
71 517
50 648
737
10 0
06 53
6 0
2 583
5 590
521
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 656 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Driveway Hansen Dr
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 0 0 1 0
7:15 AM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
3 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 5 11
8:15 AM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 7
8:00 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 10
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1 8
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9
2 0 0 16 0
Peak Hour 0 0 3 0
Count Total 0 0 5 0 0 1 5 3 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 0 0
RT
8 0
Interval
Start
Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Driveway Hansen Dr
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 8:00 AM
0 0 0 0
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 1
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
1 8:30 AM
0 0 0 1 0 0 1
0 0
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Peak Hour
Count Total 1 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 657 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
0 0
1 1
0 2
5 1
10 8
Date: 08/25/2022
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 1.5% 0.84
TOTAL 0.4% 0.92
TH RT
WB 0.2% 0.91
NB 0.0% 0.38
Peak Hour: 5:00 PM 6:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.4% 0.96

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Driveway Hansen Dr
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
3 2 70 34 0 0
14 0 2 267 0
4:15 PM 0 4 115 1
4:00 PM 1 2 125 0 5 1 80 31 0 0 0 6 0
22 0 1 281 0
4:45 PM 0 1 118 0
42 0 0 0 13 0
269 0
4:30 PM 0 2 112 0 1 2 86
0 6 0 32 0 2
283 1,100
5:00 PM 0 2 116 0 8 2 76
6 0 67 42 0 1 0 13 0 34 0 1
7 1 66 40 0 0
31 0 0 315 1,148
5:15 PM 0 1 112 1
40 0 0 0 40 0
40 0 0 290 1,159
5:45 PM 0 1 107 0
39 0 0 0 5 0
271 1,150
5:30 PM 2 0 113 0 10 1 80
1 9 0 32 0 1
6 1 99 34 0 0 0 5 0 31 0 0 284 1,160
Count Total 3 13 918 2 46 10 624 236 0 7 2,260 0
Peak
Hour
All 2 4 448
302 0 1 1 97 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 0
1 1,160 0
HV 0 0 2 0 0 0
1 31 5 321 153 0 0 1 59 0 134 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% - - 0% 0% - 1% - 0% 0%
0 0
4:15 PM 3 0 1 0 4 0 0
1 0 0 1 0 0
West North South
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 1 0
0 4:30 PM 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
5:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0
5:00 PM 1 0 0 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 5 0 0 0
0 5:30 PM 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 2
1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
5 0
Peak Hour 2 1 0 2 5 1 2
Count Total 5 2 1 2 10 2 3 0 0 5 5 0
0 0 3 5 0 3 0
0 1
0 0
00 00
0 1
1 0
3 0
0 5
N
Hansen Dr
Dublin Blvd
Dublin Blvd
Driveway
Dublin Blvd
Hansen Dr
TEV: 1,160
PHF: 0.92
1 0
134
135
158
0 153
321
5 510
672
31 59
0 1
6 60
0 1
448
4 455
324
2 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 658 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Driveway Hansen Dr
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
4 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 2 7
5:15 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 5
5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 4
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 2 5
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
2 0 0 10 0
Peak Hour 0 0 2 0
Count Total 0 0 4 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0
4:00 PM 1 0
RT
5 0
Interval
Start
Dublin Blvd Dublin Blvd Driveway Hansen Dr
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
2 5:00 PM
0 0 0 0
1 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
1 2
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
2 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 1
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 3
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 3
0 0 0 0 5 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
1 LT TH
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 1 1
0 2 0 0 2 1
0 1 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 659 C
Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 2022
Appendix C
Intersection Level of Service Calculations
660
661
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Phasing 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/12/2022Existing AM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 5 583 2 60 517 71 0 0 6 138 1 4Future Volume (veh/h) 5 583 2 60 517 71 0 0 6 138 1 4Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 686 2 71 608 84 0 0 7 162 1 5Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 12 1275 4 97 1416 628 0 0 35 226 1 7Arrive On Green 0.01 0.35 0.35 0.05 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.13 0.13 0.13Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3663 11 1810 3582 1588 0 0 1659 1738 11 54Grp Volume(v), veh/h 6 335 353 71 608 84 0 0 7 168 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1791 1883 1810 1791 1588 0 0 1659 1802 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 6.3 6.3 1.6 5.2 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.7 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 6.3 6.3 1.6 5.2 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.7 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.96 0.03Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 12 623 656 97 1416 628 0 0 35 234 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.51 0.54 0.54 0.73 0.43 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.72 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 671 1500 1577 671 2999 1329 0 0 1270 1095 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.7 10.9 10.9 19.5 9.2 8.1 0.0 0.0 20.1 17.4 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.4 1.0 1.0 3.9 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.5 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 2.0 2.1 0.7 1.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.1 12.0 11.9 23.4 9.5 8.2 0.0 0.0 21.2 19.0 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS C B B C A A A A C B A AApproach Vol, veh/h 694 763 7 168 Approach Delay, s/veh 12.1 10.6 21.2 19.0
Approach LOS B B C BTimer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 21.5 10.0 6.7 19.6 5.5Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 35.0 25.4 15.5 35.0 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 7.2 5.7 3.6 8.3 2.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.6 0.6 0.0 6.3 0.0Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.2HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Phasing1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/12/2022Existing PM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 6 448 1 36 321 153 0 1 59 134 0 1Future Volume (veh/h) 6 448 1 36 321 153 0 1 59 134 0 1Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 487 1 39 349 166 0 1 64 146 0 1Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 14 1026 2 64 1103 486 0 2 117 223 0 2Arrive On Green 0.01 0.28 0.28 0.04 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.12 0.00 0.12Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3696 8 1810 3610 1590 0 25 1629 1795 0 12Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 238 250 39 349 166 0 0 65 147 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1805 1898 1810 1805 1590 0 0 1655 1808 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 4.2 4.2 0.8 2.8 3.1 0.0 0.0 1.4 3.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 4.2 4.2 0.8 2.8 3.1 0.0 0.0 1.4 3.0 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.98 0.99 0.01Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 14 501 527 64 1103 486 0 0 119 225 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.47 0.47 0.61 0.32 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.65 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 950 1895 1993 950 3790 1669 0 0 1303 949 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.8 11.4 11.5 18.1 10.2 10.3 0.0 0.0 17.1 15.9 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.8 1.0 0.9 3.4 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.2 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 1.4 1.4 0.3 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.1 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 29.7 12.4 12.4 21.5 10.4 10.8 0.0 0.0 18.5 17.1 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS C B B C B B A A B B A AApproach Vol, veh/h 495 554 65 147 Approach Delay, s/veh 12.7 11.3 18.5 17.1
Approach LOS BBBBTimer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 16.6 9.3 5.9 15.6 7.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 40.0 30.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 5.1 5.0 2.8 6.2 3.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.4 0.4 0.0 4.4 0.2Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.9HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. 662
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Phasing 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/12/2022Existing + Project AM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 5 583 3 61 517 71 0 0 3 138 1 4Future Volume (veh/h) 5 583 3 61 517 71 0 0 3 138 1 4Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 686 4 72 608 84 0 0 4 162 1 5Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 12 1276 7 98 1423 631 0 0 29 226 1 7Arrive On Green 0.01 0.35 0.35 0.05 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.13 0.13 0.13Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3651 21 1810 3582 1588 0 0 1659 1738 11 54Grp Volume(v), veh/h 6 336 354 72 608 84 0 0 4 168 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1791 1881 1810 1791 1588 0 0 1659 1802 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 6.3 6.3 1.6 5.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.7 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 6.3 6.3 1.6 5.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.7 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.96 0.03Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 12 626 658 98 1423 631 0 0 29 234 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.51 0.54 0.54 0.73 0.43 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.72 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 673 1503 1579 673 3007 1333 0 0 1273 1098 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.6 10.9 10.9 19.4 9.1 8.0 0.0 0.0 20.2 17.4 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.4 1.0 1.0 3.9 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.8 1.5 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 2.0 2.1 0.7 1.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.1 11.9 11.8 23.3 9.4 8.1 0.0 0.0 20.9 18.9 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS C B B C A A A A C B A AApproach Vol, veh/h 696 764 4 168 Approach Delay, s/veh 12.0 10.6 20.9 18.9
Approach LOS B B C BTimer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 21.6 10.0 6.8 19.6 5.3Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 35.0 25.4 15.5 35.0 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 7.1 5.7 3.6 8.3 2.1Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.6 0.6 0.0 6.3 0.0Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.1HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Phasing1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/12/2022Existing + Project PM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 6 448 2 37 321 153 1 1 60 134 0 1Future Volume (veh/h) 6 448 2 37 321 153 1 1 60 134 0 1Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 487 2 40 349 166 1 1 65 146 0 1Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 14 1008 4 66 1090 473 2 2 119 223 0 2Arrive On Green 0.01 0.28 0.28 0.04 0.30 0.30 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.12 0.00 0.12Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3658 15 1810 3582 1554 25 25 1608 1796 0 12Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 238 251 40 349 166 67 0 0 147 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1791 1882 1810 1791 1554 1658 0 0 1808 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 4.2 4.2 0.8 2.9 3.2 1.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 4.2 4.2 0.8 2.9 3.2 1.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.01 0.97 0.99 0.01Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 14 493 518 66 1090 473 123 0 0 224 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.48 0.48 0.61 0.32 0.35 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 735 1642 1726 735 3285 1425 1390 0 0 1203 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.9 11.6 11.6 18.1 10.2 10.3 17.0 0.0 0.0 15.9 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.8 1.0 1.0 3.4 0.2 0.6 1.4 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 1.4 1.5 0.4 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 29.7 12.6 12.6 21.5 10.5 11.0 18.4 0.0 0.0 17.1 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS C B B C B B B A A B A AApproach Vol, veh/h 496 555 67 147 Approach Delay, s/veh 12.8 11.4 18.4 17.1
Approach LOS BBBBTimer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 16.6 9.3 5.9 15.5 7.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 35.0 25.4 15.5 35.0 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 5.2 5.0 2.8 6.2 3.5Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.3 0.5 0.0 4.3 0.2Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.0HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. 663
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Phasing 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/12/2022Future AM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 7 710 3 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 2 5Future Volume (veh/h) 7 710 3 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 2 5Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 710 3 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 2 5Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 14 1293 5 99 1435 636 0 0 36 235 3 7Arrive On Green 0.01 0.35 0.35 0.05 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.14 0.14 0.14Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3658 15 1810 3582 1588 0 0 1658 1731 20 51Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 348 365 74 630 87 0 0 8 176 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1791 1882 1810 1791 1588 0 0 1658 1803 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 6.7 6.7 1.7 5.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 4.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 6.7 6.7 1.7 5.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 4.0 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.96 0.03Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 14 633 666 99 1435 636 0 0 36 245 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.55 0.55 0.75 0.44 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.72 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 652 1456 1531 652 2912 1291 0 0 1233 1064 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 21.3 11.2 11.2 20.1 9.4 8.2 0.0 0.0 20.7 17.8 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 11.0 1.1 1.0 4.2 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.5 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 2.2 2.3 0.7 1.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.6 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.2 12.2 12.2 24.3 9.7 8.3 0.0 0.0 21.8 19.3 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS C B B C A A A A C B A AApproach Vol, veh/h 720 791 8 176 Approach Delay, s/veh 12.4 10.9 21.8 19.3
Approach LOS B B C BTimer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 22.2 10.4 6.8 20.2 5.5Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 35.0 25.4 15.5 35.0 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 7.5 6.0 3.7 8.7 2.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.8 0.6 0.1 6.5 0.0Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.5HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Phasing1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/12/2022Future PM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 8 568 2 46 407 194 0 2 75 170 0 2Future Volume (veh/h) 8 568 2 46 407 194 0 2 75 170 0 2Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 8 568 2 46 407 194 0 2 75 170 0 2Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 15 1098 4 72 1187 511 0 3 128 237 0 3Arrive On Green 0.01 0.30 0.30 0.04 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.13 0.00 0.13Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3689 13 1810 3610 1555 0 43 1613 1786 0 21Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 278 292 46 407 194 0 0 77 172 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1805 1897 1810 1805 1555 0 0 1656 1807 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 5.3 5.3 1.0 3.5 4.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 3.8 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 5.3 5.3 1.0 3.5 4.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 3.8 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.97 0.99 0.01Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 15 537 565 72 1187 511 0 0 132 240 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.64 0.34 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.72 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 675 1521 1599 675 3043 1311 0 0 1276 1105 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.5 12.1 12.1 19.6 10.5 10.7 0.0 0.0 18.5 17.3 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.8 1.1 1.0 3.5 0.2 0.7 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 1.8 1.9 0.4 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.7 1.5 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 30.3 13.2 13.2 23.2 10.8 11.3 0.0 0.0 20.0 18.8 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS C B B C B B A A B B A AApproach Vol, veh/h 578 647 77 172 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.4 11.8 20.0 18.8
Approach LOS BBBBTimer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.9 18.7 10.1 6.1 17.4 7.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 35.0 25.4 15.5 35.0 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 6.0 5.8 3.0 7.3 3.9Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.1 0.6 0.0 5.1 0.3Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.7HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. 664
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Phasing 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/12/2022Future + Project AM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 7 710 4 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 2 5Future Volume (veh/h) 7 710 4 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 2 5Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 710 4 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 2 5Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 14 1295 7 100 1441 639 0 0 31 235 3 7Arrive On Green 0.01 0.35 0.35 0.06 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.14 0.14 0.14Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3652 21 1810 3582 1588 0 0 1658 1731 20 51Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 348 366 75 630 87 0 0 5 176 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1791 1881 1810 1791 1588 0 0 1658 1803 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 6.7 6.7 1.8 5.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 6.7 6.7 1.8 5.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.0 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.96 0.03Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 14 635 667 100 1441 639 0 0 31 245 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.55 0.55 0.75 0.44 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.72 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 654 1461 1535 654 2922 1295 0 0 1237 1067 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 21.2 11.1 11.1 20.0 9.3 8.1 0.0 0.0 20.7 17.8 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 11.0 1.1 1.0 4.2 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.9 1.5 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 2.2 2.3 0.8 1.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.6 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.2 12.1 12.1 24.2 9.6 8.2 0.0 0.0 21.6 19.3 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS C B B C A A A A C B A AApproach Vol, veh/h 721 792 5 176 Approach Delay, s/veh 12.3 10.8 21.6 19.3
Approach LOS B B C BTimer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 22.3 10.4 6.9 20.2 5.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 35.0 25.4 15.5 35.0 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 7.5 6.0 3.8 8.7 2.1Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.8 0.6 0.1 6.5 0.0Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.4HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Phasing1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/12/2022Future + Project PM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 8 568 3 47 407 194 1 2 76 170 0 2Future Volume (veh/h) 8 568 3 47 407 194 1 2 76 170 0 2Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 8 568 3 47 407 194 1 2 76 170 0 2Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 15 1095 6 73 1189 512 2 3 129 237 0 3Arrive On Green 0.01 0.30 0.30 0.04 0.33 0.33 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.13 0.00 0.13Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3682 19 1810 3610 1555 21 42 1595 1786 0 21Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 278 293 47 407 194 79 0 0 172 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1805 1896 1810 1805 1555 1658 0 0 1807 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 5.3 5.3 1.1 3.6 4.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 5.3 5.3 1.1 3.6 4.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.01 0.96 0.99 0.01Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 15 537 564 73 1189 512 135 0 0 240 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.65 0.34 0.38 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 672 1514 1591 672 3029 1305 1272 0 0 1100 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.6 12.2 12.2 19.7 10.6 10.7 18.5 0.0 0.0 17.3 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.8 1.1 1.1 3.5 0.2 0.7 1.5 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 1.8 1.9 0.5 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 30.4 13.3 13.2 23.2 10.8 11.4 20.0 0.0 0.0 18.8 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS C B B C B B C A A B A AApproach Vol, veh/h 579 648 79 172 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.5 11.9 20.0 18.8
Approach LOS B B C BTimer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.9 18.7 10.1 6.2 17.4 8.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 35.0 25.4 15.5 35.0 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 6.0 5.8 3.1 7.3 3.9Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.1 0.6 0.0 5.1 0.3Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.8HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. 665
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/02/2022Existing AM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 5 583 2 60 517 71 0 0 6 138 1 4Future Volume (veh/h) 5 583 2 60 517 71 0 0 6 138 1 4Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 686 2 71 608 84 0 0 7 162 1 5Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 12 1120 3 100 1270 562 5 0 66 212 74 372Arrive On Green 0.01 0.31 0.31 0.06 0.35 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.12 0.27 0.27Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3663 11 1810 3582 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 272 1358Grp Volume(v), veh/h 6 335 353 71 608 84 0 0 7 162 0 6Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1791 1883 1810 1791 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 0 1629Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 6.2 6.2 1.5 5.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.4 0.0 0.1Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 6.2 6.2 1.5 5.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.4 0.0 0.1Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.83Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 12 548 576 100 1270 562 5 0 66 212 0 447V/C Ratio(X) 0.51 0.61 0.61 0.71 0.48 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.76 0.00 0.01Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 187 806 848 258 2688 1190 243 0 1374 441 0 447HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.1 11.5 11.5 18.0 9.7 8.5 0.0 0.0 17.9 16.5 0.0 10.2Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.4 1.6 1.5 3.5 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 5.7 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 2.0 2.1 0.6 1.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 31.5 13.0 13.0 21.4 10.1 8.7 0.0 0.0 18.2 22.2 0.0 10.2LnGrp LOS C B B C B A A A B C A BApproach Vol, veh/h 694 763 7 168 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.2 11.0 18.2 21.8
Approach LOS B B B CTimer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.7 18.7 0.0 15.2 6.6 16.8 9.1 6.1Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 29.0 5.0 8.5 5.5 17.4 9.5 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 7.1 0.0 2.1 3.5 8.2 5.4 2.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.2 0.0Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.1HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/02/2022Existing PM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 6 448 1 36 321 153 0 1 59 134 0 1Future Volume (veh/h) 6 448 1 36 321 153 0 1 59 134 0 1Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 487 1 39 349 166 0 1 64 146 0 1Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 14 987 2 64 1066 459 5 2 154 190 0 514Arrive On Green 0.01 0.27 0.27 0.04 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.00 0.32Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3696 8 1810 3610 1554 1882 25 1630 1795 0 1603Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 238 250 39 349 166 0 0 65 146 0 1Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1805 1898 1810 1805 1554 1882 0 1655 1795 0 1603Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 4.2 4.2 0.8 2.8 3.2 0.0 0.0 1.4 3.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 4.2 4.2 0.8 2.8 3.2 0.0 0.0 1.4 3.0 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 14 482 507 64 1066 459 5 0 156 190 0 514V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.49 0.49 0.61 0.33 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.77 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 193 675 710 218 2797 1204 251 0 1415 408 0 514HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.5 11.6 11.6 17.8 10.3 10.4 0.0 0.0 16.0 16.3 0.0 8.6Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.8 1.1 1.1 3.4 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.7 6.4 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 1.4 1.4 0.3 0.9 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.4 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 29.3 12.7 12.6 21.2 10.5 11.1 0.0 0.0 16.6 22.7 0.0 8.6LnGrp LOS C B B C B B A A B C A AApproach Vol, veh/h 495 554 65 147 Approach Delay, s/veh 12.9 11.5 16.6 22.6
Approach LOS B B B CTimer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 16.1 0.0 16.6 5.8 15.0 8.5 8.1Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 29.0 5.0 7.9 4.5 14.0 8.5 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 5.2 0.0 2.0 2.8 6.2 5.0 3.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.1 0.2Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.6HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. 666
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/02/2022Existing + Project AM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 5 583 3 61 517 71 0 0 3 138 1 4Future Volume (veh/h) 5 583 3 61 517 71 0 0 3 138 1 4Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 686 4 72 608 84 0 0 4 162 1 5Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 12 1120 7 101 1276 565 5 0 61 212 74 369Arrive On Green 0.01 0.31 0.31 0.06 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.12 0.27 0.27Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3651 21 1810 3582 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 272 1358Grp Volume(v), veh/h 6 336 354 72 608 84 0 0 4 162 0 6Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1791 1881 1810 1791 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 0 1629Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 6.2 6.2 1.5 5.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.4 0.0 0.1Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 6.2 6.2 1.5 5.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.4 0.0 0.1Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.83Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 12 549 577 101 1276 565 5 0 61 212 0 443V/C Ratio(X) 0.51 0.61 0.61 0.71 0.48 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.76 0.00 0.01Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 188 808 849 258 2694 1193 244 0 1378 442 0 443HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.1 11.4 11.4 17.9 9.6 8.4 0.0 0.0 17.9 16.5 0.0 10.3Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.4 1.6 1.5 3.5 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 5.7 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 2.0 2.1 0.6 1.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 31.4 13.0 12.9 21.4 10.0 8.6 0.0 0.0 18.1 22.1 0.0 10.3LnGrp LOS C B B C B A A A B C A BApproach Vol, veh/h 696 764 4 168 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.1 10.9 18.1 21.7
Approach LOS B B B CTimer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.7 18.7 0.0 15.1 6.6 16.8 9.1 6.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 29.0 5.0 8.5 5.5 17.4 9.5 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 7.1 0.0 2.1 3.5 8.2 5.4 2.1Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.2 0.0Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.0HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/02/2022Existing + Project PM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 6 448 2 37 321 153 1 1 60 134 0 1Future Volume (veh/h) 6 448 2 37 321 153 1 1 60 134 0 1Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 487 2 40 349 166 1 1 65 146 0 1Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 14 983 4 66 1066 459 5 2 156 190 0 320Arrive On Green 0.01 0.27 0.27 0.04 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.00 0.20Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3687 15 1810 3610 1554 1882 25 1630 1795 0 1598Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 238 251 40 349 166 1 0 66 146 0 1Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1805 1897 1810 1805 1554 1882 0 1655 1795 0 1598Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 4.2 4.2 0.8 2.8 3.2 0.0 0.0 1.4 3.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 4.2 4.2 0.8 2.8 3.2 0.0 0.0 1.4 3.0 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 14 481 506 66 1066 459 5 0 158 190 0 320V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.50 0.50 0.61 0.33 0.36 0.20 0.00 0.42 0.77 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 193 674 708 217 2790 1201 251 0 1412 407 0 336HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.6 11.6 11.6 17.8 10.3 10.4 18.7 0.0 16.0 16.3 0.0 12.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.8 1.1 1.1 3.3 0.3 0.7 18.4 0.0 0.7 6.4 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 1.4 1.5 0.3 0.9 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.4 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 29.3 12.8 12.7 21.2 10.6 11.1 37.1 0.0 16.6 22.7 0.0 12.0LnGrp LOS C B B C B B D A B C A BApproach Vol, veh/h 496 555 67 147 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.0 11.5 16.9 22.6
Approach LOS B B B CTimer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 16.1 4.6 12.1 5.9 15.0 8.5 8.2Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 29.0 5.0 7.9 4.5 14.0 8.5 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 5.2 2.0 2.0 2.8 6.2 5.0 3.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.1 0.2Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.7HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. 667
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/02/2022Future AM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 7 710 3 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 2 5Future Volume (veh/h) 7 710 3 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 2 5Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 710 3 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 2 5Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 14 1131 5 102 1282 568 5 0 69 221 132 331Arrive On Green 0.01 0.31 0.31 0.06 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.12 0.28 0.28Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3658 15 1810 3582 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 475 1188Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 348 365 74 630 87 0 0 8 169 0 7Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1791 1882 1810 1791 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 0 1663Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 6.6 6.6 1.6 5.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.6 0.0 0.1Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 6.6 6.6 1.6 5.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.6 0.0 0.1Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.71Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 14 554 582 102 1282 568 5 0 69 221 0 463V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.63 0.63 0.73 0.49 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.77 0.00 0.02Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 183 787 828 251 2625 1163 238 0 1342 431 0 463HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.6 11.7 11.7 18.4 9.9 8.6 0.0 0.0 18.3 16.8 0.0 10.4Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.9 1.7 1.6 3.7 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 5.5 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 2.2 2.3 0.7 1.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.6 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 30.4 13.4 13.3 22.0 10.3 8.8 0.0 0.0 18.5 22.3 0.0 10.4LnGrp LOS C B B C B A A A B C A BApproach Vol, veh/h 720 791 8 176 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.5 11.2 18.5 21.8
Approach LOS B B B CTimer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 19.2 0.0 15.6 6.7 17.2 9.4 6.2Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 29.0 5.0 8.5 5.5 17.4 9.5 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 7.4 0.0 2.1 3.6 8.6 5.6 2.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.2 0.0Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.3HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/02/2022Future PM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 8 568 2 46 407 194 0 2 75 170 0 2Future Volume (veh/h) 8 568 2 46 407 194 0 2 75 170 0 2Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 8 568 2 46 407 194 0 2 75 170 0 2Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 15 950 3 73 1045 450 5 4 161 221 0 543Arrive On Green 0.01 0.26 0.26 0.04 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.00 0.34Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3689 13 1810 3610 1553 1882 43 1614 1795 0 1603Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 278 292 46 407 194 0 0 77 170 0 2Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1805 1897 1810 1805 1553 1882 0 1657 1795 0 1603Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 5.2 5.2 1.0 3.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 1.7 3.6 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 5.2 5.2 1.0 3.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 1.7 3.6 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 15 465 489 73 1045 450 5 0 166 221 0 543V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.60 0.60 0.63 0.39 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.77 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 186 651 684 210 2697 1160 242 0 1366 393 0 543HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.2 12.6 12.6 18.3 11.0 11.2 0.0 0.0 16.5 16.5 0.0 8.5Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.7 1.8 1.7 3.3 0.3 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.8 5.6 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 1.8 1.9 0.4 1.1 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.6 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 28.9 14.4 14.3 21.7 11.4 12.1 0.0 0.0 17.2 22.1 0.0 8.5LnGrp LOS C B B C B B A A B C A AApproach Vol, veh/h 578 647 77 172 Approach Delay, s/veh 14.6 12.3 17.2 21.9
Approach LOS B B B CTimer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 16.2 0.0 17.8 6.1 15.0 9.3 8.5Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 29.0 5.0 7.9 4.5 14.0 8.5 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 5.9 0.0 2.0 3.0 7.2 5.6 3.7Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.1 0.3Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 14.6HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. 668
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation 1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/02/2022Future + Project AM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 7 710 4 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 2 5Future Volume (veh/h) 7 710 4 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 2 5Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1885 1900 1900 1885 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 710 4 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 2 5Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 14 1132 6 103 1287 570 5 0 64 221 131 328Arrive On Green 0.01 0.31 0.31 0.06 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.12 0.28 0.28Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3652 21 1810 3582 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 475 1188Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 348 366 75 630 87 0 0 5 169 0 7Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1791 1881 1810 1791 1586 1882 0 1660 1795 0 1663Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 6.6 6.6 1.6 5.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.6 0.0 0.1Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 6.6 6.6 1.6 5.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.6 0.0 0.1Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.71Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 14 555 583 103 1287 570 5 0 64 221 0 459V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.63 0.63 0.73 0.49 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.77 0.00 0.02Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 183 790 830 252 2633 1166 238 0 1346 432 0 459HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.5 11.7 11.7 18.3 9.8 8.6 0.0 0.0 18.3 16.8 0.0 10.4Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.9 1.7 1.6 3.7 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 5.5 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 2.2 2.3 0.7 1.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 30.4 13.3 13.2 22.0 10.2 8.7 0.0 0.0 18.5 22.2 0.0 10.4LnGrp LOS C B B C B A A A B C A BApproach Vol, veh/h 721 792 5 176 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.4 11.2 18.5 21.8
Approach LOS B B B CTimer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 19.2 0.0 15.5 6.7 17.2 9.3 6.1Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 29.0 5.0 8.5 5.5 17.4 9.5 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 7.4 0.0 2.1 3.6 8.6 5.6 2.1Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.2 0.0Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.3HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 8-Phase Operation1: Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive 12/02/2022Future + Project PM Synchro 11 ReportW-Trans Page 1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 8 568 3 47 407 194 1 2 76 170 0 2Future Volume (veh/h) 8 568 3 47 407 194 1 2 76 170 0 2Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1976 1976 1976 1885 1900 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 8 568 3 47 407 194 1 2 76 170 0 2Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0Cap, veh/h 15 946 5 74 1045 450 5 4 163 221 0 356Arrive On Green 0.01 0.26 0.26 0.04 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.00 0.22Sat Flow, veh/h 1810 3682 19 1810 3610 1553 1882 42 1615 1795 0 1599Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 278 293 47 407 194 1 0 78 170 0 2Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1810 1805 1896 1810 1805 1553 1882 0 1657 1795 0 1599Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 5.3 5.3 1.0 3.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 1.7 3.6 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 5.3 5.3 1.0 3.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 1.7 3.6 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 15 464 487 74 1045 450 5 0 168 221 0 356V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.60 0.60 0.63 0.39 0.43 0.21 0.00 0.47 0.77 0.00 0.01Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 186 649 682 209 2690 1158 242 0 1363 392 0 356HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.2 12.7 12.7 18.4 11.1 11.2 19.4 0.0 16.5 16.5 0.0 11.8Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.7 1.8 1.7 3.3 0.3 0.9 19.9 0.0 0.7 5.6 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 1.9 1.9 0.4 1.1 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.6 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 28.9 14.5 14.4 21.7 11.4 12.2 39.3 0.0 17.2 22.1 0.0 11.8LnGrp LOS C B B C B B D A B C A BApproach Vol, veh/h 579 648 79 172 Approach Delay, s/veh 14.6 12.4 17.5 22.0
Approach LOS B B B CTimer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.8 16.3 4.6 13.3 6.1 15.0 9.3 8.5Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 29.0 5.0 7.9 4.5 14.0 8.5 32.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 5.9 2.0 2.0 3.0 7.3 5.6 3.7Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.1 0.3Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 14.7HCM 6th LOS BNotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. 669
D
Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project December 2022
Appendix D
Truck Turning Templates
670
671

DUBLIN BLVD
HANSEN DR WESTERN DRIVEWAY EASTERN DRIVEWAY DUBLIN BLVD Steering Angle Lock to Lock Time Articulating Angle WB-62 Trailer Track Tractor Track Trailer Width Tractor Width 4.00 19.50 feet 8.50 8.50: 8.00 8.00 :::0.00 2.50 41.00 15.00 48.00 ::: 6.0 28.4 70.0 672

DUBLIN BLVD EASTERN DRIVEWAY DUBLIN BLVD WESTERN DRIVEWAY

HANSEN DR
Steering Angle Lock to Lock Time Articulating Angle WB-62 Trailer Track Tractor Track Trailer Width Tractor Width 4.00 19.50 feet 8.50 8.50: 8.00 8.00 :::0.00 2.50 41.00 15.00 48.00 ::: 6.0 28.4 70.0 673
414 13th Street, 5th Floor Oakland, CA 94621 510.444.2600 w-trans.com SANTA ROSA • OAKLAND
Memorandum
Date: April 6, 2023 Project: DUB900-2
To: Mr. Oliver Castillo, EIT
Assistant Civil Engineer
City of Dublin
From: Kenny Jeong, PE
[email protected]
Subject: Hexcel Redevelopment Project Transportation Impact Study Addendum As requested, W-Trans has prepared a revised trip generation and parking analysis relative to the proposed redevelopment of the Hexcel facility located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin.

Revised Project Description
The project site plan has recently been updated and now consists of 18,000 square feet of office space, 30,000 square feet of light industrial space and 77,304 square feet of warehouse use with 217 parking spaces. This represents a change from the previous project description as depicted in the Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project, December 12, 2022, W-Trans(TIS), which provided an analysis of a project comprised of 18,000 square feet of office use, 36,500 square feet of light industrial space and 70,804 square feet of warehouse uses with 227 parking spaces. It is noted that the overall size of the proposed project has remained constant at 125,304 square feet in both the project as evaluated in 2022 and the current proposal. A copy of the revised site plan is enclosed.

Revised Trip Generation
According to the trip generation estimates documented in the TIS, the proposed project would result in a net reduction of 201 trips on a daily basis from the prior Research and Development uses, with an increase of 1 net new trip during the morning peak hour and 2 net new trips during the evening peak hour. The project as currently proposed would be comprised of slightly different square footage estimates of internal uses whichwould result in a net decrease of 21 daily trips, including 4 fewer a.m. peak hour trips and 3 fewer p.m. peak hour trips compared to the project as evaluated in the 2022 TIS. A summary of these changes is shown in Table 1. 674
Mr. Oliver Castillo Page 2 April 6, 2023
Table 1 –Trip Generation Summary (December 2022)
Land Use Units Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
(ksf) Rate Trips Rate Trips In Out Rate Trips In Out
Existing
Research & Dev -62.715 11.08 -695 1.03 -65 -53 -12 0.98 -61 -10 -51 Proposed (December 2022)
Offices 18.000 10.84 195 1.52 27 24 3 1.44 26 4 22
Light Industrial 36.500 4.87 178 0.74 27 24 3 0.65 24 3 21 Warehousing 70.804 1.71 121 0.17 12 9 3 0.18 13 4 9
Proposed 2022 Subtotal 125.304 494 66 57 9 63 11 52
Total (Proposed 2022 less Existing) -201 1 4 -3 2 1 1
Proposed (April 2023)
Offices 18.000 10.84 195 1.52 27 24 3 1.44 26 4 22
Light Industrial 30.000 4.87 146 0.74 22 19 3 0.65 20 3 17 Warehousing 77.304 1.71 132 0.17 13 10 3 0.18 14 4 10
Proposed 2023 Subtotal 125.304 473 62 53 9 60 11 49
Total (Proposed 2023 less Existing) -222 -3 0 -3 -1 1 -2 Note: ksf = 1,000 square feet
Finding – Since the currently proposed project is expected to generate slightly fewer vehicle trips than were used in the analysis presented in the Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project (2022), the project’s effect on intersection Level of Service (LOS) and queuing would be similar to the results presented for the prior analysis. The results as presented in the prior Transportation Impact Study would therefore continue to adequately represent the project as currently proposed, and as no changes to the findings would be expected, a comprehensive update of the prior traffic analysis is unnecessary.

Revised Parking Analysis
An update to the expected demand and City code requirements using the current (2023) proposed land uses is summarized in Table 2. According to these estimates, the revised proposed parking supply of 217 spaces is anticipated to adequately accommodate the estimated peak parking demand of 93 spaces and would satisfy the City Code requirement of 217 spaces. For informational purposes, a copy of the previous summary is also provided in Table 2.
675
Mr. Oliver Castillo Page 3 April 6, 2023
Table 2 – Revised Parking Analysis Summary
Land Use Units
(ksf)
Supply
(spaces)
City Requirements ITE Parking Generation
Rate Spaces
Required
Rate
(per ksf)
Est. Parking
Demand
Proposed (December 2022)
227
Offices 12.000

6.000
1 per 0.25 ksf
1 per 0.3 ksf
30 35 2.39 43
Light Industrial 36.500 1 per 0.4 ksf 91 0.65 24
Warehousing 70.804 1 per 1 ksf 71 0.39 28
Total (2022) 125.304 227 227 95
Proposed (April 2023)
217
Offices 12.000

6.000
1 per 0.25 ksf
1 per 0.3 ksf
30 35 2.39 43
Light Industrial 30.000 1 per 0.4 ksf 75 0.65 20
Warehousing 77.304 1 per 1 ksf 77 0.39 30
Total (2023) 125.304 217 217 93
Note: ksf = 1,000 square feet
The Uniform Building Code and the Federal Accessibility Guidelines include minimum requirements disabled parking. The site plan shows that out of 217 spaces available at the proposed project, there are eight stalls designated for disabled persons’ use (including two spaces with the added designation for electric vehicles only).

Based on requirements stipulated by the Federal Accessibility Guidelines, seven accessible stalls are required.

Thus, the proposed project would comply with the Federal Accessibility Guidelines.

Finding – The proposed parking supply would satisfy the City of Dublin’s parking requirements and accommodate the anticipated parking demand. The supply of eight accessible stalls proposed for the project is greater than the seven stalls required.

Thank you for giving W-Trans the opportunity to provide these services. Please call if you have any questions.

MES/kbj/DUB900-2.M1
Enclosures: Revised Site Plan
676
677
Attachment 3
1 Exhibit B
Hexcel Redevelopment Project
Findings Concerning Significant Impacts and Mitigation
Measures
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15163(e), the City Council hereby makes the following findings with respect to the potential for significant environmental impacts from the Hexcel Redevelopment project (Project) and means for mitigating those impacts. Many of the impacts and mitigation measures in the following findings are summarized rather than set forth in full. The text of the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) should be consulted for a complete description of the impacts and mitigations. Findings pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(c) relating to Project Alternatives are made in Exhibit C.

These findings do not attempt to describe the full analysis of each environmental impact contained in the EIR. Instead, the findings provide a summary description of each impact, describe the applicable mitigation measures identified in the EIR 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 EIR, and these findings hereby incorporate by reference the discussion and analysis in those documents supporting the EIR’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 EIR, and ratifies, adopts, and incorporates in these findings the determinations and conclusions of the EIR relating to environmental impacts and mitigation measures, except to the extent any such determinations and conclusions are specifically and expressly modified by these findings.

SECTION 1: AIR QUALITY
Impact AQ-1: Conflict with air quality plans Impact; andAQ-2: Result in cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant
Mitigation Measure:

Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices The construction contractor shall comply with the following Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Basic Construction Measures, as applicable, for reducing construction emissions of uncontrolled fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5):
 All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
 All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. 678
Attachment 3
2  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.  All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).  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.
 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.  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.  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 BAAQMD’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects during demolition and construction activities identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, the Project’s cumulative impact would not exceed the air quality thresholds established by BAAQMD for fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) emissions. Additionally, the Project would not conflict with the attainment of the applicable air quality plan.

Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the impact would be less than significant. This is because the implementation of mitigation would make the Project consistent with BAAQMD Rules and Regulations for controlling fugitive dust emissions and would reduce fugitive dust emissions during demolition and construction.

SECTION 2: BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact BIO-1: Have substantial adverse effect on candidate, sensitive, or special status species Mitigation Measure:

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Nesting Bird Avoidance Measures A. To the extent practicable, construction activities and any tree trimming/removal shall be performed from September 16 through February 15 to avoid the general nesting period for 679
Attachment 3
3 birds. If construction or tree trimming/removal cannot be performed during this period, nesting bird surveys and active nest buffers (as necessary) shall be implemented as follows:
i. Nesting Bird Surveys: If Project-related work is scheduled during the nesting season (typically February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for active nests of such birds within 7 days prior to the beginning of Project construction. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding the work area shall be determined by the qualified biologist, but should be at least: i) 50 feet for passerines; ii) 300 feet for raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day and during appropriate nesting times, as determined by the qualified biologist.
ii. Active Nest Buffers: If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the survey area, an appropriate buffer between the nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of the nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and shall increase the buffer if the birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Construction shall only be allowed to impact a migratory bird or its nest, including its young, if a permit from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is obtained in accordance with the MTBA and all permit conditions are adhered to.

Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, the Project would reduce impacts to nesting birds to a less than significant level by avoiding impacts to active nests.

Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, the impact would be less than significant. This is because the mitigation would protect nesting birds by first requiring that construction activities during the nesting season be avoided. If construction cannot be avoided, preconstruction surveys would be required to identify all active nests with the potential to be impacted by tree removal, construction noise, or human presence, define appropriate avoidance buffers, and require qualified biologists to monitor active nests and bird behavior during construction. The buffer distance would be adjusted as needed.

Impact BIO-2: Interfere or impede the movement of migratory fish or wildlife Mitigation Measure:
680
Attachment 3
4 Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Roosting Bat Surveys and Avoidance A. The Project Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a bat habitat assessment in all project areas that require tree removal. The qualified biologist shall identify and document the location of potentially suitable bat roosting habitat prior to construction activities. If no suitable bat habitat is observed, the biologist shall inform the Project Applicant, and no further considerations are required. If bat roosting habitat is observed, the location of such habitat areas shall be provided to the Project Applicant, and the following requirements shall be implemented throughout the construction period:
i. Removal of trees that provide suitable bat roosting habitat shall be conducted outside of the bat maternity season (April 15 to August 31) and overwintering season (October 16 to January 15) to the extent feasible.
ii. Presence/absence surveys shall be conducted 2 to 3 days prior to removal of any trees in suitable bat habitat, at any time of year. If presence/absence surveys are negative, work may proceed with no restrictions. If presence/absence surveys detect bats within trees planned for removal, work should proceed in accordance with the following restrictions:
 If a maternity colony of bats is observed during maternity season (April 15 to August 31), tree removal shall not occur until August 31 or when maternity season has ended based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist.  If bats are observed during overwintering season (October 16 to January 15), tree removal shall not occur until January 15 or until bats are no longer present based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist.
 If bats are present outside of maternity or overwintering seasons, construction shall follow a two-phase tree removal system conducted over 2 consecutive days.

On the first day (in the afternoon), limbs and branches will be removed using chainsaws or other hand tools. Limbs with cavities, crevices, or deep bark fissures will be avoided, and only branches or limbs without those features will be removed. On the second day, the entire tree shall be removed.

Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, impacts to roosting bats would be reduced to a less than significant level by avoiding impacts to trees that provide suitable bat roosting habitat during bat maternity season and overwintering season.

Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, the impact would be less than significant. This is because the mitigation would require a qualified biologist to identify and document the location of potentially suitable bat roosting habitat prior to construction activities. Tree removal during times of the year when bats are most sensitive to disruption (maternity and overwintering seasons) would be avoided to the extent feasible by either confirming that bats are absent prior to tree removal and/or following protocols that provide an opportunity for bats to relocate prior to tree removal.
681
Attachment 3
5 SECTION 3: CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact CR-1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource Mitigation Measures:

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: HABS Recordation
In consultation with the City of Dublin Planning Division, the Project applicant shall document the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility prior to demolition. Documentation shall be performed by a Secretary of Interior-qualified professional (in history or architectural history) and be consistent with the standards of the National Parks Service (NPS) Historic American Building Survey (HABS) and shall consist of the following elements:

1. Historical Report: A qualified historian or architectural historian shall assemble historical background information relevant to the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility in short format Historic American Building Survey (HABS), based on HABS guidelines for historical reports. Much of this information may be drawn from the previous Historical Resource Evaluation and would detail critical information such as the property’s significance, physical description, history, and a summary of information sources.

2. Photographs: Large-format, black and white photographs of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility shall be taken and processed for archival permanence in accordance with HABS, Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), and HALS (Historic American Landscapes Survey) Photography Guidelines in effect at the time of recording. The standards require large-format black-and-white photography, with the original negatives having a minimum size of 4”x5”. Digital photography, roll film, film packs, and electronic manipulation of images are not acceptable.

The photographs shall be taken by a professional with HABS photography experience. A minimum of 10 and a maximum of 24 photographs must be taken, detailing the site, building exteriors, and interiors, specifically the R&D portion of the building. Photographs must be identified and labeled using HABS/HALS standards.

Following completion of the HABS documentation, including the short form historical report and large-format photographs, and approval by the City of Dublin, the materials shall be placed on file with the City of Dublin Planning Division, and the Dublin Historical Society at the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Interpretive Displays
In concert with HABS documentation (Mitigation Measure CUL-1), the Project applicant shall install permanent interpretive displays or signage for public exhibition detailing the history and significance of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility at the Project site. The interpretive displays or signage could be based on the photographs produced in the HABS documentation and the historic archival research previously prepared as part of the Project. 682
Attachment 3
6 The interpretive displays or signage shall be prepared by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards, in coordination with an exhibit designer.

Interpretive displays or signage at the Project site shall be located outside of the new building, near the publicly accessible sidewalk and/or inside the new building in a prominent space, such as the lobby, where they may be viewed by employees and visitors.

Resulting Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Finding: Even with implementation of mitigation measures, the Project would still result in a significant and unavoidable impact to the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, as it would result in its demolition. Therefore, the Project would have a Significant and Unavoidable Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. For the impact determined to be significant and unavoidable, no additional feasible measures are available to further reduce the impact. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon approval of the Project.

Rationale for Finding: Despite implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2, the Project would result in a Significant and Unavoidable Impact. This is because the Project would still result in the complete demolition of the existing building, which is a historical resource.

Impact CR-2: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource Mitigation Measures:

Mitigation Measure CUL-3: Archaeological and Tribal Monitoring A. A qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology shall be retained by the applicant prior to implementing construction or soil remediation activities that involve earthmoving or soil excavation, and the archaeologist shall be available for consultation or evaluation of any cultural resources uncovered by such activities. Prior to the start of excavation, the archaeologist shall produce an Archaeological Testing Plan and an Archaeological Treatment 683
Attachment 3
7 and Monitoring Plan, in consultation with the City of Dublin, and through them, with any consulting Native American tribes.
i. The Archaeological Testing Plan will define the following:
 Methods and scope of archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction (e.g., GPR, hand excavated test units, trenching with flat edged bucket).
 Treatment of any discoveries during testing.
ii. The Treatment and Monitoring Plan will comply with mitigation measures 4, 5, 6, and 7, set forth in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B, and will specify the following:
 Archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction.  Archaeological and Tribal monitoring requirements, which will be based on the results of archaeological testing and consultation with Native American tribes.  Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any historic-era or pre-contact era artifacts encountered during project activities.  Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any human remains from the historic era. For human remains of Native Americans from any time period, treatment protocols would be established with the designated MLD.

B. If an archaeological resource or human burials are discovered during archaeological testing, consideration will be given to options that avoid or minimize impact.

C. If an archaeological resource (or suspected resource) is discovered during monitoring of project activities, construction or excavation activities within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be temporarily halted or directed to other areas, pending the archaeologist's evaluation of its significance. If the resource is significant, data collection, excavation, or other standard archaeological or historical procedures shall be implemented to mitigate impacts, pursuant to the Treatment and Monitoring Plan and the archaeologist’s direction.

If any human remains are encountered, the archaeologist shall contact the appropriate County Coroner immediately, and security measures shall be implemented to ensure that burials are not vandalized until the decision of burial deposition has been made pursuant to California law. If human remains are determined to be Native American interments, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and follow the procedures stated herein and other applicable laws. A report by the archaeologist evaluating the find and identifying mitigation actions taken shall be submitted to the City and filed with the California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS). Where appropriate to protect the location and sensitivity of the cultural resources, the report may be submitted under Public Utilities Code Section 583 or other appropriate confidentiality provisions.

Mitigation Measure CUL-4: Inadvertent Discovery Protocols A. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology to implement archaeological awareness training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities. The training shall include information regarding the possibility of encountering buried cultural resources, the 684
Attachment 3
8 appearance and types of resources likely to be seen during construction, notification procedures, and proper protocols to be followed should suspected or confirmed resources be encountered by the crew. This training shall be provided once to each worker involved in ground-disturbing activities before they begin work, and shall be documented in training records.

B. In the event that precontact or historic-age resources (or suspected resources) are inadvertently discovered during Project implementation, all activity within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the City of Dublin’s Project Manager shall be notified, and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the City of Dublin to examine the find, pursuant to Mitigation Measure 7 set out in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B.

Project personnel shall not collect or move any historic material. The archaeologist shall evaluate the find(s) within 48 hours to determine if it meets the definition of a historical or unique archaeological resource and follow the procedures outlined below:
i. If the find(s) does not meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming Project implementation.
ii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of a historical resource or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be avoided by Project activities and preserved in place. If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Dublin, the qualified archaeologist shall make appropriate recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of such find(s), and significant impacts to such resources shall be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the archaeologist prior to resuming construction activities within the 50-foot radius.
iii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of both a tribal cultural resource and a historical or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be treated in accordance with MM CUL-3.

C. Recommendations for treatment and disposition of find(s) could include, but are not limited to, archaeological monitoring, collection, recordation, and analysis of any significant cultural materials. A report of findings documenting any data recovery shall be submitted to NWIC. i. In the event that archaeological resource(s) are discovered during Project implementation, an archaeological monitor shall be retained to monitor all ground disturbing activities in the vicinity (i.e., within 50 feet) of the find.

Archaeological monitors have the authority, upon the finding of a potential resource, to request that work be slowed, diverted, or stopped if archaeological resources are identified within the direct impact area.

If the resource is determined by an archaeologist to be a historical or unique archaeological resource, the archaeologist shall amend the Treatment and Monitoring Plan, with measures to avoid or reduce impacts to the resource. The treatment plan measures may include, but not be limited to, avoidance and preservation in place (the preferred method if feasible), capping, incorporation of the site within a park or other open space, or data recovery. If the resource is also a tribal cultural resource, then designated representatives from the consulting tribe(s) shall make appropriate recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of such find(s) in 685
Attachment 3
9 accordance with MM CUL-3 and these recommendations shall be incorporated into the treatment plan.

Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation 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 EIR. With implementation of mitigation, the potential impact on archaeological and buried resources would be reduced to a less than significant level since protocols and procedures would be followed during construction activities.

Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-3 and CUL-4, potentially significant impacts on archeological and buried resources would be reduced to a less than significant impact. This is because these mitigations would require training for all construction workers so that they are aware of the potential for encountering buried resources and the procedures that need to be followed if potential precontact or historic period archaeological resources are encountered during onsite activities, as well as the regulations pertaining to discovery of human burials.

SECTION 4: ENERGY
Impact EN-1: Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources
Mitigation Measure:

Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices The construction contractor shall comply with the following BAAQMD Basic Construction Measures, as applicable, for reducing construction emissions of uncontrolled fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5):
 All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
 All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.  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.  All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).  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.
 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.  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.  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 686
Attachment 3
10 48 hours. The BAAQMD’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, the Project’s impact would not consume energy in a wasteful or inefficient way. Thus, the impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the impact of wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy consumption would be less than significant. This is because this mitigation measure would minimize the idling time of construction equipment and trucks by shutting equipment off when it is not in use or reducing the idling time to 5 minutes. Additionally, construction contractors would be required to maintain and properly tune all construction equipment in accordance with the manufacturer’s specification. These required practices would limit wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption.

SECTION 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impact GEO-1: Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature
Mitigation Measure:

Mitigation Measure GEO-1. Avoid Impacts to Unique Paleontological Resources To minimize the potential for destruction of or damage to previously unknown unique, scientifically important paleontological resources during earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall do the following:
 Prior to the start of earthmoving activities, retain either a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist to inform all construction personnel involved with earthmoving activities regarding the possibility of encountering fossils, the appearance and types of fossils likely to be seen during construction, and proper notification procedures should fossils be encountered.  If paleontological resources are discovered during earthmoving activities, the construction crew shall immediately cease work within 50 feet of the find and notify the Project applicant and the City. The Project applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist to evaluate the resource and prepare a recovery plan, based on SVP Guidelines. The recovery plan may include, but is not limited to, a field survey, construction monitoring, sampling and data recovery procedures, museum curation for any specimen recovered, and a report of findings. Recommendations in the recovery plan that are determined by the City (as the CEQA lead agency) to be necessary and feasible shall be implemented before construction activities can resume within 50 feet of the site where the paleontological resource or resources were discovered. 687
Attachment 3
11 Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, the Project’s impact would minimize impacts to paleontological resources.

Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, the impact would be less than significant. This is because construction workers would be alerted to the possibility of encountering paleontological resources and, in the event that resources were discovered, construction would be halted, and fossil specimens would be recovered and recorded and would undergo appropriate curation.

SECTION 6: HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact HAZMAT-1: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials Mitigation Measures:

Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-1: Perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment  Prior to the start of earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall retain the services of a qualified remediation firm to perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA). The Phase II ESA shall be limited to only those areas where chemical use, storage, and handling have previously occurred. Soil borings shall be obtained as part of the Phase II ESA, along with groundwater samples if necessary. The samples shall be submitted to a laboratory for environmental testing and the results shall be reported in the Phase II ESA, copies of which shall be provided to the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH) and the City of Dublin Building Department. If there are no detections of constituents of concern, or the amounts are below regulatory agency threshold levels, no further actions shall be required.
 If the results of laboratory analyses from the Phase II ESA demonstrate that constituents of concern are present at levels that exceed regulatory agency threshold levels, the Project applicant shall consult with ACDEH (and other regulatory agencies such as the SWRCB if necessary) regarding the necessary actions for remediation. All necessary remedial activities shall be completed by the Project applicant, with a certification by the lead agency with remedial oversight (e.g., ACDEH or SWRCB) that no further action is required, prior to the start of construction activities at the Project site.

Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-2: Perform Sampling of Materials To Be Demolished.

Prior to demolition of any building in the project area, the building shall be sampled to determine if the building contains lead paint and/or asbestos. If either of the materials are determined to be present, 688
Attachment 3
12 they shall be handled and disposed of as a hazardous material and in compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations.

Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, potential construction-related impacts from accidental exposure to hazardous materials would be less than significant.

Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZMAT-1 and HAZMAT-2, the impact would be less than significant. This is because Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-1 would reduce potential impacts from exposure to on-site hazardous materials because soil (and groundwater, if necessary) testing would be performed, and if contamination is found to be present, necessary remediation would be completed prior to the start of Project-related earthmoving activities. Mitigation Measure HAZMAT-2 would sample materials before demolition would occur, and if hazardous materials such as lead paint and asbestos are found, they would be handled and disposed in compliance to applicable regulations.

SECTION 7: TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact TR-1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource Mitigation Measure:

Mitigation Measure TR-1: Inadvertent/Unanticipated Tribal Cultural Resources Discovery Protocols The City of Dublin shall require the following steps to be taken, including as a part of all contracts related to construction of the Project, as applicable:

A. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain representatives from consulting tribe(s), if available, to implement Tribal Cultural Resources Sensitivity Training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities. The training shall include information regarding the possibility of encountering buried tribal cultural resources, the appearance and types of tribal cultural resources that could potentially be seen during construction, notification procedures, and proper protocols to be followed should suspected or confirmed tribal cultural resources be encountered. This training shall be provided once to each worker involved in ground disturbing activities before they begin work and shall be documented in training records.

B. If tribal cultural resources or potential tribal cultural resources are discovered during Project implementation, all activity within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the City of Dublin’s Project Manager shall be notified, and Tribal Representatives from the consulting tribe(s) shall be immediately notified. The Tribal Representative(s) shall evaluate the find(s) 689
Attachment 3
13 within 48 hours to determine if it meets the definition of a tribal cultural resource (PRC §21074) and follow the procedures outlined below:
i. If the find(s) does not meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming Project implementation (but see Mitigation Measures CUL-3 and CUL-4)
ii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, then it shall be avoided by Project activities and preserved in place. The contractor shall implement any measures deemed by the City of Dublin to be necessary and feasible to preserve in place, avoid, or minimize impacts to the tribal cultural resource. If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Dublin, Tribal Representatives from the consulting tribe(s) if available, shall make recommendations regarding the culturally appropriate treatment and disposition of such find(s) and significant impacts to such tribal cultural resources shall be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the consulting tribe(s), if they are available, prior to resuming construction activities within the 50-foot radius.
iii. If the find meets the definition of both a tribal cultural resource and a historical or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be treated in accordance with the measures described in Section C. below and Mitigation Measure CUL-4.

C. Culturally appropriate treatment may include, but is not limited to, minimal processing of materials for reburial, minimizing handling of tribal cultural resources objects, leaving objects in place within the landscape, or returning tribal cultural resources objects to a location within the Project area where they would not be subject to future disturbance. No cultural soil may be removed from the Project site. Permanent curation, testing, or data collection of tribal cultural resources will not take place unless requested in writing by the consulting tribe(s).

D. All fill soils imported and used for this Project must be clean, engineered fill.

E. The applicant shall enter into a tribal monitoring agreement with the consulting tribe(s) prior to the start of ground disturbing activities. The tribal monitoring agreement shall form the terms and compensation for the tribal monitoring with the consulting tribe(s) and be utilized in combination with the tribal cultural resource treatment. Tribal Monitors have the authority to identify sites or objects of cultural significance and to request, upon the finding of a potential tribal cultural resource, that work be slowed, diverted, or stopped if such sites or objects are identified within the direct impact area. Only the consulting tribe(s) can recommend culturally appropriate treatment of such sites or objects, via their Tribal Monitor. Work within 50 feet of the discovery location cannot resume until all necessary investigation and evaluation of the discovery under the requirements of the tribal monitoring agreement have been implemented.

Resulting Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation 690
Attachment 3
14 Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. With implementation of mitigation, tribal cultural resources encountered during construction would be treated in a culturally appropriate manner in consultation with Tribal Representatives and protocols to protect these resources under the mitigation measure would be required.

Rationale for Finding: With implementation of Mitigation Measures TR-1, the impact would be less than significant. This is because with incorporation of Mitigation Measure TR-1, potential impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant since protocols would be required during construction activities, including retaining a qualified archaeologist during ground disturbing activities; implementing archaeological awareness training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities; stopping activity within a 50-foot radius of the precontact or historic-age resources find(s) to have it evaluated by an a qualified archaeologist; and avoiding or mitigating impacts to the find(s).
691
Attachment 4
1 Exhibit C
Hexcel Redevelopment Project
Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and
Potential Additional Mitigation Measures
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides that decision makers 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 Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Hexcel Redevelopment project (Project) identified feasible mitigation measures that would reduce most of the potentially significant impacts to less than significant, as set forth in Exhibit B (Findings Concerning Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures).

However, the following impacts in the EIR either remained significant after mitigation or no feasible mitigation was identified:
 Cultural Resources. The Project is proposing to completely demolish the existing Hexcel Corporation Research & Development facility (R&D), which is a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. The demolition of this facility would result in a significant direct impact even with the implementation of the Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2. Thus, the Project would have a Significant and Unavoidable Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. For the impact determined to be significant and unavoidable, no additional feasible mitigation measures are available to further reduce the impact.

As required by CEQA, the following findings address whether there are any feasible alternatives or any additional feasible mitigation measures available that would reduce any of these impacts 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 decision maker 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 alternatives that were identified and analyzed to lessen significant impacts to historical resources are discussed in the Alternatives Chapter of the Draft EIR and include the No Project Alternative, Reduced Grading Alternative, Partial Preservation Alternative, and Alternative Location. As further set forth below, the City Council considered the alternatives identified and analyzed in the Draft EIR and finds them to be infeasible for specific economic, social, or other considerations pursuant to CEQA 692
Attachment 4
2 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.)
No Project Alternative – Draft EIR Section Description and Analysis of Alternatives Retained 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: 1) when the project is a revision to an existing land use or regulatory plan, the “no project” alternative will be the continuation of the existing plan into the future; or 2) if the project is other than a land use or regulatory plan, the “no project” alternative is the circumstances under which the project does not proceed. The No Project Alternative assumes no demolition or development would occur on the Project site. The Hexcel Corporation R&D facility would not be demolished, the site would not be redeveloped with a new facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field, and Parcels 1 and 2 would not be rezoned. Accordingly, this alternative would avoid all of the Project’s significant impacts (including significant and unavoidable impacts to a historical resource), as well as the need to implement mitigation measures for Air Quality; Biological Resources; Cultural Resources (Historical and Archeological Resources); Energy; Geology and Soils (Paleontological Resources); Hazards and Hazardous Materials; and Tribal Cultural Resources.

Finding:

The City finds this alternative infeasible because it would not be consistent with any of the Project’s objectives. The No Project Alternative would not achieve any of the following Project objectives, as described in the Project Description of the Draft EIR:
 To redevelop the Hexcel site with a new and upgraded facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field.
 To rezone Parcels 1 and 2 as a Planned Development, which provide development standards beyond those of the M-1 zoning, and adopt a new ordinance. The property would be rezoned under a new PD Zone with a new ordinance number associated with it.

Therefore, the City Council considered the No Project Alternative and declines to adopt it because it would not achieve any of the Project’s objectives, as supported by the administrative record for the Project.

Reduced Grading Alternative - Draft EIR Section Description and Analysis of Alternatives Retained Under the Reduced Grading Alternative, soil would be imported to build up the southern periphery of the property and treat stormwater onsite with a valley gutter catch basin and a Silva cell rather than grading to enable stormwater to be gravity fed into bioretention planters. The Silva cell is a modular suspended pavement system that uses soil volumes to support large tree growth and provide onsite stormwater management. The Silva cell would replace 3,280 square feet of the two bioretention planters proposed in the southeast corner of the site adjacent to the south parking areas. 693
Attachment 4
3 This alternative would reduce the amount of grading in the High Archaeological Probability Area by approximately 23 percent, compared to the proposed Project at approximately 53 percent, thereby reducing the risk of impacts to buried cultural resources. Excavation depths for the Reduced Grading Alternative would generally be limited to less than one foot below current grade, except for three locations where depths would range from two feet deep to seven feet deep. While this design does not completely eliminate the risk of impact to archaeological resources or human remains, the area and degree of potential impact are substantially reduced with the Reduced Grading Alternative.

Nevertheless, the Project would still have the potential to impact archaeological resources and disturb human remains, both of which could be potentially significant.

The Reduced Grading Alternative would also reduce the potential to impact paleontological resources, because it would reduce the depths of excavation where these resources could occur. Furthermore, by reducing the amount of grading, there would be less total construction equipment use during the grading phase, which would reduce NOx, ROG, PM10 exhaust and PM2.5 exhaust emissions.

The Reduced Grading Alternative would still involve demolition of the existing Hexcel building in its entirety and, therefore, would have a significant and unavoidable impact to historical resources.

Finding:

The City finds that although the Reduced Grading Alternative would meet the proposed Project’s objectives, it would not avoid significant and unavoidable impacts related to historical resources and, from an operational standpoint, the City has concerns with the use of a Silva cell for this Project. The City is aware of other projects implementing Silva cells for stormwater treatment that have malfunctioned. Operational failure of these Silva cells can result in sewage getting mixed with stormwater.

Therefore, the City Council considered the Reduced Grading Alternative and declines to adopt it because there is a risk implementing a Silva cell for stormwater treatment for this Project.

Partial Preservation Alternative – Draft EIR Section Alternatives Considered but Rejected Under the Partial Preservation Alternative, the 25,000-square-foot laboratory building, the portion of the existing Hexcel Corporation R&D facility that qualifies the building as a historical resource, would be adaptively reused as a commercial self-storage facility. The rest of the existing building would be demolished and a new 114,141-square-foot building would be constructed in its place. The new building would be used by future tenants in the life sciences and manufacturing field. This would result in a mixed-used site, rather than a site used for solely life sciences and manufacturing.

This alternative would reduce impacts to a historical resource as that portion of the building would be retained and would somewhat meet the Project’s objectives. However, it is unlikely that the Partial Preservation Alternative would avoid the significant and unavoidable impact on the historical resource.

Although this alternative would retain the most important portion of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility contributing to its eligibility as a historical resource and would, therefore, have a reduced level of impact compared to the proposed Project, the alternative would still demolish more than half of the original structure and would also involve substantial changes to the setting of the historical resource. 694
Attachment 4
4 Therefore, the structure would not continue to retain its integrity to convey the historical significance.

It is considered unlikely that feasible mitigation measures could be implemented to fully mitigate the potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level. Furthermore, the applicant prepared a Pro Forma for financial feasibility of Partial Preservation Alternative and found that this alternative would result in a loss of approximately $10.8 million over the life of the Project, while the total upfront costs (capitalization) would be approximately $55.7 million, which is approximately 40 percent higher than the proposed Project. Therefore, the Partial Preservation Alternative would be financially infeasible.

Other significant impacts related to Air Quality; Biological Resources; Cultural Resources (Historical and Archeological Resources); Energy; Geology and Soils (Paleontological Resources); Hazards and Hazardous Materials; and Tribal Cultural Resources would still remain under this alternative and mitigation would be required.

Finding:

The City finds that the Partial Preservation Alternative would not meet the Project objective to redevelop the site with a new and upgraded facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field because it would be developed as a mixed-used site with the introduction of the commercial selfstorage facility, which would not be as appealing to future life sciences/manufacturing tenants. It also would not be economically feasible for the Project applicant due to the reduction in the number of tenants, and the reduction in value of a commercial self-storage and warehousing floorspace compared to life sciences/manufacturing. Also, as noted in the section above, it is unlikely that the Partial Preservation Alternative would avoid the significant and unavoidable impact on the historical resource.

Therefore, the City Council considered the Partial Preservation Alternative and declines to adopt it because it would not achieve the Project’s objectives and is infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations described above, as supported by the administrative record for the Project.

Alternative Location - Draft EIR Section Alternatives Considered but Rejected The use of another site for this Project would not meet the project’s objectives to redevelop the Hexcel site with a new and upgraded facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field and to rezone Parcels 1 and 2 of this site as a Planned Development. Furthermore, the Project applicant already owns this site, which is suitable for the scale and type of project that the applicant has proposed. Development of the Project on the proposed site would help ensure the construction of the Project is affordable and accomplished in a timely manner. A new site option would require the applicant to sell this site and find a new site within the City limits of a similar size, designated for this type of use, and proximate to regional freeway access. There are limited sites in the City designated for industrial uses of similar size and proximity to a freeway interchange to implement the proposed Project. Therefore, an alternative location was rejected from further consideration.

Finding:
695
Attachment 4
5 The City Council considered an alternative location and declines to adopt it because it would not achieve any of the Project’s objectives 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 Not Applicable: The EIR did not identify any additional mitigation measures and/or modifications to the measures beyond those identified in the EIR as set forth in Exhibit A. 696
Attachment 5
1 Exhibit D
Hexcel Redevelopment Project
Statement of Overriding Considerations
General.

Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council of the City of Dublin makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations.

The City Council has balanced the benefits of the Hexcel Redevelopment project (Project) to the City of Dublin against the significant adverse impacts identified in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that cannot be reduced to less than significant through feasible mitigations or alternatives and would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council hereby determines that the benefits of the Project outweigh the adverse impacts and the Project should be approved.

The City Council has carefully considered each 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 significant adverse environmental impacts as identified in the EIR. The City Council specifically finds that to the extent 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 benefits that support approval of the Project.

Significant and Unavoidable Adverse Impacts.

The following significant and unavoidable environmental impact is associated with the Project as identified in the EIR:
 Historical Resources. Since the proposed Project would result in the demolition of the existing Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, which is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable impact on a historical resource. Even with implementation of the mitigation measures, the Project would still result in a significant and unavoidable impact to a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, as the Project would result in the demolition of the historical resource.

Overriding Considerations.

The City Council has carefully considered the significant and unavoidable impact in reaching its decision to approve the Project. In reaching its decision, the City Council has balanced the significant and unavoidable impact against the Project’s benefits, and hereby determines that the significant and unavoidable impact is outweighed by the benefits of the Project as further set forth below. Any one of 697
Attachment 5
2 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 redevelopment of the Project site creates an opportunity to bring economic and job-rich uses to the City related to advanced manufacturing and life sciences. Presently, the site is occupied by the Hexcel research and development facility, which is an outdated and smaller facility that does not offer the most recent amenities and other design features that would appeal to future tenants in this field. Due to the smaller size of the existing facility, it limits the ability to offer tenant space that is flexible for various business needs. The redevelopment of the Project site with a new and updated light industrial building will attract advanced manufacturing and life science uses contributing to approximately 200 net new jobs onsite and other employment opportunities in the City that would function around the operations at the site. Additionally, the Project will be an incubator for innovation and business attraction within the City.
 Since the Project would be attracting new jobs to the City, it would also support local retail and restaurants, as it is expected that future employees would be patrons to these surrounding businesses.
 The General Plan provides a long-range vision for economic growth and development of the City. The Project will further the General Plan objective of providing a broad range of non-retail businesses and high-growth employment opportunities in research, limited manufacturing and distribution activities, and administrative offices. The Project supports the following General Plan Policies and Goals:
o Policy 11.5.3-A. Retaining high-growth companies is a priority for the City of Dublin.

Targeting high-growth companies, the City should maintain a Business Visitation Program that seeks to identify and solve local economic development constraints; and o Goal III. Development of Strategic Employment Supporting Sites seeks to maximize the potential for development of workplace uses in the City of Dublin.  The Project site is approximately 0.25-mile from the Interstate 580 (I-580)/San Ramon Road interchange. The proximity of the Project site to the I-580/San Ramon Road interchange is consistent with General Plan goals and policies and facilitates efficient transportation. The benefit of the Project site being close to a major highway is that delivery vehicles and trucks coming to and from the site would be able to take shorter routes on the City’s roadways and, therefore, impacts related to noise and transportation and circulation would be minimized. This would be consistent with General Plan Policy 5.6.1-A.1. Designate and accommodate truck routes to minimize noise nuisance on residential arterial streets.  The Project would result in a net reduction in energy consumption, primarily related to improved building energy standards and eliminating natural gas infrastructure. Therefore, the Project would support the following City’s General Plan’s Energy Conservation Element Policies:
o Policy 13.3.2-A:
698
Attachment 5
3  Encourage the installation of alternative energy technology in new residential and commercial development.
 Encourage designing for solar access.
 Encourage energy efficient improvements be made on residential and commercial properties.
o Policy 13.3.2-B:
 New development proposals shall be reviewed to ensure lighting levels needed for a safe and secure environment are provided—utilizing the most energyefficient fixtures.  In new commercial and residential parking lots, require the installation of conduit to serve electric vehicle parking spaces to enable the easier installation of future charging stations.
 Encourage the installation of charging stations for commercial projects over a certain size and any new residential project that has open parking.  Encourage buildings (and more substantially, whole neighborhoods) to be designed along an east-west axis to maximize solar exposure. Where feasible, require new development projects to take advantage of shade, prevailing winds, landscaping and sun screens to reduce energy use; and to use regenerative energy heating and cooling source alternatives to fossil fuels.  Continue to implement parking lot tree planting standards that would substantially cool parking areas and help cool the surrounding environment.

For all of the above reasons, the benefits of the Hexcel Redevelopment Project outweigh its significant and unavoidable environmental impact.
699
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 19
4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is a CEQA-required component of an EIR. CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 and Public Resources Code §21081.6 requires a public agency to adopt a monitoring and reporting program to ensure efficacy and enforceability of any mitigation measures applied to a proposed project. The Lead Agency must adopt an MMRP for mitigation measures incorporated into the project or proposed as conditions of approval. As stated in Public Resources Code §21081.6 (a)(1):
“The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation.”
Table 4-1 represents the MMRP for the Project. This table lists each of the mitigation measures proposed in the EIR, including mitigation refined or updated in the Final EIR in Chapter 3, Changes to the Draft EIR, and specifies the timing and responsible party for each mitigation measure.

Attachment 6
700
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 20
Table 4-1. Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program Table Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
Air Quality
During
construction
MM AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices.

The construction contractor shall comply with the following BAAQMD Basic Construction Measures, as applicable, for reducing construction emissions of uncontrolled fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5):
• All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
• All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
• 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.
• All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).
• 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. • 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.
• All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall  Responsible for
approval: City of
Dublin
 Implementation:

Project applicant
701
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 21
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
• 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 BAAQMD’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Biological Resources
During
construction
MM BIO-1: Nesting Bird Avoidance Measures
A. To the extent practicable, construction activities and any tree trimming/removal shall be performed from September 16 through February 15 to avoid the general nesting period for birds. If construction or tree trimming/removal cannot be performed during this period, nesting bird surveys and active nest buffers (as necessary) shall be implemented as follows:
i. Nesting Bird Surveys: If Project-related work is scheduled during the nesting season (typically February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for active nests of such birds within 7 days prior to the beginning of Project construction.

Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding the work area shall be determined by the qualified biologist, but should be at least: i) 50 feet for passerines; ii) 300 feet for raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day and during appropriate nesting times, as determined by the qualified biologist.
ii. Active Nest Buffers: If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the survey area, an appropriate buffer between the nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall  Responsible for
approval: City of
Dublin
 Implementation:

Project applicant
with assistance from
qualified biologist
702
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 22
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of the nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and shall increase the buffer if the birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Construction shall only be allowed to impact a migratory bird or its nest, including its young, if a permit from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is obtained in accordance with the MBTA and all permit conditions are adhered to.

Prior to
construction
MM BIO-2: Roosting Bat Surveys and Avoidance
A. The Project Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a bat habitat assessment in all project areas that require tree removal.

The qualified biologist shall identify and document the location of potentially suitable bat roosting habitat prior to construction activities. If no suitable bat habitat is observed, the biologist shall inform the Project Applicant, and no further considerations are required. If bat roosting habitat is observed, the location of such habitat areas shall be provided to the Project Applicant, and the following requirements shall be implemented throughout the construction period:
 Responsible for
approval: City of
Dublin
 Implementation:

Project applicant
with assistance from
qualified biologist
703
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 23
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
i. Removal of trees that provide suitable bat roosting habitat shall be conducted outside of the bat maternity season (April 15 to August 31) and overwintering season (October 16 to January 15) to the extent feasible.
ii. Presence/absence surveys shall be conducted 2 to 3 days prior to removal of any trees in suitable bat habitat, at any time of year.

If presence/absence surveys are negative, work may proceed with no restrictions. If presence/absence surveys detect bats within trees planned for removal, work should proceed in accordance with the following restrictions:
• If a maternity colony of bats is observed during maternity season (April 15 to August 31), tree removal shall not occur until August 31 or when maternity season has ended based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist.
• If bats are observed during overwintering season (October 16 to January 15), tree removal shall not occur until January 15 or until bats are no longer present based on surveys
conducted by a qualified biologist.
• If bats are present outside of maternity or overwintering seasons, construction shall follow a two-phase tree removal system conducted over 2 consecutive days. On the first day (in the afternoon), limbs and branches will be removed using chainsaws or other hand tools. Limbs with cavities, crevices, or deep bark fissures will be avoided, and only branches or limbs without those features will be removed. On the second day, the entire tree shall be removed.

Cultural Resources
Prior to building
demolition
MM CUL-1: HABS Recordation
In consultation with the City of Dublin Planning Division, the Project applicant shall document the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility prior to  Responsible for
approval: City of
Dublin
704
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 24
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
demolition. Documentation shall be performed by a Secretary of Interior-qualified professionals (in history or architectural history) and be consistent with the standards of the National Parks Service (NPS) Historic American Building Survey (HABS) and shall consist of the following elements:

1. Historical Report: A qualified historian or architectural historian shall assemble historical background information relevant to the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility in short format Historic American Building Survey (HABS), based on HABS guidelines for historical reports. Much of this information may be drawn from the previous Historical Resource Evaluation and would detail critical information such as the property’s significance, physical description, history, and a summary of information sources.

2. Photographs: Large-format, black and white photographs of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility shall be taken and processed for archival permanence in accordance with HABS, Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), and HALS (Historic American Landscapes Survey) Photography Guidelines in effect at the time of recording.

The standards require large-format black-and-white photography, with the original negatives having a minimum size of 4”x5”. Digital photography, roll film, film packs, and electronic manipulation of images are not acceptable.

The photographs shall be taken by a professional with HABS photography experience. A minimum of 10 and a maximum of 24 photographs must be taken, detailing the site, building exteriors, and interiors, specifically the R&D portion of the building. Photographs must be identified and labeled using HABS/HALS standards.

Following completion of the HABS documentation, including the short form historical report and large-format photographs, and approval by the City of Dublin, the materials shall be placed on file with the City of  Implementation:

Project applicant
with assistance from
qualified historian or
architectural
historian
705
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 25
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
Dublin Planning Division, and the Dublin Historical Society at the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums.

Prior to building
demolition
MM CUL-2: Interpretive Displays
In concert with HABS documentation (MM CUL-1), the Project applicant shall install permanent interpretive displays or signage for public exhibition detailing the history and significance of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility at the Project site. The interpretive displays or signage could be based on the photographs produced in the HABS documentation and the historic archival research previously prepared as part of the Project.

The interpretive displays or signage shall be prepared by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards, in coordination with an exhibit designer.

Interpretive displays or signage at the Project site shall be located outside of the new building, near the publicly accessible sidewalk and/or inside the new building in a prominent space, such as the lobby, where they may be viewed by employees and visitors.
 Responsible for
approval: City of
Dublin
 Implementation:

Project applicant
with assistance from
qualified historian or
architectural
historian
Prior to
construction
MM CUL-3: Archaeological and Tribal Monitoring
A. A qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology shall be retained by the applicant prior to implementing construction or soil remediation activities that involve earthmoving or soil excavation, and the archaeologist shall be available for consultation or evaluation of any cultural resources uncovered by such activities. Prior to the start of excavation, the archaeologist shall produce an Archaeological Testing Plan and an Archaeological Treatment and Monitoring Plan, in consultation with the City of Dublin, and through them, with any consulting Native American tribes.
 Responsible for
approval: City of
Dublin
 Implementation:

Project applicant
with assistance from
qualified
archaeologist
706
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 26
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
i. The Archaeological Testing Plan will define the following:
• Methods and scope of archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction (e.g., GPR, hand
excavated test units, trenching with flat edged bucket). • Treatment of any discoveries during testing.
ii. The Treatment and Monitoring Plan will comply with mitigation measures 4, 5, 6, and 7, set forth in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B, and will specify the following:
• Archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction.
• Archaeological and Tribal monitoring requirements, which will be based on the results of archaeological testing and consultation with Native American tribes.
• Procedures and considerations for handling,
documenting, analyzing, and curation of any historic-era or pre-contact era artifacts encountered during project activities.
• Procedures and considerations for handling,
documenting, analyzing, and curation of any human
remains from the historic era. For human remains of
Native Americans from any time period, treatment
protocols would be established with the designated MLD.

B. If an archaeological resource or human burials are discovered during archaeological testing, consideration will be given to options that avoid or minimize impact.

C. If an archaeological resource (or suspected resource) is discovered during monitoring of project activities, construction or excavation activities within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be temporarily halted or directed to other areas, pending the 707
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 27
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
archaeologist's evaluation of its significance. If the resource is significant, data collection, excavation, or other standard archaeological or historical procedures shall be implemented to mitigate impacts, pursuant to the Treatment and Monitoring Plan and the archaeologist’s direction. If any human remains are encountered, the archaeologist shall contact the appropriate County Coroner immediately, and security measures shall be implemented to ensure that burials are not vandalized until the decision of burial deposition has been made pursuant to California law. If human remains are determined to be Native American interments, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and follow the procedures stated herein and other applicable laws. A report by the archaeologist evaluating the find and identifying mitigation actions taken shall be submitted to the CPUC. Where appropriate to protect the location and sensitivity of the cultural resources, the report may be submitted under Public Utilities Code Section 583 or other appropriate confidentiality provisions.

Prior and during
construction
MM CUL-4: Inadvertent Discovery Protocols
A. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology to implement archaeological awareness training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities.

The training shall include information regarding the possibility of encountering buried cultural resources, the appearance and types of resources likely to be seen during construction, notification procedures, and proper protocols to be followed should suspected or confirmed resources be encountered by the crew. This training  Responsible for
approval: City of
Dublin
 Implementation:

Project applicant
with assistance from
qualified
archaeologist
708
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 28
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
shall be provided once to each worker involved in ground-disturbing activities before they begin work, and shall be documented in training records.

B. In the event that precontact or historic-age resources (or suspected resources) are inadvertently discovered during Project
implementation, all activity within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the City of Dublin’s Project Manager shall be notified, and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the City of Dublin to examine the find, pursuant to Mitigation Measure 7 set out in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, Appendix B. Project personnel shall not collect or move any historic material. The archaeologist shall evaluate the find(s) within 48 hours to determine if it meets the definition of a historical or unique archaeological resource and follow the procedures outlined below:
i. If the find(s) does not meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming Project implementation.
ii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of a historical resource or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be avoided by Project activities and preserved in place. If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Dublin, the qualified archaeologist shall make appropriate recommendations
regarding the treatment and disposition of such find(s), and significant impacts to such resources shall be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the archaeologist prior to resuming construction activities within the 50-foot radius. iii. If the find(s) does meet the definition of both a tribal cultural resource and a historical or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be treated in accordance with MM CUL-3.
709
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 29
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
C. Recommendations for treatment and disposition of find(s) could include, but are not limited to, archaeological monitoring, collection, recordation, and analysis of any significant cultural materials. A report of findings documenting any data recovery shall be submitted to NWIC.
i. In the event that archaeological resource(s) are discovered during Project implementation, an archaeological monitor shall be retained to monitor all ground- disturbing activities in the vicinity (i.e., within 50 feet) of the find.

Archaeological monitors have the authority, upon the finding of a potential resource, to request that work be slowed, diverted, or stopped if archaeological resources are identified within the direct impact area.

If the resource is determined by an archaeologist to be a historical or unique archaeological resource, the archaeologist shall amend the Treatment and Monitoring Plan, with measures to avoid or reduce impacts to the resource. The treatment plan measures may include, but not be limited to, avoidance and preservation in place (the preferred method if feasible), capping, incorporation of the site within a park or other open space, or data recovery. If the resource is also a tribal cultural resource, then designated representatives from the consulting tribe(s) shall make appropriate recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of such find(s) in accordance with MM CUL-3 and these recommendations shall be incorporated into the treatment plan.

Geology and Soils
During
construction
MM GEO-1: Avoid Impacts to Unique Paleontological Resources To minimize the potential for destruction of or damage to previously unknown unique, scientifically important paleontological resources  Responsible for
approval: City of
Dublin
710
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 30
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
during earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall do the following:
• Prior to the start of earthmoving activities, retain either a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist to inform all construction personnel involved with earthmoving activities regarding the possibility of encountering fossils, the appearance and types of fossils likely to be seen during construction, and proper notification procedures should fossils be encountered.
• If paleontological resources are discovered during earthmoving activities, the construction crew shall immediately cease work within 50 feet of the find and notify the Project applicant and the City. The Project applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist to evaluate the resource and prepare a recovery plan, based on SVP Guidelines.

The recovery plan may include, but is not limited to, a field survey, construction monitoring, sampling and data recovery procedures, museum curation for any specimen recovered, and a report of findings. Recommendations in the recovery plan that are determined by the City (as the CEQA lead agency) to be necessary and feasible shall be implemented before construction activities can resume within 50 feet of the site where the paleontological resource or resources were discovered.
 Implementation:

Project applicant
with assistance from
qualified
archaeologist or
paleontologist
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Prior to
construction
MM HAZMAT-1: Perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment • Prior to the start of earthmoving activities at the Project site, the Project applicant shall retain the services of a qualified remediation firm to perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA). The Phase II ESA shall be limited to only those areas where chemical use, storage, and handling have previously occurred. Soil borings shall be obtained as part of the Phase II ESA, along with groundwater samples if necessary. The samples shall be submitted to a laboratory  Responsible for
approval: City of
Dublin
 Implementation:

Project applicant
with assistance from
qualified
remediation firm
711
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 31
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
for environmental testing and the results shall be reported in the Phase II ESA, copies of which shall be provided to the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH) and the City of Dublin Building Department. If there are no detections of constituents of concern, or the amounts are below regulatory agency threshold levels, no further actions shall be required. • If the results of laboratory analyses from the Phase II ESA demonstrate that constituents of concern are present at levels that exceed regulatory agency threshold levels, the Project applicant shall consult with ACDEH (and other regulatory agencies such as the SWRCB if necessary) regarding the necessary actions for remediation. All necessary remedial activities shall be completed by the Project applicant, with a certification by the lead agency with remedial oversight (e.g., ACDEH or SWRCB) that no further action is required, prior to the start of construction activities at the Project site.

Prior to building
demolition
HAZMAT-2: Perform Sampling of Materials To Be Demolished.

Prior to demolition of any building in the project area, the building shall be sampled to determine if the building contains lead paint and/or asbestos. If either of the materials are determined to be present, they shall be handled and disposed of as a hazardous material and in compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations.  Responsible: City of
Dublin
 Implementation:

Project applicant
with assistance from
qualified
remediation firm
Transportation and Traffic
Project design Condition of Approval:
• Requires vegetation maintenance for sight distance to achieve a minimum sight distance of 250 feet at each driveway access point • Prohibits trucks from accessing the eastern driveway
 Responsible: City of
Dublin
 Implementation:

Project applicant
712
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 32
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
Tribal Cultural Resources
Prior to and
during
construction
MM TR-1: Inadvertent/Unanticipated Tribal Cultural Resources Discovery Protocols
The City of Dublin shall require the following steps to be taken, including as a part of all contracts related to construction of the Project, as applicable:

A. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain representatives from consulting tribe(s), if available, to implement Tribal Cultural Resources Sensitivity Training for all construction personnel involved with ground disturbing or excavation activities. The training shall include information regarding the possibility of encountering buried tribal cultural resources, the appearance and types of tribal cultural resources that could potentially be seen during construction, notification procedures, and proper protocols to be followed should suspected or confirmed tribal cultural resources be encountered. This training shall be provided once to each worker involved in ground-disturbing activities before they begin work and shall be documented in training records.

B. If tribal cultural resources or potential tribal cultural resources are discovered during Project implementation, all activity within a 50- foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the City of Dublin’s Project Manager shall be notified, and Tribal Representatives from the consulting tribe(s) shall be immediately notified. The Tribal Representative(s) shall evaluate the find(s) within 48 hours to determine if it meets the definition of a tribal cultural resource (PRC §21074) and follow the procedures outlined below:
i. If the find(s) does not meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming Project implementation (but see MM CUL-3 and CUL-4)  Responsible for
approval: City of
Dublin
 Implementation:

Project applicant
with assistance from
representatives from
consulting tribe(s)
713
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 33
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
ii.If the find(s) does meet the definition of a tribal cultural resource, then it shall be avoided by Project activities and preserved in place. The contractor shall implement any measures deemed by the City of Dublin to be necessary and feasible to preserve in place, avoid, or minimize impacts to the tribal cultural resource.

If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Dublin, Tribal Representatives from the consulting tribe(s) if available, shall make recommendations regarding the culturally
appropriate treatment and disposition of such find(s) and significant impacts to such tribal cultural resources shall be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the consulting tribe(s), if they are available, prior to resuming construction activities within the 50-foot radius.
iii. If the find meets the definition of both a tribal cultural resource and a historical or unique archaeological resource, then it shall be treated in accordance with the measures described in Section C. below and MM CUL-4.

C. Culturally appropriate treatment may include, but is not limited to, minimal processing of materials for reburial, minimizing handling of tribal cultural resources objects, leaving objects in place within the landscape, or returning tribal cultural resources objects to a location within the Project area where they would not be subject to future disturbance. No cultural soil maybe removed from the Project site.

Permanent curation, testing, or data collection of tribal cultural resources will not take place unless requested in writing by the consulting tribe(s).

D. All fill soils imported and used for this Project must be clean, engineered fill.

E. The applicant shall enter into a tribal monitoring agreement with the consulting tribe(s) prior to the start of ground disturbing activities. 714
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 34
Timing Project Design Feature / Condition of Approval / Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Approval / Monitoring /
Implementation
Completion
Date Initials
The tribal monitoring agreement shall form the terms and compensation for the tribal monitoring with the consulting tribe(s) and be utilized in combination with the tribal cultural resource treatment. Tribal Monitors have the authority to identify sites or objects of cultural significance and to request, upon the finding of a potential tribal cultural resource, that work be slowed, diverted, or stopped if such sites or objects are identified within the direct impact area. Only the consulting tribe(s) can recommend culturally appropriate treatment of such sites or objects, via their Tribal Monitor. Work within 50 feet of the discovery location cannot resume until all necessary investigation and evaluation of the discovery under the requirements of the tribal monitoring agreement have been implemented.

Energy Conservation
During
construction
See Air quality mitigation measure MM AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices.
 Responsible for
approval: City of
Dublin
 Implementation:

Project applicant
715
Attachment 7
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 1 of 8 ORDINANCE NO. XX – 24

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN

AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND APPROVING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT WITH RELATED STAGE 1 AND STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE

HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
PLPA 2022-00038
(APNS 941-1560-009-01 AND 941-1560-003-04)
The Dublin City Council does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. RECITALS
A. The property owner, Overton Moore Properties, proposes to redevelop an 8.81-acre site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The project would demolish the existing 62,175-squarefoot Hexcel research and development building and construct a new 125,532-square-foot light industrial building to appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses with 217 parking stalls and related site improvements. Requested approvals include a Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the “Hexcel Redevelopment Project” or the “Project.” B. The Project site includes two parcels totaling approximately 8.81 acres located north of the I580, south of Dublin Boulevard and residential and commercial uses, east of existing office buildings, and west of the U.S. Bank Branch, Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery.

C. The Project site has a General Plan and Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial.

D. The Project site is subject to zoning, where one half of the site is zoned Planned Development (Alameda County Ordinance No. 80-60) and the other half is zoned M-1 (Light Industrial).

E. The proposed Project is consistent with the Business Park/Industrial land use designation but requires a Planned Development Rezone to accommodate the Project.

F. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the CEQA Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared.

G. Pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures, the City prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated August 2023, and a Final EIR dated November 2023, for the proposed Project, which reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project.
716
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 2 of 8 H. The Draft EIR identified potentially significant impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal resources, energy, geology and soils, and hazards and hazardous materials, most of which can be substantially reduced through mitigation measures.

I. The Draft EIR was circulated for 45 days for public comment from August 21, 2023, to October 5, 2023. Comments received on the Draft EIR were responded to in the Final EIR dated November 2023. The Draft EIR, comments and associated responses, and changes and clarifications to the Draft EIR constitute the Final EIR.

J. Following a properly noticed public hearing on December 12, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 23-11, recommending that the City Council certify the Final EIR and adopt required CEQA Findings, and approve a Planned Development Zoning District with a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit, which Resolution is incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours.

K. On March 19, 2024, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard, and continued the proposed project to a date uncertain.

L. A Staff Report dated September 17, 2024, and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the proposed Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, Heritage Tree Removal Permit and Final EIR, for the City Council.

M. On September 17, 2024, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard.

N. The City Council considered the Final EIR prepared for the Project, and all above referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony prior to taking action on the Project.

O. On __________, the City Council adopted Resolution No. xx-24 certifying the Final EIR and adopting CEQA Findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project.

P. The City Council did hear and use independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendations, and testimony herein above set forth.

SECTION 2: FINDINGS
A. Pursuant to Section 8.32.070 of the Dublin Municipal Code (DMC), the City Council finds as follows.

1. The Hexcel Redevelopment Project (“the Project”) PD-Planned Development Zoning meets the purpose and intent of DMC Chapter 8.32, in that it provides a comprehensive development plan that will be consistent with the General Plan and Dublin Village Historic 717
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 3 of 8 Area Specific Plan, and protects the integrity and character of the area by creating a desirable use of land that is sensitive to surrounding land uses by virtue of the layout and design of the site plan. The Project is planned comprehensively and will follow development standards tailored to the specific needs of the site. These standards will address issues such as building setbacks, architecture, landscaping and grading. The proposed building will blend with the natural features unique to the site through design and planning. The Applicant proposes an outdoor seating area and sufficient landscaping within new biretention areas and the new parking lot, along the site perimeter and the frontage of the building façade, which are consistent with the provisions and regulations for development set forth therein.

2. Development of the Project under the PD-Planned Development Zoning will be harmonious and compatible with existing and future development in the surrounding area, in that the proposed Project would redevelop an existing developed site with a light industrial building catering to advanced manufacturing and life science uses, which is consistent with the General Plan and Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan.

B. Pursuant to DMC Sections 8.120.050 A and B, the City Council finds as follows.

1. The PD-Planned Development Zoning for the Project will be harmonious and compatible with existing and potential development in the surrounding area, in that the proposed Project would redevelop an existing developed site with a light industrial building catering to advanced manufacturing and life science uses and has taken into account adjacent land uses.

2. The Project site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the zoning district being proposed, in that the site is flat with existing access provided from Dublin Boulevard and is served by existing public utilities. The Project site conditions were documented in the EIR prepared for the Project, and the environmental impacts that have been identified will be mitigated to the greatest degree possible. There are no major physical or topographic constraints and, thus, the site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of uses proposed through the PD-Planned Development Zoning.

3. The PD-Planned Development Zoning will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, in that the Project will comply with all applicable development regulations and standards and will implement all adopted mitigation measures. In order to ensure adequate emergency vehicle access to all portions of the site, access is provided to the site from Dublin Boulevard.

4. The PD-Planned Development Zoning is consistent with and in conformance with the Dublin General Plan and the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, in that the proposed light industrial building is consistent with the existing Business Park/Industrial land use designation for the site, which allows non-retail businesses such as research, limited manufacturing and distribution activities, and administrative offices. The Project complies with this designation as it will provide for an attractive facility that appeals to advanced manufacturing and life science uses that will not generate nuisances related to emissions, noise, odors, or glare.

C. Pursuant to CEQA, the City Council certified a Final EIR via Resolution No. xx-24 on September 17, 2024, prior to approving the Project.
718
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 4 of 8 SECTION 3: ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
Pursuant to DMC Chapter 8.32, Title 8 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code, the City of Dublin Zoning Map is amended to rezone the property described below to a Planned Development Zoning District and supersedes the previously adopted Planned Development Zoning (Alameda County Ordinance No. 80-60) and M-1 Zoning (Light Industrial):

8.81 acres located north of the I-580, south of Dublin Boulevard, east of existing office buildings, and west of the U.S. Bank Branch, Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery, which includes the following Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 941- 1560-009-01 AND 941-1560-003-04 (“the Property”).

A map of the rezoning area is shown below:

SECTION 4. APPROVAL OF STAGE 1 AND 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
The regulations for the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the Property are set forth in the following Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for the entire 8.81-acre Project area, which is hereby approved. Any amendments to the Stage 1/Stage 2 Development Plan shall be in accordance with DMC Section 8.32.080 or its successors.

Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan
This is a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan pursuant to DMC Chapter 8.32. This Development Plan meets all the requirements for both a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan and is adopted as part of the PD-Planned Development rezoning for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project (PLPA-2022-00005).

The Planned Development zoning district and this Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan provides flexibility to encourage innovative development while ensuring that the goals, policies, and action programs of the General Plan and provisions of DMC Chapter 8.32 are satisfied.

1. Statement of Uses
Parcel 1
Permitted Uses (as defined by the Zoning Ordinance):
719
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 5 of 8 Industrial – Light (Warehouse and Distribution uses involving heavy truck traffic are not permitted)
Office – Professional/Administrative
Similar and related uses as determined by the Director of Community Development Conditional Uses:

None
Accessory Uses:

Uses which are necessarily and customarily associated with, and are appropriate, incidental, and subordinate to the principal uses as determined by the Director of Community Development
Parcel 2
No development or uses are permitted on Parcel 2.

2. Stage 1 and Stage 2 Site Plan
The Stage 1 and Stage 2 Site Plan is shown below.
720
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 6 of 8

3. Development Regulations
The following Development Standards apply to Parcel 1 only. No development is permitted on Parcel 2.

Floor Area Ratio 0.33
Maximum Building
Height:
40 feet
Maximum lot coverage 31%
Parking Spaces Office: Up to 7,500 square feet - 1 per 250 square feet
7,501 to 40,000 square feet - 1 per 300 square
feet
40,001+ square feet - 1 per 350 square feet
Industrial – Light: 1 per 400 square feet of
general purpose area, plus 1 per 1,000 square
feet of warehouse or distribution area
Parking Stall Dimensions
Standards
Per Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.76 (OffStreet Parking and Loading Regulations) Minimum Setbacks 10’ front (along Dublin Boulevard)
10’ side (along west and east property lines)
20’ rear (along south property line)
Signage Per Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.84 (Sign
Regulations)

4. Phasing Plan. The Project will be built in one phase, first beginning with demolition, and followed by site preparation/grading, trench and foundation, exterior building construction, interior building construction and paving/landscaping.

5. General Plan and Specific Plan Consistency. The Project is consistent with the General Plan and Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial, which allows non-retail businesses such as research, limited manufacturing and distribution activities, and administrative offices. In addition, the proposed Project design will provide for an attractive building that appeals to advanced manufacturing and life science uses that will not generate heavy truck traffic and nuisances related to emissions, noise, odors, or glare and is consistent with the floor area ratio of 0.30 to 0.40 allowed in the Business Park/Industrial land use designation.

6. Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. The proposed Project is an industrial use type and is not subject to the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations (DMC Chapter 8.68) for the provision of affordable housing because the regulations apply only to residential development projects of 20 units or more.

7. Architectural Standards. The Project’s architectural style utilizes a historic industrial adaptive reuse design approach that is industrial in nature and is unique to light industrial, advanced manufacturing and life science uses.
721
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 7 of 8 The architectural design of the Project shall reflect the following standards:
 Incorporate features such as channel canopies and different wall planes and horizontal and vertical reveals to break down the building form into more human scale volumes.  Use varying colors, brick veneer, heights, low slope/flat roof construction, light fixtures, and landscaping to enhance the building detail at the pedestrian level.  Colors shall be neutral in nature, while bright/harsh primary colors shall be avoided.  Lighter building color applications for portions of the façade shall be used to provide interest.
 Provide outdoor space for tenants, which allows for gathering and socializing, with landscaping, outdoor seating, enhanced paving treatment, and other features to provide an appropriate urban scale for the development.

8. Preliminary Landscaping Plan. The conceptual landscape design of the Project shall reflect the following standards:
 Provide plentiful green space and natural habitat that utilizes a native and climateadaptive planting palette to Dublin’s Historic Area and is considered moderate or low water use.
 Provide a generous landscape buffer along the perimeter of the project site to soften the main street frontage, rear and sides of the building, and reduce the mass of the building onto adjacent properties.
 As shown on the Preliminary Landscape Plan, preserve existing trees where possible along the site perimeter to further enhance the landscape buffer and better integrate the new development into the surrounding community.
 Utilize plants that provide a year-round vegetated landscape with seasonality, color, and interest for an attractive visual environment.

9. Aerial Photo.

10. Applicable Requirements of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Except as specifically provided in this Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the property shall be subject to the regulations of the closest comparable 722
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 8 of 8 zoning district as determined by the Community Development Director and the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. No development shall occur on this property until a Site Development Review Permit has been approved.

SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if any provision, clause, sentence, word or part thereof is held illegal, invalid, unconstitutional, or inapplicable to any person or circumstances, such illegality, invalidity, unconstitutionality, or inapplicability shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions, clauses, sentences, sections, words or parts thereof of the ordinance or their applicability to other persons or circumstances.

SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days following its adoption.

SECTION 7. POSTING OF ORDINANCE
The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public spaces in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this __th day of _______ 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
City Clerk
723
Attachment 8
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 1 of 35 RESOLUTION NO. XX – 24

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN

APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT AND HERITAGE TREE REMOVAL

PERMIT FOR THE HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
PLPA 2022-00038
(APNS 941-1560-009-01 AND 941-1560-003-04)
WHEREAS, the property owner, Overton Moore Properties, proposes to redevelop an

8.81-acre site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The project would demolish the existing 62,175- square-foot Hexcel research and development building and construct a new 125,532-square-foot light industrial building to appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses with 217 parking stalls and related site improvements. Requested approvals include a Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the “Hexcel Redevelopment Project” or the “Project;” and WHEREAS, the Project site includes two parcels totaling approximately 8.81 acres located north of the I-580, south of Dublin Boulevard and residential and commercial uses, east of existing office buildings, and west of the U.S. Bank Branch, Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery; and
WHEREAS, the Project site has a General Plan and Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial; and WHEREAS, the Project site is subject to zoning, where one half of the site is zoned Planned Development (Alameda County Ordinance No. 80-60) and the other half is zoned M-1 (Light Industrial); and
WHEREAS, the proposed Project is consistent with the Business Park/Industrial land use designation but requires a Planned Development Rezone to accommodate the Project; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the CEQA Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures, the City prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated August 2023, and a Final EIR dated November 2023, for the proposed Project, which reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR identified potentially significant impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal resources, energy, geology and soils, and hazards and hazardous materials, most of which can be substantially reduced through mitigation measures; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated for 45 days for public comment from August 21, 2023, to October 5, 2023. Comments received on the Draft EIR were responded to in the Final 724
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 2 of 35 EIR dated November 2023. The Draft EIR, comments and associated responses, and changes and clarifications to the Draft EIR constitute the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, following a properly noticed public hearing on December 12, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 23-11, recommending that the City Council certify the Final EIR and adopt required CEQA Findings, and approve a Planned Development Zoning District with a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit, which Resolution is incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours; and WHEREAS, On March 19, 2024, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard, and continued the proposed project to a date uncertain; and
WHEREAS, A Staff Report dated September 17, 2024, and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the proposed Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, Heritage Tree Removal Permit and Final EIR, for the City Council; and WHEREAS, on September 17, 2024, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the Planned Development Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Final EIR prepared for the Project, and all above referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony prior to taking action on the Project; and
WHEREAS, on September 17, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. xx-24 certifying the Final EIR and adopting CEQA Findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendations, and testimony herein above set forth.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding the Site Development Review Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project:

A. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of this Chapter, with the General Plan and with any applicable Specific Plans and design guidelines because: 1) the proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial as it will provide space for light industrial uses that would cater to advanced manufacturing and life science tenants that will not generate nuisances related to emissions, noise, odors, or glare; 2) the proposed Project gives thoughtful consideration to the surrounding area through setbacks, height, architectural elements and landscape design; and 3) the proposed Project will conform to the allowable uses and development standards as stated in the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan.
725
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 3 of 35 B. The proposal is consistent with the provisions of Title 8, Zoning Ordinance because: 1) the Planned Development Zoning provides a comprehensive development plan that creates a desirable use of land that is sensitive to surrounding land uses by virtue of the layout and design of the site plan; and 2) development of the Project under the Planned Development Zoning will be harmonious and compatible with existing and future development in the surrounding area, in that the site will provide new light industrial facility.

C. The design of the Project is appropriate to the City, the vicinity, surrounding properties, and the lot(s) in which the Project is proposed because: 1) the Project site is adjacent to Office uses and is appropriately setback and screened from adjacent properties; 2) the proposed development will consist of a light industrial facility that would appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses that would provide for additional employment opportunities and innovation in the Dublin community and surrounding areas; and 3) the design of the Project has taken into account sensitive adjacencies and will provide for a light industrial facility for advanced manufacturing and life science companies.

D. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the approved development because: 1) the Project site is flat with access provided from Dublin Boulevard and is served by existing public utilities; 2) development intensity is consistent with the floor area ratio and employee density for the Business Park/Industrial land use designation; and 3) the Project site conditions were documented in the EIR that has been prepared, and the environmental impacts that have been identified will be mitigated to the greatest degree possible.

E. Impacts to existing slopes and topographic features are addressed because: 1) the Project site is flat; 2) the roadway and utility infrastructure to serve the site already exist; and 3) future approval of grading and improvement plans will enable the site to be modified to suit the Project, which will be developed for the site in accordance with City policies and regulations.

F. Architectural considerations including the character, scale and quality of the design, site layout, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, screening of unsightly uses, lighting, building materials and colors and similar elements result in a project that is harmonious with its surroundings and compatible with other development in the vicinity because: 1) use of varying building planes, colors and materials, and the contrast between horizontal and vertical reveals would break up the scale of the concrete tilt-up panels and overall building mass; 2) lighter building color applications and materials are used to provide interest; 3) articulation in plan and elevation and black channel window trim further break up the scale of the building and distinguish each office entrance; 4) the loading docks would be screened from public view on Dublin Boulevard by the building and from adjacent properties and the I-580 by new and existing landscaping treatment on the east and south sides of the project site; and 5) the existing sidewalk that runs along the site frontage leading into the property will be further extended into the project site with direct access to the outdoor seating area at the main building entrance, thereby providing a strong relationship between the street and building and enhance the project’s connectivity to the surrounding area.

G. Landscape considerations, including the location, type, size, color, texture and coverage of plant materials, and similar elements have been incorporated into the project to ensure 726
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 4 of 35 visual relief, adequate screening and an attractive environment for the public because: 1) landscape plan features a low water usage plant palette, including a variety of drought tolerant trees, shrubs and ground cover to provide visual interest in texture and color while conserving natural resources. Native plants are utilized to encourage biodiversity in conjunction with the existing riparian vegetation and Dublin Creek on Parcel 2; 2) sufficient plant screening is provided in the setback between the site and adjacent community area north of Dublin Boulevard to minimize any undesirable visual impacts; 3) sufficient plant screening is provided between the site and adjacent properties to the east to minimize any undesirable visual impact; 4) the loading docks will be screened by new and existing landscaping treatment on the south and east sides of the project site; 5) large shade trees are provided within the parking lot to minimize radiation, provide a cooler environment, and reduce urban heat island effect; 6) a variety of drought tolerant trees, plants, and shrubs are included to provide visual interest in texture and color palette; and 7) the landscape design was conducted in a manner that preserves the existing heritage trees on-site by incorporating them into the site design.

H. The site has been adequately designed to ensure proper circulation for bicyclists, pedestrians and automobiles because: 1) the project site is accessed from two existing driveways on Dublin Boulevard with the main driveway located at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hansen Drive and the secondary driveway located at the northeastern corner of the project site (east of Hansen Drive adjacent to the U.S. Bank Branch entrance); 2) the existing sidewalk that runs along the site frontage leading into the property will be further extended into the project site and provide direct access to the main building entrance and outdoor seating area; 3) safe and convenient pedestrian paths are proposed between the building entrances, public sidewalks, and on-site parking lot; 4) all infrastructure including, pathways, sidewalks, and lighting have been reviewed for conformance with City policies, regulations, and best practices and have been designed with multi-modal travel in mind; and 5) the Project has been reviewed by the Public Works Department and Fire Department and adequate access and circulation has been provided on-site.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding the Historic Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project:

A. Approval of the application is consistent with the purpose and intent of this Chapter because: 1) the project has implemented various elements of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Commercial Design Guidelines, where appropriate, to be in compliance with the Specific Plan; 2) the project would enhance and reinforce the unique historic qualities and design elements found in Dublin Village in that the project includes muted earth tone building colors, vertically oriented windows with simple framing, stone monumentation, and similar lighting design and plant pallet standards found in the Historic Area; 3) the project would improve the public realm to create a positive pedestrian experience because the building is oriented toward the street and provides direct pedestrian connectivity with the walkway from the street to the main building entrance; and 4) the project would enhance the areas image as a historic district and create a unique sense of place because the project would install permanent interpretive display/signage for public exhibition detailing the history and significance of the former Hexcel Corporation research and development facility.
727
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 5 of 35 B. Any approval complies with the policies of the General Plan, with any applicable Specific Plans, with the development regulations or performance standards established for the standard Zoning District (C-O, C-1, PD, R-M, etc.) in which it is located, and with all other requirements of the Zoning Ordinance because: 1) the proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial as it will provide space for light industrial uses that would cater to advanced manufacturing and life science tenants that will not generate nuisances related to emissions, noise, odors, or glare; 2) the proposed Project gives thoughtful consideration to the surrounding area through setbacks, height, architectural elements and landscape design; and 3) the proposed Project will conform to the allowable uses and development standards as stated in the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan.

C. The approval will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare because: 1) the Project will comply with all applicable development regulations and standards and will implement all adopted mitigation measures; and 2) adequate emergency vehicle access to all portions of the site is provided from Dublin Boulevard.

D. The design of the project will provide a desirable environment for the development and an attractive environment for the public because: 1) the project has implemented various design elements that would enhance and reinforce the unique historic qualities and design elements found in Dublin Village Historic Area while ensuring it would appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses in that the project includes muted earth tone building colors, vertically oriented windows with simple framing, stone monumentation, and similar lighting design and plant pallet standards found in the Historic Area; and 2) the project creates an attractive environment for the public because the building is oriented toward the street, proposes landscaping consistent with the Historic Area, and provides direct pedestrian connectivity with the walkway from the street to the main building entrance and the project would install permanent interpretive display/signage for public exhibition detailing the history and significance of the former Hexcel Corporation research and development facility.

E. The project is in substantial compliance with the applicable chapters of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan because: 1) the project has implemented various elements, where appropriate, under the Commercial Design Guidelines to be in compliance with the architectural, site planning and lighting standards of the Specific Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby approve Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council does hereby approve the Site Development Review Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project subject to the conditions included below, and other plans, and text relating to this Site Development Review Permit.

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance of building permits and shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval. The following codes represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitoring compliance of the conditions of approval: [PL] Planning; [B] Building; [PO] Police; [PW] Public Works; [ADM] 728
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 6 of 35 Administration/City Attorney; [FIN] Finance; [PCS] Parks and Community Services; [F] Dublin Fire Prevention; [DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District; [LDD] Livermore Dublin Disposal; [CO] Alameda County Department of Environmental Health; [Zone 7] Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Zone 7; [LAVTA] Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority; and [CHS] California Department of Health Services.

CONDITION TEXT RESPONA
GENCY
WHEN

REQUIRED
Prior to:

PLANNING – GENERAL

1. Approval. This approval is for the Hexcel
Redevelopment Project generally depicted and
indicated on the Project Plans prepared by HPA
Architecture, dated August 21, 2024, attached as
Exhibit A and other plans, text, and diagrams relating to this project, and as specified as the following Conditions of Approval for this project.

PL On-going

2. Effective Date. This Site Development Review Permit
approval becomes effective once the Planned
Development Rezoning has been approved by City
Council and is effective.

PL On-going

3. Permit Expiration. Construction or use shall commence within one (1) year of Permit approval or the Site
Development Review Permit shall lapse and become
null and void. If there is a dispute as to whether the Site Development Review Permit has expired, the City may
hold a noticed public hearing to determine the matter.

Such a determination may be processed concurrently
with revocation proceedings in appropriate
circumstances. If the Site Development Review Permit
expires, a new application must be made and processed
according to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.

PL One Year
After Effective
Date

4. Time Extension. The Director of Community
Development may, upon the Applicant’s written request
for an extension of approval prior to expiration, and upon the determination that any Conditions of Approval
remain adequate to assure that applicable findings of
approval will continue to be met, grant a time extension of approval for a period not to exceed twelve (12)
months. The Director of Community Development may
grant a maximum of two (2) extensions of approval, and
additional extensions may be granted by the original
decision maker.

PL Prior to
Expiration
Date

5. Compliance. The Applicant/Property Owner shall
operate this use in compliance with the Conditions of
Approval of this Site Development Review Permit, the
approved plans and the regulations established in the
Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or
conditions specified may be subject to enforcement
PL On-going
729
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 7 of 35 action.

6. Modifications. Modifications or changes to this Site Development Review Permit approval may be
considered by the Community Development Director if
the modifications or changes proposed comply with
Dublin Municipal Code (DMC) Section 8.104.100.

PL On-going

7. Revocation of Permit. The Site Development Review
Permit approval shall be revocable for cause in
accordance with DMC Section 8.96.020.I. Any violation
of the terms or conditions of this permit shall be subject to citation.

PL On-going

8. Requirements and Standard Conditions. The
Applicant/Developer shall comply with applicable City of Dublin Fire Prevention Bureau, Dublin Public Works
Department, Dublin Building Department, Dublin Police
Services, Alameda County Flood Control District Zone
7, Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority, Alameda
County Public and Environmental Health, Dublin San
Ramon Services District and the California Department
of Health Services requirements and standard
conditions. Prior to issuance of building permits or the installation of any improvements related to this project, the Applicant/Developer shall supply written statements from each such agency or department to the Planning
Department, indicating that all applicable conditions
required have been or will be met.

Various Building
Permit
Issuance

9. Required Permits. The Applicant/Developer shall
obtain all permits required by other agencies including, but not limited to Alameda County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District Zone 7, California
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Army Corps of
Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board,
Caltrans and provide copies of the permits to the Public Works Department.

PW Building
Permit
Issuance and
Grading
Permit
Issuance

10. Fees. The Applicant/Developer shall pay all applicable fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance, including, but not limited to, Planning fees, Building fees, Traffic Impact Fees, TVTC fees, Dublin San Ramon
Services District fees, Public Facilities fees, Dublin
Unified School District School Impact fees, Fire Facilities Impact fees, Alameda County Flood and Water
Conservation District (Zone 7) Drainage and Water
Connection fees; or any other fee that may be adopted
and applicable.

Various Building
Permit
Issuance

11. Indemnification. Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Dublin and its agents,
officers, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Dublin or its agents,
officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Dublin or its advisory agency, ADM On-going
730
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 8 of 35 appeal board, Planning Commission, City Council,
Community Development Director, Zoning
Administrator, or any other department, committee, or
agency of the City provided, however, that the
Applicant's duty to so defend, indemnify, and hold
harmless shall be subject to the City's promptly notifying the Applicant of any said claim, action, or proceeding
and the City's full cooperation in the defense of such
actions or proceedings.

12. Clarification of Conditions. In the event that there needs to be clarification to the Conditions of Approval, the Director of Community Development and the City
Engineer have the authority to clarify the intent of these Conditions of Approval to the Applicant/Developer
without going to a public hearing. The Director of
Community Development and the City Engineer also
have the authority to make minor modifications to these conditions without going to a public hearing in order for the Applicant/Developer to fulfill needed improvements
or mitigations resulting from impacts to this project.

PL, PW On-going

13. Clean-up. The Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for clean-up and disposal of project related trash to
maintain a safe, clean and litter-free site.

PL On-going

14. Construction Trailer. The Applicant/Developer shall obtain a Temporary Use Permit prior to the
establishment of any construction trailer, storage shed, or container units on the Project site.

PL Establishment
of the
Temporary
Use

15. Equipment Screening. All electrical equipment, fire risers, and/or mechanical equipment shall be screened
from public view by landscaping and/or architectural
features and that electrical transformers are either
underground or architecturally screened.

Any roof-mounted equipment shall be completely
screened from adjacent street view by materials
architecturally compatible with the building and to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.

The Building Permit plans shall show the location of all equipment and screening for review and approval by the
Community Development Director.

PL Building
Permit
Issuance
PLANNING – PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS

16. Public Art. The project is required to comply with DMC Sections 8.58.05A and 8.58.05D of Chapter 8.58 (Public
Art Program). The project will make a monetary
contribution in-lieu of acquiring and installing a public art project on the property, as provided by the DMC Section

8.58.050D. The in-lieu contribution shall be as provided in the DMC Chapter 8.58.

PL Building
Permit
Issuance

17. Mitigation Monitoring Program. Applicant/Developer
shall comply with the applicable mitigation measures of PL Ongoing
731
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page
9 of 35
the 2023 Hexcel Redevelopment Environmental Impact
Report certified by Resolution No. XX-24, including any applicable action programs and implementation
measures contained in Resolution No. XX-24. The EIR
is on file with the Community Development Department.

18. Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan. Plans shall
comply with DMC Chapter 8.72 and be generally
consistent with the project plans attached to this
Resolution as Exhibit A prepared and stamped by a
State licensed landscape architect or registered
engineer shall be submitted for review and approval by
the Community Development Director.

PL Building
Permit
Issuance

19. Water Efficient Landscaping Regulations. The
Applicant/Developer shall meet all requirements of the
City of Dublin's Water-Efficient Landscaping Regulations contained in DMC Chapter 8.88 and submit written
documentation to the Public Works Department (in the
form of a Landscape Documentation Package and other
required documents) that the development conforms to
the City’s Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance.

PL Building
Permit
Issuance

20. Landscape Edges. Concrete curbs or bands shall be
used at the edges of all planters and paving surfaces,
unless otherwise defined differently. The design width
and depth of the concrete edge shall be to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director and
City Engineer.

PL Building
Permit
Issuance

21. Backflow Prevention Devices. The Landscape Plan
shall show the location of all backflow prevention
devises. The location and screening of the backflow
prevention devices shall be reviewed and approved by
City staff
.

PL Building
Permit
Issuance

22. Maintenance of Landscape. All landscape areas on the site shall be enhanced and properly maintained at all
times. Any proposed or modified landscaping to the site, including the removal or replacement of trees, shall
require prior review and written approval from the
Community Development Director.

PL On-going

23. Distance Between Light Poles and Tree Trunks. A
minimum distance of 15 feet shall be provided between
light poles and tree trunks.

PL Building
Permit
Issuance

24. Protection of Existing Landscaping on Adjacent
Property. To the maximum extent feasible, existing
landscaping on the adjacent property to the east,
including but not limited to trees, shrubbery, and vines on the existing fence, shall be protected during
grading/construction activities. Protection measures
shall include fencing trees at the drip line perimeter and, where construction is proposed within existing driplines, excavating by hand. In addition, roots over one (1) inch PL On-going
732
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 10 of 35 in diameter that must be cut shall be observed and
approved by the City Arborist.

25. Protection of Heritage Trees. Prior to obtaining a
demolition permit, a tree protection plan shall be
prepared for the heritage trees to remain on Parcel 1.

PL Demolition
Permit
Issuance

BUILDING AND SAFETY

26. Building Codes and Ordinances. All project
construction shall conform to all building codes and
ordinances in effect at the time of building permit.

B Through
Completion

27. Construction Drawings. Construction plans shall be
fully dimensioned (including building elevations)
accurately drawn (depicting all existing and proposed
conditions on site), and prepared and signed by a
California licensed Architect or Engineer. All structural calculations shall be prepared and signed by a California licensed Architect or Engineer. The site plan, landscape plan and details shall be consistent with each other.

B Issuance of
Building
Permits

28. Building Permits. To apply for building permits,
Applicant/Developer shall submit electronic drawings for plan check. An annotated copy of the Conditions of
Approval shall be included with the submittal. The
notations shall clearly indicate how all Conditions of
Approval will or have been complied with. Construction
plans will not be accepted without the annotated
resolutions attached to each set of plans.

Applicant/Developer will be responsible for obtaining the approvals of all participation non-City agencies prior to the issuance of building permits.

B Issuance of
Building
Permits

29. As-Built Drawings. All revisions made to the building plans during the project shall be incorporated into an “As Built” electronic file and submitted prior to the issuance of the final occupancy.

B Occupancy

30. Addressing
a) Provide a site plan with the City of Dublin’s address grid overlaid on the plans (1 to 30 scale). Highlight
all exterior door openings on plans (front, rear,
garage, etc.). The site plan shall include a single
large format page showing the entire project and
individual sheets for each neighborhood. Application
and required plans shall be submitted electronically.
b) Address signage shall be provided as per the Dublin
Commercial Security Code.
c) Address signage will be required on all doors leading to the exterior of the building. Addresses shall be
illuminated and be able to be seen from the street,
four (4) inches in height minimum.

B
a) Prior to
Release of
Addresses
b) Prior to
Permitting
c) Prior to
Occupancy

31. Engineer Observation. The Engineer of record shall
be retained to provide observation services for all
B Prior to
Scheduling
733
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 11 of 35 components of the lateral and vertical design of the
building, including nailing, hold-downs, straps, shear, roof diaphragm and structural frame of building. A
written report shall be submitted to the City Inspector prior to scheduling the final frame inspection.
the Final
Frame
Inspection

32. 60-Foot No Build Covenant. Pursuant to Dublin
Municipal Code Section 7.32.130, the owner shall file
with the Building Official a Covenant and Agreement
Regarding Maintenance of Yards for an Oversized
Building binding such owner, his heirs, and assignees,
to set aside a 60-foot required yard as unobstructed
space having no improvements. After execution by the
owner and Building Official, such covenant shall be
recorded in the Alameda County Recorder’s Office, and
shall continue in effect so long as an oversized building remains or unless otherwise released by authority of the Chief Building Official.

B Prior to
Permitting

33. Foundation. Geotechnical Engineer for the soils report shall review and approve the foundation design. A letter shall be submitted to the Building Division on the
approval.

B Prior to Permit
Issuance

34. Air Conditioning Units. Air conditioning units and
ventilation ducts shall be screened from public view with materials compatible to the main building. Units shall be permanently installed on concrete pads or other nonmovable materials approved by the Chief Building Official and Director of Community Development.

B Occupancy of
Building

35. Plumbing Fixture Count. The plumbing fixture count
(e.g., water closets, lavatories, urinals, drinking
fountains) shall meet the minimum requirements for the
use as regulated by the CA Plumbing Code.

B Prior to
Permitting

36. Solar Zone – CA Energy Code. Show the location of
the Solar Zone on the site plan. Detail the orientation of the Solar Zone. This condition of approval will be waived if the project meets the exceptions provided in the CA
Energy Code.

B Through
Completion

37. Accessible Parking. The required number of parking
stalls, the design and location of the accessible parking stalls shall be as required by the CA Building Code,
Chapter 11-B.

B Through
Completion

38. Green Parking. The design and number of clean air/
EV ready stalls shall be as required by the CA Green
Building Standards Code.

B Through
Completion

39. Retaining Walls. All retaining walls over 30 inches in height and adjacent to a walkway shall be provided with guardrails. Retaining walls with a surcharge and
retaining walls over 36 inches in height shall obtain
permits and inspections from the Building and Safety
Division.

B Through
Completion
734
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 12 of 35

40. Accessory Structures. Building permits are required for all trash enclosures and associated amenities /
structures and are required to meet the accessibility and building codes.

B Through
Completion

41. FEMA – Floodplain. The property is currently shown to be in a floodplain. If the building is located within the floodplain, the applicant shall submit either a letter of map amendment, letter of map change or letter of map
revision prior to permitting. If the location of the building has not been removed from the floodplain by a letter,
then elevation certificates will be required at the correct stages.

B Prior to
Permitting

42. Temporary Fencing. Temporary construction fencing
shall be installed along perimeter of all work under
construction
B Through
Completion

43. Copies of Approved Plans. Applicant shall provide
City with one reduced (1/2 size) copy of the City of
Dublin stamped approved plan.

B 30 Days After
Permit and
Each Revision
Issuance

FIRE PREVENTION

44. Fire Apparatus Access Road
Fire department access requirements are to be met.

All fire apparatus access road shall be with an approved all-weathered surface and capable of supporting
imposed load of 75,000 lbs.

F Approval of
Improvement
Plans

45. Fire Hydrants
All existing and proposed fire hydrants shall comply with the requirements in CFC Section 507.5, Appendix B, and
Appendix C.

F Approval of
Improvement
Plans

46. No fire service lines shall pass beneath buildings. F Approval of Improvement
Plans

47. New Fire Sprinkler System & Monitoring
Requirements
a) In accordance with The Dublin Fire Code, fire
sprinklers shall be installed in the building. The
system shall be in accordance with the NFPA 13, the
CA Fire Code and CA Building Code. Plans and
specifications showing detailed mechanical design,
cut sheets, listing sheets and hydraulic calculations
shall be submitted to the Fire Department for
approval and permit prior to installation. This may be
a deferred submittal.
b) Sprinkler Plans. (Deferred Submittal Item). Submit
detailed mechanical drawings of all sprinkler
modifications, including cut sheets, listing sheets and calculations to the Fire Department for approval and
permit prior to installation.

F Building
Permit
Issuance
735
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 13 of 35 c) All sprinkler system components shall remain in
compliance with the applicable N.F.P.A. 13 Standard,
the CA Fire Code and the CA Building Code.
d) Underground Plans. (Deferred Submittal Item).

Submit detailed shop drawings for the fire water
supply system, including cut sheets, listing sheets
and calculations to the Fire Department for approval
and permit prior to installation. All underground and
fire water supply system components shall be in
compliance with the applicable N.F.P.A. 13, 24, 20,
22 Standards, the CA Fire Code and the CA Building
Code. The system shall be hydrostatically tested and
inspected prior to being covered. Prior to the system
being connected to any fire protection system, a
system flush shall be witnessed by the Fire
Department.
e) Central Station Monitoring. Automatic fire
extinguishing systems installed within buildings shall
have all control valves and flow devices electrically
supervised and maintained by an approved central
alarm station. Zoning and annunciation of central
station alarm signals shall be submitted to the Fire
Department for approval.
f) Fire Protection Equipment shall be identified with
approved signs constructed of durable materials,
permanently installed and readily visible.

48. Fire Alarm System Required
A Fire Alarm-Detection System shall be installed
throughout the building so as to provide full property
protection, including combustible concealed spaces, as
required by NFPA 72. The system shall be installed in
accordance with NFPA 72, CA Fire, Building, Electrical, and Mechanical Codes.

If the system is intended to serve as an evacuation
system, compliance with the horn/strobe requirements
for the entire building must also be met. All automatic fire extinguishing systems shall be interconnected to the fire alarm system so as to activate an alarm if activated and to monitor control valves. Delayed egress locks shall
meet requirements of C.F.C.

Fire Alarm Plans. (Deferred Submittal Item). Submit
detailed drawings of the fire alarm system, including floor plan showing all rooms, device locations, ceiling height and construction, cut sheets, listing sheets and battery and voltage drop calculations to the Fire Department for review and permit prior to the installation. Where
employee work areas have audible alarm coverage,
circuits shall be initially designed with a minimum 20
F Occupancy
736
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 14 of 35 percent spare capacity for adding appliances to
accommodate hearing impaired employee’s.
a) Central Station Monitored Account. Automatic fire
alarm systems shall be monitored by an approved
central alarm station. Zoning and annunciation of
central station alarm signals shall be approved by the
Fire Department.
b) Qualified Personnel. The system shall be installed,
inspected, tested, and maintained in accordance with
the provisions of NFPA 72. Only qualified and
experienced persons shall perform this work.

Examples of qualified individuals are those who have
been factory trained and certified or are NICET Fire
Alarm Certified.
c) Inspection & Testing Documentation.

Performance testing of all initiating & notification
devices in the presence of the Fire Inspector shall
occur prior to final of the system. Upon this
inspection, proof that the specific account is UL
Certificated must be provided to the Fire Inspector.

49. Fire Access During Construction.
a) Fire Access. Access roads, turnaround, pullouts,
and fire operation areas are fire lanes and shall be
maintained clear and free of obstructions, including
the parking of vehicles.
b) Entrances. Entrances to job sites shall not be
blocked, including after hours, other than by
approved gates/barriers that provide for emergency
access.
c) Site Utilities. Site utilities that would require the access road to be dug up or made impassible shall
be installed prior to construction commencing.
d) Entrance flare, angle of departure, width, turning
radii, grades, turnaround, vertical clearances, road
surface, bridges/crossings, gates/key-switch, within
a 150-foot distance to Fire Lane shall be maintained.
e) Personnel Access. Route width, slope, surface and
obstructions must be considered for the approved
route to furthermost portion of the exterior wall.
f) All-Weather Access. Fire access is required to be
all-weather access. Show on the plans the location of
the all-weather access and a description of the
construction. Access roads must be designed to
support the imposed loads of fire apparatus.

F During
Construction

50. Fire Extinguishers. Extinguishers shall be visible and unobstructed. Signage shall be provided to indicate fire extinguisher locations. The number and location of
extinguishers shall be shown on the plans. Additional fire extinguishers maybe required by the fire inspector.

F Occupancy
737
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 15 of 35 Fire extinguisher shall meet a minimum classification of 2A 10BC. Extinguishers weighing 40 pounds or less
shall be mounted no higher than five (5) feet above the floor measured to the top of the extinguisher.

Extinguishers shall be inspected monthly and serviced
by a licensed concern annually.

51. FD Building Key Box. Building Access. A Fire
Department Key Box shall be installed at the main
entrance to the Building. Note these locations on the
plans. The key box should be installed approximately 5
1/2 feet above grade. The box shall be sized to hold the master key to the facility as well as keys for rooms not accessible by the master key. Specialty keys, such as
the fire alarm control box key and elevator control keys shall also be installed in the box.

The key box door and necessary keys are to be provided
to the fire inspector upon the final inspection. The
inspector will then lock the keys into the box.

F Occupancy

52. Means of Egress. Exit signs shall be visible and
illuminated with emergency lighting when building is
occupied.

F Occupancy

53. Maximum Occupant Load. Posting of room capacity is
required for any occupant load of 50 or more persons.

Submittal of a seating plan on 8.5-inch x 11-inch paper is required prior to final occupancy.

F Occupancy

54. Interior Finish. Wall and ceiling interior finish material shall meet the requirements of Chapter 8 of the
California Fire Code. Interior finishes will be field verified upon final inspection. If the product is not field marked and the marking visible for inspection, maintain the
products cut-sheets and packaging that show proof of
the products flammability and flame-spread ratings.

Decorative materials shall be fire retardant.

F Occupancy

55. General Inspection. Upon inspection of the work for which this submittal was provided, a general inspection of the business and site will be conducted.

F Occupancy

56. Addressing. Addressing shall be illuminated or in an illuminated area. The address characters shall be
contrasting to their background. If address is placed on glass, the numbers shall be on the exterior of the glass and a contrasting background placed behind the
numbers.

Building Address. The building shall be provided with
all addresses or the assigned address range so as to
be clearly visible from either direction of travel on the street the address references. The address characters
shall not be less than 5 inches in height by 1-inch
F Occupancy of
any building
738
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 16 of 35 stroke. Larger sizes may be necessary depending on
the setbacks and visibility.

Multi-Tenants. Where a building has multiple tenants,
address shall also be provided near the main entrance
door of each tenant space. The address shall be high
enough on the building to be clearly visible from the
driveway, street or parking area it faces even when
vehicles are parked in front of the tenant space. The
address shall not be less than 5-inches in height with a ½-inch stroke.

Rear Doors. The address shall also be provided on
any rear doors to the tenant space with minimum 5-
inch-high characters.

Entrance Posting. Where the addressing on the
building will not be clearly visible from either direction of travel along the access road the address references.

Address posting shall also be provided at the entrance
to the property. The address size shall be 5-inches high and should be on a reflective background.

57. Fire Safety During Construction and Demolition
A. Clearance to combustibles from temporary heating
devices shall be maintained. Devices shall be fixed in
place and protected from damage, dislodgement or
overturning in accordance with the manufacturer’s
instructions.

B. Smoking shall be prohibited except in approved
areas. Signs shall be posted “NO SMOKING” in a
conspicuous location in each structure or location in
which smoking is prohibited.

C. Combustible debris, rubbish and waste material shall be removed from buildings at the end of each shift of
work.

D. Flammable and combustible liquid storage areas
shall be maintained clear of combustible vegetation
and waste materials.

F Ongoing
during
construction
and
demolition
PUBLIC WORKS – GENERAL CONDITIONS

58. Conditions of Approval. Applicant/Developer shall
comply with the City of Dublin Public Works Standard
Conditions of Approval contained below (“Standard
Condition”) unless specifically modified by Project
Specific Conditions of Approval below.

PW On-going

59. Compliance. Applicant/Developer shall comply with the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinances, City of Dublin Title 7 Public Works Ordinance, which includes the Grading
Ordinance, the City of Dublin Public Works Standards
and Policies, the most current requirements of the State Code Title 24 and the Americans with Disabilities Act
PW On-going
739
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 17 of 35 with regard to accessibility, and all building and fire codes and ordinances in effect at the time of building
permit. All public improvements constructed by
Applicant/Developer and to be dedicated to the City are hereby identified as “public works” under Labor Code
Section 1771. Accordingly, Applicant/Developer, in
constructing such improvements, shall comply with the
Prevailing Wage Law (Labor Code § 1720 et seq.).

60. Hold Harmless/Indemnification. Applicant/Developer
shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Dublin and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Dublin or its advisory agency, appeal board, Planning
Commission, City Council, Community Development
Director, Zoning Administrator, or any other department, committee, or agency of the City to the extent such
actions are brought within the time period required by
Government Code Section 66499.37 or other applicable
law: provided, however, that the Applicant/Developer’s
duty to so defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be submitted to the City promptly notifying or proceeding
and the City’s full cooperation in the defense of such
actions or proceedings.

PW On-going

61. Fees. Applicant/Developer shall pay all applicable fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance,
including, but not limited to: Planning fees; Building
fees; Dublin San Ramon Services District fees; Alameda
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
fees.

Various
Depts
Grading
Permit or
Building
Permit
Issuance

62. Zone 7 Impervious Surface Fees. Applicant/Developer shall complete a “Zone 7 Impervious Surface Fee
Application” and submit an accompanying exhibit for
review by the Public Works Department. Fees
generated by this application will be due at issuance of Building Permit.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Building
Permit
Issuance
PUBLIC WORKS – AGREEMENTS

63. Stormwater Management Maintenance Agreement.

Developer or Property Owner shall enter into an
Agreement with the City of Dublin that guarantees the
property owner’s perpetual maintenance obligation for
all stormwater management measures installed as part
of the project, including those on-site and within the
public Rights of Way. In addition to stormwater
management measures, drainage v-ditches, mitigation
areas, and existing wetlands shall be included for
reference, as applicable. Said Agreement is required
pursuant to Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional
Stormwater NPDES Permit, Order No. R2-2022-0018.

Said permit requires the City to provide verification and assurance that all treatment devices will be properly
PW
Grading
Permit or
Building
Permit
Issuance
740
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 18 of 35 operated and maintained. The Agreement shall be
recorded against the property and shall run with the land.

64. Improvement Agreement. Applicant/Developer shall
enter into an Improvement Agreement with the City for
all public improvements including any required offsite
storm drainage or roadway improvements that are
needed to serve the development, as determined by the
City Engineer.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Building
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
PUBLIC WORKS – PERMITS AND BONDS

65. Encroachment Permit. Applicant/Developer shall
obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Public Works
Department for all construction activity within the public right-of-way. At the discretion of the City Engineer an encroachment permit for work specifically included in an Improvement Agreement may not be required.

PW Permit
Issuance

66. Grading Permit. Applicant/Developer shall obtain a
Grading Permit from the Public Works Department for all grading.

PW Permit
Issuance

67. Security. Applicant/Developer shall provide faithful performance security to guarantee the improvements,
as well as payment security, as determined by the City
Engineer (Note: The performance security shall remain
in effect until one year after final inspection).

PW Permit
Issuance

68. Permits from Other Agencies. Applicant/Developer
shall obtain all permits and/or approvals required by
other agencies including, but not limited to:

Regional Water Quality Control Board
Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD)
PW Permit
Issuance
PUBLIC WORKS – SUBMITTALS

69. Improvement Plan Submittal Requirements. All
submittals of plans shall comply with the requirements of the “City of Dublin Public Works Department
Improvement Plan Submittal Requirements”, the “City of
Dublin Improvement Plan Review Check List,” and
current Public Works and industry standards. A
complete submittal of improvement plans shall include
all civil improvements, joint trench, street lighting and onsite safety lighting, landscape plans, and all associated documents as required. Applicant/Developer shall not
piecemeal the submittal by submitting various
components separately.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance

70. Improvement Plan Requirements from Other
Agencies. Applicant/Developer will be responsible for
submittals and reviews to obtain the approvals of all
participating non-City agencies, including but not limited to: the Alameda County Fire Department and the Dublin
San Ramon Services District.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance
741
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 19 of 35

71. Composite Exhibit. Construction plan set shall include a Composite Exhibit showing all site improvements,
utilities, landscaping improvements and trees, etc. to be constructed to ensure that there are no conflicts among the proposed and existing improvements.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance

72. Geotechnical Report. Applicant/Developer shall
submit a Design Level Geotechnical Report, which
includes street pavement sections, grading and
additional information and/or clarifications as
determined by the City Engineer.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance

73. Ownership and Maintenance of Improvements.

Applicant/Developer shall submit an Ownership and
Maintenance Exhibit for review and approval by
Planning Division and Public Works Department. Terms
of maintenance are subject to review and approval by
the City Engineer.

PL, PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance

74. Building Pads, Slopes and Walls.

Applicant/Developer shall provide the Public Works
Department with a letter from a registered civil engineer or surveyor stating that the building pads have been
graded to within 0.1 feet of the grades shown on the
approved Grading Plans, and that the top & toe of banks and retaining walls are at the locations shown on the
approved Grading Plans.

PW Acceptance of
Improvements

75. Approved Plan Files. Applicant/Developer shall
provide the Public Works Department a PDF format file
of approved site plans, including grading, improvement, landscaping & irrigation, joint trench and lighting.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance

76. Master Files. Applicant/Developer shall provide the Public Works Department a digital vectorized file of the “master” files for the project, in a format acceptable to the City Engineer. Digital raster copies are not
acceptable. The digital vectorized files shall be in
AutoCAD 14 or higher drawing format. All objects and
entities in layers shall be colored by layer and named in English. All submitted drawings shall use the Global
Coordinate System of USA, California, NAD 83
California State Plane, Zone III, and U.S. foot.

PW Acceptance of
Improvements

77. Environmental Services Files. Applicant/Developer
shall provide to the Public Works Department GIS shape
files, provided in a format acceptable to the City, all MRP Provision C.3 stormwater features, trash capture
devices, mitigation measures, wetlands, v-ditches and
public waste containers.

PW/ESD Acceptance of
Improvements

78. SB 1383 Compliance Reporting. To comply with SB
1383, applicant shall provide to the Public Works
Department records indicating where SB 1383 compliant
mulch or compost was applied in the project, the source and type of product, quantity of each product, and
invoices demonstrating procurement.

PW/ESD
Acceptance of
Improvements
/ building
occupancy
742
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 20 of 35 PUBLIC WORKS – EASEMENTS AND ACCESS RIGHTS

79. Dedications. Applicant shall dedicate all rights-of-way and easement dedications required by these conditions
or determined necessary by the City Engineer.

PW Improvement
Plan Approval

80. Public Service Easements. A Public Service Easement (PSE) shall be dedicated along the project’s frontage to allow for the proper placement of public utility vaults, boxes, appurtenances or similar items behind the backof-sidewalk. Private improvements such as fences, gates or trellises shall not be located within the PSE.

PW Improvement
Plan Approval

81. Emergency Vehicle Access Easements.

Applicant/Developer shall dedicate Emergency Vehicle
Access Easements (EVAE) over the clear pavement
width of all drive aisles as required by the Alameda
County Fire Department and City Engineer.

PW Improvement
Plan Approval

82. Abandonment of Easements. Applicant/Developer
shall obtain abandonment from all applicable public
agencies of existing easements and rights-of-way within the project site that will no longer be used. Prior to
completion of abandonment, the improvement plans
may be approved if the Applicant/Developer can
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the abandonment process has been initiated.

PW Improvement
Plan Approval

83. Acquisition of Easements. Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for obtaining all onsite and offsite
easements, and/or obtain rights-of-entry from the
adjacent property owners for any improvements not
located on their property. The Applicant/Developer shall prepare all required documentation for dedication of all easements on-site and off-site. The easements and/or
rights-of-entry shall be in writing and copies furnished to the Public Works Department.

PW Improvement
Plan Approval

84. Approval by Others. Applicant/Developer will be
responsible for submittals and reviews to obtain the
approvals of all applicable non-City agencies.

PW Improvement
Plan Approval
PUBLIC WORKS – GRADING

85. Grading Plan. The Grading Plan shall be in
conformance with the recommendation of the
Geotechnical Report, the approved Site Development
Review, and the City design standards & ordinances. In
case of conflict between the soil engineer’s
recommendation and the City ordinances, the City
Engineer shall determine which shall apply.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance

86. Geotechnical Engineer Review and Approval. The
Project Geotechnical Engineer shall be retained to
review all final grading plans and specifications. The
Project Geotechnical Engineer shall approve all grading plans prior to City approval.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance/
Sitework
Permit
743
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 21 of 35

87. Grading Off-Haul. The disposal site and haul truck
route for any off-haul dirt materials shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the
issuance of a Grading Permit. If the Applicant/Developer does not own the parcel on which the proposed disposal
site is located, the Applicant/Developer shall provide the City with a Letter of Consent signed by the current
owner, approving the placement of off-haul material on
their parcel. A Grading Plan may be required for the
placement of the off-haul material.

A Transportation Permit or Encroachment Permit may
be required for the haul route, as determined by the City Engineer, which shall include a pre- and post-hauling
survey of the pavement condition. Applicant/Developer
shall be responsible for repairing damaged pavement
due to hauling operations, as determined by the City
Engineer.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance/
Sitework
Permit

88. Erosion Control Plan. A detailed Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall be included with the Grading Plan
submittal. The plan shall include detailed design,
location, and maintenance criteria of all erosion and
sedimentation control measures. The plan shall also
address site housekeeping best management practices.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance

89. Demolition Plan. Applicant/Developer’s Civil Engineer shall prepare a demolition plan for the project, which shall be submitted concurrent with the improvement plan
package. The demolition plan shall address the following:
 Pavement demolition, including streetlights and
landscaped median islands
 Landscaping and irrigation
 Fencing to be removed and fencing to remain
Any items to be saved in place and or protected, such as trees, water meters, sewer cleanouts, drainage inlets or backflow prevention devices.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance

PUBLIC WORKS - STORM DRAINAGE & OTHER UTILITIES

90. On-Site Storm Drain System. Storm drainage for the
10-year storm event shall be collected on-site and
conveyed through storm drains to the public storm drain system. Show the size and location of existing and
proposed storm drains and catch basins on the site plan.

Show the size and location of public storm drain lines
and the points of connection for the on-site storm drain system.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance

91. Overland Release. Grading and drainage shall be
designed so that surplus drainage (above and beyond
that of the 10-year storm event) not collected in site
PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance
744
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 22 of 35 catch basins, is directed overland so as not to cause
flooding of existing or proposed buildings.

92. Storm Drain Easements. Private storm drain
easements and maintenance roads shall be provided for
all private storm drains or ditches that are located on private property. The Applicant/Developer shall be
responsible for the acquisition of all storm drain
easements from offsite property owners which are
required for the connection and maintenance of all offsite storm drainage improvements.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance

93. Storm Drain Inlet Markers. All public and private storm drain inlets must be marked with storm drain markers
that read: “No dumping, drains to creek,” and a note shall be shown on the improvement plans. The markers may
be purchased from the Public Works Department.

PW Acceptance of
Improvements

94. Fire Hydrants. Fire hydrant locations shall be approved by the Alameda County Fire Department. A raised
reflector blue traffic marker shall be installed in the street opposite each hydrant, and shown on the signing &
striping plan.

PW Acceptance of
Improvements

95. Dry Utilities. Applicant/Developer shall construct gas, electric, telephone, cable TV, and communication
improvements within the fronting streets and as
necessary to serve the project and the future adjacent
parcels as approved by the City Engineer and the
various Public Utility agencies.

PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements

96. Dry Utility Locations. All electric, telephone, cable TV, and communications utilities, shall be placed
underground in accordance with the City policies and
ordinances. All utilities shall be located and provided within public utility easements or public services
easements and sized to meet utility company standards.

PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements

97. Utility Vaults and Boxes. All utility vaults, boxes, and structures, unless specifically approved otherwise by the City Engineer, shall be underground and placed in
landscaped areas and screened from public view.

Landscape drawings shall be submitted to the City
showing the location of all utility vaults, boxes, and
structures and adjacent landscape features and
plantings. The Joint Trench Plans shall be submitted
along with the grading and/or improvement plans.

PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements

PUBLIC WORKS- STREET IMPROVEMENTS

98. Public Improvements. The public improvements shall
be constructed generally as shown on the Site
Development Review. However, the approval of the Site
Development Review is not an approval of the specific
design of the drainage, traffic circulation, parking,
stormwater treatment, sidewalks and street
improvements.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
745
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 23 of 35

99. Public Improvement Conformance. All public
improvements shall conform to the City of Dublin
Standard Plans, current practices, and design
requirements and as approved by the City Engineer.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
100. Pavement Structural Sections. Asphalt concrete
pavement sections within the public right-of-way shall be designed using the Caltrans method for flexible
pavement design (including the asphalt factor of safety), an assumed R-Value of 5. Final pavement sections shall
be based on the actual R-Value obtained from pavement
subgrade.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
101. Decorative Pavement. Any decorative pavers/paving
installed within City right-of-way shall be done to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Where decorative
paving is installed at signalized intersections, preformed traffic signal loops shall be put under the decorative pavement. Decorative pavements shall not
interfere with the placement of traffic control devices, including pavement markings. All turn lane stripes, stop bars and crosswalks shall be delineated with concrete
bands or colored pavers to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Maintenance costs of decorative paving
installed within the public right-of-way along the project frontage shall be the responsibility of the
Applicant/Developer or future property owner.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
102. Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk. Applicant/Developer shall remove and replace damaged, hazardous, or
nonstandard curb, gutter and sidewalk along the project frontage. Contact the Public Works Department to mark
the existing curb, gutter and sidewalk that will need to be removed and replaced.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
103. Curb Ramps. City standard curb ramps are required at all intersections. All curb ramps shall include truncated domes and meet the most current City and ADA design
standards. Curb ramp locations shall be shown on the
plans.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
104. Visibility Triangle. All improvements within the sight visibility triangle at all intersections, including but not limited to walls and landscaping, shall be a maximum
height of 30” from the roadway surface elevation at the nearest lane.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
105. Traffic Signing and Striping. Applicant/Developer
shall install all traffic signage, striping, and pavement markings as required by the City Engineer. Signing
plans shall show street name and stop signs and any
other regulatory signage appropriate for the project.

Striping plans shall show stop bars, lane lines and
channelization as necessary. Striping plans shall
distinguish between existing striping to be removed and PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
746
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 24 of 35 new striping to be installed. All striping shall be
thermoplastic.
106. Street Lighting. Street light standards and luminaries shall be designed and installed or relocated as
determined by the City Engineer. PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance

PUBLIC WORKS - CONSTRUCTION
107. Erosion Control Implementation. The Erosion and
Sediment Control Plan shall be implemented between
October 1st and April 30th unless otherwise allowed in
writing by the City Engineer. The Applicant/Developer
will be responsible for maintaining erosion and sediment control measures for one year following the City’s
acceptance of the improvements.

PW
Start of
Construction
and On-going
108. Archaeological Finds. If archaeological materials are encountered during construction, construction within
100 ft of these materials shall be halted until a
professional Archaeologist certified by the Society of
California Archaeology (SCA) or the Society of
Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has had an
opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitigation measures.

PW
Start of
Construction
and On-going
109. Construction Activities. Construction activities,
including the idling, maintenance, and warming up of
equipment, shall be limited to Monday through Friday,
and non-City holidays, between the hours of 7:30 a.m.
and 6:00 p.m. except as otherwise approved by the City
Engineer. Extended hours or Saturday work will be
considered by the City Engineer on a case-by-case
basis. Note that the construction hours of operation
within the public right-of-way are more restrictive.

PW
Start of
Construction
and On-going
110. Temporary Fencing. Temporary construction fencing
shall be installed along the construction work perimeter to separate the construction area from the public. All
construction activities shall be confined within the fenced area. Construction materials and/or equipment shall not be operated/stored outside of the fenced area or within the public right-of-way unless approved in advance by
the City Engineer.

PW
Start of
Construction
and On-going
111. Construction Noise Management Plan.

Applicant/Developer shall prepare a construction noise
management plan that identifies measures to minimize
construction noise on surrounding developed properties.

The plan shall include hours of construction operation, use of mufflers on construction equipment, speed limit
for construction traffic, haul routes and identify a noise monitor. Specific noise management measures shall be
provided prior to project construction.

PW
Start of
Construction
Implementatio
n, and Ongoing as
needed
747
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 25 of 35 112. Traffic Control Plan. Closing of any existing pedestrian pathway and/or sidewalk during construction shall be
implemented through a City-approved Traffic Control
Plan and shall be done with the goal of minimizing the
impact on pedestrian circulation.

PW
Start of
Construction
and On-going
as needed
113. Construction Traffic Interface Plan.

Applicant/Developer shall prepare a plan for
construction traffic interface with public traffic on any existing public street. Construction traffic and parking may be subject to specific requirements by the City
Engineer. Lane Closures on Dublin Boulevard are only
permitted between 9:00 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.

PW
Start of
Construction;
Implementatio
n, and Ongoing as
needed
114. Pest Control. Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for controlling any rodent, mosquito, or other pest
problem due to construction activities.

PW On-going
115. Dust Control Measures. Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for watering or other dust-palliative
measures to control dust as conditions warrant or as
directed by the City Engineer.

PW
Start of
Construction;
Implementatio
n On-going as
needed
116. Dust Control/Street Sweeping. Applicant/Developer
shall provide adequate dust control measures at all
times during the grading and hauling operations. All
trucks hauling export and import materials shall be
provided with tarp cover at all times. Spillage of haul materials and mud-tracking on the haul routes shall be
prevented at all times. The Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for sweeping of streets within, surrounding and adjacent to the project, as well as along the haul
route, if it is determined that the tracking or accumulation of material on the streets is due to its construction
activities.

PW
During
Grading and
Site Work
117. Construction Traffic and Parking. All constructionrelated parking shall be off-street in an area provided by the Applicant/Developer. Construction traffic and
parking shall be provided in a manner approved by the
City Engineer.

PW
Start of
Construction
and On-going
PUBLIC WORKS – EROSION CONTROL & STORMWATER QUALITY
118. Stormwater Treatment. Consistent with Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit
(MRP) Order No. R2-2022-0018, the
Applicant/Developer shall submit documentation
including construction drawings demonstrating all
stormwater treatment measures and hydromodification
requirements as applicable are met.

PW/ESD
Grading
Permit
Issuance
119. Stormwater Source Control. All applicable structural and operational stormwater source controls shall be
implemented.

PW/ESD
Grading/Sitew
ork Permit
Issuance
748
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 26 of 35 120. Maintenance Access. Applicant shall design and
construct maintenance access to all stormwater
management measures and mitigation swales, as
appropriate. Maintenance access for equipment and
personnel to overflow risers, cleanouts and other
structures is required. The final number, location, width, and surfacing of maintenance access points from public
or private streets is subject to the approval of the City Engineer.

PW/ESD
Grading
Permit
Issuance
121. Green Stormwater Infrastructure. The
Applicant/Developer shall incorporate Green
Infrastructure facilities within the public rights-of-way of newly constructed or widened streets, subject to the
review of the Public Works Department. Green
Stormwater Infrastructure facilities include, but are not limited to: infiltration basins, bioretention facilities, pervious pavements, etc.

PW/ESD
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
122. NOI and SWPPP. Prior to any clearing or grading,
Applicant/Developer shall provide the City evidence that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been sent to the California State Water Resources Control Board per the
requirements of the NPDES. A copy of the Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be provided to
the Public Works Department and be kept at the
construction site.

PW
Start of Any
Construction
Activities
123. SWPPP. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) shall identify the Best Management Practices
(BMPs) appropriate to the project construction activities.

The SWPPP shall include the erosion and sediment
control measures in accordance with the regulations
outlined in the most current version of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Erosion and Sediment
Control Handbook or State Construction Best
Management Practices Handbook. The
Applicant/Developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors implement all storm water pollution
prevention measures in the SWPPP.

PW
SWPPP to be
Prepared
Prior to
Grading
Permit
Issuance;
Implementatio
n Prior to Start
of
Construction
and On-going
as needed
124. Stormwater Management Plan. A final Stormwater
Management Plan shall be submitted for review and
approval by the City Engineer. Approval is subject to the Applicant/Developer providing the necessary plans,
details, and calculations that demonstrate the plan
complies with the standards issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board and Alameda
Countywide Clean Water Program. Landscape Based
Stormwater Management Measures shall be irrigated,
be on a separate irrigation controller from traditional landscape, and meet WELO requirements.

PW/ESD
Building
Permit
Issuance and
Grading
Permit
Issuance
125. SB 1383 Compliance. To comply with SB 1383
procurement requirements, all mulch and compost used PW/ESD Building Permit 749
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 27 of 35 in stormwater management measures and general
landscape areas shall meet SB 1383 procurement
requirements. Specifically, compost must be produced
at a permitted composting facility; digestate, biosolids, manure and mulch do not qualify as compost. Eligible
mulch must be derived from organic materials and be
produced at a permitted transfer station, landfill, or
composting facility. Examples of allowed compost
include arbor mulch and composted mulch.

Issuance and
Grading
Permit
Issuance.
126. Trash Capture. The project must include appropriate full trash capture devices for both private and public
improvements. Specific details on the trash capture
devices selected are required on the construction plan
set demonstrating how MRP Provision C.10 (trash
capture) requirements are met. A list of approved full
trash capture devices may be found at the California
Stormwater Quality Association website at the following link: https://www.casqa.org/resources/trash/certifiedfull-capture-system-trash-treatment-control-devices.

Please note that lead time for trash capture device
delivery can be substantial. The applicant/contractor
shall plan accordingly.

PW
Building
Permit
Issuance and
Grading
Permit
Issuance
127. Phased Construction and Stormwater Management
Measures. Required stormwater treatment,
hydromodification management, and trash capture
devices shall be installed concurrent with construction of the first phase of improvements. Temporary facilities are not permitted.

PW/ESD
Building
Permit
Issuance and
Grading
Permit
Issuance
PUBLIC WORKS – ON-SITE IMPROVEMENTS
128. Drive Aisle Width. The parking lot aisles shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide to allow for adequate onsite
vehicle circulation for cars, trucks, and emergency
vehicles.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance
129. Vehicle Parking. All on-site vehicle parking spaces shall conform to the following:
a. All parking spaces shall be double striped using fourinch white lines set two feet apart in accordance with City Standards and DMC 8.76.070.A.17.
b. Twelve-inch-wide concrete step-out curbs shall be
constructed at each parking space where one or both
sides abut a landscaped area or planter.
c. Where wheel stops are shown, individual six-foot
long wheel stops shall be provided within each
parking space in accordance with City Standards.
d. A minimum two-foot radius shall be provided at curb
returns and curb intersections where applicable.
e. Parking stalls next to walls, fences and obstructions to vehicle door opening shall be an additional 4’ in
width per DMC Section 8.76.070.A.16.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance
750
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 28 of 35 f. Landscaped strips adjacent to parking stalls shall be unobstructed in order to allow for a minimum two-foot
vehicular overhang at front of vehicles.
130. Traffic Management Plan. The applicant shall make
necessary modification to the parking area or develop
and implement an on-site traffic management plan to
address any potential concerns that may be identified by site circulation review of the site for delivery vans and trucks. If an on-site traffic management plan is
developed, it should be pre- approved by Public Works
department.

PW
Building
Permit
Issuance and
Grading
Permit
Issuance
131. Onsite Signing and Striping Plan. A Traffic Signing and Striping Plan showing all proposed signing and
striping within on-site parking lots and drive aisles, shall be submitted for review and approval by the City
Engineer.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
132. Photometrics. The Applicant/Developer shall provide a complete photometrics plan for both onsite and frontage roadways. Include the complete data on photometrics,
including the High, Average and Minimum values for
illuminance and uniformity ratio.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
133. Project signs. All proposed project monument signs shall be placed on private property. Signs should be
located outside of any easement areas unless
specifically approved by the City Engineer. Any signage allowed to be located in an easement is subject to
removal and replacement at the expense of the
Developer/property owner if required by the easement
holder.

PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance
134. Solid Waste Requirements. The Project must comply
with all requirements in Dublin Municipal Code Chapter

7.98, including the following requirements:

Install trash, recycling and organics collection containers at the entrance and exit of the property.

PW/ESD
Building
Permit or Site
Work Permit
Issuance
135. Cigarette Butt Collection. Install and appropriately site cigarette butt collection containers for employee and
public use. PW/ESD
Building
Permit or Site
Work Permit
Issuance
136. Garbage Truck Access. The applicant shall provide
plans and details on anticipated garbage truck access
and routes, in addition to example set-out diagrams for waste carts/bins placement on garbage day
demonstrating adequate space available for carts/bins.

Carts and bins shall not block street or driveway access.

PW/ESD
Building
Permit or Site
Work Permit
Issuance

PUBLIC WORKS - SPECIAL CONDITIONS
137. Corrective Grading Plan. The Geotechnical Report
identifies areas of undocumented fill which shall be
removed and replaced with engineered fill. The
Applicant shall provide corrective grading plans for
removal and replacement of soil. The Public Works
PW
Grading
Permit
Issuance
751
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 29 of 35 Department may issue a separate grading permit for this work.
138. Access Easement. The Applicant shall dedicate an
access easement from the public right-of-way at Dublin
Boulevard to the existing City maintained storm drain
line located near the south side of the property, to allow the City maintenance access through the project site to the storm drain line.

PW Improvement
Plan Approval
139. Public Sidewalk Easement. The Applicant shall
dedicate a public sidewalk easement behind the public
right-of-way at Dublin Boulevard where the proposed
public sidewalk extends outside the right-of-way and
onto private property.

PW Improvement
Plan Approval
140. Easement Vacation. An existing easement is located within the parcel that will be in conflict with the location of the proposed building. The project shall provide
documentation to the City as needed for the existing
easement to be vacated. Vacation of the easement will
be required through the City Council process.

PW
Building
Permit
Issuance
141. Parking Lot Slopes. Slopes shall not exceed five
percent in parking lot areas. PW Improvement Plan Approval 142. Adjacent Properties. The Applicant is responsible to obtain written authorization from adjacent property
owners for any access needed through adjacent
properties, and any grading and improvements on
adjacent properties. A copy of written authorizations
shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to start of any work.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Building
Permit
Issuance
143. Traffic Study. The Applicant shall comply with the findings and recommendations of the traffic study,
including but not limited to maintaining the landscaping to provide the minimum sight distance for vehicles
exiting the project site and providing signage instructing drivers of trucks and other large vehicles that access into the project site is prohibited from the eastern driveway.

PW Improvement
Plan Approval
144. Public Sidewalk. The project shall provide a 10-footwide sidewalk separated from the curb by a five-foot landscape/amenities strip per Dublin Village Historic
Area Specific Plan along the project frontage at Dublin Boulevard, between the two driveways serving the site.

PW Improvement
Plan Approval
145. Bicycle Lane at Dublin Boulevard. The Applicant shall provide a six-foot-wide bicycle lane with a two-foot-wide buffer at Dublin Boulevard along the project frontage.

PW Improvement
Plan Approval
146. Bicycle Parking. The Applicant shall provide 12 shortterm bicycle parking spaces and 12 long-term bicycle parking spaces onsite. PW
Building
Permit
Issuance and
Grading
Permit
Issuance
752
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 30 of 35 147. Landscape Features within Public Right-of-Way. The Property Owner shall enter into an “Agreement for Long
Term Encroachment for Landscape Features” with the
City to require the Property Owner to maintain the
sidewalk, landscape, irrigation and any decorative
features within public right-of-way along the project
frontage, including but not limited to any decorative
pavements, stormwater treatments and trash capture
devices. The Agreement shall identify the ownership of
the special features and maintenance responsibilities.

The Property Owner will be responsible for maintaining
the surface of all decorative pavements including
restoration required as the result of utility repairs.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
148. Stormwater Management Report. Provide a
Stormwater Management Report including narrative of
existing and proposed conditions, explaining how
stormwater treatment, hydromodification and trash
capture requirements are being met. The report shall
also include exhibits, plans and sizing calculations.

PW/ESD
Building
Permit
Issuance and
Grading
Permit
Issuance
149. Bubble-Up Structures. Bubble-ups are discouraged. If bubble-ups are needed, they shall be placed outside of
the bioretention area (e.g. adjacent to the stormwater
treatment facility, not in the treatment soil).

PW/ESD
Approval of
Improvement
Plans
150. Irrigation at Stormwater Treatment Areas.

Stormwater treatment areas are required to be irrigated, be on a separate irrigation controller from the traditional landscape and meet WELO requirements.

PW/ESD
Approval of
Improvement
and
Landscape
Plans
151. ReScape California Landscape Design. All publicly
owned landscape (e.g. parks, right of way, etc.) shall be designed and rated to meet ReScape standards. The
applicant is encouraged to design all other landscape
areas according to ReScape Landscape standards.

PW/ESD
Building
Permit
Issuance and
Grading
Permit
Issuance
152. Street Restoration. A pavement treatment, such as
slurry seal or grind and overlay, will be required within the public streets fronting the site as determined by the Public Works Department. The type and limits of the
pavement treatment shall be determined by the City
Engineer based upon the number and proximity of
trench cuts, extent of frontage and median
improvements, extent of pavement striping and
restriping, excessive wear and tear/damage due to
construction traffic, etc.

PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements
153. Overhead Utilities. Existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground as generally shown on the
approved Site Development Plans. All new utilities shall be placed underground.

PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
753
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 31 of 35 154. Hydromodification Management Standards. This
project is subject to hydromodification management
measures. The Applicant/Developer shall review the
Bay Area Hydrology Model (BAHM) Review Worksheet
for all projects that must meet Hydromodification
Management Standards. The worksheet is available on
the City’s website at the following webpage:
http://dublin.ca.gov/1656/
PW
Grading
Permit or
Encroachment
Permit
Issuance
155. Waste Enclosure. The waste enclosure shall meet all of the requirements set forth within the Dublin Municipal Code Section 7.98, including but not limited to providing sewer and water hook-ups. The improvement plans
and/or building permit plans shall show additional
information demonstrating these requirements are met.

A standard plan for the waste enclosure can be
downloaded at https://dublin.ca.gov/341/StandardPlans in the “Stormwater Measures” section. A pedestrian accessible path of travel shall be provided for employees from the building to the waste enclosure in
conformance with current accessibility requirements.

PW/ESD
Building
Permit
Issuance and
Grading
Permit
Issuance
156. PCBs Demolition Ordinance. The applicant shall
provide all screening and testing forms required to
comply with Chapter 7.29 of the Dublin Municipal Code,
Management of Polychlorinated Biphenyls during the
Building Demolition Process. Forms and additional
resources may be found at
https://dublin.ca.gov/2113/PCBs-Building-DemolitionOrdinance.

PW/ESD
Prior to
issuance of
Demolition
Permit
157. Mitigation Measures. The applicant shall provide to the Planning Division and the Public Works Department a
copy of the mitigation measures maintenance manual
and schedule for reference, including maintenance
procedures and protocols to follow after mitigation
reporting is complete.

PW/ESD Acceptance of
Improvements
158. Fair Share Contribution. The Applicant shall pay a fair share contribution in the amount of $210,000 towards
the construction of a 12-foot-wide Class I trail and a fivefoot-wide buffer from the roadway on the north side of Dublin Boulevard between Silvergate Drive and Hansen
Drive along the project frontage.

PW
Building
Permit
Issuance
159. Traffic Signal Modification. The Applicant shall
coordinate with the City for traffic signal modifications including signal pole upgrades at the northeast and
southwest corners, ADA compliant pedestrian push
buttons, pedestrian countdown signal heads,
appropriate vehicle signal heads to provide north-south split phasing, two Iteris vehicle detection cameras for Dublin Boulevard approaches, and project entry
driveway conductor loops at the intersection of Dublin
Boulevard and Hansen Drive, as generally shown on the
PW Improvement
Plan Approval
754
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 32 of 35 approved SDR plans, to the satisfaction of the City
Traffic Engineer.

DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT
160. Regulations that apply to development projects. The regulations that apply to development projects are
codified in: the Dublin San Ramon Services District
Code; the DSRSD “Standard Procedures, Specifications
and Drawings for Design and Installation of Water and
Wastewater Facilities” as amended from time to time; all applicable DSRSD Master Plans and all DSRSD
policies. Prior to issuance of any building permit,
complete improvement plans shall be submitted to
DSRSD that conform to the pertinent documents.

DSRSD Building
Permit
Issuance
161. Fees. Planning and review fees, inspection fees, and fees associated with a wastewater discharge permit
shall be paid to DSRSD in accordance with the rates and schedules and at time of payment as established in the
DSRSD Code. Planning and review fees are due after
the 1st submittal of plans. Construction Permit and
Inspection Fees are due prior to the issuance of a
Construction Permit. Capacity Reserve Fees are due
before the water meter can be set or the connection to
the sewer system.

DSRSD Permit
Submittal and
Construction
Permit
Issuance
162. District Review and Acceptance. Prior to issuance of any building permit by the City; or any Building Permit or Construction Permit by the Dublin San Ramon Services
District, all improvement plans for DSRSD facilities shall be signed by the District Engineer. Each drawing of
improvement plans for DSRSD facilities shall contain a
signature block for the District Engineer indicating
approval of the sanitary sewer and/or water facilities
shown. Prior to approval by the District Engineer, the
applicant shall pay all required DSRSD fees, and provide an engineer’s estimate of construction costs for the
sewer and water systems, a faithful performance bond,
and a comprehensive general liability insurance policy in the amounts and forms that are acceptable to DSRSD.

The applicant shall allow at least 15 working days for
final improvement drawing review by DSRSD before
signature by the District Engineer.

DSRSD Building
Permit
Issuance or
Construction
Permit
Issuance
163. Easements. All easement dedications for DSRSD
facilities shall be by separate instrument irrevocably
offered to DSRSD or by offer of dedication on the Final Map. Prior to approval by the City for Recordation, the Final Map shall be submitted to and approved by
DSRSD for easement locations, widths, and restrictions.

DSRSD Building
Permit
Issuance or
Construction
Permit
Issuance
164. Installation in Main Thoroughfares. Where the narrow width of a proposed alley or cul-de-sac is so restrictive that the standard separation requirements for water
mains and sewer mains cannot be maintained, the water
DSRSD Building
Permit
Issuance or
Construction
755
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 33 of 35 and sewer mains shall be installed within main
thoroughfares, outside of alleyways or cul-de-sacs.

Water and sewer mains may not be installed within
courtyards. Water meters shall be installed around the
outer perimeter of buildings. Installation of water lines from the meter to each unit shall be documented and
submitted to the District.

Permit
Issuance
165. Provide Sufficient Capacity. All mains shall be sized to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate future flow
demands in addition to each development project's
demand. Layout and sizing of mains shall be in
conformance with DSRSD utility master planning.

DSRSD Approval of
Improvement
Plans
166. Submission of Proposed Easements. Prior to
approval by the City of a grading permit or a site
development permit, the locations and widths of all
proposed easement dedications for water and sewer
lines shall be submitted to and approved by DSRSD.

DSRSD Grading
Permit
Issuance
167. Locate facilities in public streets. Water and sewer mains shall be located in public streets rather than in offstreet locations to the fullest extent possible. If unavoidable, then sewer or water easements must be
established over the alignment of each sewer or water
main in an off-street or private street location to provide access for future maintenance and/or replacement.

DSRSD Approval of
Improvement
Plans
168. Looped or Interconnect Pipelines. Domestic and fire protection waterline systems for Tracts or Commercial
Developments shall be designed to be looped or
interconnected to avoid dead end sections in
accordance with requirements of the DSRSD Standard
Specifications and sound engineering practice.

DSRSD Approval of
Improvement
Plans
169. Sewers to operate by gravity flow. Sewers shall be designed to operate by gravity flow to DSRSD’s existing sanitary sewer system. Pumping of sewage is
discouraged and may only be allowed under extreme
circumstances following a case by case review with
DSRSD staff. Any pumping station will require specific
review and approval by DSRSD of preliminary design
reports, design criteria, and final plans and
specifications. The DSRSD reserves the right to require payment of present worth 30-year operations and
maintenance costs as well as other conditions within a
separate agreement with the applicant for any project
that requires a pumping station.

DSRSD Approval of
Improvement
Plans
170. Water and/or Sewer Capacity Demands. This project
will be analyzed by DSRSD to determine if it represents additional water and/or sewer capacity demands on the
District. Applicant will be required to pay all incremental capacity reserve fees for water and sewer services as
required by the project demands. All capacity reserve
fees must be paid prior to installation of a water meter DSRSD Building
Permit
Issuance or
Construction
Permit
Issuance
756
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 34 of 35 for water. If a water meter is not required, the capacity reserve fee shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. The District may not approve the building permit until capacity reserve fees are paid.
171. Obtain Permit to Construct. No sewer line or waterline construction shall be permitted unless the proper utility construction permit has been issued by DSRSD. A
construction permit will only be issued after all of the items in Condition No. 2 have been satisfied.

DSRSD Building
Permit
Issuance or
Construction
Permit
Issuance
172. Backflow Prevention Devices/Double Detector
Check Valves. Above ground backflow prevention
devices/double detector check valves shall be installed on fire protection systems connected to the DSRSD
water main. The applicant shall collaborate with the Fire Department and with DSRSD to size and configure its
fire system.

DSRSD Approval of
Improvement
Plans
173. Recycled Water Improvements. Improvement plans
shall include recycled water improvements as required
by DSRSD. Services for landscape irrigation shall
connect to recycled water mains. Applicant must obtain
a copy of the DSRSD Recycled Water Use Guidelines
and conform to the requirements therein. Availability of Recycled Water to be determined by District.

DSRSD Approval of
Improvement
Plans
174. General Condition. Fire hydrants shall not be located behind a backflow prevention device and shall be
connected directly to a DSRSD water main.

DSRSD Approval of
Improvement
Plans
175. Trash Enclosures. If trash enclosures are required to drain to the sanitary sewer system, grease interceptors shall be connected downstream of the drain and
installed near the trash enclosure area. The trash
enclosure shall be roofed and graded to minimize
rainwater or stormwater from entering the drain within
the trash enclosure.

DSRSD Building
Permit
Issuance or
Construction
Permit
Issuance
757
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 35 of 35 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
City Clerk
758
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN ONLY EV CHARGING

VAN ONLY EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER
FIRE PROTECTION - K&W--- Green Design--
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.
21657
JV
08/21/2024
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP

OVERALL SITE PLAN
DAB-A1.1

SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES

SITE PLAN KEYNOTES

SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES
TABULATION CODE ANALYSIS :

AERIAL MAP
SITE
Attachment 9
759
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN ONLY EV CHARGING

VAN ONLY EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER
FIRE PROTECTION - K&W--- Green Design--
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.
21657
JV
08/21/2024
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP

FIRE ACCESS ROUTE
DAB-A1.1F

SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES
760

PARKING
NO
VAN

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER

FIRE PROTECTION
- K&W
-
-
- Green Design
-
-
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.
21657
JV
08/21/2024
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP

ENLARGED SITE PLAN
DAB-A1.2

SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES

SITE PLAN KEYNOTES

SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES
761
Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER

FIRE PROTECTION
- K&W
-
-
- Green Design
-
-
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.
21657
JV
08/21/2024
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP

OVERALL FLOOR PLAN
DAB-A2.1

KEYNOTES - FLOOR PLAN GENERAL NOTES - FLOOR PLAN
762
Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER

FIRE PROTECTION
- K&W
-
-
- Green Design
-
-
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.
21657
JV
08/21/2024
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP

ROOF PLAN
DAB-A2.10
763
Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER

FIRE PROTECTION
- K&W
-
-
- Green Design
-
-
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.
21657
JV
08/21/2024
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP

ELEVATION
DAB-A3.1
GENERAL NOTES - ELEVATIONS ELEVATION COLOR LEGEND/SCHED.

GLAZING LEGEND

KEYNOTES - ELEVATIONS
764
Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER

FIRE PROTECTION
- K&W
-
-
- Green Design
-
-
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.
21657
JV
08/21/2024
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP

DETAILS
DAB-A4.1
765

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580

UNIT A UNIT B UNIT C UNIT D
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING
VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP
FOR
11711 DUBLIN BLVD
OF

PRELIMINARY SITE IMPROVEMENT PLANS

GENERAL NOTES

DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

VICINITY MAP
R
Call before you dig.

Know what'sbelow.

SITE MAP

SHEET DESCRIPTION
NO. CIVIL
1 C1.0 COVER SHEET
2 C2.0 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
3 C3.0 DEMOLITION PLAN
4 C4.0 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
5 C5.0 PRELIMINARY GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN
6 C5.1 TYPICAL SECTIONS
7 C6.0 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN
8 C7.0 PRELIMINARY SWQCP
9 C8.0 FIRE ACCESS PLAN
10 C9.0 GARBAGE TRUCK TURNING
11 C10.0 TRUCK TURNING
12 C10.1 TRUCK TURNING
13 C11.0 EXISTING EASEMENTS TO REMAIN
14 C11.1 EXISTING EASEMENTS TO BE VACATED
15 C11.2 PROPOSED EASEMENTS
16 C12.0 CLEAN BAY BLUE PRINT

ARCHITECTURAL

LANDSCAPE

SHEET INDEX

CIVIL ENGINEER
KIER & WRIGHT CIVIL ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS, INC.

ATTN: ZICO SARYEDDEAN, P.E.
2850 COLLIER CANYON ROAD
LIVERMORE, CA 94551
925-245-8788

DEVELOPER

DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP
19700 S. VERMONT AVENUE #101
TORRANCE, CA 90502
310-323-9100

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
GREEN DESIGN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, INC.

ATTN: BARBARA M. HATCH, RLA ASLA
1464 POPINJAY DRIVE
RENO, NV 89509
775-829-1364

ARCHITECT
HPA, INC.

ATTN: TERESA GOODWIN, AIA
600 GRAND AVENUE, SUITE 302
OAKLAND, CA 94610
925-413-6896
C1.0

COVER SHEET
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR
1 NORTH
N
SITE
766

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580 SILVERGATE DRIVE

DONLON WAY
C2.0

TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
NOTES
LEGEND
NORTH

HANSEN DRIVE

ABBREVIATIONS
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR 2
767

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580
LEGEND
C3.0

DEMOLITION PLAN
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR 3 NORTH
768

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580

UNIT A UNIT B UNIT C UNIT D
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING
VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
C4.0

PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR 4 NORTH
769

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580

UNIT A UNIT B UNIT C UNIT D
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING
VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
C5.0

PRELIMINARY GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN
NORTH
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR 5
LEGEND
NOTE
770
SECTION 1
SECTION 2

DOUBLIN

BOULEVARD
SECTION 4
SECTION 5
SECTION 7

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
SECTION 6

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
SECTION 3
C5.1

TYPICAL SECTIONS
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR 6
771

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580

UNIT A UNIT B UNIT C UNIT D
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING
VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
LEGEND
C6.0

PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN
NORTH
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR 7
772

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580 ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING
VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
LEGEND
C7.0

PRELIMINARY SWQCP
NORTH
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR 8
DMA 1
DMA 2
DMA 3
DMA 4
DMA 5
NOTE:

BIO-RETENTION DETAILS 1
NOTES
773

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580

UNIT A UNIT B UNIT C UNIT D
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING
VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
C8.0

FIRE ACCESS PLAN
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR 9 NORTH
774

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580

UNIT A UNIT B UNIT C UNIT D
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING
VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
C9.0

GARBAGE TRUCK TURNING
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR
10 NORTH
775

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580

UNIT A UNIT B UNIT C UNIT D
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING
VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
C10.0

TRUCK TURNING
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR
11 NORTH
776

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580

UNIT A UNIT B UNIT C UNIT D
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING
VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
C10.1

TRUCK TURNING
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR
12 NORTH
777

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580

UNIT A UNIT B UNIT C UNIT D
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING
VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
C11.0

EXISTING EASEMENTS TO REMAIN
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR
13 NORTH
CITY OF DUBLIN HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN
DUBLIN HILL INC. HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN
GTE SPRINT/PG&E HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN
PG&E HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN
DUBLIN HILL INC. HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN
DUBLIN HILL INC. HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN
CITY OF DUBLIN HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN
STATE OF CA MR. & MRS. KOLB TO REMAIN
STATE OF CA/PG&E HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN
STATE OF CA/PG&E HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN
STATE OF CA HEXCEL CORP. TO REMAIN
778

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580

UNIT A UNIT B UNIT C UNIT D
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING
VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
C11.1

EXISTING EASEMENTS TO BE VACATED
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR
14 DUBLIN HILL INC. HEXCELCORP. TO BE VACATED
STATE OF CA/COUNTY HEXCEL CORP. TO BE VACATED
NORTH
779

DUBLIN BOULEVARD
HIGHWAY 580

UNIT A UNIT B UNIT C UNIT D
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING
VAN
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING

ONLY EV CHARGING
C11.2

PROPOSED EASEMENTS
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR
15 NUMBER COLOR CHART EASEMENT USE IN FAVOR OF GRANTED BY DISPOSITION 1 PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP PROPOSED 2 DUBLIN SAN RAMON SEWER DISTRICT

EASEMENT

DUBLIN SAN RAMON SEWER

DISTRICT

DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER,
LP PROPOSED 3 EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP PROPOSED 4 PUBLIC SIDEWALK EASEMENT CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP PROPOSED 5 STORM DRAIN ACCESS EASEMENT CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP PROPOSED 6

SEWER EASEMENT
(EITHER PRIVATE OR DSRSD)

ENTERPRISE LLC OR DUBLIN SAN

RAMON SEWER DISTRICT

DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER,
LP PROPOSED 7 AT&T EASEMENT AT&T DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP PROPOSED 8 PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER,

LP PROPOSED
NORTH

PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT DETAIL
780
C12.0

CLEAN BAY BLUE PRINT
2850 Collier Canyon RoadLivermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 245-8788
www.kierwright.com
NO.

JUNE, 2024
OF 16 SHEETS
SHEET
DATE
SCALE

DESIGNER
JOB NO. A22024 NO. REVISION BY REVISION BY DUBLIN BOULEVARD OWNER, LP 11711 DUBLIN BLVD OF FOR DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA

DRAWN BY VB

AS NOTED
CR
16 781

UNIT A UNIT B ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING

NO ONLY EV CHARGING

VAN ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 30'
LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS:

L1.1

LANDSCAPE
PLAN

HYDROZONE

GRASSES

DROUGHT TOLERANT SHRUBS

PERENNIALS
SYM. NO. BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE WATER REGIME MATURE HABIT H X W

EVERGREEN SCREENING SHRUBS

PLANT LIST

WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS

BIO-RETENTION PLANTING
MULCHES MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.2
Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER

FIRE PROTECTION
RJA
-
-
-
- Green Design
-
-
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.

BH
1464 Popinjay Drive
Reno, NV.
email: [email protected]
p: 775 829 1364
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
21657
08/18/2022
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP
COMMENTS 1-26-23
COMMENTS 4-12-23
COMMENTS 11-3-23
REVISED 1-31-24
REVISED 6-10-24

PRELIMINARY
CA. NATIVE
DUBLIN BLVD.

WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS
NOTE:
782

UNIT C UNIT D

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN

PARKING
NO
L1.2

LANDSCAPE
PLAN

PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 30' MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.1
Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER

FIRE PROTECTION
RJA
-
-
-
- Green Design
-
-
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.

BH
1464 Popinjay Drive
Reno, NV.
email: [email protected]
p: 775 829 1364
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
21657
08/18/2022
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP
COMMENTS 1-26-23
COMMENTS 4-12-23
COMMENTS 11-3-23
REVISED 1-31-24
REVISED 6-10-24

PRELIMINARY
DUBLIN BLVD.

HYDROZONE

GRASSES

DROUGHT TOLERANT SHRUBS

PERENNIALS
SYM. NO. BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE WATER REGIME MATURE HABIT H X W

EVERGREEN SCREENING SHRUBS

PLANT LIST
CA. NATIVE
783
L1.3

LANDSCAPE
PLAN
Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER

FIRE PROTECTION
RJA
-
-
-
- Green Design
-
-
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.

BH
1464 Popinjay Drive
Reno, NV.
email: [email protected]
p: 775 829 1364
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
21657
08/18/2022
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP
COMMENTS 1-26-23
COMMENTS 4-12-23
COMMENTS 11-3-23

PRELIMINARY
TREE DATA CONTINUED ON SHEET L1.4

EXISTING TREES ONSITE

EXISTING TREES IN FENCED CREEK AREA (NOT TO BE DISTURBED) 784

UNIT A UNIT B UNIT C UNIT D ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN ONLY EV CHARGING

VAN ONLY EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
L1.4

LANDSCAPE
PLAN
Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER

FIRE PROTECTION
RJA
-
-
-
- Green Design
-
-
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.

BH
1464 Popinjay Drive
Reno, NV.
email: [email protected]
p: 775 829 1364
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
21657
08/18/2022
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP
COMMENTS 1-26-23
COMMENTS 4-12-23
COMMENTS 11-3-23

PRELIMINARY

PRELIMINARY TREE PRESERVATION PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 40'
PARCEL 2
785

UNIT A UNIT B ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING

NO ONLY EV CHARGING

VAN ONLY EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING

PRELIMINARY IRRIGATION PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 30' L2.1

WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS
IRRIGATION LEGEND:

LATERAL PIPE SIZING:

CONNECTION DETAIL
AUTOMATIC CONTROL VALVE MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L2.2

IRRIGTATION
PLAN

PRELIMINARY
Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER

FIRE PROTECTION
RJA---- Green Design--
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.

BH
1464 Popinjay Drive
Reno, NV.
email: [email protected]
p: 775 829 1364
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
21657
08/18/2022
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP
COMMENTS 1-26-23
COMMENTS 4-12-23
COMMENTS 11-3-23
REVISED 1-31-24
REVISED 6-10-24
DUBLIN BLVD.

NOTE:
786

UNIT C UNIT D

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN

PARKING
NO
L2.2

IRRIGTATION
PLAN

PRELIMINARY IRRIGATION PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 30' MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L2.2

PRELIMINARY
Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER

FIRE PROTECTION
RJA---- Green Design--
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.

BH
1464 Popinjay Drive
Reno, NV.
email: [email protected]
p: 775 829 1364
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
21657
08/18/2022
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP
COMMENTS 1-26-23
COMMENTS 4-12-23
COMMENTS 11-3-23
REVISED 1-31-24
REVISED 6-10-24
DUBLIN BLVD.
787
L2.3

IRRIGTATION
PLAN

PRELIMINARY IRRIGATION PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 30'

PRELIMINARY
Project:

Consultants:

Project Number:

Revision:

Date:

Drawn by:

Title:

Sheet:

C I V I L

STRUCTURAL

MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

ELECTRICAL

LANDSCAPE

SOILS ENGINEER

FIRE PROTECTION
RJA---- Green Design--
Developer
tel: 949 862 2113
email: [email protected]
94610
oakland, ca
600 grand ave, suite 302
hpa, inc.

BH
1464 Popinjay Drive
Reno, NV.
email: [email protected]
p: 775 829 1364
11711
DUBLIN BLVD.

DUBLIN, CA
21657
08/18/2022
19700 Vermont Ave. Suite 101
Torance, CA 90502
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD
OWNER,
LP
COMMENTS 1-26-23
COMMENTS 4-12-23
788
ONLY
VAN

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

VAN VAN ONLY EV CHARGING

VAN ONLY EV CHARGING

PARKING

ONLY NO

EV CHARGING EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

AMBULATORY ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING

1.1 1.2

1.3 1.4

1.5 1.6

2.0 2.4

2.1 1.9

2.5 2.0

1.6 1.5

1.0 1.5

1.6 1.7

1.7 1.9

2.0 2.3

2.7 2.8

2.9 2.8

2.4 2.0

1.8 1.6

1.4 1.3

1.6 1.9

2.0 2.0

1.9 1.9

2.0 2.1

2.2 2.5

2.5 2.5

2.5 2.3

2.1 2.0

1.9 1.8

1.8 1.7

1.8 2.4

2.5 2.5

2.4 2.3

2.2 2.2

2.2 2.3

2.3 2.4

2.4 2.3

2.3 2.3

2.2 2.3

2.4 2.5

2.4 2.1

2.7 3.0

3.1 3.0

2.8 2.6

2.4 2.5

2.5 2.4

2.4 2.3

2.3 2.4

2.4 2.6

2.7 2.8

3.1 3.3

3.3 2.9

2.5 3.5

3.8 3.7

3.6 3.3

3.0 2.7

2.8 2.9

2.8 2.5

2.3 2.4

2.6 2.8

3.0 3.2

3.4 3.8

4.2 4.2

3.7 2.9

3.0 4.1

4.2 4.2

4.1 3.7

3.4 3.1

3.3 3.5

3.4 3.0

2.8 2.8

3.1 3.4

3.4 3.5

4.1 4.5

4.9 5.0

4.3 3.4

2.4 2.0

3.7 4.1

4.5 4.6

4.5 4.2

3.9 3.6

3.8 4.5

4.8 4.1

3.6 3.6

4.3 4.8

4.2 3.7

4.2 5.0

5.2 5.3

4.6 3.6

2.7 1.9

3.0 3.7

4.1 4.5

4.8 5.2

4.9 5.4

5.4 4.6

3.7 2.9

2.3 1.7

1.8 2.9

3.5 3.8

4.3 4.7

4.6 3.2

3.9 4.5

3.9 3.3

2.7 2.2

1.7 2.1

2.6 3.1

3.3 3.7

3.7 4.3

4.6 5.1

4.1 3.6

3.3 2.8

2.2 1.3

2.1 2.5

2.7 3.0

3.3 3.7

4.9 6.9

5.5 4.5

3.9 3.4

2.7 2.0

1.6 2.1

2.4 2.6

2.8 3.1

3.6 5.2

6.5 5.2

4.9 4.4

3.9 3.2

2.5 1.9

1.1 2.0

2.3 2.4

2.5 2.8

3.0 3.5

5.0 5.4

4.4 4.3

4.0 3.4

2.8 2.2

1.7 1.7

2.3 2.4

2.4 2.6

2.9 3.2

3.8 5.4

6.1 3.7

3.6 3.3

2.9 2.6

2.2 1.7

1.1 2.4

2.5 2.4

2.4 2.6

3.0 3.5

4.3 5.7

7.4 3.4

3.2 3.0

2.9 2.8

2.4 1.7

2.1 2.8

2.6 2.4

2.4 2.6

3.1 3.7

4.3 5.3

5.7 3.3

3.2 3.3

3.3 3.0

2.5 2.2

2.7 2.5

2.2 2.3

2.5 3.1

3.7 4.2

4.8 4.4

3.1 3.1

3.4 3.4

3.2 3.1

2.7 2.2

2.7 2.4

2.2 2.0

2.1 2.4

2.9 3.5

4.0 4.3

3.7 2.8

3.1 3.1

3.1 3.1

3.3 2.6

2.2 2.4

2.2 2.0

1.8 1.9

2.2 2.6

3.1 3.5

3.5 3.2

2.6 2.7

2.7 2.9

3.0 3.1

1.7 1.9

2.0 1.9

1.8 1.7

1.7 2.0

2.3 2.7

3.0 3.2

3.1 3.1

2.3 2.3

2.4 2.6

2.9 2.8

1.6 1.7

1.7 1.6

1.6 1.6

1.9 2.2

2.6 2.9

3.1 3.2

3.3 1.9

2.0 2.1

2.2 2.7

2.5 1.5

1.6 1.5

1.5 1.5

1.6 1.9

2.3 2.8

3.1 3.4

1.6 1.5

1.9 1.9

1.9 2.3

2.0 1.4

1.5 1.5

1.4 1.5

1.6 2.0

2.6 3.2

3.8 4.1

1.8 2.1

1.7 1.7

1.7 2.0

1.8 1.4

1.6 1.5

1.4 1.4

1.7 2.1

2.8 3.6

4.3 4.9

2.0 2.2

1.7 1.6

1.6 1.9

1.6 1.7

1.7 1.5

1.4 1.5

1.7 2.2

2.9 3.7

4.5 5.6

2.8 2.4

1.8 1.6

1.4 1.9

1.5 1.8

1.8 1.6

1.4 1.5

1.7 2.1

2.8 3.6

4.4 5.8

3.3 2.9

2.0 1.7

1.5 2.0

1.5 2.1

2.1 1.8

1.5 1.5

1.6 2.0

2.6 3.2

3.9 4.9

4.2 3.4

2.3 2.0

1.6 2.1

1.5 2.5

2.4 2.0

1.6 1.5

1.6 1.9

2.3 2.8

3.3 4.1

5.2 4.2

2.7 2.3

1.8 2.3

1.6 2.0

2.5 2.0

1.7 1.5

1.6 1.8

2.2 2.6

3.0 3.6

5.0 4.4

2.8 2.4

1.9 2.4

1.6 2.3

2.4 2.0

1.7 1.5

1.6 1.9

2.3 2.8

3.2 3.4

4.3 3.5

2.6 2.3

1.9 2.3

1.6 2.3

2.3 1.9

1.6 1.5

1.6 2.0

2.6 3.2

3.7 3.6

3.5 3.0

2.3 2.1

1.9 2.3

1.6 1.9

1.9 1.7

1.5 1.5

1.7 2.1

2.8 3.6

4.1 4.1

2.8 2.6

2.1 2.0

1.9 2.4

1.7 1.5

1.6 1.5

1.4 1.4

1.7 2.2

2.8 3.7

4.3 4.7

2.2 2.3

2.0 2.0

2.2 2.5

2.0 1.3

1.5 1.4

1.3 1.4

1.6 2.1

2.7 3.5

4.2 4.9

2.0 2.3

2.0 2.1

2.2 2.6

2.1 1.2

1.3 1.3

1.3 1.3

1.5 1.9

2.5 3.2

3.9 5.0

1.7 2.1

2.0 2.2

2.4 3.0

2.4 1.1

1.3 1.3

1.2 1.3

1.4 1.8

2.2 2.8

3.5 5.2

2.8 1.5

1.8 2.1

2.5 3.2

2.8 1.1

1.2 1.2

1.2 1.3

1.4 1.7

2.1 2.6

3.4 4.9

4.0 1.3

1.6 2.0

2.6 3.2

2.0 1.1

1.2 1.2

1.2 1.2

1.4 1.8

2.2 2.8

3.6 5.0

1.0 1.2

1.5 1.9

2.4 3.1

2.7 1.0

1.2 1.1

1.1 1.1

1.2 1.4

1.9 2.5

3.2 4.1

5.4 5.7

1.3 1.6

1.9 2.4

2.9 2.5

1.0 1.2

1.3 1.1

1.1 1.1

1.2 1.5

2.0 2.7

3.5 4.4

5.9 1.9

1.5 1.7

2.0 2.1

2.6 2.1

1.0 1.5

1.4 1.2

1.1 1.1